ViewtifulJC
Banned
I think I saw Silence of the Lambs about a week before Elysium. She's about as good in former as she is just goddamn awful in the latter. Its pretty unreal.
-
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| March 2015
- Thread starter Charles Foster Kane
- Start date
- Status
I got the impression that she didn't get any help from Blomkamp, who seems to have given her only one direction, and that's making her accent sound like an American pretending to be British, subsequently pretending to be French. She looked so damn lost in that film.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
like she's supposed to be this cold, heartless bureaucrat, but she's literally smacking her lips with orgasmic glee at civilians getting shot down. Lord, that movie...
but for real fuck Blomkamp
but for real fuck Blomkamp
Infernostew
Member
Watched Barry Lyndon for the first time today. I'm planning on watching and rewatching all the Kubricks so I recorded this on TCM the other day and finally got some time to watch it. Cool tale of rags to riches then downfall. Kubrick's directing, as always is insane and it's interesting to see him do this type of film since I'm more used to his more uncanny selection. Great acting but Kubrick's style really makes this film what it is. 8/10
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
That movie is like incredibly beautiful.
I'm actually a little too far out of LA to come down and watch a movie any week. I have to make a little thing out of it. I'll probably blind buy it honestly. Gonna rent Book of Life too.
And I just rewatched 2001: A Space Odyssey today.
Film doesn't look dated at all. Kubrick rocks.
cast: I'd heartily endorse watching the Hartley Book of Life eventually but if you haven't seen other Hartley films I'd go for those first. Simple Men was my first iirc and it worked well, I imagine Henry Fool or Trust would work well for intros too.
He, Shawkat, Levine, Parisse and Takal were all adorable. Fun fun movie. Speaking of southby, Takal was sitting nearby and I heard her talking up Uncle Kent 2's premiere there-- a film I'd read existed but, not having seen the first and only knowing its premise, seems peculiar as sequel material.
If they were there I didn't meet them, though honestly I didn't expect to-- I'm atrocious at socializing before/after screenings. I did say hi to Ritter and tell him I nerdily think Gravity Falls is awesome, but that only happened because he happened to get in the concession line after me.
He, Shawkat, Levine, Parisse and Takal were all adorable. Fun fun movie. Speaking of southby, Takal was sitting nearby and I heard her talking up Uncle Kent 2's premiere there-- a film I'd read existed but, not having seen the first and only knowing its premise, seems peculiar as sequel material.
Dragoon En Regalia
Member
I actually quite like the photography in Chariots of Fire. Second half's increasingly dull, with just the most anticlimactic of endings, but it's nice and fluffy and the staging of certain sequences (the Cambridge club fair specifically) works out well. Themes are much too broad for in-depth development, and the script's neither witty nor can it go beyond tropes. Vangelis's big break sort of works for me, but mainly for the track-and-field build-up and release. This film class is weird. ***/*****
Net_Wrecker
Member
Good ol 70s Japanese exploitation
Female Convict 701: Scorpion (1972) (Shunya Itō
Female Convict Scorpion: Jailhouse 41 (1972) (Shunya Itō
Female Convict Scorpion: Beast Stable (1973) (Shunya Itō
So I'm not sure if it's the 1st or 3rd movie which is more highly regarded here, but count me as a huge fan of the 2nd one. 701 went pretty much as I expected: "Women in prison" exploitation, very gritty, pretty twisted, very stylish. Arthouse sleaze, even. Oddly though, as short as the movie is, I feel there are some pacing issues with the
scenes that kill the momentum a bit when it's otherwise a very punchy movie. Fortunately the final stretch makes up for all of that and ends with a lot of stylish energy. Beast Stable, the third movie, is a lot more somber than the other 2, which I don't have an issue with, but it's also more reserved stylistically aside from a few key scenes (the opening, the
) which is a little disappointing. I guess it makes sense that the series went in the direction it did, with the third acting as the "exhale" to the first's "inhale" and the second's "HOLD IT AS LONG AS YOU CAN", but it didn't feel as evocative. Still enjoyable, just not as memorable.
Jailhouse 41 though....What a weird, dark, psychedelic, manic movie that is. The cinematography and lighting are great, the pacing is the strongest of the three, the characters are all a different brand of crazy; it's all nuts. Such a dramatic shift from the first one, embracing the more expressionistic qualities there and going all the way surreal at times making for something that, I think, manages to rise above the other movies in the series. It's more of a crazy chase turned journey through a depraved world that goes way beyond the confines of the first one, in every way. Great stuff.
Meiko Kaji (as Nami Matsushima aka Scorpion) is great in her "woman of few words" starring role. Her amazing, piercing glare, that Ito makes every effort to capture as often as he can, brings to mind Eastwood and Toshiro Mifune. I haven't seen Lady Bloodshed yet, but seeing her in these 3 movies and The Blind Woman's Curse, I have no doubts she's just as good in those. Also, she's a singer, and did the theme for the series. Why yes, that is the song Tarantino used in Kill Bill.
Yes I realize there's a fourth movie. Back up off me, I didn't get to that one yet. Plus it's a different director. #NotCanon
To sum it up
Pretty good/10
Female Convict 701: Scorpion (1972) (Shunya Itō
Female Convict Scorpion: Jailhouse 41 (1972) (Shunya Itō
Female Convict Scorpion: Beast Stable (1973) (Shunya Itō
So I'm not sure if it's the 1st or 3rd movie which is more highly regarded here, but count me as a huge fan of the 2nd one. 701 went pretty much as I expected: "Women in prison" exploitation, very gritty, pretty twisted, very stylish. Arthouse sleaze, even. Oddly though, as short as the movie is, I feel there are some pacing issues with the
punishment
doctor's death, the sewer match scene
Jailhouse 41 though....What a weird, dark, psychedelic, manic movie that is. The cinematography and lighting are great, the pacing is the strongest of the three, the characters are all a different brand of crazy; it's all nuts. Such a dramatic shift from the first one, embracing the more expressionistic qualities there and going all the way surreal at times making for something that, I think, manages to rise above the other movies in the series. It's more of a crazy chase turned journey through a depraved world that goes way beyond the confines of the first one, in every way. Great stuff.
Meiko Kaji (as Nami Matsushima aka Scorpion) is great in her "woman of few words" starring role. Her amazing, piercing glare, that Ito makes every effort to capture as often as he can, brings to mind Eastwood and Toshiro Mifune. I haven't seen Lady Bloodshed yet, but seeing her in these 3 movies and The Blind Woman's Curse, I have no doubts she's just as good in those. Also, she's a singer, and did the theme for the series. Why yes, that is the song Tarantino used in Kill Bill.
Yes I realize there's a fourth movie. Back up off me, I didn't get to that one yet. Plus it's a different director. #NotCanon
To sum it up
Pretty good/10
kopitarrulez_11
Member
Dat ending
I might check out Simple Men in this case. Although it's not streaming anywhere on Netflix. Thanks man.
Where did you get those gifs NetWrecker? Seems like an obscure movie series.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
The Towering Inferno. A movie that would make Bay proud. Whatever there is to enjoy in its ridiculousness is brought down the runtime; it's too fucking long and full of stuff that goes nowhere. There were a couple of interesting hardcore deaths, though.
The movie reminds me a lot of Poseidon Adventure. That one was a lot more focused, exciting, and shorter. 5/10
The movie reminds me a lot of Poseidon Adventure. That one was a lot more focused, exciting, and shorter. 5/10
Net_Wrecker
Member
DVDs. The only thing they're good for these days is finding movies like those which may never get another release or licensed for streaming (unless Criterion/Kino/Arrow/whoever rescues them).
Irwin Allen was definitely never afraid to make sure that every dollar he had was on the screen, which certainly had a few caveats to go along with it.
I remember seeing this on cable as a kid in the 80's. About the only thing I remember was that's its fucking loooong and has a duel. Been wanting to watch it again but the length...
Femmeworth
Banned
Yeah, still don't see how Manhunter is the better film. They have very different styles, so there is room for disagreement.
User 479360
Banned
I watched most of Solo this morning, before falling asleep during the final twenty minutes. It wasn't as bad as I expected, and I remained interested throughout. It's not a good movie, though.
Annie Clark is hot, too. I'm a Degrassi fan, so I was happy to see her in it, even if it's just a Canadian indie film.
Annie Clark is hot, too. I'm a Degrassi fan, so I was happy to see her in it, even if it's just a Canadian indie film.
I'm not exactly trying to place them on the IGN scale or anything here, particularly since they are approaching things differently, as you allude to. I just feel like Manhunter resonated much more strongly with me, and the flaws I see in TSotL were big enough to where I can't really put them on the same pedestal.
Dragoon En Regalia
Member
Would love to start watching pinku stuff, but Masao Adachi and Atsushi Yamatoa films are difficult to find...
I was planning on watching a political village movie from Chad this week, but poor weather means I'm not going to risk driving it back to the library tomorrow, so I'm checking the DVD in today.
I was planning on watching a political village movie from Chad this week, but poor weather means I'm not going to risk driving it back to the library tomorrow, so I'm checking the DVD in today.
Watch DARK CITY if you haven't already! Made a thread about it the other day.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=997523
It's rare that an 'old' film creeps into my top movies. Was blasted away.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=997523
It's rare that an 'old' film creeps into my top movies. Was blasted away.
True Savior
Member
Manhunter is the greatest Thomas Harris adaptation on cinema. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
It is a fantastic film , not only stylistically but Graham's journey is fantastically developed.
Matrix --> old film.
With that I mean a movie I have not seen around the time it was released, hence the quotation marks.17 years should be sufficient enough to call the movie 'old' regardless tho.
Damn I feel old but that was a good movie.
Older, sure, but "'old' movie" implies it's old relative to all of movie history when it came out over 100 years after movies began. but I gotcha.
I mean I still find it odd-- I saw maybe one of my favorite movies ever during its original release. I understand on some level (even if I vehemently disagree with it) when people say they don't like movies earlier than a certain year, but normally they're saying something like 1960 or 1977. not ~2000 or later. it's not as if movies, whether we're talking cult sci-fi or blockbuster action or mainstream comedies, have gone through thorough changes in 15 years
I saw all my favoritish movies within a few years of their release I think. Maybe there are a few exceptions, but I can't think of one atm.
I'm open minded. I like many old movies, Citizen Kane, Dr. Strangelove etc, but I don't think they would rank among my top 20 favorites.
I'd say that there have tremendous changes, in particular when it comes to comedies and action movies. Less in setting / story more in cinematography and style.
How to Train Your Dragon 2
It was alright. Nothing especially wrong with it, but nothing memorable or all that exciting either. I'd say this was a step down from the first one if only because I remember being surprised with how much I liked the first, whereas I thought this was just okay.
Ip Man 2
For like the first 30 or 40 minutes, just as much a blast as the first. Then come the English-speaking villains who can't act... hate it when Japanese/Chinese movies do this. I'm sure it sounds just as bad to native speakers of other countries languages when Hollywood movies do the same, but I can almost always never tell the difference anyway. When your villains are are DTV z-list guys whose painful acting you can understand easily, completely takes me out of it. Really hurt the second half of the movie for me.
Charade
Amusing, breezy movie. Cary Grant is a lot of fun, Audrey Hepburn not so much. Adorable as always, but because her role is played much straighter, her presence isn't nearly as charming as other films I've seen her in. Great to see James Coburn here too, one of my favorite character actors. Overall a fine Hitchcock-lite mystery, caper, whatever this genre is.
It was alright. Nothing especially wrong with it, but nothing memorable or all that exciting either. I'd say this was a step down from the first one if only because I remember being surprised with how much I liked the first, whereas I thought this was just okay.
Ip Man 2
For like the first 30 or 40 minutes, just as much a blast as the first. Then come the English-speaking villains who can't act... hate it when Japanese/Chinese movies do this. I'm sure it sounds just as bad to native speakers of other countries languages when Hollywood movies do the same, but I can almost always never tell the difference anyway. When your villains are are DTV z-list guys whose painful acting you can understand easily, completely takes me out of it. Really hurt the second half of the movie for me.
Charade
Amusing, breezy movie. Cary Grant is a lot of fun, Audrey Hepburn not so much. Adorable as always, but because her role is played much straighter, her presence isn't nearly as charming as other films I've seen her in. Great to see James Coburn here too, one of my favorite character actors. Overall a fine Hitchcock-lite mystery, caper, whatever this genre is.
^heh I like Hepburn in Charade. More than Grant actually. I think she takes littler moments and makes them hugely charming.
hm what would you say those changes in style are, because I can't think of them. maybe the shakycam and cgi could be argued for as a change in action visuals, chaos cinema. more and more digitally artificial images.
don't see how you could make the argument for comedy at all, which generally rely on the same basic visual principles of hollywood continuity as they did not just 15 years ago but 80 years ago.
in fact I think the argument that narrative and genre have changed over 15 years would be much, much easier to make. cinematic universes, incessant origin stories, dominant superhero cinema. they all have roots in genres and plots that existed already, but the argument that they're combination/evolution distinctively marks the era could hold water.
hm what would you say those changes in style are, because I can't think of them. maybe the shakycam and cgi could be argued for as a change in action visuals, chaos cinema. more and more digitally artificial images.
don't see how you could make the argument for comedy at all, which generally rely on the same basic visual principles of hollywood continuity as they did not just 15 years ago but 80 years ago.
in fact I think the argument that narrative and genre have changed over 15 years would be much, much easier to make. cinematic universes, incessant origin stories, dominant superhero cinema. they all have roots in genres and plots that existed already, but the argument that they're combination/evolution distinctively marks the era could hold water.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
Cane, huh?
Yeah, shaky cam, close up, GCI, more 'brutal' and 'realistic' (in style) and much more.
I'd definitely say that genre-eras are sums of their parts, so a drastic change in a single area could mean the beginning of a new era.
there aren't really more close-ups. there is more CGI, but mainly because it...exists now.
as for brutality: nooooooooope. big budget movies just about 25 years ago could have horror elements, more violence, work within pg-13/R ratings. Today tentpoles are the opposite of brutal. they're all purposefully dulled in the right places to play to all four quadrants and be as inoffensive as possible.
And mainstream American film today is so so far from realism. it's pure fantasy. I mean, blockbuster cinema has always been fantasy, that's the point.
You're identifying much-mocked "grit," possibly sourced to The Dark Knight and continuing in reboots and sequels today, which is not "realism." (Though, as an exception, I do think saying The Dark Knight is "brutal" would be on. that movie scares kids, the joker is a violent portrayal.) The current tendency towards grittiness isn't realistic, it's merely a new version of fantasy.
plus you're describing tone of the narrative, not "style". Style would be shot composition and movement, editing patterns. And again outside of CGI, I really do not see how those have changed drastically in blockbuster cinema since 2000.
as for brutality: nooooooooope. big budget movies just about 25 years ago could have horror elements, more violence, work within pg-13/R ratings. Today tentpoles are the opposite of brutal. they're all purposefully dulled in the right places to play to all four quadrants and be as inoffensive as possible.
And mainstream American film today is so so far from realism. it's pure fantasy. I mean, blockbuster cinema has always been fantasy, that's the point.
You're identifying much-mocked "grit," possibly sourced to The Dark Knight and continuing in reboots and sequels today, which is not "realism." (Though, as an exception, I do think saying The Dark Knight is "brutal" would be on. that movie scares kids, the joker is a violent portrayal.) The current tendency towards grittiness isn't realistic, it's merely a new version of fantasy.
plus you're describing tone of the narrative, not "style". Style would be shot composition and movement, editing patterns. And again outside of CGI, I really do not see how those have changed drastically in blockbuster cinema since 2000.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
ITT: Swoon's alt
Well i agree with you in general, but CGI alone in the last decade or so, seems to have"gifted" us some vomit inducing camera movements.
Like if i think at the first and the second matrix alone, in that regard, the difference is there.
And then take the Goblins cave scene, in the first Hobbit movie, that type of nauseating extreme, relentless camera work seems to be a byproduct of limitless potential of modern CGi.
I'm sure you can find earlier examples, but now it seems a lot more frequent in block buster action movies.
Even Tin Tin was nauseating on that front.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
What even makes a snowman's alt?
Ridley Scott's Exodus
Completely serviceable but mostly forgettable biblical epic. The movie attempts to give a new "vision" of the Moses story, showing him being more of a fallible, non-religious man that certainly doesn't seem have the proper fear of God put in him. Scott's Moses disagrees with God, who is represented by a child, on a near-constant basis. Once he comes back to Egypt after being exiled, he becomes a rebel leader, mounting terrorist attacks on the Egyptian people. Yeah, this is a thing that happens. This seemingly realistic take on the story extends to the supernatural as well. The plagues and the parting of the red sea are also done from a moderately grounded approach, and are shown as being natural disasters/events(although initially manipulated by God, surely).
This sounds like it's a fairly fresh take on Moses, but in the end what I described is mostly superficial and the movies goes through the same motions and story beats everyone knows. There is no depth or actual development to the characters, including Moses. The decisions the characters take throughout the movie aren't believable. This is a movie that I would describing as suffering from a serious lack of balls. It kinda knows what it wants, but is too scared to go the whole nine yards. The complete opposite of another biblical epic from 2014, Noah(which has its issues, but it is certainly not lacking in balls).
All in all, it's not bad, it's just there. Solid acting from all involved, deent although muted and desaturated photography, dependable "epic" direction from Ridley Scott. It's just doesn't stand out in anyway, and you need more than average these days for this sort of thing.
Fun fact: Aaron Paul says around 10 words in the entire movie. What was this guy hired for?
Mini-review for 1956's The Ten Commandments since we're all biblical up in this shit:
I re-watched this movie last December. What a total bore. I barely made it through the entire movie. I don't know how or why I watched this religiously every easter when I was a boy. Awful.
Completely serviceable but mostly forgettable biblical epic. The movie attempts to give a new "vision" of the Moses story, showing him being more of a fallible, non-religious man that certainly doesn't seem have the proper fear of God put in him. Scott's Moses disagrees with God, who is represented by a child, on a near-constant basis. Once he comes back to Egypt after being exiled, he becomes a rebel leader, mounting terrorist attacks on the Egyptian people. Yeah, this is a thing that happens. This seemingly realistic take on the story extends to the supernatural as well. The plagues and the parting of the red sea are also done from a moderately grounded approach, and are shown as being natural disasters/events(although initially manipulated by God, surely).
This sounds like it's a fairly fresh take on Moses, but in the end what I described is mostly superficial and the movies goes through the same motions and story beats everyone knows. There is no depth or actual development to the characters, including Moses. The decisions the characters take throughout the movie aren't believable. This is a movie that I would describing as suffering from a serious lack of balls. It kinda knows what it wants, but is too scared to go the whole nine yards. The complete opposite of another biblical epic from 2014, Noah(which has its issues, but it is certainly not lacking in balls).
All in all, it's not bad, it's just there. Solid acting from all involved, deent although muted and desaturated photography, dependable "epic" direction from Ridley Scott. It's just doesn't stand out in anyway, and you need more than average these days for this sort of thing.
Fun fact: Aaron Paul says around 10 words in the entire movie. What was this guy hired for?
Mini-review for 1956's The Ten Commandments since we're all biblical up in this shit:
I re-watched this movie last December. What a total bore. I barely made it through the entire movie. I don't know how or why I watched this religiously every easter when I was a boy. Awful.
Net_Wrecker
Member
Today's big budget movies are 100% more brutal to watch than 25 years ago. big ander, fall back, you won't win this one.
wait...
wait...
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
If anything I'd say it's mostly the opposite of brutal and realistic. I'd agree with ander.
Many actually lack personality. And the overreliance on references, self awareness, and in cases use of cheap sitcom humor in some blockbusters doesn't help.
Many actually lack personality. And the overreliance on references, self awareness, and in cases use of cheap sitcom humor in some blockbusters doesn't help.
Discotheque
Banned
Lol. I found 80s blockbusters to have a more mean-spirited edge to them (that's probably also due to the cultural and political landscape too). I kind of miss that. It definitely feels like almost all big budget films now are just made by checklist and pleasing all demographics
Net_Wrecker
Member
Michael Bay is keeping that mean-spirited edge alive, and people hate him for it.
The hero we need, but not the one we deserve right now.
The points about personality nail it I think: in earlier decades movies could be made at a higher budget level but still be permitted to have some niche elements, or to be angry in certain ways. That's smoothed out in most tentpoles today.
I'd call Bay's filmmaking a weird perversion of that earlier ability though, not a practitioner of it. Bay's movies declare their capitalist restrictions, making a show of having to travel to China for no reason or transparently advertising beer. His snark isn't expressing a perspective as much as it is openly playing both sides, rather than trying to cover it up. It's more honest to say "heh fuck you, watch this explosion while I sell your eyeballs to AB InBev". I absolutely understand why people prefer that to the grey paste of other blockbuster filmmaking, even if I didn't feel the same with Age of Extinction.
Oh that's a good point-- digital cinema and far-reaching sfx have definitely given us more treated "virtuoso" shots. the "tracking" shot in Avengers, in Tintin. Gravity. My thing is that I'd still call that aminor shift, with the evidence for it being minor lying with Bordwell's breakdown of Birdman. Even in these digitally stitched shots, shots created more out of graphics than what was actually in front of the camera, the pieces within shots are readily recognizable as following standards of staging and editing, like classic shot-reverse shot. Just thinking about what I remember of Avengers for example, the individual sections of that treated shot follow normal classical HWD rules of spatial continuity and perspective, bridged by characters moving between the shot-parts. It's kinda Birdman in micro now that I think about it
I'd call Bay's filmmaking a weird perversion of that earlier ability though, not a practitioner of it. Bay's movies declare their capitalist restrictions, making a show of having to travel to China for no reason or transparently advertising beer. His snark isn't expressing a perspective as much as it is openly playing both sides, rather than trying to cover it up. It's more honest to say "heh fuck you, watch this explosion while I sell your eyeballs to AB InBev". I absolutely understand why people prefer that to the grey paste of other blockbuster filmmaking, even if I didn't feel the same with Age of Extinction.
Oh that's a good point-- digital cinema and far-reaching sfx have definitely given us more treated "virtuoso" shots. the "tracking" shot in Avengers, in Tintin. Gravity. My thing is that I'd still call that aminor shift, with the evidence for it being minor lying with Bordwell's breakdown of Birdman. Even in these digitally stitched shots, shots created more out of graphics than what was actually in front of the camera, the pieces within shots are readily recognizable as following standards of staging and editing, like classic shot-reverse shot. Just thinking about what I remember of Avengers for example, the individual sections of that treated shot follow normal classical HWD rules of spatial continuity and perspective, bridged by characters moving between the shot-parts. It's kinda Birdman in micro now that I think about it
I haven't seen Exodus but I believe a common theory is that Aaron Paul has a terrible agent and/or tanks every audition. Though Cranston's not doing too much better post-Bad, his choices at least appear to make sense.Ridley Scott's Exodus
Fun fact: Aaron Paul says around 10 words in the entire movie. What was this guy hired for?
Grinchy
Banned
Well, I watched Taken 3. Holy shit was it stupid. Horrible acting, horrible dialog, horrible characters, horrible story. But it was fun to laugh at all the way through.
I love how he commits a shit ton of crimes throughout the entire movie and then at the end, Forest Witaker is just like, "Hey I could arrest you for hacking our system you know." I guess all the murders were ok.
I love how he commits a shit ton of crimes throughout the entire movie and then at the end, Forest Witaker is just like, "Hey I could arrest you for hacking our system you know." I guess all the murders were ok.
Net_Wrecker
Member
Forrest is amaaaaaazing in Taken 3. Dude literally tastes garbage food to crack a case. I couldn't stop laughing.
- Status