Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It (Part XXVI)

[Nalens Oga]

Days of Heaven (1978) - 7/10

First Terrence Malick film I saw and found it to be a bit mediocre. It's regarded for its cinematography, there are a decent number of good looking images here but the film lacks in good looking colours in general so I never felt like the style was all that great despite individual shots being nice here and there. The dialogue is quite clunky and emotionally flat, the kind you'd expect from a 2016 blockbuster minus the urgency. The better character interactions come more from the quiet moments and the young narrator that Malick seemed to like so much here was tbh a bit annoying. Anyways, premise was nice but the movie just tried to pack in so many scenes into it that no one scene felt all that strong minus one later on so the film wasn't very memorable for me, just one of those 70s films that tries very hard to make itself seem tragic.

 

[ProspectsSTC]

Just sitting here waiting for kihei's reviews of Arrival and Manchester by the Sea.

By the way, kihei, I'm extremely excited for La la land, so I was curious about what you thought of Chazelle's first movie, Whiplash.

 

[Nalens Oga]

Trouble In Paradise (1932) - 8.5/10

What a fun 80 minute romp this early talkie was, it manages to do so much in its quick run-time including comedy, romance, drama, crime, and possibly even being better in a few moments of slapstick than most slapstick films. The leading conman in the film exudes charm and a strong stage-presence making you actively cheer for the villain-protagonist. There are a few predictive elements to the storyline but at the same time, the story itself isn't predictive and doesn't rely on too many known tropes despite being an early classic. The best part here is definetely the dialogue full of romantic tension and wit between the man and the two leading ladies.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

I really, really enjoyed this movie. Especially the ending.

Me to. I liked the tempo and the acting. Very different movie but very good.

 

[nameless1]

Just sitting here waiting for kihei's reviews of Arrival and Manchester by the Sea.

By the way, kihei, I'm extremely excited for La la land, so I was curious about what you thought of Chazelle's first movie, Whiplash.

I found kihei's review from 2 years ago:

Whiplash (2014) Directed by Damien Chazelle (unrated--I applaud the film making skill on display but I detest the message )

Andrew (Miles Teller) is a very talented young drummer still in his teens who doesn’t want to settle for being good, he wants to be one of the greats. He attends the best music school in the States, and he has caught the attention of Terence Fletcher (J. K. Simmons), a much sought-after teacher who is nonetheless willing to bully his students to the point of emotional collapse. Fletcher is tolerated by Andrew, though, because he is willing to do whatever it takes to achieve his dream. But can Andrew handle how hard he is going to be pushed by his mentor? I hated the message of this movie, but admired the film making very much. The message seems to be that greatness, at least Charlie Parker-type greatness, can only be achieved by forcing an artist at an early age to endure a white-hot crucible of abuse, the end result of which will either make his career or drive him to a breakdown. I guess this approach reflects the Bobby Knight-school of music instrument teaching, and it is depressing to see this discredited message getting a hearing at this late date. However, this message is delivered in a film that is intensely focused and tightly directed. The movie portrays the one-sided clash of personalities as though it was the most important thing in the world, and for Andrew it is. Both Teller and Simmons give thoroughly committed performances. Whiplash is Chazelle’s second film as a director, and it gives promise of an exciting career in the making.

 

[kihei]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks, nameless 1. It would have taken me weeks to try and find that.

 

[OzzyFan]

Dr. Strange
3 out of 4stars

Above all, visually entertaining. A very different type of superhero movie. Good story and Benedict Cumberbatch is great. That said, I wish there was more character development for everyone not named Dr.Strange, even the main nemesis's background is majorly explained through "word of mouth". Lots of open ended holes too by the end of the movie (not spoiling anything but... relationships, status of XXXX, Strange's assumed work, quest for XXXX motility, etc.), albeit it leaves more room for sequel opportunities, it really annoyed me this time around. I guess that means I enjoyed the movie though. lol


SPOILER/Somewhat:




I didn't like how little I saw Dr.Strange the character grow as a person in this. I mean, actions speak louder than words and the ending, but on paper/through his dialogue there wasn't a ton of "he really did a 180" with his life. Anyone else feel similar?

 

[MetalheadPenguinsFan]

Sometimes They Come Back

7/10

 

[nameless1]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks, nameless 1. It would have taken me weeks to try and find that.

It did take a while, but the search button was very handy.

It was also interesting to read my past reviews, and to see how my writing changed over the years.

 

[member 51464]

Enemy - 7/10 Stylish and interesting.

 

[Canuck21t]

Hacksaw Ridge - 9/10

Damn kihei, I had high hopes.

Just go see it, it's very good.

 

[Nalens Oga]

Harakiri (1962) - 9/10

This classic is a lot more somber and less hysterical than a Kurosawa film but it's just as powerful in its message and storytelling. The film gives homage to and also criticizes the way of the samurais without feeling exaggerated or preachy, the director does a nice job of keeping the tone subdued to perfection while easily transitioning to twists. I really started to enjoy the camera work as it went along especially in the scenes set outside of the courtyard even though it initially felt a bit flatter or less dynamic than Kurosawa's work. I never generally have an issue with a movie being in black & white and generally enjoy it especially if it's a noir or a film set in Manhattan but there are certain scenes in this film which I wish could've been in technicolour because the fields and flowers would've looked amazing as well as the temple. Anyways, go see this, it's a laid-back thriller if one ever existed.

Up next, need to watch a 90s film. Going with either Chungking Express or Ed Wood. Also need to see the Three Colours Trilogy at some point but didn't enjoy the Double Life of Veronique much outside of the colours and atmosphere.

 

[kihei]

Arrival (2016) Directed by Denis Villeneuve 6B

Louise (Amy Adams), an expert in linguistics, and Ian (Jeremy Renner), a scientist from the US space programme (I think), try to decode an alien language in order to find out why twelve odd looking spacecraft are hovering just above various parts of the Earth. Arrival is as about as intimate a "first contact" science fiction movies as can be imagined. I must say I was a little underwhelmed. Director Denis Villeneuve direction, which is both brilliant and subtle (it took me ten minutes after the movie to decide that he had indeed played fair with the audience), draws attention away from what might have been merely a tepid script and a trite message in most other directors' hands. His film is thoughtful and atmospheric with mostly gloomy visuals and an emphasis on linguistic puzzle solving. As time continues to go by without a breakthrough and as the suspicious military and government officials grow ever more antsy, the pressure builds on Louise and Ian. Louise, very strongly played by Adams, is revealed to be a far more complicated character than we first realize. The best scenes in the movie involve Ian and her trying to establish mutual communication with the aliens in their dark and misty spacecraft. While the conception of the aliens is imaginative, the emphasis overall in the movie is more on the humans and their reactions than on the visitors to our planet. Some really big ideas involving language and time get tossed into the pot, too, but I find they add up to more contrivance than revelation. Arrival has been greeted in some quarters as a profound work, but I just don't see it. Villeneuve's skill makes something winning out of the material, but it is still a minor work in his career. Certainly Arrival is well worth seeing, but I think it might be too cerebral to find a really large audience.

The next day: Still a little underwhelmed, but the craftsmanship of Villeneuve remains quite remarkable.

 

[Unaffiliated]

Arrival (2016) Directed by Denis Villeneuve 6B

Out of curiosity, do you remember (or can you come up with on the fly, possibly) your ratings for Polytechnique, Incendies, Enemy, Prisoners, and Sicario?

6/10 for me would be below everything including Prisoners, but I know we have different tastes/grading weight.

(I haven't seen Arrival yet, and I also haven't seen Maelstrom)

 

[kihei]

Out of curiosity, do you remember (or can you come up with on the fly, possibly) your ratings for Polytechnique, Incendies, Enemy, Prisoners, and Sicario?

6/10 for me would be below everything including Prisoners, but I know we have different tastes/grading weight.

(I haven't seen Arrival yet, and I also haven't seen Maelstrom)

Off the top of my non-caffeinated head:

Polytechnique - 8B
Incendies - 7A
Enemy - 7B
Prisoners - 5A
Sicario - 8B

Grading Scale

10=a masterpiece: one of the best movies ever
9=one of the best movies of the decade
8=one of the best movies of the year
7=very good
6=good
5=run of the mill
4=below average
3=bad
2=very bad
1=worst among the worst


A=accessible
B=mildly challenging in one way or another
C=difficult
D=extremely difficult

I, as well, haven't seen Maelstrom.

Later: Just double-checked in my book and Incendies was an 8A.

 

[Nalens Oga]

Sing Street (2016) - 7/10

Starts off quite well at the beginning where it's charming and even funny but as it goes on, the charm wears off and the comedy goes missing. I thought I'm initially being harsh in my rating since it's generally rated higher but I'm not gonna give a movie a good rating just because it uses music over and over again to try to make you smile without really any substance behind it, ends up being a cute but forgettable film. The problem is probably that it stretches itself too thin by trying to cover a bit too much: putting a band together, a parental separation, sibling relationships, trying to win a girl, bullying, the catholic schools, coming-of-age, etc and it doesn't end up doing any of them particularly well (there's one decently powerful scene with the brother featuring an outburst). The band is put together far too easily and never faces any real challenges in creating their music despite being a group of teenagers and characters are almost background outside of 3, the sister being the biggest example as she's used in basically two scenes and disappears later on. It also annoys me to no end that it's set in the 80s with him listening to 80s music but all the tedious songs that he produces sound like a 2000s boy-band rather than an 80s indie or even pop group. Overall, a very escapist white people film if I ever saw one lol, think I'll avoid Begin Again and Once based on this. The soft Irish accent of the girl is lovely though.

Bit concerning to see this rated as one of the best films of the year. If it was 2014 or 2015, don't think it would've cracked a top-10, hopefully the rest of the year has better stuff to come.

 

[kihei]

Loving (2016) Directed by Jeff Nichols 7A

Set in the late '50s and '60s, Loving is a biopick about Richard and Mildred Loving (how ironic that surname) who were persecuted in the state of Virginia, even imprisoned briefly, for the crime of being a mixed race couple who happened to be married. Their long ordeal was not ended until 1967(!) when the United States finally overturned the law forbidding marriage between different races. Director Jeff Nichols approach is to focus on the couple, not the courtroom wrangling which is seen only sparingly. Partly because Mildred (Ruth Negga) and Richard (Joel Edgerton) are both stoics, this presents a bit of a problem as the momentum of the film bogs down occasionally. Edgerton is very good, though he does tend to overplay the man-of-few-words card. Negga, however, is terrific in a very difficult role. Compared to furled brow approach of Edgerton, Negga's face and body language are much more revealing of what is going on inside her. One of the best thing about this movie is how it quietly shows the gulf between country people and city people and how that can sometimes unintentionally get in the way of people understanding and trusting one another. Another even more important point is that history can be made by unlikely people who would just as soon have preferred not to be the focus of attention. But sometimes there is no other choice available to them. With the Ku Klux Klan "rebranding" and publicly recruiting for the first time in sixty years, Loving has an edge and an immediacy that it didn't quite possess even a week ago.

The next day: I think I underrated Edgerton as a lot of his scenes, one in particular near the end of the movie, are staying with me. My guess is that his performance will get better every time I see it, benefiting from familiarity and my better grasp of context.

 

[snowden]

Certain Women (2016) Directed by Kelly Reichardt 6C

Director Kelly Reichardt is the leading US proponent of "slow" cinema (except for her very uneven Night Moves). Certain Women is a three-part work that focuses on a trio of women living in small town Montana: a lawyer defending a hopeless client; a woman basically just getting through the day; and a lonely ranch girl trying and failing to make a connection with an adult education instructor (played well by Kristen Stewart). These lives have little in common, though all three principle characters seem to share similar traits: competent, responsible and empty. These women recall to mind the Henry David Thoreau line that most people lead lives of quiet desperation. All this is set against a backdrop of the wide-open spaces of the beautiful Montana outdoors which seems somehow like a rebuke to people leading such paltry lives. As always, Reichardt trusts her audience to conjure their own emotions. Certain Women is very low key and understated, too slow and uneventful for many. But it is the kind of movie that I will probably be thinking about for weeks.

Really enjoyed this. I especially liked the Kristen Stewart segment but for the other girl who was great. I wanted more from that story because it was pretty heartbreaking.

 

[Shareefruck]

Enemy - 3.0 (Very Good)
Definitely had an easier time with it than with Sicario (I'm not politically wired, so that might have had something to do with it).

Slick and precise direction/execution that feels purposeful rather than indulgent (expected from Villeneuve), thoughtful/nuanced screenplay and performances. I became worried when the promising premise looked like it was gearing up to devolve into mere wife-swapping titillation/drama, but after seeing the ending and thinking about the possible interpretations/themes and the significance of that final image, that clearly wasn't the case and I was sold.

Thinking of going through Villeneuve's other movies, since his visual style makes anything he does seem like a bit of a sure thing at least on some level. Incendies next?

2013
1. Upstream Color - 4.0 (Flawless)
2. Tale of Princess Kaguya - 3.5 (Great)
3. Why Don't You Play in Hell? - 3.5 (Great)
4. Blue is the Warmest Colour - 3.5 (Great)
5. Enemy - 3.0 (Very Good)
6. Frances Ha - 3.0 (Very Good)
7. Inside Llewyn Davis - 3.0 (Very Good)
8. Before Midnight - 2.5 (Good)
9. Like Father Like Son - 2.5 (Good)
10. The Dark Knight Returns (Animated) - 2.0 (Positive)

 

[End of Line]

Heavyweights (1995): 6/10


It's personally one of my favorite movies growing up and it might be brutal at times I still love it. Also made me feel incredibly old watching it

 

[Shareefruck]

Off the top of my non-caffeinated head:

Polytechnique - 8B
Incendies - 7A
Enemy - 7B
Prisoners - 5A
Sicario - 8B

Grading Scale

10=a masterpiece: one of the best movies ever
9=one of the best movies of the decade
8=one of the best movies of the year
7=very good
6=good
5=run of the mill
4=below average
3=bad
2=very bad
1=worst among the worst


A=accessible
B=mildly challenging in one way or another
C=difficult
D=extremely difficult

I, as well, haven't seen Maelstrom.

Later: Just double-checked in my book and Incendies was an 8A.

You need either your own blog, website/database, or sticky thread (although I guess that's when the book will come in handy). It would be nice to be able to search through your reviews whenever needed.

 

[kihei]

You need either your own blog, website/database, or sticky thread (although I guess that's when the book will come in handy). It would be nice to be able to search through your reviews whenever needed.

Hey, where have you been recently? It seems like you are on sabbatical or something. Lately, you pop up on here about as frequently as your team scores. Glad to see you liked Enemy, though.

 

[member 51464]

What was your take in Enemy on the mom making a reference to the acting?

[spoil]I read something online about the whole movie being about living in a totalitarian state and it made me feel simple since I had not considered this at all/[/spoil]

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

Enemy - 2.5 or 3.0 (Good/Very Good)
Definitely had an easier time with it than with Sicario (I'm not politically wired, so that might have had something to do with it).

Slick and precise direction/execution that feels purposeful rather than indulgent (expected from Villeneuve), thoughtful/nuanced screenplay and performances. I became worried when the promising premise looked like it was gearing up to devolve into mere wife-swapping titillation/drama, but after seeing the ending and thinking about the possible interpretations/themes and the significance of that final image, that clearly wasn't the case and I was sold.

Thinking of going through Villeneuve's other movies, since his visual style makes anything he does seem like a bit of a sure thing at least on some level. Incendies next?

Incendies is another excellent entry of his, many consider it his best work. High recommendation.

As for Enemy, I remember seeing it on my own back in theaters on a Tuesday afternoon. I was not sure what to expect going in, was kind of shocked at the way it ended. Went home, talked with roommates, and I ended up going back to watch it again that same night.

Was another great film in a year with an excellent film output.

What was your take in Enemy on the mom making a reference to the acting?

[spoil]I read something online about the whole movie being about living in a totalitarian state and it made me feel simple since I had not considered this at all/[/spoil]

[spoil]I think it is a viable theory. The central theme of the film is repression, so in this case the references to totalitarianism seemed (in my opinion) to relate to the character's state of mind, the two sides of Adam/Anthony constantly trying to repress each other within the central character's subconscious.[/spoil]

 

[Shareefruck]

Hey, where have you been recently? It seems like you are on sabbatical or something. Lately, you pop up on here about as frequently as your team scores. Glad to see you liked Enemy, though.

The kind of movies that come out in summer basically puts me into a mood where I never want to see another movie again, and that kind of persists even when the good ones start popping up here and there in fall (so much work finding them). Eventually lists of the good ones start to be neatly organized for me near the end of the year, and that's usually when I feel compelled to start going through them (because you guys have already done all the work!). There's usually a snowball effect where I only want to start seeing a bunch of movies again after I stumble on a few really good ones (and I haven't stumbled on any this year, so that might be why I'm taking even longer than usual). Also, I'm finding that albums are making it easy to ignore movies lately.

Oh, and the way I'm looking at it, the fewer goals scored, the sooner the idiots in charge get canned. Too bad we're stuck with the meddling owner, though.

What was your take in Enemy on the mom making a reference to the acting?

[spoil]I read something online about the whole movie being about living in a totalitarian state and it made me feel simple since I had not considered this at all/[/spoil]

My analysis' are usually pretty half-baked, especially so soon after seeing a movie, but while it seemed obvious that the movie was setting up the whole "we live in a totalitarian state/dictatorship ourselves and we just don't know it" thing from the first lecture scene, personally, I struggled to find what that really had to do with the body double thing and how the actual movie played out. The only thing I got out of that was that the repetitive, soul-deadening daily grind of adult life was making him feel like his life was being compromised or something. [Edit: I think BLASPHEMOUS' interpretation is more on the right track... the two doubles/personalities trying to take control of one another, especially if it's the same person]

I think the mother referencing his acting was just a hint that the realities/identities of the doubles were blurring/mixing rather than having anything to do with totalitarianism.

I got the feeling that the spider imagery had to do with Anthony's fear of confronting adulthood/the thought of becoming a father, and that was what the whole movie was actually about, with the body double thing having something to do with psychologically wrestling his own demons/past/feeling like fraud or something. You get the sense that what happened to Anthony/Mary was intended to be closure on his fears/immaturity/attachment, and moments like the mother asking about the acting career of the wrong guy, Sarah being paranoid about another women, and [spoil]the lead being unaffected and breathing a sigh of relief seeing the giant spider at the end after Anthony/Mary are out of the picture[/spoil] all seemed to be pointing to the fact that it's one person's psychology not being able to let things go/having cold feet/facing his fears. It's probably about Anthony being the actual real person, being an actor who envisions himself as other people. Seems to end with Anthony coming to terms with everything, growing up, and ready to become a father. That explains why he/we thought it was Adam talking to his mother when it was actually Anthony and the acting comment takes him by surprise.

I might be way off, but the fact that the movie invites those kinds of potential parallels is really cool. Talking about it is making me like the movie more.