Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Mid-Spring Edition. Happy Beltane!

[member 51464]

As Above, So Below

A found footage horror film from 2014 that I had never heard of before a couple of days ago.

6/10

It has some fun Indiana Jones energy early on, and seems to want to be a little more than the average found footage or horror film. It doesn't always succeed, and the end is a bit rushed. But it was fun, the lead is quite charming and charismatic, and there are some quality literary allusions to Dante's Inferno that make it a cut above. A relatively short run-time means you won't be out much if you give it a go and don't care for it.

 

[kihei]

Funny enough I just got around to watching The Outsider which is also based on Stephen King's work and share an important character (though the TV world of one is entirely unrelated to the TV world of the other). I liked The Outsider quite a bit, a really nice balance between grounded cop procedural mystery and a classic King otherworldliness. Stacked cast led by a brooding sad sack Ben Mendelsohn. This pushed me to get around to the most recent TV update of The Stand. (For some reason I wasn't real eager to watch a virus destroy the world last year ...)

My media diet certainly has changed.

I'm always reading something, but haven't had the mental capacity to take on anything challenging. What I read tends to be pulpy crime, classic and modern. I did up for a Marvel Unlimited membership this year and have consumed an ungodly amount of comics, which I think speaks to what I'm up for. Not slagging comics, which I enjoy (and I've read a few steallar ones this year), but tackling 18-30 virtual pages vs., I don't know, Dostoyevsky ... I"m in the former headpsace, not the latter.

My wife and I get a lot of comfort out of history shows on NatGeo and Smithsonian. I know way more about Egypt now than I did a year ago.

A long list of movies I just get get the motivation to tackle for assorted reasons. So I rewatched Ninja 3: The Domination for the upteeth time over the weekend (definitely not a pretentious film).

Funny enough I just got around to watching The Outsider which is also based on Stephen King's work and share an important character (though the TV world of one is entirely unrelated to the TV world of the other). I liked The Outsider quite a bit, a really nice balance between grounded cop procedural mystery and a classic King otherworldliness. Stacked cast led by a brooding sad sack Ben Mendelsohn. This pushed me to get around to the most recent TV update of The Stand. (For some reason I wasn't real eager to watch a virus destroy the world last year ...)

My media diet certainly has changed.

I'm always reading something, but haven't had the mental capacity to take on anything challenging. What I read tends to be pulpy crime, classic and modern. I did up for a Marvel Unlimited membership this year and have consumed an ungodly amount of comics, which I think speaks to what I'm up for. Not slagging comics, which I enjoy (and I've read a few steallar ones this year), but tackling 18-30 virtual pages vs., I don't know, Dostoyevsky ... I"m in the former headpsace, not the latter.

My wife and I get a lot of comfort out of history shows on NatGeo and Smithsonian. I know way more about Egypt now than I did a year ago.

A long list of movies I just get get the motivation to tackle for assorted reasons. So I rewatched Ninja 3: The Domination for the upteeth time over the weekend (definitely not a pretentious film).

Ben Mendelsohn has acquired Mads and Viggo status with me. I will watch him in anything. I'll try to locate The Outsider.

 

[Puck]

My media diet certainly has changed.

I'm always reading something, but haven't had the mental capacity to take on anything challenging. What I read tends to be pulpy crime, classic and modern. I did up for a Marvel Unlimited membership this year and have consumed an ungodly amount of comics, which I think speaks to what I'm up for. Not slagging comics, which I enjoy (and I've read a few steallar ones this year), but tackling 18-30 virtual pages vs., I don't know, Dostoyevsky ... I"m in the former headpsace, not the latter.

I've also noticed that personally. I'm more into mindless stuff where I don't have to think too much, or where most everything is chewed for me (where I don't have to think).

Is it my imagination or does Hollywood not make comedies anymore? There seems to be endless Superhero, Horror, Sci-fi, Revenge shooter films, but few comedies. The 'Comedy' seems to have gone the way of the Western. (talking film not tv series here)

I also used to watch a lot more TV news, but since January the TV is off more. As a Sens fan the games aren't that interesting. I'm watching more content from my PC screen (even films if watching alone). I might be on my way to cutting the cord...

Also reading more non-fiction thrillers lately which is weird because I prefer non-fiction. Which reminds me, Michael Lewis' The Premonition: A Pandemic Story is released tomorrow. (non-fiction, I believe) https://www.amazon.ca/Premonition-P...&keywords=michael+lewis&qid=1620068479&sr=8-1

 

[OzzyFan]

Together Together
2.80 out of 4stars

"When a lonely 20-something woman becomes the gestational surrogate for a lonely man in his 40s, the two strangers come to realize this unexpected relationship will challenge their perceptions of connection, boundaries and the particulars of love." Overall a pretty human film about loneliness and life with sprinkles of comedy and drama thrown in. And imo, is a perfect example of the ways people who are alone in the world push people away from them in different ways, even if what they truly want or need in life is a connection.

Attack the Block
2.70 out of 4stars

"A teen gang in South London defend their block from an alien invasion." It's a short tight and fun british sci-fi action comedy. That said, if you are like me and don't know too much British slang, you will be lost on a lot of the dialogue and exchanges in this movie. Altogether good fun though.

Mortal Kombat (2021)
2.15 out of 4stars

"MMA fighter Cole Young seeks out Earth's greatest champions in order to stand against the enemies of Outworld in a high stakes battle for the universe." It's a movie for fans of the video game. If you've played the video game, you'll be smirking on and off throughout to all the nods and references. If you've never played the video game, you'll see this film as a mediocre action movie. It's nothing special though. Josh Lawson has a pretty funny turn as Kano though.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Funny enough I just got around to watching The Outsider which is also based on Stephen King's work and share an important character (though the TV world of one is entirely unrelated to the TV world of the other). I liked The Outsider quite a bit, a really nice balance between grounded cop procedural mystery and a classic King otherworldliness. Stacked cast led by a brooding sad sack Ben Mendelsohn.

I enjoyed it as well. It got a little goofy at the end for me, but it was bound to given the subject.

I don’t watch a ton of HBO, but probably need to because I haven’t been too disappointed so far.

 

[Osprey]

I liked it when I was in highschool but I was a little pot-head. I tried watching it again recently and ya thats kind of how I view it now too.

I assume that he was being sarcastic. His argument is that a film can't be pretentious or "up itself."

 

[Mantis]

I assume that he was being sarcastic. His argument is that a film can't be pretentious or "up itself."

Maybe. I have not been reading every post in this thread.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I assume that he was being sarcastic. His argument is that a film can't be pretentious or "up itself."

Not sure Prosthetic will appreciate the confusion. I haven't said a thing about Donnie Darko - and of course, least of all that it could be pretentious (my chair though seems to think that's it's kind of pretentious to pretend to know what a film is "thinking").

 

[Osprey]

Not sure Prosthetic will appreciate the confusion. I haven't said a thing about Donnie Darko - and of course, least of all that it could be pretentious (my chair though seems to think that's it's kind of pretentious to pretend to know what a film is "thinking").

Oops. Sorry to both of you. It's not the first time that I've confused you two because your names look similar in the corner of my eye (both start with 'P', have similar length and even have a roundish other capital letter in the middle). I also expected you because you reply to other posters a lot more often, especially on this subject.

Maybe. I have not been reading every post in this thread.

Apparently, neither have I.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Oops. Sorry to both of you. It's not the first time that I've confused you two because your names look similar in the corner of my eye (both start with 'P, have similar length and even have a roundish other capital letter midway). I also expected you because you reply to other posters a lot more often, especially on this subject.

Apparently, neither have I.

No offense taken! Our avatars are very different. I should make it a challenge to identify the film from mine... In fact, I wonder if a screencap challenge would work in this forum...

 

[Osprey]

No offense taken! Our avatars are very different. I should make it a challenge to identify the film from mine... In fact, I wonder if a screencap challenge would work in this forum...

I have avatars turned off. I find them distracting and having them off speeds up page loading slightly, at least on my aging laptop.

 

[nameless1]

In more positive news, my wife and I are looking into buying movie prints and framing them and I'm getting dangerously close to blowing 500$ on this perfect Sonatine poster and hanging it up in my office.

This one is another contender and much cheaper:

The Sonatine one is beautiful. I actually just watched it the last week, and it left quite an impression. It is slow, and it goes nowhere for the majority of the movie, but somehow, the ending just ties it all together, and it becomes a rather intriguing experience that lingers in the mind of the audience. I also find it rather interesting how fatalistic it is too. At the time, Kitano was depressed, partly because his movies has all been commercial failures in Japan, and a short time later, he became involved in a very bad accident that he later admitted to be a suicide attempt. Thus, this movie is rather personal, and in a way, it is his personal letter to the world. That is why despite its rather unusual pace and general roughness, there is also a heartfelt authenticity that makes a connection with the audience. I still think Hana-bi is his magnus opus, due to the more consistent pace and emotional connection, but this one is definitely one of his best works.

 

[nameless1]

Would Donnie Darko be anywhere near that list?

I dislike it, and there is a Christ-like quality to the character, but I do not think it wants to be pretentious. It is a common theme in Western works of art, after all.

 

[kihei]

Not sure Prosthetic will appreciate the confusion. I haven't said a thing about Donnie Darko - and of course, least of all that it could be pretentious (my chair though seems to think that's it's kind of pretentious to pretend to know what a film is "thinking").

Ai yi yi. Apparently your chair has been caught sitting down on the job. Explain to it what a figure of speech is and it should be fully recovered by morning.

 

[nameless1]

I do not have a list of pretentious movies off the top of my head, mainly because I usually forget movies I dislike, unless someone mentions them, but now that I think about it, there is a couple.

Darren Aronofsky probably heads my list, with his last two, Noah and mother!, being the prime examples. Mia Hanson-Love's Things to Come also comes to mind, mainly because most movies about intellectuals often has that holier-than-thou feel to them.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Ai yi yi. Apparently your chair has been caught sitting down on the job. Explain to it what a figure of speech is and it should be fully recovered by morning.

Of course it's a figure of speech, because you know as well as me that a film doesn't think. But it's still the closest you can come up to explaining concretely how a film could produce the will necessary to be pretentious, and that's exactly the problem. A "movie that purports to understand something that it clearly doesn’t but thinks it does" means zilch. At best you're talking about your (lack of) understanding of a movie, at worst you're just spewing nonsense (but no worry, it's a figure of speech).

So what exactly does Teorema fraudulently purports to understand? And how does it figuratively thinks it understands it? I guess this example didn't appy to Teorema? Amer then? Cloud Atlas? ( )

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I do not have a list of pretentious movies off the top of my head, mainly because I usually forget movies I dislike, unless someone mentions them, but now that I think about it, there is a couple.

Darren Aronofsky probably heads my list, with his last two, Noah and mother!, being the prime examples. Mia Hanson-Love's Things to Come also comes to mind, mainly because most movies about intellectuals often has that holier-than-thou feel to them.

Haven't seen Noah, looks pretty boring to me, and I don't remember much of Mother! but I have it at 7/10. I just Googled it and it does have quite a few reviews underlying its pretentiousness. So why is it pretentious? Is it because it has themes that were not developed as much, or in the way you thought they should have been? Is there at any point in the film something that indicates that it pretends to be more than what it is?

I feel there's something that belongs to the reading contract in this reaction, but I fail to see how it is perceived by the reader.

And is every experimental film pretentious? Most of them you can't decipher exhaustively, so they don't really bring their thematics to fruition.

 

[kihei]

Of course it's a figure of speech, because you know as well as me that a film doesn't think. But it's still the closest you can come up to explaining concretely how a film could produce the will necessary to be pretentious, and that's exactly the problem. A "movie that purports to understand something that it clearly doesn’t but thinks it does" means zilch. At best you're talking about your (lack of) understanding of a movie, at worst you're just spewing nonsense (but no worry, it's a figure of speech).

So what exactly does Teorema fraudulently purports to understand? And how does it figuratively thinks it understands it? I guess this example didn't appy to Teorema? Amer then? Cloud Atlas? ( )

Let's stop . You don't believe there is such a thing as pretentious movies; and I do. You requested explanation and examples and I gave them to you. You didn't like them. Fine. We have reached the tedious level now. Enough is enough.

 

[kihei]

Two episodes into The Outsider, and I am thoroughly hooked. I mean, it's like I'm getting ten whole Ben Mendelsohn movies. Gotta be happy about that.

 

[nameless1]

Since I mentioned movies about intellectuals, I recently watched The Decline of the American Empire and the sequel The Barbarian Invasions by Denys Arcand, and I have to say, he and Romer probably are the best filmmakers on the subject matter. In fact, A Night at Maud's and The Decline of the American Empire are probably two of the best movies on intellectuals that I have ever watched.

Set during a weekend gathering, The Decline of the American Empire takes an intimate look at a group of academia as they discuss their personal lives and how they view relationships. Marketed as a sex-comedy, it is pretty much all dialogue, but even though I am not a French speaker and depend on subtitles, Arcaud manages to transcend the language barrier, and I still find the movie rather funny. There are some scenarios that are rather absurd and can be seen merely as play-for-laughs, but everything flows very fluidly overall, so it all feels rather natural and nothing is all that out-of-place. In fact, I am very impressed with the writing, because while I come away with the feeling that he is rather critical of the moral decay of the class, and how they are often all talk and no action, he is not judgemental at all. He simply shows the audience everything in his characters' personal lives, and allows the audience to make his or her decision. To me, that is a sign of a very good filmmaker, and I have this one anywhere between 7.5 to 7.75/10.

The Barbarian Invasion is a sequel set 17 years later, and it won Arcaud his Oscar for best foreign film. That said, I do not think it is better than its predecessor. Though he is a lot more polish in his techniques, he also, somehow, complains more but has a lot less to say. In short, like his characters, Arcaud himself also feels old. Fortunately, his characters also demonstrate growth, and even though I did not particularly like them in the first movie, they are like old friends one has not met in a long time, and it is nice to get reacquainted. Since this movie is set when one of the characters is at the end of his life, it is a lot reflective, but there is also not a lot of answers. Some people might feel that it does not provide any closure, but I find that it reflects life, so I actually think that it is a nice touch. For me, it is a 6.75/10 movie. I find it a lot weaker than the first one, but the nostalgia pushes it up quite a bit.

Arcaud often returns to the subject matter, and he has two more unofficial sequels, with Days of Darkness and The Fall of the American Empire. I have not been able to find Days of Darkness, but by The Fall of American Empire, he is pretty much all complaint. He has never been big on plot, but when he attempts it, it is actually rather dull and downright stupid in its simplicity and optimistic ending. There is no thrill in this supposed thriller, and even though the title is reminiscent of the movie that gave him his international spotlight, it has no relationship at all, with the only common aspect is that the main character is an intellectual. In fact, I can safely say that it is only named like that for marketing purpose, and there is absolutely no reason to lump it together with his two previous and superior work. This is just bad, and I gave it 5/10.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Two episodes into The Insider, and I am thoroughly hooked. I mean, it's like I'm getting ten whole Ben Mendelsohn movies. Gotta be happy about that.

The first two episodes might be the best two of the series, but it’s still worth it. That is assuming you’re talking about The Outsider?!

 

[nameless1]

Haven't seen Noah, looks pretty boring to me, and I don't remember much of Mother! but I have it at 7/10. I just Googled it and it does have quite a few reviews underlying its pretentiousness. So why is it pretentious? Is it because it has themes that were not developed as much, or in the way you thought they should have been? Is there at any point in the film something that indicates that it pretends to be more than what it is?

I feel there's something that belongs to the reading contract in this reaction, but I fail to see how it is perceived by the reader.

And is every experimental film pretentious? Most of them you can't decipher exhaustively, so they don't really bring their thematics to fruition.

Aronofsky often makes movie grander than they have any reason to be. He wants to say something, but his message is often so simplistic, that it does not justify the package he wraps it in. At this point, he is just wasteful with the budget he often gets.

Even his smaller budget movies have a rift of that. I like The Wrestler, and I think it is a very accurate and intimate look at the world of professional wrestling, but there is no need to give the character an epic feel.

That is just my two cents. I will just say that I am not a fan of Aronofsky at this point.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Aronofsky often makes movie grander than they have any reason to be. He wants to say something, but his message is often so simplistic, that it does not justify the package he wraps it in. At this point, he is just wasteful with the budget he often gets.

Even his smaller budget movies have a rift of that. I like The Wrestler, and I think it is a very accurate and intimate look at the world of professional wrestling, but there is no need to give the character an epic feel.

That is just my two cents. I will just say that I am not a fan of Aronofsky at this point.

Not being a fan of Aronofsky I can understand (I'm not particularly a fan either, even though I think he has 3 great films under his belt, which is more than most - and yeah, I liked The Fountain a lot!), saying his films are pretentious (I'm well aware you didn't) is something else.

Couldn't you say the same thing about pretty much any filmmaker that makes simplistic films? the message of a Michael Bay film does not justify the package it's wrapped in, and clearly a waste of budget. And anyway, couldn't the epic feel you think is superfluous in The Wrestler be of great use in someone else's reading of the film? Or a step further, is your understanding of the film is really optimal of you leave aside something you perceived while reading it? No matter the director's ego or intentions, the film itself can't pretend to be more than the sum of its parts, and that's all there is to read.

I don't think there's any amount of "message" that could justify some of Greenaway's aesthetic fanfare. It's still some of the prettiest and most precisely constructed films I've seen, and that in itself becomes part of their meaning.

 

[kihei]

The first two episodes might be the best two of the series, but it’s still worth it. That is assuming you’re talking about The Outsider?!

Ha, yeah. Will fix.

I'm now five episodes in and it is losing some juice as the explanations begin to unfold. Makes me wonder, though: how did Schlorndorff and his writers ever reduce The Tin Drum to a 2 hours and 22 minute movie. I think the mini-series might be a far superior form for adaptations of works of literature, especially ones more complex than Stephen King novels.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Blind Beast (Yasuzô Masumura, 1969) - First off, a thousand thanks to @nameless1 for the suggestion. I started my comment about Femina Ridens by saying "crazy film" - I had no idea. You were absolutely right that the link - through the giant women sculptures - is really intriguing, considering they were done the same year in distant parts of the world. I think it too owes a lot to Clouzot's La Prisonnière, but like in Femina Ridens, the original Proust source is completely absent. On a thematic level, this is right up my alley, the carnal link between signifier (the sculpture) and signified (the woman's body), the use of the arts to echo the objectification of the woman, the brilliant invocation of psychoanalysis through the Spellbound allusion - there's a lot of stuff to feed on. Still, I didn't enjoy it as much as I would have liked. Once you've got all these ideas thrown at you, there's not much to dissect: once you've visited the studio, the art/object proposition disappears (only to be called back at the very end with the limbs), and the psychoanalytic aspects of the film are really thin beyond the Oedipus complex explaining the absence of the father, the relation to the mother only becoming sillier by the minute. I think that's my main problem with the film, it's thin but could have been fun and interesting if it hadn't gone to silly extremes (good actors might have make it work, but they're all very bad). I'm still very glad I dug it out of my files, and if you have other suggestions like that, I'm in! 5/10