• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

SMB Film Thread 2026


Psycho killer (2026). "Bloody awful" slasher, thriller crap. Ludicrous killer who can walk around in a trenchcoat and gas mask and never be seen. Truly stupid and the writer was responsible for Seven? Hard to comprehend that. 0/10 coz it's worthless.
 
Tron (1982)

Watched it for the first time and honestly I really enjoyed it, which surprised me a bit. It’s obviously dated in places, but the concept is way ahead of its time and still feels unique even now. The whole digital world idea and visuals are class in their own way, especially considering when it was made. Off to Florida next month so getting through the rides for films 🥴

7/10
 
Junior Birdman said:
Went to the cinema last night to see Project Hail Mary. Absolutely class. Most I've enjoyed a film for ages. I'm giving it a full 10.
Click to expand...
Well this person did not rate it.

Is this person for real?

1/10
You must be logged on to see external links

Contrary to massive PR lying campaign this is not intelligent nor science nor good. It has tender very moving movie moments but it's in a dystopian soup of offensively unintelligent scifi while claiming to be intelligent. It's toy story in hell with cartoon science. And it's 2½ hours long. Don't be sheep and give them your money. It's not visually impressive either at all, that's another shameless PR lie.

I wouldn't rate this 1 if they didn't lie so much and so many sheep weren't praising it, paid or otherwise.

The premise of the movie is that multiple stars are suddenly being eaten by bacteria at the same time at a pace millions of times faster than the stars' own thermonuclear explosions. Never mind that bacteria don't have space propulsion nor would survive thousands of degrees of the sun. The creature is also implausible as are many other story elements. It's not clever, it's not intelligent, only the scientifically illiterate are fooled that it is. It's like Lost. Or interstellar for that matter. Junk science by liars for sheep. But ignoring all that it is a drawn out tender cartoon buddy movie. I'd give it 4, maybe 5 if they promoted it as such without all the effing lying.
 
The Murderer Lives at Number 21 (L'assassin habite au...21) (1942) 7/10
Early film from Henri-Georges Clouzot, made during the Nazi occupation. A serial killer is traced to a boarding house. A police inspector goes under cover as a priest to catch him. Not a patch on Clouzot's later films.
You must be logged on to see media items

Pizza Movie (2026) 6/10
Better than I expected. Probably destined to become a cult film. Him out of Stranger Things and his best mate take drugs, then discover that the antidote is pizza. But getting the pizza turns into a quest. Some good ideas, and a break-the-fourth-wall twist near the end, but you probably need to be on drugs to get the most from it.
You must be logged on to see media items

The Beast Must Die (Que la bête meure) (1969) 7/10
Suspense thriller by Claude Chabrol based on a book by Cecil Day Lewis. A man loses his son to a hit and run and decides to kill the driver - whoever he is.
You must be logged on to see media items
 
League Wan said:
Well this person did not rate it.

Is this person for real?

1/10

You must be logged on to see external links

Contrary to massive PR lying campaign this is not intelligent nor science nor good. It has tender very moving movie moments but it's in a dystopian soup of offensively unintelligent scifi while claiming to be intelligent. It's toy story in hell with cartoon science. And it's 2½ hours long. Don't be sheep and give them your money. It's not visually impressive either at all, that's another shameless PR lie.

I wouldn't rate this 1 if they didn't lie so much and so many sheep weren't praising it, paid or otherwise.

The premise of the movie is that multiple stars are suddenly being eaten by bacteria at the same time at a pace millions of times faster than the stars' own thermonuclear explosions. Never mind that bacteria don't have space propulsion nor would survive thousands of degrees of the sun. The creature is also implausible as are many other story elements. It's not clever, it's not intelligent, only the scientifically illiterate are fooled that it is. It's like Lost. Or interstellar for that matter. Junk science by liars for sheep. But ignoring all that it is a drawn out tender cartoon buddy movie. I'd give it 4, maybe 5 if they promoted it as such without all the effing lying.
Click to expand...
Think they’ve misunderstood the premise of science fiction. I really enjoyed it.
 
Cone of Silence (1960)

Bernard Lee is a pilot who suffers the disgrace of an accident being labelled as ‘pilot error’. He had enough credit to be given another chance, although he insists that it wasn’t his fault.

Decent drama starring Peter Cushing, Michael Craig, Andre Morell and Gordon Jackson. It’s nicely filmed and the story chugs along quite well. Some of the themes are interesting, despite never being maximised.

6.5/10
 
Project Hail Mary - omniplex. Can understand the criticism, as it could have been a bit shorter but ultimately it’s enjoyable and well made. 7.78/10
 
Close encounters of the third kind

10/10.

Slightly biased here, remember going with my mam to the odean as an 11 year old to watch this in 1977 and coming out amazed. For months afterwards, I was gazing at the stars hoping I'd see something.

Still love it though.
 
Red said:
Close encounters of the third kind

10/10.

Slightly biased here, remember going with my mam to the odean as an 11 year old to watch this in 1977 and coming out amazed. For months afterwards, I was gazing at the stars hoping I'd see something.

Still love it though.
Click to expand...
You can't give a ten man 😂 Great filum mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Cockney Mackem said:
So it was fa fa fa fa fa fa f***ing dogshit
Click to expand...
Run run run run run away.....from the cinema immediately
League Wan said:
Well this person did not rate it.

Is this person for real?

1/10

You must be logged on to see external links

Contrary to massive PR lying campaign this is not intelligent nor science nor good. It has tender very moving movie moments but it's in a dystopian soup of offensively unintelligent scifi while claiming to be intelligent. It's toy story in hell with cartoon science. And it's 2½ hours long. Don't be sheep and give them your money. It's not visually impressive either at all, that's another shameless PR lie.

I wouldn't rate this 1 if they didn't lie so much and so many sheep weren't praising it, paid or otherwise.

The premise of the movie is that multiple stars are suddenly being eaten by bacteria at the same time at a pace millions of times faster than the stars' own thermonuclear explosions. Never mind that bacteria don't have space propulsion nor would survive thousands of degrees of the sun. The creature is also implausible as are many other story elements. It's not clever, it's not intelligent, only the scientifically illiterate are fooled that it is. It's like Lost. Or interstellar for that matter. Junk science by liars for sheep. But ignoring all that it is a drawn out tender cartoon buddy movie. I'd give it 4, maybe 5 if they promoted it as such without all the effing lying.
Click to expand...
Someone should tell this person it's not a documentary, it's a film. It can play fast and lose with scientific fact for story telling and entertainment purposes.
 
Last edited:
League Wan said:
Well this person did not rate it.

Is this person for real?

1/10

You must be logged on to see external links

Contrary to massive PR lying campaign this is not intelligent nor science nor good. It has tender very moving movie moments but it's in a dystopian soup of offensively unintelligent scifi while claiming to be intelligent. It's toy story in hell with cartoon science. And it's 2½ hours long. Don't be sheep and give them your money. It's not visually impressive either at all, that's another shameless PR lie.

I wouldn't rate this 1 if they didn't lie so much and so many sheep weren't praising it, paid or otherwise.

The premise of the movie is that multiple stars are suddenly being eaten by bacteria at the same time at a pace millions of times faster than the stars' own thermonuclear explosions. Never mind that bacteria don't have space propulsion nor would survive thousands of degrees of the sun. The creature is also implausible as are many other story elements. It's not clever, it's not intelligent, only the scientifically illiterate are fooled that it is. It's like Lost. Or interstellar for that matter. Junk science by liars for sheep. But ignoring all that it is a drawn out tender cartoon buddy movie. I'd give it 4, maybe 5 if they promoted it as such without all the effing lying.
Click to expand...
Who cares? It's a joyful cinema experience. If you want to worry about all that stuff, fair enough. We loved it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top