/int/ - certified time wasters

>>20313
I watched "The Substance" in cinema this weekend. Already prepared a draft for review, will post it a bit later.

>>20315
Such movies are still being shown in Russia? How?

I will watch that one today in cinema btw.

>>20316
By "such" you mean western? Maybe they are being pirated from other countries and then translated, I don't know for sure.

>>20318
Yeah, I meant Western movies in general. But your theory that it gets distributed via other neighboring countries is probably the solution.

I just finished watching it and am baffled. I can’t even say whether I liked it or not. I guess I just felt disgusted at what the movie was showing (materialism in general), although I’m not a big fan of body horror, so at the end I though it was too much.

>>20313
Tonight. I go ~2x/week on average.

>>20325
Nice, do you also have a subscription so that you can go as often as you like to the cinema for a small fixed price?

>>20325
What would you possibly watch twice a week? 99% of what's released is trash.
Or is it a small one that also shows old(er) and interesting films?

>>20328
Not him, but I also rewatch movies I like. For example I watched Perfect Days three times in cinema.

>>20329
>rewatching movies
what a loser.

>>20333
I bought the Bourne Identity on DVD when I was 12. I watched it probably 20-30 times. It definitely left its mark on me now that I look back. It certainly thematized things I still am interested in today.

t. biggest loser

>>20336
I think he meant watching a film on the big screen several times, i.e. paying every time you watch it.

>>20337
I pay 19,90€ every month and can go to the cinema as often as I like, so rewatching movies is not a problem.

>>20340
What does a visit to the cinema cost these days, anyway? If you don't go like three or four times you still pay too much.

>>20341
A ticket costs between 11 and 15 euros in my city, sometimes even more. So even if I only go two times a month, the subscription is still worth it.

>>20342
Damn

>>20327
Yep, I even got two different subscriptions now

>>20328
There's usually 2-3 movies each month that I'm interested in (The Substance, Megalopolis, The Beast this month), plus 1-2 I only watch since I got the subscription anyways (Joker 2 and the Trump biopic this month).
Then there's a bunch of older movies I go to as well, depends on what's showing but there's a weekly horror film night I go to almost every week.

>>20353
What are you looking forward to in November? For me:
The Empire (just for the memes)
No Other Land
Des Teufels Bad
Emilia Perez

>>20358
Mostly Gladiator 2 and I've also yet to watch Anora & In a Violent Nature. Maybe Conclave & Dahomey

>The Empire
Haven't heard about this one before. Might be fun?
I remember being impressed by Twentynine Palms by the same director as a budding cinephile, though I suppose it has almost nothing in common with this one.

>Emilia Perez
Saw the trailer recently and it looked wild, might have to go see it as well.

>>20360
>Gladiator 2
You really think this could be worthwhile? The trailer looked horrible and I think Gladiator doesn't really need a sequel.
>Anora
Watched it yesterday, pretty good.
>Dahomey
Will watch tomorrow, really looking forward to this one. Berlinale documentaries are kino most often.
>Might be fun?
Probably, if you like dumb b movies (not meant as an insult). Not my cup of tea, but everything regarding this film looks so ridiculous I might have to see it anyway.

Society

Good movie. Saw it when i was 14 or so and just rewatched it.
I take it all as a fact and assume that this is what rich people do in their spare time. Also the effects are breddy gud and deliver a few "what the fuck" moments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnre4aI7Gf4

>>20360
>Gladiator 2

The first one is one of my favorite movies. Definitely in my top 10 but i won't watch that shit. The first movie was concluded in the end and from what i've seen Part 2 already looks really bad.
Titanic 2 when?

Today is November 3 aka Dolph Bronson day so I will celebrate by watching a movie starring Dolph Lundgren and one starring Charles Bronson. Most likely Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning and Death Wish 3.

>>20362
>>20378
>Gladiator 2
I haven't even seen the trailer tbh but it's Ridley Scott and a bunch of great actors, how bad can it turn out?
I doubt it's gonna be very sequel-y either, probably just a marketing thing necessary to make another movie in that setting. But let's see. I just wanna be entertained.

>>20405
>but it's Ridley Scott and a bunch of great actors, how bad can it turn out?
Not sure if being ironic or not, but Shitley Schrott (note the subtle bilingual spoofing) has made exactly three good films in his career, and the last one of those was Gladiator.

Fleabag
Power fantasy for white millennial women. Really pandering to its target audience. And at the same time very funny, interesting and cute series. Watching Anglo-Saxons in their natural habitat is cool as well.

The substance (2024)
The movie is not scary nor realistic. It's rather schematic and conventional, like a fable.

1. The most obvious interpretation is about female's fear of aging. Heroine's TV career is tied to her appearance which makes hitting the wall for her especially painful. But in out times every woman desperately tries to look young in 50-s because:
1.1. Modern culture is teenager's culture. As Dugin puts it, modern society is sick with hebephrenia.
https://vz.ru/opinions/2011/7/21/508970.html
1.2. In past man would be tied to his wife by legal (and social) norms and common children but now it's gone so he can freely drop old white woman for young Filipino mail-order bride. "Free love" for which feminists fought is a double-edges sword.
Women can spend hours working on their beauty, for them ugliness depicted in the movie is especially painful.

2. But for me the first thing I thought of are BOOMERS and conflict of generations. Be heroine normal person, she would just retire and let the next generation shake their asses on TV. But individualism which became dominant in post-WWII West makes that impossible - boomers don't view their children as continuation of themselves, can't self-realize in their children's lives. They will rather buy a villa abroad than help their children with mortgage, and children pay them back with bad attitude. But as the voice in the phone says, "there is no you and them, you are the one", society can't survive inter-generational total war.
Since you can't take millions with you to the afterlife and Christian God is antagonistic to the Golden Calf, boomers believe in techno-singularity. When they'll start dying en masse, seeing that AI-neurogod hasn't arrived to save them, they'll act insane. Their dysfunctional offspring will be even worse. That's what the final scene shows. God help humanity survive those times.

3. There is a group of people IRL who have unrealistic desires, resort to radical measures in a groundless hope to achieve them and as a result turn into abominations. Happy trans awareness month!

To sum up, deeply antiliberal movie, which really makes you think

>>20412
Don't know what you expected, it was really obvious from the trailers already that it was shit, not just because it's a current year production, but also because the vast majority of films about THE BUSINESS are shit.

>>20407
I assume you want to say Alien and Blade Runner are the other two.
Hannibal and Robin Hood are okay, too.

>>20418
Nah, BR is one of the most overrated pieces of media in existence. The Duelists was what I meant.
Hannibal... no wonder it is how it is, never realized it was Scottschlock. That film ruined Hopkins Lecter for me and was overall very, very, very silly.

>>20313
So far I've seen following movies at the cinema this year:

- Dune Part II
- Poor Things
- The Glory of Life
- Civil War
- Niemals allein, immer zusammen
- Kinds of Kindness
- Die Unbeugsamen II
- Ein Traum von Revolution
- Colorless Dream
- Frau im Mond

Last was end of september.

>>20430
Where do you live that you can watch Frau im Mond in the cinema? Gibe!

>>20433
Imagine not living in a city that has a dedicated arthouse cinema

>>20434
arthouse schmarthouse farthouse keep your pretentious dreg. gotta be a fagot to watch those movies. are you vegan or something?

>>20434
Most arthouse cinemas show italian and french films for middle-aged women, don't act like that's not true. In fact there was an arthouse cinema I regularly visited and they haven't shown a silent film a single time, even when there were special events and such.

>>20436
What do you think of this? The local arthouse cinema's programme: https://www.arsenal-berlin.de/kalender/

>>20436
cinema is for middle-aged women, books are for middle-aged women. deal with it. real men do stuff/built stuff/make money and watch action movies on dvd, if they have too much time on their hands, which should never happen. of course city dwellers will not understand.

>>20438
>berlin
lol of course berlin

>>20438
Ohhhh, you are talking about actual Programmkinos.
They mostly show gay and middle eastern stuff though, although I actually don't know if there is one nearby around here.

Our only arthouse cinema was bought by a religious sect and now it only plays religious stuff. Not even joking.

>>20445
That doesn't have to be a bad thing. What kind of religious movies are we talking about?

>>20446
I'm going to take a closer look next time i walk past it.
Maybe I walk in and make an IWO.
They do cermons there as well.

This post and the next one will contain spoilers. 1/2

>Hannibal (TV show)

Well, finished that one. Watched it back in the day, but stopped mid-S3 because it was about the Great Red Dragon and Manhunter is such a great piece of cinema that I felt I didn't need to watch it.
Now I did anyway and I must say, I don't hate it. In fact, I like it more than the Norton film. Anyway, what is there to say?
The three seasons are all vastly different from each other.

The first one is starting the big arc about Will Graham and Hannibal Lecter, but is, for the most part, a monster-of-the-week procedural. Will Graham uses his supernatural profiler skills to catch weird killers while turning insane from having killed the father of a girl (and an encephalitis), all with Hannibal pulling strings in the background, very subtly at first. And eating people, of course.

The second season has Will being framed for a crime he didn't commit. He gets treated for his illness and eventually released on accounts of being exonerated through new evidence. Hannibal is becoming more overt in his manipulation and evilness, which eventually leads to a showdown with one of the best choreographed fighting scenes of western filmmaking (I say "one of the best" because they still couldn't refrain from shaky cam wankery and quick cuts to mask how far they stopped from each other's faces). I just enjoy this kind of visceral fighting, like the bathhouse scene in Eastern Promises. The overall arch is now more prominent (Will and Hannibal and their relationship with Will trying to catch him) and the season's finale has several people maimed, Hannibal unmasked and fleeing to Italy.

>>20468
2/2

Season 3 is a bit of a panache - the first half is basically the events of Hannibal with some donut steel OC interwoven, the last five episodes are Red Dragon. I certainly enjoyed the first half way more than the film. The second half, as mentioned earlier, kind of follows the Red Dragon book, but obviously there are some changes. What is noticeable about S3 is the change in tone. S2 and especially S1 were so bleak that one couldn't stand watching more than two episodes back to back. S3 borrows a lot from Hopkins Lecter, who is making cruel jokes, bordering on black comedy. And with the now disfigured Mason Verger (who was introduced in S2 as a guy who makes orphans cry to use their tears to spice up his drinks) had to be made so comically evil to distract the audience from how evil Hannibal is.

What is certainly striking is that every seasons becomes gayer than the last one. In the second season we see innuendo about Hannibal being gay for Will and S3 has a full-on lesbian relationship, the Tooth Fairy constantly running around (half-)naked and, more importantly, more-less speaks out loud that Hannibal might be in love with Will, and Will certainly feels drawn to Hannibal. This is very overt, so that the Sherlock-Holmes ending can (or maybe should) be interpreted in a romantic way. I don't have any big judgement on this. The way the show is set up, it's kind of logical considering the tv show characters' traits, so it doesn't feel "forced" in a way it would feel elsewhere, yet it felt a bit cheap because they already kind of did that at the end of S2. I certainly would not rate the final episode the highest.

Is there even a point to my ramblings? I don't know, I just wanted to talk about this. If you enjoy procedurals and creative gore, this will certainly be up your alley. If you don't enjoy every second line of dialogue being some kind of pretentious, pregnant insight or counterquestion, you will not have fun with this, especially in the later seasons when top milf Gillian Anderson gets a bigger role (in fact, almost all women in the show are hot, yet it's strikingly misogynistic in how almost all of them are cunts, yet the show seems to have been extremely popular with women).
You should watch it, if aforementioned things don't put you off, if only for the excellent portrayal of Mikkelsen who gives Lecter a very different quality than Cox and Hopkins.

And before some smartass feels the need to chime in: Yes, the showrunner is a gay homosexual and that was most certainly the reason for all the gay stuff.

>>20470
Why does it need to be so blatantly shown in tv shows though?
Does that help bringing in an audience?
I was bored by all the sex in GOT. It didn't need that.
I don't want heterosexual porn in my drama series and I surely do not need homosex one.
Take The Sopranos as example. It is about Italian Mafia (Bad Guys) and half of the time it plays in a strip club. Yet you barely ever see nudity. Because that was not necessary for the story.

>>20482
>Yet you barely ever see nudity.
When was the last time you watched the Sopranos?
Like every single establishing shot of the stripclubs shows some tits.
And all the goodfellas' whores, and all the other sex. And the rape. Sopranos is actually what started the violence & sex on HBO trend that directly led to GoT et al.

>>20483
>And all the goodfellas' whores, and all the other sex. And the rape
You are making that up? What is "all the other sex"? And when was anyone raped? The asshole beat that one poor girl, but that was by far the worst thing happening and it caused people to cancel their subscription with HBO.
And the establishing shots were just that. Establishing shots. It wasn't gratuitous.
Do you remember the Strip Club scene in Drive? That is how this needs to be filmed.

>>20484
>And when was anyone raped?
Ok, just say you didn't watch it, saves us all a lot of time.

>>20485
Why can't you just give an answer? Why be passively aggressive? What did I do wrong by asking a question?
It has been a couple of years since I watched the Sopranos and I do seriously not remember any rape happening.
The worst thing other than what I described above, was when Meadow had that guy putting his finger into her face. And Tony curbstumped him for that.

>>20486
Like you didn't actively provoke that answer by insinuating that your preferred definition of rape is dude-bro-like narrow. You are an ebin shitlord.

>>20493
>your preferred definition of rape
Okay. So by what definition does the Sopranos have rape?
Give me an example then.

>>20494
Not him but i think at some point that female doctor was raped