What is the Last Film You Watched? - Part II

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Once. Charming little film. Reminded me of a Lelouch film in it's minimal story. Straight, spare, with good performances and soem nice songs. ***/****.

Is it difficult to sit through/any cringe-worthy moments? I'm planning on seeing this with company and I'm cautious.

[Morlock 11]

Oh, I don't think so. The ending may be a bit too sweet for some, but can also be seen as perfect by others....no, I was pleasantly surprised by how relatively tones down it was, yet still being a nice little fantasy. And about 60% of the movie is music, and generally not at all gushy or forced.

[Goldsmithfan 6]

The last movie I watched was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Entertaining as ever. I'm probably going to watch The Last Crusade tonight. I just got around to the DVD set (widescreen of course) so I've got to make sure they play alright. Although... buying it now might have been futile since the fourth installment is coming next year. Who knows what Luscasfilm has up their sleeves?

[Red 75]

I've been on an Indiana Jones bender the past couple of days. Raiders remains my favorite, but I enjoy them all very much, even finding new things in them to appreciate. If Spielberg and company manage to match any film in the trilogy they will have done their job and more for Crystal Skulls.

[Ollie 1,059]

I pulled out a DVD I hadn't watched in awhile; Trinity And Beyond. A great look at the US and to a lesser extent Russia and China's atomic bomb developement. Fantastic footage of the atomic and nuclear bomb tests.

It also features a very good score by William Stromberg and John Morgan.

[Maglorfin 196]

Two classics: The Omen, to be closely followed by The Exorcist.

[Morlock 11]

The Omen is hardly a classic.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's a solid semi-classic though.

[Morlock 11]

Yeah, I guess it's got something about it. Still a pretty silly movie.

[robthehand 3]

The Exorcist is a classic. The Omen has a lot going for it (terrific acting and score, but a very silly script). It's a lot of fun, but not in the same league as The Exorcist, IMO.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

I'd classify The Omen as a classic. Not a great movie by any means (though quite entertaining), but well-known and old enough to be a "classic".

(I don't see what's any better about The Exorcist though)

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Well The Exorcist is considered the best horror movie ever made. I think it deserves that title along with The Shining, the only two movies that ever scared me the first time I saw them.

[indy4 155]

National Treasure 2: The Book of Secrets: I enjoyed it quite a bit. The acting was great, particularly between Jon Voight and the mom (I forget her name). Nicolas Cage and Ben (forget his name, too) were a riot most of the time. The plot was much less believable than the first, and some of the chase scenes (particularly the ones involving cars) were a bit long and tiresome, but not bad at all. The first one is still superior, but this is certainly a great film, especially for a sequel. ***1/2/*****

The score was....not that great, IMO. The best parts of it were just rehashed from the first film, and the "Luke and Leia" theme got quite annoying. JW's version is great, but I really didn't find anything special about Rabin's.

I loved that Goofy short movie in the beggining, it was very "Classic Disneyish." I wonder if we'll be seeing a short from Mickey and friends for every new (non-Pixar) Disney film? I hope so!

[Ollie 1,059]

Disney is going back to traditional hand drawn animated shorts before their films.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

Well The Exorcist is considered the best horror movie ever made. I think it deserves that title along with The Shining, the only two movies that ever scared me the first time I saw them.

The Shining scared me. Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the remake with Sutherland) scared me. Don't Look Now scared me. The Tenant and The Descent scared me.

The Exorcist didn't.

[indy4 155]

Disney is going back to traditional hand drawn animated shorts before their films.

Yes!

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Well The Exorcist is considered the best horror movie ever made. I think it deserves that title along with The Shining, the only two movies that ever scared me the first time I saw them.

The Shining scared me. Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the remake with Sutherland) scared me. Don't Look Now scared me. The Tenant and The Descent scared me.

The Exorcist didn't.

The Descent scared you?!?

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

Yes... and I believe that was its intent.

[Goldsmithfan 6]

I'd classify The Omen as a classic. Not a great movie by any means (though quite entertaining), but well-known and old enough to be a "classic".

I wholeheartedly concur.

(I don't see what's any better about The Exorcist though)

I'm so very, very glad I wasn't the one to say it. I read the book before I saw the film and was thoroughly underwhelmed by the film version. People never seem to grasp the idea given the fact that the film is virtually word for word, but the operative word here is "virtually". The scenes which were in the book and not the film allowed for a much greater build-up as well as the growing idea in the reader's mind that perhaps Regan is just troubled. In the film, no such luck. She was possessed. Period. The flame exploding from the candle when Chris when to check the attic was one of those pandering horror moments added to the screenplay that just wrecked it for me.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Same thing goes with The Omen, as Damien might just be a rather accident prone kid surrounded by a lot of paranoid religious nuts, only I think Donner's film handled that ambiguity better than Friedkin's.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Yes... and I believe that was its intent.

By The Descent do we mean that rather recent film when they go in the caves?

[pixie_twinkle 48]

The Exorcist is one of those films that gives me uneasy dreams the night after watching it every time! I don't know why that film gets to me every time but it really does. It's the epitome of slowly-building terror, which is for me the only way to make a true horror film.

I hate horror films that hide their true horror behind scenes of humour, or behind a pretense to appeal to a hip crowd. Films like the first Nightmare on Elm Street which , while still being very effective, nonetheless rely too much on humour. It's almost as if the filmmakers weren't confident enough in their ability to completely frighten the audience so they keep saying "It's ok, it's meant to be funny!"

IMO the best horror films don't need to rely on gore, humour, or incredible special effects. They just need to be single-minded in their gradual build-up of the feeling of pure, unadulterated terror in the audience.

The best of the best in my opinion:

The Exorcist

The Haunting (1962 version)

Susperia

Night of the Demon

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

Jacob's Ladder

Dark Water (Japanese version)

Don't Look Now

Psycho

As for The Omen (1976), I think it truly is a great film. The acting is for the most part excellent. Patrick Troughton is absolutely deranged as the fallen priest, and David Warner gives his all-time best performance. The Omen comes very close to being on my list. It beats pretty much any horror film made over the last 20 years.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

What about The Shining? I think the most effective horror films are the ones in which the horror never dies. Most of them are resolved, the monster/enemy dies, all is well in the end. Something like The Shining is just frightening that the hotel will continue to exist forever.

[Red 75]

The Shining is one of the most disturbing (and brilliant) films I've ever seen. It is a horror classic, featuring a couple of the scariest scenes of all time.

[pixie_twinkle 48]

Ok, I knew I'd remember other great horror classics as soon as I posted my list! The Shining certainly deserves its place. There are many others too. "Picnic at Hanging Rock" is very creepy. Still, these films are mostly over 20 years old. The only recent films that really scared me were Dark Water and Ringu, both made by Hideo nakata.

[SturgisPodmore 0]

Does anyone know who played the scientist lady at the very beginning of the movie? I could have sworn it was the wonderful Emma Thompson, but I couldn't find a credit for that part on IMDB (albeit not the best sourse of information).

Yes, it's Thompson. She did the part uncredited.

Thanks, Henry, I knew I wasn't crazy!

I watched The Shining with some friends this Halloween because I know it's supposed to be a horror classic, and it was definately scary (the scariest parts for me being the twins in the hall and the flashes to the massacre, and of course Jack's craziness) if a little confusing. This was the first Kubrick film I had seen, and his unusual style was hard to get used to, with the sudden swells of dissonant music and sound effects, but I liked the weirdness of it all after a while. I got the whole hotel-control thing, but what was the deal with the sudden influx of ghostly happenings when the mom was running around the hotel at the end (particularly the seemingly inexplicable person in an animal suit she witnessed in a hotel room and then ran away)?

~Sturgis

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I was expecting The Shining to be much scarier. I was at the edge of my seat waiting eagerly for Jack Nicholson to axe his way through the door and say "Here's JOHNNY!" After that, I was bored.

[Maglorfin 196]

I'd classify The Omen as a classic. Not a great movie by any means (though quite entertaining), but well-known and old enough to be a "classic".

I wholeheartedly concur.

So do I.

Watched the documentary Best Ever Bond this morning (I guess this is old news, being made in 2002, however I've seen it for the first time). Cool stuff.

[A24 4,331]

Adrift: I liked it despite some negative elements here and there. Of course, the film exploits our primal fears but you really get a sense of despair. And even though not one of the characters was captivating, the film itself kept me interested all the way through.

Alex

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

By The Descent do we mean that rather recent film when they go in the caves?

We do.

I also liked the original The Haunting, as mentioned by pixie. Wise made the house look like an actual evil character. The remake is garbage.

[Morlock 11]

House of Games. David Mamet's directorial debut. I thought I liked Mamet...but I've only liked the movies he's written, and the one movie he's made not based on his own material. I thought this movie was mundane and not terribly interesting. The star (Mamet's then wife) is terrible. Joe Mantegna lights up the screen a bit, but the story is just so subdued and uninteresting......I did not like this one. **/****.

The New World. I decided to give Malick another shot. And it wasn't much a revelation.

The first section of the film is easily the best. By the 10 minute point, I was totally enraptured by the film. I love the extended 'getting to know you' scene between Smith and Pocahontas.

After that, the film mostly lost me. Once Smith leaves the Indian village, and comes back to Jamestown, it becomes vague, unfocused, boring, and very flabby. The depiction of the inside-workings of the settlement are extremely uninteresting, and the occaisional meetings with Pocahontas are very vague. The big fight in the middle is terribly done. Totally and utterly ineffective in any way imaginable. No music, badly placed sound, confusing and ineffective editing.

Once Smith leaves Pocahontas, the movie does get more interesting, at least for a little while. Her relationship with Rolfe is also beautifully and quietly done. But it doesn't last long. The first depiction of the arrival in England is interesting, particularly the heartbreaking little scene with the Indian (the inimitable Wes Studi, who is criminally under-used here) sent by the chief to count how many white men he sees. But the scenes with Pocahontas taking on the visage of British nobility are not effective. The final scene between her and Smith feels like it's good...but the dialogue is rather inept. In general, the dialogue is rather inept. Often scenes feature dialogue that doesn't have much connection to what was said before.

The movie's editing is problematic. Often you see the film cut to black and restart again at a later point, it literally feels like there should be a 'SCENE MISSING' screen in between. And Often, Malick feels that cutting to some random shot of nature will add some depth in a transition between two scenes that don't necasserily go together.

The music is a mixed bag. The Wagner is distruptive, although it does have power in the begining of the begining of the film, the approach of the ships. The Mozart always feels out of place. Horner's work is fine, but it really doesn't get much room in the movie. It feels like it just fills in the gaps between the natural ambiance, Mozart and Wagner.

The film looks beutiful, obviously. And, of course, that is the biggest flaw in the film. It generally feels like the film does nothing but look beautiful. The characters rarely come alive. They do in the simple and often impressionistic montages between Pocahontas and Smith in the first third, and Pocahontas and Rolfe in the last third. But, in between, and, for me, in the final scenes, they don't.

Overall? The film struck me viscerally at times, bored me to death at times. I felt no concept to be dealt with in any particularly amazing way, save for maybe the first thanksgiving scene, which is depicted more than anything as an act of pity. It feels like the Indians are giving these whipped dogs some table scraps. Dialogue is sparse and generally ineffective. Inner-monologues are generally totally superfluous and not well written (Maybe Smith's first experiences in the Indian village are an exception). Many terrific actors are criminally underused. August Schllenberg, Wes Studi, Raoul Trujillo (fantastic in Apocalypto), and, on the English side- Noah Taylor, Christopher Plummer, and several other recognizable actors. Christian Bale comes off rather well for his truncated presence.

**1/2/****. And I still simply don't understand die-hard Melick fans.

[robthehand 3]

Have you seen Badlands and/or Days of Heaven? I wouldn't describe myself as a die-hard fan, or even a fan particularly, but I love those two.

[Morlock 11]

I've yet to see Badlands. I've seen the other three Malick movies.

[A24 4,331]

Badlands is my favorite.

[Romão 2,274]

I really can't describe the New World in words, but watching it is always a mesmerizing experience. I don't really want to dwell on its themes or symbolisms. The movie is mesmerizing.

[A24 4,331]

I've never seen The New World but it's about Pocahontas, right? Hmm, no thanks!

[Elmo Lewis 6]

I really can't describe the New World in words, but watching it is always a mesmerizing experience. I don't really want to dwell on its themes or symbolisms. The movie is mesmerizing.

Right.

You were stoned when you watched it, weren't you?

[Hlao-roo 389]

Sorry, I don't watch "films," only movies. As usual, you guys are simply too highbrow for me.

[Morlock 11]

Well, that's the first time I've ever been accused of being highbrow.

[A24 4,331]

Talking about "movies", I ended the Indiana Jones trilogy with The Last Crusade. Now I know why I don't like these movies. It's because they remind me of James Bond! I'm totally not a Bond fan. And it would also explain why this board loves Indy so much. You are all Bond crazy!! Anyways, this third movie is one step up from the previous one because Spielberg tried to capture the spirit from the original, even though this time most of the characters lack charisma.

The boy describes the movies as follows:

Raiders Of The Lost Ark: The most adventurous of the lot

Temple Of Doom: The most suspenseful of the lot

The Last Crusade: The funniest of the lot

Alex

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Now I know why I don't like these movies. It's because they remind me of James Bond!

Well, Spielberg did tell Lucas he wanted to make a Bond movie just before Lucas pitched Raiders...

[Richard Penna 3,683]

I really can't describe the New World in words, but watching it is always a mesmerizing experience. I don't really want to dwell on its themes or symbolisms. The movie is mesmerizing.

Right.

You were stoned when you watched it, weren't you?

I second that.

I don't mean any senseless bashing, but that movie could send me to sleep any day.

[Ollie 1,059]

Now I know why I don't like these movies. It's because they remind me of James Bond!

Well, Spielberg did tell Lucas he wanted to make a Bond movie just before Lucas pitched Raiders...

Funny the IJ movies always reminded me of the old serials and "B" movies from the 30's, 40's and 50's.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

I'd classify The Omen as a classic. Not a great movie by any means (though quite entertaining), but well-known and old enough to be a "classic".

(I don't see what's any better about The Exorcist though)

I think the word is 'cult classic'

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Now I know why I don't like these movies. It's because they remind me of James Bond!

Well, Spielberg did tell Lucas he wanted to make a Bond movie just before Lucas pitched Raiders...

Funny the IJ movies always reminded me of the old serials and "B" movies from the 30's, 40's and 50's.

Very true, but with that bit about Spielberg wanting to make a Bond movie, I'm not surprised there might be a hint of Bond in there.

Although it must be a very vague hint, because I haven't found it myself.

[tpigeon 3]

There is definitely some Bond influence in the IJ films, particularly The Last Crusade, the weakest of them all. I think it's the weakest because it's the less adventure-y than the others, and is made more in the episodic spirit of a Bond movie. The humor is forced, and characters that were somewhat interesting in Raiders have been reduced to comic relief. Plus, the scenes at the end of the movie are bordering on boring. But I definitely see the Bond influence, Alex, albeit mostly in the third movie. The other two have enough life and energy to stand alone.

Ted

[A24 4,331]

Although it must be a very vague hint, because I haven't found it myself.

Well, one is a secret agent and the other an archaeologist but that doesn't mean that the link is vague. Both have the same tongue-in-cheek style of action, both are about an all-round action man who does manly stunts (they fly planes, jump off cliffs, fight on top of speeding trains, race speed boats, get to kiss the girl, etc., etc.), both have a different woman in each film, both Bond and Jones open with a spectacular adventure somewhat unrelated to the main story, every film has a recurring trademark tune, ...

You're right, Ted, it was The Last Crusade that made me realize how much Bond there is in Indy. The only thing I didn't see in the Indy films (yet) is a range of different actors playing Indiana Jones.

Alex

[Elmo Lewis 6]

This is the all-films-are-The-Wizard-of-Oz debate all over again, Alex. It's called "genre".

[A24 4,331]

Well, in this case the genre is Bond.

Why? Because it's not Pinocchio, Wizard of Oz or .... what was the third ... Frankenstein?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Alex, if you never noticed that the Indiana Jones films were in many ways modeled after the Bond films then you are much less a film-expert then you are letting on.

Hell even the introduction of Indy in Raiders is straight out of the Bond tradition. (we don't see his face for the first few minutes)