Movies

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Rams’ Review: Ailing Sheep and Quirky Characters

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘Rams’ Review: Ailing Sheep and Quirky CharactersThis comedy-drama starring Sam Neill, Michael Caton and Miranda Richardson depicts a catastrophe for a farming community in Western Australia.Sam Neill in “Rams.”Credit…Samuel Goldwyn FilmsFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ET”Rams”Directed by Jeremy SimsAdventure, Comedy, DramaPG-131h 58mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.The rough, dirty life of Australian sheep farmers would seem an unlikely topic to yield much in the way of cinematic lyricism. Especially in a narrative involving sheep actually dying of a devastating disease. Nevertheless, “Rams,” rooted in a 2016 Icelandic movie of the same name, has its pastoral moments (mostly in its breathtaking views of Western Australian landscapes), not to mention raucous comedy.The screenwriter Jules Duncan’s narrative, given a hemispheric switch from the Grimur Hákonarson original, is not generically unfamiliar. It’s a story of brothers at odds who are forced, after much resistance, to become brothers in arms.Colin (Sam Neill), a taciturn type, shares land but not much else with his older brother, Les (Michael Caton), an angry type who’s more voluble than Colin only in that he likes to cuss people out. They live and work on two adjacent plots, which were once owned as one by their father. Their rams are of a special breed and, as a contest at the movie’s opening attests, are invariably the envy of the region.[embedded content]Colin notices a problem with one of the prize specimens. A friendly local veterinarian (Miranda Richardson) confirms that there’s a rare but catastrophic disease at work. All the ovine beasts in the vicinity have to be liquidated, and the area quarantined for a couple of years.Colin isn’t having it, and he secretes a few sheep in his house. Soon Les, with whom he hasn’t spoken in decades, gets wind of this — literally, as the odor increasingly attaches itself to and wafts from Colin’s place. Much of the movie’s comedy derives from Colin’s futile efforts to keep his animals hidden. And his new alliance with Les comes from what they need to do to keep those beasts alive.Directed with a genial breeziness by Jeremy Sims, the movie negotiates emotional downshift and uplift with confidence. Some of the characterizations are unpredictably quirky — Les’s enthusiasm for the 1970s hard rock group Humble Pie is unexpected. The main pleasures of “Rams,” though, come from the watching the three veteran lead actors play their eccentricities out.RamsRated PG-13. Running time: 1 hour 55 minutes. In theaters and on Apple TV, Vudu and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. Please consult the guidelines outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention before watching movies inside theaters.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Falling’ Review: Father and Son Reunion

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCritic’s Pick‘Falling’ Review: Father and Son ReunionViggo Mortensen writes, directs and stars in this lacerating drama about a son dealing with his father’s mental decline.Lance Henriksen and Viggo Mortensen in “Falling.”Credit…Brendan Adam-Zwelling/Perceval Pictures/Quiver DistributionFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETFallingNYT Critic’s PickDirected by Viggo MortensenDramaR1h 52mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.The dementia drama is on something of an upswing, and recently actors like Anthony Hopkins, Bruce Dern and Javier Bardem have joined the growing ranks of performers eager to portray a fragmenting mind.Of these, Lance Henriksen’s work in “Falling” might be the most brutally demanding, and the hardest to watch. As the foul-tempered, bigoted Willis, the actor is a weeping wound of intolerance and invective. Fully committing to dialogue rarely heard outside of scabrous comedies, Henriksen is the incendiary heart of a movie that ultimately proves more involving — and rather more complicated — than we expect.We meet Willis during a tantrum on an airplane. His middle-aged son, John (Viggo Mortensen, in his writing and directing debut) is bringing him to Los Angeles to house-hunt. Willis, no longer able to manage his beloved farm in upstate New York, has reluctantly agreed to move closer to John and John’s sister, Sarah (Laura Linney). In the meantime, he will stay with John and his husband, Eric (Terry Chen), and their young daughter (Gabby Velis). Brace for the homophobic slurs.[embedded content]Extensive flashbacks reveal that Willis has always had a mean streak (“I’m sorry I brought you into this world, so you could die,” are some of his earliest words to the infant John), but illness and the early stages of senility have made him monstrous. Somehow, though, Henriksen lets us see the loneliness and fear that gnaw at the edges of Willis’s anger — and help explain why John responds to his father’s abuse with such calm resignation. The film, though, is not without its comic moments: I’ll go a long way to see David Cronenberg play a proctologist.A small movie with outsized philosophical ambitions, “Falling” doesn’t go down easily. The nuanced performance of the Icelandic actor Sverrir Gudnason, who plays the younger Willis, is crucial, exposing the volatility and subdued menace that has alienated two wives and caused untold damage to his children. Some scenes scrape your senses like sandpaper, while others are so tender they’re almost destabilizing. Together, they shape a picture that’s tragically specific, yet more comfortable with mystery than some viewers might prefer.Though not entirely autobiographical, “Falling” is informed by Mortensen’s memories of caring for several family members stricken by dementia. The result is a movie keenly aware of the effort involved in reconciling the parent we have with the one we might have wished for.FallingRated R for sexism, racism, homophobia and terrible table manners. Running time: 1 hour 52 minutes. Rent or buy on Google Play, Vudu and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      ‘M.C. Escher: Journey to Infinity’ Review: Is It Art?

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘M.C. Escher: Journey to Infinity’ Review: Is It Art?A documentary examines the methods and interests of this Dutch printmaker, who felt his work was also indebted to mathematics.Escher’s “Band of Union,” as seen in “M.C. Escher: Journey to Infinity,“Credit…Kino LorberFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETM.C. Escher – Journey to InfinityDirected by Robin LutzDocumentary1h 21mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.Providing some orientation for the disorienting work of the Dutch printmaker M.C. Escher (1898-1972), the documentary “M.C. Escher: Journey to Infinity” takes its cues from Escher’s writings, which it uses as narration. (Stephen Fry’s voice-over applies an unwarranted grandiosity to these self-effacing musings.)Escher is quoted as saying that he often dreamed of making a film, although he adds, “I would most certainly bore people to death with it.” Whether anyone else, including Escher, would have done a more engaging job is debatable, but this movie, directed by Robin Lutz, offers an only intermittently satisfying look at his interests and methods. Don’t call it art; Escher felt his output hovered between art and mathematics.[embedded content]The film is strongest when it uses animation to illustrate Escher’s ideas, as when it unbends the curves of a lithograph to more clearly show what it depicts: a man in a gallery looking at a picture of the very scene he is in, a perspective repeated endlessly. We learn how Escher applied ideas from the mosaics at the Alhambra in Spain to imagery from the natural world. He describes the associative thinking — his mind jumping from a hexagon to a honeycomb to a bee — that inspired his subject matter and says he feels a kinship to Bach’s use of repetition and variation.Present-day footage of the sites discussed and interviews with Escher’s sons are more perfunctory, as is the commentary from the admiring folk rocker Graham Nash. Escher apparently did not understand why his “cerebral and rationalized” work found favor with the freewheeling 1960s counterculture — which was, in its own blissed-out way, also concerned with infinity.M.C. Escher: Journey to InfinityNot rated. In English, Dutch, Italian and German, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 21 minutes. In theaters and on virtual cinemas. Please consult the guidelines outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention before watching movies inside theaters.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Malcolm & Marie’ Review: Fight Flub

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘Malcolm & Marie’ Review: Fight FlubA gorgeous Hollywood couple has an extended, exhausting argument in this claustrophobic example of pandemic filmmaking from Netflix.John David Washington and Zendaya in “Malcolm & Marie.”Credit…Dominic Miller/NetflixFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETMalcolm & MarieDirected by Sam LevinsonDrama, RomanceR1h 46mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.A movie of dueling monologues and competing grievances, Sam Levinson’s “Malcolm & Marie” traps us inside the luxury rental and dysfunctional relationship of two enormously privileged, fiercely self-involved people.The mood is so depressingly combative that the elation and grace of the opening scene feels like an unfulfilled promise. As the golden beats of James Brown’s “Down and Out in New York City” flood the soundtrack, Malcolm (John David Washington), a rising-star filmmaker, dances exuberantly across his living-room. He and his girlfriend, Marie (Zendaya), have just returned from a successful premiere, and he’s high on acclaim and his own virtuosity.His peacocking, however, irritates Marie, who heads for the bathroom in a sulk. A former drug addict whose grueling experiences inspired Malcolm’s film, Marie is about to unload a wealth of resentment on her unsuspecting partner. First, though, she’ll have to listen to him, his joy evaporated, complain about critics who define him by his Blackness — a justifiable loathing of categorization that doesn’t prevent him, later in the film, from singling out one female Los Angeles Times critic for special scorn.That rant, an almost 10-minute scream-and-stomp tirade against, in part, the inadequacies of film criticism, isn’t the movie’s lowest point, only its most exhausting. (In Levinson’s script, the couple’s relationship woes are constantly competing with industry-related whining.) Malcolm may or may not be a megaphone for his director’s personal gripes, but Washington, a charismatically intense and supple performer, is ill-served by speeches that have the cadence and calculation of acting-school exercises.Zendaya, for her part, fares slightly better with a character who is more willing to be vulnerable. When Malcolm cruelly tells Marie she’s not special, listing all the damaged women he has known who could have served as inspiration, she is touchingly wounded. Yet she also senses the insecurities behind his swaggering egotism, smartly pointing out — given his educated, upper-middle-class background — the artifice of his underdog posturing.Fighting the metronomic beats of the movie’s equal-time speeches, Zendaya (who has the advantage of working with the crew and creator of her HBO show, “Euphoria”) allows us to glimpse the suffering that brought Marie to this point, and to this man. And while Marcell Rev’s high-contrast, black-and-white photography is often quite lovely — in one surreal shot, trees outside the home rear up like twisted, fairy-tale villains — only occasionally do his camera movements ease the claustrophobia of the stage-like setting.A stylized stab at pandemic filmmaking, “Malcolm & Marie,” is at once mildly admirable and deeply unlikable. Beneath the film’s Old-Hollywood gleam and self-conscious sniping, serious questions are raised, only to lie fallow. What obligation, if any, does an artist have to their muse? And how do we separate an artist’s work from their ethnicity?“I promise you, nothing productive is going to be said tonight,” Marie says near the beginning of the movie. Sadly, she’s telling the truth.Malcolm & MarieRated R for foul language, crude foreplay and toxic egotism. Running time: 1 hour 46 minutes. Watch on Netflix.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Son of the South’ Review: Tale of an Alabama Activist

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘Son of the South’ Review: Tale of an Alabama ActivistSometimes absorbing, sometimes mortifyingly tone-deaf, the film dramatizes the memoir of the white civil rights figure Bob Zellner.Lucas Till as Bob Zellner in “Son of the South.”Credit…Vertical EntertainmentFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETSon of the SouthDirected by Barry Alexander BrownBiography, DramaPG-131h 45mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.“Son of the South” gets off to an appalling start, with a man being dragged by two others, and then a freeze frame, accompanied by a voice-over: “That’s me, Bob Zellner.” As the meme goes, we’re probably wondering how he ended up in this situation — being dragged toward a noose. That Bob is white and not Black is presumably supposed to make the use of this glib and much-parodied device permissible in this context. But given that lynchings have historically been directed by whites against African-Americans, the introduction is mortifyingly tone-deaf.[embedded content]“Five months ago, life was simpler,” Bob explains, in another line so overworked it should have been cut. The screenplay, by the director, Barry Alexander Brown, a longtime editor for Spike Lee, somewhat eases up on the clichés from there. Based on the memoir that Zellner wrote with his fellow civil rights activist Constance Curry, the film tells the story of how Zellner (Lucas Till), the grandson of a Klansman (a late role for Brian Dennehy, who died in April), became an active figure in the civil rights movement in early-1960s Alabama, eventually becoming the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee’s first white field secretary.A biopic that foregrounds the perspective of a white Alabamian — who was treated violently for his activism but could protest from a position of relative safety — yet turns John Lewis (Dexter Darden) and other Black activists (including a love interest played by Lex Scott Davis) into supporting characters is an ideologically fraught proposition in 2021. Accepted on its terms, the film does a reasonably absorbing job of dramatizing how Zellner’s convictions strengthened, pulling him away from the security of inaction.Son of the SouthRated PG-13. Racist violence and language. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes. In theaters and on Google Play, FandangoNow and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. Please consult the guidelines outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention before watching movies inside theaters.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Two of Us’ Review: Thwarted Love

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘Two of Us’ Review: Thwarted LoveAn older lesbian couple is met with unexpected devastation in this aching romantic drama by Filippo Meneghetti.Martine Chevallier and Barbara Sukowa in “Two of Us.”Credit…Magnolia PicturesFeb. 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETTwo of UsDirected by Filippo MeneghettiDrama, Romance1h 39mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.Nina (the distinguished German actress Barbara Sukowa) and Madeleine (Martine Chevalier) have waited decades to love one another freely. At the beginning of “Two of Us,” the retired women — their romance long hidden under the guise of friendship — prepare to leave France for new beginnings in Rome. Timid, dutiful Madeleine, a widowed mother whose nickname is “Mado,” must first come out to her children before realizing her dream, but tragedy strikes before she can speak her truth. A stroke leaves Mado speechless and paralyzed, throwing the couple even deeper into the closet during already devastating times.Filippo Meneghetti’s pulsing romantic drama forges heartache and intrigue out of Nina’s tireless efforts to connect with her impaired lover. Played with palpable desperation and ferocity by Sukowa (“Hannah Arendt,” “Lola”), Nina is relegated to the status of friendly neighbor by Mado’s unsuspecting children. Yet she craftily maneuvers her way into Mado’s life with a tenacity that never overshadows her pain.[embedded content]The film’s us-against-them dynamic inflates the injustice of the situation, injecting rage and pathos into this tale of thwarted love at the cost of its supporting players: a frumpy caregiver with North African roots makes for a cheap punching bag, and Mado’s thinly-drawn children — clinging to the fantasy of their parents’ true love — prove disproportionately villainous.Despite these contrivances, and a climax that veers into maudlin territory, Meneghetti and the cinematographer Aurélien Marra beautifully summon the ache of queer desire. Through the use of symbolic peepholes, eavesdropping and dark rooms that provide cover for whispered assurances of devotion, “Two of Us” succeeds as a stealthy depiction of lesbian erotics, one that mirrors the inhibitions of a generation.Two of UsNot rated. In French, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 39 minutes. In theater and on virtual cinemas. Please consult the guidelines outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention before watching movies inside theaters.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      We Live in Disastrous Times. Why Can’t Disaster Movies Evolve?

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyScreenlandWe Live in Disastrous Times. Why Can’t Disaster Movies Evolve?Credit…Photo illustration by Najeebah Al-GhadbanFeb. 4, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETEveryone on Earth is dead, or will be soon. We don’t know exactly what happened — fallout from a nuclear catastrophe? — but whatever it was, it’s still spreading, still killing people, not going away. Some survivors are hiding underground, but they can’t last long. There seem to be a few people left aboveground, near the planet’s poles, but it’s clear that whatever came for everyone else is also coming for them. We are doomed — all of us, that is, apart from the five astronauts aboard Aether, a spaceship en route back to Earth after scouting a potentially habitable moon of Jupiter.So begins “The Midnight Sky,” George Clooney’s latest outing as a director and a star — a worldwide Netflix hit and a telling artifact of our relationship with the idea of disaster. As Aether approaches Earth, the astronauts are faced with a choice. Those who board one of the ship’s landing crafts — in hopes, say, of rushing to the side of still-living loved ones — will be returning to Earth to die there. Those who stay in space will remain for the rest of their lives.In an emotionally climactic scene, one crew member follows another to an equipment locker to confess his decision. But the two don’t discuss what’s happening on Earth, or why, or what it would mean to strand themselves in space. Instead, they grow philosophical about life. “I’ve been thinking,” the crew member says, his eyes moistening. “Been thinking a lot about time, and how it gets used, and why. Why one person lives a lifetime and another only gets a few years.”[embedded content]At first, the vague catastrophe of “The Midnight Sky” feels like a neat tweak to the usual disaster-movie formulas, which lavish attention on the apocalypse itself: Either we follow its slow, terrible progress through the first act, or we see it parceled out in ominous flashbacks. These days, it seems, those mechanics can be skipped over. It’s already all too easy to imagine how the end of the world might work. Every day, news and government reports remind us that we are living through a planetary crisis, bringing new projections of worse pandemics, rolling climate shocks, mass migrations that shatter our political systems. “The Midnight Sky” takes advantage of our dread-saturated imagination to skip the disaster altogether and cut straight to the pressure it puts on individual characters.But as the equipment-locker scene makes clear, this movie is more traditional than it seems. The story, in the end, uses the same dramatic conceit as just about every other disaster movie: The decimation of Earth becomes a backdrop that lends weight to the choices of a few individuals, which are meant to point to bigger truths about humanity. Two work buddies speculating about time and mortality sounds like a Samuel Beckett play, but two space explorers talking about time and mortality after the apocalypse, plus a few action scenes, sounds like Netflix gold. Rushing past the disaster doesn’t change the equation so much as boil it down into a purer version of itself — and, in doing so, reveal its fundamental inadequacies.Most disaster movies aren’t much interested in disasters in and of themselves. The disaster sparks the action and makes its resolution feel momentous, but when it comes to considering where it came from — why it unfolds one way and not another — things tend to get hazy. We see, perhaps, a montage of news reports, or a beaker taking a sinister spill in a lab somewhere. The disaster always seems to be attributed not to any specific cause, but to something nebulous and universal: “human nature,” hubris, evil business moguls. We’re offered just enough explanation to stop us from asking questions.By opting for maximum disaster briskness, though, “The Midnight Sky” actually makes it harder than usual to ignore those pesky questions. What human history underpinned the mysterious Big Bad Thing that killed everyone? What collective arrangements, decisions and failures underpinned the apocalypse, and how did they dictate how it played out? I found myself dwelling on those underground shelters: Who was in them? Who was shut out? Why, exactly? There is one brief mention of a “colony flight” that may or may not have managed to launch, carrying settlers into space. If it did, who was on board, and who watched it soar away?Once upon a time these details might have felt like distracting trivialities. But questions of this sort are among the most pressing facing humanity today. We are not living through a Big Bad Apocalyptic Thing; we are staring down a whole planetary patchwork of bad stuff that threatens death and suffering on a sweeping scale. It’s possible that the very idea of the discrete, one-shot “apocalypse” should be retired; it risks fixing our imagination on a definitive break that will never come, instead of the tangled moral drama of what needs to happen now. How are we preparing, as a species and a planet, for the hardships of the future? Will these preparations do more for some people than others? What hope do we have of modifying them for the better?[embedded content]By starting with Earth’s fate already settled, “The Midnight Sky” gives itself a pass on this line of inquiry, and an excuse to dwell instead in the pathos of small moments of loss and acceptance. It reminded me, discomfitingly, of figures like Elon Musk, who often seem more interested in triumphant dreams of life in space than in any effort to help address the earthbound problems that would send us there in the first place. Colonizing space feels exciting: a new life under a new sky, free from the entanglements of the past. Dealing with Earth’s problems involves something we’re not accustomed to seeing as romantic: accounting for other people’s basic needs on a global scale.If our planetary crises were the same as conflicts negotiated between small groups of individuals, they would be much more straightforward to resolve. But they’re not. Could we start telling disaster stories that reflect this fact, and grapple with it? The most powerful recent example comes not from film but from literature: Kim Stanley Robinson’s novel “The Ministry for the Future,” which cuts between — to give just a partial list — scenes of climate disaster, government and financial bureaucracy, geoengineering experiments, street protests, refugee camps and eco-terrorism. Each strand takes meaning not just from the experiences of its characters but also from the reader’s awareness of their deep interconnections.Until we have more disaster tales like this, the genre will only ever function as a smudged, distorted mirror for humanity. “The Midnight Sky” is suffused from the start with a distinctly current dread about our missteps, but it refuses to face the dilemmas those missteps now force upon us, even as the need to do so becomes more pressing by the day.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 200 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      Zack Snyder Claps Back at Critics of 'Toxic Fandom' for Pushing His Version of 'Justice League'

      by

      Twitter

      The filmmaker defends his fans against ‘fakers’ who were against the campaign for ‘The Snyder Cut’ of the superhero movie, asking their credibility for saying something about his fanbase.

      Feb 4, 2021
      AceShowbiz – While “Zack Snyder’s Justice League” is a deemed blessing for fans of the filmmaker who are dying for his version of the superhero film, not a few were against the campaign of “The Snyder Cut”. These people believed that Zack Snyder’s cut of “Justice League” would never exist and even after HBO Max gave the greenlight to the project, they insisted that this “toxic fandom” should not be rewarded.
      Now, on the heels of “The Snyder Cut” release, Snyder has addressed the criticism leveled at his fanbase. Speaking to CinemaBlend, the filmmaker saw it as “sour grapes.” He elaborated, “There’s really no other way to say it. We know the people who were the architects of that narrative, and it’s pretty obvious what their agenda is. Those are people that I’ve been held back from confronting, by wiser people in the room.”
      “Because I’d love to get at some of these characters. Some direct conversation would be nice,” he added. “Just to say, one, you don’t know s**t about what you’re talking about. And we can break down everything they’ve ever [said]. I can make a list. There’s a few of these guys where I could just get a list of everything they’ve ever said, that they thought was right, and [I could tell them] every single thing they’ve said is wrong.”

        See also…

      Defending his fanbase, the director questioned these critics’ credibility for speaking on his fans. “And so, in what world do you have any credibility anywhere, to any- one? I would love the opportunity to just say to the world, and to fandom in general, who these fakers are and what should be done to them, or with them. It’s just a bunch of BS,” he clapped back.
      He went on citing his fans’ good deeds as saying, “In regards to that toxic fandom, or it’s ‘a win for toxic fandom,’ again, in what world does this ‘toxic fandom’ raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for suicide prevention? How is that toxic fandom? They’ve probably achieved more than any other fan base, [and done more] good than any other group. So I don’t understand.”
      For “Zack Snyder’s Justice League”, HBO Max gave the director $70 million budget for reshoots, additional visual effects, score and editing. Jared Leto, Amber Heard and Joe Manganiello are also added to the cast to reprise their DCEU roles as Joker, Mera and Deathstroke respectively, though their characters were not featured in the original version released in 2017.
      Snyder’s version will premiere on the streaming service on March 18.

      You can share this post!

      Next article
      Cardi B Joins ‘Wayne’s World’ Stars In Uber Eats Super Bowl Ad

      Related Posts More