Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +3

[nameless1]

Yes there are things to like there. They say he used an old 16mm film camera without electronic stabilization. So he did a commendable job on low budget equipment. It's also his first major film, so that's impressive too. He did a good job with the interesting characters. On the downside, he could have been more subtle on some story telling points and his editing was not a strong suit. But it's an impressive start, I'm sure many will be looking forward to his next project.

That is indeed impressive what he did with old equipment. Thank you for informing me.

 

[Osprey]

The Last Man on Earth (1964) - 6/10 (Liked it)

A scientist (Vincent Price) is the last man alive after a plague wipes out everyone else in this first adaptation of Richard Matheson's I Am Legend. Like the novel, the former humans in this may be vampires but look and and act more like zombies. In fact, I imagine that they inspired George A. Romero, who would make Night of the Living Dead four years later. They're so dumb that Price's character just lets them bang on his front door because they aren't smart enough to find another way in. That's accurate to the novel and was probably still terrifying in 1964, but it's hard to find much suspense in it nowadays. That's kind of how it goes with horror films from that era, though. The film also spends a bit too much time on backstory, IMO. Scenes that occurred while other people were still alive just aren't that interesting. Overall, the film is a little dry and dull, but still good enough to watch and appreciate as an early horror and as the most faithful adaptation of the novel.

The Omega Man (1971) - 6/10 (Liked it)

A scientist (Charlton Heston) is the last man alive after germ warfare wipes out everyone else in this second adaptation of Richard Matheson's I Am Legend. Unlike the first adaptation, the villains are more like vampires than zombies and are more substantial because they think, talk, coordinate and pose an actual threat. It also spends much less time on backstory, which was nice, and, instead of being slower and thoughtful, offers a lot more action. It's fun to watch Heston mow down vampires with a machine gun, run them over in his vehicle and set them on fire. The soundtrack is also more fun, but I wouldn't call that a compliment. It often seems pretty inappropriate, being light and bubbly when the vampires are rampaging and even when they have Heston's character restrained and plan to kill him. It's a puzzling soundtrack, to say the least. I could give a few other criticisms, but I don't want to give anything away. Anyways, it's not as true to the novel as the first adaptation and is almost more of an action movie than a sci-fi or horror, but it's a bit more entertaining.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

The Night Eats the World

with this one guy. And a couple of other people briefly.

Sam's in Paris for some reason. His ex-girlfriend is hosting a huge party in her huge suburban apartment, and Sam's there to pick up a box of his old tapes. Apparently, they still listen to tapes in Paris. Ex-girlfriend is busy gadding about, and Sam's shunted off into a quiet bedroom at the end of the hall, where he sits down and falls asleep. He awakes abruptly the next morning...and the party turned into a huge rager at some point. Place is trashed. Bottles and debris everywhere, furniture ruined, smears of blood all over the walls...uh, what? Yup. Blood. While Sam was passing out in a chair trying to staunch a nosebleed, the zombie apocalypse came to Paris. He looks outside, and it's full Walking Dead everywhere. Now Sam's stuck in a 6 story apartment building with a zombie stuck in the elevator. Who he names Alfred. Oh well, time to build up those calves and thighs pounding up and down those stairs getting supplies. Sam's now in quarantine like the rest of us...only there's no wifi or streaming services to entertain him. The next 85 minutes are Sam staving off boredom, PTSD, paranoia and loneliness. With the occasional drum solo.

A little reminder the real apocalypse is going to be a lot less fun than you'd first think. It's a lot more boring. And watch out what you blast your shotgun at in the dark of night.

On Prime.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

I get the Drive criticism but don't you think Midnight in Paris is infinitely more corny than Drive? In a different way for sure, but I can support the former's much more than the latter's. Also, Oscar Isaac has the best performance in either movies. I think MIP is alright but the whole 'And here are the Fitzgeralds at party for Jean Cocteau! And now they're heading out to meet Hemingway who's drinking alone and talks about writing and boxing and love-making! And now Dali is being weird and oh weren't the 20s so wonderful and stylish and all these great artists were friends and you could step into a random bar and meet a genuius and and and ' a little too much even if the movie does shamelessly try to play back from it at the end.

Ahhh, but I think the corniness of Midnight in Paris is inherent to the whimsical concept, while the corniness in Drive is accidental and somewhat detrimental for a film where a man beats people with a hammer.

Won't disagree with you about Oscar Isaac who does so much with very little, but I'd be remiss if I didn't note how utterly delightful I think Corey Stoll is as an extremely caricatured Hemingway.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Ahhh, but I think the corniness of Midnight in Paris is inherent to the whimsical concept, while the corniness in Drive is accidental and somewhat detrimental for a film where a man beats people with a hammer.

Won't disagree with you about Oscar Isaac who does so much with very little, but I'd be remiss if I didn't note how utterly delightful I think Corey Stoll is as an extremely caricatured Hemingway.

Perhaps, but it just feels like such an excuse for Woody Allen to geek out, so to speak. I think the movie suffers a little bit from that having your cake and eating it too. I mean, I was greatly amused by the ' Have you ever shot at charging lions? ' line but I struggle to respect the story when it works so hard at indulging a dreamer's whims before saying ' oh no, sorry ' without ever making an effort at delving into why or what was wrong. I don't think the performances helped either. Outside of Hemingway, they were all pretty bad, I found, outside of the (lineless?) Picasso. Like, if you shouldn't romanticize the artists of the era, why are they ever caricatures in the first place? The movie never suggests that this is only an impression of its impressionable main character, who comes across as an obvious stand-in for its director. I just find Drive a lot more consistent in its approach, which I'll forgive way more than contradictory treachery.

 

[member 51464]

I get the Drive criticism but don't you think Midnight in Paris is infinitely more corny than Drive? In a different way for sure, but I can support the former's much more than the latter's. Also, Oscar Isaac has the best performance in either movies. I think MIP is alright but the whole 'And here are the Fitzgeralds at party for Jean Cocteau! And now they're heading out to meet Hemingway who's drinking alone and talks about writing and boxing and love-making! And now Dali is being weird and oh weren't the 20s so wonderful and stylish and all these great artists were friends and you could step into a random bar and meet a genuius and and and ' a little too much even if the movie does shamelessly try to play back from it at the end.

This made me want to ask what you thought of, and think of, Paris, je t'aime.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

This made me want to ask what you thought of, and think of, Paris, je t'aime.

Never seen it. From that entire series, all I've seen is Yvan Attal's piece with Ethan Hawke and I loved it. That's in the New York film.

 

[member 51464]

Never seen it. From that entire series, all I've seen is Yvan Attal's piece with Ethan Hawke and I loved it. That's in the New York film.

Perhaps you'll have a chance to see it someday, and I'll look forward to your thoughts then

 

[Osprey]

Contagion (2011) - 4/10 (Disliked it)

A highly contagious virus threatens the world and well-known Hollywood stars (Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Laurence Fishburne, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Marion Cottillard, Bryan Cranston). This movie is so forgettable that I got nearly halfway through before realizing for sure that I saw it a long time ago. I'll give it credit that it's not afraid to kill off some of its stars and is pretty realistic (even down to shots of Purell flying off of the store shelves and the virus coming from bats through an intermediary animal), though the conspiracy aspect of the plot seemed rather corny. It's probably the film that's most like what's happening in the world right now, which may attract some viewers, but might be too realistic for others. It's not exaggerated enough or entertaining enough to be an escape. It's more dry and depressing than anything and ends completely suddenly. It's not a "bad" film, but it's not one that I liked 8 years ago and the current relevance hasn't improved my feelings any.

 

[Pay Carl]

Just watched Inside Out, honestly haven’t had that hard of a time not breaking down crying during a movie in a long time

very emotional movie, but very good

8.5/10

 

[OzzyFan]

Just watched Inside Out, honestly haven’t had that hard of a time not breaking down crying during a movie in a long time

very emotional movie, but very good

8.5/10

The first time I saw Inside Out in theaters I kept thinking to myself "Wow this is some really heavy stuff for kids to be watching". It's like a minor psychology class and emotional roller coaster that I don't know if any "kid" under late elementary or even early middle school years age will fully understand. It's a very adult movie for kids.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Perhaps, but it just feels like such an excuse for Woody Allen to geek out, so to speak. I think the movie suffers a little bit from that having your cake and eating it too. I mean, I was greatly amused by the ' Have you ever shot at charging lions? ' line but I struggle to respect the story when it works so hard at indulging a dreamer's whims before saying ' oh no, sorry ' without ever making an effort at delving into why or what was wrong. I don't think the performances helped either. Outside of Hemingway, they were all pretty bad, I found, outside of the (lineless?) Picasso. Like, if you shouldn't romanticize the artists of the era, why are they ever caricatures in the first place? The movie never suggests that this is only an impression of its impressionable main character, who comes across as an obvious stand-in for its director. I just find Drive a lot more consistent in its approach, which I'll forgive way more than contradictory treachery.

What are your thoughts on Nicolas Winding Refn beyond Drive? I haven't been a fan and outright hated Only God Forgives, but I did recently make my way through his Amazon series Never Too Old to Die and I liked it quite a bit almost in spite of myself. I can't in good conscious recommend it because it is so aggressively ponderous and almost antagonistic to the viewer. It's an endurance test both in time and content. But funny enough, that kinda made me like it a little more. The guy has a style for sure. It feels like he goes to the same school as David Lynch and Gaspar Noe but he only pays half attention in class.

 

[peate]

Call of the Wild. It's worth it just for the dog. And no it doesn't talk, but the expressions they give him are priceless. 7.0

 

[SouthGeorge]

The Gentlemen - 9/10. Really good. Better than overrated Irishman.

The Monos - 8.5/10. Slightly weird in the beginning because I watched it not knowing anything about the movie. But it was really good. I think Reddit said best movie of 2019.

Invisible Man - 8/10. Solid movie.

Onward - 7.5/10. I'd never watch this type of movie if not quarantined but it wasn't bad.

The Way Back - 7/10. Meh, I needed sports and it' something to watch but nothing great.

 

[nameless1]

The script for The Way Back is very well-written, because it feels honest, and the scenarios are organic enough that the melodramatic moments do not feel forced as many of these movies tend to do, but Ben Affleck's presence definitely enhanced it. He is never a great actor, but this time, he is very connected with the character, likely because he went through a similar experience in his personal life. As a result, even though he still does not demonstrate any great acting abilities, it is his most believable performance, and like the old adage goes, honesty is the best policy.

I was wary when I decided to pick it up, but this is indeed better than I thought. I have it as a 6.5/10.

 

[nameless1]

Call of the Wild. It's worth it just for the dog. And no it doesn't talk, but the expressions they give him are priceless. 7.0

I saw through the CGI a couple of times, and the first half just meanders. It does get better by the second half, but unfortunately, the movie cannot be saved by that point. Numerous times I wanted to leave in the first half, but I only stayed because of personal habit.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

What are your thoughts on Nicolas Winding Refn beyond Drive? I haven't been a fan and outright hated Only God Forgives, but I did recently make my way through his Amazon series Never Too Old to Die and I liked it quite a bit almost in spite of myself. I can't in good conscious recommend it because it is so aggressively ponderous and almost antagonistic to the viewer. It's an endurance test both in time and content. But funny enough, that kinda made me like it a little more. The guy has a style for sure. It feels like he goes to the same school as David Lynch and Gaspar Noe but he only pays half attention in class.

You mean Too Old to Die Young (the title is too good to mess it up!). I liked it a lot until the last two episodes, where he really missed an opportunity to push this thing in really strange territories. I'm not sure I get the Lynch and Noé links though. I like the three of them a lot, but don't see much common traits. True that the series' rythm was often a little off and forced, but the most impressive thing about Too Old to Die Young is that every shot could be framed. You don't see that kind of frame composition in Lynch's work, and only some of Noé's is that meticulous - most of his stuff is, on the contrary, very grime.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

You mean Too Old to Die Young (the title is too good to mess it up!). I liked it a lot until the last two episodes, where he really missed an opportunity to push this thing in really strange territories. I'm not sure I get the Lynch and Noé links though. I like the three of them a lot, but don't see much common traits. True that the series' rythm was often a little off and forced, but the most impressive thing about Too Old to Die Young is that every shot could be framed. You don't see that kind of frame composition in Lynch's work, and only some of Noé's is that meticulous - most of his stuff is, on the contrary, very grime.

Ha. It's funny. I kept looking at what I typed and thinking it didn't look right.

The series really felt like a Twin Peaks riff to me, hence the comparison. But Refn is all surface whereas Lynch gets under my Skin. As for Noe, some of the meticulously filmed perversions made me think of him. But again, I think Refn just kinda splashes around in pool and doesn't really dive in like Noe does. My comparisons are more about a vibe or feeling I suppose than actual style. There is a visual polish to Refn that neither of the others quite have.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Ha. It's funny. I kept looking at what I typed and thinking it didn't look right.

The series really felt like a Twin Peaks riff to me, hence the comparison. But Refn is all surface whereas Lynch gets under my Skin. As for Noe, some of the meticulously filmed perversions made me think of him. But again, I think Refn just kinda splashes around in pool and doesn't really dive in like Noe does. My comparisons are more about a vibe or feeling I suppose than actual style. There is a visual polish to Refn that neither of the others quite have.

Agreed, except for the Twin Peaks part. I actually started watching TOTDY because I was told it was similar to TP, never understood got it. It could have went that way

Spoiler

after Martin Jones was killed

and that episode ended on hints that it would, but I was very wrong. Maybe the Priestess of Death stuff had some of that absurd darkness, but nah not really.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I've watched a bunch lately, just gonna do really brief reviews.

Turbo Kid - I think this had some good things going for it for a movie that was $60k to make (mainly a decent score and honestly pretty mind-blowing practical gore effects for such a low budget production), but I really felt the restraints in the set design and the world building. Even though the movie didn't exactly look amateur in production value, it really felt that way due to those two things. Like I couldn't help but think things like it looked like a school theater production of Mad Max with some of the costumes, or wondering why there weren't more extras in certain scenes, or thinking they just had one isolated lot to shoot on for the whole thing except they tried to make it seem like a bigger world than it actually was. Commendable effort but it didn't quite work for me.

Evils of the Night - My GF and I both agreed this is one of the worst movies we've ever seen. We both love 80s camp but this was like pulling teeth to get through. It's basically soft-core porn for the first half and then just uninteresting low budget schlock for the rest of it. The whole climax of the movie (which lasted like 30 minutes) is a cheap cop-out considering what they hint at, and it was obviously just done for budgetary reasons. Horrible.

Hellraiser - I don't think it quite lived up to my expectations considering it is really revered as a horror classic, but I still really appreciated the body horror and I liked the structure behind the story. The Cenobites came across as a bit comical to me though, I'm not sure if this was intentional.

You Were Never Really Here/High Life/The Farewell - It's bizarre to group these together but I really don't have much to say about any of them. All of them were decent, but for each one I was expecting more and was underwhelmed.

47 Meters Down: Uncaged - Like for what it is, this was actually kind of enjoyable. A sequel to a crappy shark movie franchise has no right to be good, but I liked the set-up, I liked the set pieces for the most part, and I enjoyed the shark effects. I don't know if I could have expected anything better than I got.

The Blackcoat's Daughter - This one was definitely interesting but I feel like I spent too much time wondering what the f*** was going on to enjoy it properly. The different timelines were so confusing to me and I could only grasp on to some of the creepy I really liked how everything clicked, but I'm not sure it was worth the payoff for being kind of clueless the rest of the movie. Maybe something I'd like more on a second watch though. Still good though, I'd definitely recommend it.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Evils of the Night - My GF and I both agreed this is one of the worst movies we've ever seen. We both love 80s camp but this was like pulling teeth to get through. It's basically soft-core porn for the first half and then just uninteresting low budget schlock for the rest of it. The whole climax of the movie (which lasted like 30 minutes) is a cheap cop-out considering what they hint at, and it was obviously just done for budgetary reasons. Horrible.

Hellraiser - I don't think it quite lived up to my expectations considering it is really revered as a horror classic, but I still really appreciated the body horror and I liked the structure behind the story. The Cenobites came across as a bit comical to me though, I'm not sure if this was intentional.

I had no idea what Evils of the Night was but a quick look at the trailer and woah, it does indeed look absolutely horrible!

Hellraiser, on the other hand, I still find very good (only flaw to me are the actors, often pretty bad).

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Until 2010, I was collecting movies as a hobby. Must have around 4000 on different hard drives and DVDs, and a LOT of them I have never seen. I thought I would save them for my older days, when I'll have no money for any other form of entertainment, but hey, I guess now is the time to start opening these old boxes... Plugged in one of my hard drives - there is zero logic to what ended up packaged together. There's 451 films on there, I'll try and work through it alphabetically (per my computer's order, the first films starting with numbers or parentheses for some reason).

9.99$ (Rosenthal, 2008) - I'm not a huge fan of animation, even Bill Plympton can't hold my interest very long. It tells a few interlaced stories all from the same apartment building, where are mixed all classes of people (broke people being evicted, a supermodel, and your common miserable neighbors). It acts as if it's more meaningful than it really is, but it's still pretty fun. The stories are uneven, but they aim at some form of moral tales and it's not all miss. It's only at the conclusion of one of the vignettes that I realized I had already seen it before - which is not a very good sign normally. 7/10

(Maruhi) shikijô mesu ichiba (Tanaka, 1974) - (Spoilers ahead, but I doubt anybody here has any intention to watch this in the near future - I have Secret Chronicle: She Beast Market as the English title) Now there's a film that's not for everyone, but in which you find everything you were looking for: a town where every female has to resign themselves to prostitution, rape, a pet rooster and a good dose of animal cruelty, a prostitute who takes care of her [censored - pejorative slur] brother's sexual needs, and an exploding sex doll device. It probably looks like a farce, but it's a pretty good film with a strong signature on both cinematography and rythm. It is really bleak. At some point, the film gets you to believe that the main character will find some kind of solace (reaching a very weird sexual peak) where she's met by a bath of light in her gloomy house and where the film turns to color for about 10 minutes. But no, these 10 minutes turn out to be the darkest and she ultimately chooses to go back to her black and white life in town as a prostitute. And I mean really bleak. 8/10

 

[Osprey]

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) - 9/10 (Really loved it)

A farmer is persuaded by his new lover to kill his homely wife and run away to the city to live with her. Admittedly, I cracked jokes through the first half of the film, playfully having fun with the slight absurdity of the plot. I also thought "This is considered by some to be the greatest silent film ever made?" and "kihei is really out to lunch" (OK, not really on that last one, but I did wonder why he gave the film a 10). It slowly won me over, though, and I was hooked throughout the second half (and certainly was not making any jokes near the end). I was surprised by how emotional it turned out to be, especially for a silent picture. It's a roller coaster, from the darkest and saddest of moments to the happiest and funniest of them. I'm not sure if I've ever experienced such extremes in a film before, but it works. It's hard to believe that this love story is from the director of Nosferatu, the horror classic, but the same guy who made The Terminator eventually made Titanic, so maybe I shouldn't be surprised. In fact, when it ended, I thought to myself that this felt a bit like the Titanic of the silent era: a Grade A love story that packs a punch and is supported by excellent overall production, including impressive technical innovation. Also like Titanic, the story might seem overly melodramatic and eye rolling at times, but it's largely excusable because the production and just the art of film making is at such a high level. Speaking of the technical innovation, several of the shots, like one on a boat and another in the middle of street traffic, are amazing for the era. The film also features recorded music and some sound effects, which help the dramatic effect and make the film slightly easier to get into than your average silent film. That said, it still is a silent film (well, more or less) and expectations need to be kept in check. It won me over to the "pinnacle of silent film" camp, though, and I wish that I had watched it a lot sooner.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Damn, you guys are going to make we watch Sunrise aren't you.

 

[kihei]

Sherlock Jr. (1924) Directed by Buster Keaton 9A

If you seek a diversion during these grim times, Buster Keaton silent films will likely do the trick nicely. There were three great comic geniuses during the silent era: Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd. Chaplin is generally considered the greatest among these three because of the thematic richness of his work, but for pure physical comedy it is hard to beat the other two. Lloyd is known for his death-defying stunts (Keaton is no slouch on this score either), but Buster is the best purely physical comedian among them. His works are ingenious, clever and funny and can be watched over and over again. Sherlock Jr. has a modest opening 13 minutes as the story gets set up, but from that point on it is one brilliant comic gag after another. Our hero is a movie theatre projectionist who longs to become a great detective. He falls in love with a girl, but he has a rival, an unscrupulous villain who will stoop to anything to get his way. The villain steals a watch and Buster gets blamed for it, but then his alter ego Sherlock Jr. is on the case and the truth will out. Whether he is walking in comic lockstep just behind the villain, defying gravity on the handlebars of a bike, doing pratfalls in a movie that he gets comically trapped in, or escaping from bad guys with stunts that make you go "How did he do that?", Keaton's deadpan humour (that description must have been invented with him in mind) is both a wonder and a pleasure to behold.

intertitles