Movies you have seen recently

[AndrewRemington]

I’ve seen some real stinkers lately: Nocturnal Animals (2016), Identity (2003), and Looper (2012). I watched all these on Netflix and they had great cast members, but were unfulfilling. Would not recommend or rewatch any of those.

So I rewatched Batman Returns and Scrooged recently to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Two great Christmas movies!

[Vicefan7777]

Watching The Polar Express for the third time this season.  I must admit the first time I watched it years ago I thought it was a so-so film.   As I have watched it many times I have completely changed my mind about it.  To myself and my wife it is a terrific animated movie. Tom Hanks voices five of the characters.  Proving himself again why he is a brilliant actor.  This is a movie that will be watched many more times.  

 

[Kladdagh]

On 12/22/2021 at 5:17 PM, AndrewRemington said:

I’ve seen some real stinkers lately: Nocturnal Animals (2016), Identity (2003), and Looper (2012). I watched all these on Netflix and they had great cast members, but were unfulfilling. Would not recommend or rewatch any of those.

So I rewatched Batman Returns and Scrooged recently to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Two great Christmas movies!

GOOD ... Some people forget that ... "Batman Returns" IS a Christmas Movie ... Need to watch it again along with Die Hard 

Edited December 24, 2021 by Kladdagh
A "S" at People ... what a mistake =)

[RedDragon86]

On 12/22/2021 at 4:17 PM, AndrewRemington said:

I’ve seen some real stinkers lately: Nocturnal Animals (2016), Identity (2003), and Looper (2012). I watched all these on Netflix and they had great cast members, but were unfulfilling. Would not recommend or rewatch any of those.

So I rewatched Batman Returns and Scrooged recently to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Two great Christmas movies!

Looper is way overrated, it's OK and entertaining but its not challenging.

It's no 12 Monkeys that's for sure.

Edited December 26, 2021 by RedDragon86

[sdiegolo78]

It can't get any more Christmassy than this: 

Great cast, including Paul Gleason (Bunny Berrigan from the S3 premiere episode 'Irish eyes are crying') as the nefarious Mr Beeks

This movie has been scheduled on every xmas eve for the past 25 years on Italian tv!

Edited December 25, 2021 by sdiegolo78

[fakespyder]

On 12/24/2021 at 11:35 AM, Vicefan7777 said:

Watching The Polar Express for the third time this season.  I must admit the first time I watched it years ago I thought it was a so-so film.   As I have watched it many times I have completely changed my mind about it.  To myself and my wife it is a terrific animated movie. Tom Hanks voices five of the characters.  Proving himself again why he is a brilliant actor.  This is a movie that will be watched many more times.  

 

I need to give this film another chance. I tried watching it once, many years ago, but the uncanny facial animations creeped  me out for some reason.

Other than that it looks beautiful.

[Vicefan7777]

Watched a classic tonight.  A film that starred an actress who knew how to scream and had beautiful eyes, Fay Wray. The film King Kong (1933). I can just imagine being in the audience when the film originally premiered in theaters.  Oh the wonders of stop motion animation.  It must have been terrifying to watch. This movie was made in pre-code Hollywood.  There are some very graphic scenes of death.  Plus Kong slowly strips the clothing off the leading lady.  The story is very enjoyable.  I am a classic film fan and this film IS a classic!!

[Augusta]

Today's filmmakers really don't know how to "make a good film".  
I know it sounds over-ripe to say it, but the statement is true.  In college, our architecture professors kept trying to make us understand that "you need to stop trying to REINVENT the wheel.  It's already been invented, it's functions according to a very successful concept.   You're wasting your time if you try to succeed on things called natural talent or gifts---good design succeeds on homework and understanding what makes the wheel work so danged well, not trying to be the one who invents a replacement for it".

The "old" film people invented great movies long ago, and I wonder if new directors really appreciate that fact.  When you strip all the resources away from them, no color film, no digital support, no portable gear or mics, no 200-piece orchestra soundtrack, no adaptable lighting, and they STILL made a fabulous picture to watch, THAT'S when you know you're dealing with filmmakers who know how to make a good film.

[Augusta]

It looks as though some of you may be going back into home-restriction for a while (Covid), depending on what city or country you're from.  

So keep up a healthy list of good movies you can curl up in the cabin with.

Frantic.  I haven't seen this movie in years.

I hate myself for saying I like this film, and that's because of a personal ethical condemnation I have against the film's director.  From what I heard at the time of the film's making, Harrison Ford (favorite actor of mine, approaching the height of his particular acting technique), jumped at the chance to go to France where this movie was going to be filmed BECAUSE it gave him the privilege of working with this famed director. Ford had finished The Mosquito Coast (in my opinion the top of the three finest performances I've ever seen and will ever see him do), so Frantic is not a movie Harrison NEEDS for any credibility.  And of course the movie is being shot in France, because the director is (holed up) there after he fled the US on charges of (rather luridly) raping a minor.  Director Roman Polanski is someone I put down as much as Harrison Ford is a man I praise up.   Polanski is a person who....well, he's just one of those individuals we hear or know about who's got a sharp lewd fetish, regardless of what we want or don't want to believe about the array of charges.  I couldn't dismiss from my mind the first incident that made him go to France.  But can I separate a work of film art from the darkness of the director, and value the film on its individual merit? YES.
.....However,...should an actor (any actor, not just Ford) separate film art from the director in the same way I can?  I say NO.  Sorry Harrison.

But the film is way better than I anticipated.  I thought is would just be good because "Ford makes any of my movies good to watch".  But it's actually a movie that doesn't need Ford to give it credibility---the movie takes you on a trip of anger, two-fisted frustration with an entire society from police to common cab driver, and finally risks people's failure and death.  

It happens to be an excellent visual portrayal of "France", the way I THINK France actually is to a tourist who is traveling just near enough to the outskirts of "posh", to tumble into the kinda greasy "hitchhiker young tourist" style of France that our parents always worry we could get into if we go to Paris for the summer.  We've seen the story of a family member missing on a holiday before (Breakdown, Taken, Taken-3), but Frantic doesn't feel like a formula for violence or car chases.   Frantic feels very much like what "really can happen" to a holiday family at any moment, and how frustratingly hard it would get to find someone who'll help you.
This could easily have been a predictable "man on a chase" movie, except for Polanski as director and Ford as "the man".  
The ending succeeds in making you feel sorry for some people who don't deserve complete sympathy (which says how well directed the story was), and you feel close enough to the survivors of the ordeal, that when the ordeal is over you don't want to celebrate or figure out if any justice can be obtained for the losses---you just feel "Jesus, can we now please just get the HELL out of this city, this place, this whole damn French country?!"

Nope, LOL, I don't have any dislike of France or French people.  But, well, you've just got to see the film to see how it makes you momentarily pissed off at a culture.

Edited January 3, 2022 by Augusta

[jpaul1]

because of your posts i watched the wailing yesterday. still digesting, but it looks a masterpiece to me. and not an horror movie IMO. horror movies are made for jump scares. this is a level above

[ViceFanMan]

4 hours ago, Augusta said:

Today's filmmakers really don't know how to "make a good film".  
I know it sounds over-ripe to say it, but the statement is true.  In college, our architecture professors kept trying to make us understand that "you need to stop trying to REINVENT the wheel.  It's already been invented, it's functions according to a very successful concept.   You're wasting your time if you try to succeed on things called natural talent or gifts---good design succeeds on homework and understanding what makes the wheel work so danged well, not trying to be the one who invents a replacement for it".

The "old" film people invented great movies long ago, and I wonder if new directors really appreciate that fact.  When you strip all the resources away from them, no color film, no digital support, no portable gear or mics, no 200-piece orchestra soundtrack, no adaptable lighting, and they STILL made a fabulous picture to watch, THAT'S when you know you're dealing with filmmakers who know how to make a good film.

I agree, with a lot of the movies of today. However, once in a while you’ll see a movie that truly is a “good” film. To me a truly good film contains characters you can relate to, sympathize with & are realistic—character depth. The plot as well, has to be something with depth & understanding. The special effects & CGI stuff is just proverbial window-dressing, and doesn’t impress me. Without the other things I mentioned, it’s just a pointless movie—regardless of the special effects. 

I’m so sick of all the fantasy & sci-fi crap...that’s all they seem to make anymore, is pointless superhero & sci-fi action flicks. But, a couple weeks ago I saw one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time...Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley. The depth & “darkness” of the characters was so realistic & fascinating, the plot was tragic but believable & relatable, the cinematography & colors were superb! 

It is not non-stop, mindless action & martial arts...it’s a “real” movie about “real” characters—I posted about it earlier, but if you haven’t seen it I highly recommend it! 

[RedDragon86]

There is no doubt the film industry has been failing for the last 20+ years, that's the reason we see so many sequels and remakes. 

Started to peter out in the early 2000's imo and now and again there is a decent film in the US/UK film industry.

The Asian film industry is the way forward.

Edited January 4, 2022 by RedDragon86

[Augusta]

15 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

I’m so sick of all the fantasy & sci-fi crap...that’s all they seem to make anymore, is pointless superhero & sci-fi action flicks. But, a couple weeks ago I saw one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time...Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley. The depth & “darkness” of the characters was so realistic & fascinating, the plot was tragic but believable & relatable, the cinematography & colors were superb! 

 

I grew up watching Tyrone Power "fight the enemies" in his movies (his war movies, his superhero movie Mark of Zorro, the phenomenal western Rawhide, and his saintly The Razor's Edge, nearly always a good guy).  So seeing him be the grifter, working his way into the seance racket, and seeing the movie turn the tables on his cleverness, so slowly and maniacally, was great.  

Just for those of you poster who don't know, there really WAS a time period in the US when this "I can speak to the dead" medium business was rampant in the country.  Almost entirely aimed at the wealthy at a time when many Americans were busted and in poverty

I'm glad to hear someone knew how to do a "remake" without embarrassing themselves against a fine original Tyrone Power film version.  If you just "copy" the original, don't bother to make your movie.   Del Toro's got some real skills, and can be a powerhouse director, in spite of those few flops you want to curse him out for.   LOL. 

[RedDragon86]

"The Pianist" (A rating)

It's one of those important films about the Holocaust that is necessary to be filmed from time to time so that the horrors of it will remain fresh in peoples minds. Great film and Adrien Brody is amazing. 

[Augusta]

1 minute ago, RedDragon86 said:

"The Pianist" (A rating)

It's one of those important films about the Holocaust that is necessary to be filmed from time to time so that the horrors of it will remain fresh in peoples minds. Great film and Adrien Brody is amazing. 

You beat me to it!  I saw that one.  Rented it back a ways (remember BlockBuster Video stores?!!).
Steven Spielberg directed a boy in an "odyssey" movie call "Empire of the Sun", and yes it was noteworthy.  The Pianist is that odyssey too (the boy was separated from family and tumbles through Japan overrun landscapes---Brody is separated and tumbles through Nazi overrun landscapes), but the Pianist does it phenomenally better.  

[ViceFanMan]

26 minutes ago, Augusta said:

I grew up watching Tyrone Power "fight the enemies" in his movies (his war movies, his superhero movie Mark of Zorro, the phenomenal western Rawhide, and his saintly The Razor's Edge, nearly always a good guy).  So seeing him be the grifter, working his way into the seance racket, and seeing the movie turn the tables on his cleverness, so slowly and maniacally, was great.  

Just for those of you poster who don't know, there really WAS a time period in the US when this "I can speak to the dead" medium business was rampant in the country.  Almost entirely aimed at the wealthy at a time when many Americans were busted and in poverty

I'm glad to hear someone knew how to do a "remake" without embarrassing themselves against a fine original Tyrone Power film version.  If you just "copy" the original, don't bother to make your movie.   Del Toro's got some real skills, and can be a powerhouse director, in spite of those few flops you want to curse him out for.   LOL. 

Yes, you are correct...the whole seance/mediums/fortune teller stuff was very popular & a bizarre life style for mostly the rich in decades past. It’s kind of made a resurgence in the last 15 years or so—unfortunately in my opinion, as it’s mostly scam artists & fake...but some will believe whatever they’re told. This story of Nightmare Alley really delves into that reality beautifully! 

The Tyrone Power movie is a classic, and I love & have it! But, Del Toro’s remake is a masterpiece! It truly proves good films can still be made, if pursued & done right. In my opinion it’s also more of another version of the original novel...rather than a remake of Power’s original movie. Del Toro’s new film is also more faithful to the novel & more realistic. I can’t wait for it to be released to DVD & Blu-ray...then I can have both! 

I’ve also heard that in the next month or so it’s going to be re-released in black-and-white, so there’s going to be two different versions. Don’t really know how true that is, but that’s what I’ve heard. It’ll be interesting to see one way or the other. 

[Augusta]

The "Black and White version" always bothers me.  It's trying to become popular over the past 10 years.  "The Walking Dead" did it too, with their premiere episode.  ...Aren't they all done with digital doctoring these days?  I could be wrong.

I do still photography.  And I know from the master shooters that when you know you have B&W film in your camera, you "see" and compose and wait for your subject differently---it's this fun work-up that you do all in your mind based on experience about what  B&W film brings out (or is NOT going to bring out like color film).  He doesn't shoot the same, he's either taking a "color shot" of the event, or a BW shot--they don't shoot the same way.  
 
If a director today wants to release a B&W version, I almost expect him to do a "B&W shoot" of the movie (different edits, different contrast and shadow on many of the scenes, maybe different time of day on some of the events in the storyline.  That would be super cool to see---TWO shoots of the same movie, same director.  Maybe the color version is 157 minutes long, and the B&W comes to 213 minutes.  Del Toro could do it!  Start a new exploratory art form.  And the audience would have to see BOTH versions to decide which telling of the story they enjoyed more.  Twice as much revenue for Hollywood.

But just draining the color out of the same photo... is kind just messin around with the photographer's color shoot.  I'd be willing to look at that for free, but don't charge me money to see it.

[ViceFanMan]

1 hour ago, Augusta said:

The "Black and White version" always bothers me.  It's trying to become popular over the past 10 years.  "The Walking Dead" did it too, with their premiere episode.  ...Aren't they all done with digital doctoring these days?  I could be wrong.

I do still photography.  And I know from the master shooters that when you know you have B&W film in your camera, you "see" and compose and wait for your subject differently---it's this fun work-up that you do all in your mind based on experience about what  B&W film brings out (or is NOT going to bring out like color film).  He doesn't shoot the same, he's either taking a "color shot" of the event, or a BW shot--they don't shoot the same way.  
 
If a director today wants to release a B&W version, I almost expect him to do a "B&W shoot" of the movie (different edits, different contrast and shadow on many of the scenes, maybe different time of day on some of the events in the storyline.  That would be super cool to see---TWO shoots of the same movie, same director.  Maybe the color version is 157 minutes long, and the B&W comes to 213 minutes.  Del Toro could do it!  Start a new exploratory art form.  And the audience would have to see BOTH versions to decide which telling of the story they enjoyed more.  Twice as much revenue for Hollywood.

But just draining the color out of the same photo... is kind just messin around with the photographer's color shoot.  I'd be willing to look at that for free, but don't charge me money to see it.

I actually don’t think it should be done or made in B&W. I agree, it doesn’t look the same or have the same impact in today’s cinema, as it did in say the 40s. It just looks odd when they try to do it, and the movie already is superbly “dark” in noir with the colors & color-scheme used! 

To me, making a movie now in B&W is trying to re-do the 40s-early 60s...and you can’t. Those films & style already “are” and have a certain classic impact. But, nowadays we need to do movies in color, regardless of genre...as real life isn’t B&W. Reality is full of all colors in all shades in all situations. 

[Augusta]

...LOL, so I'm starting to thing VicFanMan is NOT going to pay a repeat ticket to see Del Toro's B&W version.

How much is a ticket to the cinema these days?  You know, I confess I have not seen a movie AT the movies since 2002 (Attack of the Clones, IMAX experience in NYC---waste of my money trying goofy Imax).  I still have the ticket stub framed on a wall.

Been living on my old home theater set up, since then....

What's a theater seat cost you in wherever you live?  

[OCBman]

8 minutes ago, Augusta said:

...LOL, so I'm starting to thing VicFanMan is NOT going to pay a repeat ticket to see Del Toro's B&W version.

How much is a ticket to the cinema these days?  You know, I confess I have not seen a movie AT the movies since 2002 (Attack of the Clones, IMAX experience in NYC---waste of my money trying goofy Imax).  I still have the ticket stub framed on a wall.

Been living on my old home theater set up, since then....

What's a theater seat cost you in wherever you live?  

I have no clue how much tickets are now. The last time I sat in a theater to see a movie was for Hugo (2011).

[ViceFanMan]

31 minutes ago, Augusta said:

...LOL, so I'm starting to thing VicFanMan is NOT going to pay a repeat ticket to see Del Toro's B&W version.

How much is a ticket to the cinema these days?  You know, I confess I have not seen a movie AT the movies since 2002 (Attack of the Clones, IMAX experience in NYC---waste of my money trying goofy Imax).  I still have the ticket stub framed on a wall.

Been living on my old home theater set up, since then....

What's a theater seat cost you in wherever you live?  

I loved the movie, so I will still go see the B&W version, if they end up releasing that. However, I feel the color version would still be the best & most effective.

Prices of movie tickets nowadays are ridiculously high (around $13-14)...but, if the movie is good enough, it’s worth it once in a while. Plus, my town’s theater has special reclining seats w/foot rests, and a bar...so you can have drinks along with the food. 

[Dadrian]

My 11 yr old wants me to take him to the new Spider-Man movie tonight. This is not in my realm. We’ll see…  

[ViceFanMan]

4 hours ago, Dadrian said:

My 11 yr old wants me to take him to the new Spider-Man movie tonight. This is not in my realm. We’ll see…  

Everyone seems to be loving it...so I’m sure he will.  I’m glad superhero fans get movies they love pretty much every year. I just wish other, more realistic & serious, movies would be made again, too.  But, whatever the case...the important thing is, to have fun with your son! 

[Dadrian]

55 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

Everyone seems to be loving it...so I’m sure he will.  I’m glad superhero fans get movies they love pretty much every year. I just wish other, more realistic & serious, movies would be made again, too.  But, whatever the case...the important thing is, to have fun with your son! 

Full review: I would not have enjoyed it without my son.  

[ViceFanMan]

39 minutes ago, Dadrian said:

Full review: I would not have enjoyed it without my son.  

Lol, maybe not...but it’ll still be a treasured memory, of a movie you got to go to the theater to see together.