Bruins4Lifer
Registered User
No particular order:
Lanthimos
P.T. Anderson
Tarantino
Villeneuve
Linklater
McQueen
Pawlikowski
Cuarón
Ceylan
Zvyagintsev
edit: made 2 changes
Last edited:
Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +3
- Thread starter ProstheticConscience
- Start date
- Status
Lanthimos
P.T. Anderson
Tarantino
Villeneuve
Linklater
McQueen
Pawlikowski
Cuarón
Ceylan
Zvyagintsev
edit: made 2 changes
sr edler
gold is not reality
- Mar 20, 2010
- 12,135
- 6,617
Ahah, it's the Memories of Murder guy who's made Parasite? Memories of Murder's such a low key good film, I might check out Parasite when I'm in the right mood for a serious film. My gf was over this weekend and she prefers comedies and horror movies. By the way, didn't they catch the serial killer Memories of Murder is based on last year, I think they did.
Here's the director whose movies I would be curious about sight unseen (pretty much in order):
1) Apichatpong Weerasethakul
2) Jia Zhangke
3) Jean Luc Godard
4) Bela Tarr
5) Hou Hsiao-Hsien
6) Tsai Ming-liang
7) Wong Kar-wai (not sure what he has got left, but I would check it out)
8) Park Chan-wook
9) Bong Joon-ho
10) Sofia Coppola
That's a lot of Asian directors, but that's the way the cookie crumbles these days.
1) Apichatpong Weerasethakul
2) Jia Zhangke
3) Jean Luc Godard
4) Bela Tarr
5) Hou Hsiao-Hsien
6) Tsai Ming-liang
7) Wong Kar-wai (not sure what he has got left, but I would check it out)
8) Park Chan-wook
9) Bong Joon-ho
10) Sofia Coppola
That's a lot of Asian directors, but that's the way the cookie crumbles these days.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
Nothing much to add to this review except to concur with its points. The Gentlemen feels like one of those movies made just for the fun of it, and I had a really good time. Colin Farrell and Hugh Grant, acting against type, were especially enjoyable, but I thought everybody did a good job of sustaining just the right tone. And for once Charlie Hunnam isn't a black hole in the centre of the screen. 6A on my scorecard.
Last edited:
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,981
- 2,900
Color Out of Space (Stanley, 2019) - Not as good as I hoped it would be, and without the strong signature of Stanley's previous films (maybe he's rusty a little), but still a fun and sometimes visually interesting horror film. I was hoping that the line "a color I've never seen before" from the trailer would bring more to think about than it did. 5/10
I've never read the short story so I had no idea it was the same source material as The Curse!
I've never read the short story so I had no idea it was the same source material as The Curse!
Parasite (2019) - 7/10 (Really liked it)
A poor family cons its way into the service of a rich family. I went in thinking that this might be some sort of sci-fi or horror, but the title is only metaphorical, and it's really more of a dark comedy. I found it to be quite funny, not so much in overt humor, but in the absurdity of situations and the brazenness of the characters. I was particularly amused by the father, who seems like the dumbest of the family (sort of like Homer Simpson). The acting is very good and so is the direction. In hindsight, 2:12 could've felt too long for such a film, especially reading subtitles, but it was well paced and didn't feel like it dragged. I really enjoyed the first 1:30 or so, but the final half hour didn't work as well for me. For one, it gets a little unbelievable. For example:
Also, what happens to the characters near the end would've resonated more if I had grown attached them, but we don't really see other layers than what they were introduced with. For example:
It just felt to me like the film tried a bit too hard to be serious and poignant in the final act and it was just a little unbelievable and unearned.
The film isn't subtle about the theme being the disparity between the social classes. How you feel about that topic may affect how important you feel that the film is. It may not be what you expect, though. For example, the poor family is mostly shown in an unflattering light while the rich family is mostly shown in a flattering one. There's also a suggestion that the poor family could afford to buy a house like the rich family's with a lot of hard work (i.e. they could lift themselves out of poverty). It's a rather different presentation of the topic than you'd probably expect from a Hollywood film these days and makes one wonder what exactly the message is. Is the film even a criticism or more an observation? Maybe it cleverly has no message per se and viewers are left to take from it what they want.
Anyways, despite my criticisms (which I detailed more because the bar that it's being judged at is so high), I really enjoyed the film. My feelings toward it are similar to those toward Get Out, another very good dark comedy with very obvious social commentary that gets very serious at the end, so how much you like that film may suggest how much you'll like this one. It didn't quite live up to the hype, but it's still one of the year's better films that I've seen and highly recommended.
A poor family cons its way into the service of a rich family. I went in thinking that this might be some sort of sci-fi or horror, but the title is only metaphorical, and it's really more of a dark comedy. I found it to be quite funny, not so much in overt humor, but in the absurdity of situations and the brazenness of the characters. I was particularly amused by the father, who seems like the dumbest of the family (sort of like Homer Simpson). The acting is very good and so is the direction. In hindsight, 2:12 could've felt too long for such a film, especially reading subtitles, but it was well paced and didn't feel like it dragged. I really enjoyed the first 1:30 or so, but the final half hour didn't work as well for me. For one, it gets a little unbelievable. For example:
It's hard to believe that rich homeowners would put up with their lights being on the fritz, especially for years, and not call in electricians to trace the power or re-route it. We just have to accept that they put up with it because it plays a big role at the end of the film.
Also, it's hard to believe that the father would choose virtual imprisonment in the basement over the many alternatives that would allow him more contact with his family. Even going along with that, though, surely he could've sneaked out at some point (especially while the house was empty and on the market) to deliver his letter in person or even just put it in the mail. Sending it out one letter per day in Morse Code over years is just way too melodramatic.
Also, it's hard to believe that the father would choose virtual imprisonment in the basement over the many alternatives that would allow him more contact with his family. Even going along with that, though, surely he could've sneaked out at some point (especially while the house was empty and on the market) to deliver his letter in person or even just put it in the mail. Sending it out one letter per day in Morse Code over years is just way too melodramatic.
The poor family is just as unprincipled, opportunistic and uncaring at the end as at the beginning. They even kicked a lady down the stairs, knocking her unconscious, tied her and her husband up and didn't seem to worry at all that she might be badly injured or that they would starve to death being tied up. If they still don't care about others, even other poor people like them, why should we care about them?
A little character development and reason why we should sympathize with them--like realizing that what they're doing is wrong and showing compassion for the other couple--would've gone a long way to helping me to relate to the characters and care about what happens to them in the end.
A little character development and reason why we should sympathize with them--like realizing that what they're doing is wrong and showing compassion for the other couple--would've gone a long way to helping me to relate to the characters and care about what happens to them in the end.
The film isn't subtle about the theme being the disparity between the social classes. How you feel about that topic may affect how important you feel that the film is. It may not be what you expect, though. For example, the poor family is mostly shown in an unflattering light while the rich family is mostly shown in a flattering one. There's also a suggestion that the poor family could afford to buy a house like the rich family's with a lot of hard work (i.e. they could lift themselves out of poverty). It's a rather different presentation of the topic than you'd probably expect from a Hollywood film these days and makes one wonder what exactly the message is. Is the film even a criticism or more an observation? Maybe it cleverly has no message per se and viewers are left to take from it what they want.
Anyways, despite my criticisms (which I detailed more because the bar that it's being judged at is so high), I really enjoyed the film. My feelings toward it are similar to those toward Get Out, another very good dark comedy with very obvious social commentary that gets very serious at the end, so how much you like that film may suggest how much you'll like this one. It didn't quite live up to the hype, but it's still one of the year's better films that I've seen and highly recommended.
Last edited:
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,769
- 3,807
I got ya covered!
1. PTA
2. Coen Bros.
3. Villeneuve
4. Spike Jonze
5. Robert Eggers
6. Steven Soderbergh
7. David Fincher
8. David Cronenberg
9. Park Chan-Wook
10. Edgar Wright
HM: Alex Garland, Rian Johnson, Bong Joon-Ho, Guillermo Del Toro, Ridley Scott
There are some other names I considered. I LOVE Richard Linklater, but also must concede I've openly sat out his last few movies so it doesn't feel like I'm being honest. There's another class of dudes like Nolan and Tarantino and Cuaron who I generally like but whose movies sometimes verge more on obligation to me. And then there's David Lynch who almost qualifies, but I have to admit if his next mystery project were some abstract four hour ramble, I'm probably sitting it out.
I was starting to get around to this year's Best Picture nominees that I hadn't seen yet and realized that I still hadn't seen two of the more acclaimed ones from last year.
Roma (2018) - 4/10 (Disliked it)
Usually, I summarize the plot in one sentence here, but there isn't much of one. The film just follows a housemaid around and then ends the same way that it started. It feels very much like a short film that's been stretched and padded out to over two hours. That time wasn't even used much to develop the characters--even the lead character is about as uninteresting at the end as at the start--but, instead, seemingly to present writer/director Alfonso Cuaron's own personal memories of growing up in Mexico at this time. I appreciate that personal connection and his obvious passion, but there still should be a story worthy of being told, IMO. Frankly, I found it to be very tedious and one of the more boring films that I've seen in some time. I did admire and love the direction and cinematography, though. It looks like a much older film, not just because it's in black and white, but because it employs wide shots, long takes and slow pans. I wish that more directors today would shoot films like this (instead of resorting to quick edits, fast camera work, closeups and so on). As such, I have no problem with Cuaron winning Best Director and Best Cinematography. I just wish that there had been a lot more of a story to match the direction, i.e. substance to go with the style.
Green Book (2018) - 8/10 (Loved it)
An Italian bouncer (Viggo Mortensen) is hired to drive and protect a "colored" piano virtuoso (Mahershala Ali) on a playing tour through the southern states in 1962. The story may seem familiar and cliched, but at least it has one and a fairly good one. There's nothing exceptional or unique about how it's directed or shot, but it also doesn't rely on that. It's a good story with interesting characters, and that's what's more important to my personal enjoyment. It was quite a bit funnier and lighter than I expected. It doesn't avoid or sugarcoat race relations, but it doesn't make them as tough to stomach as other films. It's not really about race, after all, but about a relationship, and it keeps the focus on that, not with beating us over the head with the wrongness of racism. The performances by Mortensen and Ali are both good, with Mortensen's nomination seemingly being more for getting into character and Ali's for making it look effortless (though, honestly, I was wondering why he won halfway through, but I eventually saw, especially in one powerful scene in the rain). Anyways, is it feel good Oscar bait? Yes, it is, but I like to feel good and get emotionally invested and I'll take that any day over Oscar bait that makes me feel nothing.
Roma (2018) - 4/10 (Disliked it)
Usually, I summarize the plot in one sentence here, but there isn't much of one. The film just follows a housemaid around and then ends the same way that it started. It feels very much like a short film that's been stretched and padded out to over two hours. That time wasn't even used much to develop the characters--even the lead character is about as uninteresting at the end as at the start--but, instead, seemingly to present writer/director Alfonso Cuaron's own personal memories of growing up in Mexico at this time. I appreciate that personal connection and his obvious passion, but there still should be a story worthy of being told, IMO. Frankly, I found it to be very tedious and one of the more boring films that I've seen in some time. I did admire and love the direction and cinematography, though. It looks like a much older film, not just because it's in black and white, but because it employs wide shots, long takes and slow pans. I wish that more directors today would shoot films like this (instead of resorting to quick edits, fast camera work, closeups and so on). As such, I have no problem with Cuaron winning Best Director and Best Cinematography. I just wish that there had been a lot more of a story to match the direction, i.e. substance to go with the style.
Green Book (2018) - 8/10 (Loved it)
An Italian bouncer (Viggo Mortensen) is hired to drive and protect a "colored" piano virtuoso (Mahershala Ali) on a playing tour through the southern states in 1962. The story may seem familiar and cliched, but at least it has one and a fairly good one. There's nothing exceptional or unique about how it's directed or shot, but it also doesn't rely on that. It's a good story with interesting characters, and that's what's more important to my personal enjoyment. It was quite a bit funnier and lighter than I expected. It doesn't avoid or sugarcoat race relations, but it doesn't make them as tough to stomach as other films. It's not really about race, after all, but about a relationship, and it keeps the focus on that, not with beating us over the head with the wrongness of racism. The performances by Mortensen and Ali are both good, with Mortensen's nomination seemingly being more for getting into character and Ali's for making it look effortless (though, honestly, I was wondering why he won halfway through, but I eventually saw, especially in one powerful scene in the rain). Anyways, is it feel good Oscar bait? Yes, it is, but I like to feel good and get emotionally invested and I'll take that any day over Oscar bait that makes me feel nothing.
Last edited:
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,981
- 2,900
What Did Jack Do? (Lynch, 2017) - A fun short that kind of runs a little too long. It's Lynch, and it's no surprise that there's a uniqueness to it, but it quickly wears thin, and the ending is underwhelming (the atmosphere makes you expect something more of a punch, comedic or absurd, but nah, just falls flat at the end). Still, you've got a monkey speaking and saying stuff that feels like clichés you've all heard before - and that in itself is comedy gem. 5/10
ItsFineImFine
Registered User
- Aug 11, 2019
- 3,723
- 2,383
2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984) - 7/10
It was fine, there's some weird stuff going on here and its buildup isn't as good as other space films. Actually the problem is that I've seen enough space films that do various parts of what this is doing but slightly better, just in the past decade we had 3 or 4. I do think it's unfairly rated by some, it's a good film just not a great one. Also I find it weird that they show the aesthetic of earth to be basically the same in 2010 as it was back in actual 1984.
It was fine, there's some weird stuff going on here and its buildup isn't as good as other space films. Actually the problem is that I've seen enough space films that do various parts of what this is doing but slightly better, just in the past decade we had 3 or 4. I do think it's unfairly rated by some, it's a good film just not a great one. Also I find it weird that they show the aesthetic of earth to be basically the same in 2010 as it was back in actual 1984.
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
47 Meters Down - 6/10
Was better then I suspected but felt the ending was nonsense though and just them throwing it in there as a "Gotcha moment"
Honestly hate when films tack on an ending that ruins entire film. Would have enjoyed it more without that ending
You see this often with films ending on positive note when it should have ended on negative but in this case the film should have ended in positive but ending thrown in there was just nonsense
Was better then I suspected but felt the ending was nonsense though and just them throwing it in there as a "Gotcha moment"
Honestly hate when films tack on an ending that ruins entire film. Would have enjoyed it more without that ending
You see this often with films ending on positive note when it should have ended on negative but in this case the film should have ended in positive but ending thrown in there was just nonsense
The one thing that I liked about the movie was the first ending... but then it just had to erase even that. I watched the sequel a few weeks ago. I didn't think that it was any better, but the RT audience score is twice as good (68% vs 38% for the original), which I don't understand, but it's all subjective with movies of this quality, I guess.
GlassesJacketShirt
Registered User
High-Rise (2015)
Dir. Ben Wheatley
Cris Collingsworth: Now here's a movie that bored me to tears.
Score: 3/10
Dir. Ben Wheatley
Cris Collingsworth: Now here's a movie that bored me to tears.
Score: 3/10
Last edited:
The Rhythm Section - 4/10
Blake Lively does a decent job here, but the plot is a mess and a half. Either I blacked out and missed some things, or the big reveal has zero connection to anything that came before and there was no reason for it to resonate with the audience.
There was a solid car chase scene, though.
Also, some of the politics of the movie are very dated. It makes sense due to being an adaptation of a novel, but this plot feels about 15+ years out of date..and I believe the author of the novel wrote the screenplay, so the blame all falls to him.
But hey, Jude Law is still alive and making films, so that's something!
Edit: typos
Blake Lively does a decent job here, but the plot is a mess and a half. Either I blacked out and missed some things, or the big reveal has zero connection to anything that came before and there was no reason for it to resonate with the audience.
There was a solid car chase scene, though.
Also, some of the politics of the movie are very dated. It makes sense due to being an adaptation of a novel, but this plot feels about 15+ years out of date..and I believe the author of the novel wrote the screenplay, so the blame all falls to him.
But hey, Jude Law is still alive and making films, so that's something!
Edit: typos
Last edited by a moderator:
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
You're probably referring to something else, but I laughed while reading Variety's review:
Variety said:
Variety said:
Variety said:
Variety said:
Yep, that sounds like a movie that's 15 years out of date
.Seriously, I kind of want to see it now, in spite of the poor reviews, just because it sounds refreshing to have a human hero.
Last edited:
Haha, I was definitely referring to the bad guy and the type of evil the bad guy wants to commit. I don't think of fighting style and ability of women as a political thing.
Check it out and let us know. It has a few decent scenes. I didn't hate it. It's just not a very well constructed movie.
Check it out and let us know. It has a few decent scenes. I didn't hate it. It's just not a very well constructed movie.
ItsFineImFine
Registered User
- Aug 11, 2019
- 3,723
- 2,383
Bacurau (2019) - 7.5/10
I don't like genre changes part way through a film, I don't like how the second half tries to be a bit of a Western but is really bordering on horror, I don't like some of the drawn out scenes from earlier which could cut the length down by 10-15 minutes, I don't like some of the budget American actors they employ, I don't like Udo Kier, but it's a pretty riveting film.
I don't like genre changes part way through a film, I don't like how the second half tries to be a bit of a Western but is really bordering on horror, I don't like some of the drawn out scenes from earlier which could cut the length down by 10-15 minutes, I don't like some of the budget American actors they employ, I don't like Udo Kier, but it's a pretty riveting film.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
1929 Picadilly 10/10
Piccadilly (film) - Wikipedia
Directed by E. A. Dupont - Wikipedia
While it will annoy a few people with certain type casting and character underdevelopment, this movie. I saw the movie in an old cinema here in London where the music was performed live (as it was back in the day) and it greatly enhanced the experience. If you have ever seen an E A Dupont movie you can see his influence in both De Palma and Scorsese. The movie stared Anna May Wong one of the first well known asian actresses, she had to come to England to make a name for her self.
Piccadilly (film) - Wikipedia
Directed by E. A. Dupont - Wikipedia
While it will annoy a few people with certain type casting and character underdevelopment, this movie. I saw the movie in an old cinema here in London where the music was performed live (as it was back in the day) and it greatly enhanced the experience. If you have ever seen an E A Dupont movie you can see his influence in both De Palma and Scorsese. The movie stared Anna May Wong one of the first well known asian actresses, she had to come to England to make a name for her self.
Communal Blood
Registered User
The Gentlemen: 7.5/10 good gangster movie.. Hugh Grant is great in it.
- Status
