lazybones18

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
17,339
All Quiet on the Western Front (2022)

So I haven't seen the 1930s version in over a decade and I never read the book, so I don't think it would be fair of me to say the 2022 adaptation is the superior film version. I will say that Paul's fate in this version is much better, or you could say "more natural", than in the 30s version (I remember how that movie ended at least). Damn shame the lead actor hardly got little to no award recognition.
 

meowdi gras

Banned
Feb 24, 2018
12,679
Comrades (1986), Dir: Bill Douglas

Far better known for his earlier Trilogy (My Childhood, My Ain Folk, My Way Home), Bill Douglas's imagist, decisively pro-labor epic about the Tolpuddle Martyrs debuted on UK screens at the height of Thatcherism, and subsequently sank almost without a trace. Even few major critics seem to have seen it at the time, which has made a later reassessment and revival a surpassingly difficult prospect. (It also tragically proved to be the talented Scottish filmmaker's swan song before he died prematurely of cancer while still in his fifties.)

This is a shame, because at least the first half of the film—depicting the nascent stirrings of labor union sentiments erupting among the impoverished Dorset country peasantry—is a near-masterpiece of period detail and vividly cinematic storytelling. Douglas's sympathy for the Martyrs and passion for their cause shows in every frame. Unfortunately, the diffuse second half, when the Martyrs are exiled to Botany Bay in colonial Australia and are scattered in penal units across the Outback, fails to sustain the grip and emotion of the first half. Too, Douglas's use of the "Lanternist" as a unifying device seems clumsily integrated into the narrative.

Still, a definite cut above popular, middlebrow '80s period epics, such as those by David Lean or Richard Attenborough.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
_320x_d5a1e037c1bf0d4a21677777876841721adda73deba6830caa8d7009053fe188.jpg


Movie lives up to the title, lol. I thought the Home Alone references worked well and brings a solid amount of Christmas spirit thanks to the little kid. Watched on Peacock.
 

Osahi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,971
was finally able to see Aftersun. What a briliant movie. It was like being very slowly and gently hit by an emotional sledgehammer. I didn't shed a tear during the film, but once the credits rolled and when walking back to my car I couldn't hold them back, because suddenly the whole wheight of the film fell over me.

It's a brilliant showcase of the power of cinema. I don't think this story and how it is told could work in any other medium. The way it puts you in the POV of its main character, to only slowly reveal what is really going on - just as the main character only in the present day starts to understand - and allow you to have that revelation yourself is amazing storytelling. The way it handles memories and how deceiving they can be as a theme... I can't get over how good this film is, and I'm sure it's one of those that will hit even harder on rewatch.
 

Excuse me

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,054
The Pale Blue Eye (2022) - it was decent who dunnit, nothing special, well except for Harry Melling. I really want a show where Melling is solving grizly murders as Edgar Allan Poe. Great character.
 

snogrigg

Member
Sep 11, 2018
129
Anthropoid (2016) - Really enjoyed it. Very underrated WW2 thriller. Had some good action scenes and was well made overall.
 

Timbuktu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,305
Triangle of Sadness - I thought it was merely ok for a Palme D'Or winner, the tone was slightly off. what it was doing isn't that fresh at a time when we have been watching Succession and White Lotus for a few years.

It did hit me like a ton of bricks goggling about the ending afterwards and seeing that the on of the lead actress, Charlbi Dean, died last year aged only 32. Seemed like she had everything ahead of her and gone within a day from sepsis, after losing her spleen a decade ago after a car accident. RIP

triangle-of-sadness-movie-poster-15x21-in-2022-ruben-%C3%B6stlund-thobias-thorwid-palme-d-or.jpg
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
s-l500.jpg


Catching up on films I've heard in my queue for a while. Wanted something light to watch and the movie is indeed very silly. Breezy watch, although it could have been funnier.
 

Mabase

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,069
A few films of the past weeks:

Berlinale Screenings:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5XeXNFNHQA


"White Plastic Sky / Műanyag égbolt" (Hungary - D:Tibor Bánóczki, Sarolta Szabó)
A mixed media animated (rotoscoped/CG/2D) dystopian SciFi indie with a familiar but nonetheless compelling premise: in humanity's last functioning city, Budapest under a glass dome, humans at the age of 50 are basically turned into trees through a techical process called the Implantation, to provide oxygen and food for society.
The worldbuilding is interesting and inventive, and the atmosphere very mysterious and compelling. The plot sometimes gets a bit bogged down by half-heartedly implemented action beats, which are hindered by the film's lack of emotionality. But the philosophical and cerebral elements of it, especially about transformation of the human body, are as interesting and thoughtprovoking as one would wish from a high concept scifi story and make the film enjoyable nonetheless.

The directors called their film "slightly hopeful", although I personally would disagree... :D




View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3jCUhr0p_4

"Deep Sea/Shen Hai 深海" (PR China - D: Tian Xiaopeng)
An incredibly colorful family film about a sad teenage girl that boards an unlikely underwater restaurant-that's-also-a-submarine-at-the-same-time filled to the brim with magical sealions, beavers (who constitute the crew) and the equally grotesque patrons (think the bathhouse in Spirited Away). Central however is the relationship with the restaurant's head chef/captain, a lanky, ambitious pirate cook who looks like a cross between Lupin the 3rd and the Joker.

The director apologized after the screening that he might have overdone it with the overwhelming colorfulness, richness of the effects and never-ceasing movement.

I agree.
A few moments here and there to let the film breath properly would have done wonders I believe. It's so frantic and full and neverstopping and overwhelming (especially in 3D Stereo) people might get headaches after the first hour.

HOWEVER, the film is also incredibly beautiful and fun. The images alone are worth the watch - there's something interesting going on with the shading and rendering. The film doesn't go for a "naturalistic" material feel, but stylizes the shading without reducing the detail, and adding the motherload of particle effects on top. The end result feels very fresh and has feels of oil painting, ink painting, naturalistic skin shading, Ghibliesque 2D animation but seen through "realistic" camera lenses. The madness on screen is anchored by a basic, but effective central performance of the girl who navigates the wonderland to find a way back home.

And, as is often the case with east asian child's fare, there's no holding back on darker subject matters: depression, malfunctioning families, self-harm, the frivol depiction of alcohol and tobacco, loneliness etc.

Recommended (but don't eat too much beforehand)


Outside of the Berlinale
sing-like-the-king-shure-and-elvis-the-movie_setcard.png


ELVIS (USA, AUS - D: Baz Luhrmann)

I'm not an Elvis expert, but: Seriously underwhelmed. The first hour feels like a lazy adaptation of a Wikipedia page, just with music underlaid. Feels at the same time overstuffed and undercooked, as I could never get an emotional connection with Elvis, while the direction wasn't stylized enough to make it fun. The narrative point-of-view chosen, of his manager, is interesting but doesn't carry enough emotional weight for me to pull another almost-three-hour movie.
Stylistically, the sequence with the christmas special, where the boundaries of space and time seem to unhinge, is the only time the film seems to do something interesting with its Baz-Luhrmann-ness.
Butler's performance is undercut by the film's pace, as is Elvis' music. Seriously, how sad is it that a film about Elvis Presley never finds its groove.

Not recommended, listen to his music instead while taking painkillers.
 

EvilDead1987

Member
Nov 4, 2021
2,118
South Eastern PA
I wasn't able to write up some reviews at the end of January, so I have 10 movies to list here. I'll write a quick thought summary on each (Sorry if the post is long)


Top Gun - ***1/2 - Rewatch
- It's been a long time since I've seen this movie. It's enjoyable, but lacks that special something to make repeat viewings special. It's still a good movie with an iconic soundtrack though. I like that it's more character driven than action packed.


Top Gun: Maverick - **** - First viewing
- I really enjoyed this movie. I heard the hype surrounding it, but went in with no expectations. It captures the character elements of the first one while making the story more high stakes. Was pleasantly surprised. Wouldn't mind another, but also would be fine for the series to not overstay its welcome and end here. I'm definitely going to buy a 4K Blu Ray of this one (and by proxy, getting the first one too)


Barbarian - ***1/2 - First Viewing
- Much like the movie above, I went in with no expectations and no idea what the movie was about. I really liked it and was honestly surprised with some of the twists here. It gets goofy, but that's good. Was a very enjoyable horror movie and I'm just so glad Horror is getting another renaissance right now. It's always been one of my favorite genres of films (If my name didn't give that away lol)


Black Panther: Wakanda Forever - **** - First viewing
- I'm a big MCU dork and I really liked this movie. It's not perfect, but I really loved the depiction of grief in this film. It's multi layered and different for numerous characters. As someone going through long term grief, it's very much appreciated to see honest takes on grief. Plus, Namor was awesome


The Batman - ***** - Rewatch
- I don't know if I reviewed this movie before, but I just had to write about it again. I think I enjoyed the movie even more with my rewatch. I was able to pick up a lot during it and it made me appreciate the world and characters of this new Batman franchise. I'm really looking forward to the sequel in 2025. The soundtrack is phenomenal.


Nightmare Alley - **** - First viewing
- This was another movie where I had no expectations or prior knowledge of. I only knew it as the Guillermo del Toro movie and nothing more. Honestly, that's what drove me to watch it in the first place as I really enjoy his movies. This was no exception. I really liked the story and characters of this film. It kinda feels like two movies stuck together with its settings, but the characters you follow are interesting. The acting was really good too.


Bob's Burgers: The Movie: *** - First viewing
- I finally got around to watching this movie and I enjoyed it. However, I feel it lost a bit of the show's charm throughout. I love the show, so seeing some cool character moments in here was great. It was funny and enjoyable, but I enjoy the quick 30 minutes of the show better.


Death on the Nile: **1/2 - First viewing
- Oh boy ... Okay, the movie isn't bad or anything, but I just didn't really enjoy this too much. I was very close to shutting the movie off, but stuck with it regardless. The mystery was fun, but none of the characters were that enjoyable. It didn't really hold my interest which is a shame because I like murder mysteries. I can't put my finger on why I didn't really enjoy it.


Palm Springs: ***1/2 - First viewing
- This movie has been sitting in my Hulu queue since 2020. I finally got around to watching it and I liked it. It's charming and funny with a bit of drama added in. One complaint could be the length of the film. I actually think this could've been a series instead. Felt like we didn't really know Andy Samberg's character all too much and a series could've given us a closer look into how long he's actually been stuck in the loop. Cristin Milioti was really good here as well. Very enjoyable and I bet it gets better with multiple viewings.


Godzilla vs Kong: *** - First viewing
- I really liked Skull Island and the first Godzilla reboot movie. Went in with low expectations, but found a fun popcorn type movie. The plot is kinda stupid, but in the fun way. One thing I have to say is these new Monster movies usually have some great shots in them. There's multiple in this film alone that would make for some awesome posters or desktop wallpapers. I remember the other ones having the same as well. Interested to see more movies in this "Monsterverse" or whatever their calling it.
 
Last edited:
Feb 16, 2023
386
Alice, Darling.

I half expected them to kill the toxic boyfriend at the end but the movie is classier than that. I loved this morose drama about a controlling boyfriend

re: Wunmi Mosaku - love her and wish Lovecraft country wasn't cancelled. Also Anna Kendrick is great in this and not playing her usual chirppy self.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,250
Near Dark (1987) - I hadn't heard of this movie until someone recommended it this thread a while ago. It's a vampire movie from the same year as The Lost Boys, which apparently sucked all the blood out of the room. Directed by future Oscar winner Kathryn Bigelow, stars Bill Paxton, Lance Henriksen and Jenette Goldstein ("ever been mistaken for a man?") all from Aliens the year before, and Adrian Pasdar. As usual, Paxton is great. Music by Tangerine Dream.

It's labeled a vampire western, or neo-western horror. Set in current day for the movie.

Synopsis:

Cowboy Caleb Colton (Adrian Pasdar) meets gorgeous Mae (Jenny Wright) at a bar, and the two have an immediate attraction. But when Mae turns out to be a vampire and bites Caleb on the neck, their relationship gets complicated. Wracked with a craving for human blood, Caleb is forced to leave his family and ride with Mae and her gang of vampires, including the evil Severen. Along the way Caleb must decide between his new love of Mae and the love of his family.

Whomever it was, thanks for the rec. Loved it. I caught this on YTTV via TCM channel.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
DB_27x40_4DX_Digital_Supplemental_v3_Lg.jpg


Not nearly as bad as the low critic ratings, but not great either despite some really fun elements. A very solid 7 imo.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
GUEST_89d70bd3-f73e-4eba-8ca2-bd5ac9d53f31


Watched this on Starz. Seemed like they mixed elements of games 1 & 2 and pulled some things directly from the game. Could definitely tell the budget wasn't high, very cheesy in spots with unintentional/intentional maybe comedy. Leon is a complete idiot in this, lol.
 

Naijaboy

The Fallen
Mar 13, 2018
15,687
You may notice that my choices have been influenced by some of the recent threads on this site.

Plane (2023) Gerald Butler is quietly becoming a B-movie superstar. This time around, he plays a pilot trying to make sure everyone survives a hostile environment. We get all sorts of quietly good performances from everyone involved. What surprised me is just how efficient everyone is. Usually you have one or two idiots or cartoonish evil characters. But not here. The rebel leader is kind to his people yet ruthless to his hostages for his cause. The air executives use questionable methods to get the job done, but the CEO is competent. There's not even that much of a death count on the heroes side. That gets a bit detrimental when you don't get to see much noteworthy happen throughout the film. Yet the good acting and tight plot manages to make for a pretty good viewing experience. 7/10

Missing (2023) For anyone thinking that the movie went too much into the incredulous for the sequel... where else could they go? Sure not even the directors themselves were sure if they would be able to top the story that was Searching, but I believe they were able to do just that with Missing. Much like the first one, we have a bunch of solid actors that don't get much light in the spotlight while we go with a concept that helps make the story go more bonkers with every minute. They deserve all the praise for making an early contender of film of the year. 8.5/10

A Fish Called Wanda (1988) It's been a while since I've seen a film that's this balls-to-the-wall. I mean we have this crazy group of people who barely like each other try and pull a bank heist, double cross each other and go through all sorts of absurd antics to get the better of everyone and each other. You've got so many iconic, insane scenes that happened throughout the movie as well as Otto and Wanda being incredibly horny with each other... while posing as siblings. It gets to the point where you have to wonder how the plans don't fall apart at the seams. But since the plot doesn't take itself seriously, you can take it with a grain of salt. 7/10

Passenger 57 (1992) Yes, I went on to try and decide which of the Die Hard lookalikes is the best. I ended up with probably the weakest of the bunch. Granted, the actors weren't the problem. Everyone did pretty well here, especially Wesley Snipes and Bruce Payne as the hero and villain respectively. It's just that there's only so much you could do on a plane without running out of space or puncturing a hole in the cabin. That also meant that Marti had the least to do out of the female protagonists in the trilogy. And what was up with Sabrina Ritchie. I couldn't tell if she was jealous of Charles taking an interest to Marti or she lost her chance on Marti. Maybe both? 5.5/10

Under Siege (1992) I would say that this was the best of the bunch. Despite how he is now, Steven Seagal did well here. And everyone got to play a more outsized role in things. The villain plan as well as the heroic counterattack like they made the most sense together here as they both played off against another. And seeing an old vehicle get the better of new technology will never not be fun (one of the few things that justifies the Battleship movie). 6.5/10

Cliffhanger (1992) It's a pretty good story here with a climber that handled an incident poorly getting roped into some baddies. It's just that Sylvester Stallone is easily the worst out of the three leads. It also tested my suspension of disbelief more than the other two. Go ahead and tell yourself that dingy rope ladder found hold an entire helicopter in place. Sure, this movie did more than anyone else to flesh out the bad guys and we got some impressive practical effects, but those negatives just bugged me. 5.75/10

Ant-Man and the Wasp Quantumania (2023) So this is what's supposed to kick off Phase 5 huh? Color me a bit worried now. The only reason I'm not more worried is that it could be seen as the product of Phase 4. Still, this was possibly the worst character work in the MCU in terms of lack of character development. The main plot did little to change the characters and the introduction of Kang ran into issues despite a great performance from Majors. I can only hope that Guardians 3 can set things right. 5.5/10

Zero Hour! (1957) This was a straightforward disaster film that ticked all the right notes. It does take itself a bit too seriously with the lead's troubled past being thrown to the audiences' faces all the time. Yet it was competently made with good acting and impressive visuals. 6.75/10

Airport (1970) I was expecting melodrama up the wazoo with what I watched from Airplane! Instead, I got a bunch of stories interwoven into each other in an impressive way while making us feel for the characters involved. And it did a better job keeping itself self-aware too. I highly recommend this for fans of disaster movies and ensemble casts. 8.5/10
 
Last edited:

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
movieposter_en.jpg


Not a plane/jet guy, but did want to check out Maverick. Figured I would watch the original first. Definitely was familiar with the character names/some of the scenes from other references. An 80s movie for sure, thought the final combat scene was cool but still not engrossed by pilots. Music is really good though. Will probably wait a week or 2, then check out Maverick.
 

Excuse me

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,054
All About Lily Chou-Chou - Bleak and depressing. Bullying isn't new theme in JP movies, but somehow this feels brutally honest and it sticks with you.
All quiet on the western front - For me it felt just like any other war movie, there really wasn't anything special about it, except for the amazing action sequences. But it's still above average because of the production values and and great perfromance from the lead guy.
 

Siresly

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,683
Jurassic Park Dominion
I had low expectations and they were met. It's kind of desperate in dragging back all these people and callbacks, but I suppose without that it wouldn't really have had any kind of personality. Didn't think it was wholly or particularly bad though. Just kind of a mediocre. Highlights include the part with Edward Stabbyhands. Such a spectacularly strange creature, and they bothered doing something interesting with it.

There was way more hand than I expected. Feels like it happens in every scene with a person and a dinosaur in it, like they were actively trying to turn it into a meme. When you face a dinosaur of moderate size in real life, you might actually want to put up something in front of you, but not to try to calm or communicate with the animal, but to prevent it from getting too close to you and get all snippy pecky at your face.
 

NewDust

Visited by Knack
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,738
Saw the last two movies of the Best Picture nominees. Both mention The Jazz Singer. One had a gripping story with compelling characters and the other was absurd and absurdly self-fellating.
 

LazyLain

Member
Jan 17, 2019
6,580
Watched 20 movies in February, 2 of which were rewatches:

Rewatches:
Changeling
The Princess Bride

New:
The Sure Thing
When Harry Met Sally
North
Clueless
Adore
Tangled
Pickup On South Street
Bloodsport
Or (My Treasure)
Sorry To Bother You
Can You Ever Forgive Me?
Gremlins
Knocked Up
Fried Green Tomatoes
RRR
Lethal Weapon 1-3

Of the new watches, the 3 I'd most strongly recommend are Can You Ever Forgive Me, Fried Green Tomatoes, and RRR.
 

mbpm

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,228
Watched Something in the Dirt (2022). This definitely a Moorhead and Benson film. Very similar to Resolution (2012) in some ways but with a more topical bent to the characters. Not a fan of it really for the same reasons I didn't really get into Resolution. The characters are well sketched but not really dived into enough for me and the film despite all the stuff it tosses in around them isn't really about anything but the two protagonists. A better idea than execution. Maybe like with The Endless I'll get into a sequel that gives a better wrap up for what came here but not really interested in this level of artistic revisitation.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
p21552126_v_v13_aa.jpg


Cool concept, would have liked a different execution. Some funny moments, but thought the deadpan delivery could have used more shades or at least a character to shake up the energy of the film.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
1677745241_folder102.jpg


Just got back from seeing this and enjoyed it a lot. Jonathan Majors makes for a great antagonist throughout the film and the fight scenes really popped in IMAX.
 

meowdi gras

Banned
Feb 24, 2018
12,679
Babylon (Damien Chazelle), 2022

There seem to be no end these days of big-time Hollywood "auteurs" seemingly desperate to be idolized by movie nerds as the same sort of wizardly, edgy, untamable, boundary-annihilating, maverick, visionary filmmakers they themselves idolize; while inevitably and wearingly revealing themselves in expensive opus after opus to still be the same resolutely-square, pious-minded, convention-worshipping, establishment-championing, soft-bellied nerds with a poverty of imagination that they were as movie-addicted youngsters; tirelessly spinning up and mining their favorite classics for ideas. These wunderkinds seldom seem to ever rise above the rank of what I call "effects filmmakers" and Chazelle certainly seems to be no exception. One suspects this lot is never much troubled inwardly by their subject matter. Any canvas will do, really, as a pretext for executing certain pet visual/audio/editing effects they're enamored of. This is because, being consummate nerds still artistically stuck in film school, they're either indifferent to or incapable of seeing the possibilities of the medium beyond these formalist ones. Wanting their audiences to react in the same geeked-out way to their signature flourishes that they reacted to those of their idols--and to be venerated for it--represents essentially the limit of their ambitions in film.

In this case, the transition from silent films to talkies--a subject already explored in many better and shorter films--is the all-too-familiar and convenient canvas Chazelle selects to do his thing on. That it has nothing beyond its formalist qualities to offer except broad archetypes and simple-minded, rote sentiments dear to the prematurely-crusty Church of Film™ types is a given. That it manages the nifty feat of becoming more tedious as it goes on, not just cumulatively, but sequence-by-sequence as well, demonstrates that even Chazelle's formalist skills don't measure up to the panoramic scope he envisioned. The early scenes show that he has something of a gift for noise and movement (for what that's worth). But never mind discipline: what he most fatally lacks here is largeness of conception. Typical of effects filmmakers, he can't give anything a life beyond what's immediately onscreen at a given time. Because he refuses to enter the lives of his characters, using them instead as mere push-button mechanisms for audience reaction--along with story, plot, setting, and everything else--throwing shit at and across the screen seems to be the only trick he has in his bag to sustain interest. When that inevitably flags, so does the film, catastrophically. (One example out of many: there's an interminable "serious" scene between the characters played by Brad Pitt and Jean Smart that keeps one awake only by how stunningly cringeworthy it is.)

There's definitely more that could be (deservedly) critiqued ripped apart in this three-hour, epic misfire, but I'm rather exhausted and depressed by what I just saw. Suffice it to say that niches of Hollywood production that the billion-dollar corporations haven't yet managed to totally bankrupt creatively are being done little artistic credit by the plethora of Oscar-bait hacks (who make films for cheap prestige) and half-baked, self-styled "auteurs" like Chazelle, Nolan, and Aronofsky (who make films for a dubious posterity), that merely offer a "boutique" sort of soullessness as an alternative to corporate soullessness . (What is the point of taking an interest in "auteurs" when they aren't substantially less cynical than the billionaire suits?) It's a legit Sahara for anyone who loves film, but isn't particularly enamored of the hot-shot formalism and audience pandering that is de rigueur these days.
 
Last edited:

djinn

Member
Nov 16, 2017
15,964
Watched Memoria last night. Was in the mood for some contemplative scifi. It's about a woman that wakes to a loud thumping noise and then proceeds to have sensory hallucinations every day following. Thoughts about movie (spoilers):
First half of the movie is really quite jarring and uncomfortable. It's very hard to tell which conversations were real and which ones were snippets of memories. And since you don't know that they're memories at the time, it genuinely feels like Jessica is going insane in the most non-sensationalised way I've ever seen in a film.

Second half of the movie was not as good but still decent. I didn't particularly like that the noise she was hearing the whole movie was from an alien space ship.

I think I enjoyed it? The locations were fantastic. But the director seems allergic to anything except wide shots. Because of the constant distance between us and the characters I found it quite hard to both connect and follow along with the story. Tilda Swinton always does a good job and she does "barely holding it together" quite well here.

This movie will have no physical release apparently. Digital is the only way to watch it.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
MV5BZWRjMzJlYmYtYzI0ZC00NjBlLThiNGUtNjdlODIzY2VkOWFjXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTUzNzc3NDAz._V1_.jpg


Watched it last night on Netflix and thought it was pretty solid. It was just cool to see Luther working a case again and it seemed like they tried to step up some of the cinematic elements.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
GUEST_0f4b8de6-e233-448b-bd9c-a16a4f5f5635


Watched it on Peacock. Animation was really good, to alongside a very entertaining story. I can see why it got a lot of love.
 

myojinsoga

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,043
Babylon (Damien Chazelle), 2022

There seem to be no end these days of big-time Hollywood "auteurs" seemingly desperate to be idolized by movie nerds as the same sort of wizardly, edgy, untamable, boundary-annihilating, maverick, visionary filmmakers they themselves idolize; while inevitably and wearingly revealing themselves in expensive opus after opus to still be the same resolutely-square, pious-minded, convention-worshipping, establishment-championing, soft-bellied nerds with a poverty of imagination that they were as movie-addicted youngsters; tirelessly spinning up and mining their favorite classics for ideas. These wunderkinds seldom seem to ever rise above the rank of what I call "effects filmmakers" and Chazelle certainly seems to be no exception. One suspects this lot is never much troubled inwardly by their subject matter. Any canvas will do, really, as a pretext for executing certain pet visual/audio/editing effects they're enamored of. This is because, being consummate nerds still artistically stuck in film school, they're either indifferent to or incapable of seeing the possibilities of the medium beyond these formalist ones. Wanting their audiences to react in the same geeked-out way to their signature flourishes that they reacted to those of their idols--and to be venerated for it--represents essentially the limit of their ambitions in film.

In this case, the transition from silent films to talkies--a subject already explored in many better and shorter films--is the all-too-familiar and convenient canvas Chazelle selects to do his thing on. That it has nothing beyond its formalist qualities to offer except broad archetypes and simple-minded, rote sentiments dear to the prematurely-crusty Church of Film™ types is a given. That it manages the nifty feat of becoming more tedious as it goes on, not just cumulatively, but sequence-by-sequence as well, demonstrates that even Chazelle's formalist skills don't measure up to the panoramic scope he envisioned. The early scenes show that he has something of a gift for noise and movement (for what that's worth). But never mind discipline: what he most fatally lacks here is largeness of conception. Typical of effects filmmakers, he can't give anything a life beyond what's immediately onscreen at a given time. Because he refuses to enter the lives of his characters, using them instead as mere push-button mechanisms for audience reaction--along with story, plot, setting, and everything else--throwing shit at and across the screen seems to be the only trick he has in his bag to sustain interest. When that inevitably flags, so does the film, catastrophically. (One example out of many: there's an interminable "serious" scene between the characters played by Brad Pitt and Jean Smart that keeps one awake only by how stunningly cringeworthy it is.)

There's definitely more that could be (deservedly) critiqued ripped apart in this three-hour, epic misfire, but I'm rather exhausted and depressed by what I just saw. Suffice it to say that niches of Hollywood production that the billion-dollar corporations haven't yet managed to totally bankrupt creatively are being done little artistic credit by the plethora of Oscar-bait hacks (who make films for cheap prestige) and half-baked, self-styled "auteurs" like Chazelle, Nolan, and Aronofsky (who make films for a dubious posterity), that merely offer a "boutique" sort of soullessness as an alternative to corporate soullessness . (What is the point of taking an interest in "auteurs" when they aren't substantially less cynical than the billionaire suits?) It's a legit Sahara for anyone who loves film, but isn't particularly enamored of the hot-shot formalism and audience pandering that is de rigueur these days.
Damn lol. Enjoyed reading this, caustic as it is. As someone cautiously reinterfacing with the idea of having a creative outlet, this is as succinct a reminder as any that one needn't consider ones standards to have a ceiling.
 

Strings

Member
Oct 27, 2017
31,926
Babylon (Damien Chazelle), 2022

There seem to be no end these days of big-time Hollywood "auteurs" seemingly desperate to be idolized by movie nerds as the same sort of wizardly, edgy, untamable, boundary-annihilating, maverick, visionary filmmakers they themselves idolize; while inevitably and wearingly revealing themselves in expensive opus after opus to still be the same resolutely-square, pious-minded, convention-worshipping, establishment-championing, soft-bellied nerds with a poverty of imagination that they were as movie-addicted youngsters; tirelessly spinning up and mining their favorite classics for ideas. These wunderkinds seldom seem to ever rise above the rank of what I call "effects filmmakers" and Chazelle certainly seems to be no exception. One suspects this lot is never much troubled inwardly by their subject matter. Any canvas will do, really, as a pretext for executing certain pet visual/audio/editing effects they're enamored of. This is because, being consummate nerds still artistically stuck in film school, they're either indifferent to or incapable of seeing the possibilities of the medium beyond these formalist ones. Wanting their audiences to react in the same geeked-out way to their signature flourishes that they reacted to those of their idols--and to be venerated for it--represents essentially the limit of their ambitions in film.

In this case, the transition from silent films to talkies--a subject already explored in many better and shorter films--is the all-too-familiar and convenient canvas Chazelle selects to do his thing on. That it has nothing beyond its formalist qualities to offer except broad archetypes and simple-minded, rote sentiments dear to the prematurely-crusty Church of Film™ types is a given. That it manages the nifty feat of becoming more tedious as it goes on, not just cumulatively, but sequence-by-sequence as well, demonstrates that even Chazelle's formalist skills don't measure up to the panoramic scope he envisioned. The early scenes show that he has something of a gift for noise and movement (for what that's worth). But never mind discipline: what he most fatally lacks here is largeness of conception. Typical of effects filmmakers, he can't give anything a life beyond what's immediately onscreen at a given time. Because he refuses to enter the lives of his characters, using them instead as mere push-button mechanisms for audience reaction--along with story, plot, setting, and everything else--throwing shit at and across the screen seems to be the only trick he has in his bag to sustain interest. When that inevitably flags, so does the film, catastrophically. (One example out of many: there's an interminable "serious" scene between the characters played by Brad Pitt and Jean Smart that keeps one awake only by how stunningly cringeworthy it is.)

There's definitely more that could be (deservedly) critiqued ripped apart in this three-hour, epic misfire, but I'm rather exhausted and depressed by what I just saw. Suffice it to say that niches of Hollywood production that the billion-dollar corporations haven't yet managed to totally bankrupt creatively are being done little artistic credit by the plethora of Oscar-bait hacks (who make films for cheap prestige) and half-baked, self-styled "auteurs" like Chazelle, Nolan, and Aronofsky (who make films for a dubious posterity), that merely offer a "boutique" sort of soullessness as an alternative to corporate soullessness . (What is the point of taking an interest in "auteurs" when they aren't substantially less cynical than the billionaire suits?) It's a legit Sahara for anyone who loves film, but isn't particularly enamored of the hot-shot formalism and audience pandering that is de rigueur these days.
it was nice seeing spike jonze though
All About Lily Chou-Chou - Bleak and depressing. Bullying isn't new theme in JP movies, but somehow this feels brutally honest and it sticks with you.
Very good flick, glad to see it pop up in this thread.
 
Last edited:

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,688
UK
Babylon (Damien Chazelle), 2022

There seem to be no end these days of big-time Hollywood "auteurs" seemingly desperate to be idolized by movie nerds as the same sort of wizardly, edgy, untamable, boundary-annihilating, maverick, visionary filmmakers they themselves idolize; while inevitably and wearingly revealing themselves in expensive opus after opus to still be the same resolutely-square, pious-minded, convention-worshipping, establishment-championing, soft-bellied nerds with a poverty of imagination that they were as movie-addicted youngsters; tirelessly spinning up and mining their favorite classics for ideas. These wunderkinds seldom seem to ever rise above the rank of what I call "effects filmmakers" and Chazelle certainly seems to be no exception. One suspects this lot is never much troubled inwardly by their subject matter. Any canvas will do, really, as a pretext for executing certain pet visual/audio/editing effects they're enamored of. This is because, being consummate nerds still artistically stuck in film school, they're either indifferent to or incapable of seeing the possibilities of the medium beyond these formalist ones. Wanting their audiences to react in the same geeked-out way to their signature flourishes that they reacted to those of their idols--and to be venerated for it--represents essentially the limit of their ambitions in film.

In this case, the transition from silent films to talkies--a subject already explored in many better and shorter films--is the all-too-familiar and convenient canvas Chazelle selects to do his thing on. That it has nothing beyond its formalist qualities to offer except broad archetypes and simple-minded, rote sentiments dear to the prematurely-crusty Church of Film™ types is a given. That it manages the nifty feat of becoming more tedious as it goes on, not just cumulatively, but sequence-by-sequence as well, demonstrates that even Chazelle's formalist skills don't measure up to the panoramic scope he envisioned. The early scenes show that he has something of a gift for noise and movement (for what that's worth). But never mind discipline: what he most fatally lacks here is largeness of conception. Typical of effects filmmakers, he can't give anything a life beyond what's immediately onscreen at a given time. Because he refuses to enter the lives of his characters, using them instead as mere push-button mechanisms for audience reaction--along with story, plot, setting, and everything else--throwing shit at and across the screen seems to be the only trick he has in his bag to sustain interest. When that inevitably flags, so does the film, catastrophically. (One example out of many: there's an interminable "serious" scene between the characters played by Brad Pitt and Jean Smart that keeps one awake only by how stunningly cringeworthy it is.)

There's definitely more that could be (deservedly) critiqued ripped apart in this three-hour, epic misfire, but I'm rather exhausted and depressed by what I just saw. Suffice it to say that niches of Hollywood production that the billion-dollar corporations haven't yet managed to totally bankrupt creatively are being done little artistic credit by the plethora of Oscar-bait hacks (who make films for cheap prestige) and half-baked, self-styled "auteurs" like Chazelle, Nolan, and Aronofsky (who make films for a dubious posterity), that merely offer a "boutique" sort of soullessness as an alternative to corporate soullessness . (What is the point of taking an interest in "auteurs" when they aren't substantially less cynical than the billionaire suits?) It's a legit Sahara for anyone who loves film, but isn't particularly enamored of the hot-shot formalism and audience pandering that is de rigueur these days.
Loved reading this!
 

Naijaboy

The Fallen
Mar 13, 2018
15,687
Cocaine Bear (2023) There are concepts like this where I just want to see what kind of insanity the show can throw at me. It felt like what happened with A Fish Called Wanda. Well... it was interesting. There was a few great and gory moments in between as well as a few good acting performances. But to be honest, a lot of the actors let me down in this regard. I appreciate them trying to give us something to care for by humanizing the criminals, but their heroic counterparts felt left in the dust as a result. I'm just disappointed with how it turned out. 6.5/10

The Poseidon Adventure (1972) I decided to continue my fix of old disaster movies with this classic. It's fairly good with some solid acting as well as some impressive set pieces to showcase everything. The main guy did irk me as being a bit too clean of a guy, but they managed to pay if off in the end. It's not anything spectacular, but it gets its point out there. And make that another film that explicitly points to corporate greed as the main perpetrator. I wish more movies were to-the-point like that. 7/10

The Band Wagon (1953) I was told that this movie was on the same level as Singin' in the Rain as one of the greatest musicals of all time. I will have to hard disagree with that one. The movie tries to tackle musicals and the dynamic between serious and comedy actors, but it doesn't really come across with much nuance. It was just 'here is this great overlooked guy who's right. Also all melodrama is terrible.' I for once is team comedy, but you've got to be more subtle in your reasoning than that. It felt like Sullivan's Travels did a similar thing and did it much better. I will say that the choreography is as good as the best out there. But even then the songs aren't really that good. I expected much more out of this film. 5/10

Creed III (2023) I can definitely see the anime influences in this film. I just wish they kept more of that heading into the final fight. There just wasn't much strategy or rhythm that went into the stakes and tactics of the two rivals. Otherwise it's another pretty good chapter in the Creed franchise with a new hook in case they want to make a new movie down the road. 7.5/10

On The Waterfront (1954) This is a movie where strong acting can really elevate the material given. Not that the story is bad at all. But you have a great class of actors who give it their all in this film to tell a great tale on the waterfront. The music is pretty damn good too. 8/10
 

Androidsleeps

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,663
Both of those movies I've watched on Netflix left me with a similar impression: rushed plotlines with holes and bad writing that also feels dated as fuck straight to DVD but with A-listers.

The Little Things
I can't believe this movie had actual awards buzz around it last year, and it absolutely doesn't surprise me to learn the script was written in 1990. Boy where do I start, Ramy Malik is so miscast and Denzel, while not bad, can do this in his sleep. Of course Jared Leto is overacting in his usual cringeworthy way. The movie would be eh fine had it been released in 1995, but by now you have seen way too many iterations of this "story" and done far better as well. The best way to describe this is a bad True Detective season that has been transformed into a feature. Could've been a 6 out of 10 thirty years ago but I wouldn't give this a 3 today.

Luther The Fallen Sun
I remember watching the first season of the show back in college and loving it so much that I kept recommending it to all my friends. I eventually fell off though as the writing turned bad. This movie though, similar to the one above, is so late to the party with its nonsensical story with a fairly miscast lead in Andy Serkis, who comes across more as an eccentric sex club owner or something rather than whatever he's supposed to be here. Again, bad BBC crime show season turned into a feature film. Events are rushed, things happen that make no sense and the villain is borderline cartoony.



Still need to catch some of the Awards season films, but I managed to watch All Quiet on the Western Front and I must say I was quite underwhelmed. Good cinematography with some decent shots but a boring movie that failed to really grab me. Don't understand how this was the favorite to win and indeed won the foreign language Oscar, both EO and Close sound much more interesting to me and are on my watchlist, Close in particular I heard lots of great things about.
 
Last edited:

harleyvwarren

Member
Oct 31, 2022
3,925
Illinois
I watched Support the Girls and Columbus. The latter surprised me in a few ways, the first by not being a movie with any romance at all like I assumed there would be, and by also being more beautifully shot than I was expecting. It was a good movie with some good performances, and I was not expecting a Culkin brother (Rory) in the cast. Support The Girls, damn, I really loved this movie. Regina Hall, Haley Lu Richardson and Shayna McHale are fantastic in this movie about working at a local sports bar. Regina, who plays Lisa, is basically running Double Whammies as general manager with an owner who refuses to engage with any of the female employees outside of Lisa. Instead of acting like this owner or a normal boss, she's like a fiercely protective mother to all the women working in their scantly clad uniforms and the movie covers a day in which she's handling issue after issue after issue. A waitress needs a babysitter? She'll look after him, while arranging for one to take him. Another one ran over their abusive boyfriend? She'll raise the funds for a lawyer and provide a temporary refuge for her at her own place. A customer calls one of them fat, or implies as much? Zero policy, scary biker guy, she tosses him out like trash, no problem. God, I love that scene.

Just a lovely movie that I wanted to continue going and never end, because I loved these characters.
 
Last edited:

thenexus6

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,458
UK
220px-Living_poster.jpg


I saw this film released but it wasn't on my radar until I saw an advert stating "Based on Ikiru by Akira Kurosawa" - one of my favourite films and held as one of the greatest films of all time. Then I made the obvious connection with the film's title.

Living is a tricky one. It's well made, with gorgeous cinematography and music. It features great performances across the board, especially Bill Nighy, and the pivot from 1950s Japan works pretty well to 1950s London. My main takeaway is why? It just seems unnecessary to me. It was basically made for people that are afraid of watching subtitled or "old" films. Which is a big shame.

I fear that many people will watch this without any knowledge that Ikiru even exists. If they go on to watch that after Living all the emotional impact will be significantly dampened.

If this is on your watch list or radar, please do yourself a favour and watch Kurosawa's masterpiece first.
 

Starkweather

Member
Nov 28, 2017
160
switzerland
Operation Fortune
www.imdb.com

Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre (2023) - IMDb

Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre: Directed by Guy Ritchie. With Jason Statham, Aubrey Plaza, Cary Elwes, Hugh Grant. Special agent Orson Fortune and his team of operatives recruit one of Hollywood's biggest movie stars to help them on an undercover mission when the sale of a deadly new weapons...
Was incredibly bored by this one, what a step down from The Gentlemen :(
 

Ravelle

Member
Oct 31, 2017
18,111
Banshees of Inshirin.

Been looking forward to this ever since the announcement and trailer as a big fan of In Bruge and boy, did it deliver and fo above my expectations.

Hilarious, sad, smart, wonderfully shot and scored and some stellar acting from everyone.

Might have to look up a 4K copy soon because it was already gorgeous on streaming.
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
220px-Kate_%28film%29.jpg


Thought it was just okay. The plot really doesn't do anything new, and felt the action peaked early in the film. The less said about the kid sidekick the better.
 

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,688
UK
220px-Kate_%28film%29.jpg


Thought it was just okay. The plot really doesn't do anything new, and felt the action peaked early in the film. The less said about the kid sidekick the better.
This was so forgettable. Woody is bad in this and yeah that kid is insufferable. But I'm still down for Wick-likes. MEW going pew pew was sometimes enough, but could have had more.
 

Akumatica

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,758
Weird_The_Al_Yankovic_Story.jpg

Weird: The Al Yankovic Story (2022)
Fictionalized bio-pic telling the story of Weird Al's early days is pretty funny in the first half, but only occasionally so in the second even as it gets more outlandish.

Well made with lots of cameos sprinkled throughout.

Unfortunately it's only steaming on the Roku channel, and while it's free with ads (unless you avoid them with ad-block) and no need to create an account, I've never seen my computer slow down so much afterward.
= 3 out of 5

Project_Wolf_Hunting.jpg

Project Wolf Hunting (2022)
An ultra violent and nihilistic action horror thriller from South Korea that's well made technically, but is a bit drawn out and gets in the way of any satisfying payoffs as it becomes a slasher.

The plot follows a group of police detectives escorting dangerous criminals from the Philippines back to their country via a cargo ship. Of course the inmates escape and it's a bloodbath. However, unbeknownst to either side is that a secret organization has something else on board.

In the end it comes off as more of a technical exercise to show off the high end practical effects (the CG embellishments and shots only look off for a few seconds here and there).

While it had me hooked for the 1st half, I was kind of let down & the carnage gets to be boring.
= 3 out of 5

X-Cross_FilmPoster.jpeg

X-Cross (2007)
Kenta Fukasaku (Battle Royale 2, Black Rat) directs this horror mystery about two women going to a remote hot spring and getting caught up in a deadly ancient custom carried out by the locals.

The film rewinds at key points and shows concurrent events from each of their perspectives as deceptions and questions about who to trust creep in. Comedic touches and over the top sequences are mixed in & there's just 1 brief scene of minor gore.

It's not great, but it's fun and better than I'd expected. I've seen people compare it to a video game and that's apt.
=3.5

brutal.png

Brutal (2017)
A nasty little 66 minute film that's split into thirds. The 1st segment follows a man terrorizing and killing women he's abducted. The 2nd follows a woman who meets men and stabs them to death. Finally, they cross paths and pick each other up unaware that the other has the same violent intentions.

Interspersed are conversations between a couple talking about the differences between men & women, compatibility etc.. Then it's back to the killing.

Lots & lots of stabbing, especially into the genitals of both sexes, but the prop knives used look especially fake. Another problem is that even though this was filmed digitally there's a grimy filter of fake distress added to everything- dirt, scratches, pops, missing frames and more. It's really distracting.

While definitely not a fun film to watch the finale does elevate it slightly in how strange it gets.
Truths are laid bare (as are they, which is something to be seen), tears flow, and then they stab fuck each other.
=3 out of 5
 

TheNatureBoy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
11,067
movieposter_en.jpg


One of those movies I've heard referenced a lot, but never seen. Lindsay Lohan actually looks like a HS student, some of the other kids not so much. A lot of SNL alumni in this, which I'm sure helped with the jokes.
 

meowdi gras

Banned
Feb 24, 2018
12,679
The Banshees of Inisherin (2022), Dir: Martin McDonagh

This ten two-hour hour "What the feck?!!" gives the impression of some eager, precocious film school tyro unearthing during his studies a long-lost, much-deservedly excised minor subplot cut from early drafts of The Quiet Man—that would've been played entirely for laughs by John Ford, and featuring some of his usual, knockabout "Oirish" stock players—absurdly mistaking it for something beautiful and moving, and opting to expand it to feature length as his own ill-conceived, ponderous, grotesque, and excruciatingly dull allegory for the Irish Civil War. (Allegory is the only excuse I can come up with for why this macabre miscarriage of a movie with its inexplicable characters is presented seriously for even a second of its running time. I'm open to hearing other guesses as to why?)

Bypassing any considerations of its theme—if there is any—the film is even disappointing in its surface appeal. Everything, from the token postcard-settings, to the character types (can't forget the obligatory crone and village idiot!), to the staging is presented absolutely straightforward and center, with seemingly no life existing in this Golden Age MGM facsimile of quaint Irish village beyond the camera frame and the time elapsed between the director's "action!" and "cut"! It's as if someone somehow thought Ryan's Daughter deserved a belated follow-up, but with a tenth of David Lean's visionary splendor. (Considering that expensive misfire was essentially a four-hour anticlimax—albeit a stunningly beautiful one—this outing seems like nothing so much as an anticlimax of an anticlimax. Doesn't seem there's much real drama out on those Irish coastal wilds, after all.)

Academy of Arts and Sciences, thank you for warning away the faint of tolerance with your 8 nominations.

Save your yawns and stream The Quiet Man instead. (Far from my favorite Ford film, but at least has the saving grace of seeming immensely shorter than this film; despite actually running about 15 minutes longer.)
 
Last edited:

Akumatica

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,758
Nope_film_poster.jpg

Nope (2022)
Jordan Peele's third film is light on horror and more of an adventure film with a superfluous family drama setup that I didn't care about. Overall it has some interesting themes, ideas and fun scenes
the Akira bike slide, the western show
but feels a bit disjointed with a runtime over 2 hours. The character of OJ has no charisma and was the wrong choice to carry a lot of the story imo.

While the full alien design is unique in a jellyfish way, the square mouth with tendril-like ribbons looked so ridiculous it took me out of it.
= 3 out of 5


Smile_2022_film.jpg

Smile (2022)
The description of this film as Ring x It Follows is on point, it's just not nearly as good as either though.

Lots of jump scares, fake outs and camera shots that call attention to themselves in a story about trauma.

The problem is that the trauma becomes the sole characteristic of the character, driving and consuming nearly every moment of their lives, and the actor's performance. That trauma will also be used against them when no one believes what's actually happening too. It isn't enough for a character to go through the horrible events they're currently wrapped up in, they have to have a deeply traumatic backstory which they dream about (& the film shows again and again).
Plus the film denies her of anything close to catharsis just to have it revealed as another fake out on the audience.

I like bleak horror, but here it all comes across as cynical exploitation.
Especially with the way they deal with how her actions impacts her nephew.
I can see what they were going for & it wasn't successful imo.

The fiancé is a nothing character & the ex-boyfriend cop is dumb as shit for not recognizing what's going on when it involves a case he's working on.

The effects work in finale was effective however.
= 2.5 out of 5
45.png

Ms .45 (1981)
Abel Ferrara (Bad Lieutenant, Driller Killer) directs this unconventional rape revenge story in which a mute seamstress is assaulted twice in less than an hour. After killing her 2nd attacker she realizes that it's an empowering experience for her, setting the stage for a murder spree.

A weird and transgressive exploitation film that's enjoyable in the way that Coralie Fargeat's 2017 film "Revenge" was. Zoe Lund gives an impressive performance without speaking & the progression of her character feels right. Scenarios play out & go places you wouldn't expect and the story takes some darkly humorous turns.

The rape scenes are both handled pretty tactfully in the 1st ten minutes, while the film shows the oppressive weight of male gaze, unwanted advances, threats of violence, power imbalances and predatory behavior women are bombarded with setting the stage for her cathartic vengeance which surpasses the double digit count.

Some of the acting the supporting cast turns in isn't so good though and the the nosy landlady character is just awful. The last shot was unnecessary imo even though I expect a lot of viewers will appreciate it.
= 4 out of 5

Primer_2004_film_poster.jpg

Primer (2004)
An intriguingly dense film about a time travel device created by two engineers in their garage and the results of their experiments using it.

Short at just 77 it leaves out a lot of clarity and can be hard to piece together whats going on at times as new wrinkles in the story are thrown out, but I do think it does come together in a satisfying way.

Impressive that it was made for just $7000.
=3.5 not of 5