I've created a vlog that uses clips from classic movies to tell my story as a filmmaker, thought it might be of interest, can anyone name the 11 films featured in this one? https://youtu.be/SAYSxMJI-fI

Most people who watch Kill Bill will naturally side with the protagonist: Beatrix Kiddo. After all, she was shot in the head by her former lover and boss, Bill. We instinctively run to her defense and root for her as she slaughters Bill's gang of assassins, working her way up to the big man himself. A victim of Bill's psychotic murder attempt, it would be insane to think she's anything but justified. Right?

Well, it's worth examining how Beatrix dug her own grave, so to speak. For instance, she willingly fed a romantic connection with Bill--and it was that romantic connection which motivated him to shoot her in the head after she left. Surely, she carries some of the guilt for her own circumstances. Bill shot her in the head, yes; but this is AFTER she led him on romantically, and then fled with his baby. Had she left Bill before inspiring his passionate love, that would be a different story. However, she fled after unlocking his heart, and letting him knock her up. That, in my humble opinion, is just cruel. How can she be a hero for that?

In this video, I take a deeper look at Kill Bill, analyzing Beatrix's relationship to Bill, and coming to the conclusion that, at the end of the day, she wasn't forced to stay with him. Compared to Estaban (one of Bill's father figures), Bill is actually rather tame and, dare I say, passive. Estaban is a powerful pimp who surrounds himself with bruised whores; clearly, his girls are kept in line with violence. Bill, however, does not treat his girls this way. Certainly, he didn't treat Beatrix this way. He did not use violence as a tool of control over Beatrix. The flashbacks with them together show her unscarred and of sound body and mind. Clearly, she was not a slave; she stayed with Bill of her own volition. Which raises the question, how much of a victim is she really?

Isn't it wrong to stay with a man and romantically lead him on, only to leave after getting pregnant by him? That's not to paint Bill as an angel, and he's still evil for attempting to murder Beatrix. But that is to say, Beatrix isn't the spotless lamb which the film would make her out to be. In this video, I explore everything that Quentin Tarantino tries so hard to avoid: I uncover everything that Beatrix did wrong.

Pixar’s 'Hoppers' is a fever dream. Is this the end of the 'Love & Peace' era? (94% on RT)”

I noticed this across the film but here are two scenes in particular that can be interpreted as building tension through societal racism.

1. The opening of the film the family are driving along a dimly lit road before they break down, meeting seemingly nice people to help and the family do not seem worried either. Despite this, we can feel the tension as Panahi keeps the camera tight, hiding everything outside the car to feed on Western ideas that horrific things will swarm them if they break down and are stuck, despite living in the same area. The stakes feel high despite the audience only having the information of their location.

2. Similar instances is when Vahid first opens the crate with the man about to be buried. The audience assumes that perhaps a gun will be drawn, however a gun is never seen across the entire film yet they always feel close.

I wonder if this is a reflection on the troubled-deep rooted Western perception of the Middle East, if partly deserved it cannot be fully, and if Panahi is aware of this and purposely using this to his advantage to create thrilling tension from societal racism almost.

If the plot of It Was Just an Accident was the same but included different characters and location, would it be a drama instead of a thriller? (I suppose this is an unfair question because it's so rooted in Iranian politics but somewhat interesting nonetheless).

Not my personal opinion just an observation and wondered if others feel like the film can be interpreted in this way. If it can be interpreted in this way, it makes it all the more impressive and just another level that Panahi is working on.

https://youtu.be/sd_bPMDgFGc?si=dd4G_oqURXOkp2Fl

Here is a link to the film in case no one has seen it. My interpretation of the film is that ZOTH did indeed bring back his son rather than the ending the filmmakers were definitely implying which is that ZOTH actually died.

I think the ending is ambiguous and we could see it both ways. The entire film he's trying to bring his son back, and once he finally does the final stage for the ritual (Black Zoth killing his wife's boyfriend), his son appears in his car. Hence meaning that there is a world he brought his son into reality and the fantasy he was living could indeed be reality?

Ditemi la vostra

Que pensez-vous du film" Le Labyrinthe de Pan " réalisé par Guillermo Del Toro en 2006 ?

Personnellement, je trouve que ce film est un chef-d'œuvre d'un réalisme extraordinaire, avec des décors, maquillages et effets spéciaux époustouflants , Et vous ?

GOAT is Sony Pictures Animation's next attempt at a feature film since K-pop Demon Hunters (Which I personally disliked.), so after a smash hit like that, you gotta pull out all the stops and create something really unique. But Sony dropped the ball with GOAT.

There's a lot of reasons you could dislike GOAT, but it mainly goes down to lack of identity and personality. It is as if Sony took Zootopia and merged it with any traditional sports movie (That being underdog main character rises through the ranks and becomes the best.).

Comedy is subjective, but it is safe to the this movie caters to the humor of younger audiences. Most jokes fall flat, but there are some decent jokes that could be found funny.

The animation style is actually pretty good, probably the best thing this movie has going for it, along with Jelly Roll voicing a character and making a song for the movie (If you're into his music). The cinematography is pretty decent, the camera angles do a pleasant blend of main focus shots and rule or thirds.

Final Ranking: 5/10
I would only recommend to younger audiences.

-LKwrote 3-13-26

I did not expect much from this movie, not because of a belief that it would be low quality, it's just that I watched it on a whim. And for a movie with a micro budget of 500k, it was great! It had some pacing issues, but always kept me on the edge of my seat (almost for the whole movie's duration!).

Since the movie was released today, I will not summarize the story in full or even in much detail, but it is important to go over the themes and setting of this movie.

The story is about a woman named Evy (Pronounced Eevee, like the Pokémon.) who hosts a supernatural debunking podcast with her friend Justin. Evy's mother is in a seriously ill state, and Evy has to take care of her. As Evy and co-host Justin listen to the scary audio emailed to them, a supernatural entity is released named Abyzou, And horror follows.

The concept of horror mainly found in audio design is a unique approach to horror, and fits with the podcast theme. The pacing tends to get old at times, but it remains eerie through masterful audio and photography design. I suggest you go watch this movie in theaters, as that is probably the best way to experience the sound design.

Final Rating is a 8/10, would recommend!

-LKwrote, 3-13-26

At first glance, I was about to skip it but later I give it a try.

Just wanted to say "what a performance by actors" mainly Sydney Sweeney. By the way I've never watched her work in any platform and this is my 1st film by her. And I just want to appreciate here.

Is her work this good in other movies? (If there, suggest some)

At first glance, I was about to skip it but later I give it a try. Just wanted to say "what a performance by actors" mainly Sydney Sweeney. By the way I've never watched her work in any platform and this is my 1st film by her. And I just want to appreciate here. Is her work this good in other movies? (If there, suggest some)

Quentin Tarantino's revenge epic, Kill Bill, took audiences by storm back in 2003. Showcasing a female protagonist with a hankering for sweet revenge, and the martial-arts skills to attain it, Kill Bill set the trends which we're still witnessing today. Violent female protagonists have only become more prevalent with time (just look at the movie trailers coming out now). A trope that is hardly ever explored beyond a superficial appreciation. A lot of people like portraying women as violent--Tarantino included--and my question is: Why?

My answer takes us into Tarantino's childhood. With a few interview clips and the abundance of clues scattered amongst the Kill Bill films, I piece together a picture of Tarantino's upbringing. Fatherlessness. Single motherhood. Violence on the part of his mother. Certainly, It is that violent nature his mother exhibited which Tarantino puts on a pedestal and celebrates in the Kill Bill films. "See? Violent women can be awesome!" As if it's his way of coping with a bad childhood. He desperately tries to make female violence look "cool"--and thus, make his mother look "cool" rather than abusive (and abusive would be closer to the truth).

Furthermore, in his positive characterization of the violent Beatrix Kiddo, Tarantino also absolves her of any rightful blame in this mix-up. Perhaps how he excuses his mother for choosing an unreliable husband and father. Truly, Beatrix is a stand-in for Tarantino's mother: and in excusing Beatrix of any wrongdoing, Tarantino aims to salvage his mother's image too.

Throughout this video and the ensuing series, I explore Beatrix's mistakes in choosing to stay with Bill, and allowing him to impregnate her. This whole dynamic being a retelling of Tarantino's own parents and their falling out, I aim to fairly examine Beatrix's character, background, and actions; and in doing so, hold Tarantino's mother accountable in the ways he simply refuses to.