Two friends and I are currently in an X-Files rewatch, about once a week we meet, have pizza and watch the show again ... it's really nostalgic, and the show still works for us.
The perhaps closest thing in tone in the past years was, for us, the Paramount+ show "Evil", a real shame that it was ended after season 4. So if the X-Files reboot can fill this gap, I really wouldn't mind it. I see why people say a reboot may be superfluous, but I admit I'm guilty, if someone competently panders to my nostalgia, I won't reject it. But I guess it remains to be seen how good the new show is going to be.
If I'm honest to myself, I'd say that the original X-Files already missed a couple of opportunities for a decent ending, repeatedly, but I would lie if I say I didn't even enjoy the later episodes, including the new event seasons (well, at least the motw-episodes, the alien arc was tiresome, so was the 2nd movie, imo).
So I'm looking forward to the reboot with an open mind.
The perhaps closest thing in tone in the past years was, for us, the Paramount+ show "Evil", a real shame that it was ended after season 4. So if the X-Files reboot can fill this gap, I really wouldn't mind it. I see why people say a reboot may be superfluous, but I admit I'm guilty, if someone competently panders to my nostalgia, I won't reject it. But I guess it remains to be seen how good the new show is going to be.
If I'm honest to myself, I'd say that the original X-Files already missed a couple of opportunities for a decent ending, repeatedly, but I would lie if I say I didn't even enjoy the later episodes, including the new event seasons (well, at least the motw-episodes, the alien arc was tiresome, so was the 2nd movie, imo).
So I'm looking forward to the reboot with an open mind.
Implied sexual assault would not warrant an R rating.
I think it might depend on how graphic the implication is depicted. Though is might also just be a more edgy cut all along. More graphic implied sexual assault. More cuss words. More gore in that part of the movie. Of course also heard that their is some movies that are a soft R and others that are a hard R. I think this movie would likely have been a soft R.
It's supposed to be more scary, and I saw lot of reviews saying it was supposed to come last month. But I could never find it on Disney+.
Disney+ Officially Drops New Extended 'X-Files' Release on June 11
Disney+ announces the release of a horror-focused Director's Cut of a long-forgotten X-Files entry, featuring restored content.
collider.com
Hopefully, this is a good date since I'm looking forward to it.
Ratings make no sense. Dust Bunny received a R rating, which is nuts. Eli Roth said recently that he's going to release some films to the theatre unrated after he found out that the rating system is optional.
Huh? Graphic how? Implied is pretty much the opposite of graphic.
I think it would come down to camera angles and how long they would hold on a shot. Stuff like that.
Graphic usually means nudity, violence and gore. To imply those things means you don’t actually show it.
That tough is why I would think it would be soft R and not hard R. One of those R movies that still feels like a PG-13 movie.
He's been a filmmaker for decades. It surprises me that he's only recently learned that.
I posted his discussion about it here a while ago. It's on the AMC+ YouTube channel.
I'm sure there is a lot filmmakers don't know that they pick up along the way.
I am, however, happy that we're seeing much more higher quality horror films.
Yeah, but even that is not on the level of graphic depictions of a child being sexually assaulted, which seems to be what the person you were responding to was afraid of.I'm gonna go out on a limb and guarantee you that they did not film any flashbacks to what that character did before the story of the film. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first to admit it.
But it was the kind of show to have a family of inbred murdering scumbags who even killed their own baby.
According to this article
https://www.ign.com/articles/chris-...has-a-release-date-and-a-surprising-new-title
they had to edit it twice, to get it down to a PG-13, so it might be closer to a hard R than you're expecting.
Was the bad guy trans? I just recall the killer being screwed up because he had been molested and raped by a priest as a kid. He also had some kind of power I think but I can't remember what it was. Also their was two of them. One was played by Leoben the Cylon from "Battlestar Galactia and many things filmed in Canada.
Iirc, the murderer wanted to transplant the head of himself (or of his lover?) onto a female body. I do remember the movie heavily pandered to the sentiments of people who consider homosexuality and/or gender swaps disgusting and generally placed gender dysphoria into the realm of child abuse and perversion.
That was certainly not the explicit message of the movie, but it can perfectly be read this way by people who hold these beliefs, iirc.
Last edited:
