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

[Hurmm 91]

It's fun times at the movies... Although a little overhyped I think. 

I see Mother! has been getting most positive reviews. Seems to be quite divisive... the scores are either 5's or 1's. Sounds good to me. When it comes to Aronofsky I tend to fall on the side that says THIS IS AMAZING. 

[Matt C 452]

IT: Chapter One

 

The new adaptation is funny and scary. The whole group of kid actors are fantastic and have a great camaraderie with one another -- which really helps you root for them when Pennywise the clown shows up. Andy Muschietti does a fine job of balancing the laughs with the scares, leavened with a sense of unease and tension. Bill Skarsgard makes for a deliriously animalistic and terrifying Pennywise, nothing like Tim Curry's campy performance in the 1990 miniseries. The film is bloody when it needs to be, but not overly gratuitous. The CG effects are noticeably dodgy, especially near the end when the kids are battling the clown, but it didn't dampen the experience much.

 

The director and writers nicely structure the film as a complete experience, so it stands on its own. But considering how it's performing at the box office now, expect It: Chapter Two to be fast-tracked for September 2019.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Cool!  Seeing it tomorrow afternoon.

[crocodile 7,984]

Shouldn't they be releasing chapter two in 2043?

 

Karol

[Johnnyecks 33]

9 hours ago, Matt C said:

IT: Chapter One

 

The new adaptation is funny and scary. The whole group of kid actors are fantastic and have a great camaraderie with one another -- which really helps you root for them when Pennywise the clown shows up. Andy Muschietti does a fine job of balancing the laughs with the scares, leavened with a sense of unease and tension. Bill Skarsgard makes for a deliriously animalistic and terrifying Pennywise, nothing like Tim Curry's campy performance in the 1990 miniseries. The film is bloody when it needs to be, but not overly gratuitous. The CG effects are noticeably dodgy, especially near the end when the kids are battling the clown, but it didn't dampen the experience much.

 

The director and writers nicely structure the film as a complete experience, so it stands on its own. But considering how it's performing at the box office now, expect It: Chapter Two to be fast-tracked for September 2019.

 

Everything up there. 

 

My expectations of this were extremely hopeful, but very cautious due to the history of King adaptations. But this. Did. Not. Disappoint. Very well done, extremely well acted. Very much so looking forward to the next one, which I hope will get fast tracked.

I liked it so much I saw it Thursday night, Yest, and have tickets to see it with good friends (who are driving over an hour to see it in Dolby Cinema) tomorrow.

 

Second time around, still was unnerved by Pennywise. Parts still frightened me. And it was still exciting. I can't imagine me watching it in the theater anymore than 3 though.

 

[Jay 37,287]

Wait, does it actually say "Chapter One" on screen in the movie?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

How many times do you people need to see the same movie at the cinema? Is more than once even affordable? Let alone three or four times?

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Doesn't Karol see every Nolan film 6 times in the theater?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I saw TFA 5 times I think. Skyfall 7 times.

Fury Road 6 times!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Did you win the lotto?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I saw Fury Road twice in the same day

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I ate nothing but rice for weeks!

Just now, Disco Stu said:

I saw Fury Road twice in the same day

 

That is pretty awesome.

[Holko 9,499]

There's a guy on the Originaltrilogy forum who says he saw Empire 96 times during its original run - counting only the times he actually paid for it, because often he stayed in for a few more screenings.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Fruitcakes.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

How many times did he see Return of the Jedi? Or had he grown out of it by then? If not, did he have a VCR to record the Ewok movies several years later so he could watch those over and over again?

 

Titanic (1997) is the most recent example where people saw it over and over again. Nothing since then has really justified repeat theatrical viewings.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

People saw Avatar over and over.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Weirdos did. The type who were depressed after the movie was over because we don't have plants that light up.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Weirdos made Avatar bigger than Titanic!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I think that was the cost of the ticket. I remember it cost me around $15! Disney wishes 3D was still a thing so they could charge everyone that much for the Star Wars movies, with inflation.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

All that money!

[Koray Savas 2,251]

1 hour ago, Evil-Lyn said:

I think that was the cost of the ticket. I remember it cost me around $15! Disney wishes 3D was still a thing so they could charge everyone that much for the Star Wars movies, with inflation.

3D still is a thing. 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Only committed home theatre nuts care about 3D.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

IT

 

A pretty mixed bag if you ask me.  The character work, the Stand By Me-ish stuff, was all reasonably well-done (sort of, motivations and personality traits would veer kinda wildly sometimes).  But the nightmare horror imagery was all pretty rote and bog-standard for modern horror CGI-fests.  Nothing especially imaginative or striking if you ask me.

 

A resounding MEH.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Really? That's not the information I've received. I find your review simply not believable. I mean, people are raving about this flick and it's making tons of money. Sure, I haven't even watched the trailer, but I'm certain you must be wrong. Either that are you're deliberately trying to go against the status quo, yeah?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

So it's not okay when someone else does it? Hmmm...

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I dunno, just my reaction.  I like plenty of mega popular movies.  Just not this one.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The Conjuring also made a lot of money, but I found it as formulaic and as bland as any other modern cookie-cutter supernatural horror flick. Must have had good advertising. The second film was an improvement though.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I now live down the street from the real house that inspired that movie. It looks nowhere near as cool as in the movie, where it was like Disneyland's Haunted Mansion redone in the style of a New England cottage.

[publicist 4,643]

3 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

IT

 

A pretty mixed bag if you ask me.  The character work, the Stand By Me-ish stuff, was all reasonably well-done (sort of, motivations and personality traits would veer kinda wildly sometimes).  But the nightmare horror imagery was all pretty rote and bog-standard for modern horror CGI-fests.  Nothing especially imaginative or striking if you ask me.

 

A resounding MEH.

 

I am interested in the imagery. It's one of those adolescent's books where you have pretty solid pictures in your mind how it should look - the old ABC movie wasn't remotely polished enough to make that come true. I also never was a fan of the clown's portrayal, either in its too-clear depiction as well as its behaviour. Like early Freddy Krueger, it would have been much more effective if it wouldn't talk so much or differently. But yeah, i probably will see this at some point, even if i have modest expectations.

[Quintus 5,399]

Do they depict the intergalactic origins stuff in the new film at all?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

5 hours ago, publicist said:

 

I am interested in the imagery. It's one of those adolescent's books where you have pretty solid pictures in your mind how it should look - the old ABC movie wasn't remotely polished enough to make that come true. I also never was a fan of the clown's portrayal, either in its too-clear depiction as well as its behaviour. Like early Freddy Krueger, it would have been much more effective if it wouldn't talk so much or differently. But yeah, i probably will see this at some point, even if i have modest expectations.

 

I was mostly disappointed with all the cliched accoutrements of modern "jump scares."  The volume and bass jacked way up, the sound design and score filled with dissonant noises.  It's a technique that's always made me roll my eyes.  One thing I liked about the miniseries was I thought the imagery was presented well, even if it was fairly low-tech.

 

Take this all with a grain of salt, because I've also always loved Tim Curry's performance and I thought Skarsgard wasn't remotely scary or impressive or fun to watch.

[publicist 4,643]

35 minutes ago, Quintus said:

Do they depict the intergalactic origins stuff in the new film at all?

 

This part of the book has yet to be filmed.

27 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Take this all with a grain of salt, because I've also always loved Tim Curry's performance and I thought Skarsgard wasn't remotely scary or impressive or fun to watch.

 

Curry was not the 'problem' but the way he was shot and framed. Like in 'Jaws' or the first 'Nightmare' movie, less would have been more. To have him hopping around cackling before the children's noses just makes him less effective. The clown in 'American Horror Story' had exactly the right framing - he came too close and you were dead.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The clown comes from space? Like the Killer Klowns from Outer Space?

[publicist 4,643]

The part with the giant turtle floating through space and time was probably conceived somehwere in the 60's/70's while being seriously on acid.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

You mean Gamera?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

I thought it was the Great A'Tuin.

[Quintus 5,399]

Is the second series of American Horror Story better than the first? I really enjoyed around half of S1, but I just thought it really dragged out before it finished its story arc and I never completed it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm told the rest are a bit better

[Sweeping Strings 2,344]

IT - mostly found this unsettling, rather than terrifying (too many of the 'scares' are either too well-signposted or are set in broad daylight). But the coming-of-age-in-a-small-US-town stuff is very well done (the young cast are all excellent), and Bill Skarsgard is a suitably malevolent Pennywise.
 

Definitely up there with the superior Stephen King adaptations, I thought. 

[Brónach 1,301]

On 9/9/2017 at 7:44 PM, Stefancos said:

I saw TFA 5 times I think. Skyfall 7 times.

Fury Road 6 times!

 

Only one of those deserves more than one!

 

Although I've done that. I saw Up twice. (The second time it left me even colder...)

[publicist 4,643]

3 hours ago, Quintus said:

Is the second series of American Horror Story better than the first? I really enjoyed around half of S1, but I just thought it really dragged out before it finished its story arc and I never completed it.

 

The second is a mad riff on 'Shutter Island' in a 1964-set gothic mental asylum with nazi doctors and what have you. It's a refreshing change of pace from the oh-so usual american family in trouble situation. James Cromwell is also a plus.

[nightscape94 965]

I've only watched the first two seasons, and I enjoyed both of them.  I liked that each season felt unique with its own character.  Season 2 could sometimes feel overstuffed, but I liked it all the same.  Oddly, I never felt compelled to continue into the other seasons, and based on what I've heard/read the show kinda takes a nosedive in quality and never really recovered.

[publicist 4,643]

No, there are bad ones and good ones. The circus season with Twisty had its share of highlights.

 

 

 

[A24 4,326]

God, that was a scary dude!

[Hurmm 91]

The eyes of that thing remind me of Jeff Goldblum somehow. 

 

 

Anyone been following the reviews for Mother? Almost every review says it's absolutely bonkers mad. Like nothing we have ever seen... even from the negative reviews. It's a strictly love-it-or-hate-it affair apparently. 

[A24 4,326]

As usual, I probably going to be somewhere in the middle because of the lack of counterweight in Aronofsky's tendencies to melodramatize.

[Hurmm 91]

Yeah, but his brand of melodrama is intense. Very unlike the typical melodrama seen in other movies. 

[A24 4,326]

6 minutes ago, Hurmm said:

Yeah, but his brand of melodrama is intense. Very unlike the typical melodrama seen in other movies. 

 

I know what you mean. However, it's too intense for me, I'm afraid. When the drama of a certain situation is too strongly imposed upon the viewer, my natural reaction is to oppose it. 

[Orgasm[+]Donor. 75]

 

Quite boring: the characters are really superficial and the action scenes well executed but way too long making the movie look like expendables: western edition. The score, even though unfinished in a sense, doesnt add anything new to Horner's work.
The original i would advise to watch instead of this one.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

I would advise watching Seven Samurai over the original.