Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

[Hawki]

So the first half is full of witty back and forth as they get all the ducks in a row, and then suddenly the second half swerves into much grittier espionage drama as the operation begins to hit snags and roadblocks.

That's a good point, but I'd say it kind of adds to the film. At the start, the operation's planners can be a bit more playful - there's the sort of romance between two of the characters, how they play around with creating the corpse's backstory, but things get more serious as the op gets more serious. Not only are they encountering snaggs, but there's the knowledge that if they've played their cards wrong, the Sicily landings will be a disaster.

 

[Gordon_4]

That's a good point, but I'd say it kind of adds to the film. At the start, the operation's planners can be a bit more playful - there's the sort of romance between two of the characters, how they play around with creating the corpse's backstory, but things get more serious as the op gets more serious. Not only are they encountering snaggs, but there's the knowledge that if they've played their cards wrong, the Sicily landings will be a disaster.

Yeah, like I kind of wish I had two films clocking in at two hours, or a single one of three hours, to breathe just a little more meat on to the bones. But, if the worst I can say of this film is “I want more”, it did a pretty good job.

I do think it’s funny though that the trailer seemed to have gotten a small amount of the usual suspects all pissy because of the scene where Kelly McDonald’s character horse trades her way into the operation. And she contributes no less or more than anyone else. And no one here is stupid in a cartoonish way, just in their very human ways.

 

[Bartholen]

Saw X, 6/10

There's an opportunity to make the lamest joke in history by watching this and X back to back, and then writing "I saw X and Saw X" on something like Letterboxd. This was actually my first Saw movie ever, since during the franchise's heyday I was actually too young to be able to watch most of them, and horror movies weren't to my taste. Considering the series has a legendarily convoluted continuity, I was somewhat hoping for an impenetrable maze of a plot, where I'd be entertained by just how ludicrous it would be. In that regard I came away disappointed, because this is something of a soft reboot, or at least clearly meant to be more accessible to audiences unfamiliar with the main plot. It's not a bad movie at all, I had a decent time with it.

This is clearly aiming to be a more "legit" movie instead of the splatter exploitation the series became famous for. There's quite a lot of characterization and the cinematography is very traditional, even stylish at times. It's quite long at almost 2 hours, and unnecessarily so IMO. It spends a fair bit of time laying out Kramer's initial predicament and does a decent job at getting the audience to sympathize with him. The gore is quite nasty and brutal, but more in a manner of something like A24 films instead of the pure, lurid sleaze of the main series.

And that striving to be a more respectable film is kind of why the movie doesn't really work, because the other half of it is still pure Saw. The script's rather mid, there's obviously a ludicrous twist at the end, and plenty of stuff that makes you go "oh come on" in terms of sustaining suspension of disbelief. The more the film goes along, the more it slips back to its roots by getting dumber and dumber until it's just flat out silliness. It's trying to have its cake and eat it: one foot in legit drama land, the other in the old ways of B-movie splattergore. The end result just felt uneven, and I wish it committed fully to either instead of trying to do both. But I suppose if the movie had gone full "respectable", people would be saying it doesn't feel like a Saw movie. And if it'd remained as pure splatter, people would be saying the series is refusing to change.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★½ review of Friday the 13th (1980)

"You're all doomed!" Time to ruin any reputation I have as a slasher fan, for I really don't care for this movie at all. The plot of the film focuses on Alice (Adrienne King), one of several counselors set to open Camp Crystal Lake for the summer under the direction of camp owner Steve Christy...

letterboxd.com

 

[Hawki]

Doctor Who and the Daleks (4/10)

Well this was a letdown.

I should give some context. This is one of two Doctor Who movies that were released in the Old Who era. This one, at least, takes inspiration from the First Doctor serial where the daleks are encountered for the first time, but it's not in the same continuity, nor are the facts the same. Here, the Doctor (literally named Dr. Who) is a human scientist, who lives with his daughter Barbara and granddaughter Susan (so, Susan and Barbara Who?), with the TARDIS his custom-built time machine. Thanks to Ian Chesterton (who's dating Barbara) mucking things up, they end up on Skaro, which has been irradiated to hell and back, with the daleks living in their city, and the thals outside it.

Some Whovians might say "wait, that's kinda familiar with the earliest DW episodes), and yes, you'd be right, even if some old pieces of lore are mixed and matched. However, there's no getting around this, the movie is just dull. The stage design is uninspired. The acting is basic at best - even if Peter Cushing does an okay job with the doctor himself, he's got nothing to work with. The daleks are just boring - piece of advice from this film, don't have dalek dialogue going for minutes on end between daleks, because it's just tedious. The daleks themselves are barely menacing, the thals are boring, everything is just...dull. And while "dull" is a criticism I could apply to a lot of OldWho, this is kinda worse, in that it's stretched into the length of a movie rather than a serial, and isn't even in the same continuity.

Can a feature-length DW work? Yes - take Paul McGann's movie, or the 50th Anniversary special. But to use an old saying, "this ain't it, chief." Or to put it another way, just don't bother with this film. It won't have any appeal to a non-Whovian, for a Whovian, it has nothing to offer bar being a weird quirk of 60s history, and for those who enjoy bad movies, it's bad in the sense that it's boring, not bad in the sense of laughing yourself silly.

Don't get the Doctor. The film's dead on arrival, and has a DNR as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Hawki]

Ice Age 2: The Meltdown (6/10)

If I had to describe the Ice Age IP, I'd describe it as having a pretty solid first movie, and ending with complete idiocy and pandering to the lowest common denominator. Or at least I would describe it as such if I'd seen any Ice Age movie (not shorts, movie) beyond the first when it came out. Sure, I'm aware of the series's reputation, and as far as I can tell, it's a reputation that's earned, but since I haven't seen the other films, it's unfair to judge.

What I can judge however, is the second film. I went in, mildly curious, to see if the rot I perceived had set in here. Because again, like I said, I think the first Ice Age film is pretty decent, so maybe the second would harken closer to that than...whatever comes later. Having finally seen said film, the result is...meh. It's not as good as the first, even if it's got echoes of it (go from point a to point b), it's not batshit crazy (it's working within the laws of physics), but it's also got a much thinner plot, a lot more time spent on slapstick and jokes that aren't always funny, and a lot more cultural references, be they Noah's Ark or pop culture in general (e.g. Sid is overseeing a water park at the start, because...that was a thing over 10,000 years ago. 0_0)

Anyway, the Ice Age is apparently ending (wait, wasn't the first film the start of an ice age?), which means the glaciers are melting, which means everyone in a valley is going to be drowned by said melting glaciers unless they get to not!Noah's Ark. The trio of Sid, Manny, and Diego travel, come across two possums whose names I don't remember (or particularly care about) and Ellie, a mammoth who thinks she's a possum, because social Darwinism isn't yet a thing. Manny is afraid that he's the last mammoth, is tormented by the other last mammoth not knowing she's a mammoth, Diego's afraid of water, etc., etc. Day ends, glaciers melt, a whole herd of mammoths enter the valley (which in fairness, is one of the few genuinely emotional moments in the film), Ellie and the possums join Manny and co., stick as a herd, theme of found family is repeated from the first film, the end.

Yeah, like I said, the plot is thin, and it's in many ways a repeat of the first, just bereft of much of its emotional heft, even if it ultimately repeats the same theme in a number of ways. I've only given it a 6 because there's a few moments that are genuinely emotional or humorous that did work - enough to give it an extra point - but really, it's a bog standard kid's movie. There's not really anything to recommend here. If you're a fan of this franchise, no doubt you've seen it already, if you're curious, don't be, if you saw the first film, you won't have your experience harmed by seeing this one, but there's no particular reason to see it either.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Doctor Who and the Daleks (4/10)

Well this was a letdown.

I should give some context. This is one of two Doctor Who movies that were released in the Old Who era. This one, at least, takes inspiration from the First Doctor serial where the daleks are encountered for the first time, but it's not in the same continuity, nor are the facts the same. Here, the Doctor (literally named Dr. Who) is a human scientist, who lives with his daughter Barbara and granddaughter Susan (so, Susan and Barbara Who?), with the TARDIS his custom-built time machine. Thanks to Ian Chesterton (who's dating Barbara) mucking things up, they end up on Skaro, which has been irradiated to hell and back, with the daleks living in their city, and the thals outside it.

Some Whovians might say "wait, that's kinda familiar with the earliest DW episodes), and yes, you'd be right, even if some old pieces of lore are mixed and matched. However, there's no getting around this, the movie is just dull. The stage design is uninspired. The acting is basic at best - even if Peter Cushing does an okay job with the doctor himself, he's got nothing to work with. The daleks are just boring - piece of advice from this film, don't have dalek dialogue going for minutes on end between daleks, because it's just tedious. The daleks themselves are barely menacing, the thals are boring, everything is just...dull. And while "dull" is a criticism I could apply to a lot of OldWho, this is kinda worse, in that it's stretched into the length of a movie rather than a serial, and isn't even in the same continuity.

Can a feature-length DW work? Yes - take Paul McGann's movie, or the 50th Anniversary special. But to use an old saying, "this ain't it, chief." Or to put it another way, just don't bother with this film. It won't have any appeal to a non-Whovian, for a Whovian, it has nothing to offer bar being a weird quirk of 60s history, and for those who enjoy bad movies, it's bad in the sense that it's boring, not bad in the sense of laughing yourself silly.

Don't get the Doctor. The film's dead on arrival, and has a DNR as far as I'm concerned.

I liked some of the sets and use of colours in this. Otherwise, yeah, this is just bad. Oddly enough, the second Cushing Doctor Who film "The Dalek Invasion of Earth" isn't bad. Not a classic film, not as good as the Dr Who story it's based on, but it's alright. There's only really one bad attempt at humour in it, as opposed to constantly in the first.

Ice Age 2: The Meltdown (6/10)

If I had to describe the Ice Age IP, I'd describe it as having a pretty solid first movie, and ending with complete idiocy and pandering to the lowest common denominator. Or at least I would describe it as such if I'd seen any Ice Age movie (not shorts, movie) beyond the first when it came out. Sure, I'm aware of the series's reputation, and as far as I can tell, it's a reputation that's earned, but since I haven't seen the other films, it's unfair to judge.

What I can judge however, is the second film. I went in, mildly curious, to see if the rot I perceived had set in here. Because again, like I said, I think the first Ice Age film is pretty decent, so maybe the second would harken closer to that than...whatever comes later. Having finally seen said film, the result is...meh. It's not as good as the first, even if it's got echoes of it (go from point a to point b), it's not batshit crazy (it's working within the laws of physics), but it's also got a much thinner plot, a lot more time spent on slapstick and jokes that aren't always funny, and a lot more cultural references, be they Noah's Ark or pop culture in general (e.g. Sid is overseeing a water park at the start, because...that was a thing over 10,000 years ago. 0_0)

Anyway, the Ice Age is apparently ending (wait, wasn't the first film the start of an ice age?), which means the glaciers are melting, which means everyone in a valley is going to be drowned by said melting glaciers unless they get to not!Noah's Ark. The trio of Sid, Manny, and Diego travel, come across two possums whose names I don't remember (or particularly care about) and Ellie, a mammoth who thinks she's a possum, because social Darwinism isn't yet a thing. Manny is afraid that he's the last mammoth, is tormented by the other last mammoth not knowing she's a mammoth, Diego's afraid of water, etc., etc. Day ends, glaciers melt, a whole herd of mammoths enter the valley (which in fairness, is one of the few genuinely emotional moments in the film), Ellie and the possums join Manny and co., stick as a herd, theme of found family is repeated from the first film, the end.

Yeah, like I said, the plot is thin, and it's in many ways a repeat of the first, just bereft of much of its emotional heft, even if it ultimately repeats the same theme in a number of ways. I've only given it a 6 because there's a few moments that are genuinely emotional or humorous that did work - enough to give it an extra point - but really, it's a bog standard kid's movie. There's not really anything to recommend here. If you're a fan of this franchise, no doubt you've seen it already, if you're curious, don't be, if you saw the first film, you won't have your experience harmed by seeing this one, but there's no particular reason to see it either.

Eh, I thought this was better than the first, which I'm not a fan of. But, again, hardly a great film, or particularly franchise worthy.

 

[Gordon_4]

I liked some of the sets and use of colours in this. Otherwise, yeah, this is just bad. Oddly enough, the second Cushing Doctor Who film "The Dalek Invasion of Earth" isn't bad. Not a classic film, not as good as the Dr Who story it's based on, but it's alright. There's only really one bad attempt at humour in it, as opposed to constantly in the first.



Eh, I thought this was better than the first, which I'm not a fan of. But, again, hardly a great film, or particularly franchise worthy.

I think it coasts by on the strength of its voice cast and their chemistry. I dunno if they recorded together, but there's a real sense of camaraderie between Sid, Manny and Diego that can carry the otherwise weak plot.

 

[Baffle]

John Wick 4. My incredulity, already increduled by previous films, isn't even trying now, it's been overcreduled. An alright film, not as good as the others I think.

 

[Piscian]

Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1

Picture in your mind everything that was wrong with the Hobbit movies and Avatar 2. Just sorta mumble outloud to yourself what didn't work even if there were parts you did like. What had you checking the time on your phone an hour in. You got it all? Now imagine what the experience would look like if they didn't do all that and them as good films. Thats Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1. It's a thrill from start to finish that clearly conveys why you should care about what's happening on screen.

I was already kinda shifting uncomfortably in my seat when I sat down to watch it. Like how can they have the audacity to not only make a 3 hour mission impossible movie, but have the gall to warn you it's only part one before the movie is even out??! The answer is that they had enough good setups, stories, characters and stakes to deliver a lengthy part one that actually makes you excited to see part 2.

The most amazing part of this is that the plot is paper thing. Its the awful AI end of the world nonsense we see all the time in 5/10 films shuffled out of the door in theaters in the off season. What's different here is the writing, and directorial beats. There's something about the way the AI threat is presented here that makes the whole thing a little more compelling and the action scenes are just amazing. Every single one.

This was just such a joy beginning to end that I really didn't realize time was going by the first hour and a half (technically its like 2h45m, but its close to three.).

I'm not sure what films I could really compare this to except maybe the big tentpole Marvel Films like Infinity war and endgame. By that I mean 3 hour movies that are both action oriented and engaging.

There's a lot of chase scenes in this. I don't recall what movie came out recently, but everyone agreed the chase sequences were downright exhausting and boring. I think this film really shows the correct way to do it. The chase scenes all serve a clear purpose. You know why the chase is happening and what the stakes are. You never feel like it's circling back on itself, padding the chases run time. They are broken up with really funny bits that harken back to old jackie movies like Rumble in the bronx.

It's not often you see Tom cruise embrace comedy or self-deprecation, but I almost feel like he took home some of the positive feedback he got from Tropic thunder and let that feed into the development of Dead Reckoning. So much of the film is Tom in "FML" situations rather than invincible super spy. It feels out of place in the franchise but is a huge welcome. Theres yet another cliff jump scene, but rather than amping up the mountain dew commercial music like if Mission Impossible 2 or James Bond ambiance in Fallout, here he gets into an emotional shouting match with Benji because Benji just expects that he can magic carpet his way out of every cliff situation. It's all very Jackie Chan, at one point a chase scene ends with Ethan literally just standing around in traffic with a steering wheel handcuffed to his arm with a look his face thats like "I hate my life". I don't want to spoil the funny bits, but to say that they are well done and really serve the film well given it's length.

Until recently I would not style myself a Mission impossible fan, but I think if I were to try and sell people on the franchise I would definitely feel comfortable telling people they can just watch the series from Rogue Nation. I have positive things to say about any of the Christopher McQuarrie led MI films and this one easily feels like the best one so far.

9/10

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★ review of I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)

"What happened between us? We used to be best friends." "We used to be a lot of things." Honestly, as the first movie that was clearly inspired by Scream, this movie isn't too bad. Other than the third act...but we'll get to that. The plot of the film follows a group of friends named Julie...

letterboxd.com

 

[Bartholen]

Sorcerer (1977), 7/10

This is a story about four men from different walks of life ending up in remote South America, and having to transport a cargo of unstable dynamite through the jungle for a chance for freedom, directed by William Friedkin. This film feels quintessentially 70s in the best way possible: it feels entirely uncompromised in its vision, is aimed squarely at a mature audience, and has a properly grungy, down to earth feel to it. The film looks stunning and hasn't aged a day visually or thematically. The acting's all really good, and there's some great tension to be had with the setpieces in the second half.

What let this movie down for me the most is its structure. It starts out deliberately disorienting, with three different, entirely disconnected plot setups being presented in succession. It then moves to a bit establishing the main conflict, but doesn't bring the real main characters together until about halfway through the movie, after which it's mostly action. It doesn't really feel that the movie establishes much of a dynamic or rapport between the characters, making their connection feel tenuous at best. I don't really know how these characters feel about each other, they're just dudes brought together for a job incidentally.

There's a clear throughline of denying the viewer closure and payoff. Characters or plot threads that may seem important initially are just left in the dust, vital moments may cut in a split-second to something else entirely, and characters meet unceremonious, unexpected ends. It's an effective tool, and works well for what this movie is going for, which is an unflinching depiction of a truly crapsack world. The characters are selfish, terrible people, and no one is operating out of the goodness of their heart.

It's probably a lot better on a second watch.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1

Great, I assume this means it's out on digital.

There's a bunch of movies that came out this year that I wanted to watch in theaters but just never got around to. And then I further never got around to watching them on digital. Which sucks, because I recently rewatched Barbie at home with the family and found I enjoyed it significantly less this time around. I have greatly underestimated how much being in the theater adds to the experience.

 

[BrawlMan]

I have greatly underestimated how much being in the theater adds to the experience.

There's definite truth to that, but if I enjoyed a movie without the theater experience, than a movie still did its job.

I am still not seeing Barbie though. Not for me.

 

[thebobmaster]

Couldn't sleep, knocked this out early.

A ★★ review of I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)

"I thought you were out of town. Look, I wanted to borrow your black skirt, but I'm not ready to die for it." Lackluster sequel, but not entirely unenjoyable. One year after the events of the last film, Julie (Jennifer Love Hewitt) is still struggling to cope, having moved out of town to a...

letterboxd.com

 

[Thaluikhain]

Couldn't sleep, knocked this out early.

A ★★ review of I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)

"I thought you were out of town. Look, I wanted to borrow your black skirt, but I'm not ready to die for it." Lackluster sequel, but not entirely unenjoyable. One year after the events of the last film, Julie (Jennifer Love Hewitt) is still struggling to cope, having moved out of town to a...

letterboxd.com

Is this the one where a heroine tells people about the body and the blood, but it's cleaned up before the other's see it? Ge a piece of paper, run it between the floorboards, check for traces of blood, be hard to get it all, especially at short notice.

And the hero goes to a pawn shop to pawn an engagement ring and buys a gun. Red flag there.

 

[thebobmaster]

Is this the one where a heroine tells people about the body and the blood, but it's cleaned up before the other's see it? Ge a piece of paper, run it between the floorboards, check for traces of blood, be hard to get it all, especially at short notice.

And the hero goes to a pawn shop to pawn an engagement ring and buys a gun. Red flag there.

This is indeed that one on both parts. The first one was...not quite as ridiculous as a scene in the original movie where a body covered in crabs is completely cleaned out of a car before cops can arrive, but it's still way up there. The second one...yeah, that pawn shop owner probably was just thinking "Fuck it, not my fiancee. Long as I get money for this."

 

[BrawlMan]

Couldn't sleep, knocked this out early.

A ★★ review of I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)

"I thought you were out of town. Look, I wanted to borrow your black skirt, but I'm not ready to die for it." Lackluster sequel, but not entirely unenjoyable. One year after the events of the last film, Julie (Jennifer Love Hewitt) is still struggling to cope, having moved out of town to a...

letterboxd.com

Is this the one where a heroine tells people about the body and the blood, but it's cleaned up before the other's see it? Ge a piece of paper, run it between the floorboards, check for traces of blood, be hard to get it all, especially at short notice.

And the hero goes to a pawn shop to pawn an engagement ring and buys a gun. Red flag there.

​

 

[Piscian]

There's definite truth to that, but if I enjoyed a movie without the theater experience, than a movie still did its job.

I am still not seeing Barbie though. Not for me.

I generally try to see anything thats designed for a theater experience in theaters. Your scifis, big actions and what not, but work has kept me away recently. I'm actually really sad I also missed Creator in IMAX. I'm a bit rural and while we have a DD theater, every film only gets a week before it's shuffled off to the matchbox screens barely larger than my TV and with worse sound.

Barbie has a lot of material that has universal appeal, but I think if you know you're gonna go in with trepidation it would be at best disappointing, and at worst a slog. You probably have the right of it because it's not delivering any kind of zeitgeist Cloverfield, The Blair Witch Project experience. Fine for some good for others. No ones gonan be nostalgic for Barbie (2023) when they reboot it to The Barbie (2032) after we see the franchise end with Barbie: The Fetchining.

There might be something in Bobs comment about watching Barbie with the family. I think I probably would have enjoyed it more in a casual family setting where I'm not zero'd into it trying to analyze it as some generational film the promotional material sells it as.

 

[BrawlMan]

I generally try to see anything that designed for a theater experience in theaters. Your scifis, big actions and what not, but work has kept me away recently. I'm actually really sad I missed Creator in IMAX. I'm a bit rural and while we have a DD theater, every film only gets a week before it's shuffled off to the matchbox screens barely large than my TV and with worse sound.

For some reason, MJR didn't have an Epic screening (IMAX equivalent) of The Creator, but the screening I was in is still huge and have loud sound systems.

Barbie has a lot of material that has universal appeal, but I think if you know you're gonna go in with trepidation it would be best disappointing and at worst a slog. You probably have the right of, because it's delivering any kind of zeitgeist Cloverfield, The Blair Witch Project experience. Fine for some good for others.

There might be something in Bobs comment about watching Barbie with the family. I think I probably would have enjoy it more in a casual family setting where I'm not zero'd into it trying to analyze it as some generational film the promotional material sells it as.

I know the movie ain't bad, but there's nothing for me in it.

You probably have the right of, because it's delivering any kind of zeitgeist Cloverfield, The Blair Witch Project experience. Fine for some good for others.

Yep.