Author Topic: Respond to the last movie you watched (Jan 2011 - Nov 2013)  (Read 2532324 times)

Totoro

  • Guest
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14020 on: July 07, 2012, 01:48:30 AM »
Gentleman Prefer Blondes (Howard Hawks, 1953)
What a doozy! The similarities between this film and The Rules of the Game are so striking in its second half. The soullessness of the female characters and the lack of backbone of the male characters made me sick to my stomach. Luckily, I think Malone and Dorothy will be alright even if I find Lorelei to be almost poison incarnate. But, then again, Dorothy condones it, is she just as bad? I loved how Hawks practically shoved materialism in your face throughout the entire ride. The "Diamonds are a Girl's Best Friend" musical number was especially stomach churning while being completely entertaining as well. Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russel devoured their roles. Did they do any other movies together? I would like to see them. The callback to "Little Rock" tied the entire film together quite well. Why am I surprised? Their first musical number (which was a jolt of energy that the film needed (and more films need) floored me so much through its honesty and humor that I forgot to notice that it also set the characters up. I should have known all along. Sex is a gigantic part of the film ("I'm going back home and giving him my thanks" is a line in the first number and their dance move is to present their butt to the audience). There is so much sex and sexiness brimming throughout the film that when the little kid told Lorelei that she has "animal magnetism", I thought for a second that the boy would be the film's chorus! What a wonderful and sickening film.

 :)

verbALs

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9446
  • Snort Life-DOR
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14021 on: July 07, 2012, 02:46:53 AM »
How would you rate the cleverness of the scheme on a 1 to 10 scale, verbALs? 10 being mastermind, 1 being the war in Iraq.
;D. Somewhere between 2 & 3. It's part of what I referred to as the effortlessness of the film. Heist movies absolutely revel in the cleverness and precision of the operation. These four just get on the same train. The question Matthau keeps asking is how are they supposed to get off the train and escape once they have the money. Again, it leads to lots of jokes that start "I know how you are going to escape....". The answer isn't complicated either.

The Rear Window comparison only occurred to me when I was writing this last night but I didn't explain, why RW is similarly effortless.  A film about "did he do it?" where the protagonist cannot move, so everything has to happen right in front of him. It becomes so much about how we see things and interpret them. About the most complicated moment is when Stewart is asleep and we see something happen that he misses, that changes the overall perception.

I have this thing about the effortlessness of certain songs being an identifier of a great band or record, (One Love by The Stone Roses & New Generation by Suede, which I only saw in this light this week) having total control over the medium that the song flows without even trying.
I used to encourage everyone I knew to make art; I don't do that so much anymore. - Banksy

spoko

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2062
  • Hero of the Great Taco Syndicate
    • Bullet in the Brain
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14022 on: July 07, 2012, 08:08:55 AM »
    The Artist (2011)

Finally caught up with this. It was good, if a bit inconsistent. I think I remember Michael Phillips calling it "slight" when he talked about it on the show. I could see that. But the moment where they fall for each other is genuinely affecting, and the 20 minutes or so following the dream sequence were also quite strong. (That latter bit was a bit abrupt, though, if you weren't already familiar with the trope of silent stars who were afraid of the transition to talkies.) It was also pretty funny along the way; teetered on the brink of being overly precious, but to me it didn't ever fall that way. Also, the acting was quite good across the board. Dujardin, especially, was captivating. A lot depended on him humanizing that character, and he really did so. Goodman, for his part, was quite funny. I thought Bejo was probably the weak link in the chain, but she held up.



smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14023 on: July 07, 2012, 10:35:09 AM »
You just murder death killed that review. Time to put on your kimono and head to Taco Bell. :)

You think those sex helmets will come to pass in our lifetime? Sexting ain't gunna keep people happy forever...

verbALs

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9446
  • Snort Life-DOR
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14024 on: July 07, 2012, 11:34:16 AM »
My missus makes me think about it now!
I used to encourage everyone I knew to make art; I don't do that so much anymore. - Banksy

tjwells

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14025 on: July 07, 2012, 12:10:45 PM »
To Rome with Love (Woody Allen, 2012)
B-

http://nursingshorelines.com/2012/07/07/to-rome-with-love-woody-allen-2012/



After spending much of the late 90s and early 00s pumping out a massive amount of crap (Anything Else, The Curse of the Jade Scorpion, Hollywood Ending, etc.), I think Woody Allen has been on a bit of a hot streak lately. Ignoring the abomination that is You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger, all his work since 2004 has ranged from good (Melinda and Melinda, Scoop) to really good (Match Point, Whatever Works) to great (Midnight in Paris). So when I heard he was going back to the well to make another multiple-story film, I was worried. Fortunately, To Rome with Love is mostly solid Woody; Woody-lite, to be sure, but still quite fulfilling.

The film centers on four surreal stories which, despite being cut together so they’re all taking place simultaneously, never actually have anything to do with the others. In one, Alec Baldwin runs into a young man who strikingly resembles a younger version of himself. In another, Roberto Benigni, the most normal schmuck in Italy, finds himself famous for no apparent reason. We also have a pair of newlyweds who come to Rome and get separated, and finally an older couple (Allen and Judy Davis) to meet their daughter’s “communist” fiance.

I’ll start with the two stories that don’t work because CINECAST! do they not work. The first is Woody’s completely misguided attempt at making a statement about undeserved celebrity. While Benigni (who I actually found quite enjoyable here, surprising since I usually find him to be the equivalent to an earwig pushing into my brain) gives it all he can, the story is too flimsy and undercooked to work. The same goes for the story of the newlyweds, who get separated and end up in adultery-probably situations with a famous Italian movie star and a prostitute (Penelope Cruz). Again, the thing feels like it just didn’t have enough time in the oven, which is disappointing, though I can’t begrudge the 76 year-old Allen for trying to race the clock.

Fortunately, the two other stories were clearly given precedence (they each probably add up to about 30 minutes or so of a 102 minute film), making them altogether more interesting than the others. The first one, with Woody, Judy Davis and Allison Pill, is the funniest of the vignettes, due in no small part to Allen. Even at 76 years old, the man is still able to deliver rapid-fire witticisms with unbelievable ease. He also has fantastic chemistry with Davis, in her fifth Allen film, playing a more comedic version of her character in Husbands and Wives. The story is rather preposterous, involving opera, communism and showering, but again, it provides plenty of laughs to make up for it.

I want to spend quite a bit of time talking about the biggest chunk of the film, because it’s one that I was both spectacularly charmed and a bit disappointed in. Starring Ellen Page, Jesse Eisenberg, Alec Baldwin and Greta Gerwig, the story focuses on an architect who runs into a young man spending a year studying in Rome who may or may not be a younger version of himself. He spends an indeterminate time following him around as almost a ghostly conscience, trying to prevent his younger self from making the same stupid mistakes he did.

The film works beautifully; it feels like the best of Woody mixed with the breezy but deep conversations of an early 90s Rohmer piece. He deals in equal parts with young love, fake intellectualism and regret, never straying too far from the snappy dialogue that makes him such a brilliant filmmaker. And the entire cast is up to the challenge, particularly Page, whose portfolio of interesting roles continues to grow.

The reason I was slightly disappointed in this chunk of the film is nothing to do with the short itself. It’s beautifully done and is on par with anything great he’s done in the past fifteen years or so. However, it seems like a film that could have been so easily expanded upon with a few more months of work into a full feature, and maybe garnered Woody some of the same rave praise that he got last year for Midnight in Paris. It feels almost like he got half the script done, maybe got stuck for a bit, and rather than taking the time to expand on it and maybe NOT release a film this year, he thought up three easy, fluffy vignettes to fill out the rest of the running time rather than finish up on this one. Disappointing, to say the least, but still a great piece of filmmaking.

Overall, To Rome with Love is a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it works, some of it doesn’t. But don’t let anyone tell you this is bottom of the barrel Woody; he’s clearly working like someone who’s been recently reinvigorated by his art, something I can only hope extends into his 2013 film, which has him returning to the States.

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36129
  • Marathon Man
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14026 on: July 07, 2012, 12:26:05 PM »
Great review verbALs. I love Demolition Man. The action is much more skillful than I expected. Quite exciting. Snipes is a great foe and an excellent fighter. Plus, the satire really works. It's silly, but believable enough to earn a lot of hearty laughs. * * * 1/2

verbALs

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9446
  • Snort Life-DOR
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14027 on: July 07, 2012, 12:44:01 PM »
Did you just watch it or is that an old rating? Yeah following the comment Josh made about satire being missing from this Ted film, it becomes apparent that a film might think it is elevating its humour into satire (however much in the gutter the laughs are), but unless the targets are clear, its really just being flatulent. So, is the target of DM's satire Political Correctness (Big P Big C)? Is it a cry out to the dying age of the moron-hero films of Arnie, Sly (Die Hard? (Cat Pigeons))? Is the humour simply a 90s pre-requisite for stupid films because people are too knowing to accept serious films like Rambo or Cobra.

I prefer the humour to be there, but DM is still sadistic in its violence. It couldn't be more casual about it either. Simon Phoenix offs fools just for being in his eyeline. Notice the opening scenes are set in 1996 i.e. the near future from 1993, as if saying "hey it ain't this bad yet" and the ultraviolence is extreme to contrast with the peace and calm of San Angeles. Or am I taking this too seriously. After all we were fed on this stuff through the 80s and into the 90s.

Finally the opening scenes of Demolition Man & Predator 2 are very similar (rocks hobby horse)

btw notice the "head" theme. Simon Phoenix says he wouldn't want to lose his head in the opening scene. Benjamin Bratt's character is called Alfredo Garcia. Nice.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2012, 12:47:14 PM by verbALs »
I used to encourage everyone I knew to make art; I don't do that so much anymore. - Banksy

StudentOFilm

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3778
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14028 on: July 07, 2012, 04:35:15 PM »
The Five-Year Engagement



Maybe because I'm seeing these movies at the right time in my life, but I love this sort of age of Apatow comedy. I know, who am I to say that there is a new age of comedy all because of one man, but I remember just about every R-rated filthy mouthed, raunchy comedy pre-The 40 Year Old Virgin as just being some sort of teenage sex romp. Then comedies came along with as much heart and story as they were funny- Knocked Up, Superbad, Pineapple Express, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Bridesmaids and others such as Role Models, I Love You Man, and Horrible Bosses. I'm being general with my acceptance of all of these movies into one large category, but it is nice to see a great movie-making maturity to laugh-out-loud comedy ratio. The Five-Year Engagement from director/co-writer Nicholas Stoller and co-writer/actor Jason Segel (both of Forgetting Sarah Marshall fame) thankfully joins those comedies with its exploration of not just falling in love, but what happens after.

The film follows Tom Solomon (Segel) and Violet Barnes (Emily Blunt) who become engaged at the height of their love for each other in San Francisco. Tom is a sous-chef at a very successful restaurant and Violet is an academic psychologist. Violent unfortunately can't find a job out in California, but she is able to secure a position in Michigan. Tom and her decide to hold off on their wedding as they re-locate, Tom has trouble finding work, the relationship hits some bumps, and like the best of comedies, the events only build and build and build up from there.

Along with Forgetting Sarah Marshall, I'm amazed at how much Segel and Stoller are able to create a film that almost has a wandering-aimlessly quality to it. They don't completely throw structure out the window, but they give scenes and sequences the ability to move along in an unpredictable fashion and the two are funny and clever enough to be able to keep the movie's arc and core direction intact. The end has a bit of a meandering quality to it as a "will-they, won't-they" sort of storyline takes place, but ultimately due to the premise of exploring this couple's five years together, it ends up fitting into the film quite nicely.

As usual with Apatow productions, the ensemble of supporting characters step in to help the protagonists through their dilemmas and this film has quite a pedigree of scene-stealers in namely Chris Pratt, Alison Brie, and Rhys Ifans, but also with Jacki Weaver, Kevin Hart, Mindy Kaling, Randall Park, Brian Posehn, and Chris Parnell. Simply put, chalk up another win for adult comedies in this post-40 Year Old Virgin world my brain seems to recognize.
"Be yourself, unless you suck."- Joss Whedon

My Switchboard

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Respond to the last movie you watched
« Reply #14029 on: July 07, 2012, 05:16:00 PM »
Or am I taking this too seriously.

Sign of good sci-fi maybe is that it offers you that option. :)