Cats (1998)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

When reading reviews after, a common complaint from haters was that it had "no plot." That's a misunderstanding of what this is about. Cats has a premise that gets explained very well right at the start in "Invitation to the Jellicle Ball." This group of Cats goes to the "Jellicle Ball" once a year where Old Deutoronomy, the leader of the Jellicle cats, makes the choice of which cat gets to go to the heavyside layer (heaven basically). And the rest of the musical is cats introducing themselves and each other as a way to say "look at me! I deserve to go to the heavyside layer!" Like, it's very easy to understand. They explain it. People who say they are confused as to what it's about were NOT paying attention. Also who gaf, this is Cats the musical and you should know what you're getting into. While it has a premise, there isn't much of a story... and that's okay. We're here to have fun, watch cool dancing, and listen to silly songs from cats about themselves. It's fun. People also complain about weird sex shit---its JUST the rum tum tugger basically, and he's just like that. We understand that he's a slut and, like, okay we got that. The "orgy" people complain about is like 5 seconds of cats laying in a pile it is NOT a big deal. Though this musical is thoroughly weird, it's fun and quite enjoyable! Companion's comment: "Very fun! A different kind of four than other movies got, but it's Cats, so. The dancing was very impressive, but that one part with three in a row and no songs was a drag. Some jarring tonal shifts. Loved Mr. Mistoffelees's flamboyant song/costume change; very entertaining." Watched: jun.16.2025

Cats (2019)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

We both separately saw Cats (2019) in theaters when it came out, and I wanted to watch it again because I had been listening to the soundtrack. I know a lot about the diastrous production behind it, which was fun to explain while watching. ("Did you know they used live sound for this?" "WHAT.") It's really bad, but a fun watch! The music is weird, especially having listened to the original tracks before. Choices were made... Certain celebrities butcher their roles (sorry Rebel Wilson, they gave you a 3 part harmony as a solo), some feel like they were born for it (Jason Derulo). Of course, the CGI is really bad. The necklaces had noticeably wonky physics. Some changes from the OG are appreciated, like having Macavity appear more often. That was cool, and made him feel more important. The inclusion of growltiger for a little bit was appreciated. One thing I'm puzzled by in both movies is that there are some characters whose names they never say! Like, Munkustrap is SO IMPORTANT he's like the narrator, and yet no one says his name in either version ever! Also, they cut Jemima from this. Oh, and don't even get me started on Grizabella TURNING AWAY from when Victoria tries to touch her, and later on how she touches Grizabella RIGHT BEFORE the "touch me" line in Memory, like did you even read the script..... Victoria as a character is odd, they collapse Jemima into her character. Idk why they didn't do it the other way around. Oh, well. There's so much but this review is already long. What a mess. But it was a fun watch. Macavity! *disappears into weird dust* Companion's comment: "I was willing to rewatch it, I guess." Watched: jun.16.2025

Faust (1926)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

The first half was SO much better than the second half. The film techniques used in the first half of the film were genuinely interesting and cool, and they had fun special effects and tiny sets. Their costuming looked good. I loved their casting of Emil Jannings as Mephisto. He fit the role very well and seemed to be having fun (even if later in his life and career he did some rather bad things). The second half of the film is where everything goes downhill. I don't know what happened, but its like they leeched all of the german expressionist fun out of it. The camera stays very static and uninteresting for the most part. I think it's just the story of Faust being like that. The film REALLY lingers on Gretchen's suffering and how much she does not want to be with Faust. Genuinely very uncomfortable. We had both read the wikipedia page beforehand and every so often we would be like "HOW does he go to heaven after this." The power of "love," I guess..... totally real love.... not coerced..... #normal. Companion's comment: "Gorgeous opening scenes and some truly amazing special effects. The first half was enjoyable and mostly lighthearted, but the second is so wretched and sad." Watched: jun.12.2025

Different From The Others (1919)

??? unrateable

I don't even think I can rate this movie. It's important,,,, cool,,,, interesting,,,, but it didn't really feel like I was watching a movie? It's not super long so if you're interested in gay film history, go for it. But as a story in and of itself, meh. Companion's comment: "The fact that so many scenes were lost is sad, but does really take away from it. I'm very glad this piece of history was preserved, and it's lovely to see, but it's not much of a movie." Watched: jun.12.2025

Sinners (2025)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

THIS MOVIE WAS VERY GOOD. We saw this in theaters with a big group of people, and it was a great experience! However, the theater was so ungodly loud it was uncomfortable. There was this low droning (for the ominous vibe, presumably) but it often drowned out what the characters were saying, so there were many times where I'd miss the first bit of a sentence. But I can confidently say that, in spite of this, it communicated its story very well visually. Maybe a little too well, we were bothered by their tendency to sometimes flash back to something that happened like 35 minutes ago when it didn't need to, but it wasn't that obtrusive. The music in the movie was incredible! Like I can't overstate how good the music was. There's one scene where Sammie the guitarist is playing in the juke joint for the first time, and he's slowly surrounded and backed up by the music of his ancestors and descendants and its genuinely one of the coolest sequences I've ever seen in a movie. Normally, when movies only bring the supernatural element in at the end, I don't like it, but I think it worked very well in this instance only having the vampires properly appear later, while teasing them at the beginning of the story. It has some horror tropes---like little jumpscares---but the characters make understandable decisions. I really liked the pacing of the story. It took place over the course of a day essentially, but it never felt slow or dragged out. Also, since it has Micheal B Jordan, there is plenty of good action near the end of the movie that is fun to watch. Would highly recommend! Companion's comment: "The opening jumpscares were too loud and the sex scenes went on a bit gratuitously long, but my biggest issue was with the repetition of information as if the audience wouldn't remember what happened 15-30 minutes ago. Very, very good overall, though." Watched: jun.9.2025

The Devil Wears Prada (2006)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

I liked it. It's nothing crazy, but I enjoyed it. The score flips back and forth from being VERY questionable to quite good. It was very funny watching these characters debate over 2006 high fashion because, to our modern hearts, like 90% of what they were beefing over was straight ugly. We hated the guy that kept trying to get her to cheat on her boyfriend. I think it was a good movie, but it didn't leave a particuarly strong impression on me, which is so sad because Meryl Strep was serving cunt so severely the whole time... Companion's comment: "Too depressing for this movie, somehow?? I don't know how to say it. I have nothing against an unhappy ending or story, but it just irritated me here instead of making me feel for the characters." Watched: jun.4.2025

Saw (2004)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

I put off watching saw for sooooooo long but now I have watched it thanks to my wonderful companion who has been asking me to. The editing was genuinely so horrible it was funny. The makeup was really bad. The practical effects ranged from pretty good (blood) to bad (sawn off foot). Of course, Jigsaw's philosophy is wack. I found it odd that the punishments for their mortal sins or whatever had nothing to do with their actual act? I don't know why, but I expected them to be thematically relevant. The acting from Adam.... not good. I do love when Dr. Gordon says hello because you can tell he's pretending to be american. Normally incompetently produced films get a 2, it entered a so bad its good territory. Maybe this movie IS camp. Also, the music was genuinely good. Companion's comment: "The best of the Saw series, in my opinion. Has some scary moments, but is more funny and/or delightful overall." Watched: jun.2.2025

The Faculty (1998)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

A pretty solid movie! We actually jumped several times because of the scares. The whole situation in the movie with the alien infecting the staff is quite creepy, even if the drinking water stuff is ridiculous. Even though its a 90s teen horror, I don't remember the characters being particularly stupid on too many occasions. The score was quite good! I can say that we genuinely did not expect the twist at the end, which I won't spoil. However, it was sort of ruined at the end... the one month forward was crazy, did NOT appreciate how heterosexual that was. Characters making out with no chemistry, that guy's relationship with his TEACHER??? And, of course, lesbian who isn't a lesbian who was unfortunately played by Graham from But I'm A Cheerleader, which gave us false hope. Overall a good movie, though. Companion's comment: "Interesting characters, which made it both engaging and infuriating at the end." Watched: jun.2.2025

Death Becomes Her (1992)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

Genuinely a deligtful movie, and incredibly funny! This is one of the only movies on the list where I can actually say that the acting was notable. Every movement of Meryl Streep's face was funny and well-timed. The chekovs gunning in this movie is incredible by the way, and is actually so smooth its surprising. It's camp. The green screened hole is terrible. It's a cult classic. It's a sort of misogynistic movie about women hating each other and fighting over a man. They are condemned to be stuck fixing each other forever. En garde, bitch. Watched: jun.1.2025

Until Dawn (2025)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

Me and my buddypal are huge until dawn fans, so we were looking forward to this movie when it got announced. HOWEVER, our excitement quickly faded when we heard that the concept was completely different! Why was this movie called "Until Dawn," when it doesn't even keep the concept or locations from the original game? There are references to Until Dawn, and Dr. Hill is in it, but it wasn't substantial. I watched this with two other people (my buddypal and another friend), which made the experience enjoyable in the "old man that yells at TV" sense, but yeah this movie was not good. I did not care about any of the characters. I did enjoy when the people combusted, and when Max drop kicked that clown doll. The score was not really notable :/. The concept was cool, but it wasn't executed well. My friend: "It was funny-bad (for the first 30 minutes), but it was bad. It was only compelling for the first two turns." My buddypal: "The fuck you *explodes* is the only reason this gets a one star from me. Why did they have to do Megan like that, though." Companion's comment: "Wasn't there." Watched: may.26.2025

The Thing From Another World (1951)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

Girl, what even... not a good movie. We watched this and John Carpenter's The Thing back to back. They're both adapted from the same novel, but you can barely tell. They both take place at one of the poles, get The Thing out of ice, and The Thing eats blood or whatever. However, they go for this really weird angle where The Thing is actually a vegetable. There's none of the "imitation" that happens in the original. You'd think there would be in this clearly anti-communist 1950s era movie, but no, it's like they're a group of anti-science elementary schoolers who don't want you to eat your vegetables. Also, incredibly bizzarely, everyone is always talking over each other! Every single character could have said 20% fewer words and we would have lost nothing. The pacing was awful too---it felt like nothing happened until the last 30 minutes. Almost fell asleep, and so did my movie companion. Boring. Don't watch it. Companion's comment: "I think I fell asleep but I'm not even sure." Watched: may.23.2025

The Thing (1982)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Great movie! Yay! My one problem is that I had no idea who anyone was. Shockingly, all of these white men looked distinct from each other, they just never say each others names when the object of the naming is in the room with them. So, that was very confusing. But, once we got the names down, the whole conflict was super interesting, especially not knowing whether or not the main guy was infected/The Thing until the very end of the movie, and only if you notice a small detail my movie companion pointed out which I will not spoil (the movie came out like 40 years ago). Whatever dog actor they got did a really good job acting like an alien pretending to be a dog?? I don't even know how you do that. Really cool! Sets and props were awesome! The Thing's corpse looked sick af! Also, the minimalist scoring actually worked in this movie's favor, which was very cool. Highly recommend. Companion's comment: "The character names were a serious problem. Some of the deaths were underwhelming. The dog actor was absolutely amazing, though, as were the practical effects." Watched: may.23.2025

Hannibal (2001)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

I don't know how you fumble a concept so hard. What a freak movie. I completely understand why Jodie Foster did NOT come back lmao. This is probably a 2 star movie on its own, but in comparison with its original, man is it even worse! The weird relationship this movie implies between Clarice (who sucks now) and Hannibal Lecter (who sucks more now) is deeply weird and incongruent with everything that happened in the last film. Juliane Moore... why did you take this movie. Anthony Hopkins was also clearly phoning it in and hamming it up, obviously in it for the paycheck. Get your bag, I guess. Another movie by Ridley Scott, what a coincidence! Sigh. There was no reason you needed to start this movie by having Clarice shoot a woman holding a baby. No one was making you do that. This series did not need romance. It did not need a brand new Italian guy who dies in a B plot that feels pointless once it's over. They also abused Hannibal's classical piece at inappropriate times, so fuck whoever made that decision. This movie sucked. Companion's comment: "Hannibal's drawing of Clarice was confusing and anatomically awful. He should stick to landscapes. Also, the brain scene was a bit much." Watched: may.18.2025

Silence of the Lambs (1991)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★/ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

As good as they say! I do love the score. The sound design was solid, and felt grounded in the world (apart from a few moments). I don't know if I can say it was ever "scary," but there were certainly some creepy atmospheres and unsettling scenes. I think the movie does a good job of balancing the police bureaucracy conflict of Clarice fighting for her place, and the murder conflict with Bill. It's like everything had the right amount of time dedicated to it. Jodie Foster does a GREAT JOB in this movie. Like her performance is impeccable. Anthony Hopkins ate it up too. The pacing was really well done, and the movie had a great flow of events! Every point of tension felt like it belonged there. The butterfly really is the most self congratulatory metaphor for transition. Watch it! Companion's comment: "Absolutely adore when Hannibal tries to turn the page of the packet while looking at Clarice and misses twice. I looked up the scene again just to laugh at it." Watched: may.18.2025

My Fair Lady (1964)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

Nah man, no. Maybe I'm just too young for this---when we went to the screening, everyone's phones kept going off because they were all old people who don't know how to put their devices on silent. I swear I heard an actual pager. This movie did not fit our sensibilities, to be sure. Everything was so loud, especially in the beginning where Audrey Hepburn's character is always shouting. Almost every single song went on for too long and kept saying the same thing over and over---there's no reason why a song about the English not teaching their children to speak properly should be 6 minutes. I hated everyone except Higgins' mother. Not a single character was likeable, whether it be sexism, being obnoxious, or just deeply annoying. I liked the song that Eliza's father sings. It was SOMETIMES funny, but there were a lot of times where characters said something and the audience laughed, but we just... did not get it. Neither of us liked how by the end of the movie, Higgins didn't really change that much. He was so awful for so much of this INCREDIBLY LONG movie that the modocum of change that happens in him wasn't enough. Bad! Companion's comment: "Beautiful costuming, except for her baby carriage hair and weird springy crown during the ball." Watched: may.4.2025

House on Haunted Hill (1959)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

Saw this in a theater, and had to step out to take an urgent phone call from a friend for like 5 minutes, and in those 5 minutes everthing important about the moive was revealed. Boo! Still sad about that. The plot of this movie was quite convoluted, and the twist at the end sorta sucked. I wish there was more buildup for it. The FIRST twist was fine, but the second twist at the end involving Vincent Price's character and that fuckass skeleton? No. I mean, it was an interesting story, but I don't know if it was worth it. Maybe the later adaptations are a better use of your time. Companion's comment: "It's hard to remember what happened. I think they tried to include too many twists. Also, the ending felt like it was setting up a sequel or leading into the next act of a long movie. Weird." Watched: apr.18.2025

Phantom of the Opera (1925)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

Not a musical! Which is fine, but I do love the overture... Oddly, I remember literally nothing about the score of this movie. It's the 1920s, so they have to kill the phantom at the end, sadly, which sort of weakens the story about redemption and love or whatever. It was genuinely scary when he was standing in the shadow and all you could see was the highlights of his face and eyes. The prosthetic was pretty cool for the time---fun to imagine people fainting in the theater (which, they did). It was pretty good... like a 3.5. Companion's comment: "Kudos to Lon Chaney for doing his own makeup; he was very skilled. Sorry for confusing you with your son." Watched: apr.8.2025

Phantom of the Opera: Love Never Dies (2011)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

BAM shitty sequel time. Somehow, it's simultaneously worse and better. The good thing is that the new cast can sing. They sort of do character assassination on Raoul. Now he's an alcoholic asshole! In the original novel, his worst crime was being french, really... The very existence of this movie weakens the end of the musical, which isn't great. It's very memeable. Meg is suddenly important---okay, then. She and Madam Giry are not obsessed with the phantom and helped ship him to coney island---okay... She is vying for the phantom's love and is implied to be selling herself for the business---huh???? And the fact it takes place on Coney Island. Literally why. Speaking of why: the 10 minute ballad about Erik and Christine having sex like 10 years ago. The music is so odd sometimes. Again, this was sort of watched in a fugue state, so that's all I remember, but it was fun! Companion's comment: "Give me the gun, Meg." Watched: apr.7.2025

Phantom of the Opera (2004)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

I'm going to start this off by saying that Gerard Butler CANNOT sing, which knocks this movie down a lot. But... god, is this movie a riot if you're watching in a group/pair and can be like "GUYS WAIT SHUT UP THIS IS THE LINE" before Butler completely fails on one of his notes. At least Christine can sing. The cinematography is so questionable. The sets are... something! My companion had a lot to say about some of Christine's costumes. I did enjoy Carlotta (the previous prima donna), she's really great in this adaptation. Raoul is sort of unlikeable, but is serving wet cat by the end when he's pitifully tied up by the phantom. This is an issue with both the 2004 and 2011 versions, and probably all versions of the musical, but damn does ALW love using like 3 motifs over and over again. It gets sort of musically uninteresting after a while. It's so hard to rate this because its an amazing experience, but not a good movie. But good enough for my movie companion to ask to watch the shitty sequel to this I guess! Companion's comment: "Christine's jaw looks way too tight the whole movie. That may be how she sung it, I guess, but it looks bad and uncomfortable." Watched: apr.7.2025

Phantom of the Opera 25th Anniversary at the Royal Albert Hall (2011)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

You may be looking at these dates of when we watched these movies and asking, "why did you watch 4 phantom of the operas in 3 days?" Incorrect. We watched 4 phantom of the operas in two separate 5-7 hour sessions from like 7pm-2am two nights in a row and then woke up the next morning to install some flooring. I don't know man. Anyway, this was the one we started with, since it is probably the best version. The fact it's in a theater, rather than on a set, helped a lot with the immersion, since so much of the story takes place on a stage. Being able to see the phantom going up into the actual rafters to kill a guy is SO COOL. It was so long, but I did actually like it. It's the ALW POTO musical, so it can't be that good, but it was great for what it was, and a good time. Good enough of a time that we decided to watch the really bad version next... Companion's comment: "It's okay to talk sometimes. It's not an actual opera; not everything needs to be sung." Watched: apr.6.2025

Shrek The Musical (2008)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

We watched this movie in preparation to work on a production of Shrek the Musical, and man did it not make us excited about that prospect! Never have I watched a movie so gay and homophobic. The big bad wolf literally says the T slur??? Like what??? Also, did you know this is like the second most expensive musical of all time, second to that fuckass spiderman musical with the crazy flying stunts? Whew! But yes, it's not that funny. The songs... are fine for what they are. Shrek's song about building a wall and his talk about getting these fairytale creatures (refugees) out of his swamp is certainly something post-trump 2016 era. The Shrek and Fiona costumes kind of eat, but the guy who plays Shrek does not sound like Shrek. Both of us HATED donkey's costume---donkey's performance in general was weird. Honestly, we enjoyed our production of Shrek the Musical a lot more than the broadway recording---especially Shrek and Donkey. The one standout moment I actually got excited about was the tap dancing rats. And of course the dragon served, but its my firm belief that Forever is better than Donkey Pot Pie. Watched: mar.7.2025

Final Destination (2000)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

I gotta say, I liked it less than I know what you did last summer. It's just less interesting. Final Destination loves its wacky and incredibly convoluted deaths, but there isn't a lot of mystery involved. Like, yes, the nuances of how the curse works is complicated with all the skipping people stuff it gets up to, but pretty soon into the movie you know that everyone is going to die, you just don't know how. And I get that it adds tension---when are they going to die?---but because the deaths are so supernatural, its hard to care when the risk is almost even the whole time. I did enjoy the movie, but I think it could have been executed better. I respect its place in modern culture, and its definitely worth a watch. I watched it with my movie companion and my buddypal, and I had a really good time. Watching in a group is fun if you can. Watched: feb.18.2025

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

Okay so maybe I couldn't stop thinking about man door hand hook car door while watching this movie. This and final destination are sister films to me, and I think this succeeds in adding an element of mystery and tragedy to the murders as they take place. Like, having an actual guy who is Doing the Murders and making Julie try to solve it adds some secondary tension apart from "when is our wacky cast of teens going to die." Having the characters be beefing with each other is also a good touch, same with the choice to set the events of the movie post-incident, the characters keeping this big secret, and hoping it doesn't get revealed. I think it's much more interesting and complicated than FD in that way. I really liked this movie! I coulnd't predict the ending, that's to be sure, and it had a story I wanted to follow until the end. Would recommend! Watched: feb.14.2025

Casablanca (1942)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

You wouldn't expect it, but sometimes old moves people are pretentiously obsessed with are good, actually. Considering its a movie from the 40s, the fact that it's a normal length and I don't hate every single character is impressive. I would say that the drama is fairly compelling. This is a normie opinion, but the use of the as time goes by piano motif is effective. You genuinely don't know what will happen next, and the love triangle-esque scenario Rick, Ilsa, and Lazlo are put into is interesting to follow. Like wow! I felt emotions while watching this movie! Watch with a friend, probably. Watched: feb.14.2025

The Shape of Water (2017)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

I remember when this came out a while ago and the controversy around the oscar stuff, all the jokes about wanting to fuck/not wanting to fuck that fish man, but it's actually a good movie past the memes! The acting is quite good, and the pacing makes the movie flow really nicely. The characters are sympathetic and the ending almost got me. For once I can say I liked the sound design of a movie! The cinematography and lighting choices were also quite good, I can tell there was a lot of thought to put in to the tint and warmth of certain scenes. 5 stars, because I had a lot of fun and the movie made me happy to watch its craftsmanship. Shame that some general audiences were too preoccupied with the fish love when it came out... Companion's comment: "The ending was silly. Why did she become a fish person? Since she had the marks on her neck before they became gills, was she always a fish? Crazy sexual dimorphism?" Watched: feb.8.2025

I Saw The TV Glow (2024)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

I feel like this movie would have hit me harder if I saw it maybe like 5 years ago. Like, I've already learned this lesson. I see how other people would be greatly affected by it. It's a beautiful, but uncomfortable movie at times. Soundtrack was great. I sort of feel bad for not liking it more, which is why I'm lending it an extra star. It was excellently crafted and I get it, but it didn't... impact me how it was supposed to. I felt sort of empty when it was over. Watched: feb.8.2025

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

My favorite thing about this movie is definitely the sets. They're so charming and very bizzarre looking! My movie companion loves Conrad Veidt, and I would have to agree that he does a pretty good job in his films that I've seen. The bar is low for silent film acting, but he clears it well. The history of this movie is quite interesting as well, if you're willing to look it up. The whole twist ending dream mystery at the end is novel for its time! It's probably a 3.5, but I can't find half unicode stars. Companion's comment: "Love the triangles and artistic sets. Hate the twist, but so did the people making the movie, so." Watched: jan.11.2025 (?)

Nosferatu (2024)

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

GENUINELY FUCK THIS MOVIE!!! What did they do to my beautiful boy... Me and my movie companion---who is even more of a Nosferatu head than I am---ranted about this movie for at least 2 hours after it ended about how bad it was. I can't fit all of my problems with it on the page. As a sound guy, the mixing was godawful and I don't know what posessed them to do that. The lighting was actually fine, and some of the costumes were cool. The settings were... very British for a movie that is supposed to mostly take place in Germany. AND THAT! WHY WAS EVERYONE ENGLISH? Also, why did they give Orlok a mustache. What was up with his design anyway. The depiction of the women in Nosferatu 2024 was also awful! In 1922, Ellen has agency in how she chooses to learn about the monster and the curse, and what she can do to kill him, but in the 2024 its sort of just ~destiny~ and ~only she can save them~ through the power of sex, of course. A lot of weird sex shit in this movie! Normally when people want to fuck that old monster man, I can at least say "sure fine" but I do NOT get it here. They also make the pair of siblings in the 1922 version a married couple instead, and kill their children (who didn't exist in the og) just for fun!? And the guy tries to fuck his wife's dead body (did not happen in 1922)?? Not to mention the barbaric depiction of the townspeople near the start of the movie, sacrificing a virgin (also didn't happen)??? Robert Eggers I am happy that I will be outliving you, and will look forward to seeing your obituary in the news when you die peacefully someday. Companion's comment: "Apparently Robert Eggers loves the original Nosferatu. I don't see it. Also, shockingly more racist despite being made over 100 years later. And necrophilia. Ew. The second I came to terms with the fact he had a mustache and it was not, in fact, an unfortunate shadow, I knew there was going to be a scene of him slobbering all over it and dripping blood. I was right, because Robert Eggers is stupid and predictable." Watched: jan.1.2025

Gladiator 2 (2024)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

You know what, it was actually a pretty solid movie! It fixed basically all the problems I had with the first one and then some. One of my main problems with the original was the lack of a good B plot---and this movie managed to do it really well with having Pedro Pascal's character contra Paul Mezcal, seeing the side of his "enemy" and what his motivations were made it more interesting, and let us viewers break up the movie since it's so long (2.5 hrs). It helps that the movie is gorgeous. Sets, lighting, costumes---thankfully the cinematography is MUCH improved. And of course, the acting is great, Mezcal's performance was amazing. I liked it quite a bit! Companion's comment: "I wanted more of the freaky emperors; they seemed interesting." Watched: dec.18.2024

Gladiator (2000)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

I would say it's... good. The story is compelling, the acting is good, and its pacing is adequate. HOWEVER. Man, this movie looks and sounds like absolute dogshit. The awful, choppy slow motion shots, confusingly edited fight scenes, and weirdly balanced audio took me out of the movie completely. Like, it would have been an amazing play---the costumes and sets are good! But as soon as the technology of cameras and digital audio recording is involved, it falls apart. There's also that one shot of Russell Crowe at the end where he's being carried away and the lighting on his face against the background is so jarring it looks green-screened. Meh. I mean, it's good, but my father told me it made him cry in the theatre 20 years ago, and I do NOT get it. Companion's comment: "The colors for this movie are deeply off. Also, him mourning his family would have been sad, but he slobbered over her toes, so it just grossed me out." Watched: dec.15.2024

Conclave (2024)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

It DEEPLY saddens me that there was no murder in this movie. I was waiting the WHOLE TIME for there to be murder... and then there just wasn't. How sad! This movie was really good though, definitely would have gotten that oscar if it had come out like just a few months later after the real pope died. I think its carefully balanced political tension was quite compelling! Now I know to put the turtles back if I want to be pope. At the end, my movie companion and I were ALMOST convinced that the pope was going to be transgender for a second, but no. Still a cool result! The score was good, too, and I could actually see the movie, which is rare for modern films. Would recommend honestly. Watched: dec.8.2024

The Creature From The Black Lagoon (1954)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

Suffers from being boring, like most 50s movies do. The scenes where the creature is stalking around the water, chasing the lady with the triangle boobs sort of drag on. I'm impressed with the guy swimming in the suit. It looks very difficult. They were really haters of this big ol' fishman for no reason, he did nothing wrong... except killing those people, but whatever. In conclusion, it was fine I guess. If you're watching it, watch it with a friend. Companion's comment: "The underwater photography/choreography is beautiful. The scene of him swimming under her was something I visualized before it happened, so it was nice to see the vision." Watched: nov.29.2024

Alien (1979)	★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆
	Honestly, I don't have a lot to say about this movie? I don't remember most of it? I remember it being fine. The effects were pretty cool, I have to say. I have complicated feelings about Ridley Scott as a director, though---I'm not his biggest fan. I remember liking the score. The end of the movie was wack. Watched: nov.29.2024

House of Wax (2005)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

Had a great time with this movie! Arguably, there's too much setup at the start with the football game and the car trouble and the very specific fan belt needed, but I thought it did a good job of setting up the characters. It's sufficiently creepy most of the time, and looks pretty good for 2005. I think the concept of a town where everything is made of wax and nothing is real is scary af! I'm also a big fan of those scenes where people get cast in wax and then someone touches them, exposing their flesh... like eep! Villain was wack, but deaths were spread out nicely and executed well for the most part. Music was shockingly good, and in the credits Helena by MCR played and my movie companion and I LOST OUR SHIT (we are both fans). However, it also says in the credits that there's another MCR song in the movie that isn't really there. Hm! Oh well. It's a good movie, I'd recommend it. Companion's comment: "The scene of him cutting that guy's achilles tendon was horrifying." Watched: nov.27.2025

The Giant Claw (1957)

★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

I'm going to be so real with you: we did NOT finish this movie. We saw that it had that godawful amazing bird in it, and tried to watch it for the bird's sake, but man movies from the 50s are hard to get through. What were they doing in that era that made most of their movies so bad?? My money's on anti-communist propaganda. Anyway, we just ended up skipping to the sections with the wackass bird prop. That thing is incredible. Don't watch this movie. Companion's comment: "Just watch the trailer. All of the fun and none of the drag." Watched: nov.27.2024

Dracula (1931)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

Okay my main problem is that it's nothing like the book. Which... yeah, fine if that's what you're going for, but there's so much that they leave out. Also, it's the 1930s and they are so much meaner to their female characters than Bram Stoker's novel is! Also, because the movie is like an hour 15, the pacing is utterly wack. From a non-adaptational standpoint, I would have to agree with my movie companion that it's in desperate need of a soundtrack. There are long spaces of time with no music at all, and it can realllllly drag things out. I do think that the effects involving dracula are VERY funny, especially when he's trying to mind control people, so that was a good time. In conclusion: eh, its fine. But #NotMyDracula. Read the book. Watched: nov.24.2024

Frankenstein (1931)

★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆

What did they do to my boy! Lowkey this movie was a blur, but I remember feeling betrayed (again, an opinion based on the fact I've read the book). This is another adaptation of Frankenstein that protrays him as a shambling monster with no intelligence. They also make the choice to kill the monster, because, again, it's the 1930s so good guys have to win. I have no idea why the hell they changed Victor Frankenstein's name to Henry Frankenstein, especially when in the novel, Victor's best friend is already named Henry Clerval??? What a bizzare choice. Victor is also less of a freak than he should be. I dunno man. Not great and sort of baffling at times. Watched: nov.24.2024

The Man Who Laughs (1928)

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

It was a while ago but I remember it being a fairly good movie. The wigs were BAD. The story was pretty interesting, and its interesting to see how modern versions of the joker sort of sprung from this story, even if they're very different. I do remember the score being quite nice, and the title cards were really pretty. Conrad Veidt ate it up as usual. Watch with a friend. Companion's comment: "Genuinely a very sweet story overall. One of my other friends wouldn't watch it with me because she doesn't like horror, which it ISN'T!! He just looks like that." Watched: nov.10.2024

Nosferatu (1922)

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ / ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Count Orlock is my little guy and i love him so much. his weird little fingers and silly hat makes me very happy. this movie is deeply goofy but a very good time. i miss silent film acting, i would kill to see a modern actor try to throw the book on the ground with as much gumption as Gustav von Wangenheim. i know there are 100000 different scores for this movie, but the one i watched had this absolutely mind boggling fuckass organ in the back that NEVER stopped playing. the choices the organist made were questionable at times but damn. hilarious. please watch this movie, preferably with your companion who knows all the lore and can explain it to you the whole time <3. Companion's comment: "Deeply strange about this one. We had to finish a video for English at home and Count Orlok showed up, which made me very excited. I'm glad I was at home." Watched: nov.10.2024

Stats

Not always up to date because I do these manually. Last updated: Jun.17.2025.

Number of Movies by Decade Decade 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s # 5 2 1 4 1 1 1 5 8 4 6

Number of Movies by Rating Rating ★★★★★ ★★★★☆ ★★★☆☆ ★★☆☆☆ ★☆☆☆☆ ☆☆☆☆☆ # 5 9 9 8 6 1

Average Rating: 2.895 For every good movie, there's a bad one. And thus, the karmic movie destiny remains in balance.

Star System

5 stars	Very few movies get the 5 star rating. I only give this rating if I both enjoyed the movie AND thought it was excellently crafted.
4 stars	I rate movies 4 stars when I finish them and think, "Wow! That was a really good movie!" However, these are lower than 5 stars because I have problems with the movie that are outweighed by its good qualities.
3 stars	These movies are a real mixed bag. Some are bad, but very enjoyable (Phantom of the Opera). Some are pretty good, but not very fun (Cabinet of Dr. Caligari). Some had potential, but wasted it. A perfectly fine or even good movie can get 3 stars.
2 stars	This is the special tier where I put movies with shitty or notably bad craftsmanship. Even if your movie is otherwise ejnoyable, if your sound/lighting/cinematohraphy sucks, your movie goes here! Also, movies I didn't enjoy go here---normally if they are boring, unfaithful, or just mid.
1 star	If I actually hate the movie, it gets one star. Something about the movie made it a deeply unpleasant experience. This is where you get movies with deeply unlikeable characters, wack story decisions, or movies with obtrusive -isms (sexism, racism, etc). Or they can just be straight up bad.
0 stars	This is the special place in hell I reserve for Nosferatu (2024).