Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





Four of the Apocalypse (1975)

-


With being directed by Lucio Fulci, this was one of the westerns I was most looking forward to. Needless to say it was very disappointing. When there was action there was the expected violence, but there wasn't nearly enough action. Besides the first 25 minutes and the last 5 minutes, it was a whole lot of sucky nothing.




Vivarium (2019, Lorcan Finnegan)

Interestingly dark satire on family life as an endless loop, a trap of routine, where raising a child is a nightmare, the father is literally digging his own grave working a job that is ultimately meaningless, and there's no way out of it until you die. At times grotesque, at times mildly creepy, Vivarium wears its metaphorical aspects on its sleeve throughout in what seems to be an attempt to examine a young couple's subliminal fears of parenthood but I thought it needed a much stronger vision/execution to elevate it above your average indie flick. Eisenberg's bland performance doesn't help things either (Imogen Poots, on the contrary, did a much better job).




Kids Return (1996, Takeshi Kitano)

Kitano's first film after recovery from a motorcycle accident, Kids Return is a beautifully low-key, understated, episodic but ultimately very lyrical affair. It doesn't hit you over the head with overblown dramatism or mindblowing plot twists - instead, it tells a very predictable, almost boring story, set to a quintessentially '90s soundtrack, about two delinquent high school misfits hanging out together, drifting apart and going separate ways in life, ending in failure and going back to square one. While not super intricately woven or particularly compelling or profound, the film has a simple, heartfelt story at its core, and is shot and edited with an unobtrusive, mundane elegance that paints life as a series of fleeting snapshots - bittersweet, awkward, comedic, trivial, as life mostly is.
Will keep an eye out for this



What dah f%ck is that picture of? I'm not even going to say wtf I think it is. Is that a female?
To answer your question JoaoRodrigues I believe this is one of the public torture/executions carried out after the Chinese Boxer Revolution in the early 1900s. Happy to be proven wrong.



Eye of God (1997)



Interesting crime drama with Martha Plimpton and a host of other recognisable actors. It follows the action in a small town where a woman gets mixed up with an ex convict and the consequences all around them. It's very thoughtful and Nick Stahl is v. good in his part. the whole film has a kind of nervous inevitability about it but is portrayed at a good pace and very well done.

.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.

The Skin (Liliana Cavani, 1981)
6/10
Arabian Nights (Pier Paolo Pasolini, 1974)
5/10
Pharos of Chaos (Manfred Blank & Wolf-Eckart Bühler, 1983)
- 6.5/10
Bad Boys for Life (Adil & Bilall, 2020)
6/10

Some action, some comedy, some heart, a lot of pointless crap, or as Lawrence says "telanovela".
The New Gladiators (Lucio Fulci, 1984)
5/10
Underwater (William Eubank, 2020)
6/10
The Grudge (Nicolas Pesce, 2020)
5/10
FM (John A. Alonzo, 1978)
6/10

Enjoyable but a bit underwhelming.
Brown Girl Begins (Sharon Lewis, 2017)
5/10
Vivarium (Lorcan Finnegan, 2019)
5.5/10
Land of Doom (Peter Maris, 1986)
- 5/10
Portrait of a Lady on Fire (Céline Sciamma, 2019)
- 7/10

Pointed, slow-burn, sexy, gorgeous.
The Decline (Patrice Laliberté, 2020)
6/10
Tip Top (Serge Bozon, 2013)
+ 5/10
Gabrielle (Patrice Chéreau, 2005)
6/10
On the Silver Globe (Andrzej Zulawski. 1988)
6/10

Futuristic sci-fi movie plays equally as an ancient pagan drama.
I See You (Adam Randall, 2019)
5.5/10
Kill Chain: The Cyber War on America's Elections (3 Directors, 2020)
6.5/10
Loud Places (Dan Kennedy, 2017)
+ 5/10
Badland (Justin Lee, 2019)
6/10

Believable performancs in a true good vs. evil western.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
The Gentlemen (2019)


Guy Ritchie started his career with a bang (I know @honeykid would disagree xD). "Lock, stock and two smoking barrels" and "Snatch" defined a genre. They were messy, fast, bold with great scripts and powerful performances. The man gained my respect. Enough for me to withstand every disappointment each of his films were after Snatch and keep looking forward to any new film he put out.


The Gentlemen was no exception. My expectations kept being high and I sat down expecting to watch a true Guy Ritchie film, if not as good as the first two hits, at least something that could make them justice.


I wasn't left disappointed. The film brought back many of his traits he had seemed to forgot how to use, presenting at the same time a more mature and cleaner style.
I didn't have as much fun as with Snatch, but I felt entertained and at times drawn to the world where Grant, McConaughey and Hunnam where convincingly exchanging jabs at each other in the old Guy Ritchie's style.


Very nice surprise to see the man closer to his balance!


+



The Unholy (1988)

This has all the vibes of a good 80's horror but fell flat, the opening credits was the best part of the movie.. nothing much ever happens after that, the main actor paying a priest is stiff and unlikable, I think they were going for the achetypal strong and quiet manly type but we are left with a void where there ought to be some kind of personality or vitality!! hell maybe they succeeded ...or as a priest a hint of ****ing warmth and goodness!! no this actor would be more suited to playing an evil henchman who's only job is to get killed by the hero.

__________________
I wanna be sedated



Hook (rewatch), 8/10. It grew on me a bit on this viewing.



Are you gonna bark all day, little doggy?
Dunkirk, 8/10, and 1917, 5/10.


1917 struck me as corny (especially the dialogue) and uninspired. Wasn't too impressed with the "single shot" format since it was obvious where most of the cutting happened and Mendes didn't really do anything interesting with it. There were a few good scenes towards the end but that's about it. The soundtrack was particularly irritating.


Dunkirk was a more visceral and exciting experience, and I was invested in the story throughout, even if it wasn't a very emotionL affair. The dialogue felt much more realistic and the soundtrack was great. Visual elements and sound design also were far superior to 1917.



Dunkirk, 8/10, and 1917, 5/10.


1917 struck me as corny (especially the dialogue) and uninspired. Wasn't too impressed with the "single shot" format since it was obvious where most of the cutting happened and Mendes didn't really do anything interesting with it. There were a few good scenes towards the end but that's about it. The soundtrack was particularly irritating.


Dunkirk was a more visceral and exciting experience, and I was invested in the story throughout. The dialogue felt much more realistic and the soundtrack was great. Visual elements and sound design also were far superior to 1917.

Damn, I loved 1917, oh well to each his/her own. I need to rewatch Spectre, and will watch Road to Perdition soon, but 1917 is def one of my fave Mendes films.


Out of curiosity, is there a Mendes film that you have really liked or loved?



Unreliable Narrator
The film revolves around her countenance. It really is a take on the Kuleshov effect with the reference frame being implied rather than shown. I think that's where the division happens for me personally. Whereas somebody of faith might imagine Joan's actual visions of god and see her euphoria, I lean more towards the psychology of such a claim. This film is a lot more painful without the glory of a miracle at its heart. It's a broken girl enraptured by failing mental health. As much as that's a false reading given the divine confirmations late in the picture, it also reads truer to history for me as an apostate. I feel like the faithless perspective hasn't really been explored as much. So much of the discourse surrounding the film is theological for obvious reasons.
I am in favour of supporting this (unorthodox) reading which explores the psychological terrain as its central concern. Now that you brought it up I can see and do appreciate its highly effective use of the Kuleshov effect, and in fact I think this is where the psychological reading dovetails with the religious reading (something that I've tried to show by bringing in modern aesthetic theorists/philosophers like Bataille who have continued to draw "secular" readings from religious sources). The underlying motives for Joan's behavior might have been religious or nationalist in nature, but the emphasis on her countenance makes this film much more about immanence than about transcendence. What we witness are very much the effects on her (the immanent reading), as opposed to their causes which remain implied but never fully revealed (that's what the transcendent readings have often chosen to focus on). In this sense, the emphasis shifts away from her motives for her seemingly irrational behavior towards more humane concerns - the lived reality of her premonition.

The Kuleshov technique then reinforces such a split between effects (the main frame) and their causes (the frames which are implied/secondary).



I am in favour of supporting this (unorthodox) reading which explores the psychological terrain as its central concern. Now that you brought it up I can see and do appreciate its highly effective use of the Kuleshov effect, and in fact I think this is where the psychological reading dovetails with the religious reading (something that I've tried to show by bringing in modern aesthetic theorists/philosophers like Bataille who have continued to draw "secular" readings from religious sources). The underlying motives for Joan's behavior might have been religious or nationalist in nature, but the emphasis on her countenance makes this film much more about immanence than about transcendence. What we witness are very much the effects on her (the immanent reading), as opposed to their causes which remain implied but never fully revealed (that's what the transcendent readings have often chosen to focus on). In this sense, the emphasis shifts away from her motives for her seemingly irrational behavior towards more humane concerns - the lived reality of her premonition.

The Kuleshov technique then reinforces such a split between effects (the main frame) and their causes (the frames which are implied/secondary).
Yeah, by no means is my take the core conceit of the film. It's just a particular avenue I was drawn to personally. Given that the transcendent material (nationalism, religion) are the prime movers, it was very easy to for me to eschew them and re-contextualize the immanent material. I actually read a fair amount about the history of the film print and it's the transcendent material that drew the ire of censors. Anti-British, blasphemous, etc. I think you're correct in that Dreyer smartly made this a very tangible and human story which is probably why it stands the test of time.
__________________
Letterboxd | ReverseShot | SlantMagazine



Coherence (2013)


I saw a couple people discussing this along with Time Trap, and I hadn't seen either of them. Coherence appears to be the more highly rated of the two, and I found this to be pretty enjoyable. The pacing is similar to Uncut Gems where it never releases, and this might be one of the most attractive ways to tell a Schrodinger's cat type of story.

I'm not going to pretend I understand a fraction of quantum theory, but I've read on the subject enough to grasp the idea. The movie definitely keeps your head spinning trying to figure things out, but in the end it's still hard to dissect (which I guess is kinda the point). Only 90 minutes, so I'd say it's worth watching once for anyone remotely interested in this kind of mind game. Not sure if I'm on board enough to watch Time Trap though.






Way too long. It's more westerny than I expected and it's not a zombie flick at all so I don't get the poster. It's a bit like the Hotel California - you can check in anytime you like but... An old couple run an Inn out in the middle of nowhere Australia and when folks check in they kill them. They use an interesting method, not sure I totally buy it though. A sheriff begins investigating missing people which leads him to the Inn and that's it. Has some decent scenery but it's not good or bad enough to get excited about.



Account terminated on request
Wow, pretty low rating for this movie, why did you dislike it so much?
I thought it was one of those fun Sunday-afternoon-it's-raining kind of films.
__________________
Rules:
When women have a poet, they want a cowboy.
When they have a cowboy, they want a poet.
They'll say "I don't care if he's a poet or cowboy, so long as he's a nice guy. But oh, I'm so attracted to that bad guy over there."
Understand this last part, and you'll get them all.



Are you gonna bark all day, little doggy?
Damn, I loved 1917, oh well to each his/her own. I need to rewatch Spectre, and will watch Road to Perdition soon, but 1917 is def one of my fave Mendes films.


Out of curiosity, is there a Mendes film that you have really liked or loved?

I actually really liked American Beauty. I need to watch Road to Perdition as well.





Re-watch of a classic movie. Still relevant & on topic today.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



Coherence (2013)


I saw a couple people discussing this along with Time Trap, and I hadn't seen either of them. Coherence appears to be the more highly rated of the two, and I found this to be pretty enjoyable. The pacing is similar to Uncut Gems where it never releases, and this might be one of the most attractive ways to tell a Schrodinger's cat type of story.

I'm not going to pretend I understand a fraction of quantum theory, but I've read on the subject enough to grasp the idea. The movie definitely keeps your head spinning trying to figure things out, but in the end it's still hard to dissect (which I guess is kinda the point). Only 90 minutes, so I'd say it's worth watching once for anyone remotely interested in this kind of mind game. Not sure if I'm on board enough to watch Time Trap though.
Yeah I was kind of a bit iffy about my analogy in the beginning and then @this_is_the_ girl confirmed my fears.. I am sure there was a better analogy that I just can't think of, in hindsight I can say I enjoyed Coherence more.