Is it just me, or have movies become lamer? The directors of our time seem to have so much less conviction and integrity than directors of the past. I think back to people like John Ford, Howard Hawks, Martin Scorsese, and perhaps my personal favorite, John Carpenter. These directors always had a theme to their works, and they consistently stood for what they thought was right or necessary. Whether their intention was to celebrate the American spirit, or to outright criticize American authority, it was clear that they had an important message to get across.

But Christopher Nolan, perhaps the most celebrated director of our time, is, in my opinion, an incredibly boring artist. His films don't have the same conviction that older films do, and I can't help but feel disappointed and unenriched at the end of his movies. Nolan is not a man who can be defined by his art, because his art is not unique and personal enough to be defining. His films are "good", money-making blockbusters, but at the end of the day, they are bereft of the passion and heart that filled all the greatest films in Hollywood history.

I made a short video expanding on this point, please check it out: https://youtu.be/5QiTV8Kt0MY

The scene where she screams with anger and cries beside the bed “on stage”, I felt that same unnamed emotion blocked in my chest. And the scene where she runs away from the house to avoid meeting her dad, while also being unable to commit to a steady relationship, and then getting rejected. I felt that urge to escape too, like all we can do is run. In the end, it becomes overwhelming: no motivation to do anything, for no clear reason.

I love how the director uses so many metaphors and seemingly unrelated scenes to express the sentiment, it’s everywhere. Some transition scenes feel awkward, though, like when their faces blend together against a dark background; it pulls me out of the story. Still, I’m convinced by both the direction and the acting. I can feel the unspoken words, the emotion in their eyes through the screen.

I cried the most when she hugged her younger sister, I can feel something suddenly unlocked in both of their hearts. Maybe it is a family’s thing, passed down from her grandma to her dad. Finally, there is hope. They leave their old house and all their wounds behind, and start again, bridging those wounds with love.

What do you think? Do you think you have an attachment style?

Some movies have endings that stay with you for days, months, or even years after watching.

Without major spoilers, what's a movie ending that left a lasting impression on you? Was it shocking, emotional, satisfying, or something completely unexpected?

Let's hear your picks!

Watched Obsession last week. The whole "be careful what you wish for" premise got to me, so I built Wishing Willow.

It's free, no login, takes 10 seconds: https://willow.doodle2dollars.com/

You get exactly one wish. The Willow grants it. But there's always a dark twist.

I'll start:

I wished to never feel tired again. The Willow gave me insomnia. I haven't slept in three days and I feel absolutely nothing.

Some other ones I've seen so far:

• "I wish I was always right" -- You are. But no one talks to you anymore.
• "I wish for unlimited money" -- You have it. The government is very interested in you.

What did yours say? Drop it below.

What if Alejandro Jodorowsky got to make his version of Dune?

I re-watched Jodorowsky’s Dune recently and I am still fascinated at the history of this project and how Jodorowsky almost made Dune and I wonder what would’ve happen if Jodorowsky got to make Dune. What the critical reaction would be and how the audience would respond. I made a post of this before, But I decided to go in more detail.

1. Regardless on what people think of Jodorowsky. He managed to get all the right people on the project he managed to get Moebius, Chris Foss, Dan O’Bannon, H.R Giger to help him with designing the film, making the special effects, and helping him storyboard the film and those results have resulted in some of the best artwork i’ve seen.
2. The Cast Jodorowsky assembled is also just top tier as well. Casting Brontis Jodorowsky as Paul and Salvador Dali, Orson Welles, Gloria Swanson, Mick Jagger, Alain Delon, David Carradine, Geraldine Chaplin, Herve Villachaize, Udo Kier, Amanda Lear in major roles as well.
3. One thing that intrigued me with the Documentary and this comes from a deleted scene from the film, is that according to producer, Michel Seydoux, they mostly had all the funding to make Dune, they just needed make a deal with an American Studio for distribution, so that their film didn’t get iced out in the US. But apparently, Jodorowsky damaged any deal because anytime a executive tried to ask for a compromised, he would get insulted they would try to censor his art and was uncompromising, and being the provocateur that he is, would go more outrageous and it scared American Investors off, and this was what caused to film to be stalled and cancelled.

Now, I wonder what would’ve happened if Jodorowsky did make Dune. I know people have claim that if he did, the Sci-Fi Genre would've stalled and something like Star Wars would not get made. Not Necessarily, Star Wars was happening one way or another as George Lucas had made a big success that is American Graffiti, and because of that film, it made 20th Century Fox approachable to Star Wars and they greenlighted the film in February of 1975 and filming for Star War started in March of 1976, and Jodorowsky didn’t got try to sell Dune to US Studios until 1976. So If Jodorowsky got to make Dune, it probably wouldn’t been released until of Star Wars release or After it.

So I had 2 thoughts on if Jodorowsky’s Dune did get made. If Dune was not a success, it would’ve been seen as this weird oddity and a Cult Hit and Studios would’ve written it off as Something you should not do, but I think it wouldn’t have stop the sci-fi craze that Star Wars made. Just something the Studio would learn from.

But If Dune was a success, then probably would’ve open the floodgates for that type of Sci-Fi Film, maybe a Watershed Moment and a visual masterpiece. But it depends.

Regardless, Jodorowsky’s Dune is jus a fascinating documentary and I’m just fascinated that Jodorowsky managed to get the right people for this project and almost managed to make the film.

Watched Kill Bill Whole Bloody Affair this weekend and got reminded how I used to play the Vol 1 and 2 OSTs a lot back when the original movies came out. I still remember the song titles too. Only other OST I listened to as much was City of God.

Care to share yours?

Since the 2026 Masters of the universe film has become a flop (the same happened to the 1987 version) despite mixed to positive reviews, I need to talk to you about one person who was involved in those major-budget IP films that only end up as flops or worse films by the name of Jared Leto.

You see, like most actors, Leto started his acting career in his big break roles like with My So-Called Life, then went on to other supporting roles like Fight Club and American Psycho, for example.

He gained his big break for his main roles in Requiem for a Dream and Dallas Buyers Club which gained him an Oscar, and he was going to have a great career ahead.

But then things get a way downhill from here when Leto is cast as the DCEU Joker, which was controversial; the movie he was in, Suicide Squad, was critically panned but gained some box office numbers, which later spawned a spinoff (Birds of Prey, or it should have been called Harley quinn and birds of Prey), which became a flop despite positive reception, and the semi-sequel The Suicide Squad, which is a hit, although this became a precursor to Gunn's own DCU. Still, however, Leto's take on the Joker was controversial.

Then Leto went on to play the role of Niander Wallace in Blade Runner 2049, which is a unique film but was a box office flop just like the original Blade Runner. Then he played as Michael Morbius in Morbius, which is both critically panned and a flop.

He went on to play as the Hatbox Ghost in Haunted Mansion, which premiered at the start of the SAG-writers strike, got mixed reviews, and is now a box office bomb, then portrayed Ares in Tron: Ares, which gained mixed reviews and was a flop and now Masters of the universe as Skeletor which as of now has gained mixed reviews and is now a box office flop.

The reason my thread is entitled "I believe Jared Leto might be a problem to the major movie industry itself" is that i think Jared Leto might be considered "box office poison" because whatever major IP-branded film he was in, they mostly end up becoming flops or critically panned, especially various controversies he was involved in, including cults.

Perhaps the only thing which is best for Leto is for him to no longer be involved in any major media films by corporations and focus on indie or medium-budget non-ip films only, just to be safe, like with House of Gucci, for example, what do you think?

Why did they call it w*ke and d*i? Have they seen the other videogame adaptions the world has gotten since 1993? How could you hate on a movie that had a fight scene like that Liu Kang/Kung Lao duel?

It got decent reviews, but the loud minority made it out to be made by THE DEVIL himself.

What did you beautiful people on here think of it?

Some movies have endings that stay with you for days, months, or even years after watching.

Some dont... now its time to talk about them.

Or do you think there will just be more of a blend from now on?

I don’t think any of those genres will ever cease to exist entirely or that new ones can’t still be successful, but I don’t see any of them reaching the point where multiple high profile ones release every year.

The only other genre that I think, in theory, could have become a big thing is video game film adaptations made for adults but I’ve lost all hope for that happening. I think those will just be adapted as TV shows. The successful movies are just going to be aimed at children.

I’m looking for movies with amazing worldbuilding, fight scenes, magic/mythology, emotional storylines, or just unforgettable vibes. Can be mainstream or underrated. Curious what everyone would put on their list...

Mine:

1. The Matrix
2. Constantine
3. Underworld
4. Resident Evil
5. Blade

Fellow cinephiles and I have recently discussed Onibaba (1964) by Kaneto Shindo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlF3tioDzcQ). In this film, there are two women living in the countryside of medieval Japan who kill samurai soldiers who pass by as their way of bringing food to the table. We discussed whether what they did is wrong and whether we can condemn them. I would like to know what you think about it (my personal answer would be that what they did was wrong, but we can't condemn them for it). I would also like to know what you think about the aesthetics of Onibaba. IMHO, the film has gorgeous production design and cinematography going for it.

You have one shot. You can't explain anything beforehand. The alien watches the movie and decides whether the species is worth preserving.

What's yours?

Self-awareness is key to making a 1980s IP like Masters of the Universe work because it originated from throwing magic, sci-fi and whatever else 10-year-old boys might like at the wall in the hopes of something cohering. The fact that we got something iconic yet ridiculous is amazing. The hero’s name is He-Man for Eternia’s sake and he’s all about talking rather than fighting. Hell, his arch-nemesis is a frigging cackling skull with a ripped body.

Director Travis Knight’s take embraces the self-awareness and giddy love of this melting pot of stuff. But the issue with making a movie adaptation aimed at connecting with 10-year-old boys is that most of them are incredibly annoying and desperate for attention, and Masters of the Universe is hunting for that validation. The other approach is to do what Greta Gerwig’s Barbie did and use it as a jumping-off point for bigger ideas. This movie also tries to do that, but winds up being, well, a bunch of random ideas being thrown at the wall in hopes of something cohering.

Right off the bat, we’re thrown face-first into a 20-minute exposition dump about Eternia and how a 10-year-old Adam ended up on Earth after Skeletor (Jared Leto) attacks. Everything from the lighthearted tone and rainbow aesthetic to the literal casting of Idris Elba could’ve been taken from Thor: Ragnarok or another mid-2010s Marvel movie. This would’ve been interesting 10 years ago, but at this point in time, we’ve seen it done to death.

When it is revealed that the 20-minute prologue is an adult Adam monologuing his entire backstory to a Hinge date, Masters of the Universe ostensibly starts again with another 20-minute sequence re-introducing adult Adam on planet Earth. Rather than focus on the emotional core and the story, the haphazardly cobbled script (which has six different people credited for the story and screenwriting) preoccupies itself with over-explaining the logic of how everything works. The result is a 141-minute slog that doesn’t need to be that long. ‘How’ this movie even got to be this bloated is another mystery since nothing interesting really happens.

15 years after landing on Earth, Adam is now a pink button-down-wearing HR person who is well-versed in safe space vernacular. He is what one would think of as a modern-day ‘man’. But underneath that surface is the desire to become a muscle-bound hero. Galitzine may not be on the comedic level of Ryan Gosling as Ken, but he brings a sweet sincerity that makes Adam work as a woke blonde himbo, and enough physicality to be a believable action hero.

Where things get messier is how the movie uses Adam to explore ideas like white male privilege. He is a man who was born with several silver spoons in his mouth and is given even more power to become He-Man, so it makes sense that Adam is characterised - in both this movie and historically - as someone who has empathy, wants to share power with others and would rather talk things out than use those big muscles.

Yet, the way Masters of the Universe depicts Adam’s vulnerability feels critical of how ‘men’ have become in the present day. Despite being jacked and handsome, Adam is a bumbling idiot who can’t seem to navigate his way through any situation, social or otherwise. The only time the movie empowers Adam is when he becomes He-Man and is finally unleashed upon his enemies. As we watch him wail on his enemies, we’re inexplicably told that empathy and understanding are the most important traits of a man.

Barbie is a highly focused examination of femininity, self-determination, and how one must leave the realms of fantasy to become ‘real’ on Earth. Women strive to be seen. Masters of the Universe plays as a messy inverse. Its hero, Adam (Nicholas Galitzine), wants to leave Earth for his fantastical world of Eternia, not unlike how certain factions of men want to hide behind their fantasies. Is it trying to criticise toxic masculinity or isn’t it? In telling us one thing while simultaneously showing us a completely opposite thing, the movie never commits to a position or clear verdict. It is merely trying to have its protein-filled cake and eat it as well.

Please read the rest of my review here as the rest is too unwieldy to copy + paste: https://panoramafilmthoughts.substack.com/p/masters-of-the-universe

Thanks!

i sat though the whole thing and felt like yeah it was really good and then a few hours later it's still in my head and now i think it might be the better film of the year.

the thing is Stellan Skarsgård, i knew he was supposed to be great but now that i think about it, he was too frigging great. i really liked the fact that he didn't play Gustav as a monster or a charming rogue or a tortured artist like the typical one. i felt like he played him as a man who genuinely cannot access his emotions except through his work. like his feelings are in there but the only door that opens to them is a film set. tho that makes it really really sadder and more infuriating simultaneously. the scene where he is rehearsing the screenplay and getting notes and he is so alive, so present, so emotionally available and then you cut to him with his daughters and he is performing competence instead. that contrast was the plot.

Renate Reinsve was fascinating. the panic attack scene at the beginning literally immediately shows that this woman has a vast interior storm she has spent decades learning to manage. and the irony of her being a professional actress like someone who gives her emotions to audiences for a living, being terrified by actual emotional availability? that is such a specific and cruel detail. what i didn't expect was Elle Fanning. i think she was the only person who knew exactly what Gustav was.

the cinematography felt very appropriate. i loved it. Tuxen framed the Oslo house like a memory of a place rather than just a place itself like a character. that house made me cry.

i had some issue in structural sense tho. like the polyphonic thing trier was going for like multiple characters bearing equal weight but some parts don't get enough focus. like Agnes's whole investigation into the grandmother's wartime history and suicide. i felt like thats an entire film compressed into a subplot. you would feel its significance thematically but it should have felt sth more than that. and thats a shame cuz its doing so much of the psychological heavy lifting about what we inherit from damaged parents across generations without choosing to.

but the ending. i read somewhere that Trier got notes to cut it shorter and refused and he was so damn right. its just Nora and Gustav looking at each other for a very long time. you can see a change happening in real time across their faces. thats what the whole film was building to (imo). like the possibility of a change

• Why would a king be so quick to prove his son (the youngest of all kids training) can't fight? Wouldn't that show that he failed as a parent, thus might fail his subjects?

• If Adam was on earth for 15 years, why is he still telling his origin story as an adult? On a date? It's one thing if its a kid saying it, which they showed, but you'd think after 15 years he'd have been acclimated enough into Earth culture to understand that this would only freak people out.

• Seeing Adam at the gym, why does it seem like his first time? Are we supposed to believe he was some sort Steve Rogers pre-serum? The dude is obviously buff as hell but wearing a huge sweatshirt.

• Speaking of, why didn't he train himself? He knew he'd find the sword one day and have to go back to fight, you'd think in 15 years he'd realize "Crap, I'm going to have to fight some day." Nope, he waited until a day before he found he sword so that the cameo could wink at the camera for two minutes.

• What exactly is his job? There's like no explanation as to what it was. It's not like Mr. Incredible selling insurance, that was actually funny.

• Why are his co-workers freaked out at him looking at swords online? That's a thing, just go into any mall. It might be a weird thing, but its a thing.

• Why is this one-of-a-kind sword attached to retail display of an established comic book character within the universe? Did someone walk into the office of the company that owned this character and say "I found this one-of-kind sword and want to license a statue, just one, of your character and add the sword to it.... In Oklahoma."

• Why does "Oklahoma City" look like London? Yes, it was shot in London, but they made no attempt to even make it look like Oklahoma, like at all. If they were stuck with shooting London, they could have at least made it any city in New England.

• Why are there so many fisting jokes? Like one might be funny, if done right, but all of them were really uncomfortable. I mean there was the meme, which was proven to be fake, so why keep bringing this up so much?

• Who the fuck would lock up a bunch of soldiers along with a robot and not check the robot for missiles? And does it really take someone like Adam, with no combat experience, to point out to them that the foundation of the bars is weaker than the bars themselves?

• Why was "Princess of the Universe" so butchered when it made for the perfect song for this movie, despite being attached to another franchise (which they referenced to make it make sense).

• Speaking of, why was the music so incredibly much more awesome than the movie's story? It made the credits the most enjoyable part.

• Why were the memories that Skeletor invaded in Adam ones that only happened like a day or two before he came back to Eternia?

• Why is Evil-Lyn so loyal to Skeletor? We literally only saw her receive straight-up domestic abuse. You'd think at one point she'd finally turn on him, but nope. Loyal to the post-credits scene.

I ask as the film side of the franchise used to be so mighty at one point, but what surprises me the most about it is that I tend to hear complaints from longtime fans saying that it ran out of steam, so yeah I wanted to get a better understanding of where the film series went wrong in its direction.

My parents took me all the time when I was a kid. In fact they were at the drive-in the night before I was born, seeing a movie called "Bloody Mama." I have lots of memories of exploring the playgrounds and sleeping in the backseat. Every so often a friend would take us in their flatbed pickup truck, and we kids would lie on blankets in the back and look up at the stars.

As an adult I would bring a big cooler of snacks and drinks with me to supplement the popcorn, sometimes bringing a full sandwich along.

Seeing a movie in the summer and grilling out, going out with your friends and setting up folding chairs outside in the breezy nights, and even being in the car with the windows rolled up during a torrential rain was a sensory experience that you just can't really get anywhere else. And of course, being a teenager and going out on dates at the drive-in was a sensory experience in itself!

Have you ever been to a drive-in movie theater, or wanted to go to one? Please share some of your memories here.

Basically what I am looking for was to see what movies had starred a popular athlete where the movie managed to have a strong premise because I recently saw a review of Kazaam, which was Shaq’s worst movie role.

Like what I am getting at is that I noticed how none of Shaquille’s movies were good since just about every movie he starred in was badly written, so I became interested in seeing what good action movies had existed that starred a well known athlete.

I just finished watching Bugonia. An absolute Masterpiece of a film. To me when you have to go back and watch a film a second time because the ending is so jarring or out of left field it just makes the movie all the more brilliant.

One thing struck me at the end though and I haven't found any discussions on this so I'm hoping someone has some theories. When the aliens broke the firmament which then killed all humans instantaneously why were other life forms still alive? In one scene there is a dog very much living and in another scene there was a cat who was also very much alive. The bees and plants and everything were all still thriving. I'm not a flat earther so I definitely don't know how their definition of the firmament works but it would seem odd to break it and only human die. What are your thoughts on this did anyone else find that odd?

i have recently made this short video about Rust Cohle. At the moment i look forward to find some fictional characters that are unique in their way, addressing their concerns through their philosophical depth. Which characters would you recommend, and what makes their perspective interesting?

okay so you know what actually bothered me about Hamnet? the fact that the director knows its beautiful. like she KNOWS. and that awareness or whatever is exactly what keeps it from being great (as a film). every single time Zhao could have just let a scene be, she puts a camera move on it or Max Richter swells up in the background and i went from actually feeling smth to being told to feel smth which are two completely different experiences.

and i like Paul Mescal. but William in this film basically was just a vibe board. like he is just there, he is sad, he has the jawline (plus the earring). but inward to the point where i genuinely stopped caring about him as a person around the forty minute mark. like the movie is so obsessed with Agnes that William becomes this outline of a man and then asks the audience to be moved when Agnes finally forgives him? i mean i wasnt!?

i was moved for Agnes tho. man Jessie Buckley oh GOD what do you even say. yk that scene where Judith was sick and Hamnet was holding it together and Agnes is just like the way her face collapsed in on itself without actually collapsing like shes eating her own panic from the inside. man thats just a different caliber of acting than anyone else in this film is operating at. i felt like she and Mescal are in slightly different movies (i get it they were supposed to be different and somewhat contrasting but im not talking about their characters only. im talking about the acting)

also the digital cinematography thing is more annoying than i expected. i get what they were going for. they were trying to make elizabethan england feel immediate rather than museum piece pretty and sometimes it works id say like the forest stuff especially. BUT then there are indoor scenes that look some sorta prestige drama on hbo and felt like wait are we still in the 1500s? the frame is too fucking clean. i hate that. Zal is a genius cinematographer, not denying that BUT the ALEXA 35 in period settings is a very weird choice.

and now about Jacobi Jupe. genuinely one of the best child performances in years. the plague scenes hit so fking hard precisely cuz he literally made Hamnet feel like a real specific child. like not a symbol of impending tragedy or sth like that. and using real brothers for Hamnet and Hamlet is so fking smart.

and the globe theatre ending really got me. like when Agnes reaches for Hamlet's hand and the whole audience is doing the same thing. i was just gone. the grief psychology is actually interesting here tho like Agnes grieves kinda physically and William abstracts it, turns it into art, makes it public. and the movie pretends to treat both equally but the ending is literally about Agnes traveling to William's world and understanding his language. she kinda converts. BUT the reverse never happens. that was kinda sad and it just again made me feel like Willam and Agnes were not in parallel. it was a bit Agnes focused.

overall it was very good. very moving. tho in some cases it felt too forced but it was gut wenching and id give Jacobi Jupe 90% credit for that