Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





I didn't liked the acting, story and characters. The film has some interesting scenes (like that one in the bar) but I just think it was very boring for the entire run. They take some liberties in the vampire mitology, thats cool, and the desert scenario was different, but I really think this film has nothing good to add to the "vampire" films at all. All the fights are very boring with some strange edit; some characters dies in very stupid way (I know it's just for fun, but I don't dig it), even the violence was boring (sorry, I know all you guys like this filme). This film has a very big cult following, and I can see why, I just don't like of pratcly nothing in this, I know I'm the minority here, but I not even liked the over the top moments! Maybe a rewatch will be a good thing (like it was for John Carpenter's Vampires) but for now, this is it.
The first time I saw Near Dark I loved it. I thought, wow, a refreshing take on vampires with a lot of throwbacks to the more classical portrayal. Gritty, dark, violent, and yet also very human and relatable. In terms of acting I can't reallyt see any flaws. You didn't like the acting? I would actually be intersted in hearing a little more on this. Why didn't you like the acting, or which actors in particular did you feel had weak performances? I'm more surprised by you, because I thought this would be a movie up your alley based on other stuff you like. Now, I'm not saying it's a masterpiece or anything. The second time I watched this movie I actually got a little bored and ran out of steam. It's not a masterpiece or anything. But one star I feel is extremely unfair. It's at least a half decent movie overall. The story? Okay, that's a little wierd. There is nothing wrong with the story. I challenge you to actually articulate an issue you have with the story. It's a really solid story. The characters, again, I can't see an isssue. It's not that I can't understand someone having high standards and not liking the movie overall, but I really can't see an issue with the story or characters. Every character is distinct, fleshed out, and has personality. You may not like the characters, and maybe that's the issue, but they're not bad characters in quality terms. Nothing good to add to vampire films? But I thought it stood out as really important piece of the vampire mythology. It showed a person overcoming the infection and bringing his lover from a vampire back to human. That's something I've never seen in any other vampire film, but also the culture of the vampires was really cool. It's a contrast to Interview With a Vampire and Dracula in the classic vampire sense as apposed to Underoworld and Twilight modernising whole new approaches. Usually I think you have excellent taste Ultraviolence, that's why I'm surprised you disliked Near Dark so much.


Payback: Straight Up (2006) [Brian Helgeland] - ★★★★
^ There's a directors cut of Payback (1999), I just readed about this cut last friday, I really like the original, even with all of the flaws and I'm not a big fan of the third act, this cut changes the entire third act, and the atmosphere is more sober, more darker (even without the "almost" black & white palet of the original - this is the only thing I whish was in this version). For the fans of the original I really recomend give this a try, it's oblique and anticlimax! I loved even more!
Interesting. I'm also a fan of Payback, so I'll have to check this cut out.



“I was cured, all right!”
The first time I saw Near Dark I loved it. I thought, wow, a refreshing take on vampires with a lot of throwbacks to the more classical portrayal. Gritty, dark, violent, and yet also very human and relatable. In terms of acting I can't reallyt see any flaws. You didn't like the acting? I would actually be intersted in hearing a little more on this. Why didn't you like the acting, or which actors in particular did you feel had weak performances? I'm more surprised by you, because I thought this would be a movie up your alley based on other stuff you like. Now, I'm not saying it's a masterpiece or anything. The second time I watched this movie I actually got a little bored and ran out of steam. It's not a masterpiece or anything. But one star I feel is extremely unfair. It's at least a half decent movie overall. The story? Okay, that's a little wierd. There is nothing wrong with the story. I challenge you to actually articulate an issue you have with the story. It's a really solid story. The characters, again, I can't see an isssue. It's not that I can't understand someone having high standards and not liking the movie overall, but I really can't see an issue with the story or characters. Every character is distinct, fleshed out, and has personality. You may not like the characters, and maybe that's the issue, but they're not bad characters in quality terms. Nothing good to add to vampire films? But I thought it stood out as really important piece of the vampire mythology. It showed a person overcoming the infection and bringing his lover from a vampire back to human. That's something I've never seen in any other vampire film, but also the culture of the vampires was really cool. It's a contrast to Interview With a Vampire and Dracula in the classic vampire sense as apposed to Underoworld and Twilight modernising whole new approaches. Usually I think you have excellent taste Ultraviolence, that's why I'm surprised you disliked Near Dark so much.




Interesting. I'm also a fan of Payback, so I'll have to check this cut out.
Challenge accepted, but first, I'll rewatch this film next weekend, and then, I'll write about it and mark you!



Challenge accepted, but first, I'll rewatch this film next weekend, and then, I'll write about it and mark you!
Okay cool, mark HK too, cuz I'd like to hear what he says. Based on what you say I think I may rewatch it too. I mean, I do plan on rewatching it at some point anyway.





Sweet documentary about 2 people with autism/Aspergers.




Amusing satire. Steve Buscemi hilarious as Nikita Krushchev.




Re-watch of an excellent movie, which I did not fully realize my 1st time round. @Citizen Rules, this is a good movie.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



Souls For Sale (Rupert Hughes, 1923)
+
I'll be darned if I haven't forgotten the lead character's name already



Ant-Man [2015] ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

What a joyous film. Paul Rudd is great in the lead role and really adds to the fun factor. It has such a strong and interesting premise, and there were some great miniature action sequences. I will make an effort to seek out the next film in the series, Ant-Man and the Wasp.





Heart and Souls
(1993)
3/5

It was better the first time I saw it.

@Citizen Rules , have you seen this? If not, you might enjoy it.





Not bad. Lost the plot of the plot about a 1/4 of the way in, but that’s not uncommon for me with action movies. Claire Foy very good actress. Much prefer the Swedish versions of these movies.



Heart and Souls
(1993)
3/5

It was better the first time I saw it.@Citizen Rules , have you seen this? If not, you might enjoy it.
Thanks MG, I have not seen it, but I just read about it at IMDB and it sounds like I might like it. I usually like Robert Downey Jr. so I'll watch it.



Beoning\Burning (2018) Chang-dong Lee


This movie turns around physiologic & behavior where details are very important. I just saw the movie once, so I'm still trying to connect all the dots, but I'll give my two cents. We have Lee Jong-su, a introvert kid with relationship struggles, first with his own parents, a mother who he didn't see for 15 years, a aggressive father filled with anger. Then we have Shin Hae-mi, a very emotional extrovert, shes trying to find herself, seeks males acceptance and have/had complexes with her body. Then we have Ben a very mysterious rich guy, who have traces of something we might call sociopath, psychopath, someone else's tears intrigue him, something he never had, he laughs faced with someones else's love, he can't focus or find any type of attraction to his friends stories or ideas, he banalizes disasters/destruction/death even the one he creates justifying it with the laws of nature, his nihilistic saying there isn't good or bad, right or wrong. In general this movie approaches different subject, from types of masculinity, different social standards and contrasts between lifestyles. One movie made to be stuck in your brain for days.

WARNING: spoilers below
This movie have many questions, but we have enough evidences to support the rich guy killed her: the girls watch in Ben's bathroom, the cat responding by being called by name. The scene where Lee Jong-su burns a small piece of the green house is to give the viewers the idea of how fast the plastic would have burned. We now know that Ben was lying saying, it would need gas and ten minutes to burn a entire green house, what would need gas and ten minutes would be Shin Hae-mi body.



The Standoff at Sparrow Creek (2018)

+


Nice independent thriller. It's slow paced but at the same time there's no wasted time so it moves along nicely for it's 85 minutes. It's got the Reservoir Dogs theme of who in our midst did it, but of course it's not like Reservoir Dogs. Good acting and I like the way it played out. A very good watch but not particularly memorable.





This movie, almost 30 years old, based on characters created almost 45 years ago, is still freaking hilarious...the screenplay is nothing short of brilliant with its creation of "Conehead-speak", not to mention some terrific visual effects and a cast which features just about everyone who was making America laugh circa 1990.