grudlian.

but...but Space Buddies is a classic! If anything, I assume it makes me look even stranger to get Xanadu and Rossellini's war trilogy at the same time.

So, when I'm checking out HDTGM movies, I can stop also grabbing some legitimately good movie to ensure the librarian doesn't think I'm an idiot for an inter library loan of Geostorm?

That's not fair picking two songs written by George. If we took Elvis' top 20 songs against Ringo's top 20, it would be tough choice in my mind. Most Elvis songs aren't good but most Ringo songs aren't great either. Almost every Ringo song that isn't a single (and isn't on the albums Ringo and Goodnight Vienna), it's pretty boring listening.

I was never a fan. I guess I can kind of appreciate his spreading rock music to racist white people. He had some good songs but meh overall. I can see his appeal but, to answer the Tarantino question, Elvis ranks a little above solo Ringo and below almost anything else Beatles related. I saw Elvis And Nixon before we all found out Spacey was a child rapist. You're not missing much.

I worked at a theatre at the time and this bombed hard. Even the teenage girls who worked at the theatre didn't seem interested. This was the first movie I remember where the tide turned against paranormal romance as the next big thing. You mention coattail movies but Beautiful Creatures came out even after the Twilight parody movie Vampires Suck. I don't know when the books came out but you're way too late to the party if the parody movie is already out.

I have definitely seen Bedknobs And Broomsticks way way more times than Mary Poppins but I'd still recognize him as the dad from Mary Poppins first.

If you've been to Orlando, you'll understand why it's on the United States' enemies list.

This episode was great. I completely agree with June's analysis. I think the movie is trying to talk about the dangers of ignoring global warming and generally not caring about the environment. But the whole movie is about "well, we can fix it completely in three years of shit gets real." So, it's really anti caring about the environment. The frying an egg on the street made me look into how hot that needs to be. Bill Nye found out you could fry an egg at temperatures as low as 130 degrees Fahrenheit but it takes 20 minutes at that temperature. To get a firm fried egg, it needs to be 158 degrees inside.

Just an FYI. The technique you're describing is called Mickey Mousing.

I have only seen Birdemic by itself. I enjoyed it just fine.

I just saw him live last week (as Alice Cooper not Herod) and he was theatrical but very stiff. I don't know how much is being near 70 or what.

John Cena got me pretty excited. I get why wrestling smarks may dislike him but I feel like people don't appreciate him enough. I'd love to hear Cena defend The Marine which is HDTGM on its own but I can't imagine Cena would nite the hand that feeds him that much. And speaking of people not appreciated enough: RIP Isao Takahata

Sucker Punch really is one of the worst. Not only is it completely misogynist, but Zack Snyder (and fans of Sucker Punch) have tried to argue it's feminist. So, I just imagine all the comments would be "NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!" repeated for two hours. I'm personally kind of glad I won't be able to make the Mac and Me get together. I tried to watch it once and couldn't do it. I saw clips of an ET ripoff porn once (I want it to be known, I didn't search this out) that made me want to die; Mac and Me looked close enough that it literally nauseated me.

NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Vin, please just grow up and be an adult for the few months it takes to make a movie.

I'm not able to do it on the 13th. So, I vote everyone else watch Sucker Punch.

Thank you! This answers my questions and I think confirms Cameron H. I guess I was wrong.

Its not just that I've seen better movies cover worse characters (though there definitely are and it makes this movie look terrible in comparison). I'm curious what the intent of this movie is. Is the movie supposed to have us ruminate on morality? That's what truly makes this movie bad to me: it feels like it's pointless.

sorry but the only moral line worthy of discussion is liking or hating this movie...your either with us or against us

What's bad in the first 10 minutes (or so) is two people have sex with people who are parental figures for and one of them cheats on their significant other to do this. Some people may not feel it's bad. I acknowledge their relationship crosses lines for some and not for others. But my problem with Adore is characters cross lines in other movies all the time. Crossing a line doesn't necessarily make a movie worth discussing or even interesting. For example, I think killing is morally wrong but when I watch Commando, I don't have a discussion on when John Matrix crossed a line. I don't think "Well, he was killing to save his home and daughter. That's okay I guess, but I draw the line at lying to Sully about killing him last because that's premeditated murder." Is Commando a meditation on where the line is for killing? So, my question is what makes this movie, to you, raise interesting questions when many movies have characters break social taboos? Because, to me, this movie doesn't raise any questions and I still don't think that was the intent of the film.

The problem is, in my mind, that not judging characters isn't reason enough for this movie to exist. A lot of movies don't judge their characters. A lot of movies even celebrate immoral characters much worse than anyone here. If the movie's purpose was having the audience judge them, I don't think it accomplishes that. Partly because no one's behavior gets much worse than the first 10 minutes of the movie. So, they either cross the line 10 minutes in or they probably never do. I can't imagine there are many people who make it 90 minutes in and say they've finally gone too far when they give up their daughters. Since there are no conflicts that aren't immediately resolved, it could be a slice of life movie but it's unusual to have a slice of life movie covering 40 years that really only focuses on a relationship. Not to say it can't be done but from the synopsis of the story, it seems like that wasn't the point. That's why this movie is such a turd in my mind. Its not really about anything except this four way relationship. But it doesn't explore the relationship in any meaningful way. Why are these people in love? Why are these people eschewing social norms for this relationship? Why anything? You and Taylor Anne are totally free to like this movie. And I could be wrong. To me, the movie's goals are muddled at best plus it really is insufferably boring. So, it's just a failure all around (except it does look nice and Wright/Watts are good as always).

Having a line "We've crossed a line" isn't the same thing as the movie's purpose is the make the audience question "Where was the line crossed?" A lot of movies have characters lamenting "going too far" over something they've done, but I don't always feel that the filmmakers want us to have a debate on the characters morality.That's my question: Is the movie's purpose to question when the characters crossed the rubicon in their relationships? Again, I'm honestly not sure. If it isn't the purpose, then I genuinely don't understand the purpose of the film. If it is, then I guess I completely missed it. I think your take is the most logical because there are functionally no stakes. There are stakes, technically, because people give up spouses, careers, children for their relationships. But every obstacle is resolved quickly and returns to where they were before. I suppose this could be a sexual version of Funny Games which posits pretty explicitly, "If you don't like what you're seeing, stop watching this movie." I could have said, "Hmmm...this sexual relationship is gross, I'll turn this movie off." But, I don't know, that wasn't very clear to me while watching it. I thought the purpose was to be scandalous and titillating but it didn't achieve that either. I think it's definitely a bad movie because I don't think it achieved whatever it was trying to achieve. While I'm not sure what that even was, all it managed to get out of me was boredom and mild confusion over which son was which. It's possible this is all because I've seen better movies cover much more taboo subjects than Adore. The filmmakers can't help it that I've seen other movies but they can at least their purpose clear which I don't think it was. I found Jason perfectly voiced my criticisms on the movie. There are a lot of good movies within this movie but none of them are explored. They introduce a new obstacle that could be its own movie but it never once pays off in a meaningful way. I think I would have felt the exact same if the movie consisted of the first 20 minutes then cut directly to the final shot of everyone on the floating dock content in their relationships. Even though a lot technically happens, it feels like nothing happens because absolutely every plot development is addressed and over with in five minutes and none of the characters seemingly care. Maybe you're right. Maybe this movie is all about audience meditation on the character's actions because nothing affects the four main characters at all.

Genuine question: Are we supposed to be uncomfortable? Are we supposed wonder where the line is? That would at least given the movie a purpose. That might explain why the movie has practically no plot or other characters or why things continually escalate with literally zero payoff or repercussions (losing the grandchildren is but no one in the movie cares).

I definitely hear you on everything you've said and your earlier post. As gross as this entire movie premise is, I never actually felt icky watching it. I think that's because the movie is messy in its execution and doesn't commit to any of its ideas though. It ends up just being boring to me. Compare that to something like Call Me By Your Name where I felt it was kind of gross but I still enjoyed it. But Call Me By Your Name also commits to its central premise, develops its characters and doesn't have a bunch of ideas happening at once. If Adore pared down to one of its many ideas worthy of being its own movie, it would be such a better movie.

This is something I really go back and forth on with this movie. I think its a gross plot because Wright and Watts are mother figures. But I also think they are consenting adults and the sons initiate everything. But then I also think, as June said in Ladybugs, this is really only considered acceptable because it's happening to men instead of women. Then I think if I'm just teetering on whataboutism with that. If the movie had given in and made the main characters hedonistic libertines who can't control their taboo passions, I might have respected the movie more. Since the writer wrote Dangerous Liasons, Atonement, Dangerous Method, I think that's what the movie wanted to do.

Boss Baby also learns something valuable and changes because of his new found knowledge. I'd put that alone above Trump.