Last Movie You Watched.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Taxi Driver. A film that could not be made today.

In what way? Are you talking about the infantilisation of the movie going audience? Or something else?
The themes of the movie itself could not be more poignant today.

According to the regnant ideology in AINO (America in Name Only), Travis Bickle is a straight-up villain and the nightcrawlers of New York he condemns are heroes to be worshiped. Yet the film's judgment of Bickle is ambivalent. Yes, he's portrayed as a borderline lunatic, but he also behaves heroically, and effectively save's a young girl's life while removing three slimeballs from the planet. That will never do in the age of DIE (diversity, inclusion, equity). Bickle would have to be portrayed as an unreconstructed monster.

I think Scorsese's POV on Bickle is very ambiguous too.
The way I think the movie is more relevant than ever is with the sheer amount of people who feel alienated by the societies they are inhabiting. This is potentially even more of a thing now than it was back in the 1970s.

Salomé wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Taxi Driver. A film that could not be made today.

In what way? Are you talking about the infantilisation of the movie going audience? Or something else?
The themes of the movie itself could not be more poignant today.

According to the regnant ideology in AINO (America in Name Only), Travis Bickle is a straight-up villain and the nightcrawlers of New York he condemns are heroes to be worshiped. Yet the film's judgment of Bickle is ambivalent. Yes, he's portrayed as a borderline lunatic, but he also behaves heroically, and effectively save's a young girl's life while removing three slimeballs from the planet. That will never do in the age of DIE (diversity, inclusion, equity). Bickle would have to be portrayed as an unreconstructed monster.

I think Scorsese's POV on Bickle is very ambiguous too.
The way I think the movie is more relevant than ever is with the sheer amount of people who feel alienated by the societies they are inhabiting. This is potentially even more of a thing now than it was back in the 1970s.

True. How very, very true.

Underrated. This and Thomas Crown are two great Brozzer films I can just get lost in over and over.

Salma was something else.

I always wonder which scene was filmed on the day Brosnan got the call saying Eon wasn't using him on the next film.

I am sorta surprised by how many Bret Ratner movies I like.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Taxi Driver. A film that could not be made today.

In what way? Are you talking about the infantilisation of the movie going audience? Or something else?
The themes of the movie itself could not be more poignant today.

According to the regnant ideology in AINO (America in Name Only), Travis Bickle is a straight-up villain and the nightcrawlers of New York he condemns are heroes to be worshiped. Yet the film's judgment of Bickle is ambivalent. Yes, he's portrayed as a borderline lunatic, but he also behaves heroically, and effectively saves a young girl's life while removing three slimeballs from the planet. That will never do in the age of DIE (diversity, inclusion, equity). Bickle would have to be portrayed as an unreconstructed monster.

I thought you were originally referring to Foster's age but, yes, all of that, too.

Elf - amiably daft and sweet seasonal fun. The Will Ferrell movie for people who don't like Will Ferrell.

I think STRANGER THAN FICTION is the Ferrell for people who don't like Ferrell (or at least aren't fans of his feature work.) In fact, the first time I talked to Forster, that was the last thing I asked him about, because frankly I was astounded by how Farrell didn't ever just default back into doing his thing -- it was probably the most reigned-in performance that I've seen from a typically out-of-control SNLer since Belushi in CONTINENTAL DIVIDE.

Haven't seen Stranger Than Fiction, I must admit.

Glass Onion: a Knives Out Mystery

It was okay. Not as good as the first one. Relies a lot more on mystery tropes (some very dumb ones) than the first film. It is a fun ensemble and that makes up for a lot of its flaws in keeping the film mostly watchable. Kate Hudson gives what is perhaps the most Goldie Hawn like performance of her career. Dave Bautista is fun and more or less proves again that he is the most talented of the wrestlers-turned-actors. Perhaps not leading man material, but certainly enough chops to become a very interesting character actor if he would be interested in that. And yeah, DC looks like he is having more fun here than in almost every one of his Bond movies (which is a shame).

The Meg - Jason Statham vs a giant prehistoric shark, basically. Like one of those cheapo B-movie creature features that used to litter the SyFy/Horror Channel schedules, but with a bigger budget and better cast. It made for an pleasantly undemanding way to pass a New Year's Day afternoon as I continued to recover from the previous night's drunken excesses.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Haven't seen Stranger Than Fiction, I must admit.

It's very much powered by charm rather than logic -- in fact, there's no logic applied at all to the basic conceit of the piece, though I imagine a good science fiction writer could have contrived things in a way that really made the thing an interestingly deep speculative fic piece.

And the thing is -- for once I don't even care, because I just got onboard with the story and characters anyway. Come to think of it, I will probably rewatch it this week instead of continuing our belated xmas viewings (missed out on 3 DAYS OF THE CONDOR this year but still got LONG KISS GOODNIGHT re-viewed), since it is also a fave for my wife.

Had written about 20 pages of my Bond script, but then had to set it aside for issues of life and death, but might tidy up the PTS and post here someplace as originally intended, depends on how next couple of weeks goes.

trevanian wrote:

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Haven't seen Stranger Than Fiction, I must admit.

It's very much powered by charm rather than logic -- in fact, there's no logic applied at all to the basic conceit of the piece, though I imagine a good science fiction writer could have contrived things in a way that really made the thing an interestingly deep speculative fic piece.

L Ron wrote a book called Typewriter In the Sky which was basically the same idea. I've never read it but it seems well regarded in the sf circles.

Stranger Than Fiction is one I should rewatch. Saw it once on release. The idea of a restrained Ferrel performance has my interest piqued.

Salomé wrote:

Glass Onion: a Knives Out Mystery

It was okay. Not as good as the first one. Relies a lot more on mystery tropes (some very dumb ones) than the first film. It is a fun ensemble and that makes up for a lot of its flaws in keeping the film mostly watchable. Kate Hudson gives what is perhaps the most Goldie Hawn like performance of her career. Dave Bautista is fun and more or less proves again that he is the most talented of the wrestlers-turned-actors. Perhaps not leading man material, but certainly enough chops to become a very interesting character actor if he would be interested in that. And yeah, DC looks like he is having more fun here than in almost every one of his Bond movies (which is a shame).

Still never seen the first one. The idea of Rian Johnson and Craig together was a bit much for me when it came out but as some time's passed I may have a go at it and the new one.

Girlboss Womyn of Colour = good
Rich white male = bad

There, summarised both crapfests for you.

Foghorn Craighorn is basically superfluous as a character.

CJB wrote:

Girlboss Womyn of Colour = good
Rich white male = bad

There, summarised both crapfests for you.

Foghorn Craighorn is basically superfluous as a character.

The point of the second one seems to be that everyone was varying degrees of terrible?

Admittedly the Ana de Armas character from the first one is presented as a true innocent.

Blood Simple - the Coens' debut feature, a tremendously moody noir. Featuring great sleazebag turns from M. Emmet Walsh and Dan Hedaya, and Frances McDormand at her most toothsome.

Mile 22 - I have enjoyed previous movies that Peter Berg and Mark Wahlberg have made together, but this actioner is edited even more frantically than the Bournes and QOS combined ... it felt like I was watching an anxiety attack play out or something. Quite thankful it was only 90 minutes long, to be honest.

Black Dynamite - enjoyable spoof of the blaxploitation genre with 'jive turkeys', funky soundtrack, stickin' it to 'The Man', shootouts and gratuitously topless hotties all present and correct.

The Menu

For all the hype I found this to be merely okay. A rather far-fetched concept, but Ralph Fiennes is his usual and thus excellent self. For Anya Taylor-Joy is this a rather pedestrian performance after some more showy outings in recent years.

Top Gun: Maverick debuted recently on streaming so I gave it a second watch, first time since the theater. Somehow liked it even more. Reading reception online, it is amazing just how much this sort of movie — which they were making at least two dozen of every year, say, a decade and a half ago — how much appetite there was for it, understandably.

And what’s also amazing is how comparatively civil the discourse has been around it. No polarized socio-political flame wars. It actually seems to be bringing people together rather than driving them apart. Wasn’t that Tolstoy’s definition of great art?

Not that I’m sure of its truth. But it’d be a good working definition for the current epoch.

I think people were just relieved to see a well-made, old-fashioned action flick again?
I see the warm reception of Maverick as the other side of the coin of what I would call superhero movie fatigue.
Certainly I cannot recall the last time I watched any of the MCU or DC studios releases and did not go "meh" at best.

The Pale Blue Eye

Far from perfect but definitely worth seeing. I would say the main selling point is Harry Melling's performance as Edgar Allen Poe, which is truly astonishing at times. A great ensemble cast as well, besides Melling and Bale we also get Toby Jones, Gillian Anderson, Timothy Spall, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Simon McBurney. And even some recognizable young actors among the West Point cadets, like Ozark's Charlie Tahan.

Somerset wrote:

Top Gun: Maverick debuted recently on streaming so I gave it a second watch, first time since the theater. Somehow liked it even more. Reading reception online, it is amazing just how much this sort of movie — which they were making at least two dozen of every year, say, a decade and a half ago...

That's the big factor, I think. Not that long ago, mindless-but-fun blockbusters with manly-man leads were a staple of cinema.

That genre disappeared almost as quickly as comedy films did, replaced by an overabundance of Marvel and other corporatised "content."

Clearly, millions were yearning for that sort of film again. Something that made you get off your backside and go to the cinema, instead of consuming yet another inoffensively dull Netflix production.

CJB wrote:

Somerset wrote:

Top Gun: Maverick debuted recently on streaming so I gave it a second watch, first time since the theater. Somehow liked it even more. Reading reception online, it is amazing just how much this sort of movie — which they were making at least two dozen of every year, say, a decade and a half ago...

That's the big factor, I think. Not that long ago, mindless-but-fun blockbusters with manly-man leads were a staple of cinema.

That genre disappeared almost as quickly as comedy films did, replaced by an overabundance of Marvel and other corporatised "content."

Clearly, millions were yearning for that sort of film again. Something that made you get off your backside and go to the cinema, instead of consuming yet another inoffensively dull Netflix production.

Generally speaking, the elites don't give a toss what the people want. They produce what they think we need to see, and if we don't like it, tough titties. And because they're all on the same page, nobody gets penalized for producing offensive dreck.

Salomé wrote:

The Pale Blue Eye

Far from perfect but definitely worth seeing. I would say the main selling point is Harry Melling's performance as Edgar Allen Poe, which is truly astonishing at times. A great ensemble cast as well, besides Melling and Bale we also get Toby Jones, Gillian Anderson, Timothy Spall, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Simon McBurney. And even some recognizable young actors among the West Point cadets, like Ozark's Charlie Tahan.

As a devotee of Poe, I'm curious about this one. Is it gratuitously violent?

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Salomé wrote:

The Pale Blue Eye

Far from perfect but definitely worth seeing. I would say the main selling point is Harry Melling's performance as Edgar Allen Poe, which is truly astonishing at times. A great ensemble cast as well, besides Melling and Bale we also get Toby Jones, Gillian Anderson, Timothy Spall, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Simon McBurney. And even some recognizable young actors among the West Point cadets, like Ozark's Charlie Tahan.

As a devotee of Poe, I'm curious about this one. Is it gratuitously violent?

Not truly, you mostly see the aftermath of the violence (in post-mortems and such).
Though there is some violence in there.

Manhunter - both Tom Noonan's and Brian Cox's (as the first Hannibal Lecter) performances here bring to mind what's been said about 'the banality of evil' (especially Cox as a far less 'showy' Lecter than Hopkins, but no less terrifying ... 'How are your dreams, Will?'). Meanwhile, as the brilliant-but-tormented profiler Will Graham, William Petersen sort-of foreshadows his future role in CSI.

Michael Mann directs with a heavy emphasis on style, but not at the expense of substance. A 'chilly' (and chilling) thriller.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Manhunter - both Tom Noonan's and Brian Cox's (as the first Hannibal Lecter) performances here bring to mind what's been said about 'the banality of evil' (especially Cox as a far less 'showy' Lecter than Hopkins, but no less terrifying ... 'How are your dreams, Will?'). Meanwhile, as the brilliant-but-tormented profiler Will Graham, William Petersen sort-of foreshadows his future role in CSI.    

Michael Mann directs with a heavy emphasis on style, but not at the expense of substance. A 'chilly' (and chilling) thriller.      

Odd coincidence, just two days back I happened across the CD soundtrack at a 2nd hand store (great deal, since it goes for nearly three figures online.) Listening to it got me to thinking about Cox's Lector along the same lines you cite, and also made me wonder if the score was used as a temp track for TWIN PEAKS and/or DRIVE, as there are lots of similarities (and yeah, it sounds like Tangerine Dream's great THIEF score at times too.)

I remember seeing the movie first-run in Mountain View and finding it thrilling at first but ultimately tedious, probably because Peterson does nothing for me (not even in TO LIVE AND DIE IN LA), though Noonan and Cox and Farina were all in fine form.

In the make a wish dept: as nice as it sounds, I would trade this in a second for the cd scores to IRON EAGLE, THE OMEGA MAN or BLUE THUNDER.

Will be embarking on my RichardBrooksathon soon, which always features the same 4 movies: LOOKING FOR MR GOODBAR (vhs, unfortunately, since there isn't anything else), THE PROFESSIONALS, BITE THE BULLET and WRONG IS RIGHT aka THE MAN WITH THE DEADLY LENS. The latter is a freight-train wreck of a movie but eminently watchable and prescient as all get out, while the westerns -- which bracket Peckinpah's THE WILD BUNCH almost perfectly in terms of release year -- are just awesome damn good times for me, and did a lot to format and cement my thoughts on friendship at a tender ager. GOODBAR has a lot of odd choices in it (plus first movie I recall where dream sequences are shot 'straight'), but I've always found it mesmerizing, owing to Keaton and to the electrically charged ending.

Totally off-topic, but I just read that John Hough (BRASS TARGET, THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE) was originally supposed to direct FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. Does anybody know anything about this? I love HELL HOUSE and really wonder what he could have done with FYEO.