What are you watching & why? (splain)

I watched Cocaine Bear at the local "hip" theater yesterday. The one that sells pseudo-gourmet food, wine, and microbrews.

Cocaine-Bear-Review-Featured-Culture.jpg


Why? A bear hooked on blow and desperate for more? Needs no further explanation!

I only see at most 2 or 3 movies a year at a theater, and I am very harsh with my 0 to 10 point grading scale. I attempt to make a 5 mean that half the shows I have ever seen were better, and half were worse. A 7 is a good score; an 8 is an excellent score. There are less than a handful of 10s among the hundreds (thousands?) of shows I have seen.

This was an unprecedented . . . 11.

It might be my favorite movie that I have ever seen. I enjoyed it immensely. It delivered everything that I could ever want and more in a movie about an essentially anthropomorphic bear addicted to coke. I laughed at least once a minute all the way through. I'm laughing right now thinking about some of the stuff they did.

Setting the movie in 1985 instead of the present day was an excellent decision - at least to this dude who lived in SoFla in the early 80s during the height of the Cocaine Cowboys era, and who knew more than one dude who was "in the import business." The film had sooooooo many "Easter Eggs," too, that I think I'm going to have to watch it again just for that. And the cast . . . inspired choices. I especially liked seeing the prolific actor Isiah Whitlock, Jr. (who IMO is good in everythng he's in) reunited with Ray Liotta (RIP) with whom he shared a small scene in "Goodfellas" more than 30 years ago.

Now this movie is most definitely NOT for everyone. There is no nudity. No sex, either. If you want that, you'll need to look elsewhere. There IS a lot of profanity - much of it coming from the mouths of ten year old kids. Violence and gore? Yes, there's some of that. 🤣 In fact there is so much graphic gore, that is so laughably over-the-top, that it's almost like "Kill Bear: Part 3." Except {QUASI-SPOILER ALERT!!!} here Cokey the Bear does most but not all of the killing of the humans {END OF QUASI-SPOILER ALEERT}.

If there is a better movie featuring a bear, I am unaware of it.

And not a boring second in its tidy 95 minutes. How many movies can one say that about?

Bottom Line: I absolutely loved it.
 
The Amazing Virginian said:
I watched Cocaine Bear at the local "hip" theater yesterday. The one that sells pseudo-gourmet food, wine, and microbrews.

Cocaine-Bear-Review-Featured-Culture.jpg


Why? A bear hooked on blow and desperate for more? Needs no further explanation!

I only see at most 2 or 3 movies a year at a theater, and I am very harsh with my 0 to 10 point grading scale. I attempt to make a 5 mean that half the shows I have ever seen were better, and half were worse. A 7 is a good score; an 8 is an excellent score. There are less than a handful of 10s among the hundreds (thousands?) of shows I have seen.

This was an unprecedented . . . 11.

It might be my favorite movie that I have ever seen. I enjoyed it immensely. It delivered everything that I could ever want and more in a movie about an essentially anthropomorphic bear addicted to coke. I laughed at least once a minute all the way through. I'm laughing right now thinking about some of the stuff they did.

Setting the movie in 1985 instead of the present day was an excellent decision - at least to this dude who lived in SoFla in the early 80s during the height of the Cocaine Cowboys era, and who knew more than one dude who was "in the import business." The film had sooooooo many "Easter Eggs," too, that I think I'm going to have to watch it again just for that. And the cast . . . inspired choices. I especially liked seeing the prolific actor Isiah Whitlock, Jr. (who IMO is good in everythng he's in) reunited with Ray Liotta (RIP) with whom he shared a small scene in "Goodfellas" more than 30 years ago.

Now this movie is most definitely NOT for everyone. There is no nudity. No sex, either. If you want that, you'll need to look elsewhere. There IS a lot of profanity - much of it coming from the mouths of ten year old kids. Violence and gore? Yes, there's some of that. 🤣 In fact there is so much graphic gore, that is so laughably over-the-top, that it's almost like "Kill Bear: Part 3." Except {QUASI-SPOILER ALERT!!!} here Cokey the Bear does most but not all of the killing of the humans {END OF QUASI-SPOILER ALEERT}.

If there is a better movie featuring a bear, I am unaware of it.

And not a boring second in its tidy 95 minutes. How many movies can one say that about?

Bottom Line: I absolutely loved it.
Click to expand...
Your theater has beer?????

And I was just talking about this movie with a guy at work Friday , he said I "I bet it will actually be good"

Sounds like he was right
 
yoko said:
Your theater has beer?????

And I was just talking about this movie with a guy at work Friday , he said I "I bet it will actually be good"

Sounds like he was right
Click to expand...
Yeah, one local theater does. It calls itself a "Film Center and Cafe." Fancy, huh? I enjoyed an overpriced DC Brau Pils while watching Cokey the Bear maul many people.

I'm thinking this movie is probably polarizIng. I figure 90% of folks will either love it, or absolutely hate it. I don't think there will be too many in the middle. FWIW, no one else would go see this with me. I don't think anyone in my family will see it. My sisters absolutely hate the idea of it. Not sure what that says about me. But probably not good. 🤣
 
Richard338 said:
My understanding is that my son has tricked his mother and is seeing it as we speak with his friends. I hope it's not too scary...
Click to expand...
How old?

I didn't find it scary. Then again, while jump cuts and cheap ricks sometimes startle me, but I can't recall a movie actually scaring me. I guess I just can't suspend disbelief that much. 🤷‍♂️

I think this movie would probably be characterized by most people as more gross than scary.
 
Last edited:
Blues said:
Nah. I wasn't gonna watch it anyway. (To be honest, I wish I did find the whole Yellowstone family of shows palatable, but...I just couldn't take them.)
Click to expand...
Yeah, they're trying, but at the end of the day, they're not really that good. First few episodes of 1923 had some promise, but by the end of the season, I've pretty much lost interest.

I'm moving on to S3 of The Mandalorian. Arguably a far better Western, in a number of ways. 😉
 
Last edited:
Smithhammer said:
Yeah, they're trying, but at the end of the day, they're not really that good. First few episodes of 1923 had some promise, but by the end of the season, I've pretty much lost interest.

I'm moving on to S3 of The Mandalorian. Arguably a far better Western, in a number of ways. 😉
Click to expand...

I on the other hand, have been suckered in for several reasons although I could also see the valid reasons as to why viewers are p*ssed off enough at how this S1 was so intentionally slooooow walked to squeeze every little bit of juice possible and still not near tying up the 3 separate storylines which originally was part of the charm of this 1923! I means FFS, splitting it up to S1A and S1B with like a few weeks entr'acte midseason and then the supposed protagonist spending 4 full episodes on various marine vessels, still ending up on a dingy and nowhere near Montana?! FFS, we wanna see violence, retributions and revenge right now with Banner double hanged this time, right?
 
Casinostocks said:
I on the other hand, have been suckered in for several reasons although I could also see the valid reasons as to why viewers are p*ssed off enough at how this S1 was so intentionally slooooow walked to squeeze every little bit of juice possible and still not near tying up the 3 separate storylines which originally was part of the charm of this 1923! I means FFS, splitting it up to S1A and S1B with like a few weeks entr'acte midseason and then the supposed protagonist spending 4 full episodes on various marine vessels, still ending up on a dingy and nowhere near Montana?! FFS, we wanna see violence, retributions and revenge right now with Banner double hanged this time, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, it felt pretty milked out. I think they could have covered a lot more ground in 8 episodes. The "evil capitalist" felt like a bad caricature, the English wife just got downright annoying, and I have no idea what is up with the Native American side story - no inkling whatsoever how, or even if, that is going to tie into the rest of it. Or whether they just threw that in to check a box.

Some pretty funny geographical anomalies as well, for anyone familiar with that area, but that's not too surprising.
 
I really, really, REALLY tried watching "The Consultant" on Amazon Prime.

Why? I think Christoph Waltz is a major douche, but to me he is also an a very interesting actor.

I really couldn't tell if this show was trying to be serious (That's a Fail) or funny (That's a Major Fail).

Plot kind of matters. At least to me. To the extent there is one, it's asinine. The show is nothing more just a collection of barely connected quirky scenes and ideas that never go anywhere. If that's your thing, have at it. There are a lot of quirky scenes and interesting dialog. But mostly there is Christoph Waltz playing Christoph Waltz. Unfortunately . . . there is no discernable story. You know, like with a beginning, middle, and especially an end?

Too many of these showrunners seem to come from David Lynch's Twin Peaks School for TV Producers. Even the creator admits that he is not sure if the protagonist is supposed to be Satan or not. So what is the viewer supposed to make of him?

Eventually . . . I bailed.

From what I saw . . . 2 out of 10.
 
The Amazing Virginian said:
I really, really, REALLY tried watching "The Consultant" on Amazon Prime.

Why? I think Christoph Waltz is a major douche, but to me he is also an a very interesting actor.

I really couldn't tell if this show was trying to be serious (That's a Fail) or funny (That's a Major Fail).

Plot kind of matters. At least to me. To the extent there is one, it's asinine. The show is nothing more just a collection of barely connected quirky scenes and ideas that never go anywhere. If that's your thing, have at it. There are a lot of quirky scenes and interesting dialog. But mostly there is Christoph Waltz playing Christoph Waltz. Unfortunately . . . there is no discernable story. You know, like with a beginning, middle, and especially an end?

Too many of these showrunners seem to come from David Lynch's Twin Peaks School for TV Producers. Even the creator admits that he is not sure if the protagonist is supposed to be Satan or not. So what is the viewer supposed to make of him?

Eventually . . . I bailed.

From what I saw . . . 2 out of 10.
Click to expand...
I've given up even attempting to watch any movie produced by Amazon or Netflix. My mind is literally blown by the amount of money wasted on such unwatchable tripe. I've basically resorted to older period pieces and movies that have made the cutoff around 2015ish (just finished watching The Sopranos for the 2nd time).

Everything is political now and it's just depressing. Can't speak for others but when I want to watch a movie or show I just want to zone out for a bit and be absorbed. I did stumble upon "Wolf Hall" recently and it was amazing.

The Amazing Virginian said:
If there is a better movie featuring a bear, I am unaware of it.
Click to expand...

The Revenant.
 
Last edited:
SwissHeritageCo said:
I've given up even attempting to watch any movie produced by Amazon or Netflix. My mind is literally blown by the amount of money wasted on such unwatchable tripe. I've basically resorted to older period pieces and movies that have made the cutoff around 2015ish (just finished watching The Sopranos for the 2nd time).

Everything is political now and it's just depressing. Can't speak for others but when I want to watch a movie or show I just want to zone out for a bit and be absorbed. I did stumble upon "Wolf Hall" recently and it was amazing.
Click to expand...

I'm a big fan of Mark Rylance...but if you haven't done so yet...read the book. (All three preferably.)
 
I really wanted to like that Amazon show with Josh Brolin "Outer Range" because I'm a fan of weird zany head trips. I don't even know what I watched, but I watched all of it... after it ended I was pissed, and not because I wanted to see more.
 
So, after toker toker made me aware that they've been releasing a bunch of old remastered Hong Kong action movies in 1080p and 4k, I wound up finding a bunch of HK movies I hadn't seen in decades.

Up tonight is the 1986 movie Millionaires Express, starring Sammo Hung, Yuen Biao, Cynthia Rothrock and a host of other actors from the era.

Haven't seen this in a long time, but I recall some pretty sweet fights, and THIS one stunt

***sidenote:
It's amusing to me, but I first heard the term Parkour in the late 90s, when I caught a documentary about it. The development of Parkour is credited to David Belle (starred in the French movies Banlieue 13 and Banlieue 13 pt. 2) and Sébastien Foucan (featured in the foot chase in the 007 movie Casino Royale).

When I saw the documentary, my first thought was, "Huh... developed in the 90s? We used to call that 'Jackie Chan Running', back in the 70s and 80s". Jackie Chan and Yuen Biao were well known for it in their movies.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top