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
Short Term 12: 7.5/10

Really enjoyed this little film. Had no idea who directed it until I looked it up afterwards. Glad to see he'll be joining the MCU. I thought Brie Larson was fantastic in this movie, and it appears I'm not alone in that thought.
 
Trap Jesus said:
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was on TV the other day, which I hadn't seen since it was first released over 10 years ago. Don't get me wrong, it's not a good movie, but it's also not as bad as I remembered it to be. There's some truly perplexing CGI animal moments, and they certainly botched the ending, but I think they actually captured the feel of an Indiana Jones movie pretty well for the majority of the first half/two thirds.
Click to expand...

That's probably thanks to Spielberg directing it, Frank Marshall producing it and George Lucas writing it. Speaking of which, it doesn't feel like it's been 12 years since I saw the first photos of Spielberg and Ford from the film set and it struck me that a new Indiana Jones movie was really happening.
 
Amerika said:
I just find it to be a lazy crutch. It doesn't add anything.
Click to expand...

How is it a crutch, though? Wouldn’t a lazy crutch be a lazy story point that is used simply to advance the plot?

These cameos are just for fun. They’re not part of the story or used to advance the plot of the story. Just a fun cameo to acknowledge the guy who helped create it all. Nobody judges the movie based on the cameo, and it has no impact on how the story unfolds.
 
Harold and Maude (1971) by Hal Ashby – 6.25/10

I always mis-remember this film as Harry and Maude.

This film was (or felt) better the second time I watched it. I don't think it was because it "grew" on me though, but more likely because I just appeared in a more relaxed state of mind.

The music (by Cats Stevens also known as Yusuf Islam) really fits the movie. The intro tune kinda makes you happy for a brief moment. But the movie also feels a bit dull at times.

Ruth Gordon is brilliant (obviously).

I wouldn't classify it as a dark comedy but more like a "dark" feel good movie.
 
Last edited:
senior edler said:
Harold and Maude (1971) by Hal Ashby – 6.25/10

I always mis-remember this film as Harry and Maude.

This film was (or felt) better the second time I watched it. I don't think it was because it "grew" on me though, but more likely because I just appeared in a more relaxed state of mind.

The music (by Cats Stevens also known as Yusuf Islam) really fits the movie. The intro tune kinda makes you happy for a brief moment. But the movie also feels a bit dull at times.

Ruth Gordon is brilliant (obviously).

I wouldn't classify it as a dark comedy but more like a "dark" feel good movie.
Click to expand...
Is this the one they reference in There's Something About Mary?
 
Sicario - 7.5/10

Only complaint I really have is that the story wasn't always compelling to me. It was interesting, but not like constant anxiety kind of interesting. Some parts of the story were very interesting, while others fell a little flat. Not saying they were terrible or didn't make sense - but I just didn't connect with them as much as other parts. Some of the action sequences were damn great, though. And the overall arch of the story is interesting. Really enjoyed the last 20-25 minutes of the movie.

Thought Emily Blunt was good. Not great, but good. But.. Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro were fantastic, especially Brolin. His role in this movie fits him perfectly, though, so no surprise there.
 
Trap Jesus said:
Think it's tough to not see Del Toro as the standout. Such an amazing character.

Probably my 2nd favorite Villeneuve movie behind Blade Runner. It's amazing how much Roger Deakins can elevate a movie through interesting shots.
Click to expand...

He was fantastic, no doubt. But Brolin really caught my attention in this one. Like I said, though, it could be because it's such a good fit for him.
 
OhCaptainMyCaptain said:
How is it a crutch, though? Wouldn’t a lazy crutch be a lazy story point that is used simply to advance the plot?

These cameos are just for fun. They’re not part of the story or used to advance the plot of the story. Just a fun cameo to acknowledge the guy who helped create it all. Nobody judges the movie based on the cameo, and it has no impact on how the story unfolds.
Click to expand...

Both can be. I just feel like cameos are a way to get the viewer to have the movie feel clever/wink at him in a way that feels superficial. I mean, looking at Stan Lee's filmography, he seems to have had a cameo in almost every single film. It just feels hacky and tired.
 
Amerika said:
Both can be. I just feel like cameos are a way to get the viewer to have the movie feel clever/wink at him in a way that feels superficial. I mean, looking at Stan Lee's filmography, he seems to have had a cameo in almost every single film. It just feels hacky and tired.
Click to expand...

And like I’ve said.. if the purpose of those was as an important plot device, then I would 100% agree with you. But considering they’re all just in fun, I don’t see the issue. But we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
OhCaptainMyCaptain said:
And like I’ve said.. if the purpose of those was as an important plot device, then I would 100% agree with you. But considering they’re all just in fun, I don’t see the issue. But we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...

I think so too. I just think that what's just in fun is still part of the viewer's experience (i.e. I enjoyed the comedy and cleverness in The Sopranos one) and that it doesn't click with the Marvel one's.
 
Amerika said:
I think so too. I just think that what's just in fun is still part of the viewer's experience (i.e. I enjoyed the comedy and cleverness in The Sopranos one) and that it doesn't click with the Marvel one's.
Click to expand...

The only thing I will say is that I believe a majority of people will disagree with you on that last part. I think many, many people enjoy his cameos quite a bit. But they don't work for you, and that's fine.
 
John Wick 3: 7/10 Good first 30 minutes but when the movie starts to just be big guns and head shot it lose a lot of it interest just like the 2nd movie.

Dark Phoenix: 5/10 Terrible. Zero substance. It makes X-3 Last stand looks like a masterpiece .
 
Unmasking Jihadi John Anatomy of a Terrorist (2019) :

Solid documentary.

7.5/10

Movie Trailer :
 
Last edited:
Get Me Roger Stone (2017) by Dylan Bank, Daniel DiMauro and Morgan Pehme – 6.25/10

Apparently Netflix needed 3 director/writers, 7 producers and 5 photographers to shoot this documentary. I did giggle slightly when the title character said "politics is show business for ugly people", but the film was a little too long/dragged out, they could have cut it a bit or two. Most interesting parts were probably some of the flashbacks dealing on Roy Cohn and such.
 
OhCaptainMyCaptain said:
And like I’ve said.. if the purpose of those was as an important plot device, then I would 100% agree with you. But considering they’re all just in fun, I don’t see the issue. But we may just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...
I don't see how whether or not it's an important plot device has anything to do with whether or not it's justifiable criticism to point out, personally. It's still part of the movie. Being random and needless doesn't make it any less objectionable (if someone does find it objectionable, that is). If anything, in my mind, that would make criticism even harder to forgive.
 
Last edited:
Shareefruck said:
I don't see how whether or not it's an important plot device has anything to do with whether or not it's justifiable criticism to point out, personally. It's still part of the movie. Being random and needless doesn't make it any less objectionable (if someone does find it objectionable, that is). If anything, in my mind, that would make criticism even harder to forgive.
Click to expand...

I was arguing with him saying they use it as a crutch. Because, IMO, using it as a crutch would indicate they rely on it to advance the plot in a way they know will please fans, even if it’s lazy. What they do, though, is not to advance the plot but acknowledge the great man
 
OhCaptainMyCaptain said:
I was arguing with him saying they use it as a crutch. Because, IMO, using it as a crutch would indicate they rely on it to advance the plot in a way they know will please fans, even if it’s lazy. What they do, though, is not to advance the plot but acknowledge the great man
Click to expand...

And it's great that some people appreciate it. It still cheapens the film as a whole from the use of fan-pleasing facilités. Anyway, it's not like there's a lot of artistic value to cheapen in there to begin with.
 
Rocketman - 8½/10. Much more honest and better than Bohemian Rhapsody. I think it could have used 5-10 minutes more at the end to cover more of Elton's happier life after getting sober. Not sure why the producer David Furnish left himself completely out of the movie. One scene would have been enough. Candle In the Wind's 1997 version also could have helped flesh out all the friendships he's had with other celebrities. Taron Egerton definitely earned at least nominations for his performance.
 
Won't You Be My Neighbor?

Documentary of the career and philosophy of Mr Rogers, whose PBS show we all know ran for decades.

If you're of a certain age, Mr Rogers exemplifies boring, bland tv kid's show fare. You don't even think about it. It's just rote, easy tv pablum. As white bread as it gets...until you dig just a tiny bit. Did you know the first episode of Mr Rogers dealt with the RFK assassination? Or that he had to personally sing a moving song to a US senator to keep funding for PBS going? Or that he had an episode where the neighborhood policeman (who was black (and gay, though they didn't deal with that on the show)) washing his feet in the same pool and drying off with the same towel as Mr Rogers during massive anti-integration riots in the US? Bet you didn't. I sure as hell had no idea.

This is a portrait of of Fred Rogers; ordained Presbyterian minister, child psychologist extraordinaire and generational tv show host as he goes about his gentle way among the rest of us.

I've been sitting in front of my computer for an hour now trying to sum this up, but I just don't know how to. It's so utterly simple and clear. Unconditional positive regard and listening to people. I just don't know if that's too simple and easy for this generation to understand. I always thought Mr Rogers was such a simple, easy target. But then I watched this and I am left with the indelible impression that Fred Rogers was not only one of the foremost ambassadors for public television but also one of the most genuinely decent human beings to have ever walked the earth.

On Netflix now.

I'm not crying, you're crying.

Shut up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyFan and kihei
Finally saw Midsommar. Liked the beginning a lot, but it peaks very quickly and there isn't much afterwards. Some nice images and ideas (again mostly in the beginning), but pretty much inefficient as a horror film. 5/10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom