Last Movie You Watched.

Sarai wrote:

I always really like M Night Shyamalan movie The Happening for that very reason, watching the masses panic in every irrational way one can imagine for absolutely no reason at all.
it's one of the funniest movies I have ever watched

I haven't heard of that one. What's it about? I assume it's fairly recent.

2008 "A science teacher, his wife, and a young girl struggle to survive a plague that causes those infected to commit suicide."

The movie seems to be hated by his fans and most of the general population and considered a total hack job. Even what it's about is up for debate but I found it insanely funny.
I feel like people didn't 'get' the movie but I hate saying that as it sounds like an intellectual issue when all I mean is tune into the spirit of it.
It's idiotic, absurd, irrational all true but I have always felt that was the point and he knew exactly what he was doing when he made it.
it's either that or I am seeing a whole other movie in there that others aren't ...maybe it's just in my head or how I interpret it, dunno

I see it being about a neurotic culture and masses who are endlessly reacting to a scripted reality and media. at one point they are trying to run and escape from the wind, people find that absurd I find it spot on

Perilagu Khan wrote:

As for the religious aspect, it's certainly an interesting one. The Christianity professed by the characters in the film was every bit as totalizing as that held by many Muslims today. It is the sole defining feature of their entire lives, and it is believed, literally, with a passionate intensity that is frightening in itself. I mean, they actually believed that their baby was burning in hell because it was killed by the witch before it could be baptized. Can you imagine actually believing that? Such a belief, to me, would drive one insane very quickly. Then again, perhaps one must be quite daft to begin with to believe such a thing.

Being able to present a divergent POV in a compelling fashion -- not necessarily selling that point of view, but presenting it in an engaging way -- is a real trick for filmmakers, especially with a touchy subject like religion. Kind of makes me flash back to when Siskel & Ebert (never my favorites, which I guess is what I'd say about every reviewer) discussed THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Siskel said something like, "I've never had any interest in this subject matter or belief in anything like this, but this film made me want to know more." And that in turn made me flash back to seeing it in a theater. There was a much older couple in front of us, and they seemed very quietly engaged by the film, but 2hrs in, when Christ comes off the cross and goes into his alt-life, they just rose and left -- it was like they were just there to see the notes they had already committed to memory, but wouldn't go this extra step.

Bottom line is that zealotry is always a hard sell unless it's your particular brand of zealotry. If somebody reimagined THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN only made it about Trump, there's only be 'stop the steal' lemmings in the audience.

Sarai wrote:

I see it being about a neurotic culture and masses who are endlessly reacting to a scripted reality and media. at one point they are trying to run and escape from the wind, people find that absurd I find it spot on

In other words, the masses hate it because their ox is being gored. But perhaps that gives them too much credit. I'm not sure they're capable of grasping satire or parody.

trevanian wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

As for the religious aspect, it's certainly an interesting one. The Christianity professed by the characters in the film was every bit as totalizing as that held by many Muslims today. It is the sole defining feature of their entire lives, and it is believed, literally, with a passionate intensity that is frightening in itself. I mean, they actually believed that their baby was burning in hell because it was killed by the witch before it could be baptized. Can you imagine actually believing that? Such a belief, to me, would drive one insane very quickly. Then again, perhaps one must be quite daft to begin with to believe such a thing.

Being able to present a divergent POV in a compelling fashion -- not necessarily selling that point of view, but presenting it in an engaging way -- is a real trick for filmmakers, especially with a touchy subject like religion. Kind of makes me flash back to when Siskel & Ebert (never my favorites, which I guess is what I'd say about every reviewer) discussed THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Siskel said something like, "I've never had any interest in this subject matter or belief in anything like this, but this film made me want to know more." And that in turn made me flash back to seeing it in a theater. There was a much older couple in front of us, and they seemed very quietly engaged by the film, but 2hrs in, when Christ comes off the cross and goes into his alt-life, they just rose and left -- it was like they were just there to see the notes they had already committed to memory, but wouldn't go this extra step.

Bottom line is that zealotry is always a hard sell unless it's your particular brand of zealotry. If somebody reimagined THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN only made it about Trump, there's only be 'stop the steal' lemmings in the audience.

I'm a devoted Christian--if not a hugely pious one--but have not seen The Last Temptation. Conversely, I have seen Jesus Christ Superstar. My movie viewing is rather chaotic and haphazard.

Yes, presenting a divergent POV in compelling fashion is a tremendous filmmaking skill. Particularly if the POV is not merely divergent from the popular zeitgeist but from the filmmaker's POV. One must fight the temptation to mock or belittle or undermine. It takes a disciplined commitment to objectivity, and objectivity is decidedly out of fashion in this dayonage.

Interesting discussion above. As an aside, The double-V-itch was probably the only horror movie of the last few years that I didn't think was a sack of balls, not that it's a genre I seek out that often. Atmosphere was really something.

I've never seen The Happening, but I did once see it referred to as 'the movie to watch if you've ever wanted to see Mark Wahlberg get comprehensively out-acted by plants' .

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I've never seen The Happening, but I did once see it referred to as 'the movie to watch if you've ever wanted to see Mark Wahlberg get comprehensively out-acted by plants' .

I had more to add to this thread but that made me laugh so hard I forgot what I was going to say

Sarai wrote:

Blunt Instrument wrote:

I've never seen The Happening, but I did once see it referred to as 'the movie to watch if you've ever wanted to see Mark Wahlberg get comprehensively out-acted by plants' .

I had more to add to this thread but that made me laugh so hard I forgot what I was going to say  

I've been thoroughly unimpressed by everything in this Wallberg's career save for his work in THE DEPARTED, even movies that like I enjoy like TED, but really liked his brother in BOOMTOWN (at least the first season, before everything changed.)

trevanian wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

As for the religious aspect, it's certainly an interesting one. The Christianity professed by the characters in the film was every bit as totalizing as that held by many Muslims today. It is the sole defining feature of their entire lives, and it is believed, literally, with a passionate intensity that is frightening in itself. I mean, they actually believed that their baby was burning in hell because it was killed by the witch before it could be baptized. Can you imagine actually believing that? Such a belief, to me, would drive one insane very quickly. Then again, perhaps one must be quite daft to begin with to believe such a thing.

Being able to present a divergent POV in a compelling fashion -- not necessarily selling that point of view, but presenting it in an engaging way -- is a real trick for filmmakers, especially with a touchy subject like religion. Kind of makes me flash back to when Siskel & Ebert (never my favorites, which I guess is what I'd say about every reviewer) discussed THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. Siskel said something like, "I've never had any interest in this subject matter or belief in anything like this, but this film made me want to know more." And that in turn made me flash back to seeing it in a theater. There was a much older couple in front of us, and they seemed very quietly engaged by the film, but 2hrs in, when Christ comes off the cross and goes into his alt-life, they just rose and left -- it was like they were just there to see the notes they had already committed to memory, but wouldn't go this extra step.

Bottom line is that zealotry is always a hard sell unless it's your particular brand of zealotry. If somebody reimagined THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN only made it about Trump, there's only be 'stop the steal' lemmings in the audience.

The Last Temptation was such an incredible spiritual journey it's almost an insult to call it a movie or book. Not without it's humor either when he talks about trying to deal with his ego in that scene with Peter after he tells him how great it must be to hear from God. I don't know why the movie was controversial as it says right at the beginning it's not based on the Gospels. It's a work that any Buddhist could really relate to as well.

Sarai wrote:

I don't know why the movie was controversial as it says right at the beginning it's not  based on the Gospels. It's a work that any Buddhist could really relate to as well.

The most enjoyable novel I've read about Jesus -- actually it is probably the only novel I've read about Jesus outside of TEMPTATION -- focuses mainly on the years when he is missing, presumably getting enlightenment in the East. I think a lot of people considered it heretical as well (I just thought it was awfully funny and pretty well-researched.) It's called LAMB, by Christopher Moore, and it is the life of Jesus as told by his lifelong friend Biff, an apostle who got whited out of all the historical accounts.

Iron Man 3 - a midweek Marvel rewatch. Colourful, cheery fun for the most part (not being mired in the comic 'lore', Shane Black's twist on The Mandarin didn't bother me at all ... it helps that once he's exposed as actually being hapless actor Trevor Slattery, Ben Kingsley's performance is bloody funny). 

A trifecta this week -- HOT FUZZ, SHAUN OF THE DEAD and THE ROCKETEER.

First time I've ever truly enjoyed THE ROCKETEER (another one of those movies where the Horner score sounds so borrowed, from THE RIGHT STUFF and THE NATURAL, and a certain repeated cue that seems to have originated with BRAINSTORM and STAR TREK III, it always distracted me), but always relished Dalton's turn as the baddie.

FUZZ and DEAD have long been favorites, though this time I noticed a faint familiarity on the FUZZ score that seemed to resonate with DAD and QUANTUM. Still though, enormous fun, as there's a joy in the performances from so many great character actors. Pegg really gives a lot of hints that he has some acting juice himself, but haven't really seen it in his later films, though I've only seen one of his M:Is thus far (not a fan of Mr. Cruise, not now, not ever, though he seemed pretty okay in COLOR OF MONEY and TAPS.)

trevanian wrote:

not a fan of Mr. Cruise, not now, not ever, though he seemed pretty okay in COLOR OF MONEY and TAPS.)

Not even in Rain Man?

I barely remember RAIN MAN, to be honest. It might be he is okay in it, but there's just a vibe coming off the guy that really rankles me. I remember walking out on THE FIRM halfway through even though it was 105 degrees outside. Honestly, in terms of leading men, the ones I have the most problems with are Cruise and Craig. Sometimes Costner too. Maybe the only 'C's for me have to be Connery and Caine!

Mr. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang wrote:

trevanian wrote:

not a fan of Mr. Cruise, not now, not ever, though he seemed pretty okay in COLOR OF MONEY and TAPS.)

Not even in Rain Man?

He was very good in War of the Worlds. Otherwise, I don't have much of an opinion on Cruise.

trevanian wrote:

I barely remember RAIN MAN, to be honest. It might be he is okay in it, but there's just a vibe coming off the guy that really rankles me. I remember walking out on THE FIRM halfway through even though it was 105 degrees outside. Honestly, in terms of leading men, the ones I have the most problems with are Cruise and Craig. Sometimes Costner too. Maybe the only 'C's for me have to be Connery and Caine!

Give Rain Man a rewatch! The Hoffman/Levinson combo is brilliant. And while Cruise plays a cocky bastard in the movie, he softens as he navigates his arc and it's quite moving. But I do like Cruise's output: Risky Business, Rain Man, Top Gun, Magnolia, A Few Good Men, The Colour of Money, Eyes Wide Shut... And then to reinvent himself as an action star. M:I is delivering where the current Bonds aren't so for a stunt-laden, thrill fix, that's who I turn to these days. His dedication to giving audiences premium entertainment can't be faulted.

Craig's not a leading man. As for Caine... just heard he's retiring from acting:

A sad day but he's Sir Michael. Fine body of work for the most part. And he's Michael Caine.

So, you're now a member of the Club?

Venom - over-harshly reviewed Marvel number with Tom Hardy as investigative journo Eddie Brock, a man transformed when a 'symbiote' creature enters his body. Not perfect by any means, but absolutely fine Saturday-night-with-a-few-beers entertainment. Catching the sequel tomorrow.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

So, you're now a member of the Club?

loved it buddy, great pick and watched it four times


and I am totally on team Allison here ....those eyes, that smile...wow

Venom : Let There Be Carnage - this sequel is for the most part an absolute hoot, leaning into the absurdities of the situation more than the first film. Also done and dusted in a pretty trim 97 minutes as opposed to being too dragged out (Avengers Endgame, I'm looking at you).

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

So, you're now a member of the Club?

loved it buddy, great pick and watched it four times


and I am totally on team Allison here ....those eyes, that smile...wow

I had a suspicion Allison might be your type...

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Sarai wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

So, you're now a member of the Club?

loved it buddy, great pick and watched it four times


and I am totally on team Allison here ....those eyes, that smile...wow

I had a suspicion Allison might be your type...

yeah, she's OK I guess

OK I am actually in love with her but the movie itself is already one of of my favorites. It's difficult to explain why as I didn't particularly relate to any of it. it's simplistic, cliched yet every moment seemed to work for me
I love when there is space in a movie, a little air to breath, a bit of nothing going on if that makes sense. It's one of those movies you can put on anytime.
and in it's own simple little way there are great ideas in there, almost profound like when the characters dropped their masks, the act, let the ego go, the walls come down
I always, always wonder why everyone doesn't do exactly that

in that sense I see it as almost a fantasy by the director of what he wished things could be like then and now
there is just something I really love about the soul of his movies, well the two I have seen anyways and plan on seeking out more of them