The Unofficial Ongoing Current Movies in Theaters thread

[dookeyXXX]

LOVE LIES BLEEDING
Aside from the obvious comparisons—Thelma & Louise, Bound, Wild Things—director and co-screenwriter Rose Glass’s latest genre blast has more in common with the early work of John Dahl (Kill Me Again and Red Rock West) and Of Mice and Men than anything else. She also seems heavily influenced by Nicolas Winding Refn.
On the surface it’s an unabashed love story laced with quick flash lurid sex and ultra-violence. And if one wishes to get academically introspective, it also examines toxic femininity and what happens when women adopt the traits of toxic masculinity in order to navigate the twisted patriarchy of bodybuilding and the late ‘80s underworld of Albuquerque gun running.
Lensed in a neon like dream haze that’s more hallucinatory nightmare gonzoness than anything else, the film is additionally drenched in a sonic maelstrom of electronic oomph! courtesy of Clint (Pop Will Eat Itself) Mansell, not to mention mind-numbingly intense sound design.
As for the Steinbeckian connection? Read into it as you will, but I found the lead characters of Lou (fantastically portrayed by Kristen Stewart) to be akin to George with Jackie (played by an uber ripped Katy O’Brian) taking on the role of Lennie. Feel free to draw your own conclusions, but this story follows many of the same themes as the 1937 novel.
Honestly though, when stripped to its core, this is a wickedly paced, slick, and frenetic ode to steamy 1980’s noir influenced B-movies. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

RIYL
Good Time; Vengeance; Rumble Fish; Wild At Heart


https://youtu.be/BF_J3-DmiS0?si=wwsdzRvdWL4mvuY6

[dookeyXXX]

Oh yeah, besides garnering considerable buzz at its Sundance premiere earlier this year, Love Lies Bleeding has also gained some notoriety in Michigan (and abroad thanks to the way news spreads across the webz):

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/m...or-1235942865/

[PB]

SLEEPING PENISES?!?!?
Is nothing sacred???

[dookeyXXX]

New Guy Ritchie joint looks entertaining…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvwDen1Wrx8

[dookeyXXX]

Hitting theaters 4/11, the latest from Alex (Ex Machina) Garland:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDyQxtg0V2w

[Supermoon]

I’m going to be interested in what people think of this movie. I could see it going either way

[dookeyXXX]

I am trying to temper my expectations, but I have really enjoyed Garland’s last few movies— Ex Machina, Annihilation, and Men—so they are skewing high…

[PB]

I’m going to be interested in what people think of this movie. I could see it going either way

Pretty sure it will go all ways, hard.
The fact that this movie even exists scares me.

[dookeyXXX]

From the looks of the trailer the story doesnt seem too far removed from the likes of The Man in the High Castle, the 2005 comic book series DMZ (which itself was turned into a series), the short-lived 2012 series Revolution or numerous other sci-fi musings. Here, however, it seems to be taking place in the real world in lieu of an alternate history.
In other words, it looks like it is mining familiar territory
But Garland has a solid track record of tweaking and updating familiar themes in innovative and engaging ways

[mcski]

Pretty sure it will go all ways, hard.
The fact that this movie even exists scares me.

Indeed feels a little to possible and will probable seen as a blueprint by all the wrong people. Will still watch it. Garland isn?t cookie cutter so who knows

[MontuckyFried]

Hitting theaters 4/11, the latest from Alex (Ex Machina) Garland

Interesting! I was a big fan of Ex Machina. Bought the BD for the great DTS:X track. Also enjoyed Annihilation of course. He also wrote the screenplay for Danny Boyle's excellent Sunshine and 28 Days Later!

At first, something that threw me (and countless others) off about the trailer was how in this theoretical Civil War scenario, CA and TX team up. Seemed implausible at first, BUT I read a good comment from someone addressing that very thing making the point that it kind of removes real world current politics from it, making it less of a Left vs Right thing which would only serve to divide audiences. You know how it goes so often. A film tries to make a point or has a political/religious slant and people review bomb it on either side depending upon the viewpoint. It's quite possible that Garland removes that entirely from the equation, which I certainly hope so! Would make for a much more intriguing plot and "world-building" if that's the case. Looking forward to this one, and will go in with an open mind.