Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Here - This was too sentimental for me. The movie plays out in a a single place, in multiple time spans, ranging from the dinosaurs, the asteroid impact, the ice ages, the colonial era and down to some version of recent time.

People are born and die here, as do dinosaurs. Hanks and Wright are married characters, waning with age and dementia. They lived most of their lives in this house...births and deaths, good times and not-so-good, met challenges, and somehow managed to stay together, not to mention, redecorate that same room a bunch of times

The movie is heavy with seeming heartfelt emotion, to the point that I got overdosed. I basically agreed with the sentiment, but it was poured on too thick for me. My movie partner, generally more sentimental than I am, agreed. We see Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, as well as some supporting characters, at many different ages, wearing many kinds of presumably digital makeup.

By the time it was over, I was wishing for those dinosaurs to stomp on that house.

By scanned from the DVD cover, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=13199933

As Tears Go By - (1988)

You've got to start somewhere, but there are enough flashes of brilliance in this first feature from Wong Kar-wai that it's imperfections don't seem to matter too much. He's especially gifted at grafting a love story into your average gangster crime film narrative - Andy Lau and Maggie Cheung have serious chemistry as star-crossed lovers Wah and Ngor. Wah's main purpose in life is to protect his idiotic brother Fly (Jacky Cheung), who is so desperate to prove himself on the streets that he keeps finding himself in deep trouble. You can see where it's all leading, but it's no less compelling for that. I loved the Cantonese version of "Take My Breath Away", and I'm surprised at how well adapted Wong Kar-wai already is to his chosen genre, and how you can already see the development of what we'd get from him in later films.

Next up is Days of Being Wild (1990)

8/10


By The Weinstein Company - imdb.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56852175

Clerks II - (2006)

I don't know what to say but...I liked this? I liked this. I'm sorry. I apologize to all of those who have a certain reverence for Clerks and found this sequel to be inferior and lacking in what made the first film special. I never really fell in love with Clerks and have a general dislike for Kevin Smith's films, but for some reason this really clicked with me and I found it to be pretty damn funny and perhaps too solid a movie in all departments to feel as anarchic and rule-breaking as Smith's famous debut. I mean, the circumstances are so different - but I guess some would have liked to have seen the guy try to film this on a $100,000 budget instead of $5 million (which was still considered extremely low-budget for the kind of attention-getting property this would be.) I get it, but all the same it had already been done. I enjoyed this as a regular comedy, and compared to many that are out there it still felt fresh and well-written. It actually made me feel like watching the original again, perhaps seeing it in a new light. I'd read so much hate directed at this that I was expecting something soulless and empty - but it didn't feel that way at all. It has something to say and it's damn funny - I like it more than the original... at the moment anyway.

7.5/10

__________________

The Revenge of Frankenstein - This was an unexpected watch. I ran across it on youtube and had no idea it was a Hammer Production. But it starred Peter Cushing and turned out to be the direct sequel to The Curse of Frankenstein. Anyone who has watched that would have thought it put an end to Cushing's character of Baron Frankenstein but I suppose the opportunity to turn a profit is too powerful. Hence the Baron is back and operating under the name Stein in the town of Carlsbruck. He's successful to the point where the local medical council considers him a threat. Having recognized his true identity one of it's junior members approaches Dr. Stein and blackmails him into taking him on as an apprentice. And so the stage is set for more bizarre experimentation with stray body parts being gathered and brains being transplanted.

I thought this was a bit slow moving with not a lot going on but it does have exemplary reviews and is lauded as one of the better entries in the Hammer/Frankenstein catalogue. I did enjoy being able to check off another entry in my Hammer film watching and Cushing, as always, is money in the bank.

75/100

On Dangerous Ground (1951, Nic Ray) - A-

__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below

http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201

Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part One (2023)

Tom still doing crazy sh*t in his 60s. Gotta give the man his props...he doesn't half ass it. This film however is the weakest of the new batch since he rebooted the franchise in 2011. It felt bloated and clunky imo. Too many characters a bunch felt useless. Cartoonish plot line imo. If I had to hear "the key" one more time. Listen it's entertaining enough to give it a watch but this one felt a bit silly and arduous to get through at points. Maybe it will come together in the next one but I can't say I am going be jumping at the bit to see a part 2 of this one. I just thought this was a bit of a messy miss.

__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)

I finally got around to finishing Big Clock. I found it to be a great film from top to bottom. I wouldn't say any part stood out as excellent although I wouldn't say any part was at all bad. I thought it was really well done with a satisfactory, albeit a little short, ending. It's a solid film noir, and I'm glad I took the time to watch it.

__________________
I destroyed the dastardly dairy dame! I made mad milk maid mulch!

Grand Illusion (1937)

__________________

[ J ] - [ S ] - [ F ]

Finished up with Maxxine and it's about the same as the other two in the series. I'm not really into 'stabby stabby' stuff, but I do enjoy crime stories, so that quality was a draw. Good work from Goth and Kevin Bacon. 3 out of 5

Before that... The Long Darkness (1972) Directed by Kei Kumai - some fantastic camera work, nice visuals - I really liked the heartfelt story, though it piles on the misery, and that wore me down after a spell (I get it, these are the damned).

Though set over several days and months, it's kind of like a depressed Before Sunrise, where you watch this couple talk and walk and get to know one another. I do hope they can break the family cycle of unrelenting sorrow, but probably not, ♫ life's a piece of sh--- when you look at it. ♫ But maybe they'll find some joy, too. 4 out of 5

__________________
My Three B's: Bunuel, Brando, and Blanchett

El Hoyo 2 - (2024)

Terrible. 2/10

__________________
There has been an awekening.... have you felt it?

Inside Out 2 (2024)


Rewatch, and its still probably my favorite animated movie of the year over Wild Robot...probably.

A Real Young Girl (1976) Watched on Criterion Channel. Catherine Breillat directs this frank coming of age drama about a 14 year old girl exploring her body and fantasies. This is very much a Catherine Breillat film. It's weird, icky, and pervy. It's also beautiful, provocative, compelling, and features a fantastic and fierce performance from Charlotte Alexandra. Like most Breillat films, this is not for everyone, but if you appreciate her vision and themes, this is a must see for Breillat films.

Under Siege, 1992


As a batman forever fan and tommy lee jones fan---this film sticks out to me because of TLJ's (villain) character. His character in this film feels like a two face without the makeup. Of course this movie comes before batman forever but i feel like im watching a backstory of how harvey became who he was in an alternate timeline if you will. Tommey lee Jones acting in under siege is amazing, you can see how bad he is and everytime i watch Batman forever after siege plays i feel their connected yet their nothing alike and they aren't related. 5 stars for story and development of the good and bad guys all around.

__________________

Ok, decided to take a 2nd look at the movie, still came away with the same concerns as I had before.

Before going into that, I do want to reiterate that Jacques Audiard really does seem to be trying to address important social issues, happening in Mexico right now, mostly the disappearance of hundreds of thousands of people due to widespread violence.

I can heartily commend the film for its good intentions while still maintaining some reservations about the ways in which he has gone about doing that; even in Mexico, some people have become irritated by what they see as "cultural colonialism" - a French director taking his personal concerns and using Mexico as the backdrop for expressing them.

Whether or not one feels that is a valid criticism, the fact is that the movie still remains very much one that feels more like an international co-production than anything else; outside of a few establishing shots, it feels like very little of it was actually shot in Mexico. Most of the movie looks like it could have been shot on a small soundstage pretty much anywhere in the world (some online research suggests most of the movie was filmed in France).

Having said that, the performances from all three leads remain pretty powerful, and the movie as a whole tends to be a mostly positive experience. The chances remain pretty high that it will win at least the Best International Feature Oscar, as well as one or more acting awards.

If you plan on watching the movie, do bear in mind that the overall causes it champions are definitely very real, while the overall story and plot developments still remain more like something out of a telenovela; the characters as written like much psychological depth, and yet the performances themselves are really quite good.

Late Spring (1949) 9.75
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...04#post2503904

Damsel -

This is a subpar fantasy flick that may satisfy your craving for the genre in the short term but will leave you hungry for something better. Millie Bobby Brown is quite good as Princess Elodie, always giving you the impression she is trying to elevate the material. The same goes for director Fresnadillo (28 Weeks Later) for how he similarly tries to turn this into a work of art despite of Netflix's demands to stick to the algorithm. The visuals are cheesy on the whole, especially the dragon's, but my overall impression is positive thanks to the much less cheesy-looking magical glow worms taking up residence in the dragon’s lair and Portugal's natural beauty. Unfortunately, the positives are marred by the movie being too predictable and for insulting your intelligence too much. If you have any familiarity with this genre, whether via movies or video games, your early guesses as to where it will go will likely be right. On top of that, it gets there in a way that hopes you're looking at your phone most of the time because characters repeatedly make uncharacteristically dumb decisions. Elodie knows what will put her in the dragon's crosshairs, but she does it anyway, while the dragon has multiple opportunities to turn her into ashes but conveniently does not take them, for instance. Also, the supporting cast of Ray Winstone, Angela Bassett and Robin Wright may have also enticed you, but I ended up feeling embarrassed for all of them.

If this writeup seems generic - well, moreso - it's because the movie does too, both as a member of its genre and in general. I can't help but think Netflix produced it solely so there would be an option if you filter on “fantasy” while browsing their catalog. Its aesthetics are the best thing going for it, so if you're also a fan of them and more willing to stomach all of the above, it may be worth your time. However, you would be better off queuing up an Enya playlist and browsing a Frank Frazetta coffee table book for the same length of time instead.

SF = Z

Viewed: Blu-ray


[Snooze Factor Ratings]:
Z = didn't nod off at all
Zz = nearly nodded off but managed to stay alert
Zzz = nodded off and missed some of the film but went back to watch what I missed
Zzzz = nodded off and missed some of the film but went back to watch what I missed but nodded off again at the same point and therefore needed to go back a number of times before I got through it...
Zzzzz = nodded off and missed some or the rest of the film but was not interested enough to go back over it

Just saw this mentioned on the forum last week and thought it sounded great. It's definitely my kind of film and I was constantly engaged. Very good performances and it's a pleasure visually. Although it tries, I thought it was missing that wow factor, and this is the type of film that needs that. Therefore I don't think it'll be extremely memorable. I thought there was a homage to the opening Pulp fiction diner scene, and another to a scene from Goodfellas, but I read some reviews afterwards and I didn't see anything mentioned. Maybe it was just me? Wifey also enjoyed it but also thought it fell short of being great.

Double Indemnity (1944, Billy Wilder) - A+

The Man I Love (1947, Raoul Walsh) - B

Important ethical issues are raised in a perfunctory manner and a talented cast is mostly wasted in Clint Eastwood's Juror #2, one of the most tedious movies he has made in his long career as a filmmaker.

First of all, if you haven't heard of this movie, that may be largely due to the fact that Eastwood's long-time studio, WB, pretty much dumped this in a handful of theaters over the weekend, with little or no publicity, and has no plans to expand the movie to more theaters.

Curiously, it is the 2nd movie in a row for WB that features the number "2" in its title and involves a lot of tedious courtroom drama; both movies also happen to have been financial disasters for the studio.

The film stars Nicholas Hoult, Zoey Deutch, Toni Collette, Chris Messina, J. K. Simmons, and Kiefer Sutherland, with very good supporting roles for actors that I have long admired, namely Leslie Bibb as a jury foreperson and Amy Aquino as the judge in the case.

How could such a great cast be so incredibly wasted?

It would be impossible to discuss at length all of the screenplay's weak spots and the numerous plot holes or implausibilities, without also going into some serious spoilers (I didn't watch the trailer before watching the movie so I can't say how much it spoils).

I'll just say that people in real life do not sound or behave like some of the characters in the movie. And there's a heck of a lot of holes in the arguments of the prosecutor that even a hack lawyer would have examined a heck of a lot more assiduously than what you get in the movie.

In some ways, it almost plays like a movie that could have been made in the 1940s, except it doesn't have the cynicism of some of the best 40s movies. The mind boggles at the amazing things that someone like Billy Wilder or Fred Zinnemann could have done with this material.

As the case proceeds in a series of interminable courtroom scenes, it becomes clear that this movie isn't even remotely connected to anything that could happen in real life, especially in this day and age. The actors try their level best, but they can't sell a story as phony and unconvincing as this one.

In the case of Juror #2, the verdict is unavoidable: this movie deserves a life sentence as streaming content, without the possibility of awards consideration.