Rate the last movie you've seen

Explore Tinsel Town and discuss your favorite TV shows and movies.

Moderator: Community Team

Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#121

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

The Edge of Seventeen (link) or what is meant to be the indie movie of the year from within the main Hollywood caravan, yet, while most such indiecoms are generally meant to bounce right off me, I swear I couldn't think of a more half-assed project this year once I finished watching this. Overall, its aim is to add to the bulk of John Hughesian, high-school dramedies focusing on teen angst and social niche mismatch, while amping up the levels of dark / deadpan / awkward comedy and the protagonist's youthful imbalance of outspoken cynicism, grief or social anxiety (the gist is that our main girl's - Hailee Steinfeld - world comes tumbling down when her BFF hooks up with her brother, leaving her stranded in a pool of [even more] intense negativity and disconnect from almost anyone else in the community).

I think what doesn't work with the movie are the precise things it may try to charm us with: the uncanny prevalent brooding or sharp tone and the pay off. Steinfeld - making a true notable return, as far as I'm concerned, only since True Grit - does a commendable effort to play this bluesy, erratic, atypical lead teen figure and shout out even to Blake Jenner (the brother in the story) who can apparently play a jock with flair and substance in any situation (he also played one this year in Linklater's Everybody Wants Some!! which, for my money, is the true - if bathing in retro - indie jewel of the year). Meanwhile, Woody Harrelson...I think some of the posters even highlighted the bond between his character and the main girl, a sort of off-the-wall student-teacher mentorship, but it's probably the most deceiving part of the entire movie, because Woody's scenes are too few and far in between and they don't add up to anything: there are like five identical scenes in which the girl comes in class freaking out and the teacher approaches the kick-some-sense-into-her solution via wisecracking quippy sarcasm, plus a more fatherly-behind-all-the-facade later scene... and I chuckled alright at the former, because they were hilarious, but was there any real pay off?

At its best, I almost sensed that this movie tried to deliver a peculiar message about how negativity sometimes means just as much to poison yourself from within as to not be able to click with the world around you, thus making the protagonist a sort of anti-heroine, whose self-deprecation and rejection are questionably over-the-top and egocentric and whose "coming-of-age", in the end, comes closer to "getting your head out of your ass". But can you fully sell something like this to the mass audiences, in need of their laughs, romance awws and predictable plot developments? Of course not. Hence the pedestrian set pieces, despite the glaze of dark comedy on top of them.

Right Now, Wrong Then (link) - whose original title is so quirkly long and weird, I just have to mention it: Ji-geum-eun-mat-go-geu-ddae-neun-teul-li-da - apparently not the first movie by Sang-soo Hong I've watched (Nobody's Daughter Haewon), though I don't remember much from it. With this movie, one could almost joke that this is how South Korean cineasts envision romcoms, since it is a story of a filmmaker on a business trip who gets enamoured with a stranger and the date goes quite weird, due to his awkward social skills and several faux pas... only for the story to be rebooted completely, with alterations that lead things into a different, seemingly more favorable direction. If your first thought would be that such gimmick of crafting the same movie twice - which apparently is not even the first time this director is doing it :o - would instill boredom upon viewing, well, in some ways that effect could surface, especially since its aesthetics are also fairly minimal and its pace is slow, nevertheless I think there was enough chemistry between the lead characters and humor or emotion to carry some of its moments; plus it resembles that quality of Eric Rohmer's movies, rich in dialogue and interaction if not much else to the naked eye, in which people just talk and talk, acting both philosophical and cursory in their thoughts. One theme this movie might go for, and that I've seen come up in other reviews, would be how the artist can use (or manipulate) the language of his art to his own will and thus tailor the amount of reality or fantasy he puts in his story or drama or whatever content he chooses - the equivalent of a date gone wrong that you'd later wish you could just dial the clock back and do it the right way. Anyway, bit hard to recommend a movie whose two-hour running is literally generated by a one hour act and a complete variation of it, but this was not bad at all.

Krisha (link) - a concise, poignant Thanksgiving drama about an old woman trying to reconnect with her family, despite some troubled past issues. The drama boils up nicely from its apparent conciliatory opening tone, complete with quirky, menacing, bomb-ticky background music, gradual cracks in the family interactions and the protagonist's psyche, even in sync with, oh sweet analogy, the turkey getting roasted in the oven. Plus the big family reunion depicted has a combination of conservative and hipster elements: they have like a bazillion dogs in the house and some of them blabber on about spiritual integrity and practices, whilst matriarchal and/or patriarchal elements are also on full display (the women nursing to their chidren or preparing the meal, while the men watch football, wrestle in the back garden like bros and such). But mostly, this movie deals with psychological pressure and demons of the past you cannot always deal with it - or rather, for which you cannot always be forgiven by others. While this is neatly etched in frame by its debutant director, I'd also say there's a bit more style than substance put into it, plus I didn't feel I'll remember or revisit this one any time soon.

L'avenir (Things to Come) (link), a new, awards-gifted (Silver Bear for Directing) movie by Mia Hansen-Løve, a director who might fly under your radar (in which case you should correct that), but whose past three movies I've seen and liked, including this one - 2011's Goodbye First Love, a rare instance of a youthful, capricious and misguided romantic drama that I've actually loved, and 2014's Eden, which I've shortly noted in the past. Her movies always appear to be small scaled, intimate in depiction as well as quasi-referential in creativity, although even with this movie there are hints of bigger themes nudged forward: the protagonist is a philosophy teacher, so naturally a lot of references and allusions come up; social instances of what appears to have been student strikes during the (2010?) pension reform protests: plus the teacher meeting again with a past eminent, gifted student that seems to have, nevertheless, embraced communard anarchy. But deep down, this movie is nothing but the personal drama of a woman who experiences, late in her age, a lot of separations and losses, and must deal with it and with "the things to come". And what better actress to render this than the lovely Isabelle Huppert, capable to act so emancipated and vulnerable within the same range. Contrary to Verhoeven pushing her in Elle to be as sardonic, acerbic and stony-hearted as possible, in light of all grievances and adversities - a performance that was, nonetheless, mindblowing - Hansen-Løve allows more natural and raw emotion from Huppert, while also pushing for the same note of not yielding to any sorrowful circumstances. Soft spoken filmmaking and atmosphere, lively pace and visuals (photogenic frenchiness and/or parisianess, so to speak) and the usual dash of French chic, all making a pleasant viewing, one that could turn out among the best of the year, in hindsight.

And finally, on the more lunacy-driven side of French cinema, Alain Guiraudie's new movie Rester vertical (Staying Vertical) (link), a fairly risqué and weird flick, if that wouldn't be the case with all of his ouevre. While his previous Stranger by the Lake proved such a shocker and surprise delight for me, if its combination of gay romance and chilling thriller could be regarded as plausible and described as such, this one didn't quite land well. "A screenwriter going into rural pilgrimage, in search of inspiration, only to hook up and have a baby with a shepherdess" is about the straightest narrative that could be shared, before things go quite batshit, with, as expected from Guiraudie, full elements of homoeroticism, the protagonist facing conflicting, contradictory opposition from everyone around him and everything happening to him, plus some scenes that just shoot into magic realism fantasy, without any discernible meaning or connection. Nah.
User avatar
Tangrowth
Don Emeritum
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 33120
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:20 am
Location: California
Gender: Genderfluid
Preferred Pronouns: any/all
Aka: Tangy

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#122

Post by Tangrowth »

Just saw Arrival last night. Loved it! I guess I'd rate it a 9/10.
User avatar
Tangrowth
Don Emeritum
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 33120
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:20 am
Location: California
Gender: Genderfluid
Preferred Pronouns: any/all
Aka: Tangy

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#123

Post by Tangrowth »

Also wanted to say that as a movie novice, I enjoy your movie reviews, Rico. Keep it up!
User avatar
A Person
Loan Shark
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#124

Post by A Person »

If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
User avatar
Tangrowth
Don Emeritum
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 33120
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:20 am
Location: California
Gender: Genderfluid
Preferred Pronouns: any/all
Aka: Tangy

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#125

Post by Tangrowth »

A Person wrote:If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
Sweet, thanks for the recommendation! I'll have to do that. Arrival was just freaking awesome.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#126

Post by Ricochet »

A Person wrote:If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
What impresses me the most about Enemy is that it is not only a great mindfuck of a standalone movie, it is also a great adaptation of a mindfuck of a book (Saramago's The Double). The adaptation is overall straightforward, but Villeneuve also finds and includes an extra psychological layer, that completely works.
User avatar
Tangrowth
Don Emeritum
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 33120
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:20 am
Location: California
Gender: Genderfluid
Preferred Pronouns: any/all
Aka: Tangy

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#127

Post by Tangrowth »

Ricochet wrote:
A Person wrote:If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
What impresses me the most about Enemy is that it is not only a great mindfuck of a standalone movie, it is also a great adaptation of a mindfuck of a book (Saramago's The Double). The adaptation is overall straightforward, but Villeneuve also finds and includes an extra psychological layer, that completely works.
I'm definitely intrigued.
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#128

Post by insertnamehere »

Ricochet wrote:
A Person wrote:If you liked Arrival check out his other movies, Enemy is what I saw first from him and it blew my mind. Mongoose did not like it though >:(
What impresses me the most about Enemy is that it is not only a great mindfuck of a standalone movie, it is also a great adaptation of a mindfuck of a book (Saramago's The Double). The adaptation is overall straightforward, but Villeneuve also finds and includes an extra psychological layer, that completely works.
IMPROMPTU DENIS VILLENEUVE RANKINGS:

1. Enemy
2. Arrival
3. Polytechnique
4. Prisoners
5. Sicario
6. Incendies
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#129

Post by Ricochet »

Enemy > Sicario > Incendies > Arrival > Prisoners

Polytechnique and the rest are ?? at the moment
User avatar
A Person
Loan Shark
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#130

Post by A Person »

Prisoners for me is mostly memorable for Paul Dano's performance.
User avatar
JaggedJimmyJay
The Brassiere of The Syndicate
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 39248
Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 11:42 pm
Location: United States
Gender: Man
Preferred Pronouns: He/him/his/himself
Aka: Jay | JJJ | J3 | 3J | jagged | Jimmy | KOFM
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#131

Post by JaggedJimmyJay »

MovingPictures07 wrote:Just saw Arrival last night. Loved it! I guess I'd rate it a 9/10.
*estimates approximately 2.3 months before MP's RYM page starts to show film ratings*
Spoiler: show
Overall: 73-57 (.56) | Town 49-41 (.54) | Mafia 18-11 (.62) | Independent 6-4 (.60)

The Syndicate: Town 23-26; Mafia 10-5; Indy 5-1 | RateYourMusic: Town 14-13; Mafia 5-4; Indy 0-3 | Mafia Universe: Town 6-0; Mafia 1-0 | Student Doctor Network: Town 2-1; Mafia 1-0 | HeroClixRealms: Town 1-0; Mafia 0-1 | Bulbagarden: Mafia 0-1; Indy 1-0 | 2+2 POG: Town 1-0 | Naruto Forums: Town 0-1 | Personality Café: Town 1-0 | Vendetta Strada: Town 0-1 | Mafia451: Town 1-0 | Wintreath: Mafia 1-0

Awards:

Spoiler: show
The Syndicate

ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

Student Doctor Network

ImageImageImageImageImage

Rate Your Music

Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9
Best Scum, Maffies 3
Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9
Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9
Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6
Spirit Award, Maffies 9
Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4

Mafia Universe

Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020
Best Town Player, 2020

Hosts:

Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage[-Mass Effect Mafia banner-]ImageImageImageImage
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#132

Post by Ricochet »

Or better yet, wait for Sonemic? (Or whatever the film branch will be called)

Is that still happening?
User avatar
JaggedJimmyJay
The Brassiere of The Syndicate
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 39248
Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 11:42 pm
Location: United States
Gender: Man
Preferred Pronouns: He/him/his/himself
Aka: Jay | JJJ | J3 | 3J | jagged | Jimmy | KOFM
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#133

Post by JaggedJimmyJay »

Ricochet wrote:Or better yet, wait for Sonemic? (Or whatever the film branch will be called)

Is that still happening?
Yeah, the three-pronged site is still supposed to happen eventually. It was originally due last year, but something or another got in the way. Hopefully it's soon; it's kind of becoming an inside joke at this point.

It'll be:

Sonemic for music
Cinemos for films
Glitchwave for video/computer games

All three are separate but also intertwined, and the transition will be seamless for everyone's profiles. Whenever it happens.
Spoiler: show
Overall: 73-57 (.56) | Town 49-41 (.54) | Mafia 18-11 (.62) | Independent 6-4 (.60)

The Syndicate: Town 23-26; Mafia 10-5; Indy 5-1 | RateYourMusic: Town 14-13; Mafia 5-4; Indy 0-3 | Mafia Universe: Town 6-0; Mafia 1-0 | Student Doctor Network: Town 2-1; Mafia 1-0 | HeroClixRealms: Town 1-0; Mafia 0-1 | Bulbagarden: Mafia 0-1; Indy 1-0 | 2+2 POG: Town 1-0 | Naruto Forums: Town 0-1 | Personality Café: Town 1-0 | Vendetta Strada: Town 0-1 | Mafia451: Town 1-0 | Wintreath: Mafia 1-0

Awards:

Spoiler: show
The Syndicate

ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

Student Doctor Network

ImageImageImageImageImage

Rate Your Music

Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9
Best Scum, Maffies 3
Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9
Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9
Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6
Spirit Award, Maffies 9
Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4

Mafia Universe

Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020
Best Town Player, 2020

Hosts:

Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage[-Mass Effect Mafia banner-]ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#134

Post by insertnamehere »

I just use Letterboxd instead
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#135

Post by Ricochet »

My movie log points out I've apparently hit the 800 mark on unique movies watched. Started keeping this list four and half years ago.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Trois souvenirs de ma jeunesse (My Golden Days) (link), a 2015 movie by Arnaud Desplechin, which I believed for a while to be a solo story, but turns out it was a prequel conceived for an earlier 1996 movie of his, Comment je me suis disputé... (ma vie sexuelle) (My Sex Life... or How I Got Into an Argument) (link). So I just binged the both of them, on consecutive days - quite the binge, too, since they totaled five hours. The cinematic touch and style has also experienced visible changes between the 20-year span - more neutral, focused on the acting, in the 90s, more potent in its cinematography and chic-ness nowadays.

While my impressions evolved backwards, I'll try to present them now in chronological order. The 1996 movie presents the story of a middle aged man (played a very young looking Mathieu Amalric at that time, but just as idiosyncratic in his acting as always) who's stuck in a bit of an existential rut (overdue, unfinished doctorate in philosophy; unfulfilling teaching position where he must suddenly face an old foe; a 10-year long up and down relationship with main love-of-his-life figure Esther - played by Emmanuelle Devos - and numerous others love interests or hanky-pankies). Not only overly long (nearly three hours), but also fairly indulgent in its weaved narrative, this seems to be the usual bourgeois social drama the French usually do, with a lot of musings and ramblings, emotional or hormonal tantrums, humor and romance and such. I was either not patient enough or failed to detect any particular detail that sets Desplechin's way of doing it apart from others. Still, I liked a few moments and a couple of the actresses (Devos, as well as Marianne Denicourt, as a very passive-agressive secondary love interest). The new movie reintroduces the protagonist years later in his mid 40s, only to provide some semblance of narrative support for him to reflect back on his adolescence - literally three particular moments, the first two a bit short and flimsy (scenes from a trouble childhood and an escapade into Mother Russia, respectively), followed by the one that counts the most, mainly how he met and fell in love with the abovementioned Esther. Watching this without any knowledge of prequel shenanigans, I thought the three-story act was a bit disjointed and in the end I could still fault it with this. But even here there was a pretty solid choice in the actress playing the younger version of Emmanuelle Devos and a few sequences to like. I just didn't feel any depth to this drama-making, nor felt compelled by this overarching human saga. I'd color Trois souvenirs so and Comment je me suis dispute... so.

Câini (Dogs) (link), a new Romanian thriller/neo-western that screened at Cannes' Un Certain Regard and set itself apart this year for being just that: a Romanian movie in a genuine hardboiled thriller/neo-western style. The main anectode is that our so called New Wave, while getting its fair share of praises and awards year after year, is also criticised (mainly poor audience feedback) for being so shut-in in its realism, ultra-minimalist, ultra-aesthetic, heavy on long takes and dialogue and silences and 2deep4u psychological layers. Compared to which Dogs is indeed sort of refreshing: clear-cut, incisive and gritty, minimal but in a way it generates tension and sharp lines of dialogue, variegated in its crimson-ranged environmental nuances. A thriller of throbbing pulses at first that you just know will burst and spray all over later on (you can read the synopsis on IMDb, if you want, what's written there is basically it). It's not an unique recent experience, since there have been a few other thrillers or "newwave"-genre-evading attempts, even this director (Bogdan Mirică) having previously made a TV show for local HBO in the same vein, albeit with too much urban slum talk and realism in it. This movie has been broadly said to be taken almost from a Cormac McCarthy handbook, to the point of looking quite derivative - something I can't myself argue against, although, overall, it still felt valuable in its own way and refreshingly smart and composed in its realization.

Weiner (link), a recent documentary that covered the controversial political figure's sexting scandals and career downfall, mainly during his bid for resurrection during the 2013 NY mayoral campaign. Not sure how much depth I would say this feature has, given that it mostly chronicles the 2013 period, with direct focus on Weiner, his wife, his campaign staff, his detractors or the media, but since it appears that Weiner allowed consistent real time access and inquiry during the events, it almost fascinates me that this could have originally been a documentary meant to highlight Weiner's return to glory, only to go into trainwreck mode afterwards, changing thus the narrative halfway through. As for the story itself, while I was aware of some of the details (from watching the bulk of TV late show satirists), it was still pretty hard to fathom just how much of a foresight-less damaged doofus this man has been. Much of the heartbreak will probably be provided by seeing his wife, Huma Abedin, struggling through all of this shitstorm and wave after wave of betrayal and shock, following a period of reconciling and even pulling lobby strings to push Weiner back into office contention. Her entire body language in the documentary is "I cannot even".

And finally The Founder (link), the story of Ray Kroc who, as an early failing salesman, fortuitously discovered the McDonald brothers' small, but innovative and modern-thinking burger restaurant and struggled then succeeded to franchise the shit out of it. While aware that a more positive take on this movie has been written and mentioned here, I have to confess I couldn't have been more bored watching this after a third of it or so - even opened the Friday Chatzy to hang out there in the process. Part of this, I reckon, has to do with director John Lee Hancock, who has yet to show any sign of cinematic style highmark (though, technically, The Founder is his best yet). Really typical American Dream biopic framework. He directed before The Blind Side, which was a complete dud and an infuriating cheeseball awards-contender (earned Sandra Bullock that Oscar) and Saving Mr. Banks which... ergh. Interesting enough, both this and Mr. Banks seem to show Hancock's inclination for certain stories - and even period pieces of American history - both highlighting a visionary figure (Walt Disney / Ray Kroc) who nevertheless took questionable steps in bringing someone else's creation (P.L. Travers / McDonald brothers) towards a bigger audience (Mary Poppins / the food megachain that is today McDonalds), arguably corrupting a bit of its initial quality or standards in the process. As for The Founder, while, yes, it does highlight capitalist expansion and smart skilled booming at its finest, it also highlights the different stages of Kroc's driving ambition, perhaps not in a way that's ultimately on a moral high note. Maybe it was a naive viewing from my part, but towards the end Kroc become a fairly questionable, reprobate character. Keaton and Offerman in particular do a competent portrayal, but the rest of the script and settings felt like a no face, no substance basic filmmaking affair. From a movie viewpoint, this couldn't have felt more generic and Hollywood fodder in its chronicle of big moments, figures and such.
User avatar
G-Man
Made Man
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:13 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#136

Post by G-Man »

My wife and I hit Redbox for Sully last night. Very good movie but the sound mixing was dreadful at times. I like hearing the scripted dialog. Sue me.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
My Banners:
Spoiler: show
Image
Word to your mom- my spreadsheet's the bomb
I got more rhymes than BoB's host Dom
User avatar
nutella
Connoisseur of Spice
Posts in topic: 10
Posts: 24677
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:23 pm
Location: Chicago
Gender: Female
Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#137

Post by nutella »

Just saw Hidden Figures, it was fantastic.
to the spoiler go the victories:
Spoiler: show
Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image ImageImage Image Image Image
Image Image Image Image
Image Image Image Image Image
Image Image
User avatar
thellama73
Supatown
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 12623
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Murder Park

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#138

Post by thellama73 »

I saw A Cure for Wellness and Fist Fight. Thoroughly enjoyed both of them.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.

I don't want to live in that universe.
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#139

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Rewatched Silence. Guess I could bump the grade, even though I still feel it's somehow far from the best thing Scorsese could have crafted. One aspect I picked on the second time is how much Christic parallels and undertones are put in - probably how they were put in the original novel, as well - sometimes not even in a particularly subtle way: without spoiling much, there is a literal Judas-like character, for instance. I suppose this still adds a degree of how much Scorsese wanted to polemise on issues of fanaticism and willful martyrdom, just like it does on issues of faith, "God's silence" (very Bergmanesque topic btw), etc.

Paterson (link) - "A-ha"

or

Jim Jarmusch's latest, who as always tends to pull something from his bag of tricks with each movie. His previous, Only Lovers Left Alive was a lavish, cult existential vampire flick - if a fusion like that can even sound legit - that could have been equally (and has been) accused of having a hollow swag, but which I nevertheless, for the most part, really liked. And this time, it almost feels like he wants to subvert expectations and meet them at the same time. This movie is a most intimite, urban drama whose minimalism, simplicity and "everyman-ness" couldn't be more on the nose: the protagonist is a bus driver (played by Adam... Driver) called Paterson who lives in... Paterson. He drives the bus every work day. He walks the dog and goes to have a drink at a bar in the evening. He also has a passion for poetry, writing daily inspired by the tiniest details in his activity - his poems walking the fine edge between plain & corny and holding up nicely once finished - and mostly keeping them for himself. He has a loving, beautiful wife who goes for a mix of hipster-at-heart creativity and joie de vivre and pretentious daydreaming or nagging. His ivory towel takes the shape of a very variationless routine in his life and marriage. So basically this movie pushes the idea of monotony and un-happening, while its more serious themes nevertheless surface in a more or less subtle way: the pop culture references, that Jarmusch can rarely shake off, are assured by the bar's bartender's hobby for Paterson-related memorabilia; there is inherent poetry and bohemy inside an austere, 8 to 5 work schedule or matrimonial activities; there is sadness and stoicism to how the protagonist sees his life and goals; you can sense ripples of great tension, yet Driver is directed to perform the most imperturbable, tenderhearted man possible. If you cannot already tell from how much I extracted out of a movie that was supposed to test my patience or prove simple or shallow, I ended up quite loving this.

Extra movie trivia: this movie also gave me the impression that it is the antithesis of a much darker, difficult movie, Bela Tarr's 2011 The Turin Horse (link). Over there, the sense of repetition and minimalism was an expression of life's burden and escathological strip of meaning. Jarmusch instead aims, apparently, for an ode to the common man and his endurance throughout life.

Rewatched Moonlight. Guess I could bump this one to a B as well. If there's an Oscar nomination that has more artistic flair to it and should be counted as above the rest, might as well be this one.

Rewatched L'avenir (Things to Come), the French philosophical, existential drama with Isabelle Huppert. Firmly staying in the top tier of this year. Just lovely.

La fille inconnue (The Unknown Girl) (link), a new movie by the Belgian Dardenne brothers, who have been releasing projects at a very steady pace during the last few years, all appearing to veer more and more into austere, anonymous social drama vignettes. Even their charm seems to be subduing - 2011's The Kid with a Bike was a nice coming-to-age tale; 2014's Two Days, One Night was a passable drama that reflected on middle-class issues. This one narrows the focus and tightens the frame even more, on a female doctor who proceeds to investigate the death of a young black woman, after she might have indirectly contributed to it due to a brief moment of indifference. This movie didn't caught on much at Cannes and elsewhere and I fear it didn't make a serious impression on me either. While I don't dislike Adele Haenel's frostier, more impassive acting, this felt like a bit stretchy and... pun intended... sterile procedural-like drama, that seriously made me "dose off" (as in start doing other things while watching) and even not pick up much on its who, what, how endgame. My bad on the latter, perhaps, but still, not the most memorable Dardenne effort - and, again, bit worrying it its austere, trivial stylistical direction.

Rewatched Jackie. Remains notable pretty much only for Portman's intense character study and the sense of slight directorial boost, coming from Pablo Larrain, who won't settle for the easy narrative path in anything.
User avatar
Glorfindel
Money Launderer
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1518
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 7:22 am

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#140

Post by Glorfindel »

nutella wrote:Just saw Hidden Figures, it was fantastic.
Same here. The stupidity of the human race is sometimes frankly unfathomable and I'd like to think that we as a race have come a long way since 1961 but I find myself constantly reminded just how far we have to go. Still, this was a brilliant movie. The storyline was interesting, the acting was very good. 8/10 from me.
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is always nicer than a puppy.

Golden wrote: I agree. Let glorf be glorf.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#141

Post by Ricochet »

Slowly getting back in the groove, after having taken a week off

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

20th Century Women (link) found me in a weird mood, half feeling like a chore to watch this, as a sort of post-Oscars leftovers (as indeed this received Globes movie & acting nominations, after which it only got a Screenplay nod and that was that). Part of it looks like "Let's Put Benning Back in the Limelight - The Movie", as she plays an emancipated single woman, that's nevertheless insecure in her upbringing ways of her pubescent son; her slight nostalgia and out-of-touch-ness with new trends - which appear to be synthesized and presented as "punk rock" and "Talking Heads" - are also additional traits, turned into running gags at times. Their living place is more of a boarding house, facilitating the presence of other supporting characters: Billy Crudup as the most light-macho and laidback male figure possible; Greta Gerwig as the most feminist (i.e. she's a feminist) and hipster (i.e. she's an artist) younger female figure possible; and Ella Fanning, as a stray cat teenager that bonds openly with the son in the story, flaring up his affection while friendzoning him hard at the same time. Despite the title, the movie doesn't seem decided in its presentation between an overt exposition of the three female figures' flawed and volatile personalities and a coming-of-age tale for the kid, as he receives a moral and sentimental education from each of the three women in his life. The director, Mike Mills (who also made Beginners 6 years ago, which I remember failing to connect with much) also seems to add a bit of WesAndersonian flavor to some of the narration cuts and editing style, to draw from the Noah Baumbach hipster-flavored dramatization textbook and maybe a bit from Cameron Crowe's Almost Famous, too, in regards to the mother-son bonding. At its worst, the movie has been described by critics as smug and explanatory, instead of naturalistic, in its themes of end-of-70s malaise, feminism and cultural period cues. At its best, I suppose Benning's duality in how she handles (and mishandles) arising tensions is a nice touch. There are some good moments and even some sparks of wicked humor, but I just couldn't feel determined to indulge much in this eccentric and quirky fusion of indie drama.

A Man Called Ove (link) which, by contrast, was a complete chore, given its inclusion in the Best Foreign Language final five, surely as a mere token towards Scandinavian (comedy-drama) flicks. If you've seen in the past and enjoyed movies with grumpy, stingy old grinches whose hearts grow three sizes under a new influence (whether it's a child, a family or a new random person they meet) and whose life stories open up (with flashbacks), you'll find it just as lighthearted and sentimental. Myself, as an eternal grinch, I was playing games on my tablet after the first half hour already. Nothing here surprised or elated me.

A Monster Calls (link), an intriguing and darkly toned fantasy film, developing a reclusive, sad boy's coping with his mother's terminal illness into a manifestation of a giant yew tree monster. Clear elements of folk stories, fables and fantasy mirroring reality are crafted pretty well for the genre and both the visual and acting skills are at full levels - plus, in a way, its resolute brooding tone reminded me a bit of Pan's Labyrinth, which is certainly a nice throwback. On the minus, the intensity of the drama is at times a tad too neurotic and there were moments when the CGI didn't wow me (or somehow the wow factor decreased). It's been also said that it may be slightly too dark if targeted as an actual children's tale, but I'm inclined never to buy into this argument. Fairy tales can be dark and ugly. Goody good, for all I care. So yeah, I enjoyed this on the whole.

After the Storm (Umi yori mo mada fukaku) (link), a relatively slow-paced and low-fi drama about a father who is trying to stay in touch with his son, against her ex-wife's hissy attitude towards him and plans to move on, while his own life is fairly unsatisfying and jumbled. There is simplicity in the narrative and some obvious allegories (the title, for instance, relates to a typhoon set to sweep the city, forcing the former family to have to stick together for a while), but I also thought the lead actor had a lot of gesture and expressive flair. This looked well made for a light drama, even if I don't have anything spectacular to note about it.
User avatar
DharmaHelper
Capo Regime (Street Boss)
Posts in topic: 17
Posts: 16565
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#142

Post by DharmaHelper »

Logan is one of the best Comic Book films of all time. A damn sight better than the previous Wolverine/X-Men films, and in ways better than most Marvel movies. I actually cried when watching it, so there ya go. People need to win awards for this movie.
our Linkitis is our lives.

Image
ImageImage
ImageImage
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#143

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

American Pastoral (link). This is one of two Philip Roth adaptations that both appeared last year and it was signaled that, while both have issues in adapting the source material, AP would count as the worse attempt. I wouldn't say it is a dud, but since Ewan McGregor took the helm of directing this after the original director quit, he has come up with fairly mundane results. Even the main acting trio of McGregor - Connelly - (Dakota) Fanning is pulling an honest, if unremarkable job. If you aren't familiar with the story (I haven't read the book myself yet), it concerns how a seemingly picture-perfect family's dissolution, once their rebellious, Electra-complexed-like daughter turns into a violent anti-Nam radical, mirrors the turmoil of 60s-70s America. Thing is, all this is presented lineary in the movie, which drew criticism that it misses the point of the book's less linear approach.

Christine (link), the dramatization of 70s TV reporter Christine Chubbuck, her struggles with depression and conflicts within her station, that led her to commit suicide on live air in July 1974. A secondary theme inadvertedly covered here is also the early stages of sensationalism in news media in their crave for ratings - something that, if it sounds more familiar, inspired, just two years after this incident, the movie Network. Now given that this movie was pretty much DOA during the awards season, you might get the impression it is a more modest creation, apart from the topic and lead performance, yet you might be surprised (as I was) how virtuosic and assured the activity and interactions inside the news station are covered and the acting is pretty bang up across the board (maybe just Timothy Simons irks me a little, since he seems to pull the same style anywhere). Rebecca Hall herself is excellent and not in a showy, big lettered "I'M ACTING SO MUCH" manner - in a way that I think her and Amy Adams (for Arrival, less so for Nocturnal Animals) have proven this year that it's possible, even if getting ZERO recognition in the process. Even the directorial angle doesn't seem to crave just for overdramatic moments, but to truly scoop as much as possible from the story and the interactions. Good stuff, for sure.

Kong: Skull Island (link). Happy to report best friendo was mighty pleased with this and that he also spilled half of his popcorn even before the movie started. As for me, the effects are in such state, that you cannot even be contrarian about them, while the rest is a compilation of poor overused tropes we've been used to all this time: mad scientist in search to find and capture da big beast (literally pick your movie), nature vs da bad human (Avatar), revenge-thirsty army man is the real enemy (Avatar again) or another creature is the real enemy (new Godzilla, with which this movie is now linked), plus some billboard lead faces that get sucked into this and are destined to edge out in the ensuing survival game. Tom Hiddleston brings his blandest mode and Brie Larson, bless her heart... either she trolled her part, due to how underwritten she realized she was, she was high or, worst possibility of them all, gave a dud of a performance. Plus, you'll know it when/if you see it, but John C. Reilly also stepped in to totally break the camel's back - although, at the same time, it also had a weird now-I-surely-can't-take-any-of-this-seriously levity to it. I wasn't disappointed or infuriated by any of this, to be honest. I just ate my nachos, disconnected my brain and went on my way after two hours.

Les Cowboys (link) - about as hardboiled and PC-free as an odd European/French western-like movie can come, about a daughter who runs from her family and converts into a Muslim, prompting her father and brother (the movie eventually splits the narrative into two halves, for each of them) to search for her and come into a culture clash with the Muslim minority. At times, there is no tiptoeing in this movie regarding how much friction there is in said culture clash. Apt performances, gritty occasionally, little room for melodra- oh my god another John C. Reilly cameo are you freaking kidding meeee.

Mediterranea (link), an immigrants movie that, back to back with the movie above, made for a weird combo of sharp, no-BS depictions of minority life and social rift in Europe. This movie is what Palme d'Or '15 winner Dheepan and Golden Bear '16 winner Fuocoammare could have been, if more focused in their drama and documentary sections, respectively, and less obvious in trying to milk some politically-relevant attention and awards concession. I thought this was a typical solid movie that you will just feel interested in or not, less go into polemics regarding its movie qualities.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#144

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

So it seems I needed to trudge through about 50 movies, during two-three months worth of mostly 2016 movies to finally get to see some more interesting works. Too bad I watched most of the following with modest to very low attention span. But before I point them, there was...

Passengers (link) - I mean jesus, I had this intentionally running in the background and it still managed to draw grimaces from me. This is basically an either misguided, misconceived or just half-assed attempt of a love drama in space blockbuster, with two of perhaps the best known faces in Hollywood right now, Starlord (WHOOO) and JLaw. Don't know why Chris Pratt is pushed towards drama right now, because he surely couldn't sustain a near-solo performance during the first 30 minutes of this movie. And JLaw, I don't even know... it's not that I think she isn't a good actress, per se, but I've sort of lost belief in her craft for a long time now - and this movie again seems the perfect cheap, artificial, rigid medium in which she can limit herself. The chemistry between these two is pretty off, given the Titanic in Space allure it wants to give; the writing is bad; nothing truly interesting or exciting happens in the movie. The only tidbit that sparked interest about this movie was SPOILERS from now on if you haven't seen it, but you shouldn't see it so sorry not sorry about the moral choice Pratt makes that impacts JLaw's character (waking her up from her cryogenic sleep only so that he could have a companion, while sentencing her to the same lonely slow life he would be forced to experience) and how bizarrely, despite it all, the romance between these two is still pushed on. But seriously, I've written too much already about this one to launch into further debate... A movie you know will prove bad that still manages to tick you off is pretty much in a category of bad on its own.

Tanna (link), a movie shot on the eponymous island in Vanuatu with actual locals from the Yakel tribe, reenacting a true story about marriage customs and "heart vs tradition" conflicts. It's basically a sort of Romeo and Juliet, if rather Juliet and Romeo were in the same house, but the house would want to marry Juliet off to the other house. This was an Oscar Foreign nominee and, since I've now seen 4/5, I'd say it could rank second in preferences (I'm just not ready to drop my undying admiration for Farhadi's style of dramas). Then again, if you're fan of "indigenous kino", like say the recent Embrace of the Serpent or a bit older movie called Ten Canoes or documentary-drama duel flair of some Herzogian docuworks, you should very much enjoy this. I thought it struck a decent balance between authentic and heartfelt.

The Childhood of a Leader (link), an adaptation of Sartre's short story (part of his The Wall) and a debut directorial effort from Brady Corber, who might have been better known till now for his acting (Mysterious Skin, Funny Games, Simon Killer); one might say he proceeded with this to "steal" a bit of craft from directors he worked with such as Michael Haneke or Antonio Campos (previous week's Christine), since this seems a foremost stylish exercise, crafting a slow-paced, dark & brooding puritanical story about a child who will grow up, following a troubled childhood, to become an unnamed fascist leader (the parallels with history here are left unclear and irrelevant, the last portion of the movie wanting moreover to recreate a page out of 1984 more than anything else). But I called it a stylistic exercise - complete with a soundtrack from ya favorite DJ in da house SCOTT WALKER hello again - to highlight its diligent visual and artistic qualities, even if I have to admit the narrative might turn you away from calling it captivating.

Truman (link) or about the most straightforward heartfelt movie, about a terminally ill middle-aged man visited by his lifelong friend, just about when he contemplates "pulling the plug". Sounds somber and there is a typically Spanish looseness in, for instance, how said protagonist reflects on his plans or how humorous with bittersweet moments are combined during this bromantic reunion. And the movie seems both Almodovar super-light and typical mainstream dramedy, in a good way. Went on to sweep the Goyas, of course, two years ago.

And lastly, Under the Sun (link) which, whoa boy, I can barely wrap my head around how it was achieved. Technically, this was meant to be a propaganda movie, ordered by North Korean government, allowing a small Russian crew to film on location, except the Russian crew cheekily kept rolling past the intensely scripted and staged desired sequences, recorded it on a separate memory card and smuggled it out of the country. The result is pretty much the harsh reality we already knew about that country: everything is staged; every single part of their life is solid active brainwash. Both the most enlightening and harrowing parts of the movie are catching on the tape how the North Korean officials would insist on reshooting certain sequences, till everything looked spot on: down to the words people were saying, their degree of "comradery" and reverence towards the Great Leader(s) and so on. You'd definitely have to see it with your own eyes, but this is textbook cult of personality and propaganda coating, except on an infinitely cruder, heartless, life- and freedom-sapping level. Sure, this was probably bound to awaken my empathy levels, but I also thought it was a surprising, masterful execution overall.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#145

Post by Ricochet »

Needless to say, I did not have time for a full week of movie-watching and I also happen to have run out of fresh stuff to watch. If any of you reading this would like to recommend me some titles, new or old, feel free to do so.

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

I did see, though, White Girl (link), a pretty grim, trashy and loose look into how a teenager hooks up with a drug dealer, only to then, in a weird sympathetic way, to go to serious lenghts (which, considering the world of cocaine, promiscuous partying and sex she's spiraled into, gets quite "serious" indeed) to bail him out. Morgan Saylor, who a few years ago played Dana (Brody's daughter) in Homeland, if anyone (still) remembers that (period of the) show, goes kinda all in with her investment in her performance, which is commendable. The movie is not really moderate on its sleazy, unsettling, depraved and at times near-explicit content and could remind movie-watchers of stuff like Heaven Knows What or any of Harmony Korine's edgy movies. One thing left to debate is whether, since this is created partly out of the director's own experiences, it entitles this loose, licentious depiction to be seen in a better light. I think it was a fine, daring movie.

Also watched The Fits (link), a neat, short indie experiment which nevertheless let me a bit in a "huh" mood. Story takes place almost entirely at a gym / sports club sort of thing, with the protagonist as a young tomboyish girl, who would rather work out and box with her brother and the rest of the boys than join the girl's dance troupe. There's a strong sense of genre-divided and genre-specific, with the only interactions between the sides being, of course, flirtatious - with the exception of this girl being drawn in to both worlds. Then strange stuff start happening and affecting the group, which is an obvious source of mystery and genre-escaping magic, reminding me heavily of another Brit psychostrange drama, The Falling (probably reviewed it, too, somewhere in this thread). Didn't like that one much, wasn't enamoured with this one either. One thing to note, though, is the soundtrack provided by the same duo who created the one for Villeneuve's Enemy, Danny Bensi & Saunder Jurriaans - it's very experimental and eerie for regular tastes in film scores, but ups the sensations and vibes throughout the movie very well.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#146

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Last week, I managed to watch just one movie, which constituted my focus in more ways than that, namely Georg Wilhelm Pabst's silent movie from 1929 Die Büchse der Pandora (Pandora's Box) (link), which was also played at my Philharmonic with live music, a project in which I was involved in the orchestra. This is based on Frank Wedekind's two "Lulu" plays, about an amoral and libertine temptress who spins the mind of every man around her, until it leads to dire consequences - a movie that happens to predate another adaptation, which was Alban Berg's opera Lulu, a work I have yet to fully grasp, yet find myself rewatching/relistening often with twisted pleasure. This movie is perhaps also notable for rising lead actress Louise Brooks to fame. While the source material seems like the perfect match for a fin-de-siecle, expressionistic style, I think the movie strays from the sharp, gritty format of earlier German cinema, instead embracing elements of flowing, dynamic, intense melodrama, while still having a gothic vibe to it. The most tense and dramatic scenes are perhaps the greatest, in ways I'd only spoil them by talking in detail about their visuals and flow. I'd say this movie has elements of a classic. I'd also like to mention that I grew fond of the new score that was performed in concert, composed by Dominik Schuster, so much that at home I matched the "bootleg" from the live performance with the movie; it is a clean and compelling soundtrack, with qualities of a coherent symphonical work in itself, not just fragments tailored for the scenes it accompanies.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#147

Post by Ricochet »

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Das Leben der Anderen (The Lives of Others) (link), the well known and acclaimed, Oscar Foreign winning drama about the former Stasi's methods of infiltrating and surveilling the life of artists and people in East Berlin - focusing in the movie, on one hand, on such an artist, a playwright, and his life partner, an actress, believed but unproven to harbour dissident feelings (or, better yet, which higher officials of the regime just want to try to find some dirt on) and, on the other hand, on the secret agents on the side of ... the wall. While political in nature and very serious in tone, its plot is also fairly romanticised, as the protagonist, the Stasi agent in charge of the surveilling, begins to experience a turnaround. This is considered a distinct cult movie among those with the subject rooted in life under the Soviet regime in East Berlin, following more lighthearted takes such as Good Bye, Lenin! - although other dramas such as The Tunnel shouldn't perhaps be ignored either. This is a movie you will either have seen already or will need to pick it up eventually, the way I finally did; there's no other way around it, I'd say. It has some style and manner to reach out to your heartstrings and empathy buttons - in which regard it did catch me by surprise (but I'm also prone to be distressed by any story of oppression and human injustice). It's been said the portrayal of secret service machinations and the burdening social atmosphere of those times is incredibly faithful - something probably coming from the personal experience of the director and even of some of the actors - but there was also noted criticism about casting in a better light the work and character of a Stasi agent, to which my thoughts will be put into spoilers - read further only if familiar with the movie:
Spoiler: show
While I agree there is cause for controversy in "making a hero out of a regime pawn", especially with Wiesler's early demeanor as an agent -
meticulous, scrupulous, staunchingly efficient, no-nonsense and idealist in his duty - I think the drama was scripted well enough to argue that a seed of dissent could have grown even in the heart of such an agent, in that it was not only his own infatuation and sympathy towards the actress, but also witnessing the sheer vainglory of his officials' intents and actions (whether the Minister of Culture or his superior) that proved enough for eventual disenchantment.

But on the other hand, I don't think the above matters too much, because the way I see it, Wiesler's actions didn't end up fully "heroic" one bit. In fact, they were quite tragic. There were at least two moments in which Wiesler's so-called "better judgment" led to worse, karma-like consequences: 1) when the playwright and his friends test out whether his flat is bugged and Wiesler choose not to report it, which in turn makes the playwright confident enough to become an over dissident (setting in motion all the troubles to follow) and 2) when he removes the typewriter from the apartment, yet the actress still ends up committing suicide. Both these instances managed to wreck me inside, especially given their highlight of a no-win scenario during those oppressive times.

Finally, I would like to note that, for all its quality drama and flow, the movie's "coda" felt a bit too saccharine and intent on creating closure on all levels.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (link) - it's pretty bad when you decide to watch a movie like this in a completely ironic way and non-committal mood and still it manages to irk you. This is basically J.K. Rowling's next idea and milking more millions out of the Harry Potter franchise (she contributed directly with the script here) and, in a way, its saving grace is that we get stuff set in the past, rather than any "Harry Potter forward in time, as an adult" nonsense. Eddie Reymayne continues to sport his extreme mumblecore, gestic-jerky act and Katherine Waterson either doesn't have too good of comedic chops or mishandles a fair bit a quirky, mousy role. The plot wants to be both lighthearted and insert elements of ominous, srs bzns danger and the imbalance of it is just something to facepalm yourself over. Let me know what was to truly like about this fan servicing, over-indulgent spin-off, because I sure couldn't detect.

Heart of a Dog (link) a documentary / art project made by musician Laurie Anderson, who is one of my favourite artists ever. As with mostly everything Anderson has done, it seems small in scope and oddball and... kooky in the way it's designed. Most of the times, it pans out the same way one of her albums would: filled with short, anecdotal, intertwined stories and musings. But the reward, also as always, is getting a sense of this artist's pure, emotional, philosophical perspective on both humane and spiritual aspects of life. The "documentary" side of this relates to the time spent with her terrier Lollabelle until she passed away, but if you know, for instance, that Anderson was married with Lou Reed, it's not hard to figure out that the movie ends up as a device for reflecting on dealing with loss, mortality, life reminiscences and treasured memories and such.

Sátántangó (link). My second time watching this 7-hour movie. What a beast. First time it was also on Holy Saturday, three years ago - which was in no way intended to relate to the Easter festivities, I just found myself being alone for the holiday and having the right amount of free time to attempt to watch it - and now it seems I'm keen to build it into a ritual.

Anyway, I have no real strength and impetus right now to sell you on why I believe this to be a masterpiece. It has, after all, some pretty outrageous elements that cannot be easily advocated towards a larger audience: it's seven hours long, it's a highlight of extremely slow cinema, with an intense mixture of long takes and minimalist action (or at times non-action) and it's supremely dark, depressing and desolate. But it is my personal belief that, if there is room in art for "the dark side", Bela Tarr is confidently ahead in line for me as the master of the pitch black. I've yet to expand past having seen this and The Turin Horse, but so far, I'll gladly watch him paint the apocalypse. In a way, he already has. There are scenes or entire chapters from this that will stick with me forever. If you could make room at least once during your lifetime for this kind of an experience, love it or hate it, I would say do it.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#148

Post by Ricochet »

I'm back into watching movies. Remember movies??

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

A Cure for Wellness (link) - a sprawling experience with this babyfrankenstein of a movie by Gore Verbinski (hard to recommend on his own, since he spent the last decade making Pirates of the Caribbeans movies and... The Lone Ranger). I guess the trailer signaled some interesting, eery aesthetics, but then the reviews were all a turn off, so I delayed watching it until now. There is an air of homage/pastiche towards old gothic fantasy horrors or even Verhoevean body horror - including an appropriately unsettling lead cast of sickly-/creepy-looking Dane DeHaan and Mia Goth - and it does have a good dose of unadulterated batshit ideas, still it's not a great movie. It's incredibly long, overbloated and honky in its plot events and, after a while, I even had on just half of the screen, with a sense of dullness. Also surprised this isn't adapted from some kind of bestseller or fantasy franchise, because it felt like it could be Twilight for goths and the background music was as cheesily fitting as coming out of a Harry Potter movie.

Before the Rain (link) - was supposed to watch this during my trip in Macedonia, but oh well. Probably the most popular Macedonian movie - though more of a British-French-Macedonian co-production - having one the Golden Lion and nominated at the Oscars, crafting an intertwined tryptich of stories about human violence, ethnic tensions in that country and other drama, with a particular storyline gimmick about people can influence each other under certain circumstances. But its serious themes are about the best thing I feel I could point out about it, the approach otherwise was seriously melodramatic.

Get Out (link) - well then, this was a fairly dank surprise, that I enjoyed more than I expected. I don't watch Key & Peele, so I'm judging the movie on its own and for the most part, it was nice and refreshing to see a smart, balanced, cheeky type of horror comedy. Steady build up, quality tension at times, a few good (but not gratuitous) spooks. Also obviously also a lot of tropes, stereotypes and racial comment either used or turned on their head. A few details and plot nodes were still tad predictable, but it didn't detract much from the viewing.

Les fils de Joseph (The Son of Joseph) (link) - what might likely be my favorite movie of the week is the one I feel less decided what to say about or even how good of a grade to color it in. Alas, this is how it usually goes with Eugene Green's movies, whose earlier work The Portuguese Nun I've listed here as among my unranked favorites of the 2000s. His aesthetic style is unwavering with each new movie - arthouse yet still mostly accessible to the viewer's understanding; dialogue-heavy "a la Eric Rohmer" but also aseptic, in a way that the actors are forced to carry these dialogues facing the camera in close-ups, with hardly any kind of organic exchange between each other; heavy very literate and subtle themes (whether it's religion, art, history), yet boiling down to small story theatrics; quirky, dry, light humor etc. As the title suggests, there is some biblical allegory (although it's curiously centered more on Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac), while the narrative is about a boy wanting to find out the identity of his father and instead ending up, unknowingly, to bond with his uncle. I'd still say there's no real way to sell or recommend Green's movies, unless you come to appreciate them on their own, but as a mere "connoiseur", I'd rank this below The Portuguese Nun, but above the movie before this one, La Sapienza.

Life (link) - finally, a really indulgent and dumb-thrills space horror, ripping off just about whatever it needs from the likes of Alien or Gravity. While its core theme may be promising enough - that our optimism in searching for or making contact with extraterestrial life should be more reserved - its execution boils down to a plain monster movie with a small cast stranded in space getting dunked on. Everything in terms of plot, spooks, tension, twists and such should count as predictable to any afficionado.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#149

Post by Ricochet »

Not much to report this week, apart from

A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Agonie (Agony) (link) - a German-language debut by Paraguayan director David Clay Diaz, in which its main idea of a shocking climax is taken away (or it's rather intended as a deconstruction of the typical thriller / murder drama) by being spoiled in synopses (as seen on IMDb) and even at the beginning of the movie. What remains are two stories, mixed but not intersected, of young adults experiencing interior turmoil in different environments; sketched are the profiles of, on one hand, the reclusive intellectual student type, shot in minimalistic brushstrokes and implacably sparse dialogue and characterisation, and on the other hand, the broken home street punk type, whose scenes seem moreover appropriate to burst out of a Xavier Dolan movie or British slum tales. Neat experimentation overall with this dual montage, interesting and serious approach on the subject youthful frailness, plus the foreshadowed shocking even filmed as unflinching and visceral as possible - and yet, not too much to keep this movie in mind for long, either.

Lady Macbeth (link) - not an actual spin-off on the famous Shakespearean anti-heroine - technically an adaptation of Nikolay Leskov's Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District (every art buff would, at this point, point out Shostakovich to have written an opera based on it, plus this not even being the first movie adaptation, considering Andrzej Wajda's 1961 work) - still, set in a vague Victorian rural setting, in which a young woman (Florence Pugh) is forced (sold, even) into marriage, finding herself stranded and treated as a commodity inside the most patriarchal stuck-up ménage possible. This is initially the setting for a rather tame period piece, filled with Flaubertian ennui, but soon her desire for gaining status and for adulterous carnal sweet releases turns up the "macbethian" knob. There is considerable depth and finesse into highlighting the protagonist in both sympathetic and questionable light - empowered and blinded by her cunningness at the same time - or showing class differences even among the subservient (particular props to Naomi Ackie, as the coloured servant) and the performances are downright impetous (not the first time I watch Florence Pugh in a movie and she is a wild young force, for sure).
User avatar
Dragon D. Luffy
The Pirate
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 12119
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 5:25 pm
Location: Brazil
Gender: Male
Preferred Pronouns: He/Him/His
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#150

Post by Dragon D. Luffy »

Watched the new Spider Man a while ago.

Probably the best spider man film until now. Maybe others have better plot of something, but boy this film was so FUN. It really captured the magic of the underdog teenage superhero that barely kows what to do, and learns through adversity and creativity. And it was hilarious, from start to end.

Also had a pretty good villain for MCU standards.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#151

Post by Ricochet »

Well I figured I'd wait until the end of the month to post some new reviews, so here it is

A (10)/A- (9) / B+ (8) / B (7) / B- (6) / C (5) / D (3-4) / F (1-2) / No rating

L'Odyssee (The Odyssey) (link) - bland and by-the-numbers biopic on legendary nature explorer and filmmaker Jacques Cousteau, the type of effigy building that is empty at its core about capturing the personality, also with the sinful ambition of covering as much of his significant lifespan as possible, from the ex-marine turning his diving passion into a business, his fight to manage, expand and maintain public and commercial interest, his marital and familial conflicts (particularly with one of his sons, who gets his own kind of B-story). For a French movie, the style is moreover trying to pander to Hollywood expectations and it's all very 101 in stereotypes and biopic tropes. I guess some of the wildlife shotmaking is good, but even that starts feeling NatGeo-ish, once in synergy with a schmaltz of a movie.

Logan (link) - a no doubt inspired, if still way overdue (considering how much they took their sweet time milking the image of the most iconic of X-Men into one shitty action movie after another) quality Wolverine solo movie, timing it with a proper send-off to Hugh Jackman. The austere superhero build (think you can actually count the full-grown mutants on one hand) and gritty R-rated action offer some liberties in regards to focusing on the story and rising the stakes; both Jackman's Wolvie and Stewart's Xavier are shown in their late, post-glorious, ailing phase, which allows to care more about them; plus the prodigy child character, while kinda sketched to bank on the same magnetic appeal as say Eleven from Stranger Things, has a buddy-up connection with Wolvie that works; the villans are corporate stock, but not annoying etc. etc. So technically there's a lot to like (the story, the meaningful action, the feels), yet I remain agnostic to the fact that one out of 10 capemovies working against the trend of Marvel's factory bland style or DC's spectacle of shooting itself in the face repeatedly is meant to earn instant praise. There's still a whole universe outside this capeuniverse, compared to which Logan, just like Guardians or Deadpool before that, still doesn't quite stack up to or is in any way perfect. The flow of the movie, for instance, is not devoid of predictable, not spectacularly new set pieces and I can't say the use of a "superior Wolverine clone" trope as an element of tension, danger and "underdoggery" blew me away.

Lu bian ye can (Kaili Blues) (link) - not much I can say about this right now, on account of having done a poor watching of it. On surface level, seemed like the kind of lo-fi, plot-light, slow 'n' pensive arthouse, plus I remember having had an impressive 30-minute or so long take. So good chops for a debut, but I just wasn't in an attentive mood that evening.

Notes on Blindness (link) - what could have easily been a biopic or even an interview slash album photos doc is instead a documentary that uses theologian John Hull's audio diaries on his blindness and converts them in recreated scenes using actors. A delicately modeled, stylistically lavish movie, heavy on musings and recollections from which the core message is trying to actively understand your life as an existential mechanism.

Okja (link) - UGH. Bong Joon-ho is an acclaimed director of Korean horror (Mother, The Host), but once he transitioned to English mainstream movies, I still consider him to be struggling in producing a levelheaded work out of his bonker, outlandish ideas. Did not join the hype wagon with the Oldboy meets Orwell meets Matrix pastiche that was Snowpiercer and I feel even worse about this one. In essence, it's meant to be a sharp satire on ecological woes and Western corporations, but the end product is risibly off the wall. Thing is, it could have been an idyllic, funny, exciting and moralizing movie - heck, in small doses, it even is - but it's almost like it went for deliberately retarded instead. Tilda Swinton does an only-for-fanboys role, just like in Snowpiercer and Jake Gyllenhaal puts on the most absurd, imbecilic comedic hat, a role that I think even Rob Schneider would have had the dignity to pass. Also notable that this is the movie that stirred controversy at Cannes over the eligibility of Netflix screenings, but I couldn't care less now considering that its content doesn't hold up to its merits.

Lovesong (link) - as the title suggests, a simple kind of indie vignette in which a young mother (Riley Keough), whose own marriage becomes strained, almost becomes involved in a relationship with her best friend (Jena Malone). Years later, as her friend is getting married, their reuniting also becomes an occasion to reconcile with what could have been or even what might still be between them. Soft-spoken, emotionally charged framing and performances, but ech, nothing particularly special.

Sieranevada (link) - meanwhile on the Romanian front, nothing new, as New Wave eminence Cristi Puiu goes as deep and implacable as always with his hyper-realistic ways, trying to capture for nearly three hours the "nothing-happens-ness" of a family gathering in an apartment to commemorate the recent passing of the protagonist's father. Of course, aside from the technical goals for minimalistic, long-take shotmaking and seamless, incredible montage within a small, crammed space for filming (all achieved with excellence), Puiu's ambition must certainly be to create a fresco of family and human interactions. To us, it hits very much home to see these scenes of randomness, small talk and animosities at a family gathering - for the rest of the world, though, idk; I suppose it could appeal to American fans of Osage County? Anyway, I've dreaded a bit to actually watch this movie - it created, as expected, an even bigger rift between critics who lick it with praise for its utter big-lettered Cinema and those who are fed up with New Wave's incorrigible style and thus mocked it as "three hours of waiting for the pastor to arrive, so the family can have the memorial service and then finally sit down to eat borscht". At Cannes, the reviews were positive, but the jury ultimately went with some laurels towards Mungiu's Graduation, although I think this one is somewhat better. Its screening time did not prove such an issue, the three hours flew by and at times I was genuinely amused or enchanted by this bitter comedy of manners.

Sobache serdtse (Heart of a Dog) (link) - a TV two-part adaptation of one of Bulgakov's novels. As a moderate fan of Bulgakov's anti-bolshevic satirical works (Master and Margaret, Fatal Eggs), I found the style both recognizable and a bit too plainly transposed on screen - though some credit to the acting, to the old movie sense of sepia-tinged visuals and especially to finding a dog who can act depressed.

Split (link) - well then, dare we hope for an "M. Night Shayamalanaissace", as this is his first decent movie in fucking forever? The movie's premise remains wacky and precarious to handle, having "batshit" and "exploitative" written all over it, as James McAvoy plays a man with 23 split personalities who abducts three female teenagers as an offering for an emerging dark, ominous 24th personality. And yet the movie is solid enough, McAvoy carries the movie's difficulty and prevents it from plunging into derision (he doesn't perform all 23 splits, don't worry) and I have to credit Anya Taylor-Joy as well, who follows up her role in The VVitch with the same mix of pure and troubled horror damsel aura. Not bereft of some clunk in its treatment of mental dysfunction or in some flashbacks serving as blunt exposition and has a "tweeeest" that links the movie with a previous Shyamalan (good) oeuvre, but still, well beyond decent - which is saying something, in this case.

T2 Trainspotting (link) - also on the "colour me impressed, this didn't suck" list, Danny Boyle's sequel to his cult, magnificent (at least IMO) 90s movie. Not that the world desperately needed a Trainspotting 2 - then again, there was pre-existing material for this, as Irvine Welsh has a taste for sequels himself (what I'm saying is that this movie adapts his book Porno in some degree). Boyle applies his usual modern-day style, much like you might have seen on Slumdog Millionaire or Trance, especially with the fast-paced dialogue and zappy montage. Not an essential, relevant movie by any movies, but still a nice view on the characters returning 20 years later to muse on their aging life, following their fucked-up teenage days. Some of the slur-heavy, Scot-argotic humor holds up about as hysterically well as on the original, too.

Dunkirk (link) - so bona fide Nolan-esque, it was both going to be hard to disappoint and yet there's room for letting you down a bit. Mainly it's the thing that I'm not sure Nolan can evolve past his incessant, ever-recurring tropes anymore (whether it's his fascination with time, his desire to create smart-mode blockbusters, his orchestral vision and large-scale meticulousness etc.). Somehow the Dunkirk subject was meant to fit like a glove on his approach (plus a chance for him to finally go back to making a bloody British movie), the only unique opportunity being for him to ease up on any Sci-Fi mindfuckery and hamfisted themes such as "love is the driving force of everything" - which he complies with, to the point of sacrificing any deep characterization (the Private-Ryan-esque aim to empathise with your heroes' struggles and goals) for a technically masterful and aptly grandiose depiction of war. So as a symphony of filmic structure, sprinkled with attention to historical fidelity, Dunkirk is a safe accomplishment. Like Jay argued, I'm not sure myself if we needed or not another war movie - I'll add I never went in with the expectation of Nolan delivering the never-seen before, ultimate war movie experience. I'm even less concerned with how Dunkirk stacks up, considering I'm usually sold by Nolan's cinematic wizardry when watching it on the big theatre screen, but then feel gradually worse once time passes and I process it more - same thing happened with Interstellar and nowadays I can no longer rewatch that one with a straight face, tbh. And Dunkirk itself did not end without any penalty either. I for one was slightly irked by the explicit mention of the three timelines' duration - it's not like Nolan cared about that when fucking with our brains in Inception and Interstellar - though I get it that it's grounded in reality (the army was stranded for a week, the civilian boats took a day to carry rescue trips and RAF Spitfires could only carry hour-long missions). Plus, by the time all the themes in this "symphony" converge in the third act, one might well be struck, depending on their acquired knowledge of previous works, by either the familiarity or annoyance of Nolan's frame-swapping non-linearity. Still, this movie is Nolanesque through and through. But it is so both in good and ech ways.

The Bad Batch (link) - alas, I must conclude this briefing, as I conclude my month in movies, with quite a stinker. This is the second movie by Ana Lily Amirpour, who wowed indy audiences with her vampire glossy-shick debut A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (that failed to impress me, however) and now seemingly wanted to flex her "I'd be able to direct a Mad Max sequel" muscles with a dystopian, Texan wasteland gritty story filled with canibals, damaged people and dog-eat-dog surviving skills. At first, the movie wastes little time with exposition or social commntary, lauching us straight into the feral setting and for a good 20 minutes it seems to go unflinchingly brutal and dark. But then it gets bogged down by stuff like introducing a carnaval-like cornucopia community, in which everyone is damaged good and Keanu Reeves plays a spiritual patriarch bullshitter, plus Jim freaking Carrey is a silent wacky roamer - the plot gets erratic and undecided between badland dystopia, Kill Bill-esque revenge story and Stockholm syndrome tinged weird-ass romance; the pacing becomes atrocious; all the performances are unconvincing or forcedly bonkers. It's sad and strange, but this was by far the hardest watch I had to sit through all month.
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#152

Post by insertnamehere »

I've recently gotten into Letterboxd and logging films and whatnot. So, I bring you the first installment of a hopefully regular series in which I rate the films I've seen over the course of the week and give a review in ten words or less.

Link to my letterboxd for those interested:
https://letterboxd.com/eddie330/films/diary/

Fallen Angels (1995) by Wong Kar-Wai
★★★½

Chungking sequel. Hit and miss. Astounding cinematography, but less emotion.

Dumbland (2002) by David Lynch
No Rating

Profane, crude, and surreal YouTube animation from before YouTube existed.

Vampire’s Kiss (1988) by Robert Bierman
★★★½

Every time Cage speaks, I laugh. Nothing else noteworthy here.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) by Derek Cianfrance
★★½

Ryan Gosling = Great, Bradley Cooper = Alright, Dane DeHaan = Garbage.

Night on Earth (1991) by Jim Jarmusch
★★★★

L.A. > Helsinki > NYC > Rome > Paris. An experience, albeit inconsistent.

Battle Royale (2000) by Kinji Fukasaku
★★★½

Outdoes the premise due to strong characterization. Kitano is excellent.

The Nice Guys (2016) by Shane Black
★★★

Inherent Vice/Lebowski for Dummies. Gosling excels at physical comedy.

Carol (2015) by Todd Haynes
★★★★

Stellar performances/cinematography. A little too subtle. Prefer Haynes' Safe.

Days of Heaven (1978) by Terrence Malick
★★★★

Attempting to climb Malick learning curve. Perfect length, gorgeous visuals.

Barton Fink (1991) by the Coen Brothers
★★★★★ - Rewatch

One of my favorites. Coens do Lynch; absurdity of creating.

Naked (1993) by Mike Leigh
★★★½

Thewlis is magnificent. Everything else is repellant. Should've eliminated characters.
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#153

Post by Ricochet »

Carol and Safe have nothing in common. More like Carol and Far from Heaven.
Place Beyond was turd.
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#154

Post by insertnamehere »

Ricochet wrote: Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:04 pm Carol and Safe have nothing in common. More like Carol and Far from Heaven.
Place Beyond was turd.
Safe is the only other Todd Haynes' film I've seen, so it's my only frame of reference. Despite strong female performances and direction, I agree that there wasn't much commonality between them, which was a little disappointing for me, because of how much Safe sticks in my mind. I plan on revisiting Carol, with different expectations. Some of it is my own personal preference, which isn't really aligned with 50's Douglas-Sirk-type dramas.

Place Beyond had a hell of a premise and structure, just wish the execution wasn't a complete letdown, Ryan Gosling's third excluded. I'd love to see that same idea done well.
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
User avatar
Sloonei
Cap'n Sloonbeard
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 26368
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:05 pm
Location: Buffalo
Gender: Male
Preferred Pronouns: he/his/him

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#155

Post by Sloonei »

I agree with all of what Rico said RE: Dunkirk. It was exactly what you'd expect from "Christopher Nolan does a WWII film", which is neither great nor bad. I enjoyed its grandiosity, and it was visually and emotionally appealing, but it is not something that must be watched.
My banners:
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#156

Post by insertnamehere »

The films I watched this week were all pretty death-obsessed, albeit in very different ways.

Nocturnal Animals (2016) Directed by Tom Ford
★★½

Ford's dialogue sucks. Cast makes a valiant attempt. Dumb fun.

Harold and Maude (1971) Directed by Hal Ashby
★★★★½

Charming goddamn movie. Little too much Stevens. Perfect tone/performances.

Le Samouraï (1967) Directed by Jean-Pierre Melville
★★★½

Style over substance, but what style! The definition of suave.

Alternate Gif Review:

Image

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) Directed by Quentin Tarantino
★★★½

fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun but disposable

Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004) Directed by Quentin Tarantino
★★★

fun fun fun fun fun fun but even more disposable

Amour (2012) Directed by Michael Haneke
★★★★½

Enjoyably felt like I was being suffocated for two hours.
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
User avatar
insertnamehere
Made Man
Posts in topic: 15
Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:40 am
Location: Twin Peaks, Washington

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#157

Post by insertnamehere »

These ten-word reviews are getting harder to do, especially with films like the last one on this week's list, meaning that there's some sloppy syntax I've had to employ.

Drive (2011) Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn
★★★

Fun neon-noir until it devolves into barely justified violence.

Cléo from 5 to 7 (1962) Directed by Agnès Varda
★★★★

Creating meaning from minutia, doom from everyday encounters. Empathetic verite.

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992) Directed by David Lynch
★★★★★ - Rewatch with friends who hadn't seen it

HELLGODBABYDAMNNO! I FOUND SOMETHING!

Woman in the Dunes (1964) Directed by Hiroshi Teshigahara
★★★★

Sand's never been scarier. More you dig, more you're trapped.

Strangers on a Train (1951) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
★★★★

Hitchcock's most darkly playful. Impeccable photography, and Walker is iconic.

Eastern Promises (2007) Directed by David Cronenberg
★★★½

Viggo single-handedly turns this film into a pulpy treat.

Blow Out (1981) Directed by Brian De Palma
★★★

Unfortunately fails to live up to influences, despite stellar ending.

Love Exposure (2008) Directed by Sion Sono
★★★★½

Love/empathy winning over organized religion. Most manic film ever.
WILD AT HEART MAFIA
SIGN UP NOW
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1679


Spoiler: show
Image

Image Image Image
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#158

Post by Ricochet »

I haven't watched any new movies while on holiday.
User avatar
G-Man
Made Man
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:13 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#159

Post by G-Man »

I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
My Banners:
Spoiler: show
Image
Word to your mom- my spreadsheet's the bomb
I got more rhymes than BoB's host Dom
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#160

Post by Ricochet »

G-Man wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:13 pm I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
Why for me? I skipped past all the, ahem, plot development, anyway. :grin:
User avatar
G-Man
Made Man
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:13 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#161

Post by G-Man »

Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:57 pm
G-Man wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:13 pm I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
Why for me? I skipped past all the, ahem, plot development, anyway. :grin:
Because you griped about me not sharing my thoughts on movies I've been watching in Discord last week.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
My Banners:
Spoiler: show
Image
Word to your mom- my spreadsheet's the bomb
I got more rhymes than BoB's host Dom
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#162

Post by Ricochet »

Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#163

Post by Ricochet »

G-Man wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:21 pm
Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 4:57 pm
G-Man wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:13 pm I'll drop this here just for Rico:

Fifty Shades Darker? More like fifty shades less plot development.
Why for me? I skipped past all the, ahem, plot development, anyway. :grin:
Because you griped about me not sharing my thoughts on movies I've been watching in Discord last week.
Ah. Well, that does remain a valid complaint.
User avatar
Epignosis
Skeletor
Posts in topic: 13
Posts: 40516
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:59 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#164

Post by Epignosis »

Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:46 pm Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
I have some thoughts. I'll get to them after I get SF2 Mafia rolling.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
User avatar
Epignosis
Skeletor
Posts in topic: 13
Posts: 40516
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:59 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#165

Post by Epignosis »

Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:46 pm Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
Spoiler: show
I believe with all my heart that people suffer from "The previous version is better than this one" sickness.

While I do believe the anime was superior to the Netflix film, I think the Netflix film did a lot of things right. For one, they showed Light as a self-centered KID. Yes, a kid who "makes so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless move within his first two kills." To me, that makes sense. He's a smart math kid, but stupid when it comes to the Death Note. That said, I liked his first few kills. They made sense within the framework of American culture.

I don't understand your complaints about apples or candy. How are they "treated like a meme?" How would you do them differently as a filmmaker? The apples and candy shots, in my opinion, were better than the anime. I don't need to see Ryuk sucking apple cores to get that he likes apples. This movie did it with fun and a nod. That's all you need.

The CGI on Ryuk was fine and I liked how he wasn't the center of attention with his "glorious full detail." This isn't a cartoon. He was also an asshole instead of a friendly character. I liked that too.

My disagreements end there.

I loved "Dr. Strange" from Gotham playing Watari, but I agree with Rico here: Watari isn't his real name, so what the hell?

Yes, this is inferior to the anime, but I believe if this movie had come out first, a lot of people would call the anime garbage. That's how we are a lot of the times. I felt this was a good movie with a few distinct weaknesses.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#166

Post by Ricochet »

Epignosis wrote: Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:37 am
Ricochet wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:46 pm Was gonna rant about the Netflix Death Note, but then I suddenly found no energy whatsoever to pursue this in serious fashion. D for dumb. Not a travesty, still dumb.

...

Actually, I changed my mind. Get mildly spoiled below only if you've seen it or do not care about seeing it (which is the better mindset of the two, fwiw).
Spoiler: show
"Remember the cat 'n' mouse chase and mindgames between L and Light in the anime? The twisted elements of bonding and playing each other? The, all hyperbolic characterisation aside, chess play between two hyper-intelligent minds? Well let's have none of that. None. In fact, let's have this Light make so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless, impulsive move within his first two kills, after the which the movie should continue for another hour simply because L doesn't go deep enough (or, y'kno, actually smart enough) to figure it out."

Every throwback to the anime is just treated like a meme. Remember apples, people? Remember those apples? Well let's have Ryuk munch them off-screen, plus not even express delight at the taste of them. Remember squating and eating sweet, people? Well let's have L stuff himself with Haribos and squat on a chair, like, two times in the movie, and otherwise just let the actor act as spastic as he can improvise, plus act a zillion times more nervous and twitchy than L's whole composure and range throughout the entire anime.

The CGI on Ryuk is a complete joke. Somewhere stuck in midprocess between trying to animate a doll and going all murky grey dark to hide the imperfections of the CGI shitjob. Remember any moment in the anime where Ryuk was not shown in his glorious full detail? Me neither.

Watari is "Watari"'s real name in this movie. His. Real. Name. And he's called just Watari, a human being legally named just... Watari. Light writing his name in the DN literally works. Writing just Watari in the DN... literally... works*screeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmm-*
Spoiler: show
I believe with all my heart that people suffer from "The previous version is better than this one" sickness.

While I do believe the anime was superior to the Netflix film, I think the Netflix film did a lot of things right. For one, they showed Light as a self-centered KID. Yes, a kid who "makes so blatant of a wrong, thoughtless move within his first two kills." To me, that makes sense. He's a smart math kid, but stupid when it comes to the Death Note. That said, I liked his first few kills. They made sense within the framework of American culture.

I don't understand your complaints about apples or candy. How are they "treated like a meme?" How would you do them differently as a filmmaker? The apples and candy shots, in my opinion, were better than the anime. I don't need to see Ryuk sucking apple cores to get that he likes apples. This movie did it with fun and a nod. That's all you need.

The CGI on Ryuk was fine and I liked how he wasn't the center of attention with his "glorious full detail." This isn't a cartoon. He was also an asshole instead of a friendly character. I liked that too.

My disagreements end there.

I loved "Dr. Strange" from Gotham playing Watari, but I agree with Rico here: Watari isn't his real name, so what the hell?

Yes, this is inferior to the anime, but I believe if this movie had come out first, a lot of people would call the anime garbage. That's how we are a lot of the times. I felt this was a good movie with a few distinct weaknesses.
Well that was me in simple fanboy rant mode more than pertinent criticism, but I can go more in depth, I suppose.
Spoiler: show

Well, I believe with all my heart that the American film industry suffers from the "let's crap out a movie (or adaptation) out of everything popular, with half-assed effort put into it" syndrome.

Among the things that I can mention to have actually liked would me Mia. Faint praise in the overall context, but I feel she struck the right note of crazy-eyed, psychotic, overly attached and yet even potentially duplicitous character. Plus, while I'm sure the actress was overall selected for her natural mix (at least from the previous shows I've seen her in) of cheerleader looks, sass and sarcasm, the other stuff wasn't quite in her usual range, so that's already someone who visibly went into her character.

The other thing would probably be the gore. Not something the anime had full liberty to do, up to a point, but here at least it had a splashy, trashy, Final Destination-like quality. I'm convinced the budget went more into the blood splatters, while the Ryuk one stopped at making him look like a Gremlin.

"Self-centered" is a fairly weak descriptor to want or applaud for being achieved, because to an extent, absolutely every main character in this story is "self-centered". One big theme proposed by Death Note is that there is less heroism to talk about and more what means people will take to have it their way on the grand chessboard of life and morality; that there is no big-lettered one Justice, only justice seen through the eyes of many, who want to impose it as the right one.

Digression-aside, while I understand that Yagami Light is a Japanese anime version of a "genius kid developing a God complex", an avatar that tests plausibility plenty of times, Light Turner is just... idk, geek emo? I think Light Turner being "stupid when it comes to the Death Note" is deeply problematic instead of anything close to satisfying. Why would anyone want a Light who's bad at using the Death Note?! At a basic level, Yagami Light being competent, skillful, intelligent and focused with his actions surrounding the Death Note should be a desirable element of the show. I do not for a second believe that the expectation for this movie from any Death Note fan should be for Light to do something that could, under normal circumstances, lead back to him in two-three moves. Yagami Light being tested and put under great pressure time and again was immense fun in the anime. Light Turner having his dad come up to him after it's time for the movie to end and say "hey kid I just realized you went through my stuff to get your mother's murderer killed under strange, comical circumstances"? Ech.

I can also agree in principle with what you've said about part of the narrative fitting the American cultural frame, but I think that's also a problem in itself. Yagami Light required no major premise to set the events in motion. For all we know, he was a prodigious student and handsome, popular kid in the public eye that nevertheless felt empty, lonely and... "bored" inside. Roll things from there. I think the "American" mindset took that last part and developed it into "oh, Light Turner has to be a high-school loner, doesn't he? There just has to be a bully somewhere to fuel his rage, doesn't it? We just have to make him a half-orphan, to establish clear motive for one of his early kills, right?". Ech.

By "treating things like a meme", I meant treating any clear throwback or token from the lore as just that. "Showing the lightsaber just because." There is no real depth in showing an apple being snatched somewhere from darkness and then spit out half-chomped, only evasiveness (perhaps from technical shortcomings, which I believe in since I find Ryuk's aspect to be so half-assed) and shallowness in style. It's like that "jump scares in horrors need to come from seconds of silence and uncertainty, followed by a loud bang and jump" trope used 99% of times. Ryuk eating apples meant, in itself, nothing. Ryuk loving apples meant a lot. This is used in the movie with about as much depth as you having posted an image of apples and then a sketch of Ryuk in the Birthday thread.

Furthermore, my point was not about Ryuk being center of attention, but of there being no need to mask, blur his appearance or use the shallow "spooky" method in portraying him. It's just a cheap effect pertaining to American cinema's understanding of introducing a monster or weird character. I also get the idea of shaking things up and having Ryuk as an asshole rather than a sidekick, but I feel that's just moving from one wrong extreme to the next. There were layers upon layers into Ryuk's alien, neutral-stanced, yet humanised character. Netflix's Ryuk is just... "cackling asshole". Ech.

Look, I obviously don't mean to imply that I wanted or expected 37 episodes of mindgames, procedurals and slow-burning developments to be crammed into a 90-minute adaptation. There's a clear cartoon side of Death Note that does not need to be reflected in a live-action version, but there are also very potent themes and delectable stand offs between its iconic characters that I would have liked to get at least a whiff of in here as well. Did any of the "confrontations" between L and Light feel exciting? The one in the bar, at least, ended up giving me a headache.

I think all the "right things", the "vibes gotten right" from the movie can be mostly attributed to being taken from the anime source itself. Take the "had the movie come out first" idea and, as a standalone movie, this Death Note would have nearly no plausible, well-paced character development for anyone. L least of all. All his right, slick detective moves are borrowed directly from the anime - no standalone creative effort from the moviemakers there - while the rest is superficial and, in the end, he also mentally caves at the first sign of great stress (which is furthermore developed based on / fueled by a completely NONsensical premise of Watari being compromisable via the Death Note). Is that a more human characterisation than an anime-avatar one? Sure. But it's wrong, since in this instance, it doesn't stand for who or what L should represent. L in this movie is the very definition of adaptation by pandering to the memetic traits that stem from a well-known source. "Have him squat on a chair a bit, munch candy, talk about how sleep is overrated, hold a paper by the tip of fingers, mumble and twerk with his lips aaaaaand that's a wrap. Great job everybody, coffee break!" There's nothing that feels natural about this adaptation of L.

Finally, I'd like to disagree with your final supposition on anime vs movie because A) let's be real, there are less notable instances of anime adaptations of cult live action products, while the other way around, you have an movie industry beyond gluttonous for such pandering take-overs and B) had these two products come out in reverse order, but with the same content and quality in them, the anime would still be a deep(er), thoughtfully made show, making me doubt it would have been shot down simply because "oh mah god, it's nothing alike the movie, reeeeeee-".

Is it wrong for this movie to have gone for a "moody kids fool around as demi-gods of death, while chased by a weird-ass edgy (if sloppy at times) detective" approach? Of course not. It's why I didn't say it was a "travesty" in its treatment of the source. Still, doesn't mean I like it.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#167

Post by Ricochet »

Well, while at it, I might as well write an update on my last sequence of viewings (sometime after returning from Amsterdam, two weeks ago, till present day), which was mostly... ech, rough.

A (10)/A- (9) / B+ (8) / B (7) / B- (6) / C (5) / D (3-4) / F (1-2) / No rating

War Machine (link) - also of Netflix distribution, something apparently timed as "we haven't had another war satire in a while", although it sure ain't no Dr. Strangelove. It adaptes the nonfiction book The Operators and fictionalizes the activities of former US Army General, ISAF and Afghanistan Forces Commander Stanley McChrystal; Brad Pitt portrays his film version, as a competent General, strong willed and dedicated to taking more decisive steps in gathering more troops and securing victory in the conflict, while also getting carried away by his resolute vision and having his patience tested by the bureaucratic strings necessary to be pulled to gain allied support or wishy-washy stances of other officials. Or... something in that vein. Anyway, problem is the movie is kind of a two-hour uneven slug and whatever satirical effect it aimed for (apart from more or less veiled anti-war criticism and stab at McChrystal's missteps and undoing), it felt neither witty or smirk-inducing enough. Pitt carries the movie with some mimic- and discourse-virtuous acting, while most of the ensemble cast is completely non-descript, save for maybe Ben Kingsley playing a buffoon of an Afghan leader and Tilda Swinton doing a German accent as a meddling reporter. I don't see why this subject couldn't have been approached via a more straightforward documentary, but that's how it is. Entertaining, this was not.

Wiener-Dog (link) - something that must have landed on someone's end-of-year lists, otherwise there'd be no real explanation why I picked this up. Don't remember having watched any of this director's - Todd Solondz - previous stuff, either. The simplest way to summarize it is also the easiest way to make it sound utterly silly, as it's basically about a dachshund ending up with various owners, which establishes the frame for a cycle of vignettes around different people with different woes. The overall tone of the movie is a blend of dark or absurd comedy, indie and mumblecore, dysfunctional drama, stuff that may seem taken at times from a Wes Anderson or Coens' scrapbook, yet I kinda cringed at the whole thing. If you haven't seen Danny DeVito in a while (in movies at least), I guess it may be worth briefly seeing him as a mopey disillusioned writer, but the rest of the ensemble cast (Julie Delpy, Greta Gerwig, Kieran Culkin) has been more frequent on screen and this isn't significant stuff from any of them.

Bad Boy Bubby (link) - what proved the most testing thing to sit through, however, was this Rolf de Heer movie, something I had prepared for my Amsterdam trip but never found the time to watch - I was familiar already with his way more delightful Ten Canoes aboriginal docu-film or docu-drama. This one, however, concerns a 35-year-old manchild, confined by his mother all his life in a small, filthy apartment until circumstances make it that he finally steps outside and, even more audaciously, despite his social inexperience and mentally unstable character, somehow connects with the people he meets and converts them to be in sync with his theatrics. Anyway, while the movie deliberately experimented with the sound design (everything manipulated to seem like it's from the perspective of what the main character is hearing) and switching between dozens of director of photography styles to reference the kaleidoscopic, hectic outside world the character encounters, it's still drenched in so black, scabrous and unpalatable of a humor, visuals and storytelling, it's hard to defend even in the name of ugly aestheticism. I asked a Dutch friend why I found de Heer's movie so atrocious and he simply replied "because it's Dutch".

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (link) - *sigh*... well, they tried at least, I guess? or did they? Thing is, my most prevalent feeling after watching this was that, in a clear attempt to cash in on the first movie's wild, smart success, they tried to stay smart and not botch a sequel out of this recipe - and yet they kinda botched it, anyway, as it feels like an overdose on everything: the quipkino, the mindless galactic adventures, the jukebox cues, the spacenova visuals, the tension-less bulletproof superpowers of the characters. What they did strive and somewhat achieved to do was finding some pace and disposition to outline more character development (it's at least what every critic has been praising, so who am I to disagree) - though even here it's uneven, it's mostly about Starlord or Rocket or Yondu stealing the show at times - while toning down the same Marvellian variation on a "save the world/galaxy" situation and flimsy, unmemorable antagonists (who in turn become either comic relief or aid in a main character's further development). Still, it felt like a cheesy exaggeration of the first movie's swag. The plot could have filled the length of a Star Trek episodic adventure rather than another capekino bucket-of-money-making chapter. I laughed or chuckled zero times. All the Guardians felt like growing into a caricature of themselves.

Keetje (Katie) Tippel (link) - a more agreeable Dutch movie this time, also something prepared for my Amsterdam trip but never watched during it, one of Paul Verhoeven's early movies, though slightly flourishing the touches of explicit, loose style and sleazy drama he'd fully affirm himself with later on (RoboCop, Starship Troopers, Showgirls, Black Book, last year's Elle). The story follows a young woman, relocating to Amsterdam with her poverty-stricken family, after which she's tempted into everything ranging from doing manual labor, prostitution, being the concubine of artists and climbing the social ladder towards couture bourgeoisie. As stated, there's room for some Verhoevean drops of explicit, libertine content, but the overall style is nevertheless solid enough to make for an enjoyable, soapy, syrupy 70s melodrama.

Death Note (link) - and lastly, whether you've read the stuff above in spoilers or not, I'll recap that this, for me, proved an insubstantial and hardly worthwhile adaptation of a cult manga/anime, pinning down some of the original's iconic lore and elements (resorting moreover to cues rather than working with them), while not bothering too much with the deeper ethical and moral themes. There is visual gore that may satisfy the way watching a supercut of Final Destination death scenes might, yet there is little development that sticks and isn't superficial and the story turns into half-nonsensical, painful chaos halfway through. It's a sloppy, low on quality result to validate the pursuit to adapt Death Note into an American version of mope, teenage edge and playing God.
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#168

Post by Ricochet »

Wrapped up my August with both a few revisits and a couple new movies

A (10)/A- (9) / B+ (8) / B (7) / B- (6) / C (5) / D (3-4) / F (1-2) / No rating

Wanted to give both Kaili Blues and Notes on Blindness the viewing they deserved, after I had flimsily watched and reviewed them here a while ago. Given this debut of his, Chinese director Bi Gan should be worth keeping an eye out, even if, as I've said the first time, he's moving thus far within an arthouse, rural-picturesque, minimalist range rather than anything more plot-heavy or exciting. The most I got, for now, was from his skillful aesthetics and technical ambition (a 30-minute-plus one-shot sequence choreographing several characters travelling by bike, car or boat at various times or intermingling on labyrinthine streets) and the touch of poetic storytelling. Didn't get much more out of Notes on Blindness than the first time, but again, if you want to see something that could have been a straightforward slideshow & interview documetary, yet was instead beautifully stylised and crafted with voice acting, or in the mood for something meditative and profound given theologian John Hull's musings on his condition and life, then you should give this a try.

Also wanted to enjoy Jarmusch's Paterson one more time - and it's definitely going in the shelves and staying up there as one of my faves from last year.

On to the new, two movies provided bizarre, if mostly rewarding experiences (unlike the last batch of Dutch-libertine bawdiness or indie edginess...)

Picked up Raw (link) as a fairly hyped French horror film from last year. The trailer and the IMDb page seem to go subtle on what the main ingredient of horror here is, but plenty other sites, uhm, sink right into it (pun intended), so not sure how one can avoid not being spoiled in this aspect prior to seeing it (as was my case). The thinnest possible synopsis is that it's about a young student following in her parents' and sister's footsteps by going at vet school; the entire family is established as strictly vegetarian, but then the initial phase of the school's crazy, campy, frat-like initiation rituals push the protagonist past her limits, (spoiler)
Spoiler: show
discovering her craving for meat that goes as far as turning her predatorily cannibalistic.
This being a French movie, viewers should probably know what they're getting into in terms of shock value and wild cinematic fantasy, as the movie nonchalantly hits no breaks on its doses of gore and debauchery, the protagonist both seemingly corrupted by and willfully losing herself into crazed behaviour. There are also thick enough undertones on themes of coming-of-age, self-discovery, social inclusion, sisterhood and such, that add value past the queasiness. There are a few spots of predictability, nevertheless with some decent twists and quick stuns along the way. I'd be lying if I'd say this wasn't entertaining: there's a slick, Refn-esque style to the visuals and a giallo tinge to an uninvasive yet loud when it matters score, plus the story and tension ramped up very well without tipping over.

Also, To the Bone (link), an equally discomforting topical movie, this time on the opposite extreme - eating disorders. For me, it felt a bit weird to get back into this subject, after just having read this year a book by Sofi Oksanen that mostly builds on such a theme, but at least with the little knowledge I have following this, I'd imagine this movie did hit some right notes on depicting the struggles with such disorders, therapies and their limitations when it all boils down to the battle with your self, stigmas and social or parental difficulties and so on. There's a sense of honest research put into the depiction, plus of transposing personal experiences, coming both from the director, Marti Noxon (formerly a writer and producer on shows such as Buffy or Glee) and the main actress, Lily Collins - doing her most significant role to date as far as I can recall, at times so focused and hard to fathom she went this deep into her role, especially considering her own prior experiences. Anyway, while the subject and the considerate treatment of it make the most impression, I couldn't help feeling the movie, in its style, is nonetheless fairly lightweight. Maybe there's something to the Netflix recipe that makes them pick up bold subjects, but either crank them up to eleventy stupid (Ojka, Death Note) or play it safe. Past the acting, the thematic hard facts and the unsettling tensity of the story, there was nothing too transformative, transcendent, which is a shame.
User avatar
G-Man
Made Man
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:13 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#169

Post by G-Man »

Hidden Figures- It was good but felt like it was playing it safe.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V
My Banners:
Spoiler: show
Image
Word to your mom- my spreadsheet's the bomb
I got more rhymes than BoB's host Dom
Ricochet
Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
Posts in topic: 72
Posts: 11660
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#170

Post by Ricochet »

So I know it's cheesy RIP-ing, at least to my standards - plus, one can certainly go way deeper into Harry Dean Stanton's filmography - but I've rewatched Paris, Texas yesterday (third time, which is already special territory for me) and I'll be bumping it to a full 10. No clue why I had it at 9 thus far, the open space cinematography and color scheme is superb, the acting is contained and great (save perhaps for Aurore Clement's English that never manages to connect me to a veritable character), the opening and closing 30 minutes mirror each other in having me hooked on, watching every detail, every gesture, every word (if any, that is), the story is so simple, yet unfolds in a way that feels more epic.
Post Reply

Return to “Tinsel Town”