Author Topic: Respond to the last movie you watched  (Read 50272 times)

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 26774
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2740 on: November 10, 2018, 12:51:50 AM »

Three Identical Strangers

Just fantastic. Joyous at times, Heartbreaking at times. Insightful into a number of things. Really well told.

We ended up on way opposite sides on this one, the longer this thing went on the angrier I got, but not really for the reasons the filmmakers intended. It felt so focused on making its point that it overlooks so much that happens in the periphery. Using the triplets as a means of accessing a nature vs nurture and ethics debate (on this one not sure there's really much of a debate in any real world context, certainly not in the way the nature v nurture one is explored) is an interesting way to approach the subject, but it very much felt like a thing that, once it discovered what it was, had a thesis and then went about 'proving' when so much shows that it's not only hardly as clear cut as the film presents it, but actually felt like a good deal pointed to supporting the inverse of its ideas.

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 20205
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2741 on: November 10, 2018, 08:12:59 AM »
This raises an interesting question. What would make a good show for preschoolers? And how do you think "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" fell short?

Obviously I'm about 30 years removed from experiencing it live so it's hard for me to critique it as a child. Then as now I don't think I'd like a lot of the kids TV that is just so bright and loud. Many kids dig that, but I get sensory overload. Mister Rogers' Neighborhood goes too far in the other extreme in terms of being sedate. I'd say Thomas the Tank Engine and Sesame Street were a little more threading that needle.

philip918

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4177
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2742 on: November 10, 2018, 02:00:37 PM »
The Outlaw King (2018)

Braveheart without any cinematic magic. It's fine if you're looking for some swords-and-shields action. Florence Pugh is so good. After Lady MacBeth I'm interested in anything she's doing.
"If God gives you lemons find a new God."

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 24426
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2743 on: November 10, 2018, 02:57:12 PM »
The Outlaw King (2018)

Braveheart without any cinematic magic. It's fine if you're looking for some swords-and-shields action. Florence Pugh is so good. After Lady MacBeth I'm interested in anything she's doing.

I've been looking at this film skeptically ever since Netflix started insisting I watch it. That lack of cinematic magic comes across in the preview. It looks utterly bland... a Netflix signature at this point.

But damn, I just looked who directed it and now I feel obliged. And he's Scottish no less. I think it's the casting of Chris Pine in the lead that puts me off it most. I'm sure that wasn't the directors choice. I look down the rich cast list though and see a dozen other more interesting faces. I'm going to set my sets low. Like Ridley Scott's Robin Hood or Guy Ritchie's King Arthur low. The R-rating may give it a leg up, but looking at the credits I am disturbed there is no overall "Music by" credit listed.

philip918

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4177
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2744 on: November 10, 2018, 03:05:00 PM »
I like Pine in general, but he's not a great fit here.

The music has no impact whatsoever. There's a theme that sounds a lot like some other piece I couldn't quite place.

It's not bad. If you're in the mood for this type of film you'll probably be fine. It's just utterly unremarkable.
"If God gives you lemons find a new God."

philip918

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4177
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2745 on: November 12, 2018, 01:38:18 PM »
Madeline's Madeline (2018)

This was a tough watch, but kept me engaged with an outstanding lead performance by Helena Howard. Miranda July and Molly Parker play two intensely unlikable characters and they make for a very tough hang. It's all part of what Madeline is dealing with, but made for some scenes so uncomfortable I skipped ahead. Personally, I had trouble investing in the avant garde theatre troupe central to the story. It all seems so deeply silly and I think the film takes that into account - especially the director's capricious and grasping role. The film has a crazy energy that threw me for a loop. Ultimately not really my cup of tea, but hopefully we'll be seeing a lot more of Helena Howard after this.


Legend (1985)

This was a lot of fun. The blatant Peter Pan elements surrounding Cruise and his crew of woodland scamps didn't really work for me, but everything with Mia Sara, who is given a much more interesting storyline than the usual damsel in distress, and Curry's villain Darkness, is very engaging. The film looks amazing. Most scenes are filled with floating wisps, leaves, petals, embers, or snow. Each frame is filled with color, depth, and motion. Cruise and his buddies scamper about willy-nilly and that storyline is pretty unfocused, but it's largely enjoyable. Darkness is an iconic villain. An incredible achievement in creature design. Then there's my favorite scene, a dance with Mia Sara and a faceless woman that's darkly beautiful.

Dragonslayer (1981)

So, this a Disney movie where the princess is torn limb from limb and eaten alive by baby dragons in graphic detail. Just that is pretty incredible. It's another film with some scattered storytelling, but remarkable visuals and creature design. The location filming is gorgeous and Vermathrax is a great looking dragon. The weakest point is Peter MacNicol in the lead role. He constantly wears an expression that I cannot place for the life of me. Something between astonishment and expectation, but with utter blankness. I don't think even he knows what his character is thinking in those moments, which are many. Despite some of the story issues I really enjoyed going along for this ride.

"If God gives you lemons find a new God."

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 24426
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2746 on: November 13, 2018, 03:48:01 AM »
Passengers (2016)        9/10

If the image above conjures memories of The Shining I'm sure it's no accident. Michael Sheen in the fine red tuxedo, the underlit bar, the general sense of 1920's swank. It's too familiar not to be a nod. And what about the carpet? That's familiar too isn't it? Oh that carpet is in The Shining alright, but not in the bar. Where you do find it (or something more like it) is in one of the hallways near the elevators. Why the change? In fact, why reference The Shining at all? Merely because there is a bar in both films? Is this one of those cheap references they throw in to stroke critics' egos for being knowledgeable enough to recognize it, thereby lending a superficial air of sophistication to a blockbuster film? The same sort of fancy-sounding but ultimately meaningless snob-bait they use to sell everything these days from cooking spice to cars?


Please don't think this meme isn't self critical. My spice rack is embarrassingly pretentious.

I think the answer is actually no. If they'd wanted to make and easy and obvious Kurbrick connection, it's a layup for 2001. Passengers is a film about space travel after all. That they didn't go that route I think speaks to the homage having a deeper, more thoughtful connection. One worth exploring and not merely patting oneself on the back for noticing.

So explain the carpet? Why reference the bar from The Shining but use a carpet from another scene? The completely boring and ungenerous answer is it that it's simply the most iconic. And due to its iconic nature it was easiest (or only) carpet the set designers could source. Or maybe it's CG (a lot of the film is). However, the more exciting answer, and the one that viewers of Room 237 may be thinking of already, is that this particular carpet has a space flight connection of it's own.

Between the stranded protagonist, the solitude, and vast and lonely setting of many rooms, the thematic connections between Passengers and The Shining are already richer than any reference to 2001 would be. Then you throw in the odd mixed reference between the bar and the carpet that doesn't actually belong there, and you begin to wonder if the filmmakers had alternate explanations in mind. Conspiratorial minded people point to Danny's sweater, and the carpet's resemblance to the Apollo 11 launch pad, as Kubrick tipping his hand to his involvement in faking the moon landing. Whether you believe that or not (I think it's a super fun theory myself), it does associate the carpet with something deceitful. And the plot of Passengers revolves around a big deception. Or is the explanation weirder still? Is there something paranormal going on? How much of the film is simply the protagonists imagination? It's a fun inclusion and does give those scenes a slightly uneasy atmosphere, thanks to whatever residual trauma The Shining left you with.

I will continue to champion this film. I find it scratches the same itch that a good Black Mirror episode does while giving me more time for character and emotion. The central morality question is one I continue to think about. It is very ugly and disturbing in the "I can't say for sure I wouldn't do the same thing" vein. I think about it with different characters. I think about it if the characters were in opposite positions. I would love to see many variations on this film. I think about being in either characters shoes. Whether you make the virtuous choice or not, the consequences are awful in their own unique way. Could you live with either?

My primary gripe with this film, and the thing that will always keep it from being that rare 10/10, is that it does flinch now and then. There are times when it needs to linger but it cuts away. There are times when the direction is light but the moment demands something raw. It's kind of a tone thing... it only has a few notes when it really needs another octave or two for the optimal response. Thomas Newman's score is a great and distinct element in the film, a real enhancement, except for that final push at the end when it's looking for another gear and it isn't there. In short, it lacks any true wow sequences that bring everything together in that magic way. That stuff that puts you over the edge. It's a "so close" kind of experience for me. I'll probably continue to watch it every now and then hoping something changes and it eventually gets there. I don't think it will but even so, I still like it a lot.

Dave the Necrobumper

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10749
  • My tinypic changed so no avatar for a little while
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2747 on: November 13, 2018, 05:10:33 AM »
Death Wish 1 to 4 (1974, 1982, 1985, 1987)

I have not yet watch the fifth in this series, but the first 4 are a case study in a series wanting to escalate the situation/stakes with each new film. First it was just somewhat random acts of vigilantism, the it was taking on a small gang, then a big gang, then 2 drug crime families. Maybe in the fifth film he takes on country. Just watched the trailer for the new Death Wish film with Bruce Willis in the Bronson role and it looks like they are going to start at a higher level than the original. Like Bronson Willis has a calmness to his performances, but they differ in the timbre of that calmness. Bronson's had a grittiness\earthiness to his, Willis's has a cockiness.

Another interesting change over the films was the change of the source of the scourge. In the original it is general lawlessness of individuals, the second moves a little towards being about gangs being the problem, the third amps that up, and adds in drugs in a small way. The fourth film is about the evil of drugs.

The women in Paul Kersey's life have a shit time, none seem to survive long. This series being in the 70's and 80's is pretty much a poster child for the mistreatment of women characters.

If you wish to watch these films, Hulu has all 4 available at the moment.

MattDrufke

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2748 on: November 13, 2018, 09:01:07 AM »
Venom was... not terrible.

C
@ihatemattdrufke

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10965
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #2749 on: November 13, 2018, 05:37:15 PM »
Passengers (2016) 

Has this film landed in your top 100? If so, I'll watch it for movie club, if not, I'll still put it on my watchlist. Do I need to see The Shining first? :)

Quote
Please don't think this meme isn't self critical. My spice rack is embarrassingly pretentious.

Pics or it doesn't exist! :)
"Inside you there's a strength that lies."