Jump to content

What Is The Last Film You Watched? (2020 films)


Recommended Posts

Exclusive Trailer for Sound of Metal - YouTube

 

Sound of Metal

 

Fantastic film well deserving of its Oscar nominations, especially Riz Ahmed and Paul Raci who were both excellent.


The plot concerns a recovering (from drug addiction) drummer in a heavy metal duo (the other member is lead singer/guitarist and his girlfriend Olivia Cooke) who begins to lose his hearing a few years into his recovery.  He ends up staying at a home run by a deaf Vietnam vet (Raci) where he learned to cope with his new status in life while weighing the option of getting expensive and not guaranteed to work cochlear implant surgery.

 

This film has some of the best sound design I've ever heard.  Many scenes put you into the headspace of how Ahmed hears the world, in various different ways, such as making everything feel distant and muddled, or only hearing the bass, or certain sounds appearing more up front than others, etc.  It's a shoe-in to win the Oscar.

 

One of the best films of 2020 for certain.  It's free on Amazon Prime

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 613
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I like to think this is the dumbest superhero movie ever made... Just watch this, at least it should make you laugh about the script  

KK and Edmilson get points for endurance. I could stomach more than 10 or 20 minutes of The Midnight Sky.  

So you probably missed the glorious opening tracking shot that culminates in the reveal of the MacGuffin (and Herrmann's leitmotif for it).

Watched The Invisible Man for the first time. Loved it. Amazing film! Should have been nominated for VFX at the oscars.

Moss is terrific and the tension the movie is able to build with silence and long takes is amazing. Amd in that way the few jumpscares that were in the film felt very much earned instead of there to just scare you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup! It's so expertly crafted. After seeing and loving what Whannel did with UPGRADE, I was curious to see what he'd do with a bigger budget and more of a mainstream picture, and he completely knocked it out of the park. Can't wait to see what he's got next

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no idea either, until the movie was over and I saw "Directed by Leigh Whannell" in the credits and I was like oh wow, of course!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This weekend, we watched not 1, not 2, but 3 black and white films..... first up was

 

The Forty-Year-Old Version' Review | Finding a Voice | by Nick Shadix |  Medium

 

The 40 Year Old Version

 

Unfortunately this is kind of a dud.  It seemed funny enough from the trailer and general idea (unsuccessful near-40 Brooklyn playwright decides to pursue a rap career), but while Radha Blank might have a knack for coming up with good concepts and individual scenes, the overall story here is completely scatterbrained, has no flow, and lumbers through an indulgent 2 hour 9 minute running time.


There was nothing special about the cinematography nor any good reason I could see for shooting in black&white, other than perhaps the final shot where color begins to enter his life, but that was so heavy handed it was eye rolling and not eye opening.

 

Not recommended.  It's free on Netflix

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next up for our B&W triple feature was

 

David Fincher's 'Mank' Trailer Debuts

 

Mank

 

I have never seen Citizen Cane and didn't know anything about it's creation and production; This film purports to be that story, but come to find out Herman J. Mankiewicz writing the script in 1940 is only a framing story that takes up probably less than 30 minutes of screentime; The bulk of the 2 hour 11 minute running time is flashbacks to various interactions Mankiewicz has at various studios and with various notable people throughout 1930s Hollywood.  Towards the end of the film it becomes clear why Fincher decided to make this film now, as one of these story threads is about the 1934 California governor's election between a Republican candidate backed by head of MGM Studios Louis B. Mayer, and Williams Randolph Hurst, against Democratic candidate Upton Sinclair, who it seems would have won if not for Mayer and Hurst's interference.

 

Gary Oldman is oddly cast; Mankiewicz was 43 years old when writing Citizen Kane and in his 30s for all the flashbacks, but Gary Oldman is 63 years old - and looks it, at all times!  I love Gary Oldman and he's generally great in every role, but I didn't find anything particular remarkable about this one.  Charles Dance was his usual self as Hurst, and Amanda Seyfried was maybe a step above one-note as his mistress Marion Crane.  I was left thinking her story would have made for a better story than Mankiewicz's, or even an entire movie on just the 1934 election.

 

The film is so indulgent in these flashbacks, the actual interesting part of Mankiewicz's life as it pertains to Citizen Kane - that him and Orson Wells fought over screenwriting credit, and because Hurst banned all mention of it in his papers it bombed at tge box office - is only barely mentioned before the film quickly wraps up.

 

So while I was not engaged by the story or characters for the most part, the cinematography and set design was very much top notch.  The two combine to really transport you back to old time Hollywood and there were often interesting framing and lighting choices to admire when the story wasn't being very compelling.  I think Fincher went overboard with some indulgences though, like putting in fake cigarette burns in the corners throughout the whole film.  Too much!

 

I'm glad I saw it before the Oscars, but I'll probably never watch it again.  It's free on Netflix.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jay said:

The film is so indulgent in these flashbacks

 

Well, Citizen Kane is *the* original flashback movie, so I suppose that's the reason, for better or worse. I haven't seen Mank yet (it's certainly on the list), but Kane is absolutely worth seeing. It's an excellent film with a great cast and great score, and the cinematography is still top notch 80 years later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

I watched it just once at class, during my first year in college. If I remember correctly, I believe I lost about 5 minutes of screentime of the beginning of the movie due to arriving late for class.

 

So you probably missed the glorious opening tracking shot that culminates in the reveal of the MacGuffin (and Herrmann's leitmotif for it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is I watched it because of all the praise for the SCORE- I like to see the film FIRST.

 

IDIOT#😵

1 hour ago, bruce marshall said:

WONDER WOMAN 1984

 

Maybe, I'm just the wrong demographic for these films ....

 

No. It just sucked.

Imdb reviewers agree,  and most of them were fans of the first one!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The film was terrible, really disappointing (with a few cool parts) 

 

The score is fun

Link to post
Share on other sites

SOUL

 

Strange film.

It started out very strong, if reminiscent of the wonderful INSIDE OUT.

Then, they throw in that tired trope about body switching! Oy vey!

Thankfully, it didn't last too long before returning to its metaphysical roots.

And, boy was that a emotionally satisfying ending. I was in tears.

On 1/4/2021 at 12:29 PM, JoeinAR said:

Lets see watched WW 84 lots of fun.

 

 

If that comment doesn't earn at least a one year ban, I don't know what does!

 

 

😝

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2021 at 2:17 AM, bruce marshall said:

The irony is I watched it because of all the praise for the SCORE- I like to see the film FIRST.

 

IDIOT#😵

No. It just sucked.

Imdb reviewers agree,  and most of them were fans of the first one!

Using imdb reviews as part of your argument totally destroys any argument you might have had.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

UsingJWFAN reviews as part of your argument totally destroys any argument you might have had.

I didn't go by them. I read them after watching to see what  others thought; I acknowledge I may.not be the audience for MCEU films.

IMDB Fans who write thoughtful reviews are usually pretty reliable.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

News of the World movie review (2020) | Roger Ebert

 

News of the World

 

Hey this movie is pretty good!  I was expecting it to be Tom Hanks going around and reading the news to a bunch of towns in the old west, and while that happens a few times, it's largely a road trip action flick with Hanks continually facing new adversaries as he tries to get a twice orphaned German girl to relatives she has on the other side of Texas.

 

Some of the action scenes were impressive, which shouldn't have surprised me coming from Paul Greengrass.  The setting of 1870 post-Civil War Texas was wonderfully realized, and the various interactions he has with some former soldiers and townsfolk makes you think about how little has changed in 150 years in some respects.

 

James Newton Howard's score had some really nice parts that stood out and made me want to check out the score album.

 

It's $6 on VOD

Link to post
Share on other sites

the-father-movie-review-2021.jpg

 

The Father

 

A simple but highly effective film that really tries to be in the mind of someone drowning. One of Hopkins' most compelling performances in years, the kind that doesn't at all feel constructed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, can't wait to see that one as soon as it shows up on streaming... or maybe $6 VOD (still $20 VOD here as of right now)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, of course it sounds like that, but that automatically mean that it is. I had no interest when I first heard about it either, but then when my movie podcast reviewed it I learned it was actually something special 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2021 at 1:41 AM, AC1 said:

Hopkins with dementia sounds like Oscar bate though ...

 

On paper, yea, but it transcends that I think. None of it feels conceited. And the whole thing is actually rather clever in how it tries to emulate the experience rather than just trying to bait the audience with trauma porn.

 

Hopkins' performance is quite devastating by the end however. What a pro.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love and Monsters

 

Post-apocalyptic movies shouldn't be light-hearted, fun and romantic, but this one is maybe the first few good movie set in the last days of mankind.

 

It has a fun script, charismatic characters, great use of visual effects for the monsters. But it can be also very scaring sometimes, with great setpieces involving the monsters.

 

Beltrami's score is unremarkable though. The movie makes better use of pre existing songs.

 

I recommend it. It's "free" on Netflix, at least if you live outside the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MANK

 

 

Very enjoyable for the most part!
Absolutely loved Oldman. Though he may be a bit old for the role it fits his style of acting perfectly.

I like that it wasn't a  " Making of..." film but more a portrait of a a man and an era.

The stuff about Upton Sinclair - probably;t completely unknown to modern audiences- made the film for me.

 

Im sure a lot of the film is fictionalized but they did not

pretend they were making a " factual' biopic .

 

Well worth seeing!

Link to post
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.