seraphxiii
Seraph_X3
seraphxiii

Side characters are one thing that can probably skirt by, but can you imagine the negative headlines that they’d get for putting a gay youth focused program more directly under the Disney name? “They’re trying to force their agendas down our kids throats!” “Disney’s kids content streaming platform encourages them to

The only catch is that Olyphant is 51, abouto 6 years older than even Ioan Gruffudd currently is and about 3 years younger than Robert Downey, Jr. currently. He can certainly currently play him NOW, but I’m sure Marvel would want to get a few movies out of the characters over the long haul, and would they want to

I’ve always pictured Timothy Olyphant, though I'm pretty much saying this as someone who doesn't read comics and only follows the peripheral stuff...

I think "The Lighthouse" was definitely robbed for cinematography. Zellweger was also my top choice for actress until I saw "Marriage Story," but her win doesn't feel like robbing Johansson.

I feel like it was a really weak year for mainstream films - I really enjoyed both Frozen 2 and Toy Story 4, but neither was truly great, and How to Train Your Dragon 3 left me seriously cold after the two fantastic first entries - so I really don’t know who I would’ve picked, but I guess I’m appreciative it was this

To be fair, it mostly got reshuffled because of the Disney purchase of Fox and the subsequent reshuffling of all their films and not necessarily because of its quality.

To be somewhat fair, they probably had a general (mediocre) sketch about the quality of Hallmark Channel movies that they later shoehorned a joke referencing the commercial controversy into at the last minute. So, actually, they probably should've done even better because they probably had much more time to brainstorm

Sure, but the movie itself is another story...

Was Liam Neeson actually not available for this?

Precisely! Even stuff that’s tangential can at the very least add texture to a work, its world, and its message.

I really hate when critics flippantly use “unnecessary” for things like subplots. Did that scene detract from the film in anyway? If you had a good time and it didn’t subtract from the overall quality of the film, then what of it?

So... Family Circle?

I know! It’s a real blindspot. Is it perhaps due to animator unions? Their audience typically also seeing animation as strictly children’s entertainment rather than art on par with live action? It’s really strange. And sad.

I’m still shocked that Criterion hasn’t managed and/or bothered to get the rights to the film... Wonder what kind of hurdles that would take if it was funded in part by Warner Bros. but released by Miramax seemingly while it was under Disney...

My first screening of Shazam! was tainted by the parents of this poor 6-year-old kid (estimating) who kept freaking the hell out when kids were being beat up or the seven deadly sins were doing fairly gruesome things. I could understand taking a kid to that movie and not realizing it was so intense, but when he's

I’ve enjoyed McCartney’s music (admittedly mostly when he was in The Beatles) and I love “It’s A Wonderful Life,” but “Wonderful Christmastime” is cloying, and McCartney can be a bit cornball, so I can’t exactly find myself clamoring for this, even though I’m likely to see it at some point, even if just out of

Oh God, he’s going to cast himself as Clarence, isn’t he?

Also, fuck the people who ruined the 69!

Nah, yours was definitely first. I just went through the process of editing and then realized I should check if someone else noticed first. Then, naturally, I moped when I saw yours but still shared my efforts.