What was the last movie you saw?

Page: 1 ... 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 ... 195
Online now: Google [Bot]
Post Reply
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Not sure how much any of them followed the Phillip K. Dick story.
user posted:
Not sure how much any of them followed the Phillip K. Dick story.

Basically none of them do so. A lot of the movies like "Total Recall" are based on Dick's short stories so there wasn't a lot of detail for the movie-makers to use. For "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale" there is only the basic premise of a memory-implantation system which gives the user the memory of having lived an experience which goes wrong when a (deep-cover?) secret agent uses it and (accidentally?) recovers his previous life, so practically every other detail in either version of "Total Recall" was not in that short story.
bratboy so sorry I schooled you
User avatar
Also does Kate Beckinsale act in anything not directed by her husband or does he singlehandedly sustain her career (or perhaps she'll only appear upon the condition that he directs? :paranoid: )
bratboy posted:
Also does Kate Beckinsale act in anything not directed by her husband or does he singlehandedly sustain her career (or perhaps she'll only appear upon the condition that he directs? :paranoid: )

Given Len Wiseman's short list of directorial credits (6 entries) versus Kate Beckinsale's much longer list as a actress (43 entries, 26 since 2001 starting with her co-starring credit in "Pearl Harbor" which is arguably her first movie as an "above-the-title" star), there doesn't seem to be much of a convergence. Wiseman directed only the two of the six "Underworld" series of movies currently out (although he does have a writing credit for all seven of them, and a producer's credit for five of them [although note that the seventh movie in this series is not yet in production and so is at a point where it may not be made]).

So: yes, no (and no) are your answers. :)
justine Elitist Beer Lover
User avatar
Percy Jackson Sea Of Monsters last night again because my granddaughter wanted to see it. I still think the first one is better, but i liked it.
Séamas Honorary Consul General
User avatar
Five Easy Pieces
One thing that struck me watching this was the credits. I've been paying more attention to them in recent years--for both good and bad movies. I recognized a lot of names from Roger Corman movies and from Easy Ryder. It's cool how some great movies came about from the networking done in crappy exploitation B movies, etc. Also noticed that the cinematographer was László Kovács, who I just noticed in my recent viewing of Paper Moon.
This movie is really kind of light on plot, but heavy on character development, and the movie that first showed Nicholson's range as an actor. I don't know quite what to make of it, but I enjoyed it.


Patton
I must have seen this 2-3 times, but haven't in more than 20 years. It has a great opening, but on this viewing I thought that there was too many missed opportunities. In a lot of ways it was shot like a made for TV movie. There were so many times where I wished the camera displayed more depth and drama-- or recorded more of a clear message of what was occurring on the battle field. Scott was great, but everyone else--including Karl Malden, just seemed to be reading lines as opposed to acting. Madlen (as Omar Bradley) even utters as stilted line about "if only we had a man who could …", kind of a "if only Superman was here". Ick.
There is one point in the movie where Rommel wants to know more about Patton, that the reports he was being given didn't tell him about "the man". I think this movie was guilty of just that.
dv
User avatar
Séamas posted:
Patton
I must have seen this 2-3 times, but haven't in more than 20 years. It has a great opening, but on this viewing I thought that there was too many missed opportunities. In a lot of ways it was shot like a made for TV movie. There were so many times where I wished the camera displayed more depth and drama-- or recorded more of a clear message of what was occurring on the battle field. Scott was great, but everyone else--including Karl Malden, just seemed to be reading lines as opposed to acting. Madlen (as Omar Bradley) even utters as stilted line about "if only we had a man who could …", kind of a "if only Superman was here". Ick.
There is one point in the movie where Rommel wants to know more about Patton, that the reports he was being given didn't tell him about "the man". I think this movie was guilty of just that.


Funny you'd mention that. Somewhere I have a DVD of "The Last Days Of Patton" - the made for TV sequel to that movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Days_of_Patton
The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

Does anyone else think that anyone who has NOT read first Hunger Games novel would get at least a bit lost watching the first movie? Certainly there always will be a lot of details lost whenever a book is turned into a movie, but I think that nearly all of the pre-history of Panem is handled inadequately by the opening text screen. Also the pre-book/movie past between Katniss and Peeta (when--after losing her father in a coal mine accident--she was starving and looking for food for her family and he "accidentally" tosses some partly burnt loaves of bread towards her. I'll also note that the fact that Peeta's father is the District 12 baker is never mentioned in the movie, only that Peeta worked at the bakery and had tossed around large bags of flour to explain his show of strength at pre-games training) is handled inadequately by a seemingly unconnected set of reminiscence scenes intercut into the movie. If you have read the first novel then those scenes can click together easily for you, but I do have to wonder if anyone who has NOT read the first book would be left wondering why these scenes were there (except for a couple of lines between Peeta and Katniss well after these scenes were shown). I should note that I think these problems of the first movie were NOT repeated in the second, partly because the second movie dealt with the movie-current problems of Panem as opposed to trying (and mostly failing) to fill in the nation's history.

Other than these problems, I think that both movies are nice renderings of their respective novels. They each hit most of the important highlights of the novels. I do recommend reading the first novel before seeing its movie in order for parts of its story to be more coherent.
TOS
User avatar
Séamas posted:

Patton
I must have seen this 2-3 times, but haven't in more than 20 years. It has a great opening, but on this viewing I thought that there was too many missed opportunities. In a lot of ways it was shot like a made for TV movie. There were so many times where I wished the camera displayed more depth and drama-- or recorded more of a clear message of what was occurring on the battle field. Scott was great, but everyone else--including Karl Malden, just seemed to be reading lines as opposed to acting. Madlen (as Omar Bradley) even utters as stilted line about "if only we had a man who could …", kind of a "if only Superman was here". Ick.
There is one point in the movie where Rommel wants to know more about Patton, that the reports he was being given didn't tell him about "the man". I think this movie was guilty of just that.


i always felt that movie had a cardboard, wooden feel to it

it came out during vietnam and when the studios were in financial crisis, plus when minorities were demanding their rights ... given the market forces the odds of it being a quality flick were low

the main thing i associate it however is the fact that nixon watched it again and again prior to announcing the invasion of cambodia
My memory of that film is always tainted by the MAD Magazine parody. In fact a lot of 70s movies are tainted for me because of MAD.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Yeah, I always keep waiting for that guy in Clockwork Orange to throw up when he sees violence.
Pithecanthropus Roast Master
User avatar
Lego Movie: I take back every bad thing I ever said about this movie. Awesome punchline.

Singing In The Rain: I stick fiddling LOVE that movie. Gene Kelly was a genius.
Pithecanthropus posted:
Lego Movie: I take back every bad thing I ever said about this movie. Awesome punchline.

Singing In The Rain: I stick fiddling LOVE that movie. Gene Kelly was a genius.


My favourite bits are the Moses Supposes number and of course, Cyd.
Séamas Honorary Consul General
User avatar
Ribtor posted:
My memory of that film is always tainted by the MAD Magazine parody. In fact a lot of 70s movies are tainted for me because of MAD.

user posted:
Yeah, I always keep waiting for that guy in Clockwork Orange to throw up when he sees violence.


Weird.

The very first Mad Magazine I ever read had a parody of A Clockwork Orange.
It must have been 4-5 years after the movie came out (so it could have been a special edition or reprint).
I found the parody completely baffling because I was 9 and never heard of the movie at all.


anyway

Apocalypse Now Redux
I saw the documentary Hearts of Darkness in the theaster in the early 90s, and knew the backstory of the difficulties of making the movie, and about the whole French Plantation scene that was cut for several reasons.

All in all, the addition of that 40+ minute segment does very little for the movie imho. I think it just slows the pace more, and the gist of what was needed to be said there could have been said much more clearly and quickly. The music put together for the love interlude was pretty out of place.

I think the other scene with the nearly abandoned army hospital and the stranded Playmates was also best left on the cutting-room floor.

Other than that, I think the order of the sequences was a little better--in the sense that it was intended in part to be a quasi-psychedelic disorientating experience.
If you liked the original theatrical release, it's an interesting thing to watch, but not an improvement.
I agree on the Redux thing. It was just another example of dry-humping the public with material that wasn't quite good enough to get into the first release.

The director's cut of Amadeus did the same thing. Salieri was turned into a more explicit villain and it harmed the story rather than enhanced it.
Séamas Honorary Consul General
User avatar
Ribtor posted:
I agree on the Redux thing. It was just another example of dry-humping the public with material that wasn't quite good enough to get into the first release.


Yeah, though that 45 minute French plantation sequence was something Coppola really wanted in the finished product but there were too many technical problems to keep it.

Technology was able to fix the technical problems, but I think he was totally wrong in thinking it was so important in the first place.

When I look at that, and know that there were hundreds of hours shot, and there was so many mishaps and difficulties on the set, it is astounding that he was able to make a good movie to begin with let alone a great one.
dv
User avatar
I binge-watched Blackadder series 2 & 3 the other day.
dv posted:
I binge-watched Blackadder series 2 & 3 the other day.

Excellent.

Avoid season 1
dv
User avatar
Ribtor posted:
dv posted:
I binge-watched Blackadder series 2 & 3 the other day.

Excellent.

Avoid season 1


Yeah, I watched a couple episodes of that, but was unimpressed. Except, of course, for BRIAN BLESSED.
dv posted:
Ribtor posted:
dv posted:
I binge-watched Blackadder series 2 & 3 the other day.

Excellent.

Avoid season 1


Yeah, I watched a couple episodes of that, but was unimpressed. Except, of course, for BRIAN BLESSED.


His wailing (or "acting" as some call it) nearly ruined I Claudius for me. The man is one big ham.
Metacell Chocolate Brahma
User avatar
Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation (2012). I thought it might at least be amusing since Jefferey Combs stars in it. Weird thing to say, but is he ever slumming. While trying to be a spinoff, ripoff, and tribute to two of the greatest cult classics ever made, it's a perfect example of truly bad filmmaking. Not to be confused with Night of the Living Dead: Reanimated (2009), but is also a prequel to Night of the Living Dead 3D, another unauthorized remake from 2006, since sadly George Romero never copyrighted his original film. If he wasn't still alive, he'd be spinning in his grave.
TOS
User avatar
Ribtor posted:
dv posted:
I binge-watched Blackadder series 2 & 3 the other day.

Excellent.

Avoid season 1


blackadder goes forth

for

eva
Metacell posted:
Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation (2012). I thought it might at least be amusing since Jefferey Combs stars in it. Weird thing to say, but is he ever slumming. While trying to be a spinoff, ripoff, and tribute to two of the greatest cult classics ever made, it's a perfect example of truly bad filmmaking. Not to be confused with Night of the Living Dead: Reanimated (2009), but is also a prequel to Night of the Living Dead 3D, another unauthorized remake from 2006, since sadly George Romero never copyrighted his original film. If he wasn't still alive, he'd be spinning in his grave.

I heard an interview with Romero explaining the copyright problem. They had most of the movie completed and had a title sequence with their original title (with copyright notice) but found out that there was another recently released movie with close to that same title, so they quickly thought up "Night of the Living Dead" and redid the title sequence without any copyright notice. They all had assumed that the copyright notice was in the ending credits.

In 1989 movie copyright law was changed so that movies without a copyright notice are NOT automatically considered public domain.
Pithecanthropus Roast Master
User avatar
Sharknado.

At least I never have to watch it again.
Pithecanthropus posted:
Sharknado.

At least I never have to watch it again.

Masochist. :D
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
They've got a sequel coming out, you know.
jkahless Custom Title
User avatar
Guardians of the Galaxy.

Good film. Very fun. :D
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
District 9 again. Holee fiddlesticks.

In the doc about the making of the film, they mention that the director had been initially brought in to work on the Halo film, which fell through.
user posted:
District 9 again. Holee fiddlesticks.

In the doc about the making of the film, they mention that the director had been initially brought in to work on the Halo film, which fell through.

Unfortunately Neill Blomkamp also wrote/directed Elysium, so maybe he got lucky with District 9 (by having Terri Tatchell as a co-writer) and unlucky with Elysium (for which he has sole writing credit)?
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
He's a documentary filmaker who got incredibly lucky by even being able to make D9 at all. I think of it more as a low-budget Peter Jackson project.

I'd like to see the sequel where the alien comes back to free his people and scorch the Earth, but I guess the version in my head is better anyway.
justine Elitist Beer Lover
User avatar
Watching The Nut Job with the littles.
Pithecanthropus Roast Master
User avatar
Guardians of the Galaxy. Tons of fun, but that's not why I'm posting. We saw a trailer for what I can only call a "gritty reboot" of Annie. Kill me now.
Metacell Chocolate Brahma
User avatar
I'll never understand the modern appeal of a reactionary depression era comic strip. Oh wait, I suddenly get it: nostalgic squares.
dv
User avatar
Metacell posted:
I'll never understand the modern appeal of a reactionary depression era comic strip. Oh wait, I suddenly get it: nostalgic squares.

Depends on how they carry it off. "Hyper-focused professional meets somebody who awakens within them the desire for love and family they didn't know they had" is hardly a unique plot.

When the protagonist is male, it's usually a child that does the job. (Old Dogs, Three Men and a Baby.) When the protagonist is female, it's usually an attractive adult male, and it's a rom-com.
dv
User avatar
Saw Guardians tonight. Good flick. Worth the popcorn.

The guy in the seat next to me... man, this guy. This stick fiddling guy. No matter what the emotional impact of the scene (Groot giving the flower to the little girl, Groot impaling a hallway full of redshirts, Groot dancing in a flower pot) this guy giggles his ass off and says in heavily accented english, "oh, so stupid."

Dude, if you need to revert back to whatever your native tongue is in order to fully express your range of emotion, go ahead, nobody's going to take issue.
Metacell Chocolate Brahma
User avatar
dv posted:
Metacell posted:
I'll never understand the modern appeal of a reactionary depression era comic strip. Oh wait, I suddenly get it: nostalgic squares.

Depends on how they carry it off. "Hyper-focused professional meets somebody who awakens within them the desire for love and family they didn't know they had who then dies of despair at the election of Franklin Roosovelt" is hardly a unique plot.

FTFY
obvs Social Distancing Grandmaster
Send private message
Lady and the Tramp.

It was another one of the many movies I'd never seen, and it is adorable.
Robert B. Dandy Highwayman
User avatar
Saw Get On Up this weekend.

Now looking forward to All Is By My Side
justine Elitist Beer Lover
User avatar
Robert B. posted:
Saw Get On Up this weekend.


Please say you loved it!
sturner Ancient Soldier
User avatar
Argo, for the second time. The gallows humor is exquisite.
Subsequent topic  /  Preceding topic
Post Reply

What was the last movie you saw?

Page: 1 ... 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 ... 195