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

[Naïve Old Fart 9,525]

THE MATRIX took $400mil, and THE PHANTOM MENACE took $900mil.

There's room in the marketplace, for both.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Yeah, especially since they don't appeal to the same core demographic: The Phantom Menace was clearly aimed at a much younger audience.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Matrix was the more infuential of the two.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The Court Jester

 

I only caught this by accident and I'm glad I did, because this movie is tremendously good! Cleverly funny and vividly colourful. Interesting it has a pristine new HD transfer but it's not available on blu-ray at all, and the DVD is scarce.

[John 2,032]

3 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

The Phantom Menace was clearly aimed at a much younger audience.

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Red Dragon

 

I watched this last night for the first time since 2003 and ooooof it didn't hold up for me (I liked it when I was 16).

 

It's got such an amazing cast, but the adaptation and direction are so dull.  It's lifeless.

 

Especially when compared to the tv show Hannibal's stylish, artful, and more intense adaptation of the same material later on.

 

I distinguish them both from Manhunter, since they were both made after Hannibal Lecter became a cultural icon which necessitates beefing up his role considerably.

[Chen G. 3,949]

6 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

The Matrix was the more infuential of the two.

 

Well, it was much more novel. The Phantom Menace was, in many respects, "yet another Star Wars movie." The Matrix was the first of its kind.

 

But than, I really don't put much stock into judging films by their influence. I could appreciate a film's contribution to the industry or its effect on the public over and over, but what really matters to my eyes is whether I enjoyed watching it. 

[Jay 37,359]

I haven't seen Red Dragon since back in the day either and I also wonder how I'll view it now in a post-Hannibal (TV) world.  When it came out, I enjoyed it just fine

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I'm still so disappointed that Hannibal didn't get to do Silence of the Lambs.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Whatcha got in your hand, Clarice? Something to bash me over the head with?

[Jay 37,359]

59 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

I'm still so disappointed that Hannibal didn't get to do Silence of the Lambs.

 

I was really hoping Hulu or Netflix would pick up the show after NBC canceled it.  Now that Fuller's been kicked off yet another show, maybe he can drum up support for a revived season to happen somewhere

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Inspired by a brief aside in another thread earlier, I decided to watch Jim Jarmusch's last film Paterson, streaming on Amazon.  It worked a quiet spell on me.  One of his very best.

 

There's real power in his quietly observed films, with their wonderful punctuations of perfect deadpan comedy.  They always seem just this close to tilting into absurdity, and never quite do.  It's his mastery of a wholly original tone.  This is one of his more contemplative and warmly human movies.  It should also be said I'd never thought about how much Jarmusch's filmic style is indebted to the poetry of William Carlos Williams, until I saw this movie which is practically a tribute to him.

 

Much like with Wes Anderson, I don't even really think about if a particular Jarmusch is good or bad.  I don't view his work through that paradigm.  I'm just always on board to enter his world.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

11 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

Red Dragon

 

I watched this last night for the first time since 2003 and ooooof it didn't hold up for me (I liked it when I was 16).

 

It's got such an amazing cast, but the adaptation and direction are so dull.  It's lifeless.

 

Especially when compared to the tv show Hannibal's stylish, artful, and more intense adaptation of the same material later on.

 

I distinguish them both from Manhunter, since they were both made after Hannibal Lecter became a cultural icon which necessitates beefing up his role considerably.

I honestly forgot this film existed, along with Danny Elfman’s score! Is this the one with Philip Seymour Hoffman being tied to a wheelchair and set on fire?

[publicist 4,643]

It's by Brett Ratner and it looks it.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Mr Bean's Holiday

 

Very funny and some real chuckle inducing moments, but there's something about this character that I don't think really works in feature film format. He was just a mimey sketch character similar to some of Chaplin's flicks whose popularity exploded in the mid 90s and this is obviously an attempt to return to basics and recapture past glories for Atkinson. Love the French chick he teams up with.

[John 2,032]

He's the British equivalent of Pee-wee Herman. Best taken in small doses.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

But Pee-wee's shot at immortality is undoubtedly the feature-length movie, Pee-wee's Big Adventure. Not the more shortform TV stuff.  It's a classic.

[John 2,032]

True.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I do agree that Mr. Bean works far better as a TV show, which was amazingly only 15 episodes.

 

That's such a British thing and I kind of admire it.  Like recently when Brooklyn Nine-Nine was briefly cancelled and certain corners of the internet were in uproar.  I'm like, that show already had 5 seasons and dozens of episodes, a fine run.  Whereas the best British sitcoms generally are so much more limited.  Fawlty Towers being the ur-example.  Every long-running American sitcom went on years too long, with no exceptions.

[Not Mr. Big 4,639]

4 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

But Pee-wee's shot at immortality is undoubtedly the feature-length movie, Pee-wee's Big Adventure. Not the more shortform TV stuff.  It's a classic.

The TV show's Christmas special is one of the best ever though

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Those weird old sisters singing "Winter Wonderland" is my favorite part

[Jay 37,359]

7 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Every long-running American sitcom went on years too long, with no exceptions.

 

You don't think Sienfeld is an exception?  Sure, the final 2 David-free seasons aren't as good as when he was showrunner, but they were still good.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Sure they were good (except for the finale, still not on board with that), but it had long ceased being vital IMO.  It could have ended at 5.

 

I just wish more sitcoms were like British-style.  Shorter seasons and they go out when they're still on top generally.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

To Be or Not to Be

 

This was great! And pretty underrated too because I don't hear about it talked about much anymore. Did it hurt people's feelings or something? I'll have to see the 1942 version now.

[SteveMc 2,674]

Stalag 17

 

Excellent if you ask me, very entertaining, very well made.  Wilder's wit works quite well here.

 

As for Mr. Bean's Holiday, hilarious in a guilty pleasure sort of way.

[publicist 4,643]

1 hour ago, Margo Channing said:

To Be or Not to Be

 

This was great! And pretty underrated too because I don't hear about it talked about much anymore. Did it hurt people's feelings or something? I'll have to see the 1942 version now.

 

Too bad you started with the Brooks one.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Just now, publicist said:

 

Too bad you started with the Brooks one.

 

It was on tele.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

On 5/22/2018 at 12:06 PM, Stefancos said:

The Matrix was the more infuential of the two.

Neither has held up worth a damn. At least there was good music in TPM

[Chen G. 3,949]

3 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Neither has held up worth a damn.

 

If you care about the story being told, you should be able to get over poor or dated special effects. Production value is secondary to narrative.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of the Matrix (and the less is said about the sequels the better) but its a better story than The Phantom Menace!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Its the same story as Star Wars!

[Chen G. 3,949]

But its a much stronger execution to The Phantom Menace.

[Fancyarcher 350]

Key Largo - 8.5 / 10

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

15 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Neither has held up worth a damn. At least there was good music in TPM

 

Joey,

 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Just now, Chen G. said:

 

If you care about the story being told, you should be able to get over poor or dated special effects. Production value is secondary to narrative.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of the Matrix (and the less is said about the sequels the better) but its a better story than The Phantom Menace!

You make false assumptions that I was strictly talking special effects. The Matrix has a visual style that is really dated. TPM looks particularly weird with its half sets.

21 minutes ago, Sharky said:

 

Joey,

 

How so?

 

[Chen G. 3,949]

8 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

The Matrix has a visual style that is really dated. TPM looks particularly weird with its half sets.

 

Again, issues of production value. NOT of storytelling.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

You are amatuer. Storytelling  can be done through visual style. 

[crocodile 8,012]

The Lost World: Jurassic Park. Now the first film (which I watched last night) receives slight picture quality boost on UHD Blu-ray but this one looks WAY better than Blu-ray. The film itself, while far from perfect, actually gets better with age for some reason. Perhaps because everything that came after ended up being way worse. I might be in the minority but it was always better looking of the two - feels like a prooer film and not a TV movie.

 

Karol

[Fancyarcher 350]

Hangman (2017) - Quite frankly, pretty poor. One of Pacino's worst. Urban was pretty good, though. Otherwise I couldn't care less for this. -  3.5 / 10

[Chen G. 3,949]

11 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

You are amatuer. Storytelling  can be done through visual style. 

 

Storytelling in film is, usually, done primarily visually. Its a visual medium.

 

But its mostly done through composition, light, camera placement and movement, mise-en-scene set dressing, etc...

 

9 hours ago, crocodile said:

The Lost World: Jurassic Park.[...]The film itself, while far from perfect, actually gets better with age for some reason.

 

Having not seen it in years and possesing but a faint memory of it, rewatching it was nice. Its not great, but I like it fine. More than fine, actually.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

1 minute ago, Chen G. said:

 

Storytelling in film is, usually, done primarily visually. Its a visual medium.

 

But its mostly done through composition, light, camera placement and movement, mise-en-scene set dressing, etc...

 

But all of that is to achieve a visual result. They don't each exist within a vacuum.

 

Joe's arguement has merit that the films mentioned didn't move him because they're visually flawed. Fair enough. But of course you're free to look past those flaws and view it as a "scripty" movie rather than a work of visual expression.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Yeah, but the sheer beauty of the visuals is secondary to their narrative utility. Unless, of course, we aren't watching a strictly narrative work.

 

We sadly have no shortage of preety if not outright gorgeous looking movies that range from the "okay" through the "meh" to the "empty": because the beauty of their shots and the way they are composed is not narrativelly-motivated. Prometheus being a good example; a lot of people (myself included) aren't crazy about Interstellar, either; Hell, The Last Jedi had very nice visuals (minus the odd bad CG), but left a lot of people (again, myself included) kind of cold.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Two particular flicks come to mind - All About Eve and Sunset Boulevard. AAE is really talky film primarily concerned with character development and showing off the writer/director's witticisms, but it's utterly flat in its visuals, there was no attempt to innovate or experiment at all. Whereas SB has both visual strengths and an amazing script. No one need guess who my next avatar will be.

[A24 4,331]

8 minutes ago, Margo Channing said:

Joe's arguement has merit that the films mentioned didn't move him because they're visually flawed. 

 

I wouldn't put much stock in that since Joey hates everything that doesn't look conventional.

[Quintus 5,399]

10 hours ago, crocodile said:

 I might be in the minority but it was always better looking of the two - feels like a prooer film and not a TV movie.

 

Karol

 

You're right it is much better photographed than the first movie was. Jurassic Park looks crap. It's still a classic, mind. Just more proof though that visual aesthetics aren't everything, or even that important.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Jurassic Park does have something of washed-out palette, but in terms of actually directing the camerawork, its aces. Big, spectacular dinusaurs framed from the perspective of the human characters a) creates a sense of scale; b) adds to the immersive quality of the film; c) allows for motivated "Spielberg" reveals, such as when the reveal of the T-Rex' features is being delayed by reason of the characters' (and, by extension, the camera's) view being obstructed by branches, the rain on the windows, etc. This allows you to introduce a gradual (and therefore dramatic) reveal, as is wont to happen on Spielberg films, without it feeling contrived.

 

That's what I mean about the visuals serving the story, rather than being beautiful just for the sake of being beautiful.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Saying Jurassic Park looks like "crap" only proves the point of my "extreme polarisation" thread - if something isn't perfect, it's "terrible".

[Quintus 5,399]

34 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Jurassic Park does have something of washed-out palette, but in terms 

 

Not sure I understand what you mean by washed-out? When I watch Jurassic Park I see primary colours, it's an extremely bright and assorted palette. But it's also flat and bereft of any sense of depth. It does look like nineties TV, like Croc said.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Given how green some of the locations are, they don't look terribly lush. The slightly desaturated look is an unfortunate earmark of films made in the early to mid ninties.

 

Its part of what I appreciate about Braveheart: its so friggin green!

[Quintus 5,399]

1 hour ago, Margo Channing said:

Saying Jurassic Park looks like "crap" only proves the point of my "extreme polarisation" thread - if something isn't perfect, it's "terrible".

 

No it doesn't. What a load of bollocks actually. I already said I think The Lost World was an improvement over the cinematography seen in JP, indeed I think it's a fairly decently shot movie - compared to the low benchmark of the original. But it's hardly a world beating crème de la crème visual achievement of cinema. Or "prefect", as your heavily generalised hypothesis speculates. 

 

I do not rate the visual ID of Jurassic Park highly at all and I never have, its photography (and lighting) is one of its weakest aspects. Or, it's "crap" if you wanna get succinct.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Lost World looks amazing, imo. One of Kaminski's finest.