I thought you hated films.

[Podey]

Thread for film chat, anyone? 

I’m in the “Digger was brilliant” side of the divide, also really enjoyed ‘Resident Evil’ and ‘Teenage Sex and Death in Camo Miasma’ might be my pick of 2026 so far. Off to see ‘Whalefall’ in 4DX today.

Topic

[Nick R]

I finally watched the recent He-Man movie.

I haven’t seen that, but today I went to the cinema to watch the other film that Travis Knight directed this year: Wildwood.

If he’s going to spend that sweet Nike money on a vanity project, there are worse things he could spend it on than making what’s probably my favourite animated film since Wolfwalkers.

That’s not light praise, since the last few years have had loads of animated films I’ve loved. (Across the Spider-Verse, Memoir of a Snail, The Boy and the Heron, Inu-oh, Del Toro’s Pinocchio, Robot Dreams, Flow, The Mitchells vs the Machines, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, Vengeance Most Fowl, The Bob’s Burgers Movie, Zootopia 2, and The Day the Earth Blew Up…)

Wildwood might not be as pretty as Kubo and the Two Strings, and I don’t think it has any individual character designs as striking as those of Del Toro’s Pinocchio or as weird as those of Memoir of a Snail. But the sheer scale is astonishing. I remember on the commentary and making of features for Missing Link, Chris Butler was very open that Laika makes “hybrid” films, not purely stop-motion ones, and Wildwood must tip the scale further toward CG enhancements than anything they’ve done before, but I don’t think that should take away from what they’ve achieved here. It is spectacular.

I realise this could end up like Kubo and the Two Strings, which I utterly adored at the cinema and still really like, but which started to show some cracks upon rewatching it at home.

But for now: HOLY FUCK JUST LOOK AT IT!!! 5 stars out of 5, best film of 2026.

[Technopeasant]

But at the same time it was all fairly flimsy, and I was shocked when I realised the runtime was 2hrs20m – there’s no way something like this needed to be more than 1hr45m, tops.

I have no idea why films feel they need to be over an hour and a half these days. I’ve tried watching The Mandalorian and Grogu twice and ended up needing to shut it off sometime after he gets captured.I might just decide he dies.

[Ben Saunders]

You can continue a movie from where you left off, you know.

[Dave]

I haven’t seen that, but today I went to the cinema to watch the other film that Travis Knight directed this year: Wildwood.

I really want to see this one too, it looks beautiful from the trailers.

[Podey]

I finally watched the recent He-Man movie.
I haven’t seen that, but today I went to the cinema to watch the other film that Travis Knight directed this year: Wildwood.
If he’s going to spend that sweet Nike money on a vanity project, there are worse things he could spend it on than making what’s probably my favourite animated film since Wolfwalkers.
That’s not light praise, since the last few years have had loads of animated films I’ve loved. (Across the Spider-Verse, Memoir of a Snail, The Boy and the Heron, Inu-oh, Del Toro’s Pinocchio, Robot Dreams, Flow, The Mitchells vs the Machines, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, Vengeance Most Fowl, The Bob’s Burgers Movie, Zootopia 2, and The Day the Earth Blew Up…)
Wildwood might not be as pretty as Kubo and the Two Strings, and I don’t think it has any individual character designs as striking as those of Del Toro’s Pinocchio or as weird as those of Memoir of a Snail. But the sheer scale is astonishing. I remember on the commentary and making of features for Missing Link, Chris Butler was very open that Laika makes “hybrid” films, not purely stop-motion ones, and Wildwood must tip the scale further toward CG enhancements than anything they’ve done before, but I don’t think that should take away from what they’ve achieved here. It is spectacular.
I realise this could end up like Kubo and the Two Strings, which I utterly adored at the cinema and still really like, but which started to show some cracks upon rewatching it at home.
But for now: HOLY FUCK JUST LOOK AT IT!!! 5 stars out of 5, best film of 2026.

I’m going to see it this week on a friend’s rec, though I’ll be miffed if it knocks ‘Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma’ off my top spot for the year!

‘Is God Is’ is also up there, sort of like Sinners meets Kill Bill but with more depth than the latter. 

[Moonlight]

I have no idea why films feel they need to be over an hour and a half these days.

If a movie feels too long at 2 hour 20 minutes, that’s not a problem with movies being 2 hours 20 minutes, that’s a problem with this particular movie stretching itself too thin. 90 minutes is pretty much towards the lower end of how long films traditionally are. I just showed a friend of mine Dog Day Afternoon (1975) last night, my all-time favorite film ever, it’s fucking brilliant, go watch it now, and even though it’s 2 hours long it just flies by. I don’t find myself thinking “How much longer is this?” in the backhalf because I’m consistently engaged throughout the entire runtime. It’s as long as it needs to be. Al Pacino is so good in it. Oh my god.

There’s also the distinct possibility your attention span has been fried dead from decades of the internet. I know mine has. That’s why I’m trying to train myself to not check my phone during a movie, or at least a movie I haven’t seen before. It’s much easier to not do this in the theater.

[Dave]

Thankfully my attention span isn’t an issue – I don’t get distracted by my phone, internet, social media etc. while I watch stuff, and I like nothing better than getting drawn into a movie and forgetting about the rest of the world for a couple of hours.

But some styles of movie justify an epic runtime (I can happily sit and watch the LotR EEs) and some don’t, and this take on He-Man is light and swashbuckling enough to be enjoyable but there isn’t enough there to support a hugely long runtime.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

Both Resident Evil and Other Mommy were a firm 90mins and they were brilliant 

I get really antsy when a film gets to 90mins and the final act is only just starting. It’s rare a story is benefiting from another 20mins or so. It could easily be trimmed. 

Some definitely do benefit, and theyll have earned it, but so many don’t.

[Moonlight]

Second viewing of Soylent Green (1973). This film feels disturbingly prescient with its world ravaged by climate change in the year 2022 after humans destroy the environment. Going back to our discussion of opening titles, it also features what might be my favorite opening titles:

[Ben Saunders]

My attention span is fried by decades of instant gratification, but I still never check my phone during a movie. I did watch an extended cut of Attack of the Clones recently where I was like damn, this shit long af, but that nonsense clocked in at like 157 minutes. You need to be a real Star Wars head to be watching something like that with no breaks.

Lord of the Rings Extended is funny because Return of the King just doesn’t stop ending. They’re at the peak of Mount Doom and there’s still 35 minutes to go. Imagine if they added the scouring of the Shire as well, it would be ridiculous.

Maybe a lifetime of watching Classic Who has made me somewhat more resilient to slow pacing than your average 31-year-old. I do notice when a movie is long, but as long as it’s not boring I’ll stick it out. I also notice when a movie is short, like oh I carved out my afternoon for this and it’s already over? Boo.

[Warbodog]

I was already LOTRed out after two long films to not need to see a third one (it either stopped being a family outing because we all lost interest or I opted out), let alone Xtending them.

Titanic was a good long film and is still my mental benchmark when I’ve got 3 hours left til home time or something, though I just learned it’s an even longer 3 hours 15 mins. An entire series of Red Dwarf doesn’t feel shorter.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

Titanic works because you are experiencing this epic journey and traumatic event in sort of compressed real time. You are along for the ride with them. Especially once the ship starts sinking. It took less than 3hrs to really go down.  
A TV series has 6 beginning, middle and ends, and the focus and story keep changing which maybe why it feels as long/longer?

[Dave]

Titanic works because you are experiencing this epic journey and traumatic event in sort of compressed real time.

It’s a bit like a Series VIII marathon.

[Dave]

In all seriousness though, last time I watched Titanic I was struck by how much it felt like two films stitched together, with the first half a period romance that suddenly shifts gears into a disaster movie in the second half. I think that helps make the runtime feel like less of a drag, if it was a full three hours of the disaster I don’t think it would have worked.

[Podey]

I remember watching ‘Return of The King’ in the cinema and hearing the entire audience groan at every false ending after the Mount Doom business was over. It was quite funny. 

Watched ‘Bone Tomahawk’ for the first time tonight. Holy moly… if I ever suffer the misfortune of being cleaved in half “hotdog bun” style, I would very much like it to be from the TOP end, please (and preferably whilst fully-clothed).

[Podey]

My ‘Wildwood’ review, I don’t often write long ones unless I have something to say and I had a lot to say about this, as an artist…!

…

Early on in this movie we get the briefest glimpse of a street artist whose setup includes a sign which reads “enjoy handmade art… before it is gone for good!” and, in a time where AI already threatens to take humans out of the animation process, this serves as not only a stark warning but also a battle cry.

‘Wildwood’ has, predictably, bombed at the box office whilst simultaneously earning the highest Rotten Tomatoes score for a mainstream release in 2026 and it isn’t hard for me to understand how both of these contradictory facts can be true because I’d not been interested enough to watch this movie until my friend Dan mentioned that the entire thing was rendered in stop-motion (frame-by-frame animation with physical puppets and environments) and now, having seen it for myself, I’m in absolute AWE at the scope of what has been achieved.

Though not entirely free of CGI, great lengths have been taken to ensure that just about everything that could be animated by hand has been and it’s quite astonishing to read about what some of that entailed (particularly with bringing the crows to life) over an incredible 16-year process.

As far as the story goes, I think part of the poor box office performance might be that it superficially looks to be aimed at kids which, whilst being family-friendly to the extent of it not having any swears in it (I was going to say nudity as well but there is a fully naked pre-teen in the opening scene!), is certainly not the case as it sits firmly in “dark fantasy” territory.

From a design perspective I would also say that it has one of the least enticing movie posters I have ever seen and I have seen it a lot in recent weeks because an entire wall of my cinema’s toilets feature it and, well, I am a man in my 40’s…

I’m unsure at the time of writing if it will make my top 5 for the year because, although I watched in a constant state of feeling impressed, I never got that emotionally involved with the plot.

Artistically speaking, ‘Wildwood’ is the argument for why a studio should spend significantly more time and money preserving a form of animation that is superior to digital techniques and which WILL die out if they don’t… whereas the box office speaks for why too many more projects like this won’t be supported in the future. We can only hope it gets a second life on streaming.

Alternative Letterboxd style one-line review: this movie = 99% gold and 1% crow propaganda.

[Dave]

I really want to see Wildwood. Maybe I should do that soon before it leaves cinemas.

[Technopeasant]

You can continue a movie from where you left off, you know.

The obvious rejoinder sure, but it was because we were trying to watch through it with my brother who wasn’t there on our first attempt.
And of course, in terms of starting and stopping: congratulations, you just reinvented the mini-series. I’d argue the purpose of the movie format is to structure it for continous viewing.

I don’t find myself thinking “How much longer is this?” in the backhalf because I’m consistently engaged throughout the entire runtime.

There can indeed be artistically valid reasons for a film to be longer, but at the end of the day I need to put the baby down, take the dog out, and go to bed. Most work days I only have about two hours of unalloted time, so respecting my time matters. And most filmmakers aren’t talented enough to justify it anyway. Economy in art is a virtue.
I’d also gently suggest that if brain fry was the issue longer films would be preferred because you would not need to keep changing them mid-doom scroll.

 90 minutes is pretty much towards the lower end of how long films traditionally are

I’m honestly surprised how many theatrically released films I’ve encountered from before 1960 that are sub-60.

In all seriousness though, last time I watched Titanic I was struck by how much it felt like two films stitched together, with the first half a period romance that suddenly shifts gears into a disaster movie in the second half

I literally still have a VHS copy pretty much cleaved like that.

[Moonlight]

There can indeed be artistically valid reasons for a film to be longer, but at the end of the day I need to put the baby down, take the dog out, and go to bed. Most work days I only have about two hours of unalloted time, so respecting my time matters. And most filmmakers aren’t talented enough to justify it anyway. Economy in art is a virtue.

I feel like this reads a lot differently to saying you have no idea why filmmakers think movies need to be over 90 minutes and I won’t argue with it because I am frequently seeking out movies around the 90 minute mark or less when I want to watch something but I also have limited time before I need to go to bed. It’s just that I am very happy to sit through 120+ minute movie if I can.

My free-time situation is more along lines of never feeling like I have a good time to put on the 3 or 4 hour movies I keep meaning to watch. 2 is usually doable. It’s also probably worth noting that watching films has basically become my primary hobby this year so I’m always looking to make time for it where I can.

[Podey]

I definitely watch more movies now thanks to having a cinema membership plus the fact I’ve determined I need to get out of the house/my studio space on days off in order for them to feel like days off.

[Moonlight]

I haven’t watched a movie literally every day but I have watched 29 feature films so far this month, and I might be watching Forbidden Planet with my brother today.

[Technopeasant]

I feel like this reads a lot differently to saying you have no idea why filmmakers think movies need to be over 90 minutes

Perhaps. Maybe I should clarify I don’t understand why modern genre movies need to be over two hours. Does anyone want that much of a Marvel movie?

[Warbodog]

The only Marvel movie I’ve seen is Guardians of the Galaxy because it was supposed to be a bit like Farscape. It was okay.

Old Marvel comics are fun, but I don’t need to see film or TV adaptations. Same goes for books that work fine as books.

[Podey]

Finally got to see Donnie Darko on the big screen last night. Really enjoyed it, the biggest difference was hearing the score on massive speakers as feeling those eerie drones rumbling through the room is something I’ve never experienced at home and it definitely adds to the unsettled atmosphere of the movie. 

I’d say the reaction from the crowd was very positive, though I got the sense most people were already fans (first thing I heard when I walked in was people talking Papa Roach and other early 2000s alt culture!). There was one old bloke on the front row who fell asleep after maybe half and hour and then snored loudly throughout the rest of the movie, though…! 

[Dave]

Went to see Wicker this afternoon, a lovely little fairytale fable of a film that explores some interesting ideas around social norms and relationships while also being pretty funny in places. Plus the effects are subtly impressive. This will probably get more attention when it hits streaming as it’s fairly low-key but engaging.

[Technopeasant]

Watched the first Elvira movie in the leadup to Halloween. The sexualization is kind of uncomfortable when you learn about Cassandra Petersen’s personal life, but it certainly contextualizes the numerous times she humiliates sex pests and rapists. W. Morgan Shepard is worth the cost of admission alone of course (which I mean, streamed on Prime bundled with my internet is basically free, but anyway).

[Moonlight]

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Finally made my girlfriend watch this with me, in part because we’ve been watching The Simpsons in order and we’re about to start crashing into the Kubrick references. I first saw this movie around age 11 – would’ve been, much like Red Dwarf around the same time, something my dad had rented that caught my eye – and it completely fucking rewired my brain. This was my first capital-F Film, one of those formative experiences of seeing a movie do things you had no idea a movie could do. As a result, I expect, nay, demand that every movie or TV show I watch has a mysterious and ambiguous trip-out ending.

This is also my first time seeing 2001 since the LLM boom really took off and it really recontextualizes HAL in a way I found quite entertaining to think about as I watched.

Technical sidenote: I still have yet to watch my 4K Blu-ray of this movie since I have no way to play it on my computer and stream over Discord, but the set came with a regular Blu-ray that I ripped instead. The resulting file came out to about 42 GB, nearly double the size of my original Blu-ray, and looked goddamn pristine.

[Rushy]

I rewatched “Psycho” and “Psycho II”.

Thoughts on the original:

I felt a sense of sadness. Many classical films get a new life on home media. In the case of Psycho, that’s not quite possible. Hitchcock constructed this great mystery, with lots of twists and turns and red herrings. But because of pop culture, it’s almost impossible not to know the story and the film just simply isn’t designed to be watched like that.

Sure, you can admire the cinematography, the acting, some of the tension. The murder scenes hold up wonderfully.
But this isn’t like a Poirot or a Columbo where being in the world and spending time with the detective is half the fun
This is very much a procedural, where the searching of clues and the tension of what could happen is a huge part of the film. I felt as though I was reading a very good crossword that’s already been solved.

Perkins was very good, but because of the nature of the film, we don’t delve very deeply into Norman’s character until that truly awful scene with the psychiatrist at the end, where everything gets spelled out. This is where the sequels have a huge advantage. They know the audience knows, so there’s just so much more time that we can spend on Norman as a fully fleshed out character, rather than an enigmatic presence. And of course Perkins’ age contributes to his acting ability.

I appreciated Janet Leigh much more on this rewatch. I think the film is excellent during the entire first act, because it’s character driven. Her death is when it becomes wonky and dated.

Thoughts on the sequel: 

I can’t remember the last time a film took me on such a journey. I started out thinking “oh no, this is a lot more pedestrian than I remember”, “They’re trying to contrive another murder thriller”. And the clumsy Hitchcock callbacks, oh no.
But then it became interesting and then it became great and then it was fantastic.

It’s much more focused than the original. Rather than a vague case of thievery-turned-murder mystery, it’s a story about how many different people react to Norman’s release from the institution and how, in many ways, he’s the only sane one in the film.

Norman as an enigmatic murderer in the first one was creepy
Norman playing a bemused straight man to the insanity around him is pure genius

If I have any complaints, it’s that it’s very dense. But in this case, knowing the resolution to the mystery actually made the film better, because I was catching so many new details and possibilities of who was doing what, and why.

[Moonlight]

One other 2001 note: it was the first movie I ever streamed from Netflix, and if I recall correctly it was cropped into 4:3 for some fucking reason.

[Rushy]

I just got done watching Psycho III. Before I can even talk about the film, I need to talk about my DVD.

I’ve been watching these films from a DVD collection. So you’d think the audiovisual quality of them would be consistent. The last two films looked like you would expect them to on DVD. Psycho III somehow looks like it’s a 4K Blu-Ray. Very grainy, very shiny, absolutely f*cking gorgeous. And the sound design is so intricate and immersive. It almost drowned out the dialogue. Now admittedly, the strange audio mix might have something to do with my new headphones, but that doesn’t change the fact that Perkins put a ton of effort into the sound cues and effects

Let’s talk about the actual film then. It was very… eccentric. Perkins completely abandons the mystery thriller genre that defined the earlier films as well as the grounded stage-play tone that goes along with that. This is a highly stylized, descent-into-madness sort of picture; an erotic, feverish nightmare. Almost as if Perkins wanted Norman Bates to be the director, rather than himself.

I definitely enjoyed it, but I don’t know how to compare it to the others. There is barely any story. There’s a theme of repression (Norman’s 1950s mindset and the main heroine’s obsessive Christianity) clashing with 1980s drug-addled excess all around them. Both of them being mentally ill in a world that is also mentally ill, but in the opposite way.
What it’s trying to actually say, I have no idea.

[Warbodog]

2001’s one of my favourites. One time when I watched it, I got really freaked out by the shot where all the moons are all improbably, inexplicably aligned. Ahhhh!

I watched Psycho when I watched all of Hitchcock’s films, mostly to check some off but also for the journey through the decades. It was my third favourite of his after Strangers on a Train and Rear Window, but yes, Red Dwarf had spoiled it.

[Rushy]

Just got done watching Psycho IV. It’s not very good at all.

A low budget made-for-TV prequel, with Anthony Perkins only appearing as part of the framing device. For some reason, the director loves colour saturation, so this thing looks like a kids movie.

The climax is memorable and puts a period at the end of the story. But ending it with a total happy ending for Norman is just kind of weird and sentimental for Psycho… at least Perkins got a few great moments of acting, and the idea behind his storyline was decent. Not executed the best, but still. Decent.

Easily the weakest of the films though. Not a patch on I-III.

[Moonlight]

2001’s one of my favourites. One time when I watched it, I got really freaked out by the shot where all the moons are all improbably, inexplicably aligned. Ahhhh! 

I’m just counting down to 2028 when we’ll surely get 60th anniversary IMAX screenings.

[Dave]

Watched How To Make A Killing tonight. Weirdly unsatisfying movie. On paper you can kind of see how they thought it might work, but there just isn’t enough energy or charm or likeability to it, nobody in the film to really root for and it doesn’t have anything interesting to say. Even a late appearance from Ed Harris (being great as usual) isn’t enough to save it. Glen Powell clearly still has his limits.

[Dave]

I tell you what was good though, 28 Days Later: The Bone Temple. I watched it on Halloween night and thought it was superb, and as good as the previous movie. Some great ideas explored in there and I couldn’t have told you where it was going next. Fiennes excellent as ever but the whole cast were good. Great use of music too. I’m really glad I went into this unspoiled.

[Moonlight]

Watched How To Make A Killing tonight. Weirdly unsatisfying movie.

I misread this as To Kill a Mockingbird and I was already reaching for the phone to call my lawyer when something happened that made me realize I fucked up.

[Ian Symes]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

[Dave]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

[Unrumble]

[Warbodog]

Planet of the Apes is another good one from the same year. My dad bought the VHS boxset, which thoughtfully had the Statue of Liberty scene as the cover art for any kids who hadn’t seen it yet (BBC Simpsons was behind), but I might have guessed. I watched most of the others in that set a few times, but had something against the second one (Beneath the Planet of the Apes) and never rewatched that, but I suppose I will now.

[gerrydelasel]

[Rushy]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

[Nick R]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

Who would want to watch a story about a guy called Dave stuck alone in space with a computer that doesn’t seem to be very good at keeping its crew alive?

[Nick R]

@Rushy – Is this viewing of the Psycho series going to include Gus Van Sant’s 1998 remake? I’ve always been mildly curious about seeing it, to see how different – and how much worse – an almost shot-for-shot remake (plus a few surreal inserts) can really be.

I mean, I’m not interested enough to actually seek it out and watch it myself. But I’m curious enough to let you do it and then read your thoughts on it!

[Rushy]

@Rushy – Is this viewing of the Psycho series going to include Gus Van Sant’s 1998 remake? I’ve always been mildly curious about seeing it, to see how different – and how much worse – an almost shot-for-shot remake (plus a few surreal inserts) can really be.
I mean, I’m not interested enough to actually seek it out and watch it myself. But I’m curious enough to let you do it and then read your thoughts on it!

(the answer is yes)

[Moonlight]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

You’re not getting the new Criterion Kubrick boxset for Christmas anymore.

[crunch]

Watched How To Make A Killing tonight. Weirdly unsatisfying movie. On paper you can kind of see how they thought it might work, but there just isn’t enough energy or charm or likeability to it, nobody in the film to really root for and it doesn’t have anything interesting to say. Even a late appearance from Ed Harris (being great as usual) isn’t enough to save it. Glen Powell clearly still has his limits.

Out of interest, have you watched Kind Hearts and Coronets at all? That was probably the best film I watched last year.

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

I sort of agree. 

[Dave]

Out of interest, have you watched Kind Hearts and Coronets at all? That was probably the best film I watched last year.

I haven’t ever seen it but know of it by reputation, and I know that this film was “inspired by” that one.

[Technopeasant]

2001 is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. Self-indulgent nonsense.

My people!

but had something against the second one (Beneath the Planet of the Apes) and never rewatched that

That’s just common sense.

[Author]

Replies