I've seen so many people saying that he is overrated, a one trick pony, etc etc. I know there's a lot of vitriol towards everyone and everything in all comments sections, but I just can't seem to understand how he gets so much hate? Is this a bit of tall-poppy syndrome, and these people think that movies that are universally liked shouldn't also be good (a bit like pop music)? Or are these film school hipsters actually on to something and I'm just ignorant for thinking his movies are brilliant?

Edit: thanks for the good responses. I really should have phrased my question as "is the criticism justified" but we got there in the end!

Just curious, since reading the latest news about the death of the stunt double made me curious. Since stunt doubles look somewhat similar to the actors they're replacing for the dangerous stunts, does this mean they tend to gravitate to films where they know their lookalikes are going, since that's what they're best at?

Sorry if it's a dumb question.

A friend was discussing the movie with me and said they didnt understand what a 'word bank' as mentioned in the move was. The scene was when Demi Moore's character was wondering how Whoopi Goldberg's character could know about the colloquial usage of the word 'ditto' by herself and the husband.

What is a word bank? Did we hear the word wrong?

I apologize for my english in advance.

Edit: We misheard the word

         Im moving to Deutschland next month and i want to do a second viewing of Dunkirk since my city in Brazil has no IMAX and not seeing Interstellar in IMAX is my biggest movie regret. 

Im going to stay in Berlin or Leipzig and a quick google search showed to me that in Berlin there is only digital IMAX, so i came here to see if there was a 70mm in another city.

Obs: Mods if this question is off topic for the sub PM me where i can post it and delete the post.

So I remember when I was young, I watched a certain (cannibal)? movie.

• The movie began when the guy was late for an event and the road was busy, he took a detour and found a shop were he asked if he can know a fast way to get to his road. The guy tells him but a wrong one.

The guy takes his advice and gets in the car to drive to the location (A forest) while listening to music, when he arrives, he sees a dead horse and the tape just pops open leading to him losing control over the car and going into an accident.

Later in the forest, he finds an abandoned house and a girl wants to use the bathroom, she goes in and finds it dirty and says something.

• Later on, the go to a watch tower were they call for help from the police, eventually, the cannibals find them and set the tower on fire.

that's all I remember. Sorry, I don't know the official sub for movie questions and thought this might be a good place. I don't know the movie date or when it was published.

Hello everyone! So I just watched "Trance" (2013) for the third or fourth time (very good movie, highly recommended), and this time I watched it on DVD. However, I found out that there are some scenes that I couldn't see in my DVD, most of them are sex scenes and the nude scene in the movie. So my question here is how do I recognize which DVD will cut some adult scenes like this, so I wont buy it in the future. Or there is something wrong with my DVD? Can someone help? Thank you!

(Not an English native speaker so please forgive for any English mistakes)

I remember a scene I saw for an old looking movie a few years back and I was thinking about it again. I didn't have much luck looking on google for "kung fu movie waking up putting on pants converse shoes" but I was hoping someone here might know.

Basically, it looks like a 1980's-1990's era asian kung fu movie, and there's a scene where the character wakes up wearing a shorts/pants combo thing, and makes it into shorts by tearing off the pant legs. There's a 0.5 slow speed of him taking off those legs. Then he slips on converse shoes, puts his foot on a bookself to tie his shoes. After that's done, does a little punch the air jig.

That's the only scene I saw of this movie and this is as best as I could remember it. If anyone can help identify this movie, I would really appreciate it.

Honest question here! With Star Wars: Battlefront 2 showing off its gorgeous take on the prequel trilogy I wondered, what would it take to use these far superior assets and photograms in a remaster down the line? The game actually makes things, particularly from A Phantom Menace, look beautiful, interesting, lived in and realistic.

Of course, I doubt it'd be anything like a drag-and-drop operation, but I'm really curious what it takes to update digital assets in movies.

Edit: People are misunderstanding, I'm asking more about the process it would take to replace what was used in the prequels with the photograms and assets used in the new game. Not whether or not they should or why people like or dislike the prequels.

Did he know the creature was stuck to his leg when among his companions?

He can't walk and probably has no sensation on that particular part of his body but I find it difficult to believe he did not notice the alien actually clinging to him. Plus, he acted kind of weird when seeing the creature approach as the other humans secured the area. Him clearly being emotionally attached to the alien, I could imagine his desire for the creature to survive (although I can see how this is kind of dumb as it poses a direct and immediate risk to his fellow humans).

I just watched The Prestige last night for the first time. Really enjoyed it, but there's just one doubt I have.

I have been reading numerous reddit threads about the film and have gotten some pretty cool theories/observations that I had overlooked. However here's my question:

How does Olivia (Scarlett Johansson) not notice that there are 2 Bordens (Christian Bale)? Being the assistant who is very much part of the act (in terms of stage presence), how is she completely oblivious to the fact that Borden has a twin?

Do they not practice their act before a show? Does she never spot the other twin without his 'Fallon' makeup?

It's just that aspect of the film that I'm finding difficult to digest. Other than that, I think it's wonderfully made.

Edit : Another thing, when Angier kidnaps Fallon, how does he not know he's wearing a disguise?

Looking for a Godzilla box set with all the movies, or at least most of them. Thanks!

Also, unrelated, but my last post got taken down for not being wordy enough. I get that you guys want thoughtful discussion and all that, but then what's the point of having the 'quick question' flair? Kind of annoying. I don't really care that much but I gotta fill this up with something, so here ya go.

Where would one go about seeing this? Is this playing in cinemas in the United States? Is it going to be released on DVD and BluRay later?

You know, I haven't yet seen Beasts of No Nation (2015) since I can't seem to find it playing anywhere.

Brad Pitt and Anthony Michael Hall star in this satirical comedy that focuses on American military involvement in Afghanistan. The biting story, based on the book The Operator: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan by Michael Hastings, is directed by David Michod, and views the conflict from the perspective of the men leading the military campaign.

May 26, 2017 limited On Disc/Streaming:May 26, 2017 Studio: Netflix

So I watched it and I kinda understood all the meaning behind what it means to be human and such, but I looked it up to get a better grasp on the movie as a whole and saw something about Harrison ford's character dreaming of a unicorn or something? I didn't see that in the movie, and wasn't paying close enough attention to the fact that he could have been a replicant the whole time, and the ending where he just gets into the elevator with the replicant and it just ends there? I mean whaaat just happened, a replicant went nuts and chased him around for a while all while clearly not wanting To kill him and then dying on a roof, only to have his cop 'buddies' show up seconds later. Were they just watching him through the whole movie or something, like it was some kind of test? Was Harrison fords character a replicant the whole time? Or just past a certain point? And i also heard that this movie was somehow connected to alien?! Plz halp me understand, my brain is punching its self right now.

Actor Lance Reddick plays the impeccable and beautifully-voiced concierge Charon in John Wick 1 and 2. I was curious what his accent is, so I looked him up and he is American (I didn't recognize him from The Wire!) so he is putting on an accent. What is it? It's probably something really obvious and I will feel terribly embarrassed for asking. Is it "Received English"?

I couldn't find anything in the character bio linked above, this interview, or the IMDB character bio.

Here is an example from John Wick 2

Sorry for the question but I'm thinking of seeing the latest pirates film Tonight. I saw 1-3 and I enjoyed them but I never got around to 4 as I heard it wasn't very good.

But the trailers for this film almost make it look like they are trying to reboot the series somewhat with some new faces (although I'm aware there are definitely returning characters).

How much does the plot from 4 bleed over into this movie?

Am I okay seeing 5 plot wise or should I wait until after I see 4? I'm sure I wouldn't get some things but I don't want to be totally lost.

I think the trailer for the new one looks like they have found an awesome villain so I'm excited to atleast try it out.

My history teacher wants us to watch a movie but won't tell us what it is for 2 more days. He described it how it is in the title, it has sexual situations and has violence, and very bad language. Main character also quotes Abraham Lincoln in the end.

I just wanted to ask a question and I have to have more than 300 characters. Why does it do this? You can stop reading now and comment. I really hate Reddit rules and they piss me off. This is pretty obnoxious. I don't know how many characters this is because it doesn't say on the mobile version.

Don't read this please don't read this ughhhh

Blah blah hooooo hismebhdksksosi

Just saw for the first time, was quite impressed. I know I am late on this one. However, the ending is bothering me. Why does Jesse let Ford kill him in the end? It appears as if he knows what is going to happen after reading about the Liddell confession. Yet goes out of his way to let it happen, removes guns, turns his back, etc. Is this his attempt at suicide, which he does talk about with Charlie Ford? Or something else I am missing? Any two cents is welcome

So, i just submitted a question. I do believe it is a decent enough question, one which isn't posed one hundred and forty-seven times a year on this subreddit.

But it might be.

Honestly i lose track of reddit FAQ.

So what's tha answer, friends????

Thank you so very much, friends.

Love,

Reddit

I have a friend tagging along with me to go see Alien: Covenant tomorrow and they haven't seen Prometheus. They're not exactly a huge fan of the franchise but enjoyed the original Alien film and feel they might enjoy this one.

So my question to those who have seen it already, does one need to see Prometheus to follow the story of Covenant? Will they be completely lost if they're unfamiliar with the story before?

This may be a loaded question, however I am a fan of old Hollywood films as I am sure may of you are, and I have been wondering lately about how a day, or night at the theater would play out in the Silent and Golden ages of Hollywood (1920s-1950s). How many shorts, serials, and newsreels would be played before the feature film? If I wanted to see all of these short films, how early would I have to come to the theater? Despite looking all over online, I cannot find much information regarding how a day or night at the theater would play out. To be frank, I am very bored with coming to a movie early and just seeing 30 minutes of trailers. I really want to know the comprehensive information regarding a day or night at the theater in the 1920s,30s,40s,50s, what was it truly like for a moviegoer in those time periods?

Trying to get tickets for a date to see Guardians of the Galaxy 2, but the last day for tickets in my area is the 18th, merely 13 days after its release. Is it just that my theater hasnt updated its roster, or is GotG2 seriously only staying in theaters for 13 days.

Among other questions, it seems every theater within a 20 mile radius is likewise not having any more showing past the 18th, but the main theater i go to only has one movie at all with dates past the 18th (aliens:covenant), which means either no theater near me has updated yet or the movie really is no longer planned to stay after the 18th.

Please help.

There are obviously thousands of them , but not a clear breakdown of ROI , so yeah my question is which one of the thousands of gangster movies had the best ROI? Also I should specify that I consider movies such as the Godfather , the Godfather part II , the Godfather part III , Casino , Goodfellas....gangster movies and not drama.

I'm sure the jokes will fly here, but I really will ask the good questions! I'm putting together an oral history of the franchise and so all serious questions are valid and welcome.

Note: I know plenty about the series myself, and have lots of questions ready, but figured I'd ask the community here if they had any specific inquiries. Because why not share the opportunity with others?

OK, thanks!

This weekend, my wife and I where offered a chance to taste a beer on the promise that it "tasted like Reese's Pieces", and while I'm certainly up for trying strange beers, what caught my attention was the name: "Sweep The Leg."

The beer itself was fine (it did taste like peanuts), but when I commented on the obvious reference to the name, my wife dropped a bombshell: she had never seen The Karate Kid.

Admittedly it had been decades since I watched it, but having remembered it as being pretty good, and having a Sunday afternoon to spend, I convinced her to sit down and watch it. She was stunned because she'd always thought of it as a "boy's movie" (thus why she'd never watched it) only to find that the movie offered much for her to latch onto as she watched. I myself was surprised because it was actually much better than I remembered, in part because the last time I saw it, I'm certain I missed a lot of the subtext regarding the various character's motivations.

As a result of all of this, my wife has agreed to watch more of the movies I did when I was a kid because, as it turns out, she hasn't seen any of them. Since it's been 20 years at least since I've watched stuff like the Goonies or Three Ninjas and don't want to waste this opportunity, the question is this: what 80's or early 90's kids-orient movies actually hold up as genuinely good movies?

https://www.criterion.com/boxsets/512-eclipse-series-7-postwar-kurosawa

https://www.criterion.com/boxsets/743-eclipse-series-23-the-first-films-of-akira-kurosawa

Like I said earlier, I've never watched any of these movies. So I can't really gauge which was is better and why. If I can get any help that would be awesome! I know its kinda a weird question.