Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[mark f]

The Curse of the Cat People (Gunther V. Fritsch & Robert Wise, 1944) 2.5 5.5/10
Horizon Line (Mikael Marcimain, 2020) 2 5/10
The Museum of Imagination (Amit Dutta, 2012) 2.5 6/10
The Dissident (Bryan Fogel, 2020) 3+ 6.5/10
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZWI2M2JjNTMtNWJkMC00MDEwLTg3Y2QtNjMwYjk4OTc4YzA3XkEyXkFqcGdeQXZ3ZXNsZXk@._V1_UX477_CR0,0,477,268 _AL_.jpg
Prince Mohammed bin Salman meets with Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi and later orders his murder.
Once Upon a River (Haroula Rose, 2019) 2.5 5.5/10
The Mystery of the 13th Guest (William Beaudine, 1943) 2+ 5/10
Before Midnight (Lambert Hillyer, 1933) 2.5 5.5/10
Seance on a Wet Afternoon (Bryan Forbes, 1964) 3 6.5/10
https://43vapp2ojjm1f6pyd32k2szp-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/seance-on-a-wet-afteroon.png
Mentally-unstable medium Kim Stanley and her husband and compatriot Richard Attenborough kidnap a child for notoriety.
Le Notti Bianche AKA White Nights (Luchino Visconti, 1957) 2.5 6/10
Moments in Spacetime (Chris Cowden, 2020) 2 5/10
Butchers (Adrian Langley, 2020) 1.5+ 4.5/10
Wildlike (Frank Hall Green, 2014) 2.5 6/10
https://www.cinemaclock.com/images/580x326/19/wildlike__2014_7317.jpg
14-year-old Ella Purnell runs away from a series of traumas and finds some reluctant relief in widower Bruce Greenwood hiking in Alaska.
Stars Fell on Alabama (V.W. Scheich, 2021) 2 5/10
The Empty Man (David Prior, 2020) 2.5 6/10
If Not Now, When? (Tamara LaSeon Bass & Meagan Good, 2019) 2 5/10
Skyfire (Simon West, 2019) 2.5 6/10
https://guyatthemoviescom.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/skyfire-featured-image.jpg?w=640
Volcanic eruptions threaten to destroy a resort and its inhabitants much to the chagrin of PR Man Jason Isaacs.
Madame X (Sam Wood, 1937) 2.5 5.5/10
Crack: Cocaine, Corruption & Conspiracy (Stanley Nelson, 2021) 3+ 6.5/10
Sibyl (Justine Triet, 2019) 2.5 5.5/10
Outside the Wire (Mikael Håfström, 2021) 2.5 6/10
https://www.moviezone.cz/obr/YXJ0aWNsZXNUb3AvMjQ2Mzgy
Action sci-fi mystery involving fall guy officer Damson Idris and android officer Anthony Mackie fighting against rebels near Russia looking fot nukes,

[Marco]

Valhalla Rising (2009)

Graphhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/58/Valhalla_rising_poster_dk.jpgic and brutal story from Nicolas Winding Refn...must may I didn't get the historical references but it was a decent story of "One-eye". Think this was a bit between "Rome" the TV series and Refn's usual observational films.

2

[Allaby]

Adolescents (2019), French documentary about two teenage girls. I rated it a 6/10. It felt too long and was only moderately interesting.

[Allaby]

With Six You Get Eggroll (1968), comedy with Doris Day, Brian Keith, Barbara Hershey, George Carlin, and others. I rated it an 8/10. This was an enjoyable cute and funny film. I loved the ending, very sweet.

[Fabulous]

Impact (1949)

2.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/bMKU5vxYx2nhGW45IXFKfRu0n5Z.jpg

[Rockatansky]

Dial M for Murder rating_4

Very entertaining (as can be expected from the Master of Suspense), but I think different casting might have taken this to the next level for me. Ray Milland is very good as the conniving husband, but he's not exactly easy to identify with, and I think someone like Cary Grant (who Hitchcock used brilliantly in a such a capacity in Suspicion) could have complicated the audience's sympathies with his immense charisma. Placing the heroine in the wrong man role is pretty novel at least, and Grace Kelly is very easy to root for. As for John Williams, at first I was thinking I would have liked Jimmy Stewart in the role, but I think his fogey-ishness nicely subverts our expectations of his intelligence (I understand he played the same role in the stage version).

Hitchcock's visual direction is astute as always but also somewhat low-key (the film's stage origins are pretty evident), which makes it interesting that the film was originally made in 3-D. There are a few scenes that obviously would play well in the format (the best known scene, Grace Kelly's trial scene) but given how much of the movie is set in the same house, I'm curious how he would have handled those interior scenes. Definitely would like to see the film in that format eventually.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fthefilmstage.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2F2012_beasts_of_the_southern_wild_006.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Beasts of the Southern Wild, 2012

This is a rewatch for me, and I haven't seen the film since around the time of its original release.

Hushpuppy (Quvenzhane Wallis) is a 6 year old girl living in a small, ramshackle bayou community called the Bathtub with her father, Wink (Dwight Henry). But Wink's failing health and a natural disaster that threatens the Bathtub forces Hushpuppy to grow up faster than her years.

This is one of those films that got a ton of praise and then a moderate amount of backlash. I liked it when it first came out and I liked it on this rewatch.

A lot of this is due to Wallis and her natural charisma. Whether it's her natural talents or just director Behn Zeitlin skillfully finding ways to capture her youthful moods, Hushpuppy comes across as someone who is both world-weary and yet still naive when it comes to certain things.

A huge focus of the film is on Hushpuppy's relationship with Wink. Hushpuppy's mother has left them, and it has caused a breach in the relationship between father and daughter. Wink's treatment of Hushpuppy often veers into an interesting shaping of her personality--he frequently refers to her using masculine pronouns, including telling her that she will be the king of the Bathtub one day. Wink's education of Hushpuppy is largely confined to a way of life that functions in the Bathtub--how to catch a catfish by hand, or breaking a crab in half. There is a desperation and determination in Wink to toughen Hushpuppy up before he is physically unable to care for her anymore. This element is incredibly relatable--he has so much to teach her and not enough time for it. Without him she will be without family, and every scene between them is fraught with a mix of fear and anger about this situation.

As for the magical realism, I kind of wish that the film had leaned into it a bit more. As it stands, it feels a bit haphazard. I liked the way that the film depicted these sequences--products of Hushpuppy's imagination--such as a "memory" of her mother lighting the stove just by walking by. In terms of the "beasts" themselves, prehistoric creatures who emerge from melting ice caps and descend on the Bathtub, I wasn't entirely sure how to interpret them. Are they meant to symbolize natural forces (like her father's illness or the storms) that are out of Hushpuppy's control? Are we supposed to see them as symbols of toughness and realize that Hushpuppy is getting in touch with her inner "beast"? Regardless of their meaning, they look great, and I enjoyed the sequences with them even if their purpose in the narrative wasn't wholly clear to me.

I'd say that on the whole, most of the reviews I've read of this one in the last few years have been on the middling or negative side. I wondered if I would still enjoy it and was pleased to find that I did.

4

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fopenloading.com%2Fmedia%2Fthe-man-from-nowhere-2010-original-1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

The Man from Nowhere, 2010

Another rewatch.

Cha Tae-sik (Won Bin) is a reclusive pawnshop owner who has a tentative friendship with a little girl, So-mi (Sae-Ron Kim), who lives in an apartment above his with her drug-addicted mother. When So-mi's mother steals drugs from a ruthless gang, So-mi and Cha end up in the middle of a nasty feud between rival drug dealers and the police.

I watch this movie quite a lot, actually, but I always watch the last hour or so (for those who have seen it, I usually start watching at the nightclub scene). I had totally forgotten about many sequences from the first hour.

The only real criticism that I have of this film is that its narrative is built entirely on cliches: little girl in danger? Check. Man with mysterious and violent past? Check. Tragic backstory involving loved one? Check. Outrageous villains? Check. Bumbling "comic relief" detective? Check. Cynical chain-smoking detective? Check. Right-hand man to the villains? Check.

But it doesn't really bother me because so many aspects of the plot, even at its most cliched, are executed so well. Won Bin (and it blows my mind that within a year or so he also starred in Bong Joon-ho's Mother) is a solid anchor for both the emotional and the physical aspects of the story. He emotes as well or better than almost any other action lead I can think of, and he is also convincing in the various action sequences. Sae-Ron Kim is also really solid as So-mi, and it's a credit to the writing that she is a very likable child (with a palpable need for acknowledgement and affection), but manages not to trip into being too cutesy or feel like an adult writing for a child.

And the action sequences are really what keep me coming back to this film. Sometimes I come back to the movie just to watch certain fight scenes. The knife fight in the bathroom, the chase through the building that includes the shot where Cha jumps out a window and the camera follows him. I cannot get enough of this shot and often have to go back to watch it over and over.. It's all well-choreographed but the sequences are distinct from each other so it doesn't just feel like the same action scene over and over.

The movie is graphically violent, and it does deal with some heavy topics like child labor and even organ harvesting. But while the movie can be bleak at times, for me personally it never crosses a line into wallowing or exploitation.

I still hugely prefer the second half, but I really enjoyed rewatching the entire film. It's on my shortlist of favorite action movies ever.

4.5

[WHITBISSELL!]

I really need to rewatch The Man From Nowhere. I meant to catch it when it was in my Netflix queue but it left and I kicked myself for procrastinating. But now it's on Amazon and on my watchlist. I don't know how it got there but thanks for reminding me.

Oh and The Chaser. Also on Prime. Need to rewatch that one as well.

[Marco]

Oedipus Rex (1967)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/81/StefanoBattaglia_Pasolini.jpg
Wonderfully powerful, basic and poetic telling of the Sophocles tragedy. Updated by Pasolini, but not to a major degree that it loses its resonance. Franco Citti is incredible in this. Funnilly enough I reckon that if Pasolini was around and making films today his spartan aesthetic would still be the same despite the technological advances in film making. This was very satisfying.

4

[ScarletLion]

Valhalla Rising (2009)

Graphhttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/58/Valhalla_rising_poster_dk.jpgic and brutal story from Nicolas Winding Refn...must may I didn't get the historical references but it was a decent story of "One-eye". Think this was a bit between "Rome" the TV series and Refn's usual observational films.

2

Refn is obsessed with the one eye / all seeing eye theme - he's used it to good effect in V Rising, Only God Forgives, The Neon Demon and Too Old to Die Young

[mojofilter]

https://media.wwltv.com/assets/WWL/images/f56b657d-dfa8-4c37-beae-e47ffc0cdc6b/f56b657d-dfa8-4c37-beae-e47ffc0cdc6b_1920x1080.jpg
MACHO:
THE
HECTOR CAMACHO STORY
(2020)

First viewing. A look at the rise and fall of one of boxing's most entertaining and tragic figures. I'm awaiting the film based on his life now.

4

https://www.sho.com/site/image-bin/images/0_0_3433572/0_0_3433572_00h_1280x640.jpg
BELUSHI
(2020)

First viewing. A look at the quick rise and sudden demise of one of the most celebrated comedians in TV and film history. I'm surprised a film based on his life hasn't been made yet.

4.5

[ScarletLion]

'Secrets and Lies' (1996)

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51FWG6iuMfL._AC_SX342_.jpg

Dir.: Mike Leigh

A woman decides to find out who her biological mother is. The film explores pain, grief, identity, loneliness, family cycles, do we turn into our parents? Beautiful almost overbearing score by Andrew Dickson works well. Tim Spall and Brenda Blethyn are exceptional, especially Spall (despite all the plaudits that seemed to go Blethyn's way - her performance was a little cartoony at times, which probably helped to quell the dourness). The long take in the cafe is brilliant, and the scene at the BBQ outside where they are all talking over is brilliantly directed. There is alot going on, lots of little things like the character Paul being responsible for the make up assistant's disfigurement, as he is banned from driving.

Life is rarely perfect. It mostly sucks. But Mike Leigh films make it better.

4.5

[pahaK]

First, I finished my rewatches yesterday.

Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
2
It's slightly more entertaining than the previous film, and it has some decent Palpatine/Sith action. It also has the worst propaganda the series has to offer, but it still manages to beat two other SW movies (kind of sad, really).

So, after rewatching all three trilogies I'd rank them as follows: V > IV > VI > I > III > VII > IX > II = VIII

--
Tenet (2020)
2.5
Nolan does what Nolan has done for ages; technically brilliant films that are clinical, unemotional, and empty. The story is typical B-tier SciFi that's probably written for the sole purpose of putting certain effects on screen. Back in the day, someone described TDK as "Twilight for the boys" and it feels quite adequate for Tenet as well. Still, it was better than I expected (can you guess if I'm a Nolan fan?).

[Allaby]

Stuntwomen: The Untold Hollywood Story (2020) 8/10. Directed by April Wright, this action documentary focuses on stuntwomen and their experiences from the early days of cinema to today. The film features insightful and entertaining interviews with a lot of talented and hardworking stuntwomen, from different different backgrounds and different ages. There is also behind the scenes footage and clips from a variety of films interwoven. This is an enjoyable and informative documentary that does a good job celebrating these amazing women and all the work they do. Definitely worth checking out.

[Iroquois]

Mind Game - 4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZRbjJNH6Jg

[WrinkledMind]

Watched Super 8. What a fun little flick this is.

Takoma11
Love Man from Nowhere myself. It had an average Indian remake (Rocky Handsome) whose final fight scene was surprisingly better than the original(though less realistic).
Also, agree on that window scene. It's marvellously creative.

[Fabulous]

Village of the Damned (1960)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/vD26dt9ATOulvjej923GfxAjGre.jpg

[Takoma11]

I really need to rewatch The Man From Nowhere. I meant to catch it when it was in my Netflix queue but it left and I kicked myself for procrastinating. But now it's on Amazon and on my watchlist. I don't know how it got there but thanks for reminding me.

Oh and The Chaser. Also on Prime. Need to rewatch that one as well.

I was a bit underwhelmed by The Chaser, but I didn't dislike it.

[WrinkledMind]

I have to mention I saw the Devil if we are speaking of violent South Korean movies with serial killer plot (like the Chaser).


Though the best SK serial killer flick has to be Memories of Murder.

[Tequila]

Invention for destruction (1958) A.K.A The fabulous world of Jules Verne, this Czech film directed by Karel Zeman is based on various works by Jules Verne and is a combination of live action and animation. The film visuals are based on the original style of illustrations in Jules Verne's books and look very unique. An enjoyable watch and I will be checking out more of Zeman's work in the future. 3

[Takoma11]

I have to mention I saw the Devil if we are speaking of violent South Korean movies with serial killer plot (like the Chaser).

I wasn't quite as taken with I Saw the Devil (performances were great, I had serious issues with the writing). MKS and I have already argued about this to great extent--like at one point there was borderline name calling involved. :p

Though the best SK serial killer flick has to be Memories of Murder.

This I will agree with, though in my mind it's a slightly different kind of film than the others. I will never forget seeing this movie when it was first released, in a theater so crowded that we had to sit in the very front row. It blew my mind and the whole audience SCREAMED when the figure runs out of the field in the rain.

[Fabulous]

The Wreck of the Mary Deare (1959)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/bpMqJLinAfllKoGEFLYHHWWVAJ4.jpg

[CharlesAoup]

Parnormal Activity 2, 2010, 2nd watch (C)

So this really isn't a terribly eventful series of movies. They're also horrendously under-directed. Some mumblecore that, at some point, gets topical, and camera footage of increasingly apparent, yet never truly interesting paranormal footage. Loud bangs and things moving a bit, a shadow, stuff like that.

It's clear that a franchise was not written before the second movie was in the works, because this takes places a couple weeks before the first movie, includes some major events that should be mentionned in the first one. Not a hint previously given, however. You'd never guess any of the original 2 characters had family.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.rogerebert.com%2Fuploads%2Freview%2Fprimary_image%2Freviews%2Fshame-1968%2Fhero_EB20080804REVIEWS608629928AR.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Shame, 1968

Some films get a ton of different parts of your brain firing, and that is definitely what happened with me as I watched Shame.

A couple named Ava (Liv Ullmann) and Jan (Max von Sydow) live on a farm in the countryside of an unspecified country. A war wages on, unseen by them at first. Then one days jets fly overhead and paratroopers arrive. Despite their relatively neutral status, they come under siege from both sides. As they endure one trial after another, an irreparable rift begins to form between Eva and Jan.

Something that grew on me the more I watched the film was the was that visually it speaks to both the past and a vague futuristic post-apocalypse. You know when you watch a movie and a visual from it resonates incredibly strongly in your mind and you realize it's because it reminds you of another film? Several times during Shame I was reminded of certain shots from The Road. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.tmdb.org%2Ft%2Fp%2Foriginal%2F37KpSKw20exXCyZNXtFc21tK1Of.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fimages_blogs%2Funderwire%2F2009%2F11%2Froad_beach_1200.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

We've had a few conversations in this thread about what it means for a movie to be anti-war. I think that Shame is a film that can unhesitatingly be given that label. We are never given to understand why the war is even happening, aside from a phrase here and there like "revolution" and "liberation." But these words are stripped of their potentially benevolent meetings. After the paratroopers threaten Eva and Jan, they shove a trembling Eva in front of a camera as "testimony" of their liberation. Later this footage is used in an accusation against Eva and Jan of collaboration with the enemy. Both sides seem to regard Eva and Jan only for what they can take from them and how they can use them. If Eva and Jan ("the people") are meant to benefit from the revolution or the resistance or the liberation, that certainly doesn't seem to be the case.

At a character level, the film is also a damning look at what it means to be brought to the point of just wanting to survive. In the beginning of the film, Jan can't bring himself to shoot or otherwise kill the couple's chickens. By the halfway point of the film, he is willing to commit indirect or even direct actions that kill others. Eva is a ball of frustration. She wants children, but knows that she cannot in good conscience bring them into this world of violence. She is the more forceful of the two (running out of the house to help a stranded paratrooper who is caught in a tree), and although she maintains more of her humanity and empathy, she falls into a more visceral despair.

I've said this before about a movie, but this is the kind of film where I find myself wanting to simply describe things that happened in it ("And then there's this scene where . . . ") as opposed to necessarily analyzing it. I think that this is largely because my response to it was so much on an emotional level, and that can be harder to articulate in a review.

This is definitely one of the more bleak (LOL, I've used that word a lot this month!) films I've seen from Bergman. The imagery it contains of both violence and the aftermath of violence is some of the stronger things in his filmography. Strangely, though I'm sure I've heard of this film before, neither the title nor the plot were familiar to me. I'm incredibly glad that it was recommended to me.

4.5

[Fabulous]

Red Dust (1932)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/bAXToJkAahJfR8isDSL04jfz5sW.jpg

[GulfportDoc]

Dial M for Murder rating_4

Very entertaining (as can be expected from the Master of Suspense), but I think different casting might have taken this to the next level for me. Ray Milland is very good as the conniving husband, but he's not exactly easy to identify with, and I think someone like Cary Grant (who Hitchcock used brilliantly in a such a capacity in Suspicion) could have complicated the audience's sympathies with his immense charisma. Placing the heroine in the wrong man role is pretty novel at least, and Grace Kelly is very easy to root for. As for John Williams, at first I was thinking I would have liked Jimmy Stewart in the role, but I think his fogey-ishness nicely subverts our expectations of his intelligence (I understand he played the same role in the stage version).

Hitchcock's visual direction is astute as always but also somewhat low-key (the film's stage origins are pretty evident), which makes it interesting that the film was originally made in 3-D. There are a few scenes that obviously would play well in the format (the best known scene, Grace Kelly's trial scene) but given how much of the movie is set in the same house, I'm curious how he would have handled those interior scenes. Definitely would like to see the film in that format eventually.
Good points. Hitchcock wanted to contain the feel in the production, so he kept it filmed in virtually the same set. The whole film was shot in 36 days! He felt that the picture was an easy make because the elements were mostly there already from the stage play, which Warner Bros. had already purchased. He felt that he was "playing it safe" with a tailor made project.

I always felt that Ray Milland was a little too stilted in his portrayal; too pat. The role would have been difficult to cast in any rate. Most name actors of the day did not want to play a bad guy. Hitchcock said that he even changed the ending of Suspicion because he believed that the public would not accept Cary Grant as a bad guy.

[Gideon58]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERfRTOuWoA4-Iag.jpg


3.5

[Captain Terror]

A film with the word "One" in its title

Are you posting your monthly lists somewhere or do I have to become a Tweeter?

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fkalafudra.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F11%2Ftraselcristal1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

In a Glass Cage, 1986

Another rewatch.

The film begins with a man named Klaus (Gunter Meisner) torturing and murdering a young man as he is watched by an unseen figure. Years later, Klaus is paralyzed, kept alive only by an iron lung that churns away in the large home that he shares with his wife, the maid, and his daughter Rena (Gisele Echevarria). One day a mysterious man named Angelo (David Sust) appears, ostensibly to act as a nurse for Klaus. It is immediately obvious that Angelo has some past relationship to Klaus, and as time goes on he begins to exert an influence over the house.

This is a nasty film, and there are certain sequences that are very difficult to watch. Much of the film centers on the discussion of or perpetration of sexual violence and torture against boys. This is my second time watching the movie, and it was interesting to try and remember how I felt the first time I saw it, over 15 years ago, when I had just graduated from college. I had done a lot of academic work related to the Spanish Civil War and Spanish Involvement in World War 2), and I loved seeing how some of that history was explored in films (including things like The Devil's Backbone).

The film explores the notion of the way that violence begets violence, and addresses the way that abuse can become fetishized or internalized by its victims. Klaus's crimes are revisited and re-imagined with Angelo's arrival, and the movie sets up multiple symmetries and echoes between the original crimes and their new iterations. Klaus, alive but turned into a passive observer, exists in a strange place between victim and perpetrator. This includes echoes such as the way that the first boy who ties gasps just the way that Klaus does when removed from the iron lung

The performances in the film are solid, including Sust as Angelo in his first feature film. This includes the performances of the child actors (more on that later), and the whole movie trembles with a fraught energy that means the entire 100 minutes is incredibly tense. There are maybe 3 minutes of happiness or joy or lightness. There are maybe a few moments of dark humor, especially as Angelo begins to transform the house into a literal war zone, but it's never winky enough to pull you from the sense of doom.

One thing that does slightly alleviate the brutality of the film's content is the way that it begins to scale into a sort of larger allegory as it goes on. The relationship between the war and violence and the lineage of violence between oppressors and the oppressed starts to take on a clear thematic presentation. There is a degree of craft and care in the narrative itself and way that the different sequence are filmed that lifts it a bit from feeling like exploitation. It's a fine line, though, and I could easily see another viewer feeling that it crossed that line.

So let's talk about the kids.

The very first sequence of the film graphically shows the torture and murder of a boy who is probably no older than 14 or 15, and many other sequences in the film either graphically describe or show the sexual abuse, torture, and/or murder of boys, sometimes in the context of WW2 medical "experimentation". There is a disclaimer at the very end of the film that all of the sequences filmed with children, "despite looking real", were filmed with consideration of ethics, and the statement is followed by the authorization of a child psychologist. When I listened to the commentary on the film [B]Mysterious Skin[/B, I was amazed when the director described the way that they kept the children from being involved by using editing tricks and special effects. In a scene where a character touches a child's belly, the director notes, "That's not the kid, that's actually a mannequin." Watching In a Glass Cage this time with an eye toward what the child actors were actually doing, you can tell that some tricks were used in this film. But that said, the child actors (I suspect that the person in the first scene was a bit older and possibly even a young-looking adult, considering there is nudity, but the other children are clearly much younger) are actually manhandled and partially disrobed on camera. To me, as I said before, the film barely lands on the "right side" of the question of how child actors and child characters are treated on screen.

I cannot say whether it was the way that the writer/director wanted things, or whether it was a concession to the limits of what you can put on screen, but I did think it was interesting that Angelo's fixation is on death and not the sexual abuse. While we learn that Klaus frequently raped/abused the children he victimized, it's interesting that Angelo is focused mostly on killing them. His sexual fixation is on Klaus himself, but he seems to primarily draw excitement from the purely violent aspect of the crimes and not the more sexualized ones.

Something I noticed very strongly this time around was the way that the film examines the power of gaze. In the very first sequence, it is the stare of his victim that agitates Klaus. Throughout the film Klaus is forced to witness much of the action through a mirror that is mounted on his iron lung--yet another symbol of the way that he becomes a second-hand part of the crimes. We learn that the gaze of his victims both repulsed and excited him. It is interesting to watch Angelo's own sight-lines as the film progresses, as well as those of the daughter, Rena.

This is a hard film, and it definitely won't be for everyone. The subject matter is obviously very disturbing. But I was impressed with both the craft and the message of the film.

4

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indiewire.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F06%2Fbarry-lyndon-landscape.jpg%3Fw%3D765&f=1&nofb=1

Barry Lyndon, 1975

I watched Barry Lyndon years ago and I was not a fan. But enough time had passed that I couldn't really remember the specifics beyond not liking Ryan O'Neal's lead performance. This time around I liked it better (I'd originally given it a 6/10 on IMDb, LOL), but it wasn't entirely smooth sailing.

Barry (Ryan O'Neal) is a young Irishman. The film follows his many adventures and misadventures as he fights for the affection of the woman he wishes to marry, serves in multiple armies, and seeks to find love and a title among English nobility.

This movie is three flippin' hours long. I was set to give a massage and I asked "Hey, do you mind if I put on this movie in the background?", and so that was how I watched the first 80 minutes of the movie. And honestly, it was probably to the movie's favor that I approached it that way. Watching from a more removed state, I was able to better set aside the things I didn't like (O'Neal still stinks) and focus more on what I did like.

This time around (and admittedly watching on a larger TV), I was much more taken with the painterly composition of many of the shots. The movie, whatever else my complaints, looks great. The colors are excellent, the sense of depth and scope. The movie feels epic and never more so than when Kubrick lets the land and the sky take over the top 2/3 of the frame. The locations and sets are also grand in color and size. It is a lush film that feels dimensional.

My struggle with the film is that Barry is just such a tool. He is selfish and impulsive and the film feels like three hours of watching him ruin other peoples' lives. Barry is a cad, and not a fun one. There are a handful of moments of genuine emotion from him that allow you to connect to his character, but it's not enough across the space of so many hours. By two hours I was done spending time with him . . . and then spent another hour with him.

Also, and I realize that this is a minor complaint, WHAT ON EARTH WAS HAPPENING WITH THE CROTCH OF HIS PANTS?!?! He spends so much of the film looking like he's wearing a diaper backwards under his pants, and at first I thought that it must just be the style of the clothes, but no one else in the film seemed to have diaper crotch!

I had a very mixed response to the pacing of the film, and this extends to individual scenes. The camera often lingers and sequences often go on for a long while as characters do things like drink a cup of water or walk down a hall. One part of me kind of appreciated that it was "the pace of life" and gave you a sense of how long these characters were interacting with each other instead of cutting it short with crisp edits. But the downside is that the film is very long and at a certain point I felt like "Okay I get it!! They are walking down a hall! NEXT! SCENE! PLEASE!"

The person on the massage table also had some hot takes, which I feel compelled to share:
1) (sitting up to look at the screen for a moment about an hour into the film) "Oh, god, is that Barry?! His face is so punchable!"
2) "Is this pipe music going to last much longer? I feel like it's been playing forever."
3) "Is this the same narrator who narrates Watership Down?!" (It was--she has a great ear for that stuff).

Then we come back to O'Neal in the lead role. I read that Kubrick had to cast a top 10 box office actor in the role to get funding and . . .fine. But whatever the reason--that's who is in the movie for all three hours. He is simply a black hole of charisma and so bland. It's hard to even feel strong emotions toward him, positive or negative. I would just feel irritation or annoyance or maybe a smidgen of pity. Give me someone I can love. Give me someone I can hate. Give me someone complicated. But don't give me a blank slate. I was willing to overlook the absurdity of everyone calling him a "boy" for the first half hour or so, but there is nothing to the performance and Barry just remains a faintly irritating, diaper-crotched enigma. O'Neal's smarm can work (as in Paper Moon), but not here.

I liked it more this time around, but the combination of a flat lead performance and a lengthy runtime still make it a less than stellar viewing for me.

3.5

[ThatDarnMKS]

Love in the Afternoon

3

Hepburn is charming. Wilder is as talented behind the camera as ever. The film is close to being another classic alongside the Apartment and Some Like It Hot but is kneecapped by the casting of Gary Cooper, who is too old and FAR too wooden to be believable as the charming Playboy the film desperately wants him to be. From that, the cracks in the script show as we don't have the chemistry of their connection to sell the romance.

Originally Cary Grant was sought for this film and given how well they played off each other in Charade, it's a shame that he didn't accept this film. It would've made it an entirely different film.

Cooper has his place (High Noon)but I've yet to see a role of his that couldn't have better by many of his contemporaries.

[Rockatansky]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indiewire.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F06%2Fbarry-lyndon-landscape.jpg%3Fw%3D765&f=1&nofb=1

Barry Lyndon, 1975

I watched Barry Lyndon years ago and I was not a fan. But enough time had passed that I couldn't really remember the specifics beyond not liking Ryan O'Neal's lead performance. This time around I liked it better (I'd originally given it a 6/10 on IMDb, LOL), but it wasn't entirely smooth sailing.

Barry (Ryan O'Neal) is a young Irishman. The film follows his many adventures and misadventures as he fights for the affection of the woman he wishes to marry, serves in multiple armies, and seeks to find love and a title among English nobility.

This movie is three flippin' hours long. I was set to give a massage and I asked "Hey, do you mind if I put on this movie in the background?", and so that was how I watched the first 80 minutes of the movie. And honestly, it was probably to the movie's favor that I approached it that way. Watching from a more removed state, I was able to better set aside the things I didn't like (O'Neal still stinks) and focus more on what I did like.

This time around (and admittedly watching on a larger TV), I was much more taken with the painterly composition of many of the shots. The movie, whatever else my complaints, looks great. The colors are excellent, the sense of depth and scope. The movie feels epic and never more so than when Kubrick lets the land and the sky take over the top 2/3 of the frame. The locations and sets are also grand in color and size. It is a lush film that feels dimensional.

My struggle with the film is that Barry is just such a tool. He is selfish and impulsive and the film feels like three hours of watching him ruin other peoples' lives. Barry is a cad, and not a fun one. There are a handful of moments of genuine emotion from him that allow you to connect to his character, but it's not enough across the space of so many hours. By two hours I was done spending time with him . . . and then spent another hour with him.

Also, and I realize that this is a minor complaint, WHAT ON EARTH WAS HAPPENING WITH THE CROTCH OF HIS PANTS?!?! He spends so much of the film looking like he's wearing a diaper backwards under his pants, and at first I thought that it must just be the style of the clothes, but no one else in the film seemed to have diaper crotch!

I had a very mixed response to the pacing of the film, and this extends to individual scenes. The camera often lingers and sequences often go on for a long while as characters do things like drink a cup of water or walk down a hall. One part of me kind of appreciated that it was "the pace of life" and gave you a sense of how long these characters were interacting with each other instead of cutting it short with crisp edits. But the downside is that the film is very long and at a certain point I felt like "Okay I get it!! They are walking down a hall! NEXT! SCENE! PLEASE!"

The person on the massage table also had some hot takes, which I feel compelled to share:
1) (sitting up to look at the screen for a moment about an hour into the film) "Oh, god, is that Barry?! His face is so punchable!"
2) "Is this pipe music going to last much longer? I feel like it's been playing forever."
3) "Is this the same narrator who narrates Watership Down?!" (It was--she has a great ear for that stuff).

Then we come back to O'Neal in the lead role. I read that Kubrick had to cast a top 10 box office actor in the role to get funding and . . .fine. But whatever the reason--that's who is in the movie for all three hours. He is simply a black hole of charisma and so bland. It's hard to even feel strong emotions toward him, positive or negative. I would just feel irritation or annoyance or maybe a smidgen of pity. Give me someone I can love. Give me someone I can hate. Give me someone complicated. But don't give me a blank slate. I was willing to overlook the absurdity of everyone calling him a "boy" for the first half hour or so, but there is nothing to the performance and Barry just remains a faintly irritating, diaper-crotched enigma. O'Neal's smarm can work (as in Paper Moon), but not here.

I liked it more this time around, but the combination of a flat lead performance and a lengthy runtime still make it a less than stellar viewing for me.

rating_3_5
Not that it will make it any more enjoyable, but I think Barry's lameness in contrast to the grandeur of the events around him is the point (O'Neal badness makes him ideal for this role). He basically stumbles up and down in his place in society almost entirely due to external factors. It's like Forrest Gump but if Forrest Gump was a bad person (which makes it a nice antidote to the BS feel-good vibes of the Zemeckis film). I do think that if it wasn't for Kubrick firing on all cylinders on a technical level (the contrast between Barry's selfish, inane motivations and the gorgeous visuals only works because of how stunningly beautiful the movie looks), I wouldn't have nearly as much love for it as I do.

[StuSmallz]

What's wrong with it is that he's not using Charlize.
To me, Tom Hardy was boring as Max. He just really didn't convince me, and some of it was the script, admittedly, that he was anyone as special as Max had been in the previous films. I'm certainly not debating whether Tom Hardy is a better actor than Mel Gibson, but he does not have Gibson's charisma/magnetism/screen-presence.
The movie was always better, for me, when it was focused on Furiosa. And a lot of that is because Charlize is a ****ing master.
She deserves that Furiosa movie and I deserve that Furisoa movie.
Instead we get a prequel with a younger actor (assuming it happens at all). I love you for a lot, George, but **** you for that.


To each his own, then; for me, Hardy's Max was a force of nature as overwhelming as that giant dust storm, like if you took the anti-social loner he was in The Road Warrior and dialed that up to 11, to the point that he seemed like more of a grunting, rabid animal than man at first, before slowly but surely regaining his sense of humanity and camaraderie with other people step by step, inch by inch (which means that he got a meatier arc in FR than he did in TRW, to boot). As far as I'm concerned, he's the new definitive version of Rockatansky.

[StuSmallz]

Barry Lyndon (1975) - 4.5

I was surprised by how much I loved this film. I know it's a Kubrick film, but since I'm not a fan of historical dramas and given that Barry Lyndon is a middle child between four Kubrick films which are more well-known (2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, and Full Metal Jacket), I was wondering if this would be one of his weaker films. But nope, Kubrick blew me away once again.

A major theme of this film is the death of existentialism. Barry's attempts to use his wit and skills to secure a good outcome outside of the system make him an existentialist. These efforts are constantly undermined though. For example, though it initially seems like he kills John Quin in a duel, it's later learned that Quin didn't die and that the duel was a ruse to get rid of him. Also, his efforts of escaping to Dublin are undermined by being robbed. In addition, his plan to join the Seven Years' War to get a pension that will enable him to return home are undermined by his friend dying and, of course, never receiving the pension. Finally, his efforts of deserting the war are undermined by him being drafted into the Prussian Army. Since Barry was unable to change his fate and avoid becoming part of the system, his existentialist ideals fell flat.

The latter parts of the first half are where Barry loses his existentialist ideals and becomes part of the system he attempted to avoid. Saving a Prussian soldier's life in the Seven Years' War is his first turning point. While he initially attempted to create a good outcome for himself by operating outside of the system (again, with no luck), he's now operating from inside the system and doing what those above him would want him to do. Except, he isn't quite ready to be a part of the system. Though he's operating from inside it now, he's yet to master the act of deception. While many people in the film deceived Barry up to this point, he's yet to do the same as Prussian Captain Potzdorf caught on to his last attempt. Eventually though, Barry and Chevalier successfully deceive the Prussians by escaping the country. Marrying Lady Lyndon serves as the final nail in the coffin to his existentialism, causing him to be a member of the system. He's now a deceiver who marries for class and uses violence to settle disputes, just like those around him. He wasn't able to escape this fate.

Now is a good time to mention the cinematography. Most shots in the film are constructed to look like paintings, largely due to the abundance of wide angle shots and how the film was shot only in natural light. While this style is visually outstanding, it also adds to the film's themes. Of course, paintings never move regardless of how long or how many times you view them. They will always tell the same story. I think this aesthetic shows how Barry's story is neither special nor unique. Rather, the character traits we see of him are part of a pattern. Many other people had, have, and will have the same fate as Barry. For instance, though little is known about Barry's father, the first shot shows that he also used violence to settle disputes. In fact, a common camera movement in the film shows a close-up of Barry, only to pull back and reveal more and more of the setting he occupies. These shots show that Barry is less important to these frames than the scenery surrounding him is.

The second half expands upon this generational pattern by detailing how Bullington becomes a faceless member of the system, just as Barry, Barry's father, and everyone else around them did. Much like Barry uses violence to solve conflicts with Bullington in the second half, Bullington uses violence to solve his own conflicts later on. Bullington also upholds the same existentialist ideals Barry had in the early stretches of the film, shown by how Bullington constantly defies Barry with the belief he can save his mother from him or how he later leaves the family estate. Like Barry though, Bullington's efforts are undermined. Defying Barry doesn't save his mother: it only results in him getting beaten. Leaving the family estate doesn't allow for him to operate outside the system: he later returns to the estate. Given this, Barry and Bullington are one and the same as they both end up operating inside the system, despite their efforts to avoid it. Just like a character in a painting, they have no free will and will always live in the same scene.

In conclusion, this is another impressive addition to Kubrick's large body of films. I'm not sure where I'd rank it amongst his other films, but it's definitely a great film. If you haven't seen this film yet, I highly recommend doing so.And since we're talking about it again, I'd just like to go back and say that this was a good review of a great movie, Popcorn, and while Lyndon may have been pretty long and slow, I ultimately found it be highly involving (in addition to visually beautiful, of course), and one of Kubrick's very best; good work, man!

[Thief]

Dial M for Murder rating_4

Very entertaining (as can be expected from the Master of Suspense), but I think different casting might have taken this to the next level for me. Ray Milland is very good as the conniving husband, but he's not exactly easy to identify with, and I think someone like Cary Grant (who Hitchcock used brilliantly in a such a capacity in Suspicion) could have complicated the audience's sympathies with his immense charisma. Placing the heroine in the wrong man role is pretty novel at least, and Grace Kelly is very easy to root for. As for John Williams, at first I was thinking I would have liked Jimmy Stewart in the role, but I think his fogey-ishness nicely subverts our expectations of his intelligence (I understand he played the same role in the stage version).

Hitchcock's visual direction is astute as always but also somewhat low-key (the film's stage origins are pretty evident), which makes it interesting that the film was originally made in 3-D. There are a few scenes that obviously would play well in the format (the best known scene, Grace Kelly's trial scene) but given how much of the movie is set in the same house, I'm curious how he would have handled those interior scenes. Definitely would like to see the film in that format eventually.

This is my #3 Hitchcock so I agree that it is very, very entertaining. However, I have no issues with the casting. Milland is simply excellent and steals every scene, but so is Kelly, and the rest. The only issue I have is with the character of Mark, who I see as pretty much unnecessary, and it's there only to provide Kelly with an empathetic male cushion, opposite Milland. Other than that, it's excellent.

[Thief]

Are you posting your monthly lists somewhere or do I have to become a Tweeter?

I might start a thread here. I'll let you know.

[Captain Terror]

Barry just remains a faintly irritating, diaper-crotched enigma.

Just wanted to acknowledge that this made me laugh for a solid minute. Thank you for the chuckle. :D

Barry L is a film I've only seen once but my reaction was similar to yours. I found it a real chore to finish. Maybe on another night I'd feel differently but the runtime is a real deterrent.

[Takoma11]

Not that it will make it any more enjoyable, but I think Barry's lameness in contrast to the grandeur of the events around him is the point (O'Neal badness makes him ideal for this role). He basically stumbles up and down in his place in society almost entirely due to external factors. It's like Forrest Gump but if Forrest Gump was a bad person (which makes it a nice antidote to the BS feel-good vibes of the Zemeckis film). I do think that if it wasn't for Kubrick firing on all cylinders on a technical level (the contrast between Barry's selfish, inane motivations and the gorgeous visuals only works because of how stunningly beautiful the movie looks), I wouldn't have nearly as much love for it as I do.

Oh, I totally get that it's the point. And there's this sort of fascination in watching this guy who is just charming enough and just handsome enough manage to survive (and at times thrive) through a combination of scheming and luck.

But that's a movie I would enjoy watching for maybe 90 minutes. At a certain point there is simply fatigue.

And while I felt that the other performances were better, our time with the other characters is SO choppy--with characters vanishing for like 15 or 20 minutes at a time--that I didn't have any "anchors" to keep me invested.

Yoda - spam account - lifted text from here (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=2116509#post2116509).

I saw the mention of Mercado and I was like "OMG! This person feels the same way about the film!!". And just for a moment I thought I'd found a soulmate. :(

Just wanted to acknowledge that this made me laugh for a solid minute. Thank you for the chuckle. :D

Barry L is a film I've only seen once but my reaction was similar to yours. I found it a real chore to finish. Maybe on another night I'd feel differently but the runtime is a real deterrent.

It's the kind of story I could see myself enjoying as a miniseries.

[SpelingError]

And since we're talking about it again, I'd just like to go back and say that this was a good review of a great movie, Popcorn, and while Lyndon may have been pretty long and slow, I ultimately found it be highly involving (in addition to visually beautiful, of course), and one of Kubrick's very best; good work, man!

Thanks, Stu! This was written for the current Hall of Fame we're hosting here. Join the next one Stu (which won't be for a while, but keep an eye out for it)!

[Fabulous]

The Prince and the Showgirl (1957)

2.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/aLL2J4MOZFrcxBEZNWSpo4sIa39.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sudplanete.net%2F_uploads%2Fimages%2Fillustrations%2FQUBEKA_Jahmil_2013_Of-Good-report_05.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Of Good Report, 2013

Parker Sithole (Mothusi Magano) is a quiet, reserved man who gets a job at a local high school. Parker goes home with a beautiful young woman one night after drinking at a bar, only to be horrified when she walks into his classroom the next day as a pupil. Nolitha (Petronella Tshuma) is willing to continue their affair, and the two become shockingly bold in pursuing each other even on school grounds. But when Nolitha goes through a traumatic experience and withdraws from her relationship with Parker, he becomes dangerously obsessed with her.

I am a fan of the contemporary use of black and white photography, and in this case the look of the film matches the topic perfectly. There are many noir elements to this story, and some of the best moments in the film involve the use of light and shadow. This is especially true in a series of flashbacks that show us Parker's miserable, abusive life with his dying mother.

The performances are also strong. In the role of Parker, Mothusi Magano pulls off the challenge of making the character a totally immoral weasel, and yet someone who you could sympathize with at times. He is just so desperate and needy that you almost (almost) have to feel bad for the guy. As Nolitha, Petronella Tshuma is also very good. She embodies a character who is gorgeous and knows it, and who enjoys their forbidden affair until she begins to feel fear at the real consequences of their actions, and ultimately an inability to understand or cope with Parker's adult, needy dysfunction.

The film operates in two different modes/tones: a more straight ahead thriller and a darkly comedic borderline horror. As is often the case with me and movies, I really wish that the film had picked a vibe and stuck with it. As the film starts with building a more serious tone and mood, it's a little jarring when it switches gears to something more tongue-in-cheek. This more darkly comedic tone is what seems to have been intended to dominate, and it's okay. Elements like the wordplay at hand (take a good look at Parker's last name and Nolitha's first name) signal this. But the comedy angle sometimes underwhelmed me a bit, and weakens the implied critique about people abusing their power.

While the comedy was hit or miss for me, the only thing that bothered me was the degree to which Nolitha's nude or semi-nude body was frequently put on display. As is often the case when I find this element frustrating, the film seems content to break its own rules of point of view if it's convenient to get some nudity on camera. It makes sense, in some of the sequences, to see her and to understand Parker's infatuation. But at a certain point it began to feel like the actual purpose of certain shots was just to put an attractive female body on display. (Will I shock and amaze anyone when I say that there is nowhere near the same amount of male nudity? No? We're not shocked?). There is, of course, a difference between a character in a film objectifying someone and the film itself objectifying that person. There were several times that I felt the film slipped from the former to the latter. And considering the actress would have been 21 or 22 while filming, it bordered on feeling a bit exploitative.

It's frustrating when the film slips into this mode of objectifying Nolitha, because at many points it seems to understand exactly why objectification is a problem. When Nolitha tries to move on to dating a boy her age, he is also demanding and needy (in one uncomfortable sequence demanding a "real kiss" with tongue before he will let her get in the car). Acknowledging the struggle of a person who is being mistreated but then exploiting her body for a jiggle factor lends the film a bit of a sense of hypocrisy.

I do want to give a shout out to Lee Ann von Rooi, who plays a police constable who looks into Nolitha's disappearance when the girl goes missing. She is incredibly charismatic and I wish the writing had given her a bit more to do.

That said, I would check out another film by this director. African films are a huge blindspot for me. I feel like when films from Africa or the Middle East get put on lists they are often the more serious dramas. It was neat to see a film pulling from different genres (noir, horror, dark comedy).

3.5

[SpelingError]

Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012) - 3.5

Though the last time I saw this film was several years ago, I remember thoroughly enjoying my time with it. I was impressed with Wallis's performance and Hushpuppy's character arc, though I felt the film's magical realism flew over my head and wasn't sure what to make of that aspect. I had been meaning to rewatch the film for a while, so I was happy to revisit it for this thread.

When it was released back in 2012, it garnered a lot of praise, but since then, it has received a fair share of backlash. Given this, I wasn't sure how well it would hold up. Fortunately though, it held up pretty well, except my initial opinion of the film is pretty much the same as it was last time.

As has been noted by many people in the past, Quvenzhane Wallis gives a strong performance. Nowadays, it's hard to find good child actors, but Wallis did a phenomenal job in this film, sounding like someone much older who's had many years of acting experience. Her narration brimmed with all kinds of emotion, causing her to disappear into her role. While Dwight Henry was good, Wallis definitely stole the film.

Hushpuppy's and Wink's relationship was also compelling, just like I thought it was last time. Hushpuppy's mother has left them and has caused a rift in their family. Hushpuppy has her own house and her father requires for her to take care of herself, hence toughening her up for the real world. With his health declining and the ability to thrive in the Bathtub growing harder, accomplishing this becomes especially important. While there are some scenes of Wink teaching her various skills (fishing and preparing food), I liked how her arc didn't have a "checking off the boxes" feel in terms of him teaching her a single skill at a time, one after another. Instead, this theme was largely handled by the way Wink spoke to her. He often referred to her with masculine pronouns and having her act "manly" with telling her to break open a lobster with her bare hands instead of a knife or pretending that she beat him in an arm wrestle. I thought their dynamic was pretty solid, overall.

While Hushpuppy's character arc in the film is compelling, I think only one scene from it reaches greatness, which is when she goes to seek out her mother. The sequence starts off fine enough with the dreamy atmosphere of the restaurant, but her conversation with her mother blew me away. What's interesting is that Hushpuppy doesn't reveal they're mother and daughter throughout this sequence. Like, she almost reveals it by saying "You can take care of me. Me and Daddy." However, once her mother says she can't take care of anyone, Hushpuppy doesn't reveal any more info about their relation and leaves after a few minutes. My reading of this sequence is, after Hushpuppy noticed her father wasn't going to live much longer, she chose to go to her mother as a last resort in hopes she'd look after her. Seeing her mother couldn't take care of her either though was when she fully realized she had to take care of herself. Thus, that was the final main step to her character arc. Overall, I think the emotional bits of this scene were handled pretty obliquely, which was why I responded so well to it. Again though, I don't think anything else in the film is able to reach this scene in terms of greatness.

I found the film's magical realism to be a mixed bag. I enjoyed some aspects to it, like Hushpuppy imagining her mother as the playfulness of these scenes were contrasted with a strong sense of longing. They also highlighted Hushpuppy's dependency on her parents. As with my first viewing though, I wasn't sure what to make of the Aurochs. Were they supposed to be reflections of how Hushpuppy has to toughen up? Are they supposed to represent a form of violence which Hushpuppy has to avoid adopting? No clue. As they stood, I appreciated their scenes as a curiosity, but I felt they were underdeveloped and would've liked for them to be fleshed out more.

Overall, I think this film holds up pretty well. Though I think only one scene in it reaches greatness, it still has plenty to offer, both in the way of Wallis's performance and Hushpuppy's character arc. I don't know if I'll watch it again, but I'm glad I got to revisit it.

[Wooley]

'The Hidden Fortress' (1958)

https://i.imgur.com/10xDuTM.gif

One of Kurosawa's more accessible films, laced with comedy and adventure. His ability to keep characters in focus (deep or shallow) is brilliant. Framing and blocking also noticeable and the way he uses fog to light the scene is sublime. Mifune again dominates the screen.

4

This was the first Mifune (and Kurosawa) I ever saw and you're right Mifune just dominates a screen. In Sword of Doom, for example, Nakadai is fantastic in the lead role yet the moment Mifune walks into the frame he dominates it until the moment he is no longer in it and then for a while after really too. I think I could get hooked on watching him iron his shirts.

[Wooley]

Dial M for Murder rating_4

Very entertaining (as can be expected from the Master of Suspense), but I think different casting might have taken this to the next level for me. Ray Milland is very good as the conniving husband, but he's not exactly easy to identify with, and I think someone like Cary Grant (who Hitchcock used brilliantly in a such a capacity in Suspicion) could have complicated the audience's sympathies with his immense charisma. Placing the heroine in the wrong man role is pretty novel at least, and Grace Kelly is very easy to root for. As for John Williams, at first I was thinking I would have liked Jimmy Stewart in the role, but I think his fogey-ishness nicely subverts our expectations of his intelligence (I understand he played the same role in the stage version).

Hitchcock's visual direction is astute as always but also somewhat low-key (the film's stage origins are pretty evident), which makes it interesting that the film was originally made in 3-D. There are a few scenes that obviously would play well in the format (the best known scene, Grace Kelly's trial scene) but given how much of the movie is set in the same house, I'm curious how he would have handled those interior scenes. Definitely would like to see the film in that format eventually.

I also loved this movie. In fact, I think it's now one of my favorites. But I gotta say, I think Ray Milland was perfectly cast, I think it's the best role and performance of his career (at least that I've seen) and I absolutely would not like to have seen Cary Grant in this role. Milland is so self-assured, frankly over-confident, too slick by half as he should be, to me, for this film. I will admit that the first time I saw the film I was a little unsure of him (I had only seen him in X: The Man With The X-ray Eyes at that point) but having seen it several times now, I think he's less replaceable than Kelly in this film. She's great but someone else could have played that role. But I think Milland was perfect.

[Wooley]

Village of the Damned (1960)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/vD26dt9ATOulvjej923GfxAjGre.jpg

Another recent favorite of mine.

[Wooley]

To each his own, then; for me, Hardy's Max was a force of nature as overwhelming as that giant dust storm, like if you took the anti-social loner he was in The Road Warrior and dialed that up to 11, to the point that he seemed like more of a grunting, rabid animal than man at first, before slowly but surely regaining his sense of humanity and camaraderie with other people step by step, inch by inch (which means that he got a meatier arc in FR than he did in TRW, to boot). As far as I'm concerned, he's the new definitive version of Rockatansky.

Oh my.
Yeah, I definitely didn't find him definitive. He really didn't do much for me in this, fine but unspectacular and upstaged by Theron in every scene they shared, and I do like him usually. I thought he was fine, but I also felt a number of other actors could have been as good or better and that he definitely didn't have the charisma to be the new Max long-term but since they were switching the focus to Furiosa (and Charlize is a master) it was fine, we could just leave Max behind.
Now he's not giving me Charlize so I'm gonna go find George Miller and take a dump in his hat.


PS - I obviously need to rewatch Fury Road because a lot of people seem to have been more impressed with it than me. I thought it was a good job by George to somehow bring the Mad Max world to a modern film and I think he is one of the most underrated filmmakers out there (why doesn't he make more movies?!!!). But, while I thought it was a good Mad Max movie, it would probably either be 3rd or tied for 4th (with Thunderdome) for me in the series, given that I like them all quite a bit.
As a side note, I would have liked more Immortan Joe too. I think Toecutter was a much better villain and I was hoping to get something more like that (more depth) from the casting of Keays-Byrne and I thought just making him nothing more than a scary face was a waste. I think that really was my biggest beef with the film was that Immortan Joe was scary-looking but was barely a villain at all. He was a mechanism to put The Road Warrior on-screen for a new generation and to pass the torch from Max, who really had no relationship with the villain at all, to Furiosa, who not only did, but was a much more interesting character than Max or Joe overall.
But, I as I said, I obviously need to see it again as I really did enjoy it and I need to see if maybe my feelings will soften and it rises above Thunderdome in the MM pantheon (though it could never pass MM or RW).

And, on that note, I will take this moment to give my ranking of the series:

1. Mad Max
2. The Road Warrior
3. Beyond Thunderdome
4. Fury Road

Finally, I would like to say, that I have greatly enjoyed our discussion. It doesn't need to end, but I just wanted to say that.

[Wooley]

This is my #3 Hitchcock so I agree that it is very, very entertaining. However, I have no issues with the casting. Milland is simply excellent and steals every scene, but so is Kelly, and the rest. The only issue I have is with the character of Mark, who I see as pretty much unnecessary, and it's there only to provide Kelly with an empathetic male cushion, opposite Milland. Other than that, it's excellent.

100.

[Captain Terror]

I obviously need to rewatch Fury Road because a lot of people seem to have been more impressed with it than me. I thought it was a good job by George to somehow bring the Mad Max world to a modern film and I think he is one of the most underrated filmmakers out there (why doesn't he make more movies?!!!). But, while I thought it was a good Mad Max movie, it would probably either be 3rd or tied for 4th (with Thunderdome) for me in the series, given that I like them all quite a bit.

I would guess that a lot of us feel the same, actually. I adored Fury Road but I would also rank it 3rd, so I don't think you're missing something that the rest of us got. Not me, at least.
You're crazy to rank Thunderdome above it, but other than that you're fine. :D

[Wooley]

I would guess that a lot of us feel the same, actually. I adored Fury Road but I would also rank it 3rd, so I don't think you're missing something that the rest of us got. Not me, at least.
You're crazy to rank Thunderdome above it, but other than that you're fine. :D

Ha!
There's just a lot I really like about Thunderdome that, again, I did not like for years but found a new appreciation for when I went back and watched it recently... on top of all the things I already did like, like Barter Town and Master Blaster and the politics between the dwarf and Auntie Entity and then the final RW-esque action sequence. And of course, the final line of dialogue, which I have always loved.
That said, perhaps when I re-watch Fury Road, and I've been meaning to do a marathon with friends but a number of them just didn't feel they could make it through all four, it will bump up above Thunderdome.

[CharlesAoup]

Paranormal Activity 3, 2011, 2nd watch (D)

This movie is much more overtly supernatural than the others, but it adds nothing. First off, it has the worst characters yet. The first guy was a believable douche-adjacent guy, but the two guys in this one are full douche, and nothing else beyond that. They have bro reactions to the ghost stuff on the tapes and don't have a personality besides being bros with cameras. The main kid acts like a small adult, and you never believe for a second that a child would talk the way she talks, supernatural stuff or not.

I thought looking at it as a franchise with an over-arching story would make it better, but that story is barely there. There's nothing to see besides the part where they actually show you everything at the end. No fun game of guess-who or hidden stuff. This is a lazily decorated house, which you constantly have to remind yourself is from 1988 because, *******, they did not hire a decorator to make it convincing. Can't spend a penny extra on paint or wallpaper or carpet in this absolute cashgrab of a franchise. I dislike each movie less than the first time, but I have so much more contempt for the franchise itself now. This is just a way for the studios to make the least effort to ride on a successful name and finance their other projects. I'll finish it, but man, this is threadbare already.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmyfavort.files.wordpress.com%2F2015%2F09%2Fseainsid.jpg%3Fw%3D1280&f=1&nofb=1

The Sea Inside, 2004

Ramon (Javier Bardem) has been paralyzed from the neck down for over 25 years, ever since breaking his neck after an ill-fated dive into the ocean. Feeling that he no longer wants this life, Ramon begins to advocate for the right to die by assisted suicide, as he cannot take his own life without help. In this journey he connects strongly with two different women: Julia (Belen Rueda) is a lawyer who helps fight Ramon's legal battle, and Rosa (Lola Duenas), a local factory worker who becomes friendly--and maybe more than that--with Ramon after seeing his story on TV. Ramon also struggles with the feelings of his family, especially his brother, Jose (Celso Bugallo), who believes it is wrong for Ramon to take his own life.

This is a very powerful film and I appreciated that it handled a very sensitive topic with nuance and clarity.

Ramon's position is this: life is a right, but should not be an obligation. He is of sound mind, and he does not wish to live any longer under his conditions. Something that the film does a good job of portraying is that Ramon is not living in some sort of perpetual, obvious funk--he is capable of joking around, sharing a cigarette with Julia, turning his mind to writing, and engaging in a debate with a priest who tries to talk him out of his determination. But as Ramon explains, the world is cut off from him in a way that he cannot bear. He cannot reach out to touch a hand that is mere inches from his. It is, as he says, an impossibility and thus not even really part of his reality. Ramon elegantly explains the way that his confinement is unbearable, while at the same time conceding that he can't judge people in his condition who would choose to live. There can be a very cruel rhetoric around people with severe mental or physical disabilities, along the line that it would be better if they were dead. The film has to tread carefully to make it clear that it is a question of choice, not a judgement on who should or should not live.

Javier Bardem is very talented as a performer, and he does a great job of portraying a man who is very intelligent and witty, but who deals with a constant undercurrent of despair. Even in scenes where he might joke around, there is an anger and a frustration that bubbles to the surface in a facial expression or a sharp remark. I'm a huge fan of Belen Rueda, and I was thrilled to see her in this film. Ramon chooses Julia as his lawyer in part because she also suffers from a degenerative condition--a series of seizures that are slowly diminishing her mental capabilities--and in her performance you see someone who is working through her own demons as she helps another person. Lola Duenas is also very solid as Rosa, who begins with the intention to help "fix" Ramon, but eventually comes to understand that it's not a matter of just cheering Ramon up.

It could be very easy for a film to go overboard trying to show Ramon's condition. But there is a more subtle approach here. Simply by allowing us to see that Ramon does not move from his bed, and the stillness with which Bardem plays the character, we can understand the unbearable sense of being imprisoned. This contrasts by sequences which show us Ramon's inner fantasies--dreams in which he rises from bed, sometimes literally flying over the landscape, reaching out to touch Julia. Te memories and the beauty that Ramon has inside is not freeing for him. Instead, the difference between his dreams and his reality becomes a kind of extra hardship.

While the movie is clearly on Ramon's side, it is very sympathetic to those who oppose Ramon's plans. Jose does not want to lose his brother. He cannot bear the thought of playing a part in his brother being gone forever. He sees the idea of euthenasia as akin to putting down an animal. It's true that this is a way of trying to exert control over Ramon, but it comes from a place tat is understandable.

This movie was intense to watch. When I was younger someone very close to me was very, very sick. And I will never forget a conversation as a teenager when they confided to me that they had joined the Hemlock Society ("I got a lifetime membership--seemed appropriate") and had made some plans to die if their illness reached a certain stage. This conversation shook me deeply. I was too young and inexperienced to understand the process of living with or fighting painful or uncurable illnesses or conditions, and the idea of choosing to die seemed to me like a "wrong" choice. Then there's the pain of knowing that someone you love might chose to leave life (and you) before they have to. In all I thought that many of the aspects of this film touched on the emotional complications of such a debate and situation.

While the visuals of the film are not the main thing I focused on, I do want to say that the sequence in which Ramon breaks his neck (a brutal impact with the sea floor) is both beautiful and nightmarish.

I did feel a bit unresolved in terms of where the film left some of the characters. I know that the focus of the film was on Ramon and his journey, but in the final moments I wanted to see and know more about how the conclusion of the film impacted his friends and loved ones. And considering the way that we see how Ramon's story is publicized, I wanted a bit more "big picture" in the wrap up. But these are relatively minor quibbles. I really enjoyed this film and, shocker, cried several times.

4.5

[WHITBISSELL!]

I don't think Bardem has gotten his just due as an actor. I remember back at another forum (RT I think it was) another poster dismissively talked about his performance in Biutiful. The movie itself wasn't anywhere near perfect but I didn't think anyone could find fault with Bardem himself. The person making the criticism was a bit of a tw*t so I didn't take it all that seriously.

[WHITBISSELL!]

Also Tak, have you ever heard of an Argentinian actor named Ricardo Darin? I've been a fan of his since watching El Hijo de la Novia (Son of the Bride) years and years ago. I think you'd like it if you haven't seen it already. And some of his other work like Nine Queens, The Secret in Their Eyes and White Elephant.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Tunnelen (2019) (it had English subtitles) 9/10
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZTNhZTM2NDUtZTFlMy00OTdjLTg2ZDYtZTk0ODc5NWE4MjMxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjI4MjA3NDY@._V1_.jpg

[Takoma11]

Also Tak, have you ever heard of an Argentinian actor named Ricardo Darin? I've been a fan of his since watching El Hijo de la Novia (Son of the Bride) years and years ago. I think you'd like it if you haven't seen it already. And some of his other work like Nine Queens, The Secret in Their Eyes and White Elephant.

Yup! Have you seen The Aura?

[WHITBISSELL!]

Yup! Have you seen The Aura?No, no I haven't. I just looked it up and it sounds intriguing. Not on Netflix or Prime though. I'll have to keep an eye out for it.

[MovieGal]

No, no I haven't. I just looked it up and it sounds intriguing. Not on Netflix or Prime though. I'll have to keep an eye out for it.

Ricardo Darin is an amazing actor. If you can, watch XXY.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinema.ucla.edu%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2FLarge%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F pages%2Fborderincident.jpg%3Fitok%3DSMyXWnj4&f=1&nofb=1

Border Incident, 1949

At the border between Mexico and the United States, a group of Mexican laborers illegally cross the border back into Mexico after a few weeks of work in the US. As soon as they cross, however, they are set upon by a gang, robbed and murdered. Seeing a pattern of such killings, Mexican and American authorities decide to work together to crack down on the human smugglers and exploitative farmers who are victimizing the Mexican workers. On the American side is a man named Jack Bearnes (George Murphy); on the Mexican side is a man named Pablo Rodriguez (Ricardo Montalban). The plan is for Pablo to infiltrate the smuggling organization by posing as a migrant worker. When things get complicated, Jack also steps in by pretending to be a man who can forge work permits. But neither man is prepared for the ruthlessness of the smugglers.

This film has been on my radar ever since I took the TCM Film Noir class. And everything that I felt I was promised was delivered by the movie and more.

From the very first sequence, the film makes no bones about the brutality of what is happening to the Mexican workers. This isn't a case of "bang bang fall down" stuff. The men are stabbed, stripped of their money and some clothing, and then left to drown in quicksand. In the first meeting between the Mexican and American officials, one the Mexican officials holds up the bloody clothing of one of the men and says, "This is about the men who lived in these clothes." The film continues this intensity and roughness, including a sequence in the final act of the film that is one of the more horrible and suspenseful things I've seen in an older film.

The film is immediately remarkable for its treatment and point of view on the Mexican workers. They are treated as men who, for the most part, simply want to earn a decent wage. There is a sequence in the middle of the film where Pablo explains to the other workers the fact that because they are going to cross illegally, they will be more vulnerable to wage slavery. There are plenty of bad guys in the film--Mexican and American--and what they all have in common is their willingness to take advantage of men in their time of need.

Both Murphy and Montalban give engaging performances in their roles, though they often work parallel to each other. Howard Da Silva is sufficiently smarmy as the man at the head of the smuggling operation.

Overall this was a tense and compelling thriller. It definitely simplifies the dynamics of the relationship between Mexico and the United States, but within a narrative that is violent and suspenseful, there is something very optimistic about seeing the two countries work together to put an end to exploitation and abuse.

I was really pleasantly surprised by this one, and I would recommend it.

4

[WHITBISSELL!]

Ricardo Darin is an amazing actor. If you can, watch XXY.Will do. :up:

[MovieBuffering]

"Back to the middle"? Where is it now?

Lefter than left.

[Allaby]

Carl(a) (2011) Directed by Eli Hershko and starring Joslyn DeFreece, Gregg Bello, Laverne Cox, and Mark Margolis. A drama about a trans woman, about to finish her transition, who falls in love with a man who isn't supportive of her completing the transition. I rate it a 7/10.

[Wooley]

Lefter than left.

Is it?

[StuSmallz]

Thanks, Stu! This was written for the current Hall of Fame we're hosting here. Join the next one Stu (which won't be for a while, but keep an eye out for it)!Eh, I'm not good at taking on-the-fly recs from otger people, as I tend to only be in the mood to watch new movies occasionally at most, and even then, I'm only ever in the mood for one specific movie at a time (meaning I can't just do something like pick any random movie off of Netflix to watch daily), so I'm sorry, but not interested in that right now. That being said though, keep on keeping it up from your end of things, Pops!

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BY2EwOTYxOWMtZDUwOC00NDE1LWIyMTMtYjBmODkwMTk4ZjA0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUwNzk3NDc@._V1_.jpg
Spellbound (1945, Alfred Hitchcock)
2.5
First, let me get this out of the way: Ingrid Bergman is absolutely gorgeous here, her sheer presence in the frame automatically makes me want to give a higher rating to any film she's in but... in this case I wasn't particularly grabbed by the story, the suspense was lacking, and the film just didn't flow so well for me. Some interesting moments here and there (it's a Hitchcock film, after all) but some scenes didn't work, like the fake skiing scene - I get it, technical limitations of the era and all that, but there you have it, it took me right out of the movie where it should've been a tense climactic nail-biter. Same with the gun hand scene at the end - should've been a lot more tense than it was. As for the famous dream sequence (designed by Salvador Dali), it had some cool imagery but I felt the impact of it was irrevocably diminished by the fact that it was narrated after the fact and overly explained rather than just shown (imo).
A lesser Hitchcock for me.

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/deankorrl/17123290/3953007/3953007_800.jpg
Frenzy (1972, Alfred Hitchcock)
4
A later-era work by the master, darker, more viscerally violent and sexually explicit than I'm used to, but it still has all the ingredients of the Hitchcock world - mystery, suspense, witty dialogue, macabre humor, excellent cinematography (check out the symmetrical shots like the one above), and a well constructed, interesting plot. Where Spellbound came short in getting me fully invested in the story, Frenzy drew me in right away. Contrasting with the grisly subject matter, the scenes with the police inspector and his gourmet-cook wife provided comedic relief without feeling annoying or out of place - that's how you develop secondary characters. Definitely in the mid-upper echelon of Hitchcock's ouvre, afaic.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fcriterion-production%2Fstills%2F132158-4d9277cbf2ec1ff7063f04e981d29d9a%2FFilm_Furies_original.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

The Furies, 1950

An old rancher named TC (Walter Huston) owns a huge property in New Mexico knows as the Furies. He manages the property in part with his daughter, Vance (Barbara Stanwyck), who loves the land deeply. TC is constantly annoyed with the presence of squatters on the property, especially the Herrera family. Vance has a deep friendship with the eldest Herrera son, Juan (Gilbert Roland). But when TC begins to take action that will cut Vance out of her place on the ranch, he and Vance get into a serious conflict that only deepens as each of them digs their heels in deeper.

It is rare that I can truly identify a moment where a movie lost me, but in this case it is crystal clear. The first half of this film is amazing and I was totally in love with it aside from one element. But around the halfway point something happens and from there I watched the rest of the film with a mix of bafflement and slight disgust.

The first half of the movie is mostly a delight. Stanwyck and Huston have solid chemistry together as two people who are just as stubborn as each other and clearly love sparring with each other. I also really enjoyed the sequences between Vance and Juan--a great portrayal of a loving and respectful relationship between two people. Juan is in love with Vance, and she knows it, but he respects that she doesn't return his romantic feelings and the two are able to continue their friendship.

The one sour note for me in the first half was Vance's romantic pursuit of another main character, Rip Darrow (Wendell Corey). Rip believes that part of the Furies rightfully belongs to him and his family, and romancing Vance is a good way to get back at TC. It is easy to understand that Vance would need a strong man, and that in the mold of her father she might even prefer one who is slightly domineering. But there is a scene between Rip and Vance that really put me off. When he stands her up for dinner she goes to his home. And angry at her he grabs her by the hair, hits her, pushes her down, submerges her face in a basin of water, and calls her names. This really crossed a line for me, and watching Vance run after him like a kicked puppy was gross. There could have been a well-observed theme here about why Vance continues to like Rip, but the film never bothers to even attempt to explain. She just loves him, ya'll. And for a character who has been so strong, this sudden meekness is kind of confusing.

But the film picks up again nicely as TC brings home a new wife, Flo (Judith Anderson), and blatantly begins to push Vance out. TC also offers Rip a bribe to break things off with Vance. Fed up at his interference, Vance attacks Flo and then runs away to join the Herreras. TC and a crew of ranch hands get into a standoff with the Herrera family, as Vance frets.

It is the conclusion of this standoff that leads to the moment in which the movie "broke" from my point of view. I'll put the rest of this review in spoiler tags.

Juan, seeing that Vance is worried about her father's safety, agrees that the Herreras will leave the Furies. He negotiates safe passage with TC. Only TC then goes back on his word. And in a horrible scene he has Juan hanged as the laughing ranch-hands look on and Juan's mother screams. Vance, furious and tearful and unable to watch her best friend's final moments, swears vengeance against TC and rides away as Juan's mother screams for her son.

Okay--that sequence is awesome and powerful and emotional.

And then the film . . . turns into a comedy?? Vance hatches a plan to steal the Furies from TC by sabotaging his mortgage. She reunites with Rip (you know, the guy who physically abused her, manipulated her, and took money to not marry her?) and the two of them get back together romantically.

Then we see further wacky adventures of TC and his men on a large cattle drive, not realizing that Vance is the one set to buy the cattle.

I was, frankly, just grossed out by this last half of the film. I could not forget Rip's treatment of Vance as she continues to make doe eyes at him. I could not forget Juan's brutal murder as the film moved toward its conclusion and everyone's attitude toward TC seemed to be "aw, he's such a character!!!". It's the fact that Vance herself seems to have forgotten the murder and memory of her childhood best friend that stings the most. It makes her seem like a money-grubbing creep, not all that different from her father. I don't think she even mentioned Juan's name in the entire last half of the movie.

And the romance between Rip and Vance stings partly because Rip is a jerk. He's smarmy and self-centered. He is not even 1/3 of the person that Juan was, and so the romance just adds insult to injury.

If the second half had matched the first in intensity and character work, this would have been an instant classic.

3.5

[SpelingError]

Eh, I'm not good at taking on-the-fly recs from otger people, as I tend to only be in the mood to watch new movies occasionally at most, and even then, I'm only ever in the mood for one specific movie at a time (meaning I can't just do something like pick any random movie off of Netflix to watch daily), so I'm sorry, but not interested in that right now. That being said though, keep on keeping it up from your end of things, Pops!

I'll miss ya, but that's fair.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-S4x0YwZ693Y%2FTz6GClz8pqI%2FAAAAAAAAAdg%2FZuqd9tJqRaQ%2Fs1600%2Ftrainjackal.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Day of the Jackal, 1973

Unhappy at different political maneuvers by President Charles DeGaulle, an underground group hires a British assassin named the Jackal (Edward Fox) to kill DeGaulle. A French investigator named Lebel (Michael Lonsdale) pursues the Jackal.

I placed a request for this film from my library yesterday, and so imagine my surprise when I found it on my own DVD shelf!

I really, really enjoy this film. It's the kind of movie that's fun to bust out every year or so and watch from beginning to end.

The joy in the film comes from watching two "machines" working to opposite purposes: the Jackal working to carry out the assassination, Lebel working to stop it. Both men (and their various helpers) must be rigorous in their preparations and the slightest slip up can mean a huge setback.

From the Jackal's point of view, this means procuring a weapon, creating various aliases/disguises to travel without detection, and taking advantage of the lonely and needy along the way to stay off the radar. From Lebel's side of things, it is about combing the data available to them and working to discover a pattern. This is the kind of film that pulls you in two directions because while you are ultimately on the side of the police, it is fascinating to see the clever ways in which the Jackal carries out the various elements of his plan.

Something that the film captures brilliantly is the way that it all comes down to humans being humans. Lebel understands the way that human weakness can be exploited. The Jackal himself is adept at knowing just how to play on the sympathies, loneliness, or lust of the people he uses. As the Jackal makes his various escapes (and as bodies pile up behind him), the film maintains a dual momentum as the Jackal moves closer to executing his plan and Lebel learns more about his adversary with each incident.

I have also always loved getting glimpses of how crime fighting worked in the past from a procedural/forensic point of view. A lot of it is just brutal dedication of man-hours, as officers pour over lists of names in hotel registrations or passport entries.

The character of the Jackal is pretty aloof, as is fitting. This is a cold-blooded person who doesn't hesitate to kill and old woman to provide a momentary distraction and the performance from Fox fits this well. He turns charm on and off as needed (and he is handsome and fit enough to appeal to those he meets along the way), but we aren't going to get to know him. Lonsdale's performance as the intelligent and determined Lebel provides a nice counter-balance, including a few moments of much-needed humor. I had also forgotten that Derek Jacobi is in this film as Lebel's right-hand man.

In terms of criticisms, I would say that the film is highly procedural. I always feel a little let down in the last 5 minutes, as the film resolves very quickly and it's like "Okay, people. That was the story. You can show yourselves out.". The film doesn't spend much time on the many victims of the Jackal along the way, offering them some sympathy, but not much else.

It's also very of the time, but the film's gender and sexuality biases come off a bit silly. There are multiple instances of nudity from the female characters, but very little from the men. And when the Jackal becomes romantically involved with a man later in the film, there's never so much as an embrace or a kiss between the two. We can watch murders and we can hear the screams of a man being tortured, but heaven forbid the lips of two male characters touch!

These are relatively minor complaints. I really enjoy this film, and even after many viewings I still find it thrilling.

4

[Rhys]

When Harry Met Sally... (REWATCH)

https://resizing.flixster.com/f2RFC-sBO0_OzE-fgYb14RqlFYk=/740x380/v1.bjsxODExMDg7ajsxODY3NzsxMjAwOzE1MzY7NzY4

rating_5

[Stirchley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-S4x0YwZ693Y%2FTz6GClz8pqI%2FAAAAAAAAAdg%2FZuqd9tJqRaQ%2Fs1600%2Ftrainjackal.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Day of the Jackal, 1973


Never seen this, but have put it in my Netflix Q.

[Stirchley]

71898

Re-watch. Once it got going, it was quite the romp. Enjoyed it.

[mark f]

Cry of the Hunted (Joseph H. Lewis, 1953) 2.5+ 6/10
Charming (Ross Venokur, 2018) 2.5 5.5/10
The Delivered (Thomas Clay, 2019) 2.5 6/10
News of the World (Paul Greengrass, 2020) 3.5 7/10
https://i1.wp.com/www.provideocoalition.com/wp-content/uploads/3098.jpg?resize=525%2C295&ssl=1
Relevant, suspenseful western with Tom Hanks as an ex-Confederate officer who travels throughout Texas reading newspapers to interested townsfolk and tries to return home a German orphan (Helena Zengel) who has spent years with the Kiowas.
Enormous (Sophie Letourneur, 2019) 2.5 6/10
Tarzan and the Green Goddess (Edward Kull, 1938) 2 5/10
Bulldog Drummond's Secret Police (James Hogan, 1939) 2.5 5.5/10
One Night in Miami... (Regina King, 2020) 3 6.5/10
https://media.vandal.net/i/620x256/11-2020/202011197594972_1.jpg
In Miami after Cassius Clay (Eli Goree) [right] beats Sonny Liston for the heavyweight boxing crown, he gets together with Sam Cooke (Leslie Odom Jr.), Jim Brown (Aldis Hodge) and Malcolm X (Kingsley Ben-Adir) to talk about what's going on.
Batman: Soul of the Dragon (Sam Liu, 2021) 2.5 6/10
Love Sarah (Eliza Schroeder, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Locked Down (Doug Liman, 2021) 2 5/10
Dr. Bird's Advice for Sad Poets (Yaniv Raz, 2021) 2.5 6/10
https://d1nslcd7m2225b.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xAny/5/4/6/1319546_drbird_316038.jpg
Teenager Lucas Jade Zumann has some problems - he has an imaginary pigeon as his therapist - but his first crush (Taylor Russell) agrees to help him solve a mystery regarding his sister.
Climate of the Hunter (Mickey Reece, 2019) 2.5 5.5/10
Grand Piano (Eugenio Mira, 2013) 2.5 6/10
Don't Tell a Soul (Alex McAulay, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Spacewalker (Dmitriy Kiselev, 2017) 2.5 6/10
https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/hostedimages/1588493529i/29402230._SX540_.png
The Soviet Union tries to stay ahead in the Space Race by sending cosmonauts up prematurely in 1965 for the first spacewalk but the mission undergoes a series of disasters.
Matador (Pedro Almodóvar, 1986) 2.5 6/10
Buck Run (Nick Frangione, 2019) 2 5/10
The Silence (Mohsen Makhmalbaf, 1998) 2.5 5.5/10
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown (Pedro Almodóvar, 1988) 3+ 6.5/10
https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-06-2017/IXsp1z.gif
You never know what they're going to do.

[Takoma11]

News of the World (Paul Greengrass, 2020) 3.5 7/10
https://i1.wp.com/www.provideocoalition.com/wp-content/uploads/3098.jpg?resize=525%2C295&ssl=1
Relevant, suspenseful western with Tom Hanks as an ex-Confederate officer who travels throughout Texas reading newspapers to interested townsfolk and tries to return home a German orphan (Helena Zengel) who has spent years with the Kiowas

The book that this is based on is amazing (and it's a short, page-turner that I read almost in one sitting). I am happy that the adaptation seems to be getting a positive reception.

[mark f]

It goes right into my Top 10 of 2020.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.rogerebert.com%2Fuploads%2Freview%2Fprimary_image%2Freviews%2Fgreat-movie-ordet-1955%2Fhero_Ordet.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Ordet, 1955

Morten Borgen (Henrik Malberg) lives with his three adult sons, as well as the wife and children of his eldest. Mikkel (Emil Hass Christensen) is agnostic, though his wife, Inger (Birgitte Federspiel) is incredibly devout. Johannes (Preben Lordorff Rye) has had a psychological break and now believes himself to be Jesus Christ. Anders (Cay Kristensen) is in love with the daughter of a family with different religious beliefs from the Borgens. The conflict about whether the two young people can marry causes a feud between Morten and the young woman's father, Peter. Things get further complicated when Inger's pregnancy takes a bad turn.

This movie will give you shivers, though it does take a little while for the narrative momentum to build to that point.

The film begins by laying out the different belief systems of the family members. It's interesting, and I appreciated that it did a good job of conveying what it is like when others try to dictate your response to situations based on their beliefs. In one scene, Inger advises someone to pray. When they respond that they are praying and it isn't helping, she's like "Well, maybe you just need to pray some more!". This conflict is given more depth later when Morten and Peter explicitly get into a debate about religious belief--Morten claiming that religion should be about joy and Peter expressing that it is actually about suffering.

In a turn of events that is both powerful and frustrating, Inger's horrific childbirth experience becomes a litmus test for the "truth" of the different characters' beliefs. And things kick off in a horrible fashion with Peter basically saying that he hopes Inger dies so that it will teach Morten a lesson about suffering. As Inger languishes, characters not only have different outlooks on how to regard her situation (including the town doctor, who at one point bluntly asks something to the effect of, "What do you think helps more: your praying or my medicine?" But characters also imply that their belief is not just about handling Inger's dire situation, but even influencing it. It is implied that the right kind of belief will save her life.

And just to talk about Inger's childbirth scene: GOOD GRIEF! It's maybe one of the worst things I've ever seen. Inger lays on a table, surrounded by the midwife, Mikkel, and the doctor. And no one talks to her or tells her what is happening. No one asks her what she is feeling or explains what they are doing. At one point the doctor, without warning, just starts cutting her open to facilitate the birth. And even the framing seems designed to put the focus of the scene on the other characters and specifically the male characters. Inger's face is almost always excluded from the frame.

It's hard to talk about the final act without giving away really key plot elements. But the last 20 minutes or so are pretty amazing. The characters really hash out their different beliefs and especially when it comes to Mikkel you can sense the internal turmoil of choosing between having no faith and having faith that might not be rewarded. While on a personal level I don't agree with the view that I think the film is ultimately espousing about faith and belief, I do think that the ideas are powerfully presented. I would imagine that for people whose beliefs do align with the film's conclusions, this would be a real jolt.

Lastly, I want to mention the look of the film which is absolutely gorgeous. This is the second Dreyer film I've watched this month, and darn if the man doesn't know how to use light, shadow, and space to the best possible impact.

I would highly recommend this film, and I would also warn anyone who hasn't seen it that it took me about 40 minutes to really warm up to it. There is a lot of talk and little action for the first third or so, but do not let that deter you. Once the pieces are all in place, the whole film comes together beautifully.

4.5

[Takoma11]

It goes right into my Top 10 of 2020.

I was so nervous when I heard they were adapting it. Now I'm excited to see it.

[ThatDarnMKS]

BREAKIN' 2: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO

5

An absurd romp of loosely strung together sequences of camp, surrealism and shockingly poor dancing. It's what I wanted the first one to be and is among the most exquisitely entertaining Cannon Group Films.

THE BLUE ANGEL

4

This was my first Sternberg/Dietrich collaboration and it's a fine film. Like many made under the Weimar Republic, it's dark, cynical and carries with it the foreboding psychology of the social/economic anxieties and traumas that would pave the way for the Nazis rise to power. Unfortunately, I recently watched PANDORA'S BOX from Pabst, starting Louise Brooks, which tells a similar story albeit shifting the focus to the seductress rather than the led astray suitor. I find that perspective far more engaging than this one, as I didn't find Janning's character much to root for (unlike his turn in THE LAST LAUGH, another recent watch).

Still quality stuff but it wasn't quite BREAKIN' 2 ELECTRIC BOOGALOO either.

[CharlesAoup]

Paranormal Activity 4, 2012, 2nd watch (F)

This is really the point at which these movies get extremely grating. The beats are the same, the rhythm is the same, the endings are the exact same since the first one. The jump scares are stale and irritating, Characters being digitally-enhancedly quiet and only making a sound when the person they're stalking turns around, half a planck from them, people punching doors as they open them after being completely and entirely silent, despite holding keys.

The worst thing here is the hateable douche of a kid though. He acts like a douchebag, isn't played by a good actor and does eveyrthing to make you hate him. The previous child actors were bad, but they didn't play insufferable brats.

[Fabulous]

Footlight Parade (1933)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/a3cPv2bi7UEnK7PGqPIYhigtpm9.jpg

[Gideon58]

https://www.classicmoviefavorites.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/dangerous-poster.jpg



3.5

[Gideon58]

Footlight Parade (1933)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/a3cPv2bi7UEnK7PGqPIYhigtpm9.jpg

Loved this movie...think I rated it higher than you did.

[JayDee]

https://i.imgur.com/WadI9OB.jpg

Promising Young Woman
(2020, d. Emerald Fennell)

3.5 -

Now here's a tough one to pigeonhole when it comes to genre. Promising Young Woman, a debut feature for Emerald Fennell, is a thriller. And a revenge movie. And a pitch black comedy. And a dramatic meditation on grief. And even a full-on romcom for a time. And.....well let's just say it's a film that wears many hats. Very much a production of the #MeToo movement that gives toxic masculinity a real kicking this is a slick and stylish piece of work.

With so many genres and tones competing for attention the film really needs a strong centre to keep it from flying off into the atmosphere. Thankfully it has such a centre in the excellent Carey Mulligan. She delivers a fearless, uncompromising performance that results in a compelling and unpredictable character in the form of Cassie Thomas. She's a character I feel had the potential to stray into camp territory, taking the film along with her, but Mulligan ensures this isn't the case.

Mulligan proves a perfect piece of casting. She has that sweet, innocent, girl-next-door allure to present herself as a target and lure in those who feel they can prey upon her; and the strength to surprise and potentially destroy them. She burns up the screen with a fury and intensity that prove impossible to avert your gaze from. Her Cassie is a damaged individual, prone to behaviour that is destructive to both herself and to others. Anger and resentment bubble perpetually under the surface in a life that is aimless but for her dangerous venture of targeting predatory men. I found myself judging her. I found myself chilled by her. I found myself completely unsure what she would do next. But all in all I found myself caring for her, drawn into her perilous exploits and fearing for her safety.

While it is undoubtedly Mulligan's film (she appears in almost every scene) the film is populated with a number of familiar faces throughout its supporting cast who make an impression and lend personality, even in the most minimal of roles. Alison Brie, Alfred Molina, Molly Shannon and Connie Britton are just some of those to cross paths with Cassie. The only performance that felt off for me was Jennifer Coolidge as her mother.

The film certainly isn't perfect. All the aforementioned genre-jumping does make for an occasionally messy, scatterbrained movie that takes a clumsy step or two along the way. Then there's the ending which I'm really not sure of. It's one that I'll need to sit with for a while. Overall I feel I'm perhaps being a tad generous with my rating but I really liked this. It's a bit scrappy but it's a bold and ballsy and vibrant venture from a debut filmmaker that I'll certainly keep an eye on in future

[Thief]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BY2EwOTYxOWMtZDUwOC00NDE1LWIyMTMtYjBmODkwMTk4ZjA0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUwNzk3NDc@._V1_.jpg
Spellbound (1945, Alfred Hitchcock)
2.5
First, let me get this out of the way: Ingrid Bergman is absolutely gorgeous here, her sheer presence in the frame automatically makes me want to give a higher rating to any film she's in but... in this case I wasn't particularly grabbed by the story, the suspense was lacking, and the film just didn't flow so well for me. Some interesting moments here and there (it's a Hitchcock film, after all) but some scenes didn't work, like the fake skiing scene - I get it, technical limitations of the era and all that, but there you have it, it took me right out of the movie where it should've been a tense climactic nail-biter. Same with the gun hand scene at the end - should've been a lot more tense than it was. As for the famous dream sequence (designed by Salvador Dali), it had some cool imagery but I felt the impact of it was irrevocably diminished by the fact that it was narrated after the fact and overly explained rather than just shown (imo).
A lesser Hitchcock for me.

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/deankorrl/17123290/3953007/3953007_800.jpg
Frenzy (1972, Alfred Hitchcock)
4
A later-era work by the master, darker, more viscerally violent and sexually explicit than I'm used to, but it still has all the ingredients of the Hitchcock world - mystery, suspense, macabre humor, excellent cinematography (check out the symmetrical shots like the one above), and a well constructed, interesting plot. Where Spellbound came short in getting me fully invested in the story, Frenzy drew me in right away. Contrasting with the grisly subject matter, the scenes with the police inspector and his gourmet-cook wife provided comedic relief without feeling annoying or out of place - that's how you develop secondary characters. Definitely in the mid-upper echelon of Hitchcock's ouvre, afaic.

I liked Spellbound a bit more than you, and Frenzy a bit less, but I agree with some of your assessments. In the former, I didn't find the murder plot that interesting or, more importantly, necessary. The focus is the interactions between J.B. and Dr. Petersen and how their relationship unfolds. In the latter, I think I was a bit put off by the fact that I thought Richard was a borderline ******* :laugh: Regardless, they're both solid Hitchcock thrillers, IMO.

[Allaby]

Uncle Tom (2020), an interesting documentary about black American conservatives. 8/10

[Wooley]

BREAKIN' 2: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO

5

An absurd romp of loosely strung together sequences of camp, surrealism and shockingly poor dancing. It's what I wanted the first one to be and is among the most exquisitely entertaining Cannon Group Films.



I agree it is the better of the two Breakin' films, but I'm not sure I saw shockingly poor dancing.

[ThatDarnMKS]

I agree it is the better of the two Breakin' films, but I'm not sure I saw shockingly poor dancing.
The dancing from the background and supportingcharacters is generally pretty strong, at the least impressively athletic, but the dancing of O-Zone and Turbo is often comically simplistic with pop n' lock moves that would look more at home at a homecoming dance than front and center of a motion picture.

It's part of what amused me so much about the film. Outside of the Astair-esque rotating house, virtually all of their dance numbers seems impromptu and thus regularly felt half assed and silly.

I'm a terrible dancer and admire break dancers. At no point should I, with my busted knees and motion resistant hips, ever have the thought "well, I could do that" cross my mind during a movie like this.

But it did. More than once.

And that's hilarious to me.

[WHITBISSELL!]

The King of Staten Island - This is a Judd Apatow film so you know it'll probably be long, shambling, shaggy and, most importantly, funny. And it is for the most part. The surprise, at least for me, is Pete Davidson's likable lead performance as Scott Carlin, a pot smoking slacker living in his mother's basement with a nebulous dream of being a professional tattoo artist. He hasn't done much with his life which he attributes to his firefighter father dying when he was seven years old. When his mother (Marisa Tomei) starts dating another guy who also happens to be a firefighter it leads to a meltdown of sorts which sets him on a path to either redemption or catastrophe. It's a hoary chestnut of a storyline and if you're expecting anything decidedly different you're S.O.L. But like I said, the script by Apatow and Davidson isn't bad, the supporting cast with Tomei, Bel Powley and Bill Burr is capable and Davidson makes for an amiable protagonist. 80/100

[StuSmallz]

I agree it is the better of the two Breakin' films, but I'm not sure I saw shockingly poor dancing.
https://i.ibb.co/Nt2Zstz/X2v4-NLw-FJEIezu-Far7jc-IULh1wj-LL57-XJBc-BVKHo-Y.gif (https://imgbb.com/)



/obligatory

[Fabulous]

Madame Bovary (1949)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/a8TgAdADUKsZogQv1xKIGCH3BJL.jpg

[StuSmallz]

Also, for any of the Johnny Mnemonic "fans" here, I just noticed this article on the front page of Gizmodo:


Johnny Mnemonic's Cyber-Dolphin Is Still the Apex of Cyberpunk (https://io9.gizmodo.com/johnny-mnemonics-cyber-dolphin-is-still-the-apex-of-cyb-1846070732)

[this_is_the_ girl]

I think I was a bit put off by the fact that I thought Richard was a borderline ******* :laugh:
He definitely was. You'd think you'd show some emotion upon learning your ex-wife's been brutally raped and murdered - and that guy barely raised an eyelash. Sheesh:rolleyes: My favorite character was the inspector by far, he was cool.
https://i0.wp.com/altereos.ru/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Frenzy.1972.720p.BluRay.2xRus.Eng_.HDCLUB.mkv-00014.jpg?ssl=1

[ScarletLion]

'Together' (2000)
Dir.: Lukas Moodysson

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fe/Tillsammans.jpg/220px-Tillsammans.jpg

Low key, almost dogme like film about a commune of friends all living under one roof. Doesn't quite match the heights of Moodysson's 'F****g Amal' or 'Lilya-4-ever' but it does have lots to say about social commentary, the will of people to change and sexuality. In that way, it almost serves as a microcosm of what a society needs to do to function properly.

3.5

[xSookieStackhouse]

BREAKIN' 2: ELECTRIC BOOGALOO

5

An absurd romp of loosely strung together sequences of camp, surrealism and shockingly poor dancing. It's what I wanted the first one to be and is among the most exquisitely entertaining Cannon Group Films.

THE BLUE ANGEL

4

This was my first Stroheim/Dietrich collaboration and it's a fine film. Like many made under the Weimar Republic, it's dark, cynical and carries with it the foreboding psychology of the social/economic anxieties and traumas that would pave the way for the Nazis rise to power. Unfortunately, I recently watched PANDORA'S BOX from Pabst, starting Louise Brooks, which tells a similar story albeit shifting the focus to the seductress rather than the led astray suitor. I find that perspective far more engaging than this one, as I didn't find Janning's character much to root for (unlike his turn in THE LAST LAUGH, another recent watch).

Still quality stuff but it wasn't quite BREAKIN' 2 ELECTRIC BOOGALOO either.

its sad that one of the actors from breakin' movie passed away recently D=

[Daniel M]

THE BLUE ANGEL

4

This was my first Stroheim/Dietrich collaboration and it's a fine film. Like many made under the Weimar Republic, it's dark, cynical and carries with it the foreboding psychology of the social/economic anxieties and traumas that would pave the way for the Nazis rise to power. Unfortunately, I recently watched PANDORA'S BOX from Pabst, starting Louise Brooks, which tells a similar story albeit shifting the focus to the seductress rather than the led astray suitor. I find that perspective far more engaging than this one, as I didn't find Janning's character much to root for (unlike his turn in THE LAST LAUGH, another recent watch).

Just a heads up you put Stroheim not Sternberg, but I watched this last year and thought it was a great film. I'm yet to see any Pabst or many Louise Brooks who I have heard great things about so, unfortunately, can't comment on your references here.

Have you seen any other Sternberg films? I was blown away by Underworld which along with Scarface seems to me to very much be an early template that would inspire much of the crime films people love today.

[Wooley]

The dancing from the background and supportingcharacters is generally pretty strong, at the least impressively athletic, but the dancing of O-Zone and Turbo is often comically simplistic with pop n' lock moves that would look more at home at a homecoming dance than front and center of a motion picture.

It's part of what amused me so much about the film. Outside of the Astair-esque rotating house, virtually all of their dance numbers seems impromptu and thus regularly felt half assed and silly.

I'm a terrible dancer and admire break dancers. At no point should I, with my busted knees and motion resistant hips, ever have the thought "well, I could do that" cross my mind during a movie like this.

But it did. More than once.

And that's hilarious to me.

Well, I wonder if there isn't some bias of time involved as I remember when we saw it in the theater back in '84 we were all really, really impressed. Of course, I was 11. But nobody I knew could do that.

[Daniel M]

Lastly, I want to mention the look of the film which is absolutely gorgeous. This is the second Dreyer film I've watched this month, and darn if the man doesn't know how to use light, shadow, and space to the best possible impact.

I would highly recommend this film, and I would also warn anyone who hasn't seen it that it took me about 40 minutes to really warm up to it. There is a lot of talk and little action for the first third or so, but do not let that deter you. Once the pieces are all in place, the whole film comes together beautifully.

4.5

It's been a while since I saw this film. I watched it years ago when I did some free online course in Scandinavian Film and TV. I think I had to do a small essay regarding the themes of faith, but what I really noticed about the film was similar to you - Dreyer's visual presentation of the story. Some of the cinematography and how he captures certain scenes and sequences is amazing. Your enthusiastic review makes me want to revisit the film. There was a member on here bluedeed who was a big fan of the film and I know he also loved Dreyer's Gertrud which I am yet to get to.

So far the only others from him I've seen are The Passion of Joan of Arc and Vampyr which I know we talked about recently, a superb director.

[Iroquois]

Her - 2

dat MoFo Top 100 backlash

[crumbsroom]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BY2EwOTYxOWMtZDUwOC00NDE1LWIyMTMtYjBmODkwMTk4ZjA0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUwNzk3NDc@._V1_.jpg
Spellbound (1945, Alfred Hitchcock)
2.5
First, let me get this out of the way: Ingrid Bergman is absolutely gorgeous here, her sheer presence in the frame automatically makes me want to give a higher rating to any film she's in but... in this case I wasn't particularly grabbed by the story, the suspense was lacking, and the film just didn't flow so well for me. Some interesting moments here and there (it's a Hitchcock film, after all) but some scenes didn't work, like the fake skiing scene - I get it, technical limitations of the era and all that, but there you have it, it took me right out of the movie where it should've been a tense climactic nail-biter. Same with the gun hand scene at the end - should've been a lot more tense than it was. As for the famous dream sequence (designed by Salvador Dali), it had some cool imagery but I felt the impact of it was irrevocably diminished by the fact that it was narrated after the fact and overly explained rather than just shown (imo).
A lesser Hitchcock for me.

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/deankorrl/17123290/3953007/3953007_800.jpg
Frenzy (1972, Alfred Hitchcock)
4
A later-era work by the master, darker, more viscerally violent and sexually explicit than I'm used to, but it still has all the ingredients of the Hitchcock world - mystery, suspense, witty dialogue, macabre humor, excellent cinematography (check out the symmetrical shots like the one above), and a well constructed, interesting plot. Where Spellbound came short in getting me fully invested in the story, Frenzy drew me in right away. Contrasting with the grisly subject matter, the scenes with the police inspector and his gourmet-cook wife provided comedic relief without feeling annoying or out of place - that's how you develop secondary characters. Definitely in the mid-upper echelon of Hitchcock's ouvre, afaic.


Agree with both assessments

[crumbsroom]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.rogerebert.com%2Fuploads%2Freview%2Fprimary_image%2Freviews%2Fgreat-movie-ordet-1955%2Fhero_Ordet.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Ordet, 1955

Morten Borgen (Henrik Malberg) lives with his three adult sons, as well as the wife and children of his eldest. Mikkel (Emil Hass Christensen) is agnostic, though his wife, Inger (Birgitte Federspiel) is incredibly devout. Johannes (Preben Lordorff Rye) has had a psychological break and now believes himself to be Jesus Christ. Anders (Cay Kristensen) is in love with the daughter of a family with different religious beliefs from the Borgens. The conflict about whether the two young people can marry causes a feud between Morten and the young woman's father, Peter. Things get further complicated when Inger's pregnancy takes a bad turn.

This movie will give you shivers, though it does take a little while for the narrative momentum to build to that point.

The film begins by laying out the different belief systems of the family members. It's interesting, and I appreciated that it did a good job of conveying what it is like when others try to dictate your response to situations based on their beliefs. In one scene, Inger advises someone to pray. When they respond that they are praying and it isn't helping, she's like "Well, maybe you just need to pray some more!". This conflict is given more depth later when Morten and Peter explicitly get into a debate about religious belief--Morten claiming that religion should be about joy and Peter expressing that it is actually about suffering.

In a turn of events that is both powerful and frustrating, Inger's horrific childbirth experience becomes a litmus test for the "truth" of the different characters' beliefs. And things kick off in a horrible fashion with Peter basically saying that he hopes Inger dies so that it will teach Morten a lesson about suffering. As Inger languishes, characters not only have different outlooks on how to regard her situation (including the town doctor, who at one point bluntly asks something to the effect of, "What do you think helps more: your praying or my medicine?" But characters also imply that their belief is not just about handling Inger's dire situation, but even influencing it. It is implied that the right kind of belief will save her life.

And just to talk about Inger's childbirth scene: GOOD GRIEF! It's maybe one of the worst things I've ever seen. Inger lays on a table, surrounded by the midwife, Mikkel, and the doctor. And no one talks to her or tells her what is happening. No one asks her what she is feeling or explains what they are doing. At one point the doctor, without warning, just starts cutting her open to facilitate the birth. And even the framing seems designed to put the focus of the scene on the other characters and specifically the male characters. Inger's face is almost always excluded from the frame.

It's hard to talk about the final act without giving away really key plot elements. But the last 20 minutes or so are pretty amazing. The characters really hash out their different beliefs and especially when it comes to Mikkel you can sense the internal turmoil of choosing between having no faith and having faith that might not be rewarded. While on a personal level I don't agree with the view that I think the film is ultimately espousing about faith and belief, I do think that the ideas are powerfully presented. I would imagine that for people whose beliefs do align with the film's conclusions, this would be a real jolt.

Lastly, I want to mention the look of the film which is absolutely gorgeous. This is the second Dreyer film I've watched this month, and darn if the man doesn't know how to use light, shadow, and space to the best possible impact.

I would highly recommend this film, and I would also warn anyone who hasn't seen it that it took me about 40 minutes to really warm up to it. There is a lot of talk and little action for the first third or so, but do not let that deter you. Once the pieces are all in place, the whole film comes together beautifully.

4.5


I thought I'd seen this, but maybe I haven't. Clearly I should since Dreyer might be a top 5 director for me. Definitely top 10.

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/dNURVKO.jpg?1

First things first, that poster in no way reflects the movie and was obviously just an attention-grabber. It's not a "sexy" film at all and Joanne Woodward is never in her underwear, on the contrary, she's as buttoned-up as one could be.

I happened on this, as I often do, on Sunday morning on TCM. I frequently just watch whatever they have on and I am rewarded more often than not.
This was not grabbing me.
I have never really connected with Henry Fonda. His brand of aw-shucks earnestness works less than Jimmy Stewart at his aw-shucksiest, for me. He's fine when he's not doing that, like in 12 Angry Men or certainly OUaTitW, but even in a movie like The Lady Eve, which I really enjoy for Stanwyck, he annoys me.
I hung around for Jason Robards, who is always worth hanging around for.
The story here is that a a family is passing through Laredo on their way to buy a farm at the same time that an annual high-stakes poker-game is in play. The husband (Fonda) is a recovering gambler and gets the itch and buys in. He eventually bets their life-savings on a hand but with no more money to put in the pot, he is required by house rules to retire from the game, forfeiting all of his chips and leaving his family destitute. Under the strain he has a heart attack and his prim and proper wife, Mary (Joanne Woodward), who's never played a game of poker in her life is forced to find a way to finish his hand or end up in the poor-house.
The movie actually becomes quite amusing and clever once Fonda mercifully suffers his coronary and gets off my screen and I found myself genuinely sucked into the proceedings by the combination of some clever writing, Robards, Paul Ford as the bellicose bank-owner Mary tries to convince to stake her, and Woodward herself, who can't keep her accent straight but is quite good otherwise.
There is more to this film than meets the eye and if anyone decides to watch it I highly suggest you do not know anything about it going in. It has its surprises and I suspect the movie would be a lot less entertaining if one knows what they are going in.
Overall, a delightful little film.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Just a heads up you put Stroheim not Sternberg, but I watched this last year and thought it was a great film. I'm yet to see any Pabst or many Louise Brooks who I have heard great things about so, unfortunately, can't comment on your references here.

Have you seen any other Sternberg films? I was blown away by Underworld which along with Scarface seems to me to very much be an early template that would inspire much of the crime films people love today.
Whoops! I'll fix it.

This was my first Sternberg, though I've got my eye on the Criterion set they have of the other films he made with Dietrich. It's far from my first Dietrich.

Underworld sounds right up my alley. I love classic gangster films. Have you seen Public Enemy, Little Caesar or the Roaring Twenties? The first two pre-date Scarface and the Roaring Twenties pushes very close to the modern crime film in scope and conscience.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Well, I wonder if there isn't some bias of time involved as I remember when we saw it in the theater back in '84 we were all really, really impressed. Of course, I was 11. But nobody I knew could do that.
Modernity certainly has not been kind to the film but has added a large amount of charm that may or may not have been present during the initial release. That said, I can't see the leads getting past the first round of So You Think You Can Dance. The bar has gotten too high.

[Daniel M]

Whoops! I'll fix it.

This was my first Sternberg, though I've got my eye on the Criterion set they have of the other films he made with Dietrich. It's far from my first Dietrich.

Underworld sounds right up my alley. I love classic gangster films. Have you seen Public Enemy, Little Caesar or the Roaring Twenties? The first two pre-date Scarface and the Roaring Twenties pushes very close to the modern crime film in scope and conscience.

I've seen three Sternberg films so far. Those two and The Docks of New York which I also thought was great. What stood out about Underworld for me was how violent the whole thing is for its time. Some awesome set-pieces.

I shamefully haven't actually seen any of those. I love James Cagney but those films are from three directors who I haven't really got around to exploring properly so far, although I've heard great things. I love the only Walsh film I've seen and both Wellman films I've seen.

[Captain Terror]

I'm yet to see any Pabst or many Louise Brooks who I have heard great things

My first, and so far only, encounter with Brooks happened last year. I watched It's the Old Army Game, which is a silent WC Fields comedy. Brooks was only a side character but I was completely smitten, and not in a va-va-voom way. She just seemed to have that rare "thing" where you can't take your eyes off a person when they're on screen. So I've been looking forward to seeing one of her more substantial roles.

[Captain Terror]

Ordet is a movie I like a lot but would hesitate to recommend to anyone because of it's glacial pace. Glad to hear some of you are into it.
Day of Wrath is another good one that I don't see mentioned enough.

[Daniel M]

My first, and so far only, encounter with Brooks happened last year. I watched It's the Old Army Game, which is a silent WC Fields comedy. Brooks was only a side character but I was completely smitten, and not in a va-va-voom way. She just seemed to have that rare "thing" where you can't take your eyes off a person when they're on screen. So I've been looking forward to seeing one of her more substantial roles.

I've just checked and I think it's actually the case that I haven't seen any of her films yet. I'm friends with a screenwriter of decent success who told me that when he was younger the first thing he tried to write was a biopic for Louise Brooks and that he was a big fan.

Silent cinema is an era where I tend to absolutely love all the films I watch for it, yet still have so much to explore, especially relative to other eras.

[ThatDarnMKS]

I've seen three Sternberg films so far. Those two and The Docks of New York which I also thought was great. What stood out about Underworld for me was how violent the whole thing is for its time. Some awesome set-pieces.

I shamefully haven't actually seen any of those. I love James Cagney but those films are from three directors who I haven't really got around to exploring properly so far, although I've heard great things. I love the only Walsh film I've seen and both Wellman films I've seen.
I've had my eye on DONY for a bit too. Criterion has them and the Last Command, which is of high interest due to Jannings, so I'll probably have to pick it up too.

What Cagney have you seen? He's among my favorite actors and I think he often gets short changed as a caricature despite having a ton of versatility and realism. Any guy that can do White Heat, Footlight Parade and Yankee Doodle Dandy is a powerhouse of a performer.

What have you seen from Walsh and Wellman?

[Daniel M]

I've had my eye on DONY for a bit too. Criterion has them and the Last Command, which is of high interest due to Jannings, so I'll probably have to pick it up too.

What Cagney have you seen? He's among my favorite actors and I think he often gets short changed as a caricature despite having a ton of versatility and realism. Any guy that can do White Heat, Footlight Parade and Yankee Doodle Dandy is a powerhouse of a performer.

What have you seen from Walsh and Wellman?

I've only seen two Cagney films but they contain two of my favourite performances of all time. One is Yankee Doodle Dandee which I was quite trepidatious going into but ended up lovely largely due to his magnetism on the screen. It's such a dynamic performance and it really makes the film.

The other is Ceiling Zero, a criminally underseen Howard Hawk's film that would probably be in my top 50 of all time. I bought a copy of it on DVD online which I think is from France and titled "Brumes" but the film was in full English. I think that Hawk's Only Angels Have Wings which revisits a lot of similar stuff is better, but love both of the films and in particular Cagney's performance.

From Walsh I've only seen Pursued which would be in my top 25 films of all time. I love Westerns, but this stands out as a favourite due to its unique imagery. It's more of a noir in many ways with its plot and slightly disturbing themes, but its a film beautifully told through imagery. If you haven't seen it I would highly recommend it and there's a great video essay on it from Tag Gallagher for Sight & Sound on Youtube.

From Wellman I've seen The Ox-Bow Incident which I thought was a great all-round Western and A Star Is Born which I watched more recently and was blown away by. I think I watched the latter on MUBI around the time Bradley Cooper released his new version. I wasn't sure how much I was going to enjoy it, especially when it starts with Vicki's humble beginnings, but it soon swept me into its dark world. Fredric March is absolutely incredible. My impressions of Wellman are that he seems like an efficient director, every scene seems to convey a lot of meaning, filled with detail but without excess.

[Takoma11]

It's been a while since I saw this film. I watched it years ago when I did some free online course in Scandinavian Film and TV. I think I had to do a small essay regarding the themes of faith, but what I really noticed about the film was similar to you - Dreyer's visual presentation of the story. Some of the cinematography and how he captures certain scenes and sequences is amazing. Your enthusiastic review makes me want to revisit the film. There was a member on here bluedeed who was a big fan of the film and I know he also loved Dreyer's Gertrud which I am yet to get to.

So far the only others from him I've seen are The Passion of Joan of Arc and Vampyr which I know we talked about recently, a superb director.

Yeah, the composition/lighting is amazing.

I was also delighted and floored to read that the actress who played Inger had audio recordings of herself actually giving birth and they used some of that audio in the childbirth sequence.

[Fabulous]

The Exterminating Angel (1962)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/mI7hfScSb8NAWC09viymxCzWZIq.jpg

[Thief]

BROKEN BLOSSOMS
(1919, Griffith)
A film with a title that starts with the letters A or B • A film from before 1920

https://larepublicacultural.es/IMG/jpg/Gish_and_Barthelmess_Broken_Blossoms.jpg

"In every group there is one, weaker than the rest — the butt of uncouth wit or ill-temper"


Broken Blossoms follows Cheng Huan (Richard Barthelmess), a Chinese immigrant that travels to Britain to "spread the gentle message of Buddha". Although things don't go that well for him, he falls for Lucy (Lillian Gish), the abused daughter of a brute boxer (Donald Crisp).

Grade: 2.5


Full review on my Movie Loot thread (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2168380#post2168380)

[ThatDarnMKS]

I've only seen two Cagney films but they contain two of my favourite performances of all time. One is Yankee Doodle Dandee which I was quite trepidatious going into but ended up lovely largely due to his magnetism on the screen. It's such a dynamic performance and it really makes the film.

The other is Ceiling Zero, a criminally underseen Howard Hawk's film that would probably be in my top 50 of all time. I bought a copy of it on DVD online which I think is from France and titled "Brumes" but the film was in full English. I think that Hawk's Only Angels Have Wings which revisits a lot of similar stuff is better, but love both of the films and in particular Cagney's performance.

From Walsh I've only seen Pursued which would be in my top 25 films of all time. I love Westerns, but this stands out as a favourite due to its unique imagery. It's more of a noir in many ways with its plot and slightly disturbing themes, but its a film beautifully told through imagery. If you haven't seen it I would highly recommend it and there's a great video essay on it from Tag Gallagher for Sight & Sound on Youtube.

From Wellman I've seen The Ox-Bow Incident which I thought was a great all-round Western and A Star Is Born which I watched more recently and was blown away by. I think I watched the latter on MUBI around the time Bradley Cooper released his new version. I wasn't sure how much I was going to enjoy it, especially when it starts with Vicki's humble beginnings, but it soon swept me into its dark world. Fredric March is absolutely incredible. My impressions of Wellman are that he seems like an efficient director, every scene seems to convey a lot of meaning, filled with detail but without excess.
I enjoy YDD quite a bit. It's crazy how many genres Michael Curtiz essentially perfected the formula for but with both that and Night and Day, it's hard to see musical biopics that don't live in his shadow.

If you want any Cagney recs, I've got a few. I think Public Enemy, White Heat and Footlight Parade should be priorities.

I'll add that to my list as I'm wholly unfamiliar with that Hawks film. With HH, it seems I'm either entirely smitten with his film or fairly lukewarm. Yet to outright dislike one.

Pursued sounds good. I've only seen a handful of Walsh films (out of the 100 or so he's made) and though the bulk of his work is in the Western genre, I have found myself much more attached to his gangster films (Roaring Twenties, They Drive By Night, White Heat and High Sierra). He combines the two genres with The Lawless Breed but it wasn't as good as I'd hoped.

I need to watch the original version(s) of A Star Is Born. I've only seen the Cooper version which I liked much more than expected. Ox Bow Incident is among the most tragic and heavy westerns around and an exemplary "Western noir." I think Wings is also very worth watching, if only for it's iconic camera moves.

It's incredible how you can see a dozen films from these classic studio directors and barely stratch the surface of their output.

[Fabulous]

Purple Noon (1960)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/hoehDIHtCBlHyygkCnWdZllf3Gt.jpg

[ThatDarnMKS]

Purple Noon (1960)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/hoehDIHtCBlHyygkCnWdZllf3Gt.jpg
I love this one so very much.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ebayimg.com%2Fimages%2Fg%2F0uQAAOSwiq9bU23e%2Fs-l400.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Love is a Ball, 1963

Etienne Pimm (Charles Boyer) has a semi-benevolent scam going whereby he helps titled-but-poor bachelors find wealthy wives. He has a small entourage who help stage events to help the couples fall in love. His latest project is a friendly-but-clumsy duke named Gaspard (Ricardo Montalban) whom he intends to pair with wealthy heiress Millie (Hope Lange). But when Millie develops a crush on a man Etienne has placed in her home as a chauffeur, John Davis (Glenn Ford), it threatens the entire operation.

I thought this was a fun little romp--a low-stakes romantic comedy that gets a boost from some above-average handling of its main characters.

Romantic comedies that pair wealthy women with less-wealthy men are often hard to watch, as they frequently trot out some really tired and obnoxious dynamics. She's stuck up, he teaches her a lesson. Or he's crude and she makes him more refined.

This film doesn't really go in either of those directions, and instead lets the characters find love through, imagine this, shared interests and enjoying each others' company. Millie is very into cars and John is a former racer. In their very first meeting, he tries to correct her mechanical work and she tells him to beat it and, winning my heart forever, tells him, "And don't call me honey." *chef's kiss*. The film indulges in a little of the obligatory "she bosses him around" stuff, but it doesn't fit that well with either of the characters and the two are soon given a real way to bond when Millie helps John work on repairs on his boat. From there, conflict develops as Millie is determined to compete in a car race and John is strongly opposed as he doesn't want her to get hurt.

Aside from a few broader attempts at humor with Millie's character (mostly in the first third), it is easy to like and empathize with these characters. When Millie discovers that she has been targeted for their scam, her reaction is completely understandable. John is a little more enigmatic--he just wants to be able to settle down into a quiet life--but mostly exudes an air of someone who is basically a good person.

In terms of hangups with the film, I only really had two.

The first is that there are some FABULOUS outfits in the film (especially Millie's Penelope-Pitstop-esque pink racing jumpsuit), and I wish that the costume design had been at that level the whole movie.

The other is maybe predictable, given the year of release, but it was kind of disappointing to see the way that Millie's idea of her own future get simplified so quickly when she decides to get married. She goes from someone who talks about loving machinery and racing and dancing and travel to someone who is totally stoked about getting to "take care of him and bring him breakfast every morning". And the problem is that we never hear John say what he will offer Millie. It would have felt so different if she'd added literally anything else to that statement. It's not hard to imagine Millie enjoying being someone's wife, but it does seem strange that all of her quirks, interests, and ambitions just seem to vaporize.

I would say that this movie lands a bit short. The central romance is fun and the performances are all solid, but it lacks a little something to boost it up into a more special category.

3.5

[Ezrangel]

Thief (1981)

*** out of *****

Simple and well told story, featuring a great performance from James Caan and great cinematography. A solid debut for Micheal Mann.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTVhMDM3NzItMjhiYS00NjVmLTkwYmItMDQ1ZmJmMDMxNmNiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODQzMDMzMzE@._V1_.jpg



4.5

[ThatDarnMKS]

PENINSULA

2.5

I think this film was a victim of cultural hegemonic forces and influences that made this film try to tap into the modern Chinese market and sensibilities. Not it only were there little bits and barbs tossed around like North Korea being and good thing and the increased presence of Hong Kong characters, the film just has the cheap, over-reliant on weightless CGI and extended, empty sequences punctuated by extreme melodrama. It did not feel like Korean cinema at all, even compared to its predecessor or other contemporary big Korean films, like Villainous.

Like modern Chinese cinema, there is still a deftness to the filming of action and a fearless imagination that makes it watchable, but without a strong anchorpoint like a great protagonist (it evokes Escape From New York but lacks a Snake Plissken) or plotting (basic post-apocalyptic MacGuffining) it just feels like a lot of bloat with little meat.

I was going to give this 3 stars until the climax sort of falls apart with some headscratching dramatic beats.

I wouldn't dissuade anyone from watching it but I also wouldn't expect another Train to Busan.

[Fabulous]

So Proudly We Hail! (1943)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/dy7dZQJNllNZdnvp2c3Tl443KKu.jpg

[Rockatansky]

North Korea being and good thing
waaaaaaaaaaaat

[ThatDarnMKS]

waaaaaaaaaaaat
Basically...

They were only able to quarantine SK because the DMZ provided a barrier and they have the newscasters remake “I guess it’s good this happened before reunification”

It’s the kind of bizarre, shoehorned politics I expect out of Ip Man 4, where I think China officially declared war on the US, not a SK zombie flick.

[LChimp]

https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-l71eudan7b/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/1614/2783/7415-TheKarateKid1984-OneSheet__20263.1582242470.jpg?c=2

After watching all 3 seaons of Kobra Kai, my son and I felt the need to watch this classic again.Holds up surprisingly well for its age.

[xSookieStackhouse]

https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-l71eudan7b/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/1614/2783/7415-TheKarateKid1984-OneSheet__20263.1582242470.jpg?c=2

After watching all 3 seaons of Kobra Kai, my son and I felt the need to watch this classic again.Holds surprisingly well for its age.

good movie, one of my favorite movies <3

[mojofilter]

https://d2iltjk184xms5.cloudfront.net/uploads/photo/file/381827/medium_e5fabbd9c83511898786edd814e28629-miami-poster.jpg
ONE NIGHT IN MIAMI...
(2020)

First viewing. In her debut as a film director, Oscar winning actress Regina King presents a compelling candid look at a rare gathering between 4 of the most influential African American figures in modern American history on the night Ali won the championship title against Sonny Liston: Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay), Malcolm X, Jim Brown, and Sam Cooke.

3.5

[Wooley]

https://d2iltjk184xms5.cloudfront.net/uploads/photo/file/381827/medium_e5fabbd9c83511898786edd814e28629-miami-poster.jpg
ONE NIGHT IN MIAMI...
(2020)

First viewing. In her debut as a film director, Oscar winning actress Regina King presents a compelling candid look at a rare gathering between 4 of the most influential African American figures in modern American history on the night Ali won the championship title against Sonny Liston: Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay), Malcolm X, Jim Brown, and Sam Cooke.

3.5

I am REALLY interested in seeing this. I was so impressed by Regina King in Watchmen that I'm just like, "Ok, what else you got? Oh, you're gonna direct too? Can't wait."
Also, I am a fan of Jim Brown, Muhammad Ali, and especially Sam Cooke. I must admit I don't know nearly as much about Malcolm X.

[mojofilter]

I am REALLY interested in seeing this. I was so impressed by Regina King in Watchmen that I'm just like, "Ok, what else you got? Oh, you're gonna direct too? Can't wait."
Also, I am a fan of Jim Brown, Muhammad Ali, and especially Sam Cooke. I must admit I don't know nearly as much about Malcolm X.
The movie seems to have been written for the stage, as the the movie feels like you're watching a play. Heavy on dialogue. It was intriguing and reflective of the racism that is still very much present in our country.

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/bHoxTzz.jpg?1

I had heard about this film from time to time but it never really came across my "feed" (if you will). I got HBO Max to watch WW84 which turned out to be the worst money I've spent in a while, but it was redeemed because it contains a Turner Classic Movies section.
Aside from having titles like the Lone Wolf And Cub series (at least several of them), Chloe From 5 to 7, Bicycle Thieves, The Gold Rush, etc., there was Black Girl finally coming through.
And at just 60 minutes run-time, how could I resist.
The movie, as the poster states, is about Diouna, a poor, young woman in Dakar, living in a shanty-town, who goes to work for a white French couple as a nanny for their children. But when she accompanies the family back to France she finds herself living in a sort of prison of subservience in their small apartment.
The movie is one of the more powerful studies of the legacy of White Colonialism and racial inequality that I've seen, to be honest. By reducing it to the story of this one woman and the one family that oppresses her, in a contemporary context (for 1966), what you see is the big picture through the eyes of how it harms and how much it harms an individual life. It humanizes the situation so much more than these broad-stroke films we so often see about it (In which there always has to be a sympathetic White character as well to act as avatar for the audience). It made me think a lot about the Democrats and how they suppress Progressivism in their party and continue, even in late 2020, to talk about "Incremental Change" and how that is the right way to do things, while the lives of millions of individuals continue to be ravaged by income inequality, racial inequality, and lack of real and equal opportunity in America. Like it's ok that entire generations suffer because eventually we're gonna get there. Just not while it's going to effect me. "Incremental Change" is just a subtle extension of White Colonialism and the maintenance of racial and economic inequality in America. And it led to a conversation this morning with a friend of mine who is African American about how so much of the kind of permissiveness toward racism comes from the inability of the white ruling class in America to even see the effects of their persistent colonialist attitudes. This whole notion that so many "good" whites have that equality already exists in this country, that "they" have all the rights that "we" have, and that they just need to "assimilate", and it's somehow on "them" that they haven't and that's why the police murder them in the street or they don't actually get to vote.
Yes, this movie led to all of that thought and more.
Because it's so personal, to be inside the head of a person who is oppressed. The film is actually much more subtle than most American films made about racial inequality and the long-term effects of White Colonialism, even though it's really not that subtle at all, which just goes to show how far off American attitudes about this topic are. For example, Diouana leaves her shantytown, where so many of the people who are actually from her city in Dakar live, to go seek work in the brand new, stark white, gleaming apartment buildings the White Colonialists have built for themselves. And she just looks up at the buildings, glaringly pristine to her even though they may be nothing amazing to us, as she has just left the doorless hut where she lives with her mother. When she rings a doorbell to ask for work, the moment the White woman inside sees her, she slams the door in her face.
And the relationship between Diouana and her "mistress" is just so awful but in such a real, non-cinematic way, such as the White woman complaining about having to make her own coffee one morning because Diouana is so "lazy" when Diouana is essentially their slave. Man, the way the White people (the family and their friends) talk about her while she's in the room, just assuming that she can't really understand them, even commenting that she understands how to respond more "instinctually... like an animal", it's just chilling and heartbreaking as Diouana talks to herself in her head - in perfect French - about how miserable she is. And of course, the White family can't fathom that she could be depressed because look at how good her life is with her clean dress and her high-heel shoes - which the "mistress" keeps insisting she take off - she must either be lazy or ill, which they repeatedly ask her about in their ignorance of how they have destroyed her spirit. God, the shoes thing alone, the way they are symbolic to Diouana of her dignity and the mistress makes her take them off every time she sees them.

Obviously, this was a very thought-provoking film and it's material is handled, in my opinion, very deftly, with much more depth and elegance than most any film I can think of about this subject. It has so much humanity in such a small and intimate and short film and the ending I felt was especially powerful.
I really strongly encourage people to spend the hour to watch it if you haven't already.

[martyrofevil]

Gleaming the Cube (Graeme Clifford, 1989)
Bland and forgettable outside of the skate scenes. There should have been more skate scenes.
rating_2_5

Ham on Rye (Tyler Taormina, 2019)
Delightful little debut. Really enjoyed the vibe and structure.
rating_3_5

3 Women (Robert Altman, 1977) rewatch
One of those films I liked initially but immediately knew I would enjoy a lot more on a second watch and I was very correct about that. It looks incredible throughout and the tone is expertly controlled. Truly a film that is felt and, if we're being honest, it eats Persona's lunch.
rating_4_5

Dead Mountaineer's Hotel (Grigori Kromanov, 1979)
The psychological thriller/mystery type films tend to go on way too long I find but this is nice and brisk, looks good and sounds good. Like all these films, it gives away its ending immediately in an attempt at foreshadowing, which makes it tough to engage with the mystery aspect in anyway.
rating_3

Dr. No (Terence Young, 1962)
Definitely carried by the music and camerawork (as a film should be) and the first hour or so is really enjoyable but loses a lot of steam in the second half (especially while they're traversing the island) and mostly just fizzles out.
rating_3

[SpelingError]

https://i.imgur.com/bHoxTzz.jpg?1

I had heard about this film from time to time but it never really came across my "feed" (if you will). I got HBO Max to watch WW84 which turned out to be the worst money I've spent in a while, but it was redeemed because it contains a Turner Classic Movies section.
Aside from having titles like the Lone Wolf And Cub series (at least several of them), Chloe From 5 to 7, Bicycle Thieves, The Gold Rush, etc., there was Black Girl finally coming through.
And at just 60 minutes run-time, how could I resist.
The movie, as the poster states, is about Diouna, a poor, young woman in Dakar, living in a shanty-town, who goes to work for a white French couple as a nanny for their children. But when she accompanies the family back to France she finds herself living in a sort of prison of subservience in their small apartment.
The movie is one of the more powerful studies of the legacy of White Colonialism and racial inequality that I've seen, to be honest. By reducing it to the story of this one woman and the one family that oppresses her, in a contemporary context (for 1966), what you see is the big picture through the eyes of how it harms and how much it harms an individual life. It humanizes the situation so much more than these broad-stroke films we so often see about it (In which there always has to be a sympathetic White character as well to act as avatar for the audience). It made me think a lot about the Democrats and how they suppress Progressivism in their party and continue, even in late 2020, to talk about "Incremental Change" and how that is the right way to do things, while the lives of millions of individuals continue to be ravaged by income inequality, racial inequality, and lack of real and equal opportunity in America. Like it's ok that entire generations suffer because eventually we're gonna get there. Just not while it's going to effect me. "Incremental Change" is just a subtle extension of White Colonialism and the maintenance of racial and economic inequality in America. And it led to a conversation this morning with a friend of mine who is African American about how so much of the kind of permissiveness toward racism comes from the inability of the white ruling class in America to even see the effects of their persistent colonialist attitudes. This whole notion that so many "good" whites have that equality already exists in this country, that "they" have all the rights that "we" have, and that they just need to "assimilate", and it's somehow on "them" that they haven't and that's why the police murder them in the street or they don't actually get to vote.
Yes, this movie led to all of that thought and more.
Because it's so personal, to be inside the head of a person who is oppressed. The film is actually much more subtle than most American films made about racial inequality and the long-term effects of White Colonialism, even though it's really not that subtle at all, which just goes to show how far off American attitudes about this topic are. For example, Diouana leaves her shantytown, where so many of the people who are actually from her city in Dakar live, to go seek work in the brand new, stark white, gleaming apartment buildings the White Colonialists have built for themselves. And she just looks up at the buildings, glaringly pristine to her even though they may be nothing amazing to us, as she has just left the doorless hut where she lives with her mother. When she rings a doorbell to ask for work, the moment the White woman inside sees her, she slams the door in her face.
And the relationship between Diouana and her "mistress" is just so awful but in such a real, non-cinematic way, such as the White woman complaining about having to make her own coffee one morning because Diouana is so "lazy" when Diouana is essentially their slave. Man, the way the White people (the family and their friends) talk about her while she's in the room, just assuming that she can't really understand them, even commenting that she understands how to respond more "instinctually... like an animal", it's just chilling and heartbreaking as Diouana talks to herself in her head - in perfect French - about how miserable she is. And of course, the White family can't fathom that she could be depressed because look at how good her life is with her clean dress and her high-heel shoes - which the "mistress" keeps insisting she take off - she must either be lazy or ill, which they repeatedly ask her about in their ignorance of how they have destroyed her spirit. God, the shoes thing alone, the way they are symbolic to Diouana of her dignity and the mistress makes her take them off every time she sees them.

Obviously, this was a very thought-provoking film and it's material is handled, in my opinion, very deftly, with much more depth and elegance than most any film I can think of about this subject. It has so much humanity in such a small and intimate and short film and the ending I felt was especially powerful.
I really strongly encourage people to spend the hour to watch it if you haven't already.

That's been on my watchlist for a while. I'll have to bump it up the queue. Good review!

[hell_storm2004]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BODY2NjQzYzYtYTgyMy00M2MxLTgyMWQtZTU1NWZjZWU4ZDc3XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjEwNTM2Mzc@._V1_UY1200_CR90,0,6 30,1200_AL_.jpg




His House (2020) - 6/10. A very good horror flick. Nicely done. The refugee angle was an interesting take on a genre that is quite really getting stale. I enjoyed the visuals. Its not scary, but artistically done.

[Stirchley]

https://i.imgur.com/bHoxTzz.jpg?1

Very good movie. Some good movies come out of Senegal.

[Stirchley]

72003

Had no idea what to expect from this movie. Love anything NYC, but unfamiliar with Pete Davidson.

Actually a good movie though a tad over-long. Funny, irreverent, what can I say - very New York.

BTW, Marisa Tomei looks terrific at age 56 in the movie.

[Thief]

Dr. No (Terence Young, 1962)
Definitely carried by the music and camerawork (as a film should be) and the first hour or so is really enjoyable but loses a lot of steam in the second half (especially while they're traversing the island) and mostly just fizzles out.
rating_3

There's a scene in Dr. No that I love (his confrontation with Prof. Dent) that is arguably my favorite moment of the franchise. But other than that, the film is indeed mid-tier Bond for me.

[WrinkledMind]

Just finished watching Come and See. I don't think I have watched any Russian films, so some of the aspects of the movie (acting, shots, etc) just felt weird. Didn't feel as powerful. Maybe because I have watched my share of war movies, and I am no longer left uncomfortable or shocked. I do feel sad, and maybe even angry thinking about people who desire wars. Anyways, overall a really good movie.
Grave of Fireflies was the last war (anti-war) movie that left me feeling uncomfortable.

[Fabulous]

Orpheus (1950)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/aZCi37ZOJZnECirobe36Fx9r1Yr.jpg

[WHITBISSELL!]

First Reformed - I had read that some people might have written off director Paul Schrader because of some clinkers he had made and other not so great choices in movie projects (The Canyons). But then he's also written some great movies like Taxi Driver, Blue Collar, Rolling Thunder, Raging Bull, Affliction and this one starring Ethan Hawke as Reverend Ernst Toller. He is the pastor at First Reformed church in upstate New York, which is about to celebrate its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary. It's also a historical attraction due to it being a stopping point in the Underground Railroad. Toller is undergoing a crisis of faith which may have contributed to his numerous physical maladies as well as his drinking problem. He is visited by Mary, (Amanda Seyfried, in one of her best performances) one of the parishioners in his steadily diminishing flock. She is pregnant and worried about her husband Michael (Phillip Ettinger). He in turn has been suffering from depression and feels that they shouldn’t be bringing a baby into a world that’s headed for an ecologically triggered extinction. All these events intersect and bring Rev. Toller’s spiritual impasse to a head.

Ethan Hawke had proven his acting chops as far back as 1997’s Gattaca but it’s only lately (probably starting with Training Day) that he’s been given the opportunity in a string of satisfying and substantial roles. He, along with Seyfried, Cedric the Entertainer as the pastor of a mega church and Schrader’s solid script, really makes this movie. 90/100

[Guaporense]

some recent watches:

Snatch (2000) 8.5/10 (funny)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a7/Snatch_ver4.jpg
Rush (2013) 9/10 (don't remember watching a racing movie that is so good)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d0/Rush_UK_poster.jpeg
Ford vs Ferrari (2019) 7.5/10 (not as good as Rush)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a4/Ford_v._Ferrari_%282019_film_poster%29.png
La Haine (1995) 3/10 (really boring)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/Haine.jpg
Before Sunset (2004) 9.5/10 (really cute)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d1/Before_Sunset_poster.jpg
Certified Copy (2010) 6.5/10 (rather easy to watch for Kiarostami)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/31/Copie-conforme-poster.png

[Fabulous]

Children of a Lesser God (1986)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/fiC5azwRjJmrwI59BlVpLqIegU1.jpg

[GulfportDoc]

72016
Night Stalker: The Hunt for a Serial Killer (2021) (not to be confused with the 2016 TV movie The Night Stalker starring Lou Diamond Phillips).

It's the story of the stalker's horrific serial murders and other crimes during 1984-85 in Los Angeles and San Francisco. It's a well done documentary that tells the tale from the point of view of the two L.A. Sheriff detectives who ultimately solved the case. There have been other depictions of this serial killer on video. But this one firmly holds one's attention, and provides suspense even when the outcome is likely known.

Directed by James Carroll and Tiller Russell, the story is told by interviews with Detectives Frank Salerno and Gil Carrillo, as well as by archival news footage and people involved in the story, along with a few victims' first hand accounts.

The miniseries does not delve into the stalker's motives or background, but those subjects are available online.

Available on Neflix.

Doc's rating: 7/10

[crumbsroom]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=72016
Night Stalker: The Hunt for a Serial Killer (2021) (not to be confused with the 2016 TV movie The Night Stalker starring Lou Diamond Phillips).

It's the story of the stalker's horrific serial murders and other crimes during 1984-85 in Los Angeles and San Francisco. It's a well done documentary that tells the tale from the point of view of the two L.A. Sheriff detectives who ultimately solved the case. There have been other depictions of this serial killer on video. But this one firmly holds one's attention, and provides suspense even when the outcome is likely known.

Directed by James Carroll and Tiller Russell, the story is told by interviews with Detectives Frank Salerno and Gil Carrillo, as well as by archival news footage and people involved in the story, along with a few victims' first hand accounts.

The miniseries does not delve into the stalker's motives or background, but those subjects are available online.

Available on Neflix.

Doc's rating: 7/10


I'm totally into these Netflix serial killer documentaries, and I like this one as much as most, but I started wondering about how cool this movie started to make Rodriguez seem. And it made me feel weird.



But still, I enjoyed the **** out of this.

[Thief]

First Reformed - I had read that some people might have written off director Paul Schrader because of some clinkers he had made and other not so great choices in movie projects (The Canyons). But then he's also written some great movies like Taxi Driver, Blue Collar, Rolling Thunder, Raging Bull, Affliction and this one starring Ethan Hawke as Reverend Ernst Toller. He is the pastor at First Reformed church in upstate New York, which is about to celebrate its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary. It's also a historical attraction due to it being a stopping point in the Underground Railroad. Toller is undergoing a crisis of faith which may have contributed to his numerous physical maladies as well as his drinking problem. He is visited by Mary, (Amanda Seyfried, in one of her best performances) one of the parishioners in his steadily diminishing flock. She is pregnant and worried about her husband Michael (Phillip Ettinger). He in turn has been suffering from depression and feels that they shouldn’t be bringing a baby into a world that’s headed for an ecologically triggered extinction. All these events intersect and bring Rev. Toller’s spiritual impasse to a head.

Ethan Hawke had proven his acting chops as far back as 1997’s Gattaca but it’s only lately (probably starting with Training Day) that he’s been given the opportunity in a string of satisfying and substantial roles. He, along with Seyfried, Cedric the Entertainer as the pastor of a mega church and Schrader’s solid script, really makes this movie. 90/100

Really, really loved this film.

[GulfportDoc]

I'm totally into these Netflix serial killer documentaries, and I like this one as much as most, but I started wondering about how cool this movie started to make Rodriguez seem. And it made me feel weird.


But still, I enjoyed the **** out of this.
Heh, heh. I know what you mean. I assume you're referring to Richard Ramirez.

[crumbsroom]

Heh, heh. I know what you mean. I assume you're referring to Richard Ramirez.


Lol yes. That's the name!


It seems the films programming didn't get his name into my head properly after all. I guess that is good. Clearly they didn't account for all of the brain damage level pot I've smoked over the years. Hooray!

[ThatDarnMKS]

I'm totally into these Netflix serial killer documentaries, and I like this one as much as most, but I started wondering about how cool this movie started to make Rodriguez seem. And it made me feel weird.



But still, I enjoyed the **** out of this.
I thought it did a good job of balancing the “rock star” persona he perpetuated in court with highlighting his cowardice and how disgusting his actions were while calling his groupies “the dumbest bitches in the world.” I think to ignore that element would be to miss a significant part of the Night Stalker tale but at no point did I think the documentary had anything but contempt and disgust for its subject. Fittingly so.

Now American Horror Story 1984... that one has some questionable bits in its depiction of Ramirez.

[Rockatansky]

Heh, heh. I know what you mean. I assume you're referring to Richard Ramirez.

You mean it's not about notorious serial killer Robert Rodriguez?

[Gideon58]

https://cdn.britannica.com/41/175441-050-E706A78E/Elizabeth-Taylor-lobby-card-William-Powell-Zasu.jpg


3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kurosawa-cinema.com%2Fimages%2FCritique%2FSwordOfTheBeast3.JPG&f=1&nofb=1

Sword of the Beast, 1965

A samurai named Gennosuke (Mikijiro Hira) is on the run, having been tricked into killing an important figure in his clan. He is pursued by the dead man's son, daughter, the daughter's fiance, and a handful of enforcer types. A worker named Gundayu helps Gennosuke in his escape, and then convinces him to come in on a scheme to illegally poach gold. But this mountain is hopping with other illegal gold poachers, including a gang of bandits and a couple who are illicitly panning gold for their clan.

This film utterly defied my usual habit of movie-multitasking. I'd look up, realize I'd lost the plot, rewind 20 minutes, look down, look up, be confused, rewind. I probably watched the first 40 minutes of the film three or four times before finally throwing in the towel and giving it my full attention.

TO BE FAIR, this is a film with a lot of plot and a lot of characters, many of whom display shifting loyalties. Part of the larger theme of the film is Gennosuke resigning himself to becoming a "beast", a predator. And it is the interactions with those around him who are more predatory (from the more highbrow version of crooked clan leaders to the more lowbrow version of the murderous bandits) that challenge his sense of ethics and his sense of self. Gennosuke, for all his talk of being a wolf, seems constantly horrified by the immoral behavior of those he encounters.

The look of the film is very strong, with plenty of gorgeous nighttime sequences and a lush mountain setting as the backdrop. Water and specifically the rushing river are used to very good effect, adding a kinetic element to both dialogue and action sequences. The river itself almost becomes a character.

A real strength of the script is that it draws very clear character motivations and has well-realized small and large conflict. For example, the female half of the clan couple isn't so keen on the idea of risking her life just to get some gold for their clan. When her partner tells her that if they are captured they will just let themselves be executed instead of giving away the clan, the look on her face if priceless. This is NOT what she signed up for.

For a samurai film (of which I have seen several but not a ton), the gender politics are far more nuanced than what I am used to. In one sequence, a woman who has just been sexually assaulted calmly redresses herself, and Gennosuke remarks that she is a "true daughter of a samurai" because despite having just been raped, she cares about her appearance. It could have come off as some weird, gross compliment, but in the line delivery and Gennosuke's expression, it is more of a horrified observation. And this sequence, and the emotional resonance of it, is used to good effect later when a group of men chase down another woman. It begins so much like the sexual assault sequence that this is what I assumed was happening, only for two of the men to brace her arms and the third to hold her head underwater, coldly drowning her. It's a brilliantly structured shock, and the woman's body slips down the river just as the other woman's clothing did in the earlier scene.

The action scenes are also notable for the way in which they are both really well-staged, but also at times almost anti-action (such as a scene early on in which Gennosuke runs away from a half dozen assailants who yell after him that he is not behaving in an honorable way). A huge theme is the absurdity and destructiveness of the clan structure, and so many of the action set-pieces reflect a lack of honor or fairness.

I think I liked this one about on par with Three Rebel Samurai, the other film I have seen by Gosha.

4

[Wooley]

That's been on my watchlist for a while. I'll have to bump it up the queue. Good review!

Thanks!

[Wooley]

https://cdn.britannica.com/41/175441-050-E706A78E/Elizabeth-Taylor-lobby-card-William-Powell-Zasu.jpg


3.5

This movie actually made me angry.

[WHITBISSELL!]

This movie actually made me angry.Was it William Powell's character? I thought they expected a lot from the audience with regards to Clarence Day.

[Fabulous]

Camille (1936)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/axtrpFJWABvXT4rDY8LSSxlg7kj.jpg

[Wooley]

Was it William Powell's character? I thought they expected a lot from the audience with regards to Clarence Day.

Yes. He's really impossible to like and every time you think he's finally gonna do the right thing or not be a complete self-centered ass, he does it again. Love Bill Powell, hated Clarence Day.

[Vanillapie]

Escape from New York (1981) **6.9**

Unbelievable cast: Pleasance, Van Cleef, Russell and of course Isaac Hayes the latter I’ve never seen in a movie, he’s just chef in South Park and alway will be. I never realised how small Kurt Russell was he’s certainly no Schwarzenegger or Seagal yeah Seagal I said it this movie in particular he’s a lot shorter than many of the cast. Still he owned the screen as Snake, which deserves even greater praise I guess. Van Cleef was completely wasted for me but Pleasance even with limited characterisation was great as he always is.*

I was let down by the extremely weak narrative, Snake having to perform this mission after having the most seemingly painless injection in his neck which he allowed to be given to him for no real reason was dumb. This has Carpenter written all over it, weak dialogue and plot points with amazing visuals and pounding musical score, although this is the weakest of his musical contributions up until that point for me. I wasn’t a great fan of ‘the fog’ either but the score was still mind blowing, good here but ultimately not memorable. This did seem like a real dystopian city on its knees through locations and JC’s genius eye with visuals and how and where to input them. Having Dean Cundey as the cinematographer always helps, understatement of the century. Some of the long shots in particular were amazing and very classy.

This is my first viewing of this movie, I always got mixed up with this and ‘escape from L.A’ for some reason which I have seen a few times. Disappointing overall, I get why this movie is so loved but I wasn’t feeling it, I did not care for any of the characters involved and that has to be down to poor writing.

Bad Boy Bubby (1993) **8.3**

I have about 180 movies on my ‘to watch list’ I used a random number generator here and 163 was this gem of a movie. The start was shockingly gritty and real, As sick as it was I’m convinced that this sort of thing has happened between a mother and son in the real world. Parents can be forceful, wrapping their children up in cotton wool, I suppose this takes it to the extreme. I’m not a fan of ‘Battlefield Earth’ type tilted camera shots, they’re rarely used well but here I felt they absolutely were. This guy is deeply disturbed and although the camera is only tilted in one or two shots it was used properly and most importantly added to the visual.

Nicholas Hope who I’ve never heard of was phenomenal as this innocent yet disturbed character, his mannerisms and facial twitches were on point. Sure many of the supporting cast were average at best but there were a lot of cast members thanks to this Bubby road trip of sorts, but this was not a movie that had a great deal of money to work with so I don’t have too much of a problem with this. My negatives for this film stem from how very kind most people are towards him, largely giving him money and letting him play with their breasts, this took away some of the realism from a gritty and very real to life story. I also wasn’t massive on him being the lead singer of the band, sure it made the final scene extremely watchable but I wasn’t enamoured by the idea.

Overall I thought this movie was so fresh and weird I couldn’t take my eyes off it, I had no idea where the plot was going. I even found myself somehow jealous of what Bubby had achieved in a relatively short space of time. Jealousy was not something I was expecting having seen the first act. Loved it.

[the samoan lawyer]

Manhattan Murder Mystery (1993) - 2
Into the Spider-Verse (2018) - 3.5
Alita: Battle Angel (2019) - 3
Godzilla:King of Monsters (2019) - 2
Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) - 3+
Night Stalker (2021) - 3.5


Struggling to get the time/mindframe to watch some good movies.

[Mcfluffington]

The last movie I saw was A Streetcar Named Desire which I give 5 popcorn boxes. Every time I see it I see something new in it. This time I was more appreciative of the situation Stanley and Stella find themselves in i.e. having an unwanted relative in your tiny newlywed"s apartment. Yikes. This doesn't change the fact that Stanley is a horrible brute who destroys Blanche. But you can see the difficulties the newlywed couple face. I also admired Karl Malden's performance as Mitch. I think he could have been more nuanced in his reactions to Blanche's deception but otherwise a strong performance.

[mojofilter]

https://aaslibrary.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/silver-linings-playbook.jpg
SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK
(2012)

Re-watch. As far as romantic comedies go, this one is very funny and top notch. And it's a rom-com that men would enjoy just as much as women. Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence are awesome together playing two emotionally and psychologically damaged individuals who meet and develop an awkward relationship. Robert Deniro is excellent in his supporting role as Cooper's OCD dad. I always get a kick out of the dance finale. It's the best out of all the David O. Russell films where he collaborated with the main stars.

4.5

[martyrofevil]

Ok so I'm aiming to watch all the James Bond films while I'm on vacation. I'd have started a thread for this if I knew how to write well enough (and enough) to justify it but since I don't its just happening here.

From Russia with Love (Terence Young, 1963)
It's definitely less engaging initially than Dr. No but where that film starts strong only to slowly peter out about half way through, From Russia with Love just keeps getting better and better as it goes. Well, to a point that is. Once again aided by the score and camerawork (and just being shot in the best decade for film aesthetically) greatly but also has a much stronger sense of build up and tension and while the entire train sequence is the real climax imo the stuff after is still very fun and well done. Thoroughly enjoyed this one.
rating_4

Goldfinger (Guy Hamilton, 1964)
There is a noticeable and disappointing drop in technical quality for this one. The colours don't pop, the fights don't bop, really lacking all the best parts of the Terence Young helmed pictures. Yes, I understand this has many of the iconic bond moments and ideas but they are just not presented all that well. Goldfinger really takes that next step further into goofy spy action conceptually but failed to match it technically and winds up just feeling a bit bland and isn't as engaging as it could have been. That being said, some of the goofier ideas are fun enough on their own to prevent this from being an out-and-out bad time.
rating_2_5

Current Bond rankings:
01. From Russia with Love
02. Dr. No
03. Goldfinger

[Fabulous]

Angel Face (1953)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/4qTuhQTKWzHUx5tw3kE2TxW2cux.jpg

[Thief]

RUDDERLESS
(2014, Macy)
A debut film

https://variety.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/rudderless-sundance-2.jpg


"♪ What is lost can't be replaced,
What is gone is not forgotten,
♫ I wish you were here to sing along...
my son... my son... my son..."



Despite some faults, the film manages to stay in course, thanks primarily to committed performances from Crudup and Yelchin. Although the way their relationship unfolds isn't perfect, there is good chemistry between the actors, and Crudup has some solid emotional moments towards the end. The second thing that anchored the film for me was the music. This soundtrack was right down my alley and I've found myself humming, tapping, and listening to it since I finished the film. Kudos to Crudup and Yelchin for actually playing and singing on it.

Grade: 3


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2169219#post2169219) and on HOF24 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2169220#post2169220).

[Gideon58]

Yes. He's really impossible to like and every time you think he's finally gonna do the right thing or not be a complete self-centered ass, he does it again. Love Bill Powell, hated Clarence Day.

I was able to excuse his unlikable qualities because he was so clueless about the fact tjhat Vinnie was REALLY the one running the house.

[LChimp]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/A1bQ6XxJhkL._AC_SL1500_.jpg

You kinda know what to expect, but still, a very good movie.

[Wooley]

I was able to excuse his unlikable qualities because he was so clueless about the fact tjhat Vinnie was REALLY the one running the house.

But he just hurts her feelings and lets her down SO many times in the movie that I really didn't believe in any redemption by the end, more that he was finally, mercifully doing this one ******* thing and then he was just gonna continue to hurt and disappoint her for the rest of their lives, yet the movie gives this happy-ending feel that just didn't seem earned to me.

[Gideon58]

I really don't think the film was about a possible redemption of Clarence Day. I never expected to see any kind of change in Day before the movie ended...people like that don't change. What I think the movie was abut was Vinnie's manipulation of Clarence not only without his knowledge, but making him think that he's still running the household when it
's really her.

[mark f]

Go/Don't Go (Alex Knapp, 2020) 2 5/10
Goodbye, Butterfly (Tyler Wayne, 2021) 2.5 6/10
Broadway Babies (Mervyn LeRoy, 1929) 2 5/10
It's the Old Army Game (A. Edward Sutherland, 1926) 2.5 6/10
https://artsfuse.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/its-the-old-army-game.jpg
Young Louise Brooks and druggist W.C. Fields find mutual friends in each other.
Remember Me (Martín Rosete, 2019) 2.5 6/10
Bright Hill Road (Robert Cuffley, 2020) 2 5/10
The Wedding in Monaco (Jean Masson, 1956) 2.5 6/10
The Climb (Michael Angelo Covino, 2019) 3+ 6.5/10
https://www.the-title.com/images/1022_6.jpg
Highly-creative, almost wacko comedy involving best friends Kyle Marvin and Michael Angelo Covino who break up over the fact that the latter is a major ass, but they constantly spend time together.
About Some Meaningless Events (Mostafa Derkaoui, 1974) 2.5 6/10
Ode to Billy Joe (Max Baer, 1976) 3- 6.5/10
Polo Joe (William McGann, 1936) 2.5 5.5/10
Assassins (Ryan White, 2020) 3 6.5/10
https://new-jobs.sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/11122713/Oscar-Contender-%E2%80%98Assassins-Tells-Bizarre-Story-Of-Angelic-Killers-Who-696x392.jpg
The story of Kim Jong-nam's murder in Malaysia by seeming fall gals Siti Aisyah and Doan Thi Huong.
The Fabulous Joe (Harve Foster, 1947) 2.5 5.5/10
Ten Minutes to Midnight (Erik Bloomquist, 2020) 2 5/10
Bloody Hell (Alister Grierson, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Wajib (Annemarie Jacir, 2017) 3 6.5/10
https://i1.imgiz.com/rshots/10047/wajib-2017-film-sahnesi_10047964-8970_640x360.jpg
Palestinian father Mohammad Bakri and son Saleh Bakri represent two sides of how tradition and recent history affect their reactions to Jewish occupation in the run-up to a family wedding.
Heroes Don't Die (Aude Lea Rapin, 2019) 2.5 5.5/10
When Were You Born (William McGann, 1938) 2.5 6/10
Sing and Like It (William A. Seiter, 1934) 2.5 5.5/10
As the Earth Turns (Richard Lyford, 2019 [shot in 1937/1938]) 2.5 6/10
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_r1vLaqvzijDkTpkXhdpmqcFvf9IPHBt0GvJawzad1jCKE1WjFySEnY23nJvfwb4iM2DxY7_k-q3Kg5s0VeDjPWVr3KcNHgNDQv7kpmf9CCLGnvF
"Mad scientist" for world peace uses his inventions and "powers" to end their constant warring.

[Gideon58]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/A1bQ6XxJhkL._AC_SL1500_.jpg

You kinda know what to expect, but still, a very good movie.

You didn't rate this movie

[crumbsroom]

I thought it did a good job of balancing the “rock star” persona he perpetuated in court with highlighting his cowardice and how disgusting his actions were while calling his groupies “the dumbest bitches in the world.” I think to ignore that element would be to miss a significant part of the Night Stalker tale but at no point did I think the documentary had anything but contempt and disgust for its subject. Fittingly so.

Now American Horror Story 1984... that one has some questionable bits in its depiction of Ramirez.


Sure, some time is spent making sure we understand how despicable he was. It's just that it also creates this almost supernatural mystique around him, that even when they deflate it a bit with the occassional tale of what a weakling coward he was, the takeaway is one that makes him seem almost super human in his badness. It's even in the slick and flashy Refn like font it uses to seduce the audience when it spells his name out during the opening- Nightstalker. So cool. So seductive. So dangerously appealing. Even though Ramirez, even when sporting sunglasses, really was neither of the above. But somehow, by the end of the film, both me and my gf could almost entirely understand why he has such a groupie appeal amongst women. How could such a revelation not make me feel a little bit icky.



Now don't get me wrong, I'm not getting bent out of shape with some moral outrage here. I shamelessly enjoyed this. But I just sometimes wondered at the choices the filmmakers made from time to time. Even their choice to not give us his backstory, at least not much beyond the childhood anecdote that his father tried to crucify him, just turns him into something that was pulled from the worst (best?) kind of horror film. I think the intent in not including much of his past, was a way of not humanizing him. Which in theory might be noble. But I think the end result of omitting this was that it ends up mythologizing him.



And it's not like you can't make these specials without the bad boy romance attached. The recent Ripper special, which recounts all of the horrors of that guys crimes, never makes him really ever seem like anything more than some pathetic loser reacting against the emerging women's lib movement at the time. Or even the Bundy doc where, as much time as it gives him to explain himself, he just comes off as a small and delusional man by the end. Nightstalker mostly keeps the elusive badboy image that Ramirez constructed around himself completely intact, and it proves to be a durable enough shell to survive the occasional dent the documentary attempts to put it in it. I just think they needed to try a little harder at that.

[Fabulous]

The Falcon and the Snowman (1985)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/cyMHUdz58fHawAjGOiL0uLfBFwn.jpg

[CharlesAoup]

some recent watches:

Certified Copy (2010) 6.5/10 (rather easy to watch for Kiarostami)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/31/Copie-conforme-poster.png

Of all the movies I didn't get, that's one of my didn't-get-itest. It feels purposeful, but I don't see it. I might watch it again someday.

[Fabulous]

Foreign Correspondent (1940)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/lVRag3dPpjVffomUQOPtlcAKFTc.jpg

[Daniel M]

Foreign Correspondent (1940)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/lVRag3dPpjVffomUQOPtlcAKFTc.jpg

One of my favourite Hitch films. I see The 39 Steps, Foreign Correspondent, and then North by Northwest as a kind of trilogy where he ups the ante each time: first Britain, then Europe, then the USA!

[hell_storm2004]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSMer_DQW2BN0os7UV1twwv-_RTXXMnOfYoew&usqp=CAU

The Awakening (2011) - 5.5/10. A very decent flick. Yes, it does use all the horror movie tropes. Alone in the hallway, ghosts in photos, a few jump scares etc etc. But it has a nice story in there. Not scary, just decent.

[GulfportDoc]

Go/Don't Go (Alex Knapp, 2020) rating_2 5/10
...

Good Lord! You watch a lot of movies...:)..👍

[Thief]

Wajib (Annemarie Jacir, 2017) 3 6.5/10
https://i1.imgiz.com/rshots/10047/wajib-2017-film-sahnesi_10047964-8970_640x360.jpg
Palestinian father Mohammad Bakri and son Saleh Bakri represent two sides of how tradition and recent history affect their reactions to Jewish occupation in the run-up to a family wedding.


I saw this one a couple of months ago and really, really liked it. What didn't work for you?

[Thief]

Foreign Correspondent (1940)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/lVRag3dPpjVffomUQOPtlcAKFTc.jpg

This is probably my #4 or #5 Hitchcock. Love it.

[mark f]

I saw this one a couple of months ago and really, really liked it. What didn't work for you?
Nothing really didn't work. It's a good movie - most people rate movies about 1 higher than I do. It's in the upper tier of movies I've seen about the Palestinian Situation.

[rauldc14]

Glad I'm not the only one who likes Foreign Correspondent! Great film!

[Daniel M]

Nothing really didn't work. It's a good movie - most people rate movies about 1 higher than I do. It's in the upper tier of movies I've seen about the Palestinian Situation.

Glad you enjoyed it Mark. Did you check it out because of its inclusion in my favourite films of the 2010s thread, or just a coincidence? I got the chance to see it at a local film society last year I think it was.

[mark f]

I had already seen it but I hadn't rated it here or at IMDb so I decided to watch it again when I saw it on yout list. It's free with Amazon Prime over here in the U.S.

[Takoma11]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSMer_DQW2BN0os7UV1twwv-_RTXXMnOfYoew&usqp=CAU

The Awakening (2011) - 5.5/10. A very decent flick. Yes, it does use all the horror movie tropes. Alone in the hallway, ghosts in photos, a few jump scares etc etc. But it has a nice story in there. Not scary, just decent.

I quite like The Awakening, though I feel some of the developments in the third act are a bit much.

I think the performances are good and the characters are interesting. It's cliched, but solid.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYTA4NWFkOGItN2Q2NS00MDdlLTliMDYtZWEwNmU1MmVkMzQ4XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjU0NTI0Nw@@._V1_.jpg



3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcps-static.rovicorp.com%2F2%2FOpen%2FFrance_Televisions_460%2FProgram%2F133538%2F_derived_jpg_q90_600x80 0_m0%2FThePlumber_ProgramKey3.jpg%3Fpartner%3Dallmovie_soap&f=1&nofb=1

The Plumber, 1979

Jill (Judy Morris) lives with her husband, Brian (Robert Coleby) on a college campus in Adelaide. Judy spends her days working on her Master's thesis while Brian works in a research lab. One day a man, Max (Ivar Kants) shows up and tells Jill that he's been sent to work on the plumbing in their bathroom. Only his "repairs" seem to be more of a slow-motion demolition of their bathroom, and he begins to play some unsettling mind games with Jill. Jill slowly begins to go mad as no one will believe her about the sinister nature of the man who only seems to show up when Jill is alone.

There's a lot to unpack in this film in terms of gender and social class dynamics. It is an incredibly uncomfortable film to watch for most of the run time.

And to be honest, I just had a scary (as in calling 911) encounter that has kind of blocked out the thematic components of the film. I don't think I can even write very many coherent thoughts about it right now, because my anger on behalf of the main character is being strongly amplified by my own experience. I may revisit this one in the future to be able to give more of an actual review.

I do think the film does a good job of showcasing Peter Weir's ability to mix the surreal and the intimate.

3.5

[WHITBISSELL!]

Charade - This splendid 1963 movie turned out to be a happy surprise. It's fun and breezy and the two stars, Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn have the kind of effortless chemistry that is often ascribed to other romantic pairings. This should be the yardstick against which other onscreen couples are measured. It's also been called, "The best movie Hitchcock never made" but I'm not all that sure he could. From the very first scene establishing Audrey Hepburn as a nervous eater, director Stanley Donen shows both finesse and a light touch. Perhaps this is due to him helming so many musicals before taking on this project but it never comes across as unwieldy or sluggish. Hepburn plays Regina Lampert, the wife of a recently murdered man whom she apparently didn't know well at all. Grant plays ... well, let's just say his character is eager to help and leave it at that. The rest of the cast is just as note-perfect with Walter Matthau, James Coburn and George Kennedy among others. As for locales, most of the film takes place in Paris and Donen takes full advantage of the local scenery. Oh and it's got a great theme from Henry Mancini that just adds to the overall engaging vibe. I look forward to watching this again in the future. 95/100

[Alicgmood12]

U.N.C.L.E. - 10/10

[Ezrangel]

Scream 3

** out of *****

Things go bad when Hollywood's biggest hack is writing your movie. A wasted opportunity and boring mess that is worse than any other installment of the franchise.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Scream 3

** out of *****

Things go bad when Hollywood's biggest hack is writing your movie. A wasted opportunity and boring mess that is worse than any other installment of the franchise.

scream 1 and scream 2 always the best ;)

[ScarletLion]

'The Banishment' (2008)

Dir.: Andrey Zvyaginstev

https://film-grab.com/wp-content/uploads/photo-gallery/50%20(978).jpg?bwg=1547461807

Zvyaginstev 's second film channels the water and decayed building traits of Tarkovsky - the shot composition of Moldovan scenery is truly stunning. The film follows a family in freefall after a devastating revelation during a holiday. Nothing new but the uncompromising two and a half hour bleak but beautiful tone is brilliantly directed.

I couldn't imagine this film coming from anywhere other than Russia, other than maybe Romania or Iran. There are long takes that embrace the nature of the location that the family has stayed in to get away from 'the city', there is bubbling tension under the surface of potentially fatal family feuds. One shot of the cabin the family are staying at it shrouded in fog, and makes the viewer wonder if the director waited months for the weather to be perfect, such is the dedication to his craft.

There is ambiguity and not all questions are answered during the final devastating 30 minutes. But Zvyaginstev makes this film so utterly mesmerizing with the visuals and atmosphere that the faults are almost cast aside, and he has to be considered one of the current greats of world cinema.

4.5

[Vanillapie]

https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-l71eudan7b/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/1614/2783/7415-TheKarateKid1984-OneSheet__20263.1582242470.jpg?c=2

After watching all 3 seaons of Kobra Kai, my son and I felt the need to watch this classic again.Holds up surprisingly well for its age.

Is cobra Kai the shizz, I need a series to watch.

[Marco]

Mank (2020)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Mank.png
Biographical drama about the screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz, in particular the development of the SP for Citizen Kane. Interesting but not enthralling account of the talented but alcoholic and abrasive writer. I find that most biopic or "real stories" can be like that. Directed by David Fincher and he plays it pretty straight. The pay-off with Mank accepting his Academy Award (at home!) and dissing Orson Welles is pretty damn funny!!
3

[Vanillapie]

Scream 3

** out of *****

Things go bad when Hollywood's biggest hack is writing your movie. A wasted opportunity and boring mess that is worse than any other installment of the franchise.

Agreed, I watched 1 and 2 recently but I refuse to watch that. I remember enjoying number 4 so that’s on the menu for me.

[Vanillapie]

First Reformed - I had read that some people might have written off director Paul Schrader because of some clinkers he had made and other not so great choices in movie projects (The Canyons). But then he's also written some great movies like Taxi Driver, Blue Collar, Rolling Thunder, Raging Bull, Affliction and this one starring Ethan Hawke as Reverend Ernst Toller. He is the pastor at First Reformed church in upstate New York, which is about to celebrate its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary. It's also a historical attraction due to it being a stopping point in the Underground Railroad. Toller is undergoing a crisis of faith which may have contributed to his numerous physical maladies as well as his drinking problem. He is visited by Mary, (Amanda Seyfried, in one of her best performances) one of the parishioners in his steadily diminishing flock. She is pregnant and worried about her husband Michael (Phillip Ettinger). He in turn has been suffering from depression and feels that they shouldn’t be bringing a baby into a world that’s headed for an ecologically triggered extinction. All these events intersect and bring Rev. Toller’s spiritual impasse to a head.

Ethan Hawke had proven his acting chops as far back as 1997’s Gattaca but it’s only lately (probably starting with Training Day) that he’s been given the opportunity in a string of satisfying and substantial roles. He, along with Seyfried, Cedric the Entertainer as the pastor of a mega church and Schrader’s solid script, really makes this movie. 90/100

Wasn’t expecting to love this as much as I did probably in my top 3 of movies in the 10’s. And yeah agreed, Gattaca is such an underated gem too.

[chawhee]

Sound of Metal (2020)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/sfc-datebook-wordpress/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/Sound-of-Metal-700x500.jpg
3.5
A tough story to watch and really get hooked into, but the acting is terrific.

[Ezrangel]

scream 1 and scream 2 always the best ;)

Agreed.

Agreed, I watched 1 and 2 recently but I refuse to watch that. I remember enjoying number 4 so that’s on the menu for me.

Scream *** 1/2 out of *****

Scream 2 *** out of *****

Scream 4 ***1/4 out of *****

[LChimp]

Is cobra Kai the shizz, I need a series to watch.


I would definetely recommend it, and The Mandalorian too, if you haven't seen it

[matt72582]

Letters From Baghdad - 7/10
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/72/Letters_from_Baghdad_poster.jpg

[Fabulous]

The 39 Steps (1935)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/2SCZfhWvFgjmVrpGWN24UpXZVbf.jpg

[WrinkledMind]

Just watched News of the World. So simplistic in its story, and not in a good way. It's predictable and something that has probably been done before. It seems like it had a decent budget as well, so it's surprising how something so ordinary was allowed to be made, and how someone like Hanks agreed to it (maybe because he had worked with the director before).

[hell_storm2004]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNDc5MTA2ZjgtOWU4OC00YjU4LTk3ZGUtYmMwZjRhODJiYTdiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTA2MDU0NjM5._V1_.jpg




Collectiv (2019) - 9/10. Saw this last month. Well all of my recent posts are of movies I have watched in the past two months. And I have to say, this is one of the best documentary I have seen. The level of fraud and the human impact was laid bare. I have to wholeheartedly say this is a recommended watch. The incident which sparked it all off seems trivial in the grand scheme of things, but the story is so much more! It might just win the best foreign film or best documentary this year, depending on which category it lands.

[Iroquois]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things - 1.5

Somehow even worse a second time around.

[hell_storm2004]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things - rating_1_5

Somehow even worse a second time around.




Yikes, shouldn't have read this! I plan to watch this tonight! 🙂

[Stirchley]

Yikes, shouldn't have read this! I plan to watch this tonight! 🙂

It’s a good movie.

[Iroquois]

So are like half the ones you don't finish, but so what.

[SpelingError]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things - 1.5

Somehow even worse a second time around.

I liked the film a lot, but what did you not like about it?

[Marco]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things - 1.5

Somehow even worse a second time around.

A masochist Iroquois huh? I found it interesting but too clever-clever. Certainly a 1 time watch.

[Yoda]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things - 1.5

Somehow even worse a second time around.
Yikes. Been looking forward to this, since it's Kaufman and all. Still gonna have to see for myself, but that's a bummer to hear.

[Fabulous]

Seven Beauties (1975)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/7IgqLub2b1ZpdIYThZRfz3MZw3c.jpg

[hell_storm2004]

Yeah I will watch it too I guess. But probably not tonight! Switched to Onibaba!

[ThatDarnMKS]

I thought I'M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS was great. *shrug*

[Marco]

I thought I'M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS was great. *shrug*
All about opinions my fellow, fellowess :) I did think it was a great bit of film-making but the story was rather slight.

[Vanillapie]

I would definetely recommend it, and The Mandalorian too, if you haven't seen it

Yeah the Mandalorian season 1 was great, I’ll watch season 2 soon have to get Disney plus back, literally the only thing I use that site for. Dark wing duck series I have a soft spot for too haha. I most recently watched the ‘Chernobyl’ series which I enjoyed but way overrated for me.

[ThatDarnMKS]

All about opinions my fellow, fellowess :) I did think it was a great bit of film-making but the story was rather slight.
I just thought I'd pipe in given the relative dog pile the film was getting.

I do think a film like ITOET demands a paradigm shift away from plot/story and more emphasis should be paid to the themes, idea and execution that it's presenting.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Agreed.



Scream *** 1/2 out of *****

Scream 2 *** out of *****

Scream 4 ***1/4 out of *****

hope scream 5 will be okay movie

[martyrofevil]

Thunderball (Terence Young, 1965)
Big step up from Goldfinger in terms of visuals and just feeling like a spy movie and I can't believe how hype all the underwater stuff managed to be. Shooting to build tension and actually using the wonderful music they had access to are probably the biggest boons to the film but the plot and set pieces are all fun too. There's definitely still some jank though (the quick turn-around on these film taking its effect) with some bad ADR and rough edits and unfortunately Bond still out here "Baby, It's Cold Outside"-ing people but at least it doesn't heroically save the day this time around. Overall this is the perfect middle ground between the (relative) elegance of From Russia with Love and the silly concepts of Goldfinger and I'm about it.
rating_4

You Only Live Twice (Lewis Gilbert, 1967)
At its peak its probably the best looking Bond film up to this point. Lots of absolutely stunning wides and some genuinely inspired shots but there's unfortunately also an over-reliance on terrible looking composite shots, which are present throughout the series but never this often and this poor, and as the film goes on (and on) those nice shots appear less and less. The story has the same overall arc the camerawork does as it just gets more embarrassing as it goes (not dropping spoilers but there's some real yikes moments) but at least there's some beautiful new additions to the score.
rating_2_5


Current Bond rankings:
01. From Russia with Love
02. Thunderball
03. Dr. No
04. You Only Live Twice
05. Goldfinger

[CharlesAoup]

Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones, 2nd watch (D)

This is the least lazy of the series, and that's its biggest strength. The movie moves a lot, even though it has stupidly long bouts of nothing every now and then, but it moves. The biggest problem is that it revolves around a teenage douchebag that is never actually made sympathetic to the audience. They have bad stuff happen to him, but he's a douche all the way. It expands on the plot behind everything else in the series, which is good. There's some good stuff to learn here. It plays nearly no role up to now, but hey, meat.

All in all, an unremarkable found-footage movie with a very unlikable protagonist.

[Marco]

I just thought I'd pipe in given the relative dog pile the film was getting.

I do think a film like ITOET demands a paradigm shift away from plot/story and more emphasis should be paid to the themes, idea and execution that it's presenting.

Yeah, it was unwavering in it's method in that sense, I do applaud it. Interesting that you say "the idea". I didn't really get a theme or idea that was original apart from regret.

[James D. Gardiner]

https://i.imgur.com/Tg06QwW.jpg

Expresso Bongo (1959)
D: Val Guest
Starring: Laurence Harvey, Sylvia Syms, Yolande Donlan, Cliff Richard.

Zillionth re-watch of this fascinating gem. Harvey plays rat-like talent agent Johnny Jackson, who whilst out with his stripper girlfriend and aspiring singer (Syms), discovers undiscovered talent in the form of Bert Rudge (Cliff Richard), whom Jackson promptly re-brands as 'Bongo Herbert' and launches an all out assault on the music industry. The witty and satirical dialogue is laugh a minute stuff, and there are some rather naughty scenes that can scarcely be missed. It slows down and goes a bit serious towards the end, but overall a unique, funny and occasionally bizarre film with a charm all of its own.

9/10

[Thief]

Thunderball (Terence Young, 1965)
Big step up from Goldfinger in terms of visuals and just feeling like a spy movie and I can't believe how hype all the underwater stuff managed to be. Shooting to build tension and actually using the wonderful music they had access to are probably the biggest boons to the film but the plot and set pieces are all fun too. There's definitely still some jank though (the quick turn-around on these film taking its effect) with some bad ADR and rough edits and unfortunately Bond still out here "Baby, It's Cold Outside"-ing people but at least it doesn't heroically save the day this time around. Overall this is the perfect middle ground between the (relative) elegance of From Russia with Love and the silly concepts of Goldfinger and I'm about it.
rating_4

You Only Live Twice (Lewis Gilbert, 1967)
At its peak its probably the best looking Bond film up to this point. Lots of absolutely stunning wides and some genuinely inspired shots but there's unfortunately also an over-reliance on terrible looking composite shots, which are present throughout the series but never this often and this poor, and as the film goes on (and on) those nice shots appear less and less. The story has the same overall arc the camerawork does as it just gets more embarrassing as it goes (not dropping spoilers but there's some real yikes moments) but at least there's some beautiful new additions to the score.
rating_2_5


Current Bond rankings:
01. From Russia with Love
02. Thunderball
03. Dr. No
04. You Only Live Twice
05. Goldfinger

Enjoying your write-ups on the Bond franchise so far. I've been doing a slow (very slow!) dive-in into the franchise as well for the last couple of years. Still have to see Connery's Diamonds Are Forever, and then it's onto Moore. I'm surprised about your reaction to Goldfinger. It's not my favorite (it's my #3 or #4), but I would say it's the most iconically Bond (whatever that means) of the franchise.

For what it's worth, here are some quick reviews I wrote about those last two...

Thunderball (https://letterboxd.com/thief12/film/thunderball/)

You Only Live Twice (https://letterboxd.com/thief12/film/you-only-live-twice/)

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.slantmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2Fmammaroma.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Mamma Roma, 1962

Mamma Roma (Anna Magnani) is an outspoken woman who tries to put her life as a prostitute behind her to build a better life for herself and for her son, Ettore (Ettore Garofolo). She fears that he will fall into the same cycle of crime that she and all the people in her life have been a part of, but her schemes to further his position in life spirals them both into dangerous territory.

First of all, this film was dedicated to Rossellini, and it shares a lead actress with Rossellini's Rome, Open City (which I just happened to watch recently). There are certainly emotional overlaps and many similarities in the way that humor, dark humor, and plain darkness live side-by-side. There are many sequences that look a lot like broad comedy, such as the opening sequence in which Mamma Roma herds a trio of costumed pigs into the wedding of her ex-husband. But none of these characters, especially Mamma Roma, are happy. And a sort of desperation creeps in as she tries to put her son on a better path at exactly the same time that he begins walking down the wrong one.

Part of the tragedy of this film is the fact that Momma Roma doesn't have the cultural savvy to help her son in a legal way. Her best idea to help him involves a blackmail scheme. She is trying to turn her skillset to her son's advantage, but ends up pushing him away.

I also felt that the film did a good job, in the scenes featuring Ettore and the little crew of bad boys he falls in with, in showing how easy it is to get pulled into a bad social situation. The film very skillfully walks the line of letting Ettore be very much a frustrating teenage boy who makes stupid choices and is very self-centered--but you never lose a certain degree of sympathy for him. He wants to be his own man. He wants a degree of independence. He has come from an unstable childhood and has no real context for a healthy way of life.

This is one of those movies where a large portion of the cast are not trained actors. This is very noticeable, especially in the case of Ettore because of how much time he is on screen. But Magnani provides a solid anchor to every scene in which she appears, she plays very well off of every other actor, and she brings an effortless energy and intensity that simply refuses to let any of her scenes fall flat.

This might not be the best of the neo-realist films I've seen, but it does have its own unique energy and an unforgettable final shot.

4

[GulfportDoc]

Just watched News of the World. So simplistic in its story, and not in a good way. It's predictable and something that has probably been done before. It seems like it had a decent budget as well, so it's surprising how something so ordinary was allowed to be made, and how someone like Hanks agreed to it (maybe because he had worked with the director before).
I share your opinions. "Ordinary" is a good adjective, and pretty much sums up the feeling I had throughout watching it. Nothing wrong with the film. It just seemed too familiar.

I was charmed by the young girl, played by Helena Zengel, though not at first. She'll get a lot of work because of this film. Hanks was adequately good, although his accent was wrong-- his character supposedly from Texas.

I'd be surprised if it made its budget back. Still, it was pleasing to see a film without incessant gutter language and gratuitous violence.

[Takoma11]

I will again encourage everyone to read the (very short!!!) novel on which News of the World was based.

[mojofilter]

https://theultimaterabbit.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/major-league-movie-poster.jpg?w=1000
MAJOR LEAGUE
(1989)

First viewing. I've wanted to see this film for quite some time. 30 years actually. I've finally come around to it. I am not a fan of baseball as I find it to be the most boring sport in the history of sports. But I really loved all the baseball scenes, specifically the climactic ending, in this hilariously clever comedy. Great cast that includes Charlie Sheen, Tom Berenger, Wesley Snipes and the gorgeous Rene Russo.

4

[Marco]

Free Fire (2016)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bb/Free_Fire.png
This is grim, a drama-comedy that succeeds in neither. One paced and dull.
Hopefully the fag packet that the story/script was written on (if at all) has been long discarded.
[rating]1[//rating]

[ThatDarnMKS]

Yeah, it was unwavering in it's method in that sense, I do applaud it. Interesting that you say "the idea". I didn't really get a theme or idea that was original apart from regret.
I don't think I've ever seen a film explore the self loathing and insecurities of an "incel" the way this film does. I also can count the number of films that have an original theme on one hand. Certified Copy comes to mind. I usually judge it on the way it chooses to explore the theme and I think that the entire film is such a perfectly distilled piece of projection, isolation and unfulfilled promise that it stands out.

[Dog Star Man]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/images/4973-8bb90608d4cdbbcc9fce8a1454981a22/current_1530_002_medium.jpg

Quadrophenia (1979)

Truth be told, I've never been much for these rebellious "coming of age" narratives like Dazed and Confused or in this case Quadrophenia. As for those narratives that share the "coming of age" tale, I tend to like those that focus on the growth and maturity of the characters rather than those living in some "Pan's Fable." (Which may be why I enjoy Jean Renoir's The River so much...) All this to be said, I do have both films within my vast collection and I have them for good reason...

I find the philosophy of film, (or any art for that matter), could be considered an "argument" only in artistic forms. To understand an "argument" though, one need look no further than the Philosophy of Logic.

It was Peter Abelard who made the great discovery in Logic that it is not necessarily the "content" of the argument which dictates it's validity... but the "form" of the argument.

Now why is this important in my discussion of Film Art?

Because while a person may "disagree" or "not like" a cinematic work/or form of art. I find the closest thing we can do to find some sort of "objective" ground within the work itself is looking at what is purely "formatical."

Example:

I do not "agree" with the "content," as I find the content rather juvenile, (as I do Dazed and Confused), but in it's "form" it's completely solid.

For Phil Daniels' character, (Jimmy), to enter into a home where a party is taking place and for the camera to track behind, and then beyond him, into the dance, and then back to profile in one long continuous shot is pure bravado.

For a film who's subject matter is on "Mod Culture," (Modernism and the influence of Modern/Free Jazz thereof), to let the narrative "loose," to let the camera "loose," and past a central character and into a "Culture" and their "dance" is utterly brilliant.

Structurally speaking, the film is completely sound if not rather invigorating and inspiring... it does hold the house on which I find the script it builds itself upon to be quite dreary and dull.

All this to be said, I find the work a fascinating example of an artistic "argument" being philosophically correct, albeit errored in many ways.

Would I recommend it? Absolutely! Enjoy!

8/10

[hell_storm2004]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROFzRaEobS4-LGx1EzprGSka73s4Qbj1ZFLQ&usqp=CAU

Onibaba (1964) - 4/10. I just didn't get it. I get the folklore and all. But this movie is rated as 8 on IMDb. Why... It's baffling. 70% of the movie is two people acting horny. And a minor twist in the end. The lighting in the movie is nicely done, but that's about all the compliment I can give the movie. Disappointed.

[martyrofevil]

Enjoying your write-ups on the Bond franchise so far. I've been doing a slow (very slow!) dive-in into the franchise as well for the last couple of years. Still have to see Connery's Diamonds Are Forever, and then it's onto Moore. I'm surprised about your reaction to Goldfinger. It's not my favorite (it's my #3 or #4), but I would say it's the most iconically Bond (whatever that means) of the franchise.

For what it's worth, here are some quick reviews I wrote about those last two...

Thunderball (https://letterboxd.com/thief12/film/thunderball/)

You Only Live Twice (https://letterboxd.com/thief12/film/you-only-live-twice/)

Thanks! I'll be watching Diamonds are Forever later today. It's been fun so far but from what I hear I'm out of good ones until like GoldenEye lmao. I'm just as surprised as anyone that Goldfinger fell flat. Ironically, its the most iconic Bond film whilst feeling the least like a "spy" movie of the bunch so far.

[Ezrangel]

Knights of Cup (2015)

** out of *****

Nonsensical, pretentious, boring, with stock level characters and fake emotions, really a dud for a good director like Malick, more I watch his lastest stuff more I think about how high he deserves to rank.

This movie is empty and falls flat in making your protagonist compelling or likeable. He's very annoying, and it’s a shame because Bale is an excellent actor.

hope scream 5 will be okay movie

I also do too.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Knights of Cup (2015)

** out of *****

Nonsensical, pretentious, boring, with stock level characters and fake emotions, really a dud for a good director like Malick, more I watch his lastest stuff more I think about how high he deserves to rank.

This movie is empty and falls flat in making your protagonist compelling or likeable. He's very annoying, and it’s a shame because Bale is an excellent actor.



I also do too.

i know that neve campbell is coming back but i dont know bout courtney cox and david whatever his last name

[Ezrangel]

i know that neve campbell is coming back but i dont know bout courtney cox and david whatever his last name

Dunno, it probably will be something like Halloween 2018 I guess.

I'm all in for action flicks or sequels, as long as they are watchable or atleast entertaining.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Dunno, it probably will be something like Halloween 2018 I guess.

I'm all in for action flicks or sequels, as long as they are watchable or atleast entertaining.

oh okay i will give halloween kills a chance to watch same with scream 5, if they both i will watch it

[Ezrangel]

oh okay i will give halloween kills a chance to watch same with scream 5, if they both i will watch it

Agreed.

[Fabulous]

Love Crazy (1941)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/1UBWu7dFPvkviZItJytKk0zJqzJ.jpg

[mojofilter]

https://originalvintagemovieposters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Dr-Strangelove-3110LB.jpg
DR. STRANGELOVE OR: HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE BOMB
(1964)

First viewing. I've always wanted to watch this movie being a Stanley Kubrick admirer and a fan of Peter Sellers' humor. I was not disappointed. This is possibly the best satirical black comedy about war in general, the cold war in particular. A surprisingly offbeat performance by George C. Scott whom I always considered a very serious actor (I learned through some research that Kubrick, who is known for having his actors do multiple takes of the same scene, tricked Scott into doing over-the-top "practice" takes that he ended up putting into the final cut, a move that had Scott vow never to work with Kubrick again.)

4

[hell_storm2004]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRV-cPQTscWbRBYpIWpRHI9h6MgjqRm-rCEE-VdG4x5QriFgsgF


28 Days Later (2002) - 7/10. Quite enjoyed this one. The movie is not about being scary, but more about human nature when the going gets tough. Well acted. Also I was wondering how was the empty London shots taken. Good stuff.


I was watching the Lord of the Rings, is it just me that felt like the CGI at times looks a bit dated?

[Fabulous]

The Incident (1967)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/t78HhX62iZKSOXaTgXrAsiIwQf5.jpg

[Thief]

Thanks! I'll be watching Diamonds are Forever later today. It's been fun so far but from what I hear I'm out of good ones until like GoldenEye lmao. I'm just as surprised as anyone that Goldfinger fell flat. Ironically, its the most iconic Bond film whilst feeling the least like a "spy" movie of the bunch so far.

I know I saw a bunch of the Moore ones when I was a kid/teen, but I don't remember much of them (which is why I want to revisit them). The only one I have fresh in my mind is A View to a Kill, which I thought was ok/fun.

[Wooley]

https://theultimaterabbit.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/major-league-movie-poster.jpg?w=1000
MAJOR LEAGUE
(1989)

First viewing. I've wanted to see this film for quite some time. 30 years actually. I've finally come around to it. I am not a fan of baseball as I find it to be the most boring sport in the history of sports. But I really loved all the baseball scenes, specifically the climactic ending, in this hilariously clever comedy. Great cast that includes Charlie Sheen, Tom Berenger, Wesley Snipes and the gorgeous Rene Russo.

4

Yeah, it really is a pretty funny movie. I musta watched it 20 or more times when I was in college.

[Wooley]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROFzRaEobS4-LGx1EzprGSka73s4Qbj1ZFLQ&usqp=CAU

Onibaba (1964) - 4/10. I just didn't get it. I get the folklore and all. But this movie is rated as 8 on IMDb. Why... It's baffling. 70% of the movie is two people acting horny. And a minor twist in the end. The lighting in the movie is nicely done, but that's about all the compliment I can give the movie. Disappointed.

Huh. This surprises me. I haven't seen it yet but for years I've heard people praise it as a pretty great movie and one worthy of still being on the cinematic radar decades later.
I don't put any stock, not one penny, in IMDB ratings, though. ;)

[Wooley]

Thanks! I'll be watching Diamonds are Forever later today. It's been fun so far but from what I hear I'm out of good ones until like GoldenEye lmao. I'm just as surprised as anyone that Goldfinger fell flat. Ironically, its the most iconic Bond film whilst feeling the least like a "spy" movie of the bunch so far.

My friends just watched Diamonds Are Forever a few weeks ago and basically ended up riff-traxing it via text to me the entire time. Hope you have as much fun as they did.

[martyrofevil]

My friends just watched Diamonds Are Forever a few weeks ago and basically ended up riff-traxing it via text to me the entire time. Hope you have as much fun as they did.


Just finished it and working on the write up now but spoilers yes I did.

[hell_storm2004]

Huh. This surprises me. I haven't seen it yet but for years I've heard people praise it as a pretty great movie and one worthy of still being on the cinematic radar decades later.
I don't put any stock, not one penny, in IMDB ratings, though. ;)

That is what led me to the movie. I heard a lot written about it, well reviewed, but turned out rubbish. Give it a shot, maybe will find something I didn't see.

[martyrofevil]

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (Peter Hunt, 1969)
This is certainly the most visually compelling and stylish film in the series thus far and it really needed to be because its paired against maybe the least compelling story in the series thus far. Even with the wonderful camerawork doing a more than admirable job carrying the film it does still start to drag through the middle. Fortunately, it starts to pick up in the back end and actually has the strongest finish of the films up to this point. Would have been nice if Lazenby had a pulse outside of the fight scenes (a loop of him throwing and uppercut should be hanging in a museum somewhere) but it helps that he's undercover as a dweeb for most of the film so he doesn't always feel miscast, though its not like Connery is that much less of a dweeb tbh. Overall, I was always entertained enough by the shot composition to at least be on board and I marked out enough times during the final act to make up for the duller bits and the conclusion was genuinely emotionally moving.
rating_3_5

Diamonds are Forever (Guy Hamilton, 1971)
Probably the most wall-to-wall entertaining film of the series thus far. A great cast of side characters, great fights, a super dope car chase and an abundance of genuinely funny writing are the many highlights here. While not the strongest film of the series visually its certainly an improvement from Mr. Hamilton's previous go at the franchise in that regard and more than gets the job done, even having its fair share of flashy moments. Though the one unfortunately holdover from Goldfinger is just how underutilized the music is which unfortunately sucks the air out of a few key scenes, most notably in the final act. It's a blast for sure but it losing that bit of steam in the third holds it back from being a truly great Bond film.
rating_3_5

Current Bond rankings:
01. From Russia with Love
02. Thunderball
03. Diamonds are Forever
04. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
05. Dr. No
06. You Only Live Once
07. Goldfinger

[Takoma11]

Onibaba is pretty great, though I LOVED Shindo's Black Cat, which is more overtly supernatural.

[CharlesAoup]

Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension, 2015, 2nd watch (D)

Same thing as the other ones, but this time with special effects. I've seen the two endings, and both somehow manage to be the same ending as every PA movie that came before it. Otherwise, no changes in the characters, with every kid being completely interchangeable, every parent being the same dumb parent, but this time with an extra douche. With a mustache. They also kept the same buildup for every jump scare, so zero effect there at this point. The special effects add nothing, unless you thing jumping on the camera is better than dropping heavy objects as far as jump scares go.

[GulfportDoc]

I know I saw a bunch of the Moore ones when I was a kid/teen, but I don't remember much of them (which is why I want to revisit them). The only one I have fresh in my mind is A View to a Kill, which I thought was ok/fun.
Moore kind of grew on you, although Connery was always missed. My favorites of his were the ones where "Jaws" (Richard Kiel) appeared, especially Moonraker (1979), where Jaws falls for Dolly (Blanche Ravalec), the blonde with the pigtails. Great comedy between the two of them, and touching too. The movie itself was not Moore's or the fanchise's best for sure.

[Thief]

Moore kind of grew on you, although Connery was always missed. My favorites of his were the ones where "Jaws" (Richard Kiel) appeared, especially Moonraker (1979), where Jaws falls for Dolly (Blanche Ravalec), the blonde with the pigtails. Great comedy between the two of them, and touching too. The movie itself was not Moore's or the fanchise's best for sure.

I remember Jaws, but I can barely remember the film. I plan on calibrating my expectations once I hit the Moore era :laugh:

[James D. Gardiner]

https://i.imgur.com/wf9qmBs.jpg

Bachelor of Hearts (1958)
D: Wolf Rilla
Starring: Hardy Krüger, Sylvia Syms, Ronald Lewis

First time viewing. Had been wanting to see it for quite some time because of the cast. Decent light-hearted British comedy film about a German foreign exchange student coming to Cambridge University, and running into all sorts of shenanigans with local customs, university culture and the opposite sex. Simple and pleasant entertainment.

7/10

[Gideon58]

https://news.wisc.edu/content/uploads/2014/04/Screen_Shot_2014-04-03_at_7.37.30_AM.png


3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Frevolutionarypaideia.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F12%2Fantwone-fisher.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Antwone Fisher, 2002

Antwone Fisher (Derek Luke) is a young man working in the Navy. After attacking a fellow seaman, Antwone is sent to a Naval psychiatrist named Dr. Davenport (Denzel Washington, who also directed the film). While Antwone is at first reluctant to open up, Dr. Davenport is eventually able to get Antwone to discuss his childhood and the traumas that still haunt him and fuel his anger and fear.

The majority of the respect that I had for this film has to do with a plot element that is revealed about a third of the way into the film, thus I will spoiler tag a lot of this review, but will not give away the ending or anything like that.

There are, in my opinion, far too films that address the way that children who have endured abuse and trauma cope as they get older, and the way that those traumas can manifest themselves. Stories about boys and trauma more often feature as explanatory backstories for brutal killers in horror or thriller movies. Even more rare is seeing a film in which a male character has a history of sexual abuse.

Stories about women who have experienced sexual trauma fit with a lot of what we are comfortable with as a culture. It makes sense that girls are abused because girls are not as strong. It makes sense that women might be afraid of men because men are stronger than women. Women-centered narratives about sexual abuse fit into our notions of the structure of power and align with our cultural "logic".

The portrayal of a male character coping with physical and sexual abuse inflicted by female "family" members (maybe it would be better to say "members of his household") is something that doesn't fit as easily. We don't tend to think of men as being victims of sexual violence. We don't square the idea of a man being afraid of sex the way we might square a female character with the same fear. I really applaud this movie for portraying such a narrative, and for normalizing what Antwone goes through. It's not even a line of dialogue, per se, but rather the way that Washington's character doesn't even flinch when Antwone admits he has never had sex or seen a woman naked aside from his abuser. And I really appreciated that the way through Antwone's fear wasn't to "man up"--it was to find a person, Cheryl (Joy Bryant), who is patient and understanding and doesn't flinch when he admits his inexperience and hesitation. Antwone does get a "stand up for himself" moment more toward the end, but I liked that he and Cheryl cemented their bond before this.

This movie struck a lot of chords with me. In my years as a teacher, I have worked with many victims of abuse--physical, mental, emotional, neglect, sexual--and just in the last month had to make a call to Child Protective Services (about a child in my community, not one of my students). Even the smartest, kindest children carry a heavy burden when they have endured such treatment. Something that this movie captured incredibly well was the way that Antwone's anger is a two-headed beast: one part he knows is his direct anger at those who hurt him, but the other part is more obscure. It is the unknowable possibilities of a better childhood. It is the lack of understanding of why these things happened to him. It's an inability to see a way forward.

Luke and Washington are both solid in their performances, and their scenes together are good. Novella Nelson is appropriately terrifying as Antwone's abusive foster mother.

I had only two hangups about the film, one from a craft point of view and the other from a personal logic point of view.

From a craft point of view, I had mixed feelings about a subplot involving Davenport's own past and issues. While it was a good way to make his character more dimensional, it felt like that part of the story was a bit half-hearted. And because there are some inevitable parallels with the therapist/angry-young-man relationship in Good Will Hunting, it's hard not to see how the subplot falls a bit flat where it could have been much deeper. There were a few parts in the film that seemed to lose momentum, and way too many times that Davenport seems almost on the edge of saying something and then doesn't, leaving me wondering "What was that all about?" several times.

And this is a little personal qualm, but it bothered me that apparently they did not report Antwone's foster family? This is a family that has at least three people in the household willing to abuse children in a variety of ways. And who is to say they haven't been cycling through children for the last 15 years? I don't even think this needed to be a significant part of the plot at all, but it bugged me a little that it was never even addressed.

This was an interesting and emotional film with a unique central conflict for the main character. It is inspiring to know how much of it was lifted from the real experiences of the film's writer, Fisher himself.

4

[MovieBuffering]

Bone Tomahawk - 2015

Holy hell. That escalated quickly Anchorman meme comes to mind. So it basically felt like a pretty normal western for about the first hour and 40 of the movie. Then about the last 30 minutes it accelerates into the horror genre. There is a scene towards the end...if you have seen it you know...that is seared into my brain forever. Yikes. It's a slow burn but goes from 0-60 quickly.

Kurt Russell is fantastic as usual. He knows how to navigate a western. The whole cast was pretty good. Richard Jenkins was especially a stand out to me. I thought the plot and writing were fine with the exception of some minor stuff that would get into spoiler territory. My biggest gripe is just a personal taste one. I was all in on the western stuff but once it dissolved into some horror boundaries it started to lose me a bit. It's just not my favorite genre. If you like westerns and horror then you will have a field day with it. Horror is just not my cup of tea. So it gets knocked a bit for that for me. I like subtle horror. But listen it was entertaining and well executed. Phew...that one scene is not for the faint of heart.

2.5

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/Bone_Tomahawk_Poster.jpg

[Fabulous]

Pal Joey (1957)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/mdySXeVDdEdJAYDtoQmq7piWDVZ.jpg