It is currently Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:24 pm



Reply to topic  [ 72839 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1452, 1453, 1454, 1455, 1456, 1457  Next
 Recently Seen 
Author Message
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Millenium Actress is my favorite Kon. Watch it next.

_________________
Last Great Movie Seen
The Friends of Eddie Coyle (Yates, 1973)


Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:49 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Charles Longboat Jr. wrote:
Did anyone here watch Sweet Country? I don’t know if I’m crazy or if my tastes have regressed, but it might be the worst release of 2018 I’ve watched thus far. It’s an utter chore to watch, has no respect for its audience’s intelligence, and has insultingly one dimensional characters. The most I can say is that the Australian landscape looks nice and the lead actor, Hamilton Morris, is decent in his one big scene towards the end. This is the type of arthouse watch that the average person would deride as pretentious drivel for elitist prudes without having seen it, but this film deserves it in this case.

God I hated this movie. Saw it together with The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, which was also terrible. Wasted an entire day on those.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:15 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

topherH wrote:
The Swimmer -9/10

Thanks, Janson.

Fucking brilliant movie.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:15 am
Profile WWW
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Beyond The Gates, 2016 (C)

A movie about a haunted VHS board game. Not the worst movie to watch, but there isn't much there at all.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:03 am
Profile
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

I watched 15:17 to Paris. Between this and the Mule, it may be official that Clint is now senile. Well, that and talkings to that chair.

https://letterboxd.com/tjjones/film/the-1517-to-paris/


Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:23 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Charles wrote:
Beyond The Gates, 2016 (C)

A movie about a haunted VHS board game. Not the worst movie to watch, but there isn't much there at all.

It's pretty blah (aside from maybe Crampton), but it's a good case of how junk horrors these days are better than they were a decade or two ago.

_________________
"We're outgunned and undermanned. But you know somethin'? We're gonna win. You know why? Superior attitude. Superior state of mind." - Mason Storm
____
Blog!


Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:32 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

ThatDarnMKS wrote:
I watched 15:17 to Paris. Between this and the Mule, it may be official that Clint is now senile. Well, that and talkings to that chair.

https://letterboxd.com/tjjones/film/the-1517-to-paris/

How many leery ass closeups are in this? That was my biggest takeaway from The Mule.

_________________
"We're outgunned and undermanned. But you know somethin'? We're gonna win. You know why? Superior attitude. Superior state of mind." - Mason Storm
____
Blog!


Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:40 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Joop wrote:

I've noticed that writers who started out writing books write weird dialogue, just about everything that doesn't come out of an actors mouth is expertly written. Gillian Flynn also come to mind.


It was the writing, but also weird line delivery. I agree that sometimes dialogue that "reads" on the page doesn't translate as well to someone saying it out loud.

Torgo wrote:
Millenium Actress is my favorite Kon. Watch it next.


Yeah, it's pretty amazing as both a story and a reflection on cinema itself.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:54 am
Profile
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Rock wrote:
How many leery ass closeups are in this? That was my biggest takeaway from The Mule.

Not nearly enough but there is a lot of Jenna Fischer having to talk about how strong her God is and how he’s told her that her son is on a collision course with something amazing. Basically the same thing.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:04 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Beyond the Gates is legitimately in the conversation for worst movie I have ever seen.


Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:27 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Charles wrote:
Beyond The Gates, 2016 (C)

A movie about a haunted VHS board game. Not the worst movie to watch, but there isn't much there at all.

I keep almost doing it and then I don't.


Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:24 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
I keep almost doing it and then I don't.

I guarantee you're imagining a better movie than the one we got. The concept is cooler than the execution of said concept. You've seen worse, but it's ok to skip this one in my humble opinion.

_________________
Captain's Log


Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:46 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

I don't know. I have The Killing of a Sacred Deer and Manchester By the Sea rented but now here comes this Beyond the Gates prancing around in it's inappropriately tight halter top. Get thee behind me Satan.

You guys make a compelling case for it too.


Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:47 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Captain Terror wrote:
I guarantee you're imagining a better movie than the one we got. The concept is cooler than the execution of said concept. You've seen worse, but it's ok to skip this one in my humble opinion.

No I'm imagining a worse one, I just keep getting sucked in by the title. No joke. As I mentioned in my Horror thread back in October, I am a sucker for cool posters and titles.


Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:37 am
Profile
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Evil Prevails wrote:
Beyond the Gates is legitimately in the conversation for worst movie I have ever seen.


How many The Predators would you rate it out of 10? A 10 being the Predator?


Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:38 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

ThatDarnMKS wrote:

How many The Predators would you rate it out of 10? A 10 being the Predator?

It is not a 10. It is not even close to being a 10.

_________________
"We're outgunned and undermanned. But you know somethin'? We're gonna win. You know why? Superior attitude. Superior state of mind." - Mason Storm
____
Blog!


Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:21 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
I keep almost doing it and then I don't.


Don't do it Wooley :(


Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:04 pm
Profile
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Rock wrote:
It is not a 10. It is not even close to being a 10.

It was a gotcha question for only the Predator can get a 10 on this metric.

I watched the Purple Rose of Cairo. It was wonderful. My love and appreciation for Allen as an artist continues grow as I fill in my era gaps of his very prolific (until recently) career.


Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:07 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

ThatDarnMKS wrote:
It was a gotcha question for only the Predator can get a 10 on this metric.

I watched the Purple Rose of Cairo. It was wonderful. My love and appreciation for Allen as an artist continues grow as I fill in my era gaps of his very prolific (until recently) career.

I liked that one when I was younger. It's been many a moon, I should revisit. So many movies.


Sat Jan 12, 2019 3:58 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Rumpled wrote:

Don't do it Wooley :(


What did you rate it?

2010: The Year We Made Contact, 1984 (B)

It's obviously no 2001. It's less focused, less artistic and much less inspiring, going for a bad, slightly open resolution instead of a good open ended one. The end is just too corny despite most of the climax being actually pretty good. It's not the kind of movie you'll regret not watching, all in all.


Sat Jan 12, 2019 5:03 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Spotlight on a Murderer

Inspired to watch this after our discussion earlier, MKS.

I understand why this is considered one of Franju's slighter efforts, but I had a great time with it. The plotting is old hat, but that's the point: Franju is toying with genre conventions here in delightfully oddball ways. The plot seems to be going on in the background, frankly, while the background weirdly takes the foreground. The film is set at a chateau, and the building itself features prominently, while incidental moments sometimes feel more significant than major plot twists. Franju is stitching together tropes from the Gothic romance and the detective story, and he finds plenty of opportunities to indulge his penchant for pulp poetry. One set piece in particular is both total kitsch and utterly sublime at the same time.

And the booklet that comes with the Arrow release is wonderful. It has a short excerpt from Durgnat's book on Franju, a contemporary interview with Franju and the writers (the team who also wrote the source material for Vertigo and Les Diaboliques, and the script for Franju's Eyes Without a Face), and an essay by Chris Fujiwara, which might be the best thing I've read on Franju -- it really captures the essence of what makes him great.

_________________
Ma`crol´o`gy
n. 1. Long and tedious talk without much substance; superfluity of words.


Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:08 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

The only Franju's I've seen are the easily accessible Judex and Eyes. Both of which I really love. Will need to watch out for that one because it sounds like my kinda thing.


Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:21 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

The Killing of a Sacred Deer - 6/10 - Watching this I kept thinking it was almost biblical in tone but it turns out it's based on an ancient Greek play. I wish I could give it a higher score because I appreciate the message but then I don't have a precise fix on what that might be. A self satisfied family gets it's comeuppance? The grotesque hiding beneath a thin veneer of normality? But is it aberrant for the sake of being aberrant? It doesn't lead you by the hand to any answers. Great performances all around though. The kid (he's actually 26) playing Martin, Barry Keoghan, is great. And after watching the accompanying previews before the movie I'm definitely watching The Lobster. From the looks of it it appears to be more up my alley.


Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:51 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Macrology wrote:
Spotlight on a Murderer
Hey, thanks for this. It was stylish and fun, and I loved the background/foreground thing. So many red herrings!

_________________
Bird Box ▪ Crazy Rich Asians ▪ Support the Girls ▪ Roma ▪ Boom for Real ▪ Nancy ▪ Hearts Beat Loud ▪ Summer 1993 ▪ Spotlight on a Murderer ▪ Leave No Trace ▪ Ismael's Ghosts ▪ Museo ▪ Unsane

Voyage | Female Gaze | MACBETH | Sokurov | Fassbinder | Greenaway | Denis | Sono | my bookshelf


Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:09 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

81/2 - 8.5/10 - This is only my fourth Fellini (following La Strada, Nights of Cabiria and Amarcord) so I’m not all that familiar with his greater body of work. I had heard of his fondness for the surreal but since my experience has been with his more earthbound works I wasn’t always completely certain of this film's inclinations. There were at least two things I was certain of, that if Marcello Mastroianni had lived in these times he would have been a world class player. The guy was a baller. And two, that even though I wasn’t always securely onboard the movie was still surprisingly affecting by the time it started winding down. And I suppose that’s the mark of a great movie. One that can inveigle you without being so conspicuous or heavy-handed .

It’s also closer to a 9/10 but that 8.5 was too easy to pass by.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:55 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Discord chat.
https://discord.gg/emfRpuE


Sun Jan 13, 2019 8:14 am
Profile YIM
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Charles wrote:

What did you rate it?

2010: The Year We Made Contact, 1984 (B)

It's obviously no 2001. It's less focused, less artistic and much less inspiring, going for a bad, slightly open resolution instead of a good open ended one. The end is just too corny despite most of the climax being actually pretty good. It's not the kind of movie you'll regret not watching, all in all.


I was on about Beyond The Gates (2016)


Sun Jan 13, 2019 8:49 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Finally saw Cannibal Holocaust.
I actually didn't think it was a bad movie at all, given the context of the 1970s (meaning that the "we are the monsters" trope had maybe not already been beaten to death at that time).
I will admit that I fast-forwarded over the animal-cruelty bits (though I was able to see basically what happened at 2 or 3x speed).
Anyway, I don't know that I want to watch it again, but I bought the narrative and I think because of the level of violence they were willing to go to and the quality of the effects, the shock legitimately worked, even now.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:12 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
Finally saw Cannibal Holocaust.
I actually didn't think it was a bad movie at all, given the context of the 1970s (meaning that the "we are the monsters" trope had maybe not already been beaten to death at that time).
I will admit that I fast-forwarded over the animal-cruelty bits (though I was able to see basically what happened at 2 or 3x speed).
Anyway, I don't know that I want to watch it again, but I bought the narrative and I think because of the level of violence they were willing to go to and the quality of the effects, the shock legitimately worked, even now.

I saw it several months ago and while it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, I didn't care that much for it. While I can give it back some points since "man is the real monster" wasn't a cliche back then, due to how much it has been used by other films, I find it hard to be impressed by this aspect. I suppose you can also read this film as a thesis for how the media and the journalists go way too far for insane sensationalism, but I found it hard to take this interpretation seriously as Deodato was doing the same thing. While I can respect Deodato for adding a couple layers to the film, I didn't find them interesting enough for me to enjoy/recommend it.

_________________
Top 30 Favorite Films of All Time


Sun Jan 13, 2019 10:19 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
Finally saw Cannibal Holocaust.
I actually didn't think it was a bad movie at all, given the context of the 1970s (meaning that the "we are the monsters" trope had maybe not already been beaten to death at that time).
I will admit that I fast-forwarded over the animal-cruelty bits (though I was able to see basically what happened at 2 or 3x speed).
Anyway, I don't know that I want to watch it again, but I bought the narrative and I think because of the level of violence they were willing to go to and the quality of the effects, the shock legitimately worked, even now.


I can never get past the scenes with the animals. I've since seen movies which have moments of similar cruelty, that while never sitting well with me, are at least usually brief and I can look away. CH lingers on those moments to the point where a legitimate part of its run time is devoted to animal torture. It is a part of the movies DNA. It can't be separated.

I saw it at a time when, beyond what I knew of horses being intentionally tripped in old Westerns, I didn't think a movie could even dare go there in terms of what it did to animals. When I put it on, I knew nothing about it, at all. Some guy at university had simply leant it to a roommate, and I just put it on one afternoon when I found it lying around. It is one of the few times in my life a film shocked me. After watching it, I remember coming across the guy who gave it to us at a party and tearing a strip off him. How dare he bring that shit into my house. He was mostly just amused at my indignation, because I am apparently hilarious when I go off on someone. But as for the quality of the movie , I can't even comment on whether or not I thought it was any good. I only saw what I didn't want to see. Regardless, the experience left a mark, and I've been forever left wondering if the movie offered much more than my vague recollections.

I'm often tempted to rewatch, just to get a better gauge of what it is, but I would never be able to watch anything but the censored version these days. And because, regardless of how much I might be happy to never see those scenes again, I don't have any reason in watching censored versions of anything. Because of this, I clearly have no reason in every watching Cannibal Holocaust again.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:04 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

It has some strong filmmaking but the movie is guilty of everything it halfassedly preaches against. "I wonder who the real cannibals are." Fuck you, movie.

_________________
"We're outgunned and undermanned. But you know somethin'? We're gonna win. You know why? Superior attitude. Superior state of mind." - Mason Storm
____
Blog!


Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:29 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

I can tell that First Reformed is one of those movies I'm going to need to process for several days.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:05 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Popcorn Reviews wrote:
I saw it several months ago and while it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be, I didn't care that much for it. While I can give it back some points since "man is the real monster" wasn't a cliche back then, due to how much it has been used by other films, I find it hard to be impressed by this aspect. I suppose you can also read this film as a thesis for how the media and the journalists go way too far for insane sensationalism, but I found it hard to take this interpretation seriously as Deodato was doing the same thing. While I can respect Deodato for adding a couple layers to the film, I didn't find them interesting enough for me to enjoy/recommend it.

Well, I guess that I didn't try to take it quite as far as you did in that I put this all on the individuals. What I mean is that yes, they were "journalists" and they did bad things in pursuit of the story, but I thought even that was related, on-screen, to the characters simply being bad actors, lousy human beings, selfish and self-indulgent pieces of shit, personally. They didn't have to represent an entire profession nor did they have to represent all of us, they were just a rotten fucking bunch, which any of us could be, but they were a rotten fucking bunch. They did horrible things and then they had their genitals mutilated, as it should be.
And I guess I don't read the whole thing as "man is the real monster" but more "we are civilized but we are not so civilized". We can break down into the basest parts of our character in many different circumstances whether stressed into them by death and other extremes around us or being desensitized to them and even wanting to release them. That's how I saw this film. There was a sort of violent decadence that came over them down there in the jungle.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 3:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

crumbsroom wrote:

I can never get past the scenes with the animals. I've since seen movies which have moments of similar cruelty, that while never sitting well with me, are at least usually brief and I can look away. CH lingers on those moments to the point where a legitimate part of its run time is devoted to animal torture. It is a part of the movies DNA. It can't be separated.

Well, I actually felt like I separated them very well, as, I started to see those moments were beginning, I hit fast-forward to the degree that I essentially could not tell what was being done, but I could tell when it was over, and then I returned. Horrifying moments essentially excised from the film.

I saw it at a time when, beyond what I knew of horses being intentionally tripped in old Westerns, I didn't think a movie could even dare go there in terms of what it did to animals. When I put it on, I knew nothing about it, at all. Some guy at university had simply leant it to a roommate, and I just put it on one afternoon when I found it lying around. It is one of the few times in my life a film shocked me. After watching it, I remember coming across the guy who gave it to us at a party and tearing a strip off him. How dare he bring that shit into my house. He was mostly just amused at my indignation, because I am apparently hilarious when I go off on someone. But as for the quality of the movie , I can't even comment on whether or not I thought it was any good. I only saw what I didn't want to see. Regardless, the experience left a mark, and I've been forever left wondering if the movie offered much more than my vague recollections.

I'm often tempted to rewatch, just to get a better gauge of what it is, but I would never be able to watch anything but the censored version these days. And because, regardless of how much I might be happy to never see those scenes again, I don't have any reason in watching censored versions of anything. Because of this, I clearly have no reason in every watching Cannibal Holocaust again.


Well, i would say watch the censored version then, if you're talking about what's done to the animals. I didn't think it was essential. I understand why they made that choice, I don't love it but it is what it is and is easily skipped over. The human get treated at least as badly.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 3:16 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

IMDB just got into the free movie game, ya'll!

_________________
Recently Reviewed


Sun Jan 13, 2019 3:31 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

The Padre - 7/10 - It's not a substantial film by any means but points are given for it's cast and locale. It's got Tim Roth and Nick Nolte and any movie featuring Luis Guzman can't be all bad. Plus Valeria Henriquez, the young actress who plays Lena, is quite good. The script is underweight and derivative but the performances allay some of the negatives.


Sun Jan 13, 2019 3:35 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
Finally saw Cannibal Holocaust.
I actually didn't think it was a bad movie at all, given the context of the 1970s (meaning that the "we are the monsters" trope had maybe not already been beaten to death at that time).
I will admit that I fast-forwarded over the animal-cruelty bits (though I was able to see basically what happened at 2 or 3x speed).
Anyway, I don't know that I want to watch it again, but I bought the narrative and I think because of the level of violence they were willing to go to and the quality of the effects, the shock legitimately worked, even now.


I don't think it's a bad film either, but it's not a very good one either.

Here's something I wrote about it a while ago.

_________________
--- UNDER CONSTRUCTION ---


Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:00 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Rock wrote:
It has some strong filmmaking but the movie is guilty of everything it halfassedly preaches against. "I wonder who the real cannibals are." Fuck you, movie.


Bingo. It rubs your face in needless animal mutilations and the cruelties of a bunch of ill-conceived young jackasses (which then further allows the film to punish them gratuitously under the guise of some sort of moral retribution). The fact that the film has some stretches of effective atmosphere-building, etc. honestly makes its arguments all the more bad-faith to me.

_________________
NOTE:
The above-written is wholly and solely the perspective of DaMU and should not be taken as an effort to rile, malign, or diminish you, dummo.


Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:47 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Wooley wrote:
Well, I guess that I didn't try to take it quite as far as you did in that I put this all on the individuals. What I mean is that yes, they were "journalists" and they did bad things in pursuit of the story, but I thought even that was related, on-screen, to the characters simply being bad actors, lousy human beings, selfish and self-indulgent pieces of shit, personally. They didn't have to represent an entire profession nor did they have to represent all of us, they were just a rotten fucking bunch, which any of us could be, but they were a rotten fucking bunch. They did horrible things and then they had their genitals mutilated, as it should be.
And I guess I don't read the whole thing as "man is the real monster" but more "we are civilized but we are not so civilized". We can break down into the basest parts of our character in many different circumstances whether stressed into them by death and other extremes around us or being desensitized to them and even wanting to release them. That's how I saw this film. There was a sort of violent decadence that came over them down there in the jungle.

I wasn't necessarily referring to how he wrote the characters in the film as much as I was referring to how the animal cruelty scenes were actually real. Deodato didn't have to do that to make this film. That, specifically, is why I had difficulty taking the sensationalism angle seriously. It was highly hypocritical.

Since we didn't get much time to be aware of the film crew's behavior before they went into the jungle, it's difficult to determine whether they were violent beforehand or if the jungle brought out something violent in them which didn't exist in them prior (or not to the same extent). In addition, with the final scene of the film showing someone question "who the real cannibals are", it's more likely that Deodato had this in mind. That's why I feel like "man is the real monster" is more appropriate. I suppose you could say that their
guide's death
could've changed them a bit, but I have difficulty believing that was the only thing which influenced all their actions throughout the film.

_________________
Top 30 Favorite Films of All Time


Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:04 pm
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Popcorn Reviews wrote:
I wasn't necessarily referring to how he wrote the characters in the film as much as I was referring to how the animal cruelty scenes were actually real. Deodato didn't have to do that to make this film. That, specifically, is why I had difficulty taking the sensationalism angle seriously. It was highly hypocritical.

Since we didn't get much time to be aware of the film crew's behavior before they went into the jungle, it's difficult to determine whether they were violent beforehand or if the jungle brought out something violent in them which didn't exist in them prior (or not to the same extent). In addition, with the final scene of the film showing someone question "who the real cannibals are", it's more likely that Deodato had this in mind. That's why I feel like "man is the real monster" is more appropriate. I suppose you could say that their
guide's death
could've changed them a bit, but I have difficulty believing that was the only thing which influenced all their actions throughout the film.


I pretty much agree with this. The film seems to have two trains of thought and I think it failed at both. One, the contrast between the alleged savagery of the natives versus the supposed civilization of the reporters, which is too unsubtle and in-your-face to be effectively communicated; and second, the criticism of the sensationalism of American media, which is undermined by the same film which sensationalizes the violent imagery it's apparently criticizing.

Still, I don't think it's a downright awful film. I do think there are some good technical aspects to it, plus there's a certain cultural significance to it that might make for an interesting, more clinical approach to it. But in terms of performance and overall narrative, it doesn't succeed.

_________________
--- UNDER CONSTRUCTION ---


Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:19 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Popcorn Reviews wrote:
I wasn't necessarily referring to how he wrote the characters in the film as much as I was referring to how the animal cruelty scenes were actually real. Deodato didn't have to do that to make this film. That, specifically, is why I had difficulty taking the sensationalism angle seriously. It was highly hypocritical.

Since we didn't get much time to be aware of the film crew's behavior before they went into the jungle, it's difficult to determine whether they were violent beforehand or if the jungle brought out something violent in them which didn't exist in them prior (or not to the same extent). In addition, with the final scene of the film showing someone question "who the real cannibals are", it's more likely that Deodato had this in mind. That's why I feel like "man is the real monster" is more appropriate. I suppose you could say that their
guide's death
could've changed them a bit, but I have difficulty believing that was the only thing which influenced all their actions throughout the film.


It's this hypocrisy in the film where its true vileness lays. Not that it would absolve the film of its many sins if it nailed its thesis, but the fact that they did this to these animals (not to mention the true life terrible treatment of the aboriginals in the film) just to shit all over their own point makes the whole thing a complete exercise in nihilism. It turns the accusations of mans savagery directly back upon the director himself, deservedly so. The film is more a condemnation of its own creator, which to me is one of the most interesting things about it. A movies failures can be just as illuminating as their successes. Not that it makes it worth enduring, but does make it interesting to talk about in the abstract.

Still, the movie simply has no excuses to have done what it did. It's a blight on cinema.


Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:30 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

The Friends of Eddie Coyle is an enjoyably gritty '70s crime flick. The "Friends" in the title might as well be in quotations because Eddie, the kind of cool, cynical and wizened Boston gangster Robert Mitchum was born to play, is finking on them in order to avoid a lengthy jail sentence. This absence of loyalty and assurance in the criminal underworld - as well as in the law's efforts to take it down - pervade this movie in this and other ways, whether it's in the dealings of Eddie's associate Jackie Brown, a cautious to a fault gun runner wonderfully played by Steven Keats', or in the machinations of Dave Foley, an ingenious cop slyly played by Richard Jordan. However, as this movie's bank robbery scenes make clear, the jobs are all about loyalty because even the slightest deviation from the plan can result in complete disaster. Speaking of these scenes, while they were filmed with an economy and a style that is a far cry from similar scenes in movies like Soderbergh's Ocean's Eleven or Affleck's The Town, they're still so tense that I forgot to breathe. These scenes do more showing than telling, but this is still a very talky movie, and while a lot of the dialogue crackles, it often comes across as long-winded. Even so, it's a flaw that only slightly affected my understanding of what was happening and my enjoyment on the whole. Besides, we should be thankful for how this and other flourishes likely influenced the works of directors such as James Gray and Quentin Tarantino.

_________________
Last Great Movie Seen
The Friends of Eddie Coyle (Yates, 1973)


Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:19 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

I should clarify that I don't think this is complete garbage or anything. There are a couple of things I like about it such as the shocking level of nihilism it contains. Also, when it's not full of excessive violence, some of the scenes are fairly suspenseful and shocking. Overall, however, I'd say the bad outweighs the good by quite a bit.

_________________
Top 30 Favorite Films of All Time


Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:22 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

crumbsroom wrote:

It's this hypocrisy in the film where its true vileness lays. Not that it would absolve the film of its many sins if it nailed its thesis, but the fact that they did this to these animals (not to mention the true life terrible treatment of the aboriginals in the film) just to shit all over their own point makes the whole thing a complete exercise in nihilism. It turns the accusations of mans savagery directly back upon the director himself, deservedly so. The film is more a condemnation of its own creator, which to me is one of the most interesting things about it. A movies failures can be just as illuminating as their successes. Not that it makes it worth enduring, but does make it interesting to talk about in the abstract.

Still, the movie simply has no excuses to have done what it did. It's a blight on cinema.


Add to that the fact that Deodato was accused of mistreating the actors and delaying payments, or even not paying some of the natives.

_________________
--- UNDER CONSTRUCTION ---


Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:36 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

Torgo wrote:
The Friends of Eddie Coyle is an enjoyably gritty '70s crime flick.
Great movie. Deserves to be watched by any fan of the genre.


Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:45 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

boojiboyhowdy wrote:
Great movie. Deserves to be watched by any fan of the genre.
It's also worth watching just to see actors like Peter Boyle and Alex Rocco, a.k.a. Moe Green from The Godfather.
It's a shame we lost Steven Keats so early. He was a very good "that guy" character actor.

_________________
Last Great Movie Seen
The Friends of Eddie Coyle (Yates, 1973)


Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:15 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

There are a small handful of films about which I will never have an opinion because I will never watch them. Cannibal Holocaust is at the top of that list. And fast-forwarding or watching a censored version won't do anything about the problems. Torturing animals is wrong. Period. It's a crime. It is morally indefensible. To knowingly participate--even passively by watching--in such activity just isn't something I can't do.

Unrelated: I'm about halfway through Yumeji and it's delightfully weird.


Tue Jan 15, 2019 7:34 am
Profile
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

I'm shocked by how much I liked Green Book. It has many of the elements that irk me about similar films, Farrely's direction is perfunctory and it's basically an inverse Driving Mrs. Daisy.

But..

Mortensom and Ali KILL it. They're perfect. They add ao much depth, dimension, humanity and humor that they, coupled with some very solid dialogue really carry the film and make it a charming, engaging watch. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Also watched Hitchcock's own remake of The Man Who Wasnt There (one outstanding sequence but lesser than the original overall) and Marnie (gets more messed up the more I think about it).

Oh. And Ocean's 8. The girls are a pleasure to watch but it lacks the energy, charm or intelligence of the Soderbergh films. Also, what's the deal with them having to treat lady driven films as gimmicks rather than a natural narrative decision?


Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:54 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

ThatDarnMKS wrote:
Marnie (gets more messed up the more I think about it).


It's a movie that is much better in hindsight. While I was watching it, I would have put it in the lower half of his filmography. But as time has worn on, it has wormed its way into my brain. It still wouldn't remotely make his top 10, but it's very much another jewel in his crown.


Tue Jan 15, 2019 9:02 am
Profile
User avatar
Reply with quote
Post Re: Recently Seen

ThatDarnMKS wrote:
Marnie (gets more messed up the more I think about it).


Yeah, Marnie is gross.

Quote:
Oh. And Ocean's 8. The girls are a pleasure to watch but it lacks the energy, charm or intelligence of the Soderbergh films. Also, what's the deal with them having to treat lady driven films as gimmicks rather than a natural narrative decision?


I was really disappointed with Ocean's 8. It went way, way past "light" and into "whatever". And the way they handled the Anne Hathaway character had far too many echoes of the Julia Roberts stunt casting from the second film.

I know the films have like zero in common, but Annihilation was 80% female led, and it felt natural and left room for character development. It can be done!


Tue Jan 15, 2019 9:03 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 72839 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1452, 1453, 1454, 1455, 1456, 1457  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DJ Rkod and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.