Jump to content

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


Mr. Breathmask

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

What. The. Actual, dude?! :o

love HEAT, but, goodness knows, I'm no fan of TDK.

Having said that, I can see similarities.

It’s really only the prologue that directly homages it. Nolan even got William Fichtner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AC1 said:

 

Doesn't seem so unusual to me. If it was a nerd like Paul Giamatti, I would agree, but there's plenty of younger women that fall for a certain dangerous type of older men.  

But she thought he was a jeweller

 Didn't know he was a hood.

Plus , it's hard to believe she was so lonely she would take a much older man. Not credible.

But the rest of it is great!

Watched twice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

 

The irony is that, if the De Nero character didn't go after Waingro, they would have made it. It was his way of sabotaging the relationship, without saying so.

 

 

 

I read it differerently.

Deniro had always kept to " the discipline" of leaving everything behind.

But, he couldn't let the betrayal go. He couldn't overcome the blow to his ego. He had to get revenge.

sense of personal Affrontery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 minutes ago, bruce marshall said:

 

Plus , it's hard to believe she was so lonely she would take a much older man. Not credible.

 

Are you not familiar with the concept of young women being attracted to older men? It's a cliche in Hollywood, but it happens in real life too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AC1 said:

 

 

Are you not familiar with the concept of young women being attracted to older men? It's a cliche in Hollywood, but it happens in real life too.

Only in Hollywood.

 

Don't argue with me!

In your heart you know I'm RIGHT!😠😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently picked up Minority Report digital copy. I hadn't seen it in a while but I was surprised to find that the digital version was in 1:85. I also had no idea it was shot on Super 35, which can have mixed results, but in my experience tends to look have a grainier cropped look for whatever reason. I'm not sure how the decision was made to make the digital version open matte or why there's no choice in the matter in regards to OAR, but I really enjoyed this version. However, it is certainly an argument in favor of physical media.

 

minorityreport029.jpg

 

20200810_131800.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of all the example screen shots you could have made for us you chose to show us one where all we see is more Peter Stormare chest hair, Tom Cruise arm, and ceiling tiles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jay said:

Out of all the example screen shots you could have made for us you chose to show us one where all we see is more Peter Stormare chest hair, Tom Cruise arm, and ceiling tiles?

I rented the FULL SCREEN version.

I refuse to watch Super 35 if I have a choice.

I'm dying to see WH again- In full screen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it whatever you want, but I, among many others in the theatre, found myself tearing up by the final act. It doesn’t dethrone his best films, but it is Malick operating at his peak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

but that of a guy who acts to the last in accordance with his values and thus becomes an outsider in a community of potentially violent conformists.

 

I sympathize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, publicist said:

At worst, he's the master of whiny, self-absorbed fluff full of whispering voice-overs and pious esotericism that defies any narrative, but at best, which this movie thankfully is an example of, he finds the right subject for his endless contemplation.

Well said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.jpeg

 

1917

 

Independent cinemas are operating again, thankfully, as I would not have wanted to see this any other way. The single shot catch (two, actually) is hardly neccesary and comes off as more of a selling point than anything else, despite the effect being quite entrancing at its best. Still, falls short at multiple points where the style becomes something of a handicap and the script misses the tone (i.e. the scene with the French woman). Thankfully, Deakins and Newman hit some considerable heights, and elevate the experience above its shortcomings. The Night Window sequence is absolutely smashing, the rest often feels like it's trying too hard. Liked it, fine film. 

 

EDIT: Rating movies is stupid. It's an entirely subjective figure on a scale that varies from person to person, I don't even know why I still do that. 4/5 if it means anything to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2020 at 12:18 AM, SteveMc said:

Rating movies is fine.

 

On 8/13/2020 at 12:36 AM, KK said:

Yea, and his rating for the film was perfectly fine. 

 

Rating movies is fine and 4/5 is a pretty accurate rating of this particular movie, but the review didn't sound like a 4/5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True Lies - granted, Jamie Lee Curtis gyrating in underwear is hot as hell ... but the 'cheating wife' part of the plot is overlong and 'bogs down' the middle of this Ahnult/Cameron actioner quite badly. Fortunately, the rest of it is up to scratch (including an amusingly sleazy turn from Bill Paxton). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE TWO TOWERS (EE)

My goodness, but this is a rollickingly good film, isn't it?!

I've always liked it, but my recent viewing might be enough to convince me that it's my favourite LOTR film.

Being the middle section of a trilogy, it maintains a balance between moving the story forward and introducing new characters, while not letting the audience forget about established situations, and plot lines, and it does this magnificently.

Yes, it's slower than FOTR, and it's not as majestic as ROTK, but it really does stand tall, among the other two. The pace (I prefer to see TTT as the slow, second movement in a symphony) is leisurely, but not so slow, as to make you lose interest, and set-pieces (the battle of Helm's Deep; the battle of Isenguard) are accomplished with an artistic aplomb that rivals the other two films.

Of all the films in the trilogy, it seems to be the one that benefits the most from the extra footage. This elevates TTT into, probably, the most plainly dramatic, and character-driven of the three films, and this works to its advantage.

I like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Bean's Holiday.

 

Certainly not bad, though I seem to remember the first one was better. The opening of the film festival sequence is way too long and the fact that I don’t like Willem Dafoe doesn’t help either.

And again, the score is simply fantastic. Oui, oui, oui!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

I remember I was hooked on the main theme of the first film, and its frantic piano!

Oh yes! When he swaps the painting with the poster, the music is just spectacular!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2020 at 10:23 PM, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

I was surprised to find that the digital version was in 1:85.

 

minorityreport029.jpg

 

20200810_131800.jpg

 

Huh! The movie was theatrically released in 2.39 and the blu-ray that was released a couple of years ago was 2:39.

 

Most old DVDs also seem to be in 2.40 or 2.35, all I am able to find is an old Japanese DVD that seems to have been in 1.85:1. Curious.

 

When did this happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The director's cut and VHS of Star Trek VI looked better open matte.

 

The alien scene in Fire in the Sky shows more stuff open matte only available on VHS, although I could swear I saw an HD broadcast a few years ago opened to 1:85.

 

Super 35 tends to have a cropped claustrophobic look in my experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PuhgreÞiviÞm said:

Especially early films in the format like The Abyss.

It's a horrible format esp. for action films.

If you can watch Cameron films in full frame or 1:78 you will see how much better they look.

TITANIC was. an improvement but I still like the opening up of the frame.

 

GLADIATOR is better too. PERDITION was poorly framed in 1:33 but looks great I. 1:78.

About the only way to see some films 1"78 is cable. They often show 2:35 films in 1"78

 

The only film I can think of that didnt suck in S35 was NCFOM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ID4 looks fine opened up, for the most part. The 16:9 version reveals some special effects goofs that were also present in the 4:3 version like the initial shot of the city destroyer hovering over the White House where people are just casually walking by, which was concealed in the 2.35:1 version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

Opening up MR just gave it more of a classic Spielberg look in terms of framing. It made me question why it was ever cropped to 2:35.

Spielberg was trying to be " hip" ( Tarantino, Jackson, and Menzies )and let his dp talk him into using that format. You know , lots of grain and chopped off heads. Sheesh!

Sadly he also used it on MUNICH...WH...LINCOLN before coming to his senses and going back to anamorphic.

Can you imagine INDY in S35?😵

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Super-35mm. It tends to be a bit less resolute than anamorphic, but it also looks more natural.

 

The difference in detail/grain really isn't that big at all.

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.