Last movie seen — Page 159

Jay has cameras everywhere, he sells our every move.

Yeah, all you naysayers!  Check it out!

Nay.

JAWS

On general release again at the cinema. It was great to see this again on the big screen. It looked good and the sound was excellent..

Intruders (2011).

I dimly remember now the critics reaction to this film when it was released but I had utterly forgotten about it until the better half expressed an interest.

They really slammed this movie.

The ending is a bit mawkish but it's actually a solidly eerie (though not frightening) modern fairy tale.

Nice performances (especially from both children) and it has some genuinely creepy moments.

I saw where the plot was going half way through but that is my curse with these sorts of stories.

If a few lines of dialogue were adjusted towards the end it would be up there with The Devil's Backbone and The Orphanage.

With those lines it does drop a notch or two.

It also needs a better and more tone setting title.

Three balls.

FanFiltration said:

"The Ninth Configuration" with director's commentary.

 

I can't interrupt that film even to listen to Bill Blatty (something I never tire of even when he is talking utter nonsense, God I hope I can spend some portion of an afterlife chatting to his spirit, even if it's a long distance phone call from heaven, where he will be, to hell where I am frequently informed I shall be).

I had to switch the picture off for the commentary and just listen because everytime I see those faces I just want to listen to what the guys are saying.

The dialogue is like the tunes on a favourite album.

As insightful as the composer's thoughts might be you don't want him talking over the actual tunes.

darth_ender said:

Treated by my sister-in-law and her hubby, I went to see the new Mission: Impossible movie.  I'd seen M:I and M:I2, but I never saw the third and had little desire to see this one.  Hearing it was directed by Brad Bird of Pixar fame gave me higher hopes, but still I had concerns.  You see, I am a big fan of the original Mission:Impossible series from the 60s, and seeing the first two movies handle it the way they did was just not what I wanted: instead of a clever team that was always one step ahead of the bad guys, it was a clever, ever arrogant Tom Cruise performing super human feats with a tiny bit of help from his "team."  Oh, and there was one mask "surprise" after another after another.

Ghost Protocol really did it for me.  It showed real teamwork, it was frightening.  It had surprisingly good humor and even seemed to poke fun at the overused mask plot device: the good guys never use any.  The opening even was a modern take on how the original series used to open.  The whole movie was a far more true to the source material, while still being modern and showing an extremely athletic (but not overly unrealistic) Tom Cruise.  My only gripe was the slower final act, which would have a hard time following what preceded it.  It was a surprisingly good and exciting movie, and pleased the true M:I fan inside me. 

doubleofive said:

You might like 3. It was a lot more down to earth than 2, but I haven't seen 4 yet. Anything with more Simon Pegg (who was featured in 3) is great in my book.

 Mr. OFive--I finally took your advice.  I watched M:I3 last night.  That was a very exciting movie.  Still not the real Mission: Impossible  formula I really enjoy, but a very exciting and enjoyable action flick in my mind.  As you said in our discussion on this back in December, it is very dark, and Hoffman, who is not really physically intimidating at all, makes a frightening antagonist.  He really comes off as truly ruthless.  The action was quite exciting, and there were times where I felt desperate watching them.  In spite of others' protestations, Abrams is still a good director in my mind.

So my official order of the four films:

Ghost Protocol (light-hearted, somewhat self-parodying, action, and closer to the true M:I formula)
M:I3 (very exciting, a few nice surprises, frightening at times)
M:I (an adequate action flick, with no true Mission: Impossible times in spite of its sanctimonious desecration of the sacred character Jim Phelps)
M:I2 (40 mask "surprises" + front wheelie while shooting out gas tanks x pointless white dove trademark = stupid movie)

Lost In Space (1999).

As with my first viewing (back in the 20th Century) it still feels like a really cool update of the first season of the television show that has crashed into a really mawkish 'author's message' film with crappy CGI.

Gary Oldman does a rather good impersonation of me doesn't he?

I wish he would speak up a bit though because sometimes his delivery seems a bit too hushed for the sound mix.

Shame this never got the sequel it deserved.

I presume Smith could still become Spider Smith (looked great in the hood, not so great outside the hood) unless someone deals with that blue hernia of his.

The best bit of the film is still the Apollo 440 rendition of the season three tune with the gaudy distorted images from the film playing over it (sometimes cutting into monochrome).

If only the whole film could be colour adjusted to look more like that.

Perhaps it would hide the worst of the CGI which looked crappy back then.

When Mr Lucas finally delivers his anticipated Prequel Trilogy I hope he doesn't go too far down that route.

3 Time Bubbles.

Until we see the original script I'm calling it Lost In Translation (it even fits as a comment within the plot).

darth_ender said:

DominicCobb said:

Quiz Show 9/10 = great

Adaptation. 9/10 = great

Fido 7/10 = horrible, barely watchable

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 10/10 = fantastic

Lost in Translation 10/10 = fantastic

Clarified that a bit fer ya.

I thought Fido was a fun little flick. 

Take Shelter 9/10

Groundhog Day 9/10

Attack the Block 9/10

Trainspotting 9/10

Brave 8/10

       THE RING:   An odd little horror film that manages to maintain a high creepy quotient without providing many jumps. They might have done more to explain the haunting. How does it work? Why was she doomed? Why does her boyfriend Noah have his image dissolve in pictures? Maybe a visit and talk with a seemingly kook paranormal investigator could have filled in some missing pieces.

       If you like lots of skin-crawling spookiness, it might be worth a spin.

George Lucas said:

They might have done more to explain the haunting.

I think it left a lot of bad feeling when the 1999 film came along as Mumy was intended to play the old Will and Harris was intended to play the part that went to Edward Fox and both would have been great cameos with a bit of bite to them.

But I think it fowled the air a bit so there was only a partial baton passing.

The problems with the film were really down to the 'tell don't show' nature of the character relationships.

It's cinema so why have characters constantly talking about their feelings and motivations when a disappointed look here or a worried look there would get the feeling across better and leave more time for things that were visually interesting or mood setting.

E.T. is a film of high emotion but the kids there express their confusion and frustration about the world of adult relationships through actions or indirect naturalistic dialogue like the bit where Elliot talks about his dad's shirt smelling of Old Spice or Sea Breeze and the bit where Gertie says the wrong thing about Mexico.

Those moments don't feel preachy and they genuinely pull at the heartstrings. 

greenpenguino said:

Superman VS The Elite (2012)

Fantastic. It really explores Superman's Morals and ethics in the modern world and explores whether or not they're outdated. The new superheroes that challenge superman, 'The Elite' are the dark, edgy and gritty Superheroes that a lot of people cry out for. I could go on and on about this, but I'd advise people to go, get a copy and watch it, especially those who are the naysayers of Superman.

4 out of 4 balls

This sounds really cool. Will have to check it out.