Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Gideon58]

http://gonewiththetwins.com/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/loveactually.jpg


4

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doctormacro.com%2FImages%2FTracy%2C%2520Spencer%2FAnnex%2FNRFPT%2FAnnex%2520-%2520Tracy%2C%2520Spencer%2520(Adam%27s%2520Rib)_NRFPT_09.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=897369b4dccd493f8ef8437b6f35cc014215586f317f4921cd7fdc0920616645&ipo=images

Adam's Rib, 1949

Adam (Spencer Tracy) and Amanda (Katharine Hepburn) are married lawyers, he a district attorney and she running a private practice. When a frustrated woman named Doris (Judy Holliday) dramatically catches her husband (Tom Ewell) and his mistress (Jean Hagen) and puts a non-fatal bullet in the former, Adam ends up as the prosecutor. Sensing that Doris would be receiving more sympathetic treatment if she were a man going after a philandering husband, Amanda takes her on as a client. As the trial wears on, Adam and Amanda's relationship begins to buckle under the strain.

Generally I enjoyed this film--and particularly Tracy and Hepburn in the lead roles--but some unevenness between the drama and comedy halves of the film led to me feeling very conflicted, especially in the third act.

Tracy and Hepburn do a great job of portraying a couple in a genuinely loving and respectful and sexy relationship. This is a marriage (at least in the first half) that clearly has a lot of dimensions to the attraction between them. They celebrate paying off their mortgage on a summer farm property. They make a late night curry dinner together. This adds a lot of weight to the later sequences where the relationship between the two begins to crumble.

It's also worth mentioning Judy Holliday as the accused attempted murderess. She is a funny but also a tragic figure. A sequence where she carefully listens to Hepburn's language to know how to answer a question shows some shrewdness that keeps her from becoming too much of a caricature.

I have to say, though, as the film went on, I really felt uneasy with some of the encounters between Amanda and Adam. After she gives him a massage, when it's his turn he genuinely hits her hard on the butt. It's meant to be debasing and even painful, and he doesn't deny it.

But what really deflated this one for me is a sequence toward the end of the film where Adam busts into the apartment where Amanda is having drinks with their neighbor, who is putting the moves on Amanda. Adam threatens them with a gun, then puts the gun in his mouth, then reveals that it's a prop gun. And to him, this proves . . . something.

The problem for me here is twofold. The first is, well, WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL?!?!?! You know that Atwood quote, "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them"? We've seen uncool behavior from both of them, and I was definitely on Adam's side when he was angry about Amanda embarrassing him in court by having a lady weightlifter pick him up in the air. But to escalate that to making someone thing you're going to kill them and/or witness a suicide?! That is some sociopath, sick stuff.

But also, Amanda's point was never that Doris had a right to do what she did. Her point, as summed up in her closing remarks, was that a man in her position would receive leniency if the situation were reversed, and Doris has the right to be judged in that same lens. That's it. So what point, exactly, was Adam making? That's it's wrong to threaten people with a gun? Yeah, no kidding. It feels like the two of them aren't even arguing the same question.

And I'm afraid that this spoiled the rest of the film for me. After the above incident, I really had no desire to see the two of them reconcile.

3.5

[Thief]

I venture to say the greatest rôle for both of them. Seen it a million times.

I like Training Day quite a bit, and Hawke is good in it, but he's definitely better in First Reformed, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, and maybe even Boyhood. Bit of an underrated actor, if you ask me. Washington's performance is showier and probably among his best, but I prefer his more nuanced performance in Philadelphia.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/White_Noise_%282022_film%29.jpg

This is the only movie I’m really interested in seeing. Reviews have not been great and I wonder if that’s from people being unfamiliar with the material. The last act is one I’m really curious to see “if” and how it’s translated.

I'm thinking the same thing, for the good reviews I've read have been from people who have read the book, but I haven't (ordered a copy - I must read it after seeing the film.) It's another case of an "unfilmable" book being translated for the screen, and while I find that most adaptations are disappointments I do hope you end like liking this film as much as I do.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f7/Over_the_Hedge_Poster.jpg
By The cover art can or could be obtained from IMP Awards., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29641012

Over the Hedge - (2006)

Much more geared towards children than Dreamworks film Shrek, this film has many bright moments but never really rises to great heights compared to the many other animated films out there. When you've got Toy Story, Finding Nemo, all of the Disney animated films along with Up and The Incredibles (I could go on) there's a high bar to be cleared, and Over the Hedge doesn't provide us with anything new or special to take away from seeing it. I enjoyed the array of voice talent, from Bruce Willis and Nick Nolte to Steve Carell, William Shatner and Thomas Haden Church - it's an impressive line-up, but adults aren't going to be provided with all of the sly jokes that pass over the heads of their kids. It's nice - espousing the value of family and friendship over greed - and Garry Shandling's turtle Verne anchors it all really well. It lacks inspiration though. If it had of been made 10 years earlier, it would have been jaw-droppingly good - but animation has advanced so far it's harder to impress.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Cars_2006.jpg
By May be found at the following website: IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=14283875

Cars - (2006)

I'm not much of a car enthusiast, so it would figure that Pixar film Cars didn't impress me much (except for the animation itself, which as usual is incredible.) I won't be going on to Cars 2 or Cars 3 - so the world where the only lifeform is vehicular (even the insects are little cars) is one I'll leave behind. It's fun to not look at the cast and play "name that voice" to, and just admire visually, but the story feels a little tired and lackluster. Also, protagonist Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) starts out a little too unlikeable - some characters are too much of an A-hole to ever win us over, and McQueen was a little like that. Doesn't come close to any other Pixar film I've seen.

5/10

[Little Ash]

I’m wondering if you know why she was so upset with her final customer? (Seen this movie a million times. Love it.)


In one of the extras, there's an interview with Akerman where she says this is a story about a woman experiencing the first two orgasms in her entire life. The first one is what sets off everything going wrong. The second one is the one at the end. I don't recall her elaborating more than that, but it's been a few years since I've seen the interview.

I can't remember if on the psychological reason as to why, was explained vs what I recall taking it as, but I generally took it as a rejection of pleasure because it unmoored the lifestyle of routine that she had basically become accustomed to through decades of subservience. I think Akerman said something in the interviews that contributed to that reading (of the psychological mentality), but I think a good amount of it was my interpretation of what she meant.

[Little Ash]

This is the only movie I’m really interested in seeing. Reviews have not been great and I wonder if that’s from people being unfamiliar with the material. The last act is one I’m really curious to see “if” and how it’s translated.

Damn. I listened to the audiobook years ago, but my memory is so bad, I've forgotten most of it. The helicopter scene is mostly what sticks out in my mind's eye. Still looking forward to the movie.

[gbgoodies]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f7/Over_the_Hedge_Poster.jpg
By The cover art can or could be obtained from IMP Awards., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=29641012

Over the Hedge - (2006)

Much more geared towards children than Dreamworks film Shrek, this film has many bright moments but never really rises to great heights compared to the many other animated films out there. When you've got Toy Story, Finding Nemo, all of the Disney animated films along with Up and The Incredibles (I could go on) there's a high bar to be cleared, and Over the Hedge doesn't provide us with anything new or special to take away from seeing it. I enjoyed the array of voice talent, from Bruce Willis and Nick Nolte to Steve Carell, William Shatner and Thomas Haden Church - it's an impressive line-up, but adults aren't going to be provided with all of the sly jokes that pass over the heads of their kids. It's nice - espousing the value of family and friendship over greed - and Garry Shandling's turtle Verne anchors it all really well. It lacks inspiration though. If it had of been made 10 years earlier, it would have been jaw-droppingly good - but animation has advanced so far it's harder to impress.

6/10


Maybe I'm just a child at heart, but I loved Over the Hedge.

[PHOENIX74]

Maybe I'm just a child at heart, but I loved Over the Hedge.

I might have animation fatigue after watching so many quality animated movies close together.

[gbgoodies]

I might have animation fatigue after watching so many quality animated movies close together.


I watch a lot of animated movies, but I never get tired of them. :)

[Corax]

ICE TRUCKER


I think that someone was in the bathroom and randomly thought, "Whoa! What if we made Sorcerer as Ice Road Truckers?!??!"



Throw in Lenny/Tom/Hodor from Grapes of Wrath/The Stand/GoT and M-O-O-N that spells stock character!



Amber Midthunder also stars as a character one letter from being named "Tonto" (I kid you not).


It's everything you've ever seen, but bigger, dumber, and sadder.


2.5/10


https://static.wixstatic.com/media/7986bd_057c885ff13940f0a3c8dc80b006a7b0~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_1000,h_1402,al_c,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/7986bd_057c885ff13940f0a3c8dc80b006a7b0~mv2.jpg

[Deschain]

I’m drunk, I watched my screener copy of The Banshees of Ed Sheeran, it was sad. So that’s where I’m at.

[Corax]

I’m drunk, I watched my screener copy of The Banshees of Ed Sheeran, it was sad. So that’s where I’m at.


Deschain... ...not that's name I've not seen in a very long time.

[Daniel M]

The Banshees of Inisherin (Martin McDonagh, 2022) 4

Every now and then I watch a film and it feels like it's been written for my life. The simple absurd plot is something I can relate to as someone who often finds himself in semi-existential crises pondering the meaning of life and whether the time I spend doing certain things, or with certain people is productive or not. As I've developed as a film watcher I've become increasingly critical of directors who don't really utilise filmmaking techniques to visually tell the story, and in terms of mise-en-scene McDonagh is quite weak on this but he doesn't care because he can rely on the quality of his writing and in particular his humour. You can see his background as playwright, this film had me laughing and crying and by the end I was incredibly moved by the sadness of the whole affair. Humans are bizarre, absurd creatures who do the most stupid things, and that's as funny as it is sad.

The Fabelmans (Steven Spielberg, 2022) 3.5

Spielberg's quasi-autobiographical look at his childhood growing up to become a filmmaker has all the ingredients you'd expect from such a film is and is full of warmth and charm. Michelle Williams is superb and her chemistry between Paul Dano and Seth Rogen is shown in a delicate way and the way Spielberg films the films within this film, create some outstanding scenes. The movies Sammy crafts have a kid have no dialogue and work through moving images, similar to some of the film's most important scenes like where he argues with his mother. I was looking forward to a certain scene in particular and it didn't fail to disappoint.

My biggest complaint is that the second act felt like it dragged, where there's not much "filmmaking" happening the film feels a little uneven with a couple of scenes dragging on for quite a while. I guess that's because certain scenes obviously stand out to Spielberg in his head strongly and he's recreated them full of detail from memory because they're fun for him.

[Fabulous]

A Midsummer Night's Dream (1935)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/71J6gmlQSA5G6V9LTtkA1D4z4Dr.jpg

[Jackie Daytona]

Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)


Saw this on a lark for the first time in 30 years, had more fun with it than I expected. There's a certain joy in seeing a movie that refuses to take itself too seriously, in a lot of ways Gremlins 2 is a satire on the entire concept of movie sequels. Plus, my man Christopher Lee shows up in a rare comedic role.

[Deschain]

Deschain... ...not that's name I've not seen in a very long time.

Sir I’m on this forum every day.

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doctormacro.com%2FImages%2FTracy%2C%2520Spencer%2FAnnex%2FNRFPT%2FAnnex%2520-%2520Tracy%2C%2520Spencer%2520(Adam%27s%2520Rib)_NRFPT_09.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=897369b4dccd493f8ef8437b6f35cc014215586f317f4921cd7fdc0920616645&ipo=images

Adam's Rib, 1949

Adam (Spencer Tracy) and Amanda (Katharine Hepburn) are married lawyers, he a district attorney and she running a private practice. When a frustrated woman named Doris (Judy Holliday) dramatically catches her husband (Tom Ewell) and his mistress (Jean Hagen) and puts a non-fatal bullet in the former, Adam ends up as the prosecutor. Sensing that Doris would be receiving more sympathetic treatment if she were a man going after a philandering husband, Amanda takes her on as a client. As the trial wears on, Adam and Amanda's relationship begins to buckle under the strain.

Generally I enjoyed this film--and particularly Tracy and Hepburn in the lead roles--but some unevenness between the drama and comedy halves of the film led to me feeling very conflicted, especially in the third act.

Tracy and Hepburn do a great job of portraying a couple in a genuinely loving and respectful and sexy relationship. This is a marriage (at least in the first half) that clearly has a lot of dimensions to the attraction between them. They celebrate paying off their mortgage on a summer farm property. They make a late night curry dinner together. This adds a lot of weight to the later sequences where the relationship between the two begins to crumble.

It's also worth mentioning Judy Holliday as the accused attempted murderess. She is a funny but also a tragic figure. A sequence where she carefully listens to Hepburn's language to know how to answer a question shows some shrewdness that keeps her from becoming too much of a caricature.

I have to say, though, as the film went on, I really felt uneasy with some of the encounters between Amanda and Adam. After she gives him a massage, when it's his turn he genuinely hits her hard on the butt. It's meant to be debasing and even painful, and he doesn't deny it.

But what really deflated this one for me is a sequence toward the end of the film where Adam busts into the apartment where Amanda is having drinks with their neighbor, who is putting the moves on Amanda. Adam threatens them with a gun, then puts the gun in his mouth, then reveals that it's a prop gun. And to him, this proves . . . something.

The problem for me here is twofold. The first is, well, WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL?!?!?! You know that Atwood quote, "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them"? We've seen uncool behavior from both of them, and I was definitely on Adam's side when he was angry about Amanda embarrassing him in court by having a lady weightlifter pick him up in the air. But to escalate that to making someone thing you're going to kill them and/or witness a suicide?! That is some sociopath, sick stuff.

But also, Amanda's point was never that Doris had a right to do what she did. Her point, as summed up in her closing remarks, was that a man in her position would receive leniency if the situation were reversed, and Doris has the right to be judged in that same lens. That's it. So what point, exactly, was Adam making? That's it's wrong to threaten people with a gun? Yeah, no kidding. It feels like the two of them aren't even arguing the same question.

And I'm afraid that this spoiled the rest of the film for me. After the above incident, I really had no desire to see the two of them reconcile.

3.5

Yeah, I was surprised to kinda struggle with this movie.
Truth is, I have never been a Spencer Tracy fan and I can't tell you why, he just doesn't work for me. Except for Bad Day At Black Rock, which I really liked him in - and, if I'm being honest, I was at least impressed with him in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. But generally, he's not for me.
But I think the really problems here were the ones you talk about above. I just thought the tone was all f*cked up, not just in terms of whether it flowed and balanced but also just like, "What movie are we making here?" And it made it hard for me to enjoy any of the humor, particularly when they just made Hepburn so damn mean. I mean, I generally really like her as an actor, like a lot, but I really, really disliked her character so it was hard for me to feel balanced in watching what was seemingly supposed to be a balanced battle of the sexes. I actually switched it off before it even got to that last really objectionable part.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/34/Cars_2006.jpg
By May be found at the following website: IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=14283875

Cars - (2006)

I'm not much of a car enthusiast, so it would figure that Pixar film Cars didn't impress me much (except for the animation itself, which as usual is incredible.) I won't be going on to Cars 2 or Cars 3 - so the world where the only lifeform is vehicular (even the insects are little cars) is one I'll leave behind. It's fun to not look at the cast and play "name that voice" to, and just admire visually, but the story feels a little tired and lackluster. Also, protagonist Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) starts out a little too unlikeable - some characters are too much of an A-hole to ever win us over, and McQueen was a little like that. Doesn't come close to any other Pixar film I've seen.

5/10

Yeah, this one really didn't do much for me and I found myself really surprised that this had been such a popular film and remains readily in the popular culture.

[Takoma11]

Yeah, I was surprised to kinda struggle with this movie.
Truth is, I have never been a Spencer Tracy fan and I can't tell you why, he just doesn't work for me. Except for Bad Day At Black Rock, which I really liked him in - and, if I'm being honest, I was at least impressed with him in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. But generally, he's not for me.
But I think the really problems here were the ones you talk about above. I just thought the tone was all f*cked up, not just in terms of whether it flowed and balanced but also just like, "What movie are we making here?".

Exactly. You can't swing from an over-the-top physical gag of a woman lifting a grown man in the air in front of an ineffectually blustering judge to someone genuinely believing they are about to be murdered by their domestic partner. That whole part made me sick.

I love the concept of two lawyers seizing on a case and using it as a way to hash out bigger legal conflicts. But, again, their arguments don't actually match up. His is: No one is above the law. Hers is: Women are not treated equally before the law. They are both right, but while he's given this big dramatic sequence to shock her into realizing that, we never get anything like the reverse.

I was really hoping that the breakthrough would be the two of them realizing how unhealthy the relationship was between Doris and her husband, and that there were nuances that made it complicated for both of their points. That he would realize that Doris being abandoned by her husband is not a symmetrical things (because she is left behind with no income and three children to care for), and that she would realize that Doris had engaged in physical violence before the incident in question.

The movie started out fun but ended up really depressing. I'm not even sure what it was trying to say in the end.

[Torgo]

Emily the Criminal - 4

This is a strongly acted crime thriller that has its finger firmly planted on the pulse of the American Millennial. Like many of them, Emily (Aubrey Plaza), a former art student, has piles of student loan debt and is underemployed. To make matters worse, she has a few minor convictions on her record. Out of desperation, she follows a lead from a co-worker to make extra cash by purchasing high-ticket items with stolen credit cards. For better or worse, she ends up being really good at it.

Like she does in Ingrid Goes West, Plaza continues to prove she can carry a movie on her own. She especially does this in two job interview scenes for how her responses to the condescending and deceptive hiring managers‘ questions and conditions nail what too many others in her shoes would like to say. There's also her subtle transition from aspiring artist to her titular description such as how her catering job becomes more of a formality and how her remaining legitimate friendship with old classmate Liz (Megalyn Echikunwoke) becomes more strained. On par with Plaza is Theo Rossi, who plays Youcef, the manager of this illegal venture who succeeds in always making you wonder about his true intentions as he becomes more interested in Emily's abilities. If the description of her new job makes you question if this is really a thriller, don't worry: some of her transactions don't go according to plan and the results put me on edge, especially one involving a car. The handheld cinematography and use of real locations adds to the tension and spontaneity in moments like this one, which made me recall how the similar Before the Devil Knows Your Dead does these things. It ends up being an exciting and thought-provoking thriller that not only boldly questions if Millennials will only be successful via illegal means, but also if that's the fate of subsequent generations.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fcriterion-production%2Fstills%2F132413-ced026cd30f75ef3e4c849e40b2f3610%2FFilm_867_WomanofYear_original.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=1a85316442a900502ae08803448435f92bce6dd8981bb2cfa68f69eaf5dbc644&ipo=images

Woman of the Year, 1942

Tess (Katharine Hepburn) is a jet-setting international reporter involved in a range of activities from refugee support to women's rights to the war effort. Sam (Spencer Tracy) is a sports reporter at the same magazine. After a short war of words---kicked off when Tess makes an offhand suggestion about getting rid of baseball to put more focus on the war--Tess and Sam engage in a whirlwind courtship and get married. But things at home become tense as Sam constantly feels like second fiddle and Tess can't figure out how to balance her work life and her home life.

Can the modern woman have it all?

This film was certainly interesting to watch, as it takes the very familiar premise of a relationship where one person is totally bound up in their job and takes a lateral step by having the work-crazed partner be the wife and the neglected, unappreciated party the husband.

Much like Adam's Rib this one started out very promising, coasting on the easy chemistry between Hepburn and Tracy. But fundamentally the movie suffers from a lack of balance in the way that it treats its two main characters.

Maybe the most startling contrast comes in the first half. Consider that Tess wasn't excited about baseball. She then accepts Sam's invitation to watch a game, expressed curiosity and interest, and genuinely engages with what is happening. Now compare that to what happens when a friend of Tess escapes a concentration camp and arrives at her apartment. Yes, it's Tess and Sam's wedding night and he's frustrated at the intrusion. But again: THIS MAN JUST ESCAPED A CONCENTRATION CAMP! Sam never shows interest in Tess's work, just annoyance when it pulls her attention away from him.

Tess is certainly not without her major flaws. She is used to living her life totally on her own terms and without having to consider the feelings or convenience of others. She also can be very impulsive, and maybe the worst thing she does is to adopt a child refugee who she has no real interest or time for. She does this without even consulting Sam, and it's gross behavior all around.

But it's also hard to feel for Sam, because while the film wants to be clever in gender flipping their dynamic, Sam is no housewife. He has his own job. He has his own friends. He has his own apartment. He endures Tess's lifestyle, but we never see him overtly supporting her or showing pride in her accomplishments. I think we see him cook some eggs one time.

And most frustratingly, he refuses to talk things out and just sulks or withdraws his attention and affection. And for me a problem was the way that his notion of his wife as a partner and her womanhood were so bound up in one another. He's not just mad that he's not an equal, he's mad that she's not playing her womanly role. I thought that his barb at her---"The woman of the year isn't really a woman"--was just plain nasty. It makes you wonder what he thought marriage to her would be like.

What I found most annoying about this movie was the way that it constantly refuses to define what a good version of this marriage would be. Tess has an aha moment about obeying her husband (barf) and offers to quit her job. Sam says he doesn't want her to totally give up her job and identity, but what does he want? Sam spends so much of the film heroically avoiding having an open, honest conversation with his wife, that I didn't even know what he wanted.

I think that there are some people in the world who just aren't suited for marriage, or for whom the passion they have for their work means that marriage will really only work if they have a spouse who is at peace with lots of time apart. I have a friend who field manages hospitals for DWB, and she is often away from home for months at a time. Her marriage works, but mainly because her husband isn't expecting dinner on the table every night. Likewise there are countless women (and men) who have spouses in the military who must cope with that kind of time apart. Sam is nice and all, but the absolutely joy and spark we see from Tess when she's working is really special. Of course the film could never conclude with Tess realizing she loves work more than marriage. But honestly: His Girl Friday managed to pull off something similar.

Frustrating characters and some entrenched *~*era appropriate*~* sexism made this one less enjoyable than I'd hoped for.

3.5

[Deschain]

Yeah Emily the Criminal was excellent. I had kind of the opposite reaction to Torgo however in thinking it would be an unrelenting thriller when it felt more like a handful of tense scenes in what was otherwise a drama.

But I’m a big big fan of Aubrey Plaza and I love that she’s been starring in these lower budget thriller and/or dark comedies like Black Bear and Ingrid Goes West. It feels like she’s taking roles that she’s genuinely interested in or movies she’s passionate about making.

[Torgo]

Yeah Emily the Criminal was excellent. I had kind of the opposite reaction to Torgo however in thinking it would be an unrelenting thriller when it felt more like a handful of tense scenes in what was otherwise a drama.

But I’m a big big fan of Aubrey Plaza and I love that she’s been starring in these lower budget thriller and/or dark comedies like Black Bear and Ingrid Goes West. It feels like she’s taking roles that she’s genuinely interested in or movies she’s passionate about making.I probably oversold it as a thriller in my writeup. Like you said, it's more like a crime drama with thriller elements. But yeah, Plaza is making great career choices in the last few years. I'm also eager to see Black Bear and The Little Hours.

Emily the Criminal is on Netflix, by the way.

[Gideon58]

Yeah Emily the Criminal was excellent. I had kind of the opposite reaction to Torgo however in thinking it would be an unrelenting thriller when it felt more like a handful of tense scenes in what was otherwise a drama.

But I’m a big big fan of Aubrey Plaza and I love that she’s been starring in these lower budget thriller and/or dark comedies like Black Bear and Ingrid Goes West. It feels like she’s taking roles that she’s genuinely interested in or movies she’s passionate about making.

So glad to hear that someone else liked Emily the Criminal....my review:

https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2332440-emily-the-criminal.html

[Corax]

Sir I’m on this forum every day.


You don't notice what you weren't noticing until you do, I suppose.


Tips hat.

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://i0.wp.com/midwestfilmjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AfterSun.png?fit=2880%2C1544&ssl=1
Aftersun (2022, Charlotte Wells)
5
Kind of a similar vibe to Celine Sciamma's Petite Maman, but, unlike the latter film, this one takes a look at a father-daughter relationship, with Welles exploring the themes of memory, loss, regret, and depression with beautiful delicacy and maturity.

I thought it was equally brilliant—understated but nuanced and quietly devastating. Loved the cinematography, the use of video recorder handheld camera work was very effective. Excellent performances from both Paul Mescal and Frankie Corio. Great debut from Charlotte Wells.

[chawhee]

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)
https://www.sonypictures.com/sites/default/files/styles/max_430x572/public/chameleon/title-movie/243516_stranger_than_fiction_2006_1400x2100.jpg?itok=X9R8-gdC
5
Still my favorite Will Ferrell movie. Nearly a perfect movie in my eyes once you buy into the premise.

[Daniel M]

https://i0.wp.com/midwestfilmjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AfterSun.png?fit=2880%2C1544&ssl=1
Aftersun (2022, Charlotte Wells)
5
Kind of a similar vibe to Celine Sciamma's Petite Maman, but, unlike the latter film, this one takes a look at a father-daughter relationship, with Welles exploring the themes of memory, loss, regret, and depression with beautiful delicacy and maturity.

I thought it was equally brilliant—understated but nuanced and quietly devastating. Excellent performances from both Paul Mescal and Frankie Corio. Great debut from Charlotte Welles.

One of my real life friends said similar stuff, was blown away by this film. I was a big fan of Petite Maman too, I can't wait for this.

[GulfportDoc]

The Outfit (2022) - rating_4

If you're not already a fan of single-location movies, this is bound to make you one. Set in 1950s Chicago, clothier Leonard Burling (Mark Rylance) allows the Mob to operate in his shop, even housing their dropbox in the back room. His sole employee is secretary Mabel (Zoey Deutch), who's not cut out for the work or life in her crime-ridden city and is eager to travel the world as soon as she's able. Burling's relationship with the mob becomes more tenuous when something tragic occurs.

The role of Burling is a gift for Rylance for how tailored (sorry) it is to his strengths. It's one requiring him to make you wonder if he's the smartest person in the room or just good at pretending that he is, which he's a proven expert at as Bridge of Spies and Wolf Hall indicate. Deutch also impresses, as does Simon Russell Beale's mob boss, especially for how well he nails a Chicago accent. Aside from the obvious that Burling's shop is the only set, the movie would translate well to the stage since it manages to deliver thrills and chills mostly via acting and dialogue. While that seems like a basic quality to mention, and even though I'm all for innovation, it's a breath of fresh air to be wowed by them in this era in which I've come to expect the visuals and the editing to do this. Also, and hopefully not to spoil it too much, but if at any point you think the movie has used up its bag of tricks, think again. Graham Moore's script is like a well-oiled machine on the whole, but there are a few occasions in which characters behave irrationally to further the plot. That doesn't take away from it being a movie that sadly seems like a rarity these days: a quality thriller for grownups that respects your intelligence.
Nice review. You liked it a hair more than I did. Here's my commentary:

The Outfit (2022)

I too am a huge fan of Mark Rylance. Possibly my favorite actor today. And he didn't disappoint here.

Still the movie was just a smidge disappointing. Part of that is due to my imagining what the film was going to be prior to watching it, but another portion was within the production itself.

First of all the color saturation was rather pale, making it seem almost like it was shot on video tape. That could have been my TV's setting. OTOH it could have been filmed that way to connote the 1950s. It's almost if it were color desaturated.

It's very tricky to bring off a crime drama set in one room. In this case I think it was a detraction. In films of this type, the story, writing, and acting have to be first rate in order to overcome the humdrum of the single set.

Notable examples of films set in one room that were successful: Rope, Rear Window (slightly expanded set), Coherence, and The Guilty (Danish).

Some of the casting was questionable, especially Simon Russell Beale as Roy Boyle, the mob boss. I never believed him in the role. The two gangsters played by Johnny Flynn and Dylan O'Brien were not very threatening. Johnny Flynn at times seem to fit the role, but at other times he seemed to be struggling to seem nasty.

The production put me in mind of an American crime version of a British drawing room drama. After about
the 10th foray into the ante room, I wanted the camera to go through the front door and show the damn neighborhood!

A very nice vehicle for Mark Rylance, but to me the twists, turns, and surprise ending was not enough to rate it the highest.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fa.ltrbxd.com%2Fresized%2Fsm%2Fupload%2F1c%2Fsg%2Fge%2F85%2Fthe-awful-truth-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg%3Fk%3D5fcaefa890&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=64564eaa3156275a29b5e4dfa79b88e8f6240ad657c1cfb109bd4956685d26d0&ipo=images

The Awful Truth, 1937

Jerry (Cary Grant) and Lucy (Irene Dunne) are a married couple who decide to divorce after Lucy realizes Jerry faked an out-of-town trip and Jerry begins to suspect that Lucy is having a fling with her handsome vocal coach, Armand (Alexander D'Arcy). After the two split, Lucy takes up with the kind-but-bland Dan (Ralph Bellamy), while Jerry eventually pairs up with socialite Barbara (Molly Lamont). At the same time, each still harbors fond feelings for the other.

Coming off of two classic comedies about rifts in marriages, it was refreshing to watch one where the relationship was contentious without ever getting mean-spirited. Overall I found this film very charming, with a good mix of banter and physical gags.

The entire film has a kind of ease to it---reminiscent of something like The Thin Man--largely driven by the energy and chemistry of Grant and Dunne. Through the entire film, you can tell that they are a good fit for one another. The movie see-saws between the two of them helping or sabotaging the new relationships of the other, and sometimes just plain sabotaging themselves.

The film was apparently shot with a lot of improvisation. I think that it's a tribute to the director and actors that there doesn't feel like a huge gap between the more improvised sequences and the scripted lines. My favorite line was probably when Armand and Jerry find themselves hiding in Lucy's guest bedroom, only to burst out and flee the apartment in a frenzy. As Dan and his mother look on in amazement, Lucy's even-keeled Aunt Patsy calmly observes, "They didn't touch second."

There are some solid physical gags, as well, maybe the highlight being Jerry thinking that he's going to catch Lucy and Armand in a compromising position, only to burst in on a recital in which Lucy is performing. Sitting sheepishly in the back of the room, he manages to upturn a table and chair, loudly wrestling with the table. Annoyed but mostly amused, Dunne lets a little laugh sneak into her singing, and it's a really cute and funny moment.

Really, this is a movie about two people falling back in love with each other. Dunne and Grant are very charming. I also like that the movie wasn't too harsh on their new romances. There's a bit poking of fun, such as when Jerry flirts with singer/dancer Dixie Belle Lee (Joyce Compton), only to discover in front of Lucy, that her performance is a bit on the saucy side. "Well," Lucy remarks afterward, "I guess it's easier for her to change her name than for her whole family to change theirs."

My only annoyance (and I realize that it's accurate to the time) was the way that Lucy gets basically all of the gossip. Jerry is the one who actually lied about something! And other people know that he lied! But it's Lucy---who didn't lie about anything--who has her name slandered and Jerry just sort of lets it happen. It's frustrating, because you can see on her face in their first scene together that she's not embarrassed or caught out when he arrives home unexpectedly. Not a big issue with the film, just a dated element.

4

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3d/Serpico_imp.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15891972

Serpico - (1973)

Serpico goes in deep and does more than just follow Frank Serpico around taking note of his insistence on doing police work the right way - it shows us how a person can get unwittingly drawn into being a crusader or whistleblower, almost against their will. It expertly shows us the slow change his character undergoes over the years, and really makes us feel his tension and fear. Al Pacino, with one of his best ever performances, helps with all of that - but you can't deny the work of one of the all time greats, screenwriter Waldo Salt in adapting the nonfiction book by Peter Maas. When he starts his career as a police officer, Serpico is willing to turn a blind eye to corruption - and just wants to do his job, but he's continually pushed into "proving" himself - and when he starts to want to affect change, he's stymied by a system that seems to be set up to encourage corruption. His frustration begins to build, and with it the fear of reprisal - since all of his fellow officers hate him enough to kill him themselves - this takes it's toll on his relationship and life in general.

These days there are new laws, so cops no longer need to be on the take - they can take money from any citizen they deem "suspicious" legally, and keep it. The world I live in seems to be bending all the laws in favour of being easily corrupted - and if anybody says anything they're branded "socialist" or "ignorant" - isolated, mocked and always with no hope of influencing law-making, for they can offer no money to politicians. A form of corruption in itself called "lobbying". Serpico shows us cops who hate the corruption, but go along with it because they feel they have no choice - that affecting change is impossible because of the odds stacked against them. It shows us politicians who become paralyzed because they need the police on their side. But it also shows us that one incorruptible man alone can make a difference - so just imagine what a group could do. Great screenplay and performance by Pacino - and a great movie. My first time seeing it.

8/10

[Wooley]

https://i0.wp.com/midwestfilmjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AfterSun.png?fit=2880%2C1544&ssl=1
Aftersun (2022, Charlotte Wells)
5
Kind of a similar vibe to Celine Sciamma's Petite Maman, but, unlike the latter film, this one takes a look at a father-daughter relationship, with Welles exploring the themes of memory, loss, regret, and depression with beautiful delicacy and maturity.

I thought it was equally brilliant—understated but nuanced and quietly devastating. Excellent performances from both Paul Mescal and Frankie Corio. Great debut from Charlotte Wells.

Finally!
I been waiting for someone around here to see this and tell me about it.

[beelzebubble]

Exactly. You can't swing from an over-the-top physical gag of a woman lifting a grown man in the air in front of an ineffectually blustering judge to someone genuinely believing they are about to be murdered by their domestic partner. That whole part made me sick.

I love the concept of two lawyers seizing on a case and using it as a way to hash out bigger legal conflicts. But, again, their arguments don't actually match up. His is: No one is above the law. Hers is: Women are not treated equally before the law. They are both right, but while he's given this big dramatic sequence to shock her into realizing that, we never get anything like the reverse.

I was really hoping that the breakthrough would be the two of them realizing how unhealthy the relationship was between Doris and her husband, and that there were nuances that made it complicated for both of their points. That he would realize that Doris being abandoned by her husband is not a symmetrical things (because she is left behind with no income and three children to care for), and that she would realize that Doris had engaged in physical violence before the incident in question.

The movie started out fun but ended up really depressing. I'm not even sure what it was trying to say in the end.
It is definitely a movie of its time. But those inequities of power are still being played out in the world. At least they are recognized with in the screenplay if not by the main male character.
It wasn't until the 70's that women who committed domestic violence were seen with any sympathy in film. I am thinking of the Burning Bed with Farrah Fawcett. Where we are given a sympathetic look at a woman who kills her husband in a grisly way after a marriage full of domestic violence.
But still women do not get a fair shake in court at least according to a documentary I saw recently, State of Alabama vs Brittany Smith in which a woman who was raped and kidnapped shot her rapist and went to jail for his murder. She used the stand your ground law as her defense, as this occurred in her home. Many men have killed with less egregious offenses against them but have walked free.

Sexism is here now, I am not surprised to find it in an old movie. Still that doesn't diminish ones sensitivity to it. And i can see how this would ruin the comedic aspect for you.

[Takoma11]

It is definitely a movie of its time. But those inequities of power are still being played out in the world. At least they are recognized with in the screenplay if not by the main male character.

Maybe?

I felt like the movie was ultimately on his side, despite the terrible thing he did to her. And in that moment, we are meant (via a close-up of dawning realization on her face) to infer that she is also coming around to his side.

[beelzebubble]

Maybe?

I felt like the movie was ultimately on his side, despite the terrible thing he did to her. And in that moment, we are meant (via a close-up of dawning realization on her face) to infer that she is also coming around to his side.
That maybe. Sexism and all the other toxic isms are difficult to fully wean your self from. Especially when very little is in the culture for you to grab a hold on. Young women are always accusing me by saying "the misogyny is coming from inside the house" when I disagree with them about things. Maybe they are right.

[Takoma11]

That maybe. Sexism and all the other toxic isms are difficult to fully wean your self from. Especially when very little is in the culture for you to grab a hold on. Young women are always accusing me by saying "the misogyny is coming from inside the house" when I disagree with them about things. Maybe they are right.

It was interesting watching the two Tracy/Hepburn films back to back, because in both cases her character was so much more interesting than his, so much more vibrant, and so much more passionate. And yet both of them had to do little plot contortions to get to a place where she's ultimately put in her place.

Apparently the sequence in the end of Woman of the Year where Tess is humiliated by her inability to make breakfast was added to the film because people wanted to see her character taken down a peg. (Do I believe she couldn't make waffles? Sure. Do I believe that a woman who travels internationally and works at a newspaper doesn't know how to brew coffee? I do not.)

[ScarletLion]

'Bones and All' (2022)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5f/Bones_and_All.jpg

Hmm, this film is fine, just fine - difficult to write about spoiler free. It's an enjoyable romantic journey with the first half being a sort of Badlands meets American Honey vibe via the American Midwest. It's a road trip coming of age film with one additional element - the horror. Which is fine but I just didn't connect with that element.

I left the film thinking is that horror a metaphor for the barrier that these people face? I.e. - being on the margins of society, outcasts trying to find their own way in the world? This burden that they have to live with daily because of who they are? Or is it not a metaphor and it's just slotted right into the film for the ride. I still don't know. So it maybe just a fault of my film viewing style but I much preferred director Luca Gudagnino's 'Call me by your Name'.

Timothy Chalamet (Lee) and Taylor Russell (Maren) are worthy of praise but Mark Rylance (Sully) steals the show as the creepy stalker type trying to track down Maren. Great score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross too. But that horror element - I have no idea.

6.9/10

3.5

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fa.ltrbxd.com%2Fresized%2Fsm%2Fupload%2F1c%2Fsg%2Fge%2F85%2Fthe-awful-truth-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg%3Fk%3D5fcaefa890&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=64564eaa3156275a29b5e4dfa79b88e8f6240ad657c1cfb109bd4956685d26d0&ipo=images

The Awful Truth, 1937

Jerry (Cary Grant) and Lucy (Irene Dunne) are a married couple who decide to divorce after Lucy realizes Jerry faked an out-of-town trip and Jerry begins to suspect that Lucy is having a fling with her handsome vocal coach, Armand (Alexander D'Arcy). After the two split, Lucy takes up with the kind-but-bland Dan (Ralph Bellamy), while Jerry eventually pairs up with socialite Barbara (Molly Lamont). At the same time, each still harbors fond feelings for the other.

Coming off of two classic comedies about rifts in marriages, it was refreshing to watch one where the relationship was contentious without ever getting mean-spirited. Overall I found this film very charming, with a good mix of banter and physical gags.

The entire film has a kind of ease to it---reminiscent of something like The Thin Man--largely driven by the energy and chemistry of Grant and Dunne. Through the entire film, you can tell that they are a good fit for one another. The movie see-saws between the two of them helping or sabotaging the new relationships of the other, and sometimes just plain sabotaging themselves.

The film was apparently shot with a lot of improvisation. I think that it's a tribute to the director and actors that there doesn't feel like a huge gap between the more improvised sequences and the scripted lines. My favorite line was probably when Armand and Jerry find themselves hiding in Lucy's guest bedroom, only to burst out and flee the apartment in a frenzy. As Dan and his mother look on in amazement, Lucy's even-keeled Aunt Patsy calmly observes, "They didn't touch second."

There are some solid physical gags, as well, maybe the highlight being Jerry thinking that he's going to catch Lucy and Armand in a compromising position, only to burst in on a recital in which Lucy is performing. Sitting sheepishly in the back of the room, he manages to upturn a table and chair, loudly wrestling with the table. Annoyed but mostly amused, Dunne lets a little laugh sneak into her singing, and it's a really cute and funny moment.

Really, this is a movie about two people falling back in love with each other. Dunne and Grant are very charming. I also like that the movie wasn't too harsh on their new romances. There's a bit poking of fun, such as when Jerry flirts with singer/dancer Dixie Belle Lee (Joyce Compton), only to discover in front of Lucy, that her performance is a bit on the saucy side. "Well," Lucy remarks afterward, "I guess it's easier for her to change her name than for her whole family to change theirs."

My only annoyance (and I realize that it's accurate to the time) was the way that Lucy gets basically all of the gossip. Jerry is the one who actually lied about something! And other people know that he lied! But it's Lucy---who didn't lie about anything--who has her name slandered and Jerry just sort of lets it happen. It's frustrating, because you can see on her face in their first scene together that she's not embarrassed or caught out when he arrives home unexpectedly. Not a big issue with the film, just a dated element.

4

This is actually my favorite romantic comedy of the black and white era (if you will).
Grant is at his absolute best and Dunne is, to me, one of the best in the game at comedic timing without being full-on Hepburn. The physical gags are great, particularly Grant's willingness to go full slapstick but bringing his natural physicality and personal charm to it it almost doesn't feel like slapstick (I'm particularly thinking of her recital) but the dialogue is so snappy. Yup, my favorite.

[Thief]

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/twEK4h2Ovoha6iACCNezTxh7nji.jpg
This isn't great.

Yeah, I used to rent these, uhh, not for the plot.

[Torgo]

Notable examples of films set in one room that were successful: Rope, Rear Window (slightly expanded set), Coherence, and The Guilty (Danish).Thanks, I've been meaning to see the Rope and Coherence. I'll add The Guilty to my list as well. I saw there was an American remake, but I'll stick with the original.

As for Johnny Flynn, what he lacked in intimidation, he made up for in coming across as petulant and entitled. Whenever he was on screen, my stomach turned (in a good way) in the same way it does when I see Joffrey in Game of Thrones or Deacon Frost (Stephen Dorff) in Blade. I at least hope you also think Burling revealing his gang tattoos was an amazing moment!

[matt72582]

La Notte

I would recommend watching the French movie, "The Rules of the Game", "La Dolce Vita" (Marcello is in both), "L'Aventura", and then this. I saw the first 30 minutes a few days ago, and finished it this morning. When I first watched it, I gave it an 8/10 (I think) on this thread (I think). I think I just completed this movie also to see the next movie (L'Eclisse, and then Red Desert, if I make it)


And like many things on YouTube, the movie is free. Stop wasting your money when YouTube is better. Sometimes you just have to search the original title in another language which you can find on IMDB.

https://youtu.be/VY3ngQOjPC0

[mattiasflgrtll6]

Takoma11 I think Adam's Rib is the all-time great satirical comedies, and incredibly ahead of its time when it was made. It discusses the friction men and women can experience between each other more frankly and honestly than most movies dared to do during the 40's. I think an apt comparison would be The War Of The Roses. Another movie where the estranged couple act extremely nasty towards each other, and where neither of them are particularly sympathic but their quarreling is so entertaining to watch. It actually gets much darker than Adam's Rib, so if you felt uncomfortable during that movie it might be worse with this one.

[Thursday Next]

Matilda the Musical (2022)

This was actually a lot of fun and better than the trailer made it look. I wasn't convinced by the casting beforehand but they convinced me. I do like the musical a lot although it took me a while to warm to the songs so even if you like musicals it might come across as odd if you don't already know it, and if you don't like musicals I think it would probably be a hard sell. But I thought it was a really good film version of the musical.

4

[Gideon58]

https://images-fe.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81Hj85-8EzL._AC_UL600_SR600,600_.jpg


4

[Captain Steel]

A Passage to India (1984)

https://images.moviesanywhere.com/8456bc82cd9bcb499f668925b4da1205/cc71de52-9fc2-4efd-8397-e3ef1e16aafa.jpg

At 2 hours, 44 minutes, my usual criticism is it's too long.

And the first two thirds... before it gets to the meat of the story... is very slow. The nice thing is much of the slowness is filled with fantastic vistas & nature shots.

A beautifully shot period piece that explores prejudices & caste systems of British-occupied India in the 1920's. The plot towards the end is very gripping, but it takes so long to get there.

But I am left with one prevailing question (for those who've seen it)...
Why did Adela accuse a man of rape whom she liked and respected, a man who showed her kindness and whose people Adela herself felt were treated poorly by the British, when she hadn't been raped at all? Why would she treat someone like that whom she viewed as oppressed? Someone outraged over inequality & oppression doesn't then make accusations of horrific crimes against the very people they feel pity for, do they?

Okay, we know she was insecure about her engagement as she flip-flopped on it at least once, we know she may have been sexually repressed (as indicated by her scene in the lost ruins) - but to accuse an innocent man of rape as a response to these things? To try to destroy the life of someone you like because you're unhappy with your own? As the prosecutor asked Adela when she withdrew her accusations in court: "Are you mad?"

Was that it? Was she mad? Was she somehow driven insane by the echo in a cave? (A lot of hints pointing that way, but no explanation.)

Personally, I needed more indication as to her motive than to just be left speculating! In that respect, the movie began to feel more like Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975) instead of a historical piece & courtroom drama. What was her goal in accusing Aziz of something that did not even occur?

The one nice surprise was when Mr. Fielding reveals he ended up marrying Stella (Mrs. Moore's daughter) and not Adela as the film previously leads us to believe.

3.5

[Stirchley]

A Passage to India (1984)

https://images.moviesanywhere.com/8456bc82cd9bcb499f668925b4da1205/cc71de52-9fc2-4efd-8397-e3ef1e16aafa.jpg


Love this classic. Can’t answer your spoiler question since it’s been a while. Would have to view it again.

Looking at the cover more closely, there we have Alec Guinness as an Indian. Race-swapping anyone? Judy Davis is Australian - was she an Aussie in the movie? Can’t remember. And people are riding on top of elephants? Always a no-no for me in any circumstances.

[Captain Steel]

Love this classic. Can’t answer your spoiler question since it’s been a while. Would have to view it again.

Looking at the cover more closely, there we have Alec Guinness as an Indian. Race-swapping anyone? Judy Davis is Australian - was she an Aussie in the movie? Can’t remember. And people are riding on top of elephants? Always a no-no for me in any circumstances.

Judy Davis was purely British in this story.

I was wondering what point Alec Guinness served in the plot (seemed the movie could have played out as it was without him)... but then I read on IMDB that much of his footage was left on the cutting room floor by director David Lean... after that the two never spoke to each other again! With all the actual Indians in the film, looks like they swapped one out in exchange for Guinness's recognizable name!

Yes, there was elephant riding, rape accusations, hitting Indians on bicycles with cars, monkey cosplay, lots of racism... all sorts of nastiness! ;)

[Allaby]

Avatar The Way of Water (2022) The film looks great and is technically well crafted, but is nowhere near as good as the first one. It's far too long and lacks the magic and wonder of the original Avatar. There are some spectacular moments along the way, but not enough to justify its bloated runtime. 3.5

[James D. Gardiner]

La Notte

I would recommend watching the French movie, "The Rules of the Game", "La Dolce Vita" (Marcello is in both), "L'Aventura", and then this. I saw the first 30 minutes a few days ago, and finished it this morning. When I first watched it, I gave it an 8/10 (I think) on this thread (I think). I think I just completed this movie also to see the next movie (L'Eclisse, and then Red Desert, if I make it)

Nice recommendations. I've seen all titles you mention except La Notte and The Rules of the Game by Renoir. Will have to get round to seeing them. Still struggling to really connect with Antonioni, other than stark coldness and emptiness. If there's something more I need to look deeper to find it. Maybe that's the point. Huge admiration though, maybe Marcello can add a new dynamic to the whole thing for me. Gotta say also Monica Vitti was perfect in these.


And like many things on YouTube, the movie is free. Stop wasting your money when YouTube is better. Sometimes you just have to search the original title in another language which you can find on IMDB.


^ This.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Oblivion2013Poster.jpg
By May be found at the following website: IMP Awards, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37862424

Oblivion - (2013)

I don't know - there's a whole debate I could go into over how much a film's derivative features affect our enjoyment of it. Oblivion isn't the most original of apocalyptic sci-fi films to come along, but it looks absolutely stunning and I still enjoyed it the second time around. Joseph Kosinski, who's done well for himself with Top Gun : Maverick directs the action really effectively - and I love the way the film ends, by both taking us somewhere awe-inspiring and showing us how the events that originally transpired actually began at the same time - those two ends of time being neatly tied together. It's not revolutionizing the genre, but it's a solid entry with a lot of polish. It won't survive intellectual scrutiny however, so it's one of those "switch your brain off" blockbusters.

6.5/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/dd/OceansEightPoster.jpeg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from Warner Bros. Pictures., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56050393

Ocean's Eight - (2018)

Ocean's Eight followed the heist formula so closely that it became kind of predictable, and it unfortunately doesn't have many twists and turns in it to liven everything up. Sometimes in these movies things go wrong, forcing members of the heist crew to improvise and try to make their way through hairy situations. In this one, everything goes to plan step by step - which for me drained the film of any tension it might have been able to create. To be fair, some things go wrong during the set-up which force the gang to improvise, but aside from that I found Ocean's Eight somewhat joyless and average. It wasn't on my wavelength humour-wise either, which kind of just left me with the joy of watching a good heist take place and little else.

5/10

[PHOENIX74]

https://images-fe.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81Hj85-8EzL._AC_UL600_SR600,600_.jpg


4

Glad to see you enjoyed it as well.

[Guaporense]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Room_%282015_film%29.png

Room - 2015

A very cute movie about the love of a mother for her kid. Has some criminal activity involved in the plot as well. :D

I see that Captain Marvel was featured in good movies at some point. :rolleyes:

[Takoma11]

Ocean's Eight[/b] - (2018)

Ocean's Eight followed the heist formula so closely that it became kind of predictable, and it unfortunately doesn't have many twists and turns in it to liven everything up. Sometimes in these movies things go wrong, forcing members of the heist crew to improvise and try to make their way through hairy situations. In this one, everything goes to plan step by step - which for me drained the film of any tension it might have been able to create. To be fair, some things go wrong during the set-up which force the gang to improvise, but aside from that I found Ocean's Eight somewhat joyless and average. It wasn't on my wavelength humour-wise either, which kind of just left me with the joy of watching a good heist take place and little else.

5/10

The writing in Ocean's 8 was so weak! It's always frustrating when a film wastes a great ensemble.

[Fabulous]

Lola Montès (1954)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/d0v44yJkq95FZZFCVlzaHKwcZvU.jpg

[skizzerflake]

Avatar - The Way of Water

It's a big one, the latest James Cameron epic. This time it's chapter two of the Na'vi and their amazing planet Pandora, attempting to end their exploitation by the mechanized, militaristic occupiers who appear to have earth like attitudes. It picks up a "decade" later. An anti-aging enzyme has been discovered that's only found in unbelievably huge whale like creatures, who, when killed, yield about a quart of the magic liquid. There's also another faction among the humanoids, the Na'vi being one, the other being anatomically somewhat different; there's friction between the two tribes and the humans want to exploit this by morphing some actual humans on the Na'vi template so they can be agent provocateurs. Not surprisingly this culminates in the huge battle that dominates the movie.

Well....what an extravaganza. The movie went on for about 3 hours and 10 minutes but seemed much longer. Lots of action, no noticeable dialog, factions on the movie that are fairly thinly veiled metaphors for a variety of conflicts between technological humans and native populations, with nature being the biggest loser. Because I couldn't imagine Cameron doing a movie in which the Na'vi are simply exterminated, the "whales" drained of their magic fluid and the planet becomes a corporate plantation, the main question was how long this had to go on before some balance was restored. It turned out to be 3 plus hours. It felt like 4.

That said, the 3D animation is spectacular. Much of it is set underwater, the colors are resplendent and the action seems convincing enough that you start to believe in 10 foot tall blue humanoids. Having seen the first movie, I expected nothing less. I just wish about an hour of the movie had been left on the cutting room floor. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. It's worth seeing, but make sure you have a full belly and an empty bladder before you go in. Apparently, chapters 3, 4 and 5 are in the queue, so we have not seen the end of Pandora.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9MyW72ELq0

[Fabulous]

Road Games (1981)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/xR63nhI1jTYsZfoSrzULnz9aQxA.jpg

[FromBeyond]

The Courier 2020


Benedict Cumberbatch convincingly portrays a mild mannered businessman from 60's London who is recruited by the secret intelligence service into recieving documents from a high ranking soviet official to try an advert the Cuban missile crisis in this true story. Cumberbatch loses an extremely amount of body weight in this movie. He makes Bale in Machinist look fat.. I was shocked when I seen him and almost wanted to cry when he was talking, he says the process of losing the weight was "horrible" and left him feeling very vulnerable and you clearly see that. His performance was top notch. There's nothing you haven't seen here before but it done it perfectly fine and it was worth a watch. Felt timely given the current circumstances though more from a one sided view one might say. At its heart a story of friendship.

[Mr Minio]

Up (2009)

https://64.media.tumblr.com/bb329cf296098e6a28a4bfa6f97518e3/tumblr_o5mm9u0gfv1voco23o1_500.gif

Seeing this on Yoda's top 10 was the final push toward watching this film. I'd meant to see it for years so I'm glad I finally watched it.

Up is a fun and at times magical adventure where Carl gets back to his little boy's dreams and eventually accepts his fate which is basically an old people's home. Very good movie with excellent first 10 minutes. My favorite Pixar film. The montage of Carl and Ellie's life at the beginning is lovely and I love how they didn't even show her funeral but just Russell sitting at the table with an empty chair opposite of him (this is later repeated multiple times, including juxtaposing the image of Carl sitting in the armchair with an empty armchair next to him. Ellie sat in that armchair in the opening montage. Even later there are two empty armchairs which symbolize that Carl went on with his life.).

There's some poignancy in how Carl escapes the caretakers who come for him to take him to an old people's home. He just attaches hundreds of balloons to his house and flies off! This works well within that entire theme of dreams that take you up and memories that weigh you down. This is clear during the first 10 minutes when Carl's cart tries to go up because of all the balloons attached to it. Carl presses it down with the weight of his body because he married Ellie and chose her over following his dreams. Later on in the film, when the little boy says "It may sound boring, but boring stuff is the stuff I remember the most", Carl kind of remembers Ellie at that point and the "boring" life they had. Of course, none of that is shown or spoken, it's just his facial expression for a second. So then when he skims through his Adventure Book, he discovers that his relationship with Ellie was an adventure, too. And that she thanked him for the adventure and told him to have another one. So he throws away his old stuff from his house, including the two armchairs, so that he can again soar into the skies.

There's that overarching question: should you choose down-to-earth life with somebody who is real and human or should you choose to follow your dreams perhaps never being able to fulfill them? Hell, dreams can even turn out to be fake or illusions (like the famous explorer you were a fan of in your childhood who turns out to be a villain!).

The soundtrack reminded me of the soundtrack to the wonderful film Yoyo. Though not quite as similar to Up's soundtrack as I remembered, I still get the same kind of magical, nostalgic vibe from both:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAARBIgyzw4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rn-vMbFglI

[Gideon58]

Glad to see you enjoyed it as well.


I did...Giamatti and Hoffman did not disappoint and Minnie Driver had me on the floor.

[cricket]

X (2022)

3.5-

https://media.tenor.com/MIvRH3NKO30AAAAd/x-movie.gif

My first non 2010's movie in a while so of course I went horror. I'm a sucker for anything set in the 70's anyway and I liked the style. Decent cast and enjoyable but nothing special.

[Marco]

The Banshees of Enisherin (2022)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6e/The_Banshees_of_Inisherin.jpg
Didn't really see where this one was going. 2 good actors wasted In my opinion. The dialogue was good but the story was trite. Finger stuff is just rubbish. I mean, really dull. If the director had cracked more into the reason for a mans longing to be remembered it should be more than this. Never thought I'd say it though, Colin Farrell totally outacts his counterpart.

2

[Fabulous]

Swing Shift (1984)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/vKWAvI1K6C7FZN2flVdgY8NntKe.jpg

[Jackie Daytona]

Panic in the Streets (1950)

I'm wrapping up Criterion's November Noir lineup with what is essentially a film noir version of the movie Contagion. After a murder victim is found with symptoms of pneumonic plague, a public health official and a detective race to find the killer. This one's smart and a cut above your typical noir. Much of it was shot on location in the streets, docks, and factories of New Orleans. Also great is the lead actor Richard Widmark, who was the maniacal gangster from the classic Kiss of Death.



Strong rec for fans of the genre.

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/5tLZ0SB7/time-out.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=14922737

Time Out - (2001)

The first of two great and underseen French films I watched yesterday - this one is partly based on the horrifying and really fascinating story of Jean-Claude Romand - but removes the horror from the equation with a fictionalized narrative about Vincent (what a performance from Aurélien Recoing) - a man who has lost his job and is unemployed, but convinces his family he has a plush and important job at a UN consulting firm. His tangled lies dazzle, and the way he keeps his head above water financially is to pretend to invest his friend's fortunes in non-existent investment schemes. This character study builds a sense of mystery around the smiling and self-satisfied Vincent - who refuses all kinds of high-paying work so he can drive around the country pretending to be in meetings and take important phone calls. Jean-Claude Romand killed his entire family when they were on the verge of discovering he wasn't really a doctor - and while the denouement of Time Out is much different, Vincent will haunt you because his pathological need to do what he does is a mystery wrapped in a riddle that will never be solved.

8/10

https://i.postimg.cc/X7D6CNpT/father.jpg
By May be found at the following website: http://www.movieposterdb.com/poster/41c97e35, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30002261

Father of my Children - (2009)

In the film industry, what determines the value of the films you produce? Is it their artistic worth, sentimental attachment or the money they make for you and your family? This is one of the questions posed by this Cannes Special Jury Prize-winning film by Mia Hansen-Løve. Grégoire Canvel (Louis-Do de Lencquesaing) has a loving wife, three beautiful and wonderful daughters not to mention a catalogue of films his production company have made over a career that has spanned much of his professional life. He's also about to face financial ruin and bankruptcy. What happens from there posits fundamental questions about both filmmaking and the human condition in a financially invested world - an interesting film that stays with you after it ends. Worth seeking out and seeing.

8/10

[Fabulous]

Something Wild (1986)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/b3J5vJWbyfbjPtgWKfCJYQ8kves.jpg

[chawhee]

Pleasantville (1998)
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-p8U0mlZ0XBk/TbHvQpR4ndI/AAAAAAAAAbM/QaHx3a7YHyI/s1600/pleasantville.jpg
4
First time ever seeing this, and its been on my watch list for years. It holds up really well, despite many films/shows tackling this same idea over history. It does drag on a bit long (right around 2 hours), as the message is pretty clear and ready to be concluded after 90 minutes or so. I didn't realize so many big names were in this outside of Maguire and Witherspoon (Macy, Daniels, Walker, etc)

[cricket]

Rise of the Footsoldier: Origins (2021)

3.5+

https://www.heyuguys.com/images/2021/10/Rise-of-the-Footsoldier-5-Origins.jpg

One of my favorite film series because there's 5 of them with a 6th on the way and I love them all. None of them are great movies but I can't get enough. British gangster is different, and this series revolves around characters involved in a real life murder. The first 2 were more serious and brutal. They have retained their violence but the films have become more fun loaded with babes, booze, drugs, and 80's music. Craig Fairbrass and Terry Stone are the best, even if they age while their characters get younger lol.

[Fabulous]

Cannery Row (1982)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/9mr25e8AZy1gsh6iZPpnJzsFP69.jpg

[Nausicaä]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1f/Knives_Out_poster.jpeg/220px-Knives_Out_poster.jpeg

3.5

SF = Zzz


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/43/The_Call_of_the_Wild_poster.jpg/220px-The_Call_of_the_Wild_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

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.srcdn.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F09%2FThe-Fabelmans-Still.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=52c21d9e433ae73e7626d763fa6c4fd7a578061a34653353e0d651c9b9a2e768&ipo=images

The Fabelmans, 2022

In a quasi-autobiographical story, Spielberg shows us the life of Sam (Gabriel LaBelle), a young man who is much beloved by his father, Burt (Paul Dano) and mother, Mitzi (Michelle Williams). But things are not all sunshine in Burt and Mitzi's relationship. As Sam begins to develop a passion for movies and filmmaking, he also becomes aware of his mother's romantic interest in family friend Bennie (Seth Rogan).

Overall I enjoyed this film, which was at once a story of childhood/teenagehood grounded in some very specific dynamics, and a loving ode to the power of art.

The aspect I enjoyed the most was Sam's developing awareness of the way that telling a story---via inclusion or omission--gives the storyteller power and control over the narrative. Early on, Mitzi realizes that Sam's need to crash his toy trains together is about having control over frightening imagery he saw in a movie theater. This idea takes on a potent twist when Sam must edit together footage he took of his family's camping trip, choosing to include or leave out moments he captures of his mother and Bennie making eyes at each other or casual physical contact.

There's also the thrill of watching a person discover and innovate in a field that they love. Sam discovers how he can create simple effects within his films, use music to heighten emotion, and use staging to create more emotional impact.

The performances are also very good, with LaBelle and Williams being the standouts for me. I also really enjoyed Keeley Karsten as Sam's eldest sister, who seems to be aware of the Mitzi/Bennie tensions before anyone else, and whose anxiety is at times almost hard to watch. Chloe East also shows some fun comic timing as Monica, a girl Sam dates in high school but who wants him to find Jesus.

For all that is strong about the film, it didn't totally click with me. At times the conflict between logic and art feels like it's presented as too much of a simplistic binary. Should Sam be like his dad, who programs computers? Should he be like him mom, who is musical and dances in her nightgown under the stars? I didn't like how frequently and how nakedly this contrast was presented.

There were also a few things that felt like they needed to be fleshed out more, such as a classmate's surprisingly negative reaction to being given a hero edit in one of Sam's films.

A good film, and especially for anyone who is a Spielberg fan.

4

[Allaby]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.srcdn.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F09%2FThe-Fabelmans-Still.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=52c21d9e433ae73e7626d763fa6c4fd7a578061a34653353e0d651c9b9a2e768&ipo=images

The Fabelmans, 2022

In a quasi-autobiographical story, Spielberg shows us the life of Sam (Gabriel LaBelle), a young man who is much beloved by his father, Burt (Paul Dano) and mother, Mitzi (Michelle Williams). But things are not all sunshine in Burt and Mitzi's relationship. As Sam begins to develop a passion for movies and filmmaking, he also becomes aware of his mother's romantic interest in family friend Bennie (Seth Rogan).

Overall I enjoyed this film, which was at once a story of childhood/teenagehood grounded in some very specific dynamics, and a loving ode to the power of art.

The aspect I enjoyed the most was Sam's developing awareness of the way that telling a story---via inclusion or omission--gives the storyteller power and control over the narrative. Early on, Mitzi realizes that Sam's need to crash his toy trains together is about having control over frightening imagery he saw in a movie theater. This idea takes on a potent twist when Sam must edit together footage he took of his family's camping trip, choosing to include or leave out moments he captures of his mother and Bennie making eyes at each other or casual physical contact.

There's also the thrill of watching a person discover and innovate in a field that they love. Sam discovers how he can create simple effects within his films, use music to heighten emotion, and use staging to create more emotional impact.

The performances are also very good, with LaBelle and Williams being the standouts for me. I also really enjoyed Keeley Karsten as Sam's eldest sister, who seems to be aware of the Mitzi/Bennie tensions before anyone else, and whose anxiety is at times almost hard to watch. Chloe East also shows some fun comic timing as Monica, a girl Sam dates in high school but who wants him to find Jesus.

For all that is strong about the film, it didn't totally click with me. At times the conflict between logic and art feels like it's presented as too much of a simplistic binary. Should Sam be like his dad, who programs computers? Should he be like him mom, who is musical and dances in her nightgown under the stars? I didn't like how frequently and how nakedly this contrast was presented.

There were also a few things that felt like they needed to be fleshed out more, such as a classmate's surprisingly negative reaction to being given a hero edit in one of Sam's films.

A good film, and especially for anyone who is a Spielberg fan.

4

Good review, Takoma. I really enjoyed The Fabelmans. Two questions for you: Would it make your top 10 of the year? And do you think it will win any Oscars?

[Takoma11]

Good review, Takoma. I really enjoyed The Fabelmans. Two questions for you: Would it make your top 10 of the year? And do you think it will win any Oscars?

Hmm. The list of 2022 releases I've seen is an anemic 22, with some of them being pretty garbage. It would probably make a top 10, but at the same time it lacked a bit of magic. It doesn't pass the "if a friend wanted to see it, would I sit through it again in the theater" test for me (whereas something like Barbarian or Everything Everywhere All at Once would both be an easy/quick "yes!").

It's a well-acted homage to movie magic/Hollywood, so I think it's a shoe-in for Oscar attention. Not saying it's necessarily unearned--Williams in particular was very strong--but I'd be shocked if it didn't pick up a slew of nominations.

[Thief]

PREP & LANDING
(2009, Deters & Wermers)

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


"This is it, people! 364 days of planning, one night of perfect execution."



This short film follows Wayne (Dave Foley), one of the elves from Prep & Landing who after 227 years feels like "the thrill is gone". Disappointed and bitter for being passed over for a promotion, Wayne now has to deal with a new partner, Lanny (Derek Richardson), a hyper-excited and lively rookie elf he has to train.

However, the main enjoyment of Prep & Landing for me comes from watching the creative and inventive ways that co-directors and co-writers Kevin Deters and Stevie Wermers-Skelton juxtapose the whole Santa Claus/Christmas elves "magic work" into a corporate-like organization, and I felt that they mostly succeed. There is a decent balance of slapstick and wit in all of it, and I had fun with it.

Grade: 3


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2353866#post2353866)

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3d/Ali_movie_poster.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7611422

Ali - (2001)

I like a biopic to be like this - the screenwriters and Michael Mann introduce Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay) when he's on the verge of winning the Heavyweight Championship of the World and we finish with him before he's lost and regained his title for a third time. In this crucial span of his life, we learn the essence of the man and his fight against a system that had every advantage against him. His winning personality could only take him so far, but his courage and integrity (if you ignore his integrity where his various wives were concerned) would see him win through not only in the ring, but in the arena of life as well, making him a revered figure and 20th Century icon. Will Smith is absolutely amazing as Ali (did the fact the film bombed influence him not winning a Best Actor Oscar? Denzel Washington won for Training Day - a performance I also love) and an unrecognizable John Voight will spin your head as Howard Cosell. I like biopics that stick to the essence of the figure they're examining - and even at 150 minutes Ali doesn't spend unnecessary time filling in every insignificant detail. It also explores the world he lived in, with Malcom X and other high profile figures making their mark in an epoch-defining push for civil rights and equality - taking the action from the ring to the pages of history. Enjoyed this.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6e/Strange_Brew_%28theatrical_poster%29.jpg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from John Solie, the graphic artist., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36557050

Strange Brew - (1983)

The first 10 minutes or so of Strange Brew are so anarchic, weird and deliriously off the rails I thought I was about to witness a film that's different and very unique - Dave Thomas and Rick Moranis are Bob and Doug McKenzie, a pair of characters they played regularly on SCTV in Canada, and they were very obviously a precursor to Wayne's World. They break the 4th wall in multiple different ways at the same time, and send us spinning with creativity and some great laughs. It can't keep that momentum up however - the characters and their schtick gets very tired after a while, and I started to get irritated by the number of times they call someone (or each other) a "hoser" or say "eh" - it goes on and on without end. The film isn't Max von Sydow's finest hour either - he hams it up as Brewmeister Smith, a beer brewer with an ambition to dominate the world's beer market. Parts of Strange Brew are really funny, and stand out, but for me there's not quite enough to stretch everything into a 90 minute film. This is a popular cult classic that many people love, but after promising a lot it kind of let me down.

4/10

[Corax]

Prey for the Devil

https://assets-prd.ignimgs.com/2022/07/14/prey-for-the-devil-button-1-1657822607082.jpg

"Plucky nun turns exorcist"

Apparently, there is a kind of Catholic version of Quantico where they study exorcism as a sort of forensic science. They even have a closet filled with "My first exorcism briefcases" with all the fixins (holy water, crosses, Bibles) for Jr. Exorcists to use to expel demons.

It's a straight ahead Good vs. Evil, God vs. the Devil thing, but written by modern hack writers who make the contest one of the super-nun vs. the forces of darkness. You know, if she had cut off her hand and replaced it with a chainsaw, I could have embraced this. But instead of the Spirit of Christ compelling the demon or reliquary of Ash's Holy Boomstick it's the dead Mom who returns to help Sister Pluck in her hour of need. Yawwwn.

Lot's of moaning and groaning and growling and gurgling and contorting and climbing walls and floating in the air and blah blah. The language, however, is clean and we don't get vomiting and peeing and all that. This is, after all, a family-friendly PG-13 movie.

[LChimp]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYrTJANWIAILK_6?format=jpg&name=medium


Del Toro's take on the classic story. I really enjoyed this one, watched it with my son. Way better than Disney's live action adaptation.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYjNhZjA3MTctOTFjNi00Mjg5LTk3ODctOGZkNDMyMjY3YWNhXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTI2ODM1ODUw._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.j pg


2.5

[cricket]

Fat City (1972)

3.5+

https://yts.torrentbay.to/assets/images/movies/Fat_City_1972/large-screenshot3.jpg

Not much of a story, and not much of a sports movie even if it handled that part well. It's a good look at people with little hope for the future with strong performances. It didn't have a big impact on me but I like this kind of thing.

[Marco]

Porridge (1972)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Porridgemovie.jpg
A great little film that stretches the premise of the original TV series but still keeps the wittiness and warmth of it. The recidivist Fletcher is ordered to organise a football team out of the lags...all to get an escape route going. The laughs are sparser than the TV Prog but just as effective.

3

[Fabulous]

Freebie and the Bean (1974)

2

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/aq2u2rdHAHf6VmnAH6VRlb1lNDL.jpg

[Torgo]

Ambulance (2022) - 4

This movie provides a sensation too many superhero and other action movies from the last few decades lack: that visceral one that makes you grit your teeth and maybe even sweat a little that come from actual stakes and effects that favor the practical over the digital. I'm probably not qualified to say this since I've only seen The Rock and Armageddon, but this is Michael Bay's best movie since Nicolas Cage's turn as a chemical superfreak. A movie that could have "That Couldn't Slow Down" appended to its title, it refers to the makeshift getaway vehicle of foster brothers Danny (Jake Gyllenhaal), a career criminal who stole millions from a downtown L.A. bank, and Will (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), an unemployed veteran with overdue bills who's assisting out of desperation. Complicating matters are the vehicle's other two passengers: ailing Officer Zach (Jackson White) who Will shot and EMT Cam (Eiza Gonzalez).

Armageddon made me avoid Bay's movies because I found his direction in it more exhausting than exhilarating. The multiple cuts and drone shots smacking of a child playing with a new toy that dominate this movie's first act started to make me regret my decision to give him another try, but it thankfully achieves a less headache-inducing rhythm as it goes on. The fact that the movie provides quality cake for all that frosting in Will's dire situation, Zach's much more dire one and Will and Danny's complicated relationship helps, as do the quality performances that shine through all the bullets and octane. Gonzalez is especially strong in a turn that should make her a star, as is Garrett Dillahunt's cocksure police captain, especially whenever he ribs Keir O'Donnell's bookish FBI agent. Enough of the boring stuff? Fine: the "frosting" thrills on both the small scale, especially a hasty, Facetime-aided surgery scene and of course on the big one like when police helicopters pursue the ambulance down the L.A. river. Again, Bay lets up on the drone shot button as the movie progresses, but there are still occasions when I considered the old saying about too much of a good thing etc. etc. With that said, I encourage anyone who also gave up on Bay or on the possibility of a modern action movie to punch you in the gut to give this a chance.

[Raven73]

Matrix Resurrections
4/10.
If this was a resurrection, they should go back to being dead. I couldn't even watch the whole thing.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMGJkNDJlZWUtOGM1Ny00YjNkLThiM2QtY2ZjMzQxMTIxNWNmXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMDM2NDM2MQ@@._V1_.jpg

[Raven73]

Turning red
6.5/10.
Mei Mei was meh meh.
https://prod-ripcut-delivery.disney-plus.net/v1/variant/disney/DDB00475C29CBA60327DC03BC1AE0024F2CC75E9B9499CFA3371D9439084CC20/scale?width=1200&aspectRatio=1.78&format=jpeg

[James D. Gardiner]

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

Scoop (2006)

Comedy crime film from writer and director Woody Allen, also starring with Hugh Jackman, Scarlett Johansson and Ian McShane. The ghost of a former investigative journalist (McShane) temporarily escapes death in a bid to pass on information regarding a murder mystery. He successfully conveys this to a journalism student (Johansson) whilst she participates on stage in a magic trick, performed by "The Great Splendini" (Allen). A British aristocrat (Jackman) is the suspect she must investigate assisted by her now stand-in father (Allen).

Jackman and Johansson naturally become romantically involved and are generally lacklustre in their roles, with a script to be fair that didn't have much character interest for them to begin with. There is never any mystery or surprise in the story (except for one thing at the end which still wasn't really made into a big deal). The re-appearing ghost character performed by McShane offered some interest but ultimately not enough was made of him.

Allen's own scenes were by far the funniest and most engaging and really the only thing that saved it, although I felt that I'd seen it all before in some of his previous films. I didn't mind that so much other than noting that he didn't seem to be offering anything particularly original here. Good production values though, as one comes to expect from him.

For me it's worth it for Woody Allen but the rest is forgettable.

6/10

[ScarletLion]

'The Beasts' (2022)

https://pics.filmaffinity.com/The_Beasts-275688233-mmed.jpg

Taut rural thriller from Director Rodrigo Sorogoyen. A French couple; Antonio (Denis Ménochet) and Olga (Marina Foïs) move to Galicia in North Western Spain and start to live a more eco friendly, idyllic life. That is until they fall out with a local family, the eldest brother Xan (Luis Zahera) being the most hostile.

What follows is a dangerous feud that is hard to write about without spoiling, but it gets tense. Very tense. There is one superb scene in the local bar that is a single long take, and feels like the characters could errupt at any moment. The acting from Menochet and Zahera at this point is off the charts. It is so natural that the viewer feels like they are sat at a nearby table in the bar looking for the exits.

'The Beasts' probably takes it's name from the annual festival named 'shearing of the beasts' in the Galicia region that involves the locals gathering up the wild horses that roam and branding them. The very first slo-mo sequence shows this taking place. However, there is so much subtext in the film, that the title could refer to the huge wind turbines that dominate the sky line of the region, and provide a driver to the animosity between the two families in the film. It could refer to the outsiders, the beasts who have invaded the Gallician land that has been inhabited by the same families for decades. Or it could mean the families themselves who are overly hostile to any form of newcomer to their homeland.

Either way, The Beasts is a finely crafted, very well acted thriller which deserves to be seen by many.

4

[Fabulous]

Blue Sky (1994)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/jNn3Un09lE4pCLJjIFTfTk7yCRu.jpg

[LChimp]

http://pm1.narvii.com/6983/4aa9860c3ded65d344fdc4435c669a0f0821b8e2r1-636-856v2_uhq.jpg

3 stories about love. I only really liked the first one, the other two are ok at best. But yeah, at least it's a short movie.

[Thief]

MAD MAX BEYOND THUNDERDOME
(1985, Miller & Ogilvie)
Freebie

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


"Do you know who I was? Nobody. Except on the day after, I was still alive. This nobody had a chance to be somebody."



Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome presents another side of that story in the character of Aunty Entity (Tina Turner), a woman that proudly proclaims having gone from "nobody" to "somebody" as the ruler of Bartertown. The film follows Max as he and Aunty clash when he refuses to help her strengthen her control of the place, which lands him in the titular Thunderdome and eventually exile.

To me, the most interesting aspect of the film was Aunty. She is really a mystifying and intriguing character that I would've liked to see more of. I was really surprised by Turner's performance and how she conveyed the strength in this woman that managed to survive and had "a chance to be somebody". An interesting contrast to Max, who she describes as a "cock of the walk" before and a "feather duster" after. Again, what does tragedy do with us? and how do we face what's ahead of us?

Grade: 2.5


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2354486#post2354486)

[Wooley]

MAD MAX BEYOND THUNDERDOME
(1985, Miller & Ogilvie)
Freebie

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




Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome presents another side of that story in the character of Aunty Entity (Tina Turner), a woman that proudly proclaims having gone from "nobody" to "somebody" as the ruler of Bartertown. The film follows Max as he and Aunty clash when he refuses to help her strengthen her control of the place, which lands him in the titular Thunderdome and eventually exile.

To me, the most interesting aspect of the film was Aunty. She is really a mystifying and intriguing character that I would've liked to see more of. I was really surprised by Turner's performance and how she conveyed the strength in this woman that managed to survive and had "a chance to be somebody". An interesting contrast to Max, who she describes as a "cock of the walk" before and a "feather duster" after. Again, what does tragedy do with us? and how do we face what's ahead of us?

Grade: 2.5


Full review on my Movie Loot (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=2354486#post2354486)

I re-watched this a few years ago and ended up liking it a lot more than I ever had. Made sense to me in the context of the MM saga and I actually also really liked the kids which most people do not.

[GulfportDoc]

90411
The Fabelmans (2022)

The Fabelmans is a core family movie-- a movie about a family, one that has a prodigy within it whose story is revealed as a reflection of that family and of his inspirations and his formation into one of the greatest movie makers of the last 50 years.

This is not an autobiography of Steven Spielberg, but it is autobiographical. We’re left to wonder how much of the story is verbatim, but we’re certain that they’ve included many significant highlights.

Sammy Fabelman was born into a Jewish family consisting of a gifted pre-computer scientist father, an artist dreamer mother, three sisters, and the father’s best friend Benny who lives with them, referred to as an “uncle”. Early on Sammy, aged 7, is taken to a showing of DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth (1952), where Sammy’s initial reluctance turns into complete fascination with the powerful film, most especially by a remarkable scene showing the traveling circus’s train crashing and piling up upon itself. The boy can’t get the scene out of his mind, and when he gets a train set for a present he tries over and over to replicate the scene. Fearing that Sammy will ruin the train set, his mother suggests that he get permission from his dad to use his 8mm camera to film the crash, which he then can view as many times as he’d like.

Filming that crash scene starts Sammy’s journey into film making. He enlists family, friends, and fellow boy scouts to participate in his film escapades, and as he acquires better equipment and more experience, he’s allowed to film his high school’s Senior “skip day” as the class spends a fun day at the beach, which is a smash success, but uncovers unexpected emotions from a few students, even from a former anti-Semitic tormentor. Along the way his filming during a family outing accidentally reveals a budding relationship between his mother and “uncle” Benny. Several characters come and go into Sammy’s life giving him insights and inspiration. After much rejection from the industry, he’s finally offered a job with a CBS sitcom, which sets him out on his well known professional career.

I approached this picture with the same confidence that I’ve felt in the past watching films from directors like Alfred Hitchcock and John Houston, that their work is of such a high quality, I was with high expectations willing to put myself in their capable hands for a couple of hours. The Fabelmans did not disappoint. Despite its 2-1/2 hour runtime I was not the least bit aware of its length from start to finish.

The story was interesting enough but it was the acting, cinematography, production design and settings and costuming that really impressed me. I’m two years older than Spielberg so I’m well aware of the way things looked in the decades of the ‘50s into the early ‘60s. So often earlier time frames are treated in a gaudy technicolor manner which is caricature, not reality. The buildings, garb, coloring, homes, furniture were 100% authentic. The era’s personality types, state of mind and manner of speaking were well represented, almost perfectly avoiding present day idioms. The simple but powerful music score was by John Williams.

Michelle Williams is a sure bet for an Oscar from her role as Sammy’s mother, Mitzi. She let out all the stops, and if the Academy has any integrity left, she’ll likely win Best Actress. I thought Paul Dano was slightly miscast as Sammy’s father, Burt, but he delivered a solid and understated performance. Sammy was played with excellence by Gabriel LaBelle, a young Canadian actor who we’re guaranteed to see more of. There must have been a lot of pressure on him to perform under the eyes of the man he’s portraying. And the young Sammy, played by Mateo Zoryan was letter perfect.

Two cameos --one extended, the other rather brief-- were absolutely memorable standouts. One, Sammy’s Uncle Boris, played by the venerable Judd Hirsch, was a performance which will be studied in acting schools. The other, director John Ford, played by the quixotic director David Lynch, was not only a good impersonation, but one with enjoyable high style.

Reportedly Spielberg had envisioned this film for many years, and it must have taken a huge amount of thought as to how to hit important events in his childhood and family which produced the development of his determination to make movies, but yet with enough appeal to engage a wide audience. Still, when it came down to it, the script, co-written by Spielberg and Tony Kushner, came together very quickly. It is of the very best of the year, and will be awarded for it.

Doc’s rating: 8/10

[Gideon58]

90411
The Fabelmans (2022)

The Fabelmans is a core family movie-- a movie about a family, one that has a prodigy within it whose story is revealed as a reflection of that family and of his inspirations and his formation into one of the greatest movie makers of the last 50 years.

This is not an autobiography of Steven Spielberg, but it is autobiographical. We’re left to wonder how much of the story is verbatim, but we’re certain that they’ve included many significant highlights.

Sammy Fabelman was born into a Jewish family consisting of a gifted pre-computer scientist father, an artist dreamer mother, three sisters, and the father’s best friend Benny who lives with them, referred to as an “uncle”. Early on Sammy, aged 7, is taken to a showing of DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth (1952), where Sammy’s initial reluctance turns into complete fascination with the powerful film, most especially by a remarkable scene showing the traveling circus’s train crashing and piling up upon itself. The boy can’t get the scene out of his mind, and when he gets a train set for a present he tries over and over to replicate the scene. Fearing that Sammy will ruin the train set, his mother suggests that he get permission from his dad to use his 8mm camera to film the crash, which he then can view as many times as he’d like.




I did like that scene where Sammy tries to recreate the train crash in Th Greatest Show on Earth, but in the HBO documentary Spielberg we were told that Lawrence of Arabia was the movie that motivated him to be a filmmaker and it might have been interesting to see what he would have done with that, And as great as the performance might have been, I thought Judd Hirsch's role as the Uncle was pointless.

[Takoma11]

And as great as the performance might have been, I thought Judd Hirsch's role as the Uncle was pointless.

They hired him to film 7 minutes where he spelled out the theme of the movie for anyone not paying attention.

[Gideon58]

Well, whatever the reason for the role, it was a waste of screentime.

[GulfportDoc]

I did like that scene where Sammy tries to recreate the train crash in Th Greatest Show on Earth, but in the HBO documentary Spielberg we were told that Lawrence of Arabia was the movie that motivated him to be a filmmaker and it might have been interesting to see what he would have done with that, And as great as the performance might have been, I thought Judd Hirsch's role as the Uncle was pointless.
Yes, I can see where you're coming from with the Uncle Boris part. However it was important to the story because Uncle Boris was the one who instilled in Sammy that to be a great artist he must not let that conflict or be influenced by family.

The other cameo where David Lynch played John Ford-- although superbly done, he was shown in his office at CBS. But as far as I know, Ford never had anything to do with CBS...:)

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Avatar_The_Way_of_Water_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2022/avatar_the_way_of_water_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=70739987

Avatar : The Way of Water - (2022)

See Avatar : The Way of Water in a cinema (and also in 3D) because once it's available streaming or on DVD/Blu-Ray it's stocks will lower considerably. This is a movie that puts all of it's oomph into it's computer generated visuals, and incredible biological invention. The story just exists to support that audiovisual aspect, although it's entertaining enough and isn't taxing. There was only one thing about the movie that I felt was really on the nose, and that was the hokum, lazy spiritual naval-gazing that sounded like a 14-year-old's answer to an essay question he hasn't studied for. "Water surrounds us. It's the beginning and end. It's eternal - exists within and..." This is something the film could have gone deep for, but instead it's a very surface-level search for divinity. Still, it's a very pleasant way to spend 3+ hours. The film takes a lot of inspiration from New Zealand natives, and to underscore that, Jemaine Clement shows up, which was a bonus for me.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/Priscilla_the_Queen.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6680285

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert - (1994)

This movie was another step along the road for LGBT acceptance in Australia - a country where just a decade or two previously that acceptance would have been unthinkable (just watch what a few of these characters go through in this movie.) Basically a road trip movie, with a trio of drag queens played by Terence Stamp, Hugo Weaving and Guy Pearce embarking on a road trip to Alice Springs - they've been invited to perform there by the wife (a shock for two of the three) of one of the performers. There's a heap of mincing, which is something that's put me off seeing it for all these years, but I felt it was time I saw this considering it's acclaim - and indeed that acclaim is deserved. Incredible performances, a lot of fun, and a movie that carries a lot of meaning and subtext. A must see.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9e/Landofthedead.jpg
By May be found at the following website: http://www.impawards.com/2005/land_of_the_dead.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2353577

Land of the Dead - (2005)

Meet Big Daddy (Eugene Clark) - the Einstein of zombies. He puts fellow zombies out of their misery when they're decapitated, and he's on to us living people. He also works out how to operate firearms, and how to teach his fellow zombies how to shoot - along with being something of a problem-solver. I'd have hated this aspect of a George A. Romero Living Dead movie years ago - but now I kind of go along with it. Where else can these movies go? This had just the right amount of gore - and if they'd skimped on that I would have been let down. We get late Dennis Hopper and the Dead Reckoning vehicle, along with some decent action and serviceable characters. It was better than I thought it would be.

7/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/The_Faculty_movie_poster.jpg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from Dimension., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2068530

The Faculty - (1998)

Something of a throwback to a 1980s horror film - which is a great thing. The only letdown item on The Faculty's list of what it offers is how much Robert Rodriguez and co relied on CGI for their monsters and horror. This was 1998 - so it all looks terribly dated now. However, there's a lot more to The Faculty, and the whole Class of 1984 atmosphere that kicks this off is a breath of fresh air considering how many movies have bad things happen to good people. Nearly every character in this is rotten to the core, save Casey Connor (Elijah Wood) and that includes gym teacher Coach Willis, giving Robert Patrick exactly the kind of role that suits him. This film is so much like Invasion of the Body Snatchers that the characters in it continually reference that film - proving just how self-aware this is, and letting the audience in on the fact this is all just good fun.

6/10

[Takoma11]

The film takes a lot of inspiration from New Zealand natives, and to underscore that, Jemaine Clement shows up, which was a bonus for me.

Please tell me his role is a gem-encrusted crab who tries to eat the main characters!

Something of a throwback to a 1980s horror film - which is a great thing. . . This film is so much like Invasion of the Body Snatchers that the characters in it continually reference that film - proving just how self-aware this is, and letting the audience in on the fact this is all just good fun.

I have a soft spot for The Faculty, which I think is a lot of fun. It also contains a sequence I found scary and oddly moving, which is when the elderly teacher wanders into the locker room and dies. It could have been played as "old people are gross!" but instead the teenage characters show a lot of empathy for her.

Finally, Josh Hartnett (who I do like!) has terrible hair in this film. Just terrible. In several sequences it's like a shelf jutting out from his head.

[PHOENIX74]

Please tell me his role is a gem-encrusted crab who tries to eat the main characters!

I've been so Jemaine Clement spoiled lately - Tamatoa the crab was one of the things I loved the most in Moana. His part in Avater : The Way of Water is a little unusual for him - a marine biologist working for whale hunters. If your discomfort in seeing animals harmed extends to fictional CGI creatures, take heed.

Finally, Josh Hartnett (who I do like!) has terrible hair in this film. Just terrible. In several sequences it's like a shelf jutting out from his head.

All the way around, right? What can I say. It was...unique?

[Takoma11]

I've been so Jemaine Clement spoiled lately - Tamatoa the crab was one of the things I loved the most in Moana. His part in Avater : The Way of Water is a little unusual for him - a marine biologist working for whale hunters. If your discomfort in seeing animals harmed extends to fictional CGI creatures, take heed.

I was bored senseless by the first Avatar film and don't intend to sit through another 3+ hours of that world/story.

All the way around, right? What can I say. It was...unique?

You have to wonder what happened. Were two of the hair stylists on the film talking and one of them was like "He's such a handsome young man. He probably would look good with any style!" and another stylist was like "Bet."

[Deschain]

Love The Faculty.

[PHOENIX74]

You have to wonder what happened. Were two of the hair stylists on the film talking and one of them was like "He's such a handsome young man. He probably would look good with any style!" and another stylist was like "Bet."

"What are you worried about? I tell you Josh, by '99 everybody is going to be wearing their hair this way."

[LChimp]

https://alternativemovieposters.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Terminator-2-poster-John-Cordero.jpg

Re-watch. Still great, aged pretty well. One of the three greatest action movies ever made, the other two being Die Hard and The Matrix.

[ScarletLion]

‘Tár’ (2022)
Dir.: Todd Field
https://64.media.tumblr.com/8e809c2fc6c0259486d513bf4e6c0e32/a606802399f55797-0f/s1280x1920/1057b65f1ca715d29a239db2961cc442eb70ae60.gif

Wow, so much to unpack. It may take me days to process this film. Firstly - Cate Blanchett - what a performance, it is absolutely stellar. Blanchett plays Lydia Tár, a successful classical conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. This is possible career best territory. The control Blanchett has whether speaking English or German is utterly spellbinding. The audience is given absolute plausibility that we are witnessing a world leading, uber intellectual, driven, workaholic composer conductor. I bought it.

Next - the direction. It is meticulously crafted, so well researched, from everything like the classical music, scoring, orchestral arrangements, music conservatories to the modern facets of life as a high profile professional in Berlin. There are minute details placed in this film, both in dialogue and in plot drivers that are there to symbolize the character arc that Tár goes through – right up until the very last scene, in which little devices and props are used to convey the situation Tár finds herself in. Director Todd Field has pulled off a master work here. At it’s heart it’s a character study, but it’s also an extremely complex look at cancel culture, modernity, the high brow versus the low brow, institutionalised behaviour, abuse of power, separating art versus the artist, politicising art, personal morals regarding art and so much more. Much of the first half of the film feels like a European film, (perhaps to keep in tune with the location), as there are long scenes that are dialogue heavy and static cameras with barely any action to speak of; but the film is teaching the viewer about the lead character all the time and it demands heavy concentration. Fans of directors like Darren Aronofsky, Ruben Ostlund and Pablo Larrain may well love this film.

There is one long take scene that is so well directed and acted that the tension and angst is almost uncomfortable to watch. Other scenes are straying into psychological horror territory as the viewer is almost put inside the mind of the lead character and perhaps living a realisation of her actions. Blanchett is absolutely magnetic, intense, captivating and steals every scene.

Incredible film.

9/10

4.5

[Raven73]

Avatar: The Way of Water
9/10.
Movie of the year. Can't wait for what James Cameron brings us next.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYjhiNjBlODctY2ZiOC00YjVlLWFlNzAtNTVhNzM1YjI1NzMxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjQxNTE1MDA@._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.j pg

[Wooley]

They hired him to film 7 minutes where he spelled out the theme of the movie for anyone not paying attention.

Ugh.
And this is why I never click with Spielberg.

[Stirchley]

Finally, Josh Hartnett (who I do like!) has terrible hair in this film. Just terrible. In several sequences it's like a shelf jutting out from his head.

Didn’t see it, but he has the most awful hair - surely a wig - in The Virgin Suicides. If I were him I would have refused to wear it. :eek:

[Stirchley]

90440

Zoe Kravitz totally made this movie. Sort of “Rear Window”. A techno thriller you might say. Still don’t understand the opening scene(s), but, whatever. Good movie.

[Deschain]

Avatar: The Way of Water
9/10.
Movie of the year. Can't wait for what James Cameron brings us next.


It’s gonna be more Avatar.

[beelzebubble]

‘Tár’ (2022)
Dir.: Todd Field
https://64.media.tumblr.com/8e809c2fc6c0259486d513bf4e6c0e32/a606802399f55797-0f/s1280x1920/1057b65f1ca715d29a239db2961cc442eb70ae60.gif

Wow, so much to unpack. It may take me days to process this film. Firstly - Cate Blanchett - what a performance, it is absolutely stellar. Blanchett plays Lydia Tár, a successful classical conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. This is possible career best territory. The control Blanchett has whether speaking English or German is utterly spellbinding. The audience is given absolute plausibility that we are witnessing a world leading, uber intellectual, driven, workaholic composer conductor. I bought it.

Next - the direction. It is meticulously crafted, so well researched, from everything like the classical music, scoring, orchestral arrangements, music conservatories to the modern facets of life as a high profile professional in Berlin. There are minute details placed in this film, both in dialogue and in plot drivers that are there to symbolize the character arc that Tár goes through – right up until the very last scene, in which little devices and props are used to convey the situation Tár finds herself in. Director Todd Field has pulled off a master work here. At it’s heart it’s a character study, but it’s also an extremely complex look at cancel culture, modernity, the high brow versus the low brow, institutionalised behaviour, abuse of power, separating art versus the artist, politicising art, personal morals regarding art and so much more. Much of the first half of the film feels like a European film, (perhaps to keep in tune with the location), as there are long scenes that are dialogue heavy and static cameras with barely any action to speak of; but the film is teaching the viewer about the lead character all the time and it demands heavy concentration. Fans of directors like Darren Aronofsky, Ruben Ostlund and Pablo Larrain may well love this film.

There is one long take scene that is so well directed and acted that the tension and angst is almost uncomfortable to watch. Other scenes are straying into psychological horror territory as the viewer is almost put inside the mind of the lead character and perhaps living a realisation of her actions. Blanchett is absolutely magnetic, intense, captivating and steals every scene.

Incredible film.

9/10

rating_4_5
This is a new one I actually want to see.

[Wooley]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0f/Priscilla_the_Queen.jpg
Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6680285

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert - (1994)

This movie was another step along the road for LGBT acceptance in Australia - a country where just a decade or two previously that acceptance would have been unthinkable (just watch what a few of these characters go through in this movie.) Basically a road trip movie, with a trio of drag queens played by Terence Stamp, Hugo Weaving and Guy Pearce embarking on a road trip to Alice Springs - they've been invited to perform there by the wife (a shock for two of the three) of one of the performers. There's a heap of mincing, which is something that's put me off seeing it for all these years, but I felt it was time I saw this considering it's acclaim - and indeed that acclaim is deserved. Incredible performances, a lot of fun, and a movie that carries a lot of meaning and subtext. A must see.

8/10



Hold on, what is "mincing"?
I can't tell if this should influence my desire to see this film or not (I've seen parts of it but never the whole thing).

[Wooley]

I was bored senseless by the first Avatar film and don't intend to sit through another 3+ hours of that world/story.


Ya know, I was bored senseless by the trailer for Avatar and so I never saw it and can't believe it's back. And I won't be seeing these new ones either.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://media.tenor.com/Se2w48tARfAAAAAM/walking-acebking.gif or https://media.tenor.com/NzROIJsrCiYAAAAM/chopping-garlic-maangchi.gif

[Takoma11]

Hold on, what is "mincing"?
I can't tell if this should influence my desire to see this film or not (I've seen parts of it but never the whole thing).

Mincing is one way to describe a sort of stereotypical, feminized behavior by a gay man.

[Wooley]

‘Tár’ (2022)
Dir.: Todd Field
https://64.media.tumblr.com/8e809c2fc6c0259486d513bf4e6c0e32/a606802399f55797-0f/s1280x1920/1057b65f1ca715d29a239db2961cc442eb70ae60.gif

Wow, so much to unpack. It may take me days to process this film. Firstly - Cate Blanchett - what a performance, it is absolutely stellar. Blanchett plays Lydia Tár, a successful classical conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. This is possible career best territory. The control Blanchett has whether speaking English or German is utterly spellbinding. The audience is given absolute plausibility that we are witnessing a world leading, uber intellectual, driven, workaholic composer conductor. I bought it.

Next - the direction. It is meticulously crafted, so well researched, from everything like the classical music, scoring, orchestral arrangements, music conservatories to the modern facets of life as a high profile professional in Berlin. There are minute details placed in this film, both in dialogue and in plot drivers that are there to symbolize the character arc that Tár goes through – right up until the very last scene, in which little devices and props are used to convey the situation Tár finds herself in. Director Todd Field has pulled off a master work here. At it’s heart it’s a character study, but it’s also an extremely complex look at cancel culture, modernity, the high brow versus the low brow, institutionalised behaviour, abuse of power, separating art versus the artist, politicising art, personal morals regarding art and so much more. Much of the first half of the film feels like a European film, (perhaps to keep in tune with the location), as there are long scenes that are dialogue heavy and static cameras with barely any action to speak of; but the film is teaching the viewer about the lead character all the time and it demands heavy concentration. Fans of directors like Darren Aronofsky, Ruben Ostlund and Pablo Larrain may well love this film.

There is one long take scene that is so well directed and acted that the tension and angst is almost uncomfortable to watch. Other scenes are straying into psychological horror territory as the viewer is almost put inside the mind of the lead character and perhaps living a realisation of her actions. Blanchett is absolutely magnetic, intense, captivating and steals every scene.

Incredible film.

9/10

4.5

I'm really starting to get excited about seeing this.

[Wooley]

Mincing is one way to describe a sort of stereotypical, feminized behavior by a gay man.

Ah. I did not know that. And I was too busy at work to look it up. :D

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/Ac3imOo.png?2

I laughed, I cried, I was filled with cheer. Best Christmas movie ever?
9/10

[Fabulous]

Thief (1981)

3

https://www.themoviedb.org/t/p/original/tNozvfZPe8oaVcM2y8t74HLD77w.jpg

[Captain Terror]

I laughed, I cried, I was filled with cheer. Best Christmas movie ever?
9/10

I may or may not have googled this to confirm that it was a real film. :shifty:

[Torgo]

https://i.imgur.com/Ac3imOo.png?2

I laughed, I cried, I was filled with cheer. Best Christmas movie ever?
9/10Please, please let this be real!

[WHITBISSELL!]

I may or may not have googled this to confirm that it was a real film. :shifty:I may or may not agree with you.

[Captain Steel]

Billy Rose's Jumbo (1962)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Poster_-_Billy_Rose's_Jumbo.jpg


I'd seen documentaries about Jumbo the elephant that were absolutely fascinating (and heart breaking) so I was looking forward to seeing his story told in this movie.

I was disappointed to find there is absolutely nothing about the real life Jumbo in this film (so points off for not telling any of the real story about the title character). In this movie "Jumbo" is just a non-specific elephant that belongs to the circus in the story... I'm not even sure if it's even supposed to be the same elephant as the real one that was ultimately owned by P.T. Barnum. The real Jumbo was an African elephant, but the one in this movie is an Indian elephant.

https://images.static-bluray.com/reviews/8956_4.jpg

The movie is based on a stage play and still comes off that way. It almost plays like a series of colorful vaudeville skits (or more accurately circus performances) with a loose plot interspersed between acts & musical numbers. As a musical it's top notch, as a story there's not much to it. The entertainment factor lies in all the acts & costumes you get to see. There IS an elephant and he does some tricks, but he hardly rates as title material. This would be a good movie to keep kids entertained.

3

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Lean_on_Pete_poster.jpg
By A24 - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5340300/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=55571524


Lean on Pete - (2017)

I'd be happy if this appeared on the Mofo Top 100 Movies of the 2010s Countdown, but it's a tall order. Absolutely loved watching this as much the 2nd time as I did the 1st - Charlie Plummer is a wonderful young talent. His lonely struggles with his father, and later with racehorse owner Del (Steve Buscemi) are so real and grounded it's easy to get lost in this film's world. The kind of movie that really invites you in to experience the emotions of the main protagonist - especially with him being a young guy who falls in love with horses destined to be put down, and one who tries to save Pete. This young guy - Charley Thompson - faces tragedies that come on top of an already precarious existence with his broke father, and he faces a fight to survive physically, let alone psychologically. It's the metaphysical equivalent of climbing a sheer cliff face, and we're with Charley every step of the way. Plummer really brings it home, as do all facets of Lean on Pete - it's sound, sight and direction by Andrew Haigh.

8/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/Lifeofdavidgaleposter.jpg
By Movieposter.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12487804

The Life of David Gale - (2003)

The Life of David Gale has numerous problems, not least of which is the casting of Kevin Spacey as a convicted rapist and murderer on death row. "He fits the role perfectly!" you might be thinking, but this film is a 'proving his innocence' thriller with Kate Winslet playing an integrity-bound journalist searching for the truth. You'll never be on this guy's side, just by virtue of who is playing him. In any event, I guessed what the twist was going to be in the last act far too easily. David Gale (Spacey) is university professor and anti-death penalty crusader who appears to have been framed for rape and murder. A previous rape set-up had him divorced, estranged from his child, and an unemployed alcoholic before the murder rap came - and the victim was his best friend - fellow crusader Constance Harraway (Laura Linney). If you stop and think, you'll figure out where all of this is going. Hale's story by itself is interesting, but the thriller it makes up a part of is kind of hackneyed and tired. Melissa McCarthy makes an appearance (an early one for her) and absolutely nails it - a weird comedic moment for a film like this - that is why it has the extra 0.5.

5.5/10

[Fabulous]

3 Godfathers (1948)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/4XvGw14wPnPCJZbfuLjVO5TMqkx.jpg

[ScarletLion]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Lean_on_Pete_poster.jpg
By A24 - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5340300/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=55571524


Lean on Pete - (2017)

I'd be happy if this appeared on the Mofo Top 100 Movies of the 2010s Countdown, but it's a tall order. Absolutely loved watching this as much the 2nd time as I did the 1st - Charlie Plummer is a wonderful young talent. His lonely struggles with his father, and later with racehorse owner Del (Steve Buscemi) are so real and grounded it's easy to get lost in this film's world. The kind of movie that really invites you in to experience the emotions of the main protagonist - especially with him being a young guy who falls in love with horses destined to be put down, and one who tries to save Pete. This young guy - Charley Thompson - faces tragedies that come on top of an already precarious existence with his broke father, and he faces a fight to survive physically, let alone psychologically. It's the metaphysical equivalent of climbing a sheer cliff face, and we're with Charley every step of the way. Plummer really brings it home, as do all facets of Lean on Pete - it's sound, sight and direction by Andrew Haigh.

8/10



I god damn love that film. Though I never could work out if Aunt Margy is his real birth mother?

[EndlessDream]

Avatar: The Way of Water is an epic sci-fi spectacle that continues the story of Jake Sully and Neytiri, who now have raised five children to young adulthood, a couple of which were adopted. As the leader of the Na'Vi, Jake is being hunted by humans, so he decides to find a new home to keep his family safe. They settle in with a new tribe on an island nation and learn their way of life. Some new conflicts start and some old ones come back to haunt the Sully family.

Like the first Avatar, The Way of Water is a hugely impressive technical achievement that is best seen in 3D on a large screen. The special effects are so good that it's hard to believe how little of it is physically real. The higher frame rate adds to the overall fidelity and I assume it helps blend the different visual effects together. Plus, I think less motion blur in a 3D movie is easier on your eyes.

The story in Way of Water feels pretty similar to the original, as we get to watch the main characters explore an alien culture and eventually they have to defend it from humans trying to unethically harvest its resources. Where it excels though is in balancing its large cast of characters. Everyone is given moments to shine and I was emotionally invested in each of their journeys by the end. It made the big dramatic moments effective for me.

I was starting to feel the length of the movie halfway through, but it all pays off in an amazing last hour. Cameron has a great eye for large-scale action and the climax here might be his crowning achievement. Despite how much is going on, it's always easy to see moments of great impact.

Overall, I really enjoyed Avatar: The Way of Water and I'll buy a ticket for as many sequels as James Cameron ends up making.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fthatshelf.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F08%2Fimage-2-e1629419835546.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=7cf643018cd8129ce3782cf02b6d58652c3ea7e70c82a90124efa59ec70cd60e&ipo=images

The Night House, 2020

Beth (Rebecca Hall) is a high school teacher who is reeling from the sudden death by suicide of her husband, Owen (Evan Jonigkeit). As she begins to sort through his things, Beth discovers a series of disturbing items, such as photos of other women, and strange floor plans related to their home. Suffering from strange dreams and visions, Beth tries to unravel her husband's secrets.

This is a solid haunted house tale, anchored by the always-reliable Rebecca Hall. In the end, though, it did leave me a bit wanting.

My only real issues came in the very last act and where the film concludes. But up to that point, the movie is full of disturbing and satisfying imagery. There are oodles of spooky things to be found here: floor plans mixed with notes about ancient mazes; fetishized statues with nails driven through them; stereos that turn themselves on in the middle of the night.

Hall is very strong as Beth, and she captures a kind of jangly impulsiveness that allows you to not sit there saying "Why didn't she just XYZ?". It's a performance that doesn't make you question, for example, why Beth doesn't call the police at a certain moment, or why she walks away from a seemingly strange and important clue about her husband's state of mind.

I also enjoyed Sarah Goldberg in a supporting role as Beth's best friend and co-worker, Claire. In a movie like this, you basically suspect that anyone might be a villain or an accomplice, and I really enjoyed Goldberg's take on the character. Likewise Vondie Curtis-Hall as Beth's lakeside neighbor, Mel, and Stacy Martin as a woman who looks a lot like Beth and who may have been having an affair with Owen.

The character of Owen is tricky. From the first minutes of the movie, he is no longer alive. What we do see of his is in glimpses of old home videos and distorted voices or visions. Jonigkeit is certainly handsome and does a good job of looking dark and mysterious, but knowing so little about him made it hard to know how to feel about the way he was shown in the visions.

Unfortunately, as things begin to get explained in the last act, the film lost me a bit. While I'd been along for the ride up to this point, I started having some bothersome questions. (MAJOR SPOILERS!!!!)We come to learn that the demon or dark entity that is haunting Beth has made itself known to Owen, in the form of trying to get him to kill Beth. Owen is aware enough to decide that this is a dark spirit, and uses mazes, spells, and other trickery to murder women in Beth's place. Um, okay. So he goes from not believing in "that stuff" to believing it so much that he will kill multiple people, but never actually talk to his wife about it?

And then we also get in the last act that the creature is able to be both seen and felt by Beth, to the point that it almost gets her to kill herself. This is where I get really confused: this thing spent months trying to get Owen to do the job, but why? If the end game is just to have Beth dead, why not go to work on her? By her own admission she was the one who had always suffered from serious depression issues.

And finally, I find it kind of amazing that Owen was able to get away with his murders so easily. He was doing things like going after women from a bookstore where he frequently shopped. He was going after women in a specific age bracket and look. You're telling me that half a dozen women who look like Rebecca Hall went missing in a short period of time and it wasn't huge news to the entire country?

I know this sounds like nitpicking, but all these questions just started popping up for me in the last 20 minutes or so.

Definitely an easy recommend for any horror fans, but I wish I'd been more satisfied with the last half hour.

3.5

[SpelingError]

30th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

Dead Man's Letters (1986) - 5

My interest for this film was piqued once I learned that some elements of it were reminiscent of Tarkovsky's Stalker, my #1 film of all time. When I first watched it, I felt it was a lesser Stalker (though still very good), but after I revisited it a couple years later, I ended up giving it a 10/10 and it landed in my all-time top 20. The more I think about it, the more I wish that other people would know about it.

The main thing which keeps me coming back to this film is how well it maintains such a bleak and depressing atmosphere throughout its entirety. Most people in this film had a nihilistic view on life and doubted that there was any hope for humanity. This seemed to be the prevailing attitude amongst most of the survivors we saw in the film except for the main character, Larsen, who believed that other surviving humans existed outside the central bunker and the town he lived in and that their species wasn't doomed. While much of his arc consisted of him trying to convince the people he encountered of his theories to no avail (which made for a number of compelling exchanges, like when a man referenced how Jesus called humanity doomed when he saved them), another handful of scenes featured several intimate moments which detailed his mental state, delivered by the way of the letters he wrote to his son. While the biting knowledge that his son might never read them lingered over these scenes, I found them to be pretty compelling in and of themselves. The monologue of how an operator was unable to make it to a computer in time to prevent the first missile strike since he was slowed down by a cup of coffee in his hands stuck out as a brilliant slice of dark humor. It was easily the standout in that regard. I do think a couple bits can come off as fluffy, like Larson reciting a story of how seeing a cow run over by a locomotive when he was little gave him recurring nightmares of a black locomotive just to describe the distance and the insecurities he felt for his son, but for the most part, I think that aspect worked really well, so in the grand scheme of things, I didn't mind it much.

Ultimately, Larsen's emotional conflict came to a compelling culmination. Allowing the children in the orphanage to be admitted into the central bunker would help pave way for humans to live on, as he believed they still could. They're young and, when they get older, they'll be able to produce more offspring. They represent the next generation of humans. Since the central bunker rejected them from entering and since the kids Larsen saw inside the Children's Department of the central bunker were all sick and injured though (I don't think his reaction upon seeing them was as much a response to his son Eric as I initially thought as much as it had to do with his fears of the potential outcome of the children in the area), this made it likely that an entire generation of people could be lost, potentially dooming humanity in the process. However, by caring for them in the final act, they were eventually healthy enough to venture out into the landscape to hopefully find the surviving humans which Larsen fervently believed in, making this the only significant impact he had on the town. Granted, I'm not holding my breath that their journey is going to lead to anything (I don't think the ending is meant to be optimistic so much as a last resort), but regardless of whether they live or die, Larsen still gave them a chance at finding somewhere else to live, a chance they surely wouldn't have had at the central bunker or if they had remained in the town.

Lopushansky is often thought of as a protégé of Tarkovsky. I see these influences in the style of this film, like some of the long takes, or the ethereal beauty to be found in certain devastated landscapes. The most significant influence is with the sepia filter which permeates throughout most of the film. This was reminiscent of the first act and the ending of Stalker (which, curiously enough, had undertones of a nuclear disaster looming over it). Overall, I found this choice of filter to be a great touch. I was initially bothered by the occasional usages of a blue/purple filter for some scenes, but though this choice is indeed noticeable every time it comes up in the film, I warmed up to it when I rewatched the film. It probably wasn't necessary, but it didn't distract me either. It's just more of the film's atmospheric design. Beyond the sepia filter though, beauty could be found in several other shots in the film, like an early tracking shot which followed Larsen out of the museum and eventually revealed the full extent to the destruction and immensity of it, a hypnotic shot of an emotionally defeated Larsen as a trickle of water ran down his head and body, and the climactic shots in the library where the camera pulled back and revealed the massive scope of the room. The film's style was packed with several types of greatness and it stuck out as one of the film's main strengths.

Overall, I feel no shame in being an ardent supporter of this film. The more I think about it, the more sad I feel that it isn't regularly considered to be a classic of Soviet cinema since I think it holds up with the best of the country's output. Here's hoping it eventually grows in popularity though.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcriterion-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcarousel-files%2F5a262a229831ab3d176356131af1fca5.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=82464d1b3c094074f5c9143b9ff9bc732d7ac9b26f15aac3fadbba7c9bbbb4c0&ipo=images

The Island of Lost Souls, 1932

Edward Parker (Richard Arlen) is the victim of a shipwreck. He's picked up by a ship, but the temperamental captain forces him off the boat and onto a small island where he's taken in by Dr. Moreau (Charles Laughton) and his assistant, Montgomery (Arthur Hohl). But the island is filled with strange men (and one woman named Lota (Kathleen Burke)) who seem to be not fully human. And on this island, all of the strange creatures speak with fear of Dr. Moreau's "House of Pain."

This is a creepy, icky adaptation of the novel The Island of Dr. Moreau. It's been way too long since I read the original novel to critique it as an adaptation, but overall I found it very effective.

There are a lot of ways that the events and themes in the film can be read. The aspect that most struck me was the cruelty that people can be capable of when they set a goal and become determined to see it through. Moreau has discovered a method for turning animals into people (or something like people). But why? His process is time-consuming, dangerous, and physical and psychological torture for its victims. There are plenty of real-life example of past and present experimentation on people and animals for reasons that do not at all seem to justify the cruelties involved.

Laughton is imposing and despicable as Moreau. As the film goes on, it becomes more and more clear that he's hoping to get Edward (who is engaged to be married), to have sex with Lota. The entire scenario is uncomfortable and sad.

I had mixed feelings about the way that the "humanized" creatures are also at times racialized. The manner of speech that they are given and the rituals we are shown are evocative of stereotypes about tribal people, and at the same time meant to illustrate how primitive they are and how sub-human. Lota, despite not actually being a real human, slots neatly into the "naive native" trope, complete with skimpy outfit and "primitive" sexual desires.

I was also a bit put off by the ending, in which it is implied that all of the creatures on the island are being burned to death, and the "civilized" white protagonists just sail away from it all, saying it's for the best. I found this a gross note to end on, as it shows a real lack of empathy for the suffering of those on the island, whose only crime was being the victim of a man willing to torture them in the name of "science"..

Even with those complaints, though, this was an effective sci-fi thriller. Arlen is a bit dull as the lead, but the story around him is compelling and horrifying.

4

[Gideon58]

https://theautry.org/sites/default/files/styles/zoom/public/events/gidget_lobby_card_columbia_pictures.jpg?itok=uXUTwSSW


3

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmountainx.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F01%2Fninth2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=3092e59299187958a696826edbbd3a30decb6cb559c1a7af941f809e60fdea4d&ipo=images

The Ninth Configuration, 1980

At the close of the Vietnam War, a former marine named Kane (Stacy Keach) arrives at a remote castle that's acting as a mental institution for members of the military. Kane becomes very interested in a man named Cutshaw (Scott Wilson), a military astronaut who bailed out of a shuttle launch after having a breakdown in the moments leading up to the launch. As he tries to help the men in his care, Kane begins having strange visions and questioning his own mental wellbeing.

Basically my only experience with this film over the years has been the really famous image from it of the astronaut on the moon facing a crucified Jesus Christ. It's one heck of an image, and I've always been intrigued by the film. Ultimately I really enjoyed it, even if I'm not 100% sure it achieves the kind of closure on its themes that it wants to.

Keach makes for a very engaging lead. He strikes just the right note of authority and empathy as he deals with the eccentric inhabitants of the castle. Wilson is also a highly sympathetic character---I really felt his anguish at having experienced a deep existential crisis when faced with the prospect of traveling to (and possibly dying in) the emptiness of space. I found his monologue around that moment to be very powerful.

Imagery-wise, the film has a lot more up its sleeve than just the astronaut/Jesus tableau (though, yes, it is the standout). There are some great, disturbing flashes that Kane sees in his dreams. There are some really great shots using extreme angles, showing how Kane sees the inmates and how they see him.

When it comes to the plot and the film's themes of loneliness and resolution and healing, the movie goes to mostly some very expected places, but it's not unsatisfying.

I often feel torn when movies take place in mental institutions. Too often, it feels as if the film is having fun at the expense of people who are mentally ill, making them totally outlandish characters and getting cheap laughs out of their eccentricities. This film does fall into that trap quite a bit, for example featuring an inmate named Reno (Jason Miller) who is determined to put on Shakespearean productions starring dogs. Miller has good comedic timing, and, sure, a line about wanting an actor to play Laertes, "a Pekingese", is funny. But there was a bit too much of it for my taste. I can appreciate that these characters add to the surreal nature of the hospital's environment, but at times it's too glib of a way to treat people with serious mental health problems.

The film also features a long, excruciating and memorable sequence where Cutshaw sneaks out to a bar where he is recognized and then harassed by a biker gang. When Kane shows up to try and rescue him, the two are subjected to a series of assaults and humiliations. The tension in the scene is not just about the safety of Cutshaw and Kane--it's about wondering how far the two men can be bullied and pushed before one of them snaps. Part of you begs for violence, to see these awful people put in their place. But another part of you knows that for Cutshaw or Kane, such violence would be a point of no return.

Overall this was an engaging thriller with sympathetic performances and some very impactful moments.

4

[Wooley]

This is gonna be long, sorry.

https://i.imgur.com/wtgVoMd.jpg?2

Finally.
When I saw the trailer for this film a few years ago I was struck and vowed to see it. I even recommended to a friend that they check it out even though I had not seen it myself. And then things and stuff and stuff and things. And it sat in my queue and I thought about watching it many times but I really had the feeling it was going to be special so I kept putting it off for the right moment.
And then Sight & Sound, blah, blah, blah.
So here we are.
Finally.

I chose the poster above because all other posters are spoilers. Whether or not they spoil the plot is irrelevant, they spoil the way the film reveals Heloise, which is one of the many wonderful things about this film. It is a disservice to one's self to see Heloise before Sciamma is ready for you to. Thus, this "alternate" poster.
There are a lot of things I could say about this film, and I've only seen it once, though I expect that will be remedied shortly. For one, I need to decide just how good I think it really is and I really can't right now. There's too much involved. There is how the movie made me feel which was powerful enough to override almost any criticism I might have. There is all the Sight & Sound baggage which, try as I might, I was not able to compartmentalize, I could not help but watch this movie comparing it every minute to the greatest films ever made. Which is not only not fair to the film but it kinda messes up the viewing experience a little. And then there is the film itself, what is actually on the screen. That's a lot to juggle.

Let me just say what I felt about this movie and then we can go from there. It is beautiful. It is so intentional. It is emotionally powerful. I mean it knocked my ******* socks off.
The photography, lighting, design, editing, and sound/music (combined here and if you see it you'll know why) is gorgeous every freaking step of the way. There are so many shots that are just stunners and the color palette is... I am genuinely having a hard time coming up with a word... it's just perfect that's all I can quite get out. There's gotta be a word for when every color perfectly matches the feeling and mood that it should evoke but does it without being garish or attracting too much attention, it just is. The compositions are excellent, and this brings me to the point of intention actually.
There is so much intention in this film where you can't help but notice how everything on the screen or not on the screen, heard or unheard, is for a reason. This movie is about Love, make no mistake about it, but it is also about painting. And Sciamma makes a point to compose frames that look like paintings of the time.

https://i.imgur.com/pQFsv9u.jpg

I mean, come on. Look at that. The movie is like that so much of the time where the characters seem to step into a painting at the exact second that something emotionally meaningful is happening. But it's subtle, you are not beaten over the head with it at all, it's just there and then it's gone, there and then it's gone.
The film has no score and all the (sparse) music is diegetic, which really grounds you in the space the characters are in. You hear nothing they do not hear. So when the music comes, it has purpose and it has power. The first time it's kinda shocking and it's very clever, a great scene. But the second time will knock you on your ass or you have no soul. Seriously. I won't talk about the third.
All of this brings me back to intention. Everything is intentional yet unobtrusive. The men on the boat in the second scene of the film are barely seen, you could not describe their faces, their presence, nay their existence, is unimportant. Yet when her package goes overboard, Marianne, on whom the camera has remained focused goes overboard after it with such suddenness, determination, and fearlessness and sits quietly shivering in the boat without complaint the rest of the way, the tone for the whole film is already set. One of the very first lines in the film, spoken offscreen but in the foreground, is "Take time to look at me." And you know, right then, that that is what this movie is about.
Somehow Sciamma uses this intention to keep you exactly where she wants you such that a movie with no "action" made me gasp out loud in my living room at a moment that was nothing more than a sudden small action with one hand by a character. Out loud, I swear.
If I have a criticism of the film, and I'm not totally sure I do, there could be two. There was one shot I did not care for, which actually says a lot about the film. Every shot was so perfect that to me one stood out because it didn't feel perfect. I'm sure it would be fine in almost any other movie. The other thing, more significantly, was the performance of Noemi Merlant, who has received tremendous praise for this role. In a group of four wonderfully strong but subtle performances, I felt that maybe hers lacked a little subtlety for this film. Her facial expressions sometimes seemed a little too obvious for the character I felt she was at all the other moments. It might be a nit to pick but again, in a film with this much intention and nuance, the slightest thing could stand out and this did to me.

Lastly, I would just like to share how this movie made me feel.
About 2/3-3/4 of the way through the film I texted my friend, to whom I had suggested the film years earlier, this exact statement (I will cut and paste it from our text for authenticity):
"This film has actually made me realize that I’ve forgotten what it’s like to be in love."
And honestly, it has had me thinking about it ever since. Love, I mean. It's such a powerful and beautiful portrait of love. And I am a middle-aged divorced man who kinda thinks of that ship as having sailed. But man, this made me remember.

Alas, I cannot say what I think about the movie in an all-time context. Had I seen it before the S&S poll, I think I could have, but I can't now, not without seeing it at least another time and probably not soon. I need distance from both my initial reaction to the film and from the controversy surrounding its quick canonization. My expectations were so high to begin with. And then the list comes out? And then the backlash comes? And I watch the movie right then? That's a lot to bring to a viewing. And, to be honest, I had an expectation in my mind, based on the trailer and my own perspective, as to what this movie was going to be like and it was both like and very unlike what I expected.
In the end, this movie moved me greatly, both with its story and themes and its execution. The love in the film, both romantic and platonic, are truly powerful but so is the art direction and production design and cinematography and editing and direction and acting and sound/music.
It's an awfully good film. I'll leave it there for now.

[Captain Terror]

Good stuff, Woolz. I've seen three Sciamma films so far, you've just convinced me to make it 4.

[Wooley]

Good stuff, Woolz. I've seen three Sciamma films so far, you've just convinced me to make it 4.

Now I wanna watch the other three.

Edit: It is worth mentioning that there are other major themes and wonderful things in the film that I had to leave out entirely because of how much one could say about the film and just run on for the whole freakin' page.

[Tramuzgan]

A Town Called Panic. Very good, but I did not have the drugs necessary to fully appreciate it.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.tmdb.org%2Ft%2Fp%2Foriginal%2FkpRwlJ2xGEBRAbv2YWPsWdlYISx.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=4a07b4596a7c7864eb4333e88977c4eca93727c9cd9010c02a3415141fea5010&ipo=images

The Apology, 2022

Darlene (Anna Gunn) is preparing to host Christmas for her relatives. The holiday is a hard one, however, because it is the 19th anniversary of her daughter Sally's (Holland Bailey) disappearance. As a Christmas Eve snowstorm blows in, Darlene's brother-in-law, Jack (Linus Roache) unexpectedly arrives. At first claiming that he's there to patch up long-alienated feelings with the rest of the family, Jack soon reveals that he might know something about Sally's disappearance all those years ago . . .

This is a frustrating movie, because there were a lot of things I liked about it, and yet there is a fundamental flaw in the main dynamic between Darlene and Jack.

Gunn gives a really good performance as Darlene, a woman who has been worn down by years of worry and torment over the loss of her child. An alcoholic who was a serious drinker when Sally disappeared, she has been sober for almost 20 years. At one point, Jack asks her what would make her "whole" again. After thinking for a moment, Darlene answers that nothing could, not even the return of her daughter, because she has lost 20 years with her. At best, she can just hope that she has done everything she could to find her child.

Roache makes Jack very, very easy to hate. As he spoons out details of what he knows about what happened to Sally, he constantly centers the narrative on himself. He frames his motivations as benevolence----telling Darlene things she wants to know---but it's clearly something he's doing for himself. At times, this gives the film a darkly comedic tone. When a distraught, angry Darlene locks Jack in the cellar (the power is out), he yells up at her, "You can't leave me here! I get panic attacks! Panic attacks!".

But a fundamental problem with this movie is that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Jack claims to have been motivated by a recent interview Darlene gave, feeling that he needed to come clean about what he knows. But every word out of Jack's mouth and every action shows a person who is completely self-centered. Not for a single second do I believe that this man would actually feel guilt, much less risk his reputation by admitting to having done wrong. It would almost have made more sense of he was presented as a sociopath, taunting Darlene as part of a plan to kill her or something. But that's not the scenario. The film plays this as a genuine desire to confess, and it makes no sense with the character we see.

What really ends up saving the movie is Janeane Garofalo as Darlene's neighbor, Gretchen. She enters the film in the last act and becomes an ally and sounding board for Darlene. While Jack as a character doesn't feel real, Gunn and Garofalo have great chemistry and you instantly believe that these women are friends. There's something really great about how both women make this little eye-contact and shrug when Jack implies that Gretchen is actually gay and that's why she spends so much time with Darlene. These two people are clearly close, long-time friends and that grounds the last act.

Despite being on Shudder, this one feels like more of a drama/thriller. The performances are good, but the premise itself has some serious flaws. A decent last act keeps it afloat, but can't quite make it into something I'd strongly recommend.

3

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.explicit.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.8fePTZyxyB5LmzVIyedGogHaEc%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=b5e17083c3c7d7ad04ec5948f3ff3c514e05eb2bf60634d0726aa82c50de79c7&ipo=images

Birdboy: The Forgotten Children, 2015

On an island whose ecosystem has been ravaged by an industrial explosion, a group of young animals dreams of a better life. Dinky (Andrea Alzuri), Sandra (Eba Ojanguren), and Little Fox (Josu Cubero) all want to run away. Dinky in particular is friends with Birdboy, who does not speak but is possessed by a bird-like demon due to the explosion.

This is a very rough story to watch, something not at all helped (and in fact made a bit worse) by the child-like, cheerful animation style used to bring it to life.

The film's first two-thirds shows us the lives of the different animal children. We see Dinky and her depression as her disapproving parents shower love and praise on her little brother while judging her every decision. There is a little pig-boy named Zachariah who looks after his disabled mother, who is addicted to drugs. Her addiction manifests in the form of a spider who (disgustingly) climbs out of the mothers nostrils to berate her son for not giving her the "medicine". Birdboy, meanwhile, tends to a secret grotto where he cares for a large tree that houses birds and produces mysterious glowing golden acorns.

In the last act, the three little ones decide to make good on their plan to escape the island. Their attempt is filled with tragedy. Heck, even the PVC duck flotation ring they plan to use has his own horrifying backstory. Along the way they come across a ruthless band of creatures knows as the Forgotten Children living in a landfill and viciously guarding their resources.

At times, the pessimism of the film is almost a little too much. That said, there are glimmers of hope and kindness among the emotional devastation, such as when Zachariah decides to finally fight back against his mother's demon, or when Dinky brings Birdboy medication to control his inner monster.

This is not an easy watch, and its themes are very heavy, but it is well-made and powerful.

4

[Torgo]

After Yang - 4

One of the coolest opening credit sequences I've seen in a long time, which features a synchronized dance contest, kicks off this otherwise subdued and introspective but no less involving sci-fi tale. Yang is an android that parents Jake and Kyra bought to look after their adopted daughter, Mika. As a "culutural model," Yang also helps Mika embrace her Chinese heritage. After something unexpected occurs, the movie changes from a futuristic family comedy into a thoughtful meditation on memory, human connection and our transitory existences.

I enjoy sci-fi movies with lasers and killer robots as much as the next guy, but it's nice to see one that's just as compelling without such tropes and that studies technology that has no apocalyptic ramifications. Instead, the focus is on Yang's memory bank, which the parents explore to perceive his and their family's stories. Jake, played by Colin Farrell in one of his best performances, is a tea salesman, and his conversation with Yang in which he believes tea contains the experiences of the person who made it is one of the movie's most thought-provoking moments. The memory playback scenes sometimes rewind for a few seconds to replay moments important to Jake or Kyra, which is an effect I haven't seen anything like before. There's also the 3D "memory map," which recalls the space map in video game No Man's Sky and ends up being a fascinating means of depicting the mind. Other visual touches like the movie not making it clear how far ahead in the future it takes place or where it was filmed are other nice touches. After all, our fascinations with the past, our mortality and our connections with others both missed and everlasting will likely never go out of style, and it's doubtful that technology will neither provide satisying answers to such questions nor provide worthy substitutes. In short, I'd describe the movie as a more than worthy attempt to turn the Talking Heads song "Once in a Lifetime" into a feature-length movie. Oh, and again, it's a nice change of pace to see one in this genre in which the fate of world is not at stake.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gbhbl.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F10%2FFinal-Destination-Pic-10.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=45d42022c9bec272a847602ac11f06d102b50895697bce3d0ab7ce5351167ac2&ipo=images

Final Destination, 2000

High schooler Alex (Devon Sawa) is supposed to go on a school trip to Paris, but a vivid nightmare about the plane crashing leads him to freak out and get kicked off of the plane along with several other students and a teacher. When the plane does actually crash, Alex comes under some scrutiny for having predicted the tragedy. But things get even weirder when the survivors begin to suffer unlikely accidents, and Alex starts to suspect that death is claiming those who escaped their fate on the flight.

There was more to this film than I'd expected there to be. I remember one slightly unfavorable review referring to it as mainly existing to showcase a series of Rube-Goldberg deaths. While this is, well, sort of true, there is enjoyment enough to make it a pleasant watch.

Sawa is an engaging enough lead, and I thought that he especially sold Alex's panic in the initial sequence on the airplane. As Alex notices more and more strange omens (like scorch marks on the plane's wing, or strange stippling around its door), his discomfort grows. As someone who (1) doesn't like flying and (2) unconsciously looks for "signs" when I'm stressed, the mounting tension of this sequence really resonated with me.

The supporting cast is fine. Seann William Scott is on board as the surprisingly easy-going Billy. Ali Larter is the love interest as Clear (did anyone else spend most of the movie thinking everyone was pronouncing "Claire" in a weird way? Just me?), a young woman who gets off of the plane because she believes Alex when he warns the passengers about his vision. Tony Todd swings through in a fun, 2-minute cameo as a mortician who enlightens Alex about the dangers of messing with Death's plans.

Unfortunately, the movie never really got me to a place where I was very engaged. All of the survivors are destined to die. And . . . .? There is some talk of continuing to cheat the "design", but how? It all stays kind of vague. There is literally one short sequence of Alex "death-proofing" a cabin (though he still has a kerosene lantern right next to his face?!), but that's about it. I know that the idea of unavoidable destiny is really scary, but it doesn't necessarily make for compelling viewing. Aside from Clear, the rest of the survivors are clearly canon fodder, and that makes it hard to stay invested in them aside from appreciating the intricacy of their deaths.

A decent teen horror flick.

3.5

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Lean_on_Pete_poster.jpg

I god damn love that film. Though I never could work out if Aunt Margy is his real birth mother?

Being as slow as I am, I never even thought of that - but it makes sense, yeah.

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Hobo-with-a-shotgun-movie-poster.jpg
By The poster art can or could be obtained from Alliance FilmsMagnet Releasing., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30660033

Hobo With a Shotgun - (2011)

When it comes to exploitation films that reference or pay homage to the most crazy and graphic of the 80s offerings, Hobo With a Shotgun is probably the best of all of them - or if not pretty close. It's as bizarre as it is graphic, and absolutely nothing is off limits. Be prepared for buckets of blood and every human organ - not to mention bones and flesh - as larger than life cartoonish characters with exaggerated traits explode onto the screen. Underneath the jacked up madness is a film that seems to understand what exploitation is (and was in the 1980s) all about - a guiding hand with impeccable comedic timing and measured sense of what a film of this kind can say while pushing the boundaries of certain taboos. I don't think I can rate a film of this kind any higher than 7.5 - so I'm introducing a new rating system where exploitation films like this are rated out of 7.5 instead of 10, and Hobo With a Shotgun gets top marks from me.

7.5/7.5

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/High_society1956_poster.jpg
By CineMaterial, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25185787

High Society - (1956)

Out of all the old musicals I've been watching, High Society isn't bad. It's better than the likes of GiGi, and seeing Frank Sinatra in one of these felt like a breath of fresh air - almost like another generation livening things up, even though Grace Kelly was far younger than most of the actors appearing in this. It was really great to see Louis Armstrong perform - and we see far too little of him in this film - I'd have liked to have seen a lot more of him. Classics like "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" and "Well, Did You Evah?" are heaps of fun. Always reminds me of Iggy Pop and Debbie Harry.

6/10

[ThatDarnMKS]

Babylon

https://boxd.it/3zfMtz

5/5

[Fabulous]

Larceny, Inc. (1942)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/nH41bJjCNLNmRJzobN42Hav6T1U.jpg

[LChimp]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb_pstLXEAEpJGG?format=jpg&name=900x900

[Allaby]

Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (2022) I enjoyed this for the most part. Screenplay was pretty good and I liked the performances. There were a couple things that didn't completely work for me, but overall this is an entertaining good time. 4

[Stirchley]

90476

Strange story. Despite this the two leads are excellent & the two supporting actor/actress are excellent too. I enjoyed it.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FM%2FMV5BMTQ3NTkwMzM3Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzU5ODY5OA%40%40._V1_FMjpg_UX1280_.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=97b590cafb6f11c9f242a18df55757bf469e0afa2b79d6c70a821f9dc1ea0ace&ipo=images

Warm Bodies, 2013

R (Nicholas Hoult) is a zombie living out his days at an abandoned airport, with occasional trips into the city to hunt for brains. On one such foray, he and his fellow undead come across a band of humans scavenging medicine. R kills and eats Perry (Dave Franco), but finds himself struck by a young woman named Julie (Teresa Palmer). Not entirely understanding why, he not only saves Julie from being eaten, he smuggles her back to the airport. Once there, Julie is shocked to learn that the undead still retain some of their humanity. And the more time they spend together, the more R emerges from his zombie state. But Julie's father (John Malkovich) is about to launch a military offensive to wipe out the zombies once and for all.

I was watching Dawn of the Dead (remake, not original) and it was bumming me out. So I took a lateral step from zombies-depressing to zombies-adorable. I think that this was my third viewing of this film, and it never fails to make me smile.

While the movie is not without its flaws, something that I love about it is the way that it maintains a lighthearted tone while introducing just enough emotional heft that it gives stakes to the story.

Hoult is very enjoyable as R, a character who starts as a slouching pile of grunts and single word exclamations, but slowly regains his human physicality and speech as the film goes on. Palmer is also good as Julie, even if her character is given some really dumb choices. Hoult and Palmer have a nice, easy chemistry to them, and it gives the movie a sweet heart of romance.

The supporting characters are also good. Lio Tipton plays Julie's best friend, Nora, and she has fun comic timing. Rob Corddry has some good moments as M, R's best friend at the airport. M's rehumanizing is a little more choppy than R's, but the character is funny.

Something that I always appreciate in movies that have romances is when they don't feel the need to vilify the characters' former relationships. It's really easy to saddle a woman with an abusive boyfriend, or to pair a man with a girlfriend who is shallow or berating. It makes it super easy to root for the main couple to get together. We largely get to know Perry through flashbacks, and I really like how humanized he is. In many ways, I think that his character is the most tragic of all the film. He endures a lot of loss, including watching his own father die. He is in love with Julie, but that is something that clearly covers up a lot of sadness and dissatisfaction. It is through Perry's memories that R first comes to love Julie, and I really like this element of the film.

For better or worse (for me it's mostly better), this is a very silly movie. Characters make choices that don't make a ton of sense. People randomly change their minds about things. The "rules" of the zombies are played with kind of fast and loose. But in the end: who cares? Certainly not me.

I could see this being a piece of forgettable fluff for many viewers. I find it really sweet and funny, and it's a great movie to be able to return to.

4

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYzg2NWNhOWItYjA3Yi00MzhhLTg4ZmItYzM3ZTIwN2U0ZGQ5XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMzEyMDQzNzY@._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.j pg


4

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.3_wIgmQ42yIeJD5S5zN02gHaEK%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=c08231830434c2232e031ef70e4db2b2dd27b2e76642e6cce1f5b6acad636822&ipo=images

Anomalisa, 2015

Michael (David Thewlis) is a corporate efficiency author doing a speaking tour that takes him to New York City. Despite his specialty being customer service, Michael experiences a serious lack of connection to those around him, including his wife and child. But one night at his hotel, Michael meets Lisa (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and the two experience an intense, one-night romance.

This is a strong little slice-of-life drama that asks questions about what it is that we need from each other as people, and what it means to try and shake ourselves out of unproductive routines.

Lisa is painfully, painfully insecure, and it's hard to tell if Michael is drawn to her because of this trait or in spite of it. Their very first scene together consists of her fangirling about meeting him, while simultaneously insisting that he not look at her because she's taken off her makeup. Both Lisa and Michael are boxed in by their own mental state, but the results of their fling are very different for each of them.

For me, the movie's power comes through mostly in the last act, which takes place the morning after Lisa and Michael meet.

What we see is that Lisa is still very much drawn to Michael, but for him she has started to become just another body. He starts to tune into her flaws, and seems to intentionally go about souring her for himself. His treatment of her is cruel and unnecessary, and of course she defaults to him being right about all of it.

I did like the animation style, which adds to the sense of a world where people are disconnected. Likewise, I really enjoyed the style choice of having every character aside from Michael and Lisa be voiced by a single actor (Tom Noonan). This is particularly fun when Michael watches a clip of My Man Godfrey on the hotel TV. But it also adds some emotional weight as the sound of characters' voices change based on Michael's perception.

A very interesting merging of story and format.

4

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.wixstatic.com%2Fmedia%2Fa35d78_2e01fd30ae4e43809aa1a193b3076baf~mv2.png&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=ea83b9d24b1c8f81686cd065736e63eadc5db97c552f596fb5b897fc69d15fc1&ipo=images

Dawn of the Dead, 2004

Nurse Ana (Sarah Polley) runs for her life when a zombie infection turns her husband and daughter into undead monsters. Ana ends up in a large shopping mall along with police officer Kenneth (Ving Rhames), the subdued Michael (Jake Weber), father-to-be Andre (Mekhi Phifer), and power-hungry security guard CJ (Michael Kelly). The mall only provides temporary relief, as a zombie horde forms outside the mall doors and tensions inside grow.

I think that if I hadn't seen (and really enjoyed) the original film, I probably would have enjoyed this remake/update a bit more. But when I think about the fundamental problems I had with it, it's not really a case of standing in the shadow of the original so much as it is stylistic choices that took me out of the film.

There is a lot to like here, including Polley's performance as Ana and the quasi-romance she develops with Michael. Likewise, I absolutely loved the subplot of the long-distance friendship that grows between Kenneth and a man named Andy (Bruce Bohne) who is trapped alone on the roof of his apartment building. The two communicate via large whiteboards, playing chess and generally bonding over their shared plight. Kelly is appropriately hateable as the security guard who enjoys having authority over the people who come into the mall.

There were also some pretty decent suspense sequences, such as when the group tries to get supplies to Andy in an unconventional manner.

But despite good work from the actors--including many more people I could name, like Kevin Zegers as a baby-faced security guard who helps wrest power away from CJ, or Jayne Eastwood as the driver of a big-rig who brings several people to safety--a lot of the choices of the film kept pulling me out of the moment.

I didn't mind at all the use of "When the Man Comes Around" in the opening credits, but just about every musical choice after that made me roll my eyes. The jazzy version of "Get Down with the Sickness" was a particular lowlight, but generally it was a series of missteps.

And I also wasn't a fan of how the action sequences were shot. Too many cuts, too many angle changes. I don't like it when I become hyper-aware of how a movie is being shot (unless it's a "wow--this is so cool!" kind of thing). I found the editing and filming of the action frustrating. I will grant the film that these sequences do have stakes, and there is some good suspense at points.

Finally, and I will stay really vague here, I did not appreciate the movie "ending" only to unfold more plot during the closing credits. It felt like a cheap trick and after the movie had really nailed the last 10 or so minutes, it felt like a slap in the face of the good emotional work done by the actors leading into the conclusion.

Credit where credit is due (mainly to the actors), but I can't imagine wanting to watch this one again.

3.5

[Deschain]

Dawn of the Dead is somehow still the best Snyder movie. :D

[Takoma11]

Dawn of the Dead is somehow still the best Snyder movie. :D

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F38.media.tumblr.com%2Fe5c3d8fe913a7359bf39e2dfaff13d9c%2Ftumblr_mrzy4qIdoi1qftbz5o1_ 500.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=82bc831c23485f6e2ef958a8ba9b9f72a55b8f3a5e1488c1b32243d889e6b91e&ipo=images

When the first terrible music choice came on I was like "Who directed this?! . . . Oh . . . "

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d1/Jack_Reacher_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2012/jack_reacher_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37219725

Jack Reacher - (2012)

Knowing how expertly Tom Cruise chooses his projects, screenplays and directors, I decided I'd give this a try. My mother was a big fan of the Jack Reacher books, and when she saw that the movie version was going to star Tom Cruise, she basically said "Oh, I see they've gone and completely ruined Jack Reacher." She told me that in the books Reacher was a monster of a man - an intimidating giant, which Cruise is surely not. Still, I've never read any of the books, so I was willing to take this film at face value - just an ordinary thriller. Well, taken that way Jack Reacher is actually very enjoyable. I liked it far more than just about any other person on the planet by the looks of it - Cruise injects his (somewhat different from the source) Reacher with confident smarts with a twinge of dark foreboding. The conspiracy story (reminding me a lot of JFK) works and getting Werner Herzog to play main villain Zek Chelovek was inspired. I hated this movie when it came out (without seeing it) - but coming at it from a new angle had me much more disarmed. I hear the second Reacher film was feculence, so I won't be going there. Christopher McQuarrie's Reacher did quite well however, as long as you're not a fan of the novels.

7.5/10

[SpelingError]

30th Hall of Fame (REWATCH)

An Autumn Afternoon (1962) - 3.5

When I watched this film a couple years ago, I had a lukewarm reaction to it and I began to wonder if I was starting to feel diminishing returns with Ozu's style. When Early Summer blew me away earlier this year though, I thankfully found out this wasn't the case. I was also pleased to enjoy this film a bit more with a rewatch, though while I wouldn't say I'm a fan of it, I wouldn't say my issue is a result of feeling burnout with Ozu's style.

Before I explain my reservation though, it's important to defend Ozu a bit to explain why this film isn't just a case of recycled themes from his earlier films. While a couple other films I've seen from him (Late Spring and Early Summer) have recurring themes regarding marriage and while both their endings convey similar moods, this film stands in contrast from them by taking a two-sided approach to the subject of marriage, showing both the pros and cons of it. On one hand, we get the usual scenes of various people urging Hirayama to marry off Michiko, in addition to The Gourd and his middle-aged daughter Tomoko acting as a what-if scenario of what could happen if Hirayama's and Michiko's situations don't change. On the other hand though, given the occasional bickering between Kōichi and Akiko and the discussions of one of Hirayama's acquaintances being ruined by marriage, it's apparent that, while Michiko may not necessarily be worse off if she gets married, it might not give her any further happiness than living with her father would. As a result, the habitual bittersweet ending works in a few ways this time. Of course, there's the surface level solemnity of families splitting apart. More importantly though, it's the implication that Michiko's emotional state while married might be the same as it was when she was with her father. Finally, there's Hirayama's reaction in the ending mimicking The Gourd's drunken behavior throughout the film, suggesting that marrying off Michiko might not have been enough to save Hirayama from meeting Sakuma's fate.

With that being said, while the potential for a great film is certainly here, that we don't get enough memorable scenes of Michiko provides a ceiling for my enjoyment of this. Throughout much of the first two-thirds of the film, her character is largely secondary to the conflicts and sub-plots of other characters in the film, whether you're referring to the banter of Hirayama's classmates, The Gourd's fractured relationship with his daughter, Kōichi's conflict with his wife, or Sakamoto. As I sort of alluded to up above, these characters aren't necessarily irrelevant to the plot (I'm not sure how to interpret the post-WW2 aspect though), but their sub-plots took too much time away from Michiko. As a result, once the film got to the inciting scene of Hirayama urging Michiko to get married, I didn't have anywhere near the amount of emotional investment in her character to be moved by her scenes as much as I could've. Plus, that her arc in the final act moved at somewhat of a fast clip didn't help in this regard.

And this is a bit of a shame as the film had more than enough potential elsewhere to stand with Ozu's best films. Due to the lack of focus on Michiko though, it didn't reach that level of greatness for me. Regardless, it's still a pretty good film as the strengths I discussed up above are more than enough to carry it. If you're a fan of Ozu, you should find plenty to enjoy here.

[Deschain]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d1/Jack_Reacher_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2012/jack_reacher_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37219725

Jack Reacher - (2012)

Knowing how expertly Tom Cruise chooses his projects, screenplays and directors, I decided I'd give this a try. My mother was a big fan of the Jack Reacher books, and when she saw that the movie version was going to star Tom Cruise, she basically said "Oh, I see they've gone and completely ruined Jack Reacher." She told me that in the books Reacher was a monster of a man - an intimidating giant, which Cruise is surely not. Still, I've never read any of the books, so I was willing to take this film at face value - just an ordinary thriller. Well, taken that way Jack Reacher is actually very enjoyable. I liked it far more than just about any other person on the planet by the looks of it - Cruise injects his (somewhat different from the source) Reacher is confident smarts with a twinge of dark foreboding. The conspiracy story (reminding me a lot of JFK) works and getting Werner Herzog to play main villain Zek Chelovek was inspired. I hated this movie when it came out (without seeing it) - but coming at it from a new angle had me much more disarmed. I hear the second Reacher film was feculence, so I won't be going there. Christopher McQuarrie's Reacher did quite well however, as long as you're not a fan of the novels.

7.5/10

The Amazon Prime show is quite fun and according to fans of the book more true to the source material.

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d1/Jack_Reacher_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2012/jack_reacher_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37219725

Jack Reacher - (2012)

Knowing how expertly Tom Cruise chooses his projects, screenplays and directors, I decided I'd give this a try. My mother was a big fan of the Jack Reacher books, and when she saw that the movie version was going to star Tom Cruise, she basically said "Oh, I see they've gone and completely ruined Jack Reacher." She told me that in the books Reacher was a monster of a man - an intimidating giant, which Cruise is surely not. Still, I've never read any of the books, so I was willing to take this film at face value - just an ordinary thriller. Well, taken that way Jack Reacher is actually very enjoyable. I liked it far more than just about any other person on the planet by the looks of it - Cruise injects his (somewhat different from the source) Reacher is confident smarts with a twinge of dark foreboding. The conspiracy story (reminding me a lot of JFK) works and getting Werner Herzog to play main villain Zek Chelovek was inspired. I hated this movie when it came out (without seeing it) - but coming at it from a new angle had me much more disarmed. I hear the second Reacher film was feculence, so I won't be going there. Christopher McQuarrie's Reacher did quite well however, as long as you're not a fan of the novels.

7.5/10I've read all 25 of the Reacher novels and I thought the same thing as your mom. They cast shrimpy Tom Cruise as someone who's supposed to be 6 foot 5 inches and around 250 pounds. But I found it to be surprisingly entertaining. But not as a Reacher story. Fans of the series need to blank their minds and view it strictly as a conspiracy thriller.

[WHITBISSELL!]

The Amazon Prime show is quite fun and according to fans of the book more true to the source material.I really need to watch that. But I'm afraid they're going to screw it up like the Syfy channel did with The Dresden Files.

[pahaK]

Dawn of the Dead is somehow still the best Snyder movie. :D

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/KeenTallGadwall-size_restricted.gif

[crumbsroom]

There are good Snyder movies?

[xSookieStackhouse]

well yesterday i seen avatar the way of water twice this time with my support in 4DX those sits that move around and spraying water and bubbles and lights etc lol and he really enjoyed it so he gave it a 5 rating_5
https://lumiere-a.akamaihd.net/v1/images/p_avatar_thewayofwater_97_v2_01ccadaf.png

[Fabulous]

Here Comes Mr. Jordan (1941)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/rN2zROo8LTTG7k7myDPF0oCZ60h.jpg

[Takoma11]

The Amazon Prime show is quite fun and according to fans of the book more true to the source material.

I really need to watch that. But I'm afraid they're going to screw it up like the Syfy channel did with The Dresden Files.


I'm not sure I'd say its much more true to the source material, but I really enjoyed it. Among other things, by making his character younger it gets around the icky book trope of him sleeping his way through every woman who crosses his path (including his best friend's daughter!).

Basically the TV series kept the stuff I liked about the books and got rid of 90% of what I thought was gross about them, so I enjoyed it very much.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-PFsPq_x2LHU%2FTrDLzc6SviI%2FAAAAAAAADhA%2FNCa-x__D3Y0%2Fs1600%2FChristine%2B2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=0145d32ca2c35f3d7bfbb8de50a0b1fef60c99468a81659d1b5152fe5b136859&ipo=images

Christine, 1983

Arnie (Keith Gordon) is a bit of a nerd and, despite his friendship with football star Dennis (John Stockwell), a frequent victim of bullying. He also has to deal with overbearing parents who criticize his every move. But things change when he buys and begins to restore an old car named Christine. It seems that Christine has a mind of her own, and anyone who gets between her and Arnie is in grave danger.

I saw this movie on TV many, many years ago and was not a big fan of it. This time around I liked it quite a bit more, mainly because I appreciated the friendship dynamic between Arnie and Dennis.

The strength of the film, overall, is in those relationships. Mainly the friendship between Arnie and Dennis, but also in the relationship between Arnie and Leigh (Alexandra Paul), the pretty new girl at his high school.

Something that the movie does very well is show that Arnie isn't some lost cause outsider. The big tragedy is that Arnie didn't need Christine for things to go well. Leigh agrees to go on several dates with him. Dennis is genuinely his friend. Arnie's skill at fixing cars even endears him to the grumpy man who runs the garage where Arnie keeps and works on Christine. Arnie undoubtedly is very put upon by both the school bullies and his parents, but all of that could have been salvaged with time and care.

Gordon is good as Arnie, transitioning from a shy nerd type to a more confident young man and then to something more deranged. Stockwell is very likable as Dennis, someone who has more social cache than Arnie, but still gets harassed by the bullying gang and gets passed over for a date. Paul is also good as Leigh, who likes Arnie but doesn't like his car and doesn't like the way that he treats her compared to the car.

The Arnie and Dennis friendship was my favorite part of the film, and so it's a shame when Dennis gets sidelined for a huge portion of the film. There's some good character work later in the movie as Dennis and Leigh begin to bond over their concern for Arnie.

I do have to say that I'm not really a car person. Car chases, killer cars---that stuff leaves me a bit cold. While I wouldn't say that I found the sequences of the car killing people silly, they also didn't do much for me.

A decent horror/thriller, but I wish they'd kept the relationships at the foreground.

3.5

[Wooley]

There are good Snyder movies?

Sucker Punch.

End of list.

[Wooley]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-PFsPq_x2LHU%2FTrDLzc6SviI%2FAAAAAAAADhA%2FNCa-x__D3Y0%2Fs1600%2FChristine%2B2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=0145d32ca2c35f3d7bfbb8de50a0b1fef60c99468a81659d1b5152fe5b136859&ipo=images

Christine, 1983

Arnie (Keith Gordon) is a bit of a nerd and, despite his friendship with football star Dennis (John Stockwell), a frequent victim of bullying. He also has to deal with overbearing parents who criticize his every move. But things change when he buys and begins to restore an old car named Christine. It seems that Christine has a mind of her own, and anyone who gets between her and Arnie is in grave danger.

I saw this movie on TV many, many years ago and was not a big fan of it. This time around I liked it quite a bit more, mainly because I appreciated the friendship dynamic between Arnie and Dennis.

The strength of the film, overall, is in those relationships. Mainly the friendship between Arnie and Dennis, but also in the relationship between Arnie and Leigh (Alexandra Paul), the pretty new girl at his high school.

Something that the movie does very well is show that Arnie isn't some lost cause outsider. The big tragedy is that Arnie didn't need Christine for things to go well. Leigh agrees to go on several dates with him. Dennis is genuinely his friend. Arnie's skill at fixing cars even endears him to the grumpy man who runs the garage where Arnie keeps and works on Christine. Arnie undoubtedly is very put upon by both the school bullies and his parents, but all of that could have been salvaged with time and care.

Gordon is good as Arnie, transitioning from a shy nerd type to a more confident young man and then to something more deranged. Stockwell is very likable as Dennis, someone who has more social cache than Arnie, but still gets harassed by the bullying gang and gets passed over for a date. Paul is also good as Leigh, who likes Arnie but doesn't like his car and doesn't like the way that he treats her compared to the car.

The Arnie and Dennis friendship was my favorite part of the film, and so it's a shame when Dennis gets sidelined for a huge portion of the film. There's some good character work later in the movie as Dennis and Leigh begin to bond over their concern for Arnie.

I do have to say that I'm not really a car person. Car chases, killer cars---that stuff leaves me a bit cold. While I wouldn't say that I found the sequences of the car killing people silly, they also didn't do much for me.

A decent horror/thriller, but I wish they'd kept the relationships at the foreground.

3.5

We're pretty close on this. I liked this more when I was very young, like when it came out and then less as I got into late teen-hood/college/adulthood, but a revisit a few years ago, particularly with my adult focus on what a film does well first, allowed me to get back right about to where you are.
As you say, the standout of the movie is Arnie and Dennis, that's what works best, although I thought Leigh was also strong, and the movie only really got into trouble when it wandered too far away from those relationships.
I did end up liking the car itself quite a bit, the way it was not only over-protective but also jealous and then Arnie's sort of unwinding with his newfound power. On the other hand, there were some things that didn't work that great for me, if I remember, that dragged the movie back from being a really good one.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/514HF4MXVML._AC_SY580_.jpg


Umpteenth re-watch- Ever since I was a kid, I couldn't go to sleep on Christmas Eve until I watched this movie. I don't know what it is exactly about this movie that entrances me the way it does, but everything here works for me...even that odd number that Danny Kaye does called "Choreography." The movie is closing in on 70 years old, but it's still my favorite Christmas movie. 4

[Citizen Rules]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/514HF4MXVML._AC_SY580_.jpg


Umpteenth re-watch- Ever since I was a kid, I couldn't go to sleep on Christmas Eve until I watched this movie. I don't know what it is exactly about this movie that entrances me the way it does, but everything here works for me...even that odd number that Danny Kaye does called "Choreography." The movie is closing in on 70 years old, but it's still my favorite Christmas movie. rating_4I never seen White Christmas until just a few years ago. I'm watching it tonight.

[sawduck]

The Banshees of Inisherin 8.5/10
A beautifully directed movie set in my home country of Ireland. The acting by all of the main players is very impressive. It's at times hilarious and at other times devastating.


Violent Night 6/10
Like a cross between Die hard and home alone


8-Bit Christmas 7/10
A very pleasant surprise indeed

Klaus 8/10

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.tmdb.org%2Ft%2Fp%2Foriginal%2Fy2lfg2yGHuLdEoPiAdvAcOMYqBv.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e3665715fe229fe145fdcae2c3722350df0724ed08b6e07d5e562304084855dc&ipo=images

Pet Sematary, 1989

Louis (Dale Midkiff) and Rachel (Denise Crosby) move to a small town where Louis is to become the local doctor. They are accompanied by their two children, Ellie (Blaze Berdahl) and Gage (Miko Hughes), as well as the family cat, Church. But when Church is killed, neighbor Jud (Fred Gwynne) shows Louis a local secret: a high ledge where dead things that are buried come back to life.

A Stephen King double feature following Christine, and I think that I liked this one a bit more. The character motivations flow more naturally, and the horror is very relatable.

There is something particularly sad about horror that comes from someone trying to do something kind, or at least doing something very understandable. Midkiff's Louis is a man who comes to accept the magic of the high ledge, but at the same time seems unwilling to engage fully with the implications of using that power. And Gwynne's Jud is the perfect benevolently nefarious counterpoint to Louis. Jud always gives Louis just enough rope to hang himself with. Despite the obvious problems with Church's resurrection, Louis cannot help himself when he faces the loss of someone more near and dear to him.

The other characters are a bit more uneven in their execution. Crosby is good as Rachel, who has her own complex relationship with the idea of death and guilt, having watched her terminally ill older sister suffer and die of spinal meningitis. But Rachel's character isn't super well developed. Ellie is also a mixed bag. As a character she's fine, but there's this whole subplot where she has psychic visions of everything that is going to happen (or has happened) and the execution of that subplot is kind of clunky. Miko Hughes is mainly tasked with toddling around, but it has to be said that he is absolutely adorable.

I was also a bit torn on the inclusion of a character called Pascow (Brad Greenquist), a young man who dies despite Louis trying to save him in the hospital and returns as a benevolent ghost to help the family with warnings and advice. Greenquist is a fun presence, but the existence of the character is a bit weird and it's hard to see how it fits with the mythology of the ledge.

The horror content itself is pretty good. I really liked the way that the setting itself keeps you on edge, as the family lives right next to a highway where trucks race up and down at high speeds. And once things kick off in the last act, they are surprisingly bloody and disturbing.

A solid horror film, even if there are a few too many ideas zinging around for it to feel entirely coherent. My favorite piece of trivia from the IMDb entry on the film is that they had to reshoot a conversation between Pascow and Louis because Midkiff looked too sexy lounging around in bed with no shirt on. Imagine.

4

[GulfportDoc]

I've read all 25 of the Reacher novels and I thought the same thing as your mom. They cast shrimpy Tom Cruise as someone who's supposed to be 6 foot 5 inches and around 250 pounds. But I found it to be surprisingly entertaining. But not as a Reacher story. Fans of the series need to blank their minds and view it strictly as a conspiracy thriller.
I agree. I've read many Reacher novels, so I was shocked to see the movie, despite the fact that I'm from Pittsburgh, and I'm a Cruise fan...:) Your advice is good re clearing you mind of any Lee Childs' Reach novels if you go to see the film. The TV series is even worse. I believe it would be more difficult to cast a good Reacher than one would think.

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2022/11/24/multimedia/21glassonion1-1-f589/21glassonion1-1-f589-videoSixteenByNine3000.jpg
Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (2022, Rian Johnson)
3.5
Enjoyable, but I definitely prefer the first movie.

[Fabulous]

The FBI Story (1959)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/gcNlpsc2UTlNTZ7K56yRWqrjvVL.jpg

[Allaby]

I watched the new Matilda: The Musical on Netflix today. The performances are good and I liked the musical numbers, but I feel they could have done a little more with the story. If you like singing children, it's worth a watch. My rating is 3.5.

[PHOENIX74]

Christmas has conspired to make this the least movie-watching couple of days I've had this year. I did manage to fit Dog Day Afternoon in on Christmas Eve to start formulating my views on that film for the 30th Hall of Fame (it's a 10/10 film for me.) Otherwise, being overloaded when Christmas Day started to turn into evening (me being a guy who works hard all day cooking and performing other logistics) I was exhaused, and none of the films that were up for a watch could be done justice - so I opted for a rewatch of a recent viewing. A film I was sure eager for a 2nd look at :

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/Nope_%28film%29_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2022/nope_ver2.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=68297324

Nope - (2022)

Great all-round filmmaking, and a perfect film to ease into on a satisfying Christmas evening (today I wake up to find my father has just got Covid - satisfaction never lasts for long.) Anyway, having thought about this film for a while now since the first viewing, I was very impressed by all the themes that are worked into the story. Our relationship with animals, our need to rubber-neck, observe and record the remarkable and the very nature of being human. The respect we need when it comes to these things, for once we lose that respect the unknown will cause all sorts of misery for us. These are things that can trouble some of us - when disasters occur and everyone is recording instead of processing and helping, and our exploitation of the animal kingdom. This is all wrapped in a Spielberg-like, awesome and deeply unsettling atmosphere which creates one of the most enjoyable cinematic experiences of the year. Loved all elements - the cinematography, music, score, acting and screenplay. It actually creeped me out more the 2nd time. A great 2nd viewing.

8/10

I said this about it in September : A fascinating genre-defying film that slowly twists you this way and that, refusing to expend all of it's energy and ammunition from the get-go like most similar films of it's ilk. The less you know, the better, and once you've been able to digest (ha!) all of it it provides ample grist to grind in an interpretative sense. Of course, it's part horror, part sci-fi, part Spielberg but all Jordan Peele. A fascinating study of exploitation - cinematic or otherwise, and our need to 'look'. This is the film M. Night Shyamalan always wants to make, but can't quite succeed at - so I guess some directors have it and some don't. Full of dreadful suspense, and a breath of fresh air.

[LChimp]

https://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/the-interview-poster1.jpg

I like their style of comedy, so for me, it worked. I loved Pineapple Express, The Night Before, The End...

[Guaporense]

Avatar 2

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic1.colliderimages.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F11%2Favatar-the-way-of-water-poster.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=5af802c5cc34be3bd78bad0ebb53a161fc92be090a390e0a8f061c111611c940&ipo=images

To be honest about it: it was substantially superior to the first Avatar, in my opinion. Characters are much better fleshed out, and even the villain now feels more "real," although he is obviously "the villain," he is the type of villain that you love to hate.

Also, one thing about Avatar movies is that while they are mainstream Hollywood movies, they are also movies that were made for hardcore science fiction fans such as myself: I think the movie was worth watching just for the science fiction worldbuilding, such as the alien planet, the creatures inhabiting it, and the cool technologies that were imagined and suberbly visually represented in this movie.

The computer animation is some of the best ever made and the whole movie is very well executed and paced. There was pretty much nothing in this movie that I think could be substantially improved: it achieves everything it tried to do and does so suberbly.

Also, since 90% of the stuff on the frames of the movie are computer animations, this is an animated movie and I would even say this is the best American animated movie I ever watched, indeed a much better work of art than anything Disney/Pixar ever made, despite the rather "James Cameron-style" of the movie: lots of scenes feel like a mix of Terminator, Aliens and Titanic. But well, that shows James Cameron is a true auteur. Maybe in fifty yers he will be as well regarded as Hitchcock is today.

[Fabulous]

Cleopatra Jones (1973)

2

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/n9dJWCv1SjLxdUVm99nhHHHVkYj.jpg

[Joel]

Puppetmaster Vs Demonic Toys. 3 popcorns


it's rare i enjoy a post 1989 corey feldman but he seemed to be having fun making this full moon feature and his co star was so hot.

an awful movie by normal standards, but i liked it. It didnt have the usual tendency to stack up some plot that bores the viewer, and instead skated by on light comedy and some sporadic gore instead, which is how it's supposed to be done, imo.

terrorvision director ted nicolau takes the helm.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.denofgeek.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F12%2FDaniel-Craig-and-Kate-Hudson-in-Glass-Onion-Ending-e1671749521725.jpg%3Ffit%3D1200%252C723&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=2de0b8af31b017abe4a7914a5f89d91adbe17222ca7dbfa9416ae2363974475c&ipo=images

Glass Onion, 2022

Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) is back, this time invited to an exclusive island murder mystery party hosted by obnoxious billionaire Miles (Edward Norton). Also along for the ride are friends of Miles, including a politician named Claire (Kathryn Hahn), a model/clothing line head Birdie (Kate Hudson), a scientist named Lionel (Leslie Odom Jr.), and an alpha-male-type YouTuber named Duke (Dave Bautista). Shocking everyone, the woman Miles shut out of a partnership, Andi (Janelle Monáe) also shows up. And before long, the island is home to a real murder.

I've been intrigued by the range of reactions I've seen to this film: everything from declaring it superior to the original film to saying it's not good at all. I have to report that my own reaction to it is a very tepid, eh, it's okay, I guess.

Let's start off with the positives. This is a great cast, and I could say nice things about every single one of them. Craig is clearly having a great time in the lead role, Kathryn Hahn is someone I'll watch in anything, Janelle Monae is just a fun person to watch doing whatever, Norton captures the doofus billionaire wonderfully, and there is a somewhat infectious sense that the people making this movie are having a really good time.

I'm also very partial to movies (especially mysteries, but of any genre) that can do that thing where they double back to a flashback, then let you rewatch a scene with a new understanding of the real dynamics at play. During its middle stretch, Glass Onion does this to pretty good effect.

But fundamentally I struggled with a lot of this movie because, for me, it takes the stories and the characters far too deep into farcical territory, to the point where it feels ridiculous in a not-good way. Knives Out had over the top characters, sure, but there was a much more grounded feel to it, mainly in the form of Ana de Armas's falsely accused nurse.

But here? Here we get people literally hiding behind trees to spy on people. Everything is overly poised and arranged. It's all too slick, and at the same time the mockery of everyone involved, including Blanc, robs it of any real suspense or emotional stakes. For about maybe 5 minutes, there was something that made me go "Oh, whoa!", but that feeling quickly falls by the wayside. Blanc is made a really active player in this story, as opposed to a keen observer. While this yields some good moments, overall I think that it makes for a weaker story.

There are some great little details in the set, just as in the first film. I loved a sequence of two characters eating at an outdoor restaurant, a bottle of sparkling water and a bottle of hand sanitizer in the middle of the table. There are lots of rewarding things if you look (like a perpetually slightly out of focus/uncentered self-portrait of Miles shirtless and lifting weights?).

I think I would have enjoyed this if it were a play that I was watching in a theater. But as a film it was kind of a miss. There's a distance and a contempt toward everyone involved. I love an ensemble mystery, but there have to be compelling character dynamics involved. When terrible people kill terrible people, eh. Who cares?

I hope that the future entries in this series steer back towards the vibe of Knives Out, which I really enjoyed. There's an obvious familiarity with old school mysteries, but what this film is missing that its predecessor had is a sense of affection.

3.5

[PHOENIX74]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/37/Captain_America_The_First_Avenger_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2011/captain_america_the_first_avenger_ver6.html, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30748989

Captain America : The First Avenger - (2011)

Well, that's it - the last of the various introductions of characters in the MCU that led up to the first Avengers movie. I'd seen them all way back when they came out, but I really needed to revisit every one before watching the big one (which I haven't seen yet.) Why did I get so far but not go see The Avengers? I think by the time I'd seen these I felt pretty sure that superhero movies weren't for me. There were a bunch of friends who loved them, and they'd drag me along to the movies to see them - but at this point I gave it away. Now, after all this time I'm curious to see more. Still - what about this film? Well...

Captain America : The First Avenger had a feel of a film made lovingly but also awfully quickly, as if the studio and filmmakers couldn't wait to get it out of the way so they could focus on the main goal. Action scenes are tidy and decent, but the real success was Hugo Weaving as Johann Schmidt and Red Skull. That often happens - the villain is a much more satisfying part to play sometimes. He digs deep into that kind of Germanic arrogance, wit and lack of empathy. Some parts of the film were very underdeveloped. Steve Rogers' "team" that he puts together after rescuing them from captivity have roles that barely last one line and moment onscreen. Chris Evans, Tommy Lee Jones and Hayley Atwell are serviceable. The formula is well-worn and very, very tired. This and Thor really felt like quick introductions leading up to the first ensemble film - so that's what I have in front of me next.

6/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/Smile_%282022_film%29.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/2022/posters/smile_ver2_xxlg.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=71110351

Smile - (2022)

Still love it!

8/10

[Takoma11]

. . . Hayley Atwell are serviceable.

I really enjoyed the first season of Agent Carter, and thought Atwell was great in it.

[PHOENIX74]

I really enjoyed the first season of Agent Carter, and thought Atwell was great in it.

Her Peggy Carter seems to have really cemented a place for herself in the MCU. (My only memory of having seen Hayley Atwell in anything else is when she played the third wheel to a marriage between Ralph Fiennes and the ever-present lady in period dramas Keira Knightley in The Duchess. She was nominated for a British Independent Film Award and a London Critics Circle Film Award. Good early career notices.)

[WHITBISSELL!]

Captain America : The First Avenger - (2011)

This and Thor really felt like quick introductions leading up to the first ensemble film - so that's what I have in front of me next.

6/10Fans liked it of course. But for everyone else it was more of a culmination event. People holding their breath during the years long setup and finally getting to let it out. I don't know if it's held up or not since I wasn't a die hard fan. The one thing that stuck with me was that Cap's uniform makes him look like the chorus boy they made fun of in CA:TFA. The character and uniform improve over time so that by the time you get to Winter Soldier he makes for a credible badass.

[this_is_the_ girl]

Just learned in the top 100 of the 2010s thread that mark f has passed away. I guess it happened while I was away.
Seen his posts a lot in this thread... talk about someone with an avid passion for cinema.
RIP:heart:

[this_is_the_ girl]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.denofgeek.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F12%2FDaniel-Craig-and-Kate-Hudson-in-Glass-Onion-Ending-e1671749521725.jpg%3Ffit%3D1200%252C723&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=2de0b8af31b017abe4a7914a5f89d91adbe17222ca7dbfa9416ae2363974475c&ipo=images

Glass Onion, 2022

Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) is back, this time invited to an exclusive island murder mystery party hosted by obnoxious billionaire Miles (Edward Norton). Also along for the ride are friends of Miles, including a politician named Claire (Kathryn Hahn), a model/clothing line head Birdie (Kate Hudson), a scientist named Lionel (Leslie Odom Jr.), and an alpha-male-type YouTuber named Duke (Dave Bautista). Shocking everyone, the woman Miles shut out of a partnership, Andi (Janelle Monáe) also shows up. And before long, the island is home to a real murder.

I've been intrigued by the range of reactions I've seen to this film: everything from declaring it superior to the original film to saying it's not good at all. I have to report that my own reaction to it is a very tepid, eh, it's okay, I guess.

Let's start off with the positives. This is a great cast, and I could say nice things about every single one of them. Craig is clearly having a great time in the lead role, Kathryn Hahn is someone I'll watch in anything, Janelle Monae is just a fun person to watch doing whatever, Norton captures the doofus billionaire wonderfully, and there is a somewhat infectious sense that the people making this movie are having a really good time.

I'm also very partial to movies (especially mysteries, but of any genre) that can do that thing where they double back to a flashback, then let you rewatch a scene with a new understanding of the real dynamics at play. During its middle stretch, Glass Onion does this to pretty good effect.

But fundamentally I struggled with a lot of this movie because, for me, it takes the stories and the characters far too deep into farcical territory, to the point where it feels ridiculous in a not-good way. Knives Out had over the top characters, sure, but there was a much more grounded feel to it, mainly in the form of Ana de Armas's falsely accused nurse.

But here? Here we get people literally hiding behind trees to spy on people. Everything is overly poised and arranged. It's all too slick, and at the same time the mockery of everyone involved, including Blanc, robs it of any real suspense or emotional stakes. For about maybe 5 minutes, there was something that made me go "Oh, whoa!", but that feeling quickly falls by the wayside. Blanc is made a really active player in this story, as opposed to a keen observer. While this yields some good moments, overall I think that it makes for a weaker story.

There are some great little details in the set, just as in the first film. I loved a sequence of two characters eating at an outdoor restaurant, a bottle of sparkling water and a bottle of hand sanitizer in the middle of the table. There are lots of rewarding things if you look (like a perpetually slightly out of focus/uncentered self-portrait of Miles shirtless and lifting weights?).

I think I would have enjoyed this if it were a play that I was watching in a theater. But as a film it was kind of a miss. There's a distance and a contempt toward everyone involved. I love an ensemble mystery, but there have to be compelling character dynamics involved. When terrible people kill terrible people, eh. Who cares?

I hope that the future entries in this series steer back towards the vibe of Knives Out, which I really enjoyed. There's an obvious familiarity with old school mysteries, but what this film is missing that its predecessor had is a sense of affection.

3.5
I agree, it wasn't as good as the first one. The whole setting and vibe of the first movie was superior imo.

[Fabulous]

Raintree County (1957)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/fN01xZGFvxdEMuCVLJXicmcdfA3.jpg

[Guaporense]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/The_Father_2020_poster.jpg

Very nice movie. At first, I was worried I would be bored, but when the movie started to show the world from the perspective of someone suffering from severe dementia, the movie got really interesting. Still, I think it was a bit short, and could have been a slightly more robust movie with a few more scenes to make the audience more immersed into the plot. Overall, it still is a very good movie. 8/10

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.tmdb.org%2Ft%2Fp%2Foriginal%2FqJE7bD23dgFLops7nJGxzfMbpqz.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=7546764549ed2d95d089d1b8dc458c136aa874f2823d5a0d0d2cba6f7d79a25b&ipo=images

The Mutations (aka The Freakmaker), 1974

Dr. Nolter (Donald Pleasence) is determined to solve world hunger by mutating people into human-plant hybrids. With the assistance of a man with a serious facial deformation, Lynch (Tom Baker), he kidnaps college students from the school where he teaches and transforms them using a formula he's created. Using a side-show carnival as a cover, Nolter puts his experiments in public as "freaks". Tensions mount as the disappearance of the students makes waves and the workers in the carnival begin to suspect something truly devious is happening behind the scenes.

This movie owes pretty much all of its significant moments and images to other films (especially Browning's Freaks!), and mainly comes off as a lesser-imitation of better films with similar premises and settings.

Pleasence is fine as the mad doctor character, determined to make his big breakthrough, but clearly driven more by his ego than by any real sense of humanitarianism. Baker injects some okay friction as a man who emphatically doesn't see himself as a "freak", holding on to the hope that Nolter will cure him. There are some genuinely good sequences of Lynch clashing with the "sideshow freaks" who live and work in the carnival. Unfortunately, the prosthetic Baker wears is pretty imposing, and it makes it hard to understand some of his dialogue.

I also really appreciated a sequence where the college students go to watch the freakshow. In turn, the workers come on stage, but many of them narrate their lives, including a woman who talks about her brother being born with the same affliction but passing away, or another woman who talks about having married and given birth to "normal" children. It's an empathetic lens on the characters. Now, that said, my sympathies for the carnival workers were somewhat stunted by an early scene where several of them help Lynch catch a young woman because they thought "it would be funny." They all casually sit around and talk about the fact that she was probably raped, and was too ashamed to call the police about it. Cool. Neat.

The movie also suffers from several aspects that make it feel cheap and exploitative. The costumes/effects for the monsters are very rubber monster man. There's also a really obvious string of sequences meant to showcase nudity and it's done so artlessly that I just rolled my eyes every time. (A sadly hilarious contrast is that both women who are transformed are seen fully nude. The man who is transformed? Don't worry, we only see him in an entire normal outfit plus a huge trenchcoat.)

Ultimately the movie ends up trapped between two horror "modes": not good enough to recommend, too slow and not bad enough for a so-bad-it's-good viewing.

2.5

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNTZiYjEzY2UtMzA2OC00NjM1LWFlMjItMzg4MTAwOTU2YzYxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_.jpg


2

[Fabulous]

The Chocolate War (1988)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/7VyyYZvbx6ATSYtvGfg5ZU42FbY.jpg

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fmondo-digital.com%2Fdeviltimesfive4.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=f06fcb9cd3e649dd2e183375085c798af70f5c38136eb56826e6de5bc8d20091&ipo=images

Devil Times Five (aka People Toys), 1974

In the middle of a snowstorm, a van transporting children from a psychiatric hospital crashes on a mountainside. David (Leif Garrett), Hannah (Gail Smale), Moe (Dawn Lyn), Brian (Tierre Turner), and Susan (Tia Thompson) emerge from the wreck and make their way to a home where a slew of adults are engaged in their own petty dramas and jealousies. Unfortunately for the adults, the children have a very extreme sense of fun.

Outside of torture porn, "evil kids" is probably my absolutely least favorite horror subgenre. The kids are often these smarmy, precocious creatures and, evil or not, I tend to find them more obnoxious than scary. While this is not necessarily a great iteration of the evil kids trope, it does manage some interesting dynamics by situating the kids inside of an insipid soap opera-type scenario and letting the carnage fall between cat fights and masculine corporate posturing.

The most winning aspect of the film is the set of child actors. Tierre Turner and Leif Garrett as Brian and David both bring a kind of cool confidence and energy to their characters. Turner's character feels like a real child, with his interest in using his stolen watch to talk in military time and just the overall way he interacts with the adults. Garrett's performance, on the other hand, has a lot of weird adult vibes to it. While I had mixed feelings about some of the sequences specifically involving David, it can't be denied that there's a kind of eerie focus to the character.

Smale brings an on-edge jittery aspect to Hannah. Lyn's Moe is the most child-like, but you can tell that when she decides to lash out it will be something special. And while Thompson's Susan is pretty low key, the final sequence with her character rewards a kind of still waters run deep element to the character.

Another major benefit of the film is how easy it makes it to dislike the adults. While two of them, Julie (Joan McCall) and Rick (Taylor Lacher) are okay, the rest are total creeps. One of the first scenes we get is of a character named Lovely (Carolyn Stellar) seducing and mocking the house's developmentally delayed worker, Ralph (John Durren). There is a kind of dark humor that develops nicely as one of the guests, Harvey (Sorrell Booke) spends the whole movie working up the nerve to tell head honcho Papa Doc (Gene Evans) that he wants a promotion, finally doing so after there are at least two dead bodies bobbling around the winter house.

The major downside to the movie is what you often get with this type of scenario, namely the portrayal of mental illness in a pretty exploitative way. This mainly comes out in the portrayal of David, who is frequently seen dressing in women's clothing and makeup. It plays into the well-worn (but completely false) narrative about genderqueer or transgender people being crazy or dangerous, and it's especially rough seeing that trope play out with such a young child. I'm not saying that every movie with a "crazy killer" needs to be 100% accurate to how mental illness really looks, but the film definitely plays fast and loose with how it shows the different kids and the manifestation of their disorders. It also doesn't totally make sense to me that a group like this would stay on the same wavelength, but that's the kind of thing you can sort of handwave away in the spirit of the thing.

I was somewhat torn on the style of the film, which employs a lot of slow motion, color filters, and freeze frames. At times it works, such as when the film will slow down when one of the kids decides to commit a murder. And a slow-motion shot of David climbing a ladder is pretty effective, but at times it's a bit goofy, especially some of the freeze frames.

Overall a good time.

3.5

[crumbsroom]

I remember finding People Toys a total slog when I watched it at the beginning of the pandemic. It mainly came to my attention when I was googling the posters of every horror movie ever made for Captain Terrors game, and I kept a list of films I had literally never heard a single thing about.


It must have coincidentally been going through some kind of critical reevaluation at the time though since as soon as I watched it, I kept coming across articles about how it was a lost classic, or hearing about how friends of mine had just watched it, or finding it on a list of Tarantino's favorite horror films. And all I could think was 'that piece of shit...why is anybody talking about this....were more people playing Captain Terrors poster game than I had previously thought'


I immediately watched a dreadful VHS transfer, assuming that was the best this supposedly completely unknown film was going to get. But, due to its supposed beloved nature, a restored version shortly appeared about a month after I watched it.

[Takoma11]

I remember finding People Toys a total slog when I watched it at the beginning of the pandemic. . . And all I could think was 'that piece of shit...why is anybody talking about this....were more people playing Captain Terrors poster game than I had previously thought'.

LOL.

I remember there was (is?) a terrible looking version of it on YouTube. The version I watched (on Shudder) was surprisingly crisp.

Lost classic . . . eh. I do think that there is something interesting in the way that a group of sociopathic/psycopathic children are smashed into an adult soap-opera drama, and that the child actors give performances that are much more interesting than almost every other "evil kid" character.

My 3.5 would more accurately be a 3.25. It's got enough going on to be interesting. Would I watch it again? Probably not on my own.

[Takoma11]

So I guess one major side effect of Things is that you sit in your living room, mimicking the slurred line deliveries of basically every other piece of dialogue?

I knoooowwwwww he's deadddddddddddd.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fstatic.rogerebert.com%2Fuploads%2Freview%2Fprimary_image%2Frevie ws%2Fdark-glasses-movie-review-2022%2Fdark-glasses-movie-review-2022.jpeg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=7651f75137aa9e01024fd3994de5cf02cde9f4574dca951bcddc3763da60f9d9&ipo=images

Dark Glasses, 2022

A sex worker named Diana (Ilenia Pastorelli) narrowly escapes an attack by a serial killer who has been targeting women in her line of work. But her evasion comes at a very heavy cost, as she crashes her car and both loses her eyesight and kills the parents of a little boy named Chin (Andrea Zhang). Diana gets some independence back, courtesy of a social worker named Rita (Asia Argento) and some help from Chin. But she is haunted by the fear that the man who attacked her is still out there, and still coming to get her.

This is a passable, but not great, horror thriller with good central performances, a great dog, and some fun-if-contrived sequences.

Pastorelli is an engaging lead, and she plays off of all of the other characters quite well. I liked the presentation of her work as work: she's neither an overly embittered victim nor a "whee this is fun" prostitute. We see that she has mainly positive encounters with her clients, but from time to time is put in physical danger. She has a complex set of emotions after the accident--relief that she survived, fear of the killer, guilt about the couple she harmed--and I found it pretty easy to root for her.

Zhang and Argento make for good supporting characters, as does a protective dog that Rita procures for Diana. This is not a movie where our hero is going to go through a character arc--she is mainly the focal point for a series of sequences that range from scary to kind of silly. But having capable supporting characters along for the ride helps.

I think that taking this film overly seriously would be a big mistake. There's a level of absurdity here that would not reward a sincere viewing. We're talking about a movie where a blind woman manages to stumble right into a nest of water snakes, and somehow immediately has one wrapped around her neck and wrist. (Is that . . . a thing that a water snake would do?). This is also a movie where the main character crosses paths with the killer to a degree that is ridiculous, even given the fact that he is pursuing her.

But if you take a step back, I think there is plenty of fun to be had here. You have to embrace the heightened stupidity, and at least on that level is is pretty consistent.

The killer does not make a huge impression, and the kills themselves are not overly stylish. There is a lot of graphic violence against female characters, and the killer has some obviously strong misogynistic views, but beyond this simple vague motivation he's not at all well fleshed out. The ending is generally satisfying, but I wish it had been a bit more thrilling. I thought the best part--thematically and visually--was a sequence where Diana tries to get Chin to help her aim a gun at the advancing killer. For me, that hits just the sweet spot of stupid but a little scary.

3.5

[crumbsroom]

So I guess one major side effect of Things is that you sit in your living room, mimicking the slurred line deliveries of basically every other piece of dialogue?

I knoooowwwwww he's deadddddddddddd.


The damage Things does to a viewer probably runs much deeper than this.

For one, blame it for 90 percent of my critical sensibilities.

Significant intellectual impairment

[crumbsroom]

Things, Freakmaker and Devil Times Three. What a nightmare of a lineup lol

[Takoma11]

Things, Freakmaker and Devil Times Three. What a nightmare of a lineup lol

I'm living the life over here, man. Watching these on a marathon while I grade student work.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_s_30zQFJp4g%2FTCIN_W4lOKI%2FAAAAAAAAhvo%2FxuLN4sUnxS8%2Fs1600% 2FPDVD_164.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=6e7429431a2b79cac4ee6484f8044e01824255904f7047bbdb013674ef9de1a6&ipo=images

Things, 1989

A man named Doug (Doug Bunston) gives his wife Susan (Patricia Sadler) experimental pills because they are having trouble conceiving a child. Unaware of some terrible things happening in their house, Doug's brother Don (Barry J. Gillis) and friend Fred (Bruce Roach) pay them a visit. Unfortunately for all involved, the pills have worked in a way . . .

Let's be real: I knew exactly what kind of movie I was getting into here. I've seen various quotes, images, and other references to this film and its, um, unique presentation that I wasn't some naive viewer shocked at what I saw.

But at the same time, I mean, WOW. Going into a movie expecting a so-bad-it's-good fun time can actually backfire, when you're like "Oh, this is just kind of boring." Say what you want about Things (and I'm going to say some things about Things!) it certainly isn't boring.

This is exactly the kind of movie that just mesmerizes you with an entire continuum of bad movie goodness. The flat acting, the misaligned sound/dialogue, the stiff creatures, the bizarre camera movement, THE WRITING THE WRITING THE WRITING!

I really think that this is a movie you just have to see for yourself. At a just about perfect 85 minutes, there's plenty of time for madness to unfurl, but it doesn't drag on to the point that you're counting the minutes for it to end. And there's just enough bizarre stuff here to give it a real personality. Adult film actress Amber Lynn appears as a newscaster reading from a comfy chair in a living room, eyes constantly on the cue cards that are way too far off to her right. And the lines venture past bad writing into the plain old weird. "Aw, blood and guts, that's all that's left of her!" or "I already had your baby!" to "I learned to do this at camp" as a man catches another man's bloody stump of a wrist ON FIRE while attempting to cauterize the wound.

Okay, so how do you even rate a film like this? If this were a new release, you want to talk about its merits. But we all know what Things is at this point. To give it a low rating kind of feels like waltzing into Manos: Hands of Fate and pretending to be surprised that it's not crisply made or well-acted. This rating is on entertainment value and I stand by it. Probably the best, most delightful minutes I gave to any film today.

4

[GulfportDoc]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/The_Father_2020_poster.jpg

Very nice movie. At first, I was worried I would be bored, but when the movie started to show the world from the perspective of someone suffering from severe dementia, the movie got really interesting. Still, I think it was a bit short, and could have been a slightly more robust movie with a few more scenes to make the audience more immersed into the plot. Overall, it still is a very good movie. 8/10

I too loved this film. A tour de force. Here is my impression of it:

The Father (2020)
It’s hard to recall in many years ever having been so taken by a film. It’s production brought together heavyweights in each aspect of movie making: writer, director, actors, cinematographer, editor, and composer. Their collaboration resulted in an astonishing and unique portrayal of an old man’s descent into dementia, his daughter’s journey in living with him, and its outcome.

Anthony Hopkins, in one of his greatest performances, introduces us into the mind of a gentleman who does not quite realize that his mind is failing, or what his circumstances are. He shows us every emotion-- sometimes overtly, others with nuance. The story disguises itself by presenting his awareness from several points of view, although the audience does not realize it at first, which introduces a feel of mystery and mild surrealism. Each perception melds together in the end, leading to a moving but sympathetic conclusion.

So too does Olivia Colman --as the daughter-- let out all the stops. Her large limpid eyes express her innermost thoughts, and lead us through sadness, irony, and determination. She is the perfect accompaniment to her father’s befuddlement and confabulation. Olivia Williams shines as a compassionate


nurse, and Imogene Poots impresses as an in-home care worker. The veteran Rufus Sewell is believable as the daughter’s mate who tries to convince her to put her father in a home.

Reportedly French writer/director Florian Zeller had Anthony Hopkins directly in mind as Zeller was writing the screenplay-- so much so that he stated that if Hopkins did not accept the role, Zeller would have made the film in the French language. We are grateful that Hopkins accepted. There simply was not a better acting performance this year, and one would hope he deservedly wins awards.

The production was instantly absorbing, and drew me in with concentration to the point that when it ended I felt as if I came to. Everything and everybody came together perfectly in this film, and it will be one for the ages.

Rating: 10/10

[Jackie Daytona]

https://iili.io/HTI16Qf.jpg



Hunt (2022)


I'm kinda surprised this one hasn't had more buzz? South Korean spy vs spy thriller with some very competent action scenes. Worth watching if you're in the mood for a classic Tom Clancy-style cold war spy movie.






Bullet Train (2022)


I came in with the expectation that this was going to be a stylish John Wick-style action movie, but really Bullet Train is more of a comedic send-up of modern action movies. I think? I'm not 100% sure how much of this movie was a deliberate spoof of action movie tropes and how much of it was sincerely meant to seem cool. I had some good laughs either way.

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/8kYj3zRG/humancondition1.jpg
By Shochiku - https://www.shochiku.co.jp/cinema/database/03208/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69840214

The Human Condition I: No Greater Love - (1959)

This was a heavy and tremendous viewing experience - a humanist drama set during World War II, where Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai) tries to introduce humane treatment to a Japanese labor camp in China, where the Chinese workers are brutally beaten, overworked and underfed. He's seen as a 'leftist' by some, a traitor by others, and his work reaches a critical junction when POWs are introduced to the labor force - with specific requests pertaining to their accommodation and treatment. It's one man's fight to retain his humanity and soul in the midst of a merciless system of injustice and cruelty. Everything is more complex than it was on paper for Kaji, and he finds himself torn and deceived at every juncture. His wife yearns to know his troubles - which are too awful to share with her - but most of all she doesn't want Kaji to do something that would put himself in danger. Of course, these things often come down to a binary choice - self preservation or spiritual integrity. The acting is smooth, and the film is terribly well shot - I really loved Harakiri and Samurai Rebellion as well, so along with Ozu and Kurosawa, Masaki Kobayashi seems to have produced a prodigious amount of Japanese classics which please me.

9/10

[donniedarko]

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2022/12/13/multimedia/13avatar-fx-1-3a70/13avatar-fx-1-3a70-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg
Avatar: The Way of Water
Well, it's been five years since I've given a new release, The Florida Project (2017), this high a rating. Between my low volume of film watching and general pessimism, it will likely be five more. This one fully deserves all its praise.

I may have done myself a bit of a disservice by not rewatching the original Avatar since its theatrical release in 09. Admittedly there were a lot of plot points and even major characters that went over my head. On the other side, I was able to judge the film as an independent work and it excelled in that perspective. Intense from the opening moments. I was skeptical when I saw the run time, and then Cameron talking all that noise of "you won't want to go to the bathroom because the movie is too good". But hey, he wasn't wrong. I immediately got pissed at my small bladder for making me get up, and quickly rushed back to the theater. You don't want to miss a moment

https://imgix.bustle.com/uploads/image/2022/11/2/9fec99b0-a5d7-42b2-afb0-ad8cbff8bdd7-avatar2.jpg?w=1200&h=630&fit=crop&crop=faces&fm=jpg

The most impressive part about this film is that despite the billions spent on CGI , Avatar is still an incredibly human piece. Despite you always rooting for the humans to get brutally massacred. I've never seen a Sci-Fi that feels so raw and draws such a level of emotions and empathy. The Tulkun scenes are particularly painful. In the human world, we've rapidly become aware of the extinction of species and destruction of ecosystems all around us. Cameron puts these uncomfortable truths unapologetically in front of the audience.

(BTW - The hunting scene reminded me of a wild show that was on Animal Planet in my younger years- Whale Wars. Dug it deep from my memories)

This is a rare film where I say run to the theaters, get the full experience, and just let yourself be immersed. This is the kind of ambition and passion I'd love to see from more blockbusters, rather than hiding behind endless action scenes and pretty funny fart jokes. My one drawback here is there are moments where it's clear they're setting up for the thrid (and fourth) films, without truly adding to the plot here. But it's so spectacular I can't say I really care. Look forward to what's next for this series

4.5

[Daniel M]

Rocky II (Sylvester Stallone, 1979) 3

Although I found the original Rocky enjoyable enough, I never had a strong desire to catch its sequels so only got round to the second instalment when I accidently flicked over to it on TV.

What's interesting about the plot is that it no longer has the out-of-nowhere plot and rise to fame from of the first, which was obviously unrealistic, and instead get something almost the opposite. After the events of the first, the contrasting fates of Rocky and Apollo Creed seem quite realistic and I enjoyed how this film focussed on simple themes to tell an enjoyable story again.

Rocky III (Sylvester Stallone, 1982) 3

Much like the second film the plot of the third instalment once again follows a realistic approach where following his title victory, Rocky takes on a series of easy challengers as his trainer avoids the much tougher opponent in Clubber Lang.

The most enjoyable aspect of this film is Rocky's relationship with Apollo Creed, who acts as his trainer for the big match. There's something about these films that pulls me in and keeps me entertained with a good amount of heart.

Rocky IV (Sylvester Stallone, 1985) 2.5

Perhaps the most famous sequel due to it's iconic Russian villain, this film throws any subtlety out of the window and at times borderlines on being silly.

Once you embrace its ridiculousness, its still quite enjoyable with well shot fight scenes.

Avatar (James Cameron, 2009) 2.5

Not sure what the big fuss about the visuals is because even though it obviously takes a lot of work to capture what they do, the result is something that just looks like a video game. It's not realistic in any way.

Story is decent enough but very derivative as I had heard. I found the whole affair okay. I'll probably watch the sequel when I can, I don't have much more to say.

Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (Chantal Akerman, 1975) 4.5

Finally got around to this because it topped the Sight & Sound poll and I can see why it's held in such high regard.

I was a tiny bit trepidatious going in because even though I love watching "artistic" films, long and slow stuff can be hit or miss depending on my mood.

This really blew me away, it never bored me. It really pulls you in and gets you into a trance like state where the finale becomes really powerful.

[Marco]

Bridgend (2015)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/Bridgend_%28film%29.jpg
Interesting dramatization of the events following a spate of young suicides that occurred in the Bridgend area of Wales in 2007/2008. It's pretty low key but an intriguing look into the outcomes that a disaffected youth in deprived areas can manifest itself. Still no answers as to why the suicides happened, no suicide notes were left from 26 cases. The performances are all good and the only let-down is the ending which tries to get all mystical where a straightforward summation of the facts would have done.

[Mr Minio]

The Human Condition I: No Greater Love - (1959)

10/10 FTFY.

Watch the rest of the trilogy ASAP. It's 10/10 easily when gauged together as one work of art.

Funny I just watched a Kobayashi film myself. Beautiful Days.

[Wooley]

Rocky II (Sylvester Stallone, 1979) 3

Although I found the original Rocky enjoyable enough, I never had a strong desire to catch its sequels so only got round to the second instalment when I accidently flicked over to it on TV.

What's interesting about the plot is that it no longer has the out-of-nowhere plot and rise to fame from of the first, which was obviously unrealistic, and instead get something almost the opposite. After the events of the first, the contrasting fates of Rocky and Apollo Creed seem quite realistic and I enjoyed how this film focussed on simple themes to tell an enjoyable story again.



Not any sort of refutation, more just an amusing footnote, but Roger Ebert actually thought Rocky II was better than Rocky. I do like the film a good bit and always thought it was much better than its apparent reputation, but it's hard to get over the joys of the OG.

[Stirchley]

Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (Chantal Akerman, 1975) 4.5

Finally got around to this because it topped the Sight & Sound poll and I can see why it's held in such high regard.

I was a tiny bit trepidatious going in because even though I love watching "artistic" films, long and slow stuff can be hit or miss depending on my mood.

This really blew me away, it never bored me. It really pulls you in and gets you into a trance like state where the finale becomes really powerful.

One of my favorite movies. Seen it many times.

[Deschain]

Not any sort of refutation, more just an amusing footnote, but Roger Ebert actually thought Rocky II was better than Rocky. I do like the film a good bit and always thought it was much better than its apparent reputation, but it's hard to get over the joys of the OG.

The first time I watched them all I preferred 2 as well.

3 is so much fun, it’s closer to an action movie though with so many fights and montages.

Daniel M don’t sleep on the Creed movies either, they’re terrific.

[Wooley]

... don’t sleep on the Creed movies either, they’re terrific.

I only saw the first one, which I did think was very good, the others are also good?

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.allhorror.com%2Fpublic%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F12%2Fblood-beat-1983-3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=034da30ee853e0c202a100ac1f5e989c3cf4d554adc499dab8a1272cb0af6fa0&ipo=images

Blood Beat, 1983

A young man named Ted (James Fitzgibbons) brings his girlfriend Sarah (Claudia Peyton) home for Christmas. But Ted's mother, Cathy (Helen Benton) seems to sense something strange, and before long the family is under siege, attacked by the ghost of a samurai warrior.

It's not often that you think to yourself, "Boy, Things really set the bar high!", but here we are.

Shot on video in a rural Wisconsin location, there are definitely some pleasures to be had in this film. No movie that includes the subtitle "Mystical boinging" can be all bad.

There's something interesting about the fact that Sarah is seemingly the vessel for the evil spirit, and yet she seems totally unaware of that fact. There's a nice contrast between her innocent horror and knowing that she's intimately involved in whatever is happening.

I also enjoyed Helen Benton's Cathy, a woman who spends the entire film in a fabulous shawl and honestly very much gives off the vibe of an artist type who also believes that she's psychic.

The real insanity (and the source of the "mystical boinging") kicks in during the last 10 minutes of the film, and it is truly amazing. It gets the film to a place of sublime ridiculousness with some genuine surprises along the way.

Unfortunately, most of the film does not operate at this level of transcendent weirdness. Yes, there's that off-kilter pacing you get from a certain kind of low-budget movie. But there's a lag to the film that isn't overcome by the eccentricities of the acting or camerawork. A recurring element of Sarah experiencing some sort of sexual ecstasy during the kills never really goes anywhere thrilling.

Worth watching, I suppose, if only for the very final sequences. But it's more of a slog to get there than you'd hope.

3

[Torgo]

God's Country - 4

Thandiwe Newton plays Sandra, a college professor who moved from New Orleans to rural Montana. With her mother dying, Christmas vacation beginning and her superior (Kai Lennox) making it clear she can't totally depend on him, Sandra feels very alone as the movie's "counting the days as they go by" structure indicates. To make matters worse, a pair of hunters are illegally parking on her property despite her asking them not to. What follows is a tense and very well acted thriller about how it feels when the systems that are there to protect us do anything but.

Sandra, like myself and a lot of us when I wrote this, is on holiday break. I was lucky to be a lot less lonely than her and unfortunately many others, which either makes this the best or worst time of the year to watch a movie like this. It helps that Newton is so good at conveying Sandra's increasing isolation with grace and subtlety. The same can be said of how she weighs the best way to handle the situation with her unwelcome guests. Also worthy of praise is Lennox, who excels at playing someone who is merely dependable up to a point. There's also Andrew Wheeler's cinematography, which captures the natural beauty of Montana as much as it does its chilliness and isolation. Oh, and hopefully not to spoil it too much, but if you're wondering why they made Sandra be from New Orleans, the answer will blindside you. Despite how good Lennox is, the movie comes close to taking his villainy over the top. The movie remains an impressive directorial debut for Julian Higgins for the ways it proves that loneliness and injustice are not exactly good bedfellows.

[Stirchley]

God's Country - 4

Thandiwe Newton plays Sandra, a college professor who moved from New Orleans to rural Montana. With her mother dying, Christmas vacation beginning and her superior (Kai Lennox) making it clear she can't totally depend on him, Sandra feels very alone as the movie's "counting the days as they go by" structure indicates. To make matters worse, a pair of hunters are illegally parking on her property despite her asking them not to. What follows is a tense and very well acted thriller about how it feels when the systems that are there to protect us do anything but.

I like Sandra and a lot of us are on holiday break right now. I'm lucky to be a lot less lonely than her and unfortunately many others, which either makes this the best or worst time to watch a movie like this. It helps that Newton is so good at conveying Sandra's increasing isolation with grace and subtlety. The same can be said of how she weighs the best way to handle the situation with her unwelcome guests. Also worthy of praise is Lennox, who excels at playing someone who is merely dependable up to a point. There's also Andrew Wheeler's cinematography, which captures the natural beauty of Montana as much as it does its chilliness and isolation. Oh, and hopefully not to spoil it too much, but if you're wondering why they made Sandra be from New Orleans, the answer will blindside you. Despite how good Lennox is, the movie comes close to taking his villainy over the top. The movie remains an impressive directorial debut for Julian Higgins for the ways it proves that loneliness and injustice are not exactly good bedfellows.

Wow, this does look good. Fan of hers. Do we presume the hunters are white?

[Torgo]

Wow, this does look good. Fan of hers. Do we presume the hunters are white?Yes, but I don't think it's just riding the woke train, if you know what I mean. It feels more substantive than that. Besides referring to events that actually happened - the title refers to Manifest Destiny, for instance - it's based on a short story by James Lee Burke, who specializes in New Orleans crime stories.

I discovered this movie thanks to a "best performances of 2022" list. I wouldn't be surprised if Newton gets an Oscar nom.

[Stirchley]

Yes, but I don't think it's just riding the woke train, if you know what I mean. It feels more substantive than that. Besides referring to events that actually happened - the title refers to Manifest Destiny, for instance - it's based on a short story by James Lee Burke, who specializes in New Orleans crime stories.

I discovered this movie thanks to a "best performances of 2022" list. I wouldn't be surprised if Newton gets an Oscar nom.

No, I never thought it would be woke. I was basing it on North Montana hunters parking illegally & trespassing most likely would be white drifters. Which would be more than scary for a black woman. Anyway, it’s in my Netflix Q. Thanks!

[WHITBISSELL!]

https://66.media.tumblr.com/3e0bdaf57950ba7f83095a94dfef9914/tumblr_nzx1siQvO11s2f16eo2_400.gifhttps://64.media.tumblr.com/85f980baba366ff4af96458e31d710fa/tumblr_ngwub4OurG1qdzjx9o7_r1_250.gifvhttps://benjaminalborough.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/smirk.gifhttps://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5c90fd14b91449766edf8978/1577225794120-F5W3YA4JOV4KUJT9C547/cainmarley.gif?format=1000w

I rewatched four version's of A Christmas Carol like I did last year but this time didn't rely on half formed memories from previous viewings. Front to back, all the way through. The 1939 version with Reginald Owen as Scrooge, the 1951 release with Alastair Sim in the role, 1984's version starring George C. Scott and lastly, 1999's with Patrick Stewart.

1951's with Sim still holds up as the best IMO. Darker than 'the 39 entry in which Owen's Scrooge was but a shadow of his unreservedly misanthropic character. He was apparently reformed before The Ghost of Christmas Present had time to finish his spiel. But points to Owen's portrayal.

Scott's '84 take was more of an actor's clinic, with a rueful Ebenezer's everlasting regrets always simmering near the surface. It's the most naturalistic of all the portrayals but I think the role calls for a little over top grandiloquence. Scott's pragmatic depiction doesn't fully mesh with Dickens' theatricality.

And as much as I like Patrick Stewart as an actor his turn at the role doesn't really add anything new to the narrative. It's not so much that's it's a bad entry, because it certainly isn't. It's just adequate.

So this was my rating breakdown last year

1938 (Reginald Owen) 75/100
1951 (Alastair Sim) 88/100
1984 (George C. Scott) 75/100
1999 (Patrick Stewart) 85/100

This time I rearrange it somewhat with Sim (88/100) still coming in first. His gimlet eyed Scrooge is still the meridian as far as I'm concerned. He's followed by Owen and Scott tied at 80/100 and Stewart at 75/100. I don't know if I'll attempt a rewatch next year but my order might change again. Oh and I stayed away from the FX version with Guy Pearce. Once bitten twice shy.

[Deschain]

I only saw the first one, which I did think was very good, the others are also good?

Yeah 2 is good, some say better than the first. 3 is not out yet but there’s a trailer.

[Fabulous]

On Moonlight Bay (1951)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/bKKyElT0sKhTPY4lrW8eQldBAPf.jpg

[Wooley]

https://i.imgur.com/4l1HiES.png?2

Well.
I just enjoyed the hell outta this. One of my favorite watches of the year, possibly No.1.
I had seen one scene of this before and liked the cut of its jib but just never felt like it was the right time to watch it. Then a friend said, "Hey, why don't you hang around and smoke this joint and watch Rockers with me?" And I said, "Ok."

This is a takeover, mon!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIUBArOXUM0

Remove ya!

Anyway, the short-version of the story is that Leroy "Horsemouth" Wallace, a drummer living in the slums of Kingston, has decided to borrow money to buy a motorcycle so that he can drive to all the dancehalls and sell the new records being pressed in order to support his family. To my surprise, pretty much everyone he asks agrees to help him.

https://i.imgur.com/EcO98gU.jpg

This is the first really cool thing about this movie. Everybody helps everybody. He gets the motorcycle and has a Lion of Judah painted on it and sets about his task, which immediately goes well because everybody helps everybody. But then someone steals it and now Leroy has lost his means of making money and the thing which he owes many people money for. What will he do?
Well, this is Jamaica (mon), and I just got back from there and this was kinda my experience too... he just asks a bunch of Rastas for help and they all say "yes". Because everybody helps everybody. Even when Jacob Miller pulls a knife on Leroy for stealing his food (literally while he was eating it) it's all just laughed off and they dap it out and then Miller sings a song and they go get the motherf*ckers who stole his bike. It suddenly turns into a 70s Blaxploitation movie where all the hard-hitters in the community band together (to Peter Tosh's "Stepping Razor") to go get The Man (oh yeah, it turns out The Man stole Leroy's bike).
The movie is so guerrilla in a lot of ways (made for $40,000) and yet there are so many little joys to it. You start out thinking Leroy is kind of a deadbeat but then he actually makes good on what he says he's gonna do and you see that people like him and he really is a good drummer, he just lives in a slum in the Third World and this is his life. All the people you meet, they're just people like Leroy trying to do their best. But what penetrates is the joy and camaraderie they all seem to find in life despite the hardships. I swear, these amazing characters don't even seem to notice they are living in abject poverty. They absolutely shine.

https://i.imgur.com/O1EW2gs.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/o9wgbqx.jpg

And, ultimately, the good feels are not the only things this movie has to offer. There is surprisingly good craft here for the budget. I mean, no one in the movie is actually an actor, they're all just real Rastas, mostly reggae-musicians, and hell, Leroy's wife is actually played by... Leroy's wife. But they make it all work. And the direction, cinematography, and editing are all quite professional considering the money, at times actually really eye-catching. There's a great tracking-shot that I was really impressed by, for example. But they really manage to transport you and it was a really, really nice ride to take. In a lot of ways, I came away from it wanting to make sure I treated people in my community the way these people did in theirs. And go get The Man too!

4.5

I'll leave you with the opening of the movie, just for a little more of the flavor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1sHNS9HEgk

[crumbsroom]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_s_30zQFJp4g%2FTCIN_W4lOKI%2FAAAAAAAAhvo%2FxuLN4sUnxS8%2Fs1600% 2FPDVD_164.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=6e7429431a2b79cac4ee6484f8044e01824255904f7047bbdb013674ef9de1a6&ipo=images

Things, 1989

A man named Doug (Doug Bunston) gives his wife Susan (Patricia Sadler) experimental pills because they are having trouble conceiving a child. Unaware of some terrible things happening in their house, Doug's brother Don (Barry J. Gillis) and friend Fred (Bruce Roach) pay them a visit. Unfortunately for all involved, the pills have worked in a way . . .

Let's be real: I knew exactly what kind of movie I was getting into here. I've seen various quotes, images, and other references to this film and its, um, unique presentation that I wasn't some naive viewer shocked at what I saw.

But at the same time, I mean, WOW. Going into a movie expecting a so-bad-it's-good fun time can actually backfire, when you're like "Oh, this is just kind of boring." Say what you want about Things (and I'm going to say some things about Things!) it certainly isn't boring.

This is exactly the kind of movie that just mesmerizes you with an entire continuum of bad movie goodness. The flat acting, the misaligned sound/dialogue, the stiff creatures, the bizarre camera movement, THE WRITING THE WRITING THE WRITING!

I really think that this is a movie you just have to see for yourself. At a just about perfect 85 minutes, there's plenty of time for madness to unfurl, but it doesn't drag on to the point that you're counting the minutes for it to end. And there's just enough bizarre stuff here to give it a real personality. Adult film actress Amber Lynn appears as a newscaster reading from a comfy chair in a living room, eyes constantly on the cue cards that are way too far off to her right. And the lines venture past bad writing into the plain old weird. "Aw, blood and guts, that's all that's left of her!" or "I already had your baby!" to "I learned to do this at camp" as a man catches another man's bloody stump of a wrist ON FIRE while attempting to cauterize the wound.

Okay, so how do you even rate a film like this? If this were a new release, you want to talk about its merits. But we all know what Things is at this point. To give it a low rating kind of feels like waltzing into Manos: Hands of Fate and pretending to be surprised that it's not crisply made or well-acted. This rating is on entertainment value and I stand by it. Probably the best, most delightful minutes I gave to any film today.

4


Everyone I tried to introduce this film to back in the early 90s hardly saw the fun in it. Even some who laughed through the whole thing considered it a miserable experience. Which to me is baffling but at the same time understandable because....what is Things even?


The whole film is a derangement of the senses. It resists being watched in any normal sense. There is not a scene that goes by where we don't question some fundamental thing about its reality. Hardly a line of dialogue where we don't have to step back and wonder what they were trying to say, or why they said anything at all. We frequently can't see what is going on. We don't understand why they won't just leave. Are those monsters even in the same house where they are dumbly drinking beer after beer in the kitchen. Maybe, we assume, but maybe not. Absolutely nothing can be taken for granted. We can't even trust the audio, which seems as if it is transmitting the voices of the characters and the score running behind them from two competing alien transmissions. Are these even the actual voices of the actors. Absolutely nothing is certain.


The only thing we really can be sure of is these guys like to drink beer, and they have a movie camera, and they made some papier machete bug monsters. And that kind of blurry half drunken headspace that the movie was clearly made in, is sort of the perspective we have to look at the movie through. And I don't think, even for a lot of my friends who laughed at it and who I thought were enjoying it, are really too eager to do such a thing. When the film ends it seemed they were just left with the niggling anger that they spent their time watching two seemingly stupid as dirt drunks videotape their weekend and they resent having to accept such a thing as a 'movie'. As if this would justify such a negligent waste of artistic license.


Of course my response was 'I guess I need to start redefining what I am willing to call a movie and what I legitimately enjoy'. And there was no looking back.

[Takoma11]

Everyone I tried to introduce this film to back in the early 90s hardly saw the fun in it. Even some who laughed through the whole thing considered it a miserable experience. Which to me is baffling but at the same time understandable because....what is Things even?

I can't see how this one would be considered miserable. It does move along at a decent pace. For me, it also lacks any kind of maliciousness that would make it unpleasant to sit through.

[GulfportDoc]

[Glass Onion]I agree, it wasn't as good as the first one. The whole setting and vibe of the first movie was superior imo.
I agree with you. I started to do a review, but bailed. There was not all that much wrong with the film, but the production seemed to be too in love with itself.

Part of my disfavor towards the picture is that the Agatha Christie type story with an embellished drawing room approach to a whodunit has become long in the tooth. After one has seen dozens of tales with that approach they've become rather stale-- even one with all the pyrotechnics and spectacular settings.

Craig has better polished his accent, but that whole business surrounding Hugh Grant's cameo wasn't funny, and fell flat. It stuck out like a sore thumb, and was basically confusing. Perhaps they had to interject a little W/SJ to satisfy Hollywood's current social fashion.

I'm a fan of Norton's and Craig's, but their work was not enough to satisfy me in this picture. I hope they don't produce another "Knives Out" followup, but if they make enough money I'm sure they'll fire up another one.

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmZlZDZkZjYtNzE5Mi00ODFhLTk2OTgtZWVmODBiZTI4NGFiXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTE5MTg5NDIw._V1_.jpg


3.5

[Jackie Daytona]

https://i.imgur.com/4l1HiES.png?2

Well.
I just enjoyed the hell outta this. One of my favorite watches of the year, possibly No.1.
I had seen one scene of this before and liked the cut of its jib but just never felt like it was the right time to watch it. Then a friend said, "Hey, why don't you hang around and smoke this joint and watch Rockers with me?" And I said, "Ok."

]

Haha, yes! I saw this one earlier this year when it was part of Criterion’s reggae collection. This movie is a bop, has a fun indie energy that’s just infectious.

[Wooley]

Haha, yes! I saw this one earlier this year when it was part of Criterion’s reggae collection. This movie is a bop, has a fun indie energy that’s just infectious.

Exactly. Fun indie energy that's just infectious. Exactly.

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/28sFLwqM/the-human-con2.jpg
By The cover art can be obtained from Amazon.com or Ninjin Club., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=32124277

The Human Condition II: Road to Eternity - (1959)

The searing and monumental story of Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai) continues here, in a place where the humanist and logically-minded man fits in the least - the Japanese armed forces. Enlisted as punishment for his failures in managing labor forces, he often finds himself at odds with his superiors and fellow recruits. He clings to the army rules and regulations at times when hazing and violent bullying are an everyday occurrence. Here we find Obara (Kunie Tanaka) driven to an act of desperation, and the troops Kaji trains and protects from the longer-serving recruits who resent them and usually beat them. To do all of this Kaji himself attracts a lot of attention and a lot of punishment. He grasps for something noble, even during situations where there are no noble and fair answers. He'll lose what's left of his innocence on the front lines, in this film where one part elevates the other and gives it even richer meaning. At 206 minutes and 178 minutes, I'm surprised both epic films were released the same year - but then again, like with War and Peace, it's all playing at as the one film.

9.5/10

FTFY.

Watch the rest of the trilogy ASAP. It's 10/10 easily when gauged together as one work of art.

Funny I just watched a Kobayashi film myself. Beautiful Days.

I'm already getting that feeling after the first two films that they compliment and elevate each other, and that taken together I'm probably eventually going to be rating The Human Condition complete 10/10

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/Aliens_poster.jpg
By http://www.impawards.com/1986/aliens_ver1_xlg.html WebArchive Archive, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=897538

Aliens - (1986)

I've seen this a hundred times, but I have to admit that as far as science fiction/action spectacle goes, Aliens is made by a cinematic maestro. Not in the same category as Alien, but all the same it's a landmark for 80s action and probably defines the decade as far as high profile/blockbuster filmmaking is concerned. There's a memorable moment every minute, the creatures are first-rate and the editing (nominated for an Oscar) perfect. The film was nominated for 7 all-up, including Sigourney Weaver for best actress. It has a one-dimensional villain, but when everything is working and the film so exciting we can overlook that with ease. There were far better intellectually-minded films released in '86, but no better film of this sort.

8.5/10

[StuSmallz]

Chinatown (1974)

https://i.ibb.co/JyG1pd3/image-w1280.jpg (https://ibb.co/dLVTpcm)

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown...

In the 1970's, in the midst of the New Hollywood movement that redefined American film as we knew it, something interesting began happening; Noir, which had mostly seemed like a relic of the Classical era beforehand, suddenly began being revitalized with fresh updates of the then-dusty genre, whether it be the cynical sexuality of Alan J. Pakula's Klute, or the satire of genre conventions in Robert Altman's The Long Goodbye. However, while it had plenty of competion at the time, for me, there's one clear-cut winner among all the Neo-Noirs that Hollywood produced that decade, one that wasn't content to just be Noir-ISH, or to parody the genre, but instead, both unbashedly engaged in the familiar old tropes of the genre, while also deconstructing them at the same time, resulting in one of the greatest Noirs of all time, of any period in the genre's history. That movie? The one, the only... Chinatown.

It tells the story of Jakes Gittes, a small-time private eye, one who's content to crack petty adultery cases for a living in 1930's LA, until what seems to be just another case of a cheating spouse unravels into a tangled web of conspiracy, deceit, and murder, and will lead him into the darkest corners of both the city of angels, and the human soul as well. And, while its multi-layered central mystery (courtesy of Robert Towne’s Oscar-winning, clockwork-precise screenplay) is a clear call-back to the often-Byzantine plots of classical Noir, instead of just being surface-level busywork, Chinatown’s intricate, conspiratorial plot is just as compelling and well-written as the best of the genre, never becoming overly convoluted just for the sake of it, but slowly, steadily unravelling its mystery step by tantalizing step, maintaining a very well-justified confidence in its storytelling all the way until the (very) bitter end.

But, the film not only serves as a genuinely affectionate love letter to Noir this way, but also subverts the elements that defined the genre at the same time with its characterizations, as it takes the two most iconic archetypes of Noir, and seems to establish textbook examples of both with its male & female leads, before turning both of them completely and utterly around on their heads by the end. With Faye Dunaway's Evelyn Mulwray, the combo of her initially cold demeanor and genre conventions cleverly manipulate us into thinking that’s just another spin on the treacherous, homocidal femme fatale at first, but a number of shocking story turns reveal that she's completely innocent of the crimes she’s suspected of, rendering her a highly sympathetic figure, and taking an extremely familiar stock character and breathing all-new life into her in the process.

And with Jack Nicholson's Jake Gittes, we get a protagonist who first appears to be just another vintage, hard-boiled private eye, the wisecracking type who never truly loses his cool no matter how much hot water he’s in, only for him to be put through a complete emotional wringer, both falling in love, and losing that love in the span of just a few days, as he forms a romance that's unusually genuine by typical Noir standards, even though it ultimately proves to be a doomed one in the end. Through it all, Nicholson puts in an excellent performance in the kind of role he was born to play, as the world's biggest smartass, a man who can both insult people just as casually as he breathes air (even through his sliced-up snhnoz), while also showcasing an underlying emotional vunerablility throughout, one that surfaces more and more as his character unravels right along with the central mystery.

Finally, Chinatown excels through its overall sense of fatalism, as the specters of dark pasts and the foreshadowing of even darker futures constantly loom over its characters, as Towne uses the titular location as a sort of metaphorical, unescapable purgatory, one that dooms Jake to relive a cycle of tragedy he's experienced before, even though he does eventually unravel that central conspiracy that drives Chinatown’s story. However, it’s ultimately all for naught, as he's completely powerless to either put a stop to the resource-hoarding conspiracy, or even just to save the life of the woman he loves, as his seemingly hard-boiled exterior finally cracks for good at the end, and all an emotionally-devastated Jake can do at the end is walk away as the bad guy actually "gets away with it", as the haunting, trumpet-laden score plays, and the credits begin to roll for one of film Noir’s greatest works. "Forget it Jake", indeed...

Final Score: 10

[Fabulous]

Auntie Mame (1958)

3

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/l91zzd3Oj4AGb3REduWR3C0YnV0.jpg

[Daniel M]

Not any sort of refutation, more just an amusing footnote, but Roger Ebert actually thought Rocky II was better than Rocky. I do like the film a good bit and always thought it was much better than its apparent reputation, but it's hard to get over the joys of the OG.

I can see why someone would think that and I give the original 3 too but it's been ages since I watched it so that's from my vague memory.

They've all been on ITV so I've got the fifth film then Rocky Balbao already recorded ready to watch. Then I'll get to the two Creed films which I've heard are good. Thanks guys.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-xWE4QJsva10%2FVDYcPKeURoI%2FAAAAAAAAA8A%2F6LfLo8yqRDg%2Fs1600%2Flarge%252Bamityville%252Bhorror%252B blu-ray9.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=5b78ba2ffe3bc3554b212827f707d0ab8249de794fecfd59ee55d54a84eea7c7&ipo=images

The Amityville Horror, 1979

George (James Brolin) and Kathy (Margot Kidder) move into a new house with Kathy's three children. But soon after their arrival, strange things begin to happen. Unbeknownst to the family, the house was the site of a terrible family murder. As George becomes more and more susceptible to the weird energies of the house, will history repeat itself?

After more than a decade of hearing about how underwhelming this movie is and about how the only scary thing about it is Brolin swanning around in a pair of underpants and a shirt, I ended up liking this one a bit more than I expected to. Oh, don't get me wrong, it's decidedly a step below being good. But I did find a few moments here or there that were pleasant surprises.

I did like some of the initial things that happened in the movie. I think that with haunted house type stories, the events have to be creepy, but not so much that the people would immediately pack up and bolt. This includes things like strange swarms of flies appearing in the house. I also liked a sequence where a young babysitter gets trapped in a closet and can't get out, while the young daughter simply ignores her cries for help. The babysitter's hands are bloodied from pounding on the door, and I liked how in the background as George and Kathy are arguing about it you can see a bloody smear on the inside of the closet door.

But from there, eh. There are a lot of aspects to the film that just don't really go anywhere. A priest and nun who visit the house become strangely ill, and the priest almost dies in a freak car accident. So the house is . . . telekinetic? A friend of George's who is sort of psychic talks about the house having been home to some sort of satanic worship and trapped spirits. So the house is . . . haunted by the spirits of those people? Also there's a well that is a portal to hell? Or something?

It's also really hard to watch Kathy enduring increasing abuse at George's hands, including him hitting her full in the face. I mean, I'm not saying that it's unrealistic, per se. We see that Kathy can be timid, as when she tries to find the priest who has gone because of his affliction.

There are also some side characters that seem like they should be more involved, but just aren't. This is especially true of a priest played by Don Stroud. He's kind of shown as this young, hunky modern priest. You'd think that he'd maybe develop a relationship of some kind with Kathy or at least doggedly pursue what's happening in the house. Nope.

It's all just very . . . okay. The actors are fine, but no one really rises above in my opinion.

3

[Gideon58]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTQ1NTAyMDgzNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNTQ1NzIwMjE@._V1_.jpg


4

[Wooley]

Chinatown (1974)

https://i.ibb.co/JyG1pd3/image-w1280.jpg (https://ibb.co/dLVTpcm)

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown...

In the 1970's, in the midst of the New Hollywood movement that redefined American film as we knew it, something interesting began happening; Noir, which had mostly seemed like a relic of the Classical era beforehand, suddenly began being revitalized with fresh updates of the then-dusty genre, whether it be the cynical sexuality of Alan J. Pakula's Klute, or the satire of genre conventions in Robert Altman's The Long Goodbye. However, while it had plenty of competion at the time, for me, there's one clear-cut winner among all the Neo-Noirs that Hollywood produced that decade, one that wasn't content to just be Noir-ISH, or to parody the genre, but instead, both unbashedly engaged in the familiar old tropes of the genre, while also deconstructing them at the same time, resulting in one of the greatest Noirs of all time, of any period in the genre's history. That movie? The one, the only... Chinatown.

It tells the story of Jakes Gittes, a small-time private eye, one who's content to crack petty adultery cases for a living in 1930's LA, until what seems to be just another case of a cheating spouse unravels into a tangled web of conspiracy, deceit, and murder, and will lead him into the darkest corners of both the city of angels, and the human soul as well. And, while its multi-layered central mystery (courtesy of Robert Towne’s Oscar-winning, clockwork-precise screenplay) is a clear call-back to the often-Byzantine plots of classical Noir, instead of just being surface-level busywork, Chinatown’s intricate, conspiratorial plot is just as compelling and well-written as the best of the genre, never becoming overly convoluted just for the sake of it, but slowly, steadily unravelling its mystery step by tantalizing step, maintaining a very well-justified confidence in its storytelling all the way until the (very) bitter end.

But, the film not only serves as a genuinely affectionate love letter to Noir this way, but also subverts the elements that defined the genre at the same time with its characterizations, as it takes the two most iconic archetypes of Noir, and seems to establish textbook examples of both with its male & female leads, before turning both of them completely and utterly around on their heads by the end. With Faye Dunaway's Evelyn Mulwray, the combo of her initially cold demeanor and genre conventions cleverly manipulate us into thinking that’s just another spin on the treacherous, homocidal femme fatale at first, but a number of shocking story turns reveal that she's completely innocent of the crimes she’s suspected of, rendering her a highly sympathetic figure, and taking an extremely familiar stock character and breathing all-new life into her in the process.

And with Jack Nicholson's Jake Gittes, we get a protagonist who first appears to be just another vintage, hard-boiled private eye, the wisecracking type who never truly loses his cool no matter how much hot water he’s in, only for him to be put through a complete emotional wringer, both falling in love, and losing that love in the span of just a few days, as he forms a romance that's unusually genuine by typical Noir standards, even though it ultimately proves to be a doomed one in the end. Through it all, Nicholson puts in an excellent performance in the kind of role he was born to play, as the world's biggest smartass, a man who can both insult people just as casually as he breathes air (even through his sliced-up snhnoz), while also showcasing an underlying emotional vunerablility throughout, one that surfaces more and more as his character unravels right along with the central mystery.

Finally, Chinatown excels through its overall sense of fatalism, as the specters of dark pasts and the foreshadowing of even darker futures constantly loom over its characters, as Towne uses the titular location as a sort of metaphorical, unescapable purgatory, one that dooms Jake to relive a cycle of tragedy he's experienced before, even though he does eventually unravel that central conspiracy that drives Chinatown’s story. However, it’s ultimately all for naught, as he's completely powerless to either put a stop to the resource-hoarding conspiracy, or even just to save the life of the woman he loves, as his seemingly hard-boiled exterior finally cracks for good at the end, and all an emotionally-devastated Jake can do at the end is walk away as the bad guy actually "gets away with it", as the haunting, trumpet-laden score plays, and the credits begin to roll for one of film Noir’s greatest works. "Forget it Jake", indeed...

Final Score: 10

To me, Chinatown is Hollywood apologizing for changing the plot of The Big Sleep.
And I accept.

[Wooley]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTQ1NTAyMDgzNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNTQ1NzIwMjE@._V1_.jpg


4

I really enjoy this film.

[crumbsroom]

But from there, eh. There are a lot of aspects to the film that just don't really go anywhere. A priest and nun who visit the house become strangely ill, and the priest almost dies in a freak car accident. So the house is . . . telekinetic? A friend of George's who is sort of psychic talks about the house having been home to some sort of satanic worship and trapped spirits. So the house is . . . haunted by the spirits of those people? Also there's a well that is a portal to hell? Or something?


This isn't an appeal to make anyone consider the movies as being good (it isn't...but it's also not bad) but it is all of these narrative dead ends that, for me, make the film almost one of the better representations of the modern ghost story. And by this I mean, the general bullshit of the modern ghost story where every little peculiar thing that happens in a families life somehow has to be woven into the fabric of their belief the house is haunted. Flies in the house? Ghosts! Someone almost gets into a car accident? Ghosts! A priest goes blind? Ghosts!



Coming from a family who thinks every house they ever lived in is haunted, I can attest that this is how every thing that happens to them is framed. Everything is proof of superstitious going ons. When it is all really just a way to find the drudgery of their lives seem a little more entertaining and mythical than it really is.



As a child I loved this movie. Along with Bugsy Malone and DePalma's The Fury, it is the first movie I ever saw in a theater. And so it held a lofty status for years. Until my brain adjusted and I saw it for the shell of a story that it really was. But, still, their is some value in its hucksterisms. And, as you mentioned, there are legitimately decent moments in the film. That almost feel like they are from a real ghost story.

[chawhee]

Out of Sight (1998)
https://www.uphe.com/sites/default/files/2015/04/Out-of-Sight-Gallery-6.jpg
3
I'm a passive Soderbergh fan I suppose, but I always love seeing Clooney's beautiful face haha

This is my first time seeing this movie, and I imagine this movie was all the rage in 1998, but it looked markedly old to me. All of the cast members were outstanding though. The plot was fine overall, but a few spots here and there didn't seem to nail the tone for me (some scenes more serious while others more comical).

[Wooley]

Out of Sight (1998)
https://www.uphe.com/sites/default/files/2015/04/Out-of-Sight-Gallery-6.jpg
3
I'm a passive Soderbergh fan I suppose, but I always love seeing Clooney's beautiful face haha

This is my first time seeing this movie, and I imagine this movie was all the rage in 1998, but it looked markedly old to me. All of the cast members were outstanding though. The plot was fine overall, but a few spots here and there didn't seem to nail the tone for me (some scenes more serious while others more comical).

I haven't seen it in a while but that was my No.1 of that year. Still would probably be one of my low-key favorites. I love both Don Cheadle and Albert Brooks in that one.

[AboveTheClouds]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51VAFCGQVHL._AC_.jpg

[LChimp]

https://br.web.img2.acsta.net/pictures/21/08/26/17/27/2091514.jpg

I was ready to trash the movie, few action scenes, a lot of talking, somewhat slow pace... but the third act kinda redeemed the whole thing, it was very good.

I was like

https://media.tenor.com/Ng0W1g3a05MAAAAM/what-okay.gif

[Takoma11]

But, still, their is some value in its hucksterisms. And, as you mentioned, there are legitimately decent moments in the film. That almost feel like they are from a real ghost story.

Right. I think that the frustration I feel with it is that it's neither a low-key, realistic portrayal of a haunting, nor is it an all-out haunting. The weird low-key stuff is great: the girl and her invisible friend, the babysitter getting trapped in the closet.

[GulfportDoc]

Chinatown (1974)

Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown...

...

Final Score: 10

Very nice review, and I agree with your rating. IMO Chinatown was, and is, the best neo-noir. I enjoyed The Two Jakes as well, but it didn't have the punch of the first one.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftrailersfromhell.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F06%2F5449topPium.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=89b1b8e9eaf6746f6290c129d7afde5a449b6d4cb0d55e369b3cbd5e24f32032&ipo=images

The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, 1970

Sam (Tony Musante) is an American writer living in Italy with his girlfriend, Julia (Suzy Kendall). One night while out walking, Sam witnesses the attempted murder of a woman named Monica (Eva Renzi) by a mysterious figure in black. Monica survives, but Sam becomes aware of a series of killings of women taking place in the city. Working alongside a police detective named Morosini (Enrico Maria Salerno), Sam becomes determined to identify the killer.

Sometimes a really excellent scene can bless a film with good vibes, and that was definitely the case for me with this one. Yes, there is some silliness that ensues (some intentional, some not), but the opening sequence was incredibly thrilling and it put me in a good mood that endured for the rest of the film.

Walking along the street, Sam catches sight of two figures struggling at the top of a staircase. Seeing what he sees, the camera dips back so that the figures are out of sight, then forward again to get a better look. As Sam draws close, Monica is stabbed in the stomach. Trying to help her, Sam goes through a set of glass doors, only for the killer to close another set behind him. Trapped between the two sections of glass, Sam can only watch powerlessly as Monica slowly drags herself along the floor, reaching her bloodied hand out for help that he cannot give. The scene stretches on and on. Sam is finally able to attract the attention of a man who calls the police, but we can feel the time and the feeling of impotence as he watches a woman dying in front of him.

Nothing else in the film is as good as this opening, but the rest is perfectly serviceable. The killer is fond of taunting the police---and later Sam--with phone calls. Sam must track down several leads, including a strange painting connected to one of the victims and interviewing a pimp who was a suspect in one of the killings. Musante makes for a good lead, and the rapport between Sam and Julia adds some fun to the film.

We only really see one murder, with the rest of the thrills coming from different attacks on Sam himself and against Julia. At the same time, I enjoyed the repeated flashbacks to the original attack, as Sam tries to figure out what he noticed that just wasn't right.

It's definitely hard to take some of the police technology with a straight face. While it might have been era-appropriate, many of the science elements just feel a little silly. A lot of it feels made up (like using an oscilloscope to tell if two voices came from the same person) and it's hard to take it seriously.

Overall a solid thriller with some good twists right up until the last few minutes.

4

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/D0Jyzzx3/human3.jpg
By Shochiku - https://www.shochiku.co.jp/cinema/database/03387/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69839342

The Human Condition III : A Soldier's Prayer - (1961)

So completes one of the most stunning and epic dramas I've ever watched - it's certainly near-impossible to find a film as purposeful and meaningful, and it's about as far from preachy or overbearing as you can get. Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai) has a kind of doomed idealism when it comes to humanity - so much so that he believes his Soviet enemies are sure to live in a Socialist paradise. He always did have a disconnect with what works on paper and what works in real life. At every turn he tries to turn his humanist passion into some kind of workable strategy despite facing situations that are hopeless from that kind of perspective. In the first film he worked for a labor camp, trying to improve the conditions for the Chinese slaves there. In the second he found himself conscripted into the army, furious at the mistreatment of his fellow recruits. Here, he's on the run, and eventually lands in a Soviet P.O.W. camp, where he is tested to his absolute limits when he finds out that, once again, the most cruel and corrupt are usually the ones who find themselves with power over others. The trilogy (which is really one film - three parts all necessary to each other) says as much about humanist ideals, and humanity, as any film can. To top all of that off it's visually brilliant, with performances, sound, editing and direction that's perfect. The themes it wrestles with are complex and they aren't handled with naivety - instead bending to reality. My rating below is for the 3 films combined - which taken together form an absolute masterpiece.

10/10

[SpelingError]

https://i.postimg.cc/D0Jyzzx3/human3.jpg
By Shochiku - https://www.shochiku.co.jp/cinema/database/03387/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69839342

The Human Condition III : A Soldier's Prayer - (1961)

So completes one of the most stunning and epic dramas I've ever watched - it's certainly near-impossible to find a film as purposeful and meaningful, and it's about as far from preachy or overbearing as you can get. Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai) has a kind of doomed idealism when it comes to humanity - so much so that he believes his Soviet enemies are sure to live in a Socialist paradise. He always did have a disconnect with what works on paper and what works in real life. At every turn he tries to turn his humanist passion into some kind of workable strategy despite facing situations that are hopeless from that kind of perspective. In the first film he worked for a labor camp, trying to improve the conditions for the Chinese slaves there. In the second he found himself conscripted into the army, furious at the mistreatment of his fellow recruits. Here, he's on the run, and eventually lands in a Soviet P.O.W. camp, where he is tested to his absolute limits when he finds out that, once again, the most cruel and corrupt are usually the ones who find themselves with power over others. The trilogy (which is really one film - three parts all necessary to each other) says as much about humanist ideals, and humanity, as any film can. To top all of that off it's visually brilliant, with performances, sound, editing and direction that's perfect. The themes it wrestles with are complex and they aren't handled with naivety - instead bending to reality. My rating below is for the 3 films combined - which taken together form an absolute masterpiece.

10/10
Glad you loved the trilogy.

[Fabulous]

The Snows of Kilimanjaro (1952)

2.5

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/original/8YtTgIKWnBRzqogsbv3GS9Z9ylE.jpg

[Stirchley]

https://i.postimg.cc/D0Jyzzx3/human3.jpg
By Shochiku - https://www.shochiku.co.jp/cinema/database/03387/, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69839342

The Human Condition III : A Soldier's Prayer - (1961)

So completes one of the most stunning and epic dramas I've ever watched - it's certainly near-impossible to find a film as purposeful and meaningful, and it's about as far from preachy or overbearing as you can get. Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai) has a kind of doomed idealism when it comes to humanity - so much so that he believes his Soviet enemies are sure to live in a Socialist paradise. He always did have a disconnect with what works on paper and what works in real life. At every turn he tries to turn his humanist passion into some kind of workable strategy despite facing situations that are hopeless from that kind of perspective. In the first film he worked for a labor camp, trying to improve the conditions for the Chinese slaves there. In the second he found himself conscripted into the army, furious at the mistreatment of his fellow recruits. Here, he's on the run, and eventually lands in a Soviet P.O.W. camp, where he is tested to his absolute limits when he finds out that, once again, the most cruel and corrupt are usually the ones who find themselves with power over others. The trilogy (which is really one film - three parts all necessary to each other) says as much about humanist ideals, and humanity, as any film can. To top all of that off it's visually brilliant, with performances, sound, editing and direction that's perfect. The themes it wrestles with are complex and they aren't handled with naivety - instead bending to reality. My rating below is for the 3 films combined - which taken together form an absolute masterpiece.

10/10

I’ve always avoided this like the plague (not a huge fan of Japanese cinema), but you do make it sound awfully good. Maybe I’ll give it a shot.

[Gideon58]

https://www.capitoltheatreusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/the-banshees-of-inisherin-13.jpg



4

[Neesonfan]

Duel (1971) 8/10

[Torgo]

Bullet Train - 3

Brad Pitt? A briefcase? Is this a Quentin Tarantino movie? No, but it tries to be one with its story involving rival hitmen, gang warfare, revenge, obscure pop culture references, unexpected use of food and drink, etc. The title refers to where all the action takes place, which is bound for Kyoto and from which the perpetually unlucky Ladybug (Brad Pitt) must retrieve that classic MacGuffin. Unfortunately, most of the passengers have an interest in the briefcase as well and are willing to kill to make it theirs, whether it's brother hitmen Tangerine (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Lemon (Brian Tyree Henry) or the school uniform-clad Prince (Joey King).

For the most part, I do not love action movies inspired by Quentin Tarantino's work. Besides lacking their secret sauce, the average one tends to be too clever and smug for my liking, not to mention unsatisfying on an emotional level. While this one didn't change my mind about them, it has enough going for it that it held my interest until the end. Overly cute monikers are an annoying cliché of this subgenre, mostly because they tend to be the most interesting thing about the characters who have them, but whenever any of them appears on screen, I genuinely cared about what would happen to them instead of reacting how I usually do, which is "oh it's that guy, and if I remember correctly, he wants to kill that other guy." The all-star cast helps, as does getting to see everyone at their best and worst, which combined with Leitch's knack for directing a good action scene give the movie the added benefit of not being easy to predict. It also pushes the cameo button, but each one is inspired and it thankfully doesn't push it too much. There are also some pretty amazing special effects, including one where I was certain Ladybug's bad luck would finally get the better of him that took my breath away. Despite what I like about it, I still has qualities that make me remember why this isn't my favorite flavor of action. The movie does cameos right, but it does push the flashback button too many times for my liking, and the lengthy and staccato dialogue tends to be more long-winded than witty. Also, for being set in Tokyo, there is an annoying lack of Japanese people. Once again, this is a subgenre I side-eye, and even though I enjoyed it more than most, I'll continue to side eye it. If you're more tolerant of such movies than I am, though, that it's on Netflix (as of late 2022, anyway) is a gift.

[Mr Minio]

The trilogy (which is really one film - three parts all necessary to each other) says as much about humanist ideals, and humanity, as any film can. Glad you loved it! It indeed is one of the greatest works of (any) art and definitely among the 20 best films ever made. The deep humanism of The Human Condition Trilogy is absolutely gut-wrenching, and it's 100% what I meant by "humane" when discussing "humane movies" with Yoda the other day.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcbsnews1.cbsistatic.com%2Fhub%2Fi%2Fr%2F2018%2F05%2F25%2F45e448c8-b431-42d9-9f7c-34148add77c7%2Fthumbnail%2F1200x630%2F8171f0c22880c25523c3e4880a69093e%2Fsummer-1993-paula-robles-laia-artigas-oscilloscope-promo.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=742d76f86ac49b88e38ba469ac3779604839e116ba3313fb55eb526c0cfe4709&ipo=images

Summer 1993, 2017

Young Frida (Laia Artigas) has just lost her mother to illness, having already lost her father. She is taken in by her uncle Esteve (David Verdaguer) and aunt Marga (Bruna Cusí), who also have a younger child named Anna (Paula Robles). Over the course of the summer, Frida must adapt to her new life and new family situation.

This was a very good, realistic look at a short period of time in which a child is going through an intense emotional experience. It captures the point of view of its child protagonist pretty incredibly, and slowly builds to a low-key but devastating conclusion.

So much of the success of this film rests on the performance of Artigas as Frida, and she is really excellent. I cannot say enough nice things about her performance, and especially the chemistry that she has with all of the other actors, particularly the very young Robles. The two young actors capture the kind rivalry that defines so many sibling relationships, and especially in this case where they are going from cousins to sisters.

The film walks just the right line in its portrayal of the family dynamic as they all adjust. Esteve and Marga are welcoming to Frida, but at times they do show some frustration with her. Of course, every word of criticism hits Frida extra hard in her fragile state, such as when Esteve scolds her for allowing Anna to walk into a river where she falls under the water for a frightening moment. Further, even the setting of the home is a new world for Frida. Coming back to her point of view, as she watches the farm animals being slaughtered, she tries to reconcile these images with her limited understanding of her mother's death.

The movie builds to a moment that is quietly devastating. It all begins with a bathtime routine, and the girls being put into their nightgowns. Suddenly, in the middle of a friendly play fight with Esteve and Anna, Frida begins sobbing and cannot be calmed. She cannot even articulate what is wrong, and we watch as Esteve and Marga realize that she's not hurt, and maybe can't even fully say why she's upset. But we can see it.

We can see that for this child, even when life is good, there will always be a heaviness. That family moments will always run the risk of being like emotional time-bombs, ready to explode when it's least expected. That she has experienced a loss that she can't entirely wrap her head around and may never fully be able to process..

This was a really beautiful movie, anchored by an incredible central performance. The emotional tumult of the last 10 minutes really snuck up on me, only to hit me like a train. It's a film that doesn't need to drum up drama any more than the real experience of someone adjusting to life after a traumatic upheaval. Based on the real experience of the writer/director Carla Simon, it lives in little details like the short argument between the girls over who gets to hold a bar of soap at bath time.

4.5

[Jackie Daytona]

Felt let down by Smile (2022). I heard it got fairly strong reviews but to me it just seemed like a slapdash version of The Ring with jump-scares instead of atmospheric horror. Lead actress was solid, I appreciate the extended metaphor on trauma, but it just fizzled as a movie imo.