Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

[Hawki]

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (7/10)

Somehow I've gone through life being exposed to Planet of the Apes parodies and memes, yet this is the first actual Planet of the Apes film I've actually seen.

Anyway, it's good. Not great, but good. Not sure why it generated the hype it did. I mean, the themes are fine ("messing around with nature is a bad idea," "cruelty begets cruelty," "humans aren't as removed from our primate counterparts as we might think"), the characters are...fine, sort of, the plot is fine, the climax is fine, it's...fine. Honestly, there's not really much I could say about this film that hasn't been said already. Though I will point out that the plot point of a virus leaking from a lab that leads to the downfall of human civilization between films is probably a parellel with 2021 that the film makers didn't intend, but hey, what do I know?

(I also know that there was no manned mission to Mars in the 2010s. Seriously, the film is simultaniously trying to be down to earth, giving a plausible explanation of the apes' 'rise', but is simultaniously throwing a manned mission to Mars at the same time, because hey, forshadowing.)

 

[Thaluikhain]

Aquaman. DC films are almost as bad as Marvel one, but their characters just tend towards being painfully unfunny, rather than reprehensible.

Aquaman stuck lots of visually exciting stuff into a movie they didn't bother getting writers for. Same old.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Aquaman. DC films are almost as bad as Marvel one, but their characters just tend towards being painfully unfunny, rather than reprehensible.

Aquaman stuck lots of visually exciting stuff into a movie they didn't bother getting writers for. Same old.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the one who admitted on these forums to not liking superhero movies? I may be confusing you with someone else, but if not, what made you put yourself through the wringer to watch this one? Nothing wrong with branching out of one's comfort zone and trying something new, but if you're against the general premise out the gate... what did you expect?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the one who admitted on these forums to not liking superhero movies? I may be confusing you with someone else, but if not, what made you put yourself through the wringer to watch this one? Nothing wrong with branching out of one's comfort zone and trying something new, but if you're against the general premise out the gate... what did you expect?

I don't think I ever said I'm against superhero films, but I have said I dislike the Marvel, or at least MCU films. Liked the 3 Hellboy films (the last not so much) and the first 2 Blade films. Green Lantern was rubbish, X-Men average out as ok. Nolan's Batman Trilogy was passable (mostly), but massively overhyped, except the first which was legitimately kinda good.

Actually, I've not seen much of the newer DC films, though Suicide Squad and Birds of Prey were alright...barely. So I can't really say for sure about modern DC without watching stuff like Aquaman.

I was expecting this to be bad, but you never know. Mostly it was pointless and forgettable.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I don't think I ever said I'm against superhero films, but I have said I dislike the Marvel, or at least MCU films. Liked the 3 Hellboy films (the last not so much) and the first 2 Blade films. Green Lantern was rubbish, X-Men average out as ok. Nolan's Batman Trilogy was passable (mostly), but massively overhyped, except the first which was legitimately kinda good.

Actually, I've not seen much of the newer DC films, though Suicide Squad and Birds of Prey were alright...barely. So I can't really say for sure about modern DC without watching stuff like Aquaman.

I was expecting this to be bad, but you never know. Mostly it was pointless and forgettable.

Oh, ok; my mistake. But I DO know someone in here mentioned a general dislike for superhero movies, maybe in the "Movie/Tv Hot Takes thread, but I feel like that person's sentiment predates that thread a bit.

Anyway, sorry Aquaman was a bust for you. Didn't deserve an Oscar or anything, but I do enjoy it as throwaway fun, passable spectacle, junk food.

 

[Piscian]

I watched "No sudden Move (2021)" yesterday. I always have trouble defining when a movie is "good". Sometimes I think of "good" as a movie I could watch over and over like Star Wars, Evil Dead 2, Blade Runner or Fight Club. These movies that have iconic, rewatchable moments. No Sudden Move isn't really that kind of film. I think of films like Life is Beautiful, Fargo or Jojo Rabbit when I'd describe the qualities of No Sudden Move. It's something you watch once. Its really engrossing and when it's over you're like "Wow I was locked in for that, and now I'm depressed". Some people can watch those movies over and over. I can't it, but I'd still put "No Sudden Move" on the good/great movie list regardless.

No sudden Move is a criminal intrigue movie more than a drama. Essentially two small time crooks are paid to do one simple job which turns out to have a vastly more complicated scheme behind it and the movie unfolds with the two crooks puzzling their way through. Its a Steven Soderbergh picture, but if you're thinking Oceans 11 I'd warn you that it's a tad more on the noir side. Imagine Soderbergh collaborating with Scorsese on the tone of the film. I'm still a little confused on some of the subtleties on the film. It has a touch of The Usual Suspects or The Spanish Prisoner to it, but by the end of the film the main puzzle of the film is mostly cleared up. Its also is loosely based on a real conspiracy/espionage event that occurred in the 1950s so that was cool. You get a nice little history lesson out of it at the End Credits.

I think the only thing that was a net negative for me was Brendan Fraiser plays an obese mob guy. His acting was fine, but he looks really healthy so it looks more like he put on weight for the role, but was almost too careful about it. His scenes kept pulling me out of the film. This is juxtaposed with Benecio Del Toro who also gained weight, but looks the part. Hard to describe unless you see it for yourself.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Grave of the Fireflies

It's an excellent movie but because I knew basically the whole plot beforehand my attention wandered on to more technical aspects of the action. Feels like Seita has all the resources he needs for him and his sister to survive (longer anyway) but applies them too late and because we don't find out about them until then it feels like cheating.

He's got all this money in the bank (which I thought had ran out by then) and it's never established he's worried about rationing it so why wait until Setsuko's dying to use it to buy food? Setsuko is sick the whole movie and only takes her to a doctor when it's too late - which only then reveals consulting a doctor was an option in the first place. And of course leaving his aunt's... She's cruel and mean but not to the point she'd let the kids die on her I think. And Seita never offers to do any chores around the house, which was a big gripe with the crone. Dude, do the dishes. Clean around. Something, anything.

Was the point of the story that Seita only makes bad decisions, and is incapable of thinking long term? Which would make sense given Takahata vehemently insists it's not an anti-war story.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Grave of the Fireflies

It's an excellent movie but because I knew basically the whole plot beforehand my attention wandered on to more technical aspects of the action. Feels like Seita has all the resources he needs for him and his sister to survive (longer anyway) but applies them too late and because we don't find out about them until then it feels like cheating.

He's got all this money in the bank (which I thought had ran out by then) and it's never established he's worried about rationing it so why wait until Setsuko's dying to use it to buy food? Setsuko is sick the whole movie and only takes her to a doctor when it's too late - which only then reveals consulting a doctor was an option in the first place. And of course leaving his aunt's... She's cruel and mean but not to the point she'd let the kids die on her I think. And Seita never offers to do any chores around the house, which was a big gripe with the crone. Dude, do the dishes. Clean around. Something, anything.

Was the point of the story that Seita only makes bad decisions, and is incapable of thinking long term? Which would make sense given Takahata vehemently insists it's not an anti-war story.

Yeah, the whole leaving his aunt thing I never quite got. It's been years since I've seen this movie, but I never got the sense that she was ever anything beyond very, very grumpy. I think I heard somewhere that Seita's decision making is apparently supposed to mirror Japan in WW2, and how they stubbornly got their own people killed because they thought they were doing the right thing. But Seita never feels framed that way, like we as the audience should shake our heads at his actions and what it's doing to his little sister; it's framed as both of them being at the mercy of a world that doesn't care about them or is too occupied with the fall-out from the war.

I can't say I ever cared much for this movie.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Yeah, the whole leaving his aunt thing I never quite got. It's been years since I've seen this movie, but I never got the sense that she was ever anything beyond very, very grumpy. I think I heard somewhere that Seita's decision making is apparently supposed to mirror Japan in WW2, and how they stubbornly got their own people killed because they thought they were doing the right thing. But Seita never feels framed that way, like we as the audience should shake our heads at his actions and what it's doing to his little sister; it's framed as both of them being at the mercy of a world that doesn't care about them or is too occupied with the fall-out from the war.

I can't say I ever cared much for this movie.

I was half expecting them to go back to the aunt's after things get worse and the farmer tells Seita to swallow his pride, only for them to find the house firebombed, retroactively (and randomly) validating Seita's decision to leave in the first place.

The whole "Don't need anybody else/I know what I'm doing/Nature will look out for me" angle gave me Into the Wild vibes. Seita, an impoverished wartime orphan, deserves less blame for his fate than some trust fund WASP with a college degree and way too many credit cards. But I got the feeling he should've known better, and could've done better, and I'm not sure the movie's conscious of this at all.

I think if you still have your pride then you still have options.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I was half expecting them to go back to the aunt's after things get worse and the farmer tells Seita to swallow his pride, only for them to find the house firebombed, retroactively (and randomly) validating Seita's decision to leave in the first place.

The whole "Don't need anybody else/I know what I'm doing/Nature will look out for me" angle gave me Into the Wild vibes. Seita, an impoverished wartime orphan, deserves less blame for his fate than some trust fund WASP with a college degree and way too many credit cards. But I got the feeling he should've known better, and could've done better, and I'm not sure the movie's conscious of this at all.

I think if you still have your pride then you still have options.

The movie is also presented very matter-of-fact, which doesn't help whatever message it's trying to send. Ultimately you're left with a movie showing two children dying of starvation against beautifully handpainted backgrounds. Not that a movie needs to have a message, but when it's something this fucking grim it kinda does, otherwise you might as well watch a documentary or the news.

 

[BrawlMan]

I was half expecting them to go back to the aunt's after things get worse and the farmer tells Seita to swallow his pride, only for them to find the house firebombed, retroactively (and randomly) validating Seita's decision to leave in the first place.

The whole "Don't need anybody else/I know what I'm doing/Nature will look out for me" angle gave me Into the Wild vibes. Seita, an impoverished wartime orphan, deserves less blame for his fate than some trust fund WASP with a college degree and way too many credit cards. But I got the feeling he should've known better, and could've done better, and I'm not sure the movie's conscious of this at all.

I think if you still have your pride then you still have options.

The movie is also presented very matter-of-fact, which doesn't help whatever message it's trying to send. Ultimately you're left with a movie showing two children dying of starvation against beautifully handpainted backgrounds. Not that a movie needs to have a message, but when it's something this fucking grim it kinda does, otherwise you might as well watch a documentary or the news.

The movie was nothing more than 2 hour guilt trip aimed at Japanese delinquents. I know their parents and grandparents had rough near the end and after WWII, but everyone on production could have handled this a 1000x better. I know this movie is based off a book too, but come the fuck on! Once I learned that in my late teens, I never wanted to watch it ever again.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Godzilla, and Godzilla: King of the Monsters.

Eh, alright for that sort of thing (Gamera is just better). But it only works because people (not necessarily excluding the audience) are quite often really stupid. Also, in the second, the heroes are desperately trying to maintain the status quo against someone that is concerned with a serious real world social problem, and therefore must be cartoonishly evil. Like half of every big budget movie nowdays, it seems.

Lots of nods to the earlier films in the second, without them stopping the movie to say they are doing that, so there's that.

 

[Piscian]

Godzilla, and Godzilla: King of the Monsters.

Eh, alright for that sort of thing (Gamera is just better). But it only works because people (not necessarily excluding the audience) are quite often really stupid. Also, in the second, the heroes are desperately trying to maintain the status quo against someone that is concerned with a serious real world social problem, and therefore must be cartoonishly evil. Like half of every big budget movie nowdays, it seems.

Lots of nods to the earlier films in the second, without them stopping the movie to say they are doing that, so there's that.

I found that, oddly king of the monsters worked better for me the second time around. It's possible the stress and fear of the continued direction of the US had started to wear on me, but the mothers plan to release one monster I could get behind and I could also empathize with Charles Dance eco-terrorist nihilism perspective. The movie works for me with small nitpicks versus my first viewing where in I enjoyed it, but thought it pretty dumb.

I've never really liked Godzilla (2016). It has its moments, but the direction to follow the two bland characters drags the movie down too much for me.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Watched Panda Kopanda and Panda Kopanda: Rainy Day Circus. Both were made by Isao Takahata and Hayao Miyazaki, early 70s, pre-Ghibli. The movies are cute and moderately entertaining in a very, very infantile way. Each lasts about 30 minutes and even then the plot stretches thin to cover the pandas' wacky hijinks. I think the biggest draw is unearthing all the concepts and ideas that Miyazaki would go on to mold into more mature, refined works. Primarily My Neighbor Totoro and Ponyo.

 

[Gordon_4]

Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring (theatrical) - 9/10

You know its interesting to go back and watch these and be reminded just how fucking good these movies are. Setting aside the discussions on the merits of stuff removed or added, these mad lads dove headlong into the primordial soup of modern fantasy fiction. Love them, imperfect that they are in some places.

 

[BrawlMan]

I've never really liked Godzilla (2016).

Godzilla (2014). That's the correct year. It was too boring for me and kept blocking, skipping, and holding off on the good parts. Skull Island and KoM are much better and higher quality monster movies. Kong vs. Godzilla is good too.

 

[Piscian]

Godzilla (2014). That's the correct year. It was too boring for me and kept blocking, sipping, holding off on the good parts. Skull Island and KoM are much better and higher quality monster movies. Kong vs. Godzilla is good too.

It was so unmemorable I've already forgotten when it came out.

Yeah it seems like every movie has been something different, but I refrain from even bringing KVG into the discussion because it's so wacky and shares so much more in common with the old stuff than any of the new films. I've kinda given up on them doing a good dramatic Godzilla. If they just want to do KVG style movies from here on out I can accept that.

 

[BrawlMan]

It was so unmemorable I've already forgotten when it came out.

Yeah it seems like every movie has been something different, but I refrain from even bringing KVG into the discussion because it's so wacky and shares so much more in common with the old stuff than any of the new films. I've kinda given up on them doing a good dramatic Godzilla. If they just want to do KVG style movies from here on out I can accept that.

I get what you mean, but KoM had the right balance of goofy and serious for me without going overboard. I know you want that super serious Godzilla, but it looks like it will have to be next time. I know there was Shin Godzilla, but that one had its own problems. Better than 2014, but not much of a milestone.

 

[Gordon_4]

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - 10/10

I've always enjoyed this movie pretty well from start to finish, which is a little ironic since the book nearly made me quit the ordeal. Everything to do with Rohan is amazing. Karl Urban has had a great career in genre fiction and Eomer of Rohan was his beginning. And what a beginning. Of course the MVP was Andy Serkis as Gollum, trailblazing the way for future characters - some of them his own - created wholly through body acting motion capture but everyone acquits themselves well. Viggo Mortensen was the find of a century because there is no scene in which he looks unnatural and I confess a deep fondness for David Wenham's performance as Faramir of Gondor and Miranda Otto's Eowyn.

 

[happyninja42]

Those are VERY specific strokes within a broad possibility of interpretations. I won't challenge anyone's take as I can't do so in good faith having not seen either Frozen film (no desire to,) but the mental leaps to make those associations, based on your description, sound more like the interpretations a Rorschach test than Disney specifically trying to specifically slide homosexual subtext into children's fantasy. Meaning why jump to homosexuality when it could just as easily be interpreted as a simple "be yourself, whoever that may be" tale as Disney has done countless times? Is Dumbo a metaphor for homosexuality now? Athlete's who want to be artists, dancers who want to be lawyers, construction workers who want to be singers, etc.; why does everyone jump to the homosexuality spin? The modern cultural zeitgeist and well-deserved emergence of prominence and confidence within the LGBTQ+ community?

Very few other avenues of throwing off the shackles of social confinement to be yourself, include a glam outfit makeover, fit for a drag queen runway, other than LGBTQ+ness. Sure it's framed as very broad "be yourself" just like everything they do. But it's pretty damn open about it. Was it the scripted, writer's room talking point of "ok let's make a gay coming out story!"? No, probably not, but once the ideas started moving, and they transitioned her from just being the villain of the piece, to the emotional centerpoint of the story, and it's counterpoint protagonist, I don't think it's that big of a leap to see them doing it.

Besides, few other avenues of life, and how a person can be, come with so much social stigma and condemnation, aside from LGBTQ+ness, and atheism. So few in fact, that I can't think of any other "secret" someone might have about them, other than the 2 that I mentioned, that regularly result in them being ostracized, referred to as a monster/demon/etc, and forced to leave their entire lives behind, due to being shunned.

Also, sparkly dress. That's very signature to coming out. I didn't make a full sequined gown when I started to openly state I was an atheist. But a lot of gay guys I know have dresses as sparkly as Elsa's