rate the last movie you saw

Talk about the latest movies and video releases here!
Message
Author
User avatar
Paul MacLean
Posts: 7031
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:26 pm
Location: New York

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2926 Post by Paul MacLean »

Kubo and the Two Strings

Wondrous, touching and gorgeously rendered CGI adventure set in a mythical version of old Japan, with a reluctant hero, scary witches and thrilling action. Kubo and the Two Strings also gets high marks for dispensing with the usually formulaic Pixar cliches. This movie is everything Brave and The Jungle Book tried (and failed) to be. Dario Marianelli's score is also quite good -- melodic and boldly orchestral (and refreshingly bereft of tired old "Zimmisms"). Recommended!

Image

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2927 Post by Monterey Jack »

Kubo is still my pick for the best movie of this year, animated or otherwise. Shame it'll probably lose out in the Best Animated Feature category to the overrated Zootopia. :?

Anyways, The Edge Of Seventeen is a lovely, perceptive high school dramedy, with an excellent, breakout performance from Hailee Steinfeld as a teenage girl left adrift when her lifelong friend starts a relationship with her hunky older brother, and featuring able support from a droll Woody Harrelson as her exasperated history teacher. It's bound to be lost in the glut of holiday multiplex offerings this season, but definitely worth a look for teens and the young-at-heart. (9/10)

Eric Paddon
Posts: 8592
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2928 Post by Eric Paddon »

My report on a couple TT bargains I just got.

Bunny Lake Is Missing (1965) 6 of 10

-Great transfer but as I felt when I saw this film a couple years ago the chief problem is that it falls apart completely in the final third when we get to the dramatic turn in the plot. First mistake is that Olivier's police inspector totally disappears at this point and what we get inside is a VERY long and protracted climax that just goes on forever and ever (over ten minutes) to the point where it becomes sadistic for the viewer.

Violent Saturday (1955) 6.8 of 10

-An interesting cross-breeding of the soapy melodrama with a noir story in which we are given a beautiful color transfer and vista of the southwest and an Arizona town impacted by a bank robbery heist planned by criminals Stephen McNally, J. Carroll Naish and Lee Marvin (still two years away from his breakout stardom on the TV series "M Squad"). I didn't even recognize Ernest Borgnine playing an Amish man who has to make a tough decision at the climax.

Collectively, both films are fast proving that commentary tracks that feature Nick Redman and Julie Kirgo are not particularly fun listening. There is just an air of elitism to them even when they provide decent background information that can be off-putting after a bit. This is especially true in "Violent Saturday" where both (but Kirgo in particular) really get over-obsessed with this idea of industrialization corrupting people as the underlying metaphor of the story and pointing to the shots of the mine etc. and the spartan landscape. Honestly, this is the kind of "subtext" that only an elitist could fall in love with and to hear them go on and on with it (complete with an inevitable potshot at "fracking") finally made me shout, "SHUT UP!" at the screen. When I watched this film before listening to the commentary track, this "subtext" didn't come off at all and maybe that's because I'm smart enough to realize that the human capacity to be a peeping tom, or an adulterer, or an alcoholic (as our townsfolk are before the robbery has these shattering effects on their lives) existed long before there was such a thing as an Industrial Revolution or the existence of strip mines and factory smokestacks.

mkaroly
Posts: 6214
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:44 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2929 Post by mkaroly »

Kirgo's liner notes are very pretentious. I am not a fan of they way she communicates her love of cinema, but I am sure there are many people who do like the way she presents things.

LOVE AND DEATH - This is one of my favorite Woody Allen movies; I love the fast pace of the film and its jokes. The Blu-Ray is excellent from TT, and that is all I have to say about that film!

BROADWAY DANNY ROSE - I have always liked this film, but after watching TT's Blu-Ray I found myself liking it more than I used to. The humor is great in it, and this time around I was really touched at how the relationship between Danny and Tina grew through the film; the ending I thought was very touching as well. I think this is one of Mia Farrow's best performances in his films, and Allen is really able to make Danny a sympathetic character. I am indoctrinating one of my co-workers into the world of Woody Allen (she is 23 and has never seen a Woody Allen movie until recently. In the can are ANNIE HALL, CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, SLEEPER, and BROADWAY DANNY ROSE), and of all the films she has seen so far she really liked this one. It was also the first of his films she has seen where she liked the character he played. I think BDR is a touching, sentimental film that I continue to grow in appreciation of.

THRONE OF BLOOD - Criterion's Blu-Ray is solid; this is one of my favorite Kurosawa films primarily because Toshiro Mifune's performance is so hypnotic. The movement of the actors (including Isuzu Yamada) is really striking and the stand-out feature of the film. It is one of those films that I just like to soak in, each time focusing on something different (from actors' faces to clothing to sets to whatever). The film is very creepy in its own way, and the tension that builds between Yamada's and Mifune's characters is fascinating to watch. The score is also stark and unsettling. All around great performances and a great film.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34184
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2930 Post by AndyDursin »

DON'T BREATHE
5/10

What does it say about our current movie-going climate that this low-budget home-invasion thriller became one of the most well-reviewed movies of 2016 and a sleeper smash – all the while including (spoiler alert!) a moment when a man spits out his own semen from a turkey baster? Yes, “Evil Dead” remake director Fede Alvarez is back with an equally horrifying – though appreciably less satisfying – tale of three young break-in experts (including “Evil Dead”’s Jane Levy) who pick the wrong, barren Detroit home to rob – one belonging to a blind Gulf War vet (Stephen Lang) who’s reportedly sitting on a fortune from an accident settlement.

The first half of “Don’t Breathe” is effective and well-executed by Alvarez, though even in its early stages, the film seems to think it’s being smarter than it actually is. Once the kids eventually run into Lang’s naturally-more-adept-than-he-appears home owner, “Don’t Breathe” goes south, falling back on a near-comical assort of modern horror tropes – women being degraded, needless gore and the before-mentioned bodily fluid encounters – that end on a distressingly predictable note.

Sony’s Blu-Ray does boast a strong 1080p (2.40) transfer plus eight deleted scenes, commentary with Alvarez and company, and a series of featurettes.

jkholm
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:24 pm
Location: Texas

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2931 Post by jkholm »

SING
6/10

Cartoon animals sing lots of pop songs. (And thanks to Seth MacFarlane, a few standards as well.) Inoffensive but nothing special. Don't you just love the new era of Star Wars taking over theaters this time of year? All the other studios run for cover.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2932 Post by Monterey Jack »

La La Land (2016): 10/10

Wonderful. I don't even like musicals, and yet I found myself completely transported by this sunny, tuneful and magical experience, one of the most purely pleasurable movie experiences of the year.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34184
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2933 Post by AndyDursin »

jkholm wrote:SING
6/10

Cartoon animals sing lots of pop songs. (And thanks to Seth MacFarlane, a few standards as well.) Inoffensive but nothing special. Don't you just love the new era of Star Wars taking over theaters this time of year? All the other studios run for cover.
What a load of coal Hollywood is serving up this year: PASSENGERS, WHY HIM, ASSASSIN'S CREED...flipping terrible.


I absolutely despised SECRET LIFE OF PETS so there's no way I'm dragging Theo to SING. He can contract an illness from day care, not the movie theater. :lol:

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2934 Post by Monterey Jack »

AndyDursin wrote: What a load of coal Hollywood is serving up this year: PASSENGERS, WHY HIM, ASSASSIN'S CREED...flipping terrible.
How many Christmas releases are any good, historically? It's always been a big dumping ground, and now that Disney has staked out the Christmas season for their annual 800-lb Gorilla Star Wars release, it's only going to get worse, as every other studio is going to avoid putting their biggest guns against it. Passengers is going to be hit the hardest, with the terrible reviews and huge budget and a pair of expensive leading actors who are just starting to edge into the "overexposed" bracket (J-Law was EVERYBODY's favorite three years ago, and now people can't stand her). And Assassin's Creed...there has never been -- nor will there ever be -- a good movie based on a video game. :? Shocking how many good actors (Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Charlotte Rampling, Jeremy Irons) are attached to that. It's gonna be this season's Warcraft, a bloated, incoherent muddle that will only appear to hardcore gamers, while general moviegoers will just look at it and think it's a rip-off of a thousand other movies they've seen. $150 million they blew on that. :shock:

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2935 Post by Monterey Jack »

AndyDursin wrote: I absolutely despised SECRET LIFE OF PETS so there's no way I'm dragging Theo to SING. He can contract an illness from day care, not the movie theater. :lol:
Always amazes me how many parents say something to the effect of, "I was forced to take my kids to [generic CGI kiddie comedy #357], it was terrible." Uh, YOU control what your kids see, not them. There have been so many genuinely good/great animated films this year to choose from, so why schlep the kids to a hyperactive piece of dung like Sing or Trolls when a magnificent film like Kubo & The Two Strings was recently released on Blu-Ray, and will cost a LOT less than three or four tickets + concessions and parking? It takes only a few minutes' worth of research to determine if a movie is not only appropriate for your child, but also any GOOD, so it confuses me why so many parents knuckle under and allow their kids to call the shots with these films. Did we need FIVE Ice Age movies?!

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34184
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2936 Post by AndyDursin »

Code: Select all

How many Christmas releases are any good, historically? It's always been a big dumping ground, and now that Disney has staked out the Christmas season for their annual 800-lb Gorilla Star Wars release, it's only going to get worse
Indeed, it will only get worse, because generally speaking, the market for adult and mid-size budget films is decreasing, with the "theme park movie" (as Scorsese called it) dominating Hollywood's slate every year.

Historically, Christmas (and by that I mean movies that open the week prior and on Christmas itself) has usually been a big window for Hollywood. Lately it hasn't produced much but it's never been a dumping ground like January. That's always been the real dumping ground, usually comprised of movies that were scheduled for Thanksgiving/Christmas and got booted (Intersection, Nothing But Trouble, etc etc.)
It takes only a few minutes' worth of research to determine if a movie is not only appropriate for your child, but also any GOOD, so it confuses me why so many parents knuckle under and allow their kids to call the shots with these films.
Well it's not happening with me!! I've already done my time with the PETS movie and ZOOTOPIA which I didn't care for either.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9712
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2937 Post by Monterey Jack »

Have yourself a Burton little Christmas... :P

-Edward Scissorhands (1990): 10/10

-Batman Returns (1992): 8.5/10

"Mistletoe can be deadly if you eat it."

"But a kiss...can be deadlier, if you mean it." [lick] :shock:

Dammit, Batman Returns might be the most underrated and misunderstood film in Burton's filmography. I can totally understand why the Happy Meal set was dragged out of screenings crying and traumatized by their infuriated parents back in the day, and I can understand why comic book fans were aggravated by Burton's outre, surreal take on the Penguin and Catwoman, yet I'll never understand why critics didn't dig deep into Burton's inspired use of the film's triptych of villains (including Christopher Walken's casually cruel businessman, Max Schrek) to metaphorically depict the varying aspects of Bruce Wayne's fractured psyche. Taken on any kind of literal level, the film's screenplay is chaotic and overstuffed and filled with plot digressions that go nowhere (like Schrek's plot to funnel excess power from Gotham into a new plant he was building...for what reason, exactly?), and it revels in grotesque freakshow digressions, but it's also eloquent and haunting and richly performed by all (especially Michelle Pfeiffer's dazzling Catwoman), and it's technically one of Burton's greatest visual achievements. Just a shame that, just like Guillermo Del Toro's equally superior comic book sequel Hellboy II, we never got to see Burton cap off his own Batman trilogy...I would have loved to have seen his take on Robin, and I'm sure he could have done true justice to the more tragic villains like Two-Face and Mr. Freeze instead of the campy, mugging jokes they became under the yoke of Joel Schumacher.

Eric Paddon
Posts: 8592
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2938 Post by Eric Paddon »

Goldeneye (1995) 7.8 of 10

-After suffering through the first three Craig films for the first time (SPECTRE is pending arrival and I will watch this weekend), I had to go back to the beginning of Brosnan. Wow, what a difference. Actors voicing their dialogue clearly instead of muddled mumbling and whispering. Serious action mixed with humor that doesn't overpower them. More charismatic actors (after ripping on Dench for her suffocating presence in the Craig films it was nice to go back to where she fit in perfect in the series). Honestly, if only Arnold had scored this film and given us the Barry sound it would be outstanding.

-I'd note that the basic plot/stakes is in many respects similar to "Skyfall" but far more entertaining. Again its a former agent behind the plot but unlike "Skyfall" we have some important distinctions. (1) The stakes are higher. In "Skyfall" it's overly elaborate just for the most minimal of reasons, to kill "M". (2) We get some credible connecting between Bond and Trevelyan in the teaser. (3) The film does probe Bond's character beneath the surface a little bit in a more believable way than in any of the angst-driven Craig films. The moment when Natalya confronts him on the beach (the real, natural quality of Isabella Scorupco makes her far more appealing than Famke Janssen's over-the-top dominatrix) is a better scene than anything I've had to slog my way through in the last few days.

-The "relaunch" of the franchise with Brosnan (as opposed to reboot) was IMO done quite successfully save for Serra's awful score. They kept enough continuity to give the sense that Brosnan is still an extension of the old universe and at the same time made some adjustments to change with the times. Samantha Bond's debut as Moneypenny is great, and better than Caroline Bliss's unsuccessful take in the Dalton films. Desmond Llewelyan was looking frail by now after having the energy to do a lot six years before, but his one scene remains a joy to watch. And the comic relief we get from Robbie Coltrane and Joe Don Baker I felt blended in to the tone of the film without ovepowering it as the humor did in the lesser Moore efforts.

I'll be revisiting the rest of the Brosnan Bond films too as it has been a while since I've seen them but my instincts about "Goldeneye" I'm glad to see remained correct.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34184
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2939 Post by AndyDursin »

PATRIOTS DAY
8.5/10

This is an enormously moving, occasionally gut wrenching, at times rousing account of what transpired on Marathon Monday back in 2013 in Boston -- and the days that followed afterwards. Peter Berg has done, overall, a sensational job distilling everything about that week -- from the horror of the bombing, to the manhunt, to the "Boston Strong" rallying of the community and its police officers -- into a two hour film that is remarkably powerful in certain moments.

There is an admitted issue with Mark Wahlberg's fictional character, an audience surrogate who just weaves in and out of the movie -- his entire presence (as well as Michelle Monaghan's worthless appearance as his wife) just doesn't seem to be necessary, because the rest of the film works even better without him. The interrogation of Tsarneav's widow, Katherine Russell, is positively chilling, and the entire sequence where Chinese student Dun Meng is carjacked by the brothers is riveting and phenomenally well done. When you're on the edge of your seat despite knowing exactly what happened, that's the sign of superior filmmaking,

Throughout, Berg uses real locations and actual footage in conveying the mood of that week, and how the entire city was shut down, as well as the emotional outpouring that followed -- including a certain slugger's unforgettable words to the Fenway faithful after it ended.

People seemed to be moved and applauded several times during the film. That could be a result of living up here, with many emotionally attached to that moment, but I still contend this is a patriotic and riveting work. Even if Wahlberg's made-up hero rides his white horse too many times through the picture, it doesn't detract from what's one of the best films of 2016 that I've seen.

Eric Paddon
Posts: 8592
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2940 Post by Eric Paddon »

The Exorcist (1973) 7.5 of 10

-Because of William Peter Blatty's death I gave this a look. I'd only seen it twice (once theatrical, once 2000 cut) and I remember my impressions being that I found compared to "The Omen" which I had already seen several times, I wasn't quite as impressed. But since the last viewing was probably 15 years ago, I decided now was the time for a new look.

-I watched the 2000 recut because I know how Blatty preferred the additions that clarified his original vision of the story being faith-affirming which he felt was missing in the theatrical cut. The final shot with Kinderman and Father Dyer certainly helps in that area (though I'm glad they didn't restore the "Casablanca" conversation that came afterwards. Showing them walking off before that was more effective). I was able to appreciate this more than I did at the time I first viewed it. Linda Blair probably should have gotten the Oscar for what she had to put herself through. I also was able to more clearly see how Ellen Burstyn was channeling Shirley MacLaine (the real life inspiration for the character) in her performance. She does fine but I couldn't help but think of how the genuine article would have done.

-However the first part of the film I think suffers from a couple narrative gaps. First, I really don't see enough to indicate why Regan is suddenly in the hospital going through tests initially. All we've seen her at this point is a complaint of the bed shaking. There could have been a little more exposition on that point. Also, did Jack MacGowran die before all of his scenes were shot? If you don't listen carefully you might not hear the dialogue about him being in the house. There should have been a scene showing him arriving at the house IMO but if he died before something like that was shot, I can understand that. Still, it made the issue of his death too much of an off-screen happening.

-I'm also not too crazy about Lee J. Cobb's Kinderman. For one thing, the character just doesn't seem all that necessary because the doctors are telling Chris that she should try an exorcism before Kinderman finally makes his first appearance. By this point we really don't need to see the nuances of a cop doing a murder investigation. His only strong scene is in the tag to give us the sign that Father Dyer is no longer troubled. On this new viewing, I'm willing to concede that Cobb isn't too reminiscent of Peter Falk's Columbo but I still don't care for how both Friedkin and Blatty tried to falsely accuse Levinson and Link of stealing the Kinderman character for Columbo when in fact the Columbo character predated the Exorcist novel by about seven years in the play "Prescription Murder".

-The location photography is great, and while this film is an early example of that "naturalistic" style of talking in lower tones that I have to admit can drive me crazy, it does work here for purposes trying to create an authentic quality of the horror.

Post Reply