Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Oh, Elvis ate burgers until they killed him. Surprised you didn't know that, everyone knows that.

Many things killed him, but the burgers were probably the most delicious part of it all.


Anyways speaking of living dangerously, just watched Fast X…or whatever the tenth one is called. At least they kept this one on earth. The only reason to watch these movies isn’t even for the cars or racing anymore. It’s to witness what kind of impossibly ridiculous bs is cgi’d into the action scenes, and in the case it’s about par for the course. You’ve got family (in Vin voice), dancing race girls, a big heavy thing tearing through the streets causing mayhem, muscly villains (I’ll give Aqua Man credit for playing this one somewhat unconventionally to my mild surprise), double crossing’s, an explosive finale with a cliff hanger ending and a surprise mid credits teaser. I guess V and D (as in Vin and Dwane, not Diesel or the other name for std) patched things up enough to team up again for what is hopefully the last of these.

What would actually be impressive is if they went for practical effects and stunts as much as possible, as a kind of homage to what started it all.

 

[thebobmaster]

Tonight's movie was Sorority Row, a loose remake of House on Sorority Row made in 2009. It's not good, but while the first half is not good in that boring slasher way, where you hate everyone within 10 minutes and want them to die for being idiots 5 minutes later, the second half is the fun kind of bad slasher, and it's pretty clear that the filmmakers were in on it as well, because the movie completely changes tone to be self-aware, with the main ***** of the group getting off several great lines and line reads, and you also have several scenes of a shotgun-toting Carrie Fisher. It at least ended fun. Not good, but fun.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Les amitiés particulières (1964)

Forbidden love story between two young teens boarding at an all-male Catholic school in 1920s France. Based on the book. They're supposed to be 12 and 14 but the actors look more like 12 and 17-18. Obviously the movie doesn't show anything explicit (not even a kiss) but I don't think it's pretending to cut anything out either. The two kids are madly, deeply, obsessively in love with each other and their way of showing it is by exchanging love letters, meeting in secret to gush about it and then at one point drinking each other's blood. Sex doesn't come into play, although maybe it would have if a priest didn't interrupt them tumbling in ze hay.

Funny how times change. This movie was considered controversial back in the day. Even the priests in this come across as sympathetic and lenient. When they start suspecting the dalliance they're not even that angry about it, just worried (for all the wrong reasons). Nowadays you could have the kids masturbate each other on the beach and wipe away the cum on the sand (see Moonlight) and they'd get Best Picture at the Oscars for it. Or jerk off into fruit and bite off the creamy center (see Call Me By Your Name) for Best Screenplay.

 

[Bartholen]

Shrek, 7/10

I hadn't seen this since I was a kid, but I remembered it pretty thoroughly because I saw it like 20 times then. It holds up. Obviously the animation's dated and the Smash Mouth soundtrack is more obtrusive than organic these days, but that's because of this movie's meme status, not because of the music itself. Shrek still stands out among typical animated movie protagonists, but especially at the time he was unlike anything ever seen before. The Disney renaissance era was dominated bu plucky, misunderstood but well-meaning underdogs who had to rise to the challenge and prove themselves in the world's eyes. Shrek, when he starts the movie, is selfish, misanthropic, devoid of ambition or greater desire, and his motivation is entirely out of self-interest. That's what makes his journey of self-discovery so engaging, and I picked up on a lot of interesting psychological elements I completely missed as a kid. For example, as much as Shrek paints himself enjoying his solitude, the moment he's given recognition by the wider populace (when fighting the knights) he embraces it wholeheartedly, suggesting he's not as solitary as he likes to think, or may even realize himself.

The movie balances contrasting styles really well. The pop songs and the orchestral score never tread on each other, and fit their respective scenes perfectly. For as much this movie was born, and is full of contempt and spite, the emotional core of the film is genuine and sincere, and the two elements also gel naturally. There's some genuinely great cinematography and framing here too. The biggest issue by far is the super lame forced third act conflict that comes out of a very selective, very convenient misunderstanding. It was lame then and it's lame now, and it easily docks at least 2 points off this movie. Otherwise there aren't really that many big issues. Not all of Donkey's jokes land, but it's natural to the character.

As much as this movie is memed, it is a genuine cultural touchstone that was made by people who really cared

Shrek 2, 8/10

Now this is how you do a sequel. This is very much a case of the sequel improving upon the first in every aspect without making it redundant: the animation's leagues better, the jokes are tighter, the editing's better, the story's more interesting and so on. It expands the universe in massive ways without falling into overindulgence, and builds upon the dynamic established in the first film. The new characters are fun and Fairy Godmother is a great villain. The themes of self-acceptance are expanded upon in interesting ways: Accepting yourself is great, but will others accept your self-acceptance? How much should you change for the ones you love? What is the price of true love?

While the first movie's climax is a bit underwhelming, the sequel has a proper, big action setpiece with old characters making a return and even reincorporating a joke from the first movie. Speaking of which, the line "You still look like a dashing stallion to me" was incredibly wholesome and sweet, and a perfect callback to an earlier line.

There's honestly not a lot I'd criticize. Donkey is perhaps playing a bit of a second fiddle, with Puss in Boots taking center stage as the sidekick, and as a result doesn't have much of an arc. But he still feels like an essential presence in the movie. So yeah, a really great sequel.

 

[Piscian]

Blue Beetle 2023

Unbiased 7/10 Biased 6/10

......Is it possible to watch a superhero movie these days, without bias? Especially an origin story? The entire movie, scene by scene I kept thinking "where the fuck have I seen this before??". Like nearly every scene I was having deja vue and when it hit me it was so head slappingly obvious. It's Ant-man. It's literally the plot of Ant-man. Goofy lighthearted romp, downtrodded down on his luck good guy, goofy buddy crew, techbased powers, tech partner going up against evil partner who took over the business and wants to use the power to make weapons. It's so goddamn obvious. There's even a backdrop mystery they cram down your throat but instead of Jane it's Ted Kord (original blue Beetle).

The more I think about it, the movie is mostly a clone of ant-man, not inspired, like scene for scene clone. There's even a heist.

Now on the flipside of that it's still fun. the hero is likeable. The powers are ...fine. It moves along at a nice clip. Theres some fun bits. It killed an afternoon.

One thing that stood out to me is that not only does the secondary villain end up being the most compelling character in the film, but theres an actual whole scene dedicated to the CIAs intervention into south american politics and the Iran-Contra scandal. It has no business being in this movie and it is dark as shit. It very much just leaves you like "uum I bought tickets to a hero flick, not Chernobyl right?"

Lets talk about the movies problems and why its fine and not "good". Well the biggest problem is Susan Sarandon as the titrator villain Victoria Kord. She's a blanket stand in for Darrin in Ant-man. Sociopathic partner who took over the company, wants to make weapons blah blah blah. Generic villains can work. Critics generally agreed Darrin was just intense enough that he works. He's creepy and evil and his acting is great. More over, he gives the audience a tiny taste of empathy. Just like a grain because he feels like he lives in the shadow of Ant-man.

Unfortunately what SS provides here is painfully phoned in. All her scenes felt read off a cue card and feel bland and flat. She's not even a Jared Leto Joker, you know giving us an over the top performance, not even an Iron man 3 Guy Pierce. No I don't mean subdued. I mean she's "blah". Its funny how much a good villain like Jake Gyllenhaal's mysterio or Michael Keatons Vulture can give you enough meat to see past a bland action flick. Not to say S1&2 are bland, I'm just saying its important to have a good villain. She's so bad the secondary villain Raoul Trujillo's Carapax easily overshadows her with barely 3 or 4 lines in the film.

Where does the other point loss come from. Well, I'm sorry guys. I found George Lopez as his "wacky uncle", painful to watch on screen. Imagine if Ant-man had Kevin James instead of Michael Pena barreling into every scene like a bull in a china shop. the thing is I like Kevin James..alot. Like I liked Paul blart (sorry). Thing is that he just Jarjar binks every fucking scene hes in and he's painfully unfunny. I just wanted to fast forward through all his lines.

Does Blue beetle stand out in anyway? Actually a tiny tiny bit. Its a solid homage to mexican-american culture. Quite a bit of the dialog in the film is in spanish with subtitles.... *crickets* oh thats it.

I think if you can forget that Ant-man was a film that happened while watching this, it's pretty solid. I did not feel the "superhero fatigue" I felt watching quantum mania. There's a lot of fun to be had in an origin story that Marvel seems not longer capable of delivering (muuuust franchiiisee). If you are just exhausted by all superhero movies existing...it's a hard 6/10 maybe even a 5.5/10. Now if youre full of childlike wonder for CGI...8/10?

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Barbie (2023)

I feel like mainstream American comedy has just lost me, man. Between this and Everything Everywhere All at Once you have those productions that try their damnedest to embrace the absurdist, 00's style of humor but deflate it with some of the most inoffensive morals about family values and "being yourself" this side of an afterschool special.

I commend Barbie for its poppy dollhouse set designs and elaborately choreographed musical numbers, but behind that is a satire that doesn't satirize anything, inside a comedy that's most of the time not very funny. Which is really the issue with it, you know. It's a movie with plenty of hyper ironic, post modern Tim-and-Ericism's but practically none of it actually hits home. There's plenty of things it clearly wants to make fun off, but then just kind of swerves away from without even so much as gracing them.

It's a movie that feels like it it knows it wouldn't be able to get away with anything. Make fun of the Barbie brand and people who want to see the movie because they like Barbie would object. Make fun of Mattel and Mattel would object. Make fun of patriarchal structures and the type of people who call things "woke" would object. Make fun of phony feminism and the type of people who call things "woke" would praise it, which is arguably even worse.

So, what is left? A movie that doesn't so much make fun of any of those things as it tiptoes around them, sometimes flashing them an awkward smile and proceeds to have the most generic morals about family and individuality and tolerance, hoping no one will call it out for all the things it brings up, but refuses to actually explore, much less satirize.

It's an exercise in looking bold and quirky but not being able to back it up with genuine wit. It has a lot in common with the Lego movies, that I have similar feelings about. But those can explain their overly safe morals with being made for kids where Barbie... I'm not sure, honestly. A lot of it certainly plays like a kids movie, but it has slightly too many references to genitalia and feminist theory for me to actually think of it as one.

It probably sounds like I'm overly harsh on Barbie, and I probably am, but a lot of it just vaguely annoyed me. It's not exactly awful, I respect the sets and the musical sequences and the pitch perfect casting of Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling as Barbie and Ken. And generally speaking it's nice that something other than an action movie managed to be as popular as this. I'm all for musical comedies being the next big trend in blockbuster movies. But in the end it just comes off as very safe, if not a bit cowardly.

It's very easy to imagine a version of this movie that's meaner and angrier and, most of all, funnier, and its biggest issue is not being that. Film making, visual design and acting are all pretty high quality but the screenplay has just too many cases of "Let's not go there". It didn't really do it for me. Parts of it are certainly fun but as a whole it's just a bit too safe, too harmless, too corporate.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Barbie (2023)

I feel like mainstream American comedy has just lost me, man. Between this and Everything Everywhere All at Once you have those productions that try their damnedest to embrace the absurdist, 00's style of humor but deflate it with some of the most inoffensive morals about family values and "being yourself" this side of an afterschool special.

I commend Barbie for its poppy dollhouse set designs and elaborately choreographed musical numbers, but behind that is a satire that doesn't satirize anything, inside a comedy that's most of the time not very funny. Which is really the issue with it, you know. It's a movie with plenty of hyper ironic, post modern Tim-and-Ericism's but practically none of it actually hits home. There's plenty of things it clearly wants to make fun off, but then just kind of swerves away from without even so much as gracing them.

It's a movie that feels like it it knows it wouldn't be able to get away with anything. Make fun of the Barbie brand and people who want to see the movie because they like Barbie would object. Make fun of Mattel and Mattel would object. Make fun of patriarchal structures and the type of people who call things "woke" would object. Make fun of phony feminism and the type of people who call things "woke" would praise it, which is arguably even worse.

So, what is left? A movie that doesn't so much make fun of any of those things as it tiptoes around them, sometimes flashing them an awkward smile and proceeds to have the most generic morals about family and individuality and tolerance, hoping no one will call it out for all the things it brings up, but refuses to actually explore, much less satirize.

It's an exercise in looking bold and quirky but not being able to back it up with genuine wit. It has a lot in common with the Lego movies, that I have similar feelings about. But those can explain their overly safe morals with being made for kids where Barbie... I'm not sure, honestly. A lot of it certainly plays like a kids movie, but it has slightly too many references to genitalia and feminist theory for me to actually think of it as one.

It probably sounds like I'm overly harsh on Barbie, and I probably am, but a lot of it just vaguely annoyed me. It's not exactly awful, I respect the sets and the musical sequences and the pitch perfect casting of Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling as Barbie and Ken. And generally speaking it's nice that something other than an action movie managed to be as popular as this. I'm all for musical comedies being the next big trend in blockbuster movies. But in the end it just comes off as very safe, if not a bit cowardly.

It's very easy to imagine a version of this movie that's meaner and angrier and, most of all, funnier, and its biggest issue is not being that. Film making, visual design and acting are all pretty high quality but the screenplay has just too many cases of "Let's not go there". It didn't really do it for me. Parts of it are certainly fun but as a whole it's just a bit too safe, too harmless, too corporate.

I agree with pretty much all your points. But what did you really expect from Warner Brothers' $1.4 Billion "Barbie" (TM), starring Hollywood's Hottest A-listers of 2023?

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★½ review of The World Is Not Enough (1999)

This review may contain spoilers. Visit the page to bypass this warning and read the review.

letterboxd.com

 

[BrawlMan]

I think if you can forget that Ant-man was a film that happened while watching this, it's pretty solid. I did not feel the "superhero fatigue" I felt watching quantum mania. There's a lot of fun to be had in an origin story that Marvel seems not longer capable of delivering (muuuust franchiiisee). If you are just exhausted by all superhero movies existing...it's a hard 6/10 maybe even a 5.5/10. Now if youre full of childlike wonder for CGI...8/10?

I still haven't seen any of the Ant-Man films.

 

[Absent]

I still haven't seen any of the Ant-Man films.

They are fun, at least the first two (or one?). Among my favorite MCU films. But again... I don't like superheroes, so the MCU films I prefer are those who tone down the pretend seriousness and play it for the silliness. And, well, these do.

A ★★½ review of The World Is Not Enough (1999)

This review may contain spoilers. Visit the page to bypass this warning and read the review.

letterboxd.com

Okay, I may have a bias. I grew up in french culture, so I'm familiar with Sophie Marceau's career since she was a teen, and I always found her an insufferable actress. And her acting just grates me in that film. She's on a par with Denise Richards. That film has the two worst "bond girls", in my view. And sometimes I wonder if things would have looked a bit more believable if they had swapped their two roles.

Bond is always a one-dimensional character strolling through a one-dimensonal world. And suddenly, for one scene, a scriptwriter suddenly goes "ooh he's a real person with real feelings you see", switch on switch off, randomly. So Bond suddenly romantically caressing the photo of that character he never met, because he fell in love with her deeply (just like Tatiana Romanova claimed to with Bond's photo) really made me roll my eyes hard. But again, my bias. I find Marceau terribly uncharismatic.

And yes, "the legendary 007 wit, or at least half of it". Bond's lines during the Brosnan run are the worst. He deserves a headbutt by any woman he talks to.

But, but but but. The music. Don't know what you're going on about. It's pefectly great. One of my favorite David Arnold track. I love re-listening to that boat chase (I wish that actress had been given a bigger role - but this film didn't deserve her). And as I like my Bond films to be a bit mooresque, I loved Bond adjusting his tie underwater. It felt out of place in that film and I wish it didn''t. As the series went from there, the scripts became more and more an incoherent mishmash of attitudes borrowed from different eras of the franchise (it would turn into an absolute catastrophy with Skyfall and Spectre). But at that point, for me it was like a glitter of hope of the Bond I like making a comeback some day... Beh.

And yes yes I loved Coltrane in these films. But they JWPeppered him, and didn't know how to stop and so here we are. Some artificial ending that really feels like the only way they had to ensure he wouldn't take too much room in the franchise. It's stupid. They didn't need that for Sylvia Trench, Leiter or Pepper. Other times, other logics.

So, another barely rememberable movie that I end up re-watching unfairly often because I forget why I forgot it. With an under-utilized Carlyle, in a nonsensical role (he feels nothing? how does he operate? how does he manipulate objects? it's like the passionately anti-emotion guys from Equilibrium, the concept would eat itself to oblivion).

Still, this is absolutely my dope :

 

[BrawlMan]

But again... I don't like superheroes

I never forgot that.

so the MCU films I prefer are those who tone down the pretend seriousness and play it for the silliness.

Sometimes; depends on what is. Though lately Marvel has gone too far with the constant quips and "witty" dialogue for their recent outing. I've been looking at non-Marvel/DC superheroes that do their own thing recently. Mainly Japanese superheroes, Toku, and Power Rangers. Give one of those or Cutie Honey a try, if you're interested. For her, either watch New Cutie Honey or RE: Cutie Honey. The former is only 8 episodes, and the latter is a 3 Episode OVA that finally got dub released last month. That OVA came out in 2004! Also, give Guyver Dark Hero a shot.

 

[gorfias]

They are fun, at least the first two (or one?). Among my favorite MCU films. But again... I don't like superheroes, so the MCU films I prefer are those who tone down the pretend seriousness and play it for the silliness. And, well, these do.


Okay, I may have a bias. I grew up in french culture, so I'm familiar with Sophie Marceau's career since she was a teen, and I always found her an insufferable actress. And her acting just grates me in that film. She's on a par with Denise Richards. That film has the two worst "bond girls", in my view. And sometimes I wonder if things would have looked a bit more believable if they had swapped their two roles.

Bond is always a one-dimensional character strolling through a one-dimensonal world. And suddenly, for one scene, a scriptwriter suddenly goes "ooh he's a real person with real feelings you see", switch on switch off, randomly. So Bond suddenly romantically caressing the photo of that character he never met, because he fell in love with her deeply (just like Tatiana Romanova claimed to with Bond's photo) really made me roll my eyes hard. But again, my bias. I find Marceau terribly uncharismatic.

And yes, "the legendary 007 wit, or at least half of it". Bond's lines during the Brosnan run are the worst. He deserves a headbutt by any woman he talks to.

But, but but but. The music. Don't know what you're going on about. It's pefectly great. One of my favorite David Arnold track. I love re-listening to that boat chase (I wish that actress had been given a bigger role - but this film didn't deserve her). And as I like my Bond films to be a bit mooresque, I loved Bond adjusting his tie underwater. It felt out of place in that film and I wish it didn''t. As the series went from there, the scripts became more and more an incoherent mishmash of attitudes borrowed from different eras of the franchise (it would turn into an absolute catastrophy with Skyfall and Spectre). But at that point, for me it was like a glitter of hope of the Bond I like making a comeback some day... Beh.

And yes yes I loved Coltrane in these films. But they JWPeppered him, and didn't know how to stop and so here we are. Some artificial ending that really feels like the only way they had to ensure he wouldn't take too much room in the franchise. It's stupid. They didn't need that for Sylvia Trench, Leiter or Pepper. Other times, other logics.

So, another barely rememberable movie that I end up re-watching unfairly often because I forget why I forgot it. With an under-utilized Carlyle, in a nonsensical role (he feels nothing? how does he operate? how does he manipulate objects? it's like the passionately anti-emotion guys from Equilibrium, the concept would eat itself to oblivion).

Still, this is absolutely my dope :

Love this one. Next to Tomorrow Never Dies, my favorite by Brosnan.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Always thought The World is Not Enough wasn't as good as the videoclip to its theme song by Garbage:

 

[thebobmaster]

New movie I watched tonight was The Thing From Another World, the original adaptation of the book by the same name from 1951 that was later remade in 1983 as The Thing by John Carpenter. However, the original movie is very different from the remake in both tone and content. Rather than an alien that essentially possesses people, this one is described quite literally as a living carrot, and looks like a guy in a suit because 1950's. For what it is, it's a fun romp, with decent acting, especially from that one "but we must communicate with the creature/keep him alive for SCIENCE!" scientist, but I preferred the remake.

 

[Piscian]

Bottoms 2023

Look I don't wanna be that guy, but Im now on my second viewing just fucking watch it and thank me later

10/10

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Finally saw John Wick 4. Gotta wonder if it ever sunk in for what was left of The Table that they did this to themselves by being corrupted in the first place. I liked the little touches that harken back to a few motifs of the original (love of dogs, muscle cars, pencils, etc.), but the rest is ultimately so excessive. Partly to comedic effect (those car hits, those bloody steps), partly because it’s the “finale” of sorts and they had to go with the biggest and best choreography, so it’s understandable to an extent. Where does John find all his bullets, and what do his internal organs look like after getting hit by/falling onto so many cars? That was my persisting curiosity as the body count approached absurdity. I still like the original best.

The ending was well played though and capped things off nicely (no pun). Who says there’s no rest for the Wick’ed. Also to the post credits, spin-off bate much?

 

[Casual Shinji]

I decided to check out Scream 6 despite the fact that 5 kinda stank, but lo and behold it was actually very alright. It's still pretty dumb for a movie so intent on having its characters be aware of horror movie tropes - I mean Jesus Christ, when you hit Ghostface hard enough to knock him on his ass don't just run away, keep hitting him till he's fucking unconcious or dead. At least put some effort into ripping the mask off so you know who the fuck it is when they eventually get away again. You know how this plays out by now, so stop making the same stupid mistakes. Like Courney Cox letting her man-hunk leave the room while Ghostface is on the phone with her. Like you know the killer's in the house by now, right?! Ugh.

Anyway, the movie's still pretty entertaining as a slasher flick. I quite liked the beginning, which starts off very similar to the other movies, but then has a nice swerve. Also, I didn't actually see the killer's identity coming, unlike Scream 5, so that was nice, too.

 

[Baffle]

Always thought The World is Not Enough wasn't as good as the videoclip to its theme song by Garbage:

I think most things aren't as good as things by Garbage.

 

[Absent]

The Big Feast, by Marco Ferreri, with Mastroianni, Piccoli, Noiret and Tognazzi (and dialogues by Francis Blanche !?). Four wealthy but jaded friends gather secretely in a house to end their lives by feeding to death - a suicide by gastronomical excess, to which some sex is added as an afterthought.

It's supposed to be a classic. It left me a bit confused. It didn't make me feel anything positive or negative (not even boredom, so there's that). It's one "okay, done, I guess" tick on a cinephile's list. One curiosity quenched.

But oh the scandal, when that film was released. Oh the controversy. It was deemed obscene and degrading, it was booed, it was considered a brilliant philosophical/political fable, insulting, tender, humiliating, joyous, depressing... everything and its opposite. And the reactions were fed by the reactions (the bourgeois are offended so it's their scathing mirror). I doubt any of these meanings were deliberate. Ferreri claims his films are just little stories that don't have layered meanings. If he's honest, this just means no deliberate ones, but it's also quite a personal work. According to Piccoli, Ferreri himself was moved to tears in front of the final version, identifying himself to the character of Noiret. So there's some depth potentially resonating to some people. And it wouldn't have triggered such outrage if its underlying play on cultural categories (the inversion of "feeding" as a deadly process, the linked sensualities of gastronomy and sexuality, the common sense of prostitutes as opposed to the complicity of the expected responsible and respectable figure, the obscene over-consumption, the self-destructive drives) didn't touch on some significant matters, whether deliberately or accidentally.

So, it's fun that it exists. It's an amusing concept exploration. And it's got some very powerful actors. But still, as a spectacle... it's mostly perplexity, a couple of cheap giggles, and a nice little music. Maybe it's a holy grail to people with very specific concerns in life. And a monstrosity likewise. Outside of that, it's mostly a (slightly dated) curiosity.

 

[thebobmaster]

Tonight's new film was Cannibal Holocaust. If you haven't already seen it, DON'T. I'm not saying that because it's a bad film, because in all the technical ways, it isn't. Soundtrack is actually great, acting is perfect for the sort of movie it is, and it captures the feel of guerilla filming all too well. However, between the absolutely brutal and unflinching way it gets its point across, and the actual on-screen violence against animals, this is the first time ever I've actually regretted watching a movie. I should have just let the reputation of this film be enough for me, and not sated my curiosity by actually watching it.