Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_ja51IYJlbws%2FSxQJ6KmkqUI%2FAAAAAAAAD7M%2FVnv86bnyWYk%2Fs1600%2 Ffat-city-1972-stacy-keach-jeff-bridges-pic-3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Fat City, 1972

Ernie (Jeff Bridges) is an up-and-coming boxer. Tully (Stacy Keach) has already made a go at it once. Each man gets involved in a romance: Ernie with the sweet Kaye (Candy Clark) and Tully with the troubled Oma (Susan Tyrrell). Both of them must navigate the changeable world of boxing.

I've said before that I have a slight personal aversion to films that feature a lot of boxing. It's not something I hold against a film, but it does make it harder for me to get invested in the narrative. This film, much like The Set-Up, managed to get around that personal bias with its intense focus on the lives and hopes of the men at the center of the story.

What's most remarkable about the film is the way that it captures how hopes of the remarkable can slightly collapse into the unremarkable. The film is really masterful in how it builds moments that feel like they will be dramatic or climactic, and sometimes they are and sometimes they simply . . . diffuse. A great example of this is a conversation between Faye where she muses aloud about the chance that she is pregnant now that she and Ernie have started having sex. She basically works her way around to pitching that they get married. In most films this would be a point for a dramatic confrontation, but instead Ernie is just sort of like, "Yeah, okay." When he later speaks about his marriage (and his child), he is neither effusive nor bitter, just mildly positive.

As a huge fan of Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker, I did a total fangirl squeeeeeeeeeee! when Susan Tyrrell popped up. Her vocal tone is this really unique thing that naturally accents what is meant to be intoxication, but makes her sound as if she's perpetually experiencing a deep heartbreak. She's a perfect match for the character of Oma who, with a lot of help from alcohol, is clearly a person who lives deep, deep in her feelings.

Bridges and Keach are both very strong in their roles, but Keach really owns the film. Tully is a man who somehow seems to have totally given up and yet still has some glimmer of hope left in him. Keach absolutely nails a sort of guarded ferocity, a desire to connect and succeed having to make its way through years and years of baked on cynicism.

A really excellent example of a film driven almost entirely by character work.

4.5

[GulfportDoc]

A Patch of Blue (1965)

Excellently acted. Very touching & topical for its time.

Some people think the major reason Gordon (Portier) doesn't consummate his relationship with Selina (Hartman) is because of their different races.

And sure, that's part of it considering the prospects of the long term. But Gordon is very intelligent and he realizes things Selina can't in her love-struck state toward the first eligible man who's shown kindness to her.

What starts as kindness toward a disabled girl on Gordon's part turns into love for both, but he realizes that although Selina is an adult age-wise, she is emotionally & intellectually a child due to her being raised as basically a prisoner / slave in an abusive home. It's almost a statutory issue for Gordon.

To have an adult romantic or sexual relationship with Selina at this point would be taking advantage of her emotional & intellectual immaturity and would be no better than taking advantage of her blindness.

His solution to get her out of her abusive home and into a school, and then revisit their relationship in a year's time (after Selina has a chance to be exposed to the world, other people and things she's never experienced before) seems an optimum one.

I was only left wondering who's going to pay for her schooling? Gordon? The state? (I imagine there must have been some type of funding for the blind at that time - although it was never addressed in the movie.)

rating_4
When I went to see it in '65, it completely took me in. I loved Selina played by Elizabeth Hartman. Hartman was a great actress whose personal problems cut her career short.

Shelly Winters won Best Supporting Oscar that year, although I wasn't overly impressed with her acting in this picture.

When you take away the racial issues of the day, I think Poitier acted about the same character that he did in several other movies, including Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? (1967). In this case he was right for the role.

It was a stunning film; a small film that got attention.

[GulfportDoc]

...
Seven Chances (Buster Keaton, 1925) rating_3_5 7+/10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXNLXqB6KhI
Buster Keaton must get married by a certain time to inherit a fortune, but when too many "brides" show up, they think he's trying to pull a fast one.


That film was a riot! Keaton was something else...

[Thief]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_ja51IYJlbws%2FSxQJ6KmkqUI%2FAAAAAAAAD7M%2FVnv86bnyWYk%2Fs1600%2 Ffat-city-1972-stacy-keach-jeff-bridges-pic-3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Fat City, 1972

Bridges and Keach are both very strong in their roles, but Keach really owns the film. Tully is a man who somehow seems to have totally given up and yet still has some glimmer of hope left in him. Keach absolutely nails a sort of guarded ferocity, a desire to connect and succeed having to make its way through years and years of baked on cynicism.

A really excellent example of a film driven almost entirely by character work.

4.5

So glad you liked this. I agree that it was pretty good. I saw this via recommendation from kgaard and ApexPredator and I really enjoyed it.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.newscientist.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F08%2F11130938%2Fim-your-man-key-visual_web.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

I'm Your Man, 2021

Alma (Maren Eggert) is a recently separated academic who, in order to secure funding for her passion project, has agreed to participate in a trial run of customized robotic romantic partners. Alma is paired with Tom (Dan Stevens) who works unrelentingly to earn Alma's love. But Tom's presence in her life at time only serves to highlight Alma's frustrations and loneliness.

A lot of films about artificial intelligences devote much of their runtime to exploring the question of whether the personality and emotions of the machine are "real". I'm Your Man is far more interested in the impact that Tom has on Alma, very much in the way that Marjorie Prime (a low-key favorite of mine) explored the impact of such an artificial intelligence on memory and sense-of-self of the people interacting with the artificial humans.

Eggert and Stevens are both really strong in their lead performances. I have some criticisms of some of the plot elements, but I can't say a single negative thing about the actors. Many romantic comedies take their man characters on an arc from sadness to happiness. But Alma doesn't follow that path. Instead she begins from a place of loneliness but then Tom's presence makes certain aspects of her life better while opening up a different kind of sorrow and self-doubt. Stevens has a tricky job, portraying a character who becomes more human as he develops his personality based on interactions with Alma. I appreciated his physicality in the role, especially noting in a late scene just how well he is able to hold still when the character is not speaking.

From a plot point of view, I felt like there were some real ups and downs. I liked that the film portrayed Alma going through a range of emotions as she tries to deal with attention and scrutiny from Tom that at times becomes oppressive. It's not all smiles and rainbows at the end, and Alma's relationship with Tom has some complexities that might never be resolved between the two of them.

I had a mixed reaction to the way that the film resolves some of the ethical issues around the interactions between Tom and Alma. The whole idea of a being designed to please a specific person opens up some weird issues of consent. In one sequence, a drunk Alma demands sex and instead Tom tucks her into bed and leaves the room. On one hand, it was nice to see that the machines are capable of asserting themselves, but I still found myself troubled by the idea of the inherent power imbalance built into their relationship. (A feeling that resurfaced when we see a 62 year old man with a model who looks to be in her early 30s). The film also kind of skirts around the question of what it means to reject one of the machines. Tom gives a little speech about how being erased isn't the same as dying (because he isn't really alive), but from Alma's point of view it does seem to be the same. So how awful is it to know that if you get one of these machines and don't connect with it for whatever reason, you basically have to live with it forever or doom it to "death".

(And this is something that didn't impact my rating, but I found myself slightly troubled by how Dan Stevens looked in this film. Maybe he's leaned down a bit since the last time I saw him in a role and it's changed the contours of his face. Or maybe it was the makeup that they used. But he looked a bit . . . sickly? . . . to me and I found it a bit disorienting. Like every ten minutes or so I got this little wave of concern about his health.)

A very engaging romantic comedy that hits some unexpected beats on the way to its resolution.

4

[Takoma11]

So glad you liked this. I agree that it was pretty good. I saw this via recommendation from kgaard and ApexPredator and I really enjoyed it.

I've seen it name dropped a few times and a picture from it was in Crumbsroom's screenshot game. When it popped up on Criterion it seemed like a good time to check it out.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/BriefEncounterPoster.jpg
By [1], Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2312442

Brief Encounter - (1945)

How was love just captured on camera like that? There are few better movies about it than Brief Encounter - it completely swept me away. The part of Laura is played by Celia Johnson, who I've seen in This Happy Breed, but really noticed here. Dr Alec Harvey is brought to life by Trevor Howard, who I've mostly seen as an old man in movies from the 60s to the 80s. It's hard to describe just how real the film feels - it's not a love story that takes place in flowered meadows, although our furtive lovers do abscond to movies, a rowboat and other places. It's doomed, because both are married, and as such it becomes something of a sordid affair, with both of them stealing kisses in dark tunnels and borrowed apartments. Surrounding them is the hubbub of life, which seems obscenely pointless and annoying now they've found something most pure - especially the interrupting ninny we see at the beginning and end. Great film.

9/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a9/Erin_Brockovich_%28film_poster%29.jpg
By POV - Impawards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15363588

Erin Brockovich - (2000)

It took me too long to get around to watching this - it really reinforces a person's belief in humanity, with people wanting to do good for others despite being swamped by life themselves. Although a lot of these stories are true - the old "corporation poisoning the water" feels like old hat these days, but in spite of that Julia Roberts becomes the person she's portraying and makes Erin Brockovich worth watching, especially for it's last couple of scenes, which are the very definition of 'feel good'.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/Horrible_Bosses.jpg
By IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31829827

Horrible Bosses - (2011)

Your average comedy. In this the three bosses played by Spacey, Aniston and Colin Farrell overshadow the three leads, because they have the best three parts - but watching Spacey act like a creepy jerk isn't as much fun now as it used to be. The movie is amusing and a little fun, but there's nothing here that would make me recommend it as comedic gold. It's more - comedic bronze.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/Malcolmdvd.jpg
By http://www.btinternet.com/~gjcouzens/dvd/malcolm.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5491233

Malcolm - (1986)

Quaint and rough Australian film about a young autistic man who is obsessed with trams and happens to be a bit of a mechanical genius. He takes in a boarder when he loses his job, but this man (who brings home a lady to live with him) is a bit of a con-man and robber. Eventually the criminal pair join up with Malcolm when they notice he's become inspired by their antics, and the three plan a massive $250,000 heist with Malcolm's gadgets. This is very Australian and very low budget, so might seem a little unusual to the casual viewer - and feels like it exists in the 70s, despite it's 80s credentials. In the end I wasn't bowled over, but it's uniqueness and the fact it's well made makes it quite watchable.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/DeathinBrunswick.jpg
By May be found at the following website: http://images.ciao.com/iuk/images/products/normal/635/Death_In_Brunswick_DVD__5915635.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5491013

Death in Brunswick - (1990)

A very young Sam Neill appears as Carl Fitzgerald in this black comedy which really only has one memorable sequence. Like so many Australian films of it's time, the protagonist is a well-meaning simpleton who is good at one particular thing (in this, Carl is a chef.) He meets and falls in love with a Greek girl at the place he's found work at - but the criminal gang that runs the place causes troubles with his love life, and then his life overall when some bad information has him attacked and murdering his workmate in self defense. The hiding of the body is a classic part of this film, but it is surrounded by middling material. It's a noteworthy film that is dated and not completely up to scratch.

6/10

[Fabulous]

The Hunger (1983)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/zi08X7ocNbWJmbrbQcWigMyclqX.jpg

[TheUsualSuspect]

Prey

4

Pretty solid Predator flick. Makes me wonder why it took so long for him to get another directed film under his belt after the thriller 10 Cloverfield Lane. Prey has the perfect balance of steering a tired franchise back in the right direction, all it took was going back to basics.

I made the mistake of watching it in English. Apparently, there is another option for the native language they speak if you watch this on Disney+. Make the effort to try that one.

[StuSmallz]

I thought the procedural aspects were really great, and Crowe's character being an ultra-rare incorruptible not just assumed but methodically shown to us - how and why he was different to those on the force who just took 'contributions' from the drug czars of the time. I was glad to spend time with his character - it made him more layered and not just your usual stereotypical hero cop. Although he had no flaws as a cop, he had innumerable flaws outside of his work, to the point he's always in court opposite his ex-wife. I liked his yearning to pass his bar exams and become something more - and the relationship he eventually develops with Lucas, which for me was completely unexpected. The first time I saw the film though, I brushed it off somewhat - liked it far far more this time.I can respect that, and usually I love it when a movie bothers to take the time to develop its characters, but the context it happened in killed it for me there; I mean, I probably would've liked the screentime the film spent with Crowe's character otherwise, but it happened in a fairly generic gangster movie that didn't do much for me in general, and the film's two and a half hours long anyway (and felt every second of it and more to me, too), so it was just never going to work for me there, you know?

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_ja51IYJlbws%2FSxQJ6KmkqUI%2FAAAAAAAAD7M%2FVnv86bnyWYk%2Fs1600%2 Ffat-city-1972-stacy-keach-jeff-bridges-pic-3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Fat City, 1972

As a huge fan of Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker, I did a total fangirl squeeeeeeeeeee! when Susan Tyrrell popped up. Her vocal tone is this really unique thing that naturally accents what is meant to be intoxication, but makes her sound as if she's perpetually experiencing a deep heartbreak. She's a perfect match for the character of Oma who, with a lot of help from alcohol, is clearly a person who lives deep, deep in her feelings.

4.5

I figured that had to be coming. Frankly, it makes me wanna see the movie more too. She was nominated for an Oscar for that performance, if you didn't know already. Did you know that she was a voice-actor too, appearing in a couple of Ralph Bakshi's films?
I think you have to watch Angel and Forbidden Zone at some point just to get where my introduction to her was. (I also enjoy both films.)

[crumbsroom]

Susan Tyrells performance in Fat City is probably one of my favorites of all time.

[Wooley]

The Hunger (1983)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/zi08X7ocNbWJmbrbQcWigMyclqX.jpg
A personal favorite.

[Siddon]

https://www.indiewire.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/195_Ven_D25_0510_RC-H-2022.jpg

Vengeance (2022)

The best episodes of The Office were when the mundane and silly episodes turn and twist into something more and unexpected. Vengeance is a comedy/mystery hybrid basically it's a neo-noir film with jokes and it's really good. A podcaster finds out his hookup has died of a drug overdose so he travels to rural Texas to speak at his funeral.

It's a red state/blue state comedy of manners. The family is a group of fully developed characters I laughed quite a bit of the twists in that everyone in the family is distinct and has their own scene to shine. BJ Novak's biggest issue is while the writing is solid and tight and filming is not. He's kinda from the Kevin Smith school of set the camera take the shot ignore everything else...which is a shame.

Ashton Kutcher might have a second act in him as a serious actor as he completely nails his two scenes playing the ridiculously wealthy record producer in this small town. It gives off The Last Picture Show vibes without the artistry but with a better plot.

rating_4

[Mr Minio]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/668da25cc3b844a8acdbbae456c647ae/tumblr_owlgg72bvt1wslf8bo1_250.gif
Jayne Mansfield provides a little bit of spice in an otherwise dull film.



Little Women (2019) - 0.5 - congrats, Greta Gerwig, that's the second insufferable schlock of a movie in a row
She's Too Young (2004) - 0.5 - "hey guess what guys i have syphilis" is almost a funny line
Promises! Promises! (1963) - 0.5 - when a pair of bazookas is all your film offers, you know you have done goofed
They/Them (2022) - 0.5 - why are people saying it's something phobic when the biggest issue with this film is that it's just a bland subpar slasher
God's Not Dead: We the People (2021) - 0 - not that bad, I've seen worse films. All 6 of them.

[Ultraviolence]

God's Not Dead: We the People (2021) - rating_0 - not that bad, I've seen worse films. All 6 of them.

A true warrior!

[Wooley]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/668da25cc3b844a8acdbbae456c647ae/tumblr_owlgg72bvt1wslf8bo1_250.gif
Jayne Mansfield provides a little bit of spice in an otherwise dull film.


Promises! Promises! (1963) - 0.5 - when a pair of bazookas is all your film offers, you know you have done goofed


Can't say I was mad about it, though.

[cricket]

The Innocents (2021)

3.5

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2022/05/09/PPHX/ca46b0ee-b0b6-4ed6-ac1f-30edaddd7e06-THE_INNOCENTS_-_Still_5.jpg?width=660&height=372&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp

This is not my type of horror but it looked so good that I had to try it. I prefer sadistic horror since I don't get frightened anymore, as opposed to the more supernatural stuff which this movie would be. One thing this movie does have that has always freaked me out is evil children. This is a slow paced movie but it had me squirming right from the start. It is unnerving. I probably wouldn't watch it again but it's very good and a lot of members here would like it.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/668da25cc3b844a8acdbbae456c647ae/tumblr_owlgg72bvt1wslf8bo1_250.gif
Jayne Mansfield provides a little bit of spice in an otherwise dull film.



Little Women (2019) - rating_0_5 - congrats, Greta Gerwig, that's the second insufferable schlock of a movie in a row
She's Too Young (2004) - rating_0_5 - "hey guess what guys i have syphilis" is almost a funny line
Promises! Promises! (1963) - rating_0_5 - when a pair of bazookas is all your film offers, you know you have done goofed
They/Them (2022) - rating_0_5 - why are people saying it's something phobic when the biggest issue with this film is that it's just a bland subpar slasher
God's Not Dead: We the People (2021) - rating_0 - not that bad, I've seen worse films. All 6 of them.Answers the question, "How many cinematic kick-in-the-nuts can one person take?"

Five apparently.

[Gideon58]

https://wwwflickeringmythc3c8f7.zapwp.com/q:i/r:1/wp:1/w:362/u:https://cdn.flickeringmyth.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Luck-poster-600x900.jpg


2.5

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://i1.netflixmovies.com/dibsl9ebc/image/upload/w_1024/b0rqh5y5o55fnukrzcft.jpg

https://fffmovieposters.com/wp-content/uploads/44760.jpg

Duel at Diablo - This is one that I've watched a number of times. It's a 1966 Western directed by Ralph Nelson and starring James Garner, Sidney Poitier, Bibi Andersson, Bill Travers and Dennis Weaver. Garner plays Jess Remsberg, an Army Scout looking to avenge the murder of his Comanche wife. Poitier plays Toller, an ex-Buffalo Soldier now working as a horse breaker for the Army.

On one of his many scouting missions Remsberg runs across a lone rider on a faltering horse. The rider is being pursued by a party of Apaches. Upon rescuing her he is surprised to find it's a woman named Ellen Grange (Bibi Andersson) and takes her back to her home and husband Willard (Dennis Weaver). She was taken as a captive by the Apaches and now seems determined to return to them.

Remsberg's friend Lt. "Scotty" McAllister (Bill Travers) has been tasked by his commander to lead an cavalry unit of untrained soldiers taking horses, ammunition and supplies to a neighboring fort. Remsberg is conscripted to serve as a replacement scout and Toller is also forced to go along to collect on the rest of the forty broken mounts he owes the Army. In the meantime, Apache chief Chata (John Hoyt) has gathered together a large number of people in an effort to escape the intolerable conditions at a local reservation. All these disparate elements and people are eventually thrown together in a confrontation at an isolated waterhole in Diablo Canyon.

This is anchored by two impressive performances from James Garner and Sidney Poitier. It was Garner's first Western since leaving his long running TV series Maverick. This was also Poitier's first ever Western but you certainly couldn't tell. He either took plenty of riding lessons or had a general affinity for horses. Given the time in which this was made the problematic portrayal of Native Americans is present with Hoyt's Chata being the most noticeable. It is somewhat mitigated with a few attempts at social commentary but in keeping with the film's harsh portrayal of frontier life the Apaches do come off as barbaric killers. But then a lot of the so called "civilized" populace is also portrayed in a negative light. Despite all of that I've always thought of it as a good to great Western.

85/100

[GulfportDoc]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/BriefEncounterPoster.jpg

Brief Encounter - (1945)

How was love just captured on camera like that? There are few better movies about it than Brief Encounter - it completely swept me away. The part of Laura is played by Celia Johnson, who I've seen in This Happy Breed, but really noticed here. Dr Alec Harvey is brought to life by Trevor Howard, who I've mostly seen as an old man in movies from the 60s to the 80s. It's hard to describe just how real the film feels - it's not a love story that takes place in flowered meadows, although our furtive lovers do abscond to movies, a rowboat and other places. It's doomed, because both are married, and as such it becomes something of a sordid affair, with both of them stealing kisses in dark tunnels and borrowed apartments. Surrounding them is the hubbub of life, which seems obscenely pointless and annoying now they've found something most pure - especially the interrupting ninny we see at the beginning and end. Great film.
I agree. It is a small film with a compact story, but it draws in the viewer very quickly. I loved the film and it's two leads. I fell in love with Celia Johnson, and Trevor Howard did a nice turn as well.

Did you see her as the head mistress in The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie (1969)? It was Maggie Smith's picture for sure, but it's one of the few I've seen Celia Johnson in.

Brief Encounter manages to rise above its soap opera type secret romance, and to galvanize the viewer's attention until the last frame.

[Takoma11]

Susan Tyrells performance in Fat City is probably one of my favorites of all time.

That red barrette in her hair that kept slowly slipping down with each passing scene probably deserved a supporting Oscar nomination as well.

[Wyldesyde19]

Susan Tyrrell was the best thing about Fat City.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simbasible.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2F2-4.png&f=1&nofb=1

Mephisto, 1981

Hendrik (Klaus Maria Brandauer) is a stage actor in 1930s Germany who is passionate about becoming a success. In the role of Mephisto, he catches the eye of a Nazi general (Rolf Hoppe), and becomes something of a darling of the growing political regime. As those around him, including his fellow actors and his lover (Karin Boyd), are driven away or even killed, Hendrik turns a blind eye in pursuit of his own fame.

There is little in this film that is subtle, as we are explicitly given the reference of the story of Faust and then watch as Hendrik hustles to curry the favor of the Nazi general and the rest of the Third Reich elite.

But subtlety in not necessary in a story like this, and in fact the lack of subtlety really calls to attention just how extreme Hendrik's compartmentalization is as the society around him deteriorates into intolerance and violence. In one early scene, Henrik leaves the theater to see a group of soldiers beating up a Jewish man. He moves as if to intervene, and is quickly driven off by one of the soldiers. This moment is upsetting, but also relatable. It asks a lot for people to put their own well-being on the line for another person.

But by the middle of the film, Henrik is blithely telling his lover--who is biracial--that she cannot leave the house, but that he will buy her a radio so that she can stay connected with the outside world. When she responds to this with indignation and protests that she's just as German as anyone else, he basically rolls his eyes at her, as if it's her ignorance and not the bigotry around her that is worthy of derision.

As with many films that combine theater and film, there are some absolutely sumptuous visuals here. The movie makes the most of Hendrik in his Mephisto costume--his stark white face and crimson red-lined cape. But there's a level here: Mephisto is a character he plays, and his power is, ultimately, an illusion.

There are a lot of films about complicity and what it means to go along with something that is morally wrong. It would seem as if the choices of an actor would pale in comparison to choices made by politicians or soldiers. But through Hendrik's story we see how easy it is to let one's own well-being and success lead us to a place where we are willing to overlook blatant atrocity.

4

[TheUsualSuspect]

They/Them

2.5

Brilliant title....disappointing film. I think a lot of people are hating on this movie because they are expecting a slasher film, which this basically is not. There is very little slashing to be had in this film. There are some forced silly moments when Kevin Bacon directs the campers to the boys cabin or the girls and one person doesn't move to either saying..."I'm trans, where do I go?"

Bacon saves the film at least, a little bit. But overall, it feels a little bit more than a direct-to-video stylized film. Disappointing, but I did not hate it.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbestmoviecast.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F09%2FMonos.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Monos, 2019

In the wilderness of Columbia, a group of child soldiers serving a group referred to only as "the Organization" watch over an American engineer they call Doctora (Julianne Nicholson) who has been taken hostage. As conflicts and relationships develop and implode within the group, they venture deep into the jungle where things slowly and steadily get out of hand.

Wowza. The kids are not alright.

A frequent refrain about this film has to do with it being Lord of the Flies-like. And I get that. You've got a group of adolescents basically making up their own rules, developing strange and often violent rituals among themselves.

But where this film deviates from that line is in the presence--and often lack thereof--of adults.

The ever-present adult is, of course, Doctora. Whatever authority she might have is frequently taken away as she suffers various abuses at the hands of the adolescents. In one particularly disturbing scene, Doctora and Swede (Laura Castrillón) cower in an underground bunker as the group--called Monos, meaning "monkeys"--is attacked. In a moment of compassion, Doctora holds Swede and tells her that they will be okay . . . only for Swede to begin kissing her. Wavering--because surely an ally would be a welcome thing--Doctora finally pushes Swede away, and the young woman laughs at her in derision. As the group gets deeper into the jungle, the cruelties toward Doctora mount, and we begin to understand that simply running away will not be an option for her.

Then there's the sometimes presence of Messenger (Wilson Salazar), a man who serves as the interface between the organization and the Monos. He puts the Monos through punishing, excessive physical "training", manipulates them into telling on each other for indiscretions, and is the arbiter of who gets to have sex with whom. These scenes serve to highlight the degree of brainwashing and abuse these kids have endured. Whether they initially joined by choice or were forced into serving as soldiers, they are all twisted up and enmeshed in the strange and violent hierarchies of the Organization.

The movie keeps the Monos in a precarious position where they are at once detestable and sympathetic. At what point do you write someone off and decide that they deserve what they get? The most sympathetic character is the sensitive Rambo (Sofía Buenaventura), who is either transgender or simply choosing to pass as male. But even the least sympathetic character, the violent Bigfoot (Moisés Arias ) is not without certain sympathies. In the final act, adults take two very different approaches to how they deal with certain teens who end up at their mercy.

It's also important to mention just how good this film looks. It has a dreamy/nightmarish and yet saturated look.

Highly recommended.

4.5

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d3/BreachPoster.jpg
By May be found at the following website: Collider.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9884480

Breach - (2007)

I didn't think much about this political thriller before watching it - I knew nothing about Robert Hanssen, or what he'd done. After watching this I would have thought the whole world would know about what Hanssen had done, which is described as "possibly the worst intelligence disaster in U.S. history." Chris Cooper has a ball with playing him - and is the main attraction for seeing Breach. Hanssen wasn't only sending all of America's secret stuff to Russia, he was a complete sexual deviant - all the while living a life of upstanding religious piousness. Young agent wannabe Eric O'Neill (Ryan Phillippe) - a prodigy - is sent in undercover as Hanssen's assistant, and after being particularly hard on him, Hanssen begins to see a bit of himself in O'Neill and the two start getting close. This is all done with your usual thriller tempo and style, but like I said - it's Chris Cooper's performance that made it worthwhile.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Movie_poster_the_terminal.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2004/terminal.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=709437

The Terminal - (2004)

Being a Steven Spielberg film, this is a little too sickly sweet and sentimental for me, but everything else about it is good enough to balance that off and as such it's a watchable two hours. You might think the story of one man being denied entry to New York, and also unable to go home - thus becoming stuck in the airport and living there - unrealistic, but the true story of Mehran Karimi Nasseri (who was stuck in Paris) involved him living in an airport from 1988 to 2006 - some 18 years. Again, truth is far stranger than fiction. There's not much to really say about this movie, which feels like feel-good fluff (albeit great feel-good fluff.)

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/53/The_Big_Steal-1990.jpg
By The cover art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20813196

The Big Steal - (1990)

This is one of those Australian films where our love of cars becomes a central defining aspect - but it's something I don't share with my fellow countrymen. As such, I hated this comedy. You have to be of a certain mindset to gel with it, and that includes believing that your car is up there on a level with the person you love. It's somewhat sexist and homophobic, and has our hero win back the girl (after treating her like dirt) just by asking her - not by actually doing something to make up for past indiscretions. I was looking forward to seeing this, because it has Ben Mendelsohn in it - but it rubbed me up the wrong way.

3/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Stuckposter07.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17121263

Stuck - (2007)

I've always had a soft spot for this Stuart Gordon horror film - a visceral and agonizing "true story" which converts a man's need for help from society into a very pointed and literal cry for help from the garage of the lady who has run him over - as he's stuck to her windshield. It has to be watched and enjoyed to get the full effect of the agony and grimace-inducing horror.

7/10

[xSookieStackhouse]

5 loved the 5 short episodes its so cute,glad to see rocket aswell on one of the episodes :)
https://terrigen-cdn-dev.marvel.com/content/prod/1x/lp_site.jpg

[xSookieStackhouse]

5 loved it
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMDBlMDYxMDktOTUxMS00MjcxLWE2YjQtNjNhMjNmN2Y3ZDA1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTM1MTE1NDMx._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.j pg

[Ultraviolence]

Xie ying wu (AKA Bloody Parrot)
88340
From the opening credits I knew I was in for no traditional wuxia/kung fu. This film breaks the wave of the Shaw Brothers time and uses fantasy elements. Unintentionally funny, some good action, weird violence. Good time.
rating_3_5

[ScarletLion]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbestmoviecast.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F09%2FMonos.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Monos, 2019


It's also important to mention just how good this film looks. It has a dreamy/nightmarish and yet saturated look.

Highly recommended.

4.5

Glad you liked it. Very good film which draws inspiration from Lord of the Flies and Apocalypse Now.

https://twitter.com/WorldCinemania/status/1268517104426209281

[ScarletLion]

The Innocents (2021)

3.5

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2022/05/09/PPHX/ca46b0ee-b0b6-4ed6-ac1f-30edaddd7e06-THE_INNOCENTS_-_Still_5.jpg?width=660&height=372&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp

This is not my type of horror but it looked so good that I had to try it. I prefer sadistic horror since I don't get frightened anymore, as opposed to the more supernatural stuff which this movie would be. One thing this movie does have that has always freaked me out is evil children. This is a slow paced movie but it had me squirming right from the start. It is unnerving. I probably wouldn't watch it again but it's very good and a lot of members here would like it.

Yeah I really liked it too. Not normally the type of film I like either, as supernatural stuff isn't my thang. But it was done really well.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F64.media.tumblr.com%2Ff3ff2550f6828aef347b0cb6e243a6cd%2F364bcc7b940ff755-6e%2Fs1280x1920%2F0f6f4bb91f5d16e1bac8ee6aa20ca76ad35b9ae2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

I Married a Strange Person, 1997

In this animated film from Bill Plympton, Grant (Tom Larson) is newly married to Keri (Charis Michelsen). But Grant soon develops a strange lump on his neck that gives him the power to warp and shape the reality around him. This creates a strain on the relationship between Keri and Grant and also makes Grant the target of a nefarious group who wants to steal Grant's powers.

Plympton, for me, falls into that category of creatives who I can appreciate, but mostly in small doses. His fixation with body mutilation and distortion, combined with a focus on sex, starts to feel a bit old hat after a while. Fortunately, this film has a narrative that's zany enough that it keeps things moving even past the hour mark.

Part of the humor in the film comes from the way that characters around Grant act with only mild surprise or annoyance to the way that he reshapes and warps the objects and bodies around him. This is sort of funny, but it was hard to get a read on whether the film thinks what Grant is doing is wrong or if it's just a fun exploration of goofy wish fulfillment. Yes, this might seem like an overly-serious thing to say about a movie where a giant lizard man teams up with a television clown to steal a lump out of a man's neck, but the film's interest in distorting women's bodies in the interest of sexual gratification starts to feel uncomfortable. This could be seen as a tongue-in-cheek critique of the kind of point-of-view you'd expect from a guy like Grant, but there are several asides that aren't from his point of view that push this same dynamic.

A problem with making the characters so subdued is that it's harder to get invested in them, even within the very wacky reality of the film. (This is a movie where a lawn full of grass comes to life, hijacks a lawnmower, and tries to run down the man who has been committing the crime of cutting them down for years.) There's something a bit too muted about the emotional tone of the film. It works as a funny contrast in small doses, but in a film where we have to stick with the same characters for 72 minutes, you want to feel like Keri or Grant are people. When Grant literally changes Keri's body to make her look like different women, or to grow her breasts so large that they burst out of their house, you want more of a reaction from her than, "Grant! Knock it off!". There's a lot of sex and sexual content, but I wish there had been more passion.

The kind of movie I'm glad I watched once, but don't imagine watching again.

3

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.mubicdn.net%2Fimages%2Ffilm%2F19808%2Fimage-w448.jpg%3F1600964885&f=1&nofb=1

Buddies, 1985

David (David Schachter) signs up to be a "buddy" to Robert (Geoff Edholm), a young man who is dying of AIDS-related complications. As the two discuss love, death, gay rights, and other weighty matters, they forge a strong relationship. But David is unprepared for the emotional toll of caring for someone who is terminally ill.

In a heartbreaking case of life imitating art, the director of this film, Arthur J. Bressan Jr., died of AIDS at the age of 44, just two years after its release. Geoff Edholm likewise died of AIDS, at the age of 33, just four years after the film. The fates of these two men add some heft to the conversations that take place through the film, including its ideas about the responsibilities of those left behind.

Something that is really refreshing about the film is that it's not just some "us vs the world" take on what it means to be gay (in 1980s America! in the middle of the AIDS crisis!), which it could easily have been. Yes, we do read part of an editorial claiming that AIDS is a punishment sent from God to gay people, but for the most part the conversations about being gay and gay acceptance are nuanced. I loved that the character of David has supportive parents. His mother knows he is gay and is proud of his work in gay rights. When David tells her that Robert's family has disowned him and won't come visit him, his mother replies with a sigh that "not all parents are like us." This is not an easy place to be gay, but the characters are not without their allies.

The conversations between David and Robert are frank and interesting. Robert talks about having been in an open relationship with his boyfriend, Edward. Robert says that he thinks their relationship could have survived him having AIDS, but that a mix of Edward being afraid to catch it from Robert AND the guilt that he might have given it to him "killed his love." The two have different points of view on pride parades, which David finds tacky and says he doesn't like the idea of putting himself on display. Robert argues that showing themselves as gay is important and necessary to help normalize being gay. David is arguing that he doesn't want to be defined by his sexuality, while Robert is saying that visibility is necessary for acceptance. They both have valid points, and the film resists being preachy one way or the other.

Something that the film really drives home in a powerful way is the isolation that Robert experiences. He is literally quarantined with a huge sign outside of his door blaring "CONTAGION!". When David first comes into the room, he's practically in a hazmat suit: gloves, apron, and a face mask. His family won't come to visit him, and neither will his lover. It's not how anyone should experience the last days or weeks of life, and for all their conversations about gay rights, the heart of the film is the way that David provides Robert with emotional and even physical intimacy that he's missing. In one sequence, Robert confesses that he masturbated the night before and, while everything "worked", it wasn't really him experiencing sexual satisfaction. The next day, David brings in some soft-core VHS tapes, and holds Robert as Robert works toward orgasm. It's a scene that could have felt lewd or exploitative, but the camera stays focused on Robert's face and David's hands on Robert's shoulders, giving him presence and pressure without being invasive or even overly sexual. There are so many things that David takes for granted--a supportive family, a loving romantic partner--that Robert has lost because of who he is and what he's been through. Witnessing this pushes David to a different understanding of what it means to be an advocate.

It is true that the film has a low-budget look to it, and that some of the acting and line delivery can come across a bit stilted. But this story and the places it's willing to go are so outside of what would have been given big studio support, that it's "shortcomings" in those areas actually serve to reinforce that this had to be an outsider story. (Note: This wasn't directly a Rockatansky recommendation, but his writing about the director put it on my radar, so *hat tip*)

Bressan apparently mainly directed adult films, but this film speaks to such an intimacy and understanding that you can feel how personal it is. I love that part of the film's message is that through helping others, we can build our own empathy and worldview. Even two people who are, on the surface, almost demographically identical (young, white, gay, male, New Yorkers, etc) can still learn from each other.

Highly recommended.

4.5

[Rockatansky]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.mubicdn.net%2Fimages%2Ffilm%2F19808%2Fimage-w448.jpg%3F1600964885&f=1&nofb=1

Buddies, 1985



Thanks for the shoutout, although I suppose I should keep nudging you to watch the pair of surprisingly artful and sensitive pornos I watched from him.


Also, how did you watch this? I see it's on Vimeo for rent, but wondering if it's on any other services. The Blu-ray looks to be out of print.

[Takoma11]

Thanks for the shoutout, although I suppose I should keep nudging you to watch the pair of surprisingly artful and sensitive pornos I watched from him.

They're on my watchlist, just not on any services I use.

Also, how did you watch this? I see it's on Vimeo for rent, but wondering if it's on any other services. The Blu-ray looks to be out of print.

I watched it on Kanopy, which I know is maybe different or not available in Canada.

[Rockatansky]

They're on my watchlist, just not on any services I use.



I watched it on Kanopy, which I know is maybe different or not available in Canada.

Ah ok.


I watched those other two on Vimeo and was able to rent them as a double feature.

[Takoma11]

Ah ok.


I watched those other two on Vimeo and was able to rent them as a double feature.

Good to know!

I use JustWatch as a way of seeing where I can watch movies, and they don't include Vimeo as a service you can add.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sff.org.au%2Fwp-content%2Fsession-images-bulk%2Fsff%2Fgallery-large%2Fnightraiders4.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Night Raiders, 2021

Niska (Elle-Máijá Tailfeathers) and her daughter Waseese (Brooklyn Letexier-Hart) living a nomadic life in a dystopian future where children are taken by the state and raised as soldiers. In a moment that she later regrets, Niska wonders if her daughter might be better off in the care of the state, and Waseese is taken. Niska ends up joining a group that seeks to infiltrate the institution and recover their children.

This is an at-times low key but still engaging sci-fi drama that pulls strongly from the real history of the institutionalization of children from indigenous populations in various countries around the world.

I read a review of this film that accused it of being "failed propaganda" because it was clear that the children were "better off" in the institution. I think that such an interpretation fails to understand that the marginalized and precarious life that Niska and Waseese are living is, in part, actually created by the institution. At the same time, it's understandable why Niska would have her doubts about keeping Waseese in their lifestyle. Niska cannot control the structure of the society around them, and she must weigh the benefits and risks of keeping her child with her.

The performances are good, albeit a bit subdued. I enjoyed seeing Amanda Plummer pop up as a woman whose son was long since taken by the institution, and in one tragic scene we see what happens when she spots him patrolling in uniform.

The sci-fi element itself--a subplot involving weaponized drones--is a bit underwhelming. While the movie's final confrontation resolves in a way that is satisfying, I wasn't sure how much sense it actually made. It's a little too evocative of a certain big-name sci-fi film, but without having earned where it wanted to go.

Solid sci-fi drama.

3.5

[Little Ash]

Vimeo - The service I primarily know these days as the place where you can buy digital copies of Don Hertzfeldt movies.

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simbasible.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2F2-4.png&f=1&nofb=1

Mephisto, 1981

Hendrik (Klaus Maria Brandauer) is a stage actor in 1930s Germany who is passionate about becoming a success. In the role of Mephisto, he catches the eye of a Nazi general (Rolf Hoppe), and becomes something of a darling of the growing political regime. As those around him, including his fellow actors and his lover (Karin Boyd), are driven away or even killed, Hendrik turns a blind eye in pursuit of his own fame.

There is little in this film that is subtle, as we are explicitly given the reference of the story of Faust and then watch as Hendrik hustles to curry the favor of the Nazi general and the rest of the Third Reich elite.

But subtlety in not necessary in a story like this, and in fact the lack of subtlety really calls to attention just how extreme Hendrik's compartmentalization is as the society around him deteriorates into intolerance and violence. In one early scene, Henrik leaves the theater to see a group of soldiers beating up a Jewish man. He moves as if to intervene, and is quickly driven off by one of the soldiers. This moment is upsetting, but also relatable. It asks a lot for people to put their own well-being on the line for another person.

But by the middle of the film, Henrik is blithely telling his lover--who is biracial--that she cannot leave the house, but that he will buy her a radio so that she can stay connected with the outside world. When she responds to this with indignation and protests that she's just as German as anyone else, he basically rolls his eyes at her, as if it's her ignorance and not the bigotry around her that is worthy of derision.

As with many films that combine theater and film, there are some absolutely sumptuous visuals here. The movie makes the most of Hendrik in his Mephisto costume--his stark white face and crimson red-lined cape. But there's a level here: Mephisto is a character he plays, and his power is, ultimately, an illusion.

There are a lot of films about complicity and what it means to go along with something that is morally wrong. It would seem as if the choices of an actor would pale in comparison to choices made by politicians or soldiers. But through Hendrik's story we see how easy it is to let one's own well-being and success lead us to a place where we are willing to overlook blatant atrocity.

4

I've been meaning to watch this for years but have never finally pulled the trigger.
Maybe I'll squeeze it in this month otherwise it's gotta wait for November.
But I am definitely in.

[Takoma11]

I've been meaning to watch this for years but have never finally pulled the trigger.
Maybe I'll squeeze it in this month otherwise it's gotta wait for November.
But I am definitely in.

I'd definitely recommend it.

[Stirchley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.simbasible.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2F2-4.png&f=1&nofb=1

Mephisto, 1981

Hendrik (Klaus Maria Brandauer) is a stage actor in 1930s Germany who is passionate about becoming a success. In the role of Mephisto, he catches the eye of a Nazi general (Rolf Hoppe), and becomes something of a darling of the growing political regime. As those around him, including his fellow actors and his lover (Karin Boyd), are driven away or even killed, Hendrik turns a blind eye in pursuit of his own fame.

There is little in this film that is subtle, as we are explicitly given the reference of the story of Faust and then watch as Hendrik hustles to curry the favor of the Nazi general and the rest of the Third Reich elite.

But subtlety in not necessary in a story like this, and in fact the lack of subtlety really calls to attention just how extreme Hendrik's compartmentalization is as the society around him deteriorates into intolerance and violence. In one early scene, Henrik leaves the theater to see a group of soldiers beating up a Jewish man. He moves as if to intervene, and is quickly driven off by one of the soldiers. This moment is upsetting, but also relatable. It asks a lot for people to put their own well-being on the line for another person.

But by the middle of the film, Henrik is blithely telling his lover--who is biracial--that she cannot leave the house, but that he will buy her a radio so that she can stay connected with the outside world. When she responds to this with indignation and protests that she's just as German as anyone else, he basically rolls his eyes at her, as if it's her ignorance and not the bigotry around her that is worthy of derision.

As with many films that combine theater and film, there are some absolutely sumptuous visuals here. The movie makes the most of Hendrik in his Mephisto costume--his stark white face and crimson red-lined cape. But there's a level here: Mephisto is a character he plays, and his power is, ultimately, an illusion.

There are a lot of films about complicity and what it means to go along with something that is morally wrong. It would seem as if the choices of an actor would pale in comparison to choices made by politicians or soldiers. But through Hendrik's story we see how easy it is to let one's own well-being and success lead us to a place where we are willing to overlook blatant atrocity.

4

KMB really made this movie for me.

[Takoma11]

KMB really made this movie for me.

It's an excellent performance.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9d/Jane_Eyre_Poster.jpg
By The cover art can or could be obtained from IMP Awards., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29549417

Jane Eyre - (2011)

I've never read Charlotte Brontë's novel (I read Pride and Prejudice after watching that - I challenged myself, so who knows I might read it one day) - and I've never seen any other version of this. That means this film had the advantage of surprising me with it's story. It's not bad, and you can see that Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender are imbuing their roles with a great deal of reverence. It's a great period piece, and as is usual with these films based on classic novels, the production design is through the roof. It's not your usual story (embarrassingly, and I'll admit to this - at one stage I thought it was going to be about vampires, the way things were going) with ghostly goings on that all indicate a great secret at the heart of our male lead's life. Out of the movies that I'd never seen before which I watched yesterday, this was the best.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/91/Swingers_ver2.jpg
By Miramax - impawards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10810626

Swingers - (1996)

A few years ago I watched 2001 movie Made, which was written and directed by Jon Favreau and featured Favreau and Vince Vaughn - but their exploits together seem to go back a bit, as evidenced in Swingers. The title had me thinking this might be a bit icky, but all it's really about is male bonding, and the L.A. social scene in the 1990s - if you don't like watching guys be testosterone-fueled guys you might hate this, but it runs a whole gamut from discussions on how long to wait till you call a girl who's given you her number to the pain suffered when a long-term relationship is ended. In between, there's a lot of booze and malarky. A very authentic, sincere film that wears it's heart on it's sleeve.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/Suffragette_poster.jpg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47657815

Suffragette - (2015)

There's a certain way you cook up historical dramas these days. You imbue a couple of characters with certain traits, have most of the things that happened involve them, and build a story around those characters that works within the framework of the history involved. Such is Suffragette, which examines the movement in the early 20th Century as involving Maud Watts (Carey Mulligan) and Edith Ellyn (Helena Bonham Carter). Meryl Streep drops in for a mere moment (a cameo the film seems to infer is a larger part than it is) as Emmeline Pankhurst, and Brendan Gleeson as a police detective determined to stop the entire Suffragette campaign. This, on the face of it, was a very average movie though.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Silver-Streak-Poster.jpg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from 20th Century Fox., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=28309267

Silver Streak - (1976)

I've always liked Silver Streak, but watching it yesterday I was impressed with how it was filmed, it's score, it's editing and direction from Arthur Hiller. It's just a superbly constructed movie that happens to be a little convoluted plot-wise. Nevertheless, it's the film that first paired up Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor (even though Pryor only comes into the film in it's last stretch.) I thought it was great, and as a whole I'm rather impressed with it.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f1/Stir_Crazy.jpg
By Google Image Search, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19009077

Stir Crazy - (1980)

I'm much less impressed with Stir Crazy - a film which has a meandering last act that's terribly boring, and some so-so improv from Wilder and Pryor. I used to love it when I was a kid though.

5/10

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FM%2FMV5BZTBkZWY3ODItZWI2OS00N2UxLTg3YTctMTBmNmFmOTJjNWFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyOTc5MD I5NjE%40._V1_FMjpg_UX600_.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Pusher, 1996

A drug dealer named Frank (Kim Bodnia) sees an opportunity for a big deal, even though it means putting himself at the mercy of big time dealer Milo (Zlatko Buric). But when the police show up, Frank is forced to dump the drugs. Milo doesn't buy Frank's story, and Frank only has a few days to gather the entire sum that he owes Milo.

There's no question in this film that Frank's week is going to go very, very poorly. It becomes a question of just how badly it will go and whether he will have any real chance at salvation.

Bondia's performance as Frank is essential to keep the film moving, and he does a good job of portraying a potent mix of fear, desperation, and ego. Even as we want to see Frank succeed in getting out from under his debt, there's no denying that Frank treats others poorly in a way that is sure to come back and bite him. You can't blame a person for prioritizing their own life, but there are moments where Frank's disregard of the well-being and feelings of others is much more blunt than it needs to be.

This movie was also the film debut of Mads Mikkelsen, and it's a confident debut, playing one of Frank's associates named Tonny. Laura Drasbæk likewise deserves a mention playing Vic, a woman who is Frank's lover but wants to be more.

The on-the-ground shooting style that Refn uses to film the action gives a sense of realism. There's sometimes almost a sense that someone is in the room with the characters, responding to their actions. In one scene, the characters look out a window and the camera pans to follow their actions, even though we can't see what the men are seeing.

Overall a solid crime thriller.

4

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.mubicdn.net%2Fimages%2Ffilm%2F19808%2Fimage-w448.jpg%3F1600964885&f=1&nofb=1

Buddies, 1985

David (David Schachter) signs up to be a "buddy" to Robert (Geoff Edholm), a young man who is dying of AIDS-related complications. As the two discuss love, death, gay rights, and other weighty matters, they forge a strong relationship. But David is unprepared for the emotional toll of caring for someone who is terminally ill.

Highly recommended.

4.5

Wow, haven't seen this since I was a teenager, used to watch it all the time. Nice to hear it holds up.

[Takoma11]

Wow, haven't seen this since I was a teenager, used to watch it all the time. Nice to hear it holds up.

Interesting. I hadn't heard about it at all.

It's amazing how sometimes you find a movie that to your mind is some hidden gem and then someone else is like "Oh, yeah, that's an old favorite. Used to watch it all the time."

[Wooley]

Interesting. I hadn't heard about it at all.

It's amazing how sometimes you find a movie that to your mind is some hidden gem and then someone else is like "Oh, yeah, that's an old favorite. Used to watch it all the time."

Well, if you were like we all are now, but in the 1980s and didn't have a bedtime, you watched every movie that came on HBO (before HBO ran anything other than movies) over and over again. I saw movies like The Night Porter, Diva, Who's Killing The Great Chefs Of Europe, Vice Squad, Knightriders (bitchin' movie), The Exterminator, Harry's War, Videodrome, Buddies, Timerider, Lost In America, Killer Fish, Turk 182, I, The Jury, Black Moon Rising, Q: The Winged Serpent, Green Ice, It's My Turn, Up From The Depths, The Black Pearl (which is literally about a giant, killer manta ray!), a whole shitload of movies that were just... on. All by the time I was 13 years old, 14 at the latest. I watched literally every movie that HBO ran every month, which was dozens of films that they could get their hands on in their early days before they had any other content. People who grew up in my day saw a fascinating array of films if they wanted to because they just came on, one after another, and if nobody stopped you, you just saw everything.

[Stirchley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FM%2FMV5BZTBkZWY3ODItZWI2OS00N2UxLTg3YTctMTBmNmFmOTJjNWFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyOTc5MD I5NjE%40._V1_FMjpg_UX600_.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Pusher, 1996

A drug dealer named Frank (Kim Bodnia) sees an opportunity for a big deal, even though it means putting himself at the mercy of big time dealer Milo (Zlatko Buric). But when the police show up, Frank is forced to dump the drugs. Milo doesn't buy Frank's story, and Frank only has a few days to gather the entire sum that he owes Milo.

There's no question in this film that Frank's week is going to go very, very poorly. It becomes a question of just how badly it will go and whether he will have any real chance at salvation.

Bondia's performance as Frank is essential to keep the film moving, and he does a good job of portraying a potent mix of fear, desperation, and ego. Even as we want to see Frank succeed in getting out from under his debt, there's no denying that Frank treats others poorly in a way that is sure to come back and bite him. You can't blame a person for prioritizing their own life, but there are moments where Frank's disregard of the well-being and feelings of others is much more blunt than it needs to be.

This movie was also the film debut of Mads Mikkelsen, and it's a confident debut, playing one of Frank's associates named Tonny. Laura Drasbæk likewise deserves a mention playing Vic, a woman who is Frank's lover but wants to be more.

The on-the-ground shooting style that Refn uses to film the action gives a sense of realism. There's sometimes almost a sense that someone is in the room with the characters, responding to their actions. In one scene, the characters look out a window and the camera pans to follow their actions, even though we can't see what the men are seeing.

Overall a solid crime thriller.

4

We should mention that Pusher is a trilogy & this is a review of Pusher I. (Pusher III is probably my favorite though I love them all.)

One of the greatest trilogies I have ever seen & I’ve watched the entire thing at least 3 times.

[pahaK]

I couldn't figure out a better thread for this, so I'll just blurt it out here. MUBI seems to have three months for one euro/dollar campaign at the moment. Pretty good value, IMO.

[Gideon58]

https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/4f6014678d6690f5ab06a14f19c39ebb.jpg


4.5

[EndlessDream]

The live-action Rurouni Kenshin movies are fantastic. They're based on the manga/anime about a wandering samurai who wants to atone for the many people he killed as a government assassin. So now he carries a reverse-blade sword that doesn't cut, only bruises.


The story hews closely to the anime, which I watched back in the day. Enemies from Kenshin's past come back to haunt him and threaten his newfound peace and friendships. He grapples with whether or not to give in to his killer instinct. Its all well-done, even though the films can feel at times like multiple different episodes of a show stitched together.



These new Kenshin movies feature some of the best sword fights I've ever seen and I've seen a lot of martial arts movies. The choreography is intricate and mind-blowingly fast. I wasn't expecting that because the fights in the anime are more of a chess match, where each character has their one special technique that needs to be countered. Also, the live-action movies are much more grounded; to the point where its weird when a supernatural ability is used.


The minor issues I had with the series are that Kenshin's friends other than Sano aren't given much to do, a few characters should have had their ridiculous anime hairstyles toned down, and the 4th movie gives a complete synopsis of the 5th movie. Thankfully I watched the 5th one first by mistake because I thought a movie subtitled The Beginning came before The Final.


I highly recommend the Rurouni Kenshin series to anyone who likes samurai movies and great fight scenes. 1, 4, and 5 are on Netflix. 2 and 3 are on Funimation, but I watched them on Blu Ray.

[Thief]

ALL THAT HEAVEN ALLOWS
(1955, Sirk)

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


"Two people who are in love with each other, want to be married. Why is it so difficult all of a sudden?"



All That Heaven Allows follows Cary (Jane Wyman), a mature widow with two adult children, that ends up falling in love with Ron (Rock Hudson), a young gardener that works at her home. To complicate things, Cary is affluent which prompts gossip around the neighborhood about Ron's reasons to fall in love with her. Although obviously smitten by Ron, Cary seems to be too worried about what will people in town think about her relationship, and if her children will approve of her relationship.

This film was recommended by a good Internet friend and it was so much better than I was expecting. For the first half, the film is carried by some solid performances from Wyman and Hudson, and good chemistry between them. The relationship feels real and not like others 50's more cliché romantic dramas. However, towards the middle of the film, there is a shift to more serious territory as the burden of gossip and those "external variables" start to take a toll on Cary and Ron's relationship, especially with Cary's children. All through the film, the script by Peg Fenwick allows for some great exchanges between the different characters

Grade: 4


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2324653#post2324653)

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lD_H4LdTjv0/WTCGujoPD5I/AAAAAAAAEAA/ERVv4uT7OGwg0jNZd4WEcj_68weOGJicQCLcB/s640/giphy%2B%25281%2529.gif
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a5/bb/13/a5bb13c95c6aef110e67aefb91ea3f75.gif


Colossal - This is probably the only Anne Hathaway starring movie I've ever wanted to catch (well, there's Nicholas Nickleby and Interstellar but she wasn't the main draw in those). It certainly starts out like something she's made in the past. She plays Gloria, a hard drinking partygirl in NYC. She's been out of work for a year and living with her boyfriend Tim (Dan Stevens). As the movie opens Tim has finally had enough and throws her out, forcing her to move back to her hometown of Mainhead, New Hampshire. While there and living in her parents old and threadbare home she runs into childhood acquaintance Oscar (Jason Sudeikis). He subsequently hires her to work in his bar which only gives her more opportunities to continue her perpetually inebriated lifestyle.

The film eventually takes a quirky detour when Gloria finds out that a giant creature has appeared out of nowhere in Seoul, South Korea. She starts to notice odd similarities between the creatures behavior and mannerisms and her own. When it does materialize it does so at the exact same time and she slowly comes to accept the implausible likelihood that she and the creature are somehow linked.

This is an odd movie but the director Nacho Vigalondo makes the mix of genres and tones work. He was also responsible for 2007's Timecrimes which took the well worn concept of time travel and reinvigorated it by not only embracing the inherent paradoxes associated with the genre but folding them neatly into a murder mystery of sorts. Here he deftly incorporates compelling commentary on ways that the men in Gloria's life seek to subjugate her. For some reason I've always felt that Jason Sudeikis is a natural at playing slimeball types. There's just something untrustworthy about him. I've never seen Ted Lasso so maybe it's been the roles he's offered. Here he's a fully despicable character. But Dan Stevens' Tim isn't much better and by the end you are actively rooting for and hoping that Gloria is able to rid herself of these two millstones around her neck.

This turned out to be a surprisingly potent character study with an engaging performance by Anne Hathaway. Sudeikis and Stevens both fulfilled the role of foils without falling into caricature and Austin Stowell and Tim Blake Nelson provided more than able support as two of Oscars drinking buddies.

80/100

[xSookieStackhouse]

5
https://www.universalpictures.com.au/tl_files/content/movies/nope/posters/01.jpg

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/05/Convoy_film_poster.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5390966

Convoy - (1978)

Some time last year somebody recommended Convoy to me - with a caveat. Apparently Sam Peckinpah was so drunk and disinterested while making it that he was virtually comatose and indecipherable. From having that information, I was expecting to watch a jumbled mess, but Convoy is actually a lot of fun, and always makes perfect sense. Sure, the redneck trucker kind of antiestablishment sentiment has caused many a lot of worry in recent years, but what is on display here was when those sorts of movements had a much cleaner and untainted feel. Add Kris Kristofferson, Ernest Borgnine, Burt Young (as a trucker, would you believe) and Ali MacGraw you get a lot of fun. Bar brawls, much property destruction, that 'Convoy' song and various indiscretions along the way. Even if it sounds awful to you, you'd be surprised how much fun Convoy really is, and how well made it is - despite the depths to which Peckinpah had dropped.

7/10

https://i.postimg.cc/85V4H754/bastards.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48696945

The Inglorious Bastards - (1978)

This Italian war film was modelled on The Dirty Dozen and never made it to American screens during it's first run, much to Quentin Tarantino's consternation, for he had read about it and really wanted to see it. He had to wait until it appeared on a specific television station - and after seeing it, every such Dirty Dozen type film (a type that almost has enough weight to be called it's own genre) he called an "Inglorious Bastards Movie". In this you get your psycho, coward, kleptomaniac, prejudiced against black guy, big shot etc etc - all escaped from a court martial and making their way to Switzerland until they accidentally kill a group of Americans on a secret mission. They're tasked with taking over - and overall there's enough killing and explosions to spread out over 5 war films. Fairly bloodless, but very action oriented - and I enjoyed it for what it is.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Terminator_Genisys.JPG
By The poster art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46295906

Terminator Genisys - (2015)

I have an embarrassing and inexplicable thing where I really enjoy Terminator sequels - even the bad ones. One thing I can agree with though, is that Terminator Genisys is absolute garbage and not worth the money they threw at it. There's nothing about this film I liked, and it was a chore to sit through - just bland and convoluted, not to mention nonsensical from every perspective you'd care to look at it from. The action is now perfunctory, and meaning completely nonexistent. One of the worst $150 million+ films I've ever seen.

3/10

https://i.postimg.cc/rsSWhjDY/human-traffic.jpg
By Derived from a digital capture (photo/scan) of the Film Poster/ VHS or DVD Cover Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36141040

Human Traffic - (1999)

For a film about British drug culture, this has to be one of the friendliest and good-natured ones I've ever seen. Where Trainspotting sketched out the worst in human behaviour, Human Traffic takes a different approach, and mainly focuses on friendship, love and responsibility. It gives you a feeling that the kids are alright, for the most part - and I enjoyed that perspective. Watching it will probably take a lot of people back to their early 20s.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Kursk_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/intl/belgium/2018/kursk_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59173360

Kursk - (2018)

This film is more solid than brilliant, so while I'll always be interested in the events surrounding the Kursk disaster, and a visual representation of what happened, I can rue just a little bit that this wasn't scripted better. That's just a quibble though, because I like Kursk a lot, and I'm grateful it's out there - as if we needed any other reasons to despair at the strange culture of secrecy and ineptitude the Russians foster.

7/10

[StuSmallz]

I watched Prey yesterday, and while there were aspects that could've done somewhat better, such as an overreliance on dodgy-looking CGI, and a pace which would've benefitted from being a bit more patient at times in building things up, it was otherwise a surprisingly intelligent piece of genre entertainment, one that was able to fit fairly gracefully into the trend of female empowerment in the industry, without forcing the issue or resorting to anachronistic "gurl power!"-style pandering, ala something like Captain Marvel. I particularly enjoyed the representation it gave to Native American culture and actors as well, and the time/effort it spent in establishing and developing the setting and characters, in order to get us invested in them before the carnage really kicked off in the second half. It's ultimately not a great movie or anything, but it's not trying to be, so it's okay if it's "just" good, because we need stuff like this just as much as we do anything else, and I had an all-around good time with it, so that's all I really needed in this case; good work, Hulu!

[Fabulous]

Chimes at Midnight (1965)

3.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/atMZwFMnbTEvOpGOh9zFob2yt9T.jpg

[Torgo]

Kimi - 4

This is a lean, mean and very fun techno-thriller that sort of plays out like Rear Window for the 2020s. Kimi is not the name of Zoe Kravitz's character - it's Angela - but the name of an Alexa-like device for which she provides production support, a job that lets her afford a dream Seattle apartment. COVID and its resulting lockdown exists in this movie, and this combined with anxiety that strikes at the mere thought of going outside makes Angela's apartment seem more like jail than home. This situation also frustrates Terry (Byron Bowers), a neighbor and frequent visitor, if you will, for how it prevents them from taking their relationship further. Life gets more complicated for Angela when she intercepts a Kimi recording that not only indicates that a crime may have occurred, but also one that certain people would rather she didn't investigate.

Having enjoyed Kravitz's work in Mad Max: Fury Road and Big Little Lies, it was nice to see her play the lead, and she's more than up to the task. Whenever she conveys Angela's fear of leaving her confines - the highlight is when she makes it to the door but cannot go any further - she in turn conveys how so many of us in the same situation still feel about walking into a potential hot zone. The nature of her job and her multiple screens with whom she chats with everyone from her concerned mother (Robin Givens) to her funny if not perverted Romanian hacker friend Darius (Alex Dobrenko) also accurately convey how this decade has made us more comfortable with interacting with devices instead of people. There’s also Angela's pursuit for justice and the higher-ups who stand in her way, which mirrors this decade’s typical front page news story. As for the parts of the movie that label it as a thriller, they highlight Soderbergh's underrated skills in the genre, feature both high- and low-tech solutions to dilemmas and, most importantly, are always tense and surprising, which says a lot since many of them recall moments in classic thrillers like The Conversation and again, Rear Window. Does this mean this movie stands alongside those classics? No, but Soderbergh and company still deserve credit for giving these moments a modern twist and for making them unpredictable despite their familiarity. It ends up being a movie that not only successfully captures 2020s life, but also might make you feel better about it, technological intrusions, depressing news cycle at all. It also has more of a reason to exist than other movies in this specific subgenre (I'm looking at you, Locked Down and How it Ends).

[Allaby]

I watched the new Netflix movie, Day Shift. Directed by J.J. Perry, Jamie Foxx stars in this horror comedy as a vampire hunter. I'm happy to say that this is much better than the last Netflix movie I watched (the dreadful Gray Man). Foxx does a decent job and the rest of the cast do what they need in order to keep things moving in a satisfactory way. Snoop Dogg is fun and makes the most of his limited screentime. There is enough humour and action to keep viewers entertained and the film moves at a fast pace. It doesn't always work and the screenplay is somewhat mediocre, but Day Shift is a pretty enjoyable flick that will give the average viewer what they are looking for. 3.5

[Takoma11]

Here he's a fully despicable character. But Dan Stevens' Tim isn't much better and by the end you are actively rooting for and hoping that Gloria is able to rid herself of these two millstones around her neck

It's a movie in which all the male characters are kind of despicable, without the message being aren't men just awful?!. I think it's more about how Gloria is living her life and the kind of crappy relationships (romantic and friendships) she ends up in as a result.

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/59/The_Gray_Man_poster.png/220px-The_Gray_Man_poster.png

3

SF = Z


[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

[Wooley]

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lD_H4LdTjv0/WTCGujoPD5I/AAAAAAAAEAA/ERVv4uT7OGwg0jNZd4WEcj_68weOGJicQCLcB/s640/giphy%2B%25281%2529.gif
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a5/bb/13/a5bb13c95c6aef110e67aefb91ea3f75.gif


Colossal - This is probably the only Anne Hathaway starring movie I've ever wanted to catch (well, there's Nicholas Nickleby and Interstellar but she wasn't the main draw in those). It certainly starts out like something she's made in the past. She plays Gloria, a hard drinking partygirl in NYC. She's been out of work for a year and living with her boyfriend Tim (Dan Stevens). As the movie opens Tim has finally had enough and throws her out, forcing her to move back to her hometown of Mainhead, New Hampshire. While there and living in her parents old and threadbare home she runs into childhood acquaintance Oscar (Jason Sudeikis). He subsequently hires her to work in his bar which only gives her more opportunities to continue her perpetually inebriated lifestyle.

The film eventually takes a quirky detour when Gloria finds out that a giant creature has appeared out of nowhere in Seoul, South Korea. She starts to notice odd similarities between the creatures behavior and mannerisms and her own. When it does materialize it does so at the exact same time and she slowly comes to accept the implausible likelihood that she and the creature are somehow linked.

This is an odd movie but the director Nacho Vigalondo makes the mix of genres and tones work. He was also responsible for 2007's Timecrimes which took the well worn concept of time travel and reinvigorated it by not only embracing the inherent paradoxes associated with the genre but folding them neatly into a murder mystery of sorts. Here he deftly incorporates compelling commentary on ways that the men in Gloria's life seek to subjugate her. For some reason I've always felt that Jason Sudeikis is a natural at playing slimeball types. There's just something untrustworthy about him. I've never seen Ted Lasso so maybe it's been the roles he's offered. Here he's a fully despicable character. But Dan Stevens' Tim isn't much better and by the end you are actively rooting for and hoping that Gloria is able to rid herself of these two millstones around her neck.

This turned out to be a surprisingly potent character study with an engaging performance by Anne Hathaway. Sudeikis and Stevens both fulfilled the role of foils without falling into caricature and Austin Stowell and Tim Blake Nelson provided more than able support as two of Oscars drinking buddies.

80/100

I was really surprised at how well this odd premise worked.

[Wooley]

It's a movie in which all the male characters are kind of despicable, without the message being aren't men just awful?!. I think it's more about how Gloria is living her life and the kind of crappy relationships (romantic and friendships) she ends up in as a result.

Maybe but Sudeikis' character was just awful. I loathed him. I couldn't wait for her to get the final better of him and was really worried as darkly as the film shifted tone, that she might not.

[Takoma11]

Maybe but Sudeikis' character was just awful. I loathed him. I couldn't wait for her to get the final better of him and was really worried as darkly as the film shifted tone, that she might not.

Oh, his specific character was a horrible human being. But I think that the movie did a good job of having several guys who were pretty awful in their own ways without it seeming like that was the point or message of the narrative.

[Siddon]

https://sffgazette.com/images/articles/banners/1886.jpg

ET (1982)

A film that likely should have won BP returns to IMAX this week and it's amazing. This is the original print (guns not walkie talkies) and when you watch the film again it's remarkable to see all the bits and pieces you forget about. When you are a kid I think you view the film though Elliot's eyes when you're older you see it through the Mom's. The craziest thing is even though the film is 40 years old and everyone knows it I still heard people crying at parts of it in the theater.

[WHITBISSELL!]

I was really surprised at how well this odd premise worked.Right? Vigalondo has shown storytelling dexterity in the past. I thought TImecrimes was one of the most fascinating time travel films I've ever watched.

[WHITBISSELL!]

It's a movie in which all the male characters are kind of despicable, without the message being aren't men just awful?!. I think it's more about how Gloria is living her life and the kind of crappy relationships (romantic and friendships) she ends up in as a result.Well yeah. I got that. She was well on her way to sobriety despite Oscar's blackmailing her into drinking. And once she was sober she also realized how much of a gaslighter Tim was as well.

[Takoma11]

Well yeah. I got that. She was well on her way to sobriety despite Oscar's blackmailing her into drinking. And once she was sober she also realized how much of a gaslighter Tim was as well.

The way that it shows two really different versions of "I just want to help you!" type manipulation is really interesting.

Especially because, with Tim, our introduction to their relationship puts him in a very understandable position of being frustrated with her.

[Mr Minio]

To Sir, With Love - (1967) I watched it thanks to your post. Thanks! Here's my take on the movie:

So good! Man, being Sidney Poitier is so nice. Not only can you call your female pupils sluts but also call your male pupils uncouth hobos and get away with it. You don't really have to follow any curriculum whatsoever, so you just talk with your students about life, marriage, and sex, and even take them to a museum. I mean, they're a bunch of hoodlums, but you're Sidney Bleeding Poitier, so they will respect you. Not only that, but a proto-anime trope of your hot female student developing a crush on you is here, too! I mean, you're after the hot blonde teacher, but the hot blonde student is there for you ready to clean your desk! You cannot really do anything except for dancing with her but it's still badass. And at the end everybody loves you and they gift you some steel mug or something and then you decide to stay in the school, hoping some more hot student chicks will come next term. Great!

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://c.tenor.com/MrISCzh24XIAAAAC/yoda-sarcasm.gif

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYWI2ZDRjYjEtOWJiOS00NWVjLWI1MjAtNWNiMzAwNGFmNjljXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODEwMTc2ODQ@._V1_.jpg


2.5

[GulfportDoc]

ALL THAT HEAVEN ALLOWS
(1955, Sirk)
All That Heaven Allows follows Cary (Jane Wyman), a mature widow with two adult children, that ends up falling in love with Ron (Rock Hudson), a young gardener that works at her home. To complicate things, Cary is affluent which prompts gossip around the neighborhood about Ron's reasons to fall in love with her. Although obviously smitten by Ron, Cary seems to be too worried about what will people in town think about her relationship, and if her children will approve of her relationship.


This film was recommended by a good Internet friend and it was so much better than I was expecting. For the first half, the film is carried by some solid performances from Wyman and Hudson, and good chemistry between them. The relationship feels real and not like others 50's more cliché romantic dramas. However, towards the middle of the film, there is a shift to more serious territory as the burden of gossip and those "external variables" start to take a toll on Cary and Ron's relationship, especially with Cary's children. All through the film, the script by Peg Fenwick allows for some great exchanges between the different characters

Grade: rating_4
It's a good film. I've always felt R. Hudson to be a lightweight actor who never seemed really sincere, but here he was very good.

[Thief]

It's a good film. I've always felt R. Hudson to be a lightweight actor who never seemed really sincere, but here he was very good.

I think I've only seen two films of his: this and Winchester 73, where he briefly plays a Native American. I've heard Seconds is pretty good, but I'm not sure if that has to do more with the plot than with his performance.

[GulfportDoc]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/59/The_Gray_Man_poster.png/220px-The_Gray_Man_poster.png

rating_3
Yeah, this film was disappointing. I had some brief commentary on it:

It's perplexing to me that this film had such eye popping action scenes, but was dragged down by such a trite story.

The action and fight scenes were as good as anything in a Bond or Bourne film. But the hackneyed idiotic story made it seem almost a satire. With a better story, this could have been a top action film.

To my surprise Billy Bob Thorton co-starred in the movie, which I hadn't known before we watched it. I'm a big BBT fan, but try as he might he couldn't overcome the worn out writing of his character.

Despite his buffoonish character, Chris Evans got to let it out a bit, whereas Ryan Gosling pretty much mumbled through his part.

If a person has Netflix you might give TGM a watch, but I couldn't have recommended that anyone buy movie tickets to see this one.

[GulfportDoc]

[Rock Hudson] I think I've only seen two films of his: this and Winchester 73, where he briefly plays a Native American. I've heard Seconds is pretty good, but I'm not sure if that has to do more with the plot than with his performance.
You've never seen Giant (1956), with James Dean and Elizabeth Taylor? You must watch it this weekend!..;)

[Thief]

You've never seen Giant (1956), with James Dean and Elizabeth Taylor? You must watch it this weekend!..;)

That one's been on the watchlist since forever :D Need to prioritize it.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gannett-cdn.com%2Fpresto%2F2018%2F12%2F13%2FPDTN%2Fbe02a904-67f6-4429-9a8c-29ddb036ded3-Favourite.jpg%3Fcrop%3D1498%2C843%2Cx1%2Cy157%26width%3D3200%26height%3D1680%26fit%3Dbounds&f=1&nofb=1

The Favourite, 2018

In the early 1700s, Queen Anne (Olivia Colman) suffers from a range of maladies and much of the running of the state actually falls into the hands of her most trusted confidant, Lady Sarah (Rachel Weisz). But when an ambitious new servant, Abigail (Emma Stone) arrives at court and makes sure to put herself on Queen Anne's radar, the dynamics between the three women have serious implications on both the personal and political well-being of the individuals and the country.

There's something really spectacular about films where the actors just feel absolutely perfect for the material, and I found this movie to be just such a case.

Though I hadn't seen the movie at the time, I remember that there were discussions about who would be nominated for which Academy Award: the film splits its time almost perfectly between its three lead characters, though with her dominating and unforgettable performance as Queen Anne, it's not surprising that ultimately Colman was given the Best Actress nod.

The story itself is a brilliantly told cautionary tale about the danger of playing games with and for power, making great use of a setting where many people do not see themselves as having a choice whether or not to engage in some of those games. While Stone's Abigail is certainly manipulative, she comes from a background that involved sexual violence and endures physical abuse from her fellow servants. As she articulates in one scene when contemplating an action she admits is immoral, what good will her morality do her if she loses her place in the court and is forced into prostitution? Sarah is likewise easy to dislike, but her position is also easy to understand. Further, she seems to have a genuine love for Anne, even if it expresses itself in a manipulative way.

But looming over it all is Colman's Queen Anne, a woman whose struggles and illnesses make her vulnerable, yet those things combined with her power make her very dangerous. She's a brilliant character--and brilliantly portrayed--because every action that Lady Sarah or Abigail takes has the potential to explode in their face. Every time they do something to amp up Anne's paranoia, or every misstep they make in trying to make themselves appear essential is like laying down a trap for themselves. Queen Anne is like a wounded animal--alone and hurting, but capable of great injury. She is so used to her life of luxury and obedience that it blinds her to the real motivations of those around her.

The look of the film is incredibly strong, with wonderful textures and shapes in the costuming and the set design. There's a neat mix in many of the rooms and outfits between opulence and squalor.

The film also makes great use of the comedic chops of its cast. All three actresses have a different kind of humor, and they are well supported by Nicholas Hoult as a politician who becomes a part of the power games being played. Joe Alwyn also gets quite a few laughs as a lord who is sent by Hoult's character to seduce and dominate Abigail, but ends up under her power. A bemused debrief between the two men after the attempted seduction ("How did it go?" " . . . she bit me.") establishes Abigail's savvy---not disregarding their attentions, but submitting to them on her own terms.

Lastly, shout out to Horatio, the Fastest Duck in the City!

4.5

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/The_Spoilers_1942_Poster.jpg
By Universal Pictures - http://www.allposters.com/-sp/The-Spoilers-John-Wayne-Marlene-Dietrich-1942-Posters_i5136971_.htm, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36820561

The Spoilers - (1942)

This follows a Hollywood formula religiously, but I can't push The Spoilers aside to be forgotten about because it has moments that stand out, good and bad. One of those includes John Wayne in blackface, sharing a godawful moment with Marietta Canty - one you have to see to believe. On a positive note the final battle between Wayne's Roy Glennister and Randolph Scott's Alex McNamara goes to ridiculous lengths, lasts a long time and ends up with half of the town destroyed. Marlene Dietrich shows up in a see-through blouse, and there is enough sexual double entendre talk to last 17 Mae West films. All of this makes this tale about prospectors being cheated out of their finds by slimy judges and lawmen interesting, and worth watching - especially for fans of Wayne or Dietrich (and was of extra interest for me because Richard Barthelmess features in a rare post-A Modern Hero role.)

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/be/If_Beale_Street_Could_Talk_film.png
By IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59422414

If Beale Street Could Talk - (2018)

Second time watching this - a window into a world that shouldn't exist as it does. There's some nice visual poetry, which adds to what has been adapted from James Baldwin's novel. I was happy to see that it didn't sell out.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/The_Wife_%282017_film%29.png
By The poster art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=55237222

The Wife - (2017)

My second time watching this as well. I was kind of spellbound by it in it's last stretch - I love Jonathan Pryce and Glenn Close in this, who really managed to snag two great roles and do their best with them. I could see myself watching it yet again in the future - it's just so well written and to the point, while looking and sounding perfect for the story it's telling.

7.5/10

[WHITBISSELL!]

I think I've only seen two films of his: this and Winchester 73, where he briefly plays a Native American. I've heard Seconds is pretty good, but I'm not sure if that has to do more with the plot than with his performance.I don't know if you've watched Bend of the River with Jimmy Stewart and Arthur Kennedy. It's an Anthony Mann Western and Hudson has a small but semi-significant role in that as a gambler. He stood out to me as a likable character with a redemptive arc of sorts.

[Thief]

I don't know if you've watched Bend of the River with Jimmy Stewart and Arthur Kennedy. It's an Anthony Mann Western and Hudson has a small but semi-significant role in that as a gambler. He stood out to me as a likable character with a redemptive arc of sorts.

Never seen it, but I'll add it to the watchlist.

[WHITBISSELL!]

That one's been on the watchlist since forever :D Need to prioritize it.You should. It's one of those sprawling epics. Only set in Texas and it actually addresses some of the prejudices Hispanics were subject to. Unheard of in a 1956 film and especially one with a big budget and a heavyweight cast. They're all so good in this. Hudson, Taylor, Dean, Dennis Hopper, Carroll Baker, Chill Wills, Sal Mineo, Earl Holliman.

[Rockatansky]

I've heard Seconds is pretty good, but I'm not sure if that has to do more with the plot than with his performance.
I think the movie gains quite a bit from his casting and the fact that he was closeted at the time, which colours the proceedings interesting. His Douglas Sirk films have a similar dynamic, so would suggest checking those out as well.

[Fabulous]

The Green Ray (1986)

3.5

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/ufvekdsuUXJIkq724JYDgKl4xtl.jpg

[Allaby]

Just For the Hell of It (1968) Directed by Herschell Gordon Lewis. A gang of young punks cause mayhem and destruction. I enjoyed this in a trashy, nasty sort of way. The plot is pretty thin, but it was still sufficiently entertaining. Bonus points for putting the baby in the garbage can. 3.5

[mark f]

Snow Monster (Huang He, 2019) 2.5 5.5/10
Squish! (Tulapop Saenjaroen, 2021) 2 5/10
Woman Wanted (George B. Seitz, 1935) 2.5 5.5/10
Enthiran (Bazin Bs & S. Shankar, 2010) 3 6.5/10
https://i.makeagif.com/media/11-03-2017/Jy11-D.gif
A doctor (Rajinikanth) creates a robot in his own image but learns that he can't control his actions, including hitting on his wife (Aishwarya Rai Bachchan).
Public Toilet Africa (Kofi Ofosu-Yeboah, 2021) 2 5/10
Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank (Chris Bailey, Mark Koetsier & Rob Minkoff, 2022) 2.5 6/10
The Nan Movie (Catherine Tate, 2022) 2 5/10
I Am Groot (Kirsten Lepore, 2022) 3 6.5/10 5 shorts
https://64.media.tumblr.com/1819250df626cf4ffca4f915a37b114b/ea5d4afbe541f4ad-29/s540x810/007948c94ce16d6400381d0854dfb23f7fa16c3a.gifv
Groot (Vin Diesel) may be a Party Animal or an immature selfish little punk.
The Forgiven (John Michael McDonagh, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Santaman (Bret Stern, 2022) 2 5/10
Carter (Jeong Byeong-Gil, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Thirteen Lives (Ron Howard, 2022) 3 6.5/10
https://www.chiangraitimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Thirteen-Lives.webp
During the Thailand cave incident a few years back, three of the "awesome foursome" British cave divers, Chris Jewell (Tom Bateman), John Volanthen (Colin Farrell) and Richard Stanton (Viggo Mortensen), prepare to get the kids out.
Jane by Charlotte (Charlotte Gainsbourg, 2021) 2.5 6/10
13 Minutes (Lindsay Gossling, 2021) 2 5/10
Secret Headquarters (Henry Joost & Ariel Schulman, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Elvis (Baz Luhrmann, 2022) 3 6.5/10
https://filmvibes.files.wordpress.com/2022/07/tumblr_798c0776c42c5625ced81091f7017042_792a4e2a_540.gif
The life story of Elvis Presley (Austin Butler) told mostly through the eyes of his egocentric manager Colonel Tom Parker (Tom Hanks). Entertaining but frantic and overlong.
One More Time with Feeling (Andrew Dominik, 2016) 3+ 6.5/10
Rise of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Andy Suriano & Ant Ward, 2022) 2.5 6/10
We Burn Like This (Alana Waksman, 2021) 2 5/10
Day Shift (J.J. Perry, 2022) 2.5 6/10
https://i0.wp.com/bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/DS_20210623_14966_R_f-scaled-e1657548362738.jpg?w=1800&ssl=1
Los Angeles pool cleaner Jamie Foxx is really a vampire hunter and gets some help near the end from legendary Big John Elliott (Snoop Dogg).

[Iroquois]

Day Shift - 3

I just love how it's like "okay now what if Bright was good"

[Gideon58]

It's a good film. I've always felt R. Hudson to be a lightweight actor who never seemed really sincere, but here he was very good.

Loved this movie...totally agree that it was the first display of some real acting skills from Rock Hudson. He was quite good in this.

[Wooley]

Oh, his specific character was a horrible human being. But I think that the movie did a good job of having several guys who were pretty awful in their own ways without it seeming like that was the point or message of the narrative.

I agree, I didn't feel like the movie was trying to make any kind of statement.
There are some pretty awful men out there, women too, people, but a woman like Gloria could easily get mixed up with shitty men. I thought the movie was pretty deft overall, to tell you the truth, and I think the fact that it never occurred to me that there was a way to see it as "all men are bad" or anything is just a part of that. They told the story they wanted to tell and they told it well.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/The_Spoilers_1942_Poster.jpg
By Universal Pictures - http://www.allposters.com/-sp/The-Spoilers-John-Wayne-Marlene-Dietrich-1942-Posters_i5136971_.htm, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36820561

The Spoilers - (1942)

This follows a Hollywood formula religiously, but I can't push The Spoilers aside to be forgotten about because it has moments that stand out, good and bad. One of those includes John Wayne in blackface, sharing a godawful moment with Marietta Canty - one you have to see to believe. On a positive note the final battle between Wayne's Roy Glennister and Randolph Scott's Alex McNamara goes to ridiculous lengths, lasts a long time and ends up with half of the town destroyed. Marlene Dietrich shows up in a see-through blouse, and there is enough sexual double entendre talk to last 17 Mae West films. All of this makes this tale about prospectors being cheated out of their finds by slimy judges and lawmen interesting, and worth watching - especially for fans of Wayne or Dietrich (and was of extra interest for me because Richard Barthelmess features in a rare post-A Modern Hero role.)

6/10



Randolph Scott! *takes off hat*

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/JYdMuHv.jpg?3

The truth is that no amount of nostalgia, love for ELO, or respect for the dead can forgive how truly awful this movie is.
It may very well be the worst movie I have ever seen. In fact, it is so bad that I leapfrogged it ahead of a backlog of write-ups I need to do, just because it is so very specially bad.
I described it thusly to my friend, Trout, first as I was watching it last night and then following up this morning:

Me: "I think I’ve finally figured out what’s wrong with Xanadu."
Trout: "That it’s a piece of hot steaming shit? Dude, I figured that out a long long time ago. I could have saved you the time."
*fast-forward to this morning...
Trout: "I’m sorry. That was unnecessarily nasty."
Me: "No, you're not wrong.
When I first texted, I was gonna say that the director should have been taken out back and shot against the wall. But then I realized that you’d need to take the cinematographer with him. And then I realized that the writer(s) might actually be even more nefarious criminals (assuming they were paid for this, they robbed somebody blind). And then I figured the lead actor, Michael Beck, would have to be left lifeless (like his “performance”) in an alleyway or ditch in like The Bronx or Kansas. And yet, that it’s a shame you can’t remake a film like this."
Me (again): "The level of incompetence involved is staggering. I mean, it’s incompetence. It’s not a bad idea or studio meddling or too low of a budget or whatever, it is gross incompetence. If I performed my doctorly duties this way I would be found guilty of both malpractice and professional incompetence and I suspect my license would be reviewed and possibly revoked."
Me: "For example, the song 'Magic' from the soundtrack actually was a No.1 hit, yet in the film, a musical, it is not performed but plays in the background while people (incompetently) talk over it. In another scene, the climactic scene, Olivia Newton John performs the soundtrack’s second biggest hit... mostly while facing away from the camera, ostensibly wowed by tight-rope walkers (three feet off the ground) and mediocre roller-skaters, often in wide shots to try to show the whole (incompetent) spectacle that’s on display, while she is like the size of a pencil on the screen and could actually be someone else in a blonde wig. During the climactic musical number which she is singing. I was dumbfounded. There is no filmmaking competence. Never seen anything like it. They simply don't know where to put the camera. They don't know where the camera should be pointed. They don't know how the actors should be blocked. They don't know how the shot should be lit. They don't know how long the shot should last. They don't know how to deliver what is actually in the scene to the audience. A complete lack of competence. It becomes clear why the Razzies were founded specifically because of this film."
Me: I love a lot of "bad" movies. But the makers of Xanadu simply could not have done worse. They had Olivia Newton-John, Gene Kelly, and Jeff Lynne writing songs and scoring the film with ELO performing it all, and they, the filmmakers, let all those people down with a simple and true lack of actual, minimal competence. Xanadu is a not a "bad" movie. It's just a bad movie.
Trout: "You're not wrong."

[Mr Minio]

Enthiran (Bazin Bs & S. Shankar, 2010) 3 6.5/10 I have a feeling this is the best film ever made and we both just can't fully get it. BOOM BOOM ROBO DA ROBO DA ROBO DA ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM ROBO DA ROBO DA ROBO DA!!

[GulfportDoc]

88405
Elvis (2022)

The chief takeaway from this picture is the phenomenal performance of Austin Butler as Elvis Presley. It’s hard to imagine how anyone could have done a better job. His uncanny resemblance to Elvis, his stage mannerisms, his subtle expressions, dancing, and overall sex appeal were as if Elvis were reborn. Butler even did his own singing when portraying the younger Elvis, although Elvis’ voice was at least partially dubbed in when Butler’s older Elvis sang.

What trivialized the film were its gaudy and exaggerated depictions of Elvis’ early life in Tupelo, Mississippi, and his visits to the center of blues in Memphis, Beale Street. Although the featured blues singers sang well, their speakeasy type settings and performances were presented with a magnified sleaze to the point of parody. In street and crowd scenes its as if the film rocketed to a whiz bang musical extravaganza ala West Side Story, with larger than life coordinated crowd scenes presented in a near psychedelic Technicolor fashion. By telling a tale that itself is larger than life, presenting that story in an over the top staging canceled out the impact of it. Elvis’ meteoric rise to fame would have been better represented if the producers would have toned down his early influences and career start.

I was 14 when Heartbreak Hotel hit the radio airwaves with a bang. Younger audiences were immediately taken in. By the time Hound Dog soon followed, we were completely hooked. It was only later that I learned that his early version of That’s All Right recorded at Sam Phillip’s Sun Studio in Memphis had been immediately played on the air at a local radio station. The response was instant and immense, with many phone calls inquiring who the young singer was, and which high school did he attend (so as to learn whether the singer was black or white). That was the event that started Elvis’ rise to fame. He subsequently used that song in his appearances on the Louisiana Hayride on radio, then TV. If one listens to that early Sun Studio recording (available on YouTube), Presley’s bluesy and evocative vocal styling is galvanizing and completely fresh.

Reports of Elvis made much of Presley’s manager, Col. Tom Parker (Tom Hanks) and that the story was told from his point of view. But for an early scene, and one near the end featuring Parker on his death bed, the story ala Parker never really registered. As a matter of fact it’s a mystery trying to understand what they were trying to do with Parker. Hanks did a creditable performance, but we’re left to understand how Parker really viewed his relationship with Elvis. Hanks used an accent, presumably to connote Parker’s Dutch heritage, but the accent was merely generically foreign sounding without much reference to Dutch, which was often sing-song in nature. But in fact Parker’s real speaking voice was not foreign sounding at all. It was more of a mid Atlantic American accent. Certainly there are any number of actors who might have been better cast than Hanks, but presumably Warner Bros. wanted to have a hefty name in the production to commercially add to audience attraction.

The film did truthfully feature some of Presley’s highlights and a few lowlights, but there were several scenes and story lines that were fabricated. For example Presley and Parker never visited a house of mirrors or rode on a Ferris wheel for serious conversation, nor did Presley ever fire Parker on stage during a show at the International Hotel. And some of the interesting incidents in his life were left out. I think the producers fell into the trap that many Hollywood biopics have done: They believe that to make the story important or attractive, it must be presented in a distorted extravagant manner, over emphasizing certain facets in order to drive home its worth.

The quality of the music, both featured and incidental, was of a high quality, which one would expect in a music biopic. Executive music producer Elliott Wheeler helmed an impressive array of songs and performances, while arranging those choices and providing incidental music. Next to Butler’s performance, Wheeler’s work was one of the most important portions of the movie.

Elvis was a highly anticipated film. While it had its missteps, it is a review of one of American history’s most important popular legends-- a man who remains the best selling solo music artist of all time. His vocal ability allowed him to sing in many styles: rock, ballad, country, gospel and others. And his importance to culture in the mid Twentieth Century is inestimable. This film is a worthwhile view of Elvis Presley’s legend and legacy.

Doc’s rating: 7/10

[Tugg]

Luck (2022) 3
https://s3.amazonaws.com/syndication.abcaudio.com/files/2022-05-13/e_luck_05132022.jpg
Prey (2022) 4
https://www.voicesfromthebalcony.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Prey-3.jpg
The Voyeurs (2021) 1.5
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/2c54b004-9dbd-44b7-8031-08fadd6517c1/der5x3c-0be5374f-672a-4405-8d4d-af3cf1bca7ae.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQz NzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6 W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzJjNTRiMDA0LTlkYmQtNDRiNy04MDMxLTA4ZmFkZDY1MTdjMVwvZGVyNXgzYy0wYmU1Mzc0Zi02NzJh LTQ0MDUtOGQ0ZC1hZjNjZjFiY2E3YWUucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.CXrFFbv-5afF35AgDw4Hl-B54S-ijzM56UAm_zxge6M
The Card Counter (2021) 3
https://www.activecontext.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/card-counter-images-poster.jpg
Day Shift (2022) 3
https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/c7268c79-9436-4230-b75e-2814495b25f4/df9e9iz-f7bb7b0f-f1ac-4e0c-b8e9-9f4fcc02eb13.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQz NzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6 W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2M3MjY4Yzc5LTk0MzYtNDIzMC1iNzVlLTI4MTQ0OTViMjVmNFwvZGY5ZTlpei1mN2JiN2IwZi1mMWFj LTRlMGMtYjhlOS05ZjRmY2MwMmViMTMucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.NmRaX3YK lEreQXzbsexGOi1rwjvuWBTbAyF7cge-bQ8

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/df/Phantom_of_the_open.jpg/220px-Phantom_of_the_open.jpg

3

SF =Z


[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

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fa.ltrbxd.com%2Fresized%2Fsm%2Fupload%2Fk6%2Feq%2F9v%2Fdw%2Fyouve-got-mail-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg%3Fk%3D6cfd866e6e&f=1&nofb=1

You've Got Mail, 1998

Kathleen (Meg Ryan) owns and operates an independent children's bookstore in New York City. Joe (Tom Hanks) is in the middle of opening a corporate, Borders-like book superstore just around the corner. Obvious animosity develops between the two, but they are unaware that they are corresponding online with each other via AOL forums. As their online relationship grows, their real-world dynamics become more and more contentious.

This is a remake of The Shop Around the Corner, updated to the internet age. While the cast is stacked with very charming talent, some the dynamics of the story end up making the romance kind of icky.

Ryan and Hanks are both proven romantic-comedy talents, including their work in Sleepless in Seattle. They both bring plenty of charm to their roles, especially Hanks, who must still come off as likable even though he is driving Ryan's character out of business. They are supported by a whole slew of secondary characters, like Greg Kinnear's goober of an intellectual poseur, who is dating Kathleen, or Parker Posey as Joe's girlfriend. Even much smaller roles are filled by talents like Dave Chapelle, Steve Zahn, and Jean Stapleton.

But the plot. The plot. Oof.

There's a plot point in both the original film and this adaptation (MILD SPOILERS) that about a third of the way or halfway through the film, Joe learns that Kathleen is his secret correspondent. In both versions, the male lead leverages this one-sided knowledge to feel out the relationship and generally mess with his love interest. It's not hard to see how this is problematic and kind of gross.

But in the original film, the characters were co-workers in the same store, with the female lead being remarkable for her salesmanship. So there was a power imbalance, but other elements somewhat balanced it out.

In this film, though, Joe's store is literally destroying Kathleen's work, something that not only brings her great joy, but is also the thing that she most connects with to her dead mother. At two hours long, this adds up to about an hour of Joe manipulating, humiliating, and otherwise playing mind games with Kathleen as her business goes under. There's a grace period right after he finds out who she is where you think, yeah, he needs to buy some time to figure out how to navigate this. But an hour of run time?! And to then have Joe basically start pitting himself against . . . himself and forcing Kathleen to choose just feels cruel. But because the movie needs us to be okay with this, Kathleen is perpetually apologizing to Joe when she's angry, and then so grateful for his attentions.

The cast is great, and deliver their lines with aplomb. But all the charm in the world can't save an overall premise that is pretty yucky if you think about it for more than two minutes.

3

[cricket]

Prey (2022)

3

https://64.media.tumblr.com/5baa56be09bd9adcb05595c6183e1fab/e66bd97c48ed6a8b-05/s1280x1920/a18d789db81f80846fd57fc7e48494364506aacf.gifv

My favorite thing about the original Predator is it's cast of badasses with different personalities. I've never even really cared about the Arnold vs Predator battle. That put this new movie at a disadvantage going in for me, but the results were still positive. The girl and the rest of the cast are fine, they just don't stand out. It's a good looking flick that keeps a strong pace and has plenty of action. I enjoyed it.

[SpelingError]

29th Hall of Fame

Vengeance is Mine (1979) - 3

This is kind of film I struggle to write much about as it left me quite emotionally cold. It's clearly a biography of sorts for the killer, but for much of it, I felt pretty disconnected from him. In spite of covering multiple events from his life (his early years growing up, the murders he committed near the start of the film, befriending a lawyer, his arrest for fraud, his marriage with Kazuko, and his relationship with Haru), the film had a somewhat aloof sense as it moved through these sequences. For instance, opening with the killer's capture, backtracking to a drawn out scene of two of his murders, and flashing back to his capture seemed like a weird choice of an introduction. Similarly, the scenes of him as a child left me particularly cold. The conflict with his wife and his relationship with Haru were among the better parts of the film, but even they felt double their runtime and left me distant as well. Maybe if the film focused more on the latter two sub-plots and less on the other parts I mentioned, I'd be more into the film. For what it's worth though, I found Haru's mother to be the most memorable character in this. Also, the acting is pretty good, the washed out color palette fits the bleak vibes of the film really well, and the final scene, while I'm not sure what it was going for, is pretty fun (I would've liked more scenes like that). Also, the film is technically well-made, so I wouldn't say it's a bad film or anything. Just one which left a lot to be desired. So yeah, all I can say is that it was a well-made and well-directed film which left me cold. I might check out some more of Imamura's films in the future to see if I respond better to them though.

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fa.ltrbxd.com%2Fresized%2Fsm%2Fupload%2Fk6%2Feq%2F9v%2Fdw%2Fyouve-got-mail-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg%3Fk%3D6cfd866e6e&f=1&nofb=1

You've Got Mail, 1998

Kathleen (Meg Ryan) owns and operates an independent children's bookstore in New York City. Joe (Tom Hanks) is in the middle of opening a corporate, Borders-like book superstore just around the corner. Obvious animosity develops between the two, but they are unaware that they are corresponding online with each other via AOL forums. As their online relationship grows, their real-world dynamics become more and more contentious.

This is a remake of The Shop Around the Corner, updated to the internet age. While the cast is stacked with very charming talent, some the dynamics of the story end up making the romance kind of icky.

Ryan and Hanks are both proven romantic-comedy talents, including their work in Sleepless in Seattle. They both bring plenty of charm to their roles, especially Hanks, who must still come off as likable even though he is driving Ryan's character out of business. They are supported by a whole slew of secondary characters, like Greg Kinnear's goober of an intellectual poseur, who is dating Kathleen, or Parker Posey as Joe's girlfriend. Even much smaller roles are filled by talents like Dave Chapelle, Steve Zahn, and Jean Stapleton.

But the plot. The plot. Oof.

There's a plot point in both the original film and this adaptation (MILD SPOILERS) that about a third of the way or halfway through the film, Joe learns that Kathleen is his secret correspondent. In both versions, the male lead leverages this one-sided knowledge to feel out the relationship and generally mess with his love interest. It's not hard to see how this is problematic and kind of gross.

But in the original film, the characters were co-workers in the same store, with the female lead being remarkable for her salesmanship. So there was a power imbalance, but other elements somewhat balanced it out.

In this film, though, Joe's store is literally destroying Kathleen's work, something that not only brings her great joy, but is also the thing that she most connects with to her dead mother. At two hours long, this adds up to about an hour of Joe manipulating, humiliating, and otherwise playing mind games with Kathleen as her business goes under. There's a grace period right after he finds out who she is where you think, yeah, he needs to buy some time to figure out how to navigate this. But an hour of run time?! And to then have Joe basically start pitting himself against . . . himself and forcing Kathleen to choose just feels cruel. But because the movie needs us to be okay with this, Kathleen is perpetually apologizing to Joe when she's angry, and then so grateful for his attentions.

The cast is great, and deliver their lines with aplomb. But all the charm in the world can't save an overall premise that is pretty yucky if you think about it for more than two minutes.

3

Yeah, couldn't understand why any of this was supposed to be good or positive. I kinda hated the idea of it.
Also just wasn't nearly up to the other comedies these two had done in the previous few years.

[Gideon58]

http://gonewiththetwins.com/new/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/abyss.jpg



4.5

[Takoma11]

Yeah, couldn't understand why any of this was supposed to be good or positive. I kinda hated the idea of it.
Also just wasn't nearly up to the other comedies these two had done in the previous few years.

Making them co-workers, as in the original film, would have been such a better way to go. Making him a millionaire corporate king and her an independent bookstore owner creates a power imbalance that destroys the stuff that just passes muster in the original.

In the original film, there are literally two minutes where the guy pretends to know the letter-writer and jokes about him being old and overweight. In You've Got Mail, Joe spends days (or maybe even weeks) feeding her ideas about why this man refuses to meet her.

I think that the best thing about this film--which I realize I didn't mention in my review, LOL--was the incredibly adult and mature break-up conversation between Frank and Kathleen.

[SuperMetro]

Elvis - Like everyone else, I thought Austin Butler played a good Elvis. Tom Hanks despite acting out his character well, I really do not think that Tom Parker behaved that manipulative in real life. I felt the rap music was also out of place for this movie. The movie was also too long, that the people I watched it with were complaining about it as well. It was a watchable one, but was not really anything special. 2.5
Seventh Seal - I enjoyed this one. I loved the medieval setting of the movie, I loved the characters I was following, and also the symbolisms as well. I then liked the ending where the knight loses the chess game, but saves the family by distracting Death. It was obvious that Death was going to win at the end, but it still felt satisfying how the characters are going to learn from it. I actually felt like I was with them in this world while watching this. As for Ingmar Bergman, I already loved Persona and I love The Seventh Seal a bit more. 5
47 Ronin - I actually did not watch this. Someone put it on, so I sat through it. It just became some bad parody of Chinese fantasy films. So awful, and cheesy, and Keanu Reeves was out of place for this junk. I played the guitar and paid no attention to THIS. I also meaninglessly read reviews about this movie and several other Ebert reviews during the run. That is sayin' a lot. I could watch any Chinese set film and have the same effect. This one really turned me off. 1 7 Samurai seems like a better movie anyway, but I have not seen it yet(mainly due to its length), but I saw something else directed by Akira Kurasawa...
Ikiru - This was a lovely movie because it shows the boredom of real life and how rank does not seem to matter but instead what one accomplishes. It showed how someone should live his or her life to the fullest no matter how much time you have left. I loved going through Ikiru's adventures with the novelist and the young woman. They help him find the meaning of life, so then he tries to accomplish something in the 6 months he has left due to stomach cancer. Then the second half plays out kind of like Citizen Kane where the old man dies, and people put together a puzzle trying to figure out the meaning of the built playground. We then see the iconic scene of him swinging and singing the song Gondola no Uta. Then I feel happy watching how a low-ranking bureaucrat accomplished way more than anyone else at his job did that at a higher rank. This completely made up for the last movie I saw. 5

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/FR4GttMQ/Gold-rush-poster.jpg
By Charles Chaplin Productions / United Artists - Here, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63076137

The Gold Rush (1942 version)

There's a certain level of fascination that creeps into my consciousness as I watch old silent films, even when they're not being silent. This was Chaplin's re-release, with added music and narration, and is what he considered the definitive version of The Gold Rush (he also re-edited it and changed a few aspects.) While I certainly think it's funny, I don't laugh the same way I do when I watch a Buster Keaton film - and that's just my preference, but it's not to say that this film isn't brilliant in a number of ways. Originally released in 1925, it was shot partly on location, and is seemingly flawless - this man's professionalism being far ahead of the pack in these early days of cinema. I often enjoy Chaplin's films more after I see them several times, for they move forward awfully quickly and pack as much material into their runtimes as possible - so I look forward to watching this again (and will probably check out the 1925 silent version.) This is iconic stuff, and a reverential feeling quickly settles into me as I take it in.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/72/Film_Poster_for_Ted_and_Venus.jpg
By Max Kady - IMDb, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61488830

Ted & Venus - (1991)

This was Bud Cort's first and last stab at being a filmmaker, and while it might be interesting to fans and those fascinated in him, others should steer well clear. Ted & Venus is poorly made, and that's just what this dank, dark and depressing feature didn't need. Cort stars as Ted Whitley, an award-winning poet who is nevertheless a failure and bearded tramp-like figure. He falls in love with Linda (Kim Adams) one day while watching her swim, and the rest of this film features his obsessive pursuit of her - despite her constant rejection. This leads Ted to being arrested, assaulted and imprisoned. His stalking of Linda becomes more and more crazed as his sanity slips far beyond his grasp. The dark and blue-tinted version I saw needs an urgent remastering and restoring - but nevertheless, everything seems sub-par. Also features James Brolin and Gina Rowlands.

5/10

https://i.postimg.cc/MK9QqkQ8/amityville-murders.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61488830

The Amityville Murders - (2018)

Amityville II : The Possession (1982) is one hell of a goofy and wild ride - and while it's no doubt an awful film, I've watched it many times with friends and family. No other supposedly spooky horror film just goes all out in such a ridiculous manner, and every scene is memorable in some way. So when The Amityville Murders was announced as a retread of the same "true story" - starring Burt Young and Diane Franklin, who appeared in the 1982 version it was exciting news. We were expecting some kind of revival or a spiritual successor. Instead, this one is as bad as all the others - grim faced, boring, unimaginative and ugly. Just another load of trash. I'm glad I watched it alone, and avoided what would have been a group let-down.

3/10

[WrinkledMind]

Honor Society

Passable high school flick, with the usual plot lines and couple of fresh twists.

[Wooley]

Making them co-workers, as in the original film, would have been such a better way to go. Making him a millionaire corporate king and her an independent bookstore owner creates a power imbalance that destroys the stuff that just passes muster in the original.

In the original film, there are literally two minutes where the guy pretends to know the letter-writer and jokes about him being old and overweight. In You've Got Mail, Joe spends days (or maybe even weeks) feeding her ideas about why this man refuses to meet her.

I think that the best thing about this film--which I realize I didn't mention in my review, LOL--was the incredibly adult and mature break-up conversation between Frank and Kathleen.

I can't say I remember that conversation. But I was really pissed about the movie. She really did kinda just feel like a victim for a significant portion of a romance. Not good.

[Fabulous]

Foxes (1980)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/tgHNHWhUIwb8Q0RiQywQzmbp8JA.jpg

[matt72582]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_ja51IYJlbws%2FSxQJ6KmkqUI%2FAAAAAAAAD7M%2FVnv86bnyWYk%2Fs1600%2 Ffat-city-1972-stacy-keach-jeff-bridges-pic-3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Fat City, 1972

Ernie (Jeff Bridges) is an up-and-coming boxer. Tully (Stacy Keach) has already made a go at it once. Each man gets involved in a romance: Ernie with the sweet Kaye (Candy Clark) and Tully with the troubled Oma (Susan Tyrrell). Both of them must navigate the changeable world of boxing.

I've said before that I have a slight personal aversion to films that feature a lot of boxing. It's not something I hold against a film, but it does make it harder for me to get invested in the narrative. This film, much like The Set-Up, managed to get around that personal bias with its intense focus on the lives and hopes of the men at the center of the story.

What's most remarkable about the film is the way that it captures how hopes of the remarkable can slightly collapse into the unremarkable. The film is really masterful in how it builds moments that feel like they will be dramatic or climactic, and sometimes they are and sometimes they simply . . . diffuse. A great example of this is a conversation between Faye where she muses aloud about the chance that she is pregnant now that she and Ernie have started having sex. She basically works her way around to pitching that they get married. In most films this would be a point for a dramatic confrontation, but instead Ernie is just sort of like, "Yeah, okay." When he later speaks about his marriage (and his child), he is neither effusive nor bitter, just mildly positive.

As a huge fan of Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker, I did a total fangirl squeeeeeeeeeee! when Susan Tyrrell popped up. Her vocal tone is this really unique thing that naturally accents what is meant to be intoxication, but makes her sound as if she's perpetually experiencing a deep heartbreak. She's a perfect match for the character of Oma who, with a lot of help from alcohol, is clearly a person who lives deep, deep in her feelings.

Bridges and Keach are both very strong in their roles, but Keach really owns the film. Tully is a man who somehow seems to have totally given up and yet still has some glimmer of hope left in him. Keach absolutely nails a sort of guarded ferocity, a desire to connect and succeed having to make its way through years and years of baked on cynicism.

A really excellent example of a film driven almost entirely by character work.

rating_4_5




Hooray! I've looked at everyone who has seen this movie, and everyone gives it such a high score (including myself - 10/10), but many won't or haven't seen it :(


I think the story is great, and I'm surprised John Huston fans didn't rush to see this, either back then or today.. somewhere.... Stacy Keach delivers one of the very, very best performances I have ever seen.


And to use some bait, it's Jeff Bridges' first movie :)

[matt72582]

I enjoy reading this thread, but if you have a few seconds, could you please tell us where/how you saw this -- I can't find any of these movies.







https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/4f6014678d6690f5ab06a14f19c39ebb.jpg


rating_4_5


I've heard good things about this movie. Would one be interested if they had no interest in space? I guess I'm hoping this movie is about people, their relationship with each other, etc.

[Takoma11]

I enjoy reading this thread, but if you have a few seconds, could you please tell us where/how you saw this -- I can't find any of these movies.

I highly recommend using JustWatch to see where films are available.

https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/fat-city

[matt72582]

Fourth of July - 7.5/10
Best American movie I've seen since "There Will Be Blood".. Well done, Louis CK... It's been out since July 1st, yet only 500 ratings on IMDB. That's the way it is, I guess.



https://youtu.be/_XiKCHS3Z_U

[matt72582]

I highly recommend using JustWatch to see where films are available.

https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/fat-city


Thanks, but they never seem to have my titles. Something entirely different comes up, despite typing it the exact movie title (even in its original language sometimes)

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fbinary%2Fe1bd%2FWindRiver.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Wind River, 2017

When a young woman is found murdered on the Wind River Indian Reservation, young agent Banner (Elizabth Olsen) is the closest federal officer and is thus assigned the case. But her unfamiliarity with both the local landscape and culture means that she needs assistance from local tracker Lambert (Jeremy Renner) to find the perpetrator.

I think that if I'd watched this film a year or two ago, I'd have thought a lot more highly of it. As it stands, the dynamics of who was put at the forefront and who was used mostly as background left me a bit underwhelmed.

There are a lot of positives to this film. I have liked or loved everything that Tyler Sheridan has written and/or directed, and this film shows his usual strengths in telling a compelling story that rolls along at a great pace while still leaving room for small character moments.

The performances themselves are also strong. Renner and Olsen are both good in their roles, and they have some great support from Graham Greene as the local sheriff and Jon Bernthal as a man involved somehow in the crime. Everyone in the supporting cast acquits themselves well.

The scenery is also absolutely stunning. The film really captures both the beauty and the danger of the mountains and their extreme weather. Much of the action takes place outdoors, and the film is stronger for it.

Finally, the plot itself and the detours it takes through the different pockets of the community are woven together quite well.

But complaint-wise, here it is: why is this a movie about two white people solving a crime on a reservation? Why is every heroic character white? And did no one stop to consider how it looks to have a white man delivering words-of-wisdom lectures to only native people and the young woman he works with? This isn't a slam on Renner, who is fine in his role, but more a question about why every scene in this movie centers white characters when one of its goals seems to be addressing the issues---boredom, isolation, drug use--that mar the lives of the people (and especially the young people) on the reservation.

Fundamentally, I understand that this is a question of good ol' capitalism. Why wouldn't you put two Marvel universe actors at the center of your movie? Is there an indigenous actor with the kind of box office pull that Renner or Olsen have? No, there isn't. But I believe that Olsen or Renner alone could have drawn a crowd and it seems like a hugely wasted opportunity for the movie to put its money where its mouth is and pair either of those actors with someone from the community it uses as its murder mystery backdrop.

Solid stuff, but a real missed opportunity when it comes to how it explores the very specific setting it uses.

4

[Thief]

LUCK
(2022, Holmes)

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


"Forever family. It's the people who are always there for you, no matter what happens. The ones who don't leave, they stick."



Luck follows Sam (Eva Noblezada), a young woman that has to leave the orphanage where she has lived all her life after turning 18. Not wanting to leave her younger friend Hazel alone, Sam wants to make sure she is successfully adopted by her "forever family", but fears that her "bad luck" would prevent this to happen.

That is until she meets Bob (Simon Pegg), a black cat that comes from the Land of Luck where leprechauns and other magical creatures create "good luck" for people. Sam then recruits Bob, and some of his friends to find a lucky penny for Hazel, thinking that would help her to be adopted. But, of course, they end up creating all kinds of shenanigans in the Land of Luck.

Grade: 3


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2325460#post2325460)

[Thief]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fbinary%2Fe1bd%2FWindRiver.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Wind River, 2017

4

This film is a perfect example of a film that has all the ingredients to be great (director, cast, premise) and still somehow fumbles the ball a bit. Like you said, solid but a missed opportunity indeed.

[StuSmallz]

This film is a perfect example of a film that has all the ingredients to be great (director, cast, premise) and still somehow fumbles the ball a bit. Like you said, solid but a missed opportunity indeed.You mean because of the white savior optics, or something else?

[Thief]

You mean because of the white savior optics, or something else?

There is that, but I don't think the main characters were properly explored. Here is my review (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2240069-wind-river.html), for what it's worth.

[Takoma11]

This film is a perfect example of a film that has all the ingredients to be great (director, cast, premise) and still somehow fumbles the ball a bit. Like you said, solid but a missed opportunity indeed.

I think it's because it fails to establish any real kind of relationship between the lead characters and the people living on the reservation. It sort of gestures at it, with Renner's character also having lost a daughter, but it never feels quite right.

I also took a little exception to that final speech where she says that she survived because she got lucky and he says that in this environment there's no such thing as luck, and that she fought for her life and earned it. Despite them repeatedly gesturing at how hardcore it is that Natalie, the murder victim, ran 6 miles in the snow, it still feels kind of like a weird slam on her that she didn't survive.

And her character made just some really bad judgment calls. Setting aside her stumbling through a house with a loaded weapon while half-blind early in the film, once she realizes how hostile the Dept. of Energy people are---and that they are armed and evenly matched in terms of people---clearly they should have made an excuse and left.

I think that the acting does a good job of covering for the fact that the character development and growth just wasn't quite there.

[Takoma11]

There is that, but I don't think the main characters were properly explored. Here is my review (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2240069-wind-river.html), for what it's worth.

Agreed. And because of the lack of character developments, the white savior aspect (which would be unavoidable anyway) feel amped up.

[StuSmallz]

There is that, but I don't think the main characters were properly explored. Here is my review (https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2240069-wind-river.html), for what it's worth.Well, while I agree with some of your points about the movie (which I liked a good deal otherwise, as you can see here (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/wind-river-2017/)), I don't see why Olsen's character would "need" more of an individual character arc; I mean, The Man With No Name doesn't have much of a character arc either, but that doesn't stop The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly from being one of the best movies I've ever seen. And I love a good arc as much as the next person, but not every character needs one, and this is one of those examples of one who didn't, if you ask me.

[Thief]

Well, while I agree with some of your points about the movie (which I liked a good deal otherwise, as you can see here (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/wind-river-2017/)), I don't see why Olsen's character would "need" more of an individual character arc; I mean, The Man With No Name doesn't have much of a character arc either, but that doesn't stop The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly from being one of the best movies I've ever seen. And I love a good arc as much as the next person, but not every character needs one, and this is one of those examples of one who didn't, if you ask me.

I agree that not every character needs an arc, but the way that they present her during the first half is as if she's either dealing with something, or burdened by something... I would need to rewatch to remember exactly what I mean, but the point is that her character felt like I said in my review... unrealized, underdeveloped.

[Takoma11]

Well, while I agree with some of your points about the movie (which I liked a good deal otherwise, as you can see here (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/wind-river-2017/)), I don't see why Olsen's character would "need" more of an individual character arc

Because without a character arc, she basically serves as an audience surrogate and appreciative witness to Renner's character. It's not the same as The Man With No Name who has a lot of agency and directly impacts the outcome of the plot.

She's also a young agent in a new and unfamiliar environment. She should be learning something, right?

Plus there are so many moments of her making mistakes which should be learning moments (the clothing needed to survive, intruding on the grieving mother, the deputy warning her about the intention of the men, etc), but she never applies ANY of them because in all of the scenes where she would apply them (speaking again to the family, climactic scene in the mountains) the action is shifted to Renner's character.

And I totally get that in Sheridan's films, there are often characters (especially law-abiding ones) who are simply outmatched by their circumstances. Here, though, it seems like there was very little in the movie that depended on her character's existence.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/03/Do_the_Right_Thing_poster.png
By The poster art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50898051

Do the Right Thing - (1989)

This could have been released this year and still it would be just as topical - have we really not got anywhere in the past 30 years? I thought it was great, with plenty of movement, colour and music as it takes in a 24 hour period on one city block with Italians, African-Americans, Asians etc struggling to live in harmony with each other, even though there's an expressed desire to. Anything bad that happens is often blamed on another person's race, but there's still as much love as there is hate. A friend recommended Jungle Fever and Mo' Better Blues to me after he heard I'd seen this. It's something I have a strong desire to watch again, as alive as it is.

8.5/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Dazed_and_Confused_%281993%29_poster.jpg
By http://img.listal.com/image/4044/600full-dazed-and-confused-poster.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30772576

Dazed and Confused - (1993)

I understand where Richard Linklater was coming from with this - although there are quite a few American traditions involved with the kids here who are either starting high school or getting to the end of that specific period. I like the fact that most of these kids are good at heart, while still doing bad things like emptying trash cans all over the street and destroying mailboxes. I like how it covers the spectrum of characters from the jerk, to the older guy still hanging around with immature kids to the decent guy. I like the depth of feeling Linklater has permeated the film with. He's quite a nostalgic guy - but so am I, so I really liked Dazed and Confused as well.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/The_Ledge_Poster.jpg
By The cover art can or could be obtained from IMP Awards., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31692078

The Ledge - (2011)

A really hackneyed story needs strong actors to take our mind off the plot - but unfortunately, although Terrence Howard, Patrick Wilson and to a lesser extent Liv Tyler give something, it's actors like Charlie Hunnam (the film's lead) and Christopher Gorham who sink this one into a black hole from which it will never emerge. There's a religious angle, with Wilson's character being an obsessive bible-thumper, but in the end not even that matters as he gets revenge over an affair his wife has had by forcing Hunnam's character to jump over a ledge, lest he kill his wife (Tyler). In the end what this mostly is, is banal.

5/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Bucket_list_poster.jpg
By Warner Bros. - Impawards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=13983903

The Bucket List - (2007)

Without it's two acting behemoths, this Rob Reiner comedy wouldn't have amounted to much - but I still like seeing Morgan Freeman and Nicholson in just about anything they decide to appear in.

6/10

[StuSmallz]

I agree that not every character needs an arc, but the way that they present her during the first half is as if she's either dealing with something, or burdened by something...I never got that impression from her characterization, personally; I mean, she seemed unsure at times (but that comes naturally from her lack of experience, which ties into the film's theme of the reservations being neglected, since the FBI obviously only cared to send an inexperienced agent like herself) but that's about it. Otherwise, she acted exactly the way I'd expect a normal, well-adjusted person to behave in such a depressing scenario.

[Iroquois]

Elvis - 2.5

drinking game: do a shot every time someone says "snow"

[Ultraviolence]

https://images.fanart.tv/fanart/rurouni-kenshin-kyoto-inferno-56608ea169119.jpg
Solid sequel and good take on Shishio's story arc, probably the most interesting villain in the manga.
rating_4

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3e/Sonic_the_Hedgehog_2_film_poster.jpg

3

SF = Z


[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

[GulfportDoc]

88426
Jerry and Marge Go Large (2022)

Stars Bryan Cranston and Annette Bening; directed by David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada); Paramount+.

If you’d like a break from films full of violence, gore, deviant and/or graphic sex, and tiresome foul language, then this is a picture to watch.

Newly retired Jerry, who is a math whiz, discovers a flaw in the Winfall lottery available at certain points in the game. He and his wife Marge initially bet large amounts to make a profit, then they enlist many of their town’s people to form a syndicate to bet and win larger amounts, which they eventually use to revitalize their fading small town. A crack team from Harvard soon also discovers the loophole, and the two teams butt heads until a satisfying conclusion.

This is a cute movie, dare I say “feel good”, which is based upon a true story. It’s charming to watch two old pros strut their stuff. It’s obvious that Cranston and Bening are having a good time, both with acting their roles and working with each other.

There is no new ground broken here. But it’s refreshing to clear out the mind once in awhile with a light guileless film that makes one smile.

Doc’s rating: 6/10

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-ccY-KZcnC8s%2FT6P6NexWX-I%2FAAAAAAAAAz4%2FYSZdhjLiEO0%2Fs1600%2F%5Brec%5D%2B1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
[Rec] (2007, Jaume Balagueró, Paco Plaza)
3.5
Spanish found-footage horror flick about a group of people, including a TV crew consisting of a female reporter and her cameraman, trapped inside a building with an unknown virus that turns humans into aggressive zombies. I had a bit of a problem with the response from the authorities: couldn't they send in a special forces team to neutralize the threat and quarantine the infected, instead of just leaving those poor souls locked inside to die? But maybe gov't incompetence is part of the film's political/social commentary—at some point, xenophobia toward immigrants is touched upon as well.
Overall, it's an enjoyable ride - perhaps not particularly scary, original, or nuanced, but it gives you that visceral impact, with at least some degree of realism and spontaneity to the unfurling of events and characters' reactions to them, which go the distance from nonchalance and complacency to dizzying, frenetic desperation. Those final 5-10 minutes are probably the best, scariest, and most claustrophobic.
I don't know where REC 2 takes things from there but it's supposedly inferior.

[Torgo]

Elvis - 2.5

drinking game: do a shot every time someone says "snow"Subliminal advertising for his next movie, perhaps?

https://i.imgur.com/t4BlmnE.jpg

[WHITBISSELL!]

If you’d like a break from films full of violence, gore, deviant and/or graphic sex, and tiresome foul language, then this is a picture to watch. What films would these be? And please provide a link.

Asking for a friend.

[Thief]

PREY
(2022, Trachtenberg)

https://i.imgur.com/LobxA8Z.jpg


"It knows how to hunt. But I know how to survive."



Set in 1719, Prey follows Naru (Amber Midthunder), a young woman from a Comanche tribe that aspires to be a hunter like her brother Taabe (Dakota Beavers). This causes some tension within the family and the tribe since she's supposed to be a healer, according to the tribe customs. When a Predator starts stalking the tribe, Naru has to resort to her cunning and skills to survive.

The initial premise seems like a refreshing approach to the franchise. Midthunder brings such a fierce energy to the lead role that's just infectious, while, Trachtenberg's direction succeeds in creating a tense atmosphere; something that he had previously succeeded at during 10 Cloverfield Lane. I thought it was interesting to see the Predator's methodical approach to his surroundings, as he continuously seizes everyone as he moves up the "food chain", so to speak, going against those that it deems "worthy" of the challenge.

Grade: 4


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2325593#post2325593)

[Stirchley]

88431

Good movie.

[SpelingError]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Dazed_and_Confused_%281993%29_poster.jpg
By http://img.listal.com/image/4044/600full-dazed-and-confused-poster.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30772576

Dazed and Confused - (1993)

I understand where Richard Linklater was coming from with this - although there are quite a few American traditions involved with the kids here who are either starting high school or getting to the end of that specific period. I like the fact that most of these kids are good at heart, while still doing bad things like emptying trash cans all over the street and destroying mailboxes. I like how it covers the spectrum of characters from the jerk, to the older guy still hanging around with immature kids to the decent guy. I like the depth of feeling Linklater has permeated the film with. He's quite a nostalgic guy - but so am I, so I really liked Dazed and Confused as well.

8/10

I need to check that one out someday.

[SpelingError]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-ccY-KZcnC8s%2FT6P6NexWX-I%2FAAAAAAAAAz4%2FYSZdhjLiEO0%2Fs1600%2F%5Brec%5D%2B1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
[Rec] (2007, Jaume Balagueró, Paco Plaza)
3.5
Spanish found-footage horror flick about a group of people, including a TV crew consisting of a female reporter and her cameraman, trapped inside a building with an unknown virus that turns humans into aggressive zombies. I had a bit of a problem with the response from the authorities: couldn't they send in a special forces team to neutralize the threat and quarantine the infected, instead of just leaving those poor souls locked inside to die? But maybe gov't incompetence is part of the film's political/social commentary—at some point, xenophobia toward immigrants is touched upon as well.
Overall, it's an enjoyable ride - perhaps not particularly scary, original, or nuanced, but it gives you that visceral impact, with at least some degree of realism and spontaneity to the unfurling of events and characters' reactions to them, which go the distance from nonchalance and complacency to dizzying, frenetic desperation. Those final 5-10 minutes are probably the best, scariest, and most claustrophobic.
I don't know where REC 2 takes things from there but it's supposedly inferior.

That one's pretty excellent.

[pahaK]

I don't know where REC 2 takes things from there but it's supposedly inferior.

While the first [REC] is the best of the bunch, the whole series is one of the better horror franchises out there. If I remember correctly, I also rated the first 3.5 and every sequel 3 out of 5.

[Wooley]

This film is a perfect example of a film that has all the ingredients to be great (director, cast, premise) and still somehow fumbles the ball a bit. Like you said, solid but a missed opportunity indeed.

Didn't fumble with me, I think it's a damn-fine film.

[Wooley]

I was kinda meh on [Rec].
Maybe it was just too much hype or you needed to see it pretty close to when it came out or something but it didn't seem particularly special to me nor did it seem particularly scary until the end there.
I saved it for years and when I finally watched it I was mightily underwhelmed.

[Thief]

Didn't fumble with me, I think it's a damn-fine film.

Overall, I thought it was pretty good. I gave it 3.5.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/83f8d0eaf38e1fc1242f672d385a005c/ee72fc62b95cfd64-5f/s640x960/79bc509f2c9c5da712c3182d37f2314d8b1b01ce.gifv
https://64.media.tumblr.com/0876eb92dcd766c7ec886ac7c9729689/e4ac80a2f9c8eb51-9e/s540x810/92d79a095278d658218b26831d0d0a3e6cd4f64c.gifv


Mysterious Island - Another Jules Verne adaptation, this one from his 1874 novel. Released in 1961, it was considered a sequel to Disney's 1954 release, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

One night during a violent storm four Union prisoners and a hostage Confederate guard board an observation balloon to effect an escape from Libby Military prison in Richmond, VA. They are blown west by the winds and are astonishingly carried all the way across the country and into the Pacific Ocean. The damaged balloon eventually deposits the party on a remote, uncharted island. Whilst exploring, the party runs across a giant crab which almost kills one of them before they get the best of it and roll it in into a conveniently placed geyser. The creature effects are courtesy of the great Ray Harryhausen and it's some standout work from the creator of the Dynamation process.

The men find some fellow shipwrecked survivors and later a chest full of valuable equipment. They get to work building a boat and it's not long before some unwelcome visitors show up. The intruders are quickly routed with the invaluable assistance of a mysterious figure emerging from the sea. Herbert Lom plays Captain Nemo and even though he's only onscreen for a small part of the movie he does a fine job of conveying the gravitas and intellect of Verne's fictional creation.

It has a runtime of an hour and 41 minutes and it is a busy story, managing to cram the Civil War, giant creatures, Captain Nemo and his submarine the Nautilus, pirates and erupting volcanoes into that narrative. But it's also sure-footed and one of the better Verne adaptations.

80/100

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Fe2%2F58%2F83%2Fe2588309022ccff07725d4bbd9c0aedd.png&f=1&nofb=1

The Illusionist, 2010

A magician (Jean-Claude Donda) is living a marginal personal and professional existence, shuttling himself and his ill-tempered rabbit from low-turnout gig to low-turnout gig. When he works a job in a small town, he captures the attention of Alice (Eilidh Rankin), a young woman who believes he really is magical. The two move together to the city where the magician finds inspiration in providing for Alice, despite the fact that he cannot maintain his job and pay for their lifestyle.

I am SO GLAD that in checking out a little about the film about 30 minutes in, I came across the trivia that this movie is based on an unproduced screenplay from Jacques Tati, and that the main character is styled after Tati. Maybe this would have been obvious to other viewers, and even I probably would have gotten the hint when the main character stumbles into a movie theater that is playing Mon Oncle. But knowing it early on adds a layer of poignancy to what happens in the film.

Trying to talk about the movie would make it sound almost unbearably bleak. And while there is a melancholy baked into it, there are moments of joy and optimism that keep it from feeling punishing.

The fate of the illusionist seems sealed from the beginning. This isn't the kind of movie where the old-school magician suddenly becomes as popular as the sexy new rock-and-roll stars. His magic does enchant many characters in the movie, but clearly not to the extent that it can be a livelihood. But it's more a study of how he chooses to enter this moment of decline, finding a kind of peace in opening himself up to the life of another person.

Visually, the film looks great. The animation style--this is the same filmmaker who made The Triplets of Belleville---perfectly suits a story about man who is slightly out of phase with the world around him. I don't know much about Tati's personal life, but I'll admit that this film made me curious about the circumstances that inspired it.

A lovely, bittersweet film.

4

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMWQ4ZjM4YzktNDQxNC00YmM5LTkzOWQtNDI5NTNmMTNkMmRlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTkxNjUyNQ@@._V1_.jpg


3.5

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.rogerebert.com%2Fuploads%2Freview%2Fprimary_image%2Freviews%2Fthe-way-back-movie-review-2020%2Fhero_the-way-back-movie-review-2020.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1

The Way Back, 2020

Jack (Ben Affleck) was a hot-shot high school basketball player who walked away from a free ride at a good school and now lives a life of barely-functional alcoholism. When his alma mater asks if he would like to step in to coach their boys' basketball team, Jack accepts the job and finally gets some spark back into his life. But the demons that drove Jack to despair in the first place rear their heads again, and Jack's newfound sense of purpose is threatened.

I had a co-worker who was a lovely woman with a hard life who died of alcoholism, and this portrait of someone drinking to numb emotional pain felt eerily accurate. As the movie goes on, we understand the source of Jack's pain better and we even come to see why it is that the people who love him allow his self-destructive behavior to continue. At first the film threatens to be one of those stories where simple discovering a passion allows a person to do a total 180. I'm not saying that can't be true for some people, but it usually doesn't work that way and I appreciated that the film acknowledged that.

There are a lot of layers to what is happening with Jack, and while the film can't avoid a few "underdog team coached by curmudgeon" tropes, I appreciated the way that the film portrayed Jack's at times desperate desire for the young players not to repeat his own mistakes. He's caught in an uncomfortable place between assuming the position of a father figure to them and also seeing himself constantly reflected in them and their potential. There's a running joke about Jack's use of profanity and the team's chaplain being exasperated about it. It's a bit goofy. But I liked how as the film goes on, Jack's profanity stops being directed at the players. His first big speech to them is just a useless "do you have a pair or are you actually girls?" demeaning type lecture that does nothing to actually help them play better. The shift in Jack's language is a neat metric of how he comes to have higher expectations for the players and for himself.

Affleck's lead performance is appropriately world-weary, with a simmering anger that's barely kept tamped down by the waves upon waves of alcohol he pours into his body. The supporting cast also does a good job, especially Al Madrigal as Dan, Jack's assistant coach.

Not necessarily breaking new ground, but solid stuff.

4

[WHITBISSELL!]

The Way Back, 2020
rating_4I liked it as well. It was just another example of why I end up liking so many of Affleck's movies. I thought he made for a great Batman and The Accountant is one of my recent favorites. And as far as his directorial efforts go I thought that Live By Night was overlooked and The Town and Gone Baby Gone were good to great films.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fkpbs.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com%2Fimg%2Fcroppedphotos%2F2011%2F11%2F18%2Ften-canoes-9_t800.jpg%3F90232451fbcadccc64a17de7521d859a8f88077d&f=1&nofb=1

Ten Canoes, 2006

In a remote section of Australian wilderness, a party of gatherers makes their way on canoes through the marshes. A younger man, Dayindi (Jamie Gulpilil, yes, son of David Gulpilil) has designs on one of his brother's wives. The brother then tells him a tale from their ancestors, where a young man named Yeeralparil (also played by Gulpilil) lusted after his brother's wife, with disastrous results.

This is the kind of dreamy, slightly off-kilter storytelling that I really enjoy.

I'm a fan of when movies use simple techniques to make an impression, and one of the things I liked most about Ten Canoes was its subversion of the use of color and black-and-white. Here, the "present day" content is in black-and-white, while the flashbacks are in sumptuous color. But within the flashbacks, the imaginings of characters are in black-and-white. It all adds to the sense of how the story is cyclical, and the past and the present spill over into one another.

Jamie Gulpilil is an engaging lead, though he definitely has to deal with comparisons to his charismatic father, who also narrates the film. Really, though, the star of the film is the rich atmosphere and the mix of humor and a sense of foreboding as the plot progresses. There's a real standout sequence in the final act of a death rite with some excellent imagery and use of color.

The movie is also noteworthy for being shot entirely in the Aboriginal language, albeit with an English voice-over narration from the elder Gulpilil.

I'm sure that the relaxed pace and overlapping narratives won't be everyone's cup of tea, but I was thoroughly charmed by it.

4.5

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d5/In_the_Heat_of_the_Night_%28film%29.jpg
By source:www.oscar.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6697521

In the Heat of the Night - (1967)

There's a scene near the beginning of In the Heat of the Night that ranks among my favourite cinematic moments - it's when Sidney Poitier's Det. Virgil Tibbs, who has just been arrested on suspicion of murder in Sparta, Mississippi, because he's black and has money in his wallet, reveals to Police Chief Bill Gillespie (Rod Steiger) that he's a homicide detective. Up until that point he's been insulted, threatened, pushed around and mocked without protesting - so it's a sweet moment, and Steiger's reaction is priceless and so well acted, because it's understated. He's not used to African Americans humiliating him, so he seethes - but at the same time he's flustered and embarrassed. Race is of course the central topic here, even though on the surface this is a murder mystery. Ever-present is the threat nearly every white person poses to Tibbs, and you often think he's about to get killed over something that has nothing to do with the police work he's been tasked with. He's just visiting from Pennsylvania, and not used to this - so he often has to think quick, and at times quiet his own rage. Hal Ashby did the editing, and for that he won his only Oscar - and of course the film went on to win Best Picture, with Steiger winning for Best Actor. I hadn't seen this for ages, so really loved catching up with it.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Quiz_-_ITV_Promotional_Poster.jpeg
By ITV, Left Bank Pictures - https://m.imdb.com/title/tt10228230/mediaviewer/rm2343419137, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63672441

Quiz - (2020)

Not strictly a movie, but just the same - a 147 minute drama/true story about Charles Ingram, who with the help of his wife and another conspirator managed to cheat his way to £1,000,000 on Who Wants to be a Millionaire - only to be discovered when suspicious producers of the show watched the tape and noticed the strange way Ingram would slowly bring up every answer - which was always answered with a direct cough from the audience after he'd said the correct one out loud. This bit of fraud has always fascinated me - so I just couldn't help watching the tele-movie/mini-series to know a bit more about it. Like many of these made-for-TV true stories it's interesting without being overly compelling - but Michael Sheen has a great turn as quizmaster Chris Tarrant.

6/10

[cricket]

Titane (2021)

4.5-

https://64.media.tumblr.com/71ef70b58a23b0331fb13a6d83248c1d/68e777c2a9ec3a96-b4/s540x810/4ac37ff8366ac3e0eff924adae13498199d87185.gifv

I only first heard of this a couple of days ago while I was looking up a different movie. It wasn't until I posted the poster in the other thread that I realized it was a Cannes winner. Same director as Raw, which was pretty good. She must be a Cronenberg fan, but then why did she have to go and make him look like a bitch. It's not the norm to have a movie this f**ked up while having quality filmmaking and acting. It is wild and full of life. It had me nauseated and enthralled, yet there was something sweet about it in the end. Some of you should watch it asap and some of you should stay far far away. You know who you are.

[Fabulous]

The Big Clock (1948)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/lNGy08t6LMTWmtMKYMu8YPSxUzd.jpg

[SpelingError]

Titane (2021)

4.5-

https://64.media.tumblr.com/71ef70b58a23b0331fb13a6d83248c1d/68e777c2a9ec3a96-b4/s540x810/4ac37ff8366ac3e0eff924adae13498199d87185.gifv

I only first heard of this a couple of days ago while I was looking up a different movie. It wasn't until I posted the poster in the other thread that I realized it was a Cannes winner. Same director as Raw, which was pretty good. She must be a Cronenberg fan, but then why did she have to go and make him look like a bitch. It's not the norm to have a movie this f**ked up while having quality filmmaking and acting. It is wild and full of life. It had me nauseated and enthralled, yet there was something sweet about it in the end. Some of you should watch it asap and some of you should stay far far away. You know who you are.

Glad you really liked it!

[cricket]

Glad you really liked it!

I'd nominate it for a HoF but then I imagine poor CR watching it with his wife lol

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/54/An_American_Pickle_poster.jpg/220px-An_American_Pickle_poster.jpg

3

SF = Z


[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

[matt72582]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=88431

Good movie.




I'm going to guess you've already seen "Buffalo '66"?
It's a shame his last two movies were never distributed (he says he'll only show them at Cannes).

[Allaby]

Hollywood Chinese (2007) A documentary about the history of Chinese representation in Hollywood films featuring interviews with actors, directors, and film historians. This was entertaining and informative. It's currently streaming on the Criterion Channel. Highly recommended. My rating is 4.

[doubledenim]

Titane (2021)

4.5-

https://64.media.tumblr.com/71ef70b58a23b0331fb13a6d83248c1d/68e777c2a9ec3a96-b4/s540x810/4ac37ff8366ac3e0eff924adae13498199d87185.gifv

I only first heard of this a couple of days ago while I was looking up a different movie. It wasn't until I posted the poster in the other thread that I realized it was a Cannes winner. Same director as Raw, which was pretty good. She must be a Cronenberg fan, but then why did she have to go and make him look like a bitch. It's not the norm to have a movie this f**ked up while having quality filmmaking and acting. It is wild and full of life. It had me nauseated and enthralled, yet there was something sweet about it in the end. Some of you should watch it asap and some of you should stay far far away. You know who you are.

Managed to go to a private showing :suspicious: when this came out. All the buzz it was getting, the Palme d’Or, seemed like a no-brainer.

After seeing it, the only thing that impressed me was the Mike Lavallee paint job on the deadbeat dad.

[LChimp]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZjk0OWZiN2ItNmQ2YS00NTJmLTg0MjItNzM4NzBkMWM1ZTRlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjMxOTE0ODA@._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.j pg

Yeah... kinda bad. Almost fell asleep midway through.

[Thief]

LIGHTYEAR
(2022, MacLane)

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


"Respect the suit. This suit means something. It's not just protecting your body; it's protecting the universe. This suit is a promise to the world that you, and you alone, will do one thing above all. Finish the mission, no matter the cost. You will never quit, whatever the galaxy may throw your way!"



Saw this on my birthday weekend with the kids and I'm still not sure what to think. The whole premise behind its conception and production seems too convoluted, and to me, this doesn't feel like the film that "Andy" would react to the way he reacts in Toy Story. It feels like what it is: a film made for people that grew up watching Toy Story, and not for actual kids.

But putting that aside, the film does manage to hold its own. The animation is great and the characters are enjoyable. Obviously there are tons of nods to the Toy Story franchise, some of them feel forced, some of them stick their landing. The bit where Zurg reveals his true identity got a huge chuckle out of me, especially because one of my kids said something like "it's his father!", remembering the original joke, and then, well :laugh:

Grade: 3


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2325989#post2325989)

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-dVXpuFr9i8M%2FUzwRN00FDEI%2FAAAAAAAAAH4%2FjbHsT_VmkUY%2Fs1600%2FDDDDs7or.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Sex and the Law, 1968

In this mockumentary/documentary by Gabriel Axel--the director who made Babbette's Feast--a woman who has gotten in trouble with the law for being a pornographic model explores the world of pornography and the hypocrisy around how sex and nudity are portrayed in different corners of contemporary culture.

Take this review for what it is because I realized most of the way through what I watched that the version I was watching (on Tubi) seems to be a full 30 minutes short of the film's actual runtime. Why? I don't know. Maybe sequences that were more explicit were excised from this particular print? Anyway, it feels a bit goofy reviewing a movie when I've only seen 2/3 of the film, but I got enough of the gist that I wanted to write it up.

I added this film to my watchlist because the (deceptive, IMO!) description said that it was an exploration of how film changed after censorship laws were changed.

That is emphatically NOT what this film is about.

This film is basically a pro-pornography, cutesy little sexy comedy about the role of pornography in contemporary society. Birgit Brüel hosts the film, playing a woman who has recently been sentenced for being a pornographic model. Incensed by this injustice, she walks us through the benefits of pornography and during several stretches questions why it is that certain material is not considered obscene when it is pornographic, but is considered fine when classified as "art".

The discussion about what makes something "obscene" was interesting, and I appreciated the humor with which the film approaches this question. For example, it starts by noting that it is considered obscene for a publication to show an erect penis, then transitions to footage of a giant erect penis statue being, um, handled in a museum display. It also points out that certain themes and images have existed in etching/painting/statue form for ages and ages. There's also the question of what poses count as obscenity, pointing out that a woman laid supine on a bed is fine, but as soon as she crooks her leg out, it's obscene.

In many ways, my favorite thing about this film is the different ways in which it shows some interesting filmmaking. My absolute favorite thing about the film was showing Bruel's character as basically a working mother. She has two kids and a husband. We see her eating dinner with them and having banal conversations. Yet in the same film there are highly stylized sequences that are really nicely shot, like a series of tableaus showing different sex positions (man on top, woman on top, "I'm the king of the world", and so on) that for me landed just on the right side of sweet not stupid. Then there's a late scene that shows a lonely man and woman fantasizing about each other, then ending up in bed together. This scene has a different energy from a lot of the sexual content that comes before it and it was the thing in the film I found the most legitimately sexy.

When it comes to the way that the movie advocates for the value of porn, I had a mixed reaction. I agreed with a lot of the points made by the film--that people should be able to look at what they want; that exposure to sexual content can help people be less inhibited--but it certainly revealed a very entrenched point of view, namely that of a straight man. This is a universe where gay men (and gay porn) do not exist. At all. There are a few shots of two women together, but in a purely performative or leading up to a threesome way.

This is definitely a world where porn is made by straight men and for straight men. A scene where we watch Bruel participate in a porn shoot has some weird, creepy vibes to it. Four men crowd around her, giving her directions. It's meant to seem fun, but even the music is a bit off (and the Tubi subtitles seemed to agree, I can't remember the exact word used, but it was like "unsettling music"). The movie frames porn as something that women experience, but only ever by being on a date and having a man pull a magazine out of nowhere. Oh, and if the woman you're with doesn't like what you're doing and tells you to stop, don't worry: "I don't know what it is that [women] say no when we really mean yes!". We also see very little content that suggests what would be helping women enjoy themselves more, as most of what we see is nude women staged different ways. (I do give the film credit for including some male nudity, including outside of just scenes involving intercourse, and for matching the age and attractiveness of the male performers with the female performers).

It might sounds like I'm taking this sex comedy fake documentary too seriously, but I think that even in this type of movie it's worth noting whose perspective is being taken and who is being excluded. On the surface this movie is very sex positive, but only around certain types of bodies and preferences.

A fun little film. Maybe someday I'll catch those missing 30 minutes.

3.5

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/45/Minions_The_Rise_of_Gru_poster.jpg/220px-Minions_The_Rise_of_Gru_poster.jpg

3.5

SF = Z


https://media.giphy.com/media/po0nceoTZ33nw3SIzo/giphy.gif



[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

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Paris%2C_Texas_%281984_film_poster%29.png
By Roger Ebert, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57044561

Paris, Texas - (1984)

Paris, Texas is hard to just briefly summarize - another one from Wim Wenders (king of the road movies) and another look at the United States from a European filmmaker who had yet to assimilate culturally. It's very metaphorically rich, with Travis Henderson (Harry Dean Stanton) emerging from the desert, near death - a very literal way of looking at how this character has fallen, only to reemerge and slowly pick up the pieces of a life that spectacularly fell apart 4 years previously. He slowly transforms from being catatonic with no memories to reengaging with his brother and son - which leads to a quest to find his wife, and an emotional revelation for us in a great scene that Stanton and Nastassja Kinski share. I think quite a few of us have periods in our lives where we find ourselves in that desert, until we reemerge and pick up the pieces again, one by one. It's what makes this film so easy to engage with, and Travis so easy to empathize with to a certain extent. A classic that a lot of people still love today.

8.5/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/VirginSuicidesPoster.jpg
By IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16905881

The Virgin Suicides - (1999)

A gut-wrenching look at middle-class suburban and soulless hell, where a family with 5 daughters are observed from the outside, slowly descending into a meaningless existence leading them all to commit suicide. Kathleen Turner is great as the girls' overbearing and strict mother - and James Woods playing opposite her as the passive father. The only Sofia Coppola film I've seen post-Lost in Translation is The Beguiled, which I really liked. Perhaps I'll have to dig up the others - considering just how good The Virgin Suicides is. That the boys looking back at all the events have no idea why the girls did what they did says as much as anything else in the film, with it's melancholy feel and humorous moments combining to produce a dream-like, hazy remembrance we participate in. Great debut.

8/10

https://i.postimg.cc/bwjQ1Vxv/The-Great-Dictator-1940-poster.jpg
By United Artists - Heritage Auctions. Cropped from the original, lightly retouched. Unedited original can be seen in upload history., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=85407881

The Great Dictator - (1940)

Even in this, Chaplin's first real talking picture, he crams so much into each second that I couldn't afford to look away - and I still likely missed a lot. It's probably because he's such a visual comedian as well, and he still carried that over into the sound era. I loved the first segment of this film, on the front lines of World War I, and most of the film really. It goes into that same set of films of his which I'm dying to watch again, to get a good handle on every little nuance and pratfall - for I find the pace of his films outrun what I can take in on my first viewing.

7.5

[LChimp]

https://uploads.jovemnerd.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/lightyear_01__0060g88.jpg

Saturday night movie with the kids. A good movie, but far from what you would expect from Pixar. And there's lots, lots of Star Wars references.

[koimoi]

Thirteen Lives
my rating - 3/5

[Torgo]

When the Cat Comes - 4

This is an odd, whimsical, and charming Czech movie about a travelling circus that visits a small town, their main draw being a cat wearing sunglasses. When the glasses come off, the cat reveals a person's true colors - literally - such as red for lovers, yellow for the unfaithful, etc. The circus angers the town's fascistic school director, who is eager to add the cat to the school's famed stuffed animal collection. The movie has similar appeals to Something Wicked This Way Comes, except that this time, the circus is a force of good, specifically of the anti-fascist variety. It helps that Jiří Sovák makes the school director out to be one loathsome guy. The main appeal of this movie, though, is in the scenes when the glasses come off, which feature vibrant music, dancing and of course colors with visual effects that seem ahead of their time. The movie is not perfect: it drags to the point of listlessness for a long while after the first scene like this. The ending, which is impossible not to smile at, mostly makes up for it, as do the facts that it’s unlike any movie I've seen and that it kindled my interest in the Czech New Wave.

You can watch it on this YouTube channel. (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCORD3T_O_pGSfng5sphuJ9g)

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/v87KmkRc/220px-Land-Film-Poster.jpg
Watch the Trailer (https://tinyurl.com/landmovieforums)
2

I was hoping to dislike everything about this film, seemed so pretentious to begin with, just like Nomadland. I thought this was going to be Fern selling the van and buying a remote cabin in some mountain, which is kind of the story of this movie. They should all learn from Debra Granik, her movies are simply showing something, never pitching an idea or lifestyle.

This is about a woman struck by a personal tragedy trying to find solace in an off grid self-reliant lifestyle, she can't handle people, they demand, and she doesn't fell like delivering, so she chooses isolation. We're starting to live in an epidemic of people that believe isolation in nature will bring growth of some kind, either spiritual or mental, people are so gullible, full of false hopes of psychologic progress, and, self-improvement always depending on this or that to become that something, this circumstance, or this environment.

"The only Zen you can find on the tops of mountains is the Zen you bring up there."

[Stirchley]

https://i.postimg.cc/v87KmkRc/220px-Land-Film-Poster.jpg
Watch the Trailer (https://tinyurl.com/landmovieforums)
2

I was hoping to dislike everything about this film, seemed so pretentious to begin with, just like Nomadland. I thought this was going to be Fern selling the van and buying a remote cabin in some mountain, which is kind of the story of this movie. They should all learn from Debra Granik, her movies are simply showing something, never pitching an idea or lifestyle.

This is about a woman struck by a personal tragedy trying to find solace in an off grid self-reliant lifestyle, she can't handle people, they demand, and she doesn't fell like delivering, so she chooses isolation. We're starting to live in an epidemic of people that believe isolation in nature will bring growth of some kind, either spiritual or mental, people are so gullible, full of false hopes of psychologic progress, and, self-improvement always depending on this or that to become that something, this circumstance, or this environment.

"The only Zen you can find on the tops of mountains is the Zen you bring up there."

Good movie.

[EsmagaSapos]

Good movie.
The acting was fine, really, not bad, one of the dramatic scenes made me almost cry, when she told him. The movie lacks dept though, that's why they needed those scenes, otherwise the plot, the ambience itself would be enough, on some other hands this could be memorable, the movie is supposed to have the nature aspect, although I feel it needed so much more. You want to know how you film nature? These guys are amateurs, and they do a good job, and actually it has a lot to do with the film. Check this channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/GreenRenaissanceFilms/featured).

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Paris%2C_Texas_%281984_film_poster%29.png
By Roger Ebert, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57044561

Paris, Texas - (1984)

Paris, Texas is hard to just briefly summarize - another one from Wim Wenders (king of the road movies) and another look at the United States from a European filmmaker who had yet to assimilate culturally. It's very metaphorically rich, with Travis Henderson (Harry Dean Stanton) emerging from the desert, near death - a very literal way of looking at how this character has fallen, only to reemerge and slowly pick up the pieces of a life that spectacularly fell apart 4 years previously. He slowly transforms from being catatonic with no memories to reengaging with his brother and son - which leads to a quest to find his wife, and an emotional revelation for us in a great scene that Stanton and Nastassja Kinski share. I think quite a few of us have periods in our lives where we find ourselves in that desert, until we reemerge and pick up the pieces again, one by one. It's what makes this film so easy to engage with, and Travis so easy to empathize with to a certain extent. A classic that a lot of people still love today.

8.5/10



Currently, I consider this to be the best movie I've ever seen not named The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

[mark f]

Shark Side of the Moon (Glenn Campbell & Tammy Klein, 2022) 2 5/10
Code Name: Emperor (Jorge Coira, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Dead Zone (Hank Braxtan, 2022) 2 5/10
The Abyss (James Cameron, 1989) 3.5 7+/10
https://66.media.tumblr.com/ce6d54dacb9124302e1ee3ed8a0923c3/tumblr_prgxteMKUv1qj6sk2o1_500.gif
There's something down in the abyss, something not human... but beautiful.
Wayward (Kurt Yochum, 2022) 2 5/10
Albatross (Myles Yaksich, 2022) 1.5+ 4.5/10
Gone in the Night (Eli Horowitz, 2022) 2 5/10
Airplane! (ZAZ, 1980) 3.5 7/10
https://c.tenor.com/PRjM0a0M10UAAAAC/leslie-nielsen-liar.gif
Dr. Leslie Nielsen tries to assure the passengers on the doomed flight that they'll be OK, but somehow they're not buying it.
No Way Out (Azi Rahman, 2022) 2 5/10
Between Two Dawns (Selman Nacar, 2021) 2.5 6/10
Dangerously Close (Albert Pyun, 1986) 2 5/10
Stranger Than Paradise (Jim Jarmusch, 1984) 2.5 6/10
https://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md5m9nfQrT1r6rx1jo1_500.gif
Slacker John Lurie, his younger cousin Eszter Balint and his best friend Richard Edson go to the movies with a popcorn-eating guy they meet.
The Moderator (Zhor Fassi-Fihri, 2022) 2 5/10
Cycling the Frame (Cynthia Beatt, 1988) 2.5 6/10
Fuzz (Richard A. Colla, 1972) 2 5/10
Nighthawks (Bruce Malmuth, 1981) 3 6.5/10
https://64.media.tumblr.com/2ac31541bf6aaa5f78ddbe95b53fbcd9/cbf705574ae936bc-5c/s540x810/f59116c102e610d0e2a404e2e38c606b49a166cb.gifv
Undercover cop Sylvester Stallone confronts superterrorist Rutger Hauer in various NYC locations with suspenseful results.
Snipers (Mo & Zhang Yimou, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Eradication (Daniel Byers, 2022) 2 5/10
Easter Eggs (Nicolas Keppens, 2020) 2.5 6/10
The Wheel (Steve Pink, 2021) 3- 6.5/10
https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/images/newsite/TheWheel_01_600.jpg
A couple (Amber Midthunder & Taylor Gray) who don't even seem to like each other end up on the [ferris] wheel where they have a chance to resolve their problems.

[Gideon58]

https://www.amalgamatedmovies.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/absolute-power.jpg

3.5

[Thief]

JURASSIC WORLD DOMINION
(2022, Trevorrow)

https://i.imgur.com/wScfq8m.jpg


"Bigger. WHY do they always have to go bigger?"



Set four years after Fallen Kingdom, Jurassic World Dominion follows Owen Grady and Claire Dearing (Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard) as they try to rescue their "adoptive" daughter, Maisie (Isabella Sermon), who has been kidnapped by operatives from Biosyn Genetics. Meanwhile, Ellie Sattler and Alan Grant (Laura Dern and Sam Neill) are trying to uncover a conspiracy to control the world food supply from Biosyn as well, with the help of Malcolm, who now works there.

If you noticed that the above synopsis doesn't mention dinosaurs *at all*, then you've noticed the main issue with this film. In their efforts to go bigger, Trevorrow and the studio have turned dinosaurs, what is supposed to be the main draw of this film, into an afterthought on a much more convoluted story. Granted, there are plenty of dinosaurs, but they just seem to be getting in the way of this story of clones, international espionage, and... crop-eating locusts?

Grade: 2.5


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2326234#post2326234)

[pahaK]

Carter (2022)
2.5
A Korean action film that resembles a video game as it tries (poorly) to maintain an illusion of one-shot cinematography. Despite some clunky CGI and obvious cuts, the action is rather imaginative and brutal. Stupid but surprisingly entertaining.

--
Mother Joan of the Angels (1961)
3
Kind of like a sequel to Russell's The Devils but made ten years earlier and in Poland. In other words, it's based on the same historical case of "Loudun possessions" but follows its aftermath. Not as bonkers as The Devils but pretty nice mystery-drama nonetheless.

--
Roh (2019)
aka Soul
3.5
A Malaysian folk horror that, despite completely different folklore, has quite a bit in common with The VVitch. A bit slow but an atmospheric film, that has some amazing scenes.

--
Fist of Fury (1972)
2
Weaker than Lee's starring debut from the year before. At times the fights look more like bodybuilding contests than martial arts, and I hate those weird noises Bruce started to do here.

--
Gun Woman (2014)
2
A Japanese gonzo-gore-action with lots of violence and nudity. I guess there was potential to be better, but I found the script terribly lacking. I have to give thumbs up for Asami, though -- not an easy role to do.

--
The Way of the Dragon (1972)
2
Even slightly weaker than the previous Lee. Too much comedy, poor pacing, and fights are far less brutal than before. I didn't remember that these Bruce Lee films were so much like Steven Seagal's -- both are always so much tougher than anyone else and they just steamroll through everyone.

--
The Nest of the Cuckoo Bird (1965)
2
Yet another weird B-horror from the 60s (or 70s, there's plenty from both). I wanted to like this more but it was just too boring at times. I think there's a good idea here but it would need to be refined by someone a bit more skilled.

--
The Barcelona Vampiress (2020)
3.5
A little artsy historical drama-mystery-horror about child trafficking (and murder) in early 20th century Barcelona. It's based on a true story and follows one interpretation quite faithfully (though I would have preferred if it had gone with the more contemporary "black legend"). It mixes many styles quite seamlessly. For those into TTRPGs, it really felt like something I could imagine running in something like Call of Cthulhu Berlin setting.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F63%2F94%2Faf%2F6394afaf40d810bf60e638f79958f2dd.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Russian Ark, 2002

Shot from the first-person perspective, a man awakens to find himself wandering through the sprawling Winter Palace of the Hermitage in St. Petersburg. As he traverses the enormous building, he encounters another such traveler he calls the European (Sergey Dreyden), and the two move through different rooms and different time periods.

There was a lot of to-do when this film first came out due to the fact that it was shot in a single take. This fact certainly adds a bit of "whoa!" factor to a film that is already impressively large in scale.

Even without having been shot in a single go, the technical merit on display here is really extraordinary and noteworthy. Sweeping sequences in ballrooms with what looks like hundreds of lushly-costumed 18th century guests transition to quiet scenes in a modern art gallery and vice versa.

When it comes to the way that the film was shot, I was surprised on the impact that it had on me as a viewer. What struck me was not the length of each sequence or even an awareness that it was a single take. Instead I started to feel the absence of cuts or more traditional transitions. Different scenes have different energies or pace, so it's not overly samey, but at the same time the sense that you are constantly being pulled forward is an interesting one.

I do think that I would have gotten more out of this film if I had a better grasp on Russian history. Aside from the sequence around Tsar Nicholas and his children, there was little that I was familiar. I wouldn't say that it's essential, because you can still grasp the emotional heft of the scenes without knowing the full context, but I imagine it would add another layer of enjoyment for those more in the know.

A really lovely film that is much more than a gimmick, and an example of how something that seems like a gimmick actually ends up in service of the film and its story.

4

[SpelingError]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F63%2F94%2Faf%2F6394afaf40d810bf60e638f79958f2dd.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Russian Ark, 2002

Shot from the first-person perspective, a man awakens to find himself wandering through the sprawling Winter Palace of the Hermitage in St. Petersburg. As he traverses the enormous building, he encounters another such traveler he calls the European (Sergey Dreyden), and the two move through different rooms and different time periods.

There was a lot of to-do when this film first came out due to the fact that it was shot in a single take. This fact certainly adds a bit of "whoa!" factor to a film that is already impressively large in scale.

Even without having been shot in a single go, the technical merit on display here is really extraordinary and noteworthy. Sweeping sequences in ballrooms with what looks like hundreds of lushly-costumed 18th century guests transition to quiet scenes in a modern art gallery and vice versa.

When it comes to the way that the film was shot, I was surprised on the impact that it had on me as a viewer. What struck me was not the length of each sequence or even an awareness that it was a single take. Instead I started to feel the absence of cuts or more traditional transitions. Different scenes have different energies or pace, so it's not overly samey, but at the same time the sense that you are constantly being pulled forward is an interesting one.

I do think that I would have gotten more out of this film if I had a better grasp on Russian history. Aside from the sequence around Tsar Nicholas and his children, there was little that I was familiar. I wouldn't say that it's essential, because you can still grasp the emotional heft of the scenes without knowing the full context, but I imagine it would add another layer of enjoyment for those more in the know.

A really lovely film that is much more than a gimmick, and an example of how something that seems like a gimmick actually ends up in service of the film and its story.

4

That's one of the first foreign films I fell in love with when I began growing interested in film. I should revisit it someday to see how well it holds up for me.

[GulfportDoc]

Watch the Trailer (https://tinyurl.com/landmovieforums)
rating_2

I was hoping to dislike everything about this film, seemed so pretentious to begin with, just like Nomadland. I thought this was going to be Fern selling the van and buying a remote cabin in some mountain, which is kind of the story of this movie. They should all learn from Debra Granik, her movies are simply showing something, never pitching an idea or lifestyle.
...


Starring a female, and with a female director, it's surprising that it didn't garner an Oscar nomination!!...🙂

[grendizer]

https://i.postimg.cc/fy80MqPg/so.jpg

2001: A Space Odyssey

Only just got around to watching it. It blows my mind that it was made in the 60s and it still holds up today. I can only imagine what people thought seeing it in the cinemas.

9/10

[xSookieStackhouse]

rating_5 i dont care what people think, to me i really loved the series, its so hilarious and its soo good
https://terrigen-cdn-dev.marvel.com/content/prod/1x/facebook_twitter_shehulk_payoff_key_art.jpg

[xSookieStackhouse]

https://i.postimg.cc/fy80MqPg/so.jpg

2001: A Space Odyssey

Only just got around to watching it. It blows my mind that it was made in the 60s and it still holds up today. I can only imagine what people thought seeing it in the cinemas.

9/10
gosh been soo long that i havent watched this

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/Gallipoli_original_Australian_poster.jpg
By Village Roadshow - http://www.joblo.com/movie-posters/gallipoli, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39195833

Gallipoli - (1981)

There are keys on your keyboard that will wipe out your entire review if you're unlucky enough to hit them - and I'm particularly clumsy. So there goes my well-worded bit about Gallipoli - and here's my "can't be buggered" second version. The history behind the film focuses not only on my fellow countrymen, but West Australians - my lot. It was a military defeat, with Australian and New Zealanders mowed down by the Turks while British officers drank tea on the beaches. The good thing about Gallipoli is that it takes in the whole view of how those young men got into that situation - why they joined up, even in some cases disliking the British - under whose Empire they were fighting for. Mel Gibson and Mark Lee play two young athletes, one of whom dreams of overseas adventure, and the other who joins his mates despite being unsupportive of the war. In the end what it amounts to is senseless slaughter - Peter Weir taking some of his inspiration from Paths of Glory and All Quiet on the Western Front.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/Charade_movieposter.jpg
By https://cartelesmix.es/cartelesdecine/?p=1762, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7454163

Charade - (1963)

Charade was an interesting new experience, although watching an old Cary Grant smooch with a young Audrey Hepburn made me a little uncomfortable. It has a good sense of what's fun, and a Hitchcock feel at times - where you know you won't know what's going on until the credits roll. I suspected Hepburn's character was in the know and behind everything - because that would have been the most surprising twist. I got it wrong. But in any event, I never knew George Kennedy, Walter Matthau and James Coburn were in it - and I enjoyed the mix of light-hearted skullduggery, romance and mystery. Seems a lot of movies were using Nazi gold in their plots during this time period. I didn't think it was a cinematic great - but all the same, a very good 60s movie.

7/10

[LChimp]

https://i0.wp.com/bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/PREY-poster.jpeg?resize=740%2C1096&ssl=1

I really enjoyed this, it's lightyears ahead of pretty much every sequel to the original.

Edit: Just to be clear, I like Predator 2, even thou it aged quite a bit

[cricket]

Tell No One (2006)

4.5

https://www.sbs.com.au/movies/sites/sbs.com.au.film/files/tellnoone_704.jpg


If you're just looking for a mystery/thriller then you can't do much better than this. Loved it.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/Gallipoli_original_Australian_poster.jpg
By Village Roadshow - http://www.joblo.com/movie-posters/gallipoli, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39195833

Gallipoli - (1981)

There are keys on your keyboard that will wipe out your entire review if you're unlucky enough to hit them - and I'm particularly clumsy. So there goes my well-worded bit about Gallipoli - and here's my "can't be buggered" second version. The history behind the film focuses not only on my fellow countrymen, but West Australians - my lot. It was a military defeat, with Australian and New Zealanders mowed down by the Turks while British officers drank tea on the beaches. The good thing about Gallipoli is that it takes in the whole view of how those young men got into that situation - why they joined up, even in some cases disliking the British - under whose Empire they were fighting for. Mel Gibson and Mark Lee play two young athletes, one of whom dreams of overseas adventure, and the other who joins his mates despite being unsupportive of the war. In the end what it amounts to is senseless slaughter - Peter Weir taking some of his inspiration from Paths of Glory and All Quiet on the Western Front.

8/10



Man, I haven't see this since I was a kid, might need to go back and give it a spin.

[honeykid]

gosh been soo long that i havent watched this

Well done. Keep it up. :D

[Allaby]

Just finished watching the film Men (2022) on blu ray. Directed by Alex Garland, Men stars Jessie Buckley as a woman in the English countryside dealing with past tragedy. This is the definition of a slow burn and is the type of film where the mood and the vibes take precedent over the story. Men is a strange film, but an interesting and compelling one. The cinematography is beautiful and the score is eerie and effective. Jessie Buckley's performance is very good and the film has some fantastic, striking, unusual imagery and bizarre moments. I'm not sure what the point of Men is though and what the director is or isn't trying to say. I can see people loving or hating Men and I can get that. For me, Men is worthwhile, challenging and one of the best films of the year. My rating is 4.

[WHITBISSELL!]

That does it. There's way too many different people here giving Prey a thumbs up. I'm gonna break down and hook the PS4 up to the large TV in the living room. That's about the only way I can think of to watch it. I'm not watching it on the smaller TV or a laptop.

[Gideon58]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/Charade_movieposter.jpg
By https://cartelesmix.es/cartelesdecine/?p=1762, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7454163

Charade - (1963)

Charade was an interesting new experience, although watching an old Cary Grant smooch with a young Audrey Hepburn made me a little uncomfortable. It has a good sense of what's fun, and a Hitchcock feel at times - where you know you won't know what's going on until the credits roll. I suspected Hepburn's character was in the know and behind everything - because that would have been the most surprising twist. I got it wrong. But in any event, I never knew George Kennedy, Walter Matthau and James Coburn were in it - and I enjoyed the mix of light-hearted skullduggery, romance and mystery. Seems a lot of movies were using Nazi gold in their plots during this time period. I didn't think it was a cinematic great - but all the same, a very good 60s movie.

7/10

Your comments about this movie are on the money.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81I-cWD9diL._SL1500_.jpg


1.5

[Siddon]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/Charade_movieposter.jpg
By https://cartelesmix.es/cartelesdecine/?p=1762, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7454163

Charade - (1963)

Charade was an interesting new experience, although watching an old Cary Grant smooch with a young Audrey Hepburn made me a little uncomfortable. It has a good sense of what's fun, and a Hitchcock feel at times - where you know you won't know what's going on until the credits roll. I suspected Hepburn's character was in the know and behind everything - because that would have been the most surprising twist. I got it wrong. But in any event, I never knew George Kennedy, Walter Matthau and James Coburn were in it - and I enjoyed the mix of light-hearted skullduggery, romance and mystery. Seems a lot of movies were using Nazi gold in their plots during this time period. I didn't think it was a cinematic great - but all the same, a very good 60s movie.

7/10


Hepburn was in her mid thirties

[ueno_station54]

https://occ-0-38-1123.1.nflxso.net/dnm/api/v6/E8vDc_W8CLv7-yMQu8KMEC7Rrr8/AAAABYDZwcsWnNdJPEAqtwREQVOX1GGjDO5GiQWt76Cy_9clxfJjtmF_XLJHi9KYxJyT3VaoErKF0P8vYPh-YFnLk5g-pFAQlnhKE4fR.jpg?r=45a
Barfi! (Anurag Basu, 2012)

oh holy hell this made me sob uncontrollably.
4.5

[PHOENIX74]

Hepburn was in her mid thirties

Hey, mid thirties is pretty young to me now, and is looking younger and younger as each year races along.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/Streetsposterart.jpg
By Distributed by Universal Pictures, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15982884

Streets of Fire - (1984)

There seem to be many interesting cinematic failures buried in the sands of time - ones I'm surprised I've never heard about. Here's one that was recommended to me that's a strange mix of musical/alternate universe gang film ala-The Warriors and film noir. It makes sense, because the director was Walter Hill - and he directed The Warriors. The film describes itself as "A Rock & Roll Fable" and has 80s star Michael Paré, sounding like Sylvester Stallone and sporting a trench coat - he's back in town, one which looks like New York with modern music but art deco-like design and 40s/50s cars. His old flame has taken up with a new guy (played by Rick Moranis, in a rare serious role) and has been kidnapped by a thug (played by Willem Dafoe) - so of course he agrees to rescue her, and although the cops and thugs slow him down, the musical numbers also get in the way. Streets of Fire was a box office bomb - competing with the likes of Star Trek III : The Search for Spock - but it's interesting nonetheless. I can't say I really enjoyed it - the dialogue was so hokey the film is nearly a parody of 50s noir, but the music was pretty good, and the film has a nice and interesting look to it - close to Dick Tracy - and Dafoe shines like a future star.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/BridesmaidsPoster.jpg
By http://www.movieweb.com/news/bridesmaids-poster, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=33275484

Bridesmaids - (2011)

I'm tempted to give Bridesmaids an '8' - it's funny, and exists in an era where many comedies simply are not that funny and enjoyable. Kristen Wiig just hits this one out of the park, and all the ladies appear to be comedically inspired - with the best stuff coming from improv, where the situations involved set up many great moments. I wasn't expecting something that tickled me this much, in just the right way. There's not much more to say about it though - the bridal story seems superfluous, and it's simply about Helen (Rose Byrne) infringing on a friendship Annie (Wiig) has with Lillian (Maya Rudolph) - Helen is rich, and as such can win Lillian over much more easily, which is where much of Annie's frustration comes from. Directed by Paul Feig and nominated for 2 Oscars - Best Original Screenplay, and Best Supporting Actress (Melissa McCarthy) - perhaps there should be a Best Ensemble Oscar awarded each year.

7.5/10

[xSookieStackhouse]

Well done. Keep it up. :D
what do u mean???

[honeykid]

what do u mean???

I mean I think it's one of the most boring films I've ever seen and I'd be proud to still not have seen it. Sadly, I don't have that honour, so I content myself with not having seen it for a long time.

[Wooley]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81I-cWD9diL._SL1500_.jpg


1.5

Dude.

[Wooley]

Hey, mid thirties is pretty young to me now, and is looking younger and younger as each year races along.

I'll drink to that.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/Streetsposterart.jpg
By Distributed by Universal Pictures, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15982884

Streets of Fire - (1984)

There seem to be many interesting cinematic failures buried in the sands of time - ones I'm surprised I've never heard about. Here's one that was recommended to me that's a strange mix of musical/alternate universe gang film ala-The Warriors and film noir. It makes sense, because the director was Walter Hill - and he directed The Warriors. The film describes itself as "A Rock & Roll Fable" and has 80s star Michael Paré, sounding like Sylvester Stallone and sporting a trench coat - he's back in town, one which looks like New York with modern music but art deco-like design and 40s/50s cars. His old flame has taken up with a new guy (played by Rick Moranis, in a rare serious role) and has been kidnapped by a thug (played by Willem Dafoe) - so of course he agrees to rescue her, and although the cops and thugs slow him down, the musical numbers also get in the way. Streets of Fire was a box office bomb - competing with the likes of Star Trek III : The Search for Spock - but it's interesting nonetheless. I can't say I really enjoyed it - the dialogue was so hokey the film is nearly a parody of 50s noir, but the music was pretty good, and the film has a nice and interesting look to it - close to Dick Tracy - and Dafoe shines like a future star.

6/10


And just like that, we're not friends anymore. :mad:

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/RIoSgh8.jpg?1

Silverado

Imagine if the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse riding across the West trope were fleshed out to a 2h 13m movie… but the horsemen were all heroes instead of villains or revisionist anti-heroes. Just straight-up paladins (though maybe Jake is Chaotic Good).

https://i.imgur.com/5XMS5Il.jpg?1

Such, really, is the premise of Lawrence Kasdan's in-yo-FACE-revisionists! Western. This is not the Western for people looking for the dark and edgy and nihilistic drudgery of the 70s nor the gritty anti-heroes of the Spaghetti Western. This is the Western for people who wanna go "f*ck yeah!" The heroes are heroes and will unerringly do the right thing even at great peril. The villain is malevolent enough that you can't wait to see him take a bullet. And all the principles are almost supernatural with their gun of choice.
I loved it again.
This movie is so ARCH, so big and unapologetic about its archness... and yet manages to not be silly in the way Tombstone sometimes feels silly. It feels big and obvious and is on a bit of a tightrope up above a pool of vicious eye-rolls but tip-toes with ease across “admit it, this is fun” without falling in and being devoured by a smirking audience. It actually gives you exactly what you want, even if you don't want to admit it.

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

https://i.imgur.com/fje5kjY.jpg?1

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

The acting, at least from the main cast, is elite.
Linda Hunt really shines, she’s the Midnight Star of the film. Kline is just absolutely perfect, I forget how gifted and skilled he was. I feel like this is Scott Glenn’s best role, he’s gravelly without taking it too far as he has on occasion. Costner reminds me that he could be a pretty good actor with the right role and I enjoyed an interview he did talking about how he prepared for this one and what it was like working on the film.
But Brian Dennehy, like Hunt, is worth singling (doubling) out. He really was a great craftsman and brought something special to his work as he does here. He can be jovial, intense, menacing, he can do jovial while being menacing, and he has a surprising athleticism for a big man that you see in little things he does that really matter. The way he throws a punch, suddenly and with real (apparent) force, the way he pops out a chair to walk into a gunfight, with a quick energy that makes him seem like a predator. It’s a really good performance.

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

Goldblum should have been given either more or less to do, as with Patricia Arquette.
Which brings me to my only negative which is that a long movie needs to be making good use of its time and, while this is true for most of Silverado’s run-time, there is material that either seems like fat or cut too lean.
Rosanna Arquette’s character, really, is a bit of a distraction and confusion in the film, as it is. One suspects that there is material on the cutting-room floor that makes her existence in this movie and the way she intertwines with a couple of main characters actually make sense. But if they were going to cut her character as lean as they did, to where you’re really not sure, even at the end, what’s going on with her and Paden and Emmett. Is there a love triangle there, is there a possibility there for one or both of them, is she there just to show that the two men can never leave the lives they live, is she a glimmer of hope for both of them, what the hell is going on with her? That’s too many questions. They should have either left her full story in or cut her completely. I suspect, as it’s well-documented that she was everybody’s muse for that brief period in the early to mid 80s (ask Toto), that Kasdan realized her part made the movie too long but he just couldn’t bring himself to cut her out, so he cut her down to what he thought he could get away with and, while you can hand-wave it and it doesn’t hurt anything, it’s superfluous as it is and makes the movie run a little long and lose a bit of steam. For my part, I would like to have seen more of it, I think it would have given the movie a little more depth, but alas.

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

And the same can probably be said of Goldblum’s character, Slick. Here, I suspect Kasdan knew he had somebody in Jeff Goldblum, from The Big Chill, and wanted to use him in this film so he wrote a part for him. But the part isn’t really necessary. It creates an extra character and he is involved in the machinations, but his motivations are barely implied so the audience really has to infer why he’s doing what he’s doing. And while you could argue that he intertwines with the main characters during the climax, you could also argue that that whole sub-plot with the sister could have been cut out (saving Lynn Whitfield from putting a pretty rough performance on celluloid for the ages) and with it Goldblum.

Hey! I just cut the movie down from a tiny bit-overlong 2h 13m to an even 2h without losing anything that mattered! I should be getting paid for this!

Anyway, Kasdan really does a pretty marvelous job here, even if it does feel like one of the best movies Spielberg never made. Everyone knows I don’t like Spielberg but his kind of storytelling and sheen wears well on this film as it’s exactly the right script for it. There are so many good moments you just enjoy and want to rewind real quick and watch again. John Cleese’s scene comes to mind but it’s actually little things Kasdan does in the scene as much as Cleese or the scene itself. Some of these ARCH moments land really well too, like when Glover’s Mal stands over the villains with his Henry rifle and says, “Now, I don’t wanna kill you and you don’t wanna be dead”, Or the cut to the next shot of the not-dead villains walking home down the dirt road with one of them stepping in horse-shit but just brushing it off (so many directors might have ****ed that up), Or my favorite moments, of the gunfighters really doing their thing, one when a guy shoots at them from a rocky promontory and all three men draw their weapons and fire simultaneously and you never know who hit the now-dead man or who didn’t, or Jake (Costner’s) great scene of luring in two of the baddies and then pulling a trick-draw to end them both. So satisfying.
That’s what I would say the movie is, really, just 2h of “satisfying” over and over again. With 13 minutes of fat that might have been cut but isn’t too unsavory.

[Torgo]

Badmouthing Streets of Fire around here is like badmouthing Canadian beer during one of their hockey games: you just don't do it. :D

[Torgo]

Closely Watched Trains - 4

This Czech comedy, which sort of reminded me of American Pie - Czech Pie, if you will - is set during the country's German occupation during World War II. It stars Václav Neckář as Milos, an apprentice train dispatcher who is eager to end the tradition of his forefathers not exactly contributing during times of crisis. He's also eager, as the first sentence implies, to, umm...lose it.

Most of the laughs, and they're all good ones, result from Milos's encounters with Masa (the charming Jitka Bendová), a conductor with whom he shares an attraction, but who is on the go much more than he would like. I also ended up laughing whenever Nazi loyalist Zedníček (Vlastimil Brodský, who is also a highlight of When the Cat Comes) appears on screen because whether it's the train station staff's refusal to take him seriously or his self-importance, he's a reliable subject of ridicule. Oh, and you're assuming that Milo's, umm…condition is a metaphor for the condition of the Czech people during this occupation, you would be right and not just because of how you also probably assume the movie ends. I don't love everything about this movie: it drags more than I would like; also, it’s too darkly lit at times and the basic and blocky camerawork make it hard to watch sometimes. I still think it deserves to be called one of the gems of the Czech New Wave and it stands alongside The Firemen's Ball as a classic example of the county’s comedy.

[WHITBISSELL!]

Badmouthing Streets of Fire around here is like badmouthing Canadian beer during one of their hockey games: you just don't do it. :DI out and out missed the boat on this one. My sister loves it. Maybe it's mostly nostalgia. And there are good parts to it like Dafoe and anytime The Blasters are onscreen. But I thought the acting overall was atrocious and Moranis implausibly hostile. He started out at a 10. They should have allowed it to build. For me the bad outweighed whatever good parts there were.

[WHITBISSELL!]

SilveradoGood writeup. Another nostalgia soaked family favorite. Maybe it's a specific time and place it brings to mind. A happier and less complicated time? But they still talk about particular scenes and moments in an almost wistful manner. The "I don't want to shoot you and you don't want to be dead" scene. And shooting the needles off the cactus.

I wasn't there when they first watched it though so it's not the same for me.

[xSookieStackhouse]

I mean I think it's one of the most boring films I've ever seen and I'd be proud to still not have seen it. Sadly, I don't have that honour, so I content myself with not having seen it for a long time.
true

[Rockatansky]

https://i.imgur.com/RIoSgh8.jpg?1

Silverado



Psssst... that's Rosanna, not Patricia.

[SpelingError]

29th Hall of Fame

The Year My Voice Broke (1987) - 3.5

This was a good coming-of-age movie which resonated with me quite a bit. It successfully captures the feelings of growing up, first love, and jealousy which are relatable for many people, me included. When I was Danny's age, I was in a similar boat as him in certain respects and my background helped me to relate to his character quite a bit. I also found Trevor memorable. While he and Danny had their differences with each other, they were still able to get along reasonably well. One gets the impression that, though they're not close friends, they're able to tolerate each other due to their shared attraction to Freya. Speaking of which, Freya is a fine character as well, even though she's not quite as memorable. She gets into some risky situations, faces the consequences of them, and attempts to recover. Not a whole lot to dig at with her, but she isn't bland by any means. For instance, that she's a soul mate to Danny is probably her most memorable trait. Technically speaking, the film is pretty good as well. The usage of natural lighting, particularly for the scenes which take place at evening where you get golden hour light, look really pretty. The paranormal aspect to certain scenes was a nice touch as well (even though I wished the film would've done a bit more with this aspect). The only reservation I had is with the noticeable disconnect between Danny's actions and how the movie wants you to feel about his character. Throughout the film, his love for Freya remains consistently creepy, with him spying on her changing clothes, stealing her underwear, and attempting to hypnotize her so he can look up her skirt. While I normally don't mind unlikable characters, I think the movie asks you to feel sympathy for him in the ending and that connection wasn't there for me. I also think the film tries to convince you that Danny is a better romantic partner for Freya than Trevor, and that fell flat for me as well. In spite of that, however, I did enjoy the movie quite a bit. While teen romance films aren't necessarily my favorite type of film out there, this one ranks amongst the better ones I've seen.

[PHOENIX74]

Badmouthing Streets of Fire around here is like badmouthing Canadian beer during one of their hockey games: you just don't do it. :D

Damn. I felt that elements of it were great, and super enjoyable. I won't add to that, lest I dig myself in even deeper.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/50/StarTrekIntoDarkness_FinalUSPoster.jpg
By Paramount Pictures/ Bad Robot/ Skydance Productions - http://trekmovie.com/2013/04/12/star-trek-into-darkness-domestic-poster-has-arrived-trailer-online-next-tuesday/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=39092660

Star Trek Into Darkness - (2013)

Having Star Trek Beyond lined up for a viewing meant I had to dust this off and watch it from start to finish, and I know liking or hating certain Star Trek films can be contentious, but I think Into Darkness might be the best of the rebooted franchise so far. By the way, are we meant to read the title as "Trekking into darkness"? There's no colon. Anyway, that really doesn't matter. Some of the things that might have had some of us rolling our eyes I liked - all of the references to Star Trek II, Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan - but okay, that "KHAAAAAAAN!!!" bit was a little too much. There seems to be many implicit references to 9/11 in this film, and the grittier feel that gave the film was right up my alley. Peter Weller gave the kind of creepy vibes that are essential for a good villain as well. My only complaint would be that some of the action scenes went on for far too long, which meant the tension in them couldn't be maintained. I tell you, when you do that the audience will go from being on the edge of their seat to slightly impatient then bored. Apart from that you have a decent Star Trek film here - at least in my book.

7.5/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/ba/Star_Trek_Beyond_poster.jpg
By Paramount Pictures - https://www.movieposter.com/poster/MPW-115634/Star_Trek_Beyond.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50376447

Star Trek Beyond - (2016)

I'm afraid this one lost me a little bit - although you could put that down to it being the second new Star Trek film I watched on the same day. Perhaps I was a bit trekked out by the time this was wrapping up. It's just that, this one followed the formula a little too closely, and as such it didn't feel like it was adding anything new to the franchise. Just one of those 'treading water' franchise films which adds a new villain and adventure very neatly, which is completely resolved within the film itself. I like there to be some kind of connection to the series, and some kind of consequences beyond the film and it's universe. None of the characters go anywhere - it's the most episodic of the three new Star Trek films. I liked Idris Elba in this, and the fact that Leonard Nimoy's death was paid tribute to within the film. It's not a total loss - just not as good as the first two reboot films.

There hasn't been a Star Trek film since. This one didn't perform as well as expected at the box office - and Tarantino's entry doesn't look like it'll materialize - though the 4th of the rebooted series is meant to begin shooting later this year.

6/10

[Wooley]

I out and out missed the boat on this one. My sister loves it. Maybe it's mostly nostalgia. And there are good parts to it like Dafoe and anytime The Blasters are onscreen. But I thought the acting overall was atrocious and Moranis implausibly hostile. He started out at a 10. They should have allowed it to build. For me the bad outweighed whatever good parts there were.

I thought the acting, especially Amy Madigan and Michael Pare was very intentional, intended to be like acting from another time period in movies, like so much of the film. I mean, the movie is Art Deco AND Rock and Roll, and I don't just mean what's in any given frame, I mean its identity, its soul, and Hill leaned pretty hard into it, is this pastiche of times and this 1940s looking Chicago with its 1950s cars and motorcycles and its motorcycle gang that's from sometime in the 40s 50s and late 70s/early 80s, not to mention its very forward-pushing 80s soundtrack. I think the acting was a part of that, totally deliberate. Which is not to say that Pare is James Dean, but they wanted some of that and some of the 50s-60s tough guy and Madigan is a post-war brat, but what War? WWII? Korea?
I dunno, I think it's a really cool flick that somehow gets glossed over by people who see its surface charms and frailties but haven't dug into it enough to see how much craft and imagination are really at work here and how this movie isn't like anything else out there.

[D54pod]

Prey 2022

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/2m86A5G4yTVHe1N9LwzDbMon6mQ.jpg

I came into this movie with some apprehension due to how much I enjoyed the original Predator movie from 1987. My biggest concern was would they ruin the legacy left by the original movie, mostly due to the fact that this is a prequel, unlike the other's in the franchise. To my surprise however, I was pleasantly surprised.

There is so much to like about this movie, from it's beautiful scenery, it's highly entertaining action sequences, it's stellar acting (led by Amber Midthunder) and how it actually paid homage to the original. The story, much like the original was simple and got straight to the point, and it didn't overcomplicate anything with lengthy or unnecessary dialogue. It also didn't do overboard with the easter eggs and references. I really cant excuse movies which make you pause to show off references to previous instalments of the franchise, even at times when they dont make sense. This movie did none of that which was refreshing.

I highly recommend this movie. If the younger generation was to watch movie first and follow up with the original from 1987, it would not be a disservice at all. Looking forward to the sequel to this and seeing how they tie in more of the predator lore.

4/5 Stars

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/52LZXxMG/s-l500.jpg

★ ★

Well, I watched this film because of all the fuzz. The action sequences were very good indeed. The rest, I jumped ahead, it was to fill space possibly, I wasn't a bit interested in Jennifer Connelly filling a space. The object of the mission was not important, they really focused on the history and Maverick's redemption.

I thought it was going to be more emotional for some reason, maybe I can't appreciate it enough because it wasn't my generation. The acting was nothing special, really, you take Miles Teller and Tom out, and you can recycle the rest.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/9M7ThN9G/MV5-BNj-Yz-Mj-Zi-NDIt-MDk2-ZC00-MWVk-LWFm-Nj-Ut-ZGU1-Mj-M2-Ym-Y0-Y2-Mx-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-MTMx-ODk2-OTU-V1.jpg

★ ★ ★

I don't know how I found this film, really don't. I watched it because of the location being New York City, Paul Giamatti and I thought he was acting alongside Catherine Keener, it was actually Kathryn Hahn and what a terrific actress she is.

Well, uh, they're an artistic couple who live in New York City, they are getting old, at least to have a kid, and they want one. This film, which is well written, very naturally acted, it's about the frenzy of a couple who love each other, that have a good thing going on, that are both on the same tune, and want a kid, but they can't, so they go through the various channels in order to get one.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/NFBDFcB6/MV5-BOWVm-NTBi-YTUt-ZWQ3-Yi00-ZDlh-LTgy-Yj-Ut-Nz-Bh-Zj-M3-Yj-Ri-NGRk-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-Nz-Yy-OTM1-ODI-V1-FMjpg-UX1000.jpg

★ ★

The poster was okay, the mask was cool, and Ethan Hawke, that's what made me watch it, I'm not alone, I'm sure. The story is very typical, a small neighborhood, kids start to disappear, what it could be, the audience knows what's coming, Ethan Hawke, that's what's coming.

His performance was alright, nothing special, the little girl was the bright star in my opinion. The movie has some keys you have to find, but it doesn't gab you that deeply, so you start finding them, so you wait, and they tell you.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/DZjQvbpT/MV5-BZjky-ZTU5-OWQt-OTZi-My00-Nzdm-LWE4-ODgt-Nm-Rk-ZTE2-MTZm-YWI3-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-ODY3-Nzc0-OTk-V1.jpg

★ ★ ★

I found this film by searching "Appalachia movies". I read the story, a young girl gets lost in the wilderness of the Appalachia. The movies start, she follows the GPS and got lost, two rednecks show up, the not fat one grabs her buttock, she beats the living hell out of both of them and runs to the forest.

In the beginning, I thought this was going to be a typical suspense-running-through-the-woods, you know, heavy breathing, she almost gets caught, but doesn't, then she gets caught and escapes to be caught again and escaping again. Not this film. This film delivers the suspense through each phrase, through each reaction, it's well written. It's also well acted, has a turn, it's not entirely predictable, but it kinda is.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/9F8hRsp2/MV5-BMTAz-NTIz-Mjkx-Nj-Je-QTJe-QWpw-Z15-Bb-WU3-MDEw-NDQ2-OTU-V1.jpg

★ ★ ★ ★

I'm in love with this girl, oh my god, I haven't felt like this since Clementine in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I was young and naive, so am I. How did I found this film? Be friends with lyrical loneliness, I think, I don't know, the story was so appealing to be honest.

A young girl, in the pinnacle, in the flower of life, is at a party, drinks a couple and drives home, as she's driving she hears frenzy on the radio about a new earth, she looks at the sky, a new earth emerges, in all the amazement tragedy happens, something she'll have to live for the rest of her life.

The movie deals heavily with sorrow and forgiveness, it's one of the richest poetic film I've seen made in America, and I deeply appreciated it. There's one scene in the hospital that will be marked in my mind for the rest of my existence, it's so emotionally poetic, the beauty. Some people got caught up in understanding the plot, they shouldn't, understand the emotion, understand the acts, everything else is non-important.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/gk98hkYy/d5-NXSkl-Xo0qy-IYkg-V94-XAg-MIck-C.jpg

★ ★ ★ ★

I wasn't going to watch this film, more fiction in front of a green screen with actors like Mamoa and Timothée, actors I dislike. Although, having such a good composer, I got into it just for the music, and brought something much better, a fantastic visual experience, even better than The Green Knight, and a very rich fantasy world. I specially enjoyed the nuns, and I hate nuns.

[EsmagaSapos]

https://i.postimg.cc/qRSnjp2T/MV5-BNz-Zk-NDAw-Nz-Yt-Njcy-Yy00-Nzk0-LWE3-NTct-NGUx-OGI2-Nm-Qy-Njcx-Xk-Ey-Xk-Fqc-Gde-QXVy-MTQy-ODg5-Mj-Qw-V1.jpg

★ ★

I was going into this with The Wrestler in my mind. It was a film I enjoyed so very much, I was hoping for a similar experience. Clifton Collins Jr. was also one of the reason I watched this film. It's a film about the difficulties of being a jockey in the end of his career, all the injuries, being replaced like an old horse. Jockey is a film that ultimately deals with legacy.

[Wooley]

Good writeup. Another nostalgia soaked family favorite. Maybe it's a specific time and place it brings to mind. A happier and less complicated time? But they still talk about particular scenes and moments in an almost wistful manner. The "I don't want to shoot you and you don't want to be dead" scene. And shooting the needles off the cactus.

I wasn't there when they first watched it though so it's not the same for me.


I certainly have nostalgia for the film but really I've tried to look at these films I feel that way about critically when I re-view them and this is one of the ones that I have to call a complete success. I was pleased to see how much my boy Ebert liked it, though sourpuss Gene didn't so much.

[Wooley]

Psssst... that's Rosanna, not Patricia.

Ha! Wonder how I got them crossed? Rosanna was Toto's muse, obviously (mine too).
Thanks.

[Wooley]

https://i.postimg.cc/9F8hRsp2/MV5-BMTAz-NTIz-Mjkx-Nj-Je-QTJe-QWpw-Z15-Bb-WU3-MDEw-NDQ2-OTU-V1.jpg

★ ★ ★ ★

I'm in love with this girl, oh my god, I haven't felt like this since Clementine in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I was young and naive, so am I. How did I found this film? Be friends with lyrical loneliness, I think, I don't know, the story was so appealing to be honest.

A young girl, in the pinnacle, in the flower of life, is at a party, drinks a couple and drives home, as she's driving she hears frenzy on the radio about a new earth, she looks at the sky, a new earth emerges, in all the amazement tragedy happens, something she'll have to live for the rest of her life.

The movie deals heavily with sorrow and forgiveness, it's one of the richest poetic film I've seen made in America, and I deeply appreciated it. There's one scene in the hospital that will be marked in my mind for the rest of my existence, it's so emotionally poetic, the beauty. Some people got caught up in understanding the plot, they shouldn't, understand the emotion, understand the acts, everything else is non-important.


I been meaning to see this since it came out and just never have pulled the trigger.
You have moved it up my queue.

[Rockatansky]

Ha! Wonder how I got them crossed? Rosanna was Toto's muse, obviously (mine too).
Thanks.

Nice try Wooley, but we know you're on two dates at the same time with both Arquette sisters. Like an '80s sitcom or the end of Doctor Detroit.

[WHITBISSELL!]

I thought the acting, especially Amy Madigan and Michael Pare was very intentional, intended to be like acting from another time period in movies, like so much of the film. I mean, the movie is Art Deco AND Rock and Roll, and I don't just mean what's in any given frame, I mean its identity, its soul, and Hill leaned pretty hard into it, is this pastiche of times and this 1940s looking Chicago with its 1950s cars and motorcycles and its motorcycle gang that's from sometime in the 40s 50s and late 70s/early 80s, not to mention its very forward-pushing 80s soundtrack. I think the acting was a part of that, totally deliberate. Which is not to say that Pare is James Dean, but they wanted some of that and some of the 50s-60s tough guy and Madigan is a post-war brat, but what War? WWII? Korea?
I dunno, I think it's a really cool flick that somehow gets glossed over by people who see its surface charms and frailties but haven't dug into it enough to see how much craft and imagination are really at work here and how this movie isn't like anything else out there.You come by your fandom honestly and as far as I'm concerned that makes it unassailable. :up:

[WHITBISSELL!]

Nice try Wooley, but we know you're on two dates at the same time with both Arquette sisters. Like an '80s sitcom or the end of Doctor Detroit.It loses something in translation but there's a slang phrase in Spanish, "tiene pega". It's the female version of something like that Seinfeld episode when Kramer caused a Latvian orthodox nun to renounce her vows. He had "the kavorka" - the lure of the animal. I'm not 100% sure what "tiene pega" means but whatever it might be, the Arquette sisters had it.

[Wooley]

Nice try Wooley, but we know you're on two dates at the same time with both Arquette sisters. Like an '80s sitcom or the end of Doctor Detroit.

I love Doctor Detroit.

[Gideon58]

I been meaning to see this since it came out and just never have pulled the trigger.
You have moved it up my queue.


LOVED this movie

[Wooley]

You come by your fandom honestly and as far as I'm concerned that makes it unassailable. :up:

Heh. Thanks man.
There is something about that movie that is just so cool to me that pretty much no other movie has. I think it dragged a bit before the climax but then it finishes super-strong so I forgive that (though I will admit that the last time I watched it, which I have at least 20 times, I fast-forwarded over the train-ride section of the movie). The music, the set-design, the lighting, the setting, the Bombers, "Tom Cody, pleased to meet ya", yes, the arch acting, all that. Just too fun.

[Wooley]

It loses something in translation but there's a slang phrase in Spanish, "tiene pega". It's the female version of something like that Seinfeld episode when Kramer caused a Latvian orthodox nun to renounce her vows. He had "the kavorka" - the lure of the animal. I'm not 100% sure what "tiene pega" means but whatever it might be, the Arquette sisters had it.

Yet, to me (and Toto, Scorsese, Peter Gabriel), Rosanna was on a different level than her sister, frankly a different level than almost anyone.

[WHITBISSELL!]

Yet, to me (and Toto, Scorsese, Peter Gabriel), Rosanna was on a different level than her sister, frankly a different level than almost anyone.I can see that. But then I watched Bringing Out the Dead and ... oof. Something about Patricia Arquette in that particular role. Nicolas Cage felt it too obviously. :randy: :yup:

[Rockatansky]

I can see that. But then I watched Bringing Out the Dead and ... oof. Something about Patricia Arquette in that particular role. Nicolas Cage felt it too obviously. :randy: :yup:

Sounds like you and Wooley should go on a double date. ☺

[Wooley]

Sounds like you and Wooley should go on a double date. ☺

We should totally make this happen. I'll call Rosanna. Though I worry about that shark eating a dude's dick on the wall there by the mirror.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbebtjlYnP1r9p706o1_r2_500.gifv
https://64.media.tumblr.com/bc7604a969c11de3f8b1943b9226d13f/tumblr_pp1iq8LfRX1qmemvwo1_1280.jpg

Scandal - Filling in some gaps in my Akira Kurosawa films. From 1950 and made right before his big breakout Rashomon. It's not exactly upper tier Kurosawa and I didn't find it quite as compelling as two of his previous films Stray Dog and Drunken Angel. But that maybe had more to do with the story which might have leaned a little too hard on it's melodramatic elements.

Toshirô Mifune stars as Ichirô Aoye, an artist of some notoriety in his country. He stops at a scenic overlook to paint a landscape of a nearby mountain and while there he meets popular young classical singer Miyako Saijo (Shirley Yamaguchi). She's missed her bus and, since they're both heading to the same place, he offers her a ride on his motorcycle. On the way there they pass the bus and onboard are two paparazzi who tail them to their hotel. After Saijo refuses their request for an interview they surreptitiously take a picture of the pair standing on the balcony of her room. It's all innocent enough but Asai (Shin'ichi Himori), their disreputable boss and editor of the scandal sheet Amour, fabricates a story to go along with the photo.

He is somewhat surprised to find that Aoye is suing the magazine for libel. One stormy night the desperately shysterish lawyer Otokichi Hiruta (Takashi Shimura) shows up at Aoye's art studio and offers his services free of charge. Aoye's no nonsense and pragmatic model, Sumie (Noriko Sengoku), warns him not to trust the guy. Aoye being the free spirited guy that he is decides to let providence take it's course. He goes to see Hiruta's family to get a more rounded picture of the guy and meets Hiruta's young daughter, Masako (Yôko Katsuragi). She's bedridden with tuberculosis but her gentle nature and unswerving belief in her father convinces Aoye to hire him on as his attorney. Aside from the sentimentality though the movie does address the so-called "kasutori culture" which sprang up in post-WWII Japan. Many blamed the open sexuality and decadence and the proliferation of sleazy magazines and cheap alcohol on Western influences.

Shimura, a Kurosawa regular, is given the lion's share of the storyline and he makes the most of it. I'd compare him to Willy Loman except that Hiruta doesn't even have fantasy to fall back on. The debased, besotted attorney character has been revisted countless times in other films and his Hiruta has reached rock bottom. There's a scene at a dive bar called The Red Cat where the drunken patrons sing along to "Auld Lang Syne". It's clear that Hiruta is mean to be the embodiment of Japan's postwar troubles. The rest of the cast deliver skillful performances but this is propelled forward on the strength of the two lead actors.

As it turns out, Mifune himself was a stone cold matinee idol. His Aoye exudes an unassuming masculinity and straightforward decency without making it cloying. One can't help but wonder what he could have done if he had been given a chance against some American leading men of the period. I think he could have easily held his own (maybe eclipsed them?) in late 40's to early 50's Hollywood and beyond.

This makes 12 of Kurosawa's films I've seen so far. Next up is another one of his films costarring Mifune and Shimura, I Live In Fear.

75/100

[Rockatansky]

We should totally make this happen. I'll call Rosanna. Though I worry about that shark eating a dude's dick on the wall there by the mirror.
No, I meant you guys go with each other. I will go with both Patricia and Rosanna, and run between opposite ends of the restaurant Doctor Detroit style.

[Rockatansky]

I love Doctor Detroit.

Don't bother to look, he's not in a book...

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Redsposter.jpg
By Moviegoods, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9765773

Reds - (1981)

At times Reds really seems to be a companion to Lawrence of Arabia - both are not only sizeable epics, but they both take place around the same time period (World War I) and they both involve an outsider travelling to a foreign land with ideals and dreams for change, only to come up against human nature to find their utopia an unattainable dream. I've always been afraid that this 3 hour+ film might be a tad boring, but the film itself seems to evolve as the story progresses - at first you could call it a love story with writer/journalist John Reed (Warren Beatty) meeting writer/artist Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton), both somewhat bohemian and believing in free love. That invites poet Eugene O'Neill (Jack Nicholson) into the picture. Much of the film takes place in Russia, which is convulsing with World War I and revolutions providing a dramatic backdrop to this true story. Personally, I found it all fascinating - but I have had a certain interest in all things Russian for a long time now. I spent some time in the country myself. There's just the right balance between Reed's personal life, the historical situation and the work Reed and Bryant do as journalists and writers as far as the story goes - and the film itself is exceedingly well constructed and filmed. All the actors give what seem to be career-best performances from what I saw, and Reds left me secure in the knowledge that I'd seen an intelligent, important and great epic film - one of the last of it's type. Many people have a very varying range of how they feel about Reds, but I'll back it all the way.

9/10

[SpelingError]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Redsposter.jpg
By Moviegoods, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9765773

Reds - (1981)

At times Reds really seems to be a companion to Lawrence of Arabia - both are not only sizeable epics, but they both take place around the same time period (World War I) and they both involve an outsider travelling to a foreign land with ideals and dreams for change, only to come up against human nature to find their utopia an unattainable dream. I've always been afraid that this 3 hour+ film might be a tad boring, but the film itself seems to evolve as the story progresses - at first you could call it a love story with writer/journalist John Reed (Warren Beatty) meeting writer/artist Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton), both somewhat bohemian and believing in free love. That invites poet Eugene O'Neill (Jack Nicholson) into the picture. Much of the film takes place in Russia, which is convulsing with World War I and revolutions providing a dramatic backdrop to this true story. Personally, I found it all fascinating - but I have had a certain interest in all things Russian for a long time now. I spent some time in the country myself. There's just the right balance between Reed's personal life, the historical situation and the work Reed and Bryant do as journalists and writers as far as the story goes - and the film itself is exceedingly well constructed and filmed. All the actors give what seem to be career-best performances from what I saw, and Reds left me secure in the knowledge that I'd seen an intelligent, important and great epic film - one of the last of it's type. Many people have a very varying range of how they feel about Reds, but I'll back it all the way.

9/10

I saw that recently and also enjoyed it quite a bit.

[Fabulous]

Billy Budd (1962)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/28tiYUtQ2nbBhzbrFjMSZbFmPxT.jpg

[Raven73]

Cutthroat Island
5/10.
Biggest bomb in movie history and 40% on Rotten Tomatoes.
The only thing I liked about it was Geena Davis's smile.

https://m.media- amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTYyNjc2MjY2MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjU3NjM0MQ@@._V1_.jpg

[Marco]

Bruno (2019)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7586628/mediaviewer/rm825140737/?ref_=tt_ov_i
Homeless man with his beloved dog get separated and he spends the next day searching for his hound followed by a precocious youngster. This film has a lot of predictability in it but is also heartfelt and beautifully nuanced. Diarmaid Murtagh does a fantastic turn as the man who has gone off the radar.

3

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bfi.org.uk%2Ffilms-tv-people%2Fsites%2Fbfi.org.uk.films-tv-people%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Fgallery_full%2Fpublic%2Fimage%2Fmatter-of-life-death-bfi-00o-6ct.jpg%3Fitok%3DvVj2JPTS&f=1&nofb=1

A Matter of Life and Death, 1946

A RAF pilot, Peter (David Niven), is stuck in a plummeting airplane with no parachute. He has an emotional final conversation with an American woman named June (Kim Hunter) who is working the radio at an air force base. However due to a miscommunication up in heaven, Peter survives bailing out of the plane and quickly strikes up a romance with June who happens to be stationed near where he lands. But when the error is discovered, Peter must fight to be allowed to remain on Earth.

While I felt that the story faltered a bit in its last act, this film's creative story and sumptuous visuals made it a real treat.

The visuals are actually what would make me most recommend this film. It's directed by Powell and Pressburger, who also directed The Red Shoes, and their visual stamp is all over this one. While it's not quite as deep and saturated as that other movie, A Matter of Life and Death uses color to tremendous effect. To begin with, the scenes in heaven are all portrayed in black and white, while the scenes on Earth are in color. But this goes a step further when characters move between the two planes and we watch the color fade from or fade into their faces. There's also the use of background color to amp up emotion, such as the vivid red glow behind June in the opening sequence.

The film also makes good use of a recurring visual where the agents of heaven are able to freeze time on Earth. This makes for some neat tableau moments as certain characters move around others who are frozen.

The performances are also pretty winning. Niven and Hunter are good in their roles. June herself is kind of thinly developed---her one defining trait is that she's in love with Peter. But Hunter gives enough passion to the role that you can go along with it. Roger Livesey gives a really strong supporting performance as Doctor Reeves, a friend of June's who tries to help Peter get to the bottom of what is happening to him.

The film did lose me for about 15 minutes toward the end. Things come to a head as there is a trial in heaven to decide Peter's fate. For reasons I don't understand AT ALL, a huge chunk of this trial is given over to the two sides arguing about whether Britain or America is better. Like, I'm sorry, but this has NOTHING to do with the story! During this time, Peter and June are basically sidelined. It's bizarre and a momentum killer. I kept thinking there would be a point to all this runtime being given to Britain vs America, and there wasn't. It might be forgivable if the humor in this section were stronger, but it isn't.

The film also shows its age in some sad ways when it comes to its portrayal of heaven. Heaven, my friends, is racially segregated, despite a declaration at the beginning that all people once they enter are equal. Everyone in power in heaven is white. Women are allowed to partake in administrative work, but are allowed nowhere near the legal process, either as judge, lawyer, or jury. The stairway to heaven is lined with the best minds that have made it to heaven and I'm sure you can guess what they all have in common! It's definitely a vision of heaven that comes from a very specific point of view.

Overall this is a fun and surprisingly moving film. It was a lot more intense than I expected from what I thought was mainly going to be a slightly goofy comedy. Definitely recommended.

4

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://regnum.ru/uploads/pictures/news/2018/05/16/regnum_picture_1526480932263290_normal.jpg
Visitor of a Museum (1989, Konstantin Lopushansky)
4.5
Made in the twilight of the USSR in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, this grim post-apocalyptic existential horror definitely reflects the angst of that era, stemming from the uncertainty about things to come and the effects of technological progress and the rise of consumerism on societal changes. Devastating in its complete and utter repudiation of humanity, the film takes no prisoners as it delivers a chilling warning of the dire consequences of nuclear confrontation and reckless pursuit of materialistic pleasures at the expense of the environment. Though not drenched in shocking gore, violence or depravity, it's still a difficult film to go through due to its incredibly oppressive, nightmarish atmosphere. The ending is one of the most soul-crushingly bleak I've ever seen—it really stayed with me for a while after watching.

[mark f]

It Snows All the Time (Jay Giannone, 2022) 2.5 5.5/10
Ted & Venus (Bud Cort, 1991) 2+ 5/10
Glorious (Rebekah McKendry, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Vengeance (B.J. Novak, 2022) 3 6.5/10
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTAyMWMzNzItYjk1Yy00ZGNiLTllMjctYzg2ZWE0MTIzODZlXkEyXkFqcGdeQWpnYW1i._V1_QL75_UY281_CR0,0,500,28 1_.jpg
NYC Podcaster B.J. Novak tries to find out what happened to a woman who turned up dead, so he travels to Texas to visit those who knew her, including Ashton Kutcher.
Look Both Ways (Wanuri Kahiu, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Collide (Mukunda Michael Dewil, 2022) 2 5/10
Caballerango (Juan Pablo González, 2018) 2.5 6/10
The Duke (Roger Michell, 2020) 3 6.5/10
https://images.bauerhosting.com/legacy/media/6217/a3cc/51ca/c278/0243/8890/the-duke.jpg?format=jpg&quality=80&width=440&ratio=16-9&resize=aspectfill
In 1961, iconoclastic taxi driver Kempton Bunton (Jim Broadbent) steals Goya's portrait of the Duke of Wellington from the National Gallery in London, and his disapproving wife (Helen Mirren) isn't happy about it.
Samantha (Stephen La Rocque, 1991) 2.5 6/10
Dead Zone (Hank Braxtan, 2022) 2 5/10
Zero Hour! (Hall Bartlett, 1957) 2.5 5.5/10
Inside the Mind of a Cat (Andy Mitchell, 2022) 3 6.5/10
https://martincid.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/inside-the-mind-of-a-cat.jpg
Sometimes obvious but entertaining look at cats' personalities and physical attributes as seen by experts and cat lovers everywhere.
Bridges (Maria Corina Ramirez, 2021) 2+ 5/10
Rogue Agent (Declan Lawn & Adam Patterson, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Below the Fold (Clayton Scott, 2021) 2+ 5/10
Babysitter (Monia Chokri, 2022) 2.5 6/10
http://www.lienmultimedia.com/IMG/arton87763.png
When her reporter husband Patrick Hivon loses his job over a misogynist joke, Monia Chokri suffers from Postpartum depression and hires a quite strange babysitter (Nadia Tereszkiewicz) to help her out. Whoa, Nellie!
Spin Me Round (Jeff Baena, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Slapface (Jeremiah Kipp, 2021) 2 5/10
Wifelike (James Bird, 2022) 2.5 6/10
Orphan: First Kill (William Brent Bell, 2022) 2.5 6/10
https://64.media.tumblr.com/8653f09ab453bc210aefb1e7775eb9e4/86e3ee3783fa64fb-e8/s540x810/fa8aacfebbe6d1a7e61db708075fe960eca2c767.gifv
Murderous "psycho dwarf" Isabelle Fuhrman escapes from a European hospital and makes it to America where she poses as the daughter of a pretty crazy family itself.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfreporter.com%2Fresizer%2F_xd4ByLVB8jq2dzlnaWy8nN2o-w%3D%2F1200x0%2Ffilters%3Aquality(100)%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Farc-wordpress-client-uploads%2Fsfr%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F05114055%2Fvenom22.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Venom, 2018

Eddie (Tom Hardy) is an investigative reporter who get wrapped up in an otherworldly nightmare when he is infected with an alien parasite, Venom, who was brought to Earth by megalomaniac tech entrepreneur Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed). With the help of his ex-girlfriend, Anne (Michelle Williams) and a scientist at Drake's company, Dora (Jenny Slate), Eddie tries to take down Drake.

I went into this film looking for some dumb fun. Unfortunately, it only really delivered on the first part of that equation.

I like to start reviews with positives and then give my criticisms, but I find that I have very little to say that's actually about the film itself. It is stacked with actors I love or really like. I will follow Jenny Slate ANYWHERE, I would watch her regrout a bathroom for 90 minutes. I think Michelle Williams is one of the most talented actresses of her generation. I really like Riz Ahmed. Tom Hardy is into helping rescue animals. For me this cast is a slam dunk.

And yet I feel like down to the last one they were all wasted with thin writing and even thinner characterization. If pressed to describe the characters themselves, I guess I would say that Slate's doctor is the best developed, because she is at least grounded in an understandable conflict and we understand the different stakes for her. She wants to do world-changing science, she has already somewhat compromised her personal and professional ethics, she has children who are threatened by Drake if she doesn't comply, etc.

Williams easily gets the worst of things as Anne. She's just sort of this weird trophy object, getting mad at Eddie or going out of her way to help him depending on which way the wind is blowing. A sequence where Venom takes over her body (and of course gives her this weird porn-y catsuit form because why not?!) leading to little entendres about Venom "being inside her" just felt gross. The one note I enjoyed from her character was when she and her new boyfriend, Dan (Reid Scott) agree to help Eddie. Usually the "jerky new boyfriend" trope is a strong one, and I appreciate its subversion here.

I also cannot overstate just how stupid a lot of this movie is. And I don't mean the crash-bang car chases or fight scenes. I mean basic logic problems. In one scene, Venom says he knows everything about Eddie because he's in Eddie's head. Two scenes later the phone rings and Venom asks "Who's Anne?". You're in this guy's head and know his deepest darkest secrets but not the part about the woman he's in love with? Let's not even talk about Dora sneaking Eddie into her workplace. And by "sneaking" I mean openly leading him around in full sight of the cameras without even trying to costume or disguise who he is.

The fight scenes themselves wring a few fun moments out of Eddie's amazement at what his body is now able to do, but they all devolve into the kind of chaotic CGI slugfests that have come to characterize comic book action. I'll admit that I didn't even fully watch the final fight scene. I half-listened to it while watching a YouTube video about cleaning my refrigerator's metal coils. This kind of action--so often totally lacking in any consequences--completely fails to engage me at this point.

Weak stuff, barely buoyed for me by a cast I like.

2.5

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfreporter.com%2Fresizer%2F_xd4ByLVB8jq2dzlnaWy8nN2o-w%3D%2F1200x0%2Ffilters%3Aquality(100)%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Farc-wordpress-client-uploads%2Fsfr%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F10%2F05114055%2Fvenom22.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Venom, 2018

Eddie (Tom Hardy) is an investigative reporter who get wrapped up in an otherworldly nightmare when he is infected with an alien parasite, Venom, who was brought to Earth by megalomaniac tech entrepreneur Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed). With the help of his ex-girlfriend, Anne (Michelle Williams) and a scientist at Drake's company, Dora (Jenny Slate), Eddie tries to take down Drake.

I went into this film looking for some dumb fun. Unfortunately, it only really delivered on the first part of that equation.

I like to start reviews with positives and then give my criticisms, but I find that I have very little to say that's actually about the film itself. It is stacked with actors I love or really like. I will follow Jenny Slate ANYWHERE, I would watch her regrout a bathroom for 90 minutes. I think Michelle Williams is one of the most talented actresses of her generation. I really like Riz Ahmed. Tom Hardy is into helping rescue animals. For me this cast is a slam dunk.

And yet I feel like down to the last one they were all wasted with thin writing and even thinner characterization. If pressed to describe the characters themselves, I guess I would say that Slate's doctor is the best developed, because she is at least grounded in an understandable conflict and we understand the different stakes for her. She wants to do world-changing science, she has already somewhat compromised her personal and professional ethics, she has children who are threatened by Drake if she doesn't comply, etc.

Williams easily gets the worst of things as Anne. She's just sort of this weird trophy object, getting mad at Eddie or going out of her way to help him depending on which way the wind is blowing. A sequence where Venom takes over her body (and of course gives her this weird porn-y catsuit form because why not?!) leading to little entendres about Venom "being inside her" just felt gross. The one note I enjoyed from her character was when she and her new boyfriend, Dan (Reid Scott) agree to help Eddie. Usually the "jerky new boyfriend" trope is a strong one, and I appreciate its subversion here.

I also cannot overstate just how stupid a lot of this movie is. And I don't mean the crash-bang car chases or fight scenes. I mean basic logic problems. In one scene, Venom says he knows everything about Eddie because he's in Eddie's head. Two scenes later the phone rings and Venom asks "Who's Anne?". You're in this guy's head and know his deepest darkest secrets but not the part about the woman he's in love with? Let's not even talk about Dora sneaking Eddie into her workplace. And by "sneaking" I mean openly leading him around in full sight of the cameras without even trying to costume or disguise who he is.

The fight scenes themselves wring a few fun moments out of Eddie's amazement at what his body is now able to do, but they all devolve into the kind of chaotic CGI slugfests that have come to characterize comic book action. I'll admit that I didn't even fully watch the final fight scene. I half-listened to it while watching a YouTube video about cleaning my refrigerator's metal coils. This kind of action--so often totally lacking in any consequences--completely fails to engage me at this point.

Weak stuff, barely buoyed for me by a cast I like.

2.5

I have avoided this film, because it looked to me like it would be... well, pretty much exactly what you describe.
I shall continue to avoid it.

[Takoma11]

I have avoided this film, because it looked to me like it would be... well, pretty much exactly what you describe.
I shall continue to avoid it.

It's right on that line where it's not so bad that I'd tell someone to avoid it, yet see absolutely no reason to recommend it.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://www.xwhos.com/photo/what_is_zodiac_sign_zatoichi_meets_yojimbo_2019-09-11_6.webp
https://i.gifer.com/46nM.gif

Zatoichi Meets Yojimbo - Upon further reflection, this is not the film with which to introduce yourself to the Zatoichi universe. I mean 26 movies going all the way back to 1962's Tales of Zatoichi? But hey, TCM was running it and since I had already seen Yojimbo I figured why not? Well, turns out there are plenty of reasons why not. Starting with not knowing much of anything about the character. Was he always a comic sort of figure? Not cartoonish but certainly not anything like Ogami Itto, the character that Shintarô Katsu's (Zatoichi) real life brother Tomisaburô Wakayama played in the Lone Wolf and Cub series. There are moments of humor that I'm sure were earned through previous films. And it's not that they don't land, it's just that there's no reference point so they don't necessarily carry the weight intended.

I knew diddily squat about the character. I knew he was blind but didn't know he was a masseur. When he shows up at a small village and talks to certain other characters like he'd known them previously I had no idea why that particular village held such significance or who these people were. And it doesn't help that the plot is a little convoluted with a lot of familiar elements from other Chanbara films. Two warring factions. Gold embezzled from the Shogunate. Wandering ronin. An imperiled and indebted young woman. Lots of double dealing and skullduggery.

This sounds like I'm complaining but I'm not. I like just about anything Toshiro Mifune appears in. I liked the rich color palette of the cinematography. I liked the clever, subversive humor. And I liked Katsu's portrayal of the blind, wandering swordsman, gambler and self described crook. I just regret not having acquainted myself sooner with this fascinating character.

80/100

[WHITBISSELL!]

Venom, 2018

I will follow Jenny Slate ANYWHERE, I would watch her regrout a bathroom for 90 minutes. I think Michelle Williams is one of the most talented actresses of her generation.
rating_2_5A big YES to both of these statements. First time I caught Slate was in the TV series Married playing Paul Reiser's much younger wife. And Williams was such a heartbreaker in Wendy and Lucy. That whole movie was.

And you're 100% right about Venom.

[WHITBISSELL!]

I have avoided this film, because it looked to me like it would be... well, pretty much exactly what you describe.
I shall continue to avoid it.Listen to Tak. It's dumb and boils down to it being a big waste of time. Another Marvel misfire. Never bothered with the sequel.

[Takoma11]

A big YES to both of these statements. First time I caught Slate was in the TV series Married playing Paul Reiser's much younger wife. And Williams was such a heartbreaker in Wendy and Lucy. That whole movie was.

And you're 100% right about Venom.

I love Jenny Slate so much. I'm glad she's stayed so visible for so long, because she's the kind of quirky that people can be interested in for a little bit and then discard.

Also, it was so bizarre that they just (Venom SPOILERS) killed her character off-screen and gave ZERO closure about the family that she risked in betraying her boss.

[StuSmallz]

Cutthroat Island
5/10.
Biggest bomb in movie history and 40% on Rotten Tomatoes.
The only thing I liked about it was Geena Davis's smile.

https://m.media- amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTYyNjc2MjY2MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjU3NjM0MQ@@._V1_.jpgStewie would disagree with that point, I'm afraid:


https://youtu.be/wBzSED8k_T8

[WHITBISSELL!]

I love Jenny Slate so much. I'm glad she's stayed so visible for so long, because she's the kind of quirky that people can be interested in for a little bit and then discard.Hotel Artemis, Gifted, Bob's Burgers. I also liked her in Parks and Recreation. She and Ben Schwartz made such a great brother and sister. And I'm curious about I Want You Back with Charlie Day. She's a celebrity crush. :yup:
Also, it was so bizarre that they just (Venom SPOILERS) killed her character off-screen and gave ZERO closure about the family that she risked in betraying her boss.Just subpar writing all around.

[Wooley]

It's right on that line where it's not so bad that I'd tell someone to avoid it, yet see absolutely no reason to recommend it.

That's enough reason for me to avoid something. There are only so many hours in my life.

[Wooley]

I am also a Slate-lover.
Looking forward to Marcel The Shell.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.nextmedia.com.au%2FNews%2FWDYPIH.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Why Don't You Play in Hell?, 2013

Multiple characters and groups intersect in this story about a crew of young filmmakers who find themselves in the middle of a feud between two gangs. At the heart of the conflict is Mitsuko (Fumi Nikaidô), the daughter of one of the gangsters. Mitsuko, who aspires to be an actress, captures the hearts of one of the filmmakers, Koji (Gen Hoshino), and the leader of the opposing gang, Ikegami (Shin'ichi Tsutsumi).

We've all been there: you're watching a film and thinking to yourself "It seems like I should like this . . . but I don't." I can normally appreciate well-crafted chaos, but this one left me cold and tested my patience at the same time.

I had high hopes for about the first 20 minutes. There are some really fun over-the-top elements. While these lost their charm for me a bit as the film went on, the visual gags are well-constructed and show a solid understanding of how to mix gore and comedy. In an early scene, a young Mitsuko returns to find a literal bloodbath in her family's apartment---about two inches of standing blood that she slides through before discovering a wounded Ikegami. There are outlandish action scenes involving shootouts and sword fights.

Criticizing the acting here is complicated, because I feel as if the actors were delivering what they were supposed to deliver. But that's not something that I was enjoying as a viewer. The film goes back to the same well over and over again. There's a repeating joke about Ikegami speaking in a soft voice whenever he thinks of Mitsuko before realizing what he's doing an putting on a more gruff voice for the benefit of his men.

Fundamentally my struggle is that I have a hard time with movies where I don't care about the characters. And the characters don't have to be realistic, or good people, or whatever. They just need to be human in some way that I can grasp. The characters in this movie mostly felt like pawns to me, being navigated from scene to scene but with no real growth.

I also had one of those "is this the character or the movie?" moments in terms of how Mitsuko is viewed. Is she sexually objectified by, like, all the main characters, including her dad? Yes, absolutely. Does this start, in two cases, when she is a child? Also yes. Does the film see this as a problem? Um, doesn't seem like it! As the film goes on, Mitsuko is put in a lot of fetish-like scenarios, with lots of pans up and down her body. It just started to feel icky, especially the constant reminders that Ikegami has lusted after her since she was 10 years old.

I've had this movie on my watchlist basically since it came out, but I was pretty disappointed in it.

3