Last Movie You Watched? 7.0

Still gotta see that. Liked what I saw of it.

I thought Melancholia was fantastic. Wonderfully shot and refreshingly weird. Loved it. Kirsten Dunst managed a great performance too!

Yeah, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, We Need To Talk About Kevin, The Eye Of The Storm, The Rum Diary, The Artist, War Horse, The Adventures Of Tin Tin, The Ides Of March and Moneyball are all on that list with A Dangerous Method. And I think I should probably watch The Help as well...

With Carnage, it's great. You'll like it, but most of the comedic moments are in the trailer. I just think it could have been shot better. But I enjoyed it.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

It felt like it could have been a lot shorter

I think you could say that of nearly all of Malick's more recent films.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Yeah, I found the film affecting in a lot of places. I'm probably in a minority on that one.

I don't think so. At the very least, critics seemed to be very moved by it.

I loved THE TREE OF LIFE's picture of childhood. It captures a child's gradually increasing awareness of the world and its complexities very beautifully. But I don't think the film ever satisfactorily connects that image of childhood with the big picture of the universe, and it all leads to a somewhat sloppy conclusion. Malick left a lot of stuff on the cutting room floor that would have really helped strengthen the thematic arc of the film.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I'll see CARNAGE pretty soon.

CARNAGE is to Polanski what MIDNIGHT IN PARIS is to Allen.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Dunno about MELANCHOLIA. I didn't make it far into ANTICHRIST. Not sure if I even want to try this other one.

Well, MELANCHOLIA is very, very different than ANTICHRIST. But of the two, I hated MELANCHOLIA far more.

The Dictator

1/5

Not only why is this moron allowed to continue to make the same dumb s**t over and over?

they also cut the Megan Fox scene shown in the trailer down to nothing.

That was the only funny part in the entire film and it was left on the cutting room floor.

I guess that movie hit too close to home for a victim of the Barack Hussein Osama regime.

The Outfit (1973)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071960/

This is based on the 3rd book in the series of books, with the first being Point Blank (1967) with Lee Marvin, which is what Mel Gibson's Payback was the remake of.

A well made gangster revenge film - they don't make movies like this anymore - featuring a young Joanna Cassidy, almost 10 years before she played the Snake Charmer Replicant in Blade Runner.

4.5/5

The Searchers (1956)

On Blu-ray, where it looks STUNNING. I'm on the fence about the upcoming Hitchcock Blu set. I just hope I can get VERTIGO and couple of others, because the VistaVision looks great on this format.

As for the film? An iconic, mighty piece of cinema to be sure. Not one of my favorite films. I really wish the unfortunate Mrs. Pawley business was done a lot differently. It's so below the level of the rest of film, and I actually like Ford's humor most of the time. Ken Curtis is a riot to me.

But when the movie works? Like I said, iconic and mighty American frontier cinema.

THE BOURNE LEGACY (2012)
directed by Tony Gilroy

I guess I should preface this by saying that I'm actually a big fan of the Bourne movies (despite it not being a very popular opinion around these parts). Unfortunately, even as someone who loves Bourne and was pretty excited to see the new installment, LEGACY is a huge disappointment, and most of the blame can be placed squarely on the shoulders of the film's writer/director, Tony Gilroy.

ULTIMATUM wrapped-up everything fairly nicely, so those thinking that LEGACY would lack story and be a simple cash-in rehash would not be wrong here. You see, there's a new super-secret government agency in town called Project Outcome. But unlike it's predecessors, Treadstone and Blackbriar, Project Outcome uses experimental genetic modification to make the agents stronger and smarter than normal humans. After Jason Bourne has publicly humiliated the CIA, they put Edward Norton in charge of cleaning up any loose ends, which includes terminating Project Outcome by killing all the active agents and the doctors who are in-charge of the genetic experiments. Jeremy Renner and Rachel Weisz, after both surviving separate assassinations, then team up to....find Renner some medicine. Gilroy's script reeks of "I'm so much smarter than you" faux- intelligence, despite having almost no story whatsoever. He puts the audience through scene after scene after scene of so much technical bullshit and scientific jargon that you can't help but wonder what the hell these characters are talking about and why it even matters. Plus, the addition of the genetic modification flies directly in the face of everything Liman and Greengrass established in the previous films. There was an element of realism there that made you believe that, somewhere in the world, there are black ops guys that can actually do stuff like like Jason Bourne. This new angle of genetic modification throws that realism out the window and turns the whole story into something you'd see in a bad sci-fi movie.

Not only does Gilroy fail in his writing, but he fails in his direction as well. He really slows the pacing down, to the point where almost every scene drags on far too long. Yet, during the action scenes, he tries to ape SUPREMACY/ULTIMATUM with the shaky-cam and rapid editing. The result is an awkward hybrid of Liman and Greengrass' different styles. But, the worst thing about LEGACY is it's abrupt ending, which occurs totally out of left field and leaves everything completely unresolved.

It's a shame because LEGACY actually has a nice cast, but they have no material to work with. Edward Norton is completely underused here. He stands around, feverishly barking orders and trying to seem important, but to no avail. The real shame is Renner and Weisz, who actually have a pretty great chemistry together. Unlike Damon's Bourne, who is stoic and hard-edged, Renner's character is likeable and charming, while Weisz brings a nice vulnerability. You can tell these two tried like hell to make something, ANYTHING happen, but there's just nothing in the script that can justify their efforts. I'd actually love to see a sequel directed by someone who knows what the hell they're doing, just because Renner and Weisz are so good.

I supposed I wrote more than this film deserves, but this film just pissed me off so much, I had to get it out.

5/10

dr. strangelove wrote:

THE BOURNE LEGACY (2012)
directed by Tony Gilroy

I guess I should preface this by saying that I'm actually a big fan of the Bourne movies (despite it not being a very popular opinion around these parts).

I like them, but LEGACY looks like simply more of the same.

The Outsiders (1983; dir. Francis Ford Coppola)

A fairly convincing social study in some parts, contrived but still entertaining in others. Doesn't hit home very much, but it displays a good choice of music.


Control (2007; dir. Anton Corbijn)

A biography of the one and only Mr. Brandon B. At first I thought this would be a stupid filmic worship of a mediocre musician who deceased at a young age, but it pulled itself together. It's a realistic-feeling portrayal of the guy's life with a good use of songs (not only JOY DIVISION) and good acting, nothing more. No real complaints, thankfully no mindless glorification. Certainly too drab for most people's tastes, but I can't complain.


The Ghost Writer (2010; dir. Roman Polanski)

Enjoyed it even more than on the first view. It's a well-scripted film with decent humour, the mystery is interesting, but the characters not that much. A lot of beautiful cinematography here, and again a fine score. The ending is probably not the best imaginable one; felt like the writers didn't know how to end the whole thing after the mystery is revealed. Unsatisfying? Not for cynics! ;)

The Towering Inferno (1974)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072308/

4/5

They don't make this kind of movies anymore.

This movie will also be too expensive to be remade today.

Made for $14 Million in 1974.

Adjusted for inflation, that's $65.1 Million in 2012 dollar.

$65.1 Million budget for a movie nowadays is considered low budget.

That amount does not include marketing cost.

To get this movie properly made as a big budget blockbuster potential, it would cost $300 Million.

Question is will it justify such a large budget at the box office?

For a movie nowadays to be considered a box office success, it has to earn 2.5 times its budget.

If they were to remake this movie for $300 Million, it will not make a profit because it will have to make $750 million at the box office.

Imitation of Life (1959)

The story and characters are passibly interesting, though I got pretty bored by the end. The real draw is Sirk's craftsmanship. The film plays like a well-oiled machine.

It's the least of the four Sirk films that I've seen, but I loved the title sequence.

HEAT (1995, dir. Michael Mann)

In general, I'm not big on Michael Mann. But HEAT, with its vision of the battle between criminals and law enforcement as a battle of raw willpower, is nevertheless pretty riveting stuff.

Harmsway wrote:

HEAT (1995, dir. Michael Mann)

In general, I'm not big on Michael Mann. But HEAT, with its vision of the battle between criminals and law enforcement as a battle of raw willpower, is nevertheless pretty riveting stuff.

I dig it pretty well. Gotta love Waingro.

Manhunter wrote:

Control (2007; dir. Anton Corbijn)

A biography of the one and only Mr. Brandon B.

Still haven't received a royalty check yet. :|

The Longest Day (1962)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056197/

It's strange to see Gert Frobe and Sir Sean in the same movie, 2+ years before Goldfinger.

5/5

Harmsway wrote:

HEAT (1995, dir. Michael Mann)

In general, I'm not big on Michael Mann. But HEAT, with its vision of the battle between criminals and law enforcement as a battle of raw willpower, is nevertheless pretty riveting stuff.

I threw in a Mann flick today, myself....

MIAMI VICE (Directors Cut) (2006)

It's slick, cool, and unmistakably Mann. The visuals are fantastic, with lots of bright, bold colors and some breathtaking sky and scenery views. I dare say it's Mann's best looking digital film, and aside from the occasional grainy frame here and there (usually a night shot), it's a pure joy to look at. I found the characters reasonably compelling (despite Ferrell's character getting more screen time than Foxx), but the story didn't do much for me, seeing as it's a pretty run-of-the-mill undercover cop story that, at times, doesn't flow particularly well. It's certainly not Mann's best work, but I liked it well enough. I'd be curious to see the differences between this and the theatrical cut, since the theatrical version seems to be almost universally hated.

On a Bond-related note, you get to see Naomie Harris' boobs and ass during a shower scene. I'd say she's well equipped for the job of (hopefully) being nailed by Bond in SKYFALL. I'd also love to see Mann take on a Bond movie.


RONIN (1998)

A fine action picture. The story is pretty much non-existent, but it's basically a chase movie. Knowing that, it could have done a better job of hammering home the whole Ronin/honor theme, since there's really not much story to focus on. The car chases are intense and thrilling, as are the shootouts (which is pretty much all you can ask from a film like this). DeNiro and Reno make a good team.

The Gay Falcon/Date with the Falcon/The Falcon Takes Over

Sanders doing his Saint bit elsewhere. Apart from the fact he has maddening girlfriends it's not that much kop. Something to pass the time.

The Kids Are All Right (2010)

I wasn't expecting to care for this one, but I actually liked it pretty well. Nothing earth-shattering, but I was worried it would be something schmaltzly in the direction of THE HELP.

2010 nominees:

1. TOY STORY 3
2. TRUE GRIT
3. WINTER'S BONE
4. THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT
5. INCEPTION (because it bored me to bleeping tears)
6. 127 HOURS (it was okay, but I just didn't enjoy it at all)
7. THE FIGHTER
8. THE KING'S SPEECH

PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE. A peculiar piece of arthouse black comedy that's like a blend of the Coens, Godard and Wong Kar-Wai. Paul Thomas Anderson's film has some funny moments and impressive visuals but is rarely truly engaging. It's watchable, sure, but on the whole not especially enjoyable. Anderson seems more concerned with making a quirky movie and paying tribute to other filmmakers than he is with crafting a compelling story. There's no denying his technical skill, but all too often during PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE it appears that he's simply pissing about.

Harmsway wrote:

HEAT (1995, dir. Michael Mann)

In general, I'm not big on Michael Mann. But HEAT, with its vision of the battle between criminals and law enforcement as a battle of raw willpower, is nevertheless pretty riveting stuff.

It's one of my favourite films. I do like a couple of other Manns (THE INSIDER being probably my second favourite flick of his), but nothing else of his that I've seen comes anywhere close to HEAT.

PROMETHEUS (2012)

Decided to give this a second go now that it's in the dollar theaters. I know it gets a lot of hate but it's so close to being great. If only it didn't try to be so damn coy.

I believe a few people around here have wondered if this will be one of those films that's hated now but will be revered a few decades down the line. As it stands, I don't think it will, but maybe the gaps the sequels will fill in will help.

Jack Wade wrote:

PROMETHEUS (2012)

Decided to give this a second go now that it's in the dollar theaters. I know it gets a lot of hate but it's so close to being great. If only it didn't try to be so damn coy.

I believe a few people around here have wondered if this will be one of those films that's hated now but will be revered a few decades down the line. As it stands, I don't think it will, but maybe the gaps the sequels will fill in will help.

People hated Blade Runner and the most of the critics killed it and it didn't do well at the box office (well it did had to go up against E.T. and Start Trek The Wrath of Khan) but it's now a cult classic!

j7wild wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:

PROMETHEUS (2012)

Decided to give this a second go now that it's in the dollar theaters. I know it gets a lot of hate but it's so close to being great. If only it didn't try to be so damn coy.

I believe a few people around here have wondered if this will be one of those films that's hated now but will be revered a few decades down the line. As it stands, I don't think it will, but maybe the gaps the sequels will fill in will help.

People hated Blade Runner and the most of the critics killed it and it didn't do well at the box office (well it did had to go up against E.T. and Start Trek The Wrath of Khan) but it's now a cult classic!

Same with THE THING, of course.

dr. strangelove wrote:

THE BOURNE LEGACY (2012)
directed by Tony Gilroy

I guess I should preface this by saying that I'm actually a big fan of the Bourne movies (despite it not being a very popular opinion around these parts). Unfortunately, even as someone who loves Bourne and was pretty excited to see the new installment, LEGACY is a huge disappointment, and most of the blame can be placed squarely on the shoulders of the film's writer/director, Tony Gilroy.

ULTIMATUM wrapped-up everything fairly nicely, so those thinking that LEGACY would lack story and be a simple cash-in rehash would not be wrong here. You see, there's a new super-secret government agency in town called Project Outcome. But unlike it's predecessors, Treadstone and Blackbriar, Project Outcome uses experimental genetic modification to make the agents stronger and smarter than normal humans. After Jason Bourne has publicly humiliated the CIA, they put Edward Norton in charge of cleaning up any loose ends, which includes terminating Project Outcome by killing all the active agents and the doctors who are in-charge of the genetic experiments. Jeremy Renner and Rachel Weisz, after both surviving separate assassinations, then team up to....find Renner some medicine. Gilroy's script reeks of "I'm so much smarter than you" faux- intelligence, despite having almost no story whatsoever. He puts the audience through scene after scene after scene of so much technical bullshit and scientific jargon that you can't help but wonder what the hell these characters are talking about and why it even matters. Plus, the addition of the genetic modification flies directly in the face of everything Liman and Greengrass established in the previous films. There was an element of realism there that made you believe that, somewhere in the world, there are black ops guys that can actually do stuff like like Jason Bourne. This new angle of genetic modification throws that realism out the window and turns the whole story into something you'd see in a bad sci-fi movie.

Not only does Gilroy fail in his writing, but he fails in his direction as well. He really slows the pacing down, to the point where almost every scene drags on far too long. Yet, during the action scenes, he tries to ape SUPREMACY/ULTIMATUM with the shaky-cam and rapid editing. The result is an awkward hybrid of Liman and Greengrass' different styles. But, the worst thing about LEGACY is it's abrupt ending, which occurs totally out of left field and leaves everything completely unresolved.

It's a shame because LEGACY actually has a nice cast, but they have no material to work with. Edward Norton is completely underused here. He stands around, feverishly barking orders and trying to seem important, but to no avail. The real shame is Renner and Weisz, who actually have a pretty great chemistry together. Unlike Damon's Bourne, who is stoic and hard-edged, Renner's character is likeable and charming, while Weisz brings a nice vulnerability. You can tell these two tried like hell to make something, ANYTHING happen, but there's just nothing in the script that can justify their efforts. I'd actually love to see a sequel directed by someone who knows what the hell they're doing, just because Renner and Weisz are so good.

I supposed I wrote more than this film deserves, but this film just pissed me off so much, I had to get it out.

5/10

Nice write-up Strangelove. You saved me the typing. What a major disappointment this film turned out to be. It works as a passable action thriller, but its utterly uninteresting. SF will blow this dud out of the water. Hadn't we seen all this before. Legacy is a half-baked reworking of the Bourne theme. ie earnest, well meaning, good guy super-agent, is being hunted down by his brutal, evil, Intelligence spymasters bent on disavowing and destroying him. Girl who is also targeted for elimination, tags along for the ride. The story was much better presented in "Identity". I do like Renner's portrayal of the new agent. Weisz was quite good as well, but the story is a dud.

Would have made much more sense to re-cast Bourne with Renner and continue along with a fresh Bourne adventure. Renner makes a better Bourne than Damon anyway IMO. There are seven new Bourne books post-Ludlum that they could have pulled ideas from. Lit Bourne has been nicely developed post Ludlum. Instead they re-worked the first film, minus the memory loss, with a new character. What a waste of time.

Pi (1998, dir. Darren Aronofsky)

Not sure what to make of it. It was entertaining, but the whole digits/mystical crap seems highly unoriginal. The style is annoying after a while. The film reveals nothing. What to make of it?