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

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,145
Toronto
2MmVAjP-asset-mezzanine-16x9-Wt6X5rH.jpg


Nam June Paik: Moon Is the Oldest TV (2023) Directed by Amanda Kim 7B (documentary)

Nam June Paik is an influential artist of the 20th century but, outside of art circles in New York, Paris and Seoul, few people have ever heard of him. That's largely because he was an avant garde artist whose experiments were denounced or misunderstood until late in his career when he came up with a series of notable pieces and installations that represented a grand culmination of his life's work. He specialized in visual media, TV and computers primarily, which was one reason why his work wasn't taken seriously. No one else was even thinking about doing that. A protege of such ultra experimental artists as John Cage and Karlheinz Stockhausen and a fan of the atonal music of German composer Arnold Schoenberg, Paik's radical approach to visual art took time to find supporters. Yet, prophetically, it ended up predicting a future where technology would radically transform visual representation. He saw the kind of future that had YouTube in it, and, now he looks like a prophet for doing so.

Avant garde art is always a challenge to the viewer/listener/reader. Much of it seems intolerable at the time, and self-indulgent in the extreme. On the other hand, avant garde pieces like Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and Jackson Pollock's paintings can revolutionize an art form while eventually becoming accepted. The strength of this documentary, though, has little to do with a debate about the value of this kind of art. Rather the achievement of Nam June Paik: Moon Is the Oldest TV rests with its portrayal of the human being making this art. Paik had creative visions that didn't really fit any artistic category. He went to incredible lengths to stay true to the art he wanted to make that didn't have a name yet. It wasn't until he had the idea to place a statue of Buddha in from of a television set, a work that finally captured a large audience's imagination, that he started making any money at all. He poured what he made into his later installations which were bold, visionary extensions of his original, more modest works. Thankfully his work was acknowledged in major galleries around the world in his lifetime. But I think what I will remember most from this documentary is Paik's dogged determination that allowed him to create the art he wanted. That all this came from a very gentle, very likeable man underscores the way in which artistic expression can become a driving part of the life force for seemingly the most unlikely people.
 
Last edited:

Howe Elbows 9

Registered User
Sep 16, 2007
3,833
379
Sweden
First Cow (2019, by Kelly Reichardt) - 6.5/10

Set in the 1800s in the United States, two marginalized members of society unlawfully sneak onto the property of the wealthiest trader to milk the titular first (and only) cow in that area. If you're interested in watching Lily Gladstone (who has a leading role in Scorsese's upcoming Killers of the Flower Moon), she has a minor role here.

EO (2022, by Jerzy Skolimowski) - 7.5/10

Directly inspired by Au Hasard Balthazar (1966), this film also focus on the life of a donkey (the titular EO) and the people around him. The symbolism felt a little hamfisted at times, but the cinematography was gorgeous.

Beau Is Afraid (2023, by Ari Aster) - 6/10

As someone who thought Hereditary was fantastic and Midsommar fascinating, I was disappointed with this one. For me, the playfulness of the movie doesn't make up for how tiresome the extended runtime becomes.
 

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
EO (2022, by Jerzy Skolimowski) - 7.5/10

Directly inspired by Au Hasard Balthazar (1966), this film also focus on the life of a donkey (the titular EO) and the people around him. The symbolism felt a little hamfisted at times, but the cinematography was gorgeous.

Is Au Hasard better? I've never seen it but I'd assume so as classical European films were a lot more grounded and not as manipulative as what they've now become.
 

shadow1

Registered User
Nov 29, 2008
16,732
5,539
MV5BMTcwNDEyNDMwOV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTMyMjU5Mw@@._V1_.jpg


My Soul to Take (2010) - 3/10

Seven teenagers - all born the same night a local serial killer died - begin getting picked off on their 16th birthday.

Max Thierot stars as Bug, one of the "Rivertown Seven" who were born the night the Rivertown Ripper (Raul Esparza) was slain. Believing they each possess one of the Ripper's multiple personalities, the group begin experiencing visions on their 16th birthday. As the body count starts rising, Bug and his fellow Rivertown Seven best friend Alex (John Magaro) begin investigating, believing the Ripper has returned...

My Soul to Take was written and directed by Wes Craven. Coming off a five year hiatus, My Soul to Take marked the first film both written and directed by Craven since 1994's New Nightmare. Shot in 2D but converted in post-production to 3D, how does one of the horror legend's final films fare?

If a Nightmare on Elm Street made audiences afraid to go to sleep, My Soul to Take works as a sedative. As you could probably gather by my rating, I did not like this one. My Soul to Take has lots of problems, most of which stem from the writing. The plot is way too slow, with so little horror in the first half of the movie that you'll be lulled into thinking you're watching a teen coming of age story. There are subplots which go no where (something about extorting classmates?) and shallow symbolism about the California condor bird, which the audience is beaten over the head with.

Things take more of a horror approach in the latter half of the film, but it's not the payoff you're hoping for. Most of the "Rivertown Seven" don't get much screen time and can be defined by a single character trait, so you're not too invested in their safety. Even if you were, this film has no tension and the kills are incredibly tame, often using CGI blood.

My Soul to Take's worst sin is in the "show, don't tell" category, though. After the slow first half, the film crams a lot of exposition down the audience's throat in the latter half of the film. Even if you try to follow this onslaught of information, the supposed shocking revelations fall flat. The film's "twist" is blatantly obvious, something I figured out despite not realizing the film was supposed to be a whodunit until end dying minutes.

Overall, My Soul to Take is bad. Visually, the film looks very similar to Scream 4 (minus the vaseline look on the lens), so you may be duped into thinking you're watching a better movie than you are. But the plot falls apart under any amount of scrutiny, and the movie is flat our boring at times. My Soul to Take underperformed at theaters, earning $21M against a $25M budget (and considering 99% of this movie takes place either in a generic house, a school, or in the woods, I am going to assume most of that money went to Wes or the 3D effects added in post production...)
 

Howe Elbows 9

Registered User
Sep 16, 2007
3,833
379
Sweden
Is Au Hasard better? I've never seen it but I'd assume so as classical European films were a lot more grounded and not as manipulative as what they've now become.

Yes, I'd go so far as to call it one of my favorite films from the 60s. It was the first Robert Bresson movie that I saw, now I have also seen A Man Escaped (1956) and Pickpocket (1959). Perhaps because it was my introduction to Bresson, Au Hasard is my favorite of the three. Bresson shied away from using professional actors and his movies had wonderful cinematography, to try to give a brief summary of him as a filmmaker.
 

Nakatomi

Registered User
Dec 26, 2022
156
200
Paris, Texas (1984) - 9/10

What a film. Beautiful landscapes, great soundtrack, and some incredibly powerful moments. I can't believe I waited so long to watch this one. I think because Until the End of the World just didn't click for me, I was hesitant to check out another by the same director. However, this one is highly recommended.
 

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
Paris, Texas (1984) - 9/10

What a film. Beautiful landscapes, great soundtrack, and some incredibly powerful moments. I can't believe I waited so long to watch this one. I think because Until the End of the World just didn't click for me, I was hesitant to check out another by the same director. However, this one is highly recommended.

Need to buy an OLED TV or a 4k monitor and re-watch this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nakatomi

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
I upgraded from an old 720P TV to a new 4K OLED over the summer and really rediscovered my love of cinema. It is like seeing any given movie again for the first time.

OLED's are unfortunately pretty much all above $1k in Canada at the moment whether it be a TV or a monitor.

I'm thinking of upgrading my 2k IPS 24" monitor to this 4k IPS 27" monitor once this goes on sale next year around $700 with my company covering up to $200 of it. It has a 3000:1 contrast ratio while most IPS monitors have 1000:1. Not at the same level as OLED but still a big imprveoment plus good colour accuracy but I'm open to recommendations on a different one as long as it's not bigger than 27-28".

 
  • Like
Reactions: Nakatomi

Ceremony

How I choose to feel is how I am
Jun 8, 2012
114,299
17,384
Philadelphia (1993) Tom Hanks gets bad AIDS and gets fired and hires Denzel Washington for the wrongful dismissal lawsuit. A film about a difficult subject which doesn't perfectly straddle the line between corny and emotional is still saved in its weaker moments by its leads. Note: I watched this on TV at half six in the evening so some of the saucier language was missing. Note 2: It's actually interesting to watch this and see that Tom Hanks can act. Then the year after this he did Forrest Gump. Woof.

The Fugitive (1993) Harrison Ford is framed for the murder of his wife and Tommy Lee Jones is the US Marshal trying to capture him when he evades custody. Despite some... convenient plot contrivances which allow Han Solo to clear his name, this is a fantastic action movie with great performances throughout and a very grounded and realistic depiction of Chicago, where it was filmed and set. Note: A young, moany Julianne Moore is a nice addition.

Psycho (1960) Even though I'd seen it before this is the sort of film it's impossible to see blind. I've seen The Simpsons, so I've seen large parts of this, shot for shot. And I know what happens anyway. And reading about it, the notion of it being scandalous because it features an unmarried woman in her underwear is quite funny. And some action/killing scenes are so obviously fake and badly acted they practically break the fourth wall. Despite all of this there's an undeniable tension watching this as you wonder when and how he's going to be rumbled.
 

Chili

Time passes when you're not looking
Jun 10, 2004
8,788
4,924
webbersphantom1.jpg

Phantom of the Opera-1925 (intertitles), 1943, 2004

The story that has been told many times of a masked man haunting the Paris opera house, while living somewhere far below. And his infatuation with a young protegé named Christine.

1925- The silent classic with Lon Chaney as the Phantom. Mary Philbin as Christine is convincing as the fearful target of the Phantom's affections. The unveiling of the face behind the mask is a stunning moment in film. Was considered being filmed in France but a replica of the Paris Opera House was built in Hollywood and used for many other films including the 1943 version.

1943-A much different film than the earlier one, it's mostly a musical. The Phantom (Claude Rains) was a violinist in the Opera House orchestra for 20 years until arthritis forced his dismissal. And then a tragic incident forces him into hiding. Young Susanna Foster had quite the voice.

2004-An operetta of the story with Gerard Butler as the Phantom with the exquisite voice of Emmy Rossum playing Christine. Costumes are off the charts good. There are nicely timed flash forwards (in black and white). Well done score.

Would have also re-watched the 1962 film with Herbert Lom as the Phantom, couldn't find it easily this week. Have seen it a couple times before and remember that I liked that version as well

the-phantom-of-the-opera-6400_4.jpg

All three films have their strengths and are significantly different in telling the same story. There's just one Phantom though for me.

programme-cover-1464713559.jpg

The Last Brickmaker in America-2001

An elderly brickmaker has a contract to make 22,000 bricks to build a school's new library with a daunting deadline. It's the same school where his late wife was librarian for many years. Since she passed, he now finds that he lacks motivation. At the same time a 13 year old boy has been getting in trouble since his parents split up. He meets the brickmaker and a friendship develops. Predictable family drama but raised up a notch or more by Sidney Poitier in the lead role. Was interested in seeing this film after reading his autobiography (The Measure of a Man). He didn't make a lot from Blackboard Jungle ($750 a week) and needed to support his wife and three children. His father-in-law was a master brick layer, so he approached him about learning the trade. It didn't go well at the time, maybe he finally put his time spent into use with this role. Good family drama, strong performance from the legendary Sidney Poitier in his last film.

king-of-hearts-3.jpg

The King Of Hearts (Le Roi du Coeur)-1966 (In French, English and some German, with subtitles)

Near the end of WWI, the Germans are vacating a town in Northern France. Before leaving they plant explosives that will level the town. A local spy (the barber) gets word to an approaching Scottish regiment, whose Colonel decides the town and it's bridge must be saved. The Colonel summons Private Plumpnick (Alan Bates) aka Pumpernickel, the troupe's pigeon specialist who is baffled why he is being sent on this mission instead of a demolitions expert. He arrives in the town and narrowly escapes the departing forces by hiding in an asylum as the Roi du Coeur. And when the asylum gate is left open, the occupants descend on the vacated town and proceed to make merry with their new found freedom.

For folks who enjoy satire, this is a beaut. Could offend others as it treads on sensitive medical ground. The cast of characters from the asylum are priceless as they take care of the King, while the backdrop of war is all around them. Geneviève Bujold as Coquelicot (Poppy) is charming as the King's Queen. Beautiful centuries old town where the film was shot. Great costumes, lots of gags, silly fun stuff until reality returns. Excellent anti-war film.
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
webbersphantom1.jpg

Phantom of the Opera-1925 (intertitles), 1943, 2004

The story that has been told many times of a masked man haunting the Paris opera house, while living somewhere far below. And his infatuation with a young protegé named Christine.

1925- The silent classic with Lon Chaney as the Phantom. Mary Philbin as Christine is convincing as the fearful target of the Phantom's affections. The unveiling of the face behind the mask is a stunning moment in film. Was considered being filmed in France but a replica of the Paris Opera House was built in Hollywood and used for many other films including the 1943 version.

1943-A much different film than the earlier one, it's mostly a musical. The Phantom (Claude Rains) was a violinist in the Opera House orchestra for 20 years until arthritis forced his dismissal. And then a tragic incident forces him into hiding. Young Susanna Foster had quite the voice.

2004-An operetta of the story with Gerard Butler as the Phantom with the exquisite voice of Emmy Rossum playing Christine. Costumes are off the charts good. There are nicely timed flash forwards (in black and white). Well done score.

Would have also re-watched the 1962 film with Herbert Lom as the Phantom, couldn't find it easily this week. Have seen it a couple times before and remember that I liked that version as well

the-phantom-of-the-opera-6400_4.jpg

All three films have their strengths and are significantly different in telling the same story. There's just one Phantom though for me.
You absolutely need to watch the 1989 version with Robert Englund, the Argento version and Phantom of the Paradise!!

Also, if you want the 1962 version, I can most probably grab that for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chili

Chili

Time passes when you're not looking
Jun 10, 2004
8,788
4,924
You absolutely need to watch the 1989 version with Robert Englund, the Argento version and Phantom of the Paradise!!

Also, if you want the 1962 version, I can most probably grab that for you.
From notes from the 1990's I have seen Phantom of the Paradise, have no recollection of it though. Will check it out again at some point as well as the other two.

Curious if you have seen King of Hearts. Believe it makes a strong statement.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
From notes from the 1990's I have seen Phantom of the Paradise, have no recollection of it though. Will check it out again at some point as well as the other two.

Curious if you have seen King of Hearts. Believe it makes a strong statement.
The De Broca film? I am 100% certain I haven't seen it.

Do you want me to get the 1962 Phantom?
 

ItsFineImFine

Registered User
Aug 11, 2019
3,745
2,389
Rocky (1976) - 7.5/10

Stallone does a great job of monologuing throughout the film but in a generally likable way and it gives it a good rhythm only broken up basically because of that training montage and the actual boxing match at the end. It's not the best boxing film when it comes to boxing but one of the better ones when it comes to everything else without getting too emotionally manipulative.

Psycho (1960) - 8.5/10

Thought this was a horror film and watched ~20 Hitchcock films before instead of this but turns out it's just a psychological thriller and one which balances suspense well without making it overbearing like Rope. Camerawork is excellent, everything is really neatly done which is the one word I'd use to describe the film outside of the psychologybabble towards the end. Nothing chaotic really and furthers my theory that the late-50s/early-60s were a perfect time for making films like this which still had some noir elements but with a more polished style of storytelling and acting. The actual mystery loses its legs a bit in the final third, I still think Dial M For Murder is Hitchcock's best work in terms of the mystery but the first half and the final scene is the real strength here.

The Bourne Identity (2002) - 7/10

Probably more refreshing for its time as an antidote to the over-the-top Bond films but it's more of a standard guy-on-the-run film outside of that. It's a really ugly grey dull looking film despite the European setting but with a nice mood more from maybe the soundtrack than anything. Damon is good and Clive Owen was really good as a potential heel whose storyline ends too abruptly.

Grave of the Fireflies (1988) - 8/10

Not much to say here other than it's a really well-animated but sad film about children suffering in war and showing the suffering quietly behind the masque of childred playing and going about as they know best. Because of that, it's truthfully a lot more impactful than something like Come And See which is more about just the suffering.

Rain Man (1988) - 7.5/10

I don't enjoy watching people getting abused but once the film goes beyond that, it's ultimately one of the better Hollywood films when it comes to showing the bond between siblings. Tom Cruise might just be good at playing the fast-talking asshole because he probably was one but the progression in his flawed character is really good to watch even if it's Hollywood-ized for the sake of a 2 hour film.

E.T. (1982) - 7/10

Found it honestly a bit dull from the master of generic cinema but I'd still say it's a solid film because I remember seeing it as a 5 year old in the 90s and actually enjoying it (I think?). The Disney-like nature of some of his films honestly makes the target audience children more than anything but the final third once the Hazmat suits come in and the stakes are raised is solid cinema along with a decent opening. It's the dull middle bits where Spielberg wants to show the 'magic of cinema' rather than doing anything fun with the characters.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) - 6.5/10

Too campy for me and not very memorable outside of a chase scene and some banter between Ford/Connery. Probably fun to watch on a big screen but the actual mystery feels very chase-quest-ish and I couldn't get into it. It was supposed to be interesting because we're shown how excited the characters get about it rather than it being interesting as bad guys are randomly thrown on the screen till we learn it's generic nazi's behind it all.

The Wrestler (2008) - 7.5/10

I can really appreciate this even if I'm not into the wrestling subject-matter or the middle aged but young at heart dude personality of Mickey Rourke's character who's fascinating to watch. As far as following a character biographically and showing all his emotions and all his ups & downs, this does it better than most films. Did have to forward past a couple of the wrestling scenes as I'm a bit squemish but credit to the stunt and make-up teams on them. It's a shame that the director's filmography became less impactful emotionally after this or after Black Swan as he decided to go more over-the-top with it.

The Piano Teacher (2001) - 5/10

Unfortunately I'm not perverted or sick enough to enjoy this Haneke film. The redeeming quality is that it's really quite well acted but that alone doesn't make for a good film. I enjoyed The Seventh Continent, there was a psychological mystery element there which his missing here and with an ending which really seems to force itself to a conclusion which is more for shock value than any original progression of the plot.

Spellbound (1945) - 7.5/10

Gregory Peck looks and acts basically the same as Gary Cooper doesn't he? Ingmar Bergman is decent in a plot which is missing the suspense which audiences might have expected from a Hitchcock film which might be a reason for some of the unfair criticism. On its own, it's a decent drama outdated psychology aside. There's a really great dream sequence here more Twilight Zone than the usual corny stuff.

Intouchables (2011) - 7/10

The rather sad Hollywood-ization of French cinema. Criticized for being a bit racist which it might be but....I still smiled for a good portion of the film so that's worth something.

The Sting (1973) - 6/10

Redford is charismatic and Newman is a great actor but the actual sting is just....underwhelming? Maybe it's because we're used to the pacing and cleverness from stuff like Soderbergh's films but the plot is messy too. It is a nice looking film but I think it's a bit empty character-wise. I think movies like this are more fun to watch when there is an actual heist and it shows the heist being intricately planned along with a good climax rather than a bunch of smaller grifts and then the ending where the bigger grift is almost abrupt and you don't feel the same payoff.

Blazing Saddles (1974) - 6/10

Not my style of humour but probably hilarious in the 70s/80s. Gene Wilder takes a backseat which is a shame because he'd have been the funniest part of the film if he'd acted over the top and had more lines.

Au hasard Balthazar (1966) - 7.5/10

Clinging on to the film-making style before the 60s French new-wave while taking some of the newer elements. The characters often talk past each other and the actors aren't exactly professionals but despite the fragmented nature of the film, it's a balanced film showing a full spectrum of good, bad, and sad....mostly with a resigned emphasis on the sad.

Kiki's Delivery Service (1989) - 8.5/10

This is a film that knows how to use the shade of blue to beautiful effect, 2D animation really peaked in the late 80s to mid 90s imo. Film itself is a cute low-stakes story where everyone is nice which makes for a nice comfort movie. Both children and adults need more stuff like this made today.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
8,057
9,100
The Wrestler (2008) - 7.5/10

I can really appreciate this even if I'm not into the wrestling subject-matter or the middle aged but young at heart dude personality of Mickey Rourke's character who's fascinating to watch. As far as following a character biographically and showing all his emotions and all his ups & downs, this does it better than most films. Did have to forward past a couple of the wrestling scenes as I'm a bit squemish but credit to the stunt and make-up teams on them. It's a shame that the director's filmography became less impactful emotionally after this or after Black Swan as he decided to go more over-the-top with it.

I actually attended a bunch of filming from this movie as an extra in the crowd, the main event was filmed at the Baker theater in Dover NJ over 2 nights along with a Ring of Honor wrestling show as a way to get free extras who were already into wrestling and would react to everything as they should. Marisa Tomei shot some scenes too.

It was the first time I truly understood movie magic because the actual match itself looked terrible in person and I had no idea how it would translate to a movie but it looks amazing in the movie lol

Nicolas Cage was originally going to be the main guy in this too which I don't think wound have worked at all lol
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Don't forget Phantom of the Mall: Eric's Revenge!

phantom-of-the-mall-1.jpg


"At Midwood Mall, prices aren't the only things being slashed!"
Watched this last year finally. The trailer for it had been a staple of the annual horror marathons I used to attend.

It's exactly what you expect and want.

Also wholly endorse Phantom of the Paradise, which is high on my rewatch plans this month.
 

Sentinel

Registered User
May 26, 2009
13,259
5,057
New Jersey
www.vvinenglish.com
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) - 6.5/10

Too campy for me and not very memorable outside of a chase scene and some banter between Ford/Connery. Probably fun to watch on a big screen but the actual mystery feels very chase-quest-ish and I couldn't get into it. It was supposed to be interesting because we're shown how excited the characters get about it rather than it being interesting as bad guys are randomly thrown on the screen till we learn it's generic nazi's behind it all.
10/10. One of the best movies ever made.

=====

Fair Play (2023). One of the most realistic films I’ve seen lately. I admit that, never having worked in a high profile, cutthroat Manhattan financial firm, I rely entirely on my wife's first-hand knowledge of such firms, and she called it “very realistic” in terms of office dynamics and human interactions but not in the field of actual hedge fund operations. I also found it utterly unbelievable how the arguing people in this film never actually interrupt each other and speak strictly in turn. But these are minor quibbles. Cinematically, it’s very real. Also, the fact there are no household names in this film helps its authenticity (The Big Short was, in fact, slightly hurt by Christian Bale’s and Brad Pitt’s inescapable recognizability): you might as well be watching the real-life story unravel from behind the transparent fourth wall.

Now for the movie itself. Two corporate analysts Emily and Luke (played by Phoebe Dynevor – a Scarlet Johanssen lookalike – and Alden Ehrenreich) start an affair but have to hide it because of the firm's policy. After a public bathroom romp, Luke proposes to Emily (skipping ahead – the movie also ends in a public bathroom; an obvious metaphor). They both believe he is about to be promoted to a portfolio manager but suddenly she is the one who gets the job. Initially, he is supportive of her but then things turn sour. Luke does not seem to be able to handle a more successful SO. First Emily tries to help him by attempting (unsuccessfully) to advance his own career but, having met with his increasing resentment, she attempts to embrace her newly found power (unsuccessfully). Luke comes undone. A series of public humiliations follows, and Emily eventually catches up with Luke on the unlikeability scale. A powerful but ugly finale ensues.

The best thing about this film is that it leaves you with a lot to talk about, unlike the vast majority of contemporary cinematic drivel. In fact, my wife and I spent the next day discussing it. We even want to see it again, to make sure we did not miss out on any key details. It’s very well made and talks about very important (bordering on, but not quite crossing into pandering) issues. A woman’s place in a high-pressure financial institution is explored with style, insight, and the right degree of emotionality. A couple of times the office banter is over the top. But the overall tone is correct. Luke exclaims “I’ve been nothing but supportive!” and probably believes it. In Emily’s nadir scene, she lies about her affair to the firm’s president (played by an appropriately terrifying Eddie Marsan), and he reacts in a way that leaves you guessing whether he believes her or knows that she is lying but doesn’t care. It’s been described as “erotic thriller,” but, to me, it’s not particularly erotic (I don’t find bathrooms particularly arousing) and is “thrilling” only in a sense that you don’t know just how badly is it going to end. Still, a great gripping film, with shortcomings that only emphasize its dramatic intensity and realism. A very impressive debut from the director *and* the screenwriter Chloe Domont. 8/10
 
Last edited:

shadow1

Registered User
Nov 29, 2008
16,732
5,539
Spiral_From_the_Book_of_Saw.jpg


Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021) - 7/10

A Jigsaw copycat targets members of a police department.

Chris Rock stars as Zeke Banks, a detective who is reviled within his department. The root of Zeke's dislike is him turning over a former partner to Internal Affairs, along with the perceived nepotism that comes along with being the son of former chief Marcus Banks (Samuel L. Jackson). After one of the few detectives he could trust is killed in a Jigsaw style trap, Zeke begins receiving personalized clues sent to the police station...

Spiral was directed by Darren Lynn Bousman, who returns after directing Saw II, III, and IV. The film was written by Jigsaw (2017) writers Peter Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg, with input from Chris Rock. Rock - who also served as Executive Producer - is responsible for the concept of the film, pitching the idea during a chance meeting with the vice chairman of Lionsgate. How does this spin-off film in the Saw franchise fare?

Very well, though I may be alone in that opinion. Spiral is a different take on Saw, functioning as a series version of the movie Seven (1995) as opposed to the tried and true "deadly escape room" formula. It's a whodunit, with a heavy emphasis on tension (which is nails) and mystery (which is a mixed bag). I've complained often about the low productions values of the Saw series, but Spiral does not have that problem. It looks great, and has - easily - the best acting in the series, with Chris Rock giving a strong leading performance as the tormented detective Zeke.

Though Spiral doesn't focus on the traps, it still has its fair share of them. The total amount of gore in the film is probably on the lower end of things, but the movie goes about the traps in such a mean spirited way that the gore that was there bothered me more than most other entries (3, 5, 3D, S, 6, 4, 2, JS, 1). I also found the child-like voice of the Jigsaw copycat to be creepy, though I've seen others complain about it.

It's not all great, though. Spiral bungles the mystery in my opinion, as I was easily able to figure out both the who and the why behind the killings very early on. To its credit, the film does set up a lot of different red herrings, but not well enough. Spiral also features a common series flaw, which is showing a Saw trap in action after the body is found. Doing this is simply gratuitous, as we already know the person in question is doomed. As a nitpick, I also thought the ending was a little rushed, and the film would've benefitted from an additional 10 minutes of run time.

Before finishing this review, I have to note how much fans despise this movie. This is the lowest rated Saw entry on both IMDB and Letterboxd, with the latter featuring a user score of 2.1/5. That's the same score as movies like Halloween 5 (1989) and Hellraiser: Hellseeker (2002), two movies which are smoldering crap in my opinion. Spiral is not. It's well acted and shot, has good dread and tension, and a story which doesn't have too many plot holes. Many reviews have targeted the divisive Chris Rock, along with the relative lack of traps and complete lack of Tobin Bell, as some of their major gripes with the film. To me, these comments give the film a Halloween III (1982) vibe; and like that movie, I recommend this one.

Overall, Spiral is my favorite Saw sequel up to this point. However, you'll have to take this review with a major grain of salt due to how much my opinion differs with the consensus. It's possible I'm losing my mind, but I do think this is a film that has been unfairly maligned. Even if you don't enjoy the story, at the very least it's a well made film, which can't be said for every entry in the franchise. Spiral had a series high budget of $20M, but only grossed $40.6M at the box office. It must be noted that this is largely due to the Covid-19 pandemic, as Spiral was one of the first films to return to theaters in May 2021.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,925
10,810
I watched that last night, too, since I figured that you might and it was on my to-do list, anyways.

Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021) - 5/10

After 8 entries, the Saw franchise finally delivers what fans been asking for: more comedy. We're introduced to Chris Rock's detective character as he's essentially doing a stand-up routine in defense of Forrest Gump and making it clear that he's not on Team Jenny. His penchant for wise cracking is eventually put to the test, though, when he starts receiving pieces of his fellow cops in lovely gift boxes. It's like Beverly Hills Cop if Taggart and Rosewood were tortured, mutilated and mailed to Axel Foley. The first hour felt like a police procedural and was a bit unoriginal and boring, except for the traps, since scenes of intense torture tend to liven things up. They're a bit short, though, and happen before we learn much about the victims. The last half hour was a lot more engaging, thanks to some of the more likable characters being endangered, but the reveal was rather disappointing. Like the 94th Academy Awards, this entry introduces a new villain for Chris Rock, who keeps Jigsaw's name out of his mouth entirely. The new villain and how the traps are set up really strain believability, which, when it comes to this franchise, is saying something. Overall, I was a bit underwhelmed by this entry, but having some familiar faces (Chris Rock, Samuel L. Jackson and Marisol Nichols, continuing the franchise's tradition of torturing early crushes of mine) made it more watchable than some other Saw sequels and I did like the sick and clever note that it ended on. The "book of Saw" is more like a graphic novel and this chapter isn't one of the best or one of the worst, IMO. I'll be generous and give it a 5/10 so that shadow1 doesn't feel too bad about losing his mind.
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,981
2,900
I watched that last night, too, since I figured that you might.

Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021) - 5/10

After 8 entries, the Saw franchise finally delivers what fans been asking for: more comedy. We're introduced to Chris Rock's detective character as he's essentially doing a stand-up routine in defense of Forrest Gump and making it clear that he's not on Team Jenny. His penchant for wise cracking is eventually put to the test, though, when he starts receiving pieces of his fellow cops in lovely gift boxes. It's like Beverly Hills Cop if Taggart and Rosewood were tortured and mutilated, then mailed to Axel Foley. The first hour felt like a police procedural and was a bit boring, except for the traps, of which there were too few and set up before we learned much of anything about the victims. The last half hour was a lot more engaging, thanks to some of the more likable characters becoming endangered, though the reveal was pretty disappointing. Like the 94th Academy Awards, this entry introduces a new villain for Chris Rock. In fact, he manages to keep Jigsaw's name out of his mouth entirely. The new villain and how the traps are set up really strain believability, which is saying something when it comes to this franchise. Overall, I was underwhelmed by this entry, but having some familiar faces (Chris Rock, Samuel L. Jackson and Marisol Nichols, who continues the franchise's tradition of featuring actresses that I've had a thing for since the 90s) made it more watchable than some other Saw sequels and I did like the sick and clever note that it ended on. I'll give it a 5/10 so that shadow1 doesn't feel too bad about losing his mind. I wouldn't call it one of the worst entries, but this chapter in the book of Saw is more graphic novel than work of art.
For sure the best review posted on this board. I laughed the whole way through!
 

shadow1

Registered User
Nov 29, 2008
16,732
5,539
I watched that last night, too, since I figured that you might.

Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021) - 5/10

After 8 entries, the Saw franchise finally delivers what fans been asking for: more comedy. We're introduced to Chris Rock's detective character as he's essentially doing a stand-up routine in defense of Forrest Gump and making it clear that he's not on Team Jenny. His penchant for wise cracking is eventually put to the test, though, when he starts receiving pieces of his fellow cops in lovely gift boxes. It's like Beverly Hills Cop if Taggart and Rosewood were tortured and mutilated, then mailed to Axel Foley. The first hour felt like a police procedural and was a bit boring, except for the traps, of which there were too few and set up before we learned much of anything about the victims. The last half hour was a lot more engaging, thanks to some of the more likable characters becoming endangered, though the reveal was pretty disappointing. Like the 94th Academy Awards, this entry introduces a new villain for Chris Rock. In fact, he manages to keep Jigsaw's name out of his mouth entirely. The new villain and how the traps are set up really strain believability, which is saying something when it comes to this franchise. Overall, I was underwhelmed by this entry, but having some familiar faces (Chris Rock, Samuel L. Jackson and Marisol Nichols, who continues the franchise's tradition of featuring actresses that I've had a thing for since the 90s) made it more watchable than some other Saw sequels and I did like the sick and clever note that it ended on. I'll give it a 5/10 so that shadow1 doesn't feel too bad about losing his mind. I wouldn't call it one of the worst entries, but this chapter in the book of Saw is more graphic novel than work of art.

Screenshot 2023-10-09 at 7.24.17 PM.png
 

shadow1

Registered User
Nov 29, 2008
16,732
5,539
dracula%2Bin%2Blove_the%2Bgang.jpg


Dracula in Love (2018) - 1/10

Four people partying in a warehouse get more than they bargained for when it turns out Dracula is also inside.

This ensemble cast features Amy Cruichshank, Josh Martin, Cailey Muise, and Alan K. Sapp as a group of young adults planning a night of drinking, partying, and sex after they're given access to a relative's warehouse. Unfortunately for them, the lord of darkness himself, Dracula (Youssef Abed-Alnour), is hidden in a shipping container and has his eye on one of the partygoers...

Dracula in Love was written and directed by Izidore K. Musallam. An independent director who has primarily focused on drama and romance films, Dracula in Love is Musallam's first foray into the horror genre. How does it fare?

Okay, you and I both know it's horrible just by reading the title. The better question is why did I watch this? The answer is because I'm trying to fill out my Hooptober X watchlist, and this was the lowest rated Dracula movie that I hadn't seen that I could find on streaming. I was at least hoping this movie would be fun, but sadly it was not.

The experience of watching Dracula in Love is equivalent to partying with four douchebags and you're the only sober one. Most of the actors in this movie don't know how to emote, let alone act. The cast spends the majority of the run time dancing, drinking, having sex, and smoking cigarettes (which they make a big deal of, as if cigarettes are a hard drug). Dracula eventually appears around the 45 minute mark of this 82 minute movie, and he looks like Uncle Fester did the fusion dance with The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Even after making his entrance, Dracula probably only has five minutes of screen time, and the rest of the movie is just further excuse to show more T'n'A (and even that isn't done well).

Overall, Dracula in Love is a horrible independent movie. It's not fun, scary, or sexy, and it's not unironically bad enough to funny. Why did the filmmaker even raise money to make this? This movie's greatest accomplishment may be getting reviewed by some random guy on a hockey forum. If you're looking for a "so bad it's good" Dracula movie this October, look elsewhere.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad