Watched this last night and then promptly forgot about it and couldn’t even remember what I had watched. Oof if that doesn’t say something about this movie.

I’ve actually watched this several times, and you guessed it, I forgot how many times I’ve seen it until I was recalling nearly every scene.

WILDLY forgettable. It just does not capture the essence of the first movie. It’s still an interesting take on zombies and how a virus is transmitted, this time with someone who is immune but can still spread the virus.

It is good to see Hawkeye being Hawkeye prior to getting that role but as a sniper for the military instead but with a heart of gold (always).

I’m teetering on putting this as a bogus but it’s not bad per se, so I’ll leave it as a decent.

It has been 8 years since the last film in the most recent Planet of the Apes Trilogy. I saw each movie in theatres and loved them all. This soft reboot/continuation came as quite a surprise to me. I went in with fairly low expectations due to what this was and it having a new director attached. While it is by no means perfect and a more simple approach, along with being a deviation from the franchise as a whole, I still had a lot of fun!

The biggest issue that I think most will have with this movie is the "more simple" part I mentioned. Each entry in this franchise, since it's inception back in 1968, has had some sociopolitical thing to "say". This movie doesn't really. If you come into it knowing that you are getting more of an action/adventure film; I think there is a whole lot to like. Your willingness to accept that, openess to a new approach, and level of dedication to the long standing tradition of the franchise will probably be the deciding factor for most. The only other big hang-up could possibly be the length of 2.5 hours, which didn't personally bother me. The time is mostly well spent with solid pacing between the action and drama.

Outside of those main things, I think almost every other aspect of Kingdom is done quite well for the new genre it finds itself in. Wes Ball truely delivers with an exciting and beautiful movie that works well with the fairly simple script. This will also be one of the most stunning displays of motion capture special effects you will ever see. The Apes are impressive and quite believable, it also helps that they are all excellently acted. Raka absolutely steals the show though!

Keeping it spoiler free I will stop there but just end in saying that we should show up to the theater for this one! It's a super fun summer blockbuster film that doesn't take itself too seriously and strays from being devisive. If I'm not mistaken many of us have been asking for that exact thing. Be careful what you ask for when wanting more political commentary in this day in age. Don't forget, it's been 8 years since the previous Trilogy's end, a lot has changed since then. Not saying it can't be done, I'm just saying I don't trust it would be done right.

The begining was pretty good but then this movie slipped into an uninteresting forgettable flick. Watched it last night, forgot about it almost instantly and probably wouldnt have reviewed it but @winefiend reminded me that we watched it.

I really dont know what I didnt like about this movie but it just didnt do it for me. I feel I have to do a Bogus since it was so forgettable.

This is a gateway noir movie. Excellent and so many aspects. The genius way it blends animated elements with real life elements… Beautiful. Groundbreaking, great characters, great acting, very intelligent. The only thing slightly negative I could say is that the mystery wraps up too easily, and not with real twisted detective work. But, maybe, it’s for kids? I don’t know, great movie. And I love me some noir,.

The opening scene was very true to life - if you're a man who goes to the police station to report stalking, you won't even get past the reception, they just tell you to deal with it yourself.

It was interesting watching this after the Persona Trilogy (Pig, Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, and Dream Scenario), as it does touch on some similar themes. It also reminded me of the excellent book "Evil" by Roy F. Baumeister. It is full of fascinating facts, but one that stands out is that most crimes, particularly violent crimes, are committed by people with high self-esteem.

The two central characters in this show both suffer from narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), though it presents differently. Martha is a delusional narcissist, constantly telling false stories that she believes paint her in a good light. She responds with explosive fury whenever her overly inflated view of herself is challenged.

Donny, by contrast, is a vulnerable narcissist. His self loathing actually stems from his inability to live up the grandiose image he has of himself. He believes himself to be someone special, and is drawn to others who feed that delusion, which places him in unhealthy, destructive, and dangerous relationships.

Donny is likely completely unaware of his own narcissistic tendencies, and appears to believe his problems stem from a lack of confidence and self-esteem. We're all told from a young age that high self-esteem is good for you, and to a certain extent (and a small degree) that is correct.

Healthy self-esteem based upon realistic self image and being proud of your actual achievements is good. Being proud of what you are or you believe you are, should be, or will be is unhealthy, especially since reality can have a nasty habit of messing with those beliefs. And here, his chosen career of stand-up comedian is very interesting.

Now, I'm going to take an instructive detour by answering a question that at first glance appears to be based on sexist opinions, but is actually neither sexist nor opinion. Why are male comedians funnier on average than female comedians?

This is an easily verifiable fact by measuring the amount of laughter at shows, and the difference becomes more pronounced the higher up you go in fame and regard. And the answer is a simple one that has a twofold effect - more men than women want to be stand-up comedians.

The most obvious effect of this is that a greater number of people means a greater number of talented people. But there is also another way this impacts, as talent will only take you so far. Nobody is great at stand-up the first time they do it, it takes years and a lot of hard work and failures to become great.

Particularly in recent years, comedy event organisers have made a concerted effort to promote female comedians, who are then thrust into the limelight before they have had the chance to perfect their acts. This attempt to help women has only ended up harming them.

There is incredible honesty showing how clumsy and pathetic Donny's early attempts at comedy were. Did he really believe he was ready to write a comedic TV show? He tried to take a shortcut, and it made him an easy target for a predator. And the reason he let it go on for so long is that it fed his ego, in a twisted way.

As it did with Martha as well. The other thing that is surprisingly honest in this show is his own complicity in these abusive relationships. Baumeister writes in Evil about the fact that pure examples of perpetrator and victim are actually less common than we think, and also that victims tend to lie both as often and to the same degree as perpetrators about abusive events.

As far as his own sexuality goes, there is much ambiguity. One gets the impression that Richard Gadd hasn't figured it out yet. Is he really bisexual, or attracted to transwomen? Is it an after-effect of his being sexually assaulted? Is he trying to convince himself he's not "heteronormative" for socio-political reasons?

I don't know, and he doesn't seem to know either. It does make me feel very lucky to have never felt any confusion about these matters, as it looks like a very difficult journey to go on, and I feel sympathy for him and others who are suffering as a result.

The question of how malleable sexuality is, I think really depends on the individual. For some people it may be possible for them to shift their attractions somewhat, whereas for others, their sexuality is set in stone. There are also those who lie to themselves and others about their sexuality, trying to convince themselves they are something they are not.

A phenomenon that has become apparent in recent years, particularly amongst female college students of a highly progressive bent, is identifying as LGBT but exclusively entering into heterosexual relationships. This also correlates very highly with mental illness, as these young women almost always suffer from at least one psychological malady.

Rates of mental illness have been sky-rocketing amongst the entire population in Western countries over the past few decades, but the highest rate by far is amongst those who identify as "Very Liberal". Rates of mental illness are lowest amongst those who identify as moderate. I will include a chart in the comments section for those interested.

Correlation isn't necessarily causation, but the rise in mental health conditions (particularly anxiety and depression) has coincided in both scale and location with the successes of the self-esteem movement. People like Martha are perhaps inevitable, but people like Donny are products of their culture.

Take it from someone who considers himself ordinary but is generally very happy most of the time - we all suck at pretty much everything. What makes life worthwhile is learning how to suck a little bit less.