Last Movie you Watched?

The Sea Chase

John Wayne as a German captain. No accent, either. Sufficient for a boring, rainy Saturday, I guess.

Interesting double this evening.



A Kiss Before Dying (1956) Dir. Gerd Oswald

The DVD box said 1955, IMDB says 1956 - I guess thats another '56 first watch to chalk down (I think since the beginning of the year I've watched about 15 new films from 1956 alone). I also loved the look of this movie - like VIOLENT SATURDAY its not glamourous (this was shot around Tucson) and features plenty of mines. As for the film itself, good fun - some of the young cast are planks (like Wagner and Virginia Leith, who was also in VIOLENT SATURDAY), Jeffrey Hunter doesnt quite pull off playing an intellectual and I'm not quite sure that Wagner really wouldve loved Joanne Woodward that much anyway. Somehow she went from this to THE THREE FACES OF EVE the following year (and won a deserved Oscar) - credit to Fox for taking the punt. Theres some pretty nice scope, Wagner's got an awesome car and there's a chilling scene in which he shoots a man dead at point blank range; from the left of course, to make it look like suicide. And his death is hilarious.



WUSA (1970) Dir. Stuart Rosenberg

Its an interesting and thoughtful analysis of America from a decently left-wing aspect, but its no clear stand-taker, which can kind of be to its detriment at times as it sort of ambles along. Paul Newman's a jaded DJ who blows into New Orleans the same day as hooker Joanne Woodward (their chemistry as man and wife instantly recognizable) - given an idea by guest-starring Laurence Harvey (as a similarly morally corrupt preacher), Newman gets a job at the extreme right-wing station WUSA. Newman's a pretty liberal guy - he's drunk all the time and high with his buddies half the time - but he does the job, and station poss and political heavyweight Pat Hingle (along with his offsider Wayne Rogers) see him as their prophet to the people. Their aim? Cutting welfare to thousands of black residents. Their tool? Anthony Perkins playing his Norman Bates persona as a do-gooder, who thinks he's running a survey on these blacks and their welfare situation. He think's he's helping, but he's actually giving the right-wingers all the info they need. If you've seen THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE you'll pick the ending and the right-wing convention descends into a massive riot. Its an intriguing film and its barebones have potential, but its not very entertaining and I agree with the IMDB reviewer that plenty is left unexplored and its inconsistent in its power. Given I love COOL HAND LUKE I'm still interested in more Rosenberg - I've got THE DROWNING POOL as part of a Newman boxset and want to see THE APRIL FOOLS, among others. Hopefully they give me more than this did.

Came out through the Olive DVD label - which is doing for Paramount like Twilight Time's doing for Fox (though less in depth it seems). Looking at their catalogue, I think I might try to pick up the Tracy/Wagner/Dmytryk pic THE MOUNTAIN. From 1956, naturally. ;)

Ip Man!!

A solid, and often deep and emotionally involving martial arts movie. The embellished life of Maser Yip Man, famously known as Bruce Lee's, set against the backdrop of the Japanese invasion of China and the Second World War. The acting, music and production values on this pic are all superb. Definitely work checking out for those into more serious and dramatic films, and not just beautifully choreographed fight sequences, of which this film has plenty.

To Die For (1995) Dir. Gus Van Sant

I caught a bit of this on TV a while back, and Nicole Kidman was insanely attractive doing an insanely attractive dance. So I recorded it when it was on again yesterday.

An extremely dark but sizzlingly funny comedy, its written by Buck Henry, features a cast full of recognizable faces that has you going "its that guy fom [insert here]!" and Kidman is indeed insanely attractive. An excellent performance too, which was refreshing. :)

127 HOURS

Believe it or not, I didn't mind it this time around. It's not perfect, by any means, but certainly beats the hell out of the rest of the Academy Award nominees it stood toe-to-toe with.

Oh, and plus it's got this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DnUxLISFcA

Secretary (2002) Dir. Steven Shainberg

"Some guy wanted me to pee on his balcony over and over. When I said no he said: I thought you were a masochist?"

A film that runs from being depressingly sad to intriguingly kinky, with laughs and an odd pleasantness to it as well. vIts odd to descrbie or write about, but its an oddly satisfying film. Was happy to finally get to watch it - it was one of the main reasons I got Quickflix but I'd had THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS (55 version) and ATLANTIC CITY on my desk for about 6 months, before finally biting the bullet and realizing I wasnt going to watch ATLANTIC CITY. I dont know why, just never got back to it after watching the first 15 minutes one night. Ah well.

BLACK SWAN

I'd give this film more credit if it weren't so sloppy. I really can't stand that handheld-esque shots that wobble and jitter all over the place, which plague the whole film; and I know it's not the only film doing this today. Natalie Portman's performance improved as the film progressed, and Mila Kunis out-performed her, I think.

Kudos to Aronofsky for the finale, also. All of the choreographed ballet scenes were great.

I'll go out on a limb and say this is one of his best works.

My Oscar 2011 nominee rankings:

1. 127 Hours (7/10)
2. Black Swan (7/10)
3. The Fighter (6/10)
4. Inception (5/10)
5. Toy Story 3 (5/10)
6. True Grit (5/10)
7. The King's Speech (2/10)
8. Winter's Bone (2/10)
9. The Social Network (0/10)


The Kids are All Right <-- Will not see.

What did you not like about The King's Speech, Brown?

Sure, it's Oscar bait, but it at least has some terrific performances.

colly wrote:

Secretary (2002) Dir. Steven Shainberg

"Some guy wanted me to pee on his balcony over and over. When I said no he said: I thought you were a masochist?"

A film that runs from being depressingly sad to intriguingly kinky, with laughs and an odd pleasantness to it as well. vIts odd to descrbie or write about, but its an oddly satisfying film. Was happy to finally get to watch it - it was one of the main reasons I got Quickflix but I'd had THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS (55 version) and ATLANTIC CITY on my desk for about 6 months, before finally biting the bullet and realizing I wasnt going to watch ATLANTIC CITY. I dont know why, just never got back to it after watching the first 15 minutes one night. Ah well.

It's odd. From some angles she looks good, and from some she looks awful. Dig that film, though. And The Spader.

TO DIE FOR is one I want to see.

127 HOURS is not one that I am anxious to see. I hated SLUMDOG, and the thought of watching a dude contemplate cutting his hand off for two hours doesn't appeal to me.

BLACK SWAN? I'd like to see it. Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and (well... past her prime) Barbara Hershey. Portman doesn't really do much for me, but I like Kunis.

colly wrote:

Interesting double this evening.



A Kiss Before Dying (1956) Dir. Gerd Oswald

The DVD box said 1955, IMDB says 1956 - I guess thats another '56 first watch to chalk down (I think since the beginning of the year I've watched about 15 new films from 1956 alone). I also loved the look of this movie - like VIOLENT SATURDAY its not glamourous (this was shot around Tucson) and features plenty of mines. As for the film itself, good fun - some of the young cast are planks (like Wagner and Virginia Leith, who was also in VIOLENT SATURDAY), Jeffrey Hunter doesnt quite pull off playing an intellectual and I'm not quite sure that Wagner really wouldve loved Joanne Woodward that much anyway. Somehow she went from this to THE THREE FACES OF EVE the following year (and won a deserved Oscar) - credit to Fox for taking the punt. Theres some pretty nice scope, Wagner's got an awesome car and there's a chilling scene in which he shoots a man dead at point blank range; from the left of course, to make it look like suicide. And his death is hilarious.



WUSA (1970) Dir. Stuart Rosenberg

Its an interesting and thoughtful analysis of America from a decently left-wing aspect, but its no clear stand-taker, which can kind of be to its detriment at times as it sort of ambles along. Paul Newman's a jaded DJ who blows into New Orleans the same day as hooker Joanne Woodward (their chemistry as man and wife instantly recognizable) - given an idea by guest-starring Laurence Harvey (as a similarly morally corrupt preacher), Newman gets a job at the extreme right-wing station WUSA. Newman's a pretty liberal guy - he's drunk all the time and high with his buddies half the time - but he does the job, and station poss and political heavyweight Pat Hingle (along with his offsider Wayne Rogers) see him as their prophet to the people. Their aim? Cutting welfare to thousands of black residents. Their tool? Anthony Perkins playing his Norman Bates persona as a do-gooder, who thinks he's running a survey on these blacks and their welfare situation. He think's he's helping, but he's actually giving the right-wingers all the info they need. If you've seen THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE you'll pick the ending and the right-wing convention descends into a massive riot. Its an intriguing film and its barebones have potential, but its not very entertaining and I agree with the IMDB reviewer that plenty is left unexplored and its inconsistent in its power. Given I love COOL HAND LUKE I'm still interested in more Rosenberg - I've got THE DROWNING POOL as part of a Newman boxset and want to see THE APRIL FOOLS, among others. Hopefully they give me more than this did.

Came out through the Olive DVD label - which is doing for Paramount like Twilight Time's doing for Fox (though less in depth it seems). Looking at their catalogue, I think I might try to pick up the Tracy/Wagner/Dmytryk pic THE MOUNTAIN. From 1956, naturally. ;)

I like to see both. WUSA looks like it has a terrific cast. A chance to see Perkins, no less. And Harvey, Leachman, and Hingle. And a Schifrin score, too? Right on.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

It's odd. From some angles she looks good, and from some she looks awful. Dig that film, though. And The Spader.

To me shes much more beautiful than sexy - which is why the naked scenes towards the end were a little odd to me. Appreciated sure, but they werent all that titillating, so to speak. Looks better in a sexy outfit than in the buff.

as for WUSA - to be honest the supporting cast gets really unexplored; Harvey turns up at both the start and the end with little explanation as to why he's there, Hingle is appropriately evil but also unexplored - really it goes too much for the Newman/Woodward angle, which kind of runs out of steam early.

I really liked the set for Spader's office, too.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

I really liked the set for Spader's office, too.

Yeah, it added to the kinky atmosphere - all those plants and picture frames and of course, his slamming door all added to the effect. Liked the colour scheme too - I'm not overly one for recognizing such a thing but that one scene where she dumps her "sweing kit" in that river was a wonderfully colourful scene.

and forgive the spelling errors - I've been out drinking.

G section wrote:

What did you not like about The King's Speech, Brown?

Sure, it's Oscar bait, but it at least has some terrific performances.

They were all a bit over-dramatized for me, but I'll give Firth credit. Not the other two, however. As for the rest of the film, I think it's one of those that anyone could have directed. It follows a pretty strict and standard "modern Oscar film" formula, with nothing spectacular in between, in terms of technical work or even color. While films like "127 Hours" and "Black Swan" failed on some levels, they at least took a step forward to offer something interesting. For example, I loved Boyle's cuts to the soft drink ads during Aron's dehydration in "127", and thoroughly enjoyed the way Aronofsky handled the ballet scenes in "Swan". Frankly, I think Tom Hooper's no better than those over-celebrated directors like Paul Haggis. No talent, but boy do they know how to sway the Oscar judges. I'm going to give "King's Speech" one more viewing, too, just to see how I feel about it a few months after first seeing it.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

127 HOURS is not one that I am anxious to see. I hated SLUMDOG, and the thought of watching a dude contemplate cutting his hand off for two hours doesn't appeal to me.

BLACK SWAN? I'd like to see it. Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, and (well... past her prime) Barbara Hershey. Portman doesn't really do much for me, but I like Kunis.

"127 Hours" is 100x better than that "Slumdog" crap. This is all coming from a guy who basically denounced the entire film when the trailer was first released, too.

As for "Black Swan", see it to watch Mila Kunis go down on Natalie Portman, if not for anything else.

Brown :shock: 2/10 for The King's Speech?

Mr. Brown wrote:

They were all a bit over-dramatized for me, but I'll give Firth credit. Not the other two, however. As for the rest of the film, I think it's one of those that anyone could have directed. It follows a pretty strict and standard "modern Oscar film" formula, with nothing spectacular in between, in terms of technical work or even color.

I'd argue that the witty, intelligent script, the supporting cast (Gambon and Pearce particularly) and genuinely powerful scenes (those in Westminster Abbey and the final speech) put it miles above the "modern Oscar film". And it's far from formulaic when compared to films such as Million Dollar Baby, nor does it have a tacky ending like Slumdog Millionaire.

Geoffrey Rush was excellent, and the script was sharp - not falling into the same, right on, sentimental cliches as THE QUEEN and FROST/NIXON did. But the amateurish direction let the picture down.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - I mistook this as a kid's fairy tale for the first 40 minutes or so, but once blood is spilt - it's Burton at his most grotesque. I thought Helena Bonham Carter was typecast in the Potter films, but she looks right at home baking human pies here.

Elegy - What a boring movie. Ben Kingsley has a strong screen presence in a rare leading role, but the always-hot Penelope Cruz and the surprising striptease from Patricia Clarkson are what make the film watchable to an extent. Oh, and Dennis Hopper.

I liked "The King's Speech" much more than "127 Hours," and I expected it to be the other way around. "127 Hours" just failed to keep me engaged.

Where Eagles Dare

I have the feeling I've hyped myself up too much for this one. Where Eagles Dare is effectively a prototype of the 80's Rambo-esque flick, except with significantly better actors. It's all good, but I can't help but think that everything feels a bit flat. Like a movie like this should be more exciting. Especially with a movie poster that exudes as much awesome as it does. It probably didn't help that I had to pause it multiple times to attend to other matters.

It goes right into the "Will probably enjoy more the second time" with Bullitt.

Best action film of all time. 8)

As for me, I was nursing a hangover this morning/arvo, so I decided to go with something thats not too taxing - usually I do a western, or a war pic, or even occasionally the good old 30s musical. Like today...



Gold Diggers of 1935 (1935) Dir. Busby Berkeley

Thankfully they didnt remake the same play again, this was a new script. Two years on from the golden year of 1933, this one has no Keeler, no Blondell, no Rogers, no Kibbee (!) - this time its Busby Berkeley directing the whole show and hes brought along Warners vets (already) on Dick Powell, Hugh Herbert and Frank McHugh, whilst bringing in a new crowd of people like Glenda Farrell, Gloria Stuart and Adolphe Menjou. Perhaps unfairly slighted, its quite a stylish pic and more enjoyable than 1933 - theres plenty of good gags about money and sex, including a cracker about a young lady having "protection" when going out. Its a film that would work almost just as well without the songs as a straight comedy - even with the code these muscials often had more sinful plots than the straight comedies, I guess the censors thought the musical interludes broke up the sin.

Of course, the film's mostly remembered for one thing - the famous "Lullaby of Broadway" showpiece, often nominated as the best Berkeley ever did. Its song won an Oscar but oddly, not the dance direction, and its an amazingly display of dancing. Really incredible stuff. Though obviously his budget's slipping - he's only got 2 big showpieces at the end, instead of the FOOTLIGHT PARADE pinnacle of 3 (plus one early on!). Ah well, the budget constraints would hit harder in...



Gold Diggers of 1937 (1937) Dir. Lloyd Bacon

Funnily enough this was based off a play by none other than Bond's own Richard Maibuam - and like 1935, this is a film that couldve easily been made as just a straight non-musical. Its got a fantastically devilishly funny plot of two schemers (Charles D. Brown and the fantastic Osgood Perkins) who have lost all the money of their boss, theatre producer Victor Moore. Seeking to avoid jail, and because Moore's a rather sick old fella, they aim to get him a million dollar life insurance policy to save their own skins. Said life insurance brings in Dick Powell, and the gold digging element brings in Glenda Farrell, with the returning Joan Blondell (who looks a lot older than she did 4 years previously) adding some spark as well.

The budget's obviously been cut again - theres only one showpiece which is stylish but not great, and theres a lot of reliance on Lee Dixon's tap dancing. But the non-musical elements are top show, and make for a really fun picture, that was towards the end of the Berkeley era - he'd make a few more pics at Warners before heading to MGM in 1939 to make BABES IN ARMS with Mickey Rooney. Twas the end of an era.

Never liked Where Eagles Dare.

Quite how Mary Ure was chosen is lost in some back room of the casting department. Though Ingrid Pitt is good value.

That is a terrific piece of artwork in Tubes' post though.

"Where Eagles Dare" has almost too much action for it's own good...

almost

Ride The High Country (1962) Dir. Sam Peckinpah

Instant love. A wonderful Western that mediates on the glory of the west gone by and the men within it - it was originally slated for the Duke and Coop, but I think theres a greater subtlety in having Scott and McCrea; they're less heroic and more "real," for want of a better word. Their age isnt played for laughs, its a natural progression that the Duke would only occasionally hit in films like the non-western IN HARM'S WAY and THE SHOOTIST. Utilizing the beauty of cinemascope and a wonderful score, its just a wonderful film. And how didnt Ron Starr become a star? He wouldve made a fine Western star...

The Wild Bunch (1969) Dir. Sam Peckinpah

I'd been wanting to do the HIGH COUNTRY/WILD BUNCH double ever since I bought both films over Christmas - I'd tried to be immune to details of the films but I was aware enough to know they both covered the end of the Western era, one from the end of the classic era in 1962 and the beginnings of a new era in 1969.

Directly after finishing the film, I consulted three books: my Warners one (written in the 80s), my Sixties one (1980) and of coruse, my 1001 Films bible (mid 2000s). The Warners one largely categorized as a violent film made by that "violent man" in Sam Peckinpah. The Sixties book addressed it in regards to RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY as a way of truly appreciating not only how cinema, but America itself had changed from '62 to '69. Said book says THE WILD BUNCH "apotheosized the violence of an era that barraged us from our city streets and TV news broadcasts of Vietnam into an epic unleashing of gore." Riding on from BONNIE AND CLYDE, it stylized such gore into something truly epic - a technique that was copied frequently afterwards, but not for the same effect as the book notes.As for the 1001 films book, its notes how hindsight really helps a film - how the focus now has shifted from its extreme violence to its ideas of honor and suchlike.

As my thoughts on the film itself? Its excellent and as you can see I've found it extremely thought provoking, but I didnt love it. Its a breathtaking style and the performances are mostly fine (I thought Robert Ryan was terrific, even if he remained unexplored) but when it comes to my Westerns, I'm becoming much more a classic man. Maybe its the panavision effect of making everything look so absolutely real as opposed to Scope, Vistavision and of course, black and white. Maybe its the dilution of the American west into more of a theatre of art. Maybe its the lack of the real men who harnessed the wilderness and marshalled the towns. I dont know.

But I will say I preferred RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY.