Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





The trick is not minding
Disregard the post I made while you were writing this. We cool.
Haha. I responded, but please don’t take me as being aggressive in it. I was trying to get a point across, but I did come off as somewhat “Hall monitor” ish.



The trick is not minding
I've only seen Sciamma's Water Lilies is she really crazy feminist? I was gonna watch Portrait Of A Lady On Fire.
Definitely watch it. Regardless if someone feels it’s “crazy feminist”, (and really, other then being an exaggeration, how is that an issue?) you should watch it and decide for yourself.
It has me interested in her earlier works
now.



Torn Curtain is actually a decent cold war thriller type film, but it suffered from the incomprehensible casting and pairing of Paul Newman and Julie Andrews. However it did feature a nice turn by the incomparable Lila Kedrova (of Zorba the Greek fame).

The other deficit was the absence of a score by the inimitable Bernard Herrmann. Hitchcock's refusal to use Herrmann's score caused an irreparable rift in their professional relationship, causing them never to work together again. Reportedly there is a version floating around with Herrmann's score added. I'd love to see that one.

But I think you'd enjoy it. It's not great Hitchcock, but it's a very watchable film.
I know I'll eventually get around to it. It is Hitchcock after all. Even his subpar efforts are better than most other films. My list of Hitchcock films I feel I absolutely need to watch includes Torn Curtain, Topaz, I Confess, Notorious, Spellbound and Foreign Correspondent.



*adds to watchlist*


I know I'll eventually get around to it. It is Hitchcock after all. Even his subpar efforts are better than most other films. My list of Hitchcock films I feel I absolutely need to watch includes Torn Curtain, Topaz, I Confess, Notorious, Spellbound and Foreign Correspondent.
I found Torn Curtain very blah. Poor actor chemistry and just all around unmemorable. As in, I am not sure I could tell you a single thing that happened in the film. The only thing I remember about it is being baffled by the acting.



I forgot the opening line.
Portrait of a Lady on Fire, The Artist and Schizopolis are great. A Simple Plan is pretty good.

I'm adding Never Rarely Sometimes Always and The Ninth Configuration to my watchlist.

I've had Brick all ready to go for a while now. When will I finally watch it? Today? Maybe!

I might even watch Nightbeast, because I really want to be one of the cool kids. I hear it's bad for you - but I'm one of the only ones not doing it I'll finally be cool then, right?







I found Torn Curtain very blah. Poor actor chemistry and just all around unmemorable. As in, I am not sure I could tell you a single thing that happened in the film. The only thing I remember about it is being baffled by the acting.
You don’t remember that
WARNING: spoilers below
excellent brawl where they try to quietly kill each other in the farmhouse?


The rest of the film is just fairly okay. But that sequence is pure Hitchcockian goodness.

Topaz is the better film with a lot of artfully made sequences but Hitch chose to not use stars and that film cries out for a Grant or even a Connery.



It's not the fact of
WARNING: spoilers below
the affair
that is meant to hit hard, in my opinion. It's the idea that it has changed the relationship between the two of them. And then you layer in the sci-fi element that they might literally NOT be the same people.

I know I've linked this video essay like 8 times on this site, so apologies to those of you who are like "IS SHE LINKING THAT FOLDING IDEAS VIDEO AGAIN?!?!?!?!", but it really does sum up what I love about the film.

But my problem with that aspect of the movie isn't that
WARNING: spoilers below
the affair fails to come off as some sort of shocking revelation, because that didn't feel like Garland's intention (what with the foreshadowing of it and what not), it's that it feels like it was designed to offer a certain insight into Portman's motivations and emotional state of mind, but it also feels like you could completely remove the affair entirely from the film, and nothing essential would be lost from Portman's characterization. The same also goes for the sub-plot's thematic connection to the implication at the end that they've been changed by their time inside The Shimmer, because that didn't add much to it either; don't get me wrong, I still feel it's a good movie, but that's definitely more for the freaky/beautiful encounters with mutated creatures, and (especially) the climax in the lighthouse, rather than the dramatic elements.


I did watch that video essay because of your recommendation, though, so I owe a sincere "thank you" for that, at the very least.



I've only seen Sciamma's Water Lilies is she really crazy feminist? I was gonna watch Portrait Of A Lady On Fire.
Portrait Of A Lady On Fire is beautiful, but pretentious. You can see right when the movie starts. One depicted men badly, the other depicted men badly, one was truthful, the other was not. I mean, I help ladies with their bags, I don't let them jump to where a men should jump, and I see the same mentality in men, I'm not the only one. I'm also driven by my sexual impulses, it takes awareness to recognize that, and I acknowledge that some men take advantage of their status, position, force to do things like the supermarket scene, the subway scene, or the ATM scene, I recognize the truthfulness of what I see.



Why do people think one has to be “crazy” to be a feminist?
I didn't say that anywhere, the fact you saw that maybe says something you need to think about, maybe you want people to say that, I think Sciamma's probably does. Do vegans need to protest naked using cow blood on the floors of fast food chains for minimum wage workers do the cleaning up? They don't. Do feminist need to make things out of proportion to make people aware of social inequality/injustices? They don't. Anyone who's extremist about any given subject is crazy to me.



The trick is not minding
Portrait Of A Lady On Fire is beautiful, but pretentious. You can see right when the movie starts. One depicted men badly, the other depicted men badly, one was truthful, the other was not. I mean, I help ladies with their bags, I don't let them jump to where a men should jump, and I see the same mentality in men, I'm not the only one. I'm also driven by my sexual impulses, it takes awareness to recognize that, and I acknowledge that some men take advantage of their status, position, force to do things like the supermarket scene, the subway scene, or the ATM scene, I recognize the truthfulness of what I see.
I somehow doubt we watched the same film. There was nothing pretentious with PoaLoF at all. It was a beautiful story of two women in love that dealt with subtle allegories and themes that captivated me.
There was so much to take away from this film, none of which involves looking at it as if some personal attack against men.







A simple, predictable story considering the time period, and it couldn't be made any other way. The outstanding thing about this film is the production, I didn't see anything I could say: it's unrealistic, it's forced. They perfectly conveyed the audience. The picture is very beautiful, the 4:3 aspect ratio that helped focusing the viewers to the essentials, the A24 vibrant colors, very beautiful picture. Without a proper study of that time period this film couldn't be made because the film is all about bringing the audience there, to the life, thoughts, ambitions and struggles of it's inhabitants.



I somehow doubt we watched the same film.
No one sees the same film everybody else sees, like Tarkovsky says about books: A book read by a thousand people, is a thousand different books. I hope you can respect my opinion, it doesn't have much value, but it's mine.

The first time I saw Portrait of a Lady on Fire I could move past the inclinations I was seeing and focus on the story and in the end I was moved by it, the Vivaldi, the number on the page, I fond it beautiful and sort of poetic. I understood the need of such story. The second time I saw the film I couldn't move past the inclinations because I was paying attention to more details because I already knew the story.

I don't have prejudice against women, if anyone here wants to go trough that and make that judgment, keep it, I don't mind, I have a brain to think and I use it. When I see something accurate (according to my experience and experience of close people), without anything out of proportion or made to create reactions, without resentments, like the recent Never Rarely Sometimes Always, or Vitalina Varela, I'm moved by it, I embrace the need of such films. It's more and more difficult to make films without statements because people have a need to belong a certain group and people want others to belong their group. To just show and let people see and make their own assessments, that's what I find very valuable, even if I don't agree, sometimes there's not even anything to agree or don't agree, that's the point.



I've only seen Sciamma's Water Lilies is she really crazy feminist? I was gonna watch Portrait Of A Lady On Fire.
She's an amazing film-maker, one of the best around at the moment. Yes feminist, which as we all know, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Check out her films 'Girlhood' and 'Tomboy' too. Sciamma is 4 from 4.

Can't wait to see 'Petite maman'.



Yes feminist, which as we all know, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
No problem in being Muslin, what about belonging ISIS? I don't support radical ideas, they fail to look around, they often demonize the other part.



No problem in being Muslin, what about belonging ISIS? I don't support radical ideas, they fail to look around, they often demonize the other part.
What in god's name are you on about?



No problem in being Muslin, what about belonging ISIS? I don't support radical ideas, they fail to look around, they often demonize the other part.



I forgot the opening line.
Okay, I'll be as quick as I can for these five films, where I delved in reputation be damned to try and find a gem I think deserves better than it got...


By Studio and or Graphic Artist - https://movies.universalpictures.com...-5ee27861e7470., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=64249060

You Should Have Left - (2020)

In the most unfortunately-named film since The Naked Bomb, Kevin Bacon rents an evil house full of jump-scares with no build-up of tension. Everything here is blandly cheesy, and the story is all over the place. I really hated this movie - devoid of a plot or sinister atmosphere - even though on the latter count they at least tried.

2/10


By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59717291

The Vanishing - (2018)

This felt like it could have been something more. Based on the fascinating disappearance of three lighthouse-keepers from the Flannan Isles Lighthouse. It grabbed me at times once it got going, but ultimately was a bit of a let-down.

4/10


By Vertical Entertainment - Vertical Entertainment, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63494479

The Head Hunter - (2018)

Pretty interesting low-budget horror film set in a mythical dark ages kingdom. Here a monster-killing bounty hunter is set on revenge for the killing of his daughter. A lot of the action takes place off-screen, but it has a moody atmosphere and plenty of invention. Not quite Evil Dead-type mayhem but it has a kind of deadite feel to it.

5/10


By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=61424261

Vivarium - (2019)

I loved this film far more than it's reputation merits. To me it worked as both metaphor and straight-forward sci-fi - reminding me more than a little of the goings-on in Under the Skin (fantastic film that.) Once I met Martin I was hooked - such an eccentric performance by Jonathan Aris. One of those films that just fit me. Much of what you see at the start will be referenced in one way or another, which rewards a second viewing. I feel most people would rate The Head Hunter highest from these Awful Four(ful) Plus One films, but I vote for Vivarium - not even Jesse Eisenberg (who I always find hard to like) could ruin it for me. In fact, it's one of my favourite films with him in now.

7/10


By Studio and or Graphic Artist - Can be obtained from film's distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63840969


Inheritance - (2020)

Interesting casting here, with Simon Pegg. That's the best I can muster for this mess full of plot holes and unlikeable characters. Bad movie.

3/10