Last Movie You Watched.

I've been wanting to check out the Jack Reacher films. Have you seen the first one?

Salomé wrote:

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Upgrade - neat 'near-future' sci-fi revenge flick, with an enjoyable streak of humour.

A bit of a "Robocop" clone, but without Verhoeven's darker, sardonic personality traits to make it more interesting.

But far from terrible.

I especially liked the dodging of any sort of Hollywood ending.

I will probably see it again, preferably at home ... there were a few toilet-goers (and a staff member wandering about pinning notices to exits during the screening, for some fucking reason) which I found irritating distractions.

Rosemary's Baby - my first time seeing this classic supernatural thriller. It still has the power to unsettle, 50 years on ... it reminded me of The Exorcist with the slow-building 'terrible things are happening to ordinary people in an everyday domesticated setting' atmosphere. Plus you're never quite sure if Rosemary HAS been chosen by a coven of devil-worshippers to bring the child of Satan into the world, or if she's in the grip of post-natal depression.

Fascinated to hear in the DVD's special features that Robert Redford was amongst those considered for the John Cassavetes part ... it would've subverted his blonde blue-eyed heart-throb image quite effectively.

The "Is it evil or is it madness?" trope is one that has typified supernatural horror since at least The Innocents in 1961. It seems to me that when these sorts of films are based on novels or short stories, the filmmakers attempt to twist evil-based source material into mental illness cinema. But there is always a great deal of residual ambiguity.

I've also noted that film critics, almost unanimously, prefer the madness interpretation to the evil one. Hardly surprising, that...

x

Both of them are pretty forgettable but I agree that the second one is somehow worse.

Mission: Impossible - Fallout

Depending on what you expect from this, you will either enjoy or hate it.
It's an incredibly well-made action film with a relentless tempo but a screenplay that doesn't really survive any scrutiny.
I do admire the practical effects and real-life stunts used for some of the most impressive set pieces.

BlacKKKlansman - an interesting true story concerning still relevant issues, yes. Unfortunately I found this mostly plodding, overlong and nowhere near as funny as the trailer made it look.

x

Erica Ambler wrote:

Bridget Jones' Baby.

Never let your daughter/niece have the remote. Although I must say it made a nice change not seeing Sarah Solemani on the crapper.

It's kind of funny to imagine you watching that film.

Sort of imagine Christopher Plummer watching Sound of Music with his family.

Salomé wrote:

Mission: Impossible - Fallout

Depending on what you expect from this, you will either enjoy or hate it.
It's an incredibly well-made action film with a relentless tempo but a screenplay that doesn't really survive any scrutiny.
I do admire the practical effects and real-life stunts used for some of the most impressive set pieces.

Christopher McQuarrie was writing on the fly, I believe, hence any screenplay flaws. Still, much more coherent than QOS, and well, CR and SP - the latter two were developed, finished screenplays!

I saw:

Phantom Thread
Shame Day-Lewis wants to retire. Riveting drama as only Day-Lewis could sell it. This Krieps may turn up in a Bond film as a henchwoman/villain at some point, I think. Gorgeous soundtrack, too.

The Greatest Showman
The music in a musical should be great and here, it's not. A major plot line isn't explored which would have created a much more organic drama than sidelining it for other contrived nonsense. But it's paced and edited well.

Oh and Rebecca Ferguson plays one of the more believable "action girl" type characters with her return as Isla.

The Thirty-Nine Steps (1935) - chalked up another Hitchcock with this, and now the 1960 Kenneth More version remains the only one of the three big-screen adaps of John Buchan's classic adventure novel that I haven't seen (although apparently it's the least well-regarded of them) ... the closest adap is meant to be the '78 Robert Powell starrer, although even that felt the need to add a Bond-style 'superstunt' with Hannay dangling from the hands of Big Ben at the climax.

At 80 minutes, this version is breezy 'stiff upper lip' fun ... also amusing that this version changes Hannay's nationality to Canadian but he's still played (with not even a stab at the accent) by the none-more-English Robert Donat.

This Is The End - various playing-themselves Hollywood types (James Franco, Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill etc) attempt to survive the Apocalypse. It made for acceptably chucklesome Saturday-night-with-a-few-beers entertainment.

x

I know about Harold Lloyd's neck-risking shenanigans ... however I thought that what with The 39 Steps being an espionage-tinged adventure flick, Bond was a more likely influence on said sequence.

Just my opinion, though.

American Animals - another movie based on a true story, but considerably better told than BlacKKKlansman. Kind of the antidote to all the 'slick' heist movies you've seen.

As a fan of Kenny More, Blunty his 39 Steps version might not be the best but he gives it a shot. Great locations and full of famous from British cinema of the time.

The 39 Steps is one of the greatest films ever made, the archetype for the action adventure film and arguably could be the foundation in film history that led to Bond.
I once gave a lecture on the film that went for several hours instead of thirty minutes. And it's not even my favorite Hitch film.

Jack Reacher is a film that doesn't quite gel together but is full of many lovely little small pieces that are focused and really work incredibly well. Cruise in a smalltown investigating is wonderful, with perhaps even a tinge of a Black Rock vibe for a second or two but this sadly dissipates. The entire reason for enjoying the film or ever watching it is the great 7.1 soundmix and the re-teaming of cruise with Robert Duvall who steals the entire film in his sections and should have been the entire focus. When they meet the entire film just lights up with energy. So it is an above average modern action film that in hindsight I think is perhaps even better than MI 5 and 6 due to having a tad more focus-but shows how those films have the same problems but magnified.
Is the sequel that bad? I still haven't seen it.

Can I also just say that the Ilsa character is the best damn thing about MI 5 and 6?

x

Jack Reacher's sheer size and physicality are such a part of the character that the choice to cast Tom Cruise in the role was baffling.

It might have been a good franchise for Archie Hammer, who is the right height and build, though his problem might be that he is somewhat too handsome/pretty to play Reacher.

Sixty years ago, Robert Ryan would have probably played him. Quite well too.

x

I must be the only one who preferred Never Go Back ... it at least moved with the sort of pace I'd usually associate with something billed as an action-thriller. Which the first one doesn't, IMO.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Sixty years ago, Robert Ryan would have probably played him. Quite well too.

A heroic vigilante such as Jack Reacher would have been unlikely in fiction 60 years ago, but Lee Marvin was coming into his own back then. Screenplay by Norman Mailer.

A perfect equivalent probably did not exist, but there were anti-heroes already in existence which are Reacher-adjacent.

Glenn Ford's character in "The Big Heat"

Robert Mitchum's character in "Thunder Road".

Robert Ryan's character in "Day of the Outlaw".

x

So I did!

Ladd was one of the few co-stars who had anything good to say about Veronica Lake.

A bit of a tragic man who seemed to have been plagued by self-loathing.

An interesting actor though. Just merely having been in "Shane" should cement his legacy.

x