Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

[thebobmaster]

A ★★½ review of Maximum Overdrive (1986)

“This machine just called me an asshole!” This film, as the sole directorial effort from famed author Stephen King and adapted from one of his short stories "Trucks", had its share of production issues. Primarily, depending on who you asked, he either spent production coked out of his mind (King...

letterboxd.com

 

[gorfias]

A Complete Unknown in theater.

The story is meh. We've seen the burnt out superstar biopic too often to comment upon.
But I have to wonder is there an entire gen that doesn't know how wonderful so much music out there is? Lotta good folk music out there.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Sisu

A old Finnish man John Wicks some Nazis.

A fun and satisfying movie that makes you go "yeah, fuck them Nazis" with your whole chest.

Highly recommended for killing an hour and half.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Nirvana (1997)

You know, I like to think I have a fairly decent grasp on world cinema so I feel fairly qualified to say: of all the cinematic traditions around the world, Italy has got to have one of the weirdest. Between their strange habit of casting foreign actors and dubbing them over and their very ambivalent approach to genre, tone and narrative coherence they feel way more foreign to me than the Japanese.

So, Nirvana is an Existential 90's Cyberpunk psychological horror buddy comedy christmas movie starring Highlander's Christopher Lambert.

... You get where I'm coming from, right? So, Nirvana stars Lambert as video game programmer Jimi in future cyberpunk Marrakesh. After the protagonist of his game somehow achieved sentience he, along with shady hackers Joystick and Niama goes on an adventure around the world find his missing girlfriend and hack into the companies server to delete the game and liberate the character from his sentience.

There is a lot of stuff going on in this. This is already a very dense plot for a movie that's just under 2 hours long and it's weirdly elaborate worldbuilding doesn't help. There are automatic security systems that verbally abuse burglars and gas stations that fill your tank with poison if you try to go off without paying them and smarthouses reminding you to take a bath in a rather pushy fashion along with technoshamanistic Hindu Yogi's and a cyberspace that feels right out of Silent Hill or Jacob's Ladder including a digital succubus trying to seduce the protagonist.

This movie is rather silly. And I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way, I had a good time watching. It underlines its zany worldbuilding with surprisingly high quality costumes and sets and props. There is a scene where a character gets surgery on his cybernetic eye implants that looks almost like something out of a Cronenberg movie. The banter between the protagonist and Joystick, his comic relief sidekick is pretty consistently entertaining and so are some of the visual jokes. It has a surprisingly memorable supporting cast, including an unfailingly polite Japanese corporate agent and a hacker who rather resembles Judy from Cyberpunk 2077.

This movie is quite fun. It's probably the closest there has ever been to a good William S. Gibson adaptation, even though it technically isn't one. I mean, I prefer it over Johnny Mnemonic. It's a movie that has a lot of ideas. I think that's something you ought to give it a lot of credit for. I'm not sure if very much of it makes a whole lot of sense but there's definitely a creative vision in there that I can respect. For better or for worse, it feels like a movie only a very weird person could have ever come up with and I respect.

In other words, if you want to see something I've seen quite accurately described as "A Cyberpunk Christmas movie with Silent Hill vibes"... well, it's the only one you're gonna get and it could be a whole lot worse. I kinda dug this. And I'm pretty sure it couldn't possibly have been made anywhere other than Italy.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Iron Man 3 - 7/10

Yes I am that heretical asshole that thinks this movie was the weakest of the three Iron Man movies though I agree it’s character development for Tony is critical to future events and the Infinity Saga would be poorer for its absence.

However I really was bummed that after spending no small amount of effort reimagining the Mandarin and landing a plum actor like Ben Kingsley for it that they did what they did. I’d have adored seeing Kingsley beat the shit out of RDJ with magic Kung Fu from space. And I think it’s kind of a shame they didn’t let Pepper keep a stable version of the Extremis powers, that would have been cool. I know there was a shirt that retconned the Mandarin thing but it never went anywhere.

But my rating of 7 is a very strong 7 since Shane Black got his paws on this one and whatever poor decisions he’s made on other projects, man still has the touch that made stuff like The Last Boy Scout work so well.

Next up, Thor: The Dark World.

Oh no, you aren't the only one. I thought the movie sucked ass when I first saw it. The whole "I'm just an actor" twist really pissed me off. For some reason, people seem to love these stupid plot twists, because same thing happened in Star Wars Ep. 9. Granted, no one saw them coming so they are indeed plot twist, but there is a difference between having a mind fuck of a plot twist (Sixth Sense comes to mind), and then there are ones that are stupid enough to make me lose words.

Tony's journey of fighting against his anxiety issue and no longer relying on his suits was a nice message.... But then he begins to use them again in Infinity War and Endgame. CinemaSin video on iron man 3 pretty much sums up everything I hate about the movie.

Aldrich Killian is not a very good villain. I mean I think he was supposed to be based on Fireband. No idea on why the name change, but the original character himself isn't associated w/ AIM. Speaking of which, no one could figure out it's MIA spelled backwards? FFS.....

I think it was one of the first movies where I questioned why it achieved such success. Guess the action scenes and RDJ saved it

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

A Complete Unknown in theater.

The story is meh. We've seen the burnt out superstar biopic too often to comment upon.

That's kind of why I just can't give a single f*** about this movie. Sorry to sound all boomer but Dylan really was one of a kind and singularly important and unique and to reduce it to "typical biopic" doesn't do anyone any favors.
As much fun as I make of that other Dylan movie where there were 6 Dylans, at least they tried to do something different.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

Sisu

A old Finnish man John Wicks some Nazis.

A fun and satisfying movie that makes you go "yeah, fuck them Nazis" with your whole chest.

Highly recommended for killing an hour and half.

Yeah it's basically the vengeful energy that fueled Django Unchained but without the Tarantino stylized smugness. Just pure tension and violence. Awesome movie.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Man of Steel (2013), after the new Superman trailer has gotten me into the mood.

Yep, still awesome. Still inspiring, and still one of the best portrayals of Superman. Especially that part where he learns to fly. Hans Zimmerman did a fantastic job of capturing that feeling. Really wish Christopher Reeves was alive to see it.

The movie isn't without its flaws, and I am willing to let some of the criticisms slide, or at most leave it at being debatable. But one criticism that I cannot stand is how "violent" Superman is and how he's letting people die. How that "ruins" the character.

Have none of them ever read any of Superman comics? Cities and properties are destroyed all the time. Yes it doesn't flat out show people dying, but with so much destruction you can imagine many people dying. Hell, JLU had a fight scene between Superman and Shazam, and only recently did I saw people commenting on how they managed to destroy several buildings in the city. Or that Doomsday animated movie where even with the entire justice league many people died during the battle.

Hell, even in the comics Superman usually is focused on stopping the threat and doesn't have the time to save people. I used to question why superman doesn't simply force the fight to more secluded locations, but then I realized some villains won't take that lying down or knock him back while trying to do so.

There were also many of those terraforming machines in the movie. Superman is fast, but let's remember he's still a newbie into his career. He hasn't had any experience to deal with them in an efficient way. For all the people that gets killed whenever those machines slam down, is that really on Superman? He is trying his best here.

Shame what happened to DECU, though. It was promising, but Zack Snyder and some major personal issues to deal with and Joss Whedon was an asshole.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★ review of Beetlejuice (1988)

"It's showtime." As one of the earlier efforts by Tim Burton, this film took some time in pre-production to actually get made. After the success of Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, Warner Bros. was willing to green-light this movie, but was less keen on Batman, while Tim Burton himself was feeling...

letterboxd.com

 

[BrawlMan]

Man of Steel (2013), after the new Superman trailer has gotten me into the mood.

Yep, still awesome. Still inspiring, and still one of the best portrayals of Superman. Especially that part where he learns to fly. Hans Zimmerman did a fantastic job of capturing that feeling. Really wish Christopher Reeves was alive to see it.

The movie isn't without its flaws, and I am willing to let some of the criticisms slide, or at most leave it at being debatable. But one criticism that I cannot stand is how "violent" Superman is and how he's letting people die. How that "ruins" the character.

Have none of them ever read any of Superman comics? Cities and properties are destroyed all the time. Yes it doesn't flat out show people dying, but with so much destruction you can imagine many people dying. Hell, JLU had a fight scene between Superman and Shazam, and only recently did I saw people commenting on how they managed to destroy several buildings in the city. Or that Doomsday animated movie where even with the entire justice league many people died during the battle.

Hell, even in the comics Superman usually is focused on stopping the threat and doesn't have the time to save people. I used to question why superman doesn't simply force the fight to more secluded locations, but then I realized some villains won't take that lying down or knock him back while trying to do so.

There were also many of those terraforming machines in the movie. Superman is fast, but let's remember he's still a newbie into his career. He hasn't had any experience to deal with them in an efficient way. For all the people that gets killed whenever those machines slam down, is that really on Superman? He is trying his best here.

Shame what happened to DECU, though. It was promising, but Zack Snyder and some major personal issues to deal with and Joss Whedon was an asshole.

Thank you! Everything you've said, I've been saying since day one. Most people do love this movie. Don't let the loud, nostalgia blind, vocal minority dumb ass and biatch ass critics (Cinema Sins, RedLetterMeda, Honest Trailers, THGWTG/Channel Awesome/Nostalgia Critic) fool you. This is still a great movie, and one of the best DCEU movies! Man of Steel and Aquaman are my top spots.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The movie isn't without its flaws, and I am willing to let some of the criticisms slide, or at most leave it at being debatable. But one criticism that I cannot stand is how "violent" Superman is and how he's letting people die. How that "ruins" the character.

Have none of them ever read any of Superman comics? Cities and properties are destroyed all the time. Yes it doesn't flat out show people dying, but with so much destruction you can imagine many people dying. Hell, JLU had a fight scene between Superman and Shazam, and only recently did I saw people commenting on how they managed to destroy several buildings in the city. Or that Doomsday animated movie where even with the entire justice league many people died during the battle.

I have no real investment in Superman as a character, and they can honestly let the character do what he wants, but it's very clear that the movie is interested in causing havoc. It's less 'oh my god, look at this destruction - I hope Superman puts a stop to it' and more 'aw yeah, look at how he's smashing through those buildings'.

But then nearly all superheroes are inherently flawed in this sense, where it's really just wishfullfillment wrapped up in noble sacrificial heroics.

 

[BrawlMan]

then nearly all superheroes are inherently flawed in this sense, where it's really just wishfullfillment wrapped up in noble sacrificial heroics.

While you have your point, it's still doesn't change the fact that a lot of loud online critics tried to single MoS for this, when other superhero shows and movies have done way worse or barely mention the destruction at all. The DCAU verse had done this multiple times, yet those same fans never bring up anything or try to make pathetic excuses about it. "It's s a kid show!", in the most overly defensive tone ever.

Snakes on a Plane I find entertaining but I don't watch it that many times. I didn't even see it in theaters.

 

[Bedinsis]

I watched Hundreds of Beavers, after various critics had praised it. It has a rather peculiar aesthetic, so I think you should watch the trailer before determining if this is something you would be interested in seeing.


It was okay. It was in essence a feature length slapstick cartoon, only performed with a mixture of different visual art forms, mostly one human interacting with people in animal costumes, but also puppetry and special effects that at times felt really cheap. I assume the intention behind the really cheap ones were to let the clarity that comes from cartoons let people immediately read what the intention was but my main reaction was "well that was a cheap effect". I am accustomed to cartoon logic in cartoons, and I fail to see what really was gained by doing this in live action. My best point of comparison is the movie George of the Jungle which had quite a slapsticky aesthetic and I thought that movie handled it better.

The story? A guy is stuck in the wilderness between a bunch of animals causing him grief and slapstick violence, in a series of scenes that escalate as he learns how the cartoon logic works. The early scenes where he learns things I thought worked well, but by the end of the movie he had so little trouble and his goals were not really sympathetic that I kinda lost interest.

 

[Thaluikhain]

But then nearly all superheroes are inherently flawed in this sense, where it's really just wishfullfillment wrapped up in noble sacrificial heroics.

And a healthy dollop of "the status quo is good".

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★½ review of DuckTales: The Movie – Treasure of the Lost Lamp (1990)

“What’s more important, your fortune or your life?” “Well…” “It’s not exactly a trick question!” This film began as a 5-part episode for the TV series, but was eventually reworked into a theatrical film. The initial idea for a plot device was based around the Philosopher's Stone, but that idea...

letterboxd.com

 

[Xprimentyl]

Speak No Evil: Alright / Great

An American couple and their pre-teen daughter (living in England) are vacationing in Italy where they meet a free-spirited British couple and their son. After their brief time together, the British couple invites the American family to their farmhouse in Southwest England. They agree to visit, and at first things are going well, but it's soon made apparent that the Brits have ulterior motives.

Decent film, but flimsy on its premise, i.e.: I don't have any kids myself, but some of the choices these parents make lead me to believe I am incapable of that unconditional parental love and/or restraint that serves as the vehicle at the film's core. James McAvoy is [for me] cementing his place as the go-to "we need someone amicable who is simultaneously capable of some heinous shit" guy, and I guess someone finally made a movie for cuckolds everywhere who fantasize about eventually growing a pair. All that to say it's not bad if you're not someone like me who questions out loud the decisions of the people on screen who obviously can't hear you.

 

[Bedinsis]

A ★★½ review of DuckTales: The Movie – Treasure of the Lost Lamp (1990)

“What’s more important, your fortune or your life?” “Well…” “It’s not exactly a trick question!” This film began as a 5-part episode for the TV series, but was eventually reworked into a theatrical film. The initial idea for a plot device was based around the Philosopher's Stone, but that idea...

letterboxd.com

That movie actually addressed an aspect of wish granting genies and protagonists who could wish for anything but choosing to be selfish, which I appreciated (paraphrasing):
[one of the nephews]: "We spend all our wishes save one, and then we wish for world peace."
Genie: "Hey! I fulfil wishes, not miracles."

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★ review of Children of the Corn: Runaway (2018)

“We don’t want trouble. We are a peaceful, God-loving country town, Miss Larson.” “Yeah, I can tell.” This film follows a woman named Ruth (Marci Miller), who escaped from Gatlin as a kid while pregnant, soon after giving birth to Aaron (Jake Ryan Scott). Thirteen years later, while constantly...

letterboxd.com

 

[Bartholen]

The VVitch, 8/10

Decided to rewatch this in preparation for Nosferatu (which I get to see in IMAX, yay!), seeing as it's the closest counterpart to it in Eggers' filmography. Man, talk about starting off strong. I wouldn't quite call this a masterpiece, but for a first feature from a complete unknown it's astonishing. It reminds me of films like Under the Skin, It Comes at Night and Justin Kurzel's MacBeth, in that it's a very artsy, grim film that doesn't lead the audience by the hand and places a heavy emphasis on atmosphere. The last one it achieves in spades: the environment of the film feels hostile, cold and miserable, and like just beyond the edge of the woods unspeakable horrors lurk. It's got heaps of themes and substance to bite into: religion, faith and the repression it inevitably creates, female puberty, man's fight against nature. It's very up to interpretation: is there really a witch in the woods, or are the family merely experiencing some sort of mass psychosis brought on by their misfortune? Could Thomasin really be unwittingly causing all this misery, or are the twins agents of chaos without knowing it? Is something truly speaking to Thomasin at the end, or is it just a figment of the imagination? You can make solid arguments for both, and it gets the brain going wonderfully. The ending is also incredible.

You can see the seeds of his style which would later bear magnificent fruit in his following films, but at the same time it does feel like you're watching the trial run. While there is undoubtedly visual flair in the movie (the shots of the forest look incredible), a lot of the time it's kind of whatever. While this was made for a very meager budget, the visuals could be better with just simple changes to the cinematography, no need for anything flashy. It also takes its time getting going, and I can see why it wasn't nearly as praised as The Lighthouse. Still, as a start to the career of one of the greatest currently working directors it's a hell of a movie to start out on.

 

[thebobmaster]

The VVitch, 8/10

Decided to rewatch this in preparation for Nosferatu (which I get to see in IMAX, yay!), seeing as it's the closest counterpart to it in Eggers' filmography. Man, talk about starting off strong. I wouldn't quite call this a masterpiece, but for a first feature from a complete unknown it's astonishing. It reminds me of films like Under the Skin, It Comes at Night and Justin Kurzel's MacBeth, in that it's a very artsy, grim film that doesn't lead the audience by the hand and places a heavy emphasis on atmosphere. The last one it achieves in spades: the environment of the film feels hostile, cold and miserable, and like just beyond the edge of the woods unspeakable horrors lurk. It's got heaps of themes and substance to bite into: religion, faith and the repression it inevitably creates, female puberty, man's fight against nature. It's very up to interpretation: is there really a witch in the woods, or are the family merely experiencing some sort of mass psychosis brought on by their misfortune? Could Thomasin really be unwittingly causing all this misery, or are the twins agents of chaos without knowing it? Is something truly speaking to Thomasin at the end, or is it just a figment of the imagination? You can make solid arguments for both, and it gets the brain going wonderfully. The ending is also incredible.

You can see the seeds of his style which would later bear magnificent fruit in his following films, but at the same time it does feel like you're watching the trial run. While there is undoubtedly visual flair in the movie (the shots of the forest look incredible), a lot of the time it's kind of whatever. While this was made for a very meager budget, the visuals could be better with just simple changes to the cinematography, no need for anything flashy. It also takes its time getting going, and I can see why it wasn't nearly as praised as The Lighthouse. Still, as a start to the career of one of the greatest currently working directors it's a hell of a movie to start out on.

Eggers himself has said he was a bit disappointed with the visuals on The VVitch. He feels like his concepts just didn't seem to come across on screen the same way they were in his mind.