Author Topic: Respond to the last movie you watched  (Read 83782 times)

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 31299
  • Marathon Man
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #660 on: March 15, 2017, 03:29:12 AM »
Mad Max - 8/10
Incredible. God damn... if I had been emotionally engaged this would be a 10. I loved the villain! I loved how he looked and how the camera moved on him! Really it was all great. Somehow it never lacked variety, even though all the ingredients were the same the whole way through. Very watchable!

The start of an unofficial marathon?


Speaking of marathons, I had the day off and went to the cheap theater to watch Resident Evil: The Final Chapter. I might've enjoyed it more if we waited to do our RE marathon until this was on DVD. Without the communal sharing it was just a lot of video game style action, very loud too and not as stylish as the series was getting. I have a feeling the budget was slashed while they were in pre-production, leaving them with only set-pieces and the thinnest connective tissue. The most interesting aspect that we discuss a lot in our Marathon is we finally learn the story of Red Queen, and now that I know, I'm surprised nobody considered it during the marathon. Milla seems tired, resigned that this is what she'll be known for.
RATING: * *


As people start watching Patriots Day and discover how good it is, there will be questions about why it failed to find an audience. Under-marketed and terribly released, it's even better and more surprisingly good than Deepwater Horizon, which I also liked a lot. The less Peter Berg emulates Michael Bay and the more he copies from Clint Eastwood the better, and this is one Eastwood himself might've made. Maybe that's why the film failed, it plays to the Republican crowd but is so pro-Obama you can tell they would've edited parts of it differently had they known which way the election was going to go. Aside from some brief political detours and occasional handheld camerawork (like the first scene), this is a very effective manhunt movie with many standout sequences.
RATING: * * * - Very Good
Must See  |  Should See  |  Good  |  Mixed  |  Bad

Dave the Necrobumper

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10997
  • My tinypic changed so no avatar for a little while
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #661 on: March 15, 2017, 04:59:48 AM »
desk top

You know how I know your old! ;)

Just because the first computer in my family's house had a huge 1Kb of memory (and could not hold the screen while it was thinking).

Corndog

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16467
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #662 on: March 15, 2017, 07:49:03 AM »
Passengers - 9/10
This is why I don't bother reading anything before watching a movie. This was fantastic. FANTASTIC! What did I know about it going in? Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt in space. Had I read any of the reviews (37% RT) it would've confirmed what my cynical mind suspected, that this was nothing but a generic star vehicle about two characters on a vehicle traveling to distant stars... and I never would have watched it! Man, I was so into this. Every element. The ship they were on for example. It was was so thoroughly realized! Like this might be the most ambitious and richly conceived space ship I've ever seen in a film. What an achievement of design! Vast, beautiful, functional, sensible, radically different! The ship in 2001 might as well be a flying log cabin by comparison. I don't mean in technology, but in detail and size and how much of it we get to see and interact with! Even the ship in Sunshine, which is outwardly a staggering thing to look at, is inside a pretty run of the mill space vessel (the payload room notwithstanding). Love the story here too... I thought every beat of it worked, even where it felt inevitable. I was so on board I would've let a lot go, but I didn't find I needed to. This movie flattens anything else I've seen from 2016. Looking forward to seeing it again.

Passengers is bad. One of the worst I saw this past year, though I will agree the design of the ship is spectacular.
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

Corndog

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16467
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #663 on: March 15, 2017, 09:31:51 AM »
T2 Trainspotting (Danny Boyle, 2017)

When I sat down to revisit 1996's Trainspotting, a film I had not seen in some time, I was excited at the prospect to see it again, mostly because I wanted to re-evaluate it coming into Danny Boyle's T2 Trainspotting, a sequel 20 years in the making. But also because I wanted to make sure I was in the right place, narratively, to fully enjoy the sequel. After seeing T2, I would certainly recommend seeing Trainspotting first, as it helps give a lot of context to the proceedings and really enhances the experience of getting to spend more time with Renton, Sick Boy, Spud and Begbie once again. These are memorable characters if you combine the two films and take their journey as a whole, as opposed to two separate stories. Seeing this film in context made it all the better, but I still left wondering whether a sequel was really truly necessary at all.

When we left these friends, Renton (Ewan McGregor) had just robbed his friends, Begbie (Robert Carlyle), Sick Boy (Jonny Lee Miller), and Spud (Ewan Bremner) of the cash they got from a drug deal. Now 20 years later, Renton, having kicked his heroin addiction to enjoy a normal life in Amsterdam, returns to Edinburgh to find his friends in various states of disarray. Spud is still struggling with his drug addiction. Begbie is serving a 25 year jail sentence, before he breaks out to hunt down Renton. And Simon (Sick Boy) is running an unsuccessful pub while conducting various illegal affairs on the side for money. Renton attempts to reconnect with his friends, but the sour taste he left them with becomes a struggle as they try to find what brought them all together and made them happy in the first place.

What made Trainspotting great was that it was a jolt to the system, so to speak. Boyle's style was so fresh and exciting, and the youthful exuberance was so electrifying, as McGregor's Renton character decided to "choose life". Much of that freshness has gone in the sequel, T2 Trainspotting, much in part to the fact that Boyle has gone on to become a successful film director. His style is no longer new, so every attempt to insert energy into the film just feels like something we've seen before, and it doesn't work quite as well in middle age. The baggage left behind from the first film makes for a compelling story to be told, but too often the characters feel like caricatures, which these now famous actors are putting on instead of performing. They feel too far removed at times.

That being said, I think Boyle and company have a lot to say about the effects of drug addiction long after the worst of it has passed. We see four characters in various states of disrepair, and it proves that you can't just quit with no ill effect. But at the core of this film is the friendship between these characters. What brings them back to one another, keeps them friends even after all these years? It is in this exploration that the film excels most, providing more than a few really poignant moments. Unfortunately it gets lost along the way at times as well, focused on call backs, or characters moments that feel inserted just to give the actors some scenery to chew on, the detriment of having to assemble a now famous cast to do a sequel to a now famous film from their distant past. Much of it feels unnecessary.

It lacks the energy and freshness of Trainspotting, and finds lulls far too often to be considered a great movie, or even just a great follow up. But that being said, having just rewatched the original soon before seeing this one, Renton, Simon, Spud, and Begbie are all characters I enjoy spending time with, and each has something to say about the state of drug addiction and its effects. It's a varied cast of characters played by very capable actors who make them into memorable. These are not throwaway parts. It's a bit unfair to cast T2 Trainspotting off for simply not being as good as its predecessor. It's not as good and that is disappointing, but T2 is still a good movie. Just as the characters have deficiencies, so too does the film, but in many ways that is precisely why I care as much as I do about them.

*** - Good
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

pixote

  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 32996
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #664 on: March 15, 2017, 12:38:20 PM »
Mad Max - 8/10
Incredible. God damn... if I had been emotionally engaged this would be a 10. I loved the villain! I loved how he looked and how the camera moved on him! Really it was all great. Somehow it never lacked variety, even though all the ingredients were the same the whole way through. Very watchable!

The start of an unofficial marathon?

smirnoff, did you watch the original Mad Max or Mad Max: Fury Road?

pixote
I think I'd love how awkward it'd be, or how awkward it should be.

mañana

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 20871
  • Check your public library
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #665 on: March 15, 2017, 10:46:25 PM »
I will forget about this movie.
lol
There's no deceit in the cauliflower.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 25007
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #666 on: March 16, 2017, 02:09:31 AM »
Mad Max - 8/10
Incredible. God damn... if I had been emotionally engaged this would be a 10. I loved the villain! I loved how he looked and how the camera moved on him! Really it was all great. Somehow it never lacked variety, even though all the ingredients were the same the whole way through. Very watchable!

The start of an unofficial marathon?

smirnoff, did you watch the original Mad Max or Mad Max: Fury Road

Doh! It was Fury Road. I forgot that's what it's called. I still haven't seen any of the others, so no, it's not the start of a marathon. :)

Speaking of marathons, I had the day off and went to the cheap theater to watch Resident Evil: The Final Chapter. I might've enjoyed it more if we waited to do our RE marathon until this was on DVD. Without the communal sharing it was just a lot of video game style action, very loud too and not as stylish as the series was getting. I have a feeling the budget was slashed while they were in pre-production, leaving them with only set-pieces and the thinnest connective tissue. The most interesting aspect that we discuss a lot in our Marathon is we finally learn the story of Red Queen, and now that I know, I'm surprised nobody considered it during the marathon. Milla seems tired, resigned that this is what she'll be known for.
RATING: * *

I would love to see some kind of supercut recap of the series before watching The Final Chapter, but then again, you say the connective tissue is pretty thin. They never were that tightly meshed to begin with I guess. I'm sorry to hear that the series didn't finish stronger, but even so, I look forward to it. Way to see it on the big screen! :)

Passengers - 9/10

Passengers is bad. One of the worst I saw this past year, though I will agree the design of the ship is spectacular.

Our experiences were very different eh. When you say "the entire existence of Aurora Lane’s character is to serve the purposes of Jim Preston" I agree, in a sense. But not in the same sense I think you mean it. Jim did wake her up for entirely selfish reasons, so in that sense she is serving his purposes. By simply existing she serves that purpose (i.e. Jim is no longer alone). That's a purpose she cannot escape from, given the circumstances aboard the ship. But it sounds like you feel the film reduced her character further still... to a person with no other reason to exist. She certainly struggles to find another reason. I mean, like Jim, she starts out faced with the thought "what the hell am I going to do with the rest of my life". She's looking for purpose in a situation where no one has ever had to find a purpose before. She knows something nobody riding the bus has ever known. That she'll die before she arrives at the next stop. Her purpose was arriving. Now what is it? And I think that's what she sets out to write about. But they both flounder in this struggle to find purpose, which made me feel for them.

And I did not feel I could judge Jim's decisions too harshly. No more than I could judge Tom Hank's character in Castaway for talking to a volleyball. It was horrible but understandable. Selfish but human. Desperate and regrettable but would she or anyone else have done any different... sooner or later?

PS. Pratt's naked ass was the only gratuitous body shot I remember. There was no particular need to see his ass just then. It's not as though the audience had reason to believe he showered in pants, and that shot was to establish that he did not. It would've been more germane to show his ass while he in the public areas of the ship, since it was established that he traversed the ship without pants from time to time. Generally I thought the film was pretty indifferent towards that stuff, never showing much even when there was an opportunity. Shooting for whatever rating, but no worse of for it.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2017, 02:11:27 AM by smirnoff »

Corndog

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16467
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #667 on: March 16, 2017, 08:37:06 AM »
I was really on board with the film for the part where Jim is alone. Once Aurora wakes up, I wavered, but even then I was curious to see where it went. Ultimately, we aren't going to be on the same page with this one. As for the "gratuitous" shots, yes, Pratt is the only one to show nudity, but there are numerous times throughout the film where Tyldum utilizes the "male gaze" type shot towards Lawrence, which further communicated to my experience that her character was there to serve the purposes of Jim. We can discuss further in a spoiler thread if you would like. Don't want to go into too much detail here.
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 24472
  • A Monkey with a Gun
    • Creative Criticism
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #668 on: March 16, 2017, 08:58:28 AM »
Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

The sweeping Waltz 2 of Dimitri Shostakovich plays as Nicole Kidman disrobes, her back to the camera. So it’s going to be that kind of film. And while Eyes Wide Shut is certainly a film dealing a lot about sex and promiscuity, it’s much more of a film about the idea of infidelity and the dark side of lust. Much like A Clockwork Orange, people are quick to label the film the very thing it is not. If anything, Eyes Wide Shut is one of the most potent arguments for monogamy and fidelity.

All of the sex and lust outside of the marriage bedroom is depicted as weird, uncomfortable, and disturbing. The infamous orgy party is a dark, satanic ritual of alien lust, not the loving intimacy between the two main characters. It’s a great example of how depicting sex and nudity is not always inherently erotic or titillating.

Eyes Wide Shut is a tale of two parties. The first has Dr. William (Tom Cruise) and Alice Harford (Nicole Kidman) going to Victor Ziegler’s (Sydney Pollack) annual Christmas party. As the couple separates, they both end up in rather flirty circumstances, but neither of these flirtings amount to anything. Alice gets suspicious and when she presses William, he denies anything. Still not sure, she decides to hurt him by confessing a time she fantasized about having an affair.

Crestfallen by this idea, William tries to go out and have his own affair but is constantly thwarted by fate. After meeting Nick Nightingale (Todd Field), he discovers the underworld of the rich elite who have dark sex orgies while wearing masks. He’s quickly outed as someone who doesn’t belong and threatened that he will be punished if he speaks a word of it.

There’s a theory that William’s experience, his attempts to have an affair, are all a dream. While the dream theory is usually a lazy fan tool, it makes a lot of sense here and enhances the film. For one, the entire orgy sequence is one of the most surreal and bizarre sequences in cinema even including a Gregorian chant sung backwards.

The short story the film is adapted from is called Dream Story, which also lends some credence to this theory. But it’s a late line that is perhaps the best proof. After confessing the events of the film, William says “no dream is ever just a dream.” It seems unlikely that he is talking about his wife’s fantasy, but his own experiences. And Eyes Wide Shut is much more about the idea of infidelity than the act itself.

All this leaves the film with perhaps one of the most potent relationship moments in cinema. Faced with adulterous intents on both sides, the couple is at a crossroads. Alice rightly says that they should consider themselves lucky for all they’ve survived. She also suggests that there’s one last thing the couple needs to do as soon as possible: CINECAST!.

While perhaps crass, it’s a beautiful demonstration of how channeling those desires and lusts back into the marriage is a far more wholesome and edifying release, that monogamy is not a trap, but a place of warmth, love, and security. Adultery is a trap, a horribly, terrifying trap, so much so that even the idea of it can wreck a relationship. And the best solution to overcome this impulse? CINECAST!ing your spouse.

PeacefulAnarchy

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
    • Criticker reviews
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #669 on: March 16, 2017, 11:38:44 AM »
We can discuss further in a spoiler thread if you would like. Don't want to go into too much detail here.
Please do. My reaction was somewhere between both of yours and I'm curious to read people discussing the most interesting aspect of the film.