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

[Jay 39,429]

I've very excited to one day finally see the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven. I hear its a totally different movie than the theatrical cut

[JoeinAR 1,953]

I've very excited to one day finally see the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven. I hear its a totally different movie than the theatrical cut

well those 8 seconds of unseen footage in the latest version of Blade Runner totally change the tone.

thanks BBT.

[A24 4,565]

Hannibal is a terrible movie, and yet it is facinating to watch.

A guilty pleasure, if ever there was one.

[Jay 39,429]

I've very excited to one day finally see the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven. I hear its a totally different movie than the theatrical cut

well those 8 seconds of unseen footage in the latest version of Blade Runner totally change the tone.

thanks BBT.

The Director's Cut of Kingom of Heaven is almost an hour longer than the theatrical cut

[JoeinAR 1,953]

yeah but it's a tale of the crusades, not my cup of tea.

[Jay 39,429]

I never said it was

Did you like Looper? I liked it but thought JGL's makeup looked awful. It was actually fine in the beginning of the movie, but starting with the scene where he first meets Bruce Willis it was just... weird looking for the rest of the movie.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

like you I liked it, didn't love it. The Bruce Willis make up on JGL was just creepy and it destroyed the your sense of disbelief rather than hightened it.

[Jay 39,429]

I came very close to loving it, I really enjoyed the story but I think the action scenes could have been handled a little better and a higher budget would have helped the effects in the some of the later scenes, and in showing the futuristic world in general. They didn't show too much future stuff, I think due to budget limitations. The cars with hoses on them looked silly rather than futuristic.

I did love the score, though.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

it had a score, I really didn't pay attention.

Emily Blunt was great I thought.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

I saw The Hunger Games on Friday. I didn't like it, it wasn't directed well. Too many close-ups and shaky-cam. Also they didn't explain the world at all, I saw it with 5 friends and we were all confused and didn't understand why things happened, we kept asking my GF (the only one who had read the book) what was going on. Even beyond that it just wasn't a very exciting movie, nothing really happened. Its 2 hours 20 minutes long, and the first literally HALF of the movie is setup, the games don't finally start until around 1 hour 10 minutes in. And even then, the main character spends most of the time strapped to a tree sleeping. Meh.

The actual Hunger Games aren't the main focus of the novels, the first half isn't set-up, that's the meat of the Katniss's story. You don't get to it until the last third of the book. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know how they handled that material. It's $15 on Amazon, I was gonna buy it but considering how Catching Fire is already filming, I have a feeling I'll be holding a trilogy set within 2 years.

I came very close to loving it, I really enjoyed the story but I think the action scenes could have been handled a little better and a higher budget would have helped the effects in the some of the later scenes, and in showing the futuristic world in general. They didn't show too much future stuff, I think due to budget limitations. The cars with hoses on them looked silly rather than futuristic.

I did love the score, though.

It's Rian Johnson, this was never going to be some big sci-fi action movie, which is precisely why I loved it. It feels very close to home, with splashes of sci-fi. My friend said he was expecting them to be using laser guns, or something like that.

As for the car augmentations, it makes economical sense. This city is not a prosperous one, there were plenty of vagrants around with high crime rates. Buying an attachment to your existing car to make it more fuel efficient is a better alternative to buying a brand new one like the loopers.

[Jay 39,429]

The score was really cool, only strings were live instruments, all the percussion and rhythm were made by recordings of sound from the world of the film, it was very cool.

I thought all the actors did fine. The little kid was great and

looked so much like JGL I was sure it was going to turn out to be him at a younger age but I guess it was just either coincidence or intentional misdirection.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

I didn't notice the similarity.

[Wojo 2,456]

Please Wojo, explain to Jason why worlds can have their own logic without any need of explanation.

Oh, because I was able to explain something to Joey that you agreed with? I'm sorry, but between that and my Django Unchained analogy, I've had more Agreeing With Alexcremers© for one day and think my head's about to collapse.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

I saw The Hunger Games on Friday. I didn't like it, it wasn't directed well. Too many close-ups and shaky-cam. Also they didn't explain the world at all, I saw it with 5 friends and we were all confused and didn't understand why things happened, we kept asking my GF (the only one who had read the book) what was going on. Even beyond that it just wasn't a very exciting movie, nothing really happened. Its 2 hours 20 minutes long, and the first literally HALF of the movie is setup, the games don't finally start until around 1 hour 10 minutes in. And even then, the main character spends most of the time strapped to a tree sleeping. Meh.

The actual Hunger Games aren't the main focus of the novels, the first half isn't set-up, that's the meat of the Katniss's story. You don't get to it until the last third of the book. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know how they handled that material. It's $15 on Amazon, I was gonna buy it but considering how Catching Fire is already filming, I have a feeling I'll be holding a trilogy set within 2 years.

I came very close to loving it, I really enjoyed the story but I think the action scenes could have been handled a little better and a higher budget would have helped the effects in the some of the later scenes, and in showing the futuristic world in general. They didn't show too much future stuff, I think due to budget limitations. The cars with hoses on them looked silly rather than futuristic.

I did love the score, though.

It's Rian Johnson, this was never going to be some big sci-fi action movie, which is precisely why I loved it. It feels very close to home, with splashes of sci-fi. My friend said he was expecting them to be using laser guns, or something like that.

As for the car augmentations, it makes economical sense. This city is not a prosperous one, there were plenty of vagrants around with high crime rates. Buying an attachment to your existing car to make it more fuel efficient is a better alternative to buying a brand new one like the loopers.

sorry but that doesn't make sense, it's simply because the film was a lower budgetted film, No way do I believe that in 30 years the Yaris will be king of the road.

[Muad'Dib 1,863]

Last films I watched:

Ivan the Terrible, Parts I and II (1944 and 1958) - 8/10

Probably Eisenstein's most Shakesperian work. The sets, the wardrobe and the light/camera work are simply amazing, a marvel to watch, and a lesson to any aspiring filmmaker. The music is fantastic too, athough not as brilliant as Prokofiev's previous work on Alexander Nevsky, but still great nonetheless.

It's insteresting to see how Part I presents Ivan as an almost God-like figure while Part II starts humanizing him and showing his darker aspects, as well as showing how ambivalent politics can be.

Stalker (1979) - 9.5/10

What can I say? Brilliant work by another fantastic Russian filmmaker, the great Tarkovsky. Another lesson in filmmaking, this is how everybody should approach their movies.

The ambiance created by this sort of post-apocalyptic world combined with the most subdued science-fiction I have ever seen in my life turn this picture into a near masterpiece. The only downside is that it should be even longer! The movie really left me wanting to explore more of this fascinating world.

Poltegereist (1982) - 8/10

What fun, what joy! I think it's been a long time since I purely enjoyed a film as much as this. It really had a Spielbergian feel, and it's no wonder since a lot people say he directed a lot of scenes himself. I reminded me of The Fury a lot, only this time the film itself was much better But it's still the same kind of enjoyment, a film that scares us but still has the guts to don't take itself so seriosuly and have fun too.

And what a brilliant score by Goldsmith. Particularly brilliant during the climax. Great stuff.

The Mission (1986) - 7.5/10

Overall it was good, but I was expecting so much more. In the end it left me a little dissapointed... Having heard Morricone's masterpiece work for years, I pictured this movie a lot differently. The result is a little clunky, and not directed as well as it could have been.

Irons is great, but I feel DeNiro is a little out of place, and I have the feeling he wasn't very well instructed regarding to what the hell was going on with his character (a little more development with his brother would have been nice...). Ennio's score and the gorgeous landscapes are the saving grace of this film, but again, it could have been so much more...

The Legend of 1900 (1998) - 9/10

You can never go wrong with Italian cinema. This is such a loving-crafted film that you can't help but enjoy the wonderful ride. Once you understand it's basically a fairy-tale, you can enjoy it peacefully. It's a film about music, with music... I can't really put into words, but if you're a music lover, you'll love this one. I'm sure.

Another winner by Ennio, too.

Thor (2011) - 6/10

Another dissapointment. I was expecting so much more from uncle Kenneth -being a fan of his acting and directing work-, but overrall the film bored me. I have no connection or knowledge with the source material, but I would have really liked to see more development regarding the brothers relationship between themselves and their father. In fact, the whole film felt rushed... Some quieter moments would have helped it a great deal, at least in my humble opinion.

It had the same feeling of "meh" as I had with Captain America, especially during the second and third acts. The first act of that one was okay, but once he actually turned into Cap, the film practically had nothing else to say, and it showed.

[Marian Schedenig 9,042]

The Legend of 1900 (1998) - 9/10

You can never go wrong with Italian cinema. This is such a loving-crafted film that you can't help but enjoy the wonderful ride. Once you understand it's basically a fairy-tale, you can enjoy it peacefully. It's a film about music, with music... I can't really put into words, but if you're a music lover, you'll love this one. I'm sure.

Another winner by Ennio, too.

One of the most amazing films I've seen.

[Delorean90 47]

Have either of you seen the longer original version? I've heard it's much superior to the American release (which is all I've seen, and I was a blubbering mess by the end of it).

[Koray Savas 2,254]

As for the car augmentations, it makes economical sense. This city is not a prosperous one, there were plenty of vagrants around with high crime rates. Buying an attachment to your existing car to make it more fuel efficient is a better alternative to buying a brand new one like the loopers.

sorry but that doesn't make sense, it's simply because the film was a lower budgetted film, No way do I believe that in 30 years the Yaris will be king of the road.

They had floating motorcycles, you think it was the budget? Seriously, look at the state that city's in. It's a dirty future that Johnson painted, and it makes sense to me. We aren't gonna be in spaceships in 30 years Joey, electric cars are much more plausible.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

yes electric cars are more plausible with modern design, not a Yaris.

Johnson showed both a beautiful and a dirty side, much like the real world is today. However I reject his vision of the future.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

I don't know what a Yaris looks like off the top of my head but I think I know which car you mean in the film. It's a car, one car. You're talking like the whole city was full of them.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

it was Koray, did you not pay attention, Johnson's future has lots of Yaris' and Ford F150 all solar powered.

[Marian Schedenig 9,042]

Have either of you seen the longer original version? I've heard it's much superior to the American release (which is all I've seen, and I was a blubbering mess by the end of it).

I've never seen the shorter version, actually. The uncut version is available on DVD and Blu-ray in Italy (e.g. via Amazon), with original English audio (obviously) and subtitles (although I have a feeling they're a translation of the Italian subs, as they're always correct in their meaning, but sometimes quite off in their wording).

[A24 4,565]

A terrible movie, yet pretty good looking and strangely entertaining? It must be Paul W.S. Anderson!

Alex

[BloodBoal 7,541]

How did you end up watching this?

[A24 4,565]

It was on TV.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,415]

the picture doesnt show for me Alex.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

That seems to happen a lot whenever Alex posts a movie poster.

[A24 4,565]

Fixed.

Oh, BTW, forget Milla Jovovich. Here's another reason to see Resident Evil: Afterlife!

Alex

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,415]

On my to do list!

I'm in the mood for some entertaining but mindless trash

[BloodBoal 7,541]

On my to do list!

I'm in the mood for some entertaining but mindless trash

Are you talking about the movie or the girl?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,415]

Hehehehe....

[A24 4,565]

There is something sexy about mindless trash, isn't it?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,415]

Again, the girl or the movie?

If you are talking about the movie, it's why I like Hannibal.

[A24 4,565]

Surely the girl is more sexy than Hannibal?

Jees, my son is watching Machete and it's such a terrible movie. As bad as a regular episode of NCIS. I'm really allergic to that movie. To think Rodriguez made Sin City (which I find hard to believe).

Alex

[Brónach 1,306]

Hard to believe? It doesn't seem to be that difficult to make.

[A24 4,565]

I'm not sure about that (in fact, I doubt it's easy) but it's a good movie. Perhaps Machete is more something for you. I hate it, so it must be.

[Brónach 1,306]

I haven't seen Machete. I would like it to be hilarious and fun, but I'm afraid it won't be.

I said that because they say Rodríguez adapted the comic book to be almost the same (only making it seem to be more surreal due to, ironically, maintaining the same visual style as the comic book). And Frank Miller co-directed the film.

[Quintus 5,449]

It's a perfect beer and mates movie. I enjoyed it quite a lot, plus that girl from Lost was fucking sex on a stick.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,415]

Rodriguez, like Tarantino to some extent still believe that their goal in life is to make more ambitious and expensive version of cheap-ass Z grade films.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

It's a perfect beer and mates movie. I enjoyed it quite a lot, plus that girl from Lost was fucking sex on a stick.

This. Machete was Rodriguez's most fun film since Desperado.

[Wojo 2,456]

Frankenweenie in 3D. Cute movie. Enjoyed the score.

[A24 4,565]

Rodriguez, like Tarantino to some extent still believe that their goal in life is to make more ambitious and expensive version of cheap-ass Z grade films.

Indeed, but Tarantino makes them a lot smarter, Steef. He adds a new emelent to them which gives these movies something fresh, a valid reason for existence, something that elevates them from just being dumb "mates and beers" movies. Machete felt tiresome from the get-go. Also, I don't regard Sin City as part of the modern exploitation wave. Like Watchmen and 300, it's an adult comic book movie.

Alex

[publicist 4,647]

MACHETE was a great idea for a 02:29-trailer. The movie is just a stinking POS.

[Quintus 5,449]

Hmm, I don't think Rodriguez is attempting to mimic or be like Tarantino at all actually. Watching Machete and Planet Terror, it's as if Rodriguez is sticking two fingers up to 'sophistication'; instead embracing schlock, tackiness and cruditiy.

When watching Tarantino, I'm never under the impression he's trying to be distasteful. Further more, just because those two are buddies doesn't necessarily accommodate worthwhile comparison, because imo they're very different directors. I for one have never thought of Lucas being in anywhere near the same realm as Spielberg where direction is concerned.

Lee - who after being tooled up with ale and made merry by daft jokes and piss taking among friends, couldn't be any less interested in elevation and sophistication if he tried. Leave that pursuit to those watching alone.

[A24 4,565]

Hmm, I definitely feel a "Tarantino Presents" while watching Machete or Planet Terror. Steef is right to say that both directors base their movies and style upon the exploitation cinema and grindhouse movies of the '70s. Are they different directors? Yes, it's why I can stomach Tarantino (for reasons I already stated) but not Rodriguez, although Planet Terror was a lot better than Machete.

Alex

[Melange 448]

I think the last movies I saw were ones on a plane.

(funny, and although McGregor seemed a bit young for the character type, he settled into it)

(very touching at some stages of the film, as well as being very funny).

Both are family friendly movies of the - 'Love actually" genre.

I probably wouldn't have chosen to watch them ordinarily, but I found them both surprisingly enjoyable.

[Quintus 5,449]

Well, I also feel a "George Lucas presents" when watching Temple of Doom, but in no way do I attribute that movie's deftness to his association. And that includes all that "divorce darkness" bullshit actually. On the other hand, I do watch Back to the Future thinking it's very Spielbergian - he and Zemeckis were almost indistinguishable in that movie. I would never say something similar about Tarantino and Rodriguez, based on what they've done so far anyway.

both directors base their movies and style upon the exploitation cinema and grindhouse movies of the '70s.

Of course, that's completely undeniable. I think we're perhaps coming at this from different angles, or through misunderstanding. I'm merely stating that the two directors approach the genre from very opposite ends. Oh and I much preferred Planet Terror to Death Proof.

[A24 4,565]

Of course, that's completely undeniable. I think we're perhaps coming at this from different angles, or through misunderstanding. I'm merely stating that the two directors approach the genre from very opposite ends. Oh and I much preferred Planet Terror to Death Proof.

Ah, good because I don't think anyone said Rodriguez is aping Tarantino.

[Quintus 5,449]

It was implied that Rodriguez's take on exploitation lacks sophistication (of Tarantino); which is precisely the point - Rodriguez wasn't aiming for it to begin with. As I said, PT and Machete are very much an open celebration of trash cinema and that absolutely includes the straight-up awfulness associated with the genre. Although even that isn't without caveats - seeing as knowing irony is in clear evidence throughout both movies.

If anything, Death Proof, which should have been a great little throwaway chase thriller along the lines of Spielberg's Duel (Ooo the delicious irony...), was totally ruined by Tarantino's "sophistication" - read: chubby indulgence.

[publicist 4,647]

I think the last movies I saw were ones on a plane.

(funny, and although McGregor seemed a bit young for the character type, he settled into it)

(very touching at some stages of the film, as well as being very funny).

And both have surprisingly good scores, especially the Newman, which is as eclectic as it is entertaining.