WHORES’ GLORY (2011)

whoresglory_5cFilmladen_FilmverleihVinai_Dithajohn

Elizabeth

I think it’s important to say first and foremost that you should not watch Whores’ Glory with anyone that you do not want to watch porn with. The title and subject matter should be an obvious giveaway, but this documentary shows for real, full nudity, graphic sex and I just think it’s good to know that before getting into it.

. . . and that’s one of the reasons why I loved Whores’ Glory so much. There’s no narrator, you never see any documentarians, you only see prostitutes living their lives, completely uncensored. It’s kind of extremely sad and scary, but soooo interesting.

Whores’ Glory is broken up into three parts, showing prostitutes in Thailand, Bangladesh, and Mexico, but it’s incredible how similar the experiences are. The film is ambiguous about whether prostitution is legal in these particular areas, but whether it seems like the girls are forced into it or not, the all have similarly depressing lives. What really hit me was that all three regions included interviews with prostitutes who more or less spoke about how sad they are inside, how often they cry, etc. One of the women talked for a while about how sad and unfair it is to be a woman. Hearing her speak almost made me cry. While I don’t directly relate to her talking about how she has no other options in life, I know that it’s true and it’s just hard not to really feel that when you’re a woman watching it. While I felt bitter hearing about her life, because it’s not fair that she’s forced into this life just because she’s female, I also felt guiltily lucky for not being in a situation like that myself.

Whores’ Glory is really pretty amazing. It’s certainly not for everyone, but man is it good.

Christopher

This movie is so good. It’s really good. The movie looks at three different brothels, one in Thailand, one in India, and one in Mexico. Now, there are weird moments, like a five minute scene where you see street dogs kind of have sex or near the end where you see a prostitute pretty much perform a blow job and have sex with a client, but really, I wouldn’t want this movie to be any different.

It’s also just really weird and a lot of the movie is just observing the women working, trying to get costumers. There are many sad parts of this film, one being an Indian lady confessing how hard it is to a woman, but there are multiple times when you feel sad because the women are unable to get customers. Either from being too old or not as sexy as the young girls.

SEE THIS MOVIE!! As of now I would say Spring Breakers and Whores’ Glory are my two favorite movies Elizabeth and I have watched this year.

EXTRA: I also watched Rabbi’s Cat and the two Jackass movies on Netflix. Rabbi’s Cat is based off the Joann Sfar comic and even though I have never read it this movie is pretty great. If nothing else seeing his animation come to life is worth seeing. And the Jackass movies? They are still fun to watch. I never saw the movies when they came out but I remember watching the show all the time. Listening to the Johnny Knoxville WTF made me check them out again.

Advertisements

ABDUCTION (2011)

_DSC9708.NEF

Christopher

This movie is fucking stupid, borders on child porn (not really but there are some uncomfortable moments), but it’s absolutely incredible to watch. It took us a while to finally sit down to watch this, it’s been on Netflix for at least a year now. This movie is basically Tyler Lautner trying to be an action star of some sort. He fails miserably but to be fair most of that is from the stupid story. Nothing makes sense.

What I do love about this movie is how they kind of set it up for a sequel but I think it’s pretty fair to say that they will never make one. But we can always pray for it!

Elizabeth (spoilers! – not that it matters)

There are so many disappointing things about Abduction.

The movie is set up to make you think that Nathan (Taylor Lautner), a teenager, was kidnapped as a child by the couple he thinks are his parents (Jason Isaacs and Maria Bello). Interesting, concept, right? Well, I agree, but unfortunately, the title of this film is extremely misleading because Nathan was not kidnapped and you’re never really supposed to think that (except maybe for like 10 minutes). This movie should actually be called Protection because, see, Nathan’s real dad is a super spy and his parents and therapist (Sigourney Weaver) are also spies that are supposed to protect him. So, that’s lame.

Taylor Lautner also disappoints by just sort of being in this movie. I like to think I’m open-minded enough that when someone says a man is attractive, even if I don’t think so, I can usually understand why. But I just don’t get it with Taylor Lautner. He’s weird looking! He has teeny eyes and what is perhaps the softest (as in, no strong lines, not skin softness) face of any adult male actor I can think of. Maybe younger girls think he’s non-threatening because he has the face of a 12 year old on the body of an overly buff man? But still. His face. Is weird. The sexiest guy in this movie would be a tie between Jason Isaacs and Michael Nyqvist. They’re the real heartthrobs!

It almost seems like the plot of the movie changed during post-production or something, but they still kept the original title. When we first meet Jason Issacs, it’s because he completely kicks the shit out of Taylor Lautner, his presumed son. I don’t just mean sparring or even aggressive wrestling. Jason Isaacs kicks Taylor Lautner in the heart, punches him repeatedly, kicks him while he’s down, etc etc. It’s crazy, but even crazier when you find out that Jason Isaacs did not kidnap him, he’s not a bad guy, and he and Taylor Lautner actually have a loving relationship? What? Even though Jason Isaacs is “training” Taylor Lautner for the inevitable shit show that will come when bad guys find out where he is, he could still train him without making it seem like he legit wanted to kill him. Right?

There’s also . . . a sex-ish scene in this movie. Between children. Okay, let me backup. So I guess Taylor Lautner was 19 and Lily Collins was 22 when this was filmed, but they legitimately look like 15 year olds. So when they’re in a train car (Fair Game?) alone, they start making out, complete with Lautner picking Collins up by her ass and banging each other against the wall. It was hard to watch. I felt like we might get arrested just for doing that. Also, again, just like Fair Game, the protagonists are completely useless when it comes to understanding technology while the bad guys are laughably insanely good at it (and also the bad guys are Russian, again).

Also a large part of this movie takes place during a Pittsburgh Pirates game for no reason and it’s really funny. The end.

FAIR GAME (1995)

game3

Elizabeth

I’m not sure what happens in Fair Game. We just watched it last night and I sort of don’t know what happened.

Something that truly strikes me in watching bad movies is how awful bad actors are. We all know that bad actors are bad. But seeing them try to act, especially near people who have even the least bit of acting ability, can be so excruciating that it’s distracting. Enter Cindy Crawford in Fair Game. I hated watching her on MTV’s House of Style, and that was a situation in which she wasn’t acting, she was just being Cindy Crawford talking about fashion. Watching her try to act was really . . . difficult. William Baldwin isn’t too great, but he seems amazing next to Cindy Crawford.

So not only are the actors not good, their characters are, perhaps, two of the stupidest leading characters I’ve ever seen. What does Kate (Cindy Crawford) do almost as soon as she’s entered into witness protection with cop Max (William Baldwin)? Oh, you know, just orders a pizza WITH HER CREDIT CARD. None of the cops she’s with stops her. So their safehouse pretty much immediately gets found out by the bad guys. I wish this was the first and last time that Kate uses her credit card and enables the bad guys to find them . . . but no. It’s not.

Max is also convinced that corrupt cops are behind everything, except the only “corrupt cops” he’s come across are actually just bad guys pretending to be cops. He’s a total fucking idiot, but unfortunately Kate is too stupid to realize this. They spend pretty much the entire movie running around (or sometimes getting blown up and being okay), not able to stay in one place because they keep doing insanely stupid things that get them caught by the bad guys, but once they’re in a train car together they suddenly find the time to stop and have slow, fairly graphic sex. The only thing that makes this make any sense is that they’re so exhausted and starving and dehydrated from not sleeping or eating for days that they’ve completely lost their minds.

Something that really stood out to me about Fair Game is how similar it is to The Pelican Brief, which came out 2 years before it. Both Fair Game and The Pelican Brief are about two beautiful young lawyers who are targeted by mysterious bad guys and have to work with only one male cop they can trust to try to figure out what’s going on. Except there’s no insane sex scene in The Pelican Brief. And also The Pelican Brief, while not the greatest movie ever made, is approximately 1000x better than Fair Game.

But, this movie needs to be seen if for no other reason than to see Cindy Crawford get blown up.

Christopher

I recently started writing down, recently as in this movie, notes during the movie. Since this is my first time, I’m really only going to only write down my notes.

– “That was probably stupid.”

– Phone room

– Heat Vision Nonsense

– Very explosive cars

– Computers?

CONGO (1995)

Screen shot 2011-02-21 at 12.11.58 PM (editor’s note: Just to be clear, the above picture is for real a thing that happens in this actual for real movie.)

Christopher

I remember this movie coming out as a kid. And I’m pretty sure all I remember is everyone loving this. The first time I saw this I remember being so proud of myself because I thought it was going to give me nightmares for weeks. But seeing it now I have absolutely no idea what the people involved in this movie were thinking. It has a talking monkey! Well not really talking it’s just using sign language.

But now that we’re on the subject that monkey and her intense romance with her care taker is the best part of that movie. It will probably make you tear up or terror in fear more that the actual story. First of all their love is forbidden! Second, She can’t even make friends let alone land a Silverback! Third the sad good-bye.

Netflix again!

Elizabeth

Have you seen Congo? Did you know how insane and (I hate to throw this word around, but I need to . . .) retarded it is? Did it blow your mind? Let me back up. Congo terrified me as a child. I was 7 when it was released in theaters, so I was 7 when the trailers were playing on TV and in movies. And the trailer fucking terrified me. Monkeys always scared me, and I know Congo is about gorillas but I’m lumping all primates in one group here, because they’re all horrifying to me and always have been. So when a movie came out that was about killer gorillas (which, let’s face it, all gorillas potentially are), I absolutely wanted nothing to do with it. I couldn’t watch the trailer, I couldn’t hear about it, and after a few years I sort of forgot that it even existed.

But then it came out on Netflix Instant. When I realized that Chris had a similar fear of it has a child, it was obvious that this was something we needed to see. And I’m so glad we did, because it’s an insane mess.

I’m not even entirely sure how to summarize this. Okay, so, Bruce Campbell and Laura Linney work for some kind of communications company that’s looking for some kind of very pure diamond, which will supposedly alter future communication. This doesn’t make a ton of sense because A.) Do we need diamonds for communication? and B.) Once Bruce Campbell finds said diamond(s), he immediately puts it into a laser and starts destroying stuff, and also potentially lighting the jungle on fire. So I guess it’s for a laser? I don’t know why they work for a communication company and not an arms dealer or something. But anyway.

A pack of unseen creatures kills everyone with Bruce Campbell’s party, so now Laura Linney has to go to Africa to find out what happened. Meanwhile, there are two scientists (I’m assuming), Dr. Peter (Dylan Walsh), and his sidekick that doesn’t do anything for the movie. Dr. Peter and his sidekick own (I’m assuming) a gorilla named Amy. They claim Amy can talk because they’ve developed some kind of robot glove that goes on her hand when she uses sign language and in a gross, creepy, little girl robot voice, speaks what she’s signing. Everyone freaks out about this talking gorilla. But no one seems to notice that Amy is not a talking gorilla. She can communicate with sign language, which we all know is possible for gorillas and has been possible for a long time. This robot hand just makes it so people who don’t know sign language can understand her. It drove me totally crazy that during the whole movie people talked about this talking gorilla but THE GORILLA CAN’T TALK. What’s even more insane is that no one also mentions the fact that Amy does not at all act like a gorilla but rather a human child. She can apparently understand English and problem solve on a really high level. She drinks martinis. She smokes cigars. And no one thinks that this is fucking crazy? I also want to point out that all the gorillas are clearly people in gorilla suits. I’m not saying I would rather CGI or something, but it really doesn’t make Amy seem less human.

Anyway, the gorilla people want to release Amy back into the wild, because that’s clearly the smart and humane thing to do to a completely domesticated animal. Laura Linney wants to find out what happened to Bruce Campbell and get some diamonds. Tim Curry wants to fund the trip, and offers to, but then can’t and still comes along anyway because he’s some kind of treasure hunter. And then they meet up with Ernie Hudson in Africa. We know Tim Curry wants to get to some kind of ancient diamond mine, but other than that I have no idea why the party travels so long. Laura Linney finds Bruce Campbell’s dead body and then keeps moving. The gorilla people want to return Amy to the wild but take forever to drop her off. Why didn’t they just make everyone have to go to these ancient ruins? Once they all get there, which is apparently inside (I think) a volcano and has cut diamonds scattered around the ground, which is convenient, they run into the species of killer gorillas. Horrifying, sure. Would humans possibly need to defend themselves here? Maybe, if the time called for it. But instead of just leaving this habitat undisturbed, these “scientists” MURDER THE ENTIRE SPECIES OF PREVIOUSLY UNDISCOVERED GORILLAS. Laura Linney even says, before she starts slicing the gorillas in half with her diamond laser, that she’s putting them on the endangered species list. Which is a total lie, because she’s actually making them all extinct. I’m sure any scientist would do the same.

The ending of Congo is sort of fantastic though, because nothing really gets resolved. Laura Linney doesn’t keep her diamonds because she finds out her evil boss is evil. The gorilla people leave Amy behind. Tim Curry dies. Everyone else gets on a hot air balloon and just . . . floats away. THE ENDDDDDDDDDDD.

I cannot believe how insane Congo is. It’s fantastic because of that.

THE CUTTING EDGE (1992)

The_Cutting_Edge_716

Elizabeth

I don’t know what Chris will say about The Cutting Edge but if it’s negative you probably shouldn’t listen because it’s one my favorite movies ever. I know a lot of that comes from the fact that I grew up watching it over and over again, but stiiiiiill. To me, it still completely holds up after 20+ years. It’s sort of goofy, but it’s not trying to not be goofy, either.

When I was younger, I always felt conflicted about Kate (Moira Kelly). In a lot of ways, I wanted to be like her: she was rich, beautiful, thin, ambitious, and an Olympian. Buuuut she’s also kind of mean. Like, really mean sometimes. As the story progresses it becomes more clear that a lot of Kate’s bitterness comes from her mother dying when she was young and being constantly pushed by aggressive males (like her father and coaches) into figure skating. It’s sort of implied that Kate has been skating for so long that she doesn’t remember if she ever even liked it. But her anger has made her nearly impossible to work with, making her partner-less. In comes Doug (D. B. Sweeney), a hockey player whose career was cut off while he was still in college because of an eye injury. Naturally, I always thought Doug was super cute and sweet. I still do, but watching the movie as an adult it’s clearer that Kate isn’t the only difficult one. Doug can be arrogant and inflexible, and sometimes just as mean as Kate. But they both want to skate, and no hockey team will take Doug and Kate’s already gone through the small pool of male figure skaters, so they have to get along.

As any sports movie should, The Cutting Edge is filled with some great montages, mostly of Kate and Doug training. And as the film moves along, it also becomes a little more serious as they get closer to the Winter Olympics and come across serious obstacles. But in the end, what I think makes The Cutting Edge so great is Moira and Sweeney’s chemistry. I’m not sure if a relationship as volatile as theirs would actually be successful in real life, but their banter and sexual tension certainly feels realistic.

The Cutting Edge is also interesting as an adult because of how it shaped my ideas of drinking. As I mentioned before, I was at first, as a child, very confused by Kate saying she doesn’t drink and that she’d never had a drink in her life. I didn’t realize she meant alcohol, so I thought there was something crazy going on with her, until my mom explained what she meant. Then the scene of Kate and Doug drinking together made going out and drinking look so fun as a kid. I know that sentence is what the MPAA dreams of, but it’s not like it made me want to drink when I was 10, I just assumed it would be a fun activity when I was an adult. Of course, flash forward 15ish years later to present-day me and I now realize that drinking is expensive, causes transportation issues, and makes me sick (especially tequila, which is what they drink in the movie). Oh well.

I hope people don’t write off The Cutting Edge just because it’s a romance from 1992. Because it’s also an awesome sports movie, it just happens to be sweet and charming, too.

Christopher

Elizabeth really likes this movie. I’m not quite sure why she thought I would like it. We at least got through it.

THE PLAYERS MANUAL (2012)

hqdefault

Christopher

Tjhs movidj kann bejk heartdd to understand sometimmmmewwss. But I think that adds to how much I loved watching it (I don’t think Elizabeth would agree). This movie isn’t really a movie, it’s more of a goosbumps/afterschool special. It’s narrated by whom I can only assume is a priest of some kind. And being our narrator you would think we should be able to understand him, well think again cause it’s almost impossible. I did find that engaging, however, every time he would show up it was almost like a game to try to see what he was trying to say.

There are two story arcs in this movie. One is about a guy named Romeo, who has sex with a ton of ladies and I think he gets stabbed at some point? But in the end I have absolutely no idea what the moral was. The other story was about a group of kids who start selling drugs. Now, maybe the director just wanted it to look like these kids were having some success but by the end of the story they were selling so much and in charge of so many people, it’s comical due to the fact that they’re about 15 or something.

In the end, this movie is also on Netflix and if it’s 3am and you don’t know what to do put this on. OH YEA, also do you know what the Player’s Manual is? Apparently it’s another term for The Bible!

Elizabeth

Watching this was so miserable. It so barely counts as a movie that IMDb doesn’t even bother to make a page for it. The movie is narrated by some kind of minister who speaks like he has a wad of meat and/or toilet paper lodged in his mouth at all times. The minister guy tells us two stories, for pretty much no reason at all. The first story is about “Romeo” (SHOCKING), who dates multiple women at a time. Which isn’t weird, but he’s in like serious relationships with these women, who somehow don’t know what’s going on. Eventually he gets stabbed. The end. The second story is about two childhood friends who end up becoming drug dealers. They get arrested. The end.

Even though this movie is right around 90 minutes, the last twenty minutes is just the narrator straight up talking to the camera about the Bible. You see, that’s the true Players Manual. I mean, everyone knows that the Bible has the best advice for relationships and selling drugs.

Please don’t bother with this. It’s so awful. I forgot we watched it maybe 10 minutes after we finished it.

PAIN AND GAIN (2013)

PAIN AND GAIN

Elizabeth

First of all, do not see this movie. Instead, read Pete Collins’ original story that the movie is based on. If you insist on seeing this movie, read the story first. If you’ve already seen the movie, stop everything and read the story immediately.

Second of all, I really hope that the filmmakers behind Pain and Gain are completely ashamed of themselves. Imagine if you can that you were kidnapped. And that everything (everything) was stolen from you. And that you were tortured endlessly. And that your abductors tried to murder you by crashing you in a car, lighting you on fire, and running you over. But you survived all of that, despite crippling permanent physical and mental injuries, while your abductors went on to murder two people. Then imagine that your story was turned into a movie almost 20 years later. But in this movie, you are not the protagonist. In fact, you are made out to be a despicable character who got everything that was coming. Your abductors/torturers although shown as stupid, are also shown in a comic light, and 90% of the torture they instilled upon you is never once mentioned, and their story is laid out as one of guys just looking for “the American dream.” Fuck that, right? Well, that’s what happened to Marc Schiller (in the movie he’s Victor Kershaw and played by Tony Shalhoub). Can you even imagine how terrible that would be?

So yeah. the real life people that Mark Wahlberg, The Rock, and Anthony Mackie play in Pain and Gain kidnapped a man, stole everything he had, tortured him, tried to murder him, left him for dead, and then later murdered another couple. Why? Because they could and because they were greedy. I feel like Michael Bay is the same way . . . sure, he could have been true to the real story, which was already crazy and interesting, and not made Schiller/Kershaw look like a womanizing dick and show the killers as the complete psychopaths that they are . . . but he didn’t, because why should he? He’s Michael Bay! He’d rather see ridiculously muscled men have fun by torturing and killing and show them as being just average guys trying to make a living. What. A. Fucking. Dick.

So, as you can see, I hate Michael Bay. All of that aside, Pain and Gain is just not that good. It’s extremely long and oddly shot to the point that it’s distracting. While the acting was good and everything, the actors didn’t have much to work with.

Please do not waste your time on this movie. Don’t let Michael Bay brainwash you and read the real story.

Christopher

We had multiple chances to see this movie but I think the main reason it took us this long to see it was a general dislike for Michael Bay. I kind of feel like anything associated with him is how I felt about watching Ted.

This movie is pretty terrible, especially considering what the real story is.

I hate Michael Bay.