Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





[Hardcore] Great, sleazy, film.
Yeah, I recall that being a pretty rough film in 1979. Of course I enjoyed George C. Scott in just about anything he ever did. He took some stinker roles. But his acting was almost always 100%



We Own the Night (2007)

Good acting all around from Wahlberg, J. Phoenix, Eva Mendes, and Robt. Duvall. The writing kind of let the film down, which sometimes is the case when there's a combination director/writer, in this case James Gray.

The story didn't seem realistic. Phoenix had to do a transformation of character type, which he really didn't pull off IMO. He's a great actor, but yet he's less effective when he plays a more straight type character role, whereas he so easily plays a stoner, a weirdo or a nut.

It's a watchable movie for sure, but I'd only give it 5/10.

~Doc



Yeah, I recall that being a pretty rough film in 1979. Of course I enjoyed George C. Scott in just about anything he ever did. He took some stinker roles. But his acting was almost always 100%
I got this as an 11yo with my older cousins as they were getting Petrol (where the "video shop" was)...let me rent it...as my Dad loved George C. Scott...when they dropped me off and I handed it proudly to my dad..... ...watched years later....good Schrader film.



Ginger and Rosa (2012)

Good, watchable and, affecting tale of growing up and relationships (sexual and familial) in the 1960s. I think for a broad film it's crystallised well down to the relationships between the two friends.

If you can get over the fact the characters are mostly all painted as rich pretentious dilettantes....it's a really good film. It holds it's strength over its time and is very enjoyable.




Raven73's Avatar
Boldly going.
Dr. Sleep
6.5/10.

Dr. Sleep pales in comparison to The Shining (1980) so much that this film feels less like a sequel and more like a spin-off. The Shining is horrifying and mysterious; this film is like Twilight (2008) but without the romance. Unlike its predecessor, Dr. Sleep asks no questions and only provides bland answers.
A disappointing follow-up to one of the greatest horror films of all-time.
It's interesting to note too that the movie is again very different from the book.
__________________
Boldly going.




MULAN
(2020)

First viewing. Definitely will be the last viewing too. I have never seen the original animated version of the film, so I had no frame of reference or an idea of what the movie was about. The story was predictable. The visuals were not groundbreaking. The acting was very bland. There were some enjoyable scenes. Overall, another forgettable live action remake that shouldn't have been made.

__________________
“Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are, it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!” ~ Rocky Balboa



Edge of Darkness (2010) 8/10

Pretty good, especially for its somewhat traditional crime/action approach to the genre and the overall commercial package.

It's entertaining without leaving a feeling of being treated like the mindless consumer the makers of these types of movies usually don't bother much with hiding that they see you as. Must say I appreciate the effort, as it actually lets me, you know, enjoy the movie.

I dare anyone disagreeing with this review to point me to better examples of comparably "available" thrillers that manage to suck you in and, for the most part, give your anti Hollywood snob bone a break



Edge of Darkness (2010) 8/10

I dare anyone disagreeing with this review to point me to better examples of comparably "available" thrillers that manage to suck you in and, for the most part, give your anti Hollywood snob bone a break
Never seen it, own and love the original tv series though - if you've seen both how would you rate the two by comparison?



Edge of Darkness (2010) 8/10

Pretty good, especially for its somewhat traditional crime/action approach to the genre and the overall commercial package.

It's entertaining without leaving a feeling of being treated like the mindless consumer the makers of these types of movies usually don't bother much with hiding that they see you as. Must say I appreciate the effort, as it actually lets me, you know, enjoy the movie.

I dare anyone disagreeing with this review to point me to better examples of comparably "available" thrillers that manage to suck you in and, for the most part, give your anti Hollywood snob bone a break
Never seen it, own and love the original tv series though - if you've seen both how would you rate the two by comparison?
I was literally about the post the same thing. Huge fan of the original miniseries.

Hunt for the Wilderpeople 8/10
A witty warmhearted movie and is probably the best movie by Taika Waititi that i have seen so far
Yeah, it's a good one. I'd probably give the edge to What We Do in the Shadows, but Waititi has a pretty strong track record at this point.



Commando (1985).






Gloriously over the top 80s action movie, dripping with testosterone and 80s excess. Arnold is in full one-man-army mode, built like a tank, taking out bad guys with a kill count higher than a small war. Some great one liners, tight pacing and probably the least intimidating villain ever in Bennett who's basically an overweight middle-aged man going toe-to-toe with peak Schwarzenegger. It's ridiculous of course and completely unrealistic but that's all part of the charm.


They don't make 'em like this anymore. An action movie classic.


3.5/5 Stars.



Fear (1996)

Early thriller outing for Mark Wahlberg and Reese Witherspoon playing teens from different sides of the track who hook up. With deadly consequences!

The story is ropey and some of the acting is too (Davids voice changing when with his friends or with his GF is bl00dy hilarious!) , it's predictable and laughable at points but still has a charm for all that.






Joker, 2019

I don't have a lot to say about this one right now, as I'm still working through my thoughts about it. Phoenix certainly gives a memorable performance and the film is very well written and directed. The 80s New York (sorry, "Gotham") that it evokes is a cold and harsh environment.

The main thing that I liked about the story is also the flip side of what I disliked, and that's the way that the film regards the main character, Arthur, a man suffering from mental illness and dealt cruelty after cruelty by both acquaintances and strangers.

So on the positive side, I appreciated the way that the movie portrayed the lack of resources and compassion for people with mental illness. There are people who have really severe mental illness who clearly need constant care. There are people with mental illness who can cope on their own. But a lot of people live in a horrible middle ground--too ill to cope on their own, but not sick "enough" to merit commitment. I have a friend whose mother struggles with schizophrenia, and they go through these horrible cycles involving 72 hour mental hospital stays, after which she is discharged, only to be found wandering the streets shoeless a month later. There is a systemic failure in our world (and certainly in the US) to support people with mental illness, and this is especially true in the 80s setting of the film. Arthur is told that he should seek help, but the government programs have been cut. I did appreciate that the movie showed that many people in the mental health system do mean well (like Arthur's counselor), but their power and resources are limited.

On the negative side, however, I felt that the film made an error in portraying Arthur as acting under a moral code. All of Arthur's violence in the movie is justified, and I actually found that to be kind of a problem. To begin with, people who are mentally ill do not precisely target only bad people. Their violence spills over into people they actually love and care about. Arthur becoming violent should be a tragedy, but the film muddies the waters by making all of his violent acts understandable (and, in certain cases, even something the audience would root for). Conveniently, all of the people he holds hostility toward but are not necessarily "guilty" are harmed by others. The film also conveniently withholds some of the justifiable concern someone might have about his behavior. I appreciated the scene with the neighbor, but generally when people in the film are worried about Arthur, the scene is framed so that they seem rude or uncaring. There are an unfortunate number of cases of people (and specifically "loner" men) who lash out violently because of a sense of rejection or having been wronged by the world--and despite Phoenix claiming that you aren't supposed to identify with Arthur, many parts of the film framed things so that the violence was his only choice or something that was justified.

I thought that the portrayal of Arthur's mother was actually a much better representation of mental illness. (MODERATE SPOILERS)
WARNING: spoilers below
She suffers from mental health issues. She may or may not have been taken advantage of by her wealthy employer (the part where she says that she signed an NDA rang true to me in a sea of other stuff that felt more ambiguous). She ends up with string of boyfriends who abuse her and abuse her son (notice that they say that she "let" the boyfriend beat her up and her son). She neglects her child, either intentionally or because of fear of her boyfriend. She tells herself a version of events that is probably some mix of truth and delusion. She is anxious, afraid, and she clings to the one person who shows her loyalty and love.


Good, but I need to mull over its themes a bit more.




Finished up two films that I had started earlier in the week.



Atlantic City, 1980

A woman named Sally (Susan Sarandon) lives in Atlantic City, hoping to become a blackjack dealer. Her loser husband, Dave, and his pregnant girlfriend arrive in town so that Dave can make a drug deal with cocaine he's stolen from some very bad people. An older man named Lou (Burt Lancaster) lives in Sally's building, mooching off of an elderly widow and pining after his glory days in Las Vegas. When Dave ropes Lou into his drug deal, Lou sees the opportunity to be a player once again and to pursue his interest in Sally.

Overall this was really good. It is strong in its treatment of the main characters and the development of the secondary characters (especially the widow, who at first seems like she might only exist to be the butt of jokes). Sally's plot arc is particularly compelling, as she strives to build a better life for herself despite repeated setbacks. Lancaster's performance is equally powerful as a man who idealizes a gangster lifestyle (drug dealing, murder, prison), despite never having achieved those things in any significant way. The almost childlike excitement he shows at the possibility of shooting someone is simultaneously endearing and chilling.

The only off-note for me was a pretty minor one. There's this whole plot element where every night Sally gets topless in front of her kitchen window and rubs herself down with lemon juice. I say again: a woman living in an apartment building that faces another apartment building routinely strips in front of an open window. She rubs herself down with lemon juice. It's revealed that this is because she hates the fish smell from the oyster bar where she works, which does nothing to explain why instead of washing her hands and arms, her entire routine is 90% breast focused. It adds this cheesy softcore element to the movie that made the whole thing feel like something that was made by an old perv, especially the second time we watch the entire sequence.

Very enjoyable and a totally satisfying narrative. I was worried about how the whole thing was going to wrap up, but it really sticks the ending.





Mon Oncle, 1958

This is easily my favorite of the Mr. Hulot films that I've seen (though I owe Playtime a rewatch).

The whole film looks like a living cartoon or graphic novel. It takes place is a hyper-technological alternate present. I LOVED the design of the house, which often had people looking out of those top windows so that it looked like two eyes with pupils.

This is maybe the most narrative and "personal" of the Hulot films--the main character spends much of his time visiting with his sister's family, hanging out with his nephew, and causing chaos at his brother-in-law's plastic hose factory.

I don't have much analysis of this one. It was pretty much a delight, though I did not enjoy the gang of sociopathic boys whose hilarious "pranks" always involved hurting people or getting people into confrontations.




Tenet - 2020

Tentative
. Need more views for a firm rating up or down from there. Expanded my thoughts more in the Tenet thread.

__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)




MULAN
(2020)

First viewing. Definitely will be the last viewing too. I have never seen the original animated version of the film, so I had no frame of reference or an idea of what the movie was about. The story was predictable. The visuals were not groundbreaking. The acting was very bland. There were some enjoyable scenes. Overall, another forgettable live action remake that shouldn't have been made.

I have actually never seen the original . Either that or I have and completely forgot I did. Might take time to watch it soon. This movie I have no desire to see. Wish they would stop remaking the old animated movies into live actions.

LEAVE THEM ALONE!