king mark

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

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

Doesn't that mean 'great' in Canada?

 

No. It is not a great movie.

7 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

Doesn't that mean 'great' in Canada?

 

No. It is not a great movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Quintus said:

Up until the other day I thought 'millennials' meant born after 2000, but apparently it means after 1983. WTF?

 

Either way, I'm sticking with my take.

 

Millennials are people who graduated high school in the 2000s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/09/2017 at 4:50 PM, Stefancos said:

Really? Saw the trailer in LA, looked rubbish.


Admittedly it has had mixed reviews ... I enjoyed it, though.

I had considered Mother!, but there are as many reviews calling it a pretentious mess as there are calling it a visionary masterpiece and I was ultimately put off (guess it was a case of 'Which set of mixed reviews bother me less?'). I opted for being entertained rather than 'challenged' ... it was the weekend, dammit!         

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mother! has the rare Cinemascore of 'F'.  Meaning the average audience member hated it passionately.

 

This of course makes me want to see it all the more as it joins such films as Soderbergh's Solaris and Williams Friedkin's Bug in this honor.  It means you'll have a unique cinematic experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:


I had considered Mother!, but there are as many reviews calling it a pretentious mess as there are calling it a visionary masterpiece and I was ultimately put off (guess it was a case of 'Which set of mixed reviews bother me less?').       

 

I tend to lean on the "it's pretentious" side for such things; yet I quite fancy Mother! for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quintus said:

 

 

I tend to lean on the "it's pretentious" side for such things; yet I quite fancy Mother! for some reason.

 

Agreed.  Arronofsky gets the benefit of my doubt solely for The Fountain.  Not sure about the rest of his output though, which may more squarely fit the pretentious bill.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard they released a tie-in book called The Bible that supposedly adds a bit more details to the story (it apparently includes scenes deleted from the film) and explains some of the plot holes. I'm tired of movies that rely on tie-in products to let the audience fill in the blanks. It's annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably several years after the alleged events took place, and then rewritten and rewritten and rewritten by people all with their own spin/agenda on said events. 

Call me crazy, but I bet it's the sort of thing that could end up turning people's heads if they start hearing about it at an age when they haven't yet learned to question it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TheGreyPilgrim said:

Agreed.  Arronofsky gets the benefit of my doubt solely for The Fountain.  Not sure about the rest of his output though, which may more squarely fit the pretentious bill.  

I don't understand how one can like The Fountain but consider the rest of his films pretentious. They are all aesthetically consistent, save for The Wrestler, but even that's just Black Swan in plain clothes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Koray Savas said:

I don't understand how one can like The Fountain but consider the rest of his films pretentious. They are all aesthetically consistent, save for The Wrestler, but even that's just Black Swan in plain clothes.

 

It's not that I'd be the one to call them pretentious necessarily, except for Black Swan, but I reckon it's how many people view them.  I'm just indifferent to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still remember renting Pi on DVD in the late 90s because I had heard about it from some friends.  Loved it.  Based on the strength of that movie I went to see Requiem for a Dream when it came out in theaters.  Loved it.  Then I waited for what seemed like forever to see The Fountain, which had a lot of underground and internet build up.  Then it was finally released.  Didn't love it.  It was okay, I certainly didn't hate it, or even dislike it.  Thankfully The Wrestler got him back on track for me, but I still haven't seen anything else since then due to sheer laziness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First Reformed - well this was interesting. It was a Christian based Paul Schrader directed film that turned into a "climate change revelation" story. Can't say I especially cared for it, but the ending was really weird at least. Ethan Hawke was excellent as well. - 6 / 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tulip Fever

 

A huge misfire. I don't know where to begin, but Dane DeHaan is woefully miscast as Jan van Loos. Alicia Vikander, cast before her star power ascended with Ex Machina, was cast due to her cheapness and what she would show. Christoph Waltz is okay, as is TWC lucky charm Judi Dench, but the miscast leads and the excessive plotting undo what is a fascinating historical fiction.

 

This would have been so much better had the original form of the film took shape -- director John Madden with Natalie Portman, Jude Law, and Jim Broadbent. In its current form, it's a watchable but boring affair. Danny Elfman's score elevates the film -- he channels some of Desplat's The Girl With the Pearl Earring -- and one of his most underrated works.

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