Helpful Links

The cinematography, the winter landscape was perfect

(I mean, black & white and not silent)

- Boris Karloff in The Body Snatcher (1945)

- Barbara Stanwyck in Meet John Doe (1941 I think)

- Humphrey Bogart in The Maltese Falcon (1941)

- James Cagney in The Public Enemy (1931 I think)

Following the silent era, it was common to see actors and directors in films struggling to adapt to sound—some succeeded, while others did not—a process depicted very well in Singin' in the Rain. It is, therefore, quite fascinating to observe how the greatest actors of that time performed in their films; their style was vastly different from what we see today, yet also distinct from the approach used during the silent era.

When tf did we become so puritanical again? Lately I’ve seen so many takes where (mostly) young people complain about sex scenes in movies. And it’s not about whether this or that scene belongs there, whether it’s tastefully and organically executed, no, people complain about sex scenes in general, that at most they should be faded to black but other than that, never shown.
I can’t accept the take that sex scenes are always unnecessary, or even that hinting at them is always enough. Not always. Because sex scenes can reveal a lot of relationships‘ dynamics between characters, the way they treat, perceive, and love each other, something that dialogues and kisses alone can’t demonstrate, that’s why sometimes showing it more or less explicitly really matters and fading to black alone can’t convey all that. Yes, love can be portrayed through different kinds of interaction, such as hugging, kissing, tension, the way they look at each other, etc, but these are not interchangeable. These things matter, but so does sex.
I perfectly support standing against misogyny, objectification, or just poorly executed sex scenes, or the presence of such where they are not necessary (though it’s kinda subjective what is required and what’s not, and one can always just fast-forward, it’s not like they’ve taken this option from you). But I will never accept this neopuritanical mindset against intimacy on-screen in general (as a progressive one, as a feminist, as a relatively young girl as well, who just pushed her thirties). This is not progress, this is not new ethics, this is just this old as time shitty purity culture loved so much by religious fanatics but dressed as progressivism. We’ve fought so hard and so long to get rid of that, yet here we go again.
P.s Especially it makes me roll my eyes and want to never open them again when someone seriously compares sex scenes to things like using the toilet („shitting is also necessary, but we don’t want to see it“), like, WTF? How delulu you have to be to really compare human relationships, intimate closeness, and the pinnacle of emotion and love to the act of relieving oneself and to bodily waste…

Has anyone seen this movie...? Is it good i stumbled upon this today saw Richard gere and i wanted to ask!

Someone took me to see it in the theater. I was 10.

I just finished Night of the Hunter and what a treat! My eyes were glued to the screen the entire time. Does anyone have film recommendations for movies similar to this? I'm looking for movies where the entire thing feels like a bad dream, beautiful but harrowing. Bonus points for creative lighting, looming sillouettes and claustrophobic settings.

Other films I've enjoyed with similar vibes: Eyes without a Face, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari

Give me your best recommendations!!

It's funny how Hollywood seems to want to throw Nicholas Cage in everything from acting to voice acting. Me personally, I don't care for his style. I must admit that PIG 2021 was his best performance, yet hardly nobody, even his fans knows about this film.

Clayface is a veritable delight and a strong addition, not only to the DC stable, but also to body horror movies in general.

When James Gunn took over the creative mantle at DC Studios, one of the promises he made was that the DCU would not be beholden to any one genre or tone. And so far, their output has more or less lived up to that promise.

From the adult animated offering of Creature Commandos, to the classic comic book stylings of Superman and Supergirl, to the True Detective-inspired show, Lanterns, the DCU has been exploring all corners of the tonal map. But with Clayface, I think they have delivered something that has a stamp of quality from start to finish.

Starring relative newcomer Tom Rhys Harries, the movie follows Matt Hagen's journey from beloved movie star to a villain out for revenge. And, as with all great villain origin stories (Mr. Freeze, anyone?), tragedy drives this one, allowing the audience to sympathise with the protagonist whilst not necessarily condoning his means to an end.

Harries is simply great. His chiselled features, while undeniably attractive, are almost marble-like, and you can see why they cast him to portray a character known for his ability to be sculpted and moulded. But fear not, even if you are not immersed in Clayface lore, this DC film requires no prior knowledge of the source material. In fact, aside from an Easter Egg here or there, you would hardly know this was a DC movie.

The script from Mike Flanagan and Hossein Amini never falters, showing us the descent of Hagen's life at an even pace, unafraid to draw out moments to build cinematic tension and even inject a little humour once in a while.

Director James Watkins has done a phenomenal job with this film, using CG sparingly and, from what I have read, relying heavily on a large amount of practical effects to bring the malleable nature of Hagen's affliction to life. And when Hagen is at the height of his "abilities", Watkins cleverly uses transitions and framing to almost make you forget that you are watching something that is not quite natural.

This is a star-making turn for Harries, and Clayface has shot up to become my favourite film in the DCU. I really hope the powers that be at DC Studios give James Watkins more films to direct, as the DCU desperately needs more films of this calibre.

If there is one downside to this movie, it would be that its R16 rating limits the audience who can see it in theatres. Don't get me wrong, the movie uses that rating to great effect, accentuating the gore, but I hope that it doesn't negatively affect its box office numbers.

Please do go check this film out in theatres. And oh, there are no end-credit sequences.

WEAPONS - RESIDENT EVIL - WHALEFALL

The Austin Abrams Trilogy folks! 😅

Which other actor/s have played similar characters in at least 3 different & unrelated films???