Sign In

Last movie seen — Page 508

Author
Time

I loved it, and I’m sure if this were actually in a star wars area of the forum I’d have tons of people telling me how I’m wrong for liking that and I must not know anything about star wars or films in general.

Author
Time

Star Wars: The Last Jedi

I liked it a lot 😛

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

I don’t really do YouTube.

Author
Time

The Shape of Water - 9/10

Beautiful.

Pitch Perfect 3 - 3/10

Oof.

Downsizing - 5/10

Interesting themes but falls apart narratively.

The Greatest Showman - 6/10

Fun but not historically accurate to how much of an ass P.T. Barnum was.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Point Blank- Existential, experimental, iconoclastic 1960s crime thriller in the mold of the then-popular French New Waves movies. Icy, odd, distant, and structurally fairly unusual, even today. Uses the novel’s The Hunter’s basic premise as the springboard for an odd tale about existential emptiness and revenge. Great performance from Lee Marvin, some stunning cinematography, and very stylish, moody direction. A touch dated, but an interesting curio of a time when American cinema was willing to fund more than blockbusters.

Payback- Directorial debut of screenwriter Brian Helgeland, recut by Mel Gibson’s production company in an attempt to make it into Lethal Weapon 5, complete with Gibson’s obligatory torture scene and eventually him taking on the whole mob and blowing stuff up. An odd blend of Helgeland’s attempt at Stark’s aesthetic and a recut by someone going in a completely different direction.

Payback: Straight Up: The Director’s Cut- Though not quite as rough as the Westlake novel, Helgeland’s original cut hews closer to the original. It’s a small movie of a small tale, and works much better than Gibson’s knowingly ridiculous cut and plays like a 70s crime thrillers Helgeland wants to emulate, though without the existential underpinnings or rawness. Still pretty good for what it is, and probably the closest adaptation outside of Darwyn Cooke’s graphic novel.

Full Contact- Though not officially an adaptation of The Hunter, it does have a similar setup. Chow Yun Fat stars in this version from director Ring Lam Ling-Tung, a brutally violet, viciously nihilistic tale of a double-crossed thief who then proceeds to kill his way to revenge. Shot with a sucker-punch visual style and full of grimy, disreputable people, with the unique energy you’ll find only in Honk Kong Action Cinema of the period and nowhere else. Interesting, but kind of punishing and so brutal that you eventually run out of people to care about and sort of watch it like a car accident. The famous “bullet-cam” shots still have a certain novelty value.

The Crazies- George Romero’s tale of infected humans and bureaucracy trying to contain a virus. Intelligent and interesting in the way it deconstruction bureaucracy and social breakdown, but its raw, low-budget quality means that time has been very unkind to it in places. Interesting, but flawed.

The Crazies- Breck Eisener’s remake of the above, loses most of sociological clout and depth of the original, but works much better as a thriller, one crackerjack set piece after another, and nicely nihilistic tone and electric energy. If only there were a way to fall between the two.

…28 Days Later- Despite director Danny Boyle’s usual hyperactive visual tics, this derivative but highly effective horror thriller is one of the better ones of recent years. Yes, I know “THEY’RE NOT ZOMBIES!” and the infected hew more closely to the infected of the above-mentioned Romero film, but the plot and feeling seem more like Dawn of the Dead, and the whole third act is basically stolen from Day of the Dead. That said, it’s done well, there’s a nice intelligence behind it, it’s properly gory and viscerally frightening when it needs to be, with a nice human edge. Shot on interlaced digital video at 576i, probably in an attempt to call back to the grainy 16mm of yore.

28 Weeks Later- Though this one is shot on grainy Super 16 (And looks fantastic, it must be said.), this sequel aims more broadly. I’m not sure what its budget was, but I bet it was significantly higher than its predecessor. There are lot more impressive FX shots and a much bigger scale, though still grounded, at least nominally, in human drama. Said human drama isn’t quite as effective this time around, but it’s a nice backbone for the super-bloody thrills which build to splattery bloodbath finale, ending in a cruel apocalyptic joke. Selfishness has a way of coming back to haunt you, and interventionism is scarier than you bargain for.

The A-Team- Every now and then, you see a film that reaffirms your faith in the power of cinema as an art form, challenging you in exciting ways. The A-Team is not that film. It’s dumb, trashy, and flashy, and totally superficial. It is also, however, a lot of fun. Disposable, forgettable, and unpretentious, with some quotable funny lines, the film is basically like watching an action film on caffeine. It’s braindead, yes, but it has the sense to know it, and the actors, particularly a scene-stealing Sharlto Copley, are all in on the joke. As far as junk food action cinema goes, you could do far worse.

Battleship- Generally terrible, but better than the Transformers movies, though that’s the definition of faint praise. A bunch of aliens invade the water, the Navy has to stop them, and I do not care. Some neat design elements (apparently noted comic book artist Jock worked on the designs) and a little less misogynistic leering up women’s’ skirts than the Bay films, but even if it’s unpretentious, it still eventually collapses under the weight of its own stupidity.

Drive- This is what digital cinematography is all about, it’s been a long time since I’ve seen a movie this visually stunning. It’s not surprising, director Nicholas Winding Refn’s father worked as an editor for digital pioneer Lars Von Trier back during the early years of digital during the Dogme movement. Refn describes the film as a fairytale, but it hews most closely to a Michael Mann film’s neon existential romanticism. The film is kind of slight and not exactly intellectually substantial, to be honest, but it’s so gorgeous that for once, style-over substance works. Refn calls it a “fetish film,” and it’s designed to within an inch of it’s life. Explosively violent and occasionally poetic, the film is pure mythmaming. If you’re looking for a crime that actually examines anything with moral value and sociological causes, go watch The Wire. Ryan Gosling is terrific as the monosyllabic driver with no name. A weird but surprisingly effective blend of existential archetypal exploitation movie storytelling and art-house aesthetics.

Looper- Fun, twisty time-travel thriller from Rian Johnson, combining the director’s penchant for noir with a sci-fi twist. Plot summary would take pages, but all of the pieces fit together pretty well. The plot doesn’t much sense on close scrutiny perhaps, but it rattles along so quickly that you don’t notice. Much stronger with the beats of the screenplay than any particular visuals, though the performances are uniformly excellent, Bruce Willis finally get a meaty role again, and makes the most of it.

Dredd- Sadly missing the scathing social satire that made Robocop, one of the imitators of the original comic so memorable, but as a balls-to-the walls action flick, that’s a throwback to the ultraviolence of the 80s and 90s, it’s a ruthlessly efficient machine. Proudly R-rated, violent as hell, and visually gritty, and Karl Urban is flint-hard as the monosyllabic title character, a raw force of nature. Disappointingly predictable screenplay, but for a movie that gives the fans what they want, it’s hard to beat. Shot digitally by the great Anthony Dod Mantle, it’s like six degrees of Lars Von Trier.

The World’s End- Maniacal mash-up from writer director Edgar Wright, the film is so busy and madcap that it’d be easy to dismiss as overwrought, but it’s a much smarter than its post-modern pastiche surface would suggest. A film about the dangers of nostalgia and the fragmentation of our technological world, shot on 35mm and Super 16 with that lovely texture that film has, it has a little bit of everything, but it works better than it has any right to work. Wright may be throwing everything but the kitchen sink in, but he has a remarkably deft hand, and under it’s frantic surface is a smart and heartfelt film.

The Conjuring- The Warren Files would’ve been a much better title. A very stylish ghost movie from director James Wan. Wan’s a rock star, but he dials that back a bit here, going for a more classical approach, though his freewheeling camera and penchant for loud noises that go “BANG!” mean it’s not exactly Val Lewton. Shot digitally, John R. Leonetti’s cinematography is stunning and makes good use of shadows and light. Wan idolizes Argento, but Argeno’s pop expressionism at least had bad dubbing to fall back on, some of the dialogue here is really horrible, and the storyline is a bit ham-fisted, regardless of your religious beliefs. “Witches believe sacrificing their child is the ultimate gift to Satan!” Ooga-booga! Stylish as hell though, with Wan’s clean gliding camera and compositions. Vera Farminga is luminous as always, but everyone else is just a prop for Wan to throw around. I jumped a lot, it did it’s job well, but lets see how memorable time decides it is.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story- Another Star Wars prequel. Yawn. Not a bad film, but one the feels calculated to within an inch of its life for commercial appeal, down to every character’s gender, ethnicity, etc. Unbelievably expensive-looking and curiously joyless. Again, whether you like Lucas or not, he did things that were once new. Oh, look. It’s the Battle of Endor again. Nearly everything about Rouge One feels too calculated towards gritty reboots, towards toy sales, towards practically everything but straightforward storytelling. Compare this to the lean economy of Lucas’ 1977 film. That said, Donnie Yen Ji-Dan kicking ass in an English-language film is loads of fun, there are some cool effects, and the set pieces are decent if overlong. But it feel like way too much of mediocre thing. Fun, but forgettable.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

I like Rogue One better every time I see it.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

I like Rogue One better every time I see it.

Maybe if like the rest of the Disney Ourvre, it didn’t constantly remind me of the OOT I can never see again, I might be more receptive to it. I’ll revisit it one of these days.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

The first time i saw Rogue one i was bored especially in the second act, i also watched it in 3D which made be sick as a Dog,

And the cinema i watched it in had no air conditioning (And in Australia) it was completely bullshit.

Working on many edits, may take many years to complete…

Also known as Mr. Liquid Jungle.

Author
Time

Mike O said:

TV’s Frink said:

I like Rogue One better every time I see it.

Maybe if like the rest of the Disney Ourvre, it didn’t constantly remind me of the OOT I can never see again, I might be more receptive to it. I’ll revisit it one of these days.

Please stop saying that. You know perfectly well you can watch the OOT thanks to Harmy.