Jump to content

Movies You've Seen Recently


Recommended Posts

I've been meaning to watch Silence at the theater but couldn't get anyone else to go with me. No real motivation to go stag either.

 

Since I enjoyed Last Temptation of Christ and The Mission, I expect to be similarly fulfilled with Silence. That and I'm a Sengoku Jidai and Jesuit Order enthusiast. Right in my wheelhouse.

"Things are funny...are comedic, because they mix the real with the absurd." - Buzz Aldrin.

"P-O-T-A-T-O-E" - Dan Quayle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gromnir is right, Silence is a beautifully filmed movie that has an intense if slow moving plot. But while it is certainly about faith it is not a triumph of faith by any means. And if you are even a little religious it will haunt you for a time after watching it. I haven't been sighted near a church in many years but for all that I am in my way a very religious man. I wonder if placed in the same situation as the main protagonist what I would have done.

 

One of the books they made us read in school was Arthur Miller's The Crucible. Well, it was a play not a book. I call Shakespeare's stuff books too I guess. Anyway I thoroughly enjoyed it. The made a decent movie cover of it a few years ago with Daniel Day Lewis as John Proctor. Silence reminded me a bit of Proctor's monologue at the end of the Crucible:

 

"I have three children—how may I teach them to walk like men in the world and I sold my friends? I blacken all of them when this is nailed to the church the very day they hang for silence! You are the high court, your word is good enough! Tell them I confessed myself; say Proctor broke his knees and wept like a woman; say what you will, but my name cannot… I mean to deny nothing. Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life. Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them that hang!"

"The man of virtuous soul commands not, nor obeys. Power, like a desolating pestilence, pollutes whate'er it touches; and obedience, bane of all genius, virtue, freedom, truth, makes slaves of men, and of the human frame a mechanized automaton."

P.B. Shelley

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw Disco Godfather (1979).

 

Yeah. Put your weight on it, put your weight on it, put your weight on it! Top notch blaxploitation b-moofie.

Give me the eyes, so I see
Give me ears, so I hear
Give me love, so I know what love is
Give me freedom to think, to believe
In something
                        -- Tony Kakko

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda feel the same way. i haven't seen the other two solo Wolverine movies, for example, or any of the post original trilogy ones minus Apolocapsye but now I will try to find time to.

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wolverine in Japan was generally good, although let down a touch by the ending.

 

 

On general film trivia (and Japan related)...

 

Toshiro Mifune driving on the set of YOJIMBO with his sword on the dash:

17626096_10155182324255746_4332330598755

  • Like 3

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

So yes, you walk past the cinema and see the billboard reading:

 

Power Rangers

Ghost in the Shell

Beauty and the Beast

 

 

And you have to ask yourself:  "What year is this??!"

  • Like 2

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rewatched Rogue One in the comfort of my own home. I was underwhelmed by it in theatres, but everyone else loved it so much I figured it might be me and I should give it another chance. I went in trying to like it. Except that didn't happen - I went from being underwhelmed to actively HATING it. I guess I just have to accept that I don't get it.

 

I followed it up with a nice little horror flick I missed called The Autopsy of Jane Doe. Fell apart in the last 15 minutes (as most horror movies do) but before that it was tense and lovely. I'd hazard to say it was some of the best build-up I've seen in a horror film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I followed it up with a nice little horror flick I missed called The Autopsy of Jane Doe. Fell apart in the last 15 minutes (as most horror movies do) but before that it was tense and lovely. I'd hazard to say it was some of the best build-up I've seen in a horror film.

 

Amen on that one. They were doing so good and just couldn't figure out what to so with it. Once the GF got out of the elevator it was downhill from there. It's like flying a plane. They got it in the air and had a great flight but just couldn't bring it in for a landing.

 

 

You know where horror movies screw up? They think everything needs to have an explanation. And it is usually handled with a clumsy, even absurd exposition in the last scene that just screws up a all the great buildup they've done. Take the original Blair Witch Project. The reason why it was so good is because none of it was ever explained. You never saw what was chasing them. You never found out where the screams were coming from. The worst of it even happened off screen so it was left to the imagination. That was brilliant. Paranormal Activity (the first one, the rest were predictably awful) was another one that set the stage and managed to not screw it up by just staying out if their own way.

Edited by Guard Dog
  • Like 1

"The man of virtuous soul commands not, nor obeys. Power, like a desolating pestilence, pollutes whate'er it touches; and obedience, bane of all genius, virtue, freedom, truth, makes slaves of men, and of the human frame a mechanized automaton."

P.B. Shelley

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, old film but have you ever tried Talos the Mummy ?

 

From back in.. '98ish if I recall, with the likes of Jason Scott Lee and Sean Pertwee. Even had a pre-fame Gerard Butler, plus a bit of support from the likes of Honor Blackman and Christopher Lee.

 

But the classic tale of Egyptian Prince, cursed tomb, archaeologists discovering and dying, then 50 years later the granddaughter of one of those archaeologists discovering the log book and re-tracing the steps back.... Cue mysticism, grisly murders, supernatural evil, and of course a trip to the British Museum in London.

 

One of those low budget adventure-horror's that partially jumped on The Mummy bandwagon, but worked quite well and had some very un-Hollywood twists to the tale. However, there is an American version of the film which is only about 88 minutes, and then there's the European/rest of the world version that is about 2 hours. The non-American lengthier one I think is better, but some people think the pacing is off (which was the reason they gave for cutting it for American audiences), but it still has a certain element of "good parts, that don't always work as a whole film".

  • Like 2

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that when I was too young to see it, it remains my scariest mummy memory. Really good.

 

 

 

I followed it up with a nice little horror flick I missed called The Autopsy of Jane Doe. Fell apart in the last 15 minutes (as most horror movies do) but before that it was tense and lovely. I'd hazard to say it was some of the best build-up I've seen in a horror film.

 

You know where horror movies screw up? They think everything needs to have an explanation. And it is usually handled with a clumsy, even absurd exposition in the last scene that just screws up a all the great buildup they've done. Take the original Blair Witch Project. The reason why it was so good is because none of it was ever explained. You never saw what was chasing them. You never found out where the screams were coming from. The worst of it even happened off screen so it was left to the imagination. That was brilliant. Paranormal Activity (the first one, the rest were predictably awful) was another one that set the stage and managed to not screw it up by just staying out if their own way.

 

 

Yep, that pinpointed the problem. Same thing happened in a lot of recent horror movies. We don't always need to know the answer, and most of the time the answers your audience comes up with are scarier than anything you've got in store for them. The recent "Lights Out" was particularly guilty, as they had a lengthy and detailed explanation halfway through the film. In comparison, I felt that "It Follows" was much more effective - we still don't really know why or what it really is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, old film but have you ever tried Talos the Mummy ?

 

From back in.. '98ish if I recall, with the likes of Jason Scott Lee and Sean Pertwee. Even had a pre-fame Gerard Butler, plus a bit of support from the likes of Honor Blackman and Christopher Lee.

 

But the classic tale of Egyptian Prince, cursed tomb, archaeologists discovering and dying, then 50 years later the granddaughter of one of those archaeologists discovering the log book and re-tracing the steps back.... Cue mysticism, grisly murders, supernatural evil, and of course a trip to the British Museum in London.

 

One of those low budget adventure-horror's that partially jumped on The Mummy bandwagon, but worked quite well and had some very un-Hollywood twists to the tale. However, there is an American version of the film which is only about 88 minutes, and then there's the European/rest of the world version that is about 2 hours. The non-American lengthier one I think is better, but some people think the pacing is off (which was the reason they gave for cutting it for American audiences), but it still has a certain element of "good parts, that don't always work as a whole film".

 

The film more or less squeaked out in the US.  I seem to recall reading about it in 1997, but it didn't come out until 1999 (and then presumably only because that was when Universal's Mummy reboot opened).  But it was definitely in the can by March 1998 when it first premiered at a film festival in Belgium. Supposedly it test screened badly, hence the edits to the US version.  Having never seen the longer version (but heard its a stronger film) I can't help but wonder if in reality the distributor really just wanted a cut around 90 minutes to maximize showtimes.  Which was pointless because, as I recall in the US at least - it didn't see a release until August 1999 when it premiered on VHS where running time wasn't important.

 

It was directed by Russell "Highlander" Mulcahy and hearkens back more to Hammer's Mummy films (which each featured a different Mummy) than those of Universal (a point underscored by the inclusion of Lee, I think).  It was for me - an admitted fan of the Mummy Film sub-genre - a frustrating experience.  Kudos for trying something different, but the film (at least in the US cut) never felt satisfactory in its story.

 

I haven't seen it since August 1999 (on VHS), and its on my list of films to try and re-watch.  Its a pity the longer version isn't available in the US as I'd like to see it and compare to the US version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rewatched Rogue One in the comfort of my own home. I was underwhelmed by it in theatres, but everyone else loved it so much I figured it might be me and I should give it another chance. I went in trying to like it. Except that didn't happen - I went from being underwhelmed to actively HATING it. I guess I just have to accept that I don't get it.

Funny, for me it's the best SW movie since the originals... While I loathe TFA, just felt soulless to me. While Rogue stayed true to it's mission, a war movie.

 

What did you expect going in? I've noticed that's usually where the issue arise.

  • Like 1

Fortune favors the bald.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, but it wasn't a film in which nothing happens and has no story that matters until the last 15 minutes and none of the characters are interesting. That was doubly clear on second viewing, where I was bored out of my skull until they hit Scarif, the only place that matters and it doesn't even matter in this movie, it just matters as a reference to another film. Even then, there's no stakes or cameraderie.

 

Nobody has a personality. Character get a sentence of history or maybe a scene establishing that history ("I did bad things for the rebellion" says spanish lead character whose name I still don't remember after two viewings), if even that much but are never seen acting like they have that history, instead being perfect heroes. What's the point of seeing Jyn's parents die and seeing her in jail? It clearly didn't affect her, because the girl we're told is a scoundrel and a rebel acts perfectly standard heroic throughout. And that's the characters who even get the remotest bit of attention. I know Donnie Yen is a monk stereotype who has a mantra - that's all I know about him because that's all there is to know about him. I know that the pilot is, in fact, a pilot. Did he even get a name?

 

And how can a movie where the Empire wins still fail to make them threatening (or interesting)? Every character that has to make a last ditch effort does so easily, being more indestructible than the Ewoks up until they succeed, at which point the script says "oh, we've run out of things for you to do, you can die now" - they never die TRYING to do something, they're never in danger of failing, just of dying after they've won. Nobody struggles emotionally or physically - there are no stakes. It's as if Frodo walked up to Mount Doom with no resistence, threw in the ring, and THEN an orc bashed his head in with a mace. All it's got going for it is the fantastic production design, as evidenced by your saying "it's a war movie" but that's not really true at all, it simply looks like one by having the effects team and cinematographer take their cues from old war films. Plot wise it's a meandering mess up until the end, where it turns into a heist movie that distracts you by throwing a lot of imagery from The Pacific at you.

 

I enjoyed TFA, it was a flashy remake true, but I can tell you what Finn's personality is. He's a coward who hides that behind bluster and lies, but also can't live with himself if he runs. I can tell you Kylo Ren is a whiny, emo teenager. Is that a good character? I dunno, I don't think he's that great. But it's A character. What's Jyn Erso got? Her character is "my dad is involved in the plot". Why are the characters here suddenly a group, or even friends? They're not, the script just says they are. The actors are better directed, but their characters are as poorly written as Mace Windu or Qui-Gon Jinn.

 

I just really can't find anything I like about Rogue One. Even the vaunted "amazing Vader scene" just feels to me like people are still high on it looking great, because it fit the character about as much as Yoda flying around Dooku in the prequels. Vader is methodical, he doesn't whip it out and start doing kung fu on people's butts.

 

EDIT: Also, that whole Kyber crystal thing never goes anywhere. It's built up as a big deal, but clearly whatever payoff it had was just cut out just like about 75% of the footage used in the trailers.

Edited by TrueNeutral
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

'The Kyber thing' was that the Death Star was a deadly mixture of Sith magic and technology - making a giant ass lightsaber based weapon out of the ruins of the Jedi original homeworld. 

 

I enjoyed TFA, it was a flashy remake true, but I can tell you what Finn's personality is. He's a coward who hides that behind bluster and lies, but also can't live with himself if he runs. I can tell you Kylo Ren is a whiny, emo teenager. Is that a good character? I dunno, I don't think he's that great. But it's A character. What's Jyn Erso got? Her character is "my dad is involved in the plot". Why are the characters here suddenly a group, or even friends? They're not, the script just says they are. The actors are better directed, but their characters are as poorly written as Mace Windu or Qui-Gon Jinn.

 

Kylo was actually a great character imo - probably the only good thing (for me) in the TFA. In many ways he is what Anakin should have been - and shows just how devastating existential angst can be, in a universe with a dark side. 

 

Jyn and the entourage of Rouge One was meant to show you, that people may find a redeeming camaraderie in the dark things they feel - rather than the heroics they do - their bond was a soldier's bond.

Their fate a reminder that Jedi and other 'important' people - get all the credit, but rarely pay the price - they were meant to be expandable.

 

 

I could argue what their character was, but obviously it didn't sell well enough with you, and that's fair of course.

 

 

And funny enough I'd have made a very similar set of arguments against TFA :)

Fortune favors the bald.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, lots of arguments to be made against TFA, I agree. It remains a poor man's remake of the original Star Wars. I'm just saying I enjoyed it more than Rogue One because Rogue One failed to connect with me on pretty much any level. And it continues to frustrate me because I WANTED to enjoy it, and everyone else seems to enjoy it. :shrugz:  The things you say about their bond and the meaning of their fate sound to me like the things this movie SHOULD have shown, not things it did show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed Rogue One, but I'm not is a hurry to rewatch it because it is a war movie. I can watch all the rest of the Star Wars movies pretty easily. They are lighthearted fantasy romps. Rogue One is serious.

Edited by Hurlshot
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wish the Imperials weren't so inept.

  • Like 1

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone watched movies from Guy Richie? I re-watched Snatch yesterday for something like 100X time and man I still love it from start to end

I really liked Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Not sure if I liked it more than Snatch. Revolver was weird, but its supposedly based on some sort of Kaballah stuff. Rocknrolla was a little more serious than Lock Stock or Snatch, but I still liked it. Enjoyed the Sherlock Holmes films, and not liking what I've seen of his King Arthur flick.

The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.

Devastatorsig.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Double feature re-watch.

 

The Thomas Crown Affair.    The original, followed by the remake. Both darn good films, and interestingly different in their own ways.

 

For the fun fact, shooting on location was rare before the original was made, and according to the director the initial bank robbery was filmed at the downtown branch of the National Shawmut Bank, and that although the guards and bank officials knew what was going on, the customers did not because the filmmakers were using a concealed camera. Although they apparently thought that a real robbery was occurring, none of the customers or pedestrians interfered in any way.

 

The shift from bank robbery to art heist for the remake, was apparently due to a series of high profile bank robberies having recently occurred in New York at the time. The producers wanted it to be a stylish and gentlemanly type of theft and not something quite so thuggish and in your face as a violent armed bank robbery.

  • Like 1

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rewatched some films the last couple of days...

 

Don't Look Now - I still have trouble getting into Nicolas Roeg's schizophrenic sense of pacing, but it does aid this film really well in generating an eerie and tense mood. The chase sequence at the end of the film is some truly wonderful stuff.

 

Demolition Man - Here's a film I wouldn't mind seeing a remake of, seeing that it's a topic so applicable to the present day and which is really in the end a good premise very poorly executed. The film too readily opts into favouring the Stallone action vehicle side of things over the satire, and the film suffers heavily for it. It could have been much smarter and acerbic than it is, but it as it is it only "has its moments".

 

Blade - One Wesley Snipes movie led to the other. I really enjoy this despite the fact that it has clearly aged poorly: the CGI is horrendous even for its time, and 90s fashion in general just seems dorky in today's context. Despite that, there are some interesting ideas and clever moments, the action setpieces are nicely shot and choreographed, and overall it's a film that doesn't bog itself down with unnecessary set-up or franchise teasing (even as the film does indicate to there being a greater world and overarching conflict out there), it just feels like it limits itself to telling a good two-hour story and works well just as that. There are some people who view this film as the start of the comic book movie craze but I think it's quite distinct and formally different to the genre as we've known it since X-Men to say it was something of a curious precursor but less so than it might have been for the bullet-dodging trenchcoat-wearing martial arts movies that would follow.

 

Arrival - Spoke about this before, it's just brilliant and still likely my favorite film of last year. I like how it echoes the conflict of understanding time in Western culture and certain Eastern ones, whereby one understands time linearly and the other cyclically. Very interesting stuff, very moving, and it's criminal that neither Amy Adams nor Johann Johannsson were nominated at this year's Oscars.

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Architect

The Town, extended version.

 

Very good movie. Intense action, solid story. Ben Affleck is better at directing than he is at acting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...