Rate the last movie you've seen

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

Moderator: Community Team

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

#81

Post by A Person »

Ricochet wrote:After the Wedding - sheer coincidence, but I planned to see this (and did so) on Mongoose's birthday, which is funny, because her and I don't feel the same about Susanne Bier's achievements and this is the movie she's pitched me countless times to make me reconsider. And well... this sort of both works better, out of all her films, and displays the issues I usually have with them. It was interesting to see a younger Mads Mikkelsen with slightly different acting chops than the mannerisms we're used to nowadays (Hannibal, The Hunt and others). Some of the drama was real good, especially early on, but then it kept reaching for more plot development to fill up the other acts and the focus shifted so wildly from one character to another.
I did like Mads Mikkelsen in this film, and thought the drama at parts was a highlight (imo) of Bier's filmography that I've seen.

Very very bad Vic though, with that review of Winter Light.

I've just watched Is the Man Who is Tall Happy? last night/this afternoon and it was alright, the best parts were just listneing to Chomsky speak, the animation was neat at times but really doesn't add a whole lot apart from one instance.
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

#82

Post by Ricochet »

<review

ok

Well you said it yourself. "At parts".
User avatar
a2thezebra
Hitman
Posts in topic: 12
Posts: 5772
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#83

Post by a2thezebra »

Ricochet wrote: Winter Light - second viewing, still couldn't feel the grace of our lord Bergman descending upon me and I still missed a ton of subtext, like an idiot. This time, I followed more of the second half - the first time I watched, past a certain important scene, it felt strangely filler-esque - but again, I had done a shit job of watching this back then and this time was a mere mild improvement.
This is my second favorite film from Bergman!
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
User avatar
a2thezebra
Hitman
Posts in topic: 12
Posts: 5772
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#84

Post by a2thezebra »

I'm not sure where else to put this but I was at a party the other night and I watched at least two-thirds of Into the Wild with the sound off and recent hip hop (a lot of Jay-Z) playing. I cannot exaggerate how well-synchronized it was. 100,000/10.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
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

#85

Post by insertnamehere »

Dead Man

4/5 Stars

This is the second Jarmusch film I've seen, after randomly coming across Coffee & Cigarettes and absolutely loving it. Dead Man is a hypnotic existential crawl through black and white forest landscapes peppered with dialogue made up of 90% non-sequiters. It's also an ostensible Western, although it mainly mines the stereotypical "Wild West" atmosphere for social commentary, surrealism, and a contradictory sense of absurdity and spirituality. Neil Young turns in some amazing work with the simplistic score; a single distorted reverb laced electric guitar chord never felt as appropriate in a movie score as it does here. I enjoyed the first half more than the second. The opening scene with the train car and Crispin Hellion Glover was probably my favorite part of the entire movie; I immediately rewatched just that sequence after the credits started rolling. Overall, the pacing felt intentionally sluggish at times. I appreciate and recognize what Jarmusch was trying to do, but it doesn't change my fact that I checked my phone throughout and almost fell asleep at one point.
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

#86

Post by Ricochet »

This week in Remember Movies?
The past week was the first in a very long time in which I managed to resume my movie watching habits, so I thought I'd resume writing a bit about them as well.

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

The Neon Demon, the new movie from Nicolas Winding Refn, the bonker chic filmmaker of Valhalla Rising, Drive and Only God Forgives, this one going along with the trend of the latter two and fitting in nicely - and in the middle, quality-wise, I'd say: theatrical minimalism and emotion-unclad portraits, visual aesthetics cranked up, jabbing moments of visceral violence or horror fantasia, shock value or sensorial bewitchery. As a counterpiece to the more masculine previous movies, this delves into the theme of the devilish female fashion industry, with both characterisations and symbolism about on the nose as it can get. As for the final act, whether it's a culmination of every theme and symbol Refn has been trying to shape or something gone totally wheels up, it's up to everyone to decide, but it's entirely in Refn's nature. Dunno what more to add; at the end of this list, I'd almost feel surprised to consider this the best of all these movies this week. It has a couple of great set pieces, it's overall good and trippy, but also not something worth throwing superlatives at or, on the contrary, get worked up about.

Gett: The Trial of Viviane Amsalem, an Israeli(-French) movie (part of a whole trilogy that I myself did not check, although I sense the movie works more than fine on its own) about a women trying to obtain official separation from the husband, with almost nothing but her own unhappiness fueling this desire, and the long-term tribulation she has to face in order to achieve that. More of a "bottle" film in which the story, the characters and their interactions are the high points. It easily taps into generating empathy for the main character's uphill battle, fueling the melodrama or subtilizing human conflict, marriage customs, prejudices, religious law issues. I think this is a tasteful, strongly scripted chamber drama.

Julieta, the new Pedro Almodovar movie, adapting a tryptich of short stories by Alice Munro into, arguably, a more cohesive story, though still marked by timeline jumps. Centering it on feminine portrayal (a quality throwback all the way to his Volver, in that regard), lush visuals (always a constant), a far diminished incentive to veer into darkly humoristic twists and trickery (a la The Skin I Live In) and restraint, elegant drama (probably in stark contrast with the total charade that he intended I'm So Excited to be), this almost feels like a return to form and a seriously crafted work... yet I didn't felt too compelled by it. Despite what a piquant, refined experience and immersive, well-performed story it can be, it still ends up feeling somewhat minor.

Cafe Society, the 100-millionth Woody Allen new movie released in quick succession, that might earn a better grade in the eternal "is it a dud or actually good" reviewing game of his recent filmography, without it really amounting to anything. It's as cozy of a period piece and quirky moral tale as he makes 'em (movie makers! stars! gangsters! complicated love triangles! aspiring youthful lad who's the spitting alter-ego of Allen!). But for all the talk about how visually polished this one is and how the performances (mostly) hold, it's really nothing to survive after a viewing. Heck, it might even be a tad too sterile, even for Woody's standards.

The Sea of Trees, the much scorned new Gus van Sant, who apparently has fully lost himself into the genre of dramatic cheeseball. Frankly, it's not in the so bad it's inconceivable category, as much as it is so dull and poorly made, it's hardly worth trying to find the words as to why it's such a misfire.

Swamp Water, a 1941 film by Jean Renoir. Entertaining.

Love & Friendship, a new Jane Austen adaptation (though the title is misleading, since the short novel Lady Susan is the adapted material) by Whit Stillman of 90s fame (but whose previous, mumblecore-ish Damsels in Distress I couldn't care less about). Not sure if the source happens to be a comedy of manners, but this is what this film aims for. And it happens to be a very pleasant watch at that, besides the light, savory period setting and vocabulary and the subtle, mannered performances (nothing too tremendous from lead Kate Beckinsale, I should say, still well done). I chuckled or even laughed out loud at some of the situations or even characters altogether.

Horse Money, latest from Portuguese Pedro Costa, a really stern and impenetrable project, with perhaps both minimalist theatrical and docufiction elements, in which the heavily discursive, stream-of-consciousness-like lines from old characters are meant to contain reflections of the past, musings and grievings altogether. It's certainly arthouse candy, alas I tried and failed, to the point of lulling.

Self-Portrait of a Dutiful Daughter, a Romanian indie flick about a young woman stuck in existential limbo, finishing up her degree, getting to live in her own apartment although not entirely independent from her parents, having an affair with a married man and having either pompous discussions or casual hangouts with the few friends she has, and whose main issue that actually seems to trouble her in all of this is that she'd like to get a dog, but it's too expensive and papa isn't willing to help her out with some money, either. Uhm yeah. This is just the sophomore movie from this young female filmmaker, with at least some interesting elements of autobiographical projection - the cast happens to be a mix of pro and amateurs, with the protagonist's parents being the filmmaker's own. The movie is representative of our New Wave heavy realism - the filmmaker being in fact a protege of New Wave titan Cristi Puiu - and it shows both the deep style and annoying limitations of the genre. Critic fans of the New Wave that I read are calling this, at least in its form, impeccable, but honestly, it's a "nothing-happens" kind of movie, most of the dialogue is cringe and most of the characters are as interesting as a pineapple, and besides, I also didn't feel good about watching myself in the mirror, a few years from now on. Except that I'm not a woman. And I'd like to have a cat.
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

#87

Post by Ricochet »

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

El Club - Chilean director Pablo Larrain is likely set to be Oscar contender this year with the biopic Jackie and four years ago he made No, a delectable, impassionate media-political drama that also got Oscar nomination, but this movie here proves he doesn't shy away from edgier subjects, shot in an impervious style, either. Story revolves around a group of disgraced Catholic priests living in seclusion until a newly joined member is tagged along by a victim of his dark past and an incident makes the whole group come under the scrutiny of the clerical administration. An interesting aspect of this movie, perhaps, is that, for the most part, the themes of remorse, redemption and such are not even close to applicable. The movie has a minimalist, obscure start, after which things go sideways and it's chilling all the way through. One thing I was struck by was how much of the dialogue unsettled me, down to the (well-acted) monotone and insensitive voices and dictions of some of the characters. The cinematography is as chilling and bleak in colours as the mood and lives that are to be beheld. With the Vatican abuses still a hot topic these past years, it's inevitable to see this movie as a strong invective and a judgemental piece - oddly enough, I thought of Spotlight as a companion piece - but I think it manages to be a resolute dissent, with dramatic purposes of raising questions and challenging the viewers' empathy or revulsion, rather than be a merely sensationalist, disagreeable ride.

Fuocoammare (Fire at Sea) - a documentary centered on the migrant crossings and crisis happening on the island of Lampedusa, in Italy, intertwined with scenes from the lives and day-to-day activities of the locals, both old and new - although the movie does switch from one story to another in such a way, that it's either a thematic implication of how most Europeans are both aware and passive in light of the situation, or a rather concerning disconnect. The colour of my rating reflects that it's not quite perfect at making this clear. Nevertheless, just like Dheepan having won the Palme d'Or (2014), this winning the Golden Bear last year might look a little on the nose as far as political-fueled awards go, but it evades the perception of being just an art project fishing for accolades at the right time and can stand out as a relevant movie, engrossing and small in details and reflections.

Metropolis - Fritz Lang's epic 1927 silent film, which I had on hold for a long time, but finally indulged in watching during my birthday. To my understanding, this is the restoration of the sole original (but damaged) copy found in Argentina(?). As always, not the best genre for me to pass on judgement, but am I ready instead to join the chorus praising this as an all-time classic? Well, the visuals and set-designs are all grandiose and A++. As expected from German expressionism, the acting (body language, facial expression) is very striking, overt, extravagant and at times even silly - culminating with the machine-woman's multitude of loose gesture, squints, crazed looks and so on. The lenghts of the scenes are Wagnerian-like - I laughed out loud when, 40 minutes into it, an intertitle signaled "the end of the Prelude" - with certain stretches that could count as redundant, including in the music, which at one point drummed hard on a dissonant version of La Marseillaise. Still, no doubt a spectacle of a classic movie.

---And from here on I found myself alone at home for a week and dropped the cinephilic standards by watching several movies airing on TV (HBO, Cinemax, this kind of stuff mostly), some of them with real interest, others just to have time pass by---

Mistress America, a 2015 Noah Baumbach movie that could count as a follow-up to his Frances Ha, especially given the reappearance of his muse Greta Gerwig in it, but with less creative fuel in the same stylistic tank, although not stagnant either, as I'll point out further along. The angsty, adrift young female protagonist figure, trying to find her voice and connect with people, is played this time by Lola Kirke (in a quite adorable way, truth be told), while Gerwig's character is a more accomplished, versatile, prolific (while also narcissistic, troubled and at times...well, full of s**t) person that becomes the former's model and sucks the young woman into her orbit. To some degree of an element of surprise, much of the second half of the movie steps away from the New York mumblecore cornucopia to a more chamber-like act filled with comedy of manners and screwball moments.

Star Trek Beyond - I don't think I'll need to spoiler this, as I'm not enough of a fan to get into detail or ranting (did watch a lot of TNG back in the days, though). I thought it was enjoyable. It does look indeed televisual - in the sense of a "quest/adventure/challenge of the week" that doesn't translate too well for our modern, multiplex-manipulated perception of how heavy in meaning a SF standalone movie should be (its thinness is basically amplified by the Lin-esque heavy action set pieces) - but I rather prefer this to either of the mind- and space-time-bending from ST or the dark-brooding confrontations (and meta gross rip-off-isms) from Into Darkness. Some secondary characters do get a bit too many lines, I sensed; by the second half my interest was halved, I'd say; and the villain with his backstory and twist didn't pay off too much. But I've got no beef with it, otherwise, for it was exactly the type of popcorn movie I had planned for the evening. It not taking itself (or its reboot mythology) too serious and keeping the story and challenge straight to the chase is definitely a better road.

Kalifornia - 90s thriller, highlighting Brad Pitt in his talented, daring youth (not that he's not still a very inspired actor at times) and, oh wow, Admiral Helena Cain. Unfortunately, both Pitt and Juliette Lewis chew a bit too much into their off-center characters, plus I never noticed this much before how dull David Duchovny comes off in movies, as opposed to TV series (although I hardly payed attention to Californication, past a few episodes of "oh look, douche guy being douche"). There are both some noir and road movie sensibilities in this one, but frankly, not that great of a watch.

Zipper - House of Cards meets... uhm, Shame? Patrick Wilson with a sex addiction. Nekid women. Stupid mistakes and "oh no my life is falling apart" moments. Blah.

13 Hours - The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi Apparently a more serious attempt at drama and action from Michael Bay (yes a Bay movie was on TV and I didn't switch to something else fml!), but I think the penchant he has for certain things still betrays him. A hack like myself would be able to tell. The script is dogballs, nothing but bro-style dialogue or shouting during action scenes. There's even that sideline guy prototype Bay tends to insert in all his movies, whose role is to be mildly irate and say quippy, over-the-top lines. Plus, I counted like three climaxes, each one looking and playing out the same. If there's one thing, the action doesn't shy away from violence and gory details - but even here, there's such a blockbuster/popcorn quality to it, instead of any authentic real combat misery.

5 to 7 (with no connection to Agnes Varda's "Cléo from 5 to 7", which for a sec I thought it would be :confused: ) A heavily syruped romantic story between an aspiring writer (RIP Anton Yelchin) going into a coup de foudre driven affair with an older, married French woman, who fully embraces however the style of her open marriage, to the point in which her husband does it as well and not even their kids find it odd or controversial. The sole conflict resides in how enamoured the protagonist becomes and what desires (read: wishful thinking) arise from this. There's elegance to how this romance plays out, although it's also very artificial and heavily scripted, making it all less plausible. Unfortunately the last act drives into total cheese, including music cues that made me want to slice my ears off. Speaking of which, the movie is so pompous, it gets to have Alan Gilbert, music director of the New York Philharmonic, in a cameo.

Sleeping Giant, a 2015 Canadian film, which I'm actually surprised of it not being a Scandinavian one, because it certainly looks made out of that fabric: beautiful wildlife scenery, the impression of a community in which everyone is running smoothly and relaxed, the coming of age of a group of kids marked by competing with each other, trash talking, stealing beer and trying pot or falling in love with girls, until introversion, deeper issues and immaturity start creating ripples and lead to more serious consequences. The title alone made me think of the British movie The Selfish Giant by Clio Barnard (which I absolutely love) and they do turn out to share sort of the same moral tale, except the Brits tend to add poverty and broken home to highlight what influences the kids' lives, whereas here it's just the dark undertones in the relationships surrounding family or close friendships. It was a good watch, but it also had its predictable set pieces.

Recordações da Casa Amarela (Recollections of the Yellow House), a 1989 movie by João César Monteiro that I didn't manage to watch as part of my Portugal trip playlist back in August and which I'd describe at first viewing as "The Life of Vompatti at 60". No joke.

Paul Thomas Anderson's Inherent Vice was also on one night and, by god, did it feel a whole lot better on second viewing (I'd describe the first to have been a disaster and a bore). Sure, a lot of it still feels hazy, but much of the humor and the logic of the narrative flow suddenly clicked this time. And I still don't know what makes Joaquin Phoenix tick, but god bless him.
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

#88

Post by Ricochet »

So the past two weeks of my movie watching activities could have been almost described as lax, touching upon a few auteur movies before wanting to descend into popcorn/weaksauce zone for a change, if not for the past two evenings (or rather nights) in which a nocturnal marathon screening of Cannes movies organized in my hometown sent me into cinephilic overdrive. With the exception of two new movies I watched (the most irrelevant ones, too), the Cannes thread will prove common to both the ones I went to see at the screenings and the ones I involuntarily picked to watch in the comfort zone of my kino lair.

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

Le dernier des injustes (The Last of the Unjust) [Cannes-screened 2013], a documentary by Claude Lanzmann, of Shoah fame, about Benjamin Murmelstein, the last surviving Elder of the Jewish Council in the Theresienstadt concentration camp, thus a partial focus on the life and activities in that ghetto, from its formation in 1941 till its liberation towards the end of the World War II (when the Nazis nevertheless attempted mass liquidation of the camp via deportation). Murmelstein served as the third and last of the Elders, after his predecessors were executed, his pragmatic if unpopular actions leading to his ill repute of a perceived collaborator. The documentary is split between the footage of Lanzmann interviewing Murmelstein in 1975 and Lanzmann himself, much later, well into his 80s, revisiting places from the camp whilst quoting from Murmelstein's memoir and musing himself at the horrors of the events. The documentary is technically very long - over three hours and a half - which is perhaps not surprising from the creator of the 10-hour Shoah, but the feel is that it all flows much quicker, because the discussions go on at length on various subjects and the montage is thus sparser. Back in 1975, Lanzmann is shown prodding Murmelstein at times for answers or certain details, but the final form of this documentary inspires the approach of (re)evaluating Murmelstein's actions as tough but necessary and the man as more of a heroic figure. To any uninformed viewer, the stories about the Theresienstadt camp should prove shocking and moving. Of course, one only needs to check the links on the film's English wikipedia page to also find articles that raise issues with Lanzmann's one-sided investigation and occasionally self-indulgent research.

The Handmaiden (Agassi) [Cannes-competing 2016], bit hard to describe this one, but since it's a Park Chan-wook (Oldboy, Vengeance trilogy), one can luckily get away with such excuse. One thing the movie does is subvert every expectation (but again, Park Chan-wook here, duh) and ramp it up at every switch, as well: at first it seems a period drama, then wham, it turns out it's a confidence trick thriller; then a subtle romance going on kinky; then halfway through it decides to basically rewind the story and fill in the gaps from a different perspective, the reveals in this process being about as fucked up as it can get; then Chan-wook realizes the violence jar has not been even remotely filled up, so yeah, let's take care of that as well. I notice the American press, in particular, is head over heels for this movie's lush aesthetic and actual romanticism. Regarding the former, now that I find myself halfway into having checked this year's Cannes slot, I could definitely describe its style and craziness as memorable. But at the same time, if, say, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance was a movie that actually moved me and Oldboy one I accepted for its cult swag (and... yeah, my Chan-wook checklist stops there), this one was tad too silly for my own immersion to prove an accomplished one.

The Price of Desire, a pretty cheesy and lazy-ass biopic I caught on TV, about famed female architect Eileen Gray, her relationship with Jean Badovici and her collaboration with Le Corbusier (complete with unrequited sentiments from the latter, although I found no such details in his actual bio) in designing the modernist E-1027 house. The acting from the first two proves fairly limited and pedantic, while the third gave me the impression he would not do a half bad Truman Capote impression, especially with the fourth wall break ramblings he's been invested with in this one.

Suicide Squad - Completely laughable. Compared to the BvS debacle, this one truly looks like a train wreck and hopefully the rock bottom of DC's misguided capeshit making. I refuse to believe this is the product of a filmmaker who at least pointed at some directorial signature with End of Watch or Fury, a few years ago (although his penchant for movies involving task force action sort of explain the SWAT-iness of the action set pieces in here as well). If this is the result of the reshoots that were decided by management, after Deadpool made them piss their pants, it shows how botched the whole thing is. The ensemble comic cast is a complete caricature. The characters' abilities were pretty much exhausted from fight level 1-1, which made the other five levels up to the boss fight repetitive and uninteresting. I cannot even praise Margot Robbie, despite the work she puts into capturing Harley Quinn, simply because she is given lines after lines of quip. The only one you could be invested in would be Will Smith, but that would basically make it a Will-Smith-is-decent-hero movie. Is there someone else I'm forgetting...? Well, thing is, I'm hardly upset about that part, it had disaster written all over it. The movie probably did as well, although what this one settles for good is that trailer/promo coolness is now completely separate from actual movie expectations, since they do require more brains and less franchise gluttony to work out at all.

Would also mention rewatching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, after A Person rustled my Jimmies in the Chatzy by dissing it without even having watched it properly. I won't get into much details, but this is one hella stylish spy thriller. Granted, it's rather no fat compared to Le Carre's book (I'm just finishing up the Karla trilogy these days), perhaps with a lot less verbal dueling than the book can charm you with, but its tension and detective set pieces are well-tailored, otherwise. Excellent Gary Oldman performance, the less is more type.

====

And now let me tell you about how I spent the past Friday and Saturday nights at my local Philharmonic hall, watching three movies from the Cannes '16 each day (err night) at ungodly late hours. The organizers' conception was baffling, in that they thought it was ok to start session each day (err night) at 10 or 11pm, screen three (3!) movies and basically run the whole thing into the night. A fortunate aspect was to make it all free, so that people actually showed up, at least for the first movie - trust me, the difference between a special screening that's free and one that would cost as little as the equivalent of two dollars fifty is yuge in this town. Yesterday (Sunday) morning I found myself wobbling back home at 6am, because it all started at 11pm, the first movie was three (3!) hours long and the last one started at 4am. I did the math and that was 20 minutes shy of watching Satantango in one sitting (spoilers: it's a 7-hour 15-minute long movie).

Anyway, here are the movies:

Night 1

Albüm [Cannes-awarded, separate section, 2016], a feature film debut from Mehmet Can Mertoglu, who graced us with his presence for Q&A, which proved a bit more illuminating than the movie's own clarity at first watch. Essentially a movie about how much of a taboo and a source for social anxiety the issue of adopting is in Turkey, although it opts to depict in a both humorous and revolting way the movie's main couple's concern with their own image rather than their parenthood. Again, without the director explaining afterwards that his message is borderline realistic, I would have taken it to be a more absurd, dystopian depiction, with several scenes making me feel I'm watching one of Roy Andersson's cuckoo movies. This movie was also shot and co-produced by several Romanian artists, which at times gave me the vibe that several minimalist or slow-paced scenes are referential in that regard (a la "watching people eat soup for minutes", which is a running gag about most of the heavy New Wave Romanian movies). Anyway, fairly good stuff, I'd almost inclined to bump the color of this rating, if not for the feeling that certain stylistic choice and narrative elaborations from this director could ripen with his next endeavors.

Nicolas Winding Refn's The Neon Demon [Cannes-competing 2016], which was the only movie from this selection that I had seen already. Reviewed it here already: silly and unsubtle, but aesthetic candy and most pleasant of his since Drive. One thing I felt at second viewing is that the third act is quite slow to get through - or was it merely my 1am urge to get to the next one?

I, Daniel Blake [Cannes - Palme d'Or, 2016] Most critics have struggled to greet the news of this taking away the big prize as anything but a bit of an upset and to define what exactly makes it so "Palme d'Or-able" (except for Mark Kermode, who apparently loves any sentimental character-driven movie that makes him tear up), and I don't really have any positive answer either. There's almost a whiff of a topical award-giving to it (just like Dheepan won Palme d'Or or Fuocoammare won the Golden Bear in 2015, both about migrants' issues), with austerity still problematic in most countries, including the UK. But Ken Loach's movie is the kind of drama with some degree of political charge that he's done before, plus the kind of drama which, split into bits, you could feel you've seen it in other movies before, as well: an old protagonist recovering from serious medical issues, but then finding himself stuck in a bureaucratic maze with no solution with the institution that assesses his eligibility for sickness benefit (yeah, I'm copying a bit from wiki here) - and all this proves to be truly Kafka slash Catch-22 nasty stuff - while also bonding with a young mother of two, facing the same support issues, plus relocation, work and financial hardships. That it was the sort of Cannes year in which the jury decided to go with the unsophisticated movie that spoke more to the heart is perfectly fine - and Loach's movie is no doubt good, with impressive character acting (to the point of identifying real humans) and, at best, making you rage at every scene of social injustice. But it doesn't quite steal the show, either.

Night 2

Toni Erdmann [Cannes-competing 2016] The German comedy by Maren Ade that earned rave responses from everyone... except, apparently, for the nine people that were in the jury and gave it nada. Now, the stone-hearted me probably also desired more meaningfulness and formal shininess from a drama about a father trying to get back in touch with his daughter and cheer her up from the stress, alienation and depression of her business work abroad, but that's really what this movie is at its core, while developed meticulously and ramping up the father's appeal to practical jokes and incorrigible silliness. Most of the times, the humor is so minutely timed and gestural, then the last hour turns up the hilarity to eleven.

Just la fin du monde (It's Only the End of the World) [Cannes - Grand Prix 2016] New drama by Canadian enfant terrible Xavier Dolan, derided as always by critics if not even more than usual. Adapted from a French stage play by Lagarce, Dolan seems to only exacerbate its theatrical qualities and stark tone to suit his own filmmaking moods quite to perfection: chamber piece, tight interior shots, close ups galore, logorrheic dialogue mixed with anxious silence or navel-gazing musical interludes, plus the gamut of emotions. But boy, does it all feel vexing and shallow. Compared to this, I almost want to go back and declare his 2014 Mommy a hyper-emotional, balls to the walls masterwork. The levels of hysteria in this movie aren't as severe as critics made me fear (although kudos to anyone going through how much Vincent Cassel can simply lose his shit without grimacing), but it's nigh impossible to relate to the dysfunctionality of the family depicted as a whole or even the members you could relate to in theory (the protagonist's inability to react to his relatives' tantrums or open up did not make him any less infuriating to me). Overall, this felt like a bit of an aesthetically rich served dish of drama bull.

The Salesman [Cannes - Best Actor and Screenplay 2016] Probably too serious of a movie at the end of such a marathon, and for its 4am startup time that night, but if there's a filmmaker who cannot be swayed from building highly poignant family vignettes with wonderful visual balance and moving dramatical stories or conflicts, it's probably Iranian Asghar Farhadi. At least after his A Separation, which is superb, and The Past, which was also good but kinda lost me towards the end, this feels like grasping at and weaving a simpler subject - a married couple's struggles after they move into a new home and the wife is attacked by an old visitor of the previous, apparently promiscuous female tenant. The movie also revolves around the couple performing in an adaptation of Miller's Death to a Salesman, although the parallels with their drama and the movie title are less clear. It seems I finally dozed off during what some critics described as a suffocating climax. Oh 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

#89

Post by Ricochet »

Addendum:

Elle, a new film by Paul Verhoeven (his first in six years, if we discard some 2012 project he made), with both elements that one could find to be unexpected (like a level of artisty and stylishness that could hardly rhyme with his pulpy, messy banger filmmaking days of RoboCop, Basic Instinct or Total Recall, decades ago) or that resurface as his trademarks (like... the pulpiness and the messiness). To describe any bit what this movie tries to go for, as far as premise or story would be concerned, would feel spoilery in itself, so I'll just note that Isabelle Huppert gets to play with outstanding panache a total bitch of a woman, and yet one you could still follow around for two whole hours. Her delivery of deadpan dark humor is a true delight at times, at least for someone like me. The other characters around her aren't quite as full-fledged, but each are revealed deeply flawed in their own way, whether they're wearing it on their sleeves or hiding it behind a facade. So a lot of Verhoeven's flavors (the vibe of a wicked thriller ride, femme fatale-ism, messy violence) shine through and, while I wouldn't say there is something deeper than that (unless it's emphasing the "French are fken weirdos" theme), it still proved an exciting, provocative, twisted pleasure.
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

#90

Post by DharmaHelper »

Dr Strange 7/10
our Linkitis is our lives.

Image
ImageImage
ImageImage
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

#91

Post by DharmaHelper »

DharmaHelper wrote:Dr Strange 7/10
Stunning visuals and effects, decent story, compelling characters for the most part, humor kind of feels out of place, sometimes doesn't land, feels rushed in parts.
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

#92

Post by Ricochet »

A new round up from me, although it's been a lazy/buzy last two week. No two-day seven-hour moviefest surprises this time.

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

Don't Breathe which is, I suppose, the hit horror movie of this year in the "smart horror" subgenre, but I wouldn't call it too accomplished or exciting. Basic story is three punks who raid and rob houses want to score a big, seemingly easy hit against a blind old lonely man, except it turns out he's a badass war veteran and joke's on them, as the rest turns into a tight space survival thriller/horror adventure. This is made by the director of the Evil Dead remake, which, depending on each person's investment in the original franchise (mine is zero i.e. zero movies seen), will make you reject or accept him as a serious wielder of the arts. There are a few tense scenes and effort into some neat technical designs, but the movie downgrades halfway into sleaze and silliness - and not really the silly kind that nevertheless kept a movie like It Follows savourable all the way through; nope, it's wheels-off-logic complete silliness. A few additional sins would be the frame spook / jump scare-ititis and (mild spoilers, perhaps) the adversary having legit nine lives.

Zootopia - formulaic as fark, but fun altogether, nicely build-up world and yes... racism, discrimination... themes, big themes, big themey themes. And I liked the fox. I like foxes. But yeah, really not colouring outside the lines much either, for a regular Pixar movie. What's that? It's a Disney movie? What's the dif-

Captain Fantastic, in which Viggo Mortensen raises a family of six on his own, into the wilderness, in a way that the kids can grow to be both self-governing and highly educated (which will serve throughout the movie as fuel for ironic gags and preachy display, respectively); all with a hint of hipsterism and marxism, as well. Things change when the kids' long-time estranged mother dies and they all have to head back into society to attend the funeral. I did not enjoy this one much at all, it sort of wants to be both a profound drama and indiesquely over the top. It also goes full cringe into the very last 15 minutes or so.

Kwaidan, an old movie by Masaki Kobayashi, which created a nice coincidence in having watched a spooky ghost-story (without realizing /movie-fact-checking-fail) movie on Halloween (which I don't care about celebrating). A beautifully crafted anthology of four segments, which are basically adaptations of folk tales or strange stories. It reminded me right away of the similarly episodic nature of Kurosawa's Dreams, which is one of my absolute sentimental favourites. Two of the stories/film parts build up very slowly and then culminate very effectively into some spooky, freaky twist, while the third is a masterful looking version of a particularly famous or popular tale / play; perhaps only the fourth felt a bit too much and uninteresting, at the end of an already long watch (three hours in total).

L'ombre des femmes (In the Shadow of Woman) by Philippe Garrell, a director with an extensive filmography over the past five decades, but whose movies I seem to have started watching backwards, or rather in real time as he keeps making new ones (2013's Jealousie and now this). There's something very "brève" to them - under the 80-minute mark, shot in b&w, simple scripted and with old movie sensibilities, a la combining Eric Rohmer's "moral tales" (but without that much philosophising and talking) and Woody Allen's spur-of-the-moment, everyman dramas (but without that much quirkiness and... talking), wrapping up at the first sign of a satisfactory conclusion. There's love and cheating and bohemia and conflicting emotions in this one, but it's also really hard to define what such a movie aims for, except for an intrigue subject that might prove interesting for a bit.

Mister Doctor House and the Cloak of Inception, hot take after seeing it today in theaters; bit of a letdown, because I would have liked a really solid, maybe more original too, MCU movie and I can only write it down as passable, and also would have liked a breather from the main bulk of the Marvel mince machine, and yet it's just an origin story set to be fully integrated into the future salad supreme. There are elements (mostly visual) that elevate it past the by-the-recipe Marvelian movie-making (which is a dire concept to think about, considering the comfort of the success they're having with it, each time), but not really all that much, once you scratch the surface. There are also good intentions in both trying to create a more solid, consistent ensemble of characters and the acting that's put into said cast, but for me, something just didn't light up and made it breathtaking. More thoughts, if you will, but in spoilers
Spoiler: show
1. FXs were remarkable, I suppose, and even strangely with a "coherence" of the action, as opposed to how the trailers made it look like hot mess unfolding on your retina, but I'm just not the type to praise effects just for that; the only scene I disliked was the "enlightment" trippy voyage - I can understand the psychedelia element to it, but comic book visuals are one thing, cinema is a different medium, and this scene came out to me like a cascade of candy coloured silliness.

2. I think the movie's biggest flaw is needing to cram an origin movie with an action movie, to the point of either too much material or, rather in this case, too little believability in how the two are meant to come together: the former implies long, slow process; the latter implies quick, imminent danger. I'd say a clear rip-off analogy to the whole oriental training phase would be Batman Begins. Do you recall the baddie bursting through the doors in "oh hey here to take over the world k" fashion whilst the hero was taking his apprenticeship finals? Huh.

I think the movie's prologue, made to wow and appetize for the first seven minutes or so, created this issue. It then made it hard to understand (or believe) just how conveniently long it took for shit to go down only after the most of the stretch in which Strange went through his becoming-who-he-must-become process, or it rather threw Strange headlong into the confrontation, asking me to believe in him as an untrained, but gifted or intuitive underdog (seriously, Ombilicus or whatshisname displayed strength to KO literally everyone except Mordo, from top rank to bottom redshirts, but Strange, oh no, doesn't look like it can land a hit, that cheeky outplayin' fella).

3. All that cloak gimmick sort of pissed me off, tbh. Literally felt like I've been thrown in a Hogwarts-style comedic skit.

4. There was almost a hint of some substance this time to Villanicius or whatshisname, in that you could sort of see what drives his motivations or perception of how order should be (fanatical, but not maniacal), plus with every other character counting as "good" having its own duality and all, but man, MCU just doesn't care about creating any durable villain figure, it seems.
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

#93

Post by nutella »

DharmaHelper wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Dr Strange 7/10
Stunning visuals and effects, decent story, compelling characters for the most part, humor kind of feels out of place, sometimes doesn't land, feels rushed in parts.
I just watched it and loved it, humor very much included -- I thought all the funny lines were done quite well. Overall I found the movie to be a pretty awesome experience.
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
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

#94

Post by Ricochet »

One more I didn't manage to write about, because too late at night yesterday.

The Commune (Kollektivet) - A few weeks ago I was saying that if you want to watch top quality family (melo)dramas, look no further than Asghar Farhadi's films, but I obviously seem to have forgotten about Thomas Vinterberg, who can also engrave disfunctional on any social / family-related story in very compelling ways. Although far from his artistically raved 90s Dogma movies, I personally think his 2012's The Hunt (starring Mads Mikkelsen) was an absolute stunner and it burned me inside to watch it. This movie, as far as I read, is meant to be one Vinterberg's most personal films and I can see where he's able to combine creativity with life inspiration in sketching such unsettling depictions, but I fear there's a disconnection between, on one hand, what the movie hints at being (from its name, poster trailers) - a couple turning the husband's old family house into a commune-style share one, with loose or whacky characters joining in and creating any interesting community to marvel at and take at face value - but only comes out half baked and, on the other, what it evolves into - the husband's affair creating a rift within the family, to the point of complete breakdown and disillusionment. The whole turmoil ends up very moving, mostly from some standout acting as well, yet this Vinterberg movie has "light" and "minor" written on it, on all levels. Certainly not even close to The Hunt's poignancy.
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

#95

Post by thellama73 »

The last movie I saw was Shock Treatment, the spiritual sequel to the Rocky Horror Picture Show. It wasn't very good. The plot was largely incoherent, the acting was generally substandard, the characters were unlikeable, and the ending was unsatisfying. The songs were pretty catchy though.
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
User avatar
a2thezebra
Hitman
Posts in topic: 12
Posts: 5772
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#96

Post by a2thezebra »

Three or so weeks ago I finally saw the entirety of Once Upon a Time in the West (before that I had only seen the last twenty minutes as a kid and didn't remember what happened) and now that some time has passed and I can safely say with confidence and conviction that it is my new favorite film.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
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

#97

Post by thellama73 »

a2thezebra wrote:Three or so weeks ago I finally saw the entirety of Once Upon a Time in the West (before that I had only seen the last twenty minutes as a kid and didn't remember what happened) and now that some time has passed and I can safely say with confidence and conviction that it is my new favorite film.
I also really love that film. I can also say that I've revised my above opinion of Shock Treatment and now really like it.
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

#98

Post by Ricochet »

So seeing as I'm hardly in the mood for movies these days (just too damn busy and exhausted after work and rehearsals, day in day out, tbh), might as well address the few couple of ones I watched last week.

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

Mon Roi (My King), a drama by Maïwenn (maïwho) about a couple's (Emmanuelle Bercot and Vincent Cassel) rhapsodic-turned-histrionic affair-turned-marriage-turned-hell-on-earth. It stuck in my mind that it got pretty stinky press at last year's Cannes, yet the actress grabbed the award. Now, as this seems to be partly autobiographical, I can see the limitations in envisioning such a drama filled with glamour, shallowness or egomania. It also chooses a prehistoric-tier narrative unfolding (flashbacks) and the outbursts are innumerable to the point of redundancy, but I'd be lying if I wasn't won over, at least in the first act, by the flirtatious repartee; alas, sour grapes afterwards, and a bit too sour, indeed.

Arrival, the latest by Canadian Denis Villeneuve, who is in serious contention for my "favourite director of late" spot, although each of his new projects makes me fear he has entered full Hollywood territory (Prisoners, Sicario) - and duh, his next bus stop only happens to be an effin Blade Runner sequel - while his arthouse side will become of the past (Incendies, Enemy), but I find it safe to say this movie sort of has something of both worlds. Plus, you can further connect the dots between this movie and Contact (which, I have to admit, I was a sucker for when I was younger), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (which I... haven't seen... :grin:) or even Interstellar (although you might cringe a bit at the aspect that's common between these, if you're familiar with both works).

Anyhow, I almost don't wish to present much about it. It has to be seen and interpreted. I left the theatre with a maelstrom of thoughts in my head. There are pretty much three components that are merged together: a human/emotional story, the Sci-Fi phenomenon and political/mediatic strata. Does it all blend perfectly? Well, the human arc is nearly flawless in reaching out to your heartstrings, but since it requires the Sci-Fi narrative to make sense, it made me slightly wonder if there's not a bit of gimmickery in this. The Sci-Fi bit should prove satisfying, if you like it more cerebral, methodic and un-flashy (if not, reddit and 4chan await you to complain about it). The social commentaries are de gustibus. Amy Adams is pretty great and believable as the savant yet, at the same time, self-discovering protagonist, although I will not be holding my breath for any Oscar buzz, because it's simply not the type of range-explosive performance that 100-year old geezers at the Academy would care about (plus, Natalie Portman portraying Jackie must be reducing the odds by a lot, as well).

Anywho, I know it's the season for Marvel wizards and prequel Pottery and Rogue space opera, but I'd seriously recommend to go see this movie(, too). Intelectual, palatable, meaningful.
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

#99

Post by Ricochet »

M'kay, might as well write a first post for this year and see if I can turn it into regular updates. Doubtful, but here goes nothing.

Will pick up not from my last input in November, but only from the most recent movies I watched since Rogue One, for which I dedicated a different entry.

Color palette scheme as usual:
A/A- / B+ / B / B- / C / D / F / No rating

Indignation, one of two Philip Roth adaptations this year (and the better received one, considering that American Pastoral appears to have been pretty much panned). I am completely uninitiated in Roth's novels and only picked this because it showed up as a rather unique pick in this yearly best video montage. Seemed overall as a very poised, slow burning drama, with rather low-key actors in the mix (although I did recognize Sarah Gadon from some previous flicks, such as Denis Villeneuve's Enemy), heavy on character study and identity plot, while also polished with some aesthetic, cultural or historical appropriations. The protagonist's moral choices, dillemas and vexations are both elliptical and immediate. Is this what I should expect from the book, as well? Probably.

Hell or High Water, a well-made heist / western-like movie starring in serious acting mode, of all celebs, Chris Pine and also Jeff Bridges (who, for my own taste at least, has been really hammy in recent years, but seems to have found his normal range in this case), a movie that, to my surprise, turned out as an awards contender, so I had to cross it on my own list. The layout of the story and drama is quite basic - the robbers as two brothers, sharing a goal, yet divided in character (between intelligent poise and moony outbursts and between seeking an objective and seeking the sheer thrills of lawbreaking), versus an aging detective in search for his own last thrill of a cat-n-mouse procedural - but it is held up well by the script, the fleshed-out characterisation and the aesthetic grand vibe of the movie. Plus the extra gritty, McCarthian even, way in which all tensions lead to a final clash. Not sure I'm ready, after only one viewing, to call this masterful in any way, but it certainly calls to mind No Country for Old Men and I can't actually recall a more solid flick in the interval since.

Loving, Jeff Nichols' take on the story of the couple whose interracial marriage and ensued controversy led to the landmark '60s case of Loving vs. Virgina. Now, after having seen enough movies by this constantly acclaimed young director (Take Shelter, Mud, Midnight Special), I'm starting to feel that his style can be described as working well within certain genres, but always finding a way to enrich them or add something special, subtle, whereas most other filmmakers would come up with (more) mundane results. With this movie, I suppose the most subtle details or style choices would concern how it focuses almost entirely on the couple's life story (and their reserved way of coping with both their burdens and their hopes for a better resolution, plus with how their case ends up being of such justicial and historical significance), as opposed to showing much of anything from the court case itself, except for a few elliptical scenes and side actors which feel kinda... uninspiring; or how, for such a subject, it almost avoids any typical scenes of passive or open racist altercations (I counted three-four, tops, throughout the whole movie); or simply how intimate the drama is shaped out. Nonetheless, this still feels by the numbers and meant to earn easy high praise and award contention; it's probably the first in his filmography that, despite all the nice touches and nuances, doesn't feel elevated enough from the bunch.

===

New Years' Weekend provided a lot of junk TV watching, so the quality will drop with the following mentions. HBO especially has this custom of providing a "surprise NYE's midnight movie", except that it's always anything but surprising, especially this time, when it anticipated the moment by binging the first two Captain America movies. Wow, surprise, the midnight movie was Civil War! *rollseyes*

Truth be told, this movie can hardly be taken serious anymore on second viewing already. Compared to it, Winter Soldier almost holds up as enjoyable and senseful. If the MCU movie-making formula would not be so adulated by critics and fan(boys) alike, I'd say either this or Ultron is the jump of the shark moment. Alas, we'll get even more bloated and expansive and intertwined ones. This viewing also provided hilarity when my parents couldn't piece up the new cape characters between Winter Soldier and this one (because they never saw Ultron to make the connections).

A day later, there was also Deadpool, which is still fairly cool, although again, it proved too fast paced and quippy for 80% of the jokes to land in the living room.

There was also We Are Your Friends, a "serious acting mode" moment from Zac Efron, as an aspiring (and, at least, presented as talented, intuitive) DJ who looks for guidance in the "complex" combo of a pretentious mentor / life drunktard trainwreck (played by Wes Bentley), only for things to get complicated when the latter's bombshell / bombshell girl (played by Emily Ratatat...something?) enters in a love triangle mix. There's some wise-ass montages and scenes meant to carry a message about who this electronic genre should be more than mashed up sounds or on the need to look for real life / inward sources in creating art, that almost, almost land, but nah, not really.

===

Back to quality watching.

American Honey, by distinguished British female director Andrea Arnold, making her first film on U.S. soil. It earned her a third Jury Prize at Cannes and I've been a great fan in the past of her movie Fish Tank (she also did a recent version of Wuthering Heights, for those who might be interested). Just like in Fish Tank, Arnold seems to focus on the impassioned, rogue, sensible qualities of a youthful protagonist, whilst placing it in harsh, tough-life, self-discovering situations. Here, a young woman is recruited / seduced (by Shia LeBeouf's - in serious acting mode - character) to abandon her unfulfilling town life and join a nomad-like group of dirtbag teenagers on a rough road mission and pack adventures, involving scamming people in various places to subscribe for magazines, earning money day by day and yet finding some pleasure in this. It should be noted that most of the actors, except Shia and another one-two familiar faces, were street cast, so basically amateurs, including the main actress Sarah Lane, who is modeled into quite the magnetic lead character, certainly a sort of breakout performance. The movie is quite long and, while it has certain typical set pieces, it rather embraces riding the momentum than spiking towards a narrative or characterial fulfilment; it's almost impossible to describe on first viewing and it does open a scuzzy, grungy window into human drifting, but it's also elevated past any teenage wasteland, miserabilist connotations.

Aquarius, a Brazilian film by Kleber Mendonça Filho, also screened at Cannes, although without any special nods in the end. It stars Sonia Braga in a standout performance (close to the rarefied heights of Isabelle Huppert this year, to be honest) as an old woman, widower, retired music critic, in which the main conflict is between her and a company that wishes to take hold of and demolish the old-style, seaside apartment building in which she resides, with her being the last stand (as the last, dissident tenant), a conflict that bursts into a more and more despicable setpiece of harassment and mindgames on the company's behalf, that's run by old and young hounding antrepeneurs alike (probably to symbolise that no generation can be impassive to corruption). But the tale of old age is also able to pigment a personal story of family bonds or issues, burdens and nostalgia, experience, pride and flaws in human character and interaction. Reading all this, I'm not sure if I managed to describe too well what the movie is aiming for, but there is certain poetry (and music of course), visual sensibility and acting prowess in it. It's a loose, sprawling movie, but it can win you over with the storytelling and performances.

Fences, Denzel Washington's adaptation for the big screen of August Wilson's play. Certain to come up in regards to Denzel's push for another award or two, for what drives the movie is his spitting and rambling performance, as the difficult and hardheaded patriarch of a family that he'd rather fence (nudge nudge) on the inside from the outside world and any progressive ideas, something generated by his own life disenchantment or by his conservative sense against racial injustice. However, I'm afraid the movie is very much plagued by the adaptation from stage to screen syndrome, as it retains a lot of the theatricality without any cinematic compensation. There are no doubt some heavy ideas and moral dialogues that hit hard, all part of an original content that would surely prove riveting if seen on stage, but it's too damn safe in style and near Oscar-bait-ish for a movie. For a better example of a movie that retains its staginess effect, whilst also gripping as cinema, I'd recommend 2008's Doubt (the one with Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman).

And finally, rewatched Goddo supiido yuu barakku emparaa, the 70s documentary from which GY!BE derived their name, about an infamous biker gang, capturing some of its members' status as outlaws, day routines, gang interactions or conflicts, all interspersed with jap rock or soft ballads. Unfortunately, very low-key filmed and half of the material is not even eventful.
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

#100

Post by DharmaHelper »

Rogue One - 8/10 (?)

Cool movie. Great to see the representation in the Star Wars Universe. Not sure if we needed a flashback movie. Probably would have preferred a new Star Wars with the representation this had. Definitely tired of every goddamn star wars film being about the Death Star. Do not want a Star Wars film every 8 months. :D
our Linkitis is our lives.

Image
ImageImage
ImageImage
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

#101

Post by Tangrowth »

So I'm incredibly movie illiterate, but I'm slowly trying to change that. Finally watched The Sting the other day. I can see why it's considered a classic. Not mindblowing, but thoroughly enjoyable in every regard. I'd say it's at least an 8.5 out of 10.
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

#102

Post by Ricochet »

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

Now, Voyager - link
To Kill a Mockingbird
Oh, classic era Hollywood... why do I fail to be enamoured with your style and apparent fixity in narration, discourse and art direction? What films must I experience to get the most out of it? The best part of the former movie was that it allowed me (however surprisingly late) to get acquainted with Bette Davis, which seems to be a marvellous acting presence, though even in this regard, it felt a bit like an "ugly duckling" type of movie, tailored to allow her to blossom and shine throughout three quarters of the movie; quite undecided also in its mix of psychological drama and more typical romance / marriage plot. It's somewhat enjoyable, but also stretching thin in certain aspects of plot and tension.

As for TKaM, which I wanted to at least check after having finished the novel, it was fairly plagued for me by the adaptation vs. original complex. It is no doubt adequate and has Gregory Peck as a domineering presence, but it only covers so much from a more ample (and yet, at all times satisfying) narration in the book, plus I felt certain distance watching the movie's set pieces, whereas the book was so immersive and personal, I felt like following the kids right along in their adventures. Also a curio, while I hardly pick up on technical issues, there were two scenes that made use of zooming or something. Wha? I mean, literally stretching the frame, till it got all pixelated. Made me chuckle, even if one of those scenes was not intended to have such an effect.

O sangue - link
From Portuguese director Pedro Costa, don't recall if I mentioned this or not (it was either this or his latest, highly hermetical and beckettian Horse Money, or both), but I rewatched this after a somewhat failed first viewing, last summer, while on holiday in Portugal. Simple, bleak and cheerless story about the poor life of two brothers who have to deal with their father passing, his debts and their uncle's attempts to force custody upon the younger of them. Plus a teenage love interest for the elderly brother, who simply accompanies them in their moody, drifting troubles. Brings a bit of French wave to it, it's shot in austere, unsentimental style, meant to weigh in on you and it seems the kind of story about misery that doesn't aspire to grand resolutions. Even so, I feel I did not manage to follow it all the through, despite its brevity.

Paris, Texas - link
Another rewatch, since I kept this movie in my folder for months, and oh my word, I may be in love with this one. It's long, but it flows so well throughout every act, especially the first and last being absolutely magnetic. And it has so much angst and grief, but not in a way you'd necessarily identify with (looking at you, Kurt Cobain), but just in a way that suits and pays off in the story. Perhaps this movie is also deceptively complex or at least heavily stylish, given how its main themes surface, in the end, layer by layer.

Divines - link
A French drama, by female French-Moroccan director Houda Benyamina, that showed up somewhere on a top year list and also got the Camera d'Or at Cannes. Coming-of-age story of two close friends, toughing it out in their slum life, although it gradually focuses more on the one that is a force of nature bottled up inside, ready to blow, willing to do anything to live larger: associate with the neighbourhood drug band and engage in various chore making for them or get to flirt with a stallion-like, equally wild tempered person from a ballet company (for you see - cue heavy insert of symbolism - these girls may be mean and street smart, but they still found a strange affinity for snooping in and watching contemporary dance). It's all very ecstatic and stylish, in the vein of Girlhood from one or two years ago, and it makes pretty good work of a young, rogue, extroverted main cast, plus it's, dare I say, feminist and empowering, but with this being said, the more it turned its energy and tension to eleventy-stupid, the less I felt engaged in this phantasy-like build of a story and drama. Plus it builds up all the way to a banging, devastating finale that I felt I could have anticipated with an hour in advance. And on this matter, it also feels like it's a finale I've seen before, only in a different setting and focusing on younger protagonists - it was called The Selfish Giant, by Clio Barnard, and it managed to reach to my heartstringers, with sort of the same stylishness and overt dramaticality, far, far deeper.

Recordações da Casa Amarela (Recollections of the Yellow House)
And finally for this week, another rewatch just to clear my movie folder of another Portuguese movie, this time by Joao Cesar Monteiro. I still can't describe this movie very well. It almost seems like a simple story or comedic farce about an idiot-like old man, musing throughout his daily life, full of sickness, darkly humorous banal interactions or happenings, fanciful hobbies, unrequited cheeky lust, until it nosedives into absurd, dada scenes throughout the last act. A mystery of a film statement, at least for me.
User avatar
Mongoose
Your Neighborhood Friendly Mongoose
Posts in topic: 14
Posts: 6079
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 8:52 pm
Location: Murder Park
Gender: Female
Preferred Pronouns: She/her/hers
Aka: Alison
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#103

Post by Mongoose »

The Good Night - 6/10 Has a heap of good people in it.

The Mignight Swim
- 8/10 - genre-bending character story with delicious supernatural undertones. I'm now obsessed with it!

Train to Busan
- 8/10 - tantalizingly Korean. Basically Zombie Strangers on a Train. Super intense tension.
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
ImageImage
ImageImageImage
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

#104

Post by Ricochet »

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

The Birth of a Nation (link), the heavily dramatized and partly historical depiction of the life of Nat Turner, an enslaved African American worker and preacher, who led a short-lived but echoing rebellion in the mid-19th Century. It's hard to judge the movie after one sitting, but at the same time, it's hard to tell how soon the second viewing might come. It's a directorial debut from Nat Parker and that in itself may be the source of both admirable and less good things about it. It has the passion to lay out a thorough, epic story and experience, but also the uneven ambition to hit all the high notes of drama and visual candy on max. It's grand, but also lavish and pompous at times. It sort of wants to be both 12 Years of Slave, in nuancing the scale of good and evil, prejudice and righteousness, (small) fortunes and (great) injustice, inside the universe of slavery, and Django Unchained, in building it up to a revenge plot, plus something alike Braveheart, in the tragic moral trials and emphatic defiance of the leading hero. It centers so heavily on Nat Turner, it blurs the lines between character study and iconography - not to mention between Nat Turner the character and Nat Parker the actor that wants to, again, hit all the notes. It no doubt wants to be a political statement, in addition to its typical biographical powerhouse drama - with its cheeky borrow of a title from Griffith's 1915's heavily racist movie and the feeling of surfing the current period of racial insecurity and Black Lives Matter wave. It doesn't shy away from depicting tragedy, cruelty and horrors, but it does shy away, as far as I understand, from certain or complete accuracies. So all in all, a both standard and questionable drama. Notable, yet flawed.

Tickled (link), a documentary with some buzz I figured I should check out. I see that its trailer is fairly generous in giving you some ideas of what happens, so up to a point I feel I can describe it without getting it spoiled - plus the documentary did / should prove rewarding in its further reveals, as well. Basically, a New Zealander journalist in search of a new bizzare/funny entertainment scoop comes across a site dedicated to "Competitive Endurance Tickling", only to be met with adversity and both legal and social harassment from the mysterious owners. At which point he decides to investigate in full and document the whole process on camera. One element missing the most is the cinematic flair, which I feel some recent documentaries were able to bring in equal measures to their content, so it relies on the investigative format and efforts above all else. But in this regard, it's one hell of a pandora box opened from a mere curiosity for a ha-ha material, revealing the extents of a business' power and bullying, plus some uncanny levels of human fetishism, injustice and sociopathy that may unknowingly surround us in the world.

===

Then, continuing from last week, another couple of rewatches, that either didn't work or didn't move me the previous times, yet were kept in my folder since:

Der Himmer über Berlin (Wings of Desire) (link), another 80s movie by Wim Wenders (I talked about Paris, Texas last week), with an imaginative, humane close-up of the lives of inhabitants of West Berlin, still divided at that time - guardian angels living amongst the humans, eavesdropping to their desires, problems, insecurities, or even getting immersed themselves in their lifestyle. Sounds so poetic and fantasy-like, I should love it, and yet it feels like a two-hour long drag, plus makes me wonder if it is that rich of a human introspection and urban ode. 'Cause somehow, I'm not feeling it.

Bergman's Winter Light (link), third attempt. Still not ready to put a colour on it, but it's improving with each viewing. Right now, I'm a bit shaken by the intricacy of human expressions and meanings in most scenes, gestures or script passages. As if the whole movie is subliminal towards deeper messages (and the answer to that is probably yes). In some cases, making me wonder if it's full sarcasm or just incertitude towards faith that's being suggested via a certain line of dialogue or expression. But the movie certainly projects an inner inquest over religion and the trials of human love, compassion and guidance.

Yoidore tenshi (Drunken Angel) (link), an early Kurosawa movie and the first of his to star Toshiro Mifune. It's incredible to think how inspired Kurosawa was to audition and cast Mifune, given that the latter exhibited already so much fiery skills and swagger, as a tough-acting and reckless, yet soul-suffering and disease-stricken lad. Furthermore, there's so much electricity in the interactions between him and a choleric, yet good-hearted doctor (Takashi Shimura) who wants to aid him. Alas, as the later acts develop, with more elements of yakuza conflict and endless backs and forths of the protagonist's recovery and perdition, meant to emphasize a tragic plot, it still can't hold my attention all the way through. The movie also has inserts of imported Western cultural elements that are supposedly meant to be politically charged, since this was made during the occupation years.

===

Finally, a new movie called Certain Women (link), which quite literally anthologizes, short story like (and the original source for this film does indeed seem to be a book in that format), three tales of, uhm, certain women (played by Laura Dern, Michelle Williams, Kirsten Stewart and Lily Gladstone), each having to cope either with work-related challenges, family issues, loneliness or existential stress. Their storylines are supposed to be also intertwined, but honestly, the connections are so minor, I doubt it's a serious element. If the movie was meant to be this slow-paced, intimate and weightless, highlighting the reverberations of human emotions in a more larger, more mundane setting encompassing them, that's all nice, but I struggled to find the richness and depth in this.
User avatar
DFaraday
Money Launderer
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2231
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 11:26 pm

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#105

Post by DFaraday »

Finally saw Girl on the Train. It's atmospheric, has good acting all around and adapts the book's structure well enough for film. My enjoyment was probably hampered by having read the book first, so nothing came as a surprise to me and I was waiting for the inevitable. Still, I can't fault the writing or editing for that, so I'd give it 8/10.
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
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

#106

Post by thellama73 »

I saw the Founder on Saturday. I intend to write a detailed review of it tomorrow, but I liked it. It was refreshingly complex and defies a one-sided interpretation.
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
User avatar
Vompatti
Loan Shark
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2903
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:46 pm
Location: Finalnd
Contact:

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#107

Post by Vompatti »

The last movie I saw was The Woman in the Dunes but I don't think I enjoyed it as much as I should have. So I give 8/10 to the movie and 4/10 to myself. :beer:
When the horse panics or something goes wrong, remain calm and reassure the horse.

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

#108

Post by Ricochet »

Vompatti wrote:The last movie I saw was The Woman in the Dunes but I don't think I enjoyed it as much as I should have. So I give 8/10 to the movie and 4/10 to myself. :beer:
8/10 is pretty high and quite the opposite of something you don't think you enjoying as much as you should have k. :beer:

I'd say 7/10 and I enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed the book.
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

#109

Post by Ricochet »

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

So my new week of movie-watching proved quite the Oscarbait fest, especially given the predictable-in-all-regards nominations that were announced, but before I slash err dive into them with my much-to-be-expected cynicism and niggling, let me quickly mention a carry over from the previous week, that I forgot to write anything about, a 2014 adaptation of Madame Bovary (link), done with precious, pedantic filmmaking, but coming off uninspiring and rather dull - plus settling for a disorienting mix of English accents, which to disconnect from any possible original book flavor. Now, I understand empathy (or lack of) towards the protagonist and her condition / tragic story is a debatable issue in the novel, nevertheless I still felt the movie achieved the wrong notes on that. There is some distancing effect in the scenic and social boredom that's portrayed, but it almost veers into navalgazing, followed in the last act by pretty run-of-the-mill overdramatic crescendos. Mia Wasikowska's performance is kinda frost and all the men around her are complete no faces, whether it was Lloyd-Hughes who might have worked too hard on getting the most-boring-man-on-the-planet act right, the hipster romantic Ezra Miller or the prince macho Logan Marshall-Green. Perhaps one exception was Rhys Ifans, as the web-spinning, cold conniving Monsieur Lheureux. Yeah, I'll put him down as the MVP in this case.

====

Now, while I still have a few more movies to check, the internet has blessed with enough screeners this week to ascertain that Hollywood has outdone itself to be even more lackluster with its awards season crop than last year. Even the ones that I did like from this list feel a bit like getting a bye, due to how much there is to complain about the rest.

Hacksaw Ridge (link), Mel Gibson's return to directing and (given the reputation slump he's been during the past years) big-budget, accolade-grabbing works, adapting the story of Desmond Doss, a conscientous objector who enlisted despite his beliefs during WWII and served and saved lives straight on the battlefield of Okinawa. This topic honestly makes perfect material for both inspirational biopic-making and, given that it's Gibson we're talking about, war movie gruesomeness - and this combination is fairly straight. All the dramatic tropes and cheese are inserted to quickly cover Doss' life, romantic interests and moral challenges in joining the military, after which it's queasy time, as the war act unfolds with graphic violence and hecticism, Doss even disappearing for a while from the center of attention, until returning for his main shot, Oscar please grand climax. There's talk about how, for a movie centered on moral objections towards war and violence, Gibson's delights for gritty, bloody imagery almost thwart that message - and it's hard to argue against that. Andrew Garfield comes off a bit hammy in the biographical stages, but once thrown in the battle zone, I found his energy and acting much better. The movie also periodically makes you suffer through Vince Vaughn with his serious-acting-face on. Aaarrrrrrrrrggggggghhh. All in all, given that his last film, 10 yeas ago, was the controversial, but substantial and unique Apocalypto, this one feels quite lazy and drenched in cheap Gibsonian moves.

Hidden Figures (link) Honest, simple movie on the story of several African-American women scientists who rose to significant contributions in NASA's Space Program during the early 60s Space Race and later on. In the Oscars' narrow spectrum of what constitutes an Oscar-worthy movie, I'd rank this as the "Hallmark Channel type" (think Trumbo last year or My Week With Marilyn a while ago), nonetheless there's some sense of balance in covering the lifestories, the racial frictions of the period, the sentimental tones of the protagonists' conflicts or the strong acting. Guaranteed crowd-pleaser, but will I remember it in a month's time, even? No I won't. Can't lie about that.

Jackie (link), which started as a Venice Filmfest contender, but it was quite inevitable to end up in the Oscars' race as well (though it may have gotten less attention than expected - only Actress, Costume and Score nods). It covers with kaleidoscopic narrative jumps a fragment from Jackie Kennedy's life, between JFK's assassination, dealing with the aftermath of it, his funerals and opening up to the media (her Life interview with Theodore H. White). Given that it's made by Chilean director Pablo Larrain, there are certain good things you could expect: some degree of visual stylistic prowess (stemming all the way back to his 2012 pretty great No, which was intentionally shot to capture the 80s televisual period style; here, there is also a visual sheen that allows for smooth transitions between fictional movie scenery and original media footage) and some elements of a non-standard approach to creating a biopic. Then again, it was also bound to be more mainstream and have soft touches, compared to his arthouse, unflinchingly bitter El Club (which I reviewed a while ago). If you're ready to say this has Oscarbait written all over it, I would say Natalie Portman does an honest hard work and approximation in her acting and the directorial approach is also indiscriminate between honoring the former First Lady's persona and challenging the concepts of her public image, grace, grief and pretension, at the same time. But since the whole movie centers around a Life interview that even its writer later disavowed (Wiki: "White later described his comparison of JFK to Camelot as the result of kindness to a distraught widow of a just-assassinated leader, and wrote that his essay was a "misreading of history."), it's hard to not imagine that this movie also has a serious spoonful of fantasy.

La La Land (link) is a fine musical. A great one even, if you happen to enjoy life, music, colors, romance, puppies, kittens, Les parapluies de Cherbourg, ice cream, chocolate, rainbows.

But for a different view on it, read it below in spoilers at your own discretion

[/Mongoose]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spoiler: show

this is its color btw

So here's the thing, every two or three years a musical is destined to get Oscarbuzz and I normally flat out refuse to care about and watch it. I just know they're almost surely handmade industry tokens. They're almost surely never meant to win big, but them being nominated is just there to force me(/you/us) to take them into consideration. Nah. It was probably Hairspray or Mamma Mia! that broke the camel's back for me. And since: have not seen Burlesque. Have not seen Les miserables. Have not seen Into the Woods. I recall a wonderful diatribe written by ProgArchives member Dean on why musicals suck by default and, while I haven't really reached that same level of dislike for the genre, La La Land incidentally made me chuckle at the thought that it would fail the test, according to Dean's standards, from the very first minutes, in which a traffic jam is transformed into a common man spectacle of merrymaking and street dancing.

But anyway, on to why I did watch La La Land after all -- now that it equaled the record for most Oscar nominations (alongside Titanic and All About Eve... some cinematic Everest level this is, geeeeeez), has the most serious shots at Best Picture since 2002's Chicago and, apart from the acting roles and some other categories that might slip out of contention, by God if it's not aiming for at least 7-9 statues -- it mostly has to do with Damien Chazelle and the interest he held up since Whiplash, a fervent piece of moviemaking, if arguable in its big message and delivery.

How was it then? Well, with all this Oscarbuzz around it, making it "the movie most likely to win given the Academy's self-infatuation", is sure to damage a bit of expectations and affection, but, for what it's worth, I can believe that Chazelle genuinely wanted to pull an epic, brash musical movie, with the elements he's most comfortable with: music, tributary forms to old art (and bloody hell are they plenty, from musicals alone!!), self-realization narratives, pizzazz filmmaking. Problem is, it ends so jacked and jazzed up [pun intended] that it seems a braggadocio effort.

Here's what worked: I didn't feel the usual strain, towards the action and the actors' abilities, to push everything into musical territory. It was still a competent, normal flowing drama, without trying to transpose every significant fragment into an aria. Indeed, except the heavy first 15 minutes or so, I felt it's quite musical light - or at least it often fused its musical numbers with other genres, like jazz, orchestral, dance etc. I kinda appreciated this. I kinda appreciated that the leads' voices were not overworked to pitch perfection.

-- In between this and the following category I'd place Emma Stone. I think she pulled the better effort here: quirky, sarcastic, bitter, emotional at various times, but vibrant through and through. --

Here's what made me feel nothing: a) it wasn't entrancing; it was a spectacle alright, but it wasn't entrancing; there were truly some moments, some seconds in which the mix of music, acting, coreography and scenery clicked and felt wonderful, but that was it; b) the American Dream fantasy storyline was quite thin and as much as the genre required; c) equally so, its technical and stylistic merits are all in there, bursting with both finesse and grandeur, but also being as artificial as the genre/industry normally demands it

Here's what's debatable from it: a) the romance chemistry - I would neither say it exists, nor that it doesn't. The Stone - Gosling coupling did not surprise me, since it is so overplayed by now (Stupid Crazy Love, Gangster something) and I think it's more an issue with Gosling playing the smug type so much that creates dissonance from a typical lovey-dovey mindframe; so if you'll expect the soulmatey type of romance connection, you'll likely be disappointed; if you like a more realistic romance, generated by shared dreams and goals, but also challenged by life and emotional hardships, this could make more sense to you; b) the amount of originality vs tributing; the movie can hardly breathe under its own glossy, tattooed with decades of musical history skin; c) the amount of elements that could be described as "subverting the tropes", like the mundane storytelling, the down-to-earth setting and ambitions of the characters, some of the deadpan twists in the romance's interactions and dialogue; they're present, but it just didn't click to me to the extent I feel Chazelle might have wanted to wow us with

Here's what fails: the preachiness (carried over from Whiplash, tbh) about true art forms (Jazz in Whiplash, for instance, meant only "muh Buddy Rich", here, jazz is reduced to namecalling Thelonious Monk and a few others; pretty disappointing elitism, if such); the feeling that this is a truly above average or even masterful product of its genre.
Manchester by the Sea (link) In light of having just cut deep into most of the movies above, you'll probably hate me for colouring this one a bit better, given that it's close to Infinite Sadness - The Movie, about a reclusive, divorced man with a troubled past who must deal with becoming the guardian of his nephew, once his brother passes away. One thing I was surprised is that I didn't recognize its director, Kenneth Lonergan, from his previous effort, Margaret, which I couldn't stand. This one fares slightly better, although the dramatic overtones feel just as implacable. Casey Affleck does a noteworthy performance on a multitude of shades of grey, so to speak: cloistered, bitter, mopey, grieving, profoundly depressed; quite small oscillations there. This is a slow burn of a story and while it could be labeled as "redemptory drama", it might still leave you wondering towards its end. You'd probably understand better if you saw it or will see it. Which you should. At least once.

And finally for this week, Moonlight (B- or maybe B color, idk yet) (link), the critically beloved three-part chronicle (literal transitions between child, adolescent and adult phases) of a black young man and his struggles with social inclusion and with his own sensitivities and sexual identity (hint: it's homosexuality). If there are movies I'd rewatch, it'd be probably be Jackie and this one. For one, it went by so fast, bewildering me with its soft, straight, but at the same time sparse, elliptical narrative. Sometimes it has more minutes of silence and visual-sensorial or gestical flickers than substantial dialogue. If that's meant to be the concentrated essence of this highly poetic and feeble movie, pretty sweet, but I still have to decide whether its themes are broad or archetypal.
User avatar
Golden
The Coward
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 20125
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#110

Post by Golden »

Everyone I know who went to see Laa Laa Land either walked out or wanted to, and said lots of other people did. My mother called it 'popular in Hollywood because they wrote a movie about themselves, but it just makes them look sad.'

We were going to go see it, but now we've changed our mind. It baffles me that I've had such a consistency of 'it's not very good' from people I know who've seen it, and it gets 14 Oscar nominations.

Rico, as for musicals - forget Burlesque, forget Into the Woods (it had its moments, but as a whole felt a little too much like a stage show on the screen). But Les Miserables was different for me, and still worth seeing, unless you know you don't like the story. I found Hugh Jackman transcendent and it remains the only time that Russell Crowe has ever managed to make me care about his character.
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Image
Canucklehead wrote:Civ Golden is a hurricane of self-assurance.
G-Man wrote: Coward
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

#111

Post by thellama73 »

Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
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
User avatar
Golden
The Coward
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 20125
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#112

Post by Golden »

thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Image
Canucklehead wrote:Civ Golden is a hurricane of self-assurance.
G-Man wrote: Coward
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

#113

Post by Ricochet »

Golden wrote:Everyone I know who went to see Laa Laa Land either walked out or wanted to, and said lots of other people did. My mother called it 'popular in Hollywood because they wrote a movie about themselves, but it just makes them look sad.'

We were going to go see it, but now we've changed our mind. It baffles me that I've had such a consistency of 'it's not very good' from people I know who've seen it, and it gets 14 Oscar nominations.
Yikes.

I don't think it's walk out or miss out material, despite the criticism, although it's up to any moviegoer, of course. You could also certainly wait for a home release a few months from now, if that's yer thing, although you'd then be stuck with a purchase you may not like, rather than a movie showing that simply did not deliver.
Golden wrote: Rico, as for musicals - forget Burlesque, forget Into the Woods (it had its moments, but as a whole felt a little too much like a stage show on the screen). But Les Miserables was different for me, and still worth seeing, unless you know you don't like the story. I found Hugh Jackman transcendent and it remains the only time that Russell Crowe has ever managed to make me care about his character.
Didn't say I'm unaware of stuff that went on in the movie or a few scenes. I just didn't sat down to watch it in full. Crowe's performance is... either ballsy or no-fucks-given. Tho not sure what the difference would be, in his case.
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

#114

Post by thellama73 »

Golden wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?
Javert's whole deal is that he has been brought up to believe that the law is everything. Absolute enforcement of the law is the only moral good. If you break the law, you are bad and must be punished. No exceptions. The amazing conflict in the character comes when his experience with Jean Valjean is utterly irreconcilable with this view. The man who is so unambiguously noble and good, who is willing to sacrifice himself to save others, who spares Javert's life when he has the opportunity even though he has spent most of his life being pursued and persecuted by him, presents a shattering conflict with his entire worldview. He can't handle that, and it ultimately destroys him. Javert is not an evil villain, but someone who has spent his entire life pursuing what he believes is the ultimate good, only to be forced to recognize that he may have been wrong.

I can't remember all the details of Crowe's performance. It's been a while since I saw the movie. But one scene in particular I thought was indefensible. Javert witness the death of the young boy Gavroche in the revolution, and sheds a tear for the lad. This was apparently added at the insistence of Crowe, not the screenwriter, and it's completely out of character. Javert would have had no sympathy for a revolutionary killed defying the law. He would have regarded the outcome as just and right. That Crowe wanted to add that to make the character more sympathetic indicates to me thta he missed the whole point.
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
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

#115

Post by thellama73 »

I should add that I regard Javert as one of the greatest, most interesting characters in all fiction, so I was perhaps more invested in the portrayal than I otherwise would have been.
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
User avatar
Golden
The Coward
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 20125
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Rate the last movie you've seen

#116

Post by Golden »

thellama73 wrote:
Golden wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Les Miserables is one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite musicals, but I was very unhappy with Russell Crowe's interpretation of Javert. I feel he missed the point of the character entirely.
Did you? well, what would you say is essential to the character of javert?
Javert's whole deal is that he has been brought up to believe that the law is everything. Absolute enforcement of the law is the only moral good. If you break the law, you are bad and must be punished. No exceptions. The amazing conflict in the character comes when his experience with Jean Valjean is utterly irreconcilable with this view. The man who is so unambiguously noble and good, who is willing to sacrifice himself to save others, who spares Javert's life when he has the opportunity even though he has spent most of his life being pursued and persecuted by him, presents a shattering conflict with his entire worldview. He can't handle that, and it ultimately destroys him. Javert is not an evil villain, but someone who has spent his entire life pursuing what he believes is the ultimate good, only to be forced to recognize that he may have been wrong.
This is exactly what I felt Crowe portrayed incredibly well. Interesting how we have such different views of his performance.

Take your point on the tear for Gavroche, though. But I have no problem with Javert shedding a tear for what he sees as senseless criminality and people even bringing children into a life of rebellion - a tear for the failings of humanity, rather than sympathy for the individual.
Spoiler: show
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Image
Canucklehead wrote:Civ Golden is a hurricane of self-assurance.
G-Man wrote: Coward
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

#117

Post by Ricochet »

I forgot to note the score for Jackie, which was done by Mica Levi, British classical composer, and also stands out a bit in the movie. Atypical at times, not the smoothest or most traditional accompaniment to scenes unfolding and maybe not as otherwordly as Under the Skin, but still good.
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

#118

Post by G-Man »

Last movie I saw was Rogue One. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5, which is the same score I gave to The Force Awakens (though they each arrived at that score for different reasons).

As for Les Mis, it's my wife's favorite musical and I thought I was taking one for the team by going to see it with her but it was great. Hugh Jackman gave the performance of his career and deserved the Oscar. But no, the Academy loves Daniel Day Lewis and his selectivity. Lincoln was lukewarm Oscar bait and DDL winning was their way to make the Academy look like it cared about social issues.

Anyway, I too felt that Javert was under-developed. He came across as the flattest of the main characters, which is not something you want in a good antagonist. That and Crowe was the worst singer in the lot for me. A song or two and some scowls wasn't enough to convey the conflict he was feeling.
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

#119

Post by Ricochet »

Heh, Dragoniel D.ay Lewffis was easily the best thing about Lincoln. But I can agree that, out of the three Oscars he received, this felt like the easiest one handed out. That year's Best Acting should have easily, easily gone to Joaquin Phoenix for The Master, but it was 2deep4Academy. Don't know how he does it, but almost all Phoenix's recent roles (The Master, Her, Inherent Vice, less so Irrational Man) have been nothing short of transcendental.
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

#120

Post by Ricochet »

A much lighter list this week, due to certain events and business that kept me busy during the evenings. Wrapping up my major Oscar season binge first and then moving on to other recent films on my watchlist.

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

Lion (link) Strange late bloomer (premiered at Toronto in September, yet screened in theaters only starting November in the US and January elsewhere) to have garnered critical buzz and end up with multiple Academy nominations, including Best Picture - enough to turn to me into a headshaker and have me believe it has Weinstein's lobbying fingerprints all over it. Thing is, it's not even half bad as an inspirational movie (even if it eventually drops into full melodrama) -- a young poor Indian boy, scrapping for coal with his brother, that gets accidentally separated from his family, getting lost in a deadheading train thousands of miles away from home, ending up on the streets, in an orphanage, then adopted by an Australian family, only to later, as a young adult, try to track down his family -- but I have not detected any details that would set it apart from the usual heartstring-tuggers that are churned. Plus, I went into this movie knowing nothing and yet, halfway through, I started sensing it had "based on a true story" written all over it, which proved to be the case. Dev Patel as the adult protagonist does a creditable job in acting gradually obsessed and consumed by his desire to reconnect with his homeplace, although I wouldn't say his range as that is particularly big, plus he nosedives along with the movie into emotional cheese during the last 10 minutes or so; Nicole Kidman, as the adoptive mother, does nothing whatsoever to warrant an Oscar Nomination; heck, even the less visible Rooney Mara is slightly more notable as Patel's sympathetic, if frustrated by his shut in feelings, girlfriend. Apart from any critical view and standards, this should prove an enjoyable, heartfelt movie, but given all its buzz right now, nah, you would have to consider it as slight bait just as much.

Silence (might go up to B, who knows) (link) - oh, toughie one here: impossible to rate after a first watch, but at the same time demanding to sit again through its three hours, anytime soon; has the hallmarks of beautiful, erudite, epic Scorsese, but also feels like it doesn't quite have the overall focus to reach deep into artistic and philosophic profundity. Some of you may have read that this was a long-time, long-postponed passion project for Scorsese, ever since making The Last Temptation of Christ - which I would wholeheartedly recommend, even if it might set on flames the blasphemy-o-meter for more religious people around here; it has without doubt true cinematic virtues - and while it is a far less "agnostic" religious movie than that one, it still deals with themes related to the trials of fate. Its synopsis is quite simple: two Jesuit priests (Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver) go to Japan, during its difficult 17th Century climate of hunting down and persecuting Christian priests and converted locals, in search for their mentor (Liam Neeson), upon hearing news that he might have apostatized. The movie starts with the two priests both pursuing their goal and fulfilling their mission to propagate the faith further, after which it focuses more and more with Garfield's character's own predicaments of facing persecution. The movie is not devoid of some rather convenient moves from Scorsese: the casting of familiar faces (Garfield, Driver, Neeson); the odd intent to cast the priests as Portuguese, yet lazily resort to mostly everyone in the movie, even the Japanese characters, speaking English; the expected maxing of violence and emotional or devotional despair. On the bright side, though, its Japanese supporting cast seems extraordinarily strong and the narrative, despite its extreme stretch, could be described as holding up quite well. Overall, if any of you are familiar and felt that his previous Wolf of Wall Street was too on the nose with its opulence and Scorsesian cheekiness, this might come off as a much more pious, thoughtful and balanced movie. I still have to decide, though, if it's meant to be up there with his finest. Not quite the believer on that matter.

Under the Shadow (link). Did a bit of a sloppy watch with this one, but here are my first impressions. British-produced Iranian psychological horror movie about a mother and a daughter having to cope not only with the war terrors and perils during the Iran-Iraq 80s war, but with evil spirits hauting their home. This movie could be easily catalogued along with the new wave of smart(er), abstract, less-is-more horror films such as The Babadook, Goodnight, Mommy or It Follows. In fact, I feel it could be easily dubbed as "The Babadook of Tehran", since it works with and delivers a straight haunt movie narrative, but one which could also translate into the distraught relationships within the family. Contrary to the The Babadook, I'd add that this movie did arguably have some actual, decent, well-timed scares. I liked it, especially for a few memorable scenes, including one in which the mother relentlessly, ritualistically works out at home to some VHS tapes of Jane Fonda aerobics, but did I like like it, I wonder? Who knows. If you want your horrors to be a full on spectacle of spookoo, even if riddled with clichés, this might not satisfy your need, but if you appreciate the less-is-more wiser approach, you should check it out.

Allied (link), a new Robert Zemeckis, starring Brad Le Pitts and Marion Cotillard in a romantic WWII / spy thriller mashup, one rather remembered by the critics for its shortcomings and its Casablanca-styled imitative aspirations. Yet I have to say, I went into this expecting nothing but woeful, forgettable cheeseball, and it turned out a much more decent experience... at least until the cheeseballs were indeed served. Its first act, in which Le Pitts infiltrates as a secret agent in occupied France and is matched up in fake marriage with Cotillard's character, so they can plot and carry a high profile assassination, is strong and charming - with particularly seductive, assured acting from Cotillard. I would even applaud the extensive language training that Le Pitts seemed to have undertaken for this role (as opposed to, say, his (likely intentional) half-assed dialects in Inglorious Basterds). Even Cotillard's English has improved or at least focused greatly. Sadly though, once the Casablanca affair concludes, they get romantically involved and relocate to Britain, it switches to a spy story on how Cotillard might be a double agent after all, and the thriller goes quite dour, mainly because the focus is taken away from Cotillard's magnetic, swaying presence and cast on Le Pitts, who suddenly couldn't be more stiff in acting out the emotional and tactical complications of this possible betrayal. So I found it rather sad that the movie did not hold up at all in the end.

And finally, I rewatched Villeneuve's Arrival. I just gave it a 6 on IMdB (mind you, though, my "quite good / real good" scale is usually at 7 over there), which feels like a step back in appreciation, but I would say it's because a) I don't think it's as well done and valuable as Sicario, for instance (not to mention Enemy, his arthouse-iest delight) and b) my mood has been embittered by the overall quality of Oscar season this year. Might bump it to 7 in the future, idk. One thing I feared this second watch was that, having experienced its big finale twist once, it wouldn't feel the same the second time. Fortunately, I can report that, while that may be an issue upon repeated views, the movie still holds up and I even felt less jumpy and eyebrow-raising at some of its twisted logic revelations than I felt in the theater, the first time. That's gotta count as a positive, right?
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.
Post Reply

Return to “Tinsel Town”