• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Movies You've Seen Recently |OT| September 2017

R

Ridley327

Member
CheeseConey said:
Just saw Close Encounters of the Third Kind for the first time. Really enjoyed it. Only problem was that they played some Behind the Scenes thing before the film started and it showed really important parts of the film, it kinda ruined it. I wish I would have gotten up and walked out or closed my eyes... thought it'd be a short introduction but it felt like it went on for 8-10 minutes. It should have been after the film not right before it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know what they were thinking with that, but at least from my perspective, I had known enough about the film already that they didn't show a lot of what I didn't already know about, and considering how tightly edited the film is, especially in the last 40 minutes or so, those images mean so much more in context than they ever do as standalone glamor shots.

It wasn't all bad, though, especially since you did get to see Denis Villeneuve geek out about being asked about the film and the behind-the-scenes footage that Spielberg shot was really cool.
 
S

smisk

Member
I remember really loving the trailers for Place Beyond the Pines(2012) but for some reason never saw it until this weekend.. But fuck is this movie great, why don't I hear more about it? The first act is easily the best, but there are strong performances throughout. The corrupt cops made me incredibly angry. And it's filmed gorgeously. The chase scene being filmed completely from the perspective of the cops felt really novel.
The worst thing I can say is that it may be overly long, and drags a bit at some points. Still absolutely worth watching, and is on netflix now!

8/10
 
M

More_Badass

Member
Son of Saul

Son of Saul is a gripping and horrifying drama that ingeniously uses its camera to engross you in this grotesque hell on a very intimate level. The camera practically hovers over the shoulder and back of Saul, often aimed directly at his face as he walks and acts throughout Auschwitz in long takes. We are here with him, beside him and behind him. The background is blurred and out of the focus, we see and hear the horror, but just barely, just enough.

The camera is Saul's mindset and perspective, him trying to not see, to cope through dissociating and numbness, except for when he can't. An early moment has him bumping into an officer; Saul instinctively snaps to attention, takes off his hat, and the world around him comes back into focus as if suddenly he's aware of everything in that moment. And then the moment passes, his head and eyes droop down again, the world blurs. It's an effective use of the camera for storytelling means.

This closeness and perspective only reinforces the intimacy of the story; Son of Saul follows the titular Saul, a Sonderkommando seeking to bury the body of his son in early October 1944. That is his laser-focused purpose, his drive over the concise two-day timeline of the movie, and it's through this journey that we follow him, that we see the methodical industrial horror of Auschwitz; in a way, I was reminded of Nolan's Dunkirk, and how that movie used its stories to represent a microcosm of the experiences of those involved in the rescue. Here, while we only see a narrow sliver through Saul's intense perspective, we can feel the larger scope of the evil that his story moves through. It's always oppressively inescapably in the background, no matter where he goes. This is no soundtrack here, only the incessant cacophony of death and misery.

Son of Saul deserves to be considered up there with Schindler's List, The Pianist, Band of Brothers' Why We Fight, and other praised movies/episodes about the Holocaust. Its unique perspective, very personal story, and unflinching yet tasteful portrayal of Auschwitz's atrocities makes it a difficult but compelling and important watch
 
A

AngmarsKing701

Member
Mercy (2016) - overly complicated, with not a single likable character in the bunch. There's also a 10 minute section in the middle that replays some stuff that had previously happened, to give us confirmation of something we could have figured out anyway, but hey it made the movie 1:27 instead of 1:15.

1.5 / 5
 
TissueBox

TissueBox

Member
(Resorting to short reviews with number grades for the time being until I don't feel as exhausted with verbosity, lol [long story].)
___________

Candleshoe
Foster's great.
4.6/10

Boyz N the Hood (rewatch)
LA hood tragedy classic! AHHHG AM cry...Cuba, you rip me, rip me..!!
8.3/10
___________

[Scale goes from 1 - 10 including decimals and sometimes a hundredth value. The precision is based on an arbitrary mix of objectivity, subjectivity, and personal value and doesn't necessarily represent any of those individually, or whether I liked a film or disliked it. I know, sometimes I don't understand it either; I just land on whatever number feels right, nothing personal -- unless I express it like so through words, or if it gets a really high or low number. In other words, a great movie can still get a low number, and a one I was bored with can get a high one.

Simpler numerical breakdown: >5 great to legendary, 5> good to terrible. Not recommended for aggregates.]
 
J

JTripper

Member
Seeing Close Encounters for the first time in a theater felt like a religious cinematic experience. Absolutely loved it. I've often felt like my maturation as a cinephile or moviegoer over the past few years had reached a point where I'd rarely experience a movie that completely sucks me in to provide the sense of infinite possibilities and creativity I'd get from the entertainment that inspired me as a kid.

Close Encounters brought me back to that place, and I can't remember the last time a movie did that to me. Even seeing The Godfather, which is my favorite film, in a theater earlier this year with a full crowd didn't do that, despite it also feeling like a transcendent moviegoing experience; just a different kind I guess.

Every scene with Roy and his family was packed with emotion and I can't even quite pinpoint why those scenes made me feel so emotional. The
mashed potatoes
scene absolutely wrecked me. I'm still thinking about that ending and how Spielberg might have changed it as he grew older. Even perhaps with its moral ambiguity, the film's sense of cinematic celebration, spectacle and wonder brought me to another place. I felt like Barry the entire time.
 
L

lordxar

Member
TissueBox said:
(Resorting to short reviews with number grades for the time being until I don't feel as exhausted with verbosity, lol [long story].)
___________

Candleshoe
Foster's great.
4.6/10

Boyz N the Hood (rewatch)
LA hood tragedy classic! AHHHG AM cry...Cuba, you rip me, rip me..!!
8.3/10
___________

[Scale goes from 1 - 10 including decimals and sometimes a hundredth value. The precision is based on an arbitrary mix of objectivity, subjectivity, and personal value and doesn't necessarily represent any of those individually, or whether I liked a film or disliked it. I know, sometimes I don't understand it either; I just land on whatever number feels right, nothing personal -- unless I express it like so through words, or if it gets a really high or low number. In other words, a great movie can still get a low number, and a one I was bored with can get a high one.

Simpler numerical breakdown: >5 great to legendary, 5> good to terrible. Not recommended for aggregates.]
Click to expand...

I rate this post 5.4629
 
M

More_Badass

Member
JTripper said:
Close Encounters brought me back to that place, and I can't remember the last time a movie did that to me. Even seeing The Godfather, which is my favorite film, in a theater earlier this year with a full crowd didn't do that, despite it also feeling like a transcendent moviegoing experience; just a different kind I guess.

Every scene with Roy and his family was packed with emotion and I can't even quite pinpoint why those scenes made me feel so emotional. The
mashed potatoes
scene absolutely wrecked me. I'm still thinking about that ending and how Spielberg might have changed it as he grew older. Even perhaps with its moral ambiguity, the film's sense of cinematic celebration, spectacle and wonder brought me to another place. I felt like Barry the entire time.
Click to expand...
I've never seen it. Deciding between seeing it or Logan Lucky tomorrow.
 
F

Fancy Clown

Member
I too saw Close Encounters for the first time in the theater this weekend. Was pretty dope, glad I didn't pass up the opportunity. I averted my eyes during most of that prescreening interview feature that showed a bunch of the scenes from the movie lol.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind:I was fortunate enough for this first time viewing to be in theaters, because the impressive visual and aural scope of the film demand to be played big. While the emotional pull of the film is surprisingly muted for a Spielberg film, and one that centers so much around wondrous sights, the commitment to a sense of realism in both Dreyfuss' character and the events that surround him makes the spectacle that much more impressive. Also, I don't know if it was just me but I found much of this film to be deeply unsettling which is also unusual for a Spielberg film. It's not his most compelling narrative as a whole, but as a collection of scenes and moments, from surreal and grand encounters by turns hilarious and chilling familial drama, it's quite the experience.

Logan Lucky:
Although it makes no bones about comparing itself to Ocean's 11 (Ocean's 7-11 in this case), Logan Lucky is less about the carefully plotted heist and ensuing shenanigans--although it certainly delivers in that regard--and more of a slower paced portrait of the lives of some down on their luck West Virginians. Its the quiet humor and heart in these slower moments that sketch out the lives of these characters that the movie is at its most surprising and effective. I knew I was going to get a stylishly executed and fun heist movie, but I didn't know I'd care so damn much about a bunch of country folk who aren't just played as punching bags for hillbilly humor. The only things that really holds the film back are some of the heist twists feel a bit rote at this point, and the final fifteen minutes or so are a bit hampered by an unnecessary subplot and character that feel rushed and inconsequential.

More_Badass said:
I've never seen it. Deciding between seeing it or Logan Lucky tomorrow.
Click to expand...

See Close Encounters since that won't be in theaters much longer and it benefits more from the big screen.
 
K

KraftyKrankins

Member
I just wanted to say I just started watching the first Battles Without Honor And Humanity after wanting to see it since like 8 years ago.

Verdict so far: Holy shit what the fuck is going on and why is it so amazing?!?!
 
R

Ridley327

Member
Alien: Covenant: What people probably wanted: a more direct prequel to Alien than Prometheus was; also, to not be like Prometheus.

What people realistically expected: a gorgeous romp through familiar territory that was ultimately unnecessary, but somewhat diverting and hopefully not too up its own ass with the religious allusions.

What we actually got: Ridley Scott making a mega-budget version of a New World Pictures ripoff of the original Alien, not unlike Galaxy of Terror or Forbidden World, filled with the same kind of intensely stupid characters, tremendous gaps in logic and some of the most entertainingly insane ideas and scenes ever committed to a sci-fi/horror film; this does not make the film particularly great, and probably not even good if we're being completely honest, but damn it all, Scott gets a lot of points in my book by going for broke with some of the shit he gets away with here.
 
K

KraftyKrankins

Member
MV5BMTM1NDgxNzU0OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTE5NzYyMQ@@._V1_UY268_CR4,0,182,268_AL_.jpg


Just saw this on Amazon Prime. I've been meaning to watch it for almost a decade and despite the absurd amount of hype I had it still didn't disappoint. Has to be one of the most unforgiving movies I've seen in a few years for people like me that tend to look at their phones every once in a while. The pacing is almost too rapid, especially in the opening where you're being introduced to ~10 characters in the span of 3 minutes and some of them don't reappear for another 45 or so but it slows down a little afterwards. I wanna mention some negatives but I'm really having a hard time here thinking about something I didn't enjoy about it. The whole series is comprised of 11 movies, the first 5 of which are on Prime. I know what I'm doing for the rest of the week.
 
N

Neith

Banned
Ridley327 said:
Yeah, I don't know what they were thinking with that, but at least from my perspective, I had known enough about the film already that they didn't show a lot of what I didn't already know about, and considering how tightly edited the film is, especially in the last 40 minutes or so, those images mean so much more in context than they ever do as standalone glamor shots.

It wasn't all bad, though, especially since you did get to see Denis Villeneuve geek out about being asked about the film and the behind-the-scenes footage that Spielberg shot was really cool.
Click to expand...

Jesus that would have fucking SUCKED for newcomers lol.

North by Northwest. Mulan. Villeneuve's Enemy. Scooby Doo and the Samurai Sword. Looney Tunes Vol. 1. All on bluray.
 
I

Icolin

Banned
Baby Driver

Saw it for the third time at a completely empty theatre in China. Entertaining all the way through; the cast kills it (chemistry between Elgort and James is A1), the music fits the visuals exceptionally well, and the editing/pacing is Edgar Wright at his frantic best. Surprisingly affecting and engaging story too; kind of heavy at times, which I liked. Still iffy on that batshit crazy last 45 minutes/hour, but it's growing on me.

Definitely somewhere in my top 10 so far this year.
 
V

Ventilaator

Banned
Noticed that the last four movies I've seen I've rated 1/5, 2/5, 3/5 and 4/5.

I think this means I can't watch movies anymore, because it's unlikely that I can just pick a 5/5 movie to watch and I don't want to break the streak. Rewatching something I already know is great seems like cheating.
 
Trumpets

Trumpets

Member
I saw Dune for the first time last night, having avoided it for years because of its terrible reputation.

Actually, I though the first half was pretty good, with some great visual and sound design. It does a good job of building its weird future world of Mentats, Spice, warring Houses, giant talking maggots and psychic witches, and it sets up Baron Harkonen as a truly repulsive bad guy.

But then Sting turns up in his metal underpants and it all goes entirely to shit. The stuff that seemed mysterious when it was first introduced just looks increasingly stupid the more you see of it, and the battle scenes are laughably bad (it's probably not a surprise that David Lynch hasn't touched stuff like that since). Even the sand worms looks silly by the end, with gangs of blue eyed men riding them into battle.
 
H

HollowCentral

Member
Trumpets said:
I saw Dune for the first time last night, having avoided it for years because of its terrible reputation.

Actually, I though the first half was pretty good, with some great visual and sound design. It does a good job of building its weird future world of Mentats, Spice, warring Houses, giant talking maggots and psychic witches, and it sets up Baron Harkonen as a truly repulsive bad guy.

But then Sting turns up in his metal underpants and it all goes entirely to shit. The stuff that seemed mysterious when it was first introduced just looks increasingly stupid the more you see of it, and the battle scenes are laughably bad (it's probably not a surprise that David Lynch hasn't touched stuff like that since). Even the sand worms looks silly by the end, with gangs of blue eyed men riding them into battle.
Click to expand...
There's a documentary called Jodorowsky's Dune, which talks about an unfinished Dune film that was going to be made by Alejandro Jodorowsky. I recommend watching that.
 
Z

Zousi

Member
HollowCentral said:
There's a documentary called Jodorowsky's Dune, which talks about an unfinished Dune film that was going to be made by Alejandro Jodorowsky. I recommend watching that.
Click to expand...

Yes, highly recommended like the rest of them Jodorowsky's crazy-ass movies that actually came to fruition. The Holy Mountain, El Topo... prepare yourself.
 
Trumpets

Trumpets

Member
Zousi said:
Yes, highly recommended like the rest of them Jodorowsky's crazy-ass movies that actually came to fruition. The Holy Mountain, El Topo... prepare yourself.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I'm very familiar with his films already. I've even read his 'Metabarons' graphic novel which is apparently loosely based on his version of Dune. I haven't seen Jodorowsky's Dune though so I'll have to seek it out.
 
F

Fancy Clown

Member
Capped off my big Spielberg binge with a rewatch of The Adventures of Tintin:
Tintin feels like the polar opposite of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull in a lot of ways, not so much an apology for it but it definitely strikes me as something of an exorcism of all the exuberant energy Spielberg had pent up during Indy IV but couldn't harness because he was tethered to an aging star, an exposition heavy script, and the laws of physical reality itself.

With Tintin, Spielberg cuts those tether and in doing so creates his most fun movie since 1989's The Last Crusade. By the time you make it through the brilliantly animated opening credits sequence (that call back to that of Catch Me if You Can), you've already sat through one whole Tintin adventure in miniature. By the time the feature proper begins, the energy doesn't slack a bit either as Spielberg wastes no time in setting up the inciting incident, hardly even bothering to let viewers in on who Tintin even is. This rapid fire pacing may be off-putting to those unfamiliar with Tintin's charms, as it bounces from one set-piece to the next with hardly enough time to realize how you got there in the first place (and, true to Edgar Wright's sharp script writing talents, it bounces hilarious "blink and you'll miss it" wordplay an visual gags off you even faster), and at scarcely over 90 minutes feels like it's over before you know it. But it's better to leave a viewer wanting more than less, and Tintin's biggest flaw in its legacy is that we haven't gotten two more of these already.

At least the one film we have been graced with gets better with every revisit, as I picked up on all sorts of jokes, references, and tiny details that skated by me in other viewings. Haddock referring to Daniel Craig's (quite good) villain Saccharine as the man with "the sweet sounding name" got a big laugh out of me. And once again I got swept up in the fantastic setpieces and reparte between Haddock and Tintin. The one-two-three punch of escaping the Karaboujan, flying through a storm in a propellor plane, and then one of the most audaciously realized examples of exposition and flashback I've ever seen, is Spielberg firing on all cylinders and the kind of breathless energy and fun I hope he'll bring to the latest Indiana Jones movie that is somehow still happening.
 
B

Blader

Member
John Wick: Chapter 2
Goddamn, how did it take me six months to finally watch this? I really enjoyed the first and thought this was as good, if not maybe a little better. Hand-to-hand brawls, shootouts, chases, the action in this movie just looks and feels fucking great. Keanu's acting seems worse in this compared to the first one, but it still ends up being part of the charm. A little disappointing that Laurence Fishburne and Ian MacShane have such small parts, but hopefully they'll be expanded into bigger roles in Chapter 3.
8/10
 
K

kevin1025

Banned
Ventilaator said:
Noticed that the last four movies I've seen I've rated 1/5, 2/5, 3/5 and 4/5.

I think this means I can't watch movies anymore, because it's unlikely that I can just pick a 5/5 movie to watch and I don't want to break the streak. Rewatching something I already know is great seems like cheating.
Click to expand...

Hold out until mother! or Suburbicon or The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I feel those are the likeliest 5/5's for the rest of the year. mother! could go either way, though, with how the Venice screening went.
 
F

Fancy Clown

Member
Ventilaator said:
Noticed that the last four movies I've seen I've rated 1/5, 2/5, 3/5 and 4/5.

I think this means I can't watch movies anymore, because it's unlikely that I can just pick a 5/5 movie to watch and I don't want to break the streak. Rewatching something I already know is great seems like cheating.
Click to expand...

Have you seen The Conversation? If not, see The Conversation. It's Coppola's more under the radar masterpiece.
 
V

Ventilaator

Banned
kevin1025 said:
Hold out until mother! or Suburbicon or The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I feel those are the likeliest 5/5's for the rest of the year. mother! could go either way, though, with how the Venice screening went.
Click to expand...

I didn't know what Suburbicon is, so I went to IMDB to see what's supposed to be interesting about it, saw that it's a Coen thing, and closed the page. That's all the information I need to be interested in whatever thing they're making.
 
A

AngmarsKing701

Member
Ridley327 said:
Alien: Covenant: What people probably wanted: a more direct prequel to Alien than Prometheus was; also, to not be like Prometheus.

What people realistically expected: a gorgeous romp through familiar territory that was ultimately unnecessary, but somewhat diverting and hopefully not too up its own ass with the religious allusions.

What we actually got: Ridley Scott making a mega-budget version of a New World Pictures ripoff of the original Alien, not unlike Galaxy of Terror or Forbidden World, filled with the same kind of intensely stupid characters, tremendous gaps in logic and some of the most entertainingly insane ideas and scenes ever committed to a sci-fi/horror film; this does not make the film particularly great, and probably not even good if we're being completely honest, but damn it all, Scott gets a lot of points in my book by going for broke with some of the shit he gets away with here.
Click to expand...

Makes me wish for "What I Watched/What I Expected/What I Got" layouts for our reviews.
 
B

big ander

Member
Ventilaator said:
I didn't know what Suburbicon is, so I went to IMDB to see what's supposed to be interesting about it, saw that it's a Coen thing, and closed the page. That's all the information I need to be interested in whatever thing they're making.
Click to expand...

well, it's coens-scripted. not directed.
 
R

Ridley327

Member
AngmarsKing701 said:
Makes me wish for "What I Watched/What I Expected/What I Got" layouts for our reviews.
Click to expand...

It felt really appropriate for this film in particular, since it carried a lot of expectations once it was revealed to be an Alien film, but I think that deep down a lot of people knew it wasn't going to measure up.

But man, this movie goes places, and it really is a credit to how great an actor Michael Fassbender is that I bought everything that happens to both Walter and David, and the flute scene is in the early running for my favorite scene of the year. The whole thing gets so out there for a blockbuster film that I admire it in spite of the fact that the best it aspires to be is the best of the post-Aliens sequels, which is a limbo bar so low that ants would struggle to clear it.
 
F

Fancy Clown

Member
Ridley327 said:
It felt really appropriate for this film in particular, since it carried a lot of expectations once it was revealed to be an Alien film, but I think that deep down a lot of people knew it wasn't going to measure up.

But man, this movie goes places, and it really is a credit to how great an actor Michael Fassbender is that I bought everything that happens to both Walter and David, and the flute scene is in the early running for my favorite scene of the year.
Click to expand...

Yup yup yup
 
K

Kickz

Member
Alien Covenant

-Very underwhelmed, hated that David had pretty much
on his own took out a planet of what I would guess is Engineer's people
. Never cared for any of the characters so their grieving and emotional outbursts as they were taken out one by one was boring and predictable.

I liked David until they made him
into 2 characters and the evil one became the villain.
On another front, as a space movie, this underwhelmed, didn't touch heights of Interstellar, Gravity, Martian, etc..

Score: 5.5/10 This was very much a worse version of Prometheus.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
Saw Suspiria and The Handmaiden. They didn't really grab me as I had hoped but they did look gorgeous. I particularly loved Suspiria's aesthetic, so much color to the point that it kind of switches from vibrant and stylish to garishly unsettling and off. Nightmare surrealism. Which is the point, I assume
 
J

jelly

Member
Fantastic Four, the latest one.

I don't know how but it's worse than Suicide Squad, Batman vs Superman.

Does Doom even have those powers in the comic?

Terrible film. 1/10 for effort.
 
T

TheOnlyOneHeEverFeared

Member
Well this was a odd film. Stratton is unsurprisingly, boring stupid rubbish, with a predictable plot badly told, with uninteresting cliched characters, gruff military types whose beards give them super human abilities, dull badly done action scenes, Dominic Cooper is for some reason in love with the sea and boats and barges. Some parts of it are really unbloody and beg for a more gritty feel, then there's a random scene where a character shoots themselves in the head and its messy as anything, and I can't remember any of the characters names. Bleh. Although they do refer to Americans as 'Yanks' unironically...
I'd think it was mildly comical or a bit camp if the rest of it had even a trace of a sense of humour.
 
S

Sean C

Member
Notes on a Scandal (2006): Coming it at a little over 90 minutes, you rarely see potent dramatic works that short these days. Most of the talk in regard to this movie is deservedly concerned with Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett's excellent work, but I have to say, as much as I enjoy Bill Nighy's normal schtick, I was particularly pleased to see him dig a little deeper than usual in his scenes as Blanchett's husband.

The King of Comedy (1983): I think this is probably my favourite of the Scorsese/De Niro films that I've seen, partly because its lesser-known status means there's less in the way of expectations; and it's a decidedly atypical performance from De Niro. I'd guess that the ending
is meant to be another of Pupkin's fantasies, but it actually works better as satire if it's real, I think
.

Aliens (1986): One of the most perfectly paced action films yet made.
 
M

mariachi507

Member
Species - Talk about a movie I should have left in my childhood. I didn't really think it would hold up to those standards by any means, but it definitely exceeded my expectations in being worse than I thought it would be. On paper it sounds pretty awesome though. A SciFi-horror flick where an alien, who is capable of looking like an incredibly sexy human being, tries to start her own personal invasion because her hyper sex drive makes her want to populate and takeover the Earth. It features a cast featuring Ben Kingsley, Michael Madsen, that woman from CSI, Forest Whitaker, and Alfred Molina. To top it all off, it has creature designs from Giger. Surefire win, right? Instead what we have is a movie where its characters and their motivations are about as dumb as its script, and I'm telling you, it's fucking dumb. The direction is shoddy as well, I lost count of the out of place Dutch angles about halfway through. Early on I thought I accidently started Battlefield Earth by accident. The creature designs are decent, but look way too similar to the xenomorph. The worst part is that it isn't even fun.

As for the positives, Natasha Hendstridge is incredibly sexy and beautiful as the antagonist and I'm fairly certain she is why I held the movie in such high regard when I was ten. Also, the practical effects are good and quite gory at times. Unfortunately, many of the effects largely resort to horrible cgi at a time when cgi wasn't advanced enough to pull off what the filmmakers were looking for with the budget they had. The single best aspect of Species is Michelle Williams. She plays the alien at a younger age, and despite the short screentime she manages to elevate the movie in the scenes featuring her. Good stuff from an actress who was quite young at the time, and her scenes deserve a better movie.

I normally have a high tolerance for this kind of schlock, but Species came at a time when the genre had changed and was in decline. Didn't seem to hurt it much as it earned over $100 million at the box office. If for some reason the premise makes you curious and you haven't already seen it, go watch a good movie instead. It may not be a creature feature directly, but Under the Skin has similar themes and is a complete success whereas Species is a failure.

Verdict: 4/10
 
K

kevin1025

Banned
IT

While not insanely terrifying, it's the inventiveness, the characters, the laughs and the surprising amount of heart that gives this its excellence. The lady who plays Beverly is the massive standout, she was fantastic. The scares are effective but not scary in themselves. An easy 8/10 from me.

Good Time

One of the year's absolute best. Robert Pattinson turns in one of, if not his best performance. I was shocked by the realness of the film, how it feels lived in and I don't know what it says about me, haha, but I've been in places like the ones in the movie, in terms of the drudge and the dirtiness. It suits the characters and their plights, and breathes life into the film that is essentially about how far someone will go to try and help their loved ones. Damn good stuff.

Wind River

Taylor Sheridan can direct! The cold is hell, the reservation and private property hold their secrets and their sins, and Jeremy Renner is a super poetic fish and game hunter. Really good, really well done.

The Hitman's Bodyguard

It's fine. It felt like it was trying too hard to be a Shane Black movie, and was a little lesser for that rather than going for its own thing. But it's not awful, just below average and super predictable.
 
S

Sean C

Member
There Will Be Blood (2007): The penultimate step in my Paul Thomas Anderson rewatch, this also happened to be my introduction to Anderson's work. It remains my favourite of his films, and perhaps the best American film of the 21st century to date. Its ten year anniversary will fittingly be marked by a reunion of the director and his leading man, Daniel Day-Lewis, for the latter's (supposed) final film role.

My main takeway this time that had never occurred to me on prior viewings is
how the final scene highlights that Plainview never bothered to learn sign language to talk to H.W. Granted, this may be more a byproduct of Anderson wanting to have DDL talk aloud in this moment, but the effect is fitting
.
 
I

Icolin

Banned
Blader said:
John Wick: Chapter 2
Goddamn, how did it take me six months to finally watch this? I really enjoyed the first and thought this was as good, if not maybe a little better. Hand-to-hand brawls, shootouts, chases, the action in this movie just looks and feels fucking great. Keanu's acting seems worse in this compared to the first one, but it still ends up being part of the charm. A little disappointing that Laurence Fishburne and Ian MacShane have such small parts, but hopefully they'll be expanded into bigger roles in Chapter 3.
8/10
Click to expand...

That action scene in the room with the mirrors is one of the best scenes in any movie this year. Gorgeous.
 
K

KraftyKrankins

Member
Battles-Without-Honor-and-Humanity-Deadly-Fight-in-Hiroshima-images-73a19acd-50d2-4d63-8e4a-d7d3a147580.jpg
Click to expand...

Part 2/11 of the Battles Without Honor Or Humanity... saga?

Shot just as cheaply and quickly as the first one(it released only a few months after Part 1), this one kinda continues the story while introducing some new characters to get killed off. Enjoyed the new protagonist a lot, but I'd still have preferred to have the old one through the whole movie, not only in the back half. Appreciated the more sensible pacing this time around, as more time was spent with some of the characters during the aftermath of certain events instead of just rushing to the next big event. If the first one was a 4.5/5 this one would be more of a 4. Very solid sequel though, especially with the quick turnaround they had from writing the script to releasing it. Part 3 tomorrow.
 
H

HollowCentral

Member
This is Where I Leave You (2014) is a traditional Hollywood comedy that really wants to be more than it is. It's definitely more complex than others in the same genre, but that also works against it with all of the storylines feeling completely separate instead of connected by a more centralized common thread. It's a shame, too, because with the cast assembled (Tina Fey, Jason Bateman, Jane Fonda, etc.) the results should've been much better, since each actor on their own has shown in the past they can do this type of movie well. But no one feels fleshed out except for the core family members, and it commits the cardinal sin of wasting Kathryn Hawn on a plotline that probably should've been cut in the first place. The two shining lights in the cast are Adam Driver and Ben Schwartz, who give the film all the heart they can muster. Ultimately, it's a harmless film, but it fails because it simply wants to be more instead of actually being more. 4/10.
 
Rhomega Beta

Rhomega Beta

Member
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974): An effective movie that works without gore. Sally screams too much though. Have to give props to Edwin Neal who does a good job portraying a psychotic hitchhiker. It's otherwise a decent slasher.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
Rhomega Beta said:
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974): An effective movie that works without gore. Sally screams too much though. Have to give props to Edwin Neal who does a good job portraying a psychotic hitchhiker. It's otherwise a decent slasher.
Click to expand...
I mean, she is in a constant state of chase, terror, torture, and madness from the moment she encounters Leatherface. It's relentless from that moment till the end

Rewatched the move recently as well, did a RTTP a few days back
More_Badass said:
sg4WjPe.gif


The tension and off-kilter unease builds, until in broad daylight, Leatherface just appears, no warning, no build-up or creepy music needed. And with that, the characters are in the midst of a nightmare. Halloween may be more tense, and Elm Street may literally take place within nightmares, but Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a nightmarish chase through hell.

Unlike other slasher movies, the horror here isn't the invasion of the killer and evil onto the banality of normal life. It's everyday people suddenly finding themselves in a gruesome insane nightmare so far removed from normalcy. TCM does it better than many other movies I've seen. One hammer blow to skull and slamming door, and suddenly the movie becomes a slaughter, a rush of meathooks in backs and hammers to skulls and chainsaw eviscerations and skeletal tapestries and dismembered limbs and cannibalistic mockery of your everyday family dinner.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre isn't gory or that bloody by today's standards, in fact it barely shows any gore or blood, but you still feel all of it thanks to the sheer physical brutality of Leatherface, the sound effects, and the characters' acting. The twitching body after hammer to the head is more disturbing than any shot of a crushed face or spraying blood could be.
Click to expand...
 
M

More_Badass

Member
Black Swan
Being a huge fan of Whiplash and really looking forward to Mother!, decided to finally watch this. It was really damn good. It has that same appeal of Whiplash in exploring the uneasy descent into destructive obsessive perfection, and then descends even further into wild psychological horror and madness.

Victoria
A crime thriller/drama with the notable element of being filmed in a single take. I felt it dragged way too long in the first hour, the movie probably could have cut the length down by 30 minutes or so. But once shit hits the fan, the pacing picks up nicely and the tight you-are-here nature of the single shot camera adds intensity. The naivety of the main character was really testing my suspension of disbelief though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Movies You've Watched Lately |OT| - 2021
38 39 40 41 42
2K
129K
EviLore replied
Movies You've Seen Recently |OT| August 2017
14 15 16 17 18
874
68K
Divius replied
Movies You've Seen Recently |OT| July 2017
12 13 14 15 16
759
60K
Divius replied
Movies You've Seen Recently |OT| June 2017
11 12 13 14 15
702
59K
Baron von Loathsome replied
Movies You've Seen Recently |OT| May 2017
15 16 17 18 19
922
83K
Divius replied
Top Bottom