Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    






STALLONE: FRANK, THAT IS
(2021)

First viewing. A candid look at one of the most famous celebrity siblings. Frank Stallone's career as a musician, actor, and boxer are highlighted in this insightful and quite entertaining documentary film that was recently added to the Amazon Prime streaming service.

__________________
“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



The Last Blockbuster Video is reigning supreme right now on Netflix. Very enjoyable. There was a guy in the movie who laughed at everything. Then I found out he created Super High Me. No wonder he was so f-ing jolly.


3/5



'The Wind Will Carry Us' (1999)

Probably the least accessible Kiarostami I've seen, which would normally not be a factor in how I view a film, but I did find the repetitive nature of our main character driving around the hills of Kurdistan somewhat challenging. He's there to photograph a funeral ceremony. But has to wait for the old woman to die. In the meantime we see him observe daily life in a tiny village.

The rewards are there, especially towards the end. And the landscapes look beautiful, but you really have to look hard.

6.9/10



“I was cured, all right!”


Not as good as B v S in my opinion.
It's funny, Wonder Woman was so badass in B v S but here she looks like a filler. All her scenes sucks.
I was on board 'cause I wanted to see Superman and it was worth. Hope they make another film with Henry, the man is so good. Also, Amy Adams is a sweet Lois Lane. Really hope Ben gets a chance with his solo Batman film too. The rest I just don't care.



'The Wind Will Carry Us' (1999)

Probably the least accessible Kiarostami I've seen, which would normally not be a factor in how I view a film, but I did find the repetitive nature of our main character driving around the hills of Kurdistan somewhat challenging. He's there to photograph a funeral ceremony. But has to wait for the old woman to die. In the meantime we see him observe daily life in a tiny village.

The rewards are there, especially towards the end. And the landscapes look beautiful, but you really have to look hard.

6.9/10
I watched it earlier this year and I found myself really drawn to the film's lyrical qualities, with how the reoccurring shots of the landscapes had subtle differences here and there. It's currently my second Kiarostami, and I'm not sure I liked it more than Taste of Cherry, but I was impressed by both films.



Sound of Metal (2019)

This was a good drama set around a punk drummer that obviously put 100% into his every performance...then his hearing goes AWOL. It's pretty broad brushstrokes from then on in but Riz Ahmed is pretty darn good in this....no road to Damascus but you can understand the characters actions and motivations.






Disturbing & unpleasant movie. Tilda Swinton excellent as per usual.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



Literally just finished watching 2016's Nocturnal Animals starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Amy Adams. Have to say I watched it in the cinema and really disliked it but my taste has massively changed. A really interesting movie and really well filmed. Jake in particular is fantastic as usual and I found the movie much better the second time around! I would give it a solid:

6/10



I always felt Woyzeck to be very underrated, it's one of my personal favorite Herzog. I find the film, (like other Herzogian works), to be enthralling based on its sheer ability to be honest with itself despite budget or technical bravado. I disagree with the rating, but to each their own.

Eastern Promises




While I like this film and "good" to see Cronenberg play something relatively straight-forward, I do find it lacks the flavor, spice, and zest of his other oeuvre. Cronenberg is one of those filmmakers which I find myself in extremes with. Either he's "terrible," "brilliant," or just "meh." I find this film to be of the opinion of the latter. I find that perhaps there was some outside influence, whether in the script itself or the producers, (haven't dug into the special features yet) ... but it seems like he could have gone any other way than he did up going with this film and it would have turned out to be a masterpiece. Hopefully that makes sense to some degree. It's a "good" munch on popcorn and watch film, but I do find the film to be narratively predictable and lacking in aesthetic innovation. While not my "type" of film personally based on the things I enjoy, but I would recommend this film as perhaps an "intro" into Cronenberg's body of work... especially since some of his other films opt on the side of more philo-visual complexity... but what can I say, it's just "good."
__________________
Imagine an eye unruled by man-made laws of perspective, an eye unprejudiced by compositional logic, an eye which does not respond to the name of everything but which must know each object encountered in life through an adventure of perception. How many colors are there in a field of grass to the crawling baby unaware of 'Green'?

-Stan Brakhage



matt72582's Avatar
Please Quote/Tag Or I'll Miss Your Responses
Listen To Me, Marlon - 10/10


Even a high school kid could have made this great just by allowing Brando to do the talking, which is exactly what this is.









The Magnificent Ambersons (1943) (Original Cut)


I liked it, I don't think I ever saw the under 2 hour version so I'll likely have to revisit Welles' darker version but for what it was it was very good.





@Dog Star Man, very briefly (please) what is this movie about? It looks ghastly, but I’m curious.

It's a German New Wave film with Herzog as a director so its merits meet at two junctions:

One - Of the German New Wave:


Whereby directors of this movement sought cinema with a higher "aethetical and artistic" purpose in reaction to post-WWII German film. (Very much so influenced by their French predecessors who sought similar purposes who viewed their own cinema.) The films are usually either political commentaries, or commentaries on a post-WWII Germany... a "broken home." Often, (in the case of Wenders or Herzog), this idea of "broken home/identity" is revealed through concepts of madness, setting their narratives outside Germany, (such as the Americas for example), or both.

Two - Werner Herzog:


Werner Herzog of this very movement primarily paints his canvas with concepts of madness, (although also setting his films outside the stage of his native German land too, but for this film not the case.) He often utilized Kinski as an actor, (much to Herzog and his crew's dismay), primarily because of Kinski's already unraveled psyche in real life.

Three - Woyzeck:

The film is about precisely these two aesthetics... but mainly about a man's decent into madness when his own homeland and everything in it turns against him, (alluding to the Nazi occupation.)








Robin and Marian - I hadn't seen this in years and after watching it for a few minutes I was struck by how much it reminded me of The Three Musketeers films from the early 70's. No big surprise then when I found out all three movies had been directed by Richard Lester. He had a way of making it seem like you were eavesdropping on actual conversations and events from that time period. His storytelling had a loose, knockabout way to it and his action sequences were polar opposites of the slick and choreographed fight scenes so common in movies these days.

This tells the story of Robin Hood in the twilight of his life. When the movie opens he's in France and he's had a falling out of sorts with King Richard the Lionhearted (a marvelous Richard Harris). After a historically accurate calamity befalls Richard, Robin and his loyal sidekick Little John (Nicol Williamson) find themselves at loose ends. After a lifetime spent fighting and Crusading by the King's side Robin decides to go home to England. Once there he goes in search of Maid Marian (Audrey Hepburn in her first role in eight years) who is now the Abbess of the local monastery. Because of King John (Ian Holm) and his feud with the Roman Catholic church, the Sheriff of Nottingham (Robert Shaw) has ordered her arrest.

This has so many things going for it not the least of which is that towering cast. Denholm Elliot and Ronnie Barker round out the principal characters and Connery and Hepburn are as good together as any right thinking fan could imagine. They seem tailor made for the roles and it's no surprise that Hepburn came out of retirement to do this movie. But it's smaller, shining roles like Harris as Richard the Lionheart that truly elevate the story. And Robert Shaw also turns in an invaluable performance as the surprisingly rational and sober minded Sheriff. It's not a perfect movie but with all that talent on display any shortcomings are easy to overlook.











Not knowing anything about the film other than the cast and the time period it was set in ,,which I love,,it ended up been a disappointment,the shoot out at the end was especially not good ,,anyway I enjoyed the film ,,I wanted it to be more depressing and to see more oldman.


WARNING: "Your Movie" spoilers below
not sure how forrest survived the neck cut and the bullets wound,,then again it's based on a true story











it had sad parts but not enough for me,,and I did not like how it ended,,murphy and martin were great in it and I enjoyed it very much.