Last Movie You Watched? 7.0

Ditto. Can't imagine the late Peter Graves was too thrilled about it either.

Graves was approached to play Phelps, but he refused when he read the script. Greg Morris walked out of a screening.

I've said I'd prefer to see a new movie (or TV) series with Bruce Greenwood as the leader of IMF.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Graves was approached to play Phelps, but he refused when he read the script. Greg Morris walked out of a screening.

I recall Morris being upset, made it to the tabloids here. Graves...well, good thing he refused it. I've only ever seen the first MI film and I dare say I won't ever bother the rest.

--

in other news

Jesse Stone: No Remorse

they are hardly any great works but Tom Selleck does his bit admirably and there is of course William Devane. Devane/Selleck's routine is first rate in some respects. Stone uses Doc as his sounding board for his police work as well as his counselling. Doc doesn't mince words.
And throw in William Sadler too. Why not.

The Matrix (1999)

Hadn't seen it since about 2000. Excellent movie. Just really well-done. I'll have to watch DARK CITY again soon. Gee, I haven't seen that in a couple years. I probably enjoy DARK CITY more.

I have to say it's kinda odd starting to see the 90's an era with a look that's as discernible as that of the decades before it.

Christ, I'm getting nostalgiac.

Now that I've finally become a fan of Rufus Sewell (since that absurdly short-lived series of his with Solange from CR), I should give DARK CITY another go. I had big plot points spoiled for me before I saw it, and I think that tainted my first couple of viewings. It has been long enough now that I could be objective, I think.

After a long stretch of extreme unpleasantness on the day job (a lot of both fear AND loathing) and really busting my ass to all hours to get a couple articles done and another couple at least partway to completion, I wanted to take it easy, so we watched THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN. Damn, still makes me laugh and I don't feel guilty about it either. I don't buy off on all Aptow, but this one (unrated version, only cut I've seen) is kind of like BADDER SANTA for me, something I can just bask in.

Though I do feel a bit guilty about Kat Dennings being in it, since I'm guessing she must still have just been a teenager.

trevanian wrote:

Now that I've finally become a fan of Rufus Sewell (since that absurdly short-lived series of his with Solange from CR), I should give DARK CITY another go. I had big plot points spoiled for me before I saw it, and I think that tainted my first couple of viewings. It has been long enough now that I could be objective, I think.

See the Director's Cut, which I think is basically how Proyas wanted the film to be before the studio messed with it. One of my favorite changes is that they went back to Jennifer Connelly actually singing. The original version with Anita Kelsey's voice sounded completely wrong, or at least it does now.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

My wife thinks she should turn up as Joan's long lost younger sister on MAD MEN -- which makes me flash back to Heather Graham playing Peggy LIpton's MUCH younger sister in TWIN PEAKS. A plethora of riches ...

The White Tuxedo wrote:

trevanian wrote:

Now that I've finally become a fan of Rufus Sewell (since that absurdly short-lived series of his with Solange from CR), I should give DARK CITY another go. I had big plot points spoiled for me before I saw it, and I think that tainted my first couple of viewings. It has been long enough now that I could be objective, I think.

See the Director's Cut, which I think is basically how Proyas wanted the film to be before the studio messed with it. One of my favorite changes is that they went back to Jennifer Connelly actually singing. The original version with Anita Kelsey's voice sounded completely wrong, or at least it does now.

WOW! Guess I don't know all that much about this one. I bought the laserdisc, if that gives you an idea of the last time I saw it. Will definitely want the DC.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Drax wrote:

Killer Joe

WTF

That's one that interests me.

It was hit and miss. I'm less shaken now that I know that the female main character was supposed to be 16/17 as opposed to 12. And the ending was fucked. I think the Coen brothers would have handled the material better.

trevanian wrote:

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

My wife thinks she should turn up as Joan's long lost younger sister on MAD MEN -- which makes me flash back to Heather Graham playing Peggy LIpton's MUCH younger sister in TWIN PEAKS. A plethora of riches ...

Wow. That is actually a great idea. I'd love to see that.

Watched some of the Animatrix. The OSIRIS one was okay. The rest of what I saw struck me as nihilistic, depressing... goth crap or whatever. I hate anime.

I don't mind CG animated stuff if the writing is good. But anime. Ugh. Or whatever kind of animation was going on. Really I just found the whole thing depressing. I won't be trying to watch this again.

I need a pick-me-up.

I've only been drunk twice in my life. The first time was at home just to see what it was like. I got slightly drunk and watched IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD.

Red River (1948, dir. Howard Hawks)

Good storytelling, interesting characters, some witty dialogue and characters (the American Indian, most of all), Wayne is good, Monty is even better. I like Hawks a lot so far (not sure about the extent of involvement by that Rosson guy).

The Sugarland Express (1974, dir. Steven Spielberg)

Pretty well-made film, there is nothing that reminds me of the malign Spielberg touch of his later films. Not sure how much of what is in the film actually happened exactly the same way, most of the details and incidents must be made-up. It's fairly humorous, but it doesn't sentimentalize its content. I can't believe people can be as stupid as our harmless crook couple here. There naivety leads to the inevitable ending (though other measures against them could have been taken). On first viewing, a pretty enjoyable film with interesting characters; of those, I found the Captain and Slide to be the most interesting and probably best developed.

Manhunter wrote:

Red River (1948, dir. Howard Hawks)

Good storytelling, interesting characters, some witty dialogue and characters (the American Indian, most of all), Wayne is good, Monty is even better. like Hawks a lot so far (not sure about the extent of involvement by that Rosson guy)..

Have you seen this one?



Possibly my favorite Hawks film.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I've only been drunk twice in my life. The first time was at home just to see what it was like. I got slightly drunk and watched IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD.

On old-fashioneds?-

Brave - one of these days Pixar may make a film I don't like, but it hasn't happened yet. Stunning animation, amusing, touching ... oh, you know the drill by now :) .

Torn Curtain (1966, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

Not one of Hitchcock's most ambitious films, but I enjoyed it. The plot has some interesting twists (though I would have loved to have seen a movie about a real traitor and defector, and that being played by Newman), and I really enjoyed the fight with Gromek in the farmhouse, the bus ride and, despite being a horrible stereotype, the conceited and vengeful ballerina.


PS: I haven't seen ONLY ANGELS yet, but I will certainly do some day. Perhaps I'll order the English-only DVD from the UK soon.

It's too bad that TORN CURTAIN didn't turn out better.

I've tried liking it, but can't.

MAGNOLIA. This would-be Altmanesque offering from Paul Thomas Anderson all too often comes across as a pretentious PULP FICTION. It's a technical tour de force, frequently dazzling to look at (and any film that features a torrential downpour of frogs can't be all bad), but it's also plodding, preachy and colossally pleased with itself, and manages simultaneously to be desperately depressing and as sentimental as anything Spielberg ever came up with. The characters are mostly uninteresting (although the performances tend to be first-rate), and the whole thing is basically a life lesson stretched out over a ridiculous running time of more than three hours. As often seems the case with Anderson, the musical soundtrack is often overbearing and intrusive, although that said there are times when MAGNOLIA becomes so talky that one longs for something to drown out all the heavyhanded dialogue. His talent as a filmmaker certainly shines through but is in dire need of control - MAGNOLIA is a textbook example of directorial self-indulgence. It's worth seeing mainly for an electrifying and perhaps career-best performance by Tom Cruise.

The Purple Plain

Gregory Peck strongly acting his way through as the Canadian RAF pilot tortured by the loss of his wife in the Blitz. Based out in Burma our Peck battles the depression as well as borish Maurice Denham and the Burmese heat. Once the plane crashes carrying Peck, Denham and impeccable Lyndon Brook it becomes man against the elements. Still, Bernard Lee is quite something here and to see him alongside Peck is...well, something. Anthony Bushell pulls off his authority figure role again (A Night to Remember, Battle of the River Plate other examples) and Lyndon Brook his role that he'd do in Reach for the Sky (swear he's Carrington in that as well).

I'm a huge fan of MAGNOLIA (I have the falling frogs teaser poster framed in my apartment). Although, I can certainly understand why some would absolutely hate it. I do agree that Anderson's pacing tests your patience at times and that it probably is a bit too long for it's own good.

Loomis wrote:

MAGNOLIA. This would-be Altmanesque offering from Paul Thomas Anderson all too often comes across as a pretentious PULP FICTION. It's a technical tour de force, frequently dazzling to look at (and any film that features a torrential downpour of frogs can't be all bad), but it's also plodding, preachy and colossally pleased with itself, and manages simultaneously to be desperately depressing and as sentimental as anything Spielberg ever came up with. The characters are mostly uninteresting (although the performances tend to be first-rate), and the whole thing is basically a life lesson stretched out over a ridiculous running time of more than three hours. As often seems the case with Anderson, the musical soundtrack is often overbearing and intrusive, although that said there are times when MAGNOLIA becomes so talky that one longs for something to drown out all the heavyhanded dialogue. His talent as a filmmaker certainly shines through but is in dire need of control - MAGNOLIA is a textbook example of directorial self-indulgence. It's worth seeing mainly for an electrifying and perhaps career-best performance by Tom Cruise.

Agreed about Cruise. His best performance ever.

It's a tie between MAGNOLIA and BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. for me.

Largo's Shark wrote:

BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY.

Came off rather hammy on that one I think. I really liked him in RAIN MAN. Haven't seen MAGNOLIA.