dparasol

Watched with a friend for the first time since...like, the year it came out I think. I remembered *almost* nothing. It really only takes a few seconds for a natural-born hatred of this film to set in. About the only thing it does right is the super hero having an alliterative name. Here's the thing. Conceptually, there's a lot of things that this movie does that are good. The friend describing G-Girl putting out a fire idiotically, as she pulls some premium silver age bullshit...but all the things that this movie does wrong are constantly piling up every single scene. Still...god dammit, this movie started winning me over at some point. The moment I realized the villain is Suzy Eddie Izzard, I knew I would be going against the grain on this. The sex scene is a transcendent work of art on the same level as the sex scene from Buffy that destroyed that building, and serves as an incredible actualization of Larry Niven's 1969 article *Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex*, which posited that sex between a Superman and a regular woman would be utterly disastrous and traumatic for said regular woman. Here's the thing that's very clear to me: this is very obviously a raunchy comedy made by somebody familiar largely with Silver Age superhero comics, and his interpretation of an emotionally-stunted, obsessive superwoman reminds me a lot of Superboy Prime in concept. You may be shocked to read this, but 2.5 does mean I enjoy this film, and there are, in fact, several Ivan Reitman features I would easily place this ahead of. Frankly, the writing is terrible, the performances are lamentable, and everything that happens in it is incredibly stupid. The dialogue threatens to torpedo this film on a scene-per-scene basis. But if you look closely, you can kind of see the idea, the vision that Reitman wanted to accomplish, which really, really totally crumbles in the final act of the film, with the exception of Izzard's utterly transformative performance, which as per usual is too good for this movie. Still, 2.5 means I enjoyed it, my friends. But...who the fuck thought to trust this writer with Fantastic Four and Thor after *this* fucking movie? No wonder those movies fucking sucked. "Please, I am not *super*. I am not a *villain*. I'm just a *regular man* like yourself with a thousand times more *money*, *intelligence* and *taste*." alt. quote: "Girls all really stick together, don't you?" alt. alt. quote: "Can I say something? Her boyfriend's a model, OK, a male model. I don't think she'd be interested in a guy like me." alt. alt. alt. quote: "So, why'd you call me?" "Steve was cheating on me." "Oh, thank god!" alt. alt. alt. alt. quote: "*Stop calling me Barry*!"

Watched with friends. So, first of all, obviously a step in a better direction compared to the all-encompassing studio nightmare we have otherwise been heading towards for the last 20 years. And I *do* think it's good. It's a very nice directorial debut for a horror filmmaker, and Parsons got props from Duplass, so that counts for how effective he is as a director. But, while I think the film is good, I'm a bit discomfited by the fact that a film with relatively basic themes that are generally communicated pretty well now comes off as a major accomplishment in some respect. Surely, this can't be the best we can expect from major films from now on, can it? As for the themes themselves, I liked them. Given that many diseases leading to psychosis are hereditary in nature, I really would have liked for Mary to have openly wondered if she was experiencing psychosis herself. And I wish Mark Duplass had a larger role. But on the whole, I think this movie had more hits than misses throughout its runtime. I think a lot of people thought the pirate was super stupid and goofy. I didn't really think it was *incredibly* goofy, but admittedly I probably have different standards than most people. To me, there's something about the concept of the backrooms which asks you to eventually dive into gonzo material, and I'm glad they did. I'm just left with the sensation that it can go much, much farther than this. "I am a fucking architect!"

Well, finally got around to watching *this* one, and I'm conflicted. Truth be told, I like it just as much as the last one, but this is a film that succeeds in part because the ideas are pretty bold (and I'm not talking about the infection inducing a psychiatric condition), not necessarily because of the execution, which is occasionally lacking. I really *wanted* to like this more, and I think with a stronger stylistic hand at the helm it probably could have even been a fiver for me. Ralph Fiennes continues to impress as Dr. Kelson, although it seems like this will be the last we'll see of him. Alfie Williams is a bit disappointing, only because it feels like somebody who never went through the last film's events. The others are mostly pretty good, although I would have liked a bit more out of Jimmy Crystal, to be honest! But, of course, two things that absolutely elevate this film: the friendship between Kelson and Samson, and the Iron Maiden show. I honestly think this movie *would* be five stars if it was just a zombie-doctor hangout flick with an Iron Maiden number and a pyrotechnics show. "And you're in a bit of a bind, too." "How so?" "Because if you can't help me with my problem, I'm going to force-feed you your own intestines until you can no longer breathe." "Yes, that is a bind."

Watched with family last night, after Linda Linda Linda. This movie is a lot less fun and light-hearted than that movie was, though. I did not harvest a quote because I was lazy!!! If you want a real review, check my last one. :)