PLEASE USE SPOILER TAGS

Hello everyone,

I saw the French movie My Dog Stupid (Mon Chien Stupide) with Yvan Attal and Charlotte Gainsbourg. Yvan also directed the film. It was an excellent film about real life with clever and funny dialogue.

My question is if anyone knows any details (address, style, etc.) about the family home used in the movie?

My guess it is located in Bidart, Pyrénées-Atlantiques, Nouvelle-Aquitaine, France based on the IMDB filming locations (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10143498/locations/). The home has a similar Usonian inspired style of architecture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usonia). It is a beautiful home with a natural feel, and would love to find out more details.

Thank you!

Note: As this is a niche question, posting here as well as

This question has lingered me for long once Trump won the election days ago, with even the MPA congratulating him and are eager to "work on Hollywood issues" with him as soon as he starts his term. And given that (flawed) progress is still going on in the industry, what does his second term would mean for movies being made or exhibited in America? What will happen to LGBTQ+ filmmakers/actors working? Will international movies may have a hard time screening in theaters? Will filmmakers (silently) revolt or upkeep the status quo?

What do you guys think?

Bernard Rose's Candyman is based on Clive Barker's "The Forbidden," a short story set in Liverpool that examines the British class system. However, Rose expertly changes the film's setting to early 1990s Chicago and skillfully incorporates racial and socioeconomic themes into the usual horror tropes to create a cult classic that ranks among the finest horror outings of the 1990s and is still relevant today.

Read the full review here

I have plenty but I think a great film that deserved more love is Scott Pilgrim (2010), it only made around 50million in theaters..

Not sure this was ever really considered a comeback per se, or if he was ever that big a star, but Eddie Griffin popped up regularly in mainstream comedies in the 90s and 00s but he wasn't really in anything big after, like, 2007

Then he showed up in A Star is Born for like 5 seconds and had one line; dude was basically a featured extra. They literally could've gotten anyone for that role. Not that he was ever really a favorite of mine (though he was one of the funnier parts of Norbit) but why'd they even bother casting...anyone recognizable in that role? Did Eddie Griffin ask Dave Chapelle for a favor or something?

It can be after 2010 also. I just didn't find anything interesting after i goggled so any suggestions?

I mean, sure I did see the movie when it originally came out in theaters, but sometimes I have a hard time understanding why fans of both properties dislike the movie as I wanted to understand what was wrong with the film.

I just realized the movie came out 20 years ago, and it was for that reason that I still had difficulty understanding why the movie was criticized as back then, I sometimes heard criticism from again fans of Alien and Predator, but I would like to know why the movie was a big letdown for them.

Am I alone in thinking that this movie is truly brilliant? The acting, the script and, controversially, the music, is amazing!

Tarantino must have been involved. The film is so on the nose Tarantino that it should be considered a rip off. I love Ritchie, and even this movie, but it just isn't him. Maybe Tarantino wasn't on set every day, but he was all but surely communicating with Ritchie before putting his final touches on it.

I could give dozens of examples from the movie itself, but you all know the similarities. Business wise, Tarantino has some sort of affinity for his "final film" that couldn't be another WWII flick. The writers don't really have the history of something like this, and it even went to distribution through Lionsgate. Finally (and you could blame COVID), Tarantino doesn't wait this long between releases--2024 fits perfectly. Til Schweiger being in both is alsointersting; we know how tight these little circles can be for casting.

Do people really think Ritchie paid homage to his still-living peer with something so perfectly Tarantino. It just doesn't make sense for his career trajectory or fit within his style.

Edit: You can disagree without being a jerk about it.

Not necessarily great films, but those movies where not a SECOND or FRAME is wasted. And it's paced to near perfection.

For me it's Unbreakable.

There are better movies out there but on its own it is a very very good film. But the pacing is excellent. You are hooked from the very start to the very end. Not a single frame or scene is wasted.

What are yours?

In A Quiet Place: Day One, the aliens arrive on earth and land on Manhattan. Manhattan is an island, the bridges are blown up, and the aliens can't swim. How do they make it to the mainland so that the stories of AQP1 & 2 can take place?

I am sure bond lairs are the first thing to come to mind but I am curious if people have others on their radar

how often do two ladies in their 70s carry a movie? Page is phenomenal as a murderous lady of the house and Gordon is always awesome as Page's antagonist.

Page's imperious, haughty shit stirring is just so delightfully hate inducing. Like you just HATE this woman! LOL.

Its not flawless, it drags at times but its is absolutely 100% worth it just to watch Page's masterful performance. Also, no botox, no fillers. These ladies look like...I don't know...regular humans? Instead of weird bloated aliens that too many actresses look like today.

LOVED the ending when Spoilers

Reading about it after the fact, some writers act like there was some kind of revolutionary tornado outbreak at every cinema where it was screened. Obviously the numbers don't lie and it's legacy and impact are far-reaching, but I guess what I'm asking is, did it have the same kind of vibe as something like "The Exorcist", "Smells Like Teen Spirit" or "The Blair Witch Project" where people were like "you've got to check this shit out."?

In 1981, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas (known for their previous work on, "Jaws", and "Star Wars", respectively) made the film, "Raiders of the Lost Ark". It follows the story of Indiana Jones, part-time college professor, part-time adventure hunter, as he tries to obtain a mythical artifact before the Nazis beat him to it.

This was followed by a prequel and several sequels.

I think this is a really good movie franchise with a great spirit of adventure, an impeccable score, and a memorable lead character.

So I was wondering, why is this movie not very much beloved?

We see that other films made by Lucas and Spielberg, like E.T., Star Wars, Jaws, or the Empire Stikes Back, have achieved that status. So why hasn't that been the case for Indiana Jones?

Why has it not sat well with audiences across decades?

Basically I ask because I had noticed that a lot of military movies such as Full Metal Jacket revolve around male soldiers, but then it got me wondering if there was ever a movie about a female soldier who wants to join the military, but has a hard time fitting in because most of her comrades are male.

It can be Any Movie, from The Original Japanese Films from the 1950s to Modern Hollywood with Godzilla x Kong

I'm talking movies like Lost in Translation, the Royal Tenenbaums, Harold and Maude, Her, Little Miss Sunshine; movies that are definitely funny and mostly pretty light but with a pervading air of melancholy. Not really depressing or zanily dark, like Dr. Strangelove or Trainspotting, just sweetly melancholy

As a milsimmer and an appreciator of the armed forces and the men and women who serve, I am oft infected by the camraderie that is present in the armed forces. Whilst I'm certain there are no shortage of good, more serious films, there's a certain itch that I'm having at the moment, namely for comedies, preferably those involving the modern armed forces.

Any suggestions?

Whatever your feelings of the three Ti West ‘X’ films, there’s no doubt that Mia Goth delivered in every way…except MaXXXine.

After rewatching all three films, Mia’s ‘Pearl’ is one of the strongest characters. I feel this because upon rewatching all three films, it was Pearl that stood out. Of course Maxine is still a good character who depicts confidence and drive without the necessity of becoming a Mary Sue, but MAXXXINE didn’t really give Mia Goth anything powerful to work with. Mia Goth acted her ass off on all three roles: old Pearl, Maxine and young Pearl and I believe it’s the Pearl iterations that show Mia Goth as a strong actress.

Pearl depicts the fantasy, the want and desire for a better life but it’s prevented by circumstance and the unfortunate decisions which bring Pearl to her downfall; the murder and hatred of people and animals, but for Maxine there’s not really anyone round her that influences her emotionally or physically, no attachments that Pearl had.

All the scenes we get of Pearl, they show off her deeper emotions on all levels be it whimsical, fantastical, happy, sad, furious and angry. The characters close to Pearl have impact on her. In MaXXXine almost every conversation Maxine gets, Mia never gets to show off the talent nor share any inner feelings other than “being a star” and scenes we get of her with other characters she is tone-deaf and hardly speaks, plus no one really has an impact on her other than her father and even then there’s no emotion.

Overall, I do love both characters for allowing Mia Goth to play in that sand box and eras, but naturally, it’s Pearl that gets the 5/5 character-wise.

Inside Llewyn Davis, a Coen bros. film about a down-on-his-luck folk singer in 1960s New York, is a downer of a movie. We follow Llewyn (Oscar Isaac) for a few days in February of 1961, and nothing goes right for him. At one point, he is invited to record a novelty song as "The John Glenn Singers" with Jim Berkey (Justin Timberlake) and Al Cody (Adam Driver).

The scene in question had me laughing the entire time. Adam Driver is doing these lip acrobatics, singing random phrases in a ridiculously deep voice (OUTER....SPACE), and keeping a serious face the entire time.

The first time I saw this movie, I remember this scene to be amusing, but not necessarily hilarious. So what changed between my first watch and my recent rewatch? Was it Adam Driver going from "Hey, it's that guy from Girls" to "Hey, it's Oscar-nominated actor and Star Wars villain Adam Driver"? Was it knowing that this was the most levity we were going to get in the movie? Did other people find this scene to be as funny as I did or was it just me?

Unpopular opinion but I don’t find sex scenes to be necessary in movies or shows. I have never seen a movie or show where the sex scene furthered the plot in any way. I can think of one: Six Feet Under. To me, that show had very necessary sex scenes.

As someone who likes sex and watches porn, I just don’t see the point.

Do you feel sex scenes are necessary? If so, why?

Do you agree they are unnecessary?

What’s a movie or show with a sex scene(s) that was relevant to the plot?

I've seen people say Yes and No and I want to know which answer is true!!

And why do you consider it cheesy?

Everytime I watch Con Air I’m impressed with how they treat the Reynoli Santiago character of Sally Can’t Dance. Clearly a character that identifies as a woman. Not one of “worst of the worst” members of society ever make fun of her. In fact they all kind of seem to support her. I always thought that was a pretty progressive take for a cheesy 90’s actioner.

Hello all!

Hope you all doing fine.

I have a question. I know that Fight Club definitely have references to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy: “two of the names Marla lists as his aliases (Rupert and Travis) are the same as the characters Rupert Pumpkin and Travis Bickle from King of Comedy and Taxi Driver respectively.”

Is there any more specific references to Fight Club like the ones I showed?

Recently I rewatched Gladiator, ahead of Gladiator II coming out. And hear me out but – I think Gladiator is basically a sports film. It follows all the rules: Maximus works his way up the "leagues" from Africa to the Colosseum by winning in the arena, and becomes a much-loved popular figure who can use his platform to challenge the emperor, who is himself trying to use sports to make his regime more popular with the Roman mob. He's trained and mentored by a coach (Proximo) and has teammates (Juba and the German guy whose name I can't remember right now).

It's also a lot of other things, too, for sure – a war film, a swords-and-sandals epic, a political and psychological thriller – but it fits the bill for "sports film" extremely well.

I wrote a much longer explanation of why I think it is a sports film here if anyone wants to read it, but essentially: what do you guys think? Sports movie or no?

characters can you think of whose entire personalities revolve around having weird little dicks?

I thought of Fargo, Part 2. Gunderson, Lundegaard, Grumsrud, Scotty Lundegaard, Stan Grossman and Shep Proudfoot are still alive.

I’m not sure why but it is, thanks for reading.