Jump to content

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


Mr. Breathmask
 Share

Recommended Posts

Its different with 35mm because anamorphic allows you to use more negative area, instead of cropping. Good anamorphic footage tends to look a bit better than Super-35mm or even a RED One. That's what I mean by "when you CAN not use anamorphic."

 

But with 65mm? There's absolutely no change in the overall picture area, its just obscenely wide and distorted, plus anamorphic lenses tend not to be as sharp, and given that medium-format lenses aren't too sharp to begin with, that's a problem. Same with 35mm 2.55:1 Cinemascope.

 

As a stylistic device - like when one is using 16mm footage or black-and-white to convey something - fine; but to shoot a whole movie with it? The days of anamorphic are over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

The days of anamorphic are over.

 

Not at all! Anamorphic lenses are used all the time. People (filmmakers great and small) love the look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, its a look that only works for 35mm because you're getting more negative area and therefore it plays on a larger screen better.

 

But, when there is no difference in the negative area or resolution (or once we truly hit a plateau in terms of picture quality), spherical always looks more natural and therefore better.

 

Its also more versatile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reservoir dogs.

It took us 20 minutes to sync the subtitles to the Blu-Ray rip because, would you know it, it wasn’t on Netflix. Pretty good movie. Maybe a little too much storytelling, but the premise was quite interesting and all the actors were great.

Most of the songs were excellent.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Þekþiþm said:

The wide selection of movies still using it says otherwise.

 

I mean going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

I mean going forward.

 

Filmmakers obviously like its distinctive aesthetic characteristics like oval shaped bokeh, slightly distorted heads, field of view and overall dreaminess. It makes you feel like you're visting a Hollywood fantasy world that standard spherical lenses can't quite achieve. Who are you to say filmmakers shouldn't use it? Are you a studio bean counter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it won't find use as a deliberate stylistic device, but I expect it would be a small niche. Just like shooting in Black-and-White. We still get B/W films, but by and large, once filmmakers had the possibility to feasibly shoot in colour, the vast majority of them took it in both hands. I expect the same to happen to anamorphic as we're moving to larger and larger (digital) formats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Þekþiþm said:

But I like it when they shoot new movies to look like old movies. Not that sterile digital shit.

 

Anyhoo, I just watched Kill Bill. Did they ever make a sequel?

 

- I like the old anamorphic look and the new digital look. 

 

 - You know very well Tarantino made a 4-hour movie which he then split in two volumes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm watching King Kong (1976)... since 3 days... I hope to finish it this week.

 

Nice John Barry Score!

 

I didn't know, but this movie was Jessica Lange début!

 

Maybe if I was an ape...

 

Jessica Lange, King Kong, 1976 | TV, Film, and Famous Folk ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Die another day.

 

Not sure how I feel about Bond being captured for more than a year and I didn’t really like the villains. On to the women. Peaceful Fountains of Desire is an awesome name and Halle Berry and Rosamund Pike are great, but Emilio Echevarría’s accent is really annoying, as are the never-ending action sequences. John Cleese and Pierce Brosnan are great, though the latter mispronounced mojito. Great final scene with Moneypenny too.

The song is atrocious. There was me thinking nothing could possibly be worse than Adele. Luckily, Madonna’s cameo is better. I don’t understand why the score was criticised for its overreliance of electronics, but I did think the first lovemaking cue resembled that of the previous entry too much and it was unnecessarily ominous and mournful for this scene, but that didn’t make it any less beautiful and the love material also kept getting better. I really liked the returning villain theme on piano and that Bond theme never gets old. The choral contributions came as a pleasant surprise and the action cues are all good. Dynamic sound mix too. No, not that song again!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bespin said:

I'm watching King Kong (1976)... since 3 days... I hope to finish it this week.

 

Nice John Barry Score!

 

I didn't know, but this movie was Jessica Lange début!

 

Maybe if I was an ape...

 

 

Since 3 days?

Why? Don't you like it?

 

This is one of my favourite movies, that i watched a lot as a kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be a bit kitch, by today's standards, and, of course, it can't hold a candle to 1933, but it's got more heart and soul in any given shot, than 2005 has, throughout its entire running time (now that really is godawful!!).

John Barry's score is absolute lush. An easy top-five Barry, for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a beautifully shot movie, I guess I watched a remastered version, it was great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

it's got more heart and soul in any given shot, than 2005 has, throughout its entire running time (now that really is godawful!!).

 

Heart? HEART? It has a creepily-sexualized relationship between a woman and a "giant" ape. Urgh...

 

2005's King Kong was too long and overwrought, but at the end - no matter how long it took to get there - I felt things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nostalgia! That's all it is! Bespin and filmmusic had King Kong (2005). I, Spielberg, Lucas and Lynch had The Wizard Of Oz (1939)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

Heart? HEART? It has a creepily-sexualized relationship between a woman and a "giant" ape. Urgh...

 

2005's King Kong was too long and overwrought, but at the end - no matter how longer it took to get there - I felt things.

 

Right, 70s movies weren't dark and disturbing enough for today's more sophisticated audience members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Heart? HEART? It has a creepily-sexualized relationship between a woman and a "giant" ape. Urgh...

2005's King Kong was too long and overwrought, but at the end - no matter how longer it took to get there - I felt things.

Yeah? Well, 1976's had The fucking Dude! M'lud, the case for the defence rests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roar (1981)

What the actual flying fuck?! :eek2::eek2::eek2:

And I thought Alien and Jaws were scary. This is the most terrifying film I've ever seen.

Handily.

 

**** out of ***** for sheer bonkers-ness.

Damn!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Forget it, Roar is ten times scarier than both films put together.
 

Overwhelmingly terrifying.

 

Chen, 2020 has been a year of continual upsets and surprises, if it also reveals that you have a sense of humor I don't know what I'll do with myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I were joking.

 

Maybe scary isn’t the right word, though. To me say it makes you anxious would be a better way of putting it, perhaps.

 

Its very hard to explain. There’s really nothing else like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KK said:

Watched Raimi's original Spider-man with the family yesterday. It's an unashamed soapbox, and I love it. Man I miss when superhero movies used to take its own stakes seriously. 

 

And Elfman's score is fantastic. 

 

Yes! It's such a genuine, heartfelt film, with an impressive blend of earnest pathos and silly antics...same goes for the sequel, with Elfman knocking it out of the park twice.

 

Back when a director could make a film of theirs featuring a superhero, instead of a director making a Superhero Film.

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

I wish I were joking.

 

Maybe scary isn’t the right word, though. To me say it makes you anxious would be a better way of putting it, perhaps.

 

Its very hard to explain. There’s really nothing else like it.

 

 

Screenshot_20200503-183915_Firefox.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KK said:

Watched Raimi's original Spider-man with the family yesterday. It's an unashamed soapbox, and I love it. Man I miss when superhero movies used to take its own stakes seriously. 

 

And Elfman's score is fantastic. 

Great minds indeed. Did a Spider-man double feature myself not but two days ago! Both the original and the second are hearty and wholesome entertainment from a time when superhero movies were still made thoughtfully. As for Elfman, I most certainly concur!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jojo Rabbit

 

A decently pleasant diversion. Story felt a bit thin at times, and it often felt like it was aping the style of Wes Anderson, but it had some charms of its own, along with some unexpectedly poignant moments.  Really enjoyed Roman Griffin Davis’ central performance; the relationship between his character and his mother gave the movie a lot of heart. 
 

*** and 1/2 out of *****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spider-Man is more of a human drama with the comic book elements one would expect given that it's Spider-Man. But I was surprised how endearing the characters were and that the trilogy was basically a love story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nick Parker, distributors must have marketed it as a "comedy" but it really doesn't aptly describe this bonkers movie. If I laughed uncontrollably (and did I ever!) it was a mixture of compensating for my unease and the sheer bonkers-ness of the movie.

 

This should get post-converted to 3D and shown on IMAX. On the other hand, no it shouldn't, because people would get heart attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

aff59aaa7af256a7a533d7f52de86eac.jpg

 

A Short Film About Killing

 

I think I like it better than Veronique and Blue. It's uglier, less refined, but ultimately more focused in structure and message. Still, when it comes to the second half, a part of my brain was taken aback by how the film was trying to get me to sympathize with someone who just committed cold, senseless murder. There was no reasonable justification for it, whatsoever. But perhaps that's what makes it difficult to digest. To see two senseless murders being committed, side-by-side. Like some of Kieslowski's other films, I also suspect the statement this film was making in the political climate of its time might be responsible for its glorified reputation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Timecop - as an actor Van Damme makes a great kickboxer, lol. Still, this bit of sci-fi action guff passed a couple of hours on a Monday night and at least the mid-90s was the period during which they could still rope in the likes of Ron Silver and Mia Sara in support of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 Steps. 

Thoroughly entertaining. This Hitchcock fellow has style. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Way Out (1987) | Jesters Reviews

 

No Way Out

I enjoy a good, taut grey-shaded Cold War thriller.  Thus, I enjoyed this one.  Cast is pretty strong.  Kevin Costner plays a sharp and handsome Navy "everyman" who falls in love with a high level escort (Sean Young) who's also involved with the Secretary of Defense, played by Hackman.   

Nice engaging direction.  Keeps you in your seat even as the plot kind of stagnates.  The script is not quite as good as maybe the filmmakers thought it would be.  It kind of sags in places, and really is kind of thin in the logic department when you think about it.

Plus, the romantic scenes are accompanied by generic 80s elevator songs, which makes you think for a moment you've accidentally switched over to Lifetime or something. 

Anyway, solid enough.

3/4

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.