Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Th3Ch33s3Cak3
- Start date
I have both versions. I still prefer the original, but they do a good job with the remake. My only problem with the remake is that it relies on a lot of jump scares. That, and the ending kinda felt tacked on with its downer ending/sequel hook.
Saw Extraction just now. It's basically COD combined with John Wick and The Raid. I know Moviebob said the fight scene are Bourne-esque, but that would be an insult to Extraction. I can tell what the fuck is going on in that film, JW, and The Raid. The movie is a solid, Own It (whenever it comes out on home video), My only gripe is that it starts with an In Media Res. I hate that style of technique, as it usually kills the suspense or spoils what happens near the end. Unless you're pulling a unique twist on the trope, don't do it. I had a similar issues with Atomic Blonde doing this.
Kedi.
Wonderful documentary about the wild-but-tame cats of Istanbul and how they affect the lives of the locals there. As a fairly passionate cat appreciator, I'm aware of unavoidable bias, but it does a good job of getting to non-cat lovers too, from what I've heard from non-cat people.
A dog's purpose.
Right. Ok. For a bit I kept doubting myself that not liking this must be clear evidence of being a bitter hopeless cretin without a soul. But then there are doggy films I do love such as Red Dog and that really depressing one with Richard Gere, as dog's are lovely, if a bit needy, creatures. So whether there's a soul or not, I'm sure it's the film not doing something right. Or maybe it is, as somehow audience reviews are overwhelmingly positive compared to critic reviews. Perhaps it's the film's need to voice the dogs with a soppy voiceover wallowing in cheap cliches of "hah, I bet this is what dog's think when they do dog stuff" while treating it's audience like complete idiots who need simple exposition for everything, when a film like Up managed to do it infinitely better with effective humour, without that even being a main element. Perhaps it's the caricatures of humans eerily similar to David Cage's less offensive work, like the neglectful mum who doesn't bother justifying her own neglect until retribution time, or the boyfriend who came right out of evil-boyfriend school and no-one would be charmed by. It feels manipulative - a dumb word when ultimately all fiction is intending to manipulate us into believing in it - yet it does come off as cheap; the emotional pulls it goes for often feel totally unearned and built from only cliche at best. It's competent enough to fool the uncritical though. But I am a soulless cretin who needs more grounded love. Not bloody reincarnation bullshit. Oh yeah, almost forgot it did that! This is just cheap strong cider for spiritual dog lovers.
Wonderful documentary about the wild-but-tame cats of Istanbul and how they affect the lives of the locals there. As a fairly passionate cat appreciator, I'm aware of unavoidable bias, but it does a good job of getting to non-cat lovers too, from what I've heard from non-cat people.
A dog's purpose.
Right. Ok. For a bit I kept doubting myself that not liking this must be clear evidence of being a bitter hopeless cretin without a soul. But then there are doggy films I do love such as Red Dog and that really depressing one with Richard Gere, as dog's are lovely, if a bit needy, creatures. So whether there's a soul or not, I'm sure it's the film not doing something right. Or maybe it is, as somehow audience reviews are overwhelmingly positive compared to critic reviews. Perhaps it's the film's need to voice the dogs with a soppy voiceover wallowing in cheap cliches of "hah, I bet this is what dog's think when they do dog stuff" while treating it's audience like complete idiots who need simple exposition for everything, when a film like Up managed to do it infinitely better with effective humour, without that even being a main element. Perhaps it's the caricatures of humans eerily similar to David Cage's less offensive work, like the neglectful mum who doesn't bother justifying her own neglect until retribution time, or the boyfriend who came right out of evil-boyfriend school and no-one would be charmed by. It feels manipulative - a dumb word when ultimately all fiction is intending to manipulate us into believing in it - yet it does come off as cheap; the emotional pulls it goes for often feel totally unearned and built from only cliche at best. It's competent enough to fool the uncritical though. But I am a soulless cretin who needs more grounded love. Not bloody reincarnation bullshit. Oh yeah, almost forgot it did that! This is just cheap strong cider for spiritual dog lovers.
The Expendables 3
A movie that parodies the macho action flicks of the 80s with a straight face. Full of idiotic moments I will never forget, but they are the boring kind of idiotic like soldiers running to melee range when the heroes are unarmed. These are tired action movie cliches for a reason! At least the Fast&Furious flicks give us crazy stuff instead of boredom. Mel Gibson is the bad guy this time and he has maybe one funny line or something. Even Jet Li is back for five minutes and he just shoots people. Wesley Snipes was broken out of jail for little reason. 1/10
A movie that parodies the macho action flicks of the 80s with a straight face. Full of idiotic moments I will never forget, but they are the boring kind of idiotic like soldiers running to melee range when the heroes are unarmed. These are tired action movie cliches for a reason! At least the Fast&Furious flicks give us crazy stuff instead of boredom. Mel Gibson is the bad guy this time and he has maybe one funny line or something. Even Jet Li is back for five minutes and he just shoots people. Wesley Snipes was broken out of jail for little reason. 1/10
Onward
Cute but very by-the-numbers Pixar movie that, like every other Pixar movie, is set in an alternate miniature version of the real world (with parallels for puns and sight gags) and has a message about growing the fuck up and embracing some unavoidable negative aspect of life. I'm not a fan of the fantasy/suburbia crossover (the concepts seem so antithetical to each other) or the implied vilification of science as something that took "magic" away, but overall enjoyed the movie. As usual the heart of the story is in the right place and you well up during the obligatory bittersweet ending but I can't help feel the specific themes have already been covered much more effectively in another dozen or so Pixar movies.
Cute but very by-the-numbers Pixar movie that, like every other Pixar movie, is set in an alternate miniature version of the real world (with parallels for puns and sight gags) and has a message about growing the fuck up and embracing some unavoidable negative aspect of life. I'm not a fan of the fantasy/suburbia crossover (the concepts seem so antithetical to each other) or the implied vilification of science as something that took "magic" away, but overall enjoyed the movie. As usual the heart of the story is in the right place and you well up during the obligatory bittersweet ending but I can't help feel the specific themes have already been covered much more effectively in another dozen or so Pixar movies.
I used to watch this with the kids on loop. My missus had never seen it and it had been years since I had done so. Therefore, it was a fun spend of time to laugh at this very controversial red pill comedy, "Just Friends" (2005). BTW: Thought this the best performance of Anna Faris ever. Fat boy nerd and "friend" to most popular girl in high school leaves town and comes back 10 years later in shape, good looking and successful. That these two can now be more than friends makes you think while you laugh, about what motivates people in (or into) relationships? 10/10.
Escape Room (2017)
Mistook it for another movie called Escape Room (2019), discussed in Half in the Bag. I don't remember the discussion itself other than they were lukewarm towards the 2019 movie, and that should tell you how awful the 2017 movie has to be that, about 10 minutes in, I suspect I'm watching the wrong movie. The first half hour is nothing but B-roll of some car cruising around town (barely connected to the rest of the plot) and a dinner party with actors speaking banal dialogue that goes in circles. The actors are all bad and the characters are horribly written. Everyone treats each other like they're trying to impress Joss Whedon by sassing each other constantly, to the point you don't believe any of these people could be friends, they so plainly despise their company.
The rest of the movie is a Saw-lite escape the room scenario. And you'd think the whole reason the movie exists is because the screenwriter went to an escape room and felt super clever puzzling his way out, but the script gets the concept all wrong. One puzzle is supposed to lead to another goddammit. You can't just sequence break everything. And most puzzles don't appear to have a way of connecting to anything you would have achieved previously. There's way too much left to chance.
The movie's so dumb and artless that the twist is that there is no twist.
Mistook it for another movie called Escape Room (2019), discussed in Half in the Bag. I don't remember the discussion itself other than they were lukewarm towards the 2019 movie, and that should tell you how awful the 2017 movie has to be that, about 10 minutes in, I suspect I'm watching the wrong movie. The first half hour is nothing but B-roll of some car cruising around town (barely connected to the rest of the plot) and a dinner party with actors speaking banal dialogue that goes in circles. The actors are all bad and the characters are horribly written. Everyone treats each other like they're trying to impress Joss Whedon by sassing each other constantly, to the point you don't believe any of these people could be friends, they so plainly despise their company.
The rest of the movie is a Saw-lite escape the room scenario. And you'd think the whole reason the movie exists is because the screenwriter went to an escape room and felt super clever puzzling his way out, but the script gets the concept all wrong. One puzzle is supposed to lead to another goddammit. You can't just sequence break everything. And most puzzles don't appear to have a way of connecting to anything you would have achieved previously. There's way too much left to chance.
The movie's so dumb and artless that the twist is that there is no twist.
High Life (2018)
I noticed that this and The Lighthouse had come to Prime and I gave it a shot after reading a few times that Robert Pattinson was doing interesting things (I'm a Batman obsessive, but had only seen Pattinson in the first Twilight film).
It's Claire Denis' first English language film, and there were plenty of interesting directing choices, some hypnotic shots and a languorous pace, but overall it was pretty standard science fiction mostly set on a single spaceship with flashbacks to earth and what happened on the ship prior to the start of the film (including one very awkward interlude with a scientist delivering exposition to a reporter on a train, neither of whom are seen before or after).
It's thematically very heavily focused on issues of reproduction, which is fine in and of itself, but there are definitely some awkward moments, especially if you're watching it with your partner as I was. See, in particular, Juliette Binoche in the F--- Box, a very explicit, kind of beautiful, but extremely un-sexy sexual scene of the sort that seems to pop up a lot in contemporary French films. This is not a date night (or quarantine and chill) kind of movie!
It feels, and probably is, too long. The ending is predicable and probably inevitable. Pattinson is good, and I can see how the Batman casting makes sense now. Mild recommendation. I'm looking forward to seeing the Lighthouse in the near future.
I noticed that this and The Lighthouse had come to Prime and I gave it a shot after reading a few times that Robert Pattinson was doing interesting things (I'm a Batman obsessive, but had only seen Pattinson in the first Twilight film).
It's Claire Denis' first English language film, and there were plenty of interesting directing choices, some hypnotic shots and a languorous pace, but overall it was pretty standard science fiction mostly set on a single spaceship with flashbacks to earth and what happened on the ship prior to the start of the film (including one very awkward interlude with a scientist delivering exposition to a reporter on a train, neither of whom are seen before or after).
It's thematically very heavily focused on issues of reproduction, which is fine in and of itself, but there are definitely some awkward moments, especially if you're watching it with your partner as I was. See, in particular, Juliette Binoche in the F--- Box, a very explicit, kind of beautiful, but extremely un-sexy sexual scene of the sort that seems to pop up a lot in contemporary French films. This is not a date night (or quarantine and chill) kind of movie!
It feels, and probably is, too long. The ending is predicable and probably inevitable. Pattinson is good, and I can see how the Batman casting makes sense now. Mild recommendation. I'm looking forward to seeing the Lighthouse in the near future.
Quel maledetto treno blindato (1978)
Translated as "Inglorious Bastards" in USA, the movie provided Tarantino with the title and motif for his 2009 movie. It's about a group of WW2 allied deserters banding up together behind enemy lines and eventually staging a climactic heist on an armored nazi train. It's campy, horribly dubbed (par for the course for 70s Italian shlock) and a lot of fun. This is probably what most people thought they were gonna get going in to watch Tarantino's movie: a good old-fashioned action/adventure epic about killing nazis. The plot is thin and scattershot but the characters are likeable and distinct (if a bit silly) and the ending set-piece is just fantastic by any standard.
Translated as "Inglorious Bastards" in USA, the movie provided Tarantino with the title and motif for his 2009 movie. It's about a group of WW2 allied deserters banding up together behind enemy lines and eventually staging a climactic heist on an armored nazi train. It's campy, horribly dubbed (par for the course for 70s Italian shlock) and a lot of fun. This is probably what most people thought they were gonna get going in to watch Tarantino's movie: a good old-fashioned action/adventure epic about killing nazis. The plot is thin and scattershot but the characters are likeable and distinct (if a bit silly) and the ending set-piece is just fantastic by any standard.
Jupiter Ascending. Spock's ears look better, and that's from ages ago.
Constantine
Hey, Bayonetta was made a few years after this film came out and seems rather similar in many ways, though both are bad for very different reasons.
Hey, Bayonetta was made a few years after this film came out and seems rather similar in many ways, though both are bad for very different reasons.
I thought it was a fun action flick with a cool gimmick. I didn't read that much more into it, kinda curious why a lot of people did.
Then again, people thought the Matrix was mind-blowing and not just an action movie take on the Allegory of the Cave.
That's mostly what I remember was Eva Green being really Sexy and some Naval Battle stuff. I can remember much of 300 but the sequel felt not nearly as memorable.
Is it sad that I now only remember Eva from Casino Royale and Penny Dreadful? I cannot remember either 300s. Or Sin Cities for that matter
The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)
I actually didn't finish this movie. I'm aware its a noire classic with a simmering tension between McQueen and Dunaway. Unfortunately its also fucking boring a lot of the time. Like Steve 'Man's-Man' McQueen is a passive mastermind in this movie - one of the few changes in the remake with Pierce Brosnan that improved it - and its just.....full of filler. The movie has a gliding scene that goes for almost five or eight minutes and it accomplishes fuck all. And no amount of camera malarkey makes a polo match exciting.
Also thank Christ for Val Doonican otherwise I fear "Windmills of your Mind" would be consigned to my shit bin.
I actually didn't finish this movie. I'm aware its a noire classic with a simmering tension between McQueen and Dunaway. Unfortunately its also fucking boring a lot of the time. Like Steve 'Man's-Man' McQueen is a passive mastermind in this movie - one of the few changes in the remake with Pierce Brosnan that improved it - and its just.....full of filler. The movie has a gliding scene that goes for almost five or eight minutes and it accomplishes fuck all. And no amount of camera malarkey makes a polo match exciting.
Also thank Christ for Val Doonican otherwise I fear "Windmills of your Mind" would be consigned to my shit bin.
She's a boilerplate femme fatale in both. You couldn't ask for a better femme fatale than Eva Green, who as far as I'm concerned is the definition of the archetype, but the characters sort of just stop there.
Also it doesn't help that both sequels look and feel way cheaper than the originals. They're like straight-to-DVD trash but with a budget.