rate the last movie you saw

Talk about the latest movies and video releases here!
Message
Author
Eric Paddon
Posts: 8595
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2296 Post by Eric Paddon »

I'd say the three best overviews are Gerald Nachman's "Raised On Radio", and Leonard Maltin had a book "The Great American Broadcast." There's a great comprehensive encyclopedic guide to programs I have "The Encyclopedia Of Old Time Radio" by John Dunning.

Jedbu
Posts: 867
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Western Michigan
Contact:

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2297 Post by Jedbu »

Two other excellent books are: LISTENING IN, by Susan J. Douglas, and EMPIRE OF THE AIR: THE MEN WHO MADE RADIO, by Tom Lewis (this tied in to the Ken Burns PBS special of the same name).

Eric Paddon
Posts: 8595
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2298 Post by Eric Paddon »

Deep Impact (1998) 6 of 10

-I think it was about seven or eight years since I last watched this, and that was probably the only time I watched it post-9/11 given my general view about the "disaster porn" films of the late 90s (and the ones made since then). It has good moments and is certainly better than "Armageddon" but its desire to be more "realistic" means spotlighting some plot holes and/or cringe-inducing moments.

1-The scientist who gets killed in the opening car wreck. You'd think he might have been smart enough to use the phone BEFORE he got in the car?

2-I have mentioned that in the past that I HATE the teenaged romance subplot complete with its cringe-inducing cliché of "I won't leave you!" moment on the bus and then of course he's going to go all the way back (from Missouri to Virginia??) to rescue her and outrun the tidal wave. I hate it even more now, but the thing I really find absurd is how the government was able to do everything in secret for more than a year yet they never were capable of figuring out that there weren't two scientists killed in the car wreck??? To me, this whole thing is what drags the film down completely in catering to a geeky teen crowd (and don't get me started on that cheering assembly crowd and the "You're going to have all the sex you want" bit.)

Freeman is good, and he makes a more believable president then.....nah, I'll go no further. But it would have been better to have shown *his* family and humanized him a bit more that way. If he's a widower, then I would have liked a script point on that detail which would have strengthened his sense of lonely responsibility.

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

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2299 Post by mkaroly »

GODFATHER II - 10/10. This is an outstanding film and I feel that Coppola juggles the modern day story of Michael's rise to power well with the backstory of Vito's rise to power. Even at 3 hours and 20 minutes it easily holds my attention. Both stories are sad in a way; both are selfishly trying to do what is best for their families, but Vito's motives are a bit more others-focused (he is concerned with loyalty and building "family") whereas Michael is more self-focused and, while concerned about loyalty, ends up tearing family apart. In these ways I think the film is extremely powerful and is a worthy successor to the original.

Jedbu
Posts: 867
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Western Michigan
Contact:

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2300 Post by Jedbu »

I think the parallel stories of GODFATHER II are one of the reasons when Coppola recut both it and the first film into one epic that it worked so well. It showed the rise of the Corleone family with Vito building up his family by not letting it get "personal" and not allowing outside forces to shift his focus away from things yet being quick enough on his feet to do what needed to be done, and it showed not necessarily the decline of the family but the destruction of Michael's soul by overextension and events that he cannot control yet trying to do so. Looking back on both films you can tell where things will go by one motif-killing to protect the family. Vito kills both old dons (in America and Sicily) without batting an eye or a moment's hesitation; Michael kills Solozzo and Captain McCluskey but you can tell by his eyes that he is conflicted right up to the point he pulls the trigger. Vito has his revenge settled into that spot where his soul would be from the time he flees Sicily as a boy and it is as much a part of him as breathing; Michael, being a war veteran, has killed men in battle but (as his brother Sonny points out) has never had to put a gun right to a person's head and do it-he has never made it personal, it has always been distant for him so he has never seen death up close at the moment it happens. He killed his own soul and now he has to pay for it, which he does with the killing of his brother and his brother-in-law and the death of his marriage, but then he pays even more dearly with the death of his daughter at the end of the third film....

...but there is no emotional payoff with the third film, which (along with other more obvious problems) is the big reason why the third GODFATHER film is so unsatisfying and why the first two films just get better with age. True, there is still good work from Garcia, Wallach, Vallone, Mantegna and to a lesser extent Pacino (he is so nice in parts of the film that I have often wondered if Coppola toyed with the idea of having parallel Michaels in some sort of fever dream on his part) and the film looks good in all respects, but at the end you feel nothing like you feel at the end of the first two films, and the tragedy that finally hits Michael at the end falls flat because you just don't care by the end (I thought Wallach's finale was much more touching). Whether this is due solely to Sofia Coppola's horrendous performance :P or the way her character is written (I still wish that instead of casting her they would have put a dark wig on Bridget Fonda and put her in the role and cast someone else as the reporter-Fonda is wasted in that role) is a question we will never really have the answer to-Coppola was rewriting the script as he was shooting, so how he and/or Puzo originally saw Mary was probably lost in the process. Having either Kay or Connie take the bullet would have been at least more emotionally satisfying (at least Keaton and Shire can act) or even the son-the irony of him debuting in the opera about an omerta would have been there, but that probably would have been too obvious even by Paramount's executives standards. Michael finally pays a heavy price, but the audience is going "Finally," not because it has finally happened to him, but because her performance is over with.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2301 Post by AndyDursin »

Funny you mention GODFATHER -- I found out AMC was running a rare HD version of THE COMPLETE NOVEL which has popped up on various internet sites. I had the laserdisc of that years ago and made a DVD-R back-up of it, and it's interesting to watch after having seen the theatrical versions.

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

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2302 Post by mkaroly »

I think the thing that is most tragic about GII is that Michael's desire to get rid of his enemies is consuming to the point that he thinks he is doing things to protect the family (and in one sense he is), but it leads to his isolation and the destruction of his family...throughout the whole movie Michael is shown to be less and less in contact with his family and more and more isolated, making it seem eprsonal. The birthday scene towards the end of the film says a lot - ultimately Michael does what is best for him, and his selfishness has blinded him to the reality around him. He is good and figuring out who his enemies are, but ultimately he is in many ways the worst enemy to the Corleone family. And that is what gives the film one of its most moving aspects from me. The first two films really are major accomplishments. Vito did kill to protect the family's interest but he also used his position to help the weak and his extended family (the woman in the apartment with the dog, for example, and killing Don Fannuci who was being violent and hurting his own Italian people). Michael did none of that in the second film.

GIII later this week...lol...not looking forward to it.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2303 Post by AndyDursin »

I like GODFATHER III quite a bit. It's not on the level of I & II but on its own terms, it's a good film. I also feel Sofia Coppola took too many unfair barbs from people. Her awkwardness actually adds, at least for me, a bit of credibility to the role. Granted someone else would have elevated the picture, but she's not the black hole at the center of the film as much as many believe -- just IMO 8)

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9714
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2304 Post by Monterey Jack »

-Lucy (2014): 7/10

Image

The latest Eurotrash potboiler from Luc Besson is one of the most bonkers genre outings of the summer, with Besson's usual voluptuous sleekness butted up against the violent perversity of Korean cinema (Choi Min-Sik is wonderfully slimy as the chief villain) and the visual effects lollapalooza of an X-Men movie. The movie's "science" is absolutely insane, and even being delivered by Morgan Freeman can't disguise how laughable the premise is, and yet Scarlett Johansson sells the movie on her steely presence alone, investing her character with an amusingly blunt, robotic edge. It's a total cinematic Twinkie...nutritionally bereft, but a fleeting sweet treat. The only disappointment is how abrupt the ending is...it's like a whole third act was jettisoned at either the script or editing stage of the production. Still, for an 89-minute late-summer potboiler, it's kinetic, visually stunning (Scar-Jo looks as yummy as she ever has here) and consistently amusing.

Jedbu
Posts: 867
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Western Michigan
Contact:

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2305 Post by Jedbu »

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY: 8/10

The Marvel film universe continues to amaze with this off-the-wall, epic and ultimately satisfying space adventure that begins in a US hospital room, proceeds to an abandoned planet, an interstellar prison, a manufacturing colony made out the skull of a dead god and ultimately to a dance-off between the main villain and one of our title characters. This is a film that does not telegraph every one of its moves, has characters that you might not like at first but you grow to really like them because of their faults and easily the best work of Vin Diesel since FIND ME GUILTY. Small roles filled by the likes of Glenn Close, John C. Reilly and Benecio Del Toro lend this film just the right amount of gravitas with Bradley Cooper's work as a raccoon and astounding CGI to complete his character being totally convincing. The look of this film works perfectly, and I loved the use of 80's oldies as a counterpoint to the story-they are not just thrown in there willy-nilly but serve as an emotional connection between Quill (a really terrific Chris Pratt-LEGO: THE MOVIE) and his mother throughout the film. I also liked Michael Rooker's weapon of choice-quick, effective, efficient and also funny. Not a bad 3D conversion, either.

Only complaints: typical Marvel movie in which they can't decide what ending to use so they use all of them which ends up making the movie a bit longer than it needs to be, and poor Djimon Hounsou is probably wondering where all of his meaty roles went.

Yes, stay through all the end credits-a Marvel character begins his film rehabilitation at the very end. :wink:

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9714
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2306 Post by Monterey Jack »

Jedbu wrote: Yes, stay through all the end credits-a Marvel character begins his film rehabilitation at the very end. :wink:
SPOILER






















Too bad they couldn't have given Lea Thompson a cameo while they were at it. 8)

Pretty much agreed with your review...the movie is fun, fast-paced and imaginative, but ultimately a bit too overstuffed with...stuff, and has too many climaxes. I still enjoyed it a lot, and would love to see the Guardians meet up with the Avengers at some point down the line.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2307 Post by AndyDursin »

Damn Jeff your initial comment already WAS the spoiler :(

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Posts: 9714
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Walpole, MA

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2308 Post by Monterey Jack »

Don't feel too bad, Andy...I already had it spoiled for me in the TITLE of a thread over at the Blu-Ray.com forum. :x

Jedbu
Posts: 867
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Western Michigan
Contact:

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2309 Post by Jedbu »

Sorry, Andy, but there are a lot of Marvel characters whose film rep needs fixing, so I didn't think I was giving away very much at all, and the two people I was with-who are big into comics and comic book movies DIDN'T GET THE JOKE!

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

Re: rate the last movie you saw

#2310 Post by AndyDursin »

I knew instantly it was Howard from how you phrased it and the source material is closer to Howard than something like Ghost Rider. I mean who else would it be? Lol.

Post Reply