Last Movie you Watched?

Yeah, the idea went as far as first day of shooting before it got scrapped altogether.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Mr. Brown wrote:

Too bad Eva couldn't have shown us her twins.

Didn't Paul Haggis want QoS to feature one of Vesper's children?

I like the kind of twins that just bounce up and down.

Well, I guess the Milton twins would count, too, as they do plenty of that.

Haggis is gay.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Haggis is gay.

Very homophobic.

Unless you mean he is a very happy chap. ;)

saint mark wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Haggis is gay.

Very homophobic.

Unless you mean he is a very happy chap. ;)

Very ironical. ;)

Superman (1978)

Boy, a bigger screen makes a difference. Great spectacle. I have the same general feeling towards the film. The first hour or more is stellar, the last 45 minutes is where some of the steam is lost, Jon Kent's death is memorable. I have more admiration for this film now. It has a great vibe to it, and the last 45 minutes is still OK. It's definitely 'less good" than what comes before.

And Margot Kidder is still fugly IMHO.

And I want to go back in time and frak the daylights out of Valerie Perrine.

Last movies I watched:

Easy A
Emma Stone's charming ^_~ although not convincing as the girl no-one pays attention to. Nothing else really compelled, which was a shame. A lot happened as a result of her character's choices, not all good: as part of the 'wrap-it-all-up' ending montage, we see a gay kid run away from home and a marriage fall apart. All this is framed positively... Just left me scratching my head. Very few laughs. And since when is losing your virginity such a big deal in a high school?

The Lion King
They just re-released it in 3D, so I went to the 2D release. Seeing it on the big screen made me notice some of the dodgier directing and animation, but it also made me notice a lot of great stuff, too. The powerful moments were quite so. Some pretty heavy stuff, especially for kids. They try to balance it out with comedy, but I think it gets pushed too far in the film's 2nd half. Some elements don't really gel for me in the big picture - like why hyenas aren't seen as legit members of the Circle of Life. But I focus more on the Hamlety aspects than on any potential commentary on society.

X-Men: First Draft
Ehhhh. You guys were right: the Xavier/Magneto dynamic is just about the only thing the film's got going for it, and January Jones is terrible. Boring villains, boring plot with stock military guys, and tons of characters that are nothing more than faces. Most scenes are filled with dialogue that should've been the intent behind the words, rather than the dialogue itself. Disappointing.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Most scenes are filled with dialogue that should've been the intent behind the words, rather than the dialogue itself.

That's the entirety of BATMAN BEGINS.

Superman II (1980)

The bigger screen makes a difference, this time in a bad way. Last I watched this, around Christmas, I prefered it to the first film. Hell, I even watched it again a week or two later and enjoyed it still. Now, while it's generally (no pun intended) entertaining, it's very uneven. The Lester footage sticks out very badly. Donner's footage is playful and fluid, while Lester's is flat, unspired, and of course filled with asinine attempts at slapstick.

I'm sort of at a crossroads. Do I watch III and IV, or do I watch some great piece of cinema? It's just that today I don't feel like watching world class cinema. I had a crappy coupla days working nearly 24 hours straight it felt like. I'm just taking it easy and wanna be entertained.

Roger Miller says yes.

The Day the Earth Stood Still (1051)

One of my favorite sci-fi flicks. Totally relevant even after 60 years.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Roger Miller says yes.

I watched about half of III, but I got Suped out. I don't care what anybody says, I love SUPERMAN III. I fully recognize how it takes a giant crap on the legacy of Superman, but it greatly appeals to me on a purely absurd level. The movie just works for me. And Annette O'Toole is a huge improvement over Kidder. The Lana stuff is surprisingly touching actually.

And I'm a huge fan of Robert Vaughn. I still wanna make a movie called HEADS OF STATE where he'd play a scumbag Congressman named Gordon Head III who tries to get his half-witted former tennis pro son, Bruce Campbell as Gordon Head IV, elected as his successor.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

And since when is losing your virginity such a big deal in a high school?

Yeah, that was kind've a suspension of disbelief thing for me -- really it's a big deal in JUNIOR high school, but I feel like in terms of MPAA and so on that it would be too hard to release a light-hearted teen comedy about the pressures of fucking or not at 14 years old, so they're in high school to make it palatable.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

Roger Miller says yes.

I watched about half of III, but I got Suped out. I don't care what anybody says, I love SUPERMAN III. I fully recognize how it takes a giant crap on the legacy of Superman, but it greatly appeals to me on a purely absurd level. The movie just works for me. And Annette O'Toole is a huge improvement over Kidder. The Lana stuff is surprisingly touching actually.

And I'm a huge fan of Robert Vaughn. I still wanna make a movie called HEADS OF STATE where he'd play a scumbag Congressman named Gordon Head III who tries to get his half-witted former tennis pro son, Bruce Campbell as Gordon Head IV, elected as his successor.

I was thinking you'd call it 'not by the hairs on your chinny-chin-chin.'

RE: missed RV opportunites, I was wishing they'd jumped ahead 25 years on TWIN PEAKS and had Vaughn playing Cooper after the latter got stuck in the RED ROOM.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I want to see THOMAS CROWN and TAILOR OF PANAMA again. THOMAS CROWN is probably my favorite Brosnan movie (discounting THE GHOST WRITER). Well, from what I recall. And PANAMA has Catherine McCormack, who needs to be in more movies. Christ she's hot. Or at least she was in that flick.

McCormack is really something else, I always totally dug her, going back to one of the last Mel Gibson movies I ever saw, BRAVEHEART, and a weird little slasher thing with Thandie Newton. She's my notion of Moneypenny for a Tarantino Bond (or maybe Greta Scachi, who should have been a Bond girl, circa Dalton, and who looks AWESOME in a movie called COCA COLA KID.) In fact, I remember McCormack did a movie with Rachel Weisz in the late 90s and it made me think, 'why aren't these women in TWINE?' (just as I wondered why Zeta-Jones and Hurley were in PHANTOM and A. POWERS instead of Bond.)

Too bad McCormack winds up in stuff like SOUND OF THUNDER. Real waste of everything.

Pre-Craig, my dream team was Clive Owen as Bond, Michael Gambon as M, and McCormack as Moneypenny. But if she was Moneypenny, no sensible Bond would leave London. He'd have to get a job at MI5.

But when it comes to the Brosnan Era, we just had to have room for Teri Hatcher. Bond's true lost love.

STRANGE DAYS(1995)
Kathryn Bigelow, director

(A drug dealer is caught up in a web of conspiracy and murder in the hours before New Years Day of the new millennium.)

An admirable attempt at a Sci-Fi noir, despite the uneven results. Certain aspects of the story are underdeveloped, particularly the racial element, which is supposed to be the motivation for the whole film. Aside from the absolutely dreadful Juliette Lewis, the cast is fine. I didn't care for the film's ending, which is predictable and a little ridiculous, and goes on for far too long. That being said, I don't really have any strong feelings toward the film, good or bad. I'm just sort of indifferent towards it, I guess.
6/10

HANNA(2011)
Joe Wright, director

(Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) is raised by her father Erik (Eric Bana) in complete solitude and is trained as an expert killer. Her world is turned upside down when she is hunted by an FBI agent (Cate Blanchette), which forces her to experience the outside world for the first time.)

Man, I wasn't expecting that at all. Nearly everything I've heard or read about this film indicates that it's a real dog, but I thought it was so damn...cool. Granted, the story is a bit thin, but for all purposes, it's essentially a chase film. What sets this film apart from all the other lady-killer movies or international thrillers is it's slick presentation. The film is oozing with style, mostly thanks to Joe Wright's fantastic visuals. Most action flicks today rely on super-quick editing and an abundance of steady-cam to present action scenes. Wright is the exact opposite. He seems to prefer long takes and a camera that revolves around the action, showing you exactly what's happening, uninterrupted by edits. HANNA isn't the most original or complex action flick out there, but really, it's just a wonderfully simple thriller with some gorgeous visuals and slick action.
8.5/10

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974 Original)

Fun score, Shaw is always interesting to watch, good to see Julius Harris just after LALD. Nowhere near as gripping to me as the likes of The French Connection, Marathon Man, Three Days of the Condor, or even The Seven-Ups (as 70s NYC-based thrillers go). But still a very competent piece of work.

Obviously as one who enjoys this little sub-genre, I'd been needing to add this to the list.

Seve wrote:

re "TFOTRE" yes indeed, the spectacle is of a similar standard...
unfortunately the story structure is too, in both cases I felt certain central characters motivations and actions made no sense to me at all...

but well worth watching for the wonderful spectacle, in particular it has an outstanding chariot race sequence

I haven't seen "Quo Vadis" in ages and the memory has faded, so I can't comment

Thanks. I've picked up and watched Quo Vadis since I couldn't find anything else to pair with Gone with the Wind in the HMV two for £20 deal, and I've ordered The Fall of the Roman Empire now (along with Spartacus on Blu, since it's one of the few Kubrick films I like). Don't know why, but I'm in the mood for longer films at the moment, even though I generally prefer my movies in the 70-90 minute range. Are there any other epics you (or anybody else) would particularly recommend? I'm going to try getting Ben-Hur when it comes out.

Anyway...

GONE WITH THE WIND Victor Fleming, 1939

A very good picture, and it makes me wonder why I put off trying it for so long. I think Gable is a great star, and he is incredibly charasmatic here. Not a big fan of Viven Leigh - can't explain why but she pisses me off - but she does well in the role here (probably because I can't stand her). I think some of the sets are a bit gaudy, but I'm a fan of the expressive use of colour and silhouette in some of the outdoor sequences. It's generally a very handsome film, and it kept me interested for the full four hours.

QUO VADIS Mervyn LeRoy, 1951

Decent. I liked the production design a lot, and I think Peter Ustinov is a total joy to watch as Nero. You can tell that the dude is just loving every minute of his screentime. But the plot is really weighed down by the ridiculous, simplistic Christian propaganda. I don't mind films that respect the spiritual, or even films that are openly concerned with Christianity specifically, but this was just a load of nonsense. Just a load of 'ain't Christianity good' stuff, with no real reason to take the message seriously. The contrast between the tone of the Christian scenes and the Nero scenes is probably part of what makes the Nero material so much fun to watch.

Alphaville

Makes me want to smoke cigarettes and have sex with Anna Karina.

dr. strangelove wrote:

HANNA(2011)
Joe Wright, director

I wanna see that. I think I'm one of the few fans of Wright 'round these parts.

00Twelve wrote:

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974 Original)

Fun score, Shaw is always interesting to watch, good to see Julius Harris just after LALD. Nowhere near as gripping to me as the likes of The French Connection, Marathon Man, Three Days of the Condor, or even The Seven-Ups (as 70s NYC-based thrillers go). But still a very competent piece of work.

Obviously as one who enjoys this little sub-genre, I'd been needing to add this to the list.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

HANNA(2011)
Joe Wright, director

I wanna see that. I think I'm one of the few fans of Wright 'round these parts.

Well, it's the only film of Wright that I'm a fan of.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

fine movie. Gary Oldman was quite something, doing much by saying -it seemed- very little. With plaudits naturally to John Hurt.

Back to the Future Trilogy (1985, 1989, 1990)



To tell the truth: they're not as exciting anymore as they were when I saw 'em last time 5 or 6 years ago, but I've grown up so it's probably because of my more mature outlook to the world. But nevertheless, I can't deny that this is still a damn fine trilogy with a great and clever plot, fun characters and an excellent visual representation. Those miniature effects still look neat to this day, in fact they have aged unbelieveably well. Overall "timeless" classics.

Part I: 9.5/10
Part II: 9/10
Part III: 9/10


Robert Zemeckis Countdown:
1. Back to the Future (1985)
2. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988)
3. Forrest Gump (1994)
4. Back to the Future: Part III (1990)
5. Back to the Future: Part II (1989)
6. Cast Away (2000)
7. Contact (1997)
8. What Lies Beneath (2000)
9. Romancing the Stone (1984)
10. Death Becomes Her (1992)
11. Beowulf (2007)
12. The Polar Express (2004)

Sharky wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

HANNA(2011)
Joe Wright, director

I wanna see that. I think I'm one of the few fans of Wright 'round these parts.

Well, it's the only film of Wright that I'm a fan of.

Why's that, Sharky?

Harmsway wrote:

Sharky wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

dr. strangelove wrote:

HANNA(2011)
Joe Wright, director

I wanna see that. I think I'm one of the few fans of Wright 'round these parts.

Well, it's the only film of Wright that I'm a fan of.

Why's that, Sharky?

It's the least pompous, talky, and worthy of his films. Unlike ATONEMENT (which is pretty much the cinematic equivalent of a megadose of Xanax), PRIDE & PREJUDICE and THE SOLOIST, it feels alive. By today's standards, the action's incredible, and it ain't too morally bankrupt either.

I doubt Soderbergh's HAYWIRE or THE BOURNE LEGACY will come close.

I like The Chemical Bros score too.





Beat that, John Powell.

The Big Sleep (1946) [1945 Pre-release version]

Like the books of Chandler it's about tone and dialogue. Who knows or cares WTF is going on? Watching this movie for me is like gazing into a fog, but I like the view. I like this film more than I have in the past. I'll watch the 1946 "movie star" version in a few days.

I've read the book, and it's as much a blur to me as the film.

Ya know, I rarely like to watch comedies. I like films like this, with humor in them, rather than comedies. Stuff like this is where I get my dose of comedy.

As for Joe Wright, some of you know that I love PRIDE & PREJUDICE. Seen it at least 6 times and I love it every time. I think it's a well-crafted piece of filmmaking, even if it does make the book slimmer than Knightley. Like the score too.

I don't really care for any of the Chandler adaptations.

THE BIG SLEEP and THE LONG GOODBYE are probably the best; however, I prefer Mitchum as Marlowe.

Today, I'd like to see 50 Cents or Kanyeah Weste play him.


John Williams had an interesting, relatively underrated score for THE LONG GOODBYE, too.