Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Fabulous]

Army of Shadows (1969)

4

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/csCSd8gftDRax0tiuo4VZJ9UaOo.jpg

[Allaby]

I just finished watching Luca (2021) on Disney+. It's a delightful animated film about the friendship between two boys who are actually sea monsters disguised as humans. The animation is gorgeous and the characters are cute. There are some great moments and some really sweet scenes. Definitely worth checking out. My rating is an 4.

[Wyldesyde19]

Army of Shadows (1969)

4

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/csCSd8gftDRax0tiuo4VZJ9UaOo.jpg
Man, I’m pretty sure I may have seen this, but it’s been so long I’m not 100% sure and may be confusing it with something else.
Gah.

[Gideon58]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61ddyxzRp9L._AC_SY445_.jpg



4

[Allaby]

I just finished watching Fatherhood (2021) on Netflix. This drama/comedy stars Kevin Hart as a new dad whose wife suddenly passes away. I really liked this film a lot. For me, this is Kevin Hart's best performance. The little girl is super adorable. This was sweet, funny, and very heartfelt. My rating is 4

[SpelingError]

25th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

Vertigo (1958) - 5

This is definitely my favorite Hitchcock film, so I'm glad to revisit it for this thread. When I first watched it, I viewed it as a tragic romance film, but only with future viewings did I really how wrong this reading was and that, in reality, Scottie was dangerous and obsessive. For instance, after Madeleine jumped into a river in an apparent suicide attempt, Scottie's way of handling the situation was by bringing her to his house, undressing her, and leaving her in his bed without telling anybody what happened (a doctor, a neighbor, or even Midge or Gavin, at the very least). If this doesn't make him creepy, I honestly don't know what would. The less time he spends with Midge and the more time he spends around Madeleine, the more clear it is that he's emotionally damaged and that the movie is about the dangers of his obsession, which extend to his fixation on Madeleine in place of Midge, his creepy behavior and demands with Judy, or the reveal that Gavin chose Scottie out of the likely hundreds of acquaintances he had since he knew that Scottie was the only person peculiar and strange enough that his elaborate scheme could possibly depend on. In spite of what we learn about the other characters in the final act, I think the full extent to Scottie's emotional damage is revealed during this part of the film (most of this is caused by Gavin and Judy though) and, as a result, we ultimately fear for Judy and are on her side.

There's also a few other things I love about this film. For one, Hitchcock utilizes technicolor better than almost every film I can think of. Through its red and green color pallet, it's able to convey such a strong emotional reaction, with red indicating danger and green indicating lust. Also, I've seen some people express boredom over Scottie tailing Madeleine by car, but I find that sequence to be an excellent slice of slow-burning tension. In fact, most of that sequence consists of Scottie driving downhill (San Francisco is a coastal city and has a number of hills), symbolizing his descent into obsession. It's a great touch to that sequence which makes it all the more atmospheric. I also loved the terrific dream sequence in the middle as, instead of feeling unnecessary, it was actually a product of Scottie's damaged emotional state. Lastly, I think the ending is perfect. Yes, it's abrupt, but intentionally so as the abruptness and confusion of it matches Scottie's headspace. The emotions it leaves me with linger long after the credits, anyways.

Overall, this is an emotionally complex masterpiece which never ceases to blow me away. Rear Window used to be my favorite Hitchcock film, but it lost its throne to this film a couple years ago.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fhorrornews.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2FKill-Your-Darlings-2013-movie-6.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Kill Your Darlings, 2013

A young Allen Ginsberg (Daniel Radcliffe) leaves a challenging home life situation--his mother (Jennifer Jason Leigh) is mentally ill--and goes to study literature at Columbia University. Once there, he quickly falls in with Lucien Carr (Dane DeHaan) Jack Kerouac (Jack Huston), and William Burroughs (Ben Foster), and as a group they rebel against the traditions of both the university and the field of literature in general. But Carr's unhealthy relationship with his lover, David (Michael C Hall), leads to tragic results for all of the men.

I always have a mixed reaction to real-story or biographical films because every time something amazing happens I have to wonder if it was a thing that really happened, or something that the writer made up or "adjusted" to make more movie-friendly.

For the most part, I liked this film. While there were several places where reality was, um, adjusted for greater narrative impact, the film wisely centers itself on Ginsberg's reaction to everything that happens. More specifically, Ginsberg experiences the double-edged sword of positioning oneself as a counter to the mainstream. As a Jewish man and someone who is also gay, Ginsberg is already at odds with much mainstream culture (both generally and in academics). This feeling of not belonging makes a satisfying through-thread, and it makes certain events late in the film land with much more power.

If anything, the film takes on a lot of issues, bordering on too many. There is the question of Ginsberg's religion and sexuality, of course. But there are also issues of social status. For all of their counter-culture posturing, all of the men are going to a prestigious school instead of fighting in the war. In one moment, Carr unabashedly positions himself as being better than his "janitor" lover. The film seems to be content with observing that this is all really complicated, and I respected it for that. It doesn't try to tie up anyone's story in a neat bow, but instead lets everything be messy.

A movie like this lives or dies by its performances. I thought that Radcliffe was really strong in the lead role, bringing just the right mix of intelligence, vulnerability, and discontent to his portrayal of Ginsberg. I don't "know" Ginsberg well enough to judge the accuracy of the performance, but the character feels complete and not just like a superficial impersonation.

DeHaan, Hall, and Huston are also good. Elizabeth Olson is very good as Kerouac's put-upon lover, Edie Parker. I thought that Foster's performance as Burroughs was really good--it is very subdued but powerful and a really interesting portrayal of a specific kind of charisma. Now, this isn't his fault, but I cannot divorce David Cross from Tobias Funke. Cross plays Ginsberg's father, and I was mostly distracted when he was on screen because I so associate him with comedy.

I would generally recommend this film, if only on the strength of the performances. I will say that it did get me to read more about the situation with Carr, something I had known a little about previously. People with a stronger knowledge of these real people and the story might be a bit more critical of the portrayal of the story and the characters, but as I said before, I felt that the themes that were developed meant that the movie didn't just rest on the scandal of the story.

3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmoviepronews.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F09%2FRush_Movie_Photo-23.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Rush, 2013

This film follows the rivalry between Formula One racers James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth) and Niki Lauda (Daniel Bruhl). The film opposes Hunt's brash style with Lauda's more calculating approach. After tragedy strikes during a race, the rivalry takes on a deeper intensity and forces both men to reevaluate their desire to win and what they are willing to do.

I am not really big on cars and/or car chases. There are exceptions, of course, but generally they really fail to light my fire. I will say, however, that watching the documentary Senna gave me appreciation for racing, and specifically Formula 1.

I liked this film. Hemsworth and Bruhl (but especially Bruhl) really sink into their characters, and the film strikes a pretty good balance between narrating the historical events and giving moments for character beats and emotional arcs. I felt that the movie captured both the excitement and rush of racing, and at the same time captured the dangers inherent in the sport. And while it isn't the main focus of the film, there is also a point made about the way that sports as commerce can lead to athletes taking risks (or being borderline forced into taking risks) beyond what is acceptable.

The only downsides to me were some dodgy moments with Hemsworth's accent and a handful of choices that were kind of odd to me (like some uses of slow motion during the racing sequences that seemed strangely timed).

I know literally nothing about James Hunt and Niki Lauda, but I found Lauda's narration to be really compelling. I liked the thematic arc about the unique relationship that is a rivalry and how it can drive competitors. I really appreciated the way that the film made the distinction between rivalries and enemies.

4

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/qBs2JBzH/rosie.jpg
By IMDB - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8247470/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58581546

Rosie - (2018)

I've seen a few movies in the last few years that are grounded in the 'real world' - the world Charlie Kaufman was pondering while adapting The Orchid Thief in Adaptation - where "nothing much happens". I've watched I, Daniel Blake, where the titular character drowns in a sea of bureaucracy. Custody, where an obsessive ex-husband stalks his ex, and uses his child - and The Death of Mr. Lazarescu where that poor guy is shunted from hospital to hospital as he dies in agony. They were all grounded to the extent where nothing out of the ordinary happens - but they were also compelling viewing and some of the finest films produced.

Irish film Rosie is definitely in that category. Rosie's landlord is selling the house she rents, along with 4 kids and a partner. They don't have much money, and indeed need government support just to get by. As she drives around ringing place after place for somewhere to stay, at least for one or two nights, she gets more and more desperate. Her kids are bored, and resent having to stay in close quarters all day. As her nerves fray she refuses to admit to herself that they may have to sleep in the car - all six of them. It's a combustible situation. A very sad situation. Disaster lurks in the background...

As A Short Film About Killing put the death penalty under the spotlight in Poland, and Daniel Blake did the same for welfare in the U.K. Rosie has reverberations that go beyond Ireland. Housing crisis after housing crisis seems to be erupting all over the world as poverty rates are high and populations grow too fast for nations to keep up. Where I am they sell shipping containers as makeshift 'houses' - but the plight of larger families is dire. Rosie is compelling enough to make it heard - if only to a small audience.

7/10

[StuSmallz]

While not really a "review", I did recently write a new entry for my old, on-hiatus project on the New Hollywood movement (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/list/the-new-hollywood-movement-a-crash-course/detail/) on The Wild Bunch (since it's certainly a better choice from '69 than Easy Rider was), so I'm re-posting here in case anyone's interested:


https://i.ibb.co/svVqkXm/Ben-Johnson-Warren-Oates-Ernest-Borgnine-William.jpg (https://ibb.co/QFKMzxb)

Personal Thoughts:

The Wild Bunch is a bit of a weird one for me, since, while I had watched it twice before this project, it still never really left much of an overall impression on me anyway (except for the final shootout, of course), and an attempted rewatch back in 2017 had to be aborted fairly early due to the film again not really grabbing me, for whatever inexplicable reason. However, my most recent rewatch finally enlightened me to the film's overall quality, particularly in the way it created a bittersweet eulogy for the death of the old West and the men unable to find their way into the modern world that replaced it, helping to kill off Hollywood's inaccurate vision of that landscape in the process, and making us sympathize with those men and their sense of "thieves' honor", even though they're still objectively a bunch of scumbags (Sons Of Anarchy could've learned a few lessons from this one, come to think of it). Anyway, while my favorite Peckinpah is still Bring Me The Head Of Alfredo Garcia, but this is pretty close behind it now regardless, and stands tall as one of "Bloody Sam's" stronger efforts nonetheless.

Significance To The Movement:

By building on Peckinpah's previous works (and setting a template for his subsequent career in turn) in taking the Western, a traditionally popular, fairly audience-friendly genre in Hollywood, and helping to radically reinvent it, reversing the traditional dynamic that characterized the genre, with the band of cutthroat outlaws now the protagonists, and without watering down their bloodthirstiness to make them any more palatable to us in the process (such as them showing zero hesitation from using civilians as human shields during the opening robbery). This helped to further popularize the "Revisionist" Western (which is a bit of a misleading term anyway, since the traditional vision of the West that Hollywood presented was already a revision from reality), but besides that, the film is also influential for its cutting edge editing techniques, as it "rubber-bands" back-and-forth in rapid succession between regular and slow-motion shots, giving us a sense of the sort of time dilation that happens to people's perceptions when in life-or-death situations.

This can obviously be seen in the film's legendary final shootout, another example of it subverting traditional genre expectations, since the portrayal of most shootouts in Westerns up to this point tended to be pretty basic and perfunctory by comparison, whereas Peckinpah put a ton of time and effort into making a unique, overwhelming impact with his film's portrayal of such outbursts of violence. By doing this, The Wild Bunch also had a huge impact on the cinematic language of the Action film, a young, burgeoning style that had been coalescing into its own genre throughout the 60's, a genre that TWB ended up having a huge influence on, whether it be the machine-gun driven carnage of Rambo, the bloodily beautiful slow-motion of John Woo's Hong Kong work, or even the visceral cinematography of the Bourne films, which can be felt in a couple of unexpected handheld cam shots sprinkled throughout Bunch. In this way, in addition to helping to dramatically revise the image of a much older, more established genre, it also unexpectedly served as the "Rosetta's Stone" for a brand new one that was just coming into its own, and if that doesn't make The Wild Bunch influential, then I don't know what the hell does.

[xSookieStackhouse]

5 rewatched
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/H6ATM5/scarlett-johansson-poster-lucy-2014-H6ATM5.jpg

[Fabulous]

How to Steal a Million (1966)

3.5

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

[John Dumbear]

5 rewatched
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/H6ATM5/scarlett-johansson-poster-lucy-2014-H6ATM5.jpg

Loved Lucy, but was widely panned. Thought it told a great story.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Loved Lucy, but was widely panned. Thought it told a great story.

well did u know they gonna make LUCY 2? i hope it be good as the first

[John Dumbear]

well did u know they gonna make LUCY 2? i hope it be good as the first

Really? Don't know how they could get more out of the story. Unless they went the super hero route, in which I hope not.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Really? Don't know how they could get more out of the story. Unless they went the super hero route, in which I hope not.

yes https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4809774/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0 it shows luc besson still the writer of the movie. maybe but never know till they release full info of it

[SpelingError]

While not really a "review", I did recently write a new entry for my old, on-hiatus project on the New Hollywood movement (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/list/the-new-hollywood-movement-a-crash-course/detail/) on The Wild Bunch (since it's certainly a better choice from '69 than Easy Rider was), so I'm re-posting here in case anyone's interested:


https://i.ibb.co/svVqkXm/Ben-Johnson-Warren-Oates-Ernest-Borgnine-William.jpg (https://ibb.co/QFKMzxb)

Personal Thoughts:

The Wild Bunch is a bit of a weird one for me, since, while I had watched it twice before this project, it still never really left much of an overall impression on me anyway (except for the final shootout, of course), and an attempted rewatch back in 2017 had to be aborted fairly early due to the film again not really grabbing me, for whatever inexplicable reason. However, my most recent rewatch finally enlightened me to the film's overall quality, particularly in the way it created a bittersweet eulogy for the death of the old West and the men unable to find their way into the modern world that replaced it, helping to kill off Hollywood's inaccurate vision of that landscape in the process, and making us sympathize with those men and their sense of "thieves' honor", even though they're still objectively a bunch of scumbags (Sons Of Anarchy could've learned a few lessons from this one, come to think of it). Anyway, while my favorite Peckinpah is still Bring Me The Head Of Alfredo Garcia, but this is pretty close behind it now regardless, and stands tall as one of "Bloody Sam's" stronger efforts nonetheless.

Significance To The Movement:

By building on Peckinpah's previous works (and setting a template for his subsequent career in turn) in taking the Western, a traditionally popular, fairly audience-friendly genre in Hollywood, and helping to radically reinvent it, reversing the traditional dynamic that characterized the genre, with the band of cutthroat outlaws now the protagonists, and without watering down their bloodthirstiness to make them any more palatable to us in the process (such as them showing zero hesitation from using civilians as human shields during the opening robbery). This helped to further popularize the "Revisionist" Western (which is a bit of a misleading term anyway, since the traditional vision of the West that Hollywood presented was already a revision from reality), but besides that, the film is also influential for its cutting edge editing techniques, as it "rubber-bands" back-and-forth in rapid succession between regular and slow-motion shots, giving us a sense of the sort of time dilation that happens to people's perceptions when in life-or-death situations.

This can obviously be seen in the film's legendary final shootout, another example of it subverting traditional genre expectations, since the portrayal of most shootouts in Westerns up to this point tended to be pretty basic and perfunctory by comparison, whereas Peckinpah put a ton of time and effort into making a unique, overwhelming impact with his film's portrayal of such outbursts of violence. By doing this, The Wild Bunch also had a huge impact on the cinematic language of the Action film, a young, burgeoning style that had been coalescing into its own genre throughout the 60's, a genre that TWB ended up having a huge influence on, whether it be the machine-gun driven carnage of Rambo, the bloodily beautiful slow-motion of John Woo's Hong Kong work, or even the visceral cinematography of the Bourne films, which can be felt in a couple of unexpected handheld cam shots sprinkled throughout Bunch. In this way, in addition to helping to dramatically revise the image of a much older, more established genre, it also unexpectedly served as the "Rosetta's Stone" for a brand new one that was just coming into its own, and if that doesn't make The Wild Bunch influential, then I don't know what the hell does.

Nice write-up! I reviewed this film back at Corrie and it's one of my favorite films of all time, period. Glad you also love it! Here's my review for it:

https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5879977/?ref_=ur_urv

[Wooley]

I'm strongly considering that one just to round that up. We'll see.

It's not great but it does have Peter Weller. And Amanda Pays, for that matter.

[Wooley]

I can't say anything about the similarities between the two as I haven't played The Last of Us. But the original short story was published in a collection released September 4th, 2012 (according to Goodreads) meaning it was written at least (and most likely, over) a year before the game was released. It was nominated for an award in 2013 (not published as implied earlier in this thread).

In any case, the film is only OK-ish, and I much preferred the book. The film makes changes to the characters and their motivations that contradict the book (too long time gone to be more specific, but I'm sure I've written about this stuff earlier).

Sure, but the game was in development since 2009.

[Wooley]

While not really a "review", I did recently write a new entry for my old, on-hiatus project on the New Hollywood movement (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/list/the-new-hollywood-movement-a-crash-course/detail/) on The Wild Bunch (since it's certainly a better choice from '69 than Easy Rider was), so I'm re-posting here in case anyone's interested:


https://i.ibb.co/svVqkXm/Ben-Johnson-Warren-Oates-Ernest-Borgnine-William.jpg (https://ibb.co/QFKMzxb)



I feel like we've talked about this before but have you read Easy Riders, Raging Bulls?
Also, what do you mean when you say "it's certainly a better choice from '69 than Easy Rider was"?

[Wooley]

5 rewatched
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/H6ATM5/scarlett-johansson-poster-lucy-2014-H6ATM5.jpg

Yeah, a lot of people apparently did not like this movie, even to the point of ridiculing, but I was not among them. I thought the ending maybe got a little silly and of course the 10% thing has been shown to be nonsense, but who cares, this movie is mostly about style and how great Scarlett is at these kind of roles and it delivers strongly on both counts.

[Allaby]

The Ghost and Mr. Chicken (1966) An enjoyable and charming comedy starring Don Knotts as an aspiring reporter who has to spend a night in a haunted house. 3.5

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://thecinemaholic.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/FireShot-Capture-1629-A-QUIET-PLACE-2-Final-Trailer-Extended-2020-YouTube-www.youtube.com_-e1622055114168.jpg
A Quiet Place Part II (2021, John Krasinski)
2
I remember the first one was ok. Part II felt like more of the same, only worse.

[CharlesAoup]

Hell House LLC, 2015 (F)

A mockumentary about a haunted house attraction where all hell broke loose one night.

First off, they could have dropped the mockumentary aspect entirely. Most of the movie is straight up footage from the people who set up the place and the event itself. The three people interviewed add nothing.

Second, this is just the worst of found footage. Everybody's a douche, everybody's always screwing with everyone, so no one believes anyone when they talk about, or literally film the weird stuff. The level of swearing makes The Blair Witch Project seem like a kids' film.

Third, not only is the camerawork nearly parody-level bad found footage stuff, but you have a scene that feels a minute long of a room going from black to bright white with a flashing light. You can almost never tell what's going on, and it's bad when you can. Basically just costumes and makeup.

Pretty long even though it's 90 minutes, mostly uneventful, and just bad.

[MacSloth]

Just finished Awakenings (1990).
I honestly can't remember the last time I cried so much at a film... This movie really resonated with me for some reason. De Niro does such an incredible job at playing Leonard, a catatonic patient in the Bronx during the 1970s.
For those of you who have not seen this film in a while, I would highly recommend revisiting it.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Yeah, a lot of people apparently did not like this movie, even to the point of ridiculing, but I was not among them. I thought the ending maybe got a little silly and of course the 10% thing has been shown to be nonsense, but who cares, this movie is mostly about style and how great Scarlett is at these kind of roles and it delivers strongly on both counts.

true i only watched it cause scarlett is in it, shes one of my favorite actresses and loved her fighting skills also

[WHITBISSELL!]

Double (Drive-in) feature

https://images.static-bluray.com/reviews/9829_5_large.jpg

https://www.kaijubattle.net/uploads/2/9/5/7/29570123/810944039_orig.jpg

King Kong Escapes - This 1967 feature has plenty of things working in it's favor. For starters it's directed by the venerable Ishirô Honda and from what I've read the guy practically invented the Kaiju genre. The head bad guy is Dr. Who, an emaciated gent with a penchant for black clothing and dramatic flourishes and the most jacked up teeth this side of Austin Powers. He's played by the just as venerable Hideyo Amamoto. Dr. Who had been chilling at his North Pole lair until Madame Piranha came calling. She has an itch for some highly radioactive Element X so Who builds a giant mechanical ape to dig for it. Because hey, who doesn't go the giant mechanical ape route when it comes to mining? As luck would have it, Mechani-Kong isn't up to the task so Who and Madame Piranha decide to kidnap the real King Kong and let him have a go at it. Kong resides on Mondo Island and he's all torso sitting atop these short, spindly legs. Sort of like a weightlifter who never bothered to schedule a leg day. He's also more than a little mongoloid-ish looking. And since you can't have two big dogs residing in the same neighborhood without them tussling he and Mechani-Kong eventually go toe to toe. There's also a trio of protagonists in mod outfits who travel around in mod conveyances and alternate between being captured and escaping from Who and his henchmen. Long story short, this movie is a big slice of goofy fun.

rating_3_5


https://images.static-bluray.com/reviews/18508_4_large.jpg
https://drfreex.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/frankenstein-1970.jpg

Frankenstein 1970 - This is in black and white which kind of surprised me until I checked out the production date and the 1970 in the title is there strictly to make it sound somewhat futuristic. It was actually filmed and released in 1958. I was also expecting Peter Cushing but he's nowhere to be found. Boris Karloff instead stars as Baron Victor von Frankenstein, the last of his line and also hurting for funds. In order to finance a "secret project" he gives permission for an American television crew to film at his ancestral home. He uses the money to supposedly buy an atomic reactor which isn't something I thought you could purchase much less have delivered to your house. The Baron is distraught over his bloodline coming to an end with his passing so he has a fallback under wraps. Literally. His unfinished "monster" looks more like a mummy with an enormous, block shaped head. But seeing as how it needs a brain and eyes among other things he goes after the likeliest donors.

Not much happens in this film. There's a lot of dialogue and Karloff is his usual game self and emotes up a storm. The rest of the cast are willing as well. I didn't find it all that boring but then I like these old type of horror flicks plus I'm a big Karloff fan.

rating_3

[James D. Gardiner]

https://i.imgur.com/UFpqNS4.jpg

Billy Budd (1962)
Directed by Peter Ustinov
Starring Robert Ryan, Peter Ustinov, Terence Stamp, Melvyn Douglas, David McCallum

Stumbled across this film by chance and very pleased to have done so. This is a very well made British period naval drama, which is not too heavy on the clichés often associated with the genre, and delivers a strong and thought provoking story.

In 1797, young, naive and innocent English sailor Billy Budd is transferred from a merchant vessel to the fighting ship HMS Avenger for active service. Here his ever present optimism strongly contrasts the negativity and ill feelings of many of the other sailors. Yet his indefatigably good natured spirit manages to win them over, except for the cruel hearted Master at Arms who looks on Billy with hatred. This simple and powerful clash between good and evil will have dramatic consequences, where issues of morality, law and justice are subsequently and intelligently explored.

Well written and produced, with excellent performances from Peter Ustinov as the Captain with a troubled conscience, Robert Ryan effectively detestable as the bad guy, and a fine charismatic performance from Terence Stamp as Billy Budd in his debut film.

8/10

[LChimp]

https://ibcdn.canaltech.com.br/joBatpadhR4fvC95VZgZ7wEPDAI=/660x0/smart/i448840.jpeg

Whole family enjoyed this one, my kid was laughing pretty much all the way through. Great entry in the Pixarverse

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4b/Finding_Altamira.jpg
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51576793

Finding Altamira - (2016)

In 1879, amateur archaeologist Marcelino Sanz de Sautuola (Antonio Banderas) and his 8-year old daughter stumble across cave paintings that are over 10,000 years old. The religious and even scientific community do everything in their power to deny they are real. Marcelino and his family are the subject of ridicule, and charges of forgery are levelled at him. Eventually the scientific community realises the cave paintings are real, and apologise - years after Marcelino's death...

Fascinating story, but this movie kind of plods along. There are nice sequences when Marcelino's daughter dreams the animals in the cave paintings are coming alive and causing all of the trouble her family is going through. Other than that, you know exactly where the movie is going - and it goes along with a minimum of fuss, as if director Hugh Hudson is bored with the material.

5/10

[Fabulous]

The Catered Affair (1956)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/574G7xi9BsRdcjjY9tjlmUdAgea.jpg

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/g0mVDCB9/MV5-BZGYz-ZDQ2-ZWIt-Nj-E4-ZS00-ZTgz-LTk3-Zjct-Zj-Aw-ZDUy-M2-I4-Nzg5-L2lt-YWdl-L2lt-YWdl-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-MTYx-Njkx-OQ-V1.jpg

3
__________________

https://i.postimg.cc/vBPtD0zJ/MV5-BZWRj-Yz-Fh-MWUt-OGEx-ZC00-NDIz-LTk4-OTIt-NWZj-ZDRj-Mm-Qy-OTE1-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-OTg4-MDYy-Nw-V1-FMjpg-UX1000.jpg

3

[Thursday Next]

The Tenth Victim (1965)

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w220_and_h330_face/7KWDiwO8haLL5UgqFNWRHGTzcoD.jpg

Absolutely nuts, and I sort of loved it for that. It doesn't take itself at all seriously. Very sixties.

3.5

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/UFpqNS4.jpg

Billy Budd (1962)
Directed by Peter Ustinov
Starring Robert Ryan, Peter Ustinov, Terence Stamp, Melvyn Douglas, David McCallum

Stumbled across this film by chance and very pleased to have done so. This is a very well made British period naval drama, which is not too heavy on the clichés often associated with the genre, and delivers a strong and thought provoking story.

In 1797, young, naive and innocent English sailor Billy Budd is transferred from a merchant vessel to the fighting ship HMS Avenger for active service. Here his ever present optimism strongly contrasts the negativity and ill feelings of many of the other sailors. Yet his indefatigably good natured spirit manages to win them over, except for the cruel hearted Master at Arms who looks on Billy with hatred. This simple and powerful clash between good and evil will have dramatic consequences, where issues of morality, law and justice are subsequently and intelligently explored.

Well written and produced, with excellent performances from Peter Ustinov as the Captain with a troubled conscience, Robert Ryan effectively detestable as the bad guy, and a fine charismatic performance from Terence Stamp as Billy Budd in his debut film.

8/10

I've been meaning to watch this for years. I'm a big fan of Melville's story. I didn't want to read it in high school, 33 years ago, because the title didn't sound like much and I thought the period writing would be boring, but I was totally captivated by the story. One thing I worried would be lost in the film is that not only was Billy supposed to be absurdly handsome but also big and strong like "a fresh horse" and someone that, despite his good nature, people wouldn't cross because he would simply be able to physically overpower anyone on the ship. This feature actually mattered to the story and the themes and I worried that Stamp, as much as I have always appreciated him as an actor, would lack that quality. Of course, that's because he seems short in Superman II, the film I first saw him in and arguably his most famous role. But I forgot that Christopher Reeve was 6'4", not to mention the fact that the other two Kryptonians were cast, in part, due to their height. Non and Ursa were actually 6'6" and 5'10", respectively, and they stood next to him for most of the film. If you assumed that just Ursa was an average sized woman or that Reeve was even just 6'1", you would expect that Stamp was no taller than about 5'9". Which would hardly fit Billy's character.
Yes, it is that simple and silly a reason that I never saw this film. But now, liberated by the research I've done after reading your review, I am free to finally watch it.

[John W Constantine]

Possession (1981)

3.5

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://www.indiewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Screen-Shot-2021-04-22-at-9.10.44-AM.png
The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021, Michael Chaves)
2
The worst Conjuring yet. The story felt lacking, and the scares weren't as good as in the other two Conjuring films, which I remember being quite enjoyable.

[Marco]

Kill List (2011)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Kill-list-poster.jpg
This is quite an entertaining film about 2 ex mercenaries that get into harsh times and take on the contract of all contracts. Good juxtaposition of light and dark in bits but always quite enjoyable as the story is good and linear. In my view it builds to a good, but rather fatuous conclusion. Ben Wheatley is kind of an enigma to me.

3

[WHITBISSELL!]

Double Feature - (Semi) Famous Monsters of Filmland

https://occ-0-114-853.1.nflxso.net/dnm/api/v6/6AYY37jfdO6hpXcMjf9Yu5cnmO0/AAAABfK-sWg2VR9gIvGMXoi9U_55MyEt97LwwnSCSgQDinT7lmH69JMU4DjnlOim_aXDqstVMFzd3tne2Su7CJLY-fspLa9b.jpg?r=f4b


https://64.media.tumblr.com/72c260eda4179f421084a3f2f92644bb/2dbf7d493ef634ae-bd/s540x810/89f7ddd5d4d8c5c584795d0ae00d67e0ed7594c9.gif


Love and Monsters - I liked this. Got into it and found myself invested by the time the third act rolled around. I think that had a lot to do with Dylan O'Brien's likable protagonist Joel Dawson. It's seven years removed from an asteroid hitting earth with the chemical fallout resulting in widespread growth and mutations in the surviving insects. The few remaining humans have been forced to take up residence in underground colonies. Joel lives in one of these and being the sole member that hasn't paired off with anyone makes him feel like the ultimate third wheel. But he has somehow managed to find his high school girlfriend Aimee (Jessica Henwick) at another colony. After one of the mutated baddies breaches their bunker Joel decides it's time for him to test his mettle, venture forth and reconnect with her. The problem being that Joel is decidedly ill-equipped to handle this sort of challenge having been relegated to cooking duties because of his tendency to freeze up in times of stress.

The second act unfolds as Joel travels the 80 or so miles where he encounters both sizable threats and unexpected allies. The third act both veers away from the previous events but also hits familiar beats for anyone who has been paying attention. The supporting cast is capable and understated with Henwick (Colleen Wing in Iron Fist), Dan Ewing, Ariana Greenblatt and the always dependable Michael Rooker providing able support. Since it's happened countless times in the past with movies I've liked I assumed that critics would have trashed the film but checking in at RT I was pleasantly surprised to find it has a 93% Tomatometer. So don't take my word for it. Check it out.

rating_4


https://imgix.kotaku.com.au/content/uploads/sites/3/2020/12/06/cd24fsfsrjqnmnvzqddk.jpg?ar=16%3A9&auto=format&fit=crop&q=80&w=1280&nr=20

Monster Hunter - Whatever became of Uwe Boll? Because a movie based off a Capcom video game would have been right up his alley. Instead it's Paul W.S. Anderson directing, with his wife Milla Jovovich starring as U.S. Army Ranger Captain Natalie Artemis. I suppose now that the Resident Evil teat has finally run dry Anderson and Jovovich are looking for the next franchise. I don't know if this is the one though. The ending is plainly set up for a sequel and while the FX are first rate (something Boll was never able to master) the story should come off as paper thin to anyone but fans of the game. This costars Tony Jaa as The Hunter, Tip "T.I." Harris as Lincoln, a member of Artemis' squad and Ron Perlman as The Admiral. The first act involves Artemis and her squad, while the second act is all Jovovich and Jaa and in the third act a 71 year old Perlman shows up in a fright wig and sailing a pirate schooner across the shifting sands of whatever parallel world Artemis and her troops blundered into.
The acting is sketchy AF with the editing frenetic especially during the assorted "fight" scenes between Jovovich and Jaa. Probably to cover up the fact that it's Milla Jovovich fighting Tony freakin' Jaa. Oh and there's a two legged humanoid cat named Palico (?) who is apparently the cook on Perlman's ship. Fans of the game will probably like this, everyone else should probably not expect too much.

rating_2

[Fabulous]

Dark of the Sun (1968)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/lLwdlakfa0XJcjdB4iBSYusW6mJ.jpg

[Thief]

The Tenth Victim (1965)

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w220_and_h330_face/7KWDiwO8haLL5UgqFNWRHGTzcoD.jpg

Absolutely nuts, and I sort of loved it for that. It doesn't take itself at all seriously. Very sixties.

3.5

Yeah, this was quite a surprise for me. Liked it a lot.

[Thief]

SUMMER CAMP
(2015, Marini)
A horror film • A film with the word "Summer" in its title

https://i.imgur.com/iu8x1H0.jpg


"You'll see when the kids arrive. At first they're like strangers, but after a few trust exercises, they're friends for life."



Summer Camp follows three American counselors (Diego Boneta, Jocelin Donahue, and Maiara Walsh) sent to work on a summer camp in Spain. The film opens with them practicing one of those trust exercises, with one of the girls assuring her partner that them girls would "do it better". But a mysterious rage-inducing virus that starts spreading around will certainly put that trust to the test.

This is yet another film I walk into pretty much blind and still walk out pleasantly surprised. Despite treading familiar ground, it manages to pack a few surprises and subvert some of the typical tropes of the genre. Not only that, but it happens to be a lot of fun. The film is also cleverly staged in terms of how it sets up certain things that pay off later in surprising yet organic ways.

Grade: 3


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2214069#post2214069)

[GulfportDoc]

78749
Cornered (1945)

I'm a big noir fan, so was looking forward to watching several while my wife was gone for the weekend. The anticipation built while watching Eddie Muller's Noir Alley intro (from TCM) on YouTube before starting Cornered.



The second pairing of Dick Powell and Edward Dmytryk, following the great Murder, My Sweet from the previous year should have been a humdinger. And truly it was a good noir style. However for some reason Powell wouldn't get off the monomaniacal angry tough guy approach to his dialogue delivery, which after awhile --especially when the situation didn't warrant it-- became a little like fingernails scraping on a blackboard (for the younger crowd, blackboards used to be in every classroom, on which pieces of white chalk were used for illustrations of lessons..:D).

Still, it was an interesting story, and it's always nice to see Walter Slezak ply his sleazy characters. It was also easy to watch the French actress Micheline Cheirel light up the screen with her performance.

Good noir, but a missed opportunity. The film could have been "A" material, but ended up with "B" patina.

Doc's rating: 5/10

[James D. Gardiner]

I've been meaning to watch this for years. I'm a big fan of Melville's story. I didn't want to read it in high school, 33 years ago, because the title didn't sound like much and I thought the period writing would be boring, but I was totally captivated by the story. One thing I worried would be lost in the film is that not only was Billy supposed to be absurdly handsome but also big and strong like "a fresh horse" and someone that, despite his good nature, people wouldn't cross because he would simply be able to physically overpower anyone on the ship. This feature actually mattered to the story and the themes and I worried that Stamp, as much as I have always appreciated him as an actor, would lack that quality. Of course, that's because he seems short in Superman II, the film I first saw him in and arguably his most famous role. But I forgot that Christopher Reeve was 6'4", not to mention the fact that the other two Kryptonians were cast, in part, due to their height. Non and Ursa were actually 6'6" and 5'10", respectively, and they stood next to him for most of the film. If you assumed that just Ursa was an average sized woman or that Reeve was even just 6'1", you would expect that Stamp was no taller than about 5'9". Which would hardly fit Billy's character.
Yes, it is that simple and silly a reason that I never saw this film. But now, liberated by the research I've done after reading your review, I am free to finally watch it.

I think you should enjoy it. Admittedly I've not read the book but did find the story refreshing and interesting.

[Fabulous]

High Hopes (1988)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/s4geTxzAb9qAf5ymG5ML0Mf2XJz.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fnsa40.casimages.com%2Fimg%2F2020%2F12%2F18%2F201218052333540452.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Hunter Hunter, 2020

Deep in the woods, Anne (Camille Sullivan) lived with her husband Joseph (Devon Sawa) and teenage daughter, Renee (Summer Howell). The family lives off the grid, sustaining themselves through hunting local animals. But following a disturbing discovery in the woods, Joseph goes AWOL, and Anne and Renee are left wondering what has become of him. A less than helpful response from the local police (Gabriel Daniels, Lauren Cochrane) and the appearance of a mysterious stranger (Nick Stahl) make things more complicated.

A lot of horror films suffer from setting up an intriguing concept and then slowly declining, often not knowing how to wrap things up. This film is interesting in that it is the middle third that lags the most, while the ending is actually quite strong. The first act does a good job of establishing the family's isolated life in the woods. But once Joseph disappears, the film lingers in a weird space. Some of the character actions just didn't ring true to me--the film struggles as it tries to put all of the pieces in place for its final act. Once that final act arrives, however, it is suitably shocking and gory.

Aside from its finale, the film's other main strength is the ambiguity it threads throughout. This is one of those films that keeps you wondering whether what is happening is supernatural or real (or some mix of the two), and I enjoyed that. Being isolated in the woods can be a beautiful thing, but it can also be very dangerous. The film really shows this double-edged relationship, and particularly the way that a stressful situation can lead to an antagonistic relationship with your environment.

The film does drag at times--especially in the middle third--and I was frustrated at points by character decisions that seemed to exist only so that certain characters would be in certain places at certain times in order for the finale to work. At the same time, the finale is powerful enough that I walked away with an overall positive impression. Especially recommended for horror fans. Not great, but worth a look in my opinion.

3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fbinary%2F74eb%2FDina.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Dina, 2017

This documentary follows a middle aged woman named Dina Buno as she pursues love and marriage with a man named Scott. Both Dina and Scott seem to be somewhere on the Autism spectrum, and in addition to trying to discover if they are truly compatible, echoes of Dina's former marriage hang over the relationship.

I always get a little emotional seeing adults with disabilities navigate the "real world". When I look at my students with disabilities, I always worry that the world will not treat them kindly or understand their brilliance. Watching someone like Dina go about her life was both relieving and anxiety producing. On one hand, it was really neat to see her assert her desires in terms of love, sex, affection, and relationship boundaries. On the other hand, you see those moments where she struggles to connect and communicate, and the frustration she experiences.

Showing the life of someone who is not neurotypical can really land in a negative place, where it feels like the film is inviting you to laugh at the person on screen. For the most part that is not how I felt. There were parts where I did laugh, but that comes more out of the contrast between Dina's understanding of appropriate behavior and what most people would consider appropriate. In the scene pictured at the top of this review, Dina matter-of-factly reads to her fiance Scott about sexual strategies for stronger ejaculation----and then a reverse camera shot shows us that a mother and two children are sitting on the bench just ahead of them.

The film offers a really balanced look at Dina and Scott's relationship. Scott is uninterested in sex (and possibly asexual?), and Dina very much wants a physical relationship. Dina frets about making Scott feel bad for the way he is, and Scott wants to make Dina happy, but clearly wanting physical touch doesn't come naturally to him. It is a sweet but also painful look at a couple that loves each other, and yet are grappling with what would be an insurmountable obstacle for some people.

I did have one issue with the film, and that has to do with information that is revealed at almost the very end of the film regarding a trauma in Dina's past. On one hand, this reveal is effective in the sense that it was like a gut-punch. I can honestly say it is one of the worst things I have ever heard in a documentary, and part of that is because of how unexpected it was. But on the other hand, this information about Dina is really critical to understanding her behavior as not just someone who isn't neurotypical, but also as someone who is suffering from a really serious trauma. It totally reframes so many of her actions, and I found myself a bit annoyed that you would almost have to rewatch the whole movie to really grasp what is happening in different moments.

Overall this was an interesting and compassionate look at someone whose though process and behavior might not fit the norm, but who just wants the same things that so many people do.

4

[PHOENIX74]

The Tenth Victim (1965)

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/w220_and_h330_face/7KWDiwO8haLL5UgqFNWRHGTzcoD.jpg

Absolutely nuts, and I sort of loved it for that. It doesn't take itself at all seriously. Very sixties.

3.5

Read about this film only a couple of weeks ago and have really wanted to see it since. Now even more so.

Kill List (2011)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Kill-list-poster.jpg
This is quite an entertaining film about 2 ex mercenaries that get into harsh times and take on the contract of all contracts. Good juxtaposition of light and dark in bits but always quite enjoyable as the story is good and linear. In my view it builds to a good, but rather fatuous conclusion. Ben Wheatley is kind of an enigma to me.

3

This is one of my favourite films. A bit of a guilty pleasure though. I know it's not a great film, but to me it was really unrelenting, dark and at times frightening.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.collider.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F01%2Fthe-wolfpack-movie-image-1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

The Wolfpack, 2015

A man and a woman meet while traveling and discover they have similar aspirations. They want to raise their children free of society's influence on some ideal Swedish farm. The only problem is that a brief stopover in New York becomes permanent. The solution? All seven children (six brothers and a developmentally-disabled sister) are raised in an apartment and never allowed to leave--only their father has the keys to the front door. Isolated in all respects, the brothers immerse themselves in the world of film, meticulously typing up the scripts and building their own props and recreating the entirety of films like Reservoir Dogs and Batman Begins. This documentary follows the family after some of the brothers begin to venture outside of the apartment.

There is a lot happening on the surface that makes this seem like it is meant to be a fun little watch. The brothers' homemade cinematic recreations bring them a lot of joy, and we watch footage of creative play and dance parties. With their long hair and soft-spoken mannerisms, this seems like, you know, the nice kind of cult.

But ultimately this film is a tragedy, and in many ways it is hard to watch. Early on we are given the least surprising piece of information: their father (you know, the one who literally kept them locked up for years at a time) was abusive to their mother and to them at times. When the oldest brother, Mukunda, ventures outside the apartment the first time, he wore a homemade Michael Myers mask . . . and was subsequently arrested and taken to a mental hospital.

It could be easy to watch this film and just enjoy the quirks of the boys, such as the way that one of them slips into a British accent out in public, or the way that the boys seem to adopt certain film personas in order to navigate the outside world. But to the credit of the filmmakers, the movie never goes too long before bringing you back down to earth. These boys do not really know how to socialize (much less date!), and they will clearly have to grapple for a long time with the unhealthy relationship that has been modeled for them their whole lives.

One of the most interesting aspects of the documentary is that, while the boys are meant to be the stars of the film, there is this subplot about a parallel liberation of the boys' mother. In a short, telling interview, the mother notes that while the boys had a lot of rules, she had even more. Under the eye of the director, the boys' mother, Susanne, calls her mother for the first time in decades. It is implied that the mother has also not left the apartment in a very long time. It is frustrating to see that the abusive relationship between the parents will continue uninterrupted.

Despite how sad this movie made me, I have to say that the creativity the boys show is astounding. Their homemade props and costumes are amazing. Toward the end of the film, we see the way that the boys could possibly leverage their years of creativity to get real-world jobs. On the other hand, all of their creativity was born out of confinement, and so even the most joyful recreation of a scene from Pulp Fiction can't disguise that their recreation comes from a very isolated place.

One small issue I had with the film was the decision to keep the narrative entirely "inside" the apartment/family. We get no interviews with Susanne's family. There is a story the boys tell about a police raid on their apartment--and we get no further details on that. What do their neighbors think? On one hand I respect the idea of limiting the point of view to the family, but this decision leaves certain gaps that I felt were important to understanding the story.

A solid little documentary that is inspiring and tragic all at once.

4

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/The_Beguiled_%282017_film%29.png
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=53877419

The Beguiled - (2017)

I've just watched the trailer for the original adaptation of The Beguiled, released 50 years ago, in 1971, directed by Don Siegel and starring Clint Eastwood with Geraldine Page. Last night I watched the 2017 version, directed by Sofia Coppola, and it was my introduction to this Civil War period drama. I really enjoyed it, but can understand why people who love the original wouldn't as much - even if it was only because they were already familiar with the story. There is so much recycling done in this modern age of movies that I assume it happens quite a bit.

There are strong performances, the film looks great and I was captivated. So I recommend it to anyone who doesn't already know what happens. For those who do, there are some differences - so it's not a complete waste of your time if you're curious.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/56/Frantz_2016.jpg
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51417747

Frantz - (2016) - France/Germany

I don't know if I've said this about any film before, but Frantz feels 'soft' and warm. I don't know if that makes sense to anyone or not. All the characters keep a tight check on their emotions, despite the story being quite an emotional one - but that feels more a part of the times represented than anything else. You feel the emotions underneath. A German war widow and her in-laws are visited by a stranger, Adrien (Pierre Niney,) a Frenchman who says he was a close friend of Frantz, the deceased German soldier in question. Xenophobia, loss, forgiveness and love are all explored - in a slow, lyrical way.

This black & white film occasionally lights up into colour - but only when there's a sense of happiness and contentedness. I'm not a film scholar or anything so I'll refrain from declaring that unnecessary or pretentious. For me, black & white works a lot of the times, but not every time it is used. The Elephant Man, Cold War and The White Ribbon are films where I've thought it really does work well.

Overall, I felt Frantz to be easy to watch, comforting and relaxing.

7/10

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmamasgeeky.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F02%2Fwillys-wonderland.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Willy's Wonderland, 2021

A seemingly mute drifter (Nicholas Cage) ends up with four busted tires in a small town in the middle of nowhere. A local businessman offers to let him work off the cost of the repairs if he will spend the night cleaning an abandoned Chuck E Cheese like family restaurant. It soon becomes apparent that the restaurant has bigger problems than graffiti in the bathrooms, and a gang of local teenagers and the town's sheriff (Beth Grant) have their own ideas about how to deal with the strange happenings.

So look.

Look.

Seriously.

There were about 20 minutes of this movie that was just Nicholas Cage silently doing a really satisfying job of deep cleaning, alternating with pulling the spines out of evil animatronics that was just *chef's kiss* perfection. I am 100% serious.

You know how people will say "I would watch so-and-so read the phone book!"? Well, apparently I would watch Nicholas Cage meticulously clean the edges of a pinball machine with a toothbrush for HOURS.

Unfortunately, the film doesn't seem to realize just how brilliantly it has created a new genre (clean with me/horror), and so it throws a group of stereotypical teenagers into the restaurant with the drifter so that they can get naked and be stupid and get eaten by a bunch of evil puppets. The quirky charm of the first third (which is mostly like . . . what is even happening right now?) dissolves as these cookie-cutter victims squabble and have sex in a ball pit or whatever, and the rhythm of the film reverts to something much more predictable.

The performances are . . . fine. I have to imagine that the total lack of dialogue was a big selling point for Cage. I'm not sure what his character's deal is--the film seems to gesture at some sort of disability (intentional or not, the selective mutism and strict adherence to a schedule and only wanting to drink a specific drink all points in one direction), but that element is not well developed. Beth Grant gives the sheriff a bit of heft, and adds some much needed frisson to the interpersonal interactions. Emily Tosta is alright as the main teen (and sheriff's adopted daughter), Liv.

The film also spends a lot of time on backstory, which just isn't necessary. Do we really care why the singing turtle wants to eat everyone's face? Plus, the more the film explains, the less it makes sense. (For example, we are supposed to believe that this town is "the size of a stamp", and yet it was also supposed to have had enough people to support a ton of businesses, including the family restaurant?).

Despite what it is, I had fun watching this movie on a Friday night. It really is what it is. If the idea of someone doing a great job cleaning a dining room and neatly stacking chairs doesn't thrill you, subtract like a star and a half from my rating.

3

[StuSmallz]

Nice write-up! I reviewed this film back at Corrie and it's one of my favorite films of all time, period. Glad you also love it! Here's my review for it:

https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5879977/?ref_=ur_urvOh yeah, I remember reading your review of it back in the day on the Corrie. Anyway, while I wouldn't quite say that I "love" it yet (as the only Peckinpah I'd currently say that for would be Bring Me The Head (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/bring-me-the-head-of-alfredo-garcia/)), it's definitely grown on me since my first couple of viewings, and it is a very good movie on the whole nonetheless.I feel like we've talked about this before but have you read Easy Riders, Raging Bulls?
Also, what do you mean when you say "it's certainly a better choice from '69 than Easy Rider was"?I haven't read that one yet (though I still want to), but I did listen to part of the audiobook version, as well as watched all of the movie version:

https://youtu.be/xy54nQj8B8Q

At any rate, I would say that The Wild Bunch is a better choice from '69 (obligatory "tee-hee") because, while Easy Rider is obviously extremely representative of the more free-willing spirit of its movement, along with reflecting the contemporary social tensions of the late 60's, I would still say that TWB was just as impactful in the way it straddled and influenced the two genres it represented, and most importantly, it's just a better movie IMO, since half of its runtime isn't spent watching two hippies do nothing but just drive cross-country, you know?

[Wyldesyde19]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmamasgeeky.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F02%2Fwillys-wonderland.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Willy's Wonderland, 2021

A seemingly mute drifter (Nicholas Cage) ends up with four busted tires in a small town in the middle of nowhere. A local businessman offers to let him work off the cost of the repairs if he will spend the night cleaning an abandoned Chuck E Cheese like family restaurant. It soon becomes apparent that the restaurant has bigger problems than graffiti in the bathrooms, and a gang of local teenagers and the town's sheriff (Beth Grant) have their own ideas about how to deal with the strange happenings.

So look.

Look.

Seriously.

There were about 20 minutes of this movie that was just Nicholas Cage silently doing a really satisfying job of deep cleaning, alternating with pulling the spines out of evil animatronics that was just *chef's kiss* perfection. I am 100% serious.

You know how people will say "I would watch so-and-so read the phone book!"? Well, apparently I would watch Nicholas Cage meticulously clean the edges of a pinball machine with a toothbrush for HOURS.

Unfortunately, the film doesn't seem to realize just how brilliantly it has created a new genre (clean with me/horror), and so it throws a group of stereotypical teenagers into the restaurant with the drifter so that they can get naked and be stupid and get eaten by a bunch of evil puppets. The quirky charm of the first third (which is mostly like . . . what is even happening right now?) dissolves as these cookie-cutter victims squabble and have sex in a ball pit or whatever, and the rhythm of the film reverts to something much more predictable.

The performances are . . . fine. I have to imagine that the total lack of dialogue was a big selling point for Cage. I'm not sure what his character's deal is--the film seems to gesture at some sort of disability (intentional or not, the selective mutism and strict adherence to a schedule and only wanting to drink a specific drink all points in one direction), but that element is not well developed. Beth Grant gives the sheriff a bit of heft, and adds some much needed frisson to the interpersonal interactions. Emily Tosta is alright as the main teen (and sheriff's adopted daughter), Liv.

The film also spends a lot of time on backstory, which just isn't necessary. Do we really care why the singing turtle wants to eat everyone's face? Plus, the more the film explains, the less it makes sense. (For example, we are supposed to believe that this town is "the size of a stamp", and yet it was also supposed to have had enough people to support a ton of businesses, including the family restaurant?).

Despite what it is, I had fun watching this movie on a Friday night. It really is what it is. If the idea of someone doing a great job cleaning a dining room and neatly stacking chairs doesn't thrill you, subtract like a star and a half from my rating.

3
I think I remember this playing at Warehouse Cinema in Frederick and thought :
“Wait....what?”

I ultimately skipped it, and figured I’d wait to rent in from the local rental but I just can’t bring myself to do it.

Reading your review.....*sigh*. I may just break down and do it.
I mean....Nic Cage vs angry muppets (possessed? Or is this some sort of Chopping Mall deal where they have an electrical short and go haywire?)

I mean.....I’ll only get answers if I watch this....and that may be the only real reason I watch it.

That and to see the dead serious line delivered from the trailer.

“He’s not locked in there’s with them....they’re locked in there with him!!”

[mark f]

Revolution Rent (Victor P. Alvarez & Andres Senor, 2019) 3 6.5/10
Security (Peter Chelsom, 2021) 2 5/10
Power of the Press (Lew Landers, 1943) 2.5 5.5/10
Ali & the Queens (Lucky Kuswandi, 2021) 2.5 6/10
https://goggler.my/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ali_4-1024x576.jpg
Indonesian teenager Iqbaal Dhiafakhri Ramadhan comes to NYC to track down his mother who came years before, but he finds other ways to become part of a family.
Gully (Nabil Elderkin, 2019) 2 5/10
Vice Versa (Peter Ustinov, 1948) 2.5+ 6/10
The Outer Gate (Ray Cannon, 1937) 2 5/10
Mogul Mowgli (Bassam Tariq, 2020) 2.5 6/10
https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&url=2dSME5_0XIMw0fv00
British rapper Riz Ahmed is about to start a world tour but travels to Pakistan first where he learns he has an autoimmune disease which threatens his life.
Escapade (Philip Leacock, 1955) 2.5+ 6/10
Frankenstein 1970 (Howard W. Koch, 1958) 1.5 4/10
I Dream of Jeanie (Allan Dwan, 1952) 2.5 6/10 tons of blackface
Two of Us (Filippo Meneghetti, 2019) 3 6.5/10
https://movies-b26f.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Screen-Shot-2020-12-27-at-8.11.28-PM-770x470.png
Lesbian soulmates Martine Chevallier and Barbara Sukowa have been keeping their love hidden from the former's children and then she has a stroke. Ominous cat-and-mouse game plays out as more of a thriller than a love story.
Fatherhood (Paul Weitz, 2021) 2.5 6/10
The Black Scorpion (Edward Lustig, 1957) 2 5/10
Kid Nightingale (George Amy, 1939) 2.5 5.5/10
Silver Skates (Mikhail Lokshin, 2020) 3 6.5/10
https://64.media.tumblr.com/17baf090fc9e0903ae6d7a6676adbde5/9be79e36ff884703-2b/s500x750/0fc146c9f7ca32db1984fe0c5681393009fcddb1.gifv
An ice-skating pickpocket has charmed a noblewoman to go out on a date, but then he runs into his boss. Russian semi-epic often seems like a Hollywood production.
Akilla's Escape (Charles Officer, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Open Secret (John Reinhardt, 1948) 2 5/10
Carefree (Mark Sandrich, 1938) 3 6.5/10
Sin (Andrey Konchalovskiy, 2019) 2.5 6/10
https://rogermooresmovienation.files.wordpress.com/2021/05/sin1.jpg?w=640
Michelangelo (Alberto Testone) lives a lonely life for the most part, but as long as he can sculpt marble he may just survive.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmamasgeeky.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F02%2Fwillys-wonderland.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Willy's Wonderland, 2021

Does this have anything to do with Mandy (2018) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6998518/)?

[xSookieStackhouse]

5 rewatched
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTI1MDk4MzA2OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMjQ3NDc3._V1_.jpg
4.5
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/BPJ78Y/catherine-zeta-jones-richard-gere-renee-zellweger-poster-chicago-2002-BPJ78Y.jpg

[Hey Fredrick]

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.AI8Ku35vEa6WO1woVWpHrwAAAA&pid=Api&P=0&w=300&h=300
Solid. 4

https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Video123/v4/b6/cd/a4/b6cda445-584e-3147-101d-6437df100c9b/IFCENT_SF50334-en.lsr/268x0w.jpg
Not bad. Has a little nastiness to it. Great acting and looks fantastic. 4

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.2vfps0y2JTvkK45K0SsN_gAAAA&pid=Api&P=0&w=300&h=300
Pretty good if you can ignore the fact that it's a sequel to arguably one of the greatest movies of all time. 3.5

https://bestsimilar.com/img/movie/thumb/6e/37425.jpg
Outstanding! Can't believe I hadn't seen this one yet. Can see watching this along with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood as a double bill some night. 4

[ScarletLion]

'Censor' (2021)

Dir.: Prano Bailey-Bond

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNzNlZjUwMjItNDc3Ny00NWFhLWEwZDItMTNjMThhZGFiNjYyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTEyMjM2NDc2._V1_.jpg

About halfway through Censor, the viewer realises what we are seeing isn't really what we started out seeing. The premise of the film really is quite good, but the predictable nature of it means that it really has to deliver a finale that makes it stand out. And it doesn't.

Also (and this may be incredibly harsh), the film-makers played up to the fact that we are watching a low budget 1980s horror film with low production values by making the production values feel very low. That is the entire point of the film. But it still doesn't remove the fact that despite some lovely lighting and a good central performance, it could have been a little more polished. One death scene in particular just didn't click at all.

There are however some lovely aspect ratio changes / resolution changes and a thumping score that probably deserve to be dissected further on a second watch.

3

[Wooley]

I haven't read that one yet (though I still want to), but I did listen to part of the audiobook version, as well as watched all of the movie version:

https://youtu.be/xy54nQj8B8Q

At any rate, I would say that The Wild Bunch is a better choice from '69 (obligatory "tee-hee") because, while Easy Rider is obviously extremely representative of the more free-willing spirit of its movement, along with reflecting the contemporary social tensions of the late 60's, I would still say that TWB was just as impactful in the way it straddled and influenced the two genres it represented, and most importantly, it's just a better movie IMO, since half of its runtime isn't spent watching two hippies do nothing but just drive cross-country, you know?

Heh. I love Easy Rider.

[hell_storm2004]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYzQxMjVkZjEtMDQxYy00MGIwLWE1NjYtYzZkZmU1NTFlZGFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjY1MTg4Mzc@._V1_.jpg


Conjuring 3: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021) - 5.5/10. Its decent. A little different from the other two. This felt more like a murder investigation than haunting. Didn't even realize one of these was being made. Its a decent watch. For the first time, I can say, Vera Farmiga was not looking hot in a movie. She looked like an aunt! :( Definitely a disappointment there!


With the Euros on and work pressure, I am watching a lot of repeat movies these days. Dont have time for new movies! :rolleyes:

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/V5Kyy3r.jpg?1

I was a big fan of this movie when I was about 17 years old, right at the end of the 1980s. I always thought it was a lot of fun, but I am such a Michael Caine fanboy that I worried I would not particularly enjoy it on a revisit.
But I was wrong.

Caine plays Graham, a middle-aged executive with a privileged, self-absorbed wife, an alcoholic mentor/boss, and a life that's maybe just a bit beyond his means, who is in line for the big promotion he's been waiting his whole career for. It is assumed to be fait accompli, he's begun to accept that he is finally getting his due, his office-mates have already started celebrating, and his wife has, at least in her head, already spent all the money.
But when he is passed over for a younger, yuppie colleague, his dashed dreams, the disrespect from his new boss, and the subtle condescension from his wife are almost more than he can take. So when he gets away with accidentally killing a homeless man, a new way of looking at life and opportunity begins to grow inside of him and we witness the evolution of sociopath. Or was it just faulty wiring in the basement that set him off?
The movie is surprisingly snappy and rides a fine line between dark and glib. You can do that when you have Michael Caine. To say that he carries this film is to miss the point, he is this film. This is not to say that Peter Riegert, Swoozie Kurtz, and even Elizabeth McGovern aren't very good in their roles, au contraire, they're all quite good (particularly Riegert), but they are there to service Caine's central performance. His ability, seen in countless films, to be charming or menacing with equally ease (Dressed To Kill, Sleuth, Deathtrap) is well-utilized here as he is consistently both. Caine takes Graham from hopeful to downtrodden to triumphant to downright sinister over the course of about 100 minutes and every step of the way is as credible as if Caine were simply exhaling. The movie actually does make some edgy choices for a film that feels so light and that's a really nice balancing act as I've mentioned. It's a thriller about a good man becoming a very bad man but it's also slight and kinda fun but also doesn't really pull the punches much either. A neat trick to be sure. Initially I took some exception with director Jan Egleson's heavy use of Dutch angles but I honestly think he pulled this film off nicely, maintaining a tension throughout the second and third acts, forcing the audience to constantly wonder, "Is he gonna get caught?... Oooh, is that how he gets caught?... Oooh!!! Is this how he gets caught?!...", and really landed it exactly where it should have landed, in an odd space between winking Black Comedy and winking-but-sinister Thriller.
Sayeth Roger Ebert, on the film's release, "A Shock to the System confounds our expectations and keeps us intrigued, because there's no way to know, not even in the very last moments, exactly which way the plot is going to fall."

[Wooley]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYzQxMjVkZjEtMDQxYy00MGIwLWE1NjYtYzZkZmU1NTFlZGFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjY1MTg4Mzc@._V1_.jpg


Conjuring 3: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021) - 5.5/10.
For the first time, I can say, Vera Farmiga was not looking hot in a movie. She looked like an aunt! :( Definitely a disappointment there!


:D I know what you mean. No matter how much I enjoy Farmiga as an actor, she's so damn hot I am always distracted. Maybe seeing her as "an aunt" will make it easier for me to focus.

[mark f]

I doubt it.

[Takoma11]

I think I remember this playing at Warehouse Cinema in Frederick and thought :
“Wait....what?”

I ultimately skipped it, and figured I’d wait to rent in from the local rental but I just can’t bring myself to do it.

Reading your review.....*sigh*. I may just break down and do it.
I mean....Nic Cage vs angry muppets (possessed? Or is this some sort of Chopping Mall deal where they have an electrical short and go haywire?)

I mean.....I’ll only get answers if I watch this....and that may be the only real reason I watch it.

That and to see the dead serious line delivered from the trailer.

“He’s not locked in there’s with them....they’re locked in there with him!!”

I watched it on Hulu (for "free"). Again, I just needed something brainless and a little weird and this fit the bill okay. Set your bar low and enjoy!

Does this have anything to do with Mandy (2018) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6998518/)?

Oh my gosh I wish.

There is actually a part where he uses duct tape on some injuries and I was like "MANDY REFERENCE!!!."

[SpelingError]

Heh. I love Easy Rider.

I think it's good, but it's the kind of film where I prefer to watch specific scenes (some of Jack Nicholson's scenes, the acid trip, the ending) rather than whole the whole film again.

[Fabulous]

Life Is Sweet (1990)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/oOhTBPEzabcSg7HvGLkydIYO1ey.jpg

[Wooley]

I think it's good, but it's the kind of film where I prefer to watch specific scenes (some of Jack Nicholson's scenes, the acid trip, the ending) rather than whole the whole film again.

I came home one night a few years ago, admittedly stoned, and flipped on TCM as I am wont to do. Some movie was starting that I recognized but knew I hadn't seen in many years and it just gripped me right from the start. I quickly realized it was Easy Rider but it was the movie itself, not the memory of it or reputation or anything, that sucked me in, and I ended up watching the whole thing despite how late it was.
I actually wrote a top-notch write-up on it right then but it was lost to the sinking of the Corri.
Anyway, I was really impressed with it and the sort of series of vignettes that make up the road-trip of these two icons of American Freedom oblivious, like the audience, to the fate that awaits them.
I just love it.

PS- While the campfire scene probably remains my favorite part of the film, I actually really liked the whole commune section of the film quite a bit as well.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMzU5YWYzZGMtNTE2My00NDE0LTgxNWYtZDYzYjI2YzM3OWJlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTkxNjUyNQ@@._V1_.jpg


3.5

[Thief]

LIAR LIAR
(1997, Shadyac)
A film with a title that starts with the letters K or L • A film with a repeated word in its title • A film about fathers

https://d2e111jq13me73.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/styles/review_gallery_thumbnail_large/public/screenshots/csm-movie/liar-2.jpg


Max: "My dad, he's a liar."
Teacher: "A liar? I'm sure you don't mean a liar."
Max: "Well, he wears a suit and goes to court and talks to the judge."
Teacher: "Oh I see. You mean he's a lawyer."
Max: *shrugs*



The film follows Fletcher Reede (Jim Carrey), a manipulative and conniving lawyer (and Max's dad) that tends to put his career and personal interests ahead, usually at the expense of his son. But things get complicated for him when, after missing his birthday, Max wishes that his father could not tell a lie for one day.

I've seen Liar Liar dozens of times, from theater back in 1997 to last night, and it never fails to make me laugh. Smacked down in the middle of Carrey's previous crazy comedies (Ace Ventura, Dumb and Dumber) and his more serious dramatic attempts (The Truman Show, Man on the Moon, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), this one manages to find a perfect balance between his physical comedy and the earnest family drama at its core, and he's pitch perfect in both.

Grade: 4


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2214294#post2214294)

[Marco]

The Unholy (2021)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/The_Unholy_2021_Film_Poster.png
Didn't expect much and that's what I got. Hackneyed writing that didn't do justice to the premise or the actors.
1.5

[matt72582]

Roma - 6/10
Could have been good. Seemed a bit like a fashion show, and watching two mutes eating dinner, since most of the dialogue is worthless... I did like the busty women, especially the topless ones.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Roma_moviep.jpg

[hell_storm2004]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSGivNt3hGCRkTxb8mO80SgspthJE3jDM9sBQ&usqp=CAU


Urban Legend (1998) - 4/10. Not that enjoyable. Kinda lame revenge plot. Clichéd to the max and jump scares galore. Probably a product of the times. But definitely a very weak entry in the genre when compared to Scream or I Know What You Did Last Summer.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BODhjNDJiMzMtMzlmMS00MDQ2LWE4Y2MtNjE4OWVhOWI4Zjc1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjE5MjUyOTM@._V1_.jpg


2.5

[Fabulous]

The Young Savages (1961)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/bm1KQsK3Ofu9ibTP87g4EaKj8zq.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.critikat.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F09%2Farton2414.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Macao, 1952

Meeting aboard a ship headed for Macao, an ex-Army man on the run from an unknown past, Nick (Robert Mitchum) and singer/hustler Julie (Jane Russell) get off to a rocky start when she lifts his wallet. Landing in Macao, Julie is hired as a singer by a casino operator named Vincent (Brad Dexter), an American who is wanted for murder back in the States. Convinced that Nick is secretly a detective sent to abduct him back to the US, the three end up in a dangerous triangle, as both men set their romantic sights on Julie.

My first impression of this film was, wow, these characters suck. Nick rescues Julie from a sexual assault aboard the boat, only to then to crowd her into "paying him back" with a kiss. What a gem! Then moments later, Julie changes her stockings, just throwing the old ones into the river. So, yeah, not a great impression of either of them.

But as the film goes on, the simple-but-effective thriller elements, combined with Mitchum and Russell's natural charms kick into gear and it's a pretty breezy ride from there on out.

While I didn't 100% buy the romantic chemistry between the characters, I did buy the dynamic between them that these are two people who have had rough times and thus can empathize with each other. They are well matched in exuding both an easy charm and a sharp wit, which gives their interactions and banter a nice rhythm.

It was also nice seeing some (but not all, unfortunately) of the Chinese characters played by actual Asian actors. There is even a nod toward the treatment of the citizen of Macao when an American gives a Chinese barber instructions in obnoxious "Chinese speak" (concluding with "chop chop"--oof!), and she retorts in perfect English, "So who do you like this year, the Giants or the Dodgers?" and then laughs at his startled response. It's not necessarily a wholly progressive portrayal of Asian characters, but frankly I was expecting to cringe the whole way through and it was nice to not be confronted with lazy, old-school racism every five minutes.

The plot itself is a bit slight. There wasn't too much that surprised me, and both the thriller aspect and the romantic aspect felt kind of underdeveloped. The film moves along at a good enough pace that you don't really feel the film drag. But it felt like there was just something missing to elevate it into a more memorable story.

An easy way to spend 90 minutes, and sure to please anyone who is a fan of Mitchum or Russell.

3.5

[StuSmallz]

Heh. I love Easy Rider.Well, I respect it, but it's definitely more of an interesting movie than it is a truly great/compelling one for me. At any rate, does this mean you're not a fan of me going with The Wild Bunch for my New Hollywood pick from '69?

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.imgur.com/V5Kyy3r.jpg?1

I was a big fan of this movie when I was about 17 years old, right at the end of the 1980s. I always thought it was a lot of fun, but I am such a Michael Caine fanboy that I worried I would not particularly enjoy it on a revisit.
But I was wrong.

Caine plays Graham, a middle-aged executive with a privileged, self-absorbed wife, an alcoholic mentor/boss, and a life that's maybe just a bit beyond his means, who is in line for the big promotion he's been waiting his whole career for. It is assumed to be fait accompli, he's begun to accept that he is finally getting his due, his office-mates have already started celebrating, and his wife has, at least in her head, already spent all the money.
But when he is passed over for a younger, yuppie colleague, his dashed dreams, the disrespect from his new boss, and the subtle condescension from his wife are almost more than he can take. So when he gets away with accidentally killing a homeless man, a new way of looking at life and opportunity begins to grow inside of him and we witness the evolution of sociopath. Or was it just faulty wiring in the basement that set him off?
The movie is surprisingly snappy and rides a fine line between dark and glib. You can do that when you have Michael Caine. To say that he carries this film is to miss the point, he is this film. This is not to say that Peter Riegert, Swoozie Kurtz, and even Elizabeth McGovern aren't very good in their roles, au contraire, they're all quite good (particularly Riegert), but they are there to service Caine's central performance. His ability, seen in countless films, to be charming or menacing with equally ease (Dressed To Kill, Sleuth, Deathtrap) is well-utilized here as he is consistently both. Caine takes Graham from hopeful to downtrodden to triumphant to downright sinister over the course of about 100 minutes and every step of the way is as credible as if Caine were simply exhaling. The movie actually does make some edgy choices for a film that feels so light and that's a really nice balancing act as I've mentioned. It's a thriller about a good man becoming a very bad man but it's also slight and kinda fun but also doesn't really pull the punches much either. A neat trick to be sure. Initially I took some exception with director Jan Egleson's heavy use of Dutch angles but I honestly think he pulled this film off nicely, maintaining a tension throughout the second and third acts, forcing the audience to constantly wonder, "Is he gonna get caught?... Oooh, is that how he gets caught?... Oooh!!! Is this how he gets caught?!...", and really landed it exactly where it should have landed, in an odd space between winking Black Comedy and winking-but-sinister Thriller.
Sayeth Roger Ebert, on the film's release, "A Shock to the System confounds our expectations and keeps us intrigued, because there's no way to know, not even in the very last moments, exactly which way the plot is going to fall."

I'm sold!!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0a/The_Chaperone_film_poster.jpg
By Studio and or Graphic Artist - Can be obtained from the film's distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59887909

The Chaperone - (2018)

The last of 16 films I borrowed from the library, I don't know what made me include The Chaperone. Elizabeth McGovern looks a bit like a man on the film poster. Maybe I thought this was some kind of mix of The Danish Girl and Some Like it Hot.

Anyway, it's something of a dull affair. I was grateful to learn a bit about Louise Brooks, and for Pandora's Box and Diary of a Lost Girl to be added to my watchlist. The film itself is about Brooks' voyage to New York and stardom, all under the strict eye of chaperone Norma (McGovern) who happens to be a lot more innocent than the person she's chaperoning. Not boring, but not particularly memorable either.

4/10

[pahaK]

Censor (2021)
2.5
An OK retro-horror that overplays the nostalgia of the "good" old video nasty days. It tries to be Ready Player One for the sleazy B-horror fans, and sort of fails for the same reasons. I kept hoping that there would be something more to the story, but there really wasn't a proper pay-off. Not a fan of the aspect ratio tomfoolery either. Still decent and I kinda liked the visual style (minus the changing aspect ratios).

[ScarletLion]

'Infernal Affairs' (2002)

https://a.ltrbxd.com/resized/film-poster/4/5/9/0/8/45908-infernal-affairs-0-230-0-345-crop.jpg?k=4b80e0c0a8

Tense, well acted, no needless action sequences. Way better than Scorsese's remake. - mainly because there is much more emotion in the final act, as opposed to a silly sequence of a rat.

4

[xSookieStackhouse]

4.5
https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/m3n1dQw8PKEBIiHxV7b7qXdYJTJ.jpg

[Wooley]

Well, I respect it, but it's definitely more of an interesting movie than it is a truly great/compelling one for me. At any rate, does this mean you're not a fan of me going with The Wild Bunch for my New Hollywood pick from '69?

It would be impossible for me not to choose ER, but it's not like tWB isn't a great film and a good example for the reasons you cite, so go in peace.

[John W Constantine]

T-Men (1947)

3.5

[Hey Fredrick]

https://thereviewmonk.com/assets/media/movies/posters/w300/feed8f9864270ace0d299d740b46cc88.jpg
Was never a fan of the original, thought it was kind of slow, which is why seeing this wasn't much of a priority but damn this was good! 4.5

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/EAUAAOSwr4RfhJhD/s-l400.jpg
Good story about a group of SoCal skateboarders who took skateboarding in new directions. The skateboarding scenes aren't overly impressive since it was still kind of new, kind of like watching a car race between a couple model T's sputtering along at 20mph, but everything else is pretty interesting. Really well acted from the mostly young cast 3.5

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VKnlNvwbGMM/S6OJ-p43FbI/AAAAAAAAA3k/6CnKJFm9sOA/w1200-h630-p-k-nu/JJ.jpg
Thought this one about a dude wanting to live off the land in the mountains of Colorado (?) lost some steam after about an hour. Felt like once I reached this point in the movie https://media1.tenor.com/images/e88f362144630ba1e56f4ac2fdfb186e/tenor.gif?itemid=6191609 I saw all I needed to see. Wasn't bad and loved the locations it just didn't keep me tuned in.3

[Captain Terror]

78805

KANSAS CITY BOMBER (1972)

Not much of a plot here, just a slice of the roller derby life with all of the expected elements. Teammates are resentful of the beautiful new girl (Raquel Welch), team owner (Kevin McCarthy) puts the moves on her, Welch deals with life on the road and missing her kids, etc. (Her daughter is played by the 10-year-old Jodie Foster who just exudes personality in her 5 minutes of screen time.) This being 1972, there's a certain grittiness involved and it does not qualify as a feel-good story, but it never descends into misery porn either. It would probably have been more memorable if they'd gone further in either direction. The previous year's Derby documentary is more my speed, but I was never bored and if you're just here for the roller derby action this one definitely delivers on that front as well.

I didn't know what to expect from Welch, as the only role I've seen her play is a sexy Cro-Magnon with no dialogue, but I'm happy to say she managed to be pretty convincing as a tough broad. This led me to speculate that a Raquel Welch Wonder Woman could have been pretty cool. Add that to my list of "what-if" movies that will never happen.

3.5

[Wooley]

https://thereviewmonk.com/assets/media/movies/posters/w300/feed8f9864270ace0d299d740b46cc88.jpg
Was never a fan of the original, thought it was kind of slow, which is why seeing this wasn't much of a priority but damn this was good! 4.5

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/EAUAAOSwr4RfhJhD/s-l400.jpg
Good story about a group of SoCal skateboarders who took skateboarding in new directions. The skateboarding scenes aren't overly impressive since it was still kind of new, kind of like watching a car race between a couple model T's sputtering along at 20mph, but everything else is pretty interesting. Really well acted from the mostly young cast 3.5

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VKnlNvwbGMM/S6OJ-p43FbI/AAAAAAAAA3k/6CnKJFm9sOA/w1200-h630-p-k-nu/JJ.jpg
Thought this one about a dude wanting to live off the land in the mountains of Colorado (?) lost some steam after about an hour. Felt like once I reached this point in the movie https://media1.tenor.com/images/e88f362144630ba1e56f4ac2fdfb186e/tenor.gif?itemid=6191609 I saw all I needed to see. Wasn't bad and loved the locations it just didn't keep me tuned in.3

I felt the opposite about the Blade Runners, I thought the first one was a straight-up masterpiece and one of the most interesting films I've ever seen while I thought the second was a pointless, if beautiful slog with a very weak third act.
I loved The Lords Of Dogtown and would watch it any time. I thought the skating was great because they really conveyed how innovative and cutting-edge those kids were at the time.
I think I mostly feel like you did about Jeremiah Johnson. There is something very positive I ended up taking away from it but I remember it feeling like it stalled a bit for a while there.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Flovehorror.co.uk%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F05%2Fc4-1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Caveat, 2020

Isaac (Jonathan French) is recovering from a serious accident, which comes along with some significant memory loss. An old friend, Barret (Ben Caplan)--or at least a man claiming to be an old friend--hires Isaac to act as a caretaker for his mentally ill niece, Olga (Leila Sykes), who has been living alone on an island since the death of her father and disappearance of her mother. But things are clearly not right in the house . . .

This is a movie that has a lot of wait, what?!?! elements, and the first fifteen minutes are especially strained by some incredibly improbable elements. When they arrive at the house, Barret announces that, oh yeah, Olga is afraid of being assaulted, so Isaac will have to wear what is essentially a metal vest on a chain that keeps him from reaching Olga's room. Isaac's reaction (and, the reaction that anyone would have) is that he refuses to wear it. Right. But the movie really needs him to put it on. So . . . he eventually just agrees? The movie vaguely tries to hand-wave the whole set up (why would any person agree to be chained up in a remote house, without access to a phone, with a mentally ill person who thinks you are a rapist/murderer?), but it's not very convincing.

Fortunately, there is a decent amount of spooky imagery and atmospheric development at hand. The film makes effective use of long takes and hallways that seem to stretch a long way from the camera. When Isaac discovers a secret passageway with a small hole that leads to Olga's room, it introduces the disturbing visual of a hand reaching through a wall. The film goes to the same handful of tricks many times, but for me it worked for the most part. The film alternates slow-burn style moments with a few jump scares.

Storywise, the movie tries to do way too much. The premise established in the first ten minutes is already outlandish, and as the film tries to layer in more connection and complications, it all gets a bit convoluted. The handful of glimpses of Olga's life with her parents are effectively disturbing, but it doesn't all tie in together all that well.

I always have mixed feelings about writers who just create their own version of mental illness and basically have the mentally ill person do whatever they want them to do for plot purposes. Olga is given a handful of movie-trope behaviors (random nosebleeds, catatonic states, paranoia), and the movie unevenly lurches between her acting almost entirely lucid and then the next moment behaving violently or erratically. The best moments of the film are when Isaac and Olga have real, honest conversations with each other, but those moments are few and far between.

If you're a horror fan, this one is worth a peek.

3.5

[hell_storm2004]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMDE1Yjk3ZjctZWViNC00MTIyLWFmYjQtNThhMWNjZGJkMjhiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODE5NzE3OTE@._V1_.jpg




U-Turn (2016) - 5.5/10. A decent effort. The ending is a bit soft. But the movie holds the tension till the last 20 mins. Good attempt at a somewhat spooky mystery.

[Iroquois]

F9 - 3

da movies

[Fabulous]

Dogfight (1991)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/hPYr9jAw0dAOz6KAgtPAEEuZLmt.jpg

[hell_storm2004]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRKlEB_ABhD8-kVNPNCbZl9I3rrmOV4nNC9-g&usqp=CAU


The Call (2013) - 6/10. Fairly decent one time watch. Nothing memorable. Halle Berry, her career was in the doldrums then, it hasn't changed much since!

[Weasel]

Godzilla Vs. Kong

78809

I think an actual monkey with a typewriter could write a script that makes more sense than this, but that doesn't matter too much for this type of movie. To make a movie like this feel like more than just mindless spectacle you need to just have some emotional investment in the titular fight, and there are bits that try to do that, but they get lost in pointless subplots and awful comedy.

Having no investment in anything happening kills any movie, even one as dumb as this, but there still is some good here. I watched this in a home theater with good projection and a great sound system, and it really did elevate the experience. The sound design and visuals are great for the most part, and there was never a point when I was bored, which I was afraid of. The only thing I'd complain about visually is the actual monsters, but that's less of the movies fault and more just a result of the technology not being there yet.

If you can see this in a theater go for it, but if not I'd recommend watching something else.

2

[Jinnistan]

I didn't know what to expect from Welch, as the only role I've seen her play is a sexy Cro-Magnon with no dialogue, but I'm happy to say she managed to be pretty convincing as a tough broad.
Check out Myra Breckinridge ;)


This led me to speculate that a Raquel Welch Wonder Woman could have been pretty cool.
:yup:


https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8f/2f/1f/8f2f1fedc9fd8df08febab4733296852.gif

[Marco]

Night Falls on Manhattan (1996)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/25/Night_falls_on_manhattan_poster.jpg
Tight, dramatic thriller from Lumet. Liked all the performances and the story.

3.5

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmJjODZlYjItZTE2Zi00YjI5LThmNTAtNzQ0OGMyNjAzOTIzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTAyMjQ3NzQ1._V1_UY1200_CR90,0,6 30,1200_AL_.jpg


5

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://tibs2.threeifbyspace.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Star-Wars-The-Rise-of-Skywalker-international-poster-800x400.jpg

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker - Finally pulled the trigger on this and it went about how I expected. Which was a lot like The Last Jedi in terms of sheer disappointment. Only this time J.J. Abrams was walking back a ton of what Rian Johnson had tried to set up in that one. The result of all this fan service revisionism is not so much a mess of a movie as it is just bleh. All the salient points people have already made about what was wrong with this are right there front and center. The cursory, abridged way that plot points are addressed and disposed of. Almost as if Abrams and Terrio and the other writers had made a list of fan complaints and were checking them off one by one in desultory fashion. The offhand and basically callous way that Kelly Marie Tran was written out of the movie. Rey, Kylo Ren and Finn, who started out so promising in SW: TFA but ended up looking just ... lost. And nothing new added to Poe Cameron who ultimately turned out be a boring cipher. Plus those effing space ponies showing up again.

After The Force Awakens I figured this would be a Star Wars trilogy for a new generation. Which was perfectly fine. But I can't fathom anyone being happy with this conclusion. Maybe some people figure that this is the best fans can hope for. That as long as one is tethered to the moldering corpse of the Skywalker saga there will be no satisfying ending. While still others hold out hope that a good final trilogy is out there. I think I'm in the former group. Just move on, focus all the positive vibes on the middle trilogy (except for those freakin' Ewoks) and concentrate on expanding the SW universe. Because Rogue One, The Mandalorian and the film below at least show some promise.

rating_2


https://lumiere-a.akamaihd.net/v1/images/solo_tall-ratios_6eef8fff.jpeg?region=0%2C0%2C1536%2C864&width=1200

Solo: A Star Wars Story - Even though this had characters from the original trilogy it was still different enough that it felt somewhat fresh and original. At least compared to episodes VIII & IX. Which, granted, isn't saying much. But at this point any sort of distance is a positive. I don't know how many people were clamoring for a Han Solo origin story but, all things considered and given the project's behind the scenes turmoil, it could have turned out worse.

I don't think Alden Ehrenreich came close to capturing Ford's Solo but there were effective set pieces and moments of derring do. The pieces were in place all it needed was a convincing protagonist. And even though Ehrenreich didn't exactly shine I don't believe he detracted from the proceedings either. The rest of the cast did fine with Donald Glover, Thandie Newton and Paul Bettany turning in solid work and even the two people I figured would be the most problematical, Emilia Clarke and Woody Harrelson, acquitting themselves nicely. After watching Clarke in numerous films I've never felt she was able to completely immerse herself in a role. And even though I still saw cracks in the facade she, like Ehrenreich, was perfectly adequate. As for Harrelson, he's a fine enough actor but he's just so ubiquitous a talent that I thought he would end up being more a distraction than a strength. I was obviously wrong.

I liked the locales and one of the smartest and most pivotal decisions the filmmakers made was hiring Lawrence and Jonathan Kasdan to write the screenplay. No J.J. Abrams or, god forbid, Damon Lindelof. Ron Howard taking over for Lord and Miller could well have been a recipe for disaster and even though it will forever inspire "what if" speculation I still think they turned out a respectable product.

rating_4

[SnotBueller]

My Cousin Vinny

A good comedy twist on the trial movies. The characters are enjoyable and realistic. I specifically love the contrast of the defendants being from new york, and the judge, prosecutor, and jury being from Alabama, the seeting of the movie. I will say the movie felt a little long though, at time slow, and the ending obviously holds no twists. I reccomend giving the movie a watch if you're looking for a lighthearted kickback kind of movie.
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[xSookieStackhouse]

4.5 love eddie murphy movies :)
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmI1ZGNiYTUtOTllNi00YWU5LThmNmItODM2N2I4OTEyYmQzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmJjODZlYjItZTE2Zi00YjI5LThmNTAtNzQ0OGMyNjAzOTIzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTAyMjQ3NzQ1._V1_UY1200_CR90,0,6 30,1200_AL_.jpg


5

Too lazy to dig up my review, but I also thought this was great.

[xSookieStackhouse]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmJjODZlYjItZTE2Zi00YjI5LThmNTAtNzQ0OGMyNjAzOTIzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTAyMjQ3NzQ1._V1_UY1200_CR90,0,6 30,1200_AL_.jpg


5

loved her music

[Fabulous]

Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/rAoCuTbIs61azLkI8GaB8iXnUHM.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbrianorndorf.typepad.com%2F.a%2F6a00e54ee7b6428833026bde935809200c-600wi&f=1&nofb=1

Alone, 2020

Jessica (Jules Willcox) is a recently widowed woman who has packed up her life to move away from the city. As she travels through the Northwest, she runs into the same man (Marc Menchaca) over and over again. Her sense that he is up to no good is proven correct, and a game of cat-and-mouse ensues between the two of them in the isolated forest.

There is something really frustrating about movies where the main character(s) repeatedly makes poor choices, and something kind of satisfying and terrifying about movies where the main character(s) make the right choices but things so sideways despite that. While ultimately the film does rely on the main character making some really questionable decisions (namely not telling anyone about the creepy guy who is clearly following and harassing her), I did especially enjoy her evasions of him in the first third of the film. For example, when he pretends his car is broken down she's just like "Sorry! I'll tell a gas station!" and drives right by him. She only ever puts her window down a crack, and when he seems to be following her for a third time, she immediately calls 911. For me, this was actually the most suspenseful and effective section of the film because you know he's going to get her, but you can identify with her more strongly because she's not making dumb horror movie decisions (for the most part). You can see the whole "At what point do I freak out?" thought process in Jessica's head in the first act and it is very easy to sympathize with her.

The rest of the film follows a fairly predictable--though not unpleasantly so--course of events. He kidnaps her, she escapes. They stalk each other through the woods. There's a particularly nice overhead shot of Jessica half-swimming/half-drowning as she escapes by jumping into a river.

Aside from making a few bad choices that are key to moving the plot forward, Jessica is a pretty decent protagonist. Her choices in the majority of the film make sense, and her frustration as she repeatedly seeks help and is rebuffed evokes a lot of sympathy. The character element of trying to deal with her husband's recent death adds some heft to her attempts to survive.

The villain of the story--credited only as "The Man" is a bit less effective. He's basically your garden-variety movie serial killer. He seems to hate women. He's manipulative (using an arm sling to elicit sympathy a la Bundy) and confident. But ultimately there just isn't much to him. He's easy to hate because he is a rapist and a murderer, and Menchaca sells his cold-bloodedness well enough.

This is a perfectly decent--though not exceptional--entry in the "woman in a fight for survival" horror subgenre.

3

[ThatDarnMKS]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbrianorndorf.typepad.com%2F.a%2F6a00e54ee7b6428833026bde935809200c-600wi&f=1&nofb=1

Alone, 2020

Jessica (Jules Willcox) is a recently widowed woman who has packed up her life to move away from the city. As she travels through the Northwest, she runs into the same man (Marc Menchaca) over and over again. Her sense that he is up to no good is proven correct, and a game of cat-and-mouse ensues between the two of them in the isolated forest.

There is something really frustrating about movies where the main character(s) repeatedly makes poor choices, and something kind of satisfying and terrifying about movies where the main character(s) make the right choices but things so sideways despite that. While ultimately the film does rely on the main character making some really questionable decisions (namely not telling anyone about the creepy guy who is clearly following and harassing her), I did especially enjoy her evasions of him in the first third of the film. For example, when he pretends his car is broken down she's just like "Sorry! I'll tell a gas station!" and drives right by him. She only ever puts her window down a crack, and when he seems to be following her for a third time, she immediately calls 911. For me, this was actually the most suspenseful and effective section of the film because you know he's going to get her, but you can identify with her more strongly because she's not making dumb horror movie decisions (for the most part). You can see the whole "At what point do I freak out?" thought process in Jessica's head in the first act and it is very easy to sympathize with her.

The rest of the film follows a fairly predictable--though not unpleasantly so--course of events. He kidnaps her, she escapes. They stalk each other through the woods. There's a particularly nice overhead shot of Jessica half-swimming/half-drowning as she escapes by jumping into a river.

Aside from making a few bad choices that are key to moving the plot forward, Jessica is a pretty decent protagonist. Her choices in the majority of the film make sense, and her frustration as she repeatedly seeks help and is rebuffed evokes a lot of sympathy. The character element of trying to deal with her husband's recent death adds some heft to her attempts to survive.

The villain of the story--credited only as "The Man" is a bit less effective. He's basically your garden-variety movie serial killer. He seems to hate women. He's manipulative (using an arm sling to elicit sympathy a la Bundy) and confident. But ultimately there just isn't much to him. He's easy to hate because he is a rapist and a murderer, and Menchaca sells his cold-bloodedness well enough.

This is a perfectly decent--though not exceptional--entry in the "woman in a fight for survival" horror subgenre.

3
I enjoyed this one quite a bit. I think what elevates it above its fairly boilerplate script is that it’s directed by one of the all-time great DTV action auteurs: John Hyams (son of Peter Hyams).

He’s made some of the best DTV action flicks, Universal Soldier: Regeneration and Day of Reckoning (the best US movie) and Dragon Eyes. With all of these projects, his ambition and deft hand with action and aesthetics are undeniable.

With Alone, he reaches so much higher than typical low budget woods films and even tries to stylistically evoke big budget man vs. nature flicks like Deliverance and The Revenant. The climactic fight specifically homages they style of the latter.

It makes some of the flimsier contrivances feel less oppressive because they’re in the hands of a filmmaker that knows how to create tension and make the action not only functional but superior to many big Hollywood contemporaries.

[Fabulous]

Bells Are Ringing (1960)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/npEU59tVtHH5IibUnefpnWCPSeH.jpg

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/FFPfzTS9/Gunsof-Navarone.jpghttps://i.postimg.cc/tTcjQn1H/Force-10-From-Navarone-movie.jpg
By Incorporates artwork by Howard Terpning - http://meansheets.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/guns-of-navarone.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25628729 / By POV - Impawards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6141273

The Guns of Navarone (1961) / Force 10 From Navarone (1978) - DVD double feature rewatch

At 158 minutes, The Guns of Navarone always used to drag on a little too long for me. I've seen it enough, and know enough about it now, for me to appreciate the technical difficulties overcome and fine performances from Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn and David Niven. These were the days where anti-war films were a little more scarce, and combat was likened to a boy's adventure story. Although Alistair MacLean's novel and this adaptation is a boy's adventure story, careful heed is payed to how commando operations were played out - which makes things a little more realistic. It's belated sequel however drifts around aimlessly at times - and the characters rely on luck and help from imbedded agents at just the right time.

The cast in Force 10 From Navarone is kind of remarkable. Having a James Bond director in Guy Hamilton seems to have brought along quite a few Bond actors for the ride. Richard Kiel and Barbara Bach were both in The Spy Who Loved Me. Robert Shaw was "Donald 'Red' Grant" in From Russia With Love and I believe Edward Fox would appear in Never Say Never Again. It has a stirring soundtrack, but sometimes borrows from other films, such as The Battle of Britain - another Guy Hamilton film. The movie is shorter, but at nearly two hours some stretches get boring - not from a lack of action, but from a lack of character development and a decent script. Harrison Ford regretted taking part in the venture, saying it was the wrong role for him. Robert Shaw also complained about his lines, telling people he was considering retiring from acting. He was dead not long after.

I could write a book about sequels which came far too late. The second Navarone movie was meant to follow soon after the first, and have Gregory Peck, David Niven and Anthony Quinn reprising their roles. It's tortured development meant that nearly 20 years had gone by before casting could even start, and the three leads were far too old by that time. Inserting Robert Shaw and Edward Fox into the end of the first movie as the Peck/Niven characters feels a little wrong. Just imagine, before The Empire Strikes Back, they'd shown you the end of Star Wars but with Michael J. Fox and Richard Gere getting their medals as Luke and Han respectively. Would have felt weird? yeah. They should have scrubbed it. It didn't do well at the box office and there was no need.

I appreciate The Guns of Navarone a lot more now, and can see why Force 10 is barely remembered. I had a thing for Harrison Ford in the 1980s, and as such had Force 10 From Navarone in my VHS collection. It wasn't a favourite though.

Special Features - The Guns of Navarone has 5 or 6 featurettes that had been filmed during it's making. Even down to the cast members going shopping. It also has a commentary track by poor old J. Lee Thompson. He starts off strong, but as the movie goes on he struggles and at one point I thought he was going to die mid-commentary. He perks up at the end though, and has quite a few useful things to say all-around. Force 10 only has several trailers.

The Guns of Navarone - 8/10
Force 10 From Navarone - 4/10

[Chypmunk]

Won't be able to include this in my monthly roundup as doesn't appear to have a proper entry on TMDb so might as well stick it in here.

Sikisma (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9164964/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_17) - [Stuck]
Arda Murat Akdag, 2015
Drama
DVR - Filmbox Arthouse

From IMDb: A light and humorous exploration of one couple's marital problems.

Primarily a two-hander concerning an assistant referee and his actress wife talking through their issues whilst stuck in the lift of their apartment block. The acting from both is perfectly acceptable and their conversation is generally well enough written, with a few moments of humour dotted here and there and certainly rings true to life in places. Sadly though the piece is not only bookended with two weakly presented peripheral characters, who initially help set the scene, but then opts to also periodically interrupt the central conversation with those same two characters attempting to resolve the couples predicament. The narrative admittedly follows the expected path, with no twists or surprises, but would've still scored higher had it just been a two-hander.

2.5

[Marco]

St Maud (2019)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/50/Saint_Maud_poster.jpg
Got pretty into this, story about a religiously devout nurse to arrives "on a mission" to deliver palliative care to an actress but also introduce her to the "power of God". Naturally she's a bit hatstand and this is seen through various accounts of her past before taking on her latest post. Spooky and grimy, this satisfied.
3.5

[Wooley]

https://i.postimg.cc/FFPfzTS9/Gunsof-Navarone.jpghttps://i.postimg.cc/tTcjQn1H/Force-10-From-Navarone-movie.jpg
By Incorporates artwork by Howard Terpning - http://meansheets.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/guns-of-navarone.jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25628729 / By POV - Impawards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6141273

The Guns of Navarone (1961) / Force 10 From Navarone (1978) - DVD double feature rewatch

At 158 minutes, The Guns of Navarone always used to drag on a little too long for me. I've seen it enough, and know enough about it now, for me to appreciate the technical difficulties overcome and fine performances from Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn and David Niven. These were the days where anti-war films were a little more scarce, and combat was likened to a boy's adventure story. Although Alistair MacLean's novel and this adaptation is a boy's adventure story, careful heed is payed to how commando operations were played out - which makes things a little more realistic. It's belated sequel however drifts around aimlessly at times - and the characters rely on luck and help from imbedded agents at just the right time.

The cast in Force 10 From Navarone is kind of remarkable. Having a James Bond director in Guy Hamilton seems to have brought along quite a few Bond actors for the ride. Richard Kiel and Barbara Bach were both in The Spy Who Loved Me. Robert Shaw was "Donald 'Red' Grant" in From Russia With Love and I believe Edward Fox would appear in Never Say Never Again. It has a stirring soundtrack, but sometimes borrows from other films, such as The Battle of Britain - another Guy Hamilton film. The movie is shorter, but at nearly two hours some stretches get boring - not from a lack of action, but from a lack of character development and a decent script. Harrison Ford regretted taking part in the venture, saying it was the wrong role for him. Robert Shaw also complained about his lines, telling people he was considering retiring from acting. He was dead not long after.

I could write a book about sequels which came far too late. The second Navarone movie was meant to follow soon after the first, and have Gregory Peck, David Niven and Anthony Quinn reprising their roles. It's tortured development meant that nearly 20 years had gone by before casting could even start, and the three leads were far too old by that time. Inserting Robert Shaw and Edward Fox into the end of the first movie as the Peck/Niven characters feels a little wrong. Just imagine, before The Empire Strikes Back, they'd shown you the end of Star Wars but with Michael J. Fox and Richard Gere getting their medals as Luke and Han respectively. Would have felt weird? yeah. They should have scrubbed it. It didn't do well at the box office and there was no need.

I appreciate The Guns of Navarone a lot more now, and can see why Force 10 is barely remembered. I had a thing for Harrison Ford in the 1980s, and as such had Force 10 From Navarone in my VHS collection. It wasn't a favourite though.

Special Features - The Guns of Navarone has 5 or 6 featurettes that had been filmed during it's making. Even down to the cast members going shopping. It also has a commentary track by poor old J. Lee Thompson. He starts off strong, but as the movie goes on he struggles and at one point I thought he was going to die mid-commentary. He perks up at the end though, and has quite a few useful things to say all-around. Force 10 only has several trailers.

The Guns of Navarone - 8/10
Force 10 From Navarone - 4/10

I always struggle with this because I saw Force 10 first and absolutely loved it.
Because I had no baggage from Guns I was able to enjoy the film as the fun romp that it is without comparing it to its far more serious predecessor. Shaw is as charming and full of guile as ever and Fox is actually a favorite of mine from that generation of British actors as well (Day Of The Jackal, A Bridge Too Far). Loved him in this role, and in the context of this film, I kinda liked him more than Niven (even though I am a huge Niven fan and, in the contest of that film, obviously think he's the better man).
This was also the first time I saw Franco Nero and I thought it was a good introduction to him. Hell, liked Carl Weathers in this as much as I did in Rocky, honestly.
Also, it's really a caper-film much more than a war-movie and it's treated that way, almost like Ocean's 11 in WWII. In fact, now that I think about it, it's a helluva lot like Ocean's 11 In WW2. Which is a movie I'd always be happy to watch on a Sunday afternoon.
I see this movie get bashed all the time for not being a good sequel to Guns but honestly it's a fun little movie taken on its own terms and actually probably rates pretty highly up there in my Movies I Love That Hardly Anyone Else Does Anymore (Or Ever Did).

[Rockatansky]

I always struggle with this because I saw Force 10 first and absolutely loved it.
Because I had no baggage from Guns I was able to enjoy the film as the fun romp that it is without comparing it its far more serious predecessor. Shaw is as charming and full of guile as ever and Fox is actually a favorite of mine from that generation of British actors as well (Day Of The Jackal, A Bridge Too Far). Loved him in this role, and in the context of this film, I kinda liked him more than Niven (even though I am a huge Niven fan and, in the contest of that film, obviously think he's the better man).
This was also the first time I saw Franco Nero and I thought it was a good introduction to him. Hell, liked Carl Weathers in this as much as I did in Rocky, honestly.
Also, it's really a caper-film much more than a war-movie and it's treated that way, almost like Ocean's 11 in WWII. In fact, now that I think about it, it's a helluva lot like Ocean's 11 In WW2. Which is a movie I'd always be happy to watch on a Sunday afternoon.
I see this movie get bashed all the time for not being a good sequel to Guns but honestly it's a fun little movie taken on its own terms and actually probably rates pretty highly up there in my Movies I Love That Hardly Anyone Else Does Anymore (Or Ever Did).
I revisited Force 10 recently and had a really good time with it.*But this kind of war movie is basically crack to me.*Get a decent cast together and saddle them with a reasonably interesting mission, and it'll get at least a 7/10 from me.*

[matt72582]

He Ran All The Way - 6/10
Most home invasion movies I've seen have been really good, but this one was just.... generic.



But, Shelley Winters does NOT drown in this one :)


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/He_Ran_All_the_Way_poster.jpg

[matt72582]

Dina - 6/10
A documentary I thought I'd like, but the characters (no fault of their own) got redundant.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Dina_%28film%29.jpg

[Wooley]

I revisited Force 10 recently and had a really good time with it.*But this kind of war movie is basically crack to me.*Get a decent cast together and saddle them with a reasonably interesting mission, and it'll get at least a 7/10 from me.*

I'm with you.

[Takoma11]

I enjoyed this one quite a bit. I think what elevates it above its fairly boilerplate script is that it’s directed by one of the all-time great DTV action auteurs: John Hyams (son of Peter Hyams).

He’s made some of the best DTV action flicks, Universal Soldier: Regeneration and Day of Reckoning (the best US movie) and Dragon Eyes. With all of these projects, his ambition and deft hand with action and aesthetics are undeniable.

With Alone, he reaches so much higher than typical low budget woods films and even tries to stylistically evoke big budget man vs. nature flicks like Deliverance and The Revenant. The climactic fight specifically homages they style of the latter.

It makes some of the flimsier contrivances feel less oppressive because they’re in the hands of a filmmaker that knows how to create tension and make the action not only functional but superior to many big Hollywood contemporaries.

I agree that stylistically it is a cut above (as with the overhead river shot I mentioned).

But the plot elements were just so generic, and I felt that neither the protagonist nor the antagonist had much of a character arc. The element of the husband's suicide is used sort of effectively, but that thread never felt like it wrapped up to me.

[Weasel]

SHIN GODZILLA (シン・ゴジラ)

78853

Starts off incredible. Other Godzilla films are about a force connected to human sin, a visual representation of our actions against one another. This Godzilla, on the other hand, is unknowable, unexplainable, and unavoidable. As the city falters in his wake, all anyone can do is ask "why?". The mad scramble for answers is what makes the beginning of this movie work, and it's so thematically interesting that sustaining that intrigue over a 2 hour long running time is a practical impossibility. When the mystery starts to unravel, the movie starts to become less consistently engaging. There are some riveting scenes later on, but they become few and far between. For a movie that's only two hours long, it ends up feeling a lot longer. This doesn't ruin it, but it means you'll have to wait a bit to get to the greatest moments.

If this was a short film, I think it'd be a masterpiece. Unfortunately, it can't quite sustain it's massive ambition. That aside, this will probably end up being the best Godzilla movie. It's certainly the smartest yet, but coming from Hideaki Anno, that's not much of a surprise.

3.5

[Stirchley]

Dina - 6/10
A documentary I thought I'd like, but the characters (no fault of their own) got redundant.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Dina_%28film%29.jpg

I enjoyed it.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Allow me to be a tad controversial regarding LOTR but I got the 4K set and FINALLY watched the Extended Editions after all this time and…

The theatrical cuts are better.

The extended editions weren’t especially worse but what was added generally hampered the pacing and was superfluous (outside of a couple scenes). Also, the 4K made it apparent that these scenes weren’t mastered wit the same level of care and detail as the theatrical footage (see: Saruman’s final scene).

I’d still recommend them but not for initial viewing.

[xSookieStackhouse]

Hey! 🙂

https://media.tenor.com/images/0cb957c9113333226009c5e4960766e3/tenor.gif

[ThatDarnMKS]

I agree that stylistically it is a cut above (as with the overhead river shot I mentioned).

But the plot elements were just so generic, and I felt that neither the protagonist nor the antagonist had much of a character arc. The element of the husband's suicide is used sort of effectively, but that thread never felt like it wrapped up to me.
Agreed. I think it’s the kind of narrative that lives or dies on the execution due to its shallowness and predictability. I think if it was handed to any number of lesser directors and I would’ve tuned out.

[Allaby]

I watched Nobody (2021). Directed by Ilya Naishuller, the film stars Bob Odenkirk as a family man who after a violent confrontation with a gang of thugs becomes the target of a dangerous drug lord. This was a lot of fun and one of the better action films I have seen in years. Odenkirk is fantastic and the film is fast paced, high octane, and relentless entertaining. It's been compared to films like John Wick, but I found Nobody much more enjoyable and satisfying. For me, right now, this is the 3rd best film of 2021. 4.5

[Wooley]

Allow me to be a tad controversial regarding LOTR but I got the 4K set and FINALLY watched the Extended Editions after all this time and…

The theatrical cuts are better.

The extended editions weren’t especially worse but what was added generally hampered the pacing and was superfluous (outside of a couple scenes). Also, the 4K made it apparent that these scenes weren’t mastered wit the same level of care and detail as the theatrical footage (see: Saruman’s final scene).

I’d still recommend them but not for initial viewing.
Man, the extended Two Towers really saved that movie for me. I did not think much of the theatrical cut as it was. It's easier to watch now that I've seen the Extended but when I saw it in theaters I was terribly disappointed. Watching that made me want to watch the Extended Fellowship and I enjoyed the longer version but I think it's less essential.
I could maybe see a situation where one watches Fellowship as is, watches Extended Two Towers, and then it's dealer's choice on the last one, depending on how much hobbit action you want.

[Takoma11]

Agreed. I think it’s the kind of narrative that lives or dies on the execution due to its shallowness and predictability. I think if it was handed to any number of lesser directors and I would’ve tuned out.

I think that the direction really escalates the whole movie, and I think that combined with the stronger writing in the first third, the initial 20 or so minutes are actually really effective. When she kept rebuffing his attempts to guilt her or trap her (by making her be "mean" by not giving him a ride) I was super intrigued.

As it goes on, the solid direction keeps it engaging, but despite the technical competence on display, there was just nothing that could have made the last hour surprising (Gee! Wonder what's going to happen to this nice hunter man who keeps talking about his adorable wife!).

If somehow it had managed to keep the surprising aspect of the first third, it could have been a pretty awesome flick. And some of the thematic elements (like the protagonist and antagonist using each others' families as leverage) were RIGHT THERE. A missed opportunity.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Man, the extended Two Towers really saved that movie for me. I did not think much of the theatrical cut as it was. It's easier to watch now that I've seen the Extended but when I saw it in theaters I was terribly disappointed. Watching that made me want to watch the Extended Fellowship and I enjoyed the longer version but I think it's less essential.
I could maybe see a situation where one watches Fellowship as is, watches Extended Two Towers, and then it's dealer's choice on the last one, depending on how much hobbit action you want.
The extended cut of Two Towers was the only one if felt on the fence about being inferior. I enjoyed the development of Faramir and Theoden in particular but I ultimately think the development of those characters is superfluous and for side characters, they were developed enough in the theatrical cuts.

Return of the King EE had stuff I think is necessary but is poorly executed (Saruman’s final scene) and it introduces some awkward continuity issues ala Arwin’s necklace.

The theatrical cut of Fellowship is still my favorite of the entire franchise. It’s EE just makes its pacing, which perfectly escalates, a series of odd sputters and starts. I think it’s EE scenes was the least necessary as well. I thought the extra Boromir by the River scene and the Elven gifts were nice but unnecessary.

[ThatDarnMKS]

I think that the direction really escalates the whole movie, and I think that combined with the stronger writing in the first third, the initial 20 or so minutes are actually really effective. When she kept rebuffing his attempts to guilt her or trap her (by making her be "mean" by not giving him a ride) I was super intrigued.

As it goes on, the solid direction keeps it engaging, but despite the technical competence on display, there was just nothing that could have made the last hour surprising (Gee! Wonder what's going to happen to this nice hunter man who keeps talking about his adorable wife!).

If somehow it had managed to keep the surprising aspect of the first third, it could have been a pretty awesome flick. And some of the thematic elements (like the protagonist and antagonist using each others' families as leverage) were RIGHT THERE. A missed opportunity.
I do think that despite it not fully realizing it’s potential, I’ve seen enough serial killer/stalker flicks that are DTV that I think it deserves some respect for not falling into exploitation/rape revenge territory and reveling in unpleasantries. It was a classier (for lack of a better term) thriller than I was expecting given the format and genre norms.

[Rockatansky]

The extended cut of Two Towers was the only one if felt on the fence about being inferior. I enjoyed the development of Faramir and Theoden in particular but I ultimately think the development of those characters is superfluous and for side characters, they were developed enough in the theatrical cuts.

Return of the King EE had stuff I think is necessary but is poorly executed (Saruman’s final scene) and it introduces some awkward continuity issues ala Arwin’s necklace.

The theatrical cut of Fellowship is still my favorite of the entire franchise. It’s EE just makes its pacing, which perfectly escalates, a series of odd sputters and starts. I think it’s EE scenes was the least necessary as well. I thought the extra Boromir by the River scene and the Elven gifts were nice but unnecessary.
Is the ROTK extended cut literally a billion hours long (as opposed to 500 million)?


I've only ever watched the theatrical versions.*Never felt that what the movies lacked was more runtime.*

[ThatDarnMKS]

Is the ROTK extended cut literally a billion hours long (as opposed to 500 million)?


I've only ever watched the theatrical versions.*Never felt that what the movies lacked was more runtime.*
Nothing that egregious. 750 million tops.

[Takoma11]

I do think that despite it not fully realizing it’s potential, I’ve seen enough serial killer/stalker flicks that are DTV that I think it deserves some respect for not falling into exploitation/rape revenge territory and reveling in unpleasantries. It was a classier (for lack of a better term) thriller than I was expecting given the format and genre norms.

Agreed. I realized that I didn't mention it in my review, but I appreciated that it didn't go to the well of sexual violence beyond establishing the threat that the antagonist poses. We're all here to see some people chase each other through the woods, so nudity or rape would have been exploitative feeling.

Maybe I should have given it an extra half popcorn.

I think that part of my reaction was just how much the first third made me feel like I was watching something special, and then it regressed into something much more "standard". Some of the little touches (like how specific it was seeing her listening to the audiobook) just fell by the wayside.

[Thief]

Allow me to be a tad controversial regarding LOTR but I got the 4K set and FINALLY watched the Extended Editions after all this time and…

The theatrical cuts are better.

The extended editions weren’t especially worse but what was added generally hampered the pacing and was superfluous (outside of a couple scenes). Also, the 4K made it apparent that these scenes weren’t mastered wit the same level of care and detail as the theatrical footage (see: Saruman’s final scene).

I’d still recommend them but not for initial viewing.

I don't know. I've only seen the Theatrical versions, well, at the theater and after that, every single time I've seen them it's been the Extended Editions. That makes my recollection of what was and what wasn't in one or the other a bit fuzzy, with the exception of 1) Saruman's final scene and 2) the further development of Faramir/Boromir/etc, both of which I found welcome. But anyway, I've had no issues or felt no slumps while watching the EE. Maybe one day, I'll put the Theatricals to see if I feel the difference.

[SpelingError]

25th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

Whiplash (2014) - 3.5

Though my appreciation of this film has somewhat decreased throughout the several times I've watched it, I still think it has a lot to offer. In the brutal world Chazelle crafts in this film, you need to pay a price for your dreams to come true (Chazelle's La La Land has a similar theme). Not only do we see the toll Andrew's pursuits of being a great drummer have on him, but also on his relationship with those around him given his alienation of some of his family or how he cuts off his contacts with someone who may have gotten in the way of his dream. Also, even though Fletcher's teaching strategies technically work, the film simultaneously acknowledges the downsides to them given what we learn about Sean Casey and how some of Fletcher's students leave his program. In spite of the darker bits though, the movie also manages to be a lot of fun. The jazz concerts are both well-shot and edited, with the standout being the technically outstanding ending which dropped my jaw when I first watched it back in 2014. Finally, J. K. Simmons does a terrific job in this film. He's electrifying when he teaches the band and equally compelling in his quieter scenes, with the standout being his conversation with Andrew about Charlie Parker.

In spite of these strengths though, something about the film's message turns me off. While I don't think the film champions Fletcher, it does imply that the only way to achieve greatness is through being abused. You can either roll with the abuse and become famous or give up your dreams. While I'm not denying some people will require that kind of pressure to improve, that isn't the only way someone can become famous. I wish the film would've presented more options to achieve greatness to Andrew, but have him choose to stay in Fletcher's program (staying in abusive relationships that you recognize as being abusive is normal, so this would've worked just fine). As it stood, I thought the film's message was conflicted. Yes, it does acknowledge the flaws to Fletcher's teaching methods, but it also acted like Andrew had no other options to pursue his dream and that didn't sit right with me. In spite of this, however, I still like the film quite a bit. Its strengths are compelling and engaging enough to carry the film.

[Takoma11]

In spite of these strengths though, something about the film's message turns me off. While I don't think the film champions Fletcher, it does imply that the only way to achieve greatness is through being abused. You can either roll with the abuse and become famous or give up your dreams. While I'm not denying some people will require that kind of pressure to improve, that isn't the only way someone can become famous. I wish the film would've presented more options to achieve greatness to Andrew, but have him choose to stay in Fletcher's program (staying in abusive relationships that you recognize as being abusive is normal, so this would've worked just fine). As it stood, I thought the film's message was conflicted. Yes, it does acknowledge the flaws to Fletcher's teaching methods, but it also acted like Andrew had no other options to pursue his dream and that didn't sit right with me. In spite of this, however, I still like the film quite a bit. Its strengths are compelling and engaging enough to carry the film.

Agreed. For me it is also problematic because of the age of the protagonist (and the other students). It is one thing for an adult to make an informed choice about potential health and mental wellness impacts of putting themselves through a grueling/abusive/dangerous process. But the students in the film are not of an age or in a situation where they are able to make that kind of informed decision/consent. They are put in an isolating, emotionally abusive environment without any scaffolds or understanding that it doesn't have to be that way.

And I further have some issues with how the message intersects with the death by suicide of a character. It feels like there is an implication that he just couldn't handle it, or that (worse) such deaths are the price we just have to pay for honing great artists in the fire.

I'm sure that some artists (or athletes, or whoever) thrive mainly in a demanding, borderline abusive system. But I'm sure that there are plenty of great artists (or athletes, or whoever) who (1) thrive in a nurturing environment and (2) would not thrive in an abusive system. I dislike the idea of lumping everything into this false binary: either you endure abuse and achieve greatness, or you live a happy life but never reach your potential. (I also happen to think that some (SOME!) people who thrived in or endured abusive situations sometimes romanticize them or retroactively justify them as having been necessary when that isn't the case, but that's a whole other conversation).

[SpelingError]

Agreed. For me it is also problematic because of the age of the protagonist (and the other students). It is one thing for an adult to make an informed choice about potential health and mental wellness impacts of putting themselves through a grueling/abusive/dangerous process. But the students in the film are not of an age or in a situation where they are able to make that kind of informed decision/consent. They are put in an isolating, emotionally abusive environment without any scaffolds or understanding that it doesn't have to be that way.

And I further have some issues with how the message intersects with the death by suicide of a character. It feels like there is an implication that he just couldn't handle it, or that (worse) such deaths are the price we just have to pay for honing great artists in the fire.

Yeah, agreed. I think the suicide complicates the message a lot. While I don't think the film is necessarily on Fletcher's side since his flaws are left out in the open, the suicide and all the abuse his students receive come off as the film going "Sorry, but there's no other way to achieve greatness, so all this abuse is necessary for creating a great musician".

When I first watched this film, I gave it a perfect rating (I was 15 at the time though), but my opinion on it has declined by a lot.

[Fabulous]

Motel Hell (1980)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/szLJQC5gxovCrUPowOFWm0dsYMt.jpg

[ThatDarnMKS]

I don't know. I've only seen the Theatrical versions, well, at the theater and after that, every single time I've seen them it's been the Extended Editions. That makes my recollection of what was and what wasn't in one or the other a bit fuzzy, with the exception of 1) Saruman's final scene and 2) the further development of Faramir/Boromir/etc, both of which I found welcome. But anyway, I've had no issues or felt no slumps while watching the EE. Maybe one day, I'll put the Theatricals to see if I feel the difference.
There’s a sense of redundancy and repetition in the EEs that is not present in the theatrical cuts. For instance, the mythril armor that Bilbo gives Frodo is explained in the scene of the giving, then it’s re-explained again by Gandalf down in the mines. There’s just a lack of economy to the storytelling in the EEs that, given how sprawling the films already are, makes the entire thing feel like the runtime isn’t quite as earned.

Then again, this was a first watch of the EEs and I’ve seen the theatrical cuts multiple times.

[ThatDarnMKS]

25th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

Whiplash (2014) - 3.5

Though my appreciation of this film has somewhat decreased throughout the several times I've watched it, I still think it has a lot to offer. In the brutal world Chazelle crafts in this film, you need to pay a price for your dreams to come true (Chazelle's La La Land has a similar theme). Not only do we see the toll Andrew's pursuits of being a great drummer have on him, but also on his relationship with those around him given his alienation of some of his family or how he cuts off his contacts with someone who may have gotten in the way of his dream. Also, even though Fletcher's teaching strategies technically work, the film simultaneously acknowledges the downsides to them given what we learn about Sean Casey and how some of Fletcher's students leave his program. In spite of the darker bits though, the movie also manages to be a lot of fun. The jazz concerts are both well-shot and edited, with the standout being the technically outstanding ending which dropped my jaw when I first watched it back in 2014. Finally, J. K. Simmons does a terrific job in this film. He's electrifying when he teaches the band and equally compelling in his quieter scenes, with the standout being his conversation with Andrew about Charlie Parker.

In spite of these strengths though, something about the film's message turns me off. While I don't think the film champions Fletcher, it does imply that the only way to achieve greatness is through being abused. You can either roll with the abuse and become famous or give up your dreams. While I'm not denying some people will require that kind of pressure to improve, that isn't the only way someone can become famous. I wish the film would've presented more options to achieve greatness to Andrew, but have him choose to stay in Fletcher's program (staying in abusive relationships that you recognize as being abusive is normal, so this would've worked just fine). As it stood, I thought the film's message was conflicted. Yes, it does acknowledge the flaws to Fletcher's teaching methods, but it also acted like Andrew had no other options to pursue his dream and that didn't sit right with me. In spite of this, however, I still like the film quite a bit. Its strengths are compelling and engaging enough to carry the film.

I don’t think that the film ever implies this is the only way for someone to achieve greatness. Fletcher SAYS this but the film punches holes in that numerous times (and goes to pretty extreme dramatic lengths to do so).

The film is about two toxic people (one far more extreme) feeding off of each other and ultimately benefitting, but at great personal and moral cost.*

A “positive” reading of this message is as off target as the copious “you go girl!” takes about Midsommar. Depiction isn’t endorsement.

[SpelingError]

I don’t think that the film ever implies this is the only way for someone to achieve greatness. Fletcher SAYS this but the film punches holes in that numerous times (and goes to pretty extreme dramatic lengths to do so).

The film is about two toxic people (one far more extreme) feeding off of each other and ultimately benefitting, but at great personal and moral cost.*

A “positive” reading of this message is as off target as the copious “you go girl!” takes about Midsommar. Depiction isn’t endorsement.

While it's true that Fletcher's teaching methods are shown to be highly problematic and ineffective, since the film provides no alternative methods on how one could become a great artist, this is why that's implied. Fletcher's teaching style is the only one shown to have this effect, both with Andrew and Charlie Parker. Nobody in the film ever states that there are other methods to achieving greatness and we also never hear any examples of people becoming famous who weren't abused.

I don't think the film endorses Fletcher. Again, his flaws are left right out in the open. However, I do think the implication is that Fletcher's abuse and the suicide are necessary to creating a great artist since there's no alternatives for achieving this.

[ThatDarnMKS]

While it's true that Fletcher's teaching methods are shown to be highly problematic and ineffective, since the film provides no alternative methods on how one could become a great artist, this is why that's implied. Fletcher's teaching style is the only one shown to have this effect, both with Andrew and Charlie Parker. Nobody in the film ever states that there are other methods to achieving greatness and we also never hear any examples of people becoming famous who weren't abused.

I don't think the film endorses Fletcher. Again, his flaws are left right out in the open. However, I do think the implication is that Fletcher's abuse and the suicide are necessary to creating a great artist since there's no alternatives for achieving this.
This is akin to saying that Wolf of Wall Street is pro-white collar crime because it doesn’t highlight proper business tactics. Not all films have to be didactic morality plays. Whiplash would be a weaker and far less provocative film of it offered a simple condemnation for Fletcher and Andrew’s choices.

Like WoWS, the film operates via depiction of a problematic ideology and assumes the viewer is bright enough to be able to tell why this is appealing (different forms of success but success nonetheless) and why it is wrong.*

We see Andrew destroy relationships, nearly destroy himself and allow Fletcher to manipulate and abuse him to a point that drove over students to suicide.

We see Fletcher destroy his career, the lives of numerous students, and ultimately fail to destroy Andrew.

That Andrew achieves greatness is certainly not meant to be a mere triumph and “see! It all worked out!”

They’ve done these horrible things all so he can be a great drummer. It’s a Faustian deal that has taken away from Faust and Mephistopheles yet both come away ironically thinking it was worth it.

It’s a masterpiece.

[SpelingError]

This is akin to saying that Wolf of Wall Street is pro-white collar crime because it doesn’t highlight proper business tactics. Not all films have to be didactic morality plays. Whiplash would be a weaker and far less provocative film of it offered a simple condemnation for Fletcher and Andrew’s choices.

Like WoWS, the film operates via depiction of a problematic ideology and assumes the viewer is bright enough to be able to tell why this is appealing (different forms of success but success nonetheless) and why it is wrong.*

We see Andrew destroy relationships, nearly destroy himself and allow Fletcher to manipulate and abuse him to a point that drove over students to suicide.

We see Fletcher destroy his career, the lives of numerous students, and ultimately fail to destroy Andrew.

That Andrew achieves greatness is certainly not meant to be a mere triumph and “see! It all worked out!”

They’ve done these horrible things all so he can be a great drummer. It’s a Faustian deal that has taken away from Faust and Mephistopheles yet both come away ironically thinking it was worth it.

It’s a masterpiece.

Okay, fair enough. I think we're on the same page now.

[StuSmallz]

I felt the opposite about the Blade Runners, I thought the first one was a straight-up masterpiece and one of the most interesting films I've ever seen while I thought the second was a pointless, if beautiful slog with a very weak third act.And I'd have to say that I feel the opposite of you about the BR movies; for me, while both of them are a bit slog-y as far as their tone/pacing goes, the original (while beautiful visually) was still more difficult to be fully engaged by, because I cared very little about Deckard or Rachael as main characters (because it felt like Ridley Scott didn't care that much about them himself), while 2049 had a more compelling protagonist, which helped make up for the film's flaws otherwise. At any rate, what was wrong with the third act? I found the ending to be surprisingly touching on an emotional level, speaking personally.

Allow me to be a tad controversial regarding LOTR but I got the 4K set and FINALLY watched the Extended Editions after all this time and…

The theatrical cuts are better.

The extended editions weren’t especially worse but what was added generally hampered the pacing and was superfluous (outside of a couple scenes). Also, the 4K made it apparent that these scenes weren’t mastered wit the same level of care and detail as the theatrical footage (see: Saruman’s final scene).

I’d still recommend them but not for initial viewing.I agree; I'm sure the extended editions are naturally the preferred versions of a lot of Tolkien completionists (and even if you aren't, they still add some nice, extra world-building details to the trilogy), but I'm not a completionist, and I don't want to judge the movies by just measuring how accurate they are to their source material, and by that metric, the theatrical editions just work better as, well... movies. I mean, the original edits were already all slightly overlong as they were, so adding at least an extra half an hour to all of them definitely adds more bloat to their runtimes, if you ask me, so the theatrical cuts are all more than enough LOTR for me.

[PHOENIX74]

I always struggle with this because I saw Force 10 first and absolutely loved it.
Because I had no baggage from Guns I was able to enjoy the film as the fun romp that it is without comparing it to its far more serious predecessor. Shaw is as charming and full of guile as ever and Fox is actually a favorite of mine from that generation of British actors as well (Day Of The Jackal, A Bridge Too Far). Loved him in this role, and in the context of this film, I kinda liked him more than Niven (even though I am a huge Niven fan and, in the contest of that film, obviously think he's the better man).
This was also the first time I saw Franco Nero and I thought it was a good introduction to him. Hell, liked Carl Weathers in this as much as I did in Rocky, honestly.
Also, it's really a caper-film much more than a war-movie and it's treated that way, almost like Ocean's 11 in WWII. In fact, now that I think about it, it's a helluva lot like Ocean's 11 In WW2. Which is a movie I'd always be happy to watch on a Sunday afternoon.
I see this movie get bashed all the time for not being a good sequel to Guns but honestly it's a fun little movie taken on its own terms and actually probably rates pretty highly up there in my Movies I Love That Hardly Anyone Else Does Anymore (Or Ever Did).

I enjoy the score very much, I don't know if there's a soundtrack out there for Force 10 - but it's really rousing. Ron Goodwin is great when it comes to war films. I love the fact that I get to see the likes of Carl Weathers, Richard Kiel, Robert Shaw and Harrison Ford in action. When I was a kid I must have watched Force 10 three or four times - and enjoyed it. But deciding to do a double feature review and seeing (and researching) the films back to back really brought the differences into plain view. So I'm another guy harping on about the fact that Guns of Navarone is so superior to Force 10 - another to add to a long list of people you hear making that comparison.

It'd been a good 30+ years since I'd seen Force 10 From Navarone. It was like watching it completely anew. I might have had a different reaction to it if I hadn't of been comparing it to the first film.

[the samoan lawyer]

https://assets.mubi.com/images/film/2176/image-w856.jpg?1554401052
A Midsummer Nights Sex Comedy (1982)


rating_3_5





A Rainy Day in New York (2019) - rating_2https://www.indiewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/WA17_09.20_0135.jpg

[jiraffejustin]

Vince Collins does it again, he dropped his newest film on YouTube last night and it might end up being the film of the year.

Stranger in Town (2021; Vince Collins) - 4.5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3BKmvChiMg&ab_channel=VinceCollins

[Takoma11]

This is akin to saying that Wolf of Wall Street is pro-white collar crime because it doesn’t highlight proper business tactics. Not all films have to be didactic morality plays. Whiplash would be a weaker and far less provocative film of it offered a simple condemnation for Fletcher and Andrew’s choices.

Like WoWS, the film operates via depiction of a problematic ideology and assumes the viewer is bright enough to be able to tell why this is appealing (different forms of success but success nonetheless) and why it is wrong.*

We see Andrew destroy relationships, nearly destroy himself and allow Fletcher to manipulate and abuse him to a point that drove over students to suicide.
.
.
.
They’ve done these horrible things all so he can be a great drummer. It’s a Faustian deal that has taken away from Faust and Mephistopheles yet both come away ironically thinking it was worth it.

It’s a masterpiece.

The rapturous way that the final drum solo is filmed (as a soaring moment of triumph from an artistic point of view AND as a moment of the student surpassing his teacher) DOES suggest that it was worth it.

The film ends on this note of triumph and leaves us with the emotional high of Andrew achieving his artistic dreams and Fletcher getting a subtle moment of public comeuppance.

I agree that a movie does not have to present a binary. We didn't need some genius drummer who was also a gentle, patient instructor to show Andrew the "right way". And we also don't need the (false) conclusion that Fletcher's methods will always end in failure. Heck, the documentary Athlete A quite capably demonstrates that emotional manipulation, isolation, and abuse can win you a boatload of Olympic medals and cultivate top-of-the-world talent.

But I still think that the film does not satisfactorily resolve the tension between artistic success and personal cost of such extreme methods. I agree that it is a very well-realized portrayal of a toxic teacher-student relationship. Where I find fault is in how the moments and beats are sequenced so that the suicide of a character is left in the dust behind an exhilarating moment of personal and professional triumph. If Andrew did that solo and then there was a shot of him walking out into the back of the theater alone, I might feel differently. But I find that the chosen emphasis of the final moment feels like endorsement of the relationship---it suggests that the ends did justify the means..

[Fabulous]

Youth of the Beast (1963)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/9BeluCE1MXfGlo8D4PKSv9fp4RV.jpg

[mark f]

The Unholy Night (Lionel Barrymore, 1929) 2.5 5.5/10
Bop Girl Goes Calypso (Howard W. Koch, 1957) 2 5/10
Hunter Hunter (Shawn Linden, 2020) 2.5 6-/10
Luca (Enrico Casarosa, 2021) 3.5- 7/10
https://64.media.tumblr.com/353a57d3250d44059a951675faf4fd31/716b77af42f928fe-6e/s540x810/bbbe4f15bedab4677370624d6b5db72b8ef71f60.gifv
Luca [the small one] learns from Alberto, another sea monster, about the joys of land life against the wishes of his family.
A Family (Michihito Fujii, 2020) 2.5 6/10
Sofia (John Reinhardt, 1948) 2 5/10
The Remarkable Mr. Pennypacker (Henry Levin, 1959) 2.5 6/10
Be Pretty and Shut Up (Delphine Seyrig, 1981) 3 6.5/10
https://www.berlinale.de/media/nrwd/filmstills/2019/forum/201902391_1_IMG_FIX_700x700.jpg
[Not an image in the film] Delphine Seyrig interviews two dozen actresses in the '70s about the dearth of meaningful women characters in the cinema and the rampant sexism in the industry.
The Warm Money (Christian Petzold, 1992) 2.5 6/10
Siberia (Abel Ferrara, 2019) 2+ 5/10
Nobody from Nowhere (Matthieu Delaporte, 2014) 2.5 6/10
Little Fish (Chad Hartigan, 2020) 2.5 6/10
https://www.filmstories.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/full_Little-Fish_01-030320.png
During a memory loss pandemic, the marriage of Jack O'Connell and Olivia Cooke is threatened repeatedly.
Circumstantial Pleasures (Lewis Klahr, 2020) 2 5/10
Censor (Prano Bailey-Bond, 2021) 2.5 6-/10
The Passion of Darkly Noon (Philip Ridley, 1995) 2.5 5.5/10
The Monster (Roland West, 1925) 2.5 6/10
https://i.gifer.com/9mea.gif
Lon Chaney is a literal monster and an attempted monster-maker in a thriller with more comedy than his usual.
Seven Keys to Baldpate (Reginald Barker, 1929) 2.5 6/10
Code of the Cactus (Sam Newfield, 1939) 2 5/10
A Girl at My Door (July Jung, 2014) 2.5 6/10
The Female Closet (Barbara Hammer, 1998) 3 6.5/10
https://jeudepaume.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/BarbaraHammer_17.jpg
Historians reveal some early cases of lesbianism and feminism through the art, writing and [in the last case] videos of Alice Austen, Hannah Höch, and Nicole Eisenman.

[Chypmunk]

A Girl At My Door - yay!

[Wyldesyde19]

A Girl At My Door - yay!
Is she the first? Well, don’t settle. There’s plenty more if she doesn’t work out for you.

[Wooley]

The extended cut of Two Towers was the only one if felt on the fence about being inferior. I enjoyed the development of Faramir and Theoden in particular but I ultimately think the development of those characters is superfluous and for side characters, they were developed enough in the theatrical cuts.
.

I felt like those things were important. I read the books and still struggled to make too much sense of Faramir and Theoden and that whole conflict in the films. I just thought, honestly, that the Extended cut was a better movie than the theatrical, period.

I agree that the Extended Fellowship didn't have that escalating pacing but I did enjoy some of the stuff that was retained.

[Wooley]

25th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

Whiplash (2014) - 3.5

Though my appreciation of this film has somewhat decreased throughout the several times I've watched it, I still think it has a lot to offer. In the brutal world Chazelle crafts in this film, you need to pay a price for your dreams to come true (Chazelle's La La Land has a similar theme). Not only do we see the toll Andrew's pursuits of being a great drummer have on him, but also on his relationship with those around him given his alienation of some of his family or how he cuts off his contacts with someone who may have gotten in the way of his dream. Also, even though Fletcher's teaching strategies technically work, the film simultaneously acknowledges the downsides to them given what we learn about Sean Casey and how some of Fletcher's students leave his program. In spite of the darker bits though, the movie also manages to be a lot of fun. The jazz concerts are both well-shot and edited, with the standout being the technically outstanding ending which dropped my jaw when I first watched it back in 2014. Finally, J. K. Simmons does a terrific job in this film. He's electrifying when he teaches the band and equally compelling in his quieter scenes, with the standout being his conversation with Andrew about Charlie Parker.

In spite of these strengths though, something about the film's message turns me off. While I don't think the film champions Fletcher, it does imply that the only way to achieve greatness is through being abused. You can either roll with the abuse and become famous or give up your dreams. While I'm not denying some people will require that kind of pressure to improve, that isn't the only way someone can become famous. I wish the film would've presented more options to achieve greatness to Andrew, but have him choose to stay in Fletcher's program (staying in abusive relationships that you recognize as being abusive is normal, so this would've worked just fine). As it stood, I thought the film's message was conflicted. Yes, it does acknowledge the flaws to Fletcher's teaching methods, but it also acted like Andrew had no other options to pursue his dream and that didn't sit right with me. In spite of this, however, I still like the film quite a bit. Its strengths are compelling and engaging enough to carry the film.

I didn't come away with that. I actually came away with something kind of ambiguous. Yes, of course, the kid got much, much better through the intense amount of practice he put in which he did because someone demanded more of him. That actually is how it works. But it's also the kid's talent that that's there and while Fletcher may feel rewarded for what the kid is able to do, he did NOT plan it that way, it was absolutely his intention to humiliate the kid in a career-ending way... but the kid rose above it. It was the kid's ambition and determination that ultimately wins because, like it or not, Fletcher still has to live with what he lost by pushing the kid too hard, but the kid rose above it and excelled anyway. So the kid actually won, not Fletcher. And Fletcher was punished for his behavior. He is not ruined but a significant part of his career is and a lot was taken from him. He's wounded and the kid is triumphant.

[Wooley]

And I'd have to say that I feel the opposite of you about the BR movies; for me, while both of them are a bit slog-y as far as their tone/pacing goes, the original (while beautiful visually) was still more difficult to be fully engaged by, because I cared very little about Deckard or Rachael as main characters (because it felt like Ridley Scott didn't care that much about them himself), while 2049 had a more compelling protagonist, which helped make up for the film's flaws otherwise. At any rate, what was wrong with the third act? I found the ending to be surprisingly touching on an emotional level, speaking personally.


This is a really interesting discussion for me because I didn't care one bit about Gosling's character or his AI girlfriend in the second one and I couldn't understand why I would care about the movie at all even when I think back on it, while the original, to me, is almost an important piece of work in cinematic history that I have very powerful feelings about to this day, nearly 30 years after I first saw it.
And I thought the third act was just an incredible mess. Leto's character was poorly handled and ended up coming across as just a device to get to the resolution that they wanted, which I thought was a terrible resolution, and the whole thing I thought cheapened the narrative of the original as well. I remember that it was a pretty and moody film, but I don't feel like I could slog through it again knowing how poor I thought the finale was.

[SpelingError]

I didn't come away with that. I actually came away with something kind of ambiguous. Yes, of course, the kid got much, much better through the intense amount of practice he put in which he did because someone demanded more of him. That actually is how it works. But it's also the kid's talent that that's there and while Fletcher may feel rewarded for what the kid is able to do, he did NOT plan it that way, it was absolutely his intention to humiliate the kid in a career-ending way... but the kid rose above it. It was the kid's ambition and determination that ultimately wins because, like it or not, Fletcher still has to live with what he lost by pushing the kid too hard, but the kid rose above it and excelled anyway. So the kid actually won, not Fletcher. And Fletcher was punished for his behavior. He is not ruined but a significant part of his career is and a lot was taken from him. He's wounded and the kid is triumphant.

That's an interesting interpretation on the ending. I never thought of the film like that before, but your reading makes sense. It provides significance to Fletcher telling Andrew he was aware he got him fired right before the final performance started or how Fletcher switched out the song to something Andrew was unfamiliar with. I take it that fixing one of his cymbals after it fell over and smiling at him at the end was Fletcher changing his mind about destroying his career after he realized that, out of the presumably hundreds of musicians he taught throughout his career, he was finally about to create a great artist.

[Jinnistan]

Maybe if Whiplash had been a little more explicit in illustrating Fletcher's white man god complex who uses jazz, and the chip on his shoulder for not being (per his perception) oppressed enough to make great jazz, as an instrument to punish true and nascent talent, whipping them like a slave master because of his stunted understanding of inspiration, to simultaneously compensate for and tacitly reinforce this complex insecurity on his part.

Or maybe that's just too close to the bone for a rich kid like Damien.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZDRkOWQ5NGUtYTVmOS00ZjNhLWEwODgtOGI2MmUxNTBkMjU0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjUzOTY1NTc@._V1_UY1200_CR84,0,6 30,1200_AL_.jpg



4.5

[Thief]

ACE IN THE HOLE
(1951, Wilder)
A film from the Criterion Collection whose number includes the #6 (#396)

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fL9iuPFstio/US5ovustXAI/AAAAAAAAMRs/OQ2g03iKGwM/s1600/Kirk+Douglas+Ace+in+The+Hole.PNG


Get this. There's three of us buried here ‒ Leo, me and you. We all wanna get out, and we're going to. Only I'm going back in style.



Ace in the Hole follows Chuck Tatum (Kirk Douglas), an ambitious but disgraced reporter that has been exiled from New York to Albuquerque for reasons that go from his alcoholism and womanizing to his work ethics (or lack of) and simply burning too many bridges. But he's determined to get back on the horse at any cost.

This is my sixth film from Billy Wilder, and I have to say he's becoming one of my favorite directors. Not only is his direction great, but the script is full of snappy dialogue that's perfectly delivered by the cast. Douglas, an actor that 4-5 years ago I don't think I had seen anything other than Spartacus, has been surprising me with every performance I see. From his scene-stealing supporting performance in Out of the Past to his lead role in Paths of Glory, and now this.

Grade: 4.5


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2215168#post2215168)

[ThatDarnMKS]

The rapturous way that the final drum solo is filmed (as a soaring moment of triumph from an artistic point of view AND as a moment of the student surpassing his teacher) DOES suggest that it was worth it.

The film ends on this note of triumph and leaves us with the emotional high of Andrew achieving his artistic dreams and Fletcher getting a subtle moment of public comeuppance.

I agree that a movie does not have to present a binary. We didn't need some genius drummer who was also a gentle, patient instructor to show Andrew the "right way". And we also don't need the (false) conclusion that Fletcher's methods will always end in failure. Heck, the documentary Athlete A quite capably demonstrates that emotional manipulation, isolation, and abuse can win you a boatload of Olympic medals and cultivate top-of-the-world talent.

But I still think that the film does not satisfactorily resolve the tension between artistic success and personal cost of such extreme methods. I agree that it is a very well-realized portrayal of a toxic teacher-student relationship. Where I find fault is in how the moments and beats are sequenced so that the suicide of a character is left in the dust behind an exhilarating moment of personal and professional triumph. If Andrew did that solo and then there was a shot of him walking out into the back of the theater alone, I might feel differently. But I find that the chosen emphasis of the final moment feels like endorsement of the relationship---it suggests that the ends did justify the means..
It’s certainly…

a triumphant moment. That’s why it works. It’s a pitch perfect climax because it’s a provocative mix of emotions. Great art IS often created via horrible abuses and conditions.*

Fletcher is hardly proven infallible by the outcome, as he outright tries to sabotage Andrew out of revenge. Andrew is hardly solely the product of Fletcher’s abuse. But they did push each other to be better at great personal cost.

Emphasizing the loss or other options reduces what it IS, which is far more engaging and interesting than Chazelle saying “this is wrong an unhealthy!”

To compare it to Midsommar, once again, Aster films the climax in a fairly rapturous way. He ends with gorgeous colors and smiles. It’s cathartic because getting out of this toxic relationship is something she should do but she’s compromised herself in doing so. We don’t need to see the eventual cost of this choice to know that it is problematic (nor does he need to hold the hand of the terrible hot take crowd).

Another comparison could be made for The Phantom Thread. Hardly an example of a positive relationship but it is provocative specifically because of the way their toxicity impacts each other and the “positivity” they pull from that relationship.

I just don’t see anyone watching Whiplash and thinking “yeah, that’s how it should be taught.” Given that I have seen more viewers taking issue with the film’s supposed stance on that subject than agreeing with it, I feel like Chazelle is just crediting you with already having that assumption before you engage with the film.

[ThatDarnMKS]

I felt like those things were important. I read the books and still struggled to make too much sense of Faramir and Theoden and that whole conflict in the films. I just thought, honestly, that the Extended cut was a better movie than the theatrical, period.

I agree that the Extended Fellowship didn't have that escalating pacing but I did enjoy some of the stuff that was retained.
They’re important for relatively unimportant characters. Certain supporting characters should be less developed than the primary cast and run time should be allocated accordingly. The scenes are nice in fleshing them out but they’re hardly cyphers. All you need to know is Faramir and Boromir have an ******* dad they try to please for their arcs to work. And we know that in the TC.

Like I said, I don’t feel passionately between the TT theatrical and EE as I do Fellowship or ROTK. It just also doesn’t stand out as being certainly better to me, while the others feel marginally worse.

[Fabulous]

The Night of the Iguana (1964)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/wVXLE90KHxMDfNb4mbWFs69Lmkx.jpg

[pahaK]

[CENTER]ACE IN THE HOLE
(1951, Wilder)
A film from the Criterion Collection whose number includes the #6 (#396)

Initially, I thought this was a boring choice but then I realized it wasn't a film where an object is in a hole ;)

[Wooley]

That's an interesting interpretation on the ending. I never thought of the film like that before, but your reading makes sense. It provides significance to Fletcher telling Andrew he was aware he got him fired right before the final performance started or how Fletcher switched out the song to something Andrew was unfamiliar with. I take it that fixing one of his cymbals after it fell over and smiling at him at the end was Fletcher changing his mind about destroying his career after he realized that, out of the presumably hundreds of musicians he taught throughout his career, he was finally about to create a great artist.
I agree but I felt that the possibility of Fletcher destroying his career was over. The kid was simply too good at that point as he had just proven. Fletcher knows he's in the presence of greatness and his natural instinct as a musician and creator of musicians takes over and his ugly pride steps in to in his mind take some credit for this. But the kid has emerged victorious and Fletcher has had to learn a hard lesson that was a lifetime in coming, without losing absolutely everything or somehow redeeming himself, which would have been too Hollywood for me.

[Wooley]

They’re important for relatively unimportant characters. Certain supporting characters should be less developed than the primary cast and run time should be allocated accordingly. The scenes are nice in fleshing them out but they’re hardly cyphers. All you need to know is Faramir and Boromir have an ******* dad they try to please for their arcs to work. And we know that in the TC.

Like I said, I don’t feel passionately between the TT theatrical and EE as I do Fellowship or ROTK. It just also doesn’t stand out as being certainly better to me, while the others feel marginally worse.

I guess this is just knowing the source material too well. I felt that Faramir, for example, was ONLY a supporting character in the film and that was a shortcoming of the film. The Extended kinda fixed that.

[ThatDarnMKS]

I guess this is just knowing the source material too well. I felt that Faramir, for example, was ONLY a supporting character in the film and that was a shortcoming of the film. The Extended kinda fixed that.
While I’ve only read the trilogy once, I stand by calling Faramir a supporting character. I’d consider virtually anyone that wasn’t in the Fellowship or Gollum to be supporting.

It just comes down to whether or not I value making Faramir a better character over the pacing of the film and I don’t believe I do.

[SpelingError]

I agree but I felt that the possibility of Fletcher destroying his career was over. The kid was simply too good at that point as he had just proven. Fletcher knows he's in the presence of greatness and his natural instinct as a musician and creator of musicians takes over and his ugly pride steps in to in his mind take some credit for this. But the kid has emerged victorious and Fletcher has had to learn a hard lesson that was a lifetime in coming, without losing absolutely everything or somehow redeeming himself, which would have been too Hollywood for me.

Yeah, I see what you mean. I've already seen the film several times, so I don't know if I'm in the mood to watch it again for a while, but if I ever get to it again, I'll keep both yours and MKS's readings in mind.

[edarsenal]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/183704a0e5064a9a36be36538290a225/ec489328b733341a-c3/s500x750/c550f18894257c5c72e717fbc96f68153618150d.gifv


Children of the Sea aka Kaijû no kodomo (2019) 4.5 A mystical sojourn of a poetic, philosophical nature that is an utterly gorgeous, lush viewing of a young girl who's parents work at a seaside aquarium where she comes across two young boys who cohabitate land and sea. Finding an internal connection to them and the cosmic occurrence that links them all. Centered between the connection of the stars and the sea.
Very, very lovely film I stumbled across on Netflix.

[Allaby]

I watched Good on Paper (2021) on Netflix. Directed by Kimmy Gatewood, this comedy stars Iliza Shlesinger as a stand up comic who meets a guy who seems perfect, only to suspect he may not be who he claims to be. I really enjoyed this. It was funny and entertaining. Iliza Shlesinger was really good in the role. My rating is a 4

[Fabulous]

And Justice for All (1979)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ysflAbvIhfWHY9eEKwnADgg4jyv.jpg

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fc/Porco_Rosso_%28Movie_Poster%29.jpg
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3889172

Porco Rosso - (1992) - Japan

I thought this was endearing and full of great humour. The world Porco Rosso lives in is one where noble people rescue damsels in distress, but treat their enemies with as much consideration. When a group of air-pirates kidnap a group of children, the kids have the time of their life, and comically banter. When Rosso rescues them he makes sure the pirates won't go out of business or lose their sea plane. That's the kind of movie this is and it feels good to live in such a world for 94 minutes.

Rosso (who at some stage has been transformed into an anthropomorphic pig) is part Sam Spade, part Indiana Jones and part Baron von Richthofen. His dry humour, bravery, confidence and morality infect the very world constructed around him. I think people who aren't even into Japanese animation would be hard pressed not to enjoy this.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Vampyr1932.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17682916

Vampyr - (1932) - Germany/France

Carl Theodor Dreyer's Vampyr is a haunting, surreal dream - although there is a narrative to it. It's amongst the very best the genre has to offer - and I find myself wondering if there are people out there today, brave enough to produce something like this. Maybe David Lynch, once. Surrealism is often underrated - but even when it's just to service a dream sequence as a small part of a film, it's often undercut when it's too logical and/or understandable. Vampyr dares to go beyond all of that and leave a trail of fascinating questions and conjecture.

9/10

[StuSmallz]

BLADE RUNNER 2049 SPOILERS BELOW!!!:


This is a really interesting discussion for me because I didn't care one bit about Gosling's character or his AI girlfriend in the second one and I couldn't understand why I would care about the movie at all even when I think back on it, while the original, to me, is almost an important piece of work in cinematic history that I have very powerful feelings about to this day, nearly 30 years after I first saw it.
And I thought the third act was just an incredible mess. Leto's character was poorly handled and ended up coming across as just a device to get to the resolution that they wanted, which I thought was a terrible resolution, and the whole thing I thought cheapened the narrative of the original as well. I remember that it was a pretty and moody film, but I don't feel like I could slog through it again knowing how poor I thought the finale was.What, you didn't feel anything for them in this scene?:

https://youtu.be/3TjyGmvNBfM

Because damn, that's kind of cold...This is akin to saying that Wolf of Wall Street is pro-white collar crime because it doesn’t highlight proper business tactics. Not all films have to be didactic morality plays. Whiplash would be a weaker and far less provocative film of it offered a simple condemnation for Fletcher and Andrew’s choices.

Like WoWS, the film operates via depiction of a problematic ideology and assumes the viewer is bright enough to be able to tell why this is appealing (different forms of success but success nonetheless) and why it is wrong.*While I haven't seen Whiplash yet, I do agree with you that I'm tired of people willfully misintrepreting movies, and assuming that just because it shows a character doing something or advocating for a particular worldview, that automatically means that the film is endorsing that particular kind of behavior or mindset; it's how we get people acting like The Last Jedi contradicts its "message" that you should let the past die (when that philosophy is held by the main villain of the movie), or that First Man holds an overly downbeat attitude towards the quest to land on the moon just because Armstrong's wife expressed something to that effect once. It's like, a movie can show something without trying to straight-up endorse it, guys.

[Jinnistan]

I'm tired of people willfully misintrepreting movies
Would you care to demonstrate SpelingError's "willful" misinterpretation? It's one thing to disagree with someone's take on a film, but it's a more serious accusation to impune their motives for it.

[ThatDarnMKS]

[B]While I haven't seen [i]Whiplash yet, I do agree with you that I'm tired of people willfully misintrepreting movies, and assuming that just because it shows a character doing something or advocating for a particular worldview, that automatically means that the film is endorsing that particular kind of behavior or mindset; it's how we get people acting like The Last Jedi contradicts its "message" that you should let the past die (when that philosophy is held by the main villain of the movie), or that First Man holds an overly downbeat attitude towards the quest to land on the moon just because Armstrong's wife expressed something to that effect once. It's like, a movie can show something without trying to straight-up endorse it, guys.
Agreed in principle. Disagreed with the Last Jedi example. The film contradicts ANY potential theme it could have and builds that one up through the villain (Kylo), fallen hero (Luke) and voice of reason (Yoda) only to do nothing with it. Other themes like "protect what you love" from Rose/Finn are contradicted directly by their own actions and the actions of others (Holdo's flight). Poe seems to only learn a lesson about blindly following orders? And the theme about helping the helpless on the casino planet contradicts the entire conflict of both Poe and Finn's conflict. It's a film that contradicts itself to the point of having no theme at all.

It definitely depicts things though. That it does.

[Wooley]

While I’ve only read the trilogy once, I stand by calling Faramir a supporting character. I’d consider virtually anyone that wasn’t in the Fellowship or Gollum to be supporting.

It just comes down to whether or not I value making Faramir a better character over the pacing of the film and I don’t believe I do.

Ok, well, we just disagree on these points, which is fine. You can watch your version and I'll watch mine. ;)

[Wooley]

I watched Good on Paper (2021) on Netflix. Directed by Kimmy Gatewood, this comedy stars Iliza Shlesinger as a stand up comic who meets a guy who seems perfect, only to suspect he may not be who he claims to be. I really enjoyed this. It was funny and entertaining. Iliza Shlesinger was really good in the role. My rating is a 4

Interesting. I find Shlesinger to be very sharp.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Vampyr1932.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17682916

Vampyr - (1932) - Germany/France

Carl Theodor Dreyer's Vampyr is a haunting, surreal dream - although there is a narrative to it. It's amongst the very best the genre has to offer - and I find myself wondering if there are people out there today, brave enough to produce something like this. Maybe David Lynch, once. Surrealism is often underrated - but even when it's just to service a dream sequence as a small part of a film, it's often undercut when it's too logical and/or understandable. Vampyr dares to go beyond all of that and leave a trail of fascinating questions and conjecture.

9/10

Really love this movie.

[Wooley]

BLADE RUNNER 2049 SPOILERS BELOW!!!:


What, you didn't feel anything for them in this scene?:

https://youtu.be/3TjyGmvNBfM

Because damn, that's kind of cold...

Obviously that's the scene in the whole movie that has a bit of resonance... but it's in a bit of a vacuum.

[James D. Gardiner]

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

Sol Madrid (1968)
Directed by Brian G. Hutton
Starring David McCallum, Stella Stevens, Telly Savalas, Ricardo Montalban

Pretty decent Friday night entertainment. David McCallum is generally kicking ass as the undercover cop, thwarting Telly Savalas' drug dealing operation and taking names with gusto. Poor Stella is a victim but gets saved in the end. All good fun.

6/10

[Hey Fredrick]

https://i.imgur.com/Qb9uCOw.jpg?1

Story of a young Jewish kid in Poland who escapes the Germans at the beginning of WW2, lands in a Soviet orphanage where they try to start to teach him all their BS, is later captured by the Germans, who find him useful as a translator on the front lines, he becomes an accidental war hero and then gets shipped off to join the Hitler Youth where they teach him all their BS. He does all this while obviously trying to conceal the fact that he is Jewish, which gets increasingly difficult especially when he falls for an attractive German girl who is all in with the Nazi ideology. There are some pretty infuriating scenes and a lot of them are in the classrooms. Very good movie 4

[Takoma11]

It’s certainly…

a triumphant moment. That’s why it works. It’s a pitch perfect climax because it’s a provocative mix of emotions. Great art IS often created via horrible abuses and conditions.*

Fletcher is hardly proven infallible by the outcome, as he outright tries to sabotage Andrew out of revenge. Andrew is hardly solely the product of Fletcher’s abuse. But they did push each other to be better at great personal cost.

Emphasizing the loss or other options reduces what it IS, which is far more engaging and interesting than Chazelle saying “this is wrong an unhealthy!”

To compare it to Midsommar, once again, Aster films the climax in a fairly rapturous way. He ends with gorgeous colors and smiles. It’s cathartic because getting out of this toxic relationship is something she should do but she’s compromised herself in doing so. We don’t need to see the eventual cost of this choice to know that it is problematic (nor does he need to hold the hand of the terrible hot take crowd).

Another comparison could be made for The Phantom Thread. Hardly an example of a positive relationship but it is provocative specifically because of the way their toxicity impacts each other and the “positivity” they pull from that relationship.

I just don’t see anyone watching Whiplash and thinking “yeah, that’s how it should be taught.” Given that I have seen more viewers taking issue with the film’s supposed stance on that subject than agreeing with it, I feel like Chazelle is just crediting you with already having that assumption before you engage with the film.

GENERAL SPOILERS FOR WHIPLASH YA'LL

I haven't seen either Midsommar or Phantom Thread, so I can't speak to those comparisons.

But you say "Great art IS often created via horrible abuses and conditions". I totally agree!

But what I take some issue with is, again, I think that the depiction in Whiplash is more of a trial-by-fire scenario where the hero comes out of the experience better and stronger. Yes, there has been sacrifice and loss along the way, but in the final moments, we get the sense that the main character is exactly where he wants to be and that we should be celebrating along with him. That last part is where I have mixed feelings. And maybe this comes down to personal viewpoint. Maybe you watched the movie and at the end the feeling you had was, "Dude, that was NOT worth it." But that's not where I felt the film pushing me.

Again, I don't think that the film is so simple as to be explicitly endorsing abusive teaching methods. But the way that the character of Fletcher is used, he basically becomes the monster to be slain by the main character and that final concert is their ultimate arena. It is the strength and determination of the main character that sees him through to the end, and I go back to having really mixed feelings about what that says about someone who died of suicide after similar treatment, ie if they had been talented/driven enough, they would have also been refined by the process.

I think that dangerous/abusive/unhealthy situations can make people stronger. And everyone loves a story where someone overcomes those obstacles (like rising above poverty to become a judge or making it out of an abusive home). But I think that such stories risk romanticizing the process by downplaying the human cost of the people who don't make it through (and end up in jail or dead or addicted to drugs or never escape the cycle of abusive relationships, etc).

So it's not so much that I see the film endorsing the teaching methods as I see it romanticizing the experience of enduring and triumphing over them.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fremezcla.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2FVVB_i-jSJMNxq-L-1212x808.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Vampires vs the Bronx, 2020

Three friends living in the Bronx--Miguel (Jaden Michael), Bobby (Gerald Jones III), and Luis (Gregory Diaz IV)--are alarmed when a new real estate firm begins buying up buildings left and right in their neighborhood. Soon coming to suspect that the new interlopers have a lot more on their mind than gentrification, the boys set out to defend their territory from a vampire menace.

I won't lie--part of my interest in this film came out of the weird little downvote campaign on IMDb (5% give it a 1/10? Really?). The movie turns out to be exactly what you'd expect--a fun little romp with shades of Attack the Block and People Under the Stairs.

I read a few remarks about how comparing vampirism to gentrification was hateful toward white people. But I think that the film isn't even equating the two. It's more that gentrification provides a cover for the vampires to infiltrate the neighborhood. While it generates some good laughs ("White people holding canvas tote bags are always the first sign" one boy glumly notes, looking at an artist depiction of a renovated building), the film ends up with a bit of a muddled message. The vampires repeatedly state that they like living somewhere that people can disappear and no one really does anything about it . . . but if they start to move a richer, more powerful class of people into the neighborhood, they will lose their hunting ground.

Fortunately, the logic gaps don't make too big of a dent because the film is mostly after a fun time and it succeeds on that front. The three stars are charismatic, and they are well supported by an adult cast--especially The Kid Mero as Tony, the owner of the local bodega--that gives the neighborhood some texture and provides some strong line deliveries. ("Those little sh*ts stole my Sprite!" gripes Method Man as the local preacher, after the boys take soda bottles to steal holy water).

And while I felt that some of the gentrification stuff was a bit muddled, I did appreciate the way that the film drew parallels between the strategies used by the vampires and the strategies used by the local drug dealers--both use a mix of bribery and intimidation to get the residents to do what they want. There's also interesting to note that the police shown in the film, also used by the real estate firm, are both Black. There are some interesting observations about race and power and systems, and I wish that they came together in a more coherent way instead of more isolated moments of insight.

The film is littered with visual gags and other references to vampire films and mythology. (The real estate firm is Murnau Enterprises; Luis reads Salem's Lot in an early scene, and there is a direct Nosferatu homage as a shadow advances on a character). These are fun, but at times they have the effect of reminding you of better vampire movies. The final showdown is okay (and there's a great visual gag as two girls obliviously walk through the confrontation with their eyes firmly on their cell phones), but it lacks a bit of heft. The vampires are taken down way too easily.

Overall a fun little horror-comedy and the kind of movie that might be good especially for someone who is like 8-10 years old and wanting to watch "horror" that isn't too intense.

3.5

[SpelingError]

While I haven't seen Whiplash yet, I do agree with you that I'm tired of people willfully misintrepreting movies,

I mean, I wasn't deliberately misinterpreting the film. I'll concede that my reading of the film wasn't correct, but I wasn't self-aware of this at the time I discussed the film. That was genuinely what I thought at the time.

[Mr Minio]

あなたにゐてほしい~SOAR~ [SOAR: I Wish You Were Here] (2015) - 4

https://i.imgur.com/e8jTSOY.png
https://i.imgur.com/p1MZz1T.png
https://i.imgur.com/SN5Zig1.png
https://i.imgur.com/rWz2WG6.png
https://i.imgur.com/IpES9nY.png

Whispering of trees
a fairy of my dearest
appears in sunlight

https://i.imgur.com/OlSR6n4.png
https://i.imgur.com/HuAg6lP.png
https://i.imgur.com/vW01ecV.png
https://i.imgur.com/Gj8Mfuk.png
https://i.imgur.com/uEEzFsU.png

Tradition and modernity. Trees and films. Film and digital. Villages and cities. A forest fairy and a soaring cat. A woman who lost her beloved to the war resolves to realize her fiancée's dream. As Japan enters the post-war era, everything seems to be in danger. Spelling, nature, the village, memories. But this clash of the old and the new is inevitable. Longing for the past while wondering what the future will bring. What would I be doing now if I was alive? A tree is a calm observer of us, humans, and it was here long before film. Tree rings work like film reels. Now if only they could talk and share their wisdom. Instead, they whisper. Can you hear their voice? Will the children of tomorrow hear these whispers? A foundling is a realized dream of an unrealized life. Time passes. All things must pass. The antenna on top of a mountain. A Moonlight Man carries his dad. Thank you, daddy. Now I can't even remember your shadow. Anything can't change and nothing can change. You mean the world to me.

[Tugg]

Cruella (2021) 3
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/i/151c14f3-8e84-4341-87ca-aa77d57f3a0d/def161b-03a4884f-108c-43c4-a216-4fe3576d2713.png
A Quiet Place Part II (2020-2021) 3
https://ohthatfilmblog.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/screenshot-2021-06-08-at-13.21.57.png?w=1024
The Conjuring 3: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021) 3
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/c7268c79-9436-4230-b75e-2814495b25f4/deizxa7-9491c1a6-5dce-4a13-a003-00ecc5a8f044.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQz NzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6 W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2M3MjY4Yzc5LTk0MzYtNDIzMC1iNzVlLTI4MTQ0OTViMjVmNFwvZGVpenhhNy05NDkxYzFhNi01ZGNl LTRhMTMtYTAwMy0wMGVjYzVhOGYwNDQucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.VJ2JkomN lEzngd3wBKtvHF2jJ-QqedlxQQe33WLPpkU
Good on Paper (2021) 3
https://www.startattle.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/jordan-matthew-young-the-voice-semifinals-2021-drift-away-season-20-blake-shelton-american-netflix-amazon-apple-tv-1.jpg
The Ice Road (2021) 3.5
https://news.causewaycoastcommunity.co.uk/content/images/size/w1000/2021/06/48145_1_THE_ICE_ROAD_AMAZON_FILM_1920x1080_V5-700x394.jpeg

[StuSmallz]

Would you care to demonstrate SpelingError's "willful" misinterpretation? It's one thing to disagree with someone's take on a film, but it's a more serious accusation to impune their motives for it.I wasn't specifically accusing SE of misintrepreting Whiplash, because, again, I haven't seen it yet; that's why I went into the tangent about the other movies I mentioned, Mr. Instigator.

:p

[Takoma11]

I mean, I wasn't deliberately misinterpreting the film. I'll concede that my reading of the film wasn't correct, but I wasn't self-aware of this at the time I discussed the film. That was genuinely what I thought at the time.

If it helps, it's still pretty close to my reading of the film. *shrug*

[SpelingError]

If it helps, it's still pretty close to my reading of the film. *shrug*

Yeah, but I feel like you guys are better at discussing this than I am, so I don't know lol :shrug:

[Wyldesyde19]

Yeah, but I feel like you guys are better at discussing this than I am, so I don't know lol :shrug:
There is nothing wrong with your interpretation of it. Everyone sees films differently.

[SpelingError]

There is nothing wrong with your interpretation of it. Everyone sees films differently.

Yeah, I know. I'm just being vaguely goofy. But yeah, thanks though :)

[ThatDarnMKS]

GENERAL SPOILERS FOR WHIPLASH YA'LL

I haven't seen either Midsommar or Phantom Thread, so I can't speak to those comparisons.

But you say "Great art IS often created via horrible abuses and conditions". I totally agree!

But what I take some issue with is, again, I think that the depiction in Whiplash is more of a trial-by-fire scenario where the hero comes out of the experience better and stronger. Yes, there has been sacrifice and loss along the way, but in the final moments, we get the sense that the main character is exactly where he wants to be and that we should be celebrating along with him. That last part is where I have mixed feelings. And maybe this comes down to personal viewpoint. Maybe you watched the movie and at the end the feeling you had was, "Dude, that was NOT worth it." But that's not where I felt the film pushing me.

Again, I don't think that the film is so simple as to be explicitly endorsing abusive teaching methods. But the way that the character of Fletcher is used, he basically becomes the monster to be slain by the main character and that final concert is their ultimate arena. It is the strength and determination of the main character that sees him through to the end, and I go back to having really mixed feelings about what that says about someone who died of suicide after similar treatment, ie if they had been talented/driven enough, they would have also been refined by the process.

I think that dangerous/abusive/unhealthy situations can make people stronger. And everyone loves a story where someone overcomes those obstacles (like rising above poverty to become a judge or making it out of an abusive home). But I think that such stories risk romanticizing the process by downplaying the human cost of the people who don't make it through (and end up in jail or dead or addicted to drugs or never escape the cycle of abusive relationships, etc).

So it's not so much that I see the film endorsing the teaching methods as I see it romanticizing the experience of enduring and triumphing over them.

CONT. SPOILERS FOR WHIPLASH

Many apologies if I spoiled Midsommar and Phantom Thread. For some reason, I was certain we’d discussed them before (check em out so we can rectify that!)

I think experienced mixed feelings IS the intended reaction. I think it is triumphant, it is where Andrew wants to be and he has vanquished his foe. But we cannot ignore the context in which this “victory” is occurring that’s been woven throughout the narrative.*

I think the issue of romanticizing is a valid concern but aside from the provocative nature of the ending, I don’t think anyone thinks positively about the method in which they get there. Virtually everyone agrees it sucks.*

If showing someone succeed in the face of adversity is a slight against those who failed, then what stops every single happy ending and success from being problematic romanticization? Especially when the narrative directly implicated Fletcher’s culpability in suicides and Andrew’s self destruction. If these elements were absent and the abuse was clearly and directly responsible for Andrew’s talent/success, I think it would be closer to problematic romanticization.*

I just don’t see how with the established costs and relative stakes, that within the context the film provides that the ending isn’t a transparent Pyrrhic victory, even if it’s an utterly rousing one.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Yeah, I know. I'm just being vaguely goofy. But yeah, thanks though :)
Yeah, man. We’re all giving subjective opinions. You’re not wrong.

Just nowhere near as correct as me. ;)

[Rockatansky]

Yeah, I know. I'm just being vaguely goofy. But yeah, thanks though :)

Don't apologize. Double down. Wildly throw out ad hominem attacks if you have to. Can't show weakness if you're wrestling with a bear (read: discussing movies on the internet).

[SpelingError]

Don't apologize. Double down. Wildly throw out ad hominem attacks if you have to. Can't show weakness if you're wrestling with a bear (read: discussing movies on the internet).

Good advice. Lemme try.

ThatDarnMKS? More like...ThatDumbMKS!!

Also, I was going to criticize everyone for not talking about Tarkovsky instead of Whiplash, but that was the schtick of a prior RT poster, so I can't copy that.

[StuSmallz]

Good advice. Lemme try.

ThatDarnMKS? More like...ThatDumbMKS!!

Also, I was going to criticize everyone for not talking about Tarkovsky instead of Whiplash, but that was the schtick of a prior RT poster, so I can't copy that.You mean Lovesexy, I assume?

[SpelingError]

You mean Lovesexy, I assume?

Yep.

[Rockatansky]

Good advice. Lemme try.

ThatDarnMKS? More like...ThatDumbMKS!!

Also, I was going to criticize everyone for not talking about Tarkovsky instead of Whiplash, but that was the schtick of a prior RT poster, so I can't copy that.
You think a bear has seen any Tarkovsky? That ursine dumbass can't even work a DVD player.*Don't be afraid to hit below the belt.*Not even literally. You think a bear will expect a punch in the balls?

[SpelingError]

You think a bear has seen any Tarkovsky? That ursine dumbass can't even work a DVD player.*Don't be afraid to hit below the belt.*Not even literally. You think a bear will expect a punch in the balls?

You distract MKS while I go for a frontal assault. He can't stop both of us.

[ThatDarnMKS]

Good advice. Lemme try.

ThatDarnMKS? More like...ThatDumbMKS!!

Is this… Is this what was once long ago referred to as pwnage? My God… the power…

[ThatDarnMKS]

You distract MKS while I go for a frontal assault. He can't stop both of us.
The only way you could possibly distract would be to challenge me on an intellectual level that forces my formidable brain to seize up at the sheer enormity of a philosophical concept or the jangle around something shiny. But you don’t have anything shiny. Do ya, punk?

[Takoma11]

MORE WHIPLASH SPOILERS, MY LOVELY UNICORNS!


CONT. SPOILERS FOR WHIPLASH

Many apologies if I spoiled Midsommar and Phantom Thread. For some reason, I was certain we’d discussed them before (check em out so we can rectify that!)

Eh, I feel like people were particularly irresponsible in how they talked about Midsommar, so I actually feel like I know about a lot of the "big stuff" despite knowing very little about the film's plot and not having seen it.

I think experienced mixed feelings IS the intended reaction. I think it is triumphant, it is where Andrew wants to be and he has vanquished his foe. But we cannot ignore the context in which this “victory” is occurring that’s been woven throughout the narrative.*

I think the issue of romanticizing is a valid concern but aside from the provocative nature of the ending, I don’t think anyone thinks positively about the method in which they get there. Virtually everyone agrees it sucks.*

Again, I don't think that the film endorses or romanticizes the method itself (though I'm sure plenty of people got a weird little thrill out of watching homophobia and emotional abuse get tossed around in a classroom). It's the romanticizing of the experience that I find concerning. I feel strongly that the finale puts the emphasis on the triumph and not at all on the cost. This is the beginning of something good for our character (and it is even validating to Fletcher).

If showing someone succeed in the face of adversity is a slight against those who failed, then what stops every single happy ending and success from being problematic romanticization? Especially when the narrative directly implicated Fletcher’s culpability in suicides and Andrew’s self destruction. If these elements were absent and the abuse was clearly and directly responsible for Andrew’s talent/success, I think it would be closer to problematic romanticization.*

To me the difference is in the reverential way that the film--and many movie/music/art fans--regard art. There is often a suggestion that there is an acceptable body count if a work of art or a talent is good enough. That's what makes it different than, say, the final girl surviving the serial killer or the one kid from the poor neighborhood making it out while others OD or go to jail. With other happy endings, it is not implied that the body count was a necessary evil on the way to finding and refining the "chosen one", for lack of a better word.

I just don’t see how with the established costs and relative stakes, that within the context the film provides that the ending isn’t a transparent Pyrrhic victory, even if it’s an utterly rousing one.

I agree with you that the film doesn't hide the costs of what he goes through. In fact, those costs (like the car accident) are even more extreme than you might expect. But I strongly feel that the last act has a trajectory that ends up--in an adrenaline-filled, reverential sequence--strongly emphasizing the benefits over the costs.

[Rockatansky]

The only way you could possibly distract would be to challenge me on an intellectual level that forces my formidable brain to seize up at the sheer enormity of a philosophical concept or the jangle around something shiny. But you don’t have anything shiny. Do ya, punk?
*drops pants, makes spring noise*

[SpelingError]

The only way you could possibly distract would be to challenge me on an intellectual level that forces my formidable brain to seize up at the sheer enormity of a philosophical concept or the jangle around something shiny. But you don’t have anything shiny. Do ya, punk?
Well, I'm no philosopher, but I do appreciate shiny things, so I'll taunt you with them.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fmovieboozer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F01%2Ffarinelli-main-review.png&f=1&nofb=1

Farinelli, 1994

At a young age, Carlo (Stefano Dionisi) is castrated to preserve his singing voice. Pressured into keeping the family reputation and finances afloat, Carlo ends up in an unhealthily close relationship with his older brother Riccardo (Enrico Lo Verso), a composer. As the brothers rise in the ranks of various European courts, Carlo (known by the stage name Farinelli) starts to become restless with their arrangement.

A quick visit to good old Wikipedia confirmed one of my suspicions, namely that this film take a LOT of liberties with the true story of Farinelli. With that in mind (and something I already kind of suspected from the get-go), I tried to regard it just as a drama and not a historical story.

This was a film that I felt was a bit at war with itself. Its most potent themes were those that had to do with what it means to be an artist and the unhealthy lengths that people will go to out of loyalty (in this case, loyalty to family). But clearly the most pressing thing that the writer could think about was "CASTRATED?! BUT HOW HE DO SEX?!"

There are moments when the best themes actually do align with the fascination with Farinelli's role as a castrati. For example, Carlo's voice has a strong effect on women, and becomes the primary way he seduces sex and romantic partners. But at the same time, much of their personal fascination with him comes from his physical condition. Carlo had no choice in his castration, and now he is forced to make the best of his situation. Carlo must also grapple with his family's complicity in his condition.

Visually, the film is a treat. The sequences where we watch Carlo perform, with lush costumes and backdrops, are great. And generally speaking the film has a sweeping, romantic look to it. The makeup is strong, as well, in both the performance sequences and generally.

There are some interested elements to this film, and overall I thought that the performances were strong. There were quite a few parts that felt a bit redundant--both some of the sex scenes and scenes of Carlo and Riccardo squabbling with each other or others. There is a whole subplot about them having a feud with Handel which . . . . meh. Never really felt like something genuine or compelling and just calls a lot of attention to the way that the film takes liberties with the true facts.

I had high hopes for this film, admittedly just based on the colorful poster, and it fell a bit short. Not bad, just not the best it could have been.

3.5

[Wyldesyde19]

I imagine this was Takoma earlier:

*sees Gideon celebrated for her 2000th review*

Takoma: *cracks knuckles*
“challenge accepted!”

😜

[SpelingError]

*sees Gideon celebrated for her 2000th review*

And here I was thinking Gideon was male all this time.

[mark f]

He is.

[Wyldesyde19]

He is.
He is? My apologies. Could have sworn it was revealed Gideon is a she.

[Gideon58]

I just finished watching Fatherhood (2021) on Netflix. This drama/comedy stars Kevin Hart as a new dad whose wife suddenly passes away. I really liked this film a lot. For me, this is Kevin Hart's best performance. The little girl is super adorable. This was sweet, funny, and very heartfelt. My rating is 4


I didn't rate it quite as high as you did, but I enjoyed this film...a real change of pace for Kevin Hart

[Fabulous]

Alphaville (1965)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/iOUhnp01rP9Xr5QG66LMAKSDkYv.jpg

[Jinnistan]

I wasn't specifically accusing SE of misintrepreting Whiplash, because, again, I haven't seen it yet; that's why I went into the tangent about the other movies I mentioned, Mr. Instigator.

:p
The real instigation was your poor choice of words. "I do agree with you that I'm tired of people willfully misintrepreting movies". I don't see where MKS ever made such a claim, either in regards to SE or anyone else. In all of our disagreements, I don't think I've ever seen MKS accuse me of deliberately misrepresenting a film. So it doesn't really matter which film or argument you're referring to, your framing of willful misinterpretation is a bit hostile for any movie discussion.

[Jinnistan]

*drops pants, makes spring noise*
Look at this mockrocker over here.

[Takoma11]

I imagine this was Takoma earlier:

*sees Gideon celebrated for her 2000th review*

Takoma: *cracks knuckles*
“challenge accepted!”

😜

Ha! Let's see I'm only *checks stats* 1,800 reviews behind. Pfft. That's, what, a weekend of review writing? Maybe three days?

[cricket]

Wrong Turn (2021)

4

https://westernweekender.com.au/wp-content/uploads/wrongturn.jpg

I'm a fan of the Wrong Turn series so I figured I'd give it a shot. I thought it was a remake of the original but no, it's a reboot that goes in a completely different direction. After about 10 minutes I thought I was going to hate it as it seemed like there was a lot of liberal messaging going on. What I got from there was nonstop shocks, thrills, and surprises. For fans of this kind of horror it is all kinds of awesome. I loved it.

[Rockatansky]

Look at this mockrocker over here.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/cfed955b77fd8346cafb5accafe61458/tenor.gif?itemid=12758168
:(

[Jinnistan]

*pwned


Internet won :king:

[pahaK]

Gaia (2021)
3
A South-African ecological body horror that looks stunningly beautiful and at times even manages to pull its artsier side through. There's very little room for characters, and the story isn't always that gripping. As a whole, it's still a positive experience and, for a long time, I was contemplating an extra half a rating, but it just lacked the final oomph. Based on the reviews, it's apparently ripping The Last of Us, but as I still haven't played the game, I can't mind.

[Fabulous]

Cover Girl (1944)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ju20hbsNpeIaeApCpYlHfr5T93B.jpg

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/The-piano-poster.jpg
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=34788954

The Piano - (1993) - rewatch

Scottish woman Ada McGrath (Holly Hunter) is electively mute, eccentric, and has just been betrothed to Alisdair Stewart (Sam Neill) who lives in the wilderness of New Zealand. She communicates through sign language (helped by her daughter) but mainly likes to think she talks through her piano - her playing infects everyone around with her moods and meaning. After a perilous journey, Stewart demands the piano be abandoned on the seashore. Baines (Harvey Keitel) - a friend of Stewart, will find out that rescuing it is akin to saving her soul, and winning over her heart - something that is beyond Stewart's understanding.

Beautiful film - matched by McGrath's eloquent playing which echoes the mood of what we see in Holly Hunter's expressive face - she deserved her Oscar in my opinion. No matter how hard she tries she can't reach Stewart, so her love for Baines is less betrayal than inevitability. Outside the confines of society - out in the middle of nowhere - there is only the law of the land which threatens to consume the lives of those in this triangle. The landing on the shore of New Zealand is a cinematographic highlight, as is the steamy, honest, sexuality between McGrath and Baines. Harvey Keitel oozes sex appeal in this - and makes the whole thing work so very well. Wonderful script and direction by Jane Campion.

9/10

[PHOENIX74]

Alphaville (1965)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/iOUhnp01rP9Xr5QG66LMAKSDkYv.jpg

High up on my watchlist - this

[StuSmallz]

Obviously that's the scene in the whole movie that has a bit of resonance... but it's in a bit of a vacuum.I dunno, I thought the film did a good job of setting up the stakes that Joi faced by choosing to go fully portable without a backup; it's why it's such a personal tragedy for K when you-know-what happened, after all. What about this scene, then; did you not feel anything for K when he was going through his identity crisis here?:


https://youtu.be/Oa9c9JBBGxM

[Fabulous]

My Name Is Nobody (1973)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ah9UKqRR66JSZ6BxawogaDpagrh.jpg

[xSookieStackhouse]

4.5
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZTQyNTU0MDktYTFkYi00ZjNhLWE2ODctMzBkM2U1ZTk3YTMzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTI4MzE4MDU@._V1_.jpg

[Wooley]

I dunno, I thought the film did a good job of setting up the stakes that Joi faced by choosing to go fully portable without a backup; it's why it's such a personal tragedy for K when you-know-what happened, after all. What about this scene, then; did you not feel anything for K when he was going through his identity crisis here?:


https://youtu.be/Oa9c9JBBGxM

No, I meant it's resonance was in a vacuum because so little of the rest of the film had resonance for me. It was like a beautiful exercise in trying to either match or surpass the greatness of the original film... without a decent script.

[Fabulous]

Please Don't Eat the Daisies (1960)

2

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/i87vfwO6NDJxrHBcaLVpeDZ8ijy.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.allhorror.com%2Fpublic%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F03%2FLake-Mungo-2008-1366x445.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Lake Mungo, 2008

While out at a family picnic near a dam, teenager Alice (Talia Zucker) goes missing and her body is later recovered from the lake. Her grieving parents, Russell (David Pledger) and June (Rosie Traynor), and her brother Matthew (Martin Sharpe) barely have time to adjust to their new reality when strange things begin to happen around the house. As the Palmers grapple with the unexplained events, they begin to learn more about Alice and the weeks and months leading up to her death.

A friend of mine recently confessed that she'd never been able to "handle" horror due to how frightening and gory it is, but that she was interested in it. On talking to her more, it seemed that she'd mainly been shown some more gnarly stuff. I told her that I would curate some horror that might be more her speed, and we've been having Sunday Afternoon Horror Club every week. (Okay, we originally met on Sundays, but lately we've just been meeting whenever we want to because she's a freelancer and I'm on summer break--woo!). While we've watched a lot of older horror (The Innocents, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Attack of the Crab Monsters), this was the first contemporary horror we've checked out.

Man, I love this movie so much.

To begin with, Lake Mungo is shot in the style of a documentary. And I cannot emphasize enough how I feel that this is one of the best "fake documentaries" I have ever seen. The editing, the production values, the use of "real" footage (like television broadcasts or old family movies) are just PERFECT.

And building on the style are the performances. I know that part of the benefit comes from the actors not being household names (I recognized Steve Jodrell, who plays a psychic consulted by Alice's mother, but none of the other actors--maybe I'd recognize more if I were more familiar with Australian films). The people in the documentary just feel like real people. I give a lot of credit on this front to the writing and line deliveries, which are incredibly naturalistic.

Something that makes discussing this film challenging, especially if someone hasn't seen it yet, is that the film builds and builds and takes several surprising turns. There are some particularly brilliant reveals around the middle of the film that change much of the tone and context of what we are seeing.

I dare not look at the IMDb reviews page, because I'm sure I'd see the word "boring" on there. To be sure, this film is a slow-burner, but it carries with it an emotional heft as we learn more and more about Alice and that knowledge intersects brutally with the unmovable fact of her death. Whatever things might have been said, repaired, done, or communicated in regard to Alice, it is all too late. The only thing left is understanding. And when the film finally brings us to a point of understanding, it's a gut punch.

I think that what I love so much about this movie is that it's not about the scary or horrible things happening to people. It's about how those people react, and the impact that their reactions have on their loved ones and on others. I can come back to it time and time again because even if I have every jump scare or creepy shadowy figure memorized, it's the different character arcs that retain their power to haunt and horrify.

Someone please tell me how and why this is the only feature made by writer/director Joel Anderson.

Highly recommended it you haven't seen it.

5

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjUwMjczMzY5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMjgyMTczNTM@._V1_.jpg



2.5

[Fabulous]

Samson and Delilah (1949)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/kDsHORf7tGXW3o9uSk7Ee8IISq7.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Funderthegunreview.net%2Fapp%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F01%2Fbigbadwolves.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Big Bad Wolves, 2013

A girl disappears in a small town, and is presumed dead. A detective on the case Micki (Lior Ashkenazi) becomes convinced that a local teacher named Dror (Rotem Keinan) is to blame. Micki steps outside of proper police procedure in his pursuit of Dror, but the missing girl's father, Gidi (Tzahi Grad) also has plans to extract the truth from Dror.

Oh, horror comedies.

As is often the case with me and horror-comedies, I find myself struggling with the mix of tones. In the first ten or fifteen minutes of the film, it feels as if the horror/thriller aspect will be the most compelling. The very first sequence---a group of children playing hide and seek with an ominous score in the background--was very effective.

But as is sometimes the case, the middle and final act of the film lean heavily on mixing humor with gore, and to me it was a really mixed bag.

As a viewer, I don't do well with torture type films. I don't want to watch people having their fingers broken or nails pulled out or being burned. And I definitely don't want to watch any of those things with cute little quips happening in between. I had to watch quite a bit of this movie on mute because listening to screaming and bones cracking with whimsical framing isn't my cup of tea. There were a handful of moments that nailed the dark comedy just right--such as a part where burning a person results in another person reminiscing about BBQ because they've been forced to be vegetarian for the last few years. But for the most part it just didn't land for me. A man torturing a dog to death is a hard pass from me, even more so if it's meant to be funny.

The performances are fine, but the script is demanding that we take the story seriously even as we are supposed to laugh at it. It's a weird gray zone and, again, it left me a bit distanced from the film.

On the horror front, the film falls back on that old specter of sexual violence against little girls. The whole thing just lost its grip for me in the long stretch of torture stuff. And, annoyingly, the film then asks us to engage sincerely in the child endangerment stuff in the last little bit.

This one has been on my watchlist for a while, and it was kind of a let down.

2.5

[skizzerflake]

It has to be one of the best opening sequences ever put in a movie, from A Touch of Evil, directed by Orson Welles. It appears to have been filmed real-time, one shot, with nearly 3D monochrome cinematography. An unknown guy, with a woman in the car, passes customs in a border town while a Mexican cop (Charlton Heston) on a date just happens to be there when the car explodes, apparently due to a bomb.

The moving frame of reference, mobil dolly shots, the musical and sonic background and (being noir), the light and shadow make this opening, as well as the rest of the movie, really interesting. On one scale, it's the 59th best movie ever made. I don't know, but it's really arresting, especially Welles himself, playing a bloated, cynical cop with a very low opinion of the Mexicans right on the other side of the street that's the border.

It's full of oblique angled shots, bongo drums, high contrast shots, minimalist sound FX, close ups and action shots. Great stuff

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhmYY5ZMXOY

[pahaK]

Кольская сверхглубокая (2020)
aka The Superdeep
3
A Russian horror somewhat reminiscent of The Thing with perhaps little Event Horizon and some cosmic horror thrown into the mix. Practical effects look really nice. It's a bit too long and there's some silliness in the script, but overall rather entertaining. Even the English dub is rather good.

[xSookieStackhouse]

3.5
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZDQ2NTdmNDgtMGIwMS00ODE2LTk5M2EtZGZhYzc4MWRlNTU3XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTc4MjczMTM@._V1_.jpg

[Seanstewart]

Jerimiah Johnson,Robert Redford,Sydney Pollock's mountain Man epic,one of the best westerns ever made,huge hit when it came out,with a limited amount of publicity,it just had audiences captivated,I was thinking, if it was made today and they had the budget of something like the The Revenant,with those locations and modern film making progress,and Redford was at his peak now,instead of the seventies,what a movie it would be,yes the original 1972 was a masterpiece,but if done today it would be even better,but only with Redford,not someone like DiCaprio,just a what if speculation.

[Hey Fredrick]

https://i.imgur.com/vW3biGP.jpg?1

There's a murder on the Orient Express, some interrogations, then an ending. Pretty simple and I enjoyed it even if the ending was a little... I didn't like the ending. What it really has going for it is the cast, especially Albert Finney as Poirot, who are all fantastic. I had a blast watching Finney who is unrecognizable and plays Poirot just to the edge of being absurd but never crosses the line (maybe he does a little). His performance reminded me of a combination of a few other great performances - Gloria Swanson as Norma Desmond, Peter Sellers as Chief Inspector Clouseau and Terry Jones as Mr. Creosote. He steals the show. I did have to use subtitles as either my sound is junk or the accents where just too thick for me to grasp what was being said and, being a talkie whodunnit, what they are saying is kind of important. 3.5

[Marco]

My Name Is Nobody (1973)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ah9UKqRR66JSZ6BxawogaDpagrh.jpg

Charming film, think my rating was akin to yours Fabulous.

[mark f]

Compensation (Zeinabu irene Davis, 1999) 2.5 6/10
Les saignantes AKA The Bloodettes (Jean-Pierre Bekolo, 2005) 2 5/10
The Apostate (Federico Veiroj, 2015) 2.5 5.5/10
The Wonder of it All (Jeffrey Roth, 2007) 3.5- 7/10
https://resizing.flixster.com/aZZIArqQrILsOG89XHxFdgOW42w=/740x380/v1.bjsyNzQzMzY3O2o7MTg4ODY7MTIwMDsyMDQ4OzEwMjQ
Brief history of the Apollo program and interviews with the men who walked on the moon.
The Misfits (Renny Harlin, 2021) 2 5/10
False Positive (John Lee, 2021) 2.5 6/10
Women (Anton Sigurdsson, 2021) 1.5+ 4.5/10
Queen Bees (Michael Lembeck, 2021) 2.5 6/10
https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/queen-bees-02_QUEENBEES_rgb-1-620x400.jpg
Women (Ellen Burstyn, Loretta Divine, Ann-Margret & Jane Curtin) at an old age home find adventure, romance and heartbreak.
The Ice Road (Jonathan Hensleigh, 2021) 2.5 6/10
A Perfect Enemy (Kike Maíllo, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Good on Paper (Kimmy Gatewood, 2021) 2.5 6/10
Wolfgang (David Gelb, 2021) 3+ 6.5/10
https://assets2.rappler.com/2021/06/2021-06-23T140946Z_1723098526_RC2E6O99VYCO_RTRMADP_3_FILM-WOLFGANG-PUCK-1624511657155-546.jpg
History of chef Wolfgang Puck's rise to fame In Hollywood and on TV, often centering on problems with his family.
Boot Camp (Christian Duguay, 2008) 2.5 6/10
Frankenstein Meets the Spacemonster (Robert Gaffney, 1965) 1.5 4/10
Gaia (Jaco Bouwer, 2021) 2.5 5.5/10
The Thief Who Came to Dinner (Bud Yorkin, 1973) 3.5 7/10
https://prod-images.tcm.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i372/thiefwhocametodinner_howcomeyouhaventcaughthim_FC_HD_2398_1_224x104_082420150145.jpg?w=400
Consistently-playful heist movie about computer expert Ryan O'Neal and his accomplice Jacqueline BIsset battling wits with insurance investigator Warren Oates.
My Heart Can't Beat Unless You Tell It To (Jonathan Cuartas, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
The Carnivores (Caleb Michael Johnson, 2020) 2 5/10
Stalker AKA Blinders (Tyler Savage, 2020) 2.5 5.5/10
Miranda Veil (Levin Garbisch, 2020) 2.5 6/10
https://www.voicesfromthebalcony.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Miranda-Veil-10.jpg
Don't worry about Miranda Veil (Annabel Barrett) - she finds out she can't die when a wannabe serial killer (Zach Steffey) plans to make her his first victim.

[Fabulous]

The Collector (1965)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/w1TAMMJgJiOHaBOE7QHh3b8UnKH.jpg

[Mr Minio]

Watched a lot of films but what's the point... Everything feels so inferior after having seen a mind-boggling masterpiece.

[WHITBISSELL!]

Double feature - Iffy Boston lowlifes

https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/review/primary_image/reviews/killing-them-softly-2012/6-Cogan-1609.jpg

Killing Them Softly - Both these movies open more or less the same way with two lowlife criminals talking. This has Scoot McNairy and the usually faultless Ben Mendelssohn as Frankie and Russell, who are recruited by Johnny "Squirrel" Amato (Vincent Curatola) to hold up a mob run card game overseen by Markie Trattman (Ray Liotta). Amato figures it's the perfect target because, even though it's under mob protection, it's common knowledge that Trattman once knocked over his own game and somehow got away with it. The robbery results in the mob sending two hit men, Jackie (Brad Pitt) and Mickey (James Gandolfini) to hunt down and kill whoever was responsible. As you can see the cast is superlative and even the smaller roles have heavyweight talent involved with Richard Jenkins as Driver, a mob go between and Sam Shepherd in a blink-and-you'll-miss-it performance as legendary enforcer Dillon.

This was released in 2012 and is set during the U.S. financial crisis and presidential election campaign of 2008. There are pains taken by director Andrew Dominik to draw parallels between the criminal underworld and the machinations of the financial elites culminating in a short monologue by Pitt's character at the end. Despite the amazing cast and the capable direction by Dominik this never quite takes that last step towards being a showpiece gangster flick.

rating_3_5


https://images.maketheswitch.com.au/fit-in/1152x99999/toppic/freefire2.jpg

Free Fire - This is also set in Boston but 30 years earlier. It's 1978 and two IRA members Chris (Cillian Murphy) and Frank (Michael Smiley) are waiting outside an abandoned factory along with Justine (Brie Larsen). She's the intermediary in the gun deal that's about to go down. They're waiting on Ord (Armie Hammer) the sellers representative and for the two lowlife half wits that will be handling transporting the guns, Frank's cousin Stevo (Sam Riley) and his friend Bernie (Enzo Cilenti). They're mirror images for Frankie and Russell in KTS in that for all their tough guy posturing and F bombs the viewer will find it hard to see them as anything but a couple of actors acting. Anyway, all the parties finally show and go inside where the other myriad characters are waiting. These include loathsome arms dealer Vernon, (a marvelous Sharito Copley) his maltreated second-in-command Martin (Babou Ceesay) and henchmen Harry (Jack Reynor) and Gordon (Noah Taylor). Because of one of those only-in-the-movies coincidences, Harry and Stevo get into an argument which, given all the firepower being both carried and sold, quickly escalates into a huge chaotic firefight. A gun battle which takes up the rest of the movies runtime. It's not continuous of course with double and triple crosses and both sides scheming to form alliances and ultimately leave with the payment, a briefcase filled with money.

I think it had a rough beginning but all due credit should go to director Ben Wheatley for actually making the grandiose concept of a protracted gun battle not only work but keep it engaging. I really liked the two Wheatley movies I'd seen, Kill List and Down Terrace and even though I didn't find this as good as those it's still worth a watch. If only to see someone with the audacity to take anyone elses crescendo and turn it into a full length movie.

rating_3_5

[GulfportDoc]

It has to be one of the best opening sequences ever put in a movie, from A Touch of Evil, directed by Orson Welles. It appears to have been filmed real-time, one shot, with nearly 3D monochrome cinematography. An unknown guy, with a woman in the car, passes customs in a border town while a Mexican cop (Charlton Heston) on a date just happens to be there when the car explodes, apparently due to a bomb.

The moving frame of reference, mobil dolly shots, the musical and sonic background and (being noir), the light and shadow make this opening, as well as the rest of the movie, really interesting. On one scale, it's the 59th best movie ever made. I don't know, but it's really arresting, especially Welles himself, playing a bloated, cynical cop with a very low opinion of the Mexicans right on the other side of the street that's the border.

It's full of oblique angled shots, bongo drums, high contrast shots, minimalist sound FX, close ups and action shots. Great stuff

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:
I agree. One of the great American films. Perhaps even top 50. Wonderful opening scene, as you say. That long take is always included in anthologies of highly rated long take sequences.

[Thief]

PHILADELPHIA
(1993, Demme)
A film about LGBTQ+ lifestyles

https://popandfilms.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/philadelphia-film-01.jpg


"Look, the place that cradled me is burning... I'm alone."



Philadelphia follows the events that led Andrew to this state, as he was inexplicably fired by his law firm. To aid him, he recruits fellow attorney Joe Miller (Denzel Washington) to help him prove that the dismissal was not only because of his AIDS diagnosis, but simply because he's gay.

This is probably the third or fourth time I see this film. I read a review from the late 2000s where I was a bit more enthusiastic, but make no mistake: this is still a very powerful film with two excellent performances in the lead. Washington is his usual cool, laid-back self, but excels when the moment calls for him to show fear, ignorance, and lack of understanding.

But oh my, how good is Tom Hanks in this. Yes, at the time it was a surprising turn from an actor that specialized in comedies and lighter fare. But seeing it now, already used to Hanks as a serious actor, I found his performance just as powerful as before, if not more. There are lots of moments of nuance and subtlety in his performance, but the way he peaks in the above quoted scene is magnificent.

Grade: 4


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2215932#post2215932)

[skizzerflake]

I'm not doing noir tonight, but Hitchcock. It's The Rear Window, a high-color, brightly lit, anti-noir movie. It's really quite a period piece. It has James Stewart being, well, James Stewart and Grace Kelly, before she became a princess in Monte Carlo. It's really a quiet movie, with little soundtrack music other than an across-the-alley pianist practicing, the music echoing across the alley. Dialog is quiet and action is nearly nil because Stewart's character, a news photog, is laid up with a broken leg, watching his neighbors out of the rear window of an apartment in "The City". Murder is afoot. Raymond Burr, who is NOT Perry Mason yet, did it. This really is good.

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m01YktiEZCw

[StuSmallz]

Silence Of The Lambs (Demme, '91)

https://i.ibb.co/RPtD362/original.png (https://ibb.co/vmfj3d1)

Have the lambs stopped screaming yet?

When it comes to the kind of movies that typically come to mind when you think of Best Picture winners, what pops up first? Do you think of an emotionally solemn, three hour black-and-white drama about The Holocaust? Or maybe a classy Mafia epic, driven by one man's slow but inevitable fall from moral grace? How about a disturbing, repulsively grimy thriller about an FBI agent's race to catch a serial killer before he slays and skins his next victim? Wait, that last one sounds a bit out of place, doesn't it? Well, if that's the case, then it's an eternal credit to the skill of the artists involved in making Silence Of The Lambs that the film managed to transcend its lurid trappings in the process of becoming a great film, one that not only won an aforementioned Best Picture Oscar, that not only additionally dominated that year's ceremony with its rare haul of all five "top" Oscars (Picture, Director, Actress, Actor, and Screenplay), but has also stood tall in the past thirty years as a truly iconic work of modern film, and one of the most influential Thrillers to ever come out of Hollywood to boot.

Adapted from the novel of the same name by Thomas Harris (who's actually from my hometown of Jackson, Tennessee; woot!), Silence tells the story of Clarice Starling, a young FBI trainee who is tasked with the "interesting errand" of profiling Dr. Hannibal Lecter, a brilliant but utterly sadistic serial killer, in the desperate hope that doing so may lend some psychological insight into the mindset of another killer, "Buffalo Bill", before he can notch up yet another victim. However, when it's unexpectedly discovered that Lecter has a personal connection to Bill deep in his murky past, his relevance to the case suddenly becomes one of upmost importance, with his captors, the politically powerful family of Bill's latest intended victim, and the FBI as a whole all jockeying to position themselves close to the fine (not so young) cannibal, all the while his real subject of interest remains Clarice, and the series of sadistic mind games he repeatedly ensnares her in.

It's the central dynamic that gives the film its drive, with both actors putting on superb, Oscar-worthy (and more importantly, Oscar-winning) performances, with Anthony Hopkins' Lecter making for a one-of-a-kind, highly cultured killer, one who's always acutely aware of his surroundings, seeming like he's in complete control of his situation at all times, even when he's trapped in a glass box, or completely restrained from head-to-toe. He sort of comes off like a giant spider wearing human skin, luring its victims into his web with his particular brand of mind games, as he's immediately able to zero in on his prey's deepest insecurities and fears, abusing his intellectual brilliance in psychiatry for his own sinister means, as he always knows just what to say or do in order to get under other people's skin (in more ways than one, as a shocking mid-film development shows).

On the other hand, while Jodie Foster's Clarice hasn't become quite as big a cultural icon (because who else could've, honestly?), she makes up for it with her overall relatability, serving as an empathetic "everywoman" surrounded by a bunch of freaks, and showcasing a shaky vulnerability in a world full of predatory men throughout (particularly in the scene where she recounts her worst childhood memory, which nearly certainly cinched her that Best Actress Oscar), while also showing a certain resilience and resourcefulness at the same time, whether it be her taking the initiative to open up a long deserted crime scene, boldly taking down a killer single-handedly, or continually being the only character clever enough to decipher the cryptic trail of clues Hannibal leaves behind him everywhere he goes. However, even though that process brings her ever closer to solving the case, it still ends up unlocking her darkest, most personal secrets at the time, leaving her with fresh scars on her psyche, and the question of whether it was all worth it by the film's end.

However, what is not even remotely in question for us is if Silence was worth the time it takes to watch it, since the answer to that is a resounding "YES", as the film simultaneously submerses us in a deep, dark world of serial killers, a world comprised of dank, dungeon-like psychiatric facilities, abandoned storage units that hold nasty surprises within, and grimy, labyrinthine killers' lairs, while also avoiding a potentially trashy, exploitative overall tone at the same time, with the combination of Harris's strong underlying source material (which managed to carry even a hack like Brett Ratner to a solid film with Red Dragon) and Johnathan Demme's classy, intelligent overall direction of the film, as Silence contains the most striking examples of the technique that Demme was best known for, that of having his actors looking directly into the camera, in order to bring a whole new level of intimacy to the film, one that makes us feel as one with the characters, even when we'd really rather not. It's a film that doesn't flinch one bit from peering deep down into the darkness of the human soul, bringing back with it some of the most iconic performances in modern film, an undeniably blurring of the line between "high" & "low" art in cinema, and what has to be admitted as just a great filmmaking in general, regardless of how disturbed it may make one feel personally; if you don't agree, then feel free to go eat your own liver, with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.


Final Score: 9

[MovieBuffering]

The Outlaw Josey Wales - 1976

Eastwood will forever be a badass. Movie was all you want out of an Eastwood western. Like most older movies I don't plan on revisiting it anytime soon but I sure do appreciate watching it. Eastwood just knows how to make a God damn Western. I wish someone would wise up and make one with his son Scott. Hell Eastwood should direct one with his son, that would be amazing. Looks just like him. This movie probably doesn't fly to great now a days as it shows sympathy towards the South during the Civil War even though in the end it feels neutral. Eastwood is great per usual. Just throw him in any Western and it automatically gets boosted up a point. I not sure what else to say it's Eastwood in a Western it's gold.

3.5

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51LVM6YuhZL._AC_.jpg

[StuSmallz]

The Outlaw Josey Wales - 1976

Eastwood will forever be a badass. Movie was all you want out of an Eastwood western. Like most older movies I don't plan on revisiting it anytime soon but I sure do appreciate watching it. Eastwood just knows how to make a God damn Western. I wish someone would wise up and make one with his son Scott. Hell Eastwood should direct one with his son, that would be amazing. Looks just like him. This movie probably doesn't fly to great now a days as it shows sympathy towards the South during the Civil War even though in the end it feels neutral. Eastwood is great per usual. Just throw him in any Western and it automatically gets boosted up a point. I not sure what else to say it's Eastwood in a Western it's gold.

3.5

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51LVM6YuhZL._AC_.jpgI would've gone somewhat higher on my score for Josey Wales, but I'm glad you liked it anyway; by the way, have you seen Unforgiven (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/unforgiven/) yet? Because as far as Eastwood Westerns go (of the ones he directed himself, at least), it definitely feels like the ultimate culmination of his career, helping to deconstruct his work in a genre he helped to define for decades, you know?

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/j5XkvZQ7/The-Fighter-Poster.jpg

3

If this film was only Dicky for two hours would be five stars. Christian Bale is really a fantastic actor. You can sense he takes acting very seriously, not Daniel Day-Lewis seriously, but seriously. I want to see the real HBO documentary "Crack in America".

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Wind_River_%282017_film%29.png
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54093390

Wind River - (2017)

Pretty solid murder mystery from Taylor Sheridan, set in the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. A place where nobody is interested, and the FBI send one of their most inexperienced to solve a case where a multiple-rape victim was forced to flee and die in the snow. Cory Lambert (Jeremy Renner) is a hunter however, and lost his young daughter in similar circumstances. The two team up on an emotional journey. Highlights the plight of women on these reservations where hundreds of violent murders are barely investigated. Performances from Renner and Elizabeth Olsen make this better than the average take on hunting down rapists/murderers and the trauma they inflict on their communities.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b1/Rambo_-_Last_Blood_official_theatrical_poster.jpg
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61421007

Rambo : Last Blood - (2019)

I'm so embarrassed for watching this.

3/10

[John-Connor]

The Thief Who Came to Dinner (Bud Yorkin, 1973) 3.5 7/10
https://prod-images.tcm.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i372/thiefwhocametodinner_howcomeyouhaventcaughthim_FC_HD_2398_1_224x104_082420150145.jpg?w=400
Consistently-playful heist movie about computer expert Ryan O'Neal and his accomplice Jacqueline Basset battling wits with insurance investigator Warren Oates.
Watch-listed!

[John-Connor]

Nomadland 2020 Chloé Zhao
78960
"It's strange that you encourage people to invest their whole life savings, go into debt, just to buy a house they can't afford."
3.5+

Greenland 2020 Ric Roman Waugh
78961
3

[Wooley]

The Outlaw Josey Wales - 1976

Eastwood will forever be a badass. Movie was all you want out of an Eastwood western. Like most older movies I don't plan on revisiting it anytime soon but I sure do appreciate watching it. Eastwood just knows how to make a God damn Western. I wish someone would wise up and make one with his son Scott. Hell Eastwood should direct one with his son, that would be amazing. Looks just like him. This movie probably doesn't fly to great now a days as it shows sympathy towards the South during the Civil War even though in the end it feels neutral. Eastwood is great per usual. Just throw him in any Western and it automatically gets boosted up a point. I not sure what else to say it's Eastwood in a Western it's gold.

3.5

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51LVM6YuhZL._AC_.jpg
One of my favorites, I've probably seen this 20 times or more.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Wind_River_%282017_film%29.png
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54093390

Wind River - (2017)

Pretty solid murder mystery from Taylor Sheridan, set in the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. A place where nobody is interested, and the FBI send one of their most inexperienced to solve a case where a multiple-rape victim was forced to flee and die in the snow. Cory Lambert (Jeremy Renner) is a hunter however, and lost his young daughter in similar circumstances. The two team up on an emotional journey. Highlights the plight of women on these reservations where hundreds of violent murders are barely investigated. Performances from Renner and Elizabeth Olsen make this better than the average take on hunting down rapists/murderers and the trauma they inflict on their communities.

7/10



I thought this was pretty strong and, having not seen The Hurt Locker, finally helped me understand why Jeremy Renner is considered good.

[Stirchley]

I thought this was pretty strong and, having not seen The Hurt Locker, finally helped me understand why Jeremy Renner is considered good.

I did not like Wind River, but The Hurt Locker is excellent.

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/de/Mogul_Mowgli.jpg/220px-Mogul_Mowgli.jpg

2.5

Snooze factor =Zzzz



[Snooze Factor Ratings]:
Z = didn't nod off at all
Zz = nearly nodded off but managed to stay alert
Zzz = nodded off and missed some of the film but went back to watch what I missed
Zzzz = nodded off and missed some of the film but went back to watch what I missed but nodded off again at the same point and therefore needed to go back a number of times before I got through it...
Zzzzz = nodded off and missed some or the rest of the film but was not interested enough to go back over it

[Stirchley]

⬆️ The Snooze Factor Ratings are the best thing ever.

[Wooley]

I did not like Wind River, but The Hurt Locker is excellent.

Yeah, considering how highly I thought of Zero Dark Thirty I should get on this.

[Stirchley]

Yeah, considering how highly I thought of Zero Dark Thirty I should get on this.

Not as good as Zero, but still a very good movie.

[Gideon58]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81tOmaIO-pL._SL1500_.jpg



4

[StuSmallz]

I did not like Wind River, but The Hurt Locker is excellent.Wait, why didn't you like River?

[Thursday Next]

In the Heights (2021)

I probably shouldn't rate this, considering I mixed up the timings for the movie and arrived at the cinema late and missed the first half hour of the film. Having bought popcorn and drinks and seeing as there was still 2 hours of the movie to go, we decided to go in anyway. It really wasn't hard to catch up with what was going on, might have missed some good songs though. It was quite a fun movie, with a hopeful, summery feel to it and some catchy songs. A bit cheesy and sanitised, but it's just good to see that musicals are still being made.

3.5