Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





matt72582's Avatar
Please Quote/Tag Or I'll Miss Your Responses
The Cats - 7.5/10
Henning Carlsen is really good. Third movie in just one day. Amazing. It took me the entire year to see that many.

The cast is all female (except one) and it's a good story about mob rule. Very sexual. This was on Mubi





Victim of The Night


The Mighty Peking Man (Ho Meng Hua, 1977)
5-/10
""Mighty Peking Man is very funny, although a shade off the high mark of Infra-Man, which was made a year earlier, and is my favourite Hong Kong monster film. Both were produced by the legendary Runme Shaw, who, having tasted greatness, obviously hoped to repeat. I find to my astonishment that I gave Infra-Man only two and a half stars when I reviewed it. That was 22 years ago, but a fellow will remember a lot of things you wouldn't think he'd remember. I'll bet a month hasn't gone by since that I haven't thought of that film. I am awarding Mighty Peking Man three stars, for general goofiness and a certain level of insane genius, but I cannot in good conscience rate it higher than Infra-Man. So, in answer to those correspondents who ask if I have ever changed a rating on a movie: Yes, Infra-Man moves up to three stars."
- Roger Ebert



27th Hall of Fame

True Romance (1993) -


This film was a mixed bag for me. For one, I don't know what it was going for with the characters. Clarence and Alabama's flaws are left out in the open,
WARNING: spoilers below
but given the weird 'they live happily ever after' ending,
it seems like you're meant to root for the two of them, and that connection just wasn't there for me. Like, Clarence's Elvis Presley hallucination in the first act screamed "This guy needs serious help!" and I kept that impression all throughout the film. Alabama didn't prove much better in this regard as the way she shrugged Clarence's violence off (the line "I think what you did is so romantic" made me cringe so hard) also annoyed me. As per Tarantino style, the action is highly stylized, but I found very little of it exciting. Those scenes really could've used some tightening up in terms of editing and cinematography. Even the final shootout, though interesting on paper, suffered from this to a degree. With that being said, I liked a few aspects about this film. Tarantino's writing style isn't for everyone, and while a couple scenes like the n word conversation are cringe inducing, I enjoyed most of the dialogue and felt it brought enough style to the film to keep it entertaining from beginning to end. Tarantino has a talent for writing catchy and witty scripts and this film was no exception to that. The film also lives up to another of Tarantino's strengths as it has a strong ensemble cast. Slater, Hopper, Walken, Rubinek, Rapaport, and even Arquette, though her acting occasionally annoyed me, ranged from good to great. Finally, while the story didn't interest me much, I did enjoy a few smaller scenes within the larger story, like Elliot being pulled over by a cop. Issues aside, I enjoyed my time with this film and, while I doubt I'll ever end up loving it, I might watch it again if I'm in the right mood.
That's so weird that you said you didn't feel the connection between Clarence and Alabama, because it was the connection between Clarence and Alabama was the only thing that allowed me to accept everything else that happened in the film.



That's so weird that you said you didn't feel the connection between Clarence and Alabama, because it was the connection between Clarence and Alabama was the only thing that allowed me to accept everything else that happened in the film.
I actually said that I wasn't able to feel a connection to them since they were both unlikable and I felt like the movie wanted me to root for them. I'm aware that the two of them felt a connection towards each other. Never doubted that for a second.



I watched Kimi. It was pretty good. Got a real Rear Window/Wait Until Dark vibe.



Rewatch The Revenant: 9/10, Love it!













In This Our Life (John Huston (& Raoul Walsh), 1942)
Who knew that Ms. Davis could play such a manipulative woman?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
+



CODA
(2021, Heder)



"Let them figure out how to deal with deaf people"

CODA follows Ruby (Emilia Jones), the only hearing member of her family of fishermen in Gloucester, Massachusetts. An outcast at school, Ruby enlists in the school choir so she can be close to her crush, but this in turn sparks her love for music and her desire to audition for Berklee. But how will that affect her family? will she be willing to leave them to follow her passion?

Through most of its course, I was more or less unimpressed by the film, even though I was enjoying it. Even though the aspect of a child growing up in a deaf family was interesting and refreshing, the coming of age angle was more or less formulaic and cliché. But once I settled in what it was going for, and I focused on the emotions, it got to me. Towards the last act, I was bawling my eyes out, especially with one scene between Ruby and her dad, Frank (Troy Kotsur).

Grade:



Full review on my Movie Loot
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



[the coming of age angle was more or less formulaic and cliché.[/rating]
An understatement.

And the deaf angle wasn't handled with an ounce of authenticity, virtually forcing the film to take place in a world where the ADA doesn't exist or the family actively refuses it (which ties into the problematic depiction of the deaf members as being parasitic and uncaring towards their daughter. Sure, some people are garbage but for a movie so praised for representation, it seemed an odd choice).

Then there's the main character. A mediocre actress and decent singer that somehow everyone is convinced is great enough to assuredly get into music school (I'm unconvinced). I've rarely seen a character with so little agency. Virtually every decision is made by her is actually forced upon her or her improbably demanding teacher (that violates every procedure and protocol in place to enforce propriety between teachers and pupils). Her auditions and even her love interest are just something of happenstance.

Making a hearing person the focus of a deaf film also has pangs of the Hollywood cliche of the white focus of the black narrative that has defined many other Oscar darlings because it makes the majority of the voters get warm fuzzies without actually having the growing pains of looking through a lens dissimilar to their own. On that front, it pales in comparison to last year's The Sound of Metal.

From a filmmaking standpoint, it has all the aesthetic pleasure of a Hallmark film.

The only compliments I can give the film are that the deaf parents are talented and bring an amound of heart to the film that was almost lacking (Matlin apparently fought for them to recast with deaf actors, which led to Kotsur). His performance especially, leads to the funniest and most heartfelt moments that in the hands of someone else, could've easily fallen prey to the rest of the films inadequacies.

In other words...

It's artless, inauthentic schmaltz.



A Face In the Crowd -


I liked it quite a bit , though its one of those movies I'll probably need to re-watch. The cast gave good performances all around, but Andy Griffith stole the show, so to speak, as Lonesome Rhodes.

Donkey Skin -


After watching The Umbrellas of Cherbourg and The Young Girls of Rochefort (Both of which I loved) I decided to watch this film by the same director. While its not as good as those two, I still liked it alright! It has lots of bizarre touches here and there that make for an entertaining watch. It also gave me some The Beauty and the Beast (1946) vibes, due to some of the visuals, effects, and also by having Jean Marais in it.

Paris, Texas -


Very good film. It's been on my list a while, and I've finally gotten around to watching it. (Come to think of it, so was A Face In The Crowd...) Its another one I'll need to re-watch to get a better opinion of, though.



Not that I was specifically invited, but I consider myself a deeply silly cinephile so it’s probably not my crowd.
Nah, we still have plenty of fun there, just like here; check it out sometime, Sexington!


A Touch of Zen, 1971

Unambitious scholar Gu (Chun Shih) has his world turned upside down when a mysterious stranger strolls into town looking for a fugitive named Yang (Feng Hsu) who is hiding out after her family was targeted by a corrupt government official. A dangerous mix of deception and violent showdowns ensues.

Always a good sign when you have to agonize over which stunning image to include at the top of a review.

This film is just great, with an interesting story, engaging characters, and a visual style that somehow starts strong and only gets better as it goes until it reaches a kind of other-worldly apex in the last five or ten minutes.

While this film is about three hours long, it's the kind of movie where you don't really feel that length. The minutes are all used purposefully, and the action or the character development is constantly moving forward. The relationship between Gu and Yang subverts typical action dynamics, as she is the seasoned warrior and he is the innocent. When Gu does participate more directly, it is to come up with a Scooby-Doo-esque plan to scare the bad guys into thinking a temple is haunted. Chuckling about his brilliance when the ruse is a success, Gu is then brought up short when he encounters the very real carnage that resulted.

While there are many great sequences in the film, the final 20 or so minutes are truly epic, from both an action and visual standpoint. At each step the film just pushes things one . . . step . . . further.

A lot to like here. No notes!

This has been high on my to-watch list for some time now, so I should probably go ahead and watch it pretty soon. That being said though, I have heard that it was an influence on Crouching Tiger (which is obviously one of my all-time faves), so how would you say it compared to that, just out of curiosity?



This has been high on my to-watch list for some time now, so I should probably go ahead and watch it pretty soon. That being said though, I have heard that it was an influence on Crouching Tiger (which is obviously one of my all-time faves), so how would you say it compared to that, just out of curiosity?
I would say that both films do a good job of juggling several story elements and character arcs at the same time. It's been a while since I watched Crouching Tiger, but it seemed to me that A Touch of Zen was a bit more evenly paced. While they both have beautiful, bittersweet endings, I have to give the edge to A Touch of Zen. I don't want to say any more about it until you've watched it, but literally the last 10 minutes are next level.



I would say that both films do a good job of juggling several story elements and character arcs at the same time. It's been a while since I watched Crouching Tiger, but it seemed to me that A Touch of Zen was a bit more evenly paced. While they both have beautiful, bittersweet endings, I have to give the edge to A Touch of Zen. I don't want to say any more about it until you've watched it, but literally the last 10 minutes are next level.
Hmm; I've heard criticism of CTHD's pacing before (most of which I presume are due to the flashback sequence in the desert), but I never felt that way about it personally. I mean, it is possible for movies to get unfocused by trying to stuff too many sub-plots/tangents in, like with A Very Long Engagement, but I think the desert flashback added a lot of welcome texture to the experience, sort of like the sub-plot with "English Bob" in Unforgiven; they're just one tangent a piece, and they contribute a lot to those film's story/themes, you know?