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

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

1 hour ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Life Of Brian - what better way to round off Easter Sunday than with a lovely bit of blasphemy? Still pant-pissingly funny.   

 

Saw it on Friday at the cinema. The print looked like it has been screened regularly since 1979, but it's nice to experience this with the kind of audience that buys tickets specifically to see it 10:30 at night on Good Friday.

[publicist 4,643]

 

Jeez, this movie was better (as in: fun to watch) than it had any right to be. Taut editing, simple but super-effective score.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes!

[Naïve Old Fart 9,513]

...Hercule Proirot playing a bad guy, Steven Segal becoming toast, in the second reel.

I like it, too. It's much more fun than the poe-faced AIR FORCE ONE.

[publicist 4,643]

Yeah, for being one joke AFO is stretched awfully long. Like with several others, i pretend it was only made to make Jerry Goldsmith write another fat pounding action score.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

20 minutes ago, publicist said:

 

Jeez, this movie was better (as in: fun to watch) than it had any right to be. Taut editing, simple but super-effective score.

 

Is this a fake poster? I remember Seagal not being on the poster at all.

[publicist 4,643]

Different versions exist:

 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Ohhhh

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

He's in this.

[A24 4,331]

Phantom Thread

 

 

Well what do you know! My faith in PTA is kind of restored. The first half is truly impressive, and yes, so is Daniel Day-Lewis. And I'm not talking about the dialog scenes, the way he was working on those dresses, I don't see any other actor doing it that captivating. PTA's amazing direction might have something to do with that too, of course. My attention got a bit weaker during the second half. It could have to do that I couldn't harmonize some of the actions with the psyche of the female lead. Jonny Greenwood's score was a pleasant surprise in that it was almost classical in nature. Loved the piano main theme. 7/10 (for now)

 

 

 

 

Alex

 

[Sweeping Strings 2,352]

6 hours ago, Richard said:

 

Its a good film, Sweep, to be sure, but what's blasphemous about it?

Fair point ... it is more a satire of the 'group-think' inherent in organised religion. But it was long regarded as a 'blasphemous' piece of work ... there may yet still be places in the world where its screening is forbidden. 

 

 

[KK 3,307]

4 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

Phantom Thread

 

 

Well what do you know! My faith in PTA is kind of restored. The first half is truly impressive, and yes, so is Daniel Day-Lewis. And I'm not talking about the dialog scenes, the way he was working on those dresses, I don't see any other actor doing it that captivating. PTA's amazing direction might have something to do with that too, of course. My attention got a bit weaker during the second half. It could have to do that I couldn't harmonize some of the actions with the psyche of the female lead. Jonny Greenwood's score was a pleasant surprise in that it was almost classical in nature. Loved the piano main theme. 7/10 (for now)

 

 

 

 

Alex

 

 

The whole cast really embraced and inhabited that world. It's a small, but engrossing film.

 

And I very much enjoyed the second half/ending. It's the cheekiest part.

 

10 hours ago, Holko said:

I saw it at 16 and wasn't ready  

When I tried again 2 years later, I loved every minute of it.

 

Likewise. I was 15 actually. I think failing at first attempt, hating it and re-evaluating it is a vital part to appreciating 2001.

 

And Chen, no film has aged as gracefully throughout the decades as 2001 has. And to this day, no film really rivals it as an experience.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

2 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Fair point ... it is more a satire of the 'group-think' inherent in organised religion. But it was long regarded as a 'blasphemous' piece of work ... there may yet still be places in the world where its screening is forbidden. 

 

At least in some parts of Germany it's illegal to screen it around Easter.

[Wojo 2,453]

Lame. 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

13 hours ago, Chen G. said:

2001: A Space Odyssey

 

This movie is gorgeous. Not just in the sets and miniatures, but the beautiful cinematography, as well: In a film so renowned for its photography of marvelous-looking spaceships, people forget how extreme Kubrick can get with his close-ups, and I always appreciate variety when it comes to camerawork.

 

Unfortunately, its also a a bit a hell of a slug. Many of my favorite movies are around or well over three hours, but this film at 140 minutes is just a chore, and it premiered with an added twenty minutes, which I now have no interest in seeing at all!

 

It was released a full year before man first landed on the moon, so Kubrick had probably assumed that the imagery would be so enrapturing that audiences would not be able get enough of it and, judging by the box office, he was right, too. Sadly, now that its well after 2001, we the audience are left - like the actual people onboard - unimpressed, at least after the first two or three scenes in space. That is especially true on the small screen, where I was watching it.

 

On the plus side, this film isn't nearly as nebulous as people would have you believe. Essentialy, it explores the possibility of omniscient extra-terrestrial life, one made of pure energy, helping humanity advance through the ages, as opposed to the idea of a transcendant deity. Admittedly, that's just not my thing when it comes to movies. I felt intellectually stimulated by A Space Odyssey, but I feel like film is at its best when its trying to move the viewer emotionally and viscerally, which this film doesn't even presume to do.

Its a fking bore.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,513]

4 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Fair point ... it is more a satire of the 'group-think' inherent in organised religion. But it was long regarded as a 'blasphemous' piece of work ... there may yet still be places in the world where its screening is forbidden. 

 

 

...then the people who ban it are ignorant idiots, by their own design. One look at the first scene after the credits, and you can clearly see and hear Moff Jerjerrod giving the sermon on the mount.

What these people object to is their own parochial mind-set being mocked.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I watched Ben Hur yesterday. The Story of the Christ. *****/*****

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Ben Solo: A Tale of the Jedi.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

7 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

I watched Ben Hur yesterday. The Story of the Christ. *****/*****

 

A Tale Of The Christ.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Last night I watched Three Men and a Baby. Probably one of the earliest films I remember seeing on TV as a kid.

[A24 4,331]

10 hours ago, KK said:

 

And I very much enjoyed the second half/ending. It's the cheekiest part.

 

 

I wish she would have found another way to deal with the balance of power. The solution she came up with seems almost too absurd to believe. 

 

10 hours ago, KK said:

 

No film has aged as gracefully throughout the decades as 2001 has. And to this day, no film really rivals it as an experience.

 

But you're quite right here so maybe you're right about Phantom Thread too. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

10 hours ago, KK said:

And Chen, no film has aged as gracefully throughout the decades as 2001 has. And to this day, no film really rivals it as an experience.

 

Good.... goooood!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

It's okay.

[Chen G. 3,949]

9 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

I watched Ben Hur yesterday. The Story of the Christ. *****/*****

 

So, you don’t mind the fact that the bookends of the film have nothing to do with the plot?

[Naïve Old Fart 9,513]

They have everything to do with the plot.

They tell of how one man's encounter with the Nazarene, and that, at the end when he's lost his best friend, and his family have become lepers, another encounter with the same Nazarene, and the healing of his family, made him realize that fame and fortune didn't mean diddly, compared to the things that really matter in his life.

[Chen G. 3,949]

okay, so not nothing to do with the plot, but still. The bulk of the movie is the story of Ben Hur, which is very captivating indeed, but than the ending is really all about the crucifiction. It affects Ben Hur’s life, but the focus is no longer with him.

 

I just found it a bit strange. And it’s not like we’re talking a few minutes of a bookend.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's a religious film, all life is about Christ and his sacrifice obviously.

 

2001 and now this? How old are you again?

[publicist 4,643]

The fucking book the movie is based on bears the title 'Ben-Hur: A tale of the Christ'.

[Chen G. 3,949]

But the bulk of the story is about Ben Hur, anyway.

 

Again, when you adapt a source material, you make whatever changes are necessary for the big screen.

 

1 hour ago, Stefancos said:

2001 and now this? How old are you again?

 

27.

 

And the difference is that I don't look at classics as classics. I look at them as films, and as narratives. As such, they are not infallible.

 

I'm hardly the first to say, for instance, that the pace (for want of a better word) on 2001 is egregious.

 

I'm not saying either film is bad or anything, I'm just pointing out their flaws.

[publicist 4,643]

16 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

But the bulk of the story is about Ben Hur, anyway.

 

Again, when you adapt a source material, you make whatever changes are necessary for the big screen.

 

Again, what you perceive as 'flaw' was the point of the story. To accuse all those writers and filmmakers - vastly more erudite people than you - of erring because they didn't fix that 'obvious' Christ hiccup is only irritating. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

If it was the point of the story, it should have been better vowen into the story of Ben Hur, I feel.

 

Other than the opening, Jesus gives him water during his journey, and that's it.

 

You could keep that epilogue in there and make it work structurally, I suppose. But, to my mind, it didn't.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

All who look upon the eyes of our Lord and intervowen in his Plan, Chen. However briefly.

[A24 4,331]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

I'm hardly the first to say, for instance, that the pace (for want of a better word) on 2001 is egregious.

 

 

And we're not the first to say that the slow pace is not a flaw but part of the movie's cosmic sense of scale and meditative properties.

 

 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Oh, its certainly a deliberate choice.

 

But it was just a bit too much for me.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

That...is why you fail!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I thought it was alright.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Chen 

 

You really haven't a grasp of the film. Its not a perfect film. What film is but it deserves the score I gave it

[Naïve Old Fart 9,513]

Wait! You wrote the music for BEN-HUR?!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

In another life!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Joe is Michael Rose??

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

9 hours ago, Chen G. said:

But the bulk of the story is about Ben Hur, anyway.

 

 

So they should have cut that bit and only retained the Jesus scenes?

[Sweeping Strings 2,352]

20 hours ago, Richard said:

...then the people who ban it are ignorant idiots, by their own design. One look at the first scene after the credits, and you can clearly see and hear Moff Jerjerrod giving the sermon on the mount.

What these people object to is their own parochial mind-set being mocked.

Earlier today, I heard about a pastor who believes that male masturbation is the Devil's way of turning men gay 'because if you're honest with yourself, it's sex with a man'. 

Mockery of these people remains deeply important.  

[JoeinAR 1,949]

12 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Earlier today, I heard about a pastor who believes that male masturbation is the Devil's way of turning men gay 'because if you're honest with yourself, it's sex with a man'.

Mockery of these people remains deeply important.  

Especially if you use your non-dominant hand.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

What about female wanking? Are they more allowed or something?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I guess they scissor or something. 

[Holko 9,516]

Since when do they count as people? (In case anyone's stupid enough to believe I meant that, I meant in the minds of these backwards idiots who can only live by 2-6000 Year old fairytales)

[Sweeping Strings 2,352]

https://wokesloth.com/pro-trump-pastor-thinks-touching-self-is-gay/stephanie/

There you go. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,054]

On 4/2/2018 at 8:15 AM, publicist said:

 

Fun (late-ish) WB swashbuckler (1951). Top production values, on par with 'The Sea Hawk'. Just right for easter monday!

 

I see the music's by a Robert Farnon. Any good?

 

EDIT: Just found a suite of it on Spotify:

 

https://open.spotify.com/album/3G9NyFIn29HnHuRf85kim3?si=2ClIvN22QpmSqGkc2Wb-9Q

[Fancyarcher 350]

I, Tonya - 7 / 10

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Lady Bird

 

Really enjoyed this one. Gerwig nails the script and direction and we get some really fantastic performances from the cast. There’s a genuine naturality in the film’s presentation, from costume, make-up, and production design, that feels unexplored and appreciated. I also really liked the cinematography. Lots of darkly lit and atmospheric scenes that added a lot to the context. It all fed into this very simple yet touching narrative that’s tightly edited. Great film.