Trailer Talk

[RyanSz 3140]

 

Oh they totally knew she was going to die. I don't know how or anything but they had marked that pole with their symbol and I believe they're the ones who left the deer out in the road. It was all part of their greater plan to put Charlie's soul into Peter because she needed to be in a male body. Part of me even believes that the reason she decapitated the bird was because she inherently knew that's how she was going to die.

 

I just can't exactly figure out how Charlie was groomed and why Peter couldn't have been used to begin with. Charlie certainly wasn't born as Paimon so I'm a little confused why it was Charlie.

 

I can at least answer that to some extent.

When Toni Collette first goes to the support group, she mentions that because of her problems between the family and her mom, the husband started to enforce a no contact rule against her, whether that was a restraining order or just an edict from the couple it's not explained. So grandma couldn't groom Peter to get him ready for the possession. Then in the same meeting Collette says that once Charlie was born she decided to mend the bridge with her mom, leading to grandma sinking her hooks into her, according to Collette. She then tells Charlie that grandma was the one to actually nurse Charlie, so presumably the was enchanting herself when feeding Charlie so that it passed onto her. Then when she died the grandma's friend gave her an incantation that would bring Charlie back to the earthly realm and have her start possessing the family, settling finally on Peter so Paimon gets a male body and Charlie's spirit is in the body.

 

[taylor anne photo 11311]

I can at least answer that to some extent.

When Toni Collette first goes to the support group, she mentions that because of her problems between the family and her mom, the husband started to enforce a no contact rule against her, whether that was a restraining order or just an edict from the couple it's not explained. So grandma couldn't groom Peter to get him ready for the possession. Then in the same meeting Collette says that once Charlie was born she decided to mend the bridge with her mom, leading to grandma sinking her hooks into her, according to Collette. She then tells Charlie that grandma was the one to actually nurse Charlie, so presumably the was enchanting herself when feeding Charlie so that it passed onto her. Then when she died the grandma's friend gave her an incantation that would bring Charlie back to the earthly realm and have her start possessing the family, settling finally on Peter so Paimon gets a male body and Charlie's spirit is in the body.

 

Yeah I remember all of that

 

explanation plus seeing the miniature that showed how far her mother was going, but to me that still didn't quite explain why they still couldn't go with Peter. He was only 4 at the time Charlie was born so was this a thing that they truly needed a child from birth? Was 4 years old really honestly too late to transfer anything into Peter?

 

[grudlian. 4725]

I can at least answer that to some extent.

When Toni Collette first goes to the support group, she mentions that because of her problems between the family and her mom, the husband started to enforce a no contact rule against her, whether that was a restraining order or just an edict from the couple it's not explained. So grandma couldn't groom Peter to get him ready for the possession. Then in the same meeting Collette says that once Charlie was born she decided to mend the bridge with her mom, leading to grandma sinking her hooks into her, according to Collette. She then tells Charlie that grandma was the one to actually nurse Charlie, so presumably the was enchanting herself when feeding Charlie so that it passed onto her. Then when she died the grandma's friend gave her an incantation that would bring Charlie back to the earthly realm and have her start possessing the family, settling finally on Peter so Paimon gets a male body and Charlie's spirit is in the body.

 

so, at the end of the movie, Charlie's spirit was where?

 

I think my being confused on people's intentions, specifically Joan, kind of killed the scares for me. Once they revealed Joan was doing *something* to Peter, I spent a lot of the movie wondering why. The final reveal seemed almost anticlimactic in a sense because it's kind of a rushed explanation that, oh, by the way, the grandmother and Joan are pagans and paganism is real. There are some hints throughout but it still felt surprising but it felt like, "oh, okay"

 

 

[RyanSz 3140]

I'm guessing 4 is too old for Pagans, similar to how Anakin being 8 when he started training as a Jedi was technically too old for the Jedi Council. As for where Charlie was, she was now possessing Peter, as shown by him doing that clicking noise after he gets up from jumping out of the window.

[grudlian. 4725]

I'm guessing 4 is too old for Pagans, similar to how Anakin being 8 when he started training as a Jedi was technically too old for the Jedi Council. As for where Charlie was, she was now possessing Peter, as shown by him doing that clicking noise after he gets up from jumping out of the window.

 

So, Paimon is in Charlie who is in Peter? I guess I thought the tongue clicking was a manifestation of Paimon. My thinking is that Paimon was in Charlie. She died. Then Paimon was disembodied until Toni Collette started the ceremony with her family then it entered Peter.

 

I guess I'm getting bogged down in details that aren't super important.

 

 

[taylor anne photo 11311]

 

So, Paimon is in Charlie who is in Peter? I guess I thought the tongue clicking was a manifestation of Paimon. My thinking is that Paimon was in Charlie. She died. Then Paimon was disembodied until Toni Collette started the ceremony with her family then it entered Peter.

 

I guess I'm getting bogged down in details that aren't super important.

 

 

 

Charlie is Paimon so Charlie is inside Peter. Joan says to Peter at the end "It's okay Charlie you're now in your proper male body and are one of the kings of hell yadda yadda."

 

If Charlie had been born a boy everything would have been already in motion because they had already began to groom the baby. So all they needed was a male host with the grandmother's blood and their plans could be finalized. But that's another thing I wanted to know was why the grandmother was considered the queen and why it had to be her descendants, but that's probably also another thing of details that aren't super important. Cause what I did like about this movie is that we get exactly the same amount of info as the family does (save poor Gabriel Byrne).

 

Although that does remind me that I also wanted more of Gabriel's character. It was obvious that he himself was a therapist of psychiatrist and with the history of mental illness in Toni's family I want to know how they met and a deeper look into their relationship, cause you can see at one point he was kinda baiting her to talk to him and she was like nope and stopped it and he just went "No? Okay." So there's an obvious dynamic where she can feel he's not listening as a husband but rather a professional. It was just very interesting to me. Especially since she felt like she had to hide going to a grief counseling group from him, which in turn made him think she was digging up her own mother's grave.

 

[RyanSz 3140]

 

Charlie is Paimon so Charlie is inside Peter. Joan says to Peter at the end "It's okay Charlie you're now in your proper male body and are one of the kings of hell yadda yadda."

 

If Charlie had been born a boy everything would have been already in motion because they had already began to groom the baby. So all they needed was a male host with the grandmother's blood and their plans could be finalized. But that's another thing I wanted to know was why the grandmother was considered the queen and why it had to be her descendants, but that's probably also another thing of details that aren't super important. Cause what I did like about this movie is that we get exactly the same amount of info as the family does (save poor Gabriel Byrne).

 

Although that does remind me that I also wanted more of Gabriel's character. It was obvious that he himself was a therapist of psychiatrist and with the history of mental illness in Toni's family I want to know how they met and a deeper look into their relationship, cause you can see at one point he was kinda baiting her to talk to him and she was like nope and stopped it and he just went "No? Okay." So there's an obvious dynamic where she can feel he's not listening as a husband but rather a professional. It was just very interesting to me. Especially since she felt like she had to hide going to a grief counseling group from him, which in turn made him think she was digging up her own mother's grave.

 

 

That's another thing I was wondering about with concern to how he died. When Toni first tries to destroy the notebook she sets on fire along with it, so she understandably thinks by destroying it and sacrificing herself will unchain the connection between Charlie and the family. So how did it then jump to Gabriel Byrne and just engulf him in a mini-inferno? Was this another mind game on the part of the cult where they led Toni to believe this was the route to take?

 

Also I think Granny was queen cultist maybe because she had come the closest to bringing Paimon into the world through her son. So much so that the possession drove him to suicide. Maybe the cultists felt that since she did so good with him they'd let her try again with her grandkids.

 

[RyanSz 3140]

Good or bad, this looks like a prime HDTGM film.

[firsttimecallerlongtimelistenr 3590]

[RyanSz 3140]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9fXbkiKfmY

This movie was actually really good. The action was really fluid and they did just enough explanation of the science to not be too in the woods and mixes in dark humor so that it isn't too dark of a film.

[Cinco DeNio 5290]

Gerard Butler has a new one that looks prime for the HDTGM treatment.

 

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

Why yes, I would like to travel across America accompanied by Jason Mantzoukas...

 

[WatchOutForSnakes 807]

Can I like this 1000x please? 

[SideofMcG 225]

On 9/17/2018 at 2:45 PM, Cinco DeNio said:

Gerard Butler has a new one that looks prime for the HDTGM treatment.

As soon as I saw that trailer I had the same reaction! GEOSTORM!!!! 

[Elektra Boogaloo 3371]

Zouks is doing a Q&A following LONG DUMB ROAD today in NYC at 7:10 (I can't go but if any of you can, the HDTGM twitter says there are tickets still available). I wonder if the Gerard Butler movie is showing at that theater too because I bet he wants to see it.

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

On 11/13/2018 at 5:27 PM, Elektra Boogaloo said:

Zouks is doing a Q&A following LONG DUMB ROAD today in NYC at 7:10 (I can't go but if any of you can, the HDTGM twitter says there are tickets still available). I wonder if the Gerard Butler movie is showing at that theater too because I bet he wants to see it.

My dream is to have Zouks co-star with Butler in either a GEOSTOOOOOORRRRRM or Den of Thieves sequel. So for that, EVERYBODY on this board has gotta see Long Dumb Road. Let's make it a hit, people!

[RyanSz 3140]

If you guys haven't seen them already, I highly recommend both Widows and Creed 2. Both had some slight issues but were still great movies.

[grudlian. 4725]

11 hours ago, RyanSz said:

If you guys haven't seen them already, I highly recommend both Widows and Creed 2. Both had some slight issues but were still great movies.

Widows was awesome. I've never seen an audience so vocal and into their reactions to what was on screen. I left the theatre wishing it had been longer and then found out it was based on a 9 hour miniseries. So, that explains away most of my issues of it feeling a bit jumpy in places.

My real issue is I can't find the miniseries anywhere to watch legally.

[RyanSz 3140]

1 hour ago, grudlian. said:

Widows was awesome. I've never seen an audience so vocal and into their reactions to what was on screen. I left the theatre wishing it had been longer and then found out it was based on a 9 hour miniseries. So, that explains away most of my issues of it feeling a bit jumpy in places.

My real issue is I can't find the miniseries anywhere to watch legally.

My biggest issues with it were that they really showed their hand too early with the twist, and the fact that Cynthia Erivo's character is kinda just thrown into the mix with her having no real stakes in the game. Overall the performances were fantastic, especially Daniel Kaluuya and Brian Tyree Henry who blended calm demeanor with ruthless sinister. It was also amazing to see how Steve McQueen, only directing his fourth film, pulled in such a stacked cast of A-list talent, and that none of them felt underused or overbearing in the film. I feel you won't have to wait too long for the British series to become available, as like with House of Cards, they released the original in America on streaming and DVD now that it's shown to a critical success. It being an old TV series also makes the bit McQeen saying it was a passion project of his  during the AMC theater intro video make sense.

[grudlian. 4725]

6 hours ago, RyanSz said:

My biggest issues with it were that they really showed their hand too early with the twist, and the fact that Cynthia Erivo's character is kinda just thrown into the mix with her having no real stakes in the game. Overall the performances were fantastic, especially Daniel Kaluuya and Brian Tyree Henry who blended calm demeanor with ruthless sinister. It was also amazing to see how Steve McQueen, only directing his fourth film, pulled in such a stacked cast of A-list talent, and that none of them felt underused or overbearing in the film. I feel you won't have to wait too long for the British series to become available, as like with House of Cards, they released the original in America on streaming and DVD now that it's shown to a critical success. It being an old TV series also makes the bit McQeen saying it was a passion project of his  during the AMC theater intro video make sense.

Regarding the major twist:

 

I don't think it makes much sense that he faked his own death given what we know of the character.  Looking back after the movie, his motivation was kind of thin that left his own wife and much have admitted to the wife of one of his crew who must have had no problem with him murdering everyone. I assume the miniseries fleshed that out a little bit more. In the moment though, I didn't care. I ate that shit up and I didn't see it coming at all.

[RyanSz 3140]

58 minutes ago, grudlian. said:

Regarding the major twist:

  Hide contents

I don't think it makes much sense that he faked his own death given what we know of the character.  Looking back after the movie, his motivation was kind of thin that left his own wife and much have admitted to the wife of one of his crew who must have had no problem with him murdering everyone. I assume the miniseries fleshed that out a little bit more. In the moment though, I didn't care. I ate that shit up and I didn't see it coming at all.

In the opening scene when the crew is gunned down, for a split second it popped in my head that he might have faked his death, but then you see the closeup of the body getting riddled with bullets. Yet to reveal it midway in the movie was kinda lackluster, but it made sense given the flashbacks of how the marriage was fairly rocky after the son's death, and that Carrie Coon's relationship with her husband didn't seem that solid from what was shown. From what I read about the series. the husband actually takes part in the heist as a mysterious "fourth woman/man" and reveals himself in the finale of the first series. I was also kinda surprised that the older Manning brother wouldn't be looking for payback for his brother being killed by the widows, as I assume he knew about their plot to rob from Colin Farrell as they were keeping each other informed of both their goings on.

[WatchOutForSnakes 807]

2 hours ago, grudlian. said:

Regarding the major twist:

  Hide contents

I don't think it makes much sense that he faked his own death given what we know of the character.  Looking back after the movie, his motivation was kind of thin that left his own wife and much have admitted to the wife of one of his crew who must have had no problem with him murdering everyone. I assume the miniseries fleshed that out a little bit more. In the moment though, I didn't care. I ate that shit up and I didn't see it coming at all.

I also ate it up at the theater! I'm going to have to see it again to see everything I clearly missed the first time. Oh, I loved Widows!  Powerhouse performances. I really do wish the miniseries were available. I can't even find discs that will play on US equipment. 

[grudlian. 4725]

1 hour ago, RyanSz said:

 

  Hide contents

In the opening scene when the crew is gunned down, for a split second it popped in my head that he might have faked his death, but then you see the closeup of the body getting riddled with bullets. Yet to reveal it midway in the movie was kinda lackluster, but it made sense given the flashbacks of how the marriage was fairly rocky after the son's death, and that Carrie Coon's relationship with her husband didn't seem that solid from what was shown. From what I read about the series. the husband actually takes part in the heist as a mysterious "fourth woman/man" and reveals himself in the finale of the first series. I was also kinda surprised that the older Manning brother wouldn't be looking for payback for his brother being killed by the widows, as I assume he knew about their plot to rob from Colin Farrell as they were keeping each other informed of both their goings on.

 

I felt kind of the same way because I thought "Did Liam Neeson just want to work with Steve McQueen badly enough that he took this tiny part?" But then they started with flashbacks and I figured his role would get bigger.

I have to assume there was a lot of debate on what they needed to cut to get this down to feature length. I wish there had been another 20-30 minutes just to fill in some character stuff to give us a little more reasoning for the less logical character choices. Like you said with Cynthia Erivo. You cut hair and babysit. You're down for a heist now?

 

19 minutes ago, WatchOutForSnakes said:

I also ate it up at the theater! I'm going to have to see it again to see everything I clearly missed the first time. Oh, I loved Widows!  Powerhouse performances. I really do wish the miniseries were available. I can't even find discs that will play on US equipment. 

My theater went bananas for it. Audible gasps. From that moment on, I just gave into the movie so every twist and turn worked on me 100%

I almost think the marketing is a bit off. I was expecting a slow burn drama, high stakes action almost like Heat. But it's more fun and crazy once it gets going.

[RyanSz 3140]

It's easy to see why the miniseries isn't available in the US as it seems like one of those cult series that just came out in a crowded TV schedule in both the UK and US. Hell just look up the series on Google and you can see it looks like an 80s soap opera from that time, if you didn't know what it was about. I'm assuming that it will come out to match the release of the movie on video,

[grudlian. 4725]

2 hours ago, RyanSz said:

It's easy to see why the miniseries isn't available in the US as it seems like one of those cult series that just came out in a crowded TV schedule in both the UK and US. Hell just look up the series on Google and you can see it looks like an 80s soap opera from that time, if you didn't know what it was about. I'm assuming that it will come out to match the release of the movie on video,

None of this is that surprising. Parts of this movie felt like a prestige soap opera. Plus it's an 80s British miniseries which, based on the handful I've seen, they are awfully melodramatic even the ones held up as legitimately great by critics.