Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Movie-mber Edition

[Pink Mist]

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) directed by Joe and Anthony Russo

Following The Avengers, Captain America (Chris Evans) is back working for S.H.I.E.L.D. in a contemporary world that is unknown to him. When the director of the organization is shot, he slowly uncovers that the organization, the state’s security apparatus, is run by a secret organization of Nazis (sounds prescient). I’ve heard this is among the best of the Marvel movies, however, I actually prefer the first Captain America movie over this one. I found the plot to be too bloated with characters and action scenes in the third act just dragged. The fight scenes were also cut extremely too quick and used too many close ups (outside of the scenes on the boat and in the elevator) making it just confusing too watch. Almost shaky camera level bad. Also, at this point all of the Marvel movies are beginning to look and feel the same.

 

[kihei]

Robert Mitchum turned down the Popeye Doyle role as well as Dirty Harry and Patton around the same time. Some signature roles for Gene Hackman Clint Eastwood and George C. Scott.

....and he still didn't give a f***. I love Robert Mitchum.

 

[Osprey]

Compulsion (1959) - 8/10 (Loved it)

In 1924 Chicago, two close friends (Dean Stockwell, Bradford Dillman) attempt to get away with the perfect crime to prove that they can. It's a fictionalized account of the infamous Leopold and Loeb case, which also inspired Rope. Unlike Rope, however, this account changes almost nothing about the case except for the names. Stockwell plays Leopold under another name and Dillman is Loeb. The first half is about their preparation and trying to avoid suspicion and I found it rather interesting because their two personalities are so different, one being introverted and hesitant and the other extroverted and brazen. About an hour in, though, Orson Welles enters the picture and completely takes it over by playing the famous Clarence Darrow under another name. His performance culminates in a powerful speech that is based on a 12-hour-long closing argument made by Darrow that was highly influential. The film is like two films in one: Rope (minus the body and dark humor) in the first hour and Inherit the Wind in the second, and I enjoyed them equally in different ways. Strangely, I hadn't heard of the film until yesterday, after it was pointed out how large Orson Welles was in 1958's Touch of Evil and I looked up his waist size in 1959 to compare. That's kind of a weird way to discover a film that I ended up loving, but there it is.

Spoiler: Fun fact

Nathan Leopold tried to block production of the film on the grounds that it would damage his reputation, but the judge ruled against him because it seemed doubtful that his reputation (as perpetrator of the "crime of the century") could get any worse .

 

[Chili]

....and he still didn't give a f***. I love Robert Mitchum.

Just finished a biography (Robert Mitchum:'Baby I Don't Care'-Lee Server). There are a lot of those stories in there.

George Peppard asked him one time if he had studied the Stanislavski method. He said no but he had studied the Smirnoff method.

 

[kihei]

Rodin (2019) Directed by Jacques Doillon 3C

Maybe the most renowned sculptor since Michelangelo, Rodin should have made a fascinating subject for a biography as his work is vivid and full of passion. Rodin spends most of its two plus hours in Rodin’s spacious studio and focuses not so much on sculpture as on the artist’s very complicated love life. Despite being beautifully photographed, the movie is dry and tedious and doesn’t even bother with the formality of searching for a pulse. Good movies about the creative process in art are few and far between (the last one I saw was Mr. Turner). On this level, Rodin is a total failure. The movie adds absolutely nothing to our understanding of the artist or his work.

subtitles

MUBI

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I haven't posted in here for a while, so here's the crap I've watched to try to sleep... (because I said I wanted to see The Mandalorian, my gf got me Disney+, but little did I know I couldn't just binge it and trash it, now I'm trying to make it worth the money and it's impossible! I have both Netflix and Prime, not in love with either, but this is just ridiculous).

Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith (Lucas, 2005) - Can't find the comments I posted on the previous 2, and I'm afraid I'll just repeat myself, but what a waste of money and potential. The only good thing that came out of this trilogy is that it got Lucas to understand he was not a filmmaker. I have some respect for the first one, even though it might be the worst of the whole bunch, because it acknowledged clearly that this was all children material, but the other two kind of try to make things a little darker and they fail at being anything but very lame laughingstock. 2/10

The Mighty Ducks (Herek, 1992) - I don't like kiddy flicks. This one is ok I guess. 3/10

D2: The Mighty Ducks (Weisman, 1994) - Now this is more like it, pure [pejorative slur] crap. No wonder people are mostly stupid if they grew up on this. Not funny, not clever, just plain dumb (I love how 80% of 'Team USA' comes from Minnesota). 1.5/10

D3: The Mighty Ducks (Lieberman, 1996) - I know that after D2 I should have stopped, but you don't go so far and quit. It's more of the same crap to justify keeping the kids together. At least they didn't make D4, where the whole bunch would have gone straight to the Olympics. 2.5/10

And from Netflix:

Aquaman (Wan, 2018) - DC really can't do anything right without Nolan. Like SW3, it's a whole lot of waste of money, but here there wasn't much potential. You're Momoa, you know you're built to play a superhero, you spent your whole life in a gym to get there, you really settle for this shitty character? I hope there really was serious money involved for him. I think it's worst than every Marvel films, even the second Thor entry and the Wasp stuff. It's a super boring SFX show, and not all of it is really nicely done either. I'll push it's ranking by 0.5 for the Italy fight sequence, that was kind of nice. 2.5/10

And from Prime:

An Honest Liar (Measom, Weinstein, 2014) - I love James Randi, and some of the stuff he did is fascinating, but this is a poorly told recap of his life and an overall pretty weak documentary. 3/10

Oh and some stuff I've watched with the gf:

Mademoiselle (Lioret, 2001) - Cute flick, kind of girly, could have been interesting had they push the fake-theater ideas into the main narrative. 4/10

Place publique (Jaoui, 2018) - Oh the times where Jaoui/Bacri were doing some of the most interesting comedies ever are long gone. This is an ok film. It's done by very talented people, and it remains at decent levels, but it's far from the great stuff they did years ago. 5/10

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

Captain America: The First Avenger. While The Avengers depreciates over time, I think this one gets even better and is still among the best Marvel films. Tone and execution are consistent and perfect for the material.

Yeah, I still dig the The First Avenger for the same reason (Joe Johnston was a great choice for director). This is one of the reasons I'm a big fan of the first Thor as well -- it at least has a different feel than the majority of the Marvel machine that would follow. I love how overly dramatic everything on Asgard was (before "wink-wink" was the modus operandi for the machine).

D2: The Mighty Ducks (Weisman, 1994) - Now this is more like it, pure [pejorative slur] crap.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

[nameless1]

D2: The Mighty Ducks (Weisman, 1994) - Now this is more like it, pure [pejorative slur] crap. No wonder people are mostly stupid if they grew up on this. Not funny, not clever, just plain dumb (I love how 80% of 'Team USA' comes from Minnesota). 1.5/10

D2 is dumb as hell. Even as a kid, I found the movie ridiculous. You have a hockey tournament, and there is no Canadian or Russian team? Really? Then the team switches jersey in the middle of the game, for no reason at all. It is not even the jersey from the first movie, so it is just a blatant free advertising for the Disney-owned franchise that the director does not even bother to hide. Honestly, there is so many things wrong with the movie, that I do not know where to begin.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

D2 is dumb as hell. Even as a kid, I found the movie ridiculous. You have a hockey tournament, and there is no Canadian or Russian team? Really? Then the team switches jersey in the middle of the game, for no reason at all. It is not even the jersey from the first movie, so it is just a blatant free advertising for the Disney-owned franchise that the director does not even bother to hide. Honestly, there is so many things wrong with the movie, that I do not know where to begin.

Ahah, yeah they go something like "You don't know the Anaheim Mighty Ducks? They named a team after us!"

 

[Thundercracker]

D2 is dumb as hell. Even as a kid, I found the movie ridiculous. You have a hockey tournament, and there is no Canadian or Russian team? Really? Then the team switches jersey in the middle of the game, for no reason at all. It is not even the jersey from the first movie, so it is just a blatant free advertising for the Disney-owned franchise that the director does not even bother to hide. Honestly, there is so many things wrong with the movie, that I do not know where to begin.

Sure they are, they are just in a different group and so don't play team USA. If you are going to criticize the movie on realism, it should be about how Gunner Stahl's triple deke glove side move involved 0 dekes and was just a standing slap shot.

 

[nameless1]

Sure they are, they are just in a different group and so don't play team USA. If you are going to criticize the movie on realism, it should be about how Gunner Stahl's triple deke glove side move involved 0 dekes and was just a standing slap shot.

That is the group of death right there. I actually never noticed the other bracket.


Yeah, I have not seen the movie in over 15 years now. There has to a lot of details that I blocked out.


Regardless, Iceland as the best team in the world still makes very little sense. I guess Iceland is safe from all political landmines, and with the word "ice" in the name, people would assume that the country will field a good team.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

If you are going to criticize the movie on realism, it should be about how Gunner Stahl's triple deke glove side move involved 0 dekes and was just a standing slap shot.

And somehow, nobody knew where the puck was until Julie the Cat opened her glove.

The most improbable thing in any movie ever is that Kenan's character could change into goalie equipment during the length of a timeout. The movie is so so dumb. Which is why I love it.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith (Lucas, 2005) - Can't find the comments I posted on the previous 2, and I'm afraid I'll just repeat myself, but what a waste of money and potential. The only good thing that came out of this trilogy is that it got Lucas to understand he was not a filmmaker. I have some respect for the first one, even though it might be the worst of the whole bunch, because it acknowledged clearly that this was all children material, but the other two kind of try to make things a little darker and they fail at being anything but very lame laughingstock. 2/10

Until ROTS came out this was my most baffling "you think that's good??" movie in the series. While it's clearly the best of the prequel trilogy, I still find it to be pretty bad certainly as a movie in general and even within the series itself. Yet it seems to not only escape a lot of the criticisms Episodes 1&2 get (eventhough many of the same issues are there) but also seems to be genuinely liked among fans. I understand that it's the episode that finally depicts some of the most significant happenings in the series and I think that buoys its reputation, but similar to my feelings about The Avengers just because it's the movie where something really important happens doesn't make it a good movie.

 

[kihei]

Vive L’Amour (1994) Directed by Tsai Ming-liang 7B

Three people, a real estate agent, a crematorium container salesman, and a street peddler, find shelter in an abandoned luxury apartment in the heart of Taipei. Vive L’Amour, director Tsai Ming-liang’s second film, seems like a dress rehearsal for his masterful I Don’t Want to Sleep Alone. As in that film, the city is a lonely place and genuine connection is hard to come by. Like atoms that bump into one another randomly, our protagonists seem to exist without a sense of purpose or clear direction Though Vive l’Amour’s narrative is much less depressing than it may seem as Tsai brings a great deal of offbeat humour to his film. In one scene, the container salesman transforms a round watermelon into a bowling ball to make it easier to smash it open against a wall. A scene of a character hiding under a bed recalls the similar comic moments in other films. Tsai is an adventurous, imaginative director who sees reality very much from his own unique perspective. A Tsai film is a special experience, an off-kilter one perhaps, but very original.

subtitles

MUBI

 

[Pink Mist]

Uncut Gems (2019) directed by Josh and Benny Safdie

Howard Ratner (Adam Sandler) is a jeweller in NYC’s diamond district with a serious gambling addiction and serious debts to pay. However, he has come across a rare and valuable gem that could net him a lot of money if it sells well at the auction. Meanwhile, Ratner seizes the opportunity to place a major bet which that could pay off all his debts and then some. This is easily one of the most stressful films I have ever watched; it is loud and tense and played by Sandler who is all in for his role as the boisterous and anxious gambler. The praise he received for his role is merited, and its disappointing that he rarely does serious roles in films because he has talent. Also notable is the direction by the Safdie brothers who made a masterclass in tense films. At this point I will be sure to bring a Xanax to whatever their next project is when I watch it.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

So, related to my recent rantings here about The Avengers and Star Wars Episode 3, I rewatched Iron Man 3. I held it in pretty high regard going in (though I hadn’t seen it in years) and I honestly still really like it today. It might be the most divisive Marvel movie (I’m open to other suggestions ...).

This movie is not important at all. It introduces and disposes of ideas and plot points quickly (Pepper got better!) and haphazardly (Tony got better!). Even one of the best and lingering moments/images — the mass detonation of all the suits — is ignored/undone in future movies. The villains are kinda dumb, generic and have inconsistent abilities/weaknesses. It takes just a few seconds of thought to pick this one apart.

All that said, I still find Iron Man 3 to be one of the most entertaining and satisfying Marvel movies. A key factor in that is that it also clearly is a Shane Black movie as much as it is a Marvel movie (and I LIKE Shane Black movies). It’s one of the rare exceptions in the 23-movie run where a writer/director’s style and voice is evident. James Gunn and Taika Waititi are the other obvious examples. I don’t know that Joe Johnson has a specific style, per se, but I also need to credit Captain America: The First Avenger for its clear tone.

I don’t NEED that type of distinction to enjoy a movie (Infinity War and Endgame are both great without having any sort of “voice” for example) but I really appreciate it when it’s there. There is a bit of an assembly line quality to the MCU that’s both a blessing and curse. It creates a reliability but also makes some of the movies feel like outlines and not stories.

If the MCU were McDonald’s, Iron Man 3 is the McRib. Only comes around occasionally. Beloved by some. Abhorred by others.

Gotta talk about the twist. I love it and find it extremely clever. I did way back on first watch and it still works for me today. Ben Kingsley is a damn delight. Truly one of my absolute favorite performances in all the movies. It’s two notes, but man they’re good notes. The villains beyond that have issues in the writing but I really like the performances from Guy Pearce and James Badge Dale. There’s an arrogance and strut to them that’s just infinitely entertaining even if a lot of what they say and do is dumb. Commitment to the bit.

I also think this is Robert Downey Jr.’s best performance as Tony Stark. He certainly has bigger emotional moments in movies before and after this, but this one gives him a lot more to do (he and Black are famously tight and I think it shows here). The middle third set in Tennessee in particular is an odd (but effective) left turn a lot of the other movies aren’t willing to make and lets RDJ stretch a little more.

The action is pretty good in this one too. Black has a sense of play in some of the set pieces — particularly as characters pop in and out of suits. The “barrel of monkeys” scene is kinda dumb, but it looks good. The aforementioned fireworks finale as the suits explode, though ultimately meaningless, also looks great.

In SUMMATION: I’ll happily take an entertaining but flawed and insignificant movie over a lot more “important” but generic movies.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

 

[McOilers97]

Uncut Gems (2019) directed by Josh and Benny Safdie

Howard Ratner (Adam Sandler) is a jeweller in NYC’s diamond district with a serious gambling addiction and serious debts to pay. However, he has come across a rare and valuable gem that could net him a lot of money if it sells well at the auction. Meanwhile, Ratner seizes the opportunity to place a major bet which that could pay off all his debts and then some. This is easily one of the most stressful films I have ever watched; it is loud and tense and played by Sandler who is all in for his role as the boisterous and anxious gambler. The praise he received for his role is merited, and its disappointing that he rarely does serious roles in films because he has talent. Also notable is the direction by the Safdie brothers who made a masterclass in tense films. At this point I will be sure to bring a Xanax to whatever their next project is when I watch it.

I agree with this. The movie is so effective because it is maybe the loudest, most stressful 2 hours I've ever watched. It's definitely one of the best of 2019.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Desert Hearts (1985) - 6/10

It's an early lesbian film but it's a bit too mired in cliches and some of the other issues you get in any romance compressed into the length of a film. Decent final scene though and decent opening.

 

[kihei]

The Blob (1958) Directed by Irvin Yeaworth 6A

The Blob is harmless fun. Steve and his girl Jane are out necking (remember necking) in his jalopy when they see a large meteor crash into the hills. They try to find it but a farmer gets there first, only to be contaminated with a gelatinous substance that grows and grows. Steve and his gang of friends try to alert the police and the townspeople but with mixed results. I suspect The Blob is a send-up of other horror movies at the time. It seems that way anyway, but maybe the movie just reflects the hokey standards of films aimed at adolescents during this period (think Beach Blanker Bingo and Gidget Goes Hawaiian). In its silly, gooey way, The Blob contains several loud echoes of a great movie from this period, Rebel without a Cause. There is the romance. There is the estranged attitude between straightlaced parents and their “misunderstood” kids who have gone “wild.” There is the gang of threatening teenage boys, though in this case they quickly morph into Steve’s buddies. And there is a good cop who tries to be understanding and supportive—all direct steals from Rebel. But The Blob is soft at heart—in fact, it is a perfect Midnight Madness vehicle. You can easily recognize the bits where modern audiences likely shout at the screen. I have to say, though, that I enjoyed the movie and, of course, The Blob stars a young Steve McQueen still on the way to discovering his cool.

Criteriion Channell

 

[Osprey]

But The Blob is soft at heart

It just wouldn't be the same without its gooey center.

 

[Pink Mist]

The Truman Show (1998) directed by Peter Weir

Truman (Jim Carrey) lives a perfectly bland boring life with a loving wife (Laura Linney) and a best friend (Noah Emmerich) selling insurance in the small town of Seahaven. Little does he know that his life is on camera and televised to millions without his permission or knowledge, and that the people he interacts with daily are actually all actors. Eventually he begins to gather suspicions and must make the decision to accept or escape this reality. The Truman Show has a lot of themes on its mind: reality tv, consumerism, free will, the construction of reality. However, I don’t think it actually has much to say about them other than a surface level exploration of these themes. That said, it is an enjoyable film to watch, but I can’t help thinking that there is a more interesting and profound movie that could have been made with the premise of the Truman Show.

 

[Osprey]

High Sierra (1941) - 7/10 (Really liked it)

A bank robber fresh out of prison (Humphrey Bogart) drives to a camp in the Sierra Nevada mountains to plan out a big heist of a resort hotel, but dames, dirty rats and coppers complicate things, see? Aside from the language, this film feels unlike most gangster films because it's set mostly out West and in the sunshine. In fact, much of it takes place on location, not in a studio or studio lot, which I found really refreshing and is probably what I liked best about the picture. In addition to being a gangster tale, there's a romance with not one, but two dames, one played by Ida Lupino. Speaking of which, it was interesting to notice that Lupino has top billing in the opening and closing credits. Bogart wasn't yet a star, but this is the film that made him into one (before The Maltese Falcon, later that same year, affirmed it). It's easy to see why. He commands the attention of every scene and is unmistakably the film's star, even without top billing. Also, even though his character is a convict and murderer, you can't help but like him because he, too, is soft at heart. Anyways, the film has a little bit of everything--action, drama, romance, suspense, a car chase and scenery--and I quite enjoyed it. It's probably not what you'd call a classic, but it's a very good Saturday matinee and historically interesting for being Bogart's breakthrough.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

The Endless Trench (2020) - Very good. A Spanish Republican hides out for over three decades in Francoist Spain. It's a long movie, fittingly so, but never boring. For large extents of the film, the main character, Higinio, appears justified in his hiding, but the best of the film comes when that certainty isn't as established anymore, yet one can understand how the main character has grown used to his hiding hole and his wife's constant hands-on support. While I wouldn't call the main character a coward, his meeker-than-expected fighting spirit gives way too some funny scenes, some intentional, some probably not, but wonderful artistic accidents. Examples of the first include the camera work when Higinio's father is first told that his son is hiding under the jars and how to speak with him. Another is Higinio, exasperated, wondering what he's done that's that bad to have a 60,000$ bounty on his head. Some of the less obvious links, but which got a nice, constant smile out of me, is how much the actor who plays Higinio looks like Louis-Ferdinand Celine, the French author. Not similar men, no, but Celine was an author who aggressively and humorously insisted on his cowardice (both in times of war and in times of peace) that I couldn't help but make a link between the two. It was very gratifying.

Rosemary's Baby (1968) - Short of a superb final scene and a solid impregnation (edit: wow...this did not come out how I intended but screw it), I didn't get much out of that one. It doesn't do anything bad but it also never clicked particularly. One of those well-done things that just don't resonate with one, for unknown and buried reasons. Still, don't understand the Mia Farrow hype in this one. I thought she was terrible. Wooden when she shouldn't be and overly blustering when a more stoic facade would have helped the movie be more unsettling. John Cassavetes was great, though as were all the others. Liked the soundtrack, especially the tinge of free jazz.

 

[MetalheadPenguinsFan]

7/10

 

[Langdon Alger]

Groundhog Day - 1993

I’ve seen this before, but I checked it out again for fun. Interesting premise for sure, and Bill Murray is very good, but I don’t love this movie. It’s not bad in any way, just not one I happen to really get into. I thought maybe I’d enjoy it more checking it out again, but it’s not really for me. Still, it’s a well made movie, so I’ll still give it a positive score.

6/10