Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +2

[Blackhawkswincup]

Martin

Underrated and sadly largely forgotten Romero classic

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

High Life - Claire Denis giving a shot to existantial sci-fi. I like both of that a lot and I really wanted to like that film, but meh. Overdone, overexposed... She should have relied a lot more on Pattinson's restraint and the nice flow of his solitary scenes, and cut a lot of the unnecessary explanations and all of the failed "weirdness" (Binoche missing target here). Anyway, it's still Denis, so it's not garbage, but don't go in expecting her Solaris... - 5/10

 

[ItsFineImFine]

The Return (2003) - 6.5/10
I wouldn't quite say good cinematography because it was very incohesive but a lot of sharp pretty pictures in there. Good start to the film but it becomes monotone. I can enjoy dreary films that are enjoyable but dreary films that aren't enjoyable feel empty.

Empire Records (1995) - 4/10
I continue to hate modern high school films though this one features 'high schoolers' working at a record store. The nostalgic 90s description sold me but I should have seen the trailer to have known that it would be a cheesy 90s flick rather than the nostalgic type with overdramatic bad acting and ridiculous situations. A few laughs and a good start were there though.

Mutual Appreciation (2005) - 7/10
Honestly thought this was a lot more enjoyable and felt more real than Computer Chess. Maybe a bit too real at times but the director does a good job of knowing when to cut the scene and just move on. It eventually settles into a nice rhythm but it ended at the right time because I probably couldn't take any more of the musings of the NY mumblecore characters.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Lair of the White Worm.

Watched this as part two of a self-programmed Ken Russell double feature. The Devils was part one, but I'm saving those thoughts for Movie of the Week Club. This little ditty was a cable late night staple for a bit in my youth. Amanda Donohoe cuts a quite memorable and striking figure as the villainesssssssss. I remembered aspects of her, uh, performance quite well. What I learned on this recent rewatch is that despite seeing it a few times before and remembering certain scenes, I obviously didn't pay close enough attention (or perhaps more accurately wasn't quite attuned to its very specific frequency). This movie is a riot. Laugh-out-loud funny at times. One might roll their eyes at the puns and the cheesy entendres. Not me. I loved every line she hisses with her crooked smile. Her unintended "snake charm" dance to that poor hitchhiker's harmonica? Hilarious physical comedy. (As is the poor possessed town constable who slithers out of a grate to the tune of bagpipes...). Mix in the dream sequences which play like LSD-dosed cut scenes from The Devils as filtered through 1980s MTV and the goofy formal charm of the two leading gents in this — a couple of young unknowns named Peter Capaldi and Hugh Grant — and I found this to be quite the romp. A great camp/cult movie choice if one is looking for such a thing.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Not Quite Hollywood.
This doc is about 10 years old, but it focuses on Australia's exploitation film boom of the 70s and 80s. Beyond Mad Max, BMX Bandits and Howling 3, I really hadn't heard of many of any of the movies discussed here. Fun doc though. You get a little film and social history, plus a plethora of ridiculous clips from all sorts of entertaining (well seemingly entertaining) grindhouse fare. If anyone has seen Electric Boogaloo, the documentary a few years ago about Canon Films, this covers similar ground albeit from a different country. I didn't know it going into Not Quite Hollywood, but it turns out they had the same director. Safe to say I left this movie with a list of about 10 other movies I want to track down at some point.

 

[kihei]

Not Quite Hollywood.
This doc is about 10 years old, but it focuses on Australia's exploitation film boom of the 70s and 80s. Beyond Mad Max, BMX Bandits and Howling 3, I really hadn't heard of many of any of the movies discussed here. Fun doc though. You get a little film and social history, plus a plethora of ridiculous clips from all sorts of entertaining (well seemingly entertaining) grindhouse fare. If anyone has seen Electric Boogaloo, the documentary a few years ago about Canon Films, this covers similar ground albeit from a different country. I didn't know it going into Not Quite Hollywood, but it turns out they had the same director. Safe to say I left this movie with a list of about 10 other movies I want to track down at some point.

Though not part of the exploitation film boom, Paul Cox is the guy to explore from Australia. Little, lovely, human movies--very underrated director. Suggested starting point: Man of Flowers.

 

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Yes, I completely agree with this review, and I honestly think this is likely the best film I have seen all year.

A friend of mine has a completely different opinion though. For her, the way the Kims are able to integrate into the Park family is very unrealistic, due to the lack of a background check, and she can just never get over the perceived plot hole. It just completely ruined the movie for her, and she cannot get into the plot as a result.

Honestly, I can see her point of view. However, everything else is so well-done, that I can easily ignore that little hitch, because it feels minor in the grand scheme of things.

Plot hole? I dunno...they all had forged documents and phony credentials and the Parks were just gullible and shallow. Even the mother got the housekeeping job because Mr. Park was impressed by the design and the "classy" paper stock of a fake business card. That's all it took. And being snobs they didn't think "chauffeur" or "housekeeper" were important enough jobs to do a serious background check. Worked for me.

 

[nameless1]

Plot hole? I dunno...they all had forged documents and phony credentials and the Parks were just gullible and shallow. Even the mother got the housekeeping job because Mr. Park was impressed by the design and the "classy" paper stock of a fake business card. That's all it took. And being snobs they didn't think "chauffeur" or "housekeeper" were important enough jobs to do a serious background check. Worked for me.

I was fine with it too, to be honest, but my friend just could not get over it.

I do think she has a point though, because the rich values their privacy and safety, and they will do background checks, even down to their gardener. They just live in a different world than the rest of the world.

 

[Osprey]

Rust Creek (2019) - 5/10 (Didn't like or dislike it)

A female college student (Hermione Corfield) gets lost in rural Kentucky and is assaulted and chased by a couple of hillbilly meth heads. This low budget independent film is not very original and feels a bit like Deliverance crossed with Winter's Bone. There also isn't a whole lot of story and it's rather predictable. I was never wondering where it was going, only waiting for it to get there. That said, it's shot and acted very well. It's much more of a Sundance type of film than an exploitation film. It doesn't try to shock or rally viewers (i.e. it's not a rape revenge movie). It's a well executed film that, unfortunately, has a basic, familiar story and doesn't really add anything to the genre. It's not a bad film and you could do worse if you're looking for something to watch, but I can't really recommend it, either.

 

[ORRFForever]

Rust Creek (2019) - 5/10 (Didn't like or dislike it)

A female college student (Hermione Corfield) gets lost in rural Kentucky and is assaulted and chased by a couple of hillbilly meth heads. This low budget independent film is not very original and feels a bit like Deliverance crossed with Winter's Bone. There also isn't a whole lot of story and it's rather predictable. I was never wondering where it was going, only waiting for it to get there. That said, it's shot and acted very well. It's much more of a Sundance type of film than an exploitation film. It doesn't try to shock or rally viewers (i.e. it's not a rape revenge movie). It's a well executed film that, unfortunately, has a basic, familiar story and doesn't really add anything to the genre. It's not a bad film and you could do worse if you're looking for something to watch, but I can't really recommend it, either.

I started to watch it but stopped for all the reasons you listed.

 

[ORRFForever]

Love Megan Hilty - altho she looks awful with dark hair.

Can't wait to see...

 

[Osprey]

What We Do in the Shadows (2014) - 7/10 (Really liked it)

This rather good documentary offers a glimpse into the daily life of a group of friends and housemates. They get along, but will argue over how many years its been since one of them did the dishes and who got blood all over the floor. They enjoy going out together to meet new people and drink. They occasionally have guests over to the house for a bite. They're open minded when it comes to gender, but do have a taste for virgins. It turns out that they're a lot like you and me, only paler. They laugh, they fight, they love, they grieve and they try to reflect. Unfortunately, society at large doesn't tolerate their way of life and hunts them down. By pulling back the curtains, this revealing documentary sheds daylight on a misunderstood minority that has been forced to live in the shadows.

 

[kihei]

By the Grace of God (2019) Directed by Francois Ozun 7A

Alexandre discovers that the priest who abused him as a child is still involved with children despite his initial censure. First he goes to the local Church authorities who are helpful in their way, but only up to a certain point, ready to accept some responsibility but not willing to do much about it. As Alexandre continues his struggle to get the priest removed from having anything to do with children, other men, with stories of sexual assault of their own, become involved, and what was once a story of one man seeking justice develops much broader implications. Scrupulously devoted to actual accounts, By the Grace of God is France's Spotlight, a film that focuses on pedophile priests and the great harm that they do. While Francois Ozun, whose movies are usually anything but weighty, seems an unusual choice for director, he places the emphasis right where it belongs, on the victims and their trauma. The movie has a few problems. It is subtitle heavy as much of the initial dialogue comes from letters that are traded back and forth between Alexandre and the Church authorities. For the first third of the movie, it seems like we are watching one man's quest for justice, so that when the movie shifts to incorporate a much broader perspective it comes as a bit of a jarring surprise initially. But Ozun is very good at quietly focusing on the human cost and the unwillingness of the religious authorities to act unless they are prodded. Despite an approach that is non-sensational, every so often the movie will pull off a sequence that has such tension and power that I was sitting there going "Whoa, where did that come from?" The movie doesn't rely too much on these bravura moments to make its points, a credit to Ozun and his concern not to overshadow the stories with cinematic effects or melodramatic bombast. But their inclusion gives the viewer a clear hint of the hell these men have gone through and continue to suffer.

subtitles

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

By the Grace of God (2019) Directed by Francois Ozun 7A

Alexandre discovers that the priest who abused him as a child is still involved with children despite his initial censure. First he goes to the local Church authorities who are helpful in their way, but only up to a certain point, ready to accept some responsibility but not willing to do much about it. As Alexandre continues his struggle to get the priest removed from having anything to do with children, other men, with stories of sexual assault of their own, become involved, and what was once a story of one man seeking justice develops much broader implications. Scrupulously devoted to actual accounts, By the Grace of God is France's Spotlight, a film that focuses on pedophile priests and the great harm that they do. While Francois Ozun, whose movies are usually anything but weighty, seems an unusual choice for director, he places the emphasis right where it belongs, on the victims and their trauma. The movie has a few problems. It is subtitle heavy as much of the initial dialogue comes from letters that are traded back and forth between Alexandre and the Church authorities. For the first third of the movie, it seems like we are watching one man's quest for justice, so that when the movie shifts to incorporate a much broader perspective it comes as a bit of a jarring surprise initially. But Ozun is very good at quietly focusing on the human cost and the unwillingness of the religious authorities to act unless they are prodded. Despite an approach that is non-sensational, every so often the movie will pull off a sequence that has such tension and power that I was sitting there going "Whoa, where did that come from?" The movie doesn't rely too much on these bravura moments to make its points, a credit to Ozun and his concern not to overshadow the stories with cinematic effects or melodramatic bombast. But their inclusion gives the viewer a clear hint of the hell these men have gone through and continue to suffer.

subtitles

*Ozon!

Haven't seen that one, and won't for some time probably, but he hasn't done a really good film since the early 2000s. Used to be an unsung genius, or at least an underdog.

 

[nameless1]

It is a very good movie, and indeed, France's answer to Spotlight.

Everything kihei wrote is spot on, and I like how understated and controlled the narrative is, which does not sensationalize the crime, and demonstrates tremendous respect to the victims. The only part I differ from kihei is that the change of narrative from one character to another, then bring them all together, does not bother me all that much, because the adjustment period is so short that it becomes insignificant to me, and I am also fine with the sudden outbursts, because it is natural, and everything is brought back into control very quickly.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

*Ozon!

Haven't seen that one, and won't for some time probably, but he hasn't done a really good film since the early 2000s. Used to be an unsung genius, or at least an underdog.

Funny enough, I just watched Double Lover last week, which is a far cry from his current film.

FWIW I'd probably give that a slightly positive review. It's a porny Hitchcock riff (with a splash of Cronenbergian body ickiness) but it so fully and willingly owns its trashiness that I can't hate on it.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

Zombieland (2009) - 7/10

It was a funny little flick. Had some really funny moments, but nothing to write home about. Glad I watched it, and mainly did it to prepare for tonight, as I am going to see Zombieland Double Tap.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

The Laundromat (Netflix) - 6/10

Some solid parts, some good messages there, but not really put together all that well, IMO. Didn't hate, didn't love it. Not even really sure I liked it all that much, but there were some moments that I did enjoy.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

Zombieland: Double Tap - 8/10

Liked this one more than the original. Some really funny stuff in here. Just a nice, turn-your-brain-off kind of movie that was quite enjoyable.

 

[kihei]

The Lighthouse (2019) Directed by Robert Eggers 8B

Whatever you generally expect in a horror movie, you are not going to find it here. Two lighthouse keepers. an old salty dog one (Willem Dafoe) and a young, troubled one (Robert Pattinson) take over duties of a remote lighthouse off the coast of New England, circa around 1890. What follows is an atmospheric fever dream of a movie that is hard to capture in words. There is a lot of dialogue in this movie, talk that ranges from the normal to the crazy, but very little gore and only a smattering of (decidedly well-executed) cheap thrills. It is hard to say exactly what we are dealing with much of the time--psychosis, hallucinations, psychological demons, myth, some of which may be imaginary, some not. What makes this work beautiful to observe are two fine performances by Pattinson and Defoe (the movie basically being a two man show) and wonderfully artful black and white cinematography with minimal use of light that creates the mood of bad dreams, even nightmares. Overall the movie has the look and existential dread of a Bela Tarr movie (Werckmeister Harmonies; The Turin Horse; Satantango). If you liked director Robert Eggers previous film The Witch, you will probably find this film worth a shot as well, though it is quite a bit more difficult to pin down than the earlier film. Other viewer response will range from wtf to a shoulder shrug. For anyone into innovative visual film, though, The Lighthouse is a must-see. Also of note, Pattinson has been as good but never better.


Best of '19 so far

1) Portrait of a Lady on Fire, Sciamma, France
2) Parasite, Bong, South Korea
3) An Elephant Sitting Still, Hu, China
4) Hope, Sodahl, Norway
5) The Lighthouse, Eggers, United States
6) It Must Be Heaven, Suleiman, Palestine
7) The Two Popes, Mirelles, Brazil/UK
8) Vitalina Varela, Costa, Portugal
9) Ema, Larrain, Chile
10) Les Miserables, Ly, France

 

[nameless1]

Yeah, I am on the shrug side for The Lighthouse. While I appreciate the effort for authenticity, from the mise-en-scene which is built from scratch, down to the dialogue, largely inspired by journals from that period, and I do like the inspired black-and-white cinematography, the plot bores me. Two guys are alone on a deserted island; what do you think will happen? Sometimes the journey is more important than the destination, but when it is that obvious, it is hard to be excited for anything. Others have mentioned that there is a deeper meaning to the movie, and there are a lot of allegories, but I find absolutely nothing profound about the movie, nor do I really care.

As for the performances, Dafoe is great as usual, Pattinson is merely serviceable. Now, he does not weight the movie down, but I see it more as a carry job by Dafoe.

To be fair, it is not terrible, but I find it to be mere middle-of-the-road.

 

[ORRFForever]

Terminator : Dark Fate [2019] :

Terminator movies don't repeat themselves, they just rhyme. Terminator: Dark Fate is a reincarnation of Terminator 2 except, because it is 2019, there is, of course, a young girl who is the future of people-kind (thank you Justin) being saved by a female terminator.

The plot and pacing are all over the map and it isn't until Arnold makes an appearance at the half way mark that the movie gets its first of many laughs - as always, he's very funny with his deadpan delivery.

TDF is too long, too silly, and should have been released in the summer where it would fit in with all the fluff. Still, for people who love the series, and I am one of them, it will give you your fix. Just not a satisfying or memorable one.

6/10

Movie Trailer :

 

[heatnikki]

Watchmen 7.5/10
Best superhero film I have seen. Very dark, good dialogue, complex story and very gritty. No constant wisecracking from the characters either. Far better than all the generic marvel rubbish.

 

[kihei]

*Ozon!

Haven't seen that one, and won't for some time probably, but he hasn't done a really good film since the early 2000s. Used to be an unsung genius, or at least an underdog.

Too sweeping a condemnation of Ozon's more recent movies. While I actively hated Potiche and A New Friend and felt middle-of-the-road about In the House, I think Young & Beautiful and Frantz are really good movies. I sometimes think his movies are so French that they just don't travel that well, but he remains a director of consequence as far as I am concerned.

 

[kihei]

As for the performances, Dafoe is great as usual, Pattinson is merely serviceable. Now, he does not weight the movie down, but I see it more as a carry job by Dafoe.

Wow, I think that is really, really underrating Pattinson here. Like many basically two-actor movies, for the film to work both actors need to be strong so they can actively play off one another. I think that is definitely the case here. The Lighthouse would not be so effective, to me anyway, if both actors weren't each pulling their share of the load. I think Pattinson did a really good job of playing off the ambiguity of his character--sometimes seeming relatively normal, though tortured about something; sometimes seeming a psychotic waiting for an opportunity. His character and the movie are dependent upon Pattinson's ability to communicate the corrosive nature of his sense of guilt and on that score I thought Pattinson was borderline brilliant.