Mr. Breathmask

What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Older Films)

Recommended Posts

I think having two main threads - one for discussing current movies, and one for discussing older ones - is a great idea!

Why do Quint and a couple others keep saying that the Reviews forum is where discussions dies? Many threads in there are up to 2 or 3 pages, and feature more discussion about a movie than this thread itself does!

The reviews forum is a good idea, its just that those opposed are being more vocal about their opposition.

People seem to forget that no one ever suggested that all discussion should be moved to the reviews forum. Only that if you feel like writing a long review of a film, that you post your review it to the Reviews forum. And don't forget we encourage book, television, music, and score reviews in that forum as well!

But yea, the general discussion of films that bounce around from film to film that stem from a quick remark that someone recently watch a film will never be moved out. The moderating staff just wants the nicely written, longer reviews that our members generate to be posted there. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think having two main threads - one for discussing current movies, and one for discussing older ones - is a great idea!

Why do Quint and a couple others keep saying that the Reviews forum is where discussions dies? Many threads in there are up to 2 or 3 pages, and feature more discussion about a movie than this thread itself does!

The reviews forum is a good idea, its just that those opposed are being more vocal about their opposition.

People seem to forget that no one ever suggested that all discussion should be moved to the reviews forum. Only that if you feel like writing a long review of a film, that you post your review it to the Reviews forum. And don't forget we encourage book, television, music, and score reviews in that forum as well!

But yea, the general discussion of films that bounce around from film to film that stem from a quick remark that someone recently watch a film will never be moved out. The moderating staff just wants the nicely written, longer reviews that our members generate to be posted there. Thanks!

I think it's a great idea too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think having two main threads - one for discussing current movies, and one for discussing older ones - is a great idea!

I love to hear your motives for saying that. I already said why I think it's a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that you wouldn't be allowed to talk about modern movies in the classic movies thread, or that you wouldn't be allowed to talk about classic movies in the modern movies thread.

One of the defining characteristics of this message board - an aspect that I truly love - is how any thread can evolve into a discussion of something else entirely, per the flow of discussion.. I would never want that to change, and would never move posts from one movie thread to the other just because the year of the movie being discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that you wouldn't be allowed to talk about modern movies in the classic movies thread, or that you wouldn't be allowed to talk about classic movies in the modern movies thread.

One of the defining characteristics of this message board - an aspect that I truly love - is how any thread can evolve into a discussion of something else entirely, per the flow of discussion.. I would never want that to change, and would never move posts from one movie thread to the other just because the year of the movie being discussed.

I agree. It wouldn't hurt anything to open another thread for current releases - no one would be forced to use it or be forced out if they went off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Super 8

It's a pleasant film and I surely prefer this to most summer movies these days. But, to be perfectly honest, it's only a Frankenstein of a movie where everything (and I mean everything) is stitched from different parts of other movies. That's disappointing. The score is good though. Heard only one cue that's not on the album (when they're riding bicycles).

Karol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh BTW the film has probably the most ridiculous train crash scene ever that goes on for like 5 minutes and apparently there were no people on it for some reason. Weird. But I laughed at the obvious Lost reference in that scene. It was funny at that point. Only later when I saw 255th reference to different things I started to pull my hair out.

About Giacchino again: I like how the film is not too heavily scored (at least the first part). It makes more impact that way. That's job well done.

Karol - who thought the best thing about Super 8 was the end credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rise of the Apes

I'm shocked -- I went in expecting a rehashed origin story, but I really enjoyed it. The film actually takes its time developing its characters before moving straight ahead with the action. The superb CGI work by WETA Digital, plus Andy Serkis' performance as Caesar truly elevate this movie. You end up rooting for the apes, who are the most developed characters in the movie, and the ending doesn't really leave room for an immediate sequel. And the action sequences (particularly the climax at the Golden Gate Bridge) are unpredictable and exciting.

Doyle's score isn't anything to sniff at either. I think it's better than his Thor score. A very pleasant surprise, both movie- and score-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doyle's score isn't anything to sniff at either. I think it's better than his Thor score. A very pleasant surprise, both movie- and score-wise.

I just listen to it on youtube and it's a generic nightmare of modern blockbuster stylings. Steve Jablonsky delivers more convincing soundscapes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doyle's score isn't anything to sniff at either. I think it's better than his Thor score. A very pleasant surprise, both movie- and score-wise.

I just listen to it on youtube and it's a generic nightmare of modern blockbuster stylings. Steve Jablonsky delivers more convincing soundscapes.

After Stepmom Doyle was like, "Ain't no valley low enough (to which I have to descend musically) to keep me from making sure I'm never rejected again."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw E.T. yesterday. What a wonderful film. Truly magical. There were a few things in the film that dissapointed me though. Why did the NASA guys dress up as astronauts just to get ET? That was strange. And there wasn't even a credit for John Williams in the end credits! There was one for Herbert Spencer though. How strange. I also think the broadcasting company cut a few scenes out. Sometimes the music stopped really abruptly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Way Back: Not much better than a dramatized documentary on Nat Geo. It's not bad but the story and execution are too tame to fascinate or to be affective. With other words, I didn't feel the journey which is essential for these type of films.

the_way_back_film.jpg

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I fancied that as well. That's potentially disappointing I guess.

Whilst on the subject of lost in the wilderness movies, does anyone recommend any I may have missed? Stuff like The Edge and Rescue Dawn. A fascinating genre, for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just listen to it on youtube and it's a generic nightmare of modern blockbuster stylings. Steve Jablonsky delivers more convincing soundscapes.

There's a bit of MV style in the Rise of the Apes score. Bruce Fowler did some orchestrations (plus Zimmer's engineers mixed the score), but it's still better than Jablonsky's work. And the final cue is undeniably Doyle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh ho, what happened to it being the next Happening everyone? ;)

I doubt I will find the movie as entertaining as The Happening. Why you eyein' my lemon drink?

Doyle's score isn't anything to sniff at either. I think it's better than his Thor score. A very pleasant surprise, both movie- and score-wise.

I just listen to it on youtube and it's a generic nightmare of modern blockbuster stylings. Steve Jablonsky delivers more convincing soundscapes.

After Stepmom Doyle was like, "Ain't no valley low enough (to which I have to descend musically) to keep me from making sure I'm never rejected again."

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my War of the Worlds (2005) review, pasted from the Review forum with an added spoiler tag:

I have always really enjoyed this film, but for some reason watching it recently it really resonated with me. I think it is absolutely one of Spielberg's best, up there with CMIYC, Minority Report, the Indy sequels, SPR, etc.

What struck me most was how creatively and uniquely Spielberg shot and staged his scenes. The film flows incredibly well, with each scene seeming to lead naturally into the next. I wouldn't know how to divide this film into acts, it's like it's all just one really engaging scene. The camera movements are really impressive, he's got some great shots. One of my favorites is the scene in Ogilvy's basement, when the camera pans past the mechanical eye and pauses on the axe for a split second, and before we can even fully realize that the axe is being emphasized we see Ogilvy's hand unlatch it. Another great shot is the one panning in and out of the van as Cruise drives his family out of the city. And the video camera capturing the massacre in New York. And the hand that reaches down and grabs Cruise's gun, right before we hear a loud gun shot....

The lighting and cinematography are magnificent. The scene in the basement when all the weird colors are flashing is petrifying. I think that scene perfectly represents the confusion and inability to get a figurative "bird's eye view" of the character's situation that the characters feel throughout. And how Robbie is the one who ultimately makes the decisions for the whole family....

Spielberg masterfully develops the two key relationships between his two kids. You really feel bad for the kids in the beginning, then for Ray when he really starts trying to be a good dad. The two big blowups between Cruise and Robbie are great (when Robbie tries to join the military). And anybody who says Spielberg can't do without the schmaltz should watch this film, because he shows a lot of restraint. (A lot of this has to do with JW's music during the

reunion scene at the end.

)

The acting is great, as always in a Spielberg film. The look on Cruise's face when he was telling Fanning that he wasn't familiar with her lullabies was heartbreaking. Sometimes with Cruise it can be hard to distinguish his character from film to film based on his performance alone, but Ray is a completely different person than John Anderton. And everybody else is great too.

Oddly enough, I thought the worst part of the film was the music. When I first got the OST, I thought it was boring. I have come to appreciate it A LOT more since then as a standalone listening experience, and 90% of it works incredibly well in the film. But there's just too much. The mechanical eye basement scene, for example, was one that really needed no music. This is one of the rare instances where I think JW mitigated the film's impact. That said, it does wonders in some key scenes. When Cruise sees the plane crash, "The Ferry Scene", "Escape from the City," and, of course, "The Reunion." One of my favorite musical moments are the string hits while Cruise and Ogilvy wrestle with the rifle...just amazing.

Overall, this has got to be one of Spielberg's most underrated films. I found every second of it to be engaging on multiple levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, there's a lot that you love about it. I only like the moment in the beginning of the movie when Cruise is fascinated by the strange dark clouds that are gathering above the city. That's it. Overall, I would say that War Of The Worlds feels very much like a Shyamalan film. The topic, the style of the movie, the cold, unnatural relationship between parent and kids, the naiveness, the sombre mood, the same kind of stillness ... Up there with Spielberg's best? That's a bold statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the similarities with Shyamalan, but I think it's pretty different overall (and not just because Spielberg is better at executing what approaches both filmmakers utilize). For one, WotW seems much more gritty and realistic compared to Shyamalan's restrained surrealism, especially in script and acting (oddly, in cinematography it is reversed). When Shyamalan wants to show a strained relationship, he uses silence. When Spielberg does, he uses dialougue that the characters use to (usually unsuccessfully) mask the tension. The latter is, in my experience, much more realistic. That's not a dig at either filmmaker - I think both results are intentional, and both work (at least in most of Shyamalan's films). But I prefer Spielberg's approach.

Up there with Spielberg's best? That's a bold statement.

Yup, and I stand by it! I think it proudly contributes to Spielberg's filmography, even though it is inferior to his classics (E.T., Raiders, etc.). It's on the second tier, the "almost good enough to vie for the title of best Spielberg film ever" tier. But even that distinction is probably more a matter of personal bias and nostalgia than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good and very underrated film.

My biggest beef is that Tom Cruise is supposed by be a crane operator, which just does not ring true somehow...

My main problem with Tom Cruise is that in nearly every film he invariably is Tom Cruise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good and very underrated film.

My biggest beef is that Tom Cruise is supposed by be a crane operator, which just does not ring true somehow...

My main problem with Tom Cruise is that in nearly every film he invariably is Tom Cruise.

I disagree. He felt very much to me like a dad who, as the film progresses, becomes increasingly tortured by his kids' distance from him. I've never seen that from Cruise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's brilliant at that though. No one is a better Tom Cruise then him.

Indeed he is. But he is not someone like Gary Oldman who disappears inside a role. He is too much a Tom Cruise to do that.

It's a good and very underrated film.

My biggest beef is that Tom Cruise is supposed by be a crane operator, which just does not ring true somehow...

My main problem with Tom Cruise is that in nearly every film he invariably is Tom Cruise.

I disagree. He felt very much to me like a dad who, as the film progresses, becomes increasingly tortured by his kids' distance from him. I've never seen that from Cruise.

As Stefan said he does not feel like a dock worker but yes he is a bit more compelling in WotW than in some of his films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now