What Is The Last Film You Watched?

[Charlie Brigden 7]

'Boxcar Bertha'

A curious mix of Corman exploitation and Scorsese realism, the film tries to be more than a Bonnie and Clyde-esque caper, and occasionally succeeds, especially looking at the race-hate of the South, but sometimes comes off Scorsese-lite. The tone of the film, particularly the harsh violence, sometimes has the air of Peckinpah, but with Scorsese's incredible knack for framing. The performances are decent, and there are flashes of brilliance, particularly the main titles and the stark ending. But while it doesn't always reach the sum of its parts, it's still a decent watch.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Shutter Island was a pointless film. Nicely photographed it was ultimately pointless. It was not a great film, not in the way Koray is desperately trying to convince. It's nothing more than a minor effort from the director.

Saw Megamind last night, I enjoyed it much more than Despicable Me. Both were better than Shutter Island and while thats apples and oranges, it's still easy to understand.

[Quintus 5,399]

Shutter Island is in no way a great movie, but it's a worthwhile little thriller nonetheless. Sometimes nicely shot pulp stories are just what the doctor ordered.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Generations

I think that in general, they handled this one all wrong. It's not a suitable first motion picture outing for the Next Gen crew. There's little in the way of character stuff for anyone other than Picard or Data (and guest star). Even in those cases, you really need to be familiar with the show to appreciate it. That's part of the problem. It requires you to already be familiar with everything. I feel like we were cheated out of a big intro to Enterprise D. I was always bothered by that. You don't even get a good look at the ship until fairly late in the movie. It needed a Motion Picture kind of sequence. Every other TNG movie had an establishing shot. Generations has a fleeting shot from behind, that cuts away before the ship is fully in frame. Stupid.

It's a bloated TV movie. The storyline could have worked, but it just sort of doesn't. Everyone is just miserable for a couple hours with all the lights turned down. Again, little character stuff. Everyone's just hanging around, then crashing in an admittedly great scene. There are nice moments throughout. It's watchable like all the Treks, but is it very fun or good? Probably not. I also don't like the ending, which is like something out of a crappy 80s cliched action movie, only with a bunch of old guys from Star Trek.

[crocodile 8,006]

Never got around to watch it. I stopped after ST VI.

Shutter Island is in no way a great movie, but it's a worthwhile little thriller nonetheless. Sometimes nicely shot pulp stories are just what the doctor ordered.

Exactly.

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I think it's a very poignant story told beautifully by a master filmmaker.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Would there really be much of a point having a TMP sequence for the D when it was shown on TV copiously for the last seven years? At least with the refit it was A: essentially a new ship; and B: the first time ST was on a movie screen.

The flick has multiple problems, but mostly it's that the crew is pretty bland outside of Picard and Data. I always thought the basic storyline worked well, but maybe that's just because I've had deaths in the family before.

It's easily the best looking of the TNG movies, though. The lighting is brilliant.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

It's easily the best looking of the TNG movies, though. The lighting is brilliant.

Must respectfully disagree, there, Charlie; "Nemesis" looks absolutely georgeous!

P.s., Loving your new avatar. There's one thing wrong, though: J.W. should be well and truly in the centre. Please rectify asap.

[Uni 306]

Star Wars.

Not the Special Edition. The theatrical version. No added garbage. No nonsense. Just the movie I grew up with.

I watched it with my 6-year-old son for the first time, and it was an extraordinary experience. I haven't really just sat and watched it in years like that. After so many repeated viewings in the 80's and 90's, I think it's a movie we (well, I, at least) began to take for granted. It was unique in that you always knew exactly where you were in the sequence of the story: after the first shoot-'em-up, you had the Tatooine stretch, which finishes nicely in Mos Eisley (hey, it's like a song er sumthin'!). Then we blast off and head for the Death Star, the real core of movie. Toward the end of it, there was always this slight sense of building regret--both with the loss of Ben Kenobi, and with the understanding that the movie was headed for the ending. Then came the Death Star attack, which I both loved and hated because of its epic and sensational presentation and because it was the signal that we were REALLY close to the end.

That was the thing, see. When I was a kid, this was the one movie above all movies that I never wanted to end.

I remembered that sensation so clearly as I watched it again. I also got to see it somewhat vicariously through my son's eyes, and experienced the slightest twinge of envy for him. What would it be like to see it again for the very first time? Aren't most of us so far removed from that experience (having watched it so many times) that we can hardly even dream of what that was like?

I also marked how surprisingly easy it was to watch the story without any influence from the prequels. There were references here and there that made me smile a bit, but the most important thing was that the prequels, awful as they were, didn't poison the experience. I could imagine--quite easily, actually--half a hundred ways the prequel trilogy could've been made so much more effectively based entirely on what was spoken of in Episodes IV-VI. They could've been as simply told as these movies were, and it would've made for a story as epic, touching, and exciting as this one. It would've been easy. So easy, dammit.

But that's what makes Star Wars such a special film. Lucas made it before he stumbled onto the lure of merchandising, back when he was into telling stories instead of selling them. Though a few of the effects have grown a bit dated, overall they're better than all the digital effects in the prequels--because they serve the story, not the other way around. The actors/characters interact with their environment. There were even some very creative camera movements I'd never noticed or appreciated before, made necessary because they were filming on a real stage with a real set occupied by real people.

I shed tears, more than once--and sometimes in the oddest places. Part of it came from the sheer nostalgia and memories, so thick I had to brush them away (as the voice of Darth Vader said in another movie). Part of it arose from the beauty of a great story plainly told; this plot is so easy to follow and understand, you always know precisely what's going on, what's at stake, and for whom. Part of it came from the ingenious combinations of music and film woven together perfectly in the all the right places. Consider the action sequence as Luke and Leia prepare to swing across the chasm. The good guys trade shots with the bad guys (with the brave heroine getting just as much involved as the hero); the composer doesn't go for gimmicks, but just lays the heroic main theme on us, straight out; the intensity increases as the door behind them begins to open; the music breaks into a quick rendition of the Princess's theme as she gives Luke the good-luck kiss; and they escape--not by means of magic or technology, but through the classic swashbuckling element of a rope swing. I literally laughed out loud for the joy of it.

I loved it, that's all. It's a movie with atmosphere, genuine drama, and unapologetic, epic romance. I know I'm going to sound dated myself by saying this, but it's a shame they don't make many of them like that any more. . . .

- Uni

[Datameister 2,042]

Weird, I just watched Star Wars yesterday. (The DVD version, but oh well.) My reaction was similar, though it really is profoundly difficult to approach this film with fresh eyes. I've seen it so many times.

On the more technical side of things, I was struck by the huge amount of ADR. Not something I really thought about before.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

'Alice In Wonderland'

Well, they might as well have called it 'Tim Burton's Tim Burton'. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would, although admittedly I had very low expectations. I enjoyed the voice acting the most, especially Stephen Fry. But it was like the best and worst of Burton, muddled together, and by extension it seems Elfman followed suit, but I think I will hunt the soundtrack down (I hope it doesn't have the dreadful end title song on there though). But the Futternwack or what have you is the most embarrassing cinema moment since Peter Parker's street dance. Horrific.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

But the Futternwack or what have you is the most embarrassing cinema moment since Peter Parker's street dance. Horrific.

Most definitely. At that point in the film I was already so appalled, but that ended it right there.

[Datameister 2,042]

'Alice In Wonderland'

Well, they might as well have called it 'Tim Burton's Tim Burton'.

I never even finished the film.

[crocodile 8,006]

(I hope it doesn't have the dreadful end title song on there though)

What song?

Karol

[Charlie Brigden 7]

The Avril Lavigne one. It doesn't, thankfully.

[crocodile 8,006]

Oh for a second I thought you meant Alice's Theme...

Karol

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Heh.

I just want to add that Generations has my favorite poster of the Trek films. They gave away miniature versions of these on opening night. Yes, the purple one with D going through the Starfleet emblem with the "Boldly Go" tagline. Oh. My. God!

[Uni 306]

Weird, I just watched Star Wars yesterday. (The DVD version, but oh well.) My reaction was similar, though it really is profoundly difficult to approach this film with fresh eyes. I've seen it so many times.

That's the thing--I was able to watch it with fresh eyes for the first time in I don't know how long. That's what made it great.

On the more technical side of things, I was struck by the huge amount of ADR. Not something I really thought about before.

Funny . . . I noticed that too, and a couple of other glitches very common in films during the late 70's. I may have broken new ground effects-wise, but it was still a Hollywood production from that time period.

I just want to add that Generations has my favorite poster of the Trek films. They gave away miniature versions of these on opening night. Yes, the purple one with D going through the Starfleet emblem with the "Boldly Go" tagline. Oh. My. God!

That's a great poster, fer sure. Very nice review of the film, too. You summed up my feelings pretty precisely.

It's easily the best looking of the TNG movies, though. The lighting is brilliant.

I must also respectfully disagree. They turned all the lights off, fercryinoutloud! That isn't creative lighting. It's a cop-out.

- Uni

[Datameister 2,042]

I just want to add that Generations has my favorite poster of the Trek films. They gave away miniature versions of these on opening night. Yes, the purple one with D going through the Starfleet emblem with the "Boldly Go" tagline. Oh. My. God!

Ew. Photoshoppy lens flare. Other than that, not bad.

[crocodile 8,006]

Flares are what makes Trek film great!

Karol

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

STAR TREK: GENERATIONS

Boldly go...away.

[Andy 4,123]

Justin Bieber: Never Say Never

Seriously.

Anyways, nice Star Wars review, Uni. I've gotten too used to Star Wars, so I've been giving it a rest. I too no longer bother with the special editions anymore. I will sacrifice picture quality and just watch the original version when I need my fix.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

Justin Bieber: Never Say Never

Seriously.

Whatever gets you through the night (is all right).

But the Futternwack or what have you is the most embarrassing cinema moment since Peter Parker's street dance. Horrific.

Most definitely. At that point in the film I was already so appalled, but that ended it right there.

Do you mean that funny little dance that Johnny Depp did? Didn't the music for that come from "CATCF"? Can anyone tell me where?

[Morlock 11]

Saw Machete. On the one hand, I think it's really not doing the film justice to watch it without a roudy audience. On the other hand, it is too shoddily made and conceived for it to deserve that.

[Quintus 5,399]

I've been meaning to get around to it. Thought the first 10mins were hilariously bad, plus I'm a fan of gratuitous nudity.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Then Machete is the film for you. I loved it, had a blast in the theater (which was mostly empty, for what it's worth).

[Jay 37,353]

Weird, I just watched Star Wars yesterday. (The DVD version, but oh well.) My reaction was similar, though it really is profoundly difficult to approach this film with fresh eyes. I've seen it so many times.

On the more technical side of things, I was struck by the huge amount of ADR. Not something I really thought about before.

That's cause they messed up the film mix for the new DVDs. In the original mix that was fine for 30 years there wasn't such a drastic change among the pieces recorded in different places

[crocodile 8,006]

Wasn't there like 6-8 original mixes?

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

In 1977 I think Star Wars had 2 or 3.

[Faleel 5,346]

There are many, I believe for each different version of the film: Mono Mix, 7(0?)mm and the like

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

There was a mono mix, a stereo mix and a six-track mix for the 70mm release. The mono mix has many notable differences from the others. I believe it's the six-track that became the "official" mix.

Then there came the TXH remaster in 1993, the Special Edition and then the Special Special Edition that ended up on the DVD (which has a mix where pretty much everything that could does go wrong).

Neil could probably explain this with a lot more detail.

[John Crichton 4]

Who?

[Jay 37,353]

There was a mono mix, a stereo mix and a six-track mix for the 70mm release. The mono mix has many notable differences from the others. I believe it's the six-track that became the "official" mix.

Then there came the TXH remaster in 1993, the Special Edition and then the Special Special Edition that ended up on the DVD (which has a mix where pretty much everything that could does go wrong).

Neil could probably explain this with a lot more detail.

Other way around; The 6track mix in 1977 had to be locked down earlier, before the others, and that is the one that had a lot of the rare stuff (the alternate Beru voice, "Close The Blast Doors", "Biggs"/"Wedge" difference, etc)

The stereo mix became the standard for years until they made a new one for the 2004 DVDs

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

There were no differences in the sound mix when Star Wars became A New Hope for the pre-TESB re-release?

[Jay 37,353]

I don't believe so

And the re-release wasn't pre-TESB, it was in 1981

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

I don't believe so

And the re-release wasn't pre-TESB, it was in 1981

So, were there any changes in mixes for "ESB", and "ROTJ"?

[Jay 37,353]

theatrically? I don't think so

[Charlie Brigden 7]

SW had like six rereleases. Not sure how much the mix changed between them.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Why did they delete that weird sound when the droids open the closet door in Mos Eisley?

[A24 4,331]

King Arthur: I managed to stand it for about 20 minutes. Is that a record?

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I don't believe so

And the re-release wasn't pre-TESB, it was in 1981

So, were there any changes in mixes for "ESB", and "ROTJ"?

I think ESB had a lot of changes when it was rereleased as the Special Edition in 1997.

The Super 8mm version of ESB also had a lot of different lines throughout the film.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Geez, Mini-Neil!

[Ollie 1,059]

There were slight dialogue changes in all the films when they were re-released in 1997. But Marc is correct, there are differences between the films, Super 8MM and 1997. Plus don't forget the 1993 THX Laserdiscs.

And there are differences in the mixes as well.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

IT'S A MESS!!!

[John Crichton 4]

Geez, Mini-Neil!

The true Neil would have listed every change in exacting detail, then give an argument as to why they all sucked.

[Wojo 2,453]

Can we get Paul Freeman to speak "the one true Neil?"

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Never Say Never Again.

A good, but wildly uneven film. A stupid scene with 007 and the man baddie playing a computer game is followed by a superb scene of Bond doing a dramatic tango with lead Bond girl (a gorgeous Kim Basinger)

Connery slips back into his role with ease. Though his Bond is closer to the Diamonds Are Forver one then the one he played in From Russia With Love. Still twice as manly as Moore ever was.

Klaus Maria Brandaur is genuinly disturbing as the villian and Barbara Carrera is nicely over the top. Music ranger fom inconsequential to being notibably in a bad way.

Direction is solid, but not particularly inspired, and the script lacks tension. (2 Nukes have been stolen, and 007 seems to be idling???)

Entertaining film though.

[JWfangirl1992 18]

Justin Bieber: Never Say Never

Seriously.

This makes me feel a lot better in saying that the last movie I watched (and loved!) was Megamind.

[Andy 4,123]

I'll do anything for my daughter. And I've had worse cinema experiences, to be honest.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,516]

I'll do anything for my daughter. And I've had worse cinema experiences, to be honest.

You are a very devoted father.