Jeez the reviews for this show are weird.

This is a pointlessly pedantic thing to point out, but Matt Frewer quite observably did not “re-don” the makeup for that Pixels appearance. Or, if he did, that’s not what made it to the screen.

Something that may surprise you to learn is that monopolistic business practices which generate billions of dollars rely on major exploitation.

This looks rather annoying.  Which may not be a good thing.

Holy cow that was a long read for the subject matter.

It would be good if Howard Shore’s score was just recycled themes from Cronenberg films the whole way through.

Yeah, this is the long and the short of it.

I’m not just trying to be “that guy” who is too much of a snob to appreciate Tarantino, but is he that solid? You read his screenplays and his shooting scripts, and you can see there’s a lot of direction in there, so he’s certainly a thoughtful director (though I don’t care for his thoughts), and certainly a visionary…

They’re both just Lord Of The Flies though.

Cronenberg famously visited Corman's offices with a view to doing Shivers with him, but Corman was at a dental appointment.

Chris Pratt has essentially been playing a Harrison Ford-lite persona since he hit the big screen.  Even if they did cast him as Indiana Jones my objection would not be the recasting, it would be how unexciting that recasting choice would be.

Theory: Netflix has got a multi-picture deal with him, and so they’re agreeing to buy any old tosh from him just to burn through the deliverables of the contract.

That farm full of guns is being blown out of proportion.  Those guns are being farmed purely for food, it's straight from the farm to your plate, they can't hurt anyone.

I dunno man, I’m equally wary of being mean, but if you watched that movie and saw a representation of a really smart, clever detective, then I think we have different definitions of smart. I saw a movie in which a fairly dim Batman behaved as though utterly boilerplate riddles were agonisingly tough, and in which he…

I mean, that’s the only way it could possibly work. The “problem” (insofar as it is one) is that the inherent nature of these characters is that they belong in wackadoo high-camp 60s sitcom. That’s what they were built for.  The insistence on inserting them into the kind of story they can’t support is the problem.

Oof.  What an odd take.

It was a bad crime movie though. If your villain tells riddles, and you’re emphasising the detective/procedural aspects of the main character, it’s essential that the audience can play along: it’s gotta be a puzzlebox for the audience. But that movie was just like watching a playthrough of a Sierra adventure game…

Gentlemen!  We cannot afford to fail again.  We must make a Fantastic Four movie at all costs!  

Imagine if Tig Notaro’s character had been an adult Daria, that would have been cool.

I only recently learned that “the law says it has to be a pencil” is an urban myth!  Can you believe that?