Gaming World Forums
General Category => Entertainment and Media => Topic started by: Mongoloid on October 01, 2008, 09:01:38 am
-
Religulous
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/
Religilous is a documentary, most similar in vein to probably either a Michael Moore flick, or maybe something by Sacha Baron Cohen. The premise is, Bill Maher, an anti-christian and anti-organized religion talk show host, travels around the world discussing religion with different demographics and figures within the various religions. Maher is cynical, but not mean when he is speaking to these people, and the comedic aspect comes from Maher forcing the interviewees into admitting their beliefs are all but ridiculous, but doing so only by asking simple questions. Maher has said himself that he sees the movie as more of a comedy than a documentary, so keep in mind that it isn't just a religion slamfest for an hour and a half.
Bill Maher is a personal hero of mine, and as I have just recently found that there will be a few showings of this movie in my hometown, I feel I must do my part to spread the word a bit. I suppose if you are anything of an avid christian or muslim, I wouldn't suggest this film because you will hopefully either be converted, offended, or best case scenario, humiliated. It's my understanding that Maher spends about a quarter of the movie on Christianity, and then divides the rest between the smaller religions.
Anyway, hopefully a decent amount of people are interested in this, at least for the entertainment value. I will be bussing as many people as I can to this movie, as I am not much of a debater, and this movie should help fill the gap left by my debate skills.
Religulous is only in "select" theatres, and will release on Friday, October 3rd.
-
Sounds pretty great! This is my first time hearing of this, and I'm already sold. I have to see this.
Does Scientology appear anywhere in the film?
-
Scientology isn't worth wasting the time on, everybody already knows their beliefs are ridiculous.
Like, at least other religions can trace many of their stories and laws etc to logic/protect themselves, but scientology is literally just a guy who made shit up.
-
WHAT A TERRIBLE FUCKING TITLE.
-
Scientology isn't worth wasting the time on, everybody already knows their beliefs are ridiculous.
Like, at least other religions can trace many of their stories and laws etc to logic/protect themselves, but scientology is literally just a guy who made shit up.
Yes, but it's so amusing to watch them squirm uncomfortably when you talk to them about it. Anyone who has seen Scientology & Me will know what I mean by this.
-
I thought this would be like SLAMFEST like you said so I was kinda pissed but now it doesn't look that bad, it reminds me more of those interviews on the daily show where the other person is like whut what just happened
-
Maher said he wanted this to come out on Easter, so they're probably getting it out as soon as they can. Maybe this movie can take a few knuckleheads out of McCains pocket before the election?
-
yeah I know I stop holding my deep convictions and beliefs after watching a single documentary on the subject.
-
There will probably be people voting more easily influenced than you, I assume.
I mean, there ARE Palin supporters aren't there?
PS "Religulous" the name comes from Religious and Ridiculous. Just thought I'd say that because it wasn't obvious to me.
-
no one religious will be convinced by this! if it's not funny it'll just be a documentary bent on preaching to a choir that probably owns a copy of the God Delusion.
-
The first thing you learn when you decide to become "Religious" is that you must constantly exercise your "faith" by shutting your ears to anything that an established religous authority doesn't tell you. It might lead to something that contradicts your doctrine, swaying you from the true path and damning your afterlife to an eternity of torture and regret. If it sounds like it's supposed to make sense, then that's the devil playing a trick on you.
Religion is well engineered to protect itself against conflicting ideaologies (it's they only way to last long enough to be worth mentioning in the first place), this movie won't be convincing anybody.
no one religious will be convinced by this! if it's not funny it'll just be a documentary bent on preaching to a choir that probably owns a copy of the God Delusion.
But what if it is funny? What will happen then?
-
I know maybe a dozen people myself that are on the wall about their beliefs (I plan to take them to this movie.)
I don't expect a revelation in any way, but I'm going to continue promoting it and telling myself it helps.
-
Bill Maher is alright but if I'm going to watch something about religion I'd rather go along the lines of Jesus Camp rather than a Michael Moore-esque comedy, documentary.
Also this kind of film is a lot less likely to influence people than Moore's stuff as people are generally able to hold their religious views despite the more extreme and ridiculous elements others might follow. Moore at least stirs up overly reactive people.
Also also since EDC just replied I think you are underestimating the amount of people who balance their religious views with science, often times science winning out. And I'm not just talking about the congregations but also how the clergy present shit.
-
man fuck this, "ehehehe your religion is so SILLY"
I would rather see someone in John Travolta's face yelling at him and asking him if he has a brain tumor and if not who is drugging him and why is he so motherfucking stupid.
WHERE IS XENO I MUST SPEAK WITH HI M THE FATE KOF THE GALAXY LEIS IN MY HAND
No but seriously I'd rather see someone a bit appalled and angrier at it infront of a Kentucky school asking kids if they want to learn in science class about how all the fossils we've found that pre-date man are really just unusually shaped rocks and how their final in biology will have questions about genesis in them
I'll still watch it when it comes out though, maybe it'll be good but Bill Mahr is really snoody
-
No but seriously I'd rather see someone a bit appalled and angrier at it infront of a Kentucky school asking kids if they want to learn in science class about how all the fossils we've found that pre-date man are really just unusually shaped rocks and how their final in biology will have questions about genesis in them
I was laughed at BY MY TEACHER in science class for suggesting that the reason we had an appendix had to do with food digestion in our more ape-like ancestors.
Literally laughed at.
Kentucky schools are goddamn unsaveable.
-
I'm looking forward to this "documentary" but Steel is absolutely right - maybe only people who are VERY on-the-fence about religion will be tipped over. I can tell this movie is going to get bad reviews though. I'll have to keep an eye on rotten tomatoes.
-
do you people really think the purpose of these type of films is to CONVERT THE FUNDAMENTALISTS??
if the fucking entire SCIENCE COMMUNITY is made up of frauds who synthesize fake dino fossils all day to fool the masses, why would this do anything???
this is obviously for entertainment purposes and not a sit-tight-and-let-us-convert-you documentary
-
which is why I said it better be funny because it sure dont look it.
-
I've watched clips from it, and it's very Bill Maher-esque. If you don't like him, you probably won't like this movie. If you haven't seen him, I would definitely look up some of his show or something because I understand he presents in a way that can be hard to swallow.
-
This looks like a circle jerk film.
Also, I watched 10 minutes of Bill Maher's HBO show once and it made me hate him.
-
Also also since EDC just replied I think you are underestimating the amount of people who balance their religious views with science, often times science winning out. And I'm not just talking about the congregations but also how the clergy present shit.
You misunderstand me. I'm not talking about numbers or amounts, I'm talking about what is, and what isn't. The fact is that there are people who still absolutley refuse to take scientific views into account because they literally fear for their souls. Not only does that fact deeply trouble me to the very core of who I am as a person, but I am genuinely suprised that this "amount of people" I am apparently underestimating aren't more appauled by this fact! It doesn't matter how outnumbered they are, they still fucking exist. Not because of what they beleive, but because there is no way for them to even acknowledge the possiblity of the world being something other than what they beleive. It is the antithesis of not just science, but of the very ideas behind thought and learning, and it offends me.
It's not like I'm a materialist or anything, It's just that I'm a rational person. I don't even mind trusting a scientist's word for something like "The earth is more than 7000 years old" because it is an institution founded on reason and rational argument.
Maybe it's unreasonable for me to expect every last living person to accept reason or at least be open to rational argument, but in my opinion it shouldn't be. The way I see it, any rational minded person who has even the slightest amount of religious conviction should find it absolutley blasphemous to reject rationality when trying to understand the world. If God made the universe, then he made it so that humans could understand it (or he made humans so that they could understand the universe, these are just semantics) I'm not basing this on any religious text, I'm basing it on the clear observation that we have the capacity to understand how nature works, and we have consistently carried that ability forward in time in order to understand more and more things about it. Hell, you understand enough things based on scientific inquiry and/or logic, then you can find more sources of faith and fewer contradictions to it. (Although faith is really a personal thing, and this is only said from personal experience. But note that I am not talking about religion here, I'm talking only about faith.)
The way I see it, people that reject thought rather than embrace it when practicing faith are much more lazy than they are pious, and such an idea should not be acceptable in any society (at least any society that hopes to be somewhat healthy, and strong historical evidence is on my side when it comes to this argument).
I'm curious as to this movie because it looks like the guy only wants to inject some thought into the ideas working behind some of the largest religious institutions ever established. If he wants public appeal though, it's going to have to be really entertaining, and the fact he markets it as humor leaves me optimisitc (Although his name is being passed around rather infamously... Maybe evidence shows that he's not really up to the job).
-
yeah best i can tell i don't like bill maher and if this is a documentary/comedy about how stupid religious people are then well done bill. can't wait until he makes one about how capitalism is evil...that'll show em
i don't think this guy is funny so that doesn't qualify this for me
-
haha man I have gotten in an argument with the campus greenspace preacher every day for the last 4 days. I never do anything to provoke him though, all my questions are really carefully worded and I gently troll him
the problem is today he got political and started talking about sarah palin and I called her a fucking retard and considering her latest child that didnt go over well with him
hes a fucking nutjob though
-
no one religious will be convinced by this! if it's not funny it'll just be a documentary bent on preaching to a choir that probably owns a copy of the God Delusion.
no extremist is going to watch this and even remotely consider the points it presents, but dumb kids who're still on the fence will. i think there are a lot of kids floating around who are vaguely religious but who this film would probably sway quite a bit. like people who would be like YEAH I KINDA BELIEVED IN GOD BUT WAIT THIS SHIT'S RIDICULOUS. you're treating it like the only two types of people who would ever watch the movie are hardcore fundamentalists and hardcore atheists and tbh i don't think that's true at all
-
any kid old enough to be watching this is either a teenager completely GUESSING at religion (hey i'm hindu today nope now i'm wiccan now i'm muslim okay i'm agnostic ATHEIST NOW whoops im buddhist AHAHA PASTAFARIAN AMAZING) or already devout in their religion (either an extreme christian teen or an atheist or pretty much anything)
there's no on the fence that this movie is going to change, the only people it would convince change religions every week and so will probably have converted again shortly after seeing it
-
aside from that, people who aren't religious aren't really an issue anyways. if you're on the fence, you're pretty much an agnostic (the viewpoint maher advocates) so...
-
I might see this. I could've sworn I saw the "Jesus" that was in the commercial in something else.
-
any kid old enough to be watching this is either a teenager completely GUESSING at religion (hey i'm hindu today nope now i'm wiccan now i'm muslim okay i'm agnostic ATHEIST NOW whoops im buddhist AHAHA PASTAFARIAN AMAZING) or already devout in their religion (either an extreme christian teen or an atheist or pretty much anything)
there's no on the fence that this movie is going to change, the only people it would convince change religions every week and so will probably have converted again shortly after seeing it
sweet blanket statements. i know some people like this but i also knew a lot of people who were really kind of only christian in name and clearly not decided as to whether they would even bother. this is a huge demo and idk how you didn't account for it but yea. i'm not talking about people who are even UNRELIGIOUS, so much as people who have basically been raised in a religious (but not hardcore) fashion all their lives but never really TOOK TO IT and would probably end up just doing it out of habit if not for something like this that would kind of make it occur to them that it's dumb as hell.
-
now that headphonics is on my side I believe this movie will change the world.
-
I enjoy his current show from time to time.... but I'm disappointed in how lowbrow this movie ended up being. I thought he was above getting cheap thrills from a subject like LOLRELIGION.
-
O'Reilly calls this movie the, "If you believe in God your a moron movie". It's about religion, not god, big difference.
Here he is talking about religion with Scarborough.
-
chainer has it leaked?
-
I tried to get a copy but I just got a blank 700mb avi with a link to some really dodgy porn site. smooth.
-
yeah i looked around, they were all marked as fakes.
-
chainer has it leaked?
Not that I'm aware of. I am just judging this based off of interviews with Bill, ads, clips/highlights, and the general tone of it all. Not to mention how they are using SAMEDIRECTORASBORAT as a selling point. It just comes off as really cheesy. I could be wrong though... but as of right now, everything they did to push it was a real turn off.
-
edit: saw this on sunday. dont have time for a review or anything, but i laughed out loud a dozen or so times, it was a good informational movie too. the only i didnt like, was the muslim portion of the film, which seemed to rely mostly only on discrediting islam with their suicide bombers.
-
Review
I just saw this film last night...while I'm not an atheist I do enjoy seeing good arguments about the subject of religion etc and have heard some good atheist arguments as well as good deist arguments.
I understand with a film like this there is a lot of bias, a lot of judgement, etc. But I'm writing this review as a critique of an essay. I'm not saying Atheists are correct or Deists are correct. I'm just trying to say what I thought about the film...
I have to say I wasn't impressed by this film. It seemed fairly sensationalist, and more about infotainment than information. While some of the points he brought up were sound, I found that the people he chose to debate the other side were fairly weak. He chose the craziest, most fundamental, conservative people, many of which took ltieralist interpretations of various scriptures. There WERE some intelligent people, but their arguments, again, all stemmed from a similar viewpoint. I think it would have been more interesting if he had interviewed people who were more moderate or progressive about religion, or who weren't taking the bible or the Qu'ran literally. I feel as if he chose these people specifically, in order to make his argument seem stronger.
As someone who was raised in a highly Catholic neighbourhood and at a Catholic school, I've encountered a lot of talk about religion. At least where I live, most people believe in the bible not as a book of pure fact, or science, but a work of metaphor, which attempts to teach certain lessons. While some of these lessons seem skewed now, it shows how times have changed since the days that they were written. It represents a shift in culture.
There are also fairly well-known interpretations of the bible which were not considered. For example, the book of revelations was quoted as if it were truly a book about the end of the world. Many progressive christians have looked at the book of revelations and come to believe that it's actually a very runaround way of telling the story of the Roman occupation in Jerusalem, and various events that happened. Satan, being a representetive of the Emperor Nero, and not being a literal devil.
Much of his discrediting of judeo-christian beliefs came from discrediting literalist beliefs, which while important, I think should not have been the entire "documentary."
And -this comment is just my own litle thing- I don't like how he used the term "All three religions" as if Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are the only religions in the world. He looked almost exclusively at these religions and their faults, and then in his conclusion stated that religion as a whole was going to be responsible for the downfall of man. There are many other religions and many otehr people in the world besides Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Those three are NOT the only religions.
I also found that his attack on Islam was fairly weak. Islam developed in a time when the Muslims were under attack, and their people were in severe danger. While this is also true of Judaism, in the case of Islam, it seemed to develop into more of a "If you are attacked, you can attack back to defend your religion (your people)" rather than the traditional "turn the other cheek" that other Judeo-Christian religions seem to have. While it is true that some very fundamentalist Muslims have taken this out of context, have twisted it, and misinterpreted it, Islam in itself is NOT teaching people to kill as Maher suggests. Also, while it is true that the stone in Mecca may be a meteor, he ignores the fact that this could possibly be compatible with Muslim beliefs. If you believe that Allah is the maker of all things, then even if it was a meteor, you could still believe that it was Allah who sent it. (I'm not too familiar with Islam so perhaps a Muslim could argue this point better).
I didn't like how he simplified the stories of the Mediterranean gods either. The most obvious one I saw was Horus. Yes, there are themes which are consistent in Mediterranean folklore, but to say that they are all the same story is over-simplifying things. I've seen someone try to make the same argument for Jesus and Dionysus. While it was convincing to people who didn't know about Greek Mythology, to anyone who did, it was obviously flawed. He also ignores the fact that stories about Horus and Dionysus are said to have taken place in prehistory without witnesses, while the story of Jesus of Nazareth took place fairly recently (considering the length of human existence). While there may have been no true witnesses to this (as some would believe, and perhaps they're right), it is still an important point to note, as Jesus DID appear in several accounts of the time. It would have been better if he had argued that Jesus may have been several people meshed togeter, or a man who became surrounded by myth, as opposed to non-existent.
His argument that America was not founded as a Christian nation was interesting. However, showing qutoes from several American historical figures condoning Christianity only indicates that these specific people did not care for it. I'm not American and so I don't know when the Pledge of Allegiance was written, but lines like "One nation under God" seem to indicate that perhaps it WAS founded as a Christian nation (originally) even if these historical men did not believe in it.
I also had a problem with the editing of the film. There were times when people were continuing to speak and he cut away from them. Or he would point out something (which in some cases was valid) but then cut to a new shot of the person looking like they couldn't answer. Persoanlly, I would have liked to see a two-shot, rather than see them cut away, as I don't know if this was actually the person's reaction.
In the scene where they go to the amusement park in Florida, people are surrounding a re-enacment of the Passion, which is interesting in itself, and does make a valid point about the commercialization of religion. However, when people are taking pictures on small digital cameras and camcorders, I have to wonder why there are loud shutter noises going off, as if they were using older cameras, or larger, more advanced cameras. There are some made recently (I know my camera makes a shutter noise) which do make this noise, but based on what I saw, I didn't tihnk it was enough to make those noises. They were obviously added in in order to make the situation seem more ridiculous than it actually was. Furthermore, the crowd applauding when the Jesus figure was attacked could easily have been edited in from other instances, or extracted completely from another audio file. I can't remember if there were times when you saw people applaud in the same shot, but from what I recall there weren't too many.
Finally, to add the perspective of someone who is not any of the above religions, nor an atheist, I believe that he tried very hard to portray religious people as fools by using selective accounts, and selective argumentation. He chose people who were very right wing (or just completely out of it like the guy who thought pot was religious) and this was unfair because it did not show more acceptable views on religion.
Furthermore, his thesis is fairly absurd. Saying that religion is entirely evil and must be stopped, is as ignorant as saying that religion is entirely good and must be spread all over the world. It would have been more effective to propose seriously looking at beliefs, questioning, and doubting things that are simply taught- to doubt people in power who use religion as a platform, and people who seek money in return for religious experience.
I consider myself fairly moderate, and I know a lot of others in the area who are- Catholics, Other Christians, Muslims, and Buddhists. I find people here very different from the people he interviewed. They don't try to convert people, and don't seek (at least from what I've seen) to attack others' religions.
Yes, there are some crazy and/or conservative people like in his piece of docutainment, but there are other kinds of religious people too, and they should not be ignored completely, or lumped in together with fundamentalists.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts on the piece. Again, please don't take the fact that I believe in a faith to mean I'm trying to attack atheism with my review. I'm not. I'm simply takling about flaws I found in the argument presented in this film.
-
good lord what a post.
i would have just written "its overrated tripe dont watch it" and then smoked some dro but uh your way is good too.
-
good lord what a post.
i would have just written "its overrated tripe dont watch it" and then smoked some dro but uh your way is good too.
im glad you made a summary for me
I saw this movie on tuesday, I liked it, it was hilarious, but it was really just a big dish of propoganda saying HEY RISE UP AGNOSTICS YOU GOTTA MAKE PEOPLE DOUBT STUFF
hell im even agnostic i guess, and the ending big spoiler: was really fucking preachy and kind of annoyed me that they couldnt have just said RELIGION BAD but instead they showed BOMBS PEOPLE BLOWING UP AND BIBLE/QUR'AN QUOTES TO CREEPY MUSIC/ it really scared me i peed my pants
other than that hey it was a good movie i liked it
-
I agree about the ending but then again, it was a documentary, and there's not really a good conclusion to something like this trying to make a point unless you put in big bold letters at the beginning or end.
@ Dulcinea, not a rebuttal, but maybe an explanation?:
The reason the movie focuses on Christianity, Judaism, and Islam is because they are the biggest religions in the world. Obviously Buddhism is probably the fourth or fifth, but Buddhism doesn't really have many drawbacks other than being a huge waste of time (no offense/my beliefs). Clearly there are too many religions to cover, but the fact that there are so many is conveyed with the interviews with the 420 religion leader, and the bits about scientology, or the mormons.
Most of the people Maher spoke with were eccentric or strange, but weaved in with them are interviews with intelligent people on both sides, who pretty much say the same thing: religions are stories with fundamentals in them, which hold no tie to science or the pursuit of truth. The bible and Quran are both up to interpretation, as are whatever documents the other religions use, since they are so old. We have the same issues with the US constitution, the difference is, with religion, amendments would be against god's original intention.
@Steel:
It says "review" at the beginning of his post. Have you actually seen this movie?
-
wtf you're both getting pissed I'm just saying WOW THATS A LOT OF FUCKIN WORDS FOR A REVIEW.
it wasn't even a negative thing it was just a totally different kind of post than we are used to here.
-
wtf you're both getting pissed I'm just saying WOW THATS A LOT OF FUCKIN WORDS FOR A REVIEW.
it wasn't even a negative thing it was just a totally different kind of post than we are used to here.
nononon i wasnt pissed :(
I was actually saying thanks for making a summary, I didnt feel like reading it........
not everyone...is always mad at you steel its ok..
-
I wasn't mad either, just curious whether you saw the movie or not since you said it was "tripe." (lol)
-
well no i havent but i got a vaguely negative sense from her review which is why i said I'D PROBABLY SHORTEN IT TO "FUCK YOU MOVIE SUCKS".
I probably won't watch this unless it's readily available to me because it does look like IM ATHEIST....AND IM MAD!!!
-
I wasn't mad either but it was meant to be a review so that's why it was so long.
-
yeah but you can sum up your thoughts really easily
just hit a few main points, people will get the gist of it and actually read your posts.
-
I like to back up my arguments if it's a review. If people don't read they don't read. If they do then they do. I'm just participating in the discussion the way I best can.
-
yeah but no one will DISCUSS what you said or even ARGUE with you if they didn't READ IT
-
yeah but no one will DISCUSS what you said or even ARGUE with you if they didn't READ IT
One person did.
Seriously, I see your point, and if you're offering me advice to improve then thanks for the help. But please be respectful of the fact that we all have our own posting styles. Not all of my posts are that long. Also, a PM would probably be more appreciated than posting straight on the thread. :)
Since it seems to be a problem...
Summary of my review:
-It seemed more like infotainment than a documentary
-The people he chose to argue with were easily discredited. It seemed as if he chose them to make his point look more intelligent than it actually was.
-He treated Judeo-Christian religions as if they were the only ones on earth.
-He ignored the fact that even though religion does evil, it also does good.
-The editing was suspicious.
-
-He treated Judeo-Christian religions as if they were the only ones on earth.
I haven't seen it yet because its not playing ANYWHERE around here but I can see why they did that. Christianity is the BIGGEST religion in the world and effects MILLIONS of people so I can see why they covered it so much.
And yeah I was only trying to help.
-
I think the reason they stuck to the religions they did was because most of the buddhists and hindu's arent going around telling me that their religions are the RIGHT WAY MUST ABIDE BY OR GO TO HELL
I really havent seen as much negative ANYTHING about buddhism or hindu or tao or any of those "other" religions, so I guess maybe thats why christianity was the only religion xD!
-
I saw Scientology on the commercial
-
I saw Scientology on the commercial
scientology also has had so much media attention lately it would be sad if they didnt make fun of it for the 5min they did
-
And yeah I was only trying to help.
Ah ok thanks then :)
They spent like 1 minute on scientology.
(Surprisingly I saw this movie on a date...an atheist and a buddhist walk into a theatre and watch Religulous...it kind of sounds like a bad joke)
-
This movie looks pretty lame. It's like, "ROFL GOD?"
-
So yeah I just came back from seeing it. It was pretty good.
Some complaints: he focused too much on religious fanatics and just weird extremists and such. I mean.... a MUSLIM GAY BAR come on. I would have liked to see more conversation with "normal" religious people. Some of the interjecting film/cartoon clips felt like crappy amateur youtube vids that were thrown in FOR THE LULZ to be random but some of them were appropriate and well-placed so it all balances out. Not much else to say. It was fairly entertaining.
I really liked the dudes at the Vatican. Especially the Vatican astronomer, he was awesome.
-
this movie fucking owned and the only people that don't like it are just upset because he makes fun of religious people but it's funny as hell and is very post 9/11, there's gay muslims and jesus is a cholo and he calls a mexican guy carmen miranda, its basically the best.
-
I seriously dug through like 4 different local theaters and NONE of them are showing it at all
-
this movie fucking owned and the only people that don't like it are just upset because he makes fun of religious people but it's funny as hell and is very post 9/11, there's gay muslims and jesus is a cholo and he calls a mexican guy carmen miranda, its basically the best.
i mean, i really liked it but
did you feel like some of the POP CULTURE clips that were thrown in there were kinda gay??
i mean like that one part where he and the ex-gay guy burst into laughter and the film cuts to a clip of PEOPLE LAUGHING HYSTERICALLY lmao
it felt like instead of letting an interviewee finish talking they would just edit rebuttals out and CUT TO THE 5 SECOND CLIP OF A CAR BOMB GOIN OFF
-
"ROFL GOD?"
Haha, that's kind of what I gathered from it.
Also, I watched Quarantine the other day. I was impressed, it wasn't half bad. Totally predictable and nothing new but it is so entertaining and I was actually on the edge of my seat the last 10 minutes. Pretty suspenseful.
-
the cutaways owned dude. they had one of jesus getting slapped. the cutaways were hilarious. i hate you ase.
also quarantine isn't this movie why'd you post here. also spoilers not really: the end is in the commercials. so you dont have to watch it now!
-
Didn't have enough to say about Quarantine to create a whole new topic and it was on my mind so I thought WHY NOT.
also, the end is totally in the commercials. you have to look... very... closely...
-
no you dont its the end of the commercial.
I wish I would be disappointing someone but the end is RIGHT THERE, what do you spoil in a movie that gives away the ending.
-
no you dont its the end of the commercial.
I wish I would be disappointing someone but the end is RIGHT THERE, what do you spoil in a movie that gives away the ending.
because it's a thesis and not an epic plot twist?
-
what were you answering considering I asked WHAT ELSE DO YOU SPOIL.
also rec wasn't a very good movie but that ending was pretty fucking chilling in the original! good job putting it in the commercial.
also this isn't a topic about rec or quarantine! make another thread if you want to talk about those!