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

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Probably one of the last great screwball comedies.

[Sir Hilary Bray 235]

Might remain the case even if this Dodgeball 2 comes out.

[Wojo 2,453]

Conan the Barbarian

Halfway through, the girlfriend admits "this movie is weird." I think I agree, but my god is the score lovely. And it really, really, really, really wants me to get Steam streaming to work so I can play Skyrim downstairs on the TV.

Saw VI

Makes up for the crapfest that Saw V was. Oh wait. I'm implying that anything after Saw was watchable. My bad. Jigsaw-talk is sure a fun way to answer the phone.

[Matt C 454]

Before Sunset

It's better than I remember it being, but not as good as Before Sunrise. Even if you don't really care for movies like these (or Richard Linklater's body of work), it's a testament to the director and stars Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy that the film flows by on just their ongoing conversations and body language. It's a really lovely travelogue of Paris, captures the obvious tourist spots but also the 'undiscovered gems' as well.

I don't know if I want to see Before Midnight though.

[Mr. Brown 91]

Ray Harryhausen: Special Effects Titan (2011)

Poorly crafted, but informative. As far as technical stuff goes, I don't know what the filmmakers were thinking. Half of it looks HD, half of it looks like it was shot on MiniDV. Then there are some decent interviews mixed with random clips of Spielberg and Cameron obviously reading from a script and strange transitions (where they shrink a still of the 90-year-old Harryhausen and embed it into a poster from one of the films he worked on). Looks like the type of shit a 12-year-old would throw together.

Mentions his relationship with Herrmann, which was interesting.

[crocodile 8,012]

Before Sunset

It's better than I remember it being, but not as good as Before Sunrise. Even if you don't really care for movies like these (or Richard Linklater's body of work), it's a testament to the director and stars Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy that the film flows by on just their ongoing conversations and body language. It's a really lovely travelogue of Paris, captures the obvious tourist spots but also the 'undiscovered gems' as well.

I don't know if I want to see Before Midnight though.

Why not? It's up there with the other two.

I actually think the second one might be the best, though.

Karol

[Sweeping Strings 2,358]

Bad Neighbours - not that I was exactly expecting (or looking for) gritty realism, but do frat houses EVER end up being situated in suburbia (a situation I don't recall ever being explained in the movie)?

Still, not too bad ... funniest gags involve the misuse of a car's stolen airbags.

[Jay 37,359]

Anybody else here seen Compliance?

[Mr. Brown 91]

THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS (1987)

Excellent, except for the bits with Felix Leiter. A nice ending for the Cold War era Bond.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

LOOK, WE COULDN'T FIX IT OUT HERE, ANYWAY! WE GOTTA REROUTE ALL THESE DUCTS AND, UH, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE'VE GOT TO DRYDOCK!

Oh, sorry, I've been watching Alien. It's the Director's Cut, since that's the only Blu-ray rip I could find to pirate. It's okay, I just don't have my Blu-ray collection (which includes only Alien from this franchise) since I abandoned all my personal possessions and left home permanently to spend the rest of my life going to Disneyland. Anyway, what is the story with this Director's Cut? Alien was already a perfect film and none of the changes improve anything or feel in any way necessary. Actually, the changes just detract, as usual. What's the point of the Dallas in the wall scene? There is none.

The alien transmission scene wasn't that bad originally, but now Ridley Scott has replaced the sound of the transmission with literally the droid detector sound effect from Star Wars. Did he think we wouldn't notice? Well, we did. I guess he just always wanted those Star Wars sound effects in Alien, but the studio, man. That damn studio always messing with Scott's films. I think he just slapped this version together for FOX to give audiences some incentive to see the reissue years ago. I don't buy that it's another case of the old studio-imposed changes to a Ridley Scott movie. There's no proof anything like that occurred to Alien, which, as I said before, was a perfect film to begin with. Did he just decide 20-something years later to add a shot of the alien hanging in the chamber above Brett? For what reason could that 2-second shot not be in the film originally?

I'm going back to the console.

[Sir Hilary Bray 235]

Patton-

storming performance by George C. Scott in a film that whatever historical quibbles is itself magnificent. Honourable mention to Goldsmith's score, a particular liking for the Battle of the Bulge pieces (e.g, Winter March/Bound for Bastogne). A favourite moment in the film is when during the advance on Bastogne, Patton after a word to his aide walks down onto the road to walk with his men. A choice moment as for a brief moment it looks almost like an outtake, almost more like Scott joking with the extras than Patton and his men.

Flight of the Phoenix-

think the grab was the cast. Totally forgot George Kennedy was in it and indeed, he seems to have a few lines if that. But then there's Stewart, Attenborough, Hardy Kruger (fine, fine performance) and Peter Finch amongst it all. Early on the score seems to be channelling Lawrence of Arabia but as the film goes on it tends to collect itself and does a job.

[A24 4,331]

I saw another turkey (well, to be honest, it was so bland, I slept most of the time):

1/10

[Naïve Old Fart 9,525]

LOOK, WE COULDN'T FIX IT OUT HERE, ANYWAY! WE GOTTA REROUTE ALL THESE DUCTS AND, UH, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE'VE GOT TO DRYDOCK!

Oh, sorry, I've been watching Alien. It's the Director's Cut, since that's the only Blu-ray rip I could find to pirate. It's okay, I just don't have my Blu-ray collection (which includes only Alien from this franchise) since I abandoned all my personal possessions and left home permanently to spend the rest of my life going to Disneyland. Anyway, what is the story with this Director's Cut? Alien was already a perfect film and none of the changes improve anything or feel in any way necessary. Actually, the changes just detract, as usual. What's the point of the Dallas in the wall scene? There is none.

The alien transmission scene wasn't that bad originally, but now Ridley Scott has replaced the sound of the transmission with literally the droid detector sound effect from Star Wars. Did he think we wouldn't notice? Well, we did. I guess he just always wanted those Star Wars sound effects in Alien, but the studio, man. That damn studio always messing with Scott's films. I think he just slapped this version together for FOX to give audiences some incentive to see the reissue years ago. I don't buy that it's another case of the old studio-imposed changes to a Ridley Scott movie. There's no proof anything like that occurred to Alien, which, as I said before, was a perfect film to begin with. Did he just decide 20-something years later to add a shot of the alien hanging in the chamber above Brett? For what reason could that 2-second shot not be in the film originally?

I'm going back to the console.

"Stay there, I'll be right down".

There's also a couple of video-display images that were re-used in "Blade Runner".

[A24 4,331]

The DC of Alien was a request of the studio. To Scott, the original version is the only true DC.

Alex

[Naïve Old Fart 9,525]

E.T.'s right: the DC adds nothing to the film, but it does have that really good shot of the alien hanging in the chains.

[Jay 37,359]

Her

So glad I finally saw this - this is a brilliant film. The first thing that draws you in is the art direction and set design - it's set in a cool quasi-futuristic world, and a will-never-really-happen future version of LA with lots of trains and cool buildings (actually filmed in Shanghai). The story concerns Joaquin Phoenix as Theodore Twombly, a lonely man who is recently separated from his marriage to his childhood sweetheart and works for a company where he spends his time writing heartfelt letters to people who pay for his company's service. One day he purchases a new advanced Operating System for his phone/computer, which is voiced by Scarlett Johansson and names herself Samantha. The two quickly grow very close.and eventually begin dating and fall in love. This may sound silly but the film makes it totally believable.

One thing I like is that this isn't played as some unique circumstance - there are references to other people dating or befriending their OSes, and nobody treats Theodore like he is crazy at all. Theodore goes on an emotional journey through the film as he must decide how to finally give up on his marriage and sign the divorce papers, plus deal with a constantly evolving Samantha and various ways in which she struggles with first the limitations of not having a body and then the advantages of having a much larger brain and no need to sleep.

I wasn't sure at first what to think of the third act, and I can see why many people would dislike the film based on where it goes at the end even after liking the first. But after sleeping on it, I think the third act was pretty good and made sense for the evolution of Theodore

His ex-wife leaves him because he's too robotic and not emotionally available; Samantha leaves him because he's too human and not transcendental enough)

Along the way, the film has many great individual scenes that stay with me still - Theodore on a date that ends very weirdly, Theodore at the carnival, Thedore and Samantha's vacation to the snowy woods, her piano compositions, the surrogate sequence, and of course the "dead cat" scene

In short, the art direction, set design, cinematography, cast (I didn't even mention Amy Adams as his neighbor and friend, Roony Mara as his ex-wife, Olivia Wilde as the date, and Chris Pratt as his friend at work), direction, editing, and sound design are all top notch, and a real treat to watch. The story may not be anything extremely original, but the film is more about the characters and emotions, and I thought it all came together brilliantly.

[Sir Hilary Bray 235]

Casino Royale

concluding the much dragged out Bondathon that started way back in 2012. Time has not been kind in my book to CR06. At the time it seemed a welcome new start but since then tend to look at the film slightly differently. A little bit long, the African/Miami Airport/Venice feel kind of pointless and tacked on even if those bits have little plot points. Even changing Royale to Montenegro rankles to a point, but a slight point. Parts feel cringeworthy almost like it's a Brosnan movie in disguise (I found myself half wishing this HAD been a Brosnan movie). Craig does his best even if Bond seems to be some sort of bulked up superman. It's a decent attempt but looking at the rankings sits above three of the four Brosnan films at any event.

The soundtrack is neither here nor there, personally. Don't view/listen to Arnold's Craig scores well. Compared to his Brosnan scores they just lack any real punch.

Bondathon might be over but I might well return to Skyfall which almost pretends the past two never happened. Well, sort of

[Sweeping Strings 2,358]

Step Brothers - really fucking stupid, but quite funny. Yes.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bram Stoker's Dracula

A triumph of grand guignol film making, Francis Ford Coppola pulls out all the stops in an orgy of light, color and noise, as hid Dracula renounces God and stabs a cross, which begins the spew blood, covering his absurd knights armor as he descends into the madness of eternal life...and thats just the first 5 minutes.

Visually this is a brilliant film, combining miniatures, pantomime, shadow ply and endless camera tricks (and mercifully eschewing digital effects). The film doesnt quite look like any I've seen. Production design and camerawork are all top notch.

This is a very very noisy film though, and as subtle as a brick. It shines through and effects some of the performances. Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder excell as the ancient Dracula and his love Mina. With loads of heavy breathing and barely contained desire culminating in an orgasmic scene in which Mina willingly drinks the monsters blood.

Sadie Frost is even more randy as the ill-fated Lucy, looking endlessly dangerous and seductive before getting her head chopped of.

Keanu Reeves got a lot of slack for his ridiculous accent, but it's so weird that it actually becomes effective in a movie where everything seems to exist in a world outside this one.

And Anthony Hopkins booming for and persona elevate this film as his Professor Van Helsing chews mercilessly into basically ridiculous lines as:

"Yeah, she was in great pain! Then we cut off her head, and drove a stake through her heart, and burned it, and then she found peace."

Naturally Hopkins doesnt even attempt a Dutch accent, but uses a weird "general" eastern European accent of sorts.

The rest of the cast. Cary Elwes, Richard E Grant, Billy Campbell etc..good actors all get lost in this flurry of noise.

It doesnt help them that the narrative of this film is extremely messy, and character motivations are kept to a bare minimum. Things happen and characters perform actions or say things because...well it's written down in the script. I wonder if Coppola had no real interest in telling a cohesive story because the Dracula story had been done so many times anyway, so he focused on special effects and lust.

This is a strange film, flawed in any sensible way, completely over the top, but captivating.

[crocodile 8,012]

I love that they didn't go for modern special effects and achieved almost everything in camera. It's really cute.

I really like this film, no matter what others say. It's also the closest adaptation of the book. Which is not a very cohesive story, anyway, largely due to the narrative framing devices (typical for the era, of course). Have you read IT, Stefan? It feels almost nothing like most film versions.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I read it in my teens, I cant say i remember a great deal of it, but I do know the story was told via a device of letters, reports, diaries etc.

I know the film tries to follow that. But if you had never, ever seen a Dracula film, you might find some of the plot points baffling.

It is not completely faithful to the book though. In that Mina was never the reincarnation of Dracula's dead wife. Renfield was never Harker's predecessor etc etc.

[crocodile 8,012]

Oh yes, there are different elements that were invented for this film, but it's still the closest one.

Karol

[filmmusic 1,828]

Il Sorpasso (1962)

This was a very pleasant surprise! A great influential (from what I read) Italian road movie!

Roberto, a shy law student in Rome, meets Bruno, a forty-year-old exuberant, capricious man, who takes him for a drive through the Roman and Tuscany countries in the summer of 1962.

[Romão 2,274]

Bram Stoker's Dracula

A triumph of grand guignol film making, Francis Ford Coppola pulls out all the stops in an orgy of light, color and noise, as hid Dracula renounces God and stabs a cross, which begins the spew blood, covering his absurd knights armor as he descends into the madness of eternal life...and thats just the first 5 minutes.

Visually this is a brilliant film, combining miniatures, pantomime, shadow ply and endless camera tricks (and mercifully eschewing digital effects). The film doesnt quite look like any I've seen. Production design and camerawork are all top notch.

This is a very very noisy film though, and as subtle as a brick. It shines through and effects some of the performances. Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder excell as the ancient Dracula and his love Mina. With loads of heavy breathing and barely contained desire culminating in an orgasmic scene in which Mina willingly drinks the monsters blood.

Sadie Frost is even more randy as the ill-fated Lucy, looking endlessly dangerous and seductive before getting her head chopped of.

Keanu Reeves got a lot of slack for his ridiculous accent, but it's so weird that it actually becomes effective in a movie where everything seems to exist in a world outside this one.

And Anthony Hopkins booming for and persona elevate this film as his Professor Van Helsing chews mercilessly into basically ridiculous lines as:

"Yeah, she was in great pain! Then we cut off her head, and drove a stake through her heart, and burned it, and then she found peace."

Naturally Hopkins doesnt even attempt a Dutch accent, but uses a weird "general" eastern European accent of sorts.

The rest of the cast. Cary Elwes, Richard E Grant, Billy Campbell etc..good actors all get lost in this flurry of noise.

It doesnt help them that the narrative of this film is extremely messy, and character motivations are kept to a bare minimum. Things happen and characters perform actions or say things because...well it's written down in the script. I wonder if Coppola had no real interest in telling a cohesive story because the Dracula story had been done so many times anyway, so he focused on special effects and lust.

This is a strange film, flawed in any sensible way, completely over the top, but captivating.

Good review, I agree with most of your points, thought overall I might hold this movie in higher regard than you. It just oozes personality. No words for KIlar's incredible score? It has a tremendous presence in the movie

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Oh I hold the film in high regard too

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

This is a strange film, flawed in any sensible way, completely over the top, but captivating.

I've always loved it. As Karol said, it's actually quite close to the book, and if the plot gets a bit thin in a dreamlike sort of way, that rather compliments the atmosphere. You not only forgot to mention Kilar's score, but Tom Waits as well!

Apparently there's only a low quality Blu release of this so far? I'd love to upgrade my DVD to a decent HD version.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Its on Netflix.

Tom Waits?

[filmmusic 1,828]

Apparently there's only a low quality Blu release of this so far?

Yes, the Bluray is bad and needs a restoration or something badly .

It's so dark, that certain special effects, like the text imposed on some scenes, aren't visible!!

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Tom Waits?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Ah yes.

What was the point of that role?

[Sweeping Strings 2,358]

Hmm, could it be that Coppola's Dracula eschewed digital effects because at the time it was made they were still pretty much in their infancy? From around then, the 'liquid metal' Terminator in Terminator 2 would've pretty much been the exception rather than the rule, if memory serves.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm guessing he wanted everything be be as real as possible. Almost all effects are practical, in camera effects.

[Jay 37,359]

Snowpiercer

Meh. The concept here is an interesting one - in the future, mankind injected a chemical into the atmosphere to combat global warming, and instead of froze the whole planet over, bringing on an artificial ice age. The only remaining humans live on a train that chugs along non-stop, spanning the entire globe over the course of exactly one year (somehow) via a perpetual-energy engine (somehow). In the (very long) train, the upper class live in the front cards, and the poor live in the back. We pick up the story at the end of the train's 17th run around the globe, as the poor, led by Chris Evans, try to stage a revolt to get up to the nicer front carriages.

The problem here is that the premise is all the movie really has. Once it's all set up, it basically devolves into endless action sequences where the crew move their way forward, running into armed troops and having long, extremely violent and bloody battles. Nothing happens that isn't cliched or predictable, including the ending. There are a few isolated moments of really cool stuff along the way, like the entire sequence in the school train, with the songs the children sing about how they freeze to death if they go outside, and what happens with the eggs. Or the fights in the steam room. But mostly it's just fighting then exposition, fighting then exposition.

The other good thing about the film is the cast. The leader of the troops is played by Tilda Swinton, and the engineer and inventor of the perpetual motion engine is played by Ed Harris, and they are both great! As is John Hurt, who plays an elderly member of the poor section. Really good work from these 3 top-notch actors. I have no idea how they were swindled into being in this film!

Oh, I almost forget the special effects - they are pretty bad. Some of the stuff inside the train is OK, but the CGI blood looked terrible, and all the sequences showing the train from the outside where really bad and cheap looking, especially when it was blasting through snow.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

But mostly it's just fighting then exposition, fighting then exposition.

It's funny you say this is the reason why you didn't like this film, because I know you like Pacific Rim, and it basically has that structure.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yeah!

Explain yourself, Leblanc!

[Quintus 5,399]

Never heard of this movie till Jason showed the poster and I found it interesting enough to Google it. Apparently it's considered very good by some who have seen it and probably worth a whirl. Which is what I'm going to do.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

It's definitely worth watching.

[Jay 37,359]

It has a great premise, but then becomes cliched and derivative after a while.

And BB it's completely different from Pacific Rim. That movie was very tongue-in-cheek, knew what it was. It knew it was a goofy movie about robots fighting monsters and embraced it. Didn't try to tell any kind of deep story at all.

Snowpiercer tries to be a big, serious movie, saying something about the human condition, but got weighed down with too much exposition and endless violent fight sequences, muddling their intentions.

And the special effects weren't up to par.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

"Cliché" is not a word I'd use to describe Snowpiercer, far from it. It has flaws, yes, but this is not one of them, in my opinion.

Regarding the special effects, I thought they were OK. Not mindblowing or anything, but nowhere near as bad as you make it sound.

As for the Pacific Rim stuff, OK, I get your point. But I think that you saying the structure of Snowpiercer is "exposition -> fight scene -> exposition -> fight scene" is a bit of an oversimplification. You could say that from virtually any action/adventure film. They all come down to "fight scene -> exposition -> fight scene -> exposition". That doesn't mean that it's all they have to offer.

[Jay 37,359]

I know, and I think Snowpiercer does offer more - a great premise, great acting, and some great fight sequences. I loved the bit where they connect all the barrels, and use them to keep all the gates open at once, and then that one guy runs down the top of them

And the fact that each compartment was different than the last was cool. Reminded me of Cube in a small way, since they are both about a group of characters stuck together entering one endless room after the next. But this one had cool stuff to offer like the aquarium room, the school room, the sushi room.

But why did they need that one unstoppable bad guy, and why did they

have to bring him back to life for no reason? Seriously, he accomplished nothing after he came back!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

I can't really comment on the score, because since it was my first time watching the film, I was just taking in the story itself, and not really paying attention to the score. To that end, it was never annoying of obnoxious at all, but I don't remember anything specific about what was there. Except for the end credits cue, which I did like. I plan to check out the score soon! There's an OST, right? Hopefully it's on Spotify

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

The odd thing too is since the train track was built before the world was frozen over, that implies they built giant bridges over the oceans just for this thing!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

Right, but the bad special effects and repetitive nature of the film weren't enough to immerse me in the world.

It didn't help that I watched it right after Her, which was brilliant.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

Actually it was the next day, not right after. But that film really immerses you into it's world!

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Rushmore

Not much else to say about this one that hasn't already been said in prior years. It's a classic, and had me thinking that Anderson was solely responsible for starting the careers of Schwartzman and the Wilson brothers.

[Sir Hilary Bray 235]

And helping Bill Murray out a little.

Remember seeing Rushmore featured on some old cinema programme on ITV back in the late 90s and the moment where Murray crushes Fischer's bike got me wanting to see the film. From there ended up a huge Anderson fan.