Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Cinema at the End of the World Edition

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,109
Canuck Nation
Free Guy

with Ryan Reynolds, Taika Waititi, and other people. My wife realized the main female character was the assassin chick from Killing Eve. Didn't recognize her without the fake Russian accent.

Guy has a pretty good thing going. He wakes up every day, says hello to his goldfish, eats breakfast, has the same coffee at the same coffee shop served by the same barista, then goes to his job at the bank, where he works alongside his best friend Buddy, the security guard. And they both hit ground together when the bank gets robbed. Which is does. A lot. Many, many times a day. See, Guy is an NPC in a GTA-style open world video game where the players rob banks, kill people, destroy buildings with ever more imaginative weapons and generally create as much mayhem as possible to level up. Everything's coming up bullet-riddled daisies for Guy...until one day he spots a female player and somehow becomes smitten. His code changes, and he becomes self-aware. He nicks the sunglasses off a human avatar, sees the HUD and menus, and after being rebuffed by his crush, takes it upon himself to level up being nice. He takes guns, foils robberies...and the gaming world is enthralled by his progress, thinking he's a person playing the game in a novel, non-sociopathic way. But there's nefarious goings-on afoot; his crush is in fact searching for proof that her coding work was stolen by Antwan, the excitable head of the development company, her former partner is working with her on the inside...but Antwan might just wipe out his own game to prevent the truth from coming out, threatening Guy and all his NPC buddies. Loud noises happen.

Nice to get back in the theatre after all this time. Stale popcorn, sound system that I'm pretty sure gave me permanent hearing loss...but still nice to get back out there. Not a bad movie, either. I personally think they could've fleshed out the concept a little better, but it was still a pretty fresh idea. If you like Ryan Reynolds at all, you'll like this movie. He's a bit more toned down from his Deadpool persona, but his trademark wit is still on full display. Some big laughs, some no quite so big laughs, and they must have shelled out a lot of money for all the references in this movie. Can't imagine what the Star Wars theme and lightsaber cost...anyway. Definitely worth the watch.

In theatres (remember those?) now.

free-guy-1.jpg

"Look! Mass murder! Neato!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyFan

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
Our Friend (2021) - 7.5/10

Emotional film with strong highs. While it isn't as succinct as My Life Without Me, it lets its subject matter get examined far closer and does a good job of looking at cancer while balancing with the more light-hearted. The time jumping is a bit annoying, it often cuts off when a scene is getting going, but it ends up with quite an expansive film.

I just wanna mention how good Jason Segel's performance in particular is, his scenes are the stealers. It's his first film in a few years and it's a shame how much talent alcohol robs us of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyFan

Puck

Ninja
Jun 10, 2003
10,772
421
Ottawa
Free Guy

with Ryan Reynolds, Taika Waititi, and other people. My wife realized the main female character was the assassin chick from Killing Eve. Didn't recognize her without the fake Russian accent.

...
Interestingly enough, Free Guy was supposed to be released directly to streaming in January 2021 but Disney (who had just bought out 20th Century Fox, decided against it and decided to give it a theatrical release in the Summer instead. The direct opposite of what they did with Black Widow. Don't ask me why. Maybe they did polling after some early screenings and the exit interviews suggested it was better than they anticipated. (hence make more money by not going directly to streaming). Release dates and change of venue have fluctuated wildly during the pandemic.

I was expecting to see it in January. It will only be released for streaming now after 45 days of its initial release in theatres. I've only been to the cinema once so far this year, in a matinee when I knew it would be near empty (won't be the case for this so I'll wait). And I love Taika Waititi as an actor and Director.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyFan

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
27,302
16,112
Montreal, QC
Watched a couple things. Getting back into it. We had to put my darling man down on Monday and we're picking up an Australian Shepard puppy tommorow, so I'm expecting a lot less socializing/boozing and a lot more training, which should leave me sitting on the couch and reading/watching flicks more, which can only be a good thing at this point as I'd gotten away from a lot of things I love and just hanging out with friends, which was much easier to do with a senior couch-potato. Anyhow:

Jump Street 1994 (2021) - Got bored fast. The aesthetic is kind of cute by moments but the writing and acting are seriously weak. I like the concept though. But man, stay away from movies for a while and you can easily forget how pervasive can be. Makes one glitch.

Death Proof (2007) - A hell of a lot of fun. The Girl Squad vibe is pulled off much better than it is in most flicks - doesn't veer into life-affirming melodrama or cringy rowdiness - even if the dialogue is sometimes a little too pleased with how cocksure it is. I get the criticism with Tarantino and one thing I'll always give him is that man, he is fun. While transcendence should always be the goal for the artist (and I don't mean that in a philosophical way), he has crafted a voice of his own while riffing off the rest of the world.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
#18-19: One classic giallo I might have seen one too many time, and one giallo-my-ass I had never seen before.

Strip-Nude-For-Your-Killer-www.whysoblu.com_1.jpg


Strip Nude for Your Killer
(Nude per l'assassino, Bianchi, 1975) – This film could have been a masterpiece of irony and film reflexivity. The moment where you see the camera and the crew in a reflection, elsewhere a pivotal moment in a film by Jodorowsky, or an interesting reflexive joke by Mel Brooks, should have confirm that the film was pointing to itself (something reinforced by the cameras, spots, makeup artists, photographers, and the women as models already present in the narrative – classic reflexive strategies that could have worked marvels here). Taking from there, the main character being a despicable misogynistic ladies man would have made a little sense, and his exaggeratedly disgusting attitude towards every female characters (even his new girlfriend) would have been relevant. Same thing for the impotent rapist who can only be a man to his inflatable sex doll, or the emasculation of that other woman beater. In that hypothetical film, sexual politics should have been front and center, and the de-gendering of the killer would have been food for thought. Sadly, Bianchi is just a terrible, terrible director, and Strip Nude for Your Killer is nothing of that. It's all in there, but any intelligent interpretation of that mess would entirely belong to the spectator/reader. At face value, without the extra efforts, this really is one of the dumbest gialli, even though it does have a few classic genre moments. I'm not even sure if it's a so-bad-it's-good 1/10 or if I should rate it for being a potential thesis candidate for gender studies.

nero-veneziano-3.jpg


Damned in Venice (Nero veneziano, Liberatore, 1978) – I've had (a pretty bad copy of) this one for years, but had never watched it. It's often listed as an occult giallo, or supernatural giallo, but it really shouldn't be considered as part of the genre. Clearly a lesser offspring of Don't Look Now, Rosemary's Baby and The Omen, the film still manages to do its own thing, with decent atmosphere, decent acting (compared to the real gialli anyway), and the few horror elements are original enough (and kind of ballsy too) – I even think it can handle a few different readings. Its use of Donaggio's music (same composer as Don't Look Now too) is more miss than hit, with a lot of silly excessive emphasis, but also with a few (rare, even) great moments. I'm pretty sure most would find the film boring (and some of it – the hallucinations mostly – poorly executed and cheesy), and maybe it's just because I needed a break from the gialli, but I thought it was quite good despite its limited means (and results). 4.5/10
 

Pink Mist

RIP MM*
Jan 11, 2009
6,779
4,905
Toronto
pather_original.jpg


Pather Panchali
(1955) directed by Satyajit Ray

Apu (Subir Banerjee) and his older sister Durga (Uma Dasgupta) enjoy their childhood in an impoverished village in rural Bengal. When their father (Kanu Banerjee) leaves for months on end to seek a better job, their mother (Karuna Banerjee) bears the burdens and injustice of the harsh village life. Wow, what a film; it’s astonishing to think that this was Satyajit Ray’s first film and that it was made with mostly non-professional actors. Ray’s instincts are skills are so sharp and confident in this that you would think he had made prior films. In particular Ray’s lyricism, in which he is willing to just deviate a little and explore the natural world of the village and incorporate it into the film’s themes, most notably the rainfall at the film’s climax. In some ways it feels at times like a bit of a Terrence Malick film, when Malick is at his best, but with an Italian Neo-realist flavour transplanted into India. It’s a little bit of a cliché to say that one of the (many) reasons I love to watch international cinema is for the times you encounter a story which takes place in a culture so alien to yourself and find that it’s characters, emotions, and themes are so familiar to me despite the cultural differences and can articulate a common humanity – but the cliché is true and it’s certainly what makes me love Pather Panchali so much. My upbringing and culture could not be more different than the life depicted in Bengal in Pather Panchali. But the story and themes are so familiar to me and it resonates so clearly that they feel universal despite the cultural differences.

Pather Panchali is arguably one of the strongest debuts for a director that I have ever seen and I’m kicking myself for putting off watching it for so long (though in my defense, there wasn't a great transfer of it on home media for a long time).
 
Last edited:

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,109
Canuck Nation
Interestingly enough, Free Guy was supposed to be released directly to streaming in January 2021 but Disney (who had just bought out 20th Century Fox, decided against it and decided to give it a theatrical release in the Summer instead. The direct opposite of what they did with Black Widow. Don't ask me why. Maybe they did polling after some early screenings and the exit interviews suggested it was better than they anticipated. (hence make more money by not going directly to streaming). Release dates and change of venue have fluctuated wildly during the pandemic.

I was expecting to see it in January. It will only be released for streaming now after 45 days of its initial release in theatres. I've only been to the cinema once so far this year, in a matinee when I knew it would be near empty (won't be the case for this so I'll wait). And I love Taika Waititi as an actor and Director.

A lot of the time they've been waffling between trying to hold out movies for the return of theatres and the first-run money and just biting the bullet and dumping things directly to streaming. Free Guy seems to be getting a lot of very positive reviews and buzz, so maybe they hoped that could get people back into the theatre (as it did for me). But yeah. For us to know what their plan is, they have to know what their plan is. And seeing as how there are a lot of people who seem to want the pandemic to go on as long as possible, who knows how releases are going to work for the next year or two.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
I read a good piece once (for the life of me I can't locate it) that separated the Coen Bros. filmography into three types of movies — crime stories (Fargo, Blood Simple), character studies (Barton Fink, A Simple Man, Inside Llewen Davis) and goofy comedies that generally speaking are populated with morons (The Big Lebowski, Raising Arizona). I'm taking a little liberty with the descriptors because I can't find the original piece exactly, but I'm close and if you're a Coen's fan you get it. I can't remember where exactly their westerns slotted (I think it was crime ... or maybe that category was western?).

Revisited Burn After Reading which is squarely in the last category.

I don't know that they ever have much to say in these types of movies, especially compared with the other two categories, but damned if I don't find most of them to be a blast. Mostly seems to give them an excuse to play in a different genre/world — a Chandler detective story, old time Hollywood, live action looney tunes, banter-y RomCom.

Here we get a spy story of sorts, but "the great game" is reduced to the banal cloak-and-dagger of pretty average thin-skinned, greedy, horny people out to extort and/or sleep with each other. No one is as smart as they believe they are and they all get their just desserts in the end, with one sad, tragic exception (well, maybe two depending on your feelings for one character). I find it to be good fun, but it's pretty cynical -- the exact sort of tone that had critics saying the Coens "don't care." That's never been something that bothered me but I know it's a criticism that dogged them for a long time. It's not that it isn't true but it was never something I felt mattered to me.

Anyway. Brad Pitt seems to generate all the chatter for his well-meaning goofball who may be the most in over his head in a story where everyone is in over their head. I laugh plenty, but for me John Malkovich is really the key figure here. His unchecked ego and rage powers this whole engine to great comedic effect. And then you have George Clooney who's basically playing a jolly dildo granted human form. I was praising William Hurt recently for his ability to play smart and dumb in the same movie. Clooney can play smart and dumb -- but he can't do it in the same character. The Coens and Clooney are experts at weaponizing his movie star-ness and putting him out in the world as a grinning moron. The women by comparison don't get much to do. Frances McDormand ports the aww-shucks energy of Marge Gunderson into an otherwise empty vessel. Tilda Swinton feels completely wasted.

Truly fantastic final scene that frames the whole thing as the lark that it really is. The movie feels a little tossed off, but that's a testament to how good the Coens are. Their doodles are better than the full drawings of so many others.

It's tempting to call Burn After Reading underrated, but I suspect if I (and others) start listing Coen Bros. movies it'll be properly rated (somewhere in the middle). It is an underrated movie in terms of using the F-word, which is copiously.

Why the hell did I just write this much about this movie?
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
99,188
65,528
Ottawa, ON
I felt like Pitt is a miss when he plays exaggerated characters, like in Burn After Reading as well as Inglorious Basterds.

I felt that the other performances (McDormand, Simmons, Malkovitch) were a little more appropriate. Even Clooney's absurd inventor fit the mood of the film better IMO.
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
I read a good piece once (for the life of me I can't locate it) that separated the Coen Bros. filmography into three types of movies — crime stories (Fargo, Blood Simple), character studies (Barton Fink, A Simple Man, Inside Llewen Davis) and goofy comedies that generally speaking are populated with morons (The Big Lebowski, Raising Arizona). I'm taking a little liberty with the descriptors because I can't find the original piece exactly, but I'm close and if you're a Coen's fan you get it. I can't remember where exactly their westerns slotted (I think it was crime ... or maybe that category was western?).

Revisited Burn After Reading which is squarely in the last category.

I don't know that they ever have much to say in these types of movies, especially compared with the other two categories, but damned if I don't find most of them to be a blast. Mostly seems to give them an excuse to play in a different genre/world — a Chandler detective story, old time Hollywood, live action looney tunes, banter-y RomCom.

Here we get a spy story of sorts, but "the great game" is reduced to the banal cloak-and-dagger of pretty average thin-skinned, greedy, horny people out to extort and/or sleep with each other. No one is as smart as they believe they are and they all get their just desserts in the end, with one sad, tragic exception (well, maybe two depending on your feelings for one character). I find it to be good fun, but it's pretty cynical -- the exact sort of tone that had critics saying the Coens "don't care." That's never been something that bothered me but I know it's a criticism that dogged them for a long time. It's not that it isn't true but it was never something I felt mattered to me.

Anyway. Brad Pitt seems to generate all the chatter for his well-meaning goofball who may be the most in over his head in a story where everyone is in over their head. I laugh plenty, but for me John Malkovich is really the key figure here. His unchecked ego and rage powers this whole engine to great comedic effect. And then you have George Clooney who's basically playing a jolly dildo granted human form. I was praising William Hurt recently for his ability to play smart and dumb in the same movie. Clooney can play smart and dumb -- but he can't do it in the same character. The Coens and Clooney are experts at weaponizing his movie star-ness and putting him out in the world as a grinning moron. The women by comparison don't get much to do. Frances McDormand ports the aww-shucks energy of Marge Gunderson into an otherwise empty vessel. Tilda Swinton feels completely wasted.

Truly fantastic final scene that frames the whole thing as the lark that it really is. The movie feels a little tossed off, but that's a testament to how good the Coens are. Their doodles are better than the full drawings of so many others.

It's tempting to call Burn After Reading underrated, but I suspect if I (and others) start listing Coen Bros. movies it'll be properly rated (somewhere in the middle). It is an underrated movie in terms of using the F-word, which is copiously.

Why the hell did I just write this much about this movie?

I like it quite a bit too, funny and dumb in an almost clever way. I guess you've already seen it, but if not, try to see Crimewave - that's just so dumb they probably didn't want to do it themselves (no budget messy film, but worth a viewing).
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
I like it quite a bit too, funny and dumb in an almost clever way. I guess you've already seen it, but if not, try to see Crimewave - that's just so dumb they probably didn't want to do it themselves (no budget messy film, but worth a viewing).

I know of it, but have not seen it. Will hunt it down.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
I felt like Pitt is a miss when he plays exaggerated characters, like in Burn After Reading as well as Inglorious Basterds.

In fact, I felt that the other performances (McDormand, Simmons, Malkovitch) were a little more appropriate. Even Clooney's absurd inventor fit the mood of the film better IMO.

I definitely did not like him as much this time as in my first viewing and, as I mentioned in my review, I feel like if this movie has any lasting legacy for whatever reason I feel like it's him. The confrontation in the car with Malkovich is hilarious, but the rest of the performance is almost too much ... which is saying something for a movie where the other three key characters are pretty dialed up too. I think part of the problem is that, unlike Clooney, he can't quite pull off being a real idiot.

I know someone will pounce on this and cite True Romance and I'd agree he's great in that small role, but that was also a pre-superstardom Brad Pitt. Either that was lightning in a bottle or he just lost that gear as he became The Brad Pitt.

Was just looking back on his filmography and did not realize that Burn After Reading is a) from 2008 and b) before Inglorious Basterds. Would have totally whiffed on that at bar trivia. I like Pitt in Basterds and in 12 Monkeys (another pretty exaggerated character).
 
  • Like
Reactions: NyQuil

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
99,188
65,528
Ottawa, ON
Was just looking back on his filmography and did not realize that Burn After Reading is a) from 2008 and b) before Inglorious Basterds. Would have totally whiffed on that at bar trivia. I like Pitt in Basterds and in 12 Monkeys (another pretty exaggerated character).

You do make a good point about his performance in 12 Monkeys. Somehow it still seemed more natural.

Maybe he was still an emerging star, like with True Romance, and was trying a bit harder, not sure.

I felt like he was almost hamming it up in the other two examples.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
You do make a good point about his performance in 12 Monkeys. Somehow it still seemed more natural.

Maybe he was still an emerging star, like with True Romance, and was trying a bit harder, not sure.

I felt like he was almost hamming it up in the other two examples.

Oh he's definitely an extra ham and cheese sandwich in both those movies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NyQuil

The Kingslayer

Registered User
Aug 26, 2004
77,530
58,541
Siem Reap, Cambodia
The Suicide Squad - 7/10

That's how it should have been done the first go round. I have the same rule with Idris Elba as I do with Denzel. If hes got a gun im watching.

Focus - 6/10

Underrated movie. The crazy chinese guy stole the movie. Brilliant.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,109
Canuck Nation
Captain Fantastic

with Viggo Mortensen, an appalled Frank Langella, and other people.

Opening: forest hunt. Vistas of trees, birds chirping in the background, black-painted faces stalk a deer. It runs; ambushed by a late teen guy. Flashes of steel, blood everywhere, but success! An elder man, 40's somewhere probably, tells his son he's now a man, and the son eats the (I think) liver. National Geographic documentary of Amazon tribes? Nope. Just Ben Cash (Viggo) and his platoon of weirdly named children who he and his wife have spent their whole lives training to basically be a leftist forest survivalist commando unit. Ben hasn't neglected education though; after rigorous daily physical training, he keeps everyone on their toes with rigorous nightly intellectual training, reading college level books around the campfire and engaging in debates in logic...but life was more fun in their ramshackle but cozy digs when Mom was around. She left a few weeks ago to go to the hospital, and Dad has to fire up the ancient landmover RV to head to the far, far away Evil Big Corporatist City to find out how she's getting on. The news isn't good, and the clan must travel to meet their big city kinfolk. Social awkwardness happens.

I think how much you like the movie will depend on how much you like the family. They're a weird little bunch, but endearing. The lefty stuff does get a bit much even for me...and I say that as pretty bolshie, liberal guy myself. Celebrating Noam Chomsky Day instead of Christmas is something that would've made my dad's eyes roll completely over in their sockets if he'd ever heard the phrase. But while Ben's parenting definitely has its ups and downs, the gormless spawn of his sister in-law hardly make a convincing case for the strengths of mainstream education. Frank Langella is rich Grampa, and he's appalled.

captain1.jpg

I must emphasize this is NOT a Wes Anderson movie. This is just their formal wear.
 
Last edited:

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,922
10,805
sword2.jpg


Sword of the Valiant (1984) - 3/10 (Really disliked it)

Sir Gawain (Miles O'Keeffe) must seek the Green Knight (Sean Connery) to pay a debt and solve a riddle. That's right... there was an adaptation of the epic poem in the glorious 80s. I didn't realize it until the other day, either. Let's just say that it's rather different than the 2021 version. It starts out fairly decently and faithfully, with the Green Knight interrupting the King's feast. Sean Connery appears to be having fun as the center of attention, though he looks like a Christmas hobo. From the mid 70s to the mid 80s, his contracts must've stipulated that he get to show off his hairy chest in every movie because he does it again here. In fact, his very practical armor covers him from head to toe except his face and chest. O'Keeffe, meanwhile, looks like a cross between He-Man and Prince Valium from Spaceballs. He honestly has better hair than the leading lady. After that decent opening scene and Connery's exit, the film goes downhill. The next hour and 15 minutes is just generic sword and sorcery (Gawain meeting friendly travelers, fighting other knights, rescuing maidens and encountering magic) that has nothing to do with the poem or its themes. It's also rather disjointed and a bit hard to follow. With about 5 minutes left, the writers remember what they're meant to be adapting and bring the Green Knight/Connery back for a short, anti-climactic ending that's worse than the poem and the recent film. John Rhys-Davies and Peter Cushing have roles so small that you might miss them if you stop paying attention for a few minutes (which is easy to do). They must've been easy paychecks. Some of the visuals were OK and I didn't mind the catchy tune that played every 5 minutes and reminded me of 80s TV show theme music. It's altogether very cheesy, but didn't feel deliberate enough for me to play along or bad enough for me to appreciate it for being "so bad it's good." I can see why it was forgotten and there isn't much reason to watch it, IMO, unless you just really like the poem (actually, that may be a reason not to watch it), care to see James Bond dressed as a Christmas tree or want to appreciate another 1984 adaptation, Dune, a little more.
 
Last edited:

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Kill Baby Kill. Saw this Mario Bava joint at one of my very first horror marathons. It was slotted around the very difficult movie watching time of 4 a.m.-ish, which is tough for any movie, but especially so for something as deliberate as this. So I struggled to stay awake and was fuzzy on what I was awake for. Revisiting with full attention and I really dug it. Just a rich, spooky gothic atmosphere peppered with a few pretty gnarly images and implications (for the time). The opening suicide reminded me of a famous scene in The Omen while I have to believe Tim Burton spent plenty of time revisiting this before doing Sleepy Hollow.

April Fool's Day. An entertaining enough 80s slasher romp. In a world with a lot of sameness it does a few things different, which is enough to warrant spending some time with it if you like these sort of things. I like that the cast is this nice collection of recognizable 80s actors (but not exactly widely known). Biff from Back to the Future. Oggie from The Wraith. The Valley Girl from Valley Girl. Ginny from Friday the 13th II, that one guy form Just One of the Guys.

In the Earth. A pandemic-filmed movie from Ben Wheatley. It's the type of movie that I don't know that I want to think about too much because dwelling on its absurdity might ruin what does work with it, which is its weird metaphysical nature horror vibe. This doesn't have nearly the magic or richness of Picnic at Hanging Rock but it feels like that movie is at the back of Wheatley's mind. He's a masterful exploiter or sound and loves an aggressive strobe light/edit, which he works to good effect here. He keeps you on your toes. It's a different take on a bad time in the woods (punctuated with three genuinely and unexpectedly funny scenes). It feels like the sort of movie that will develop rabid fans who are going to analyze it to hell, which will ultimately make it annoying because we like, you know, don't GET IT, man. But that hasn't happened yet. So, for now -- pretty good!
 

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
Wake In Fright (1971) - 6/10

It's a really well made movie cos watching it was hell. A bunch of loud Aussies hanging around being Aussie (do I need to type loud Aussies or is it implied? All the ones I've come across yell when they talk). The heat and the pure despair are really well done to the point where it comes closer to a horror film than a drama to me and I hate horror films especially with Aussies.

The Arsenal Stadium Mystery (1939) - 7/10

I'll be honest, I just watched this because of the title and my obsession with the Premier League especially when the hockey isn't on. Not a bad film for the 30s, really did enjoy some of the stadium and player scenes to see how different it all was but it isn't exactly a great mystery. Still no worse than those revered Charlie Chan type films or the one with that alcoholic with the cute wife and dog. Also the whole thing is on Youtube and it's short, no having to spend time with drunk Aussies for 2 hours, eugh.


 

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,144
Toronto
All I got to say about Brad Pitt in Burn after Reading is that he made me laugh...a lot. I thought he was great. Would the movie even be memorable without him?

Also, for some perverse reason, I rewatched Once upon a Time in Hollywood last night. The first time around I thought DiCaprio was weak, but this time around I just thought that was because Pitt stole every scene in which they were together. DiCaprio never finds a believable shape for his character while Pitt does so effortlessly.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,109
Canuck Nation
All I got to say about Brad Pitt in Burn after Reading is that he made me laugh...a lot. I thought he was great. Would the movie even be memorable without him?

Also, for some perverse reason, I rewatched Once upon a Time in Hollywood last night. The first time around I thought DiCaprio was weak, but this time around I just thought that was because Pitt stole every scene in which they were together. DiCaprio never finds a believable shape for his character while Pitt does so effortlessly.

...which exactly parallels their entire character arcs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fripp

silkyjohnson50

Registered User
Jan 10, 2007
11,304
1,195
All I got to say about Brad Pitt in Burn after Reading is that he made me laugh...a lot. I thought he was great. Would the movie even be memorable without him?

Also, for some perverse reason, I rewatched Once upon a Time in Hollywood last night. The first time around I thought DiCaprio was weak, but this time around I just thought that was because Pitt stole every scene in which they were together. DiCaprio never finds a believable shape for his character while Pitt does so effortlessly.
I’m curious what you rated Once upon a Time?

Furthermore, I’m curious which Tarantino film you’d rate the highest and/or which one was your personal favorite?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad