love

Author Topic: Respond to the last movie you watched  (Read 561881 times)

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 22983
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3270 on: March 02, 2019, 09:02:41 PM »
Mirai

This film annoyed me. It plays on the hapless father trope. I'm all for shaming men for not doing their share of the housework and family work, but if you play them up as incapable of it, it undercuts the premise.

Also, this boy is terrible and I wanted to reach through the screen and spank him so much. And the general mess all these children make was highly triggering. It's possible I'm not ready to be a parent.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 18946
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3271 on: March 02, 2019, 10:16:07 PM »
Mirai

This film annoyed me. It plays on the hapless father trope. I'm all for shaming men for not doing their share of the housework and family work, but if you play them up as incapable of it, it undercuts the premise.

Also, this boy is terrible and I wanted to reach through the screen and spank him so much. And the general mess all these children make was highly triggering. It's possible I'm not ready to be a parent.

Or it's possible that he's just as spoiled as you say.  Frankly, I found these parts of the film to be kinda awful, which is why I didn't nominate it as a contender for animated film.  It left me irritated more than entertained.  And I'm a parent
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26158
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3272 on: March 02, 2019, 10:26:43 PM »
A Few Good Men (Rob Reiner, 1992)         10/10

Can anyone explain this line?

Quote from: Kaffee
After falsely accusing a highly decorated Marine officer of conspiracy and perjury, Lieutenant Kaffee will have a long and prosperous career teaching... typewriter maintenance at the Rocco Globbo School for Women!

Specifically what does Rocco Globbo school for women mean? Like I get that it's said in the same way you hear people threatened with getting transferred to Siberia, or some other undesirable place. But what is Rocco Globbo? Is that a reference to something? Google doesn't turn anything up for me except to link my back to this film. It doesn't seem to me that Aaron Sorkin would have Kaffee just make up a complete gibberish name. It feels like it must be a reference to something. Does anyone have any ideas?

Something else I wondered this time watching the film... did Kevin Pollack (a known impressionist) give Tom Cruise pointers for doing an impression of Jack Nicholson. Nicholson isn't in the scene when Tom Cruise does it... but I wonder if he's ever watched the movie. It would be fun to know what his reaction was.

This film is somehow totally engaging, and yet the experience isn't taxing. Like at all. I feel I could begin to watch it again as soon as it's over. Most really good films leave me emotionally worn out. The idea of watching even something like Star Wars twice in a row is exhausting to me. To go through all those highs and lows and that big ending... and then to do it all again? No way. A Few Good Men  doesn't deliver the same emotional impact for me... and yet it's still a favourite. I don't quite know what it's getting by on exactly. Not big cinematic artistry that's for sure. The presentation is very straightforward. It's whatever's left I guess.

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17721
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3273 on: March 02, 2019, 10:32:50 PM »
Frozen certainly has its problems. Elsa* is incredibly hard to care about, she just acts like a mopey drama queen through most of the movie, and the stuff she pulls could have (and in reality, would have) easily killed some people. The giant eyes and tiny waists of the two girls is creepy and off-putting... their eyes are literally bigger than their stomachs. The story has some pretty predictable beats, and god, Disney/Pixar loves the good-guy-who-turns-out-to-be-bad (and the bad-guy-who-turns-out-to-be-good) WAY too much. It's just an eye-rolling moment every time that reveal comes.

But gosh darn it, this is an enjoyable flick. I liked all the songs, and found that I didn't even mind the abundance of them. It felt the closest I've seen from Disney to a straight-up musical. I liked the characters we're with for most of the film -- Anna, Kristoff, Olav, Sven -- and their performances. I liked how the romance was handled, and the comic relief, and the action. I liked the feel of the ending, which does the standard Disney thing of "let's check in with all the characters and tie a bow on their arc" without the awkwardness that usually comes with that. It's just a well put-together movie that doesn't really break any molds**, but is largely very smart and polished in its execution. Rating: Very Good (85)

* Adele Dazeem

** although I do love how Disney subverts expectations with the "act of true love" thing. that was very nice.

« Last Edit: March 02, 2019, 10:40:22 PM by MartinTeller »

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 22983
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3274 on: March 02, 2019, 10:39:43 PM »
Martin, if big eyes and tiny waists isn't your thing, maybe avoid Alita: Battle Angel.  :D

And thank you oldkid for confirming that my reaction to that film shouldn't convince me to forswear parenthood.

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 35838
  • Marathon Man
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3275 on: March 02, 2019, 11:18:51 PM »
A Few Good Men (Rob Reiner, 1992)         10/10

Can anyone explain this line?

Quote from: Kaffee
After falsely accusing a highly decorated Marine officer of conspiracy and perjury, Lieutenant Kaffee will have a long and prosperous career teaching... typewriter maintenance at the Rocco Globbo School for Women!

Specifically what does Rocco Globbo school for women mean? Like I get that it's said in the same way you hear people threatened with getting transferred to Siberia, or some other undesirable place. But what is Rocco Globbo? Is that a reference to something? Google doesn't turn anything up for me except to link my back to this film. It doesn't seem to me that Aaron Sorkin would have Kaffee just make up a complete gibberish name. It feels like it must be a reference to something. Does anyone have any ideas?

It's the Rocco Columbo School for Women. In the original play the line is "typewriter maintenance at a women's school!" My guess is that Sorkin changed the line to something that has more sonic poetry.


Something else I wondered this time watching the film... did Kevin Pollack (a known impressionist) give Tom Cruise pointers for doing an impression of Jack Nicholson. Nicholson isn't in the scene when Tom Cruise does it... but I wonder if he's ever watched the movie. It would be fun to know what his reaction was.
I always figured it was Cruise having fun with the line. A rare moment where a Nicholson impression fits the moment and the character.

This film is somehow totally engaging, and yet the experience isn't taxing. Like at all. I feel I could begin to watch it again as soon as it's over. Most really good films leave me emotionally worn out. The idea of watching even something like Star Wars twice in a row is exhausting to me. To go through all those highs and lows and that big ending... and then to do it all again? No way. A Few Good Men  doesn't deliver the same emotional impact for me... and yet it's still a favourite. I don't quite know what it's getting by on exactly. Not big cinematic artistry that's for sure. The presentation is very straightforward. It's whatever's left I guess.
In my Top 100.
As for cinematic artistry, the film is shot by Robert Richardson and it taught me that static frames can be just as visually dynamic. That comes through in the opening credits (which I read were designed and shot by Richardson.) Some of the best focus changing I've ever seen. There are shots with this incredibly crisp edge lighting so that it looks like the actors ears could catch fire. There's definite artistry, but it mostly gets by on writing and acting. (Would you say Top 3 Tom Cruise performances? It's probably my #1.)

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 35838
  • Marathon Man
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3276 on: March 02, 2019, 11:29:07 PM »
The giant eyes and tiny waists of the two girls is creepy and off-putting... their eyes are literally bigger than their stomachs.
I think the wrists are also drawn in a weirdly small manner. I questioned this big eye design Disney uses because in Tangled, Rapunzel's eyes take up half her face. Somebody explained to me that this is done because children can more easily understand the emotions when the eyes are bigger.


Disney/Pixar loves the good-guy-who-turns-out-to-be-bad (and the bad-guy-who-turns-out-to-be-good) WAY too much. It's just an eye-rolling moment every time that reveal comes.
Blame John Lasseter. This is something that worked well on Toy Story 2 and he does it way more often than not. Makes me appreciate Princess and the Frog where Dr. Facilier is just bad from the jump. What I like here is they do a really good job of having Hans do good and heroic things, to the point where his villain song is a love duet. (On a 2nd listen you better understand the deception in his lyrics and approach with Anna.) They try to pass off The Duke as the bad guy, but he's too much a buffoon to be a real threat.

ProperCharlie

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 287
  • Am I right sir? Ithangyou.
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3277 on: March 03, 2019, 02:57:50 AM »
となりのトトロ (1988) aka My Neighbour Totoro - Rewatch
Satsuki and Mei move the the countryside to help their sick mother recuperate. This is wonderful. What starts as a simple tale of a young family dealing with a difficult move and encountering benign and comedic woodland spirits becomes something much greater when Mei tries to take some health-giving corn to her mother. The underlying fears of the two girls come to the fore in a respectful and tear-inducing manner while never losing itís whimsy and gentleness. The scene at the bus-stop in the rain is iconic.

Black Narcissus (1947) - Rewatch
Several unsuitable nuns are sent to form a convent in the Himalayas, but fail to deal with the local winds. The subtext is a regretful and confused British view of the loss of India from Empire. The foreground is a tale of several women who only begin to discover themselves when placed in an alien and potentially hostile environment. Even more foreground is colour. Reds, pinks and greens bursting from the screen almost supernaturally, especially in the final visage of Kathleen Byronís demonic mania.

Amadeus (1984)
Salieri confesses and attests to the divine genius of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Brilliant performances, especially from the two leads. Amazing production design centred around the set piece productions of Mozartís operas in the Tyl Theatre in Plzen. The story itself is operatically large. Salieriís mediocrity and madness in challenging God vs Mozartís baser but divine impulses. Over all of it Milos Forman conducting in supreme control. The most perfectly constructed spectacle.

BlacKkKlansman (2018)
Ron Stallworth does intelligence. Spike Lee has made something that twists and turns from thriller to hard-nosed political commentary to blaxploitation. Following a black cop in Colorado Springs infiltrating the Klan, John David Washington and Adam Driver turn in great performances. The contrast in mood between the scenes set within the Klan amongst racist, violent, hateful men and women, and those in the outspoken, outraged but ultimately relaxed black community could not show Spike Leeís message any clearer.

Kitbull (2019)
More tear-inducing than any onion, a fierce kitty survives in a hostile world with only a pink elephant to comfort her. This could be a short promotion for any animal shelter. Rosana Sullivan knows cats and dogs. Their behaviour is characterised perfectly here, and all those whoíve known a pet will recognise all the signs of affection and play on display. Ultimately a short tale of friendship in a mostly uncaring world, it unashamedly thrashes our heartstrings into submission.




Die Austernprinzessin (1919) aka The Oyster Princess
Ossi Oswalda wants a husband. Immediately. This is utter nuts. Itís a satire of obscene affluence and those afflicted by it. Itís absurd in the same sense as The Marx Brothers, The Goons and Monty Python. Thereís isnít a scene in this that isnít pushing the boundaries of sanity and alcoholic consumption. Why have 20 waiters serve a table when you can have 200? The star of this is Victor Jansen, his facial hair and his lugubrious ennui. There is only one comment necessary - ďNow Iím Impressed!Ē

The Furies (1934)
All the way from 1934, three-minutes of montage made by Slavko Vorkapich from the beginning of the film ďCrime Without PassionĒ. It says much that this is seen a stand-alone short film. It is astonishing. Three female victims of male violence rise from death in an orgy of anger and fury, soaring forth from their own blood to become angels of vengeance roaring over the city. The scoring and editing is mesmerising. The agency of wronged womanhood has rarely been this viscerally manifested on the screen. Watch it and your jaw will hit the floor.

Get Out (2017)
Someone wants to give Chris Washington a piece of their mind. A fantastic mix of race politics, modern witchcraft, and the lust for young, healthy, strong bodies. Itís about time someone made a film that uses the concept of Ďwhite liberal eliteí and turns them into something to directly fear, following the Wicker Man in taking a weird but ultimately anodyne and effete group and making them dreadful. The silent auction is the centrepiece mixing the history of slavery with a newly terrifying suburban middle-class whimsy.

Murder by Death (1976)
Holmes and Watson are relieved to be left on the cutting room floor. A parody of the country house murder mystery, and itís terrible. A highly starry cast stumble through the ridiculous, pointlessly convoluted, and unfunny script. Itís not even silly, itís plain knuckle-bitingly awful. Neil Simonís writing and plotting is juvenile. Peter Sellers turns up in yellow-face, not for the first time. Things may have been different in the 1970s, but I donít hear them laughing back then either.

Willow (1988)
A prophecy, an evil queen, and a quest. Itís a by-the-numbers fantasy, but this has a little bit of charm about and between its set pieces. The obvious chemistry between Val Kilmer and Joanne Whalley helps as well. It never seeks to stray outside its genre-mandated norms or the Lucas-structured script of action set pieces mortared together with plot, exposition and romantic development. Together with a family audience in mind, it's a slightly tame roller-coaster ride to the final confrontation.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2019, 03:06:56 AM by ProperCharlie »

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 35838
  • Marathon Man
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3278 on: March 03, 2019, 09:38:40 AM »
The Furies (1934)
All the way from 1934, three-minutes of montage made by Slavko Vorkapich from the beginning of the film ďCrime Without PassionĒ. It says much that this is seen a stand-alone short film. It is astonishing. Three female victims of male violence rise from death in an orgy of anger and fury, soaring forth from their own blood to become angels of vengeance roaring over the city. The scoring and editing is mesmerising. The agency of wronged womanhood has rarely been this viscerally manifested on the screen. Watch it and your jaw will hit the floor.
I watched Crime Without Passion last year. Hell of an opening scene. I had no idea it was considered its own separate short film.

ProperCharlie

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 287
  • Am I right sir? Ithangyou.
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #3279 on: March 03, 2019, 12:05:50 PM »

I watched Crime Without Passion last year. Hell of an opening scene. I had no idea it was considered its own separate short film.

It's a bit odd.  It really is just the opening three minutes of Crime Without Passion, and so just stops as the montage finishes, yet it is seemingly known everywhere as its own separate thing called The Furies.  It's not the only one of his montage sequences that has its own life and name outside its host film.  He also made the 'Skyline Dance' from Manhattan Cocktail in 1928.

I need to find some more Vorkapic montage.  Wikipedia tells me that so well-known was his style of montage that montage sequences of the 1930s and 40s were referred to as the 'Vorkapic' in some scripts montage sequences were occaionally known as a Vorkapic. 

Edited to add a link to a YouTube compilation of some of his Hollywood montage sequence.  Starts out with The Furies and carries on with some outstanding work of pure cinema.  As you can probably tell, Vorkapic is my major discovery this week  :D

Get your Vorkapic here!
« Last Edit: March 03, 2019, 03:43:50 PM by ProperCharlie »

 

love