Last Movie You Watched? Mark 9

Xenia93 wrote:

AMERICAN SNIPER (2014)

Cooper was great but I found it pretty clumsy at times. Hits some nice action beats (particularly a sequence involving a sandstorm) but a lot of it just seemed "been there, done that" and the last 20 minutes or so just didn't feel right at all. Shares a lot of similarities with THE HURT LOCKER (a superior film, in my opinion).

I found enough to enjoy, I just didn't think it was great.

You know, I found myself thinking the same thing as I watched it. Eastwood's take on the subject matter is obviously more reverent and straightforward, as opposed to THE HURT LOCKER's portrayal, which ironically shows it's character as more an adrenaline junkie than anything else. I agree, though, that THE HURT LOCKER is easily the better film.

STARDUST (2007)
I've been re-watching some of Matt Vaughn's films in preparation for KINGSMEN (which looks really great, by the way). I'm a big fan of his stuff, but I never got around to seeing this one for some reason. I gotta say...after watching his take on a fantasy adventure, I'm pretty freakin' upset that Vaughn didn't get the Star Wars gig (apparently, Lucasfilm had him signed-on to direct at one point a few years ago, and was even beginning to go forward with pre-production with Chloe Grace-Moretz as the lead, but he left due to creative differences or something). Anyway, I thought this was great fun. Funny, exciting, whimsical...pretty much everything you'd want from this type of picture. An excellent score from Ilan Eshkeri, as well.

THE TRIP (2010)

Gorgeous photography of England. This film flows strangely, but I guess that's because it was a sitcom that was edited into a film. Coogan and Brydon do hilarious impressions through out.

I might check out the second series/sequel tomorrow night.

Second series is good too ... funny, of course. But there's a poignancy to the reflections on being a middle-aged man, and the food (and the locations it's eaten in) will likely make you ache with envy.

Quote :

But there's a poignancy to the reflections on being a middle-aged man...

I got that feeling from Coogan. Although, it wasn't all that bad, being able to bed a couple of younger ladies while traveling and eating around the country.

Whisky Galore

Ealing Classic. Or as it was known Stateside, Tight Little Island. Scheming locals take on the English in the form of Basil Radford who personally steals the film. Radford doing what he and some others did best, playing authority types or general clueless, determined Englishmen like he did in Way to the Stars, Passport to Pimlico and others (though perhaps less so in The Lady Vanishes).
Delightful way to end an evening after a sordid day and when the only thing you have on DVR is a Wim Wenders film and something about Adolf Eichmann (not that the former I dislike, just a bit 'heavy' for 10pm).

and here's to JRJ again

BLACKHAT (2014)

Well this isn't receiving the best reviews (in fact, most are downright negative) but I must admit: I loved it. Pure action cinema. Also fantastic use of location. A great experience in the theater. Too bad that this is bombing right now.

As entertaining as SKYFALL? That's how I'm gauging the action flicks that I watch these days.

THE TRIP TO ITALY (2014)

Had no idea this came out last year. And no recognition at any festivals? How was this film marketed?

It was excellent. Miles better than the first, with the same gorgeous photography. Brydon's "indiscretion" was a lot more interesting than Coogan's from the first film. The fact that he lives with his wife and child makes it a lot better. It's always more interesting when something's on the line, even if it's as simple as this.

I laughed my ass off at the conversation about Michael Caine, Christian Bale and Tom Hardy. Brilliant piece of comedy.

After I turned the TV off, I thought: fuck, it won't be too awful when I hit 50. I never plan on getting married anyways. But, I guess that's what they all say.

BLACKHAT is a richer film than SKYFALL, though it's not as purely entertaining.

This is the best review of BLACKHAT that I've seen:
http://reverseshot.org/reviews/entry/1989/blackhat

Control wrote:

As entertaining as SKYFALL? That's how I'm gauging the action flicks that I watch these days.

I dunno. I'm not sure if it's as entertaining as SKYFALL. The story isn't terribly strong but there's just a visceral nature to BLACKHAT that, in combination with the score, makes for an enthralling experience. They're a lot different, honestly.

Harmsway wrote:

BLACKHAT is a richer film than SKYFALL, though it's not as purely entertaining.

This is the best review of BLACKHAT that I've seen:
http://reverseshot.org/reviews/entry/1989/blackhat

"A richer film than SKYFALL" isn't saying all that much, but I do quite like Michael Mann (although I consider HEAT his one true masterpiece, which none of his other films comes close to). So where would you rank BLACKHAT in the Mann canon?

Last films I saw were the absorbing LIKE FATHER, LIKE SON (2013, directed by Hirokazu Koreeda) and the charming CHEF (2014, directed by Jon Favreau). Haven't watched too many films of late as my viewing has largely been revolving around my MODERN FAMILY box set, but I find myself interested in seeing most of this year's Best Picture nominees, especially WHIPLASH.

Loomis wrote:

So where would you rank BLACKHAT in the Mann canon?

His best since THE INSIDER, certainly.

Whiplash - great entertainment although walking away from it, something isn't quite my tempo. A nagging doubt I find hard to express. It'll come to me.

A Matter of Life and Death - still one of the most complete experiences.

Transformers (4?) - because my boyfriend's an idiot.

THE IMITATION GAME

Unengaging and cliched, yet it had the makings of something much better. I suppose Crumbpatch was alright.

Needed more tits and explosions I daresay.

Harmsway wrote:

Loomis wrote:

So where would you rank BLACKHAT in the Mann canon?

His best since THE INSIDER, certainly.

That good, huh? THE INSIDER would probably be my pick for Mann's second best film.

Despite my liking for Mann, BLACKHAT hadn't been on my to-see list but it's certainly on it now.

Out of any of Mann's films, BLACKHAT is closest in feel to MIAMI VICE (which has, incidentally, gone through something of a critical reappraisal and is now regarded by many as one of Mann's masterpieces).

I remember when Harms thought De Palma and Mann were useless. Very confusing.

Erica Ambler wrote:

I remember when Harms thought De Palma and Mann were useless. Very confusing.

Expecting consistency from young people is probably foolish.

Harmsway wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

I remember when Harms thought De Palma and Mann were useless. Very confusing.

Expecting consistency from young people is probably foolish.

I suppose that depends on how you define young. I began on the music papers when I was 15 and was editing one at 18.

Back then, you didn't go to press unless you knew exactly what you were saying. Failure could mean closure so you decided what the story was, who you believed and took sole responsibility for it. To be a dilettante was the worst thing in the world.

Times change.

Loomis wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Loomis wrote:

So where would you rank BLACKHAT in the Mann canon?

His best since THE INSIDER, certainly.

That good, huh? THE INSIDER would probably be my pick for Mann's second best film.

Despite my liking for Mann, BLACKHAT hadn't been on my to-see list but it's certainly on it now.

It's doing quite shittily in theaters right now. AMERICAN SNIPER is taking everyone's money, and I assume TAK3N (Jesus Christ, by the way) is right behind.

I'd like to see it again, but for me personally, I'd say BLACKHAT is about middle-of-the-road in comparison to Mann's other stuff. Hell, I'll even make a list...

1. Heat
2. The Insider
3. Thief
4. Collateral
5. Last of the Mohicans
6. Miami Vice
7. Blackhat
8. Manhunter
9. Public Enemies
10. The Keep
11. Ali

I like all of Mann's films, though.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

I remember when Harms thought De Palma and Mann were useless. Very confusing.

Expecting consistency from young people is probably foolish.

I suppose that depends on how you define young. I began on the music papers when I was 15 and was editing one at 18.

Back then, you didn't go to press unless you knew exactly what you were saying. Failure could mean closure so you decided what the story was, who you believed and took sole responsibility for it. To be a dilettante was the worst thing in the world.

Times change.

That's an understandable mindset for a publication (if also somewhat unfortunate, since great art often defies hasty judgments), but it's less reasonable for an isolated individual whose area of interest is not aligned with his or her career.

I'm not interested in remaining consistent for consistency's sake, particularly if points of view I've expressed in the past were grounded in false assumptions. I'll apologize for being unfair to De Palma and Mann in the past, but I won't apologize for changing my mind.

Well, that editorial policy didn't mean hasty judgements, it prevented them. The point was to not make any judgement until you were sure of your position. However, I concede that it may not be possible in a 24-7 media world.

Anyway, no apology required, but I am interested in understanding how and why your position on Mann and De Palma changed. (Changing tastes might make an interesting new thread.) Was it to do with you getting older, greater personal experience or a purely artistic reevaluation?

American Sniper.

It's ok but I'm not seeing the Oscar potential. Best scenes involve Sienna Miller, esp in the bar.

Fake babies galore.

Spoiler:

I fear I'm stuck in the past, William Wyler's Detective Story

Kirk Douglas in super form, I say this as at time's he wrenches the script to its limits. The film has no soundtrack really, takes place over a day and features a few familiar faces such as Joseph Wiseman (imagine the horror when I mistook him from a distance as Sid Caesar, no? Well...) who was suitably loony. William Bendix was a joy to see, having only really known him as the poor unfortunate Gus in Hitchcock's Lifeboat.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Anyway, no apology required, but I am interested in understanding how and why your position on Mann and De Palma changed. (Changing tastes might make an interesting new thread.) Was it to do with you getting older, greater personal experience or a purely artistic reevaluation?

I have re-evaluated my life and convictions over the past few years. Teasing out how it all relates to my turnaround on filmmakers like De Palma and Mann would be interesting, but would require more self-analysis than I'm capable of providing.

I've moved toward a strongly auteurist mode of movie-watching and criticism. Regarding bodies of work as a whole rather than films as isolated experiences can be rewarding, particularly in the cases of artists like Mann and De Palma who so consistently return to the same conceits again and again. I began to warm toward De Palma after viewing Femme Fatale for the first time. It was enough that I wanted to try and understand him, which is why I picked up Chris Dumas' Un-American Psycho. Dumas' treatment of De Palma has its flaws, but no other English-language study of De Palma so convincingly explores his commitments and arc as a filmmaker, or so passionately makes a case for the value of his work. It was after that point that I dove head-first into De Palma, reading and watching everything I could.

My interest in Mann picked up a little later. I did notice some overlap between those who held De Palma in high regard and those who respected Mann, which had me curious. But it was only after I began to take Johnnie To and John Frankenheimer seriously that I revisited Mann. I found that the extensive amount of time I'd spent with De Palma prepared me well for Mann, not just because they have similar priorities regarding narrative and formal experimentation, but because they both defy a simple "high art"/"low art" dichotomy. They are routinely (and unfairly) consigned to the genre ghetto.