What is the Last Film You Watched? - Part II

[Morlock 11]

I can understand liking it for it's tone (even though I didn't, thought the 'light' spirit was incredibly forced), I don't understand why people love it so much.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Marc, I thought you were watching Firefly this week. I made a bet with myself that you would love it. I want to know the outcome.

I spent the last two weeks watching Firefly. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Especially the later episodes.

Serenity was even better. I wanted to watch it again the same day!

I knew it! Personally, I'm not a fan (Serenity) but I was quite confindent you would like it very much.

Eh?

[Morlock 11]

He knows you better than you know yourself.

[A24 4,353]

He knows you better than you know yourself.

Not so difficult when you realize his opinions can be read here on a daily base, and as you know, opinions can tell a lot about a person's personal taste.

Alex

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

So, me likey Serenity, no good?

[A24 4,353]

Very good, I won the bet, remember?

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I guess so.

- Marc, who'll still enjoy Serenity regardless, dagnammit!

[A24 4,353]

I think most people here will love it. Maybe we should do a poll?

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I think it depends quite a bit on whether you've seen Firefly or not.

The first 10 minutes for example play heavily into fans' anticipation.

[nightscape94 965]

If I can just go back to the Pirates of the Caribbean discussion for a sec. I thought the first and second were fun, but I have a serious character quibble with the second film, DMC. There are some spoiler type material ahead. I really don't understand how Captain Jack is supposed to be a good man, and worth saving. Seriously, the man is a terrible human being, if only for the huge reason of selling Will's soul in exchange for his own, and not caring. He even tries to convince Davey Jones that Will's life is more valuable than just one soul. And at the end, when Elizabeth is raising her glass, she says (if I remember correctly) "He was a good man". Really? How so? Because he comes back at the end, after everyone is basically dead on his ship except for the main characters? That was the one aspect of the film that bothered me for whatever reason. I couldn't for the life of me buy into the fact that they felt compelled to bring Jack back from the dead (I have not seen the third film, and am just assuming that this happens). Especially Will. It's not like Captain Jack Sparrow did something minorly cruel, he freaking sold out a supposed friend, and traded Will's life for his own in a depraved way. Am I reading too much into this?

Tim

[Red 75]

That always kinda' irked me too. But he is a pirate, so what do you expect?

[John Crichton 4]

I spent the last two weeks watching Firefly. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Especially the later episodes.

Serenity was even better. I wanted to watch it again the same day!

Good man! Now, how about Buffy?

[Ollie 1,059]

One thing at a time John, one thing at a time.

[John Crichton 4]

BTW I caught some bits and bobs of the Final Fantasy movie on TV the other night, amazingly enough as big an FF game fan I am I've never seen the movie, and I really liked what I saw. I might grab it off the rental shelf here in the next week or two and check the whole thing out.

[Kendal_Ozzel 36]

I'm just surprised Marc liked Serenity better than Firefly. I'm the other way around. (And I saw Serenity first, BTW.) I think the film had to make too many compromises in order to get made, and by being a film and not a series. Too many of the Western elements were missing; the film leaned too much to the sci-fi side, IMO.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

If I can just go back to the Pirates of the Caribbean discussion for a sec. I thought the first and second were fun, but I have a serious character quibble with the second film, DMC. There are some spoiler type material ahead. I really don't understand how Captain Jack is supposed to be a good man, and worth saving. Seriously, the man is a terrible human being, if only for the huge reason of selling Will's soul in exchange for his own, and not caring. He even tries to convince Davey Jones that Will's life is more valuable than just one soul. And at the end, when Elizabeth is raising her glass, she says (if I remember correctly) "He was a good man". Really? How so? Because he comes back at the end, after everyone is basically dead on his ship except for the main characters? That was the one aspect of the film that bothered me for whatever reason. I couldn't for the life of me buy into the fact that they felt compelled to bring Jack back from the dead (I have not seen the third film, and am just assuming that this happens). Especially Will. It's not like Captain Jack Sparrow did something minorly cruel, he freaking sold out a supposed friend, and traded Will's life for his own in a depraved way. Am I reading too much into this?

Tim

I cant even remember what happened in the second film exactly. Did they want to bring him back because they thought he sacrificed himself? His crew loved him, but I dont see how Elizabeth or Will could.

BTW I caught some bits and bobs of the Final Fantasy movie on TV the other night, amazingly enough as big an FF game fan I am I've never seen the movie, and I really liked what I saw. I might grab it off the rental shelf here in the next week or two and check the whole thing out.

Which one? The Spirits Within or Advent Children? The former is a mediocre movie while the latter is total trash.

Btw I finally caught POTC3. I thought it was much better than the second, overly long and with quite possibly the most stunning special effects I've seen yet. I guess thats all that needs to be said.

[Ollie 1,059]

The films have made Captain Jack out to be somewhat of a buffoonish hero and somehow the rest of the characters seem to have some sort of respect and admiration for him.

He has helped them at times so even though he's turned around and betrayed them. I guess despite all his shortcomings he's a likeable guy.

[A24 4,353]

I'm just surprised Marc liked Serenity better than Firefly. I'm the other way around. (And I saw Serenity first, BTW.) I think the film had to make too many compromises in order to get made, and by being a film and not a series. Too many of the Western elements were missing; the film leaned too much to the sci-fi side, IMO.

That's strange you should say that, with Serenity, I thought I was watching a Western and not a sci-fi. My impression was that they merely exchanged the horses for spaceships. Of course, it's been said that the original Star Trek is also based on the Western. However, with Serenity the line is very blurry.

Alex

[Morlock 11]

That always kinda' irked me too. But he is a pirate, so what do you expect?

One thing that really surprised me about the third film is how it supports piracy. It says that piracy as a great and noble practise, worth fighting for! Damned be the evil corporations, piracy is the way to go! (admittadly, Cutler Becket hanging kids is a bit harsh, but what he's fighting for ain't such a bad thing).

Okay, now.

Dances with wolves, 237 minutes version. One of the films that I never remember what I like about it, until I see it again and am enchanted by it. Begining might be a bit slow, and ends a bit weak (both with reason, though), but the middle is quite magical. All of Dunbar's meetings with the Indians are touching and wonderful. Beautiful cinematography by Dean Semler, who photographed the terrific production design. The Sioux village is stunning.

Terrific performances. Costner is a bit of a hit and miss for me, but he is very good here. Mary McDonald is very effective. Her accent is just right. Graham Greene and the actor who plays the chief are very warm presences. And Rodney A Grant has some great moments.

About the music. I'm kind of tron about this. On the on hand, I think that many sections of scenes suffer from the overly loud and sweet melodies, however, the melodies generally fit the spirit of the scene very well. So I think Barry's misses a lot of moments on a micro scale, but, overall gets it right on a macro scale.

A wonderful quiet epic that's a feast for the eyes and heartwarming in a totally uncloying way.

****/****.

High Noon. I'm with Roger Ebert on this one. A fine western. But nothing special about it. The idea of 'every man for himself' may have been revolutionary in the McCarthy era, but now, it's nothing special. It is your typical western. Very melodramatic, none of the performances are particularly impressive, dialogue is pretty uninspired. Looks good and B&W, nice shootout at the end. I'm not a fan of Tiomkin's balad, I think it is very disruptive in the film. Although his tense music for the shootout is fine.

***/****.

My Fair Lady. After watching two mediocre Fox musicals, it was a pleasure to watch a great one. Marvelous film of a terrific musical. Beautiful and opulent. Doesn't overplay the emotions. Stages the musicals very well, sets are convincing, and the acting is superb. Hepburn is great fun as the flower seller, and I love how you see her develop into the fragile, waiflike, yet also beautiful and elegant lady at the end. Rex Harrison IMO has the best part in any musical, and is perfect. I've never heard so much performance going on in a song (not that he could sing, of course). And the supporting parts are all good, especially Stanley Halloway.

Elegant filming of a great musical. Warner shows Fox how it's done. My favorite musical, after Singin' in the Rain. ****/****.

[John Crichton 4]

Which one? The Spirits Within or Advent Children? The former is a mediocre movie while the latter is total trash.

Oh yeah, there's two now, duh. I was referring to Spirits Within. I saw Advent Children when it first came out, my initial thoughts can be found in the bowels of this thread somewhere. I liked it for what it was, it was a great tribute to the game, though I would have liked more character work and less over the top insane action.

[Morlock 11]

I hated The Spirits Within.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I'm just surprised Marc liked Serenity better than Firefly. I'm the other way around. (And I saw Serenity first, BTW.) I think the film had to make too many compromises in order to get made, and by being a film and not a series. Too many of the Western elements were missing; the film leaned too much to the sci-fi side, IMO.

That's strange you should say that, with Serenity, I thought I was watching a Western and not a sci-fi. My impression was that they merely exchanged the horses for spaceships. Of course, it's been said that the original Star Trek is also based on the Western. However, with Serenity the line is very blurry.

There were actual horses and saloon fights in the series.

[Red 75]

One can enjoy Advent Children if you can get past the rediculous plot and insane action. But it goes without saying that you have to be a fan of the game.

[John Crichton 4]

There were actual horses and saloon fights in the series.

Yeah, the movie is straight sci-fi compared to the series.

One can enjoy Advent Children if you can get past the rediculous plot and insane action. But it goes without saying that you have to be a fan of the game.

That you do.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Alatriste

The 2006 film starring Viggo Mortensen based on the main character of a series of novels written by Arturo Pérez-Reverte.

Very well acted (since I don't speak Spanish, Viggo's Argentinian accent went unnoticed by me), stunningly looking film with an effective score by Rogue Banos.

The problem is though that it is based on 5 books, and I checked this out on Wikipedia, the plotlines from these 5 books all appear in this one 2 hour and 27 minute film. This means the film is so full of characters and events that it can become a bit of a blur to remember who is who, whaty happened were and why. Also a lot of it feels like it's a "best of" of the books with just the most important of memorable scenes from the books in this film, but lacking much of the surrounding meat.

Fans of the books may be able to wade their way though it since they can fill in certain things that were not clear to me, but I do believe films should be able to stand on their own.

[nightscape94 965]

A movie based on 5 books? I guess that would be alright if the books were each about 30 pages long.

Tim

[Elmo Lewis 6]

The movie has a very annoying noveau riche quality to it, which is the reason why high-budgeted productions don't always work in usually small-scale Europe: the movie is so obsessed with making every cent spent on it visible on the screen, that it completely forgets it's telling a story.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's telling 5 stories all at once.

[Red 75]

That's just a tad rediculous.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

It isn't if it's done right (Traffic). I think there are very few non-technical things done right in Alatriste.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

On that we disagree.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

That's good. It means you got some enjoyment out of the film.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Oh I did, despite it's flaws, the film is never less then eganging.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

On that we disagree.

[Morlock 11]

Patriot Games. I used to like this film. Can't imagine why. It's boring, unengaging, has bad dialogue, and has a terrible finale. The least of the Jack Ryan films. *1/2/****.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bubblegum Babes II.

The second Bubblegum Babes introduces us to more innocent sweet nubile young girls. Isilla found the thought of undressing for the camera so dirty that, as she performed for the camera, the crew would smell her juices flowing! Diana loves older men so Viv made up a little story for the young babe to play out. She meets a dirty woodcutter Randy who has no trouble charming the pants off her. After filming, he told Viv that she was so tight it brought tears to his eyes. Melanie was very much in love with her partner, as their foreplay clearly shows. In her bedroom you can see the look of ecstasy as he gave her what she wanted, on top and from behind. Nicolette is so typical of a young girl. To begin with she was so nervous and quiet, but once she warmed up she has a very interesting time. Playing with the showerhead was really hot, and then she got very messy in bed with a bowl of fruit and yoghurt. The Bubblegum Babes series was created for everyone who has a love for the freshness of youth.

*** out of ****

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

What?

[Joni Wiljami 1,206]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I know the screenplay could have done with a re-write since there are some grating lapses of logic (why wasn't Diana wearing any underwear even though it was September) and the acting is a bit wooden at times.

But the mis-en-scene is very well done.

[Ollie 1,059]

Oh for a moment I thought your were watching adult anime.

Well there really wasn't any restrictions as to what films we could review. Or was there?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

After tonight that may change.

Pity, I have some doozies lined up......

[Joni Wiljami 1,206]

I know the screenplay could have done with a re-write since there are some grating lapses of logic (why wasn't Diana wearing any underwear even though it was September) and the acting is a bit wooden at times.

But the mis-en-scene is very well done.

Ok , I agree with you about the screenplay. But I like the cinematography and the choices of camera angles in this film.

[Ollie 1,059]

Cinematography and Camera angles are the most important things in these types of films.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True, though you can constantly see boom microphones, shadows of the cameramen and reflections of them in the mirrors.

Also, one of the ejeculations is very poorly framed (The actress misses her cue also).

[Morlock 11]

Saw Ocean's 13. Certainly enjoyable. I felt that it didn't pay off as well as it could have, but the set-up was very enjoyable, all the actors doing exactly what they did in the first movie. Clooney and Pitt always talking about Pitt's girlfriend was funny. Liked the Mexico thing. Loved some of the references there- a natural disaster is an 'Irwin Allen', a big nose is a 'Brody', and some others. Liked the Sinatra joke, although I thought the final payoff to the joke wasn't strong enough. The Godfather reference was good (even though I was the only one in the audience who got it). And a lot of other bits (the CGI joke was great).

Film looked good. I wasn't crazy about the music, it wasn't as interesting as the first two scores. And I didn't like the electronic Debussy in there.

But I do think the film got the pay-off wrong. It felt rushed, and a lot of things that should have been in there weren't. None of the elated 'sticking it to the man' feeling of the first film. Oh, and they messed up big time with the casting of the FBI agent. Great plac for a cameo, and the guy they had was just plain bad.

Entertaining flick, but not terribly memorable. First was better. Too bad, I think this could have been really great if the talented people involved just got their shit a bit more focused.

Oh, Oprah bits were very funny.

**1/2/****.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

One can enjoy Advent Children if you can get past the rediculous plot and insane action. But it goes without saying that you have to be a fan of the game.

I loved the game to bits, and I feel the movie cheapens it.

[Red 75]

Probably true. They probably should've left it alone, or spend that time making a remake for PS3.....

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Also, one of the ejeculations is very poorly framed (The actress misses her cue also).

Just while I'm eating egg.

[Ollie 1,059]

Ewww...