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

[Glóin the Dark 1,229]

5 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Blade Runner 2049, Arrival and Prisoners are much better.

Incendies and Sicario are much better than all of those!

[Schilkeman 976]

I do wish 2049 was a little more visually intense. The original had such a claustrophobic and dense feel to the compositions. the lighting was also more dynamic. I run hot and cold on that movie in general.

 

Mary Poppins Returns is the best late-stage sequel, anyway.  

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

1 hour ago, Schilkeman said:

Mary Poppins Returns is the best late-stage sequel, anyway.  

Piffle, and furthermore, stuff and nonsense!

TRON LEGACY rules.

[A24 4,359]

Prisoners for me. The other Villeneuve movies make me feel like I'm a replicant. I feel nothing. And they don't have anything interesting to say to me. 

[Schilkeman 976]

26 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Piffle, and furthermore, stuff and nonsense!

TRON LEGACY rules.

I haven't seen either Tron movies, so I can't comment. But do they have Emily Blunt? If they don't have Emily Blunt, then they can't be better, sorry.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

No, neither have Emily Blunt (whoever she is).

OTOH, both do have JEFF. FUCKING. BRIDGES!!!

[Brónach 1,302]

5 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I do wish 2049 was a little more visually intense. The original had such a claustrophobic and dense feel to the compositions. the lighting was also more dynamic. I run hot and cold on that movie in general.

 

the design of the film is much more postapocaliptic in nature

11 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

I thought BR2049's score worked just fine in the film. Something I can't say about Dune.

 

i like the House Atreides track in the sketchbook and weird drum sound for Arrakis in the movie, but i always forget about everything else

[Schilkeman 976]

17 minutes ago, Brónach said:

the design of the film is much more postapocaliptic in nature

The stuff outside of the city, sure. but the shots in the city feel empty sometimes. And the lighting is still not as dynamic, a problem I have with a lot of current movies.

[Brónach 1,302]

I think DV prefers the clearer, emptier frame. With dynamic lighting, do you mean sources of light that move? I enjoy that.

[Sweeping Strings 2,385]

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1974) - with Jack Palance as the Prince Of Darkness, no less. This has a cast of English 'stalwarts' like Simon Ward and Nigel Davenport, rattles along well enough and manages some pretty creepy moments as well as being bloodier than I expected for something made for mid-70s US television. 

Is it wrong that the only version of the story I dislike is the original novel? I found it a dull and overlong plod for the most part.   

[Brónach 1,302]

oh i have still have to find time to reread it, and the infamous icelandic retelling of it too

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

2 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Is it wrong that the only version of the story I dislike is the original novel? I found it a dull and overlong plod for the most part.   

No it's not wrong, it's your choice.

I'm about halfway through it, and it's a little disconcerting that it's all told from a first person perspective. It makes it an entire novel of unreliable narrators.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1974) - with Jack Palance as the Prince Of Darkness, no less. This has a cast of English 'stalwarts' like Simon Ward and Nigel Davenport, rattles along well enough and manages some pretty creepy moments as well as being bloodier than I expected for something made for mid-70s US television. 

I like this one, as well.

Did you see the BBC production of COUNT DRACULA, with Louis Jourdan?

That's not bad.

[Tallguy 3,411]

2 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Is it wrong that the only version of the story I dislike is the original novel? I found it a dull and overlong plod for the most part.  

 

One summer in college (shortly before Bram Stoker's Dracula was in cinemas IIRC) I said "I'm going to read Frankenstein and Dracula!" I assumed that I was going to really enjoy Dracula but Frankenstein was going to flat out be homework.

 

The exact opposite was true! I love Frankenstein! It's a masterpiece! Dracula, OTOH, is imaginative, innovative, has a pretty cool "found footage" structure to it, and is just as boring as watching grass grow.

 

OTOH, I will take Coppala's Dracula over Branagh's Frankenstein every time. Unfortunately. (I haven't seen either film in 30ish years.) But Doyle's score is still wonderful. (And so is Kilar's.)

[Sweeping Strings 2,385]

51 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

No it's not wrong, it's your choice.

I'm about halfway through it, and it's a little disconcerting that it's all told from a first person perspective. It makes it an entire novel of unreliable narrators.

 

 

 

I like this one, as well.

Did you see the BBC production of COUNT DRACULA, with Louis Jourdan?

That's not bad.

Must admit I haven't, but I can imagine Jourdan would be particularly good at Dracula's seductive side. Quite curious about the '79 version with Frank Langella also. 

[Brónach 1,302]

42 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

The exact opposite was true! I love Frankenstein! It's a masterpiece! Dracula, OTOH, is imaginative, innovative, has a pretty cool "found footage" structure to it, and is just as boring as watching grass grow.

 

i need to reread Frankenstein but without that guy's dumb corrections to make Mary use more pompous vocabulary and borrowings. let her write the way she wants goddamnit

[Nick1Ø66 4,739]

A Knight's Tale (2001)

 

Wildly entertaining flick that still holds up 20+ years later. An all-time favourite. Carter Burwell's score is merely serviceable, but let's face it, it's the rock classics that make the real score. Highly recommended.

 

[Bilbo 3,709]

The original Planet of the Apes.

 

First time watching it. It’s really really good and deserving of its classic status really. 
 

Not a lover of Goldsmith’s score though. A composer I can rarely enjoy for whatever reason. That sounds like heresy but it’s the truth. 
 

A pity the sequels are supposed to be awful because there’s great potential to expand on the original story.

[Faleel 5,384]

2 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

The original Planet of the Apes.

 

First time watching it. It’s really really good and deserving of its classic status really. 
 

Not a lover of Goldsmith’s score though. A composer I can rarely enjoy for whatever reason. That sounds like heresy but it’s the truth. 
 

A pity the sequels are supposed to be awful because there’s great potential to expand on the original story.

It's because you're a Baggins

[Bilbo 3,709]

17 minutes ago, A Farewell to Kings said:

It's because you're a Baggins

And entirely respectable 

[Holko 9,553]

24 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

A pity the sequels are supposed to be awful because there’s great potential to expand on the original story.

Not all of them! Neither are as great as the original but Escape for example is pretty good, and Conquest is alright with great visual direction.

 

[Marian Schedenig 8,238]

29 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

The original Planet of the Apes.

 

First time watching it. It’s really really good and deserving of its classic status really. 

 

A Great Film.

 

29 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

Not a lover of Goldsmith’s score though. A composer I can rarely enjoy for whatever reason. That sounds like heresy, which is the truth. 

 

Fixed that for you.

 

29 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

A pity the sequels are supposed to be awful because there’s great potential to expand on the original story.

 

Escape and Conquest are good!

[bollemanneke 3,366]

The eagle. 

Pretty good, though I liked the first half the best and the final seconds are really stupid. Donald Sutherland is fantastic, but they didn’t handle the relationship between the two protagonists that well. A few more scenes showing Esca changing his mind would have sufficed.

 

The score is really interesting. All the specialty instruments were only grating once.

[Bespin 8,492]

Slasher mode reactivated.

 

Scream 1

Scream 4

Scream 2022

[GerateWohl 4,415]

18 minutes ago, Bespin said:

Slasher mode reactivated.

 

Scream 1

Scream 4

Scream 2022

The first Scream movie is good. But I found, I am rather the Final Destination type. More my sense of humor.

[filmmusic 1,849]

 

A visual and aural masterpiece!

Really, I don't understand the criticism of this flm. It should be nominated for at least a best director Oscar, if not best film.

My only complaint is that it's overstylised sometimes with the slow motion, and I didn't like a couple of caricature characters like Barabbas.

[Edmilson 7,510]

1 hour ago, GerateWohl said:

The first Scream movie is good. But I found, I am rather the Final Destination type. More my sense of humor.

I have a soft spot for the Final Destination franchise. It was arguably the first horror movie I watched as a kid, and I loved it! Then I saw the sequels during my teenage years and I liked them too, although less than the first one.

[Bespin 8,492]

I now know why I never saw Scream 4 before today.

 

Sooo baaad. ZZZzzz...

 

And the music, omg, I hope Beltrami took the money and ran away quick. I rarely saw a movie with such an inadapted score. Pretentious, omni present, too much, everytime.

 

That's when an horror movie, is becoming an horror, literally.

 

I didn't know Wes Craven went so low before his death.

[Edmilson 7,510]

Really? 

 

Scream 4 is maybe my second favorite on the franchise besides the first. But I do like all of the five movies (haven't seen the sixth yet).

[crocodile 8,033]

Love, Simon. Oh wow, this was painfully unrelatable and unimaginative. If the kindest thing you can say is that a film is "well meaning" then we are really really lowering the bar. Nothing in this rings true.

 

Karol

[A24 4,359]

7 hours ago, filmmusic said:

Really, I don't understand the criticism of this flm.

 

If you are referring to the unremitting in-yer-face torture porn nature of that movie, then I certainly understand the critisism. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

12 hours ago, Bilbo said:

The original Planet of the Apes

Brilliant.

 

10 out of 10, for...

12 hours ago, Bilbo said:

First time watching it. It’s really really good and deserving of its classic status really. 

 

...but minus several million, for...

12 hours ago, Bilbo said:

Not a lover of Goldsmith’s score though. A composer I can rarely enjoy for whatever reason. That sounds like heresy but it’s the truth.

 

[filmmusic 1,849]

2 hours ago, AC1 said:

 

If you are referring to the unremitting in-yer-face torture porn nature of that movie, then I certainly understand the critisism. 

Why not criticise horror movies then?

I don't know, for me, it was the first time that I understood how much Jesus had suffered. I hadn't understood it with previous incarnations of the story.

[crocodile 8,033]

9 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Really? 

 

Scream 4 is maybe my second favorite on the franchise besides the first. But I do like all of the five movies (haven't seen the sixth yet).

I love Scream 4. Very underrated.

 

Karol

[Mr. Who 922]

43 minutes ago, filmmusic said:

Why not criticise horror movies then?

I don't know, for me, it was the first time that I understood how much Jesus had suffered. I hadn't understood it with previous incarnations of the story.

I have never seen Passion of the Christ but have often heard that it's very graphic. In comparison to other films and movies from the last decades, is it much more graphic and violent?

 

I am a big fan of the main actor who plays Jesus so the movie is on my watchlist. I also heard that they are making a sequel about the resurrection.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

6 hours ago, Mr. Who said:

I...heard that they are making a sequel about the resurrection.

 

True.

 

 

6 hours ago, Mr. Who said:

...is it much more graphic and violent?

 

Yes, and no.

It depends on what one defines as "violent".

TOTAL RECALL (1990) is violent, but I do not regard THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST as violent, in the same way. In The Roman Empire, what happened to Jesus, was, more or less, the standard punishment. They had crucifixion; we have electrocution, or lethal injection.

Of course, the circumstances of his death were completely different...

If Gibson was trying to set out to educate the audience as to what exactly happened, from a forensic point of view, then he succeeded, admirably.

Where he is less successful, is in attempting to elicit an emotional response to what one is watching, due to the almost ultra-graphic nature of what's on screen.

The film is heavy-handed, and rather naïve, if it expects the audience to be party to a man's torture and execution, and still be moved, in a positive sense, by it. For that, the violence needs to be dialed down. When it comes to this film, less would definitely have been more, but that would belie the point of the film.

There are many different filmed versions of the life, work, arrest, trial, torture, crucifixion, death, and resurrection of, Christ, that leave me in tears. THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is not one of them. That doesn't mean, however, that it is not a good, nor interesting, film. It is both.

Like a lot of films about Christ, it is what goes on in the background of THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (the betrayal, the flashbacks, the politics), which interest me more. That Gibson chooses to make the torture front and centre, is a brave move. It doesn't wholly come off, but at least he tried an alternate take on events, and for that, he deserves kudos.

[crocodile 8,033]

Yeah, rightly or wrongly, at least made a film that is "something". Rare enough.

 

Karol

[filmmusic 1,849]

2 hours ago, Mr. Who said:

I also heard that they are making a sequel about the resurrection.

I don't generally watch recent films but this is my most anticipated one, along with Terrence Malick's take on the story:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10937004

[GerateWohl 4,415]

49 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

 

True.

 

 

 

Yes, and no.

It depends on what one defines as "violent".

TOTAL RECALL (1990) is violent, but I do not regard THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST as violent, in the same way. In The Roman Empire, what happened to Jesus, was, more or less, the standard punishment. They had crucifixion; we have electrocution, or lethal injection.

Of course, the circumstances of his death were completely different...

If Gibson was trying to set out to educate the audience as to what exactly happened, from a forensic point of view, then he succeeded, admirably.

Where he is less successful, is in attempting to elicit an emotional response to what one is watching, due to the almost ultra-graphic nature of what's on screen.

The film, however, is heavy-handed, and rather naïve, if it expects the audience to be party to a man's torture and execution, and still be moved, in a positive sense, by it. For that, the violence needs to be dialed down. When it comes to this film, less would definitely have been more, but that would belie the point of the film.

There are many different filmed versions of the life, work, arrest, trial, torture, crucifixion, death, and resurrection, of Christ, that leave me in tears. THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is not one of them. That doesn't mean, however, that it is not a good, nor interesting, film. It is both.

Like a lot of films about Christ, it is what goes on in the background of THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (the betrayal, the flashbacks, the politics), which interest me more. That Gibson chooses to make the torture front and centre, is a brave move. It doesn't wholly come off, but at least he tried an alternate take on events, and for that, he deserves kudos.

I heard, that Passion of the Christ was especially well received by young adolsecent men, who just enjoyed watching one guy getting tortured and finished off by a group of guys.

[Bespin 8,492]

3 hours ago, crocodile said:

I love Scream 4. Very underrated.

 

Karol

 

I'm currently into the watching of Scream 2022, much more into the tone I was looking for.

 

But Scream 4 was an essential prerequisite... 

[A24 4,359]

3 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

 

Yes, and no.

It depends on what one defines as "violent".

TOTAL RECALL (1990) is violent, but I do not regard THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST as violent, in the same way. In The Roman Empire, what happened to Jesus, was, more or less, the standard punishment. They had crucifixion; we have electrocution, or lethal injection.

Of course, the circumstances of his death were completely different...

If Gibson was trying to set out to educate the audience as to what exactly happened, from a forensic point of view, then he succeeded, admirably.

Where he is less successful, is in attempting to elicit an emotional response to what one is watching, due to the almost ultra-graphic nature of what's on screen.

The film, however, is heavy-handed, and rather naïve, if it expects the audience to be party to a man's torture and execution, and still be moved, in a positive sense, by it. For that, the violence needs to be dialed down. When it comes to this film, less would definitely have been more, but that would belie the point of the film.

There are many different filmed versions of the life, work, arrest, trial, torture, crucifixion, death, and resurrection, of Christ, that leave me in tears. THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST is not one of them. That doesn't mean, however, that it is not a good, nor interesting, film. It is both.

Like a lot of films about Christ, it is what goes on in the background of THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (the betrayal, the flashbacks, the politics), which interest me more. That Gibson chooses to make the torture front and centre, is a brave move. It doesn't wholly come off, but at least he tried an alternate take on events, and for that, he deserves kudos.

 

A Christian, who loves the movie to death, once told me that you need to be religious to truly understand the value in the suffering of Jesus bearing his cross. 

 

But I saw it in the way you explained it in your post.

 

I'm not a person of faith, but I love Jesus Christ Superstar, The Last Temptation Of Christ and it saddens me that Paul Verhoeven never got to make his Jesus movie.

[Edmilson 7,510]

My parents watched The Passion of the Christ in the movie theater during the 2004 Easter. Both came back emotionally destroyed. My mom told me she covered her face during the most horrific parts.

 

I was too young for this movie, of course, so the only movie I saw in theaters during that Easter was... Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed (and I liked it).

[GerateWohl 4,415]

15 minutes ago, AC1 said:

A Christian, who loves the movie to death, once told me that you need to be religious to truly understand the value in the suffering of Jesus bearing his cross.

Believing and understanding are not really close relatives.

[Nick1Ø66 4,739]

15 hours ago, filmmusic said:

I didn't like a couple of caricature characters like Barabbas

 

Pretty sure you're not meant to like Barabbas.  It would be akin to saying you watched a WWII movie and didn't care for the Hitler character.

[Bilbo 3,709]

Master and Commander

 

Never saw it before but very enjoyable. Just a really well made and acted film. Would have made a great HBO series though. Not enough money to be made in the cinema for that type of film. 

[Brónach 1,302]

Just now, Bilbo said:

Master and Commander

 

Never saw it before but very enjoyable. Just a really well made and acted film. Would have made a great HBO series though. Not enough money to be made in the cinema for that type of film. 

 

the books go on forever

[Nick1Ø66 4,739]

3 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

Master and Commander

 

Never saw it before but very enjoyable. Just a really well made and acted film.

 

Peter Weir is just an amazing and incredibly underrated director. Gallipoli, Witness, The Mosquito Coast, Dead Poets Society, The Truman Show, Master & Commander, The Way Back..and that's just what I'm remembering off the top of my head. How many directors have a CV like that? Especially one so diverse.

[Bilbo 3,709]

3 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Peter Weir is just an amazing and incredibly underrated director. Gallipoli, Witness, The Mosquito Coast, Dead Poets Society, The Truman Show, Master & Commander, The Way Back..and that's just what I'm remembering off the top of my head. How many directors have a CV like that? Especially one so diverse.

Truman Show and M&C couldn’t be more different! Can’t believe I waited 20 years to watch it. It’s incredibly well made. 
 

It looks good but the sound is incredible. There’s so much going on but it never feels cluttered. Everything feels distinct. It’s not sensory overload like a lot of modern CGI blockbusters. 

[Brónach 1,302]

i enjoy the choice of having a ship that represents the surprise, and then having a cgi model that represents the acheron based on another historical ship, and then showing nothing from the pov of the other ship ever (except for an instant i think right before the climax)

 

a reconstruction of a british made ship represents a french made ship captured by the british (if we accept the idea from the book). a model of an historical usamerican ship represents a ship made in the us but later captured by the french, seemingly.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,633]

45 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

It would be akin to saying you watched a WWII movie and didn't care for the Hitler character.

The character of Hitler is, thanks to Bruno Ganz's towering performance, easily the most interesting thing about  DER UNTERGANG.

[Nick1Ø66 4,739]

6 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

The character of Hitler is, thanks to Bruno Ganz's towering performance, easily the most interesting thing about  DER UNTERGANG.

 

Well that goes without saying. I'd hope that the most interesting character in a movie about Hitler is Hitler.