Toggle sidebar

Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +2

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
The Two Popes The good: not your usual buddy film, but the papal bromance works. The bad: leans heavily on a couple of my least favourite narrative tropes: the reliance on strategically placed news clips to provide background info, and expositional dialogue...at one point Benny is narrating Jorge's flashback/confession! The ugly: Benedict's confession is more or less self-censored. This is supposed to be good PR for the church? [B-]
 
  • Like
Reactions: KallioWeHardlyKnewYe and Violenza Domestica
OhCaptainMyCaptain said:
Yeah, it's non-linear. The events at The Mole take place over a week, I believe; the travel by sea takes place over an hour; and the airplane stuff takes place over the course of an hour. It eventually ties itself together at the end.
Click to expand...

OK, thanks. I see. I thought we were talking about flashbacks and overlapping storylines like, say, Pulp Fiction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OhCaptainMyCaptain
Despite being warned not to, I saw The Marriage Story with my wife (on our wedding anniversary, no less) and was bracing for the worst--not from the movie itself but from collateral fallout. Not so bad, actually. Yuppies and their first-world problems. Not nearly as emotionally raw and affecting as Scenes from A Marriage, but a hell of a lot more fun. [B+]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Violenza Domestica
Round 2 of 70s sci-fi binge.

ZPG. A future where the environment has become so bad and life so tough that procreation is outlawed. Want a baby? Here’s a creepy doll that isn’t remotely lifelike but I suppose was the best a 70s SFX team could do. Oliver Reed and Geraldine Chaplin decide to break the law and have a child of their own. Bad idea. Plays almost more like a domestic drama and, thanks to those leads, they mostly pull it off. Ending felt rushed.

No Blade of Grass. A future where the environment has become so bad and life so tough that governments are killing their own citizens en-masse to ease demand on dwindling food supplies. This one is a ground-level, day of type story. The badness is just happening and martial law is just setting in. Normal citizens are banding together as society collapses. It’s an interesting enough setup that plays practically like a prequel to some of the other movies I have watched recently. The acting here is tough though. Nigel Davenport is an eye patch wearing lead here but he often feels like he’s in a different movie from others.

Logan’s Run. A future where the environment has become so bad and life is so tough ... actually life isn’t that tough here. Unless you’re 30, then they kill you. Rightfully a classic. There’s a cheesiness that might make some like it ironically. Not me. I’m all in. Love the sets which resemble both malls and gyms. Makes me want to buy Jean's. The world building is pretty cool. Rules well established and then violated. Reveals are good though the second half drags ever so much. Jenny Agutter circa 1970s is a longtime crush of mine. And I always forget Farrah Fawcett is in this.

Westworld. Written and directed by Michael Crichton, it’s easy to see it as a Jurassic Park test run. Also easy to see why anyone would want to take the concept and reboot it. It’s a ripe idea. A lot of fun here conceptually. The movie does well enough, though isn’t perhaps as good as one would like. Hence the direct and indirect remakes. Has its moments. Yul Brynner is iconic as a killer robot and his chase down a dark hallway is a nice little bit of filmmaking from Crichton. Far from great, but not too shabby.
 
Last edited:
I'm late to the game viewing Parasite. Loved it. It reminded me a bit of Burning, last year's Korean hit movie on several counts. First, the story was in two parts, the first part a more simple, innocent story that in the second part, has a surprising bad twist and turns complicated. Both had an underlying political message about class struggle (rich vs poor). And both were Faulknerian in using imagery and metaphors to give meaning to the story and define the characters. I recognized the poor family's father as the driver in A Taxi Driver, another hit Korean Film from 2017 (I liked that one too). I noticed so far an underlying theme of political-cultural trauma in these Korean films, that might be a function of it's difficult past. And the ongoing harsh struggle of poverty surrounded by eccentric wealth. The poor kids are given the choice of following in their parents' troubled footsteps or striving to do better, but in both films (Burning and Parasite), they seem to fail (just my own perception).
 
Last edited:
Breaker Morant (1980) - 8/10 - Not as good as Path's of Glory, certainly doesn't look as good visually but well-acted and directed. Less suspense but just as watchable.

American Hustle (2013) - 7/10 - Everyone is trying a little too hard to act here.

Roma (2018) - 7/10 - It was fine
 
Third and final round of my 70s sci-if binge.

Demon Seed. Man makes supercomputer. Supercomputer decides it wants to have sex with Julie Christie. I mean, sure, who among us! But it’s an odd premise. Full disclosure, I was kinda drowsy watching this, so I might have missed some details. But I definitely got the premise right. Truly a WTF movie. Tackles AI self-awareness in a micro way — not with the end of the world, but with the end of a marriage. Some strong visuals here and memorable special effects. Some problematic details. Unforgettable though. Directed by Donald Cammel who didn’t do much film wise, but is credited as co-director with Nicholas Roeg on the nutso Performance.

Rollerball. Another classic. Still holds up. The societal criticism is broad and still feels applicable. But it’s the sports insights I find particularly relevant these days. Athletes as commodities to be used and disposed of. Yep, that still works. The action/violence is well done.

Soylent Green. I can’t decide if Charlton Heston is a bad actor or if Phil Hartman has just ruined him for life for me. It’s hard not to think of Hartman’s classic Soylent Green riff from SNL, for example. Feels like the character is supposed to be younger than what Heston is. And his neckerchief is absolutely ridiculous. Story is actually well balanced with a seemingly random murder investigation giving way to a deeper conspiracy (very 1970s!). But Heston is hard to take seriously.

The Omega Man. More Heston. Still can’t take him seriously. Still feels like he’s supposed to be a younger man than he is.

One final note: The Criterion Channel 70s sci-fi set here also includes A Clockwork Orange and Mad Max, neither of which I rewatched because I’ve seen them a bunch. It also has A Boy and His Dog, Dark Star and Shivers, but I saw all of those in the past six months or so so didn’t feel a need to rewatch them either.

But still, highly highly recommend the collection if you’re a subscriber to the service.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Violenza Domestica and Ralph Spoilsport
Puck said:
I'm late to the game viewing Parasite. Loved it. It reminded me a bit of Burning, last year's Korean hit movie on several counts. First, the story was in two parts, the first part a more simple, innocent story that in the second part, has a surprising bad twist and turns complicated. Both had an underlying political message about class struggle (rich vs poor). And both were Faulknerian in using imagery and metaphors to give meaning to the story and define the characters. I recognized the poor family's father as the driver in A Taxi Driver, another hit Korean Film from 2017 (I liked that one too). I noticed so far an underlying theme of political-cultural trauma in these Korean films, that might be a function of it's difficult past. And the ongoing harsh struggle of poverty surrounded by eccentric wealth. The poor kids are given the choice of following in their parents' troubled footsteps or striving to do better, but in both films (Burning and Parasite), they seem to fail (just my own perception).
Click to expand...

The actor that played the dad was also the engineer in Snowpiercer (same director as well), IIRC.
 
Breathless (1960) - New York Herald Tribune! New York Herald Tribune! An old favorite that I watched with my wife as she's trying to learn french. She loved it as well although she didn't know who Jean-Luc Godard was so I think we're headed for a binge of his 60s filmography. It's such a fun piece between the stylish, endearing characters, the jumpcuts and fast pacing and its great use of Paris, a city I don't care much for in the first place. Godard doesn't dwelve deeply into elaborate monologues but his one-liners are nimble little strikes that add a lot of charm, style and depth to a film that doesn't seem much concerned with it at first glance. A simple story - a crook shoots a cop and tries to convince the American Patricia to flee to Italy with him while he's waiting around Paris for some owed cash - that is sustained by the great performances of Belmondo and Seberg, it's a unique film that shows the unique sensibility of the artist and one who doesn't seem concerned with what others are doing and whether he should be following them. Godard, a curmudgeon extraordinaire, marches to the beat of his own drum and this quality spills into the movie and becomes exemplified by the rascals he uses to create his art. A must for anyone with an interest in creative originality. Fully accessible. Great music to enhance his scenes too.

66b320974c683473db112739a07cd981.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Puck, Violenza Domestica, kihei and 3 others
Puck said:
I'm late to the game viewing Parasite. Loved it. It reminded me a bit of Burning, last year's Korean hit movie on several counts. First, the story was in two parts, the first part a more simple, innocent story that in the second part, has a surprising bad twist and turns complicated. Both had an underlying political message about class struggle (rich vs poor). And both were Faulknerian in using imagery and metaphors to give meaning to the story and define the characters. I recognized the poor family's father as the driver in A Taxi Driver, another hit Korean Film from 2017 (I liked that one too). I noticed so far an underlying theme of political-cultural trauma in these Korean films, that might be a function of it's difficult past. And the ongoing harsh struggle of poverty surrounded by eccentric wealth. The poor kids are given the choice of following in their parents' troubled footsteps or striving to do better, but in both films (Burning and Parasite), they seem to fail (just my own perception).
Click to expand...

Song Kang-ho is one of the best actors in the world. He is very picky with his acting choices in recent years, so anything with him in it is usually pretty good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kihei and Zeppo
I am excited to report I decided to drop Netflix and get AMC A-List, so I may become more of a regular in these parts again.
 
I watched the Aladdin remake tonight on Disney+. I enjoyed it. I thought Smith did a great job making Genie his own and I really appreciated the expansion of Jasmine's arc. What brought this movie down though was Jafar being a petulant child rather than manacing villain. I mean come on, "Second" "Second" "Second"? I mean that's a sorcerer temper tantrum if I've ever heard one.
 
Uncut Gems (2019) - 2/10 (Hated it)

A sleazeball jeweler (Adam Sandler) in trouble with debt collectors repeatedly digs himself even deeper while yelling at everyone as if all of his self-inflicted problems are their fault. This is a loud, vulgar, chaotic movie about a very unlikable guy who deserves everything that's coming to him. I guess that we're expected to sympathize with him in spite of that just because he's the supposedly likable Adam Sandler. I've never been a Sandler fan, though, nor am I a fan of yelling, arguing, talking over one another or swearing every sentence, so this movie was definitely not my cup of tea (and not because it had those things, which I can tolerate certain amounts of, but it was so much of the movie). I watched it only because all that I've heard is that it's one of the best films of the year. I should've checked RT first so that I could've seen that half of audiences haven't liked it and that, for every person who loved it, there's someone who hated it (if not called it the worst movie that they've seen or walked out of the theater). I definitely fall into the latter camp. Before you spend time and money on this movie, be very sure that it's up your alley or else you may end up disappointed and upset.

Uncut Gems (2019)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Puck
ORRFForever no longer comes up as a user in searches, his profile returns an error and he was "last seen" on Dec 28th. Does anyone know what happened? Did he get banned?

Edit: No one knows, not even a mod? Oh well. RIP, ORRFForever. We hardly knew ye.
 
Last edited:
1917. Definitely see this one in theaters, preferably with Dolby surround, if you plan to see it at all.

The story is simple, and the cinematography is magnificent. Some amazing shots and great sound mixing too.

Edit: it's worth clarifying that it is a bit more of a great experience than it is a great film.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Saw 1917. Really well made of course, although similar to something like Dunkirk, I do think there's a bit of a soulless quality to it. There is some genuine emotion in here, particularly in one scene
co-lead death of course
, but I don't know, a lot of it felt a bit barren on an emotional level. Acting was fine, nothing to write home about, but that's completely OK for this type of movie.

Where Dunkirk excels with sound, this one is much more visual. Goes without saying that it's an amazing looking movie, although not my favorite looking Deakins movie. I do think the one-shot thing held his style back in certain areas, although it still rears its head semi-consistently throughout. The whole fire sequence in particular was amazing to look at, it's classic use of lighting and shadows by Deakins. I also loved how the bunker scene was shot with the rats, and that one shot where the camera goes along the water as they're crossing the pit. I think at times it kind of felt like the area was designed like an obstacle course rather than a natural war setting, but in a weird way I kind of liked that because I went into this movie very much aware of the technical aspect of it and was looking at things more like "I wonder how they're going to approach this shot" rather than actually getting engrossed in the movie's world.

I see this is the favorite for score for awards, which surprises me a bit. Like its present throughout essentially the entire movie, but I feel like nothing really stood out about it. Good but unexceptional.

I think I'm nitpicking this but overall I do think it was really good. I think anyone that goes into it knowing that it's a war movie about a couple no-name soldiers will absolutely get a lot of enjoyment out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GlassesJacketShirt and KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
1917

Hate to say it, but my concerns with the filmmaking gimmick held true. Kind of took you out of it to think the entire film was essentially all within a couple miles from start to finish, turning an admittedly single, personal story on the front into an obviously miniaturized version of it. It was just almost always readily obvious that every scene was right on top of each other.

That being said, the direction, cinematography, acting, and action were all on point and it was an extremely tense film almost all throughout. Would recommend. I liked it, but I was hoping to love it and I can't say it approached that territory.
 
No Fun Shogun said:
1917

Hate to say it, but my concerns with the filmmaking gimmick held true. Kind of took you out of it to think the entire film was essentially all within a couple miles from start to finish, turning an admittedly single, personal story on the front into an obviously miniaturized version of it. It was just almost always readily obvious that every scene was right on top of each other.

That being said, the direction, cinematography, acting, and action were all on point and it was an extremely tense film almost all throughout. Would recommend. I liked it, but I was hoping to love it and I can't say it approached that territory.
Click to expand...
Did you see They Shall Not Grow Old?
 
Sideways (1997) - 7.5/10 - Surprisingly funny at times but I can't fully enjoy a film where Paul Giamatti is the lead. He has such an uncomfortable awkward demeanor.

Scarlet Street (1945) - 7.5/10 - Fritz Lang Re-make of a 1931 French film called La Chienne, a noir-esque drama. Fairly good for the most part minus maybe the last 5 or so minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom