Last Movie you Watched?

And ultimately that's it's downfall, especially in BB.

Look at the Commissioner Loeb character -- he's the black guy. In BB and TDK, he's essentially a stand-up guy. Against Batman, sure, but then Batman's a criminal. As portrayed in YEAR ONE, Loeb is a completely crooked, condescending sycophant to Falcone. And the mayor in TDK seems like a good mayor -- the mayor in YEAR ONE is taken orders from Loeb and Falcone.

The thing that Miller brought to Batman, what he figured out, was that to justify Batman's existence, the whole city had to be corrupt. The social contract had to have broken down. And in BB it's there, people talk about it, hell Ra's is about to kill everyone because the city is so corrupt -- but we don't SEE it. There's one slimy cop and that's it.

And then in TDK, things have cleaned up because of Batman. Which is as it should be, but it happens too fast and is too easy. But yes, once the Joker and Two-Face and the Rogues start coming out of the woodwork, they are what justify Batman's continued presence. But really the police force can't and shouldn't even begin being cleaned up until Harvey Dent is the DA and espeically until Gordon is Commissioner.

Burned through some dvds on the weekend..

Black Swan: 2010. I liked this film. Talk about creepy but also fascinating. Might watch it again.

The Hearafter:2010 Matt Damon. Glad this movie was a loaner. Lame doesn't begin to describe it. Not to mention....boring. Clint, make yourself useful and do another Dirty Harry film or something.

The Next 3 Days: 2010, Russel Crowe. Paul Haggis written and directed. Quite watchable. Lots of too cute by far, Haggis dialogue but not so much that it distracts. Haggis has spun a good little yarn here, that does hold the attention. Although he can't take full credit, as his screenplay is adapted, but its his movie, so he gets full props for making a decent suspense thriller.

Mr. Brown wrote:

Seemed like half of the scenes in HALLOWEEN 4 were of Loomis wandering the streets, approaching bystanders, and saying things like "He's evil! You've got to stop him!"

Because of Dr. Loomis, my wife and I always joke about ridiculous things being "pure evil."

BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA (1992, dir. Francis Ford Coppola)

Halloween is about the only time this film is enjoyable. Probably because it's the cinematic equivalent of a Halloween costume store.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

And ultimately that's it's downfall, especially in BB.

Look at the Commissioner Loeb character -- he's the black guy. In BB and TDK, he's essentially a stand-up guy. Against Batman, sure, but then Batman's a criminal. As portrayed in YEAR ONE, Loeb is a completely crooked, condescending sycophant to Falcone. And the mayor in TDK seems like a good mayor -- the mayor in YEAR ONE is taken orders from Loeb and Falcone.

The thing that Miller brought to Batman, what he figured out, was that to justify Batman's existence, the whole city had to be corrupt. The social contract had to have broken down. And in BB it's there, people talk about it, hell Ra's is about to kill everyone because the city is so corrupt -- but we don't SEE it. There's one slimy cop and that's it.

And then in TDK, things have cleaned up because of Batman. Which is as it should be, but it happens too fast and is too easy. But yes, once the Joker and Two-Face and the Rogues start coming out of the woodwork, they are what justify Batman's continued presence. But really the police force can't and shouldn't even begin being cleaned up until Harvey Dent is the DA and espeically until Gordon is Commissioner.

I get the sense that Nolan is setting Batman up as the problem, and not part of the solution, because he's driving things to become worse.

Sisters (1973)

I quite liked it. Color me a De Palma fan, though I've already become one before tonight.

Very nice evocation of Hitchcock. This man gets Hitchcock, and even creates the same mood. The split screen is very effective and utilized well.

I like Margot Kidder in this. Jennifer Salt - very appealling.

Bernie's score rocks. Mixed with the titles it's... wow.

I watched the first 20 minutes of CARRIE. I'm simply too tired to go on, but I loved what I saw so much I may get the Blu-ray tomorrow. I love Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I get the sense that Nolan is setting Batman up as the problem, and not part of the solution, because he's driving things to become worse.

And that's certainly a valid take, the comics have explored several times the notion that Batman's presence actually creates the supervillains he fights -- however, time and time again the comics have also rejected that notion after bringing it up, to come down on the side that Batman does more good than harm. But this may largely be simply because if the message was that Batman was bad, well it would be hard to keep the series going for 70+ years.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I watched the first 20 minutes of CARRIE. I'm simply too tired to go on, but I loved what I saw so much I may get the Blu-ray tomorrow. I love Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie.

I love Nancy Allen's tits.

Mr. Brown wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I watched the first 20 minutes of CARRIE. I'm simply too tired to go on, but I loved what I saw so much I may get the Blu-ray tomorrow. I love Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie.

I love Nancy Allen's tits.

And there we have it, Mr. Brown brings this thread to new hights.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I get the sense that Nolan is setting Batman up as the problem, and not part of the solution, because he's driving things to become worse.

And that's certainly a valid take, the comics have explored several times the notion that Batman's presence actually creates the supervillains he fights -- however, time and time again the comics have also rejected that notion after bringing it up, to come down on the side that Batman does more good than harm. But this may largely be simply because if the message was that Batman was bad, well it would be hard to keep the series going for 70+ years.

It may be hard to do in the comics, but not in film. And considering Nolan seems to have carte blanche on this thing who knows where it'll go. Nolan says he wants to end the story. I could see Bruce Wayne brought to justice. I think rather than portraying Batman as the driving force behind the madness, maybe Nolan will have Bruce Wayne pay the price, but have it be worth the price.

Maybe a critical mass will happen and Gotham will start to make a turn around in light of awful events in the film, and Batman getting out the way would help things move forward. But it would be better than the status quo from before Batman's appearance.

Tux, do you plan on viewing OBSESSION?

You should get the region-free Blu-Ray, if so. It'll be worth it.

Mr. Brown wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I watched the first 20 minutes of CARRIE. I'm simply too tired to go on, but I loved what I saw so much I may get the Blu-ray tomorrow. I love Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie.

I love Nancy Allen's tits.

trivia: Steven Spielberg was at the locker room scenes filming looking for a girl friend and he eventually ended up going out with Amy Irving.

The other actresses ignored him!

The Untouchables (1987)

Quality filmed entertainment with some standout sequences; a nice trip to cinemaland. But I wouldn't call it great. It deliveres some nice jabs but it lacks a killer punch.

Mr. Brown wrote:

I love Nancy Allen's tits.

And that's certainly a valid take as well.

A few this past week: The King's Speech, Operation Valkyrie, the two Cate Blanchett Elizabeth movies, Men Who stare at Goats, Clear and Present Danger, Downfall and The Fantastic Mr Fox.

Valkyrie was a 2004 movie made by the Germans with Sebastian Koch from The Lives of Others. Though only 90mins long it was quite good and I dare say I'll still not touch the Criuse version.

Barry Lyndon

An entertaining yarn told in beautiful pictures, underscored with most of the time lyrical music.I am not so fond of the last part in which Barry lives at Lady Lyndon's house (that's how we have tp put it), at least not in the same way as of the rest of the film, but I did find his relation to Lady Lyndon's young son quite intriguing. A shameless person, that Barryboy, a formidable character study of his, and I can see myself going back to this film with considerable interest.
I've enjoyed all of Kubrack's films so far (those I've seen, that is), the only notable exception being THE SHINNNING. But that one I only did not enjoy the last time I watched it. Great atmosphere and some individual scenes that deliver fine horror and thrill if watched out of the context, but as a whole, regarding writing, symbolization, and acting...

PS: I just saw that Ebert gave FEAR AND LOATHING one single star.
I can't say I always agree with him, and I think that LOATHING has some merits at least, but this made me laugh!
Here some comments from his review:
The result is a horrible mess of a movie, without shape, trajectory or purpose--a one joke movie, if it had one joke. The two characters wander witlessly past the bizarre backdrops of Las Vegas (some real, some hallucinated, all interchangeable) while zonked out of their minds. Humor depends on attitude. Beyond a certain point, you don't have an attitude, you simply inhabit a state.
The movie goes on and on, repeating the same setup and the same payoff: Duke and Gonzo take drugs, stagger into new situations, blunder, fall about, wreak havoc, and retreat to their hotel suite. The movie itself has an alcoholic and addict mind-set, in which there is no ability to step outside the need to use and the attempt to function. If you encountered characters like this on an elevator, you'd push a button and get off at the next floor. Here the elevator is trapped between floors for 128 minutes.
The movie's original director was Alex Cox, whose brilliant "Sid & Nancy" showed insight into the world of addiction. Maybe too much insight; he was replaced by Terry Gilliam ("Brazil," "Time Bandits"), whose input is hard to gauge; this is not his proudest moment. Depp [...] can't communicate the genius beneath the madness.
As for Depp, what was he thinking he made this movie? He was once in trouble for trashing a New York hotel room, just like the heroes of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." What was that? Research? After River Phoenix died of an overdose outside Depp's club, you wouldn't think Depp would see much humor in this story--but then, of course, there *isn't* much humor in this story.

As I said, a stupid film.

No, superb film. Stupid critic.

... and I'm off.

Valkyrie - the Cruise one - isn't as bad as I thought it might be. But considering I thought it would suck rabid dingo balls, that wasn't much to aim for.

Defiance was better. The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas was better, if a little obvious.

Last movie I watched was Senna. Not bad, if you take it all with a big pinch of salt. It's a great piece of airbrushing, erasing all of his worst moments and only really concentrating on his good points. Prost is, of course, the main Evil Bad Guy - which is fine with me, never could stand the git - along with Balestre. And anyone who followed F1 through that turbulent time would agree what a couple of gobshites they were. Senna weren't no angel, though, and the nearest this film gets to touching on that is when it shows Jackie Stewart asking Senna why it is that Senna had been involved in more crashes that all the other World Champions ever combined - ever. Senna gets very defensive, but it's true - the man was lovely of the circuit, but a bit of an evil bastard on it. Although a more honest and trustworthy one than Prost, it must be said.

Basically, don't watch this film and think you know all there is to know about Senna. Although his drive in the wet at Monaco was sheer brilliance. I had enormous respect for the man - he was a genius - but the best driver the world ever? Not for me. That title belongs to Jim Clark. I swear that man could have won if he'd turned up on his tractor.

THE THING (1982)
directed by John Carpenter

I've pretty much stated all my feelings on this film in my previous review of THE THING prequel. Simply put, this is one of my favorite films and certainly my favorite horror film.
9.5/10

dr. strangelove's Halloween Movie Marathon
1. The Thing (1982)
2. The Exorcist
3. Rosemary's Baby
4. Dawn of the Dead
5. Repulsion
6. [REC]
7. The Thing (2011)

Ravenstone wrote:

Valkyrie - the Cruise one - isn't as bad as I thought it might be. But considering I thought it would suck rabid dingo balls, that wasn't much to aim for.

Defiance was better. The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas was better, if a little obvious.

Last movie I watched was Senna. Not bad, if you take it all with a big pinch of salt. It's a great piece of airbrushing, erasing all of his worst moments and only really concentrating on his good points. Prost is, of course, the main Evil Bad Guy - which is fine with me, never could stand the git - along with Balestre. And anyone who followed F1 through that turbulent time would agree what a couple of gobshites they were. Senna weren't no angel, though, and the nearest this film gets to touching on that is when it shows Jackie Stewart asking Senna why it is that Senna had been involved in more crashes that all the other World Champions ever combined - ever. Senna gets very defensive, but it's true - the man was lovely of the circuit, but a bit of an evil bastard on it. Although a more honest and trustworthy one than Prost, it must be said.

Basically, don't watch this film and think you know all there is to know about Senna. Although his drive in the wet at Monaco was sheer brilliance. I had enormous respect for the man - he was a genius - but the best driver the world ever? Not for me. That title belongs to Jim Clark. I swear that man could have won if he'd turned up on his tractor.

Nice review, Rave. I did follow the Senna/Prost F1 battles back then,but wasn't hip to the intrigue. Mansell and Piquet were other big names of that time if I recall, and maybe Rosberg too . I was quite excited when Mansell came over here to race Indy Car and we got to see an offiical A-List F1 driver, still in his prime, up close and personal driving Indy Car on the streets of Toronto. I plan to check out this Senna film.

Prost was always big on the politics, and I hated the 'win at all costs' mentality, which I feel almost killed the sport entirely through the 90s and 00s. I would have liked more racing in the film - more of the real wheel to wheel stuff. Mansell and Senna could race the pants off each other, much more than either one could with Prost. There seemed much more respect between them, and ability.

I was never fond of Senna, though. Amazing though he was, he annoyed me. As did Prost.

Faster with the Rock, a nice small revenge-movie that doesn't take to much time explaining itself or its morals. Can we have the Rock in a 007 movie soon? He'd give DC a right kicking.

INSIDIOUS (2010, dir. James Wan)

The best thing you can say for INSIDIOUS is that it serves up some pretty effective jump scares.


THE TRIP (2010, dir. Michael Winterbottom)

An amusing little film.

saint mark wrote:

Faster with the Rock

That's Dwayne Johnson to you, bucko

The Rock's not too bad an actor IMO, he definitely has decent enough presence to be in a Bond flick, though maybe a more light-hearted one. I'd take him over Mr Kil, Goldie, Boris, Vlad, boring sh*te like Davidov or pointless Grant clones like Stamper anyday.