rate the last movie you saw

[Monterey Jack]

LONE SURVIVOR
8/10

Gut wrenching and exceedingly well-made account of Marcus Luttrell's survival against Taliban forces in Afghanistan -- while the rest of his squad was wiped out. Mark Wahlberg and the rest of the performances are convincing, Peter Berg's direction is suspenseful, and the film does impart a vital message that not every individual in the country is a religious zealot, even if their opposition receives little play in the media. A remarkable true story, very well handled.

I must say...I didn't care much for it. Berg's gratuitous lingering on every gory blood squib (which looked terrible in the wan digital cinematography) made the film a real endurance test. I don't have a problem with the Old Ultraviolence, but he seems to be exploiting this story, rather than playing tribute to the soldiers that died during this botched operation. After the fifth or sixth time we see Wahlberg and company dive headfirst off the side of a cliff, with the next five minutes' worth of screentime devoted to seeing them bounce painfully off every rock and tree trunk on the way down, the movie began to occupy a disturbing middle ground between Torture Porn and unintentional slapstick. Maybe this is exactly what happened, I dunno, but as drama, it left me emotionally unengaged and viscerally repelled.

I should add though this is one more "dramatic" film I've seen in the last 2-3 years where a few older moviegoers couldn't keep quiet. In this case we had "grandma and her friend" who had to make "Oh that's terrible!" comments after every bit of gore and violence in the picture. Kudos to my wife for telling them to keep quiet (and they did), but I don't understand what it is about this TYPE of film that encourages more bad behavior in theaters than the big blockbusters. I've sat through movies like THE HUNGER GAMES and DARK KNIGHT and you could hear a pin drop during them...even with lots of kids. I don't get it!

Old people are THE worst audiences to see any sort of movie with...everyone over the age of 55 or so seems to think that going to the movies is exactly the same as watching TV in their living rooms. As much as I hate Family Guy, there was one moderately clever joke in an episode where a retirement community had theaters specially designed to pause the movie every time some oldster in the audience started talking back to the screen, meaning the movie kept stopping every five seconds or so. As bad as teenagers can be (especially at horror movies), "old people movies" are a NIGHTMARE to see theatrically.

[AndyDursin]

I must say...I didn't care much for it. Berg's gratuitous lingering on every gory blood squib (which looked terrible in the wan digital cinematography) made the film a real endurance test. I don't have a problem with the Old Ultraviolence, but he seems to be exploiting this story, rather than playing tribute to the soldiers that died during this botched operation. After the fifth or sixth time we see Wahlberg and company dive headfirst off the side of a cliff, with the next five minutes' worth of screentime devoted to seeing them bounce painfully off every rock and tree trunk on the way down, the movie began to occupy a disturbing middle ground between Torture Porn and unintentional slapstick. Maybe this is exactly what happened, I dunno, but as drama, it left me emotionally unengaged and viscerally repelled.

Wow, I think we saw two totally, completely different films. Hey, it happens!

Old people are THE worst audiences to see any sort of movie with...everyone over the age of 55 or so seems to think that going to the movies is exactly the same as watching TV in their living rooms.

I think that's the problem. After THE DESCENDANTS I will never, ever see another film on "Senior Wednesday" for as long as I live!

[Monterey Jack]

I've never been much of a Peter Berg fan...at best, his films have been "adequate" (Lone Survivor, Hancock, that Iraq movie with Jennifer Garner I can't recall the name of), and worst, atrocious (Battleship, although to be fair NO filmmaker could have salvaged a screenplay that dumb). Friday Night Lights remains the only great film he's made. He's like a less-jittery, coke-addled Michael Bay, all puffed up with rock 'em, sock 'em jingoistic fervor in everything he makes. I can respect his obvious respect for the U.S. military, but he's a mediocre filmmaker. Lone Survivor was just kinda in one eye and out the other for me, never gripping the heart the way the greatest war movies do. Berg is no Ridley Scott, and this film is no Black Hawk Down.

I think that's the problem. After THE DESCENDANTS I will never, ever see another film on "Senior Wednesday" for as long as I live!

Heh, a few weeks back, I went to the movies to see Her (third-favorite movie of 2013) on a Wednesday, and there were SWARMS of oldsters crowding the ticket counter to see "The Orange movie", all heading off to their theater as fast as their canes, walkers and wheelchairs could take them, chattering excitedly at top conversational volume. I had no interest in seeing that anyways, but after witnessing that, I'd rather get a lap dance from Kathy Bates.

[AndyDursin]

I've never been much of a Peter Berg fan...at best, his films have been "adequate" (Lone Survivor, Hancock, that Iraq movie with Jennifer Garner I can't recall the name of), and worst, atrocious (Battleship, although to be fair NO filmmaker could have salvaged a screenplay that dumb). Friday Night Lights remains the only great film he's made. He's like a less-jittery, coke-addled Michael Bay, all puffed up with rock 'em, sock 'em jingoistic fervor in everything he makes. I can respect his obvious respect for the U.S. military, but he's a mediocre filmmaker. Lone Survivor was just kinda in one eye and out the other for me, never gripping the heart the way the greatest war movies do. Berg is no Ridley Scott, and this film is no Black Hawk Down.

Well, I'm not a fan of Berg and I agree this movie's not BLACK HAWK DOWN -- but it certainly gripped me, and I felt it was engrossing and absolutely respectful. The movie has resonated with audiences and particularly done well with the military. I wouldn't say it did not pay tribute to the fallen -- quite the contrary. But obviously we disagree on this picture....but agree totally on our elders watching films in public! lol

[Jedbu]

[quote]I should add though this is one more "dramatic" film I've seen in the last 2-3 years where a few older moviegoers couldn't keep quiet. In this case we had "grandma and her friend" who had to make "Oh that's terrible!" comments after every bit of gore and violence in the picture. Kudos to my wife for telling them to keep quiet (and they did), but I don't understand what it is about this TYPE of film that encourages more bad behavior in theaters than the big blockbusters. I've sat through movies like THE HUNGER GAMES and DARK KNIGHT and you could hear a pin drop during them...even with lots of kids. I don't get it![/quote]

[quote]Old people are THE worst audiences to see any sort of movie with...everyone over the age of 55 or so seems to think that going to the movies is exactly the same as watching TV in their living rooms. As much as I hate [b]Family Guy[/b], there was one moderately clever joke in an episode where a retirement community had theaters specially designed to pause the movie every time some oldster in the audience started talking back to the screen, meaning the movie kept stopping every five seconds or so. As bad as teenagers can be (especially at horror movies), "old people movies" are a NIGHTMARE to see theatrically.[/quote]

Ahem...being a 56-year-old let me be one of what seems to be a minority to express my loathing of people who talk during movies. I really don't even like a lot of conversation watching at home (my 21-year-old stepson drives me nuts by having me pause what I watch so I can explain what he is not sure of...let me be clear-I was watching by myself something I chose to watch by myself but now I have to keep pausing over and over ad nauseum to explain something to someone who just casually sat down and will probably leave before it is over...this makes a 90-minute film the equivalent of watching an entire season of LOST at one time) because I like to concentrate on the film. I have never understood people who leave the comfort of their home to pay money to come to a movie and then talk during it instead of just having their talk over the phone or at home for free.

Years ago when I was living near Cleveland, the city library had free Saturday screenings of classic films and one time they were going to show CITIZEN KANE. I had always wanted to see it-we had no retrospective house in the area at the time and it was never shown on TV, so I drove for about an hour to get there and spent an hour perusing the stacks before they opened the doors to the screening room. I got a good seat and just before the movie started a gaggle of female senior citizens entered and sat about two rows in front of me. As soon as they sat the jibber-jabbering started and continued INTO THE MOVIE. Considering that the opening is just Herrmann's astounding music and one word, this was driving me crazy, and when the newsreel part came on they actually started speaking LOUDER over the dialogue. I could take no more of it (a few people including myself tried shushing them to no avail) and I got out of my seat, made my way to their row, looked at them directly and quietly said "Ladies-I have always wanted to see this movie. I drove for a good distance to see and hear it and not your squawking, so SHUT UP!!" I nodded, went back to my seat and was able to watch the rest of the movie in peace. At the end, during the cast listing, they got up and started out of the theater, and as they passed me one of the ladies stuck her tongue out at me! So, there have been examples in my life of geezer rudeness, but as for this old coot, include me out.

[Jedbu]

GREEN LIGHT: 7/10

Just finished watching GREEN LIGHT (1937), Frank Borzage's adaptation of Lloyd C. Douglas' book about a doctor who takes the fall for the death of a patient so that a veteran doctor on staff-who actually caused the death due to being distracted by his bad financial decisions-keeps his reputation intact. Interesting look at how a young, cynical doctor (Flynn) learns the true meaning of self-sacrifice from a nurse who loves him, a popular radio minister and a medical researcher who is trying to develop a cure for a disease caused by ticks, all the while developing a relationship with the daughter of the woman whose death he is blamed for.

Got all that? And somehow that is all crammed into 85 minutes that perhaps is a bit too quickly paced for the material-another 10 minutes probably would have enabled Borzage and the story to really flesh out the characters. Flynn's performance actually improves as the film progresses and his scenes as his character suffers through his illness are quite well done. Cedric Hardwicke has one bizarre looking blonde wig, and the whole subterfuge about keeping Flynn's character's real name from the daughter is transparent enough for anyone to see through, but it is solid little mellerdrammer and, as always with Borzage, it is beautifully shot and the spiritual implications are well thought-out. If you missed it, you can either purchase it from Warner Archive or rent it from ClassicFlix.

[AndyDursin]

ALL IS LOST
7/10

Robert Redford’s performance as a sailor on a solo voyage in the Indian Ocean anchors – no pun intended – writer-director J.C. Chandor’s epic tale of survival.

With little dialogue, Redford gives a weary, low-key performance as a man trying to hold his sailboat, the Virginia Jean, together after a dislodged cargo container crashes into its hull. With watering pouring into the cabin, ruining all of his electronics, Redford’s sailor has to mend the vessel from sinking – all before a major storm thunders across the sea, forcing Redford to meet the wrath of Mother Nature head-on with rain, wind and waves.

“All is Lost” is a movie that does require a major suspension of disbelief – it’s hard to imagine any seasoned sailor, much less one on what looks like a trip around the world, not having more emergency devices at his disposal (No waterproof emergency radio? backup GPS? automatic bilge pump? radio distress beacon? Backup smartphone?). Meanwhile, Redford is able to patch what would be ordinarily a crippling hole in the side of his boat with relative ease – making for a movie that is likely to be frowned upon by anyone with a little familiarity with the maritime.

What the film is effective enough in conveying is the struggle of man against nature, and particularly an individual against the elements with fewer and fewer resources at his disposal. Redford’s performance is tremendously convincing and the picture compelling in spite of its shortcomings – with more authenticity, and a more satisfying ending (the film gives us one of those “open for interpretation” conclusions that feels at odds with its otherwise straight-ahead survival premise), “All is Lost” could have packed even more of a punch than it does.

Lionsgate’s Blu-Ray offers a 1080p transfer of this modestly-budgeted picture with DTS MA 5.1 audio. Extras include a commentary from Chandor and a number of brief featurettes along with a digital copy.

[Paul MacLean]

47 Ronin

Fair, but ultimately disappointing actioner. I will say that it was better than I expected -- based on the the trailer I was expecting something like The Last Airbender -- 90% CGI and full of levitating swordsmen.

First the good -- a surprising fidelity to Japanese culture (again I was expecting a Mulan-like mishmash of Japanese and Chinese traditions), and a cast in which all the Japanese characters are played by actual Japanese actors (unlike Memoirs of a Geisha, which was full of Chinese actors -- and accents!). Superb art direction and beautiful costuming are also among the film's high points.

However, it's clear that the studio was pushing to make 47 Ronin a kind of Samurai Lord of the Rings, full of magic spells and CGI monsters (odd, seeing as the film is based on a true story) which results in just another formulaic "sword and sorcery" flick.

Another problem is that the story is really an ensemble piece, but it's clear they needed a "star" to front the movie, and as such Keannu Reeves's character is awkwardly pushed into the foreground. I'm normally a defender of Keannu Reeves, and he does have the right look for someone playing a "half-breed" (Reeves is in fact part Asian) but I'm forced to admit he's given one of his most leaden performances here.

And ultimately, the film just falls-flat. The action, stuntwork and performances (from the Japanese cast at least) are impressive, but the film just never "ignites" and is afflicted with a perfunctory, formulaic blandness. It's a shame, this really could have been a great picture, had it a more clear (and inventive) vision.

[jkholm]

THE LEGO MOVIE 6.5/10

This is currently at 99% positive on Rotten Tomatoes...so either I seriously misjudged it, or am part of a small minority. If any of you see it this weekend, I'd like to know what you think.

[AndyDursin]

Not in a minority John -- here's my quick take:

LEGO MOVIE
7.5/10

Rich in visual invention and with a surprising story that actually makes sense in terms of its overriding message, as well as its connection with the Lego line itself, this is a funny kids movie...and also as effective an advertisement for Legos that one could possibly imagine. Very entertaining, though I felt its constantly chaotic nature limited it from having any kind of dramatic engagement. It's wild, frantic fun, but never much more than that, despite its logical conclusion.

[Monterey Jack]

I liked The LEGO Movie even more than Andy did...it fact, I absolutely LOVED it. Not since the Toy Story movies has an animated film offered up a blast of undiluted imagination and creativity as well as this...any kid seeing this is going to have weeks if not months' worth of playtime scenarios inspired by this sunny, funny and whip-smart comedy. I loved how it looked like a vintage Rankin/Bass stop-motion TV special from the 60's, despite being computer animated. Tremendous fun (9/10).

[Jedbu]

RUSH 7.5/10

Ron Howard's racing film is a true story-the rivalry between James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth) and Nikki Laude (Daniel Bruhl) for the world Formula 1 racing championship in 1976. Beautifully shot and edited, this is one of the better films about probably the most dangerous sport in the world and how these two men differed in their desire for glory-one loved the pure adrenalin rush of racing, and the other was perceived as cold and analytical, until a horrible accident changed their perception of the other. Both Hemsworth and Bruhl are excellent in their roles, with the latter giving a performance that looks like he is barely able to hold in what is inside. Not sure why Hans Zimmer scored this one-are James Horner and Howard on the outs? Really do not remember much about any music in the film aside from the occasional rock tunes that pop up from time to time. Too bad this film sputtered at the box office.

[Monterey Jack]

Not sure why Hans Zimmer scored this one

Have you been paying attention for the last ten years?

[Paul MacLean]

Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

Truth be told, I'd never seen a Coen Brothers film until this one. It's mildly amusing, but other then a klan rally scene (and its reference to The Wizard of Oz) it falls-short of ever being actually funny. It's really not much more than a pastiche of old movie nostalgia, and has the feel of a 70s TV film written by sitcom scribes (a lot of the characters are like something out of The Dukes of Hazard). Visually -- the the art direction, costumes and Roger Deakins' photography -- are very impressive, but it isn't much of a screenplay. Is this typical of the Coen brothers' work?


Forbidden Planet

I thought this movie was great as a kid. As an adult I was even more impressed. Rightly regarded as a classic, Forbidden Planet really is one of the greatest science fiction films ever made. It is real science fiction, dealing with with cerebral scientific concepts. The film is also powerfully atmospheric -- particularly in the case of the Krell, whose impression (even though they are never seen) is palpable, and dominates the second half of the film. Robby the Robot is still one the best (and well-designed) robots ever to grace the silver screen, and provides much of the comic relief (the replication of the cook's burbon, zapping the monkey off the table, etc.), and the effects hold up very well, even today. You can also see how strongly this film influenced Star Trek (i.e. the close friendship between the captain and the ship's doctor, and the chief engineer who can fix anything). Louis and Bebe's "electronic tonalities" add a dimension of strangeness that a more traditional score would not have (though one wonders, wistfully, what Bernard Herrmann might have done written for this movie). The Blu-ray transfer is also terrific, even for a film of this age.

[AndyDursin]

Visually -- the the art direction, costumes and Roger Deakins' photography -- are very impressive, but it isn't much of a screenplay. Is this typical of the Coen brothers' work?

O BROTHER is one of their best films, but if you haven't seen their earlier pictures -- or any of their other films for that matter -- it's tough to get a point of reference for their point of view by that picture alone. Their movies are very tough to describe -- and many of them are quirky but not laugh out loud funny (BIG LEBOWSKI is laugh out loud funny, if you know their sensibilities). FARGO is tremendous -- that's probably their best film -- but many of them can't be defined by one genre. Some of them flip between humor and heavy melodrama, others are densely serious, others lightweight.

Monterey Jack might have a better handle on where to start in terms of the Coens filmography.