Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate it | {Insert Appropriate Seasonal Greeting Here}

[OzzyFan]

Vertigo (1958)
3.10 out of 4stars

“A former San Francisco police detective juggles wrestling with his personal demons after the vertigo caused death of a cop and becoming obsessed with the hauntingly beautiful woman he has been hired to trail, who may be deeply disturbed.”
A great psychological thriller romance drama on the power of obsession and emotional manipulation. The score, camera shots, style, and usage of colors are top notch. It’s sort of 2 films/stories in 1, but they mostly overlap and work together. The power of obsession can take over someone’s mind and life and make everything else unimportant in it, consumingly, temporarily or for an extended period of time. The most important question on obsession though is the why, is it out of fear or love? A fear so deep that you have an anxious endless insecure longing for something, or a love so deep that you have an ecstatic endless craving high for something. Both based on some memory or psychological reasoning. Emotional manipulation is another powerful force by purposely causing someone, through force or guidance, to do or feel things you want them to, with them unconsciously or even consciously knowing. Oddly one of Hitchcock’s major works that I feel a bit underwhelmed by and critical of based on the hype surrounding it, exclusively with the first two thirds of the film.

The Conversation (1974)
3.05 out of 4stars

“A paranoid, secretive private-investigator/surveillance expert has a crisis of conscience when he suspects that the couple he is spying on will be murdered.”
A great mystery thriller slow burn about the ability of and paranoia from the technological abilities of surveillance, along with perception. Using an anti-melodramatic approach, it’s a film that wants you to think first and foremost as we see the world through our protagonist’s eyes (Gene Hackman). “Surveillance” technology has advanced to near limitless claustrophobic and invasive heights over the past 50 years, invisibly from both distance and intimately, but this film more than gets its point across with the equipment of its time. On that note, online public information sharing and hacking of personal home surveillance cameras/computers has become a scary reality, with people’s rights to privacy jeopardized greatly. Private and public investigators do a hazardous job with moral gray areas. Investigation and surveillance are generally done for significant reasons and can have major impacts/implications. Ranging from clarity on life changing suspicions/actions/decisions to governmentally criminal prevention/act-catching.

Anguish (1987)
2.85 out of 4stars

“A controlling mother uses hypnosis and telepathic powers to send her middle-aged son on a killing spree. A film so powerful that the movie theater audience is greatly affected by the events they’re watching on the screen.”
A great slasher horror that's memorably meta and must have been one hell of a cinematic experience to see in a movie theater. Effective, innovative, and somewhat immersive. Starts off with a Castle-esque warning on the film having mild hypnosis and subliminal messages, giving you a little taste of what you are in for. Sadly, it loses some of its effect from being watched at home on one’s TV or computer screen. It must have been a moody tense goosebumpy experience seeing this on a big screen, even for the more calmer horror movie goers. The main story suffers from it being 2 films in one, but it makes up for it by playfully materializing its subject matter and the close reality of situations. Cleverly portrays audience reactions and thoughts with anxieties, while emphasizing hypnosis and possible fears associated with horror movies. If you buy into the concept, it is rewarding. Creepy, fun, unique for its time, and underappreciated, probably in part due to its availability.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Vertigo (1958)
3.10 out of 4stars

“A former San Francisco police detective juggles wrestling with his personal demons after the vertigo caused death of a cop and becoming obsessed with the hauntingly beautiful woman he has been hired to trail, who may be deeply disturbed.”
A great psychological thriller romance drama on the power of obsession and emotional manipulation. The score, camera shots, style, and usage of colors are top notch. It’s sort of 2 films/stories in 1, but they mostly overlap and work together. The power of obsession can take over someone’s mind and life and make everything else unimportant in it, consumingly, temporarily or for an extended period of time. The most important question on obsession though is the why, is it out of fear or love? A fear so deep that you have an anxious endless insecure longing for something, or a love so deep that you have an ecstatic endless craving high for something. Both based on some memory or psychological reasoning. Emotional manipulation is another powerful force by purposely causing someone, through force or guidance, to do or feel things you want them to, with them unconsciously or even consciously knowing. Oddly one of Hitchcock’s major works that I feel a bit underwhelmed by and critical of based on the hype surrounding it, exclusively with the first two thirds of the film.

The Conversation (1974)
3.05 out of 4stars

“A paranoid, secretive private-investigator/surveillance expert has a crisis of conscience when he suspects that the couple he is spying on will be murdered.”
A great mystery thriller slow burn about the ability of and paranoia from the technological abilities of surveillance, along with perception. Using an anti-melodramatic approach, it’s a film that wants you to think first and foremost as we see the world through our protagonist’s eyes (Gene Hackman). “Surveillance” technology has advanced to near limitless claustrophobic and invasive heights over the past 50 years, invisibly from both distance and intimately, but this film more than gets its point across with the equipment of its time. On that note, online public information sharing and hacking of personal home surveillance cameras/computers has become a scary reality, with people’s rights to privacy jeopardized greatly. Private and public investigators do a hazardous job with moral gray areas. Investigation and surveillance are generally done for significant reasons and can have major impacts/implications. Ranging from clarity on life changing suspicions/actions/decisions to governmentally criminal prevention/act-catching.

Anguish (1987)
2.85 out of 4stars

“A controlling mother uses hypnosis and telepathic powers to send her middle-aged son on a killing spree. A film so powerful that the movie theater audience is greatly affected by the events they’re watching on the screen.”
A great slasher horror that's memorably meta and must have been one hell of a cinematic experience to see in a movie theater. Effective, innovative, and somewhat immersive. Starts off with a Castle-esque warning on the film having mild hypnosis and subliminal messages, giving you a little taste of what you are in for. Sadly, it loses some of its effect from being watched at home on one’s TV or computer screen. It must have been a moody tense goosebumpy experience seeing this on a big screen, even for the more calmer horror movie goers. The main story suffers from it being 2 films in one, but it makes up for it by playfully materializing its subject matter and the close reality of situations. Cleverly portrays audience reactions and thoughts with anxieties, while emphasizing hypnosis and possible fears associated with horror movies. If you buy into the concept, it is rewarding. Creepy, fun, unique for its time, and underappreciated, probably in part due to its availability.

I feel you've been (too) hard on all three of these films. You feeling grumpy? ;-)

 

[Osprey]

I feel you've been (too) hard on all three of these films. You feeling grumpy? ;-)

Says the guy who gave 4.x/10 to all three original Indy movies. ;-)

On the grumpiness scale, I give OzzyFan only 2.25 out of 4 Pranzos.

 

[OzzyFan]

I feel you've been (too) hard on all three of these films. You feeling grumpy? ;-)

DON'T READ BELOW IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN HITCHCOCK'S VERTIGO/SOME SPOILERS AHEAD:




. It's funny, I was contemplating Hackman's character in the main role of The Conversation being possibly too unrealistic given some careless and pointless/ironic activities in the film, especially considering he was "the best bugger on the west coast". Anguish was hard for me to rate because I can see people souring on it or being in love with it, thus my rating. I'm most interested in your review on Anguish if you have it documented somewhere or can post it here I'd appreciate it.


As for Vertigo, which I don't want to get into a debate on, I don't think the 2 storylines worked well together as one went almost completely silent the last 1/3 of the film and the other storyline only caught it's breath near the end of the second 1/3 of the film. And, I thought the love story aspect felt forced or should I say "extramarital affair angle", 25 year age gap aside even, I didn't believe how rapidly they both fell in love with each other, Stewart because it would have only been out of lust or pity in her very heavily "possessed"/airplane-mode/blank-no-emotion-ness time of which both would ruin the last 1/3 of the film and those angles didn't work in my mind when contemplating it, and Novak "seemingly" falling in love with a man that she knows was getting paid to follow her and her conning him and would have only been seemingly out of attention/"acting" which doesn't make sense with the last 1/3 of the film either/overall. And you may call what happened when the 2nd act ends and 3rd act begins a twist/turn, but ultimately for me it felt like an overlong hoodwink. The first 2 acts were too long/time-consuming and too elaborate to be used as a false mask for the mystery that was too light on theme matter imo. I could nitpick other stuff too, Novak helped commit a murder but wasn't paid handsomely for it and decided to stay living in the same city/area now dead Madeline(and/or "Madeline") frequented? And the biggest being Stewart not making it up the bell tower (but pursuing her with the rest of his free time), or seeing Judy or Gavin leave the tower afterward, or Stewart not seeing at any time "post-mortem" Madeline looking somehow different than Judy did in countless situations (post-bell tower fall, funeral photos or casket, acquaintance conversations (time periods not lining up as he tailed her and her being elsewhere), etc.) as he himself a detective infatuated with her no less, amongst other arguable plot holes. And I don't think any of this with Vertigo is too controversial given the initial release's mixed reviews, only if one puts it in the context as one of the greatest films of all-time (which some do). It's still a great film with some great food for thought inside, but I personally would not put it on a top 50 all-time film list, let alone a top 10 one.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

DON'T READ BELOW IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN HITCHCOCK'S VERTIGO/SOME SPOILERS AHEAD:




. It's funny, I was contemplating Hackman's character in the main role of The Conversation being possibly too unrealistic given some careless and pointless/ironic activities in the film, especially considering he was "the best bugger on the west coast". Anguish was hard for me to rate because I can see people souring on it or being in love with it, thus my rating. I'm most interested in your review on Anguish if you have it documented somewhere or can post it here I'd appreciate it.


As for Vertigo, which I don't want to get into a debate on, I don't think the 2 storylines worked well together as one went almost completely silent the last 1/3 of the film and the other storyline only caught it's breath near the end of the second 1/3 of the film. And, I thought the love story aspect felt forced or should I say "extramarital affair angle", 25 year age gap aside even, I didn't believe how rapidly they both fell in love with each other, Stewart because it would have only been out of lust or pity in her very heavily "possessed"/airplane-mode/blank-no-emotion-ness time of which both would ruin the last 1/3 of the film and those angles didn't work in my mind when contemplating it, and Novak "seemingly" falling in love with a man that she knows was getting paid to follow her and her conning him and would have only been seemingly out of attention/"acting" which doesn't make sense with the last 1/3 of the film either/overall. And you may call what happened when the 2nd act ends and 3rd act begins a twist/turn, but ultimately for me it felt like an overlong hoodwink. The first 2 acts were too long/time-consuming and too elaborate to be used as a false mask for the mystery that was too light on theme matter imo. I could nitpick other stuff too, Novak helped commit a murder but wasn't paid handsomely for it and decided to stay living in the same city/area now dead Madeline(and/or "Madeline") frequented? And the biggest being Stewart not making it up the bell tower (but pursuing her with the rest of his free time), or seeing Judy or Gavin leave the tower afterward, or Stewart not seeing at any time "post-mortem" Madeline looking somehow different than Judy did in countless situations (post-bell tower fall, funeral photos or casket, acquaintance conversations (time periods not lining up as he tailed her and her being elsewhere), etc.) as he himself a detective infatuated with her no less, amongst other arguable plot holes. And I don't think any of this with Vertigo is too controversial given the initial release's mixed reviews, only if one puts it in the context as one of the greatest films of all-time (which some do). It's still a great film with some great food for thought inside, but I personally would not put it on a top 50 all-time film list, let alone a top 10 one.

I guess I really don't take Vertigo at face value and don't mind much the details of the plot. Kind of like the better DePalma films.

As for Anguish, I wish I had something written about it (I thought I did), and it's been way too long for me to do so intelligently. I'm a HUGE Bigas Luna fan (maybe the only one?), and even though I wouldn't consider it one of his very best films, I think it's still top-tiers, and certainly a gem of the genre. I have it at 7/10 on IMDB, it's probably a 7.5.

 

[Satans Hockey]

Talk to Me (2023) Directed by Danny and MIchael Philippou 7A

Talk to Me starts out like a fun, low-budget teenage horror movie with a damn good premise. One of the characters comes into possession of a preserved severed hand that when grasped by some one causes hallucinations (or so the characters think) of dead people. The "game" the kids make of this is in the nature of a dare: Can an individual hold the hand for 90 seconds without freaking out too much? Will each teen be brave enough to "let in" the spirits for the full time duration? The kids find all this trippy as hell, great creepy fun, Then, Mia (Sophie Wilde), the most charming member of the group, takes up the challenge, and holds on to the hand a little longer than she should. Serious consequences ensue, and not just for Mia.

While Talk to Me stays a horror movie all the way through its running time, and a pretty decent one at that, the story slowly wades into deeper and far darker waters. Sort of in the background initially but moving steadily into the foreground is a narrative about the debilitating nature of grief and the consequences for other people, people you care about, that come when grief is embraced too deeply and for too long. All this works beautifully because of the wonderful, star-making performance by Wilde who creates a thoroughly believable and sympathetic character. For once a horror audience has a character that they can deeply care about. In fact, Talk to Me contains a welcome absence of cannon fodder for the sake of cannon fodder. No one is there just to be wasted in gruesome ways. This, of course, makes what happens all the more powerful. And the ending has a nice, lingering sting in its tail.

I don't want to oversell this movie. It's no masterpiece. But it is a good, well-constructed horror movie that might stick in your head for a while.


Best of '23 so far

Riceboy Sleeps, Shim, Canada
Barbie, Gerwig, US
Talk to Me, Philippou brothers, Australia

I just saw this today and went in blind besides hearing that it was really good. Didn't even know it was an Australian movie lol

I really enjoyed it, was a nice twist on the possession genre. I agree with not overselling it but I do feel like it's a must watch for anyone who enjoys the horror genre. Especially cause I feel like this year has been light on good horror movies.

 

[John Price]

Elvis (2022): 9/10

Amazing movie, great look into the man's life and the abuse of drugs and his manager

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Easy Rider (1969) - 6/10

Film attempts to be more of a vibe than anything and sometimes succeeds at it but it isn't the most riveting cinema, I generally am not a fan of road trip films anyways. Jack Nicholson comes into the film in the second half and helps out, he has a couple speeches which are probably the best part of the film. The rest is basic 'racism is bad and racist people suck' though in this case it's showing prejudice against....hippies? Anyways it's a film worth watching for the way it delivers its message it's just not very fun cinema.

Heaven Can Wait (1943) - 7/10

Lubitsch classic where a man basically retells his life. Gene Tierney is a mixed actress for me, when she's trying to be hysterical she's awful and in others parts she's lovely. The Brad Pitt look-alike lead at times has a certain rascalian charm which works well but I always struggle against these films that rapidly move through a characters life over decades and never really can settle on a scene or time period as a result. Big jumps forward in time is a useful plot device but it feels a bit worn when the entire film does it from beginning to end. The colours here are pretty gorgeous in this technicolour release despite having a mostly indoor-set setting.

The Woman In The Window (1944) - 6/10

Fritz Lang you f***er

 

[OzzyFan]

The Woman In The Window (1944) - 6/10

Fritz Lang you f***er

It's definitely one thing that made you say that . I prefer Scarlet Street over Woman in the Window of the 2 Lang/Robinson/Bennett/Duryea projects, both are good but Scarlet Street I find more effective and memorable.

 

[Chili]

48 Hours-1982

For me one of the better cop films of it's era, not because of any great story but thanks to the two leads performances. Centered on the confrontational relationship of detective Jack Gates (Nick Nolte) and currently imprisoned Reggie Hammond (Eddie Murphy). To follow up on a lead in a case, Gates has Hammond released from prison for 48 hours. Their dislike of each other leads to barbs, insults and fist fights. But somehow they stick together to go after the bad guys. The sequel Another 48 Hours is pretty good too (and very violent), this film hasn't lost it's charm. The high point of both Murphy and Nolte's film careers? At least one of them.

Family Business-1989

Three generations of a family, grandfather (Sean Connery), father (Dustin Hoffman) & son (Matthew Broderick) plan to attempt a heist. The grandfather and father have experience in this area, the son is the newcomer although it is his original idea. For whatever reason the film doesn't come together. Not many laughs and the chemistry of Connery & Hoffman isn't there (James Bond was virile but he's only 7 years older then Dustin!). There are some decent performances but the story lags, especially towards the end, like they didn't know how to wrap up the film. Might be a good candidate for a remake with a better script.

House of Bamboo-1955

A film noir in striking colour and apparently the first Hollywood film shot in Japan. A gang of thieves lead by Sandy (Robert Ryan) has set up shop in Toyko and Eddie (Robert Stack) has been sent to infiltrate. The opening violent scene of a train being held up and robbed of military arms with Mt Fuji in the background sets a tone. Impressive shots around Tokyo including a filmmaker's favorite, amusement park scenes. Not quite as good as The Yakuza although still an interesting and beautifully shot film.

House of Strangers-1949

Saga of the Monetti family. Headed by father Gino (Edward G. Robinson) who has four sons who he doesn't treat equally. Gino was a barber who became a banker which will eventually land him in hot water (the 'Barber of Seville' conviently plays in the background at one point). Robinson is funny with his Italian accent (changa the record...scrubba my back...what's a matta, you don'ta like babies?). Son Max (Richard Conte) carries much of the film. He is a lawyer who will pay a heavy price for being the favorite son. Susan Hayward who becomes Max's girl, is her usual strong presence. An interesting look at the hierarchy of a family and the consequences of playing favorites.

On Golden Pond-1981

'C'mon Girlie, I'm going to show you the bathroom...if I can remember where it is'.

Before Grumpy Old Men there was Norman (Henry Fonda). He's nearing the end of the trail and life is becoming more of a challenge. He and his doting wife Ethel (Katherine Hepburn) spend their summers in a cabin on a picturesque lake. His 80th birthday is coming up and his somewhat estranged daughter will pay a rare visit (Jane Fonda and the story somewhat mirrored their real later relationship). Interesting that Katherine Hepburn and Henry Fonda had never met before this film. There is a great emotional depth to the film, they were both recognized for their brilliant performances. Great screenplay too, plenty of humour. Scenic, timeless classic.

 

[Ceremony]

The Departed (2006) Do you think people from Boston get sick of the Dropkick Murphys? I would. Thanks to this film I've also learned there's a Wikipedia article titled "List of films that most frequently use the word f***" which is very amusing. An assortment of famous people go looking for a rat. They all find one, one way or another. I still don't think I know how the film ends the way it does.

Memento (2000) Man with very bad tattoos has an extremely bad day. I actually paid attention while watching this trying to follow the black and white sequences, which is sort of the point. I don't think the payoff is very rewarding though.

Sully (2016) As I watched this I thought the scenes with the NTSB were a bit ridiculous. As I was watching I looked the film up, and saw that this was noted and generally agreed with which I found reassuring. When the film finished and DIRECTED BY CLINT EASTWOOD appeared on screen, everything made sense. If I'm on a plane I want men with spectacular moustaches flying it. Or at least Tom Hanks.

Moon (2009) Man on the moon discovers it's clones all the way down. Perhaps it's a symptom of a film like this being made and well-received, but I feel as if the classic science fiction questions explored in this are things I've seen in Black Mirror or other anthology series. It's a good performance from Sam Rockwell and the premise wasn't actually what I thought it was, so I'll give it points for that.

Predator (1987) What a f***ing film this is. Immaculate. The irony is I could see humans, millennia from now when we can travel far enough in space, taking on the role of the Predator, going to other planets and hunting for sport. Cheating, as we use our thermal vision, invisibility armour and mounted laser guns to kill some poor buggers who don't know we're there.

 

[Jovavic]

The Lost City - Bullock, Tatum, Radcliffe, and Pitt star in a comedy that's not horrible

 

[shadow1]

Batman Begins (2005) - 6/10

Vengeful over the death of his parents death, billionaire Bruce Wayne seeks to take down Gotham City's biggest crime lord.

Christian Bale stars as Bruce Wayne / Batman, who is unable to find closure after witnessing the murder of his parents as a child. Bruce relocates to a remote area in Asia to learn special fighting skills under Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson) and the League of Shadows. However, after realizing he shares different ideals with the group, Bruce returns to hometown Gotham City, a metropolis that is in a state of decay. Utilizing technology from his company Wayne Enterprises, Bruce adopts the alter ego Batman and sets out to take down mob boss Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson).

Batman Begins was directed by Christopher Nolan, and written by Nolan and David S. Goyer. Nolan set out to make an origin story of the Batman character - which had not been done on the big screen yet - while also grounding the film in reality as much as possible. With Nolan on the precipice of massive worldwide fame, how does this earlier effort of his fare?

A huge mixed bag, with plenty to like but many frustrating elements. Batman Begins has a both familiar and fresh take on the Batman character, using well known story beats in unison with a more real world approach. We all know Batman's origin story and why he became Batman, but Batman Begins shows how he became Batman, and we get to see the interesting process of Bruce test and convert Wayne Enterprises technology into items he can use as the capped crusader. The film also has an all-star cast, which features good supporting performances from Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Katie Holmes, Cillian Murphy, and Gary Oldman.

However, Batman Begins has a major problem with editing and pacing. The film rushes through the events of the first hour, leading to emotional moments - including a major death - carrying no weight. Every scene has so many cuts it in that even dialogue scenes feel like a roller coaster ride, and things are borderline unwatchable during fight scenes. By the time the film finally slows down to catch its breath - an hour and 15 minutes in by my watch - I was nursing a headache (not hyperbole).

Additionally, I do have some nitpicks when it comes to the writing. I thought the dialogue in the scenes with Thomas Wayne were cringey (no real person talks like that), and later on the film had many one liners that probably sounded good in trailers but didn't land in the actual film. Additionally, there is a lot of self righteousness with the characterizations. For example, moments before the climax, Alfred (Michael Caine) starts laying into Bruce about how he's tarnishing the family name by being late for a party... despite the fact that Bruce had just informed him he had saved an important character from near death. I found this scene and others to be wildly off base and melodramatic.

Overall, Batman Begins is an okay film, but one with issues. I cannot stress enough how much the deadly combination of editing/pacing made my head hurt. But even that aside, I personally do not think Christopher Nolan had fully hit his stride yet, though you can see signs of what was to come. However, I'm far lower than the consensus opinion (8.2 IMDB/3.8 Letterboxd), and Batman Begins ultimately earned $374M worldwide against a $150M budget. Maybe I should have my rear end examined to make sure my head isn't up there. But until that happens, take this review with a grain of salt.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Batman Begins (2005) - 6/10

Vengeful over the death of his parents death, billionaire Bruce Wayne seeks to take down Gotham City's biggest crime lord.

Christian Bale stars as Bruce Wayne / Batman, who is unable to find closure after witnessing the murder of his parents as a child. Bruce relocates to a remote area in Asia to learn special fighting skills under Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson) and the League of Shadows. However, after realizing he shares different ideals with the group, Bruce returns to hometown Gotham City, a metropolis that is in a state of decay. Utilizing technology from his company Wayne Enterprises, Bruce adopts the alter ego Batman and sets out to take down mob boss Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson).

Batman Begins was directed by Christopher Nolan, and written by Nolan and David S. Goyer. Nolan set out to make an origin story of the Batman character - which had not been done on the big screen yet - while also grounding the film in reality as much as possible. With Nolan on the precipice of massive worldwide fame, how does this earlier effort of his fare?

A huge mixed bag, with plenty to like but many frustrating elements. Batman Begins has a both familiar and fresh take on the Batman character, using well known story beats in unison with a more real world approach. We all know Batman's origin story and why he became Batman, but Batman Begins shows how he became Batman, and we get to see the interesting process of Bruce test and convert Wayne Enterprises technology into items he can use as the capped crusader. The film also has an all-star cast, which features good supporting performances from Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Katie Holmes, Cillian Murphy, and Gary Oldman.

However, Batman Begins has a major problem with editing and pacing. The film rushes through the events of the first hour, leading to emotional moments - including a major death - carrying no weight. Every scene has so many cuts it in that even dialogue scenes feel like a roller coaster ride, and things are borderline unwatchable during fight scenes. By the time the film finally slows down to catch its breath - an hour and 15 minutes in by my watch - I was nursing a headache (not hyperbole).

Additionally, I do have some nitpicks when it comes to the writing. I thought the dialogue in the scenes with Thomas Wayne were cringey (no real person talks like that), and later on the film had many one liners that probably sounded good in trailers but didn't land in the actual film. Additionally, there is a lot of self righteousness with the characterizations. For example, moments before the climax, Alfred (Michael Caine) starts laying into Bruce about how he's tarnishing the family name by being late for a party... despite the fact that Bruce had just informed him he had saved an important character from near death. I found this scene and others to be wildly off base and melodramatic.

Overall, Batman Begins is an okay film, but one with issues. I cannot stress enough how much the deadly combination of editing/pacing made my head hurt. But even that aside, I personally do not think Christopher Nolan had fully hit his stride yet, though you can see signs of what was to come. However, I'm far lower than the consensus opinion (8.2 IMDB/3.8 Letterboxd), and Batman Begins ultimately earned $374M worldwide against a $150M budget. Maybe I should have my rear end examined to make sure my head isn't up there. But until that happens, take this review with a grain of salt.

I think it's one of Nolan's best and I too have it at 6/10 on IMDB. Not that I don't have my head up my ass.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

Yeah, there are plenty of redeeming qualities, chief among them Neeson's and Murphy's turns as villains. But man is all of the action absolutely horribly shot/edited, as noted.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Honestly, for a guy who's had the backing, money and liberty he's had, I find Nolan's body of work pretty underwhelming. He's not bad or anything but I find he's made less than what he's gotten.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

It's definitely one thing that made you say that . I prefer Scarlet Street over Woman in the Window of the 2 Lang/Robinson/Bennett/Duryea projects, both are good but Scarlet Street I find more effective and memorable.

I think Scarlet Street was probably the better film too though I wasn't a big fan of the cruel over-cuckolding of Edward Robinson by the other two.

My main problem here was not necessary the dumb ending. It's that I'm not a fan of Lang's over-suspenseful cinema because it's exhausting to watch for me, same with this film. I feel like a thriller such as The Day of The Jackal or Wages of Fear or even Lang's M have really good bursts of suspense that might be sustained for a while but in this movie after a certain point, it's non-stop 'character is in danger' and I find it more tedious than fun to watch.

On Golden Pond-1981

My favourite thing about this movie was Katharine Hepburn's old woman voice. When she sings Happy Birthday with her accent....that's cinema.

 

[shadow1]

Cell (2016) - 5/10

During an apocalypse caused by cell phone signals, a group of survivors go on a cross country trip hoping to reunite with family.

John Cusack stars as Clay, a graphic novelist traveling through Boston International Airport. Planning to reunite with his estranged wife and son, Clay's plans are grounded when everyone in the airport using a cell phone starts going crazy, turning into murderous zombies. Escaping the airport, Clay teams up with subway conductor Tom (Samuel L. Jackson) and neighbor Alice (Isabelle Fuhrman) to shelter in his apartment. With nearly the entire world inflicted, the trio set off on foot for Maine in the hopes of finding Clay's family alive...

Cell was directed by Tod Williams, and written by Adam Alleca and Stephen King. Based on the 2006 Stephen King novel of the same name, Cell was in production as early as 2009. The film went through development hell, changing directors and distribution companies multiple times, and eventually being released to video on demand. How does this direct to streaming Stephen King movie fare?

So bad, it's good! Cell is a fairly generic apocalypse movie with no budget, as we see our protagonists spend most of their time in walking through open fields or investigating random houses for supplies. John Cusack and Isabelle Fuhrman's characters are bland, while Samuel L. Jackson basically plays himself and has a funny line or two that I'm confident were ad-libbed. The film did keep my attention though, and to give it credit there was one moment that was tense/scary.

The premise of cell phone signals turning people into maniacs/zombies is cheesy though, and Stephen King's novel is often cited as one of his weakest efforts (King also wrote the screenplay here). Things really dive into "so bad its good" territory during the special effect sequences, which are gloriously awful, but made me enjoy the film more. The shaky cam action sequences are also bad, but not so much in a funny way.

There were also minor direction problems, highlighted in a scene early on in which the three leads are sheltering under overturned canoes from nearby infected. The film made it appear as though Cusack and Fuhrman were under one canoe and Jackson under another... which made me nervous because I figured this was a film where Jackson was on set for 3 days to collect a paycheck. When Cusack and Jackson started communicating I was shocked and relieved I didn't have to sit through the final hour without Sam Jackson (and rest assured, he's in the entire film).

Overall, Cell is a generic direct to video film with so bad its good elements. It's an easy watch that is competent for the most part, but will have you splitting your sides when its mid-2000's Sci-Fi channel-level special effects make an appearance. I recommend this movie only if you're in the mood for something light that will allow you to turn your brain off for 90 minutes.

 

[Fiji Water]

Thief, Mann

Pretty hard to believe that this is Mann's feature film debut. The plot is pretty cliche at this point - criminal wants to score one last hit and ride off into the sunset for a better, more fulfilling life - but the execution is pretty damn impressive. All of Mann's visual hallmarks are already here, and his dark, rain-soaked, neon-lit Chicago provides the perfect backdrop for all the criminals and lowlifes who inhabit this world. Caan is very good in his role and manages to make the viewer sympathize with him, despite all of his self-destructive and sometimes abhorrent behavior. A great movie about regret, the inability to escape one's past, and the unavoidable consequences of dealing with bad people. I especially loved the ending - Indeed, the most dangerous man is one with nothing to lose.

Bonus points for Tangerine Dream providing those nostalgic 80s vibes.

 

[Fiji Water]

Honestly, for a guy who's had the backing, money and liberty he's had, I find Nolan's body of work pretty underwhelming. He's not bad or anything but I find he's made less than what he's gotten.

He has managed his career brilliantly. Directing the Batman trilogy provided him with a lot of exposure and popularity. Even though I think they are pretty meh films, the gritty, more "realistic" approach of these films relative to the average superhero movies gave him lots of artistic credibility with the average movie-goer, which in turn gave him lots of clout and an endless stream of money to fund his projects.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

He has managed his career brilliantly. Directing the Batman trilogy provided him with a lot of exposure and popularity. Even though I think they are pretty meh films, the gritty, more "realistic" approach of these films relative to the average superhero movies gave him lots of artistic credibility with the average movie-goer, which in turn gave him lots of clout and an endless stream of money to fund his projects.

I agree.

I really don't think his Batman trilogy has aged well at all. The Dark Knight (2008) especially is a really mediocre film that gets a massive boost by a perfect Heath Ledger performance.

 

[Babe Ruth]

Twice Dead (1988)

A suburban family relocates to the barrio after inheriting a vestigial, vintage Hollywood-style mansion.
But when they show up to claim their dilapidated property, it's already inhabited by a gang of sadistic Gothic squatters.
A war between the Goths and the suburban family ensues. Turns out, the house is haunted and the ghosts ally themselves with the family.
Basically a funny, but convoluted horror story.
Good theme song in the closing credits too. I think we streamed it on Shout Factory..

 

[Satans Hockey]

Cell (2016) - 5/10

During an apocalypse caused by cell phone signals, a group of survivors go on a cross country trip hoping to reunite with family.

John Cusack stars as Clay, a graphic novelist traveling through Boston International Airport. Planning to reunite with his estranged wife and son, Clay's plans are grounded when everyone in the airport using a cell phone starts going crazy, turning into murderous zombies. Escaping the airport, Clay teams up with subway conductor Tom (Samuel L. Jackson) and neighbor Alice (Isabelle Fuhrman) to shelter in his apartment. With nearly the entire world inflicted, the trio set off on foot for Maine in the hopes of finding Clay's family alive...

Cell was directed by Tod Williams, and written by Adam Alleca and Stephen King. Based on the 2006 Stephen King novel of the same name, Cell was in production as early as 2009. The film went through development hell, changing directors and distribution companies multiple times, and eventually being released to video on demand. How does this direct to streaming Stephen King movie fare?

So bad, it's good! Cell is a fairly generic apocalypse movie with no budget, as we see our protagonists spend most of their time in walking through open fields or investigating random houses for supplies. John Cusack and Isabelle Fuhrman's characters are bland, while Samuel L. Jackson basically plays himself and has a funny line or two that I'm confident were ad-libbed. The film did keep my attention though, and to give it credit there was one moment that was tense/scary.

The premise of cell phone signals turning people into maniacs/zombies is cheesy though, and Stephen King's novel is often cited as one of his weakest efforts (King also wrote the screenplay here). Things really dive into "so bad its good" territory during the special effect sequences, which are gloriously awful, but made me enjoy the film more. The shaky cam action sequences are also bad, but not so much in a funny way.

There were also minor direction problems, highlighted in a scene early on in which the three leads are sheltering under overturned canoes from nearby infected. The film made it appear as though Cusack and Fuhrman were under one canoe and Jackson under another... which made me nervous because I figured this was a film where Jackson was on set for 3 days to collect a paycheck. When Cusack and Jackson started communicating I was shocked and relieved I didn't have to sit through the final hour without Sam Jackson (and rest assured, he's in the entire film).

Overall, Cell is a generic direct to video film with so bad its good elements. It's an easy watch that is competent for the most part, but will have you splitting your sides when its mid-2000's Sci-Fi channel-level special effects make an appearance. I recommend this movie only if you're in the mood for something light that will allow you to turn your brain off for 90 minutes.

I've read the book when it came out and thought it was ok but had absolutely no idea it was made into a movie, I gotta check it out. Always fun to see how much actually comes back to ya memory wise lol

 

[Chili]

My favourite thing about this movie was Katharine Hepburn's old woman voice. When she sings Happy Birthday with her accent....that's cinema.

Just before they started shooting the film, she broke something in her shoulder and was advised not to do the film. I'm wondering if she is in pain in that scene. My favorite scene is where she dives off the front of the boat at night in cold water and swims to Henry.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Hidden Blade (2023) Directed by Er Cheng 6C

After I wrote this review, I looked up how the film did on Rotten Tomatoes. Hilariously, the blurb that summarized the movie had nothing to do with the plot whatsoever. It must have been written by the Chinese government and everybody just cut and pasted it without watching the movie. Director Er Cheng is a wannabe Christopher Nolan and his movie is about spies maneuvering for position in China in the late '30s and early to mid '40s as Japanese influence begins to wane. Hidden Blade (unfortunate title, sounds like a samurai movie) is largely impenetrable in its first hour though eventually I was finally able to sort things out. It is an espionage story about a fairly obscure subject told from a Communist perspective which is in itself something that you don't see every day at the movies. Despite Cheng's confusing, often context-free time jumps, Hidden Blade is well worth seeing for its abundance of well directed, brilliantly acted and very stylish scenes--Cheng just puts them together in a needlessly convoluted fashion. If he ever loses the Christopher Nolan fixation, he well might become a major director. A great cast including Tony Leung and pop star Yibo Wang (who is an excellent actor--maybe the next Tony Leung) create fascinatingly complex characters who sometimes seem to be on all sides at once. Scene after scene is riveting even though it does take considerable patience to put them together in a manner better than the director did. If ever a movie's sum of its parts was greater than its whole it is this one.

subtitles

Is Tony Leung still that handsome after all these years? No way?