I just saw Usual Suspects.What did I think of it?
Literally the only thing anyone remembers about this movie is the twist. You cannot recall anything about the plot without looking it up.
>>214953389You thought it was watchable but definitely overrated.
Yikes. I think this is a movie better forgotten.
>>214953389Fennster looks like Mike Matei.
>>214954073(Saul Berg) looks like (Sam Hyde)
How come no one has ever mentioned Giancarlo Esposito was in this movie, in any of the millions of Breaking Bad threads we've had the past decade or so?Giancarlo looks like he has a gigachad chin in this particular shot. It almost makes me wonder if he has a prosthetic jaw.
In this shot, he looks much more zesty.
I like that they kept the wife's bra and panties on for this scene, to keep it tasteful.
What does that term at the end of the sentence mean? Does it mean the same thing it means now, making Roger Kint a sick fuck, or is it an actual legal term like Corporal Prosecution or something?
It's weird how even something as simple as a timebomb is something you just don't see in movies these days. You can tell its a 90's movies just by this one picture alone.
>>214953707>You thought it was watchable but definitely overrated.I thought this was a big movie lots of people talked about, but now that I'm finally making a thread, it's like radio silence except you two guys.Crazy.
It's weird to see Kevin Spacey be a weeny, when he's an alpha chad in House of Cards.
>>214953389The unreliable narrator is a shit trope if there's no objective truth there.
>>214954759Why do you say there's no objective truth in this story?
This guy looks like Nixon. Did he ever play Nixon?
>>214953519Reminder that the plot of the movie is the story Verbal is telling the detective so it’s probably all bullshit anyway
>>214953707thiscomfy flick but the twist is overrated
>>214954904Yes. Dan Hedaya played him in Dick (1999).
>>214954912>Reminder that the plot of the movie is the story Verbal is telling the detective so it’s probably all bullshit anywayThe scenes in the present confirm parts of his story. >>214954904>This guy looks like Nixon. Did he ever play Nixon?Yes, "Dick" with Kirsten Dunst. Funny movie, actually.
>>214954963>The scenes in the present confirm parts of his storyYou mean the story he was trying to make believable so the detective would let him go? That’s crAzy
>>214953389Great, GREAT editing and score [done by the same guy even]
Why is Kevin Spacey's narration used to blatantly misgender this black woman?
>>214953389Similar to LA Confidential, it's a 90s movie you really want to be great, but upon rewatching it's just fine
>>214953389I only ever saw it once when it came out, but I remember quite enjoying it. What did you think of it?
Is this supposed to look like Kevin Spacey? What a dogshit drawing.
>>214955140it's a sketch art from a hungarian that saw him once
>>214954993>You mean the story he was trying to make believable so the detective would let him go? That’s crAzyHe already had immunity. He was ready to go. The only thing that could plausibly keep the weeny Roger Kint in that office is him being legitimately afraid of the detective's threats. If he's really Kaiser Soze, than he has no reason not to clam up.
>>214953519>>214953707>>214955028I don't want to put too fine a point on shitting on this reasonably enjoyable movie, but since RLM criticized George Lucas' prequels by saying "you're not making the Usual Suspects, why don't you just write your movie normal" I gotta say, the Star Wars prequels in each film are deeper and worthier of deep discussion and contemplation than this movie.This feels not terribly different from a big budget episode of Columbo. It's good but we don't need to talk about it for decades, like the Sopranos or Breaking Bad or something.
>you will never have Yolanda Squatpump, squat and pump you up and down.
>>214954212?
>>214955194>he maintained his character and story up until the end because it was amusing to him to toy with the detective I accept your concession
herro I am Winokur Ryder. verry pretty. giv me movie job, pls.
>Claude deBussy>no Claire de Lunewhat the fuck?!
>>214955258I agree. It always confused me why it seems to have such a legacy and gets referenced in pop culture fairly frequently. But I guess a twist like this was a little more original 30 years ago
>edited on filmDoes this mean they chopped the film reels up instead of using editting software?Was editting software a new thing that people resented, and this was the contemporary equivalent of virtue signalling that no AI was used in the production of this movie?All the zoom's in this movie were clearly edit-zooms rather than the camera getting closer to the person's face, so I don't know how you do that with pure film.
>>214955372>I agree. It always confused me why it seems to have such a legacy and gets referenced in pop culture fairly frequently. But I guess a twist like this was a little more original 30 years agoWhat other movies have confusingly overrated legacies? I feel like Weekend at Bernies is a movie where if you've seen the trailer, or had the premise explained to you, than you don't need to actually sit down and watch the movie. It's like a 90 minute low energy weak sauce episode of Drake and Josh.But I'm trying to plow through the classics, and I'd like to plow through the overrated classics before I start plowing through the worthy classics, so what else you got?
>>214955421> Was editting software a new thing that people resented, and this was the contemporary equivalent of virtue signalling that no AI was used in the production of this movie?Short answer: yes
>>214955502long answer?
>>214955512Definitely yes.
>>214955487I think trying to expand the list from here will devolve into shit flinging on classic movies. It can be tough to draw the line between an older movie that's kind of shitty, but really entertaining to watch and laugh at with the mates, versus something that's completely overrated, versus a movie that contrarians like to shit on. There should be an infographic for this, it would save people watching mediocre movies.
>>214955562Ok, smart guy. can you answer this question? >>214954212
The long answer is unions and pandering to them so they don’t hassle you. I’m just a cheeky bastard
>>214955605>I think trying to expand the list from here will devolve into shit flinging on classic movies.I don't mind. Let's go. Come on, man. Don't let me down. Let's atleast try.
>>214955612Cerebral palsy baitfag. Happy?
>>214955653I don't know why you think I'm baiting, but yes, if that's the real answer, I am happy.
>>214954073This guy LOOKS like Mike Matei.Vincent Gallow SOUNDS like Mike Matei.Has anyone else noticed this?
>>214955632Did they use editting software anyway, but they paid a bunch of people to sit in a room, accepting payroll for "editting on film" while they sit on their asses, so the computer editors can do their job without being hassled?
>>214955636I felt nothing watching Big Fish and Back to the Future, is that helpful. The Big Lebowski comes to mind, I just dont get it. The Silence of the Lambs disappointed after watching again after a long time. On the flipside, Manhunter which is also about Hannibal Lector is certified kino and I couldn't believe nobody told me to watch it sooner. Same for Point Break. It's all up to everyone's preferences though
>>214955737>I felt nothing watching Big FishI haven't heard about that movie in a long time.
>>214955636Oh, I'm going to be lynched for this, but I thought Heat was really overrated. The shootouts are good yeah, but theres a whole other 3 hours you have to watch. And I though The Thing was really good
>>214955801>And I though The Thing was really goodI don't know why you think this is a controversial take. Unless the whole post is sarcastic, but I don't know that /tv/ has a strong enough opinion on Heat either way for any professed opinion to be bait.Heat is the movie where Alec Baldwin killed a woman in real life, right?
>>214955716Maybe. I don’t know I wasn’t there and you can’t prove that I was. Any other questions detective?
>>214955844I'm just trying to figure out if Crissy was giving these guys no-show's or just no-works.
>>214955834The movies I said I liked aren't supposed to be hot takes, just classics that are definitely worth watching. And you havent watched Heat? It's pretty highly regarded as a dude movie with epic cast and shootouts
>>214955864Hard to say. Hollywood has always been crooked. It’s like some group decided that they should move from simple gangsterism into white collar crime or something
>>214955886When has Hollywood been entrenched in actual gangsterism?
>>214955834>talks about a post being bait and then writes the rest of this postwewbut Alec murdered the woman during the filming of Rust
>>214955879>And you havent watched Heat? It's pretty highly regarded as a dude movie with epic cast and shootoutsThe first time I heard of The Heat, was when The Amazing Atheist was being sponsored by this movie that I doubt he would ever watch, but included a partial trailer in his video, like a decade or so ago.I know you're talking about a different movie. Its just interesting that this is probably a blatant attempt at brand confusion.
>>214955946>but Alec murdered the woman during the filming of Rustmy bad.
>>214955946holy shit a bunch of production companies worked on this. We're only on the opening credits and this looks like direct to streaming slop.
>>214956012
>>214955946Is this kid as jewish as he looks?
>>214955421>Does this mean they chopped the film reels up instead of using editting software?Yes. One of the extras on the DVD of Terminator 2 made a point of stating that the editor could waste millions of dollars if they messed up because they were working with the original negatives. I was never sure why they couldn't just make copies.
>>214955946I saw The Lost Room from 2004, featuring Ellie Fanning. This boy looks just like Ellie Fanning looked.
>>214956074>Yes. One of the extras on the DVD of Terminator 2 made a point of stating that the editor could waste millions of dollars if they messed up because they were working with the original negatives. I was never sure why they couldn't just make copies.I know that a 1960's perfectionist like Kubrick would film a scene multiple times, because he wanted to apply the special effect directly to the film, and have multiple attempts to do so, rather than paste it on a faded copy, but surely this silly business was unnecessary in the 1990's.
>>214955801I anticipate that this woman doesn't have a serious role in the movie, but she's pretty
