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

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Haven't watched Happy Together but Days of Being Wild is fantastic
Days of Being Wild is the only one of WKW's movies that I really bumped on. (Not counting the widely disliked My Blueberry Nights, of course). But the fact that that didn't work for me for some reason only makes we want to go back to it all the more. Did it just catch me on a bad day? Is it me? Is it it? My notes from my viewing are light on specifics.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
MV5BNzgzNzNjYTYtOTkwYS00OTYxLWEyZTgtOTRiMzg0NTc0YzNhXkEyXkFqcGdeQVRoaXJkUGFydHlJbmdlc3Rpb25Xb3JrZmxvdw@@._V1_.jpg


Challengers (2024) Directed by Luca Guadagnino 4A

As a tennis player (well, former tennis player) you might think i would look forward to movies with tennis backstories, but I don't. There are usually two of me watching the film at the same time. The tennis me is picking out all the flaws, especially in the actual tennis playing. The only movie that I have ever seen that gets the tennis right is King Richard, so it is a rare occurrence indeed. Challengers does a better job than most at this but still falls well short of being convincing. To make matters far worse, the effort at tennis realism is compromised even more egregiously by the excessively loud sound of tennis balls virtually exploding every time that they are struck and by the exaggerated effort the players display when striking the ball, like pit bulls straining on a leash. This gets annoying very fast, and not just on the ear drums. The rest of the movie is about a tennis menage a trois told in a constant mishmash of flashbacks (Guadagnino's exertions only made me recall how infinitely better Alain Resnais was at this sort of thing). But I enjoyed the story part of the way. Our threesome has an early meeting on a beach that crackles with nascent desire and demonstrates how emotionally disconcerting those initial feelings can be. But, then, I really hated the last third of the movie. In fact, I would say that Challengers is the most overdirected movie that I have seen in years.

For starters, the tennis player in me couldn't believe the central premise of the rivalry, that a six-time Grand Slam champion, who probably spent a lot of time at number 1 or 2 in the world, could be totally owned by a player ranked #271 who never had the ambition to get out of Challenger tournaments, the AHL of tennis competitions. But beyond that there are several ultra annoying directorial unforced errors, including the vast overuse of blaring music to hype scenes and turn up the intensity, to the point that sometimes the dialogue was inaudible. Then there was the slow, excruciating build up once the final match was underway. I found that tedious as hell--like stretching a rubber band to the breaking point for no particular reason at all. On top of which we have a very stupid open ending that tells us nothing that we don't already know but leaves several plot developments thoroughly up in the air. As well, somebody should have explained to Guadagnino that whoever touches the net automatically loses the point, or maybe that was just a detail he didn't care about anyway in his rush to an exasperating conclusion. Zendaya and Josh O'Connor are very good playing characters that I liked less and less as the movie progresses, and Mike Faist is good, also, with a character who has his share of flaws as well. But this movie pissed me off from both my perspectives, and, despite the occasionally snappy dialogue, I think basically Guadagnino sank his own ship here.
What I love about this assessment is that I agree with every point of fact here ... but while your reaction was negative, mine was overwhelmingly positive. The music, the sound, the overdirecting, the structure, the unlikability ... you're right. And I loved every minute of it.

"Exertions" is definitely the right word choice.

The sex is sex and the tennis is also sex and the arguments may be sex as well.

Snappy. Horny. Propulsive. Three actors just absolutely strutting. I skipped out of the theater smiling and laughing.
 

CDJ

Registered User
Nov 20, 2006
57,344
47,905
Hell baby
Boy Kills World

just got back from the theater- very watchable film. Loses me a little in the last quarter but if you like a movie like Kill Bill then you will like this. Bill Skarsgaard is the lead with H. Jon Benjamin doing his inner monologue. Pretty funny, tons of fight scenes/action. Over the top gore.

7.0/10
 

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,145
Toronto
The-Fall-Guy.jpeg


The Fall Guy (2024) Directed by David Leitch 5A

Retired stuntman Colt (Ryan Gosling) finds himself embroiled in a nefarious plot involving a missing movie star and a desperate power play that could sink the movie that he is now helping get made, a movie directed by his former lover Jody (Emily Blunt) who is in the director's chair for the first time. The Fall Guy is basically an homage to stuntmen/stuntwomen, and if you don't expect it to be much else, you might have a good time watching it. There is a lot of action, some of which it is pretty amazing if not exactly groundbreaking. And Ryan Gosling is terrific, really fun to watch. His performance is a major-league movie star turn in the best way imaginable.

The good vibes stop with the script, though, which is little more than a patchwork attempt to string all the stunt sequences together in some more or less orderly fashion. It is the kind of lame plot that one might find in a fifth or sixth Pink Panther remake, and one of its main problems is that the only character that gets even slightly developed at all is Colt. The main victim of this inadequacy is Emily Blunt who is stuck with a character who is so underdeveloped that even Blunt's characteristic charm can't save her. It is a fill-in-the-blanks role that gives the actor nothing to work with just a merciless void. The stunts are fun, Gosling is fun, but the rest of the movie is the cinematic equivalent of the Maple Leafs' fourth line, an afterthought not deemed worthy of attention or concern by the people who created it.
 
Last edited:

Chili

Time passes when you're not looking
Jun 10, 2004
8,788
4,924
hiredhand4.png

The Hired Hand-1971

A man (Peter Fonda) who has been drifting around the west returns home to his wife (Verna Bloom) and daughter along with his travelling buddy (Warren Oates). She has had to take care of the farm since he left and is less than enthused to see him. He offers to become her hired hand. Slow paced western, a simple, well told story. Believe it's worth watching for the cinematography and score alone. A number of picture postcards shots. Vilmos Zsigmond was shooting his first major film and went on to become one of the best. The brilliant score was provided by Bruce Langhorne, a one man band, said he played around 40 different instruments. One of Sergio Leone's favorite westerns, probably my second favorite after Once Upon a Time in the West. Beautiful film.

chimesatmidnight2.png

Chimes at Midnight-1965

I've not been much of a fan of Shakespeare but this film is an interesting look at some of the bard's work. A few quotes of wisdom:

'Your means are slender and your waste is great'
'I would my means were greater and my waist slender'

'A friend in the court is better then a penny in the purse'
'(Soldier dying on the battlefield) ...thou hast rob me of my youth'
'(The King) Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown'

Supposed to have taken one character from several plays (Falstaff played by Orson Welles). He pals around with the son (Keith Baxter) of the King (John Gielgud who is excellent), making merry. There is an impressive battle scene. The insults are plentiful, many directed at someone's girth. The audio was poor in the print I watched, seems like a general complaint from when it was released. It's probably a film mostly for Shakespeare fans, must have been well done though because I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.


Living1.png

Living-2022

I'm always interested when a classic is remade, am often left disappointed. Even if it's based on the same story, enjoy them most when it's a much different film and this one is, set in 1950's England vs Ikiru's Japan. The elements of Kurosawa's classic are here: bureaucracy, a man faced with illness finding some joy and a purpose in life. Bill Nighy as Mr Williams is splendid as the man facing a crossroads late in life (in Takashi Shimura's role in Ikiru). Moving scene when he sings an old favorite song. Aimee Lou Wood is very good as Miss Harris, a cheerful young friend Mr Williams is able to confide in. Great score and attention to period detail including the trains. I love both the original and this version, believe the story is timeless.
 
Last edited:

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,088
30,030
So Friday we had family movie night and watched  Paddington.

What a delightful movie. Very cute and a lot of legitimately funny bits. Solid performances - a real charmer and one of the best movies ive seen in a long time. Going to do the sequel next Friday.

8/10

Then last night my wife picked (500) Days of Summer.

If it wasn't for the Hall and Oates number in the middle I'd probably have a hard time finding a scene that didn't make me want to blow my head off. So I don't love the actors, I couldn't stand JGLs whininess the entire time, and Zooey gave me serious flashbacks to an ex of mine. The name of the love interest at the end of the movie created an eye roll so massive that if you could harness the energy you could power Manhattan.

2/10

And tonight I watched Paprika.

So im not a massive anime fan but Blank Check is covering the director so i went for it. And its pretty good. Very odd, and i refuse to believe that Nolan didnt rip 80% of this off for Inception. Plot is little aimless - a bit more of a vibes movie but i liked it. 8/10
 

Rodgerwilco

Entertainment boards w/ some Hockey mixed in.
Feb 6, 2014
8,018
7,499
View attachment 869032
Living-2022

I'm always interested when a classic is remade, am often left disappointed. Even if it's based on the same story, enjoy them most when it's a much different film and this one is, set in 1950's England vs Ikiru's Japan. The elements of Kurosawa's classic are here: bureaucracy, a man faced with illness finding some joy and a purpose in life. Bill Nighy as Mr Williams is splendid as the man facing a crossroads late in life (in Takashi Shimura's role in Ikiru). Moving scene when he sings an old favorite song. Aimee Lou Wood is very good as Miss Harris, a cheerful young friend Mr Williams is able to confide in. Great score and attention to period detail including the trains. I love both the original and this version, believe the story is timeless.
Hadn't heard of this but will definitely will be checking this one out. Ikiru was surprisingly one of my favorite Kurosawa films.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chili

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
And tonight I watched Paprika.

So im not a massive anime fan but Blank Check is covering the director so i went for it. And its pretty good. Very odd, and i refuse to believe that Nolan didnt rip 80% of this off for Inception. Plot is little aimless - a bit more of a vibes movie but i liked it. 8/10
I'm also a loyal Blankie so I watched Millennium Actress this weekend. I think it's actually the first time since I started listening a few years ago that I rushed to watch the movie prior to the episode (not counting new releases). I've often seen most of what they're covering or it's something I'm not eager to watch but I'll listen to an episode anyway. I do go back and listen to old episodes after I watch something. (Just did The Abyss, Ishtar, Split and Glass in the past week or so).

Anyway. Thought Millennium Actress was pretty phenomenal. My immediate takeway was that I'm shocked someone hasn't tried to adapt it into a live action movie. (Griffin said the same but I swear I thought this before I listened). But it's a great concept and it feels like it would translate pretty well.

Elsewhere this weekend:
The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent. Slight, but fun. Everyone seems like they were having a good time. I had a good time.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps. Shia LeBeouf's Jake may not be the dumbest movie character ever, but he's in the conversation. An attempt to recapture and perhaps reframe the previous movie but it all feels pretty toothless.

92 in the Shade. A grimy Florida noir about fishing boat rivals with a great cast (Warren Oates, Peter Fonda, Harry Dean Stanton, Margot Kidder, others). Quirky touches that make it seem like an Elmore Leonard story, though it isn't. These are all good things.

Raw Force (aka Kung-Fu Cannibals). Has a bit of a Jason Takes Manhattan problem in that it's largely about the journey to the aforementioned cannibals than the destination that is those cannibals. But it does have kung-fu, gratuitous nudity, cannibals and more. These are all also good things.
 
Last edited:

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,088
30,030
I'm also a loyal Blankie so I watched Millennium Actress this weekend. I think it's actually the first time since I started listening a few years ago that I rushed to watch the movie prior to the episode (not counting new releases). I've often seen most of what they're covering or it's something I'm not eager to watch but I'll listen to an episode anyway. I do go back and listen to old episodes after I watch something. (Just did The Abyss, Ishtar, Split and Glass in the past week or so).

Anyway. Though Millennium Actress was pretty phenomenal. My immediate takeway was that I'm shocked someone hasn't tried to adapt it into a live action movie. (Griffin said the same but I swear I thought this before I listened). But it's a great concept and it feels like it would translate pretty well.
Haven't listened to the last episode yet but I'm wondering if the kind of... surreal but not Lynchian surrealism is a little more daunting to adapt? It's weird - having now seen Paprika and Perfect Blue, there isn't really a live action director that plays in the same sort of playground that I've seen. Honestly Park Chan Wook might have the most similar vibe that I can think of (specifically thinking of some of the stuff in Lady Vengeance and Thirst that really play with that reality/non-reality imagery).

It does seem like his ideas (and even some shots) have been lifted pretty directly. IDK it's interesting.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,772
3,808
Haven't listened to the last episode yet but I'm wondering if the kind of... surreal but not Lynchian surrealism is a little more daunting to adapt? It's weird - having now seen Paprika and Perfect Blue, there isn't really a live action director that plays in the same sort of playground that I've seen. Honestly Park Chan Wook might have the most similar vibe that I can think of (specifically thinking of some of the stuff in Lady Vengeance and Thirst that really play with that reality/non-reality imagery).

It does seem like his ideas (and even some shots) have been lifted pretty directly. IDK it's interesting.
I feel like Millennium Actress is a little more straightforward, at least compared to those two. It bends reality but the memories and dreams are largely movie scenes so it doesn't feel quite as surreal or trippy. I feel like movie people love to create movies within movies (Hail Ceasar, Babylon, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood ) and the entire structure of this is basically a trip through Japanese movie history. Could easily see that porting over to America, though I'd be a little shocked if it kept the same ending.
 

Voodoo Child

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,525
2,655
I had a long flight and saw they had The Beekeeper and gave it a go and it was good fun; better than your average Statham joint but still a Statham joint. Lots of excellent setpieces and deaths (the elevator sequence was my favorite but the final sequence was also airtight).

Two quibbles though, one minor one major.

Minor: I don't like ceaseless exposition - but can you give me something other than a metaphor on bees as to why exactly JS is a human nuke here? MKUltra sleeper cell? Academy training from a young age? Former Black Ops team leader? Something aside from 'the Beekeeper protects the hive.', and yeah, Jeremy's Iron was great in this movie but still something tangible here.

And my major quibble is that there just felt like no stakes. Here's how it all went down.

1. The event that sent Statham HAM happens. She only had ten minutes of screentime but Phylicia Rashad is co-MVP here with Irons.
2. He consults his super secret network to find the people responsible.
3. He takes out some low level goons with ease.
4. He gets ambushed by low-level goons, takes them out with ease.
5. He takes out his successor with ease, in a pretty cool sequence but still, no danger.
6. He takes out an armed FBI SWAT team with ease.
6. He takes out some medium level goons - SEAL Team Six guys and ex-Black ops guys with ease.
7. He somehow infiltrates the private mansion of the PRESIDENT, where takes out a bunch of SS guys with ease.
8. The only fight where it seemed like he might get hurt was the one with that Russian mercenary but I still thought 'He's probably got this', he did have it.
9. I was worried the ending would be him killing but also getting fatally wounded by the villain (a coked-up zoomer who scams people - but the actor played the part well), but no, takes a bunch of people out with ease.

Okay maybe another minor complaint; Jason Statham has been the same guy in each movie since LS2SB (which was his first and best performance). You wanna win awards? Talk to your buddies like Michael Mann (JS was in Collateral) or Tarantino (Tarantino has expressed admiration). Go back to the theatre, do whatever, but this movie was good action, turn your brain off, light one up or crack a few and enjoy, but the stakes never felt high but I didn't head in expecting Rashomon here.

7.5/10; watchable and with some unforgettable scenes but not something appearing on any top-10 lists.
 
Last edited:

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,088
30,030
Decided to fire up an old standard - A Few Good Men. Talk about a movie they don't make anymore...

This movie brings up a few things for me. I want to go grab Rob Reiner and figure out what the f*** happened to him. I don't think this is a perfectly directed movie (note below), but it's really f***ing competently done and it's near the end of his absolutely legendary run.

I MISS MOVIE STARS! This is the perfect example of a movie you can't make today because movie stars don't exist. When you hire Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson and ask them to just be Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson for 2 hours and 10 minutes and you have a movie. The statement that offends so many MCU nerds is an absolute truth. Outside of literally still Tom Cruise and maybe Leo a little bit (and honestly maybe Zendaya but to a much lesser degree), I can't think of a single actor that can sell a movie by force of personality anymore. Ryan Gossling (who I like for the record) can't do that. Chris Pratt can't do that. A decade plus of such heavy studio control has left us with a terrible landscape for movie stars. IP is the new movie star and it f***ing sucks. Anyway moving on.

Jack Nicholson may be the most engaging screen presence in the history of film. What an insane career. He just dominates every scene he's in. Obviously this is one of his iconic performances, and it's earned. So good. Cruise is still in his transition era, but this is also a solid performance for him. There was that period where he tried to work with every auteur he could in the 90s and while I don't think he's the most gifted actor, he is certainly very good and has such natural charisma. Kevin Pollack was also in a nice little run of this era with this and The Usual Suspects in a few years with good supporting performances. Demi Moore was very solid here as well and it's easy to forget how good of a run she had for awhile - don't think she ever really made the shift to great actress but she has a fairly solid filmography in the early 90s.

So one weird note. The structure of this film is weird. You open with the code red. Then you get to the whole internal politics of Cruise getting assigned the case. And then... you get a flashback of the brass in Gitmo discussing Santiago? And then you go right back to the linear storytelling - this is the only nonlinear event, it isn't noted as a flashback, and then you just pick it up and keep going. There's a lot of exposition here and all of that, but it just feels like a lazy edit? Either do a reshoot to get that information out elsewhere or find a way to restructure the flashback (during the testimony later maybe?) Idk it's kind of jarring.

That being said? Still a perfect movie. 10/10.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,088
30,030
Kept up with the nostalgia kick and watched  Tombstone.

God damnit I shouldn't have. This may be the worst directed film I kinda like that I can remember. Just no... vision. If it wasn't for Kilmer and to a lesser extent Russel and Booth, this thing would be unwatchable.

It kind of reminds me of the original Willy Wonka where it all hangs on Wilder, but this is even more thin. Kilmer is undeniable, Russell delivers his Macho lines just fine but man he's struggling too. Loaded cast but needed someone to trim the script.

5/10

Edit: Just thinking about this more now that I'm on my computer and not my phone I can actually type. Like... why have a soundstage scene with bad lighting and Russell walking toward a camera with no one else on set shooting toward the camera? Like it feels like they were doing promo shots for Entertainment Weekly and the director said "f*** it let's put it in."

The pacing is insane. The first half feels like it's building to something, but even then there is so much energy putting flavor into the town that it eventually just kind of blends together. Like... Brandon Priestly (I think?) character is in like two scenes and like... other than liking art what does he serve? He doesn't even add depth - he just is a semi-recognizable face thrown in for a few scenes and doesn't do anything. The night where the cowboys kill Morgan - we have his brother and his wife getting shot at, so he leaves the relative safety of everyone to play pool alone away from everyone with a giant glass window at his back? What the f*** is up with Earp's marriage (was it a marriage?). We find out at the end that Mattie dies and it's clearly not a happy relationship but also... she is just kind of dealt with off screen? And during the climax of his brother dying and Earp weeping - is that the time to deal with the love triangle? No one's reactions or behavior makes sense there.

There are a lot of other terrible scenes, and there seems no interest in keeping track of how many bullets a six shooter can shoot before it runs out. And the scene at the creek where he just walks out and kills Booth - no one acts with any damn common sense.

I love Kurt Russell. I f***ing love him. I want to make that absolutely clear. But when I say he does any good in this movie I say that because I love him and I can't openly admit to anything else. The fact is I don't think he has a f***ing thing to work with but he's still not good in it. Biehl, Booth, and Kilmer are the only performances that anchor the film at all, and only Kilmer's is good enough to elevate it beyond it's terrible script and directing.

Ugh... I should not have watched this again. It was so disappointing. That being said it is impossible to overrate Kilmer's performance in this. It's worth watching just for him.
 
Last edited:

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
99,190
65,536
Ottawa, ON
Jack Nicholson may be the most engaging screen presence in the history of film. What an insane career. He just dominates every scene he's in. Obviously this is one of his iconic performances, and it's earned. So good.

Unforgettable with only 16 minutes of screentime.

The pacing is insane. The first half feels like it's building to something, but even then there is so much energy putting flavor into the town that it eventually just kind of blends together.

I always felt like this film couldn't decide whether it was a Western action movie or a historic biopic and it shows.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,088
30,030
Unforgettable with only 16 minutes of screentime.



I always felt like this film couldn't decide whether it was a Western action movie or a historic biopic and it shows.
Apparently he got paid 5 million for 10 days on set.

A bargain at twice the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NyQuil

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
14,593
20,024
Las Vegas
Kept up with the nostalgia kick and watched  Tombstone.

God damnit I shouldn't have. This may be the worst directed film I kinda like that I can remember. Just no... vision. If it wasn't for Kilmer and to a lesser extent Russel and Booth, this thing would be unwatchable.

It kind of reminds me of the original Willy Wonka where it all hangs on Wilder, but this is even more thin. Kilmer is undeniable, Russell delivers his Macho lines just fine but man he's struggling too. Loaded cast but needed someone to trim the script.

5/10

Edit: Just thinking about this more now that I'm on my computer and not my phone I can actually type. Like... why have a soundstage scene with bad lighting and Russell walking toward a camera with no one else on set shooting toward the camera? Like it feels like they were doing promo shots for Entertainment Weekly and the director said "f*** it let's put it in."

The pacing is insane. The first half feels like it's building to something, but even then there is so much energy putting flavor into the town that it eventually just kind of blends together. Like... Brandon Priestly (I think?) character is in like two scenes and like... other than liking art what does he serve? He doesn't even add depth - he just is a semi-recognizable face thrown in for a few scenes and doesn't do anything. The night where the cowboys kill Morgan - we have his brother and his wife getting shot at, so he leaves the relative safety of everyone to play pool alone away from everyone with a giant glass window at his back? What the f*** is up with Earp's marriage (was it a marriage?). We find out at the end that Mattie dies and it's clearly not a happy relationship but also... she is just kind of dealt with off screen? And during the climax of his brother dying and Earp weeping - is that the time to deal with the love triangle? No one's reactions or behavior makes sense there.

There are a lot of other terrible scenes, and there seems no interest in keeping track of how many bullets a six shooter can shoot before it runs out. And the scene at the creek where he just walks out and kills Booth - no one acts with any damn common sense.

I love Kurt Russell. I f***ing love him. I want to make that absolutely clear. But when I say he does any good in this movie I say that because I love him and I can't openly admit to anything else. The fact is I don't think he has a f***ing thing to work with but he's still not good in it. Biehl, Booth, and Kilmer are the only performances that anchor the film at all, and only Kilmer's is good enough to elevate it beyond it's terrible script and directing.

Ugh... I should not have watched this again. It was so disappointing. That being said it is impossible to overrate Kilmer's performance in this. It's worth watching just for him.

Yeah, my nostalgia goggles are too strong on this one. Its disjointed, its messy, and I dont care its still awesome.

The pacing is obvious though, almost like you can tell when they switched directors. Like you said the first half pacing is dead on. It moves the story, gives exposition without bogging down, but after the attacks on Virgil and Morgan it snorts a few lines of coke and goes off the rails. It's almost like they didnt want to cut anything before that point but didnt want to make a 3 hour movie either so they just shoved the rest into the remaining run time as best they could.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Macho King

Nakatomi

Registered User
Dec 26, 2022
156
200
Just rewatched Tombstone myself. It almost felt like a parody at times. Kilmer was fun but overall? Woof.
 

Babe Ruth

Looks wise.. I'm a solid 8.5
Feb 2, 2016
1,595
697
Leprechaun 3 (1995)

A cinematic triumph..

The Leprechaun takes Vegas.. and it's what you would expect from a straight to video Leprechaun sequel.
And it isn't too bad, the two leads were pretty good. Has the feeling of an extended Tales From the Crypt episode.
 

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
43,875
11,145
Toronto
MV5BNzkzYjRlMzYtYzc3Mi00ZDA3LTk1YTMtNGQ2YzA3OGY1MTFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQ5Mzc5MDU@._V1_.jpg


Do Not Expect Too Much from the End of the World (2024) Directed by Radu Jude 7C

Angela is a disgruntled, exhausted production assistant who is working on an industrial safety film sponsored by some Austrian conglomerate. We watch her fight the heavy traffic jams of Bucharest trying to gather interviews with workers who have been injured on the job who will participate in the making of this video. Her bosses keep asking her to do more and more and she does so, though hardly with good humour. Eventually the video is made, taking up nearly the last 40 minutes of this long 160 minute film. DNETMFTEOTW clearly will not to be to everybody's liking. However, if you have a taste for ultra-subtle humour, then DNETMFTEOTW will fit in very nicely with other wonderfully droll, super-dark Romanian comic films such as The Death of Mr. Lazarescu, Police, Adjective and California Dreaming.

Probably more conservative viewers will wonder who called this film a comedy in the first place. Most of the time we just follow Angela around, listening to her complaints, but as we do so, more and more is revealed about how lousy life is in Romania, and many of the problems with corporations and workers rights extend far beyond its borders. The approach to this material is deliciously bent, neo-Godardian even. There is a movie from the '80s occasionally spliced in that deals with a minor character; Uwe Boll pops in out of the blue and has some choice things to say about film critics; Angela has a foul-mouthed alter-gender, alter ego who keeps occasionally showing up saying disgusting things; and the construction of images is often lively and unexpected. The whole vibe is a rather cheerfully resigned but flippant rant on how everything has gone to hell in a bushel basket and ain't getting better anytime soon. I really enjoy Romanian humour so I thought the movie was very funny and in a universal, thought-provoking way. I especially enjoyed the long making of-the-video final scene which was a goldmine of off-kilter humour i. But caveat emptor on this one.

subtitles


Best of '24

Do Not Expect Too Much from the End of the World, Jude, Romania
 
Last edited:

CDJ

Registered User
Nov 20, 2006
57,344
47,905
Hell baby
Strangers Chapter One


Clear money grab. It’s the original but without the suspense that movie did incredibly well. It’s just mean-spirited and drawn out and redundant. I didn’t walk out but I went into this movie blind without reading reviews and after it was done i turned to the person I went with, said “this is a pile of shit”, and then immediately checked rotten tomatoes and saw 13%. Good to know that I know what I’m watching lmao

Movie is so drawn out and you can tell they were doing it because they only have so much story and they’re making 3 movies out of it. I’ll go watch the next one because I have a monthly pass for my local theater and don’t have to pay for the ticket but god damn.

2.8/10


Put this in the horror thread too but wanted to post it here as a warning lol
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,925
10,810
arcadian.jpg
Arcadian (2024) - 6/10

A father (Nicolas Cage) and his two teenage sons defend their farmhouse against nocturnal monsters. It's a post-apocalyptic survival drama/thriller similar to A Quiet Place, It Comes at Night and several other films. It felt very familiar at times, but was elevated by its writing and acting. The two brothers, especially, are believable and sympathetic. There's some friction because one is less responsible than the other, which affects the plot. Cage fans might be a little disappointed because his role is more of a supporting one, his character is underdeveloped and there are no moments of craziness, but I was glad to see him in a serious, low-key role and eventually was interested enough in the brothers to not mind that they become the focus of the story. It's a family drama during the day, but turns into a horror film at night. There are several suspenseful scenes with the creatures trying to enter the house. Their design is somewhat unique and creepy and they're revealed very slowly to draw out the mystery of what they look like and are capable of, which I think was handled well. No explanation is given for where they came from, but that's not uncommon for the genre and keeps the film lean and focused on the humans. It's only 90 minutes and I found it to be well paced. My one major criticism is the camerawork, which is all handheld and makes the film feel like it was shot on a boat. I guess that the filmmakers spent all of their budget on Cage and CGI and left nothing for a tripod. I suppose that I got used to it, though, because I ended up liking the film more than I expected to. It's generic, but competently made (outside of the camerawork) and I'm glad that I watched it.
 
Last edited:

Puck

Ninja
Jun 10, 2003
10,772
421
Ottawa
Cannes Film Festival has been on since May 14.

Here is a quick look at the (supposed) biggest releases at the festival


The following link has a more in depth look

The official Cannes webpage
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pink Mist and kihei

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad