Jump to content

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


Mr. Breathmask

Recommended Posts

Highlander is quite vague in my mind nowadays, but I don't really remember anything particularly flashy about it. Well, unless you mean Queen and pink neon.

Queen, pink neon, loud acting, high speed tracking shots, garish close ups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highlander is quite vague in my mind nowadays, but I don't really remember anything particularly flashy about it. Well, unless you mean Queen and pink neon.

Queen, pink neon, loud acting, high speed tracking shots, garish close ups.

Plus Sean as a Scottish Spaniard. I know what you mean, but it still maintains a nice grittiness despite the OTT schlock. Or maybe it's just the shitty VHS copy I last watched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, when has anyone ever discussed this movie here? The only time I recall is when I posted a short write-up about it a year or so ago.

When did we say that it has been discussed here? It just seems to be the general consensus on the film on the Internet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highlander is quite vague in my mind nowadays, but I don't really remember anything particularly flashy about it. Well, unless you mean Queen and pink neon.

Queen, pink neon, loud acting, high speed tracking shots, garish close ups.
Plus Sean as a Scottish Spaniard. I know what you mean, but it still maintains a nice grittiness despite the OTT schlock. Or maybe it's just the shitty VHS copy I last watched.
Up untill today ive only ever seen it on shitty VHS or crappy TV copies. It's actually quite a handsome film in HD, especially the Scotland scenes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huge guilty pleasure, I love how cheesy and daft it is. Ace movie!

I can't help but think all this shit the film is getting is undeserved.

Karol

I still enjoy the movie, and think it's better than the overrated Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. Ridley said he wasn't a fan of the previous interpretations, which depending on how you look at it, is a good or bad thing.

I was expecting something more. And I'm happy it does offer something new to the Robin Hood mythos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steef which version of Highlander did you watch? There's a director's cut available if I recall, with some WW2 scenes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besharam

I'm not too familiar with Bollywood films (unless you count Gurinder Chadha's Bride & Prejudice as one) but I can see why this particular genre is a huge one in India. The songs have a good beat and playfulness, with stunningly elaborate dancing and choreography, but the film grinds to a halt every time Ranbir Kapoor or Pallavi Sharda bursts into song. (And the film is way too long at 2 hrs and 23 minutes.)

It's certainly a culture trip, that's for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steef which version of Highlander did you watch? There's a director's cut available if I recall, with some WW2 scenes

I will assume he saw the version presented on Netflix, which is the only version I have seen. It contained footage of the hero saving a little girl from Nazis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cabin in the Woods. From what I've heard and read about this film I would have thought this was the second coming of Horror. It was pretty good, definitely played with the genre, and overall very enjoyable and quite fun. I didn't detect any lasting greatness beyond that, and I am a bit perplexed about the overwrought and unrelenting praise that's been slung in this film's direction. Again, I need to stress that I liked it, just reacting to the general temperature I gauged before watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I thought it was really great fun. The first time I saw it all I could think was how disappointed I was to have missed the chance to see it in theaters, with a good rowdy crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. The theatrical version (as presented during the live to music performance), for the first time in about 8 years. It feels really rushed in its third act. Funny, because this version is over 3 hours long. But at least Aragorn arriving with the dead army is handled better, even if that means him being absent from the large chunk of the story.

Karol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah in the TE you don't really see what happens to him in the Paths of the Dead and then he disappears for a long stretch of time. If you don't know the story it builds suspense and adds weight to the moment when he jumps of the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief

The supporting cast saves this film -- especially with Sean Bean and Kevin McKidd giving their characters more depth and personality than in the script. The leading characters aren't bad, but they're pretty bland. Chris Columbus, thanks to his work on the first two Harry Potter films, does pretty well here with the $95 million budget. Ultimately, the movie here is a decent time-waster, and the film is structured well as a one-off.

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

Even though the film was made on a slightly smaller budget ($90 million), everything about the film feels smaller. Aside from four primary actors returning (the trio plus Jake Abel), most of the supporting cast from the first film are either recast or written out. While having Anthony Stewart Head and Nathan Fillion in the film has its pleasures (mainly Fillion's scenes), the film suffers from the usual law of diminishing returns. (And a scene that blatantly rips off the Knight Bus scene in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban shows how desperate this film is.) Add the fact that the film ends on a cliffhanger, obviously hoping that enough money will ensure a follow-up -- and it's just shallow studio product.

Even Andrew Lockington, who usually does fine work, essentially phones in his score for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cloud Atlas

Not entirely sure how to sum up this one, except to say that I'll never get those 3 hours back.

6 movies in one? (mixed) No. NO, NO, NO. I was finding a few of them vaguely entertaining, but then it suddenly switches to another one, sometimes with some apparent connection/parallel world implication, and my brain goes to sleep for 5 minutes out of boredom. I completely lost what the hell was going on with the 70s one and the one with Hanks/Berry wandering around some mountains (and Hugo Weaving's character... what on earth was that all about?).

It may have started out as an interesting concept, but cinematically, this was a total mess, and roughly halfway through I was just getting frustrated with trying to understand what 'message' the film-makers were trying to get across here. As a whole, it comes across as very self-indulgent, and I think I cared about the fate of one character (one of Jim Broadbent's).

I liked the score though.

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.