Last Movie You Watched? 6.0

Previous threads:
Last Movie You Watched 1.0
Last Movie You Watched 2.0
Last Movie You Watched 3.0
Last Movie You Watched 4.0
Last Movie You Watched 5.0


Le dernier métro

Fine film, a billion times better than Basterds. I loved Catherine. Neat idea in the end to have the viewers believe it was "real life" (in the fictional world), when in fact it was a new theater play.


Le cercle rouge

Excellent thriller, made the way I like it. Actors and director on top form, and well written too.
It should have been Mann day, but since I had the opportunity to watch these films on TV, I availed myself of it.

The Cabin In The Woods - sorta like Scream meets The Truman Show, but then it goes somewhere else again. It's kinda weird.

A Night to Remember

I went to the BFI to catch this, part of their SOS Titanic thing where they show the Nazi Titanic, Atlantic and a few other things. In a way it was coincidental I chose this date but work being work.
At the risk of eye rolling it's been a faint life's ambition to see a Kenneth More film on the big screen and this is likely the only one I'll ever see.
As with every viewing this is a revelation on the disaster or at least it remains impressive. Yes, a lot of detail about the sinking has come into focus since the movie was made but it doesn't matter much. For one Lord (who was consultant on the 1997 movie) writes that before it went under Titanic settled at the stern appearing (with hindsight) to back up Titanic breaking in two beneath the surface.

It's not More's movie of course. Laurence Naismith is good, Frank Lawton as Ismay, Anthony Bushell's Rostron and the various others (Desmond Llewellyn, Cyril Chamberlain, Jack Watling...) especially John Merivale as he holds his son for the last time and whispers, "Goodbye my dear sweet son".

Trivially, reckon I spotted Connery at last.

and end.

Saw quite a few movies lately...

WRATH OF THE TITANS (2012)
directed by Jonathan Liebesman

While it's not good by any stretch of the imagination, it's still a huge step upwards from it's predecessor. It manages to have a lot more fun, too. But, still takes itself way too seriously, and Worthington has the personality of a wet sock.


AMERICAN PIE (1999)
AMERICAN PIE 2 (2001)
AMERICAN WEDDING (2003)

I think the first one is still a classic 90's raunchy comedy. Of course it's juvenile and rather stupid, but it's still fun, nonetheless. The second is an entertaining follow-up. The third, however, was so atrocious I couldn't even finish it.


PAYBACK (1999)
directed by Brian Helgeland

A nice little modern noir. I'm a big fan of Mel, so naturally I thought he was great here. Maria Bello, Gregg Henry, David Paymer, Lucy Liu, and Kris Kristofferson round-out a fun cast of supporting characters. I loved the washed-out color palette of the film, and the music was pretty darn good, too. The ending felt a bit premature to me, like the film was moving along nicely and just decided to cut itself short. It looks like a directors cut is due out soon, so I'd be eager to check that out.


TITANIC (1997)
directed by James Cameron

This was the first time I've watched it since seeing it in theaters in '97, so it was cool to see the movie in a different way than I did when I was younger. The whole thing is very, very theatrical. The sets, the music, the direction, the writing, and especially the acting. It feels like something that was meant for the stage. And that's something that makes the film feel pretty unique, IMO. Despite being a 3+ hour epic, the film still manages a light and airy feel that doesn't bog itself down of take itself too seriously. It's that theatrical touch that makes occasional over-the-top cheesiness work for me. The one thing that bugged the hell out of me, however, was that horrible synth choir that Newton-Howard uses throughout the soundtrack. This is a multimillion dollar production, I think they could have afforded to bring in a real choir to lay down a few tracks. Talk about lazy. All in all, though, I really enjoyed it a lot more than I was expecting to. In fact, I thought the film would have aged very poorly, but it really hasn't for me. I'll probably see this in 3D later in the week.


THE RAID: REDEMPTION (2011)
directed by Gareth Evans

This movie is balls-to-the-wall insane. A frenetic burst of non-stop "fuck yeah!" action moments from start to finish. There was certainly a lot of hype surrounding this movie before in hit theaters here, about it being "the best action movie in a decade" and the like. But, I have to say...THE RAID does a pretty damn good job of living up to that hype. There isn't much in terms of story or characters, but this type of flick doesn't really need it. I'm not sure what else to say, other than it's a pure adrenaline rush and a hell of a lot of fun. I saw it twice already, and I recommend you check it out in theaters if it happens to be playing anywhere near you.

THE MAN FROM NOWHERE (2010)
directed by Jeong-beom Lee

Pretty unremarkable, actually. The key to the film is the relationship between the main character and the girl he's trying to save, and I just didn't think there was a whole lot of depth there between the two. Action scenes were nice.


CABIN IN THE WOODS (2011)
directed by Drew Goddard

Hilarious, fun, inventive, and incredibly clever. CABIN IN THE WOODS just fucking awesome. It's hard to say anything about the film without ruining the story, because the less you know about it, the better off you'll be. All I can say is that Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard have crafted a brilliant hate-letter to the horror genre, and the fact that so many people are complaining about it is just a testament to how well this film succeeded with it's message. The most fun I've had at the movies in a long, long time. Go see this!

I, too, saw CABIN IN THE WOODS, but I was less than impressed with it. It's too clever for its own good.

Sharky wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

The one thing that bugged the hell out of me, however, was that horrible synth choir that Newton-Howard uses throughout the soundtrack. This is a multimillion dollar production, I think they could have afforded to bring in a real choir to lay down a few tracks. Talk about lazy.

Wikipedia wrote:

For the choral background of certain tracks, Horner made use of a digital choir instead of a real one; after the orchestral music was recorded, Horner personally performed the synthesized choir over a playback of the recording. The idea behind using electronics, rather than a real choir, stemmed from Horner wanting to avoid a 'church'-like sound.

...the fuck? So he gives us synth instead? There's plenty of ways to make a choir sound less "churchy". The sample he used sounds like the one on my Casio keyboard. It probably sounded outdated, even then.

Oh, and my mistake on the Horner/Newton-Howard mix-up. I had it in my mind that it was Newton-Howard for some reason.

And why do you say CABIN was too clever, Harms? It seemed like 90% of the people in my theater didn't get it at all.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Sharky wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

The one thing that bugged the hell out of me, however, was that horrible synth choir that Newton-Howard uses throughout the soundtrack. This is a multimillion dollar production, I think they could have afforded to bring in a real choir to lay down a few tracks. Talk about lazy.

Wikipedia wrote:

For the choral background of certain tracks, Horner made use of a digital choir instead of a real one; after the orchestral music was recorded, Horner personally performed the synthesized choir over a playback of the recording. The idea behind using electronics, rather than a real choir, stemmed from Horner wanting to avoid a 'church'-like sound.

...the fuck? So he gives us synth instead?

I know, it's weird as hell.

However after a Google search, I found this thread:

Quote :

I spoke with Joe E again today and he was pretty definite that it was a matter of money. It would have cost them about $20,000 to record the choir and at that stage the studios weren\'t expecting to get much of their money back let alone dish out some more. $20,000 when you\'re talking about a $200 million film isn\'t much but I gues they decided enough was enough. Apparently everyone involved in the soundtrack was disappointed that it wasn't recorded with a real choir, especially the boy choir cues.

Link.

Harmsway wrote:

ESCAPE FROM L.A. (1996, dir. John Carpenter)

Entertaining silliness.

Only thing I remember of that was seeing a TV advert in the 90s that had Snake surfing a tsunami, it looked like the coolest thing I ever saw at the age of 9.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

ESCAPE FROM L.A. (1996, dir. John Carpenter)

Entertaining silliness.

Only thing I remember of that was seeing a TV advert in the 90s that had Snake surfing a tsunami, it looked like the coolest thing I ever saw at the age of 9.

I think I saw about 30 seconds of it in the 90's. Thought it looked stupid.

I just watched the trailer



This looks like a great flick to get drunk to. Screaming with cheese. Also, I see Ro/Cain is in it. Hey. But I really do gotta see NEW YORK again, it's been way too long.


Also.

A Night to Remember (1958)

Cameron can suck it.

dr. strangelove wrote:

Sharky wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

The one thing that bugged the hell out of me, however, was that horrible synth choir that Newton-Howard uses throughout the soundtrack. This is a multimillion dollar production, I think they could have afforded to bring in a real choir to lay down a few tracks. Talk about lazy.

Wikipedia wrote:

For the choral background of certain tracks, Horner made use of a digital choir instead of a real one; after the orchestral music was recorded, Horner personally performed the synthesized choir over a playback of the recording. The idea behind using electronics, rather than a real choir, stemmed from Horner wanting to avoid a 'church'-like sound.

...the fuck? So he gives us synth instead? There's plenty of ways to make a choir sound less "churchy". The sample he used sounds like the one on my Casio keyboard. It probably sounded outdated, even then.

Oh, and my mistake on the Horner/Newton-Howard mix-up. I had it in my mind that it was Newton-Howard for some reason.

And why do you say CABIN was too clever, Harms? It seemed like 90% of the people in my theater didn't get it at all.

I like the synth choir...

dr. strangelove wrote:

And why do you say CABIN was too clever, Harms? It seemed like 90% of the people in my theater didn't get it at all.

Its conceit prohibits the audience from legitimately investing in the unfolding events. We get a funny concept that delivers a number of decent laughs, but ultimately prohibits any emotional investment on the part of the audience.

Mr. Brown wrote:

Erica Ambler wrote:

...but I still think The Man Who Fell to Earth is a very underrated film.

Indeed. I found myself defending it last night with a group of friends, actually.

:scratch: Man Who Fell To Earth gets mentioned a few times, yet STILL no sign of Lazenby. around here.

Hope he's not gone to prison or something. :|

Makeshift Python wrote:

A Night to Remember (1958)

Cameron can suck it.

Think he tried, and choked.

Harmsway wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

And why do you say CABIN was too clever, Harms? It seemed like 90% of the people in my theater didn't get it at all.

Its conceit prohibits the audience from legitimately investing in the unfolding events. We get a funny concept that delivers a number of decent laughs, but ultimately prohibits any emotional investment on the part of the audience.

Being too clever for his own good can often be Whedon's fault.

The Riddle of the Sands

&

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)

always knew Bernard Miles could be a sinister swine

THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH (1956 - snap, Hilly). Fearfully overextended (c'mon, what purpose does the visit to the taxidermists serve?) but more than watchable, thanks largely to James Stewart and Doris Day - this is a Hitchcock film in which, for once, the director somewhat disappointingly doesn't appear to be the "star". Liked the leisurely-but-nonetheless-suspenseful first half hour or so rather better than the rest of it.

Loomis wrote:

THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH (1956 - snap, Hilly). Fearfully overextended (c'mon, what purpose does the visit to the taxidermists serve?) but more than watchable, thanks largely to James Stewart and Doris Day - this is a Hitchcock film in which, for once, the director somewhat disappointingly doesn't appear to be the "star". Liked the leisurely-but-nonetheless-suspenseful first half hour or so rather better than the rest of it.

I couldn't say if it was too long or not but the taxidermists made me chuckle just for Jimmy Stewart and Ambrose Chapel but I guess it was neither here nor there to the film overall.

Loomis wrote:

(c'mon, what purpose does the visit to the taxidermists serve?)

To add some comic relief, though I'd agree it's drawn out far too long.

THE IRON LADY (2011)

Streep's performance was wasted on this movie. A straight up biopic would've been better. 12 years as prime minister, radical shift in economic trajectory... and all we get is a hallucination of Denis Thatcher popping up in silly hats. Hell, the entire period in between the end of the Falklands War and the poll tax is condensed into, what, a five second montage? Reagan and the Cold War practically non-existent...

Like I said, a shame that a performance of Streep's calibre was wasted on this. Maybe she can pull a Michael Sheen and play Thatcher in another half dozen movies.

Yeah, Streep was excellent, but I can't really forgive the thematically confused narrative. Was it about a woman's ambition, rise/struggle to power, or about a woman's dealings with grief?

BASIC INSTINCT

Deserves better than to be known simply as the film where Sharon Stone shows her minge (the scene works well in 1080p though). Good twists and turns, very well shot, Michael Douglas on top form. I enjoyed it a great deal - it's like a classic Hollywood noir but with tits and fanny.

Sharky wrote:

Loomis wrote:

(c'mon, what purpose does the visit to the taxidermists serve?)

To add some comic relief, though I'd agree it's drawn out far too long.

What irks me most about this episode is that the location seems strangely wasted. I'd have thought that a taxidermist's was just about the perfect location for Hitch to indulge his love of the macabre, but he doesn't seem to use it in a way that's particularly, well, Hitchcockian.

CJB wrote:

THE IRON LADY (2011)

Streep's performance was wasted on this movie. A straight up biopic would've been better. 12 years as prime minister, radical shift in economic trajectory... and all we get is a hallucination of Denis Thatcher popping up in silly hats. Hell, the entire period in between the end of the Falklands War and the poll tax is condensed into, what, a five second montage? Reagan and the Cold War practically non-existent...

Like I said, a shame that a performance of Streep's calibre was wasted on this. Maybe she can pull a Michael Sheen and play Thatcher in another half dozen movies.

Iron Lady 2: U-Turn-ageddon

Iron Lady 3: Thatcher Death Match

but yes, a straight up biopic would've been better. Film see-sawed too much and Carol Thatcher wasn't quite the loon I hoped for.