Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +4

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Thanks!

Follow up.... the lighthouse for The Lighthouse is not an actual functionning one and was built for the film.

• Set construction for the feature film The Lighthouse. The movie is about a Nova Scotia lighthouse keeper in the early 20th century and stars Willem Dafoe and Robert Pattinson. The site include the shell of a 18.3 meter (60ft) lighthouse built for the film. There will also be a small boat launch for scenes of the lighthouse keeper departing and arriving by dory, a coal shed, a house with a breezeway to the mock lighthouse and two other maintenance sheds.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

And it was built right beside a real one (too fugly for sure).

 

[ORRFForever]

Everyone likes a lighthouse. Not sure why. Something comforting about them.

 

[Osprey]

Everyone likes a lighthouse. Not sure why. Something comforting about them.

Yes, that's why most movies with lighthouses are horror themed .

Maybe, if you grew up around them, they might seem comforting. To me, they've always seemed other worldly.

 

[Puck]

Artemis Fowl, Directed by Kenneth Branagh, 6.0

Artemis Fowl, a young criminal prodigy, hunts down a secret society of fairies to find his missing father.

This is for kids but it isn't bad. It's a poor man's Harry Potter. A lot of people were complaining about Star Trek Picard being overstretched, this is the opposite. I think they tried to cram too much under 2 hours, it would have been better stretched out as episodes like The Mandalorian. But it's one of the few CGI graphics bonanzas you will see this Summer, so if you are into that, then this is one of the few places you will get that fix.

I thought the timing or cadence in the movie was off. I enjoyed the movie (relatively speaking) but I can't help thinking a lot was cut and left on the editing floor to bring it under two hours. The plot is somewhat complex (if you never read the book, it's an origin movie for a series that might never get sequels) however the ending is a simplistic let-down.

I checked Google and the budget for this was $125 million so it's obviously a loss leader for Disney putting this on their new streaming website. I think they knew it wasn't worth waiting for next year to air in cinenas, this product had something wrong with it for theatrical purposes. That said, I still enjoyed it. Not great, not Harry Potter level, but still interesting in a bad year for movies. Branagh did not do well on this for some reason but it's still worth a look in a sorry 2020. (go in with low expectations and it is ok).

 

[kihei]

The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant (1972) Directed by Werner Rainer Fassbinder 7B

I've always considered Werner Rainer Fassbinder to be the film director's equivalent of spinach: not fun to contemplate in advance nor to consume in the moment but somehow good for me in the long run if only because Fassbinder forces me to contemplate seriously the type of people I wouldn't walk across the street to meet if they paid me a thousand dollars. Petra is in a long-line of unappealing Fassbinder protagonists. She is a fashion designer who thinks she has achieved with experience some understanding of herself, that is, until she starts a new affair with a young female model after which we discover she's even more of an unlikable mess than she seemed in the first place. She has a daughter whom she doesn't really care about, an assistant who plays uncomplaining masochist to Petra's avid sadist, and a mother who when surveying the wreckage of her daughter's life can only bemoan the fact that Petra's new love interest is female. All this angst takes place in a single apartment in which Fassbinder finds interesting ways to shoot effectively in a confined space, ala Roman Polanski's Knife in the Water, which takes place almost entirely within the cabin of a small yacht. The mise-en-scene, all tacky designer clothes and huge Renaissance prints used as wall paper, is a lot of fun and it has to be because the characters are such a misery to be around. By the time the third act arrives I wondered if I were watching a comedy as feelings spiral more and more out of control to the point of self-parody. Minus the interesting visual style, though, The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant is a radio play in a cinematic disguise. True to much of Fassbinder's work, the movie gets better the further removed one actually is from seeing it. That's not a negligible accomplishment when you come to think about it.

subtitles

available of the Criterion Channel

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Just watched Ad Astra. Interesting glimpse into the possible near future of space travel. Something seemed familiar about the film and it turns out it was a loose interpretation of Heart of Darkness. I'd give it a 7.5/10.

 

[ORRFForever]

Just watched AD Astra. Interesting glimpse into the possible near future of space travel. Something seemed familiar about the film and it turns out it was a loose interpretation of Heart of Darkness. I'd give it a 7.5/10.

How was Pitt's acting?

 

[ORRFForever]

I understand The Rock was going to play Jack Reacher until Tom Cruise decided he wanted the role. For anyone who read the book(s), the 6'5" Rock would have been perfect, while the 5'3" Cruise is terribly miscast.

 

[Osprey]

Just watched AD Astra. Interesting glimpse into the possible near future of space travel. Something seemed familiar about the film and it turns out it was a loose interpretation of Heart of Darkness. I'd give it a 7.5/10.

That hadn't occurred to me, but I can see that now.

I understand The Rock was going to play Jack Reacher until Tom Cruise decided he wanted the role. For anyone who read the book(s), the 6'5" Rock would have been perfect, while the 5'3" Cruise is terribly miscast.

That's true, but I, personally, didn't mind Cruise in the role. I'm in the minority, though. I'm excited for the TV series that Amazon greenlit in January. Maybe Johnson will get a second chance. He did five seasons of Ballers, which had its final season last Fall, so he could be interested in and available for another series, especially in a role that he missed out on 9 years ago.

 

[ORRFForever]

That's true, but I, personally, didn't mind Cruise in the role. I'm in the minority, though. I'm excited for the TV series that Amazon greenlit in January. Maybe Johnson will get a second chance. He did five seasons of Ballers, which had its final season last Fall, so he could be interested in and available for another series, especially in a role that he missed out on 9 years ago.

I didn't like the books. The first was fine but it got really silly after that - as book series are prone to do.

 

[ORRFForever]

My Darling Vivian (2020) :

Touching documentary about Johnny Cash's first wife.

8/10

 

[Babe Ruth]

My Friend Dahmer (2017)

First hand account from illustrator Derf, of his high school relationship with Jeffrey Dahmer. It's a pretty consistent translation from graphic novel to this movie. A lot of it is typical teenaged stupidity, but with obviously dark omens as Dahmer moves closer to his first murder.
I found it interesting that Derf is pretty candid about his mean spirited manipulation of Dahmer (coaching up Dahmer's humiliating stunts, etc). But his candor seems to have limited wisdom. I've watched interviews where Derf talks about the factors that led to Dahmer's growing mental implosion, but his insidious exploitation of Dahmer seems to have no (culpable)place in those negative influences. Sad, gross relationship depicted here. But otherwise is probably valuable as an honest look in to Dahmer's psychological formation.

 

[Osprey]

The Wind (2019) - 4/10 (Disliked it)

In the pioneer West, on a ranch in the middle of nowhere, a young woman (Caitlin Gerard) and her husband deal with loneliness, new neighbors and a supernatural presence. This is a Western horror movie, which immediately makes it quite unique. As someone who likes both genres, I really wanted to like it. It does look really good, with a nice setting and good cinematography, and it has pretty good atmosphere. The acting is pretty good, at least by its star. Unfortunately, it has a number of issues. The biggest is how the story is told with lots of jumping around in time. The film starts with a bloody scene and then shows us scenes that happened before, then ones that happened after, then before, then after and so on, all the way up to the end. It's disjointed and confusing, not enough that I couldn't figure it out, but it was a distraction to sort it out. There's a lot of time to try to sort things out, too, because, despite it being less than 90 minutes, it drags. Not a whole lot happens in the story (I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it were based on a short story), and the film's apparent solution to stretch it out and try to avoid becoming boring (or maybe it's to make the film feel more artistic... or maybe both) is the aforementioned jumping around the timeline. Finally, I didn't really find it scary or even all that spooky, and the few real scares are jump scares. I see and appreciate what the film was evidently trying to do, which is make a horror movie with deeper meaning, along the lines of The Babadook, this time about other issues that women deal with, like loneliness, jealousy and postpartum depression, but it's just not put together nearly as well. It's a good effort, but not a successful one, at least for me.

 

[ORRFForever]

The Wind (2019) - 4/10 (Disliked it)

In the pioneer West, on a ranch in the middle of nowhere, a young woman (Caitlin Gerard) and her husband deal with loneliness, new neighbors and a supernatural presence. This is a Western horror movie, which immediately makes it quite unique. As someone who likes both genres, I really wanted to like it. It does look really good, with a nice setting and good cinematography, and it has pretty good atmosphere. The acting is pretty good, at least by its star. Unfortunately, it has a number of issues. The biggest is how the story is told with lots of jumping around in time. The film starts with a bloody scene and then shows us scenes that happened before, then ones that happened after, then before, then after and so on, all the way up to the end. It's disjointed and confusing, not enough that I couldn't figure it out, but it was a distraction to sort it out. There's a lot of time to try to sort things out, too, because, despite it being less than 90 minutes, it drags. Not a whole lot happens in the story (I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it were based on a short story), and the film's apparent solution to stretch it out and try to avoid becoming boring (or maybe it's to make the film feel more artistic... or maybe both) is the aforementioned jumping around the timeline. Finally, I didn't really find it scary or even all that spooky, and the few real scares are jump scares. I see and appreciate what the film was evidently trying to do, which is make a horror movie with deeper meaning, along the lines of The Babadook, this time about other issues that women deal with, like loneliness, jealousy and postpartum depression, but it's just not put together nearly as well. It's a good effort, but not a successful one, at least for me.

I agree. My old review...

Wind [2019] :

A young woman (Lizzy) and her husband live on the 19th Century American frontier. Another couple move next door. The wind blows constantly. Lizzy is nuts.

That's pretty much all I understood in this mess of a movie - next to Wind, 2017's "mother!" looks cohesive and well thought out.

2.5/10

Movie Trailer :

 

[ORRFForever]

My Friend Dahmer (2017)

First hand account from illustrator Derf, of his high school relationship with Jeffrey Dahmer. It's a pretty consistent translation from graphic novel to this movie. A lot of it is typical teenaged stupidity, but with obviously dark omens as Dahmer moves closer to his first murder.
I found it interesting that Derf is pretty candid about his mean spirited manipulation of Dahmer (coaching up Dahmer's humiliating stunts, etc). But his candor seems to have limited wisdom. I've watched interviews where Derf talks about the factors that led to Dahmer's growing mental implosion, but his insidious exploitation of Dahmer seems to have no (culpable)place in those negative influences. Sad, gross relationship depicted here. But otherwise is probably valuable as an honest look in to Dahmer's psychological formation.

I turned it off 30 minutes in.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Slacker
Been so long since I’ve seen this and I forgot how alive it is. First films are always fascinating — ok, technically this is Richard Linklater’s second film but his first that was “discovered” and popularized. There tends to be a roughness though. Hints of promise and talent held ever so slightly back by low production values or bad acting. Not here! The fashion and music certainly date it, but I wouldn’t call the movie dated. Some of the philosophy, politics and theorizing remain resonate and relevant today. The rambling, ambling nature from conversation to conversation over the course of a day in Austin, Texas is such an effective and sturdy structure I’m surprised I haven’t seen it ripped off more. (It also minimizes the time with ever character so none really wear out their welcome).

I’ve said it before ‘round these parts but I think Linklater is the underrated great American director. It isn’t like he’s NOT appreciated but he never seems to be on “the list” so to speak of the greats. I think he has eight near-perfect A-grade movies, a handful of good-to-interesting projects and yeah, there’s a few duds (usually when he leans more commercial), but you work enough and they can’t all be winners. Few have a better sense for genuine people/character. Few use time as interestingly or effectively as he does to mine that humanity.

 

[kihei]

Antiporno (2016) Directed by Sion Sono 6C

What are the chances of running into Petra Von Kant two days in a row? Lucky me. I chose Antiporno, a MUBI entry which I knew nothing about, because it was made by one of my favourite Japanese directors Sion Sono (Love Exposure; Strange Circus; Suicide Club; Why Don't You Play in Hell?; Tokyo Tribe) who seems to make a new movie every day after lunch. Anyway, I hadn't a clue what to expect and what did I get?: another self-centred fashionista who has a sado-masochistic relationship with her assistant and no shortage of other major issues, shot in a single apartment with an all-female cast. Homage? Not a chance. Antiporno is a whole other ball game, an absolute nutter of a movie, totally crazy cakes. Sono was one of five directors commissioned to reinvigorate a soft-core porn franchise, Antiporno, that was popular in Japan in the '70s and '80s. Man, did they pick the wrong guy. Despite its heavy emphasis on nudity and simulated sex, Antiporno manages to be almost entirely free of eroticism of any kind. In fact the film seems to be an attempt to piss off both the anti-porn crowd and the pro-porn crowd simultaneously. About a half hour into the movie everything shifts as Antiporno takes a massive u-turn and suddenly becomes focused on deceptive appearances and on its own artificiality as a movie. Full meta, in other words. The mixed up and confused Kyoto, our central crazy, ends up on a journey of self-discovery, though that's not necessarily all shits and giggles either. If The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant is essentially a serious character study of a messed-up woman, Antiporno is closer to a pop-art provocation. Its anger is more generalized and less coherent, but its abstract methods of displaying this turmoil are more visually stunning, too. There is an apocalyptic section right at the end that uses only paint to create its vision, and it is one of the most spectacular uses of film that Sono has ever displayed on the screen. Obviously, Antiporno won't be to everyone's taste. I approached the film as a conceptual art installation and was fine with it.

subtitles

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Da Five Bloods
Feels like there are about five movies stuffed into this — and they’re all good. While not Lee’s best film overall it’s his best at melding his undeniable politics and worldview with a pretty cracking bit of entertainment. This is so stuffed with ideas and allusions it’s almost a choose your own adventure in terms of what you want to grab onto. Want to be mad? Be mad. Want to be entertained? Yep. Want to study it for its film references? Bring a big note pad. Lee doesn’t make you choose though. He gives it all to you. Societal commentary and film history commentary. Frankly, I found it glorious. Vibrant. Alive. Give me more adjectives. Lee’s the start, but Delroy Lindo isn’t far behind. Career best and awards worthy work from him here in a cast loaded with on-point performances. The only thing stopping me from proclaiming this as one of Lee’s top five is a guard against recency bias ... but check with me again in a few months.

Bamboozled
Speaking of Lee’s best. This one is right near the top for me, having not merely stood the test of time, but having grown nearly two decades on. Super interesting to go back and read the reviews from its release, which weren’t great, dismissing the movie’s use of blackface as too extreme and clearly of a prior time. There was a haughtiness to the dismissal that reeks of really missing the point. Just because there isn’t literal blackface (though there sometimes still is!) doesn’t mean there aren’t still issues of image and stereotype and appropriation. It’s an issue beyond entertainment. Like a lot of Lee’s work, still incisive and (sadly) relevant today.

The Big Knife
This bored me to tears. Thought I was getting some gritty Hollywood noir and mostly got a bunch of people whining about their feelings. Not even Rod Steiger with his typical amped-to-11-devourer-of-worlds routine could save this experience for me.

Phase IV
A perfectly cromulent lo-fi 70s sci-fi banger. HAIL ANTS!

Grand Prix
Went into this expecting James Garner as a scrappy American beating the odds in a foreign sport type story ... couldn’t have been more wrong. This is actually a broad canvassed ensemble piece. I think Garner does have the most screen time, but he might not. Four drivers of various backgrounds and at different stages of their careers, orbited by personal and professional relationships, which they move in and out of. No villains. No cliched rival driver. No bad team owner. Just men vs. themselves vs machine over the course of a Formula 1 season. They’re more brothers than rivals. A single movie could be made from any one of the four drivers (as well as any number of supporting characters). Instead we get it all in one three-hour epic. I absolutely loved it. And I’m burying the lede a bit here because on top of all that the technical end of this is striking. Director John Frankenheimer over loads this with split screens, tiling and host of other visual tricks to drive these characters home. Introspective voice over interviews laid on top of burnt rubber racing. Stellar racing footage swooping overhead and right from the driver POV. A few of the characters and plotlines verge on cliche, but it’s well acted for the most part and those broad strokes never bothered me. In fact, the script itself is pretty good — Garner and a young Jessica Walter have a cynical hard-edged flirtation that wouldn’t be out of place in a 40s noir. Can’t recommend enough.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

How was Pitt's acting?

Like someone with a resting heart rate of 47. Kind of a low key performance. Visuals were cool though. I can definitely see a politicized and weaponized space that is suggested on the horizon.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

That hadn't occurred to me, but I can see that now.



That's true, but I, personally, didn't mind Cruise in the role. I'm in the minority, though. I'm excited for the TV series that Amazon greenlit in January. Maybe Johnson will get a second chance. He did five seasons of Ballers, which had its final season last Fall, so he could be interested in and available for another series, especially in a role that he missed out on 9 years ago.

It was mainly the Tommy Lee Jones character that led me to look it up and sure enough they were going for a Heart of Darkness vibe.

 

[NyQuil]

Grand Prix
Went into this expecting James Garner as a scrappy American beating the odds in a foreign sport type story ... couldn’t have been more wrong. This is actually a broad canvassed ensemble piece. I think Garner does have the most screen time, but he might not. Four drivers of various backgrounds and at different stages of their careers, orbited by personal and professional relationships, which they move in and out of. No villains. No cliched rival driver. No bad team owner. Just men vs. themselves vs machine over the course of a Formula 1 season. They’re more brothers than rivals. A single movie could be made from any one of the four drivers (as well as any number of supporting characters). Instead we get it all in one three-hour epic. I absolutely loved it. And I’m burying the lede a bit here because on top of all that the technical end of this is striking. Director John Frankenheimer over loads this with split screens, tiling and host of other visual tricks to drive these characters home. Introspective voice over interviews laid on top of burnt rubber racing. Stellar racing footage swooping overhead and right from the driver POV. A few of the characters and plotlines verge on cliche, but it’s well acted for the most part and those broad strokes never bothered me. In fact, the script itself is pretty good — Garner and a young Jessica Walter have a cynical hard-edged flirtation that wouldn’t be out of place in a 40s noir. Can’t recommend enough.

This is a great summary, I was similarly impressed with this film, one of my Dad's absolute favourites. He used to regale me with all of the stories around the filming of it.

I also expected a Days of Thunder type cliche but it manages to deftly balance the storylines of four separate drivers all of whom deserve a shot at the victory.

I agree that the girlfriend's over-the-top harangue speech is a bit hammy, and the Italian driver is pretty weakly acted, but overall it manages to present a somewhat introspective and philosophical perspective on auto racing.

 

[ORRFForever]

Like someone with a resting heart rate of 47.

He's gotten better over the years. Far from great but better than he was.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

This is a great summary, I was similarly impressed with this film, one of my Dad's absolute favourites. He used to regale me with all of the stories around the filming of it.

I also expected a Days of Thunder type cliche but it manages to deftly balance the storylines of four separate drivers all of whom deserve a shot at the victory.

I agree that the girlfriend's over-the-top harangue speech is a bit hammy, and the Italian driver is pretty weakly acted, but overall it manages to present a somewhat introspective and philosophical perspective on auto racing.

Having now seen it I wonder why it isn't held in higher modern esteem. Seems very well reviewed. Won multiple technical Oscars. I've read many "best sports movie" lists and listened to similar discussions and it feels like this rarely if ever comes up. Too long and introspective, perhaps? Doesn't really have a rousing cliched crescendo of a climax. There is a victory, of course, but at what cost? I'm tempted to stereotype Americans here (I am one) and just assume that's not what folks want out of a sports movie. We like underdogs and bootstrappin' and villains. We want to cheer and feel exhilarated. But that isn't exactly the story told here.

Too bad. I think it's a real gem.

 

[kihei]

Never saw Grand Prix. Guess I should.