Jump to content

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


King Mark

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Of course you can think out loud, Jerry, JWfan always encourages free-thinking, and never tries to stifle opinions (!).

You can buy this, but ask yourself; if you don't like it, then it's a bit of an expensive mistake. Perhaps you could borrow it first, then make up your mind about buying it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Baby Jane Hudson said:

 

What? I'm not allowed to think aloud?

 

You thoughts betray you, Drax. Somebody who has lost interest doesn't do blind buys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw Justice League with several other composers.  The consensus was that it was entertaining enough, and that DC is just as bad as Marvel when it comes to embracing the benefits of musical continuity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murder On The Orient Express

 

The first big screen adaptation since 1974 of arguable Christie's most famous novel.

In sumptuous 65mm, Branagh ones again shows himself a director with a strong sense of sweeping visuals. And he actually makes a superb Poirot. Putting his own stamp on a role previously played in film by Finney and Ustinov, and on TV for decades by David Suchet. 

 

The film is good, even though some of the changes to the book are hit or miss. The cast is superb, with Branagh and Michelle Pfeiffer being the stand outs. Depp is actually fine in this. He makes his Casetti a suitably loathsome character.

 

I would still go for the 74 one if I felt like a lavish dose of Agatha Christie. It actually feels a bit more authentic than this one. But if Branagh return to this role I will be sure to watch his next Poirot. 

 

*** out of ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also thought Pfeiffer was excellent but did not enjoy Branagh’s take on Poirot

 

And I’m certainly open to alternate takes on these characters.  Just recently I discovered I love Rutherford’s take on Marple despite being more silly or comedic than Hickson’s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed!  I had never seen them before a few months ago.

 

 

With a few tweaks Branagh's take wouldn't have been so bad.  I thought he overemphasized the "OCD" elements of the character in a way that felt very cliched in the context of contemporary crime fiction where every murder-solver has to be on the spectrum or OCD.  With less scenes showing that element and more scenes showing, say, his refined, exacting taste in clothing/food (like the stuff where he visits the baker was great) it would have been more to my taste.  Although other than that, his performance never really felt distinct, it was often kinda bored or something.

 

Poirot is a detective who notably solves his crimes through empathy and knowledge of human emotions, not forensic/physical clues alone, and while this movie paid some lip service to that idea, it didn't shine in the way it could/should have.  This is the area that makes Suchet's performance definitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the movie is a financial success so it seems likely that Death on the Nile will happen (as hinted at the end of this movie) and while I'd prefer they picked a Poirot novel that hasn't been made into a feature film before, at least it will give Branagh a chance to refine some things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justice League

 

Visually, this is something of a mess. Parts of it clearly look like Snyder. Close up shots from weird low angles. A great attention to detail visually. But so much of the film look a lot plainer. It has that flat, glossy look of The Avengers, which had the same aspect ratio.

Some shots are even ungainly, like The Avengers. A disapointment after the rather good looking BvS.

 

Plot wise it resembles The Avengers. But the treat is utterly generic and doesn't have anything to do with any of the characters. The villain is boring.

 

Affleck is uneven here. His looks change back and forth throughout the film. He does the funnier tone recently well, as a straight-man. But I didn't buy his remorse over Clarke's death.

 

Cavill's look changes from scene to scene too. And they did CGI on his face which looks distracting. His acting is fine though. And he's actually very strong as a non-brooding Superman.

 

Gal Gadot is solid as a rock here. Probably not even a great actress, she does put lot of sincerity in her performance. She's clearly DC's best card right now. 

 

The 3 new characters were all solid actually. I liked that Aquaman is a complete dick to Batman.

 

Compared to MoS and BvS this feels small scaled. Because of the asoect ratio, and because of the relatively small cast. In the background i mean. The destruction in MoS involved hundreds of thousands. Gotham and Metropolis....and Washington DC at stake in BvS.

 

In Justice League, which should have been the biggest DC film up to this point, it feels intimate. The big battles take place with little background people. (Even when Supes, The Flash and Cyborg are fighting in the central square of Metropolis it looks like no one's out.

 

The climax takes place in a deserted part of Russia or something. It all feels a bit small, despite the huge budget. It reminded me of X-Men: Apocalypse.

 

It is very comic book like though. Big ideas, simply told. Broad strokes, clearly portrayed heroes, good humour.

 

It's completely average, but quite inoffensive. I enjoyed it well enough.

 

** out of ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not enjoy Batman v Superman, I thought that movie was a trainwreck. But compared to Justice League, I can actually see it under a much more flattering light. For its flaws, it fells much larger, it's much better shot and it is much more ambitious, even I find it totally colapses under its own weight. Justice League is as mundane (surprisingly), lazy, forgettable and by the numbers as it gets. It feels like one those bad super hero movies of the 90's. I truly think Justice League is the worse movie ever made with Batman in it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Romão said:

I did not enjoy Batman v Superman, I thought that movie was a trainwreck. But compared to Justice League, I can actually see it under a much more flattering light. For its flaws, it fells much larger, it's much better shot and it is much more ambitious, even I find it totally colapses under its own weight

 

I disagree. I think it is the best film to come out of the DCU so far. Yes, its very flawed and uneven. But that's because of all the Justice League set up. But it's actually a very story driven film. And I love the concept of a more or less modern America trying to deal with the fact of the Superman.

 

The "Day Of The Dead" scene is actually one of my favorites in any superhero movie. Both in conceptual and visual terms.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, crocodile said:

Did you guys find it odd that they kept cutting back to this one family all the time?

 

 

Probably added later to have a human element. Don't forget, a lot is altered.

 

"There’s a big villain in Justice League and it isn’t Steppenwolf: it’s reshoots. The exact nature of the DCEU’s infamous reshoots has been debated endlessly over the past year – was Joss Whedon executing a massive course correct or simply helping out Zack Snyder? Whatever was true, most had assumed we’d never truly know.

However, nobody quite expected the reshoots to be quite so rampant or obvious in the movie itself; Justice Leagueis a mishmash of tone, narrative and character, with glaring leaps in feel and some downright-shocking CGI that makes cracking the case a little easier than expected. It’s a Frankenstein’s monster of a film, with Whedon taking Snyder’s body parts and trying to craft something new, and the clues to what really went down are right there on the screen."

 

Read more:

https://screenrant.com/justice-league-movie-reshoot-changes-explained-snyder-whedon/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is nothing wrong with Snyder as a visualist. I'm more concerned about him building scenes/sequences that naturally lead one into another. You know, the narrative. As a filmmaker, he seems to have this ADHD syndrome and is always focused on "now" but can't seem to be able to create a coherent whole out of those, often pretty, images. He comes from the 30-second TV commercial background and it shows. I've not seen a single film of his that has a sense of story, pacing or continuity.

 

Karol

Link to comment
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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.