Author Topic: What was the last movie you watched?  (Read 1553922 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18705 on: July 02, 2019, 03:05:33 AM »
I went to see Spiderman Far From Home tonight, 12:01 am showing. Maybe that explains why only about 15-20 people turned out for the 3D showing. First off, let me say Tom Holland is my favorite Spiderman of them all. As far as the Spidey actor totem pole goes, it's Tom Holland, Andrew Garfield, then Tobey Maguire in a very, VERY distant 3rd. Since I don't like Toby very much that may explain why Spiderman 2 does next to nothing for me. I mean, I just can't stand that guy, but I digress.

So Spiderman Far From home... is it worth going to see? A very big hell yes from me, and especially more so if you've been watching all the MCU movies all these years. It's kind of like an unwritten contractual obligation at this point. In this case though we are more than happy to oblige because 2019 has in my opinion been one hell of a son of a bitch of a year for the MCU. First, Captain Marvel came out and that was friggin' awesome. Avengers Endgame is like the best movie ever made, and of course Far From Home is great.

This is now Tom Hollands fourth appearance in the MCU as Spiderman, and that whole time he's just been killing it. I didn't care for Homecoming that much, but I still liked it better than all the previous Spiderman movies. Everyone gives excellent performances. The story is... pretty good. I can't say much without spoiling things. Suffice to say this movie makes excellent use of its rich history. Want to know what that means? You'll have to see the movie.

But what I really, really loved were those incredible end credits sequences. I'm not likely to ever say this ever again, but those were easily the best end credits sequences in all of the MCU. Just like Endgame, Far From Home rewards you for feverishly watching these movies over the past 11 years. So in my unqualified opinion as an amateur movie nerd, I don't think you should miss it.


Offline stansimpson

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5068
  • Liked: 379
  • Show yourself! Otherwise, we'll kill some diffrum!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18706 on: July 05, 2019, 08:10:35 AM »
Wife & kid have been out of town with family for the past 3 days while I stay home for work. Decided to watch as many movies as I could.

First, Creed II. I've enjoyed all the Rocky movies. 3 and 6 have been my favorites. 5 was my least. I really liked the first Creed quite a bit. For Creed II, I felt mostly bored or at least doing my best to get into it... and then the last half-hour happened. Reminded me why I love the Rocky movies. There were tears.

Started First Man but had turned it off after the first 10mins, because I was not in the mood for it. So I put on something I was more in the mood for: A Goofy Movie;D My favorite movie as a kid, and the only movie this week that I've seen before. Watched it for the first time on blu-ray (Disney released it for their Movie Club Members). There were tears.

I love Wreck-It Ralph so finally got around to watching Ralph Breaks the Internet. It was pretty close to being on-par with the original. The cameos, internet jokes, characters, and story all fantastic. It's a bit more flawed, but still very entertaining. There were tears.

I liked Get Out, so I watched Us. I typically don't like horror movies, because they're either too bad or too good (i.e. too effectively scary). I thought the first half hour of Us was fantastic. But, without spoiling anything, I'll say I felt a lot of the movie's mystery was given away waaay too early. Like Night of the Living Dead, it's more scary when you don't know why things are happening and the focus is on survival. Specifically when...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, I would say Us falls into the horror trope where characters make dumb decisions. Specifically when...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I knew Get Out had social commentary. I absolutely would've forgiven it for its sins had I known that it was a metaphor for
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I barely enjoyed it. There were no tears.

I take back every negative thing I've ever said about The Blind Side. My lazy afternoon self really enjoyed this. I live in Alabama, and movies tend to not really get the South right and tend to be way too pandering. The Blind Side did it the best I've seen since June Bug. I read the first 1/3 of the book years ago and was surprised how faithful the movie was. I hated Sandra Bullock's Southern accent in Infamous, but she nailed it here. And I 100% know women exactly like the character she plays. Not only does she nail it down but gives her performance nuance I've never seen for such a stereotypical character. I'm actually totally ok with her Oscar win now as well as the Best Pic nom. The fact that it's unabashedly any red state's dream movie, the Best Pic surprises me for totally different reasons. Overall, what should've been your typical Pure Flix film wound up being more Remember the Titans and less [insert Kirk Cameron movie]. Yes, there were tears.

I have two blindspot Everests in my movie watching. One is Gone With the Wind. The other is Lawrence of Arabia which I finally sat down to watch for 3.5 hours on the biggest screen I could. Surprised how much of a character piece it is considering it's an epic action/adventure/war film. Any time Peter O'Toole is doing anything, it's captivating. When not, it's usually stuffy old British dudes in a big room debating war strategy. Can't say enough good things about the cinematography. This should be released in IMAX theaters exclusively. Overall, I was with it for the first two hours, but I lost interest after that. There were tears... of boredom. :( Shame since I really wanted to enjoy it.

I should mention too that I finally saw Aquaman about a week ago. A *lot* of fun. Love the spectacle and how I was only bored during, like, one scene over its 2.5hrs. The acting is... problematic. The script's dialogue is... yikes. But I can't say I didn't have the most fun I've ever had watching a DCEU movie. Probably has my favorite action scenes of any movie last year too.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 08:12:49 AM by stansimpson »


Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18707 on: July 07, 2019, 06:44:20 PM »
Golden Swallow ( 1968 )
Director King Hu may have left Shaw Brothers, but Cheng Pei Pei was still under contract to the studio, which was all they needed for a sequel to Come Drink With Me. Directing duties went to up and coming director Chang Cheh. The Dragon Dynasty box for this film claims it was Chang Cheh's first big success, ignoring that One Armed Swordsman came out a year earlier. You would think that this time with Golden Swallow being the title character that she would finally be the hero of the film. Well, look who directed the film and think again.

The film us mostly about a character called played by Jimmy Wang Yu called Silver Roc. Just a year earlier Yu became a superstar due to the success of One Armed Swordsman, and would remain the studio's biggest star until the day he broke his contract and left Shaw Brothers to legally make films for rival studios in Taiwan.  The film opens with Golden Swallow being ambushed in a fight and felled by poison darts. Before the outlaws can kill her, another hero called Golden Whip ( Lo Lieh ) shows up and fends them off. Golden Whip brings Golden Swallow to his secluded shack in the woods to recover, which she does thanks to a time jump. Both become very close. One of Golden Whip's friends drops by for a visit, and during a picnic begins to talk about another hero called Silver Roc, an undefeatable and ruthless swordsman who has been killing villains. Golden Swallow wonders if Silver Roc is actually Little Roc, a fellow student from her martial arts school and former love intrest.

At this point the film cuts to Silver Roc, who easily obliterates a gang that has attempted to ambush him. The film then follows his character as he goes around obliterating criminal gangs, but deliberately leaving behind knives with Golden Swallow's insignia on them, framing her for the slaughters. Midway through the film a gang attacks Golden Swallow and Golden Whip, telling them that they are taking revenge for all the people Golden Swallow has killed. Somehow she figures out that Silver Roc must be framing her in order to get her attention. She says she will be going into town to investigate, but Golden Whip talks her out of it by telling her she is wanted by gangs for revenge and it isn't safe. That night Golden Swallow decides to sneak out and go to town anyway. Golden Whip decides to do the same, and ends up finding Golden Roc first. After a verbal argument, both men agree to a duel, the survivor claiming Golden Swallow. She finally shows up and attempts to talk the men out of the duel, but Silver Roc tells them he isn't done wiping out the criminal gangs, and after he gets rid of the leader that afternoon, would meet Golden Whip for the duel at dawn the next day. From this point on Golden Swallow is nothing more than a bystander. Even her attempt to stop the duel fails because she oversleeps. In the final fight between Silver Roc and the last of the criminal gangs taking vengeance for the death of their leader, Golden Swallow is nowhere to be found. Needless to say someone dies from the duel and decides that was the man she really loved while the other decides to leave her forever.

Chang Cheh typically ignored female characters in his films.  The few he did have existed only to be killed so the hero would have more if a reason to hate the villain, or were the catalyst who got the antihero into a fight with a rival streetgang. He did have one or two strong women characters during his Venom Mob era, but in 1968 he wanted nothing to do with them. But while Golden Swallow ended up sidelined in her own film, it is still one of the better films from the early old school era, and definitely one of the must see films for all Jimmy Wang Yu fans.

Conan The Barbarian ( 1982 )
There has been some debate on if pulp novel hero Conan counts as a superhero.  The character was mostly forgotten when Marvel Comics licensed the rights to the character, and for most of the 70s Conan was their best selling character. Those going to the first Schwarzenegger film were mostly fans of the comic books and assumed he was the first Marvel character to get his own movie. Actually, producer Dino De Laurentiis did a complete end run around Marvel and obtained the movie rights from the Robert E Howard estate. I was prepared not to count the Conan films as superhero films, but then Wikipedia added the 2011 reboot film to their list, and kept it there. So just in case, I got the Schwarzenegger trilogy ( including Red Sonja ), and the reboot.

I went to see Conan the Barbarian twice when it came out in theaters, but only actually saw it once. Me and my friends knew of Conan as a comic book character, and as such wanted to see it. But none of us were old enough to see an R rated film. So we had a plan. We would go to the local multiplex and buy tickets for Rocky III, but then walk into the theater showing Conan. Usually no one checked to see if you were walking into the correct theater at this particular multiplex. And if it turned out they were, then at least we bought tickets to another film we wanted to see. The plan began to fall apart on the way to the theater when one of my friends mention his older brother told him a woman's head gets chopped off in the beginning of the film. Then he kept trying to talk us all into seeing Rocky III instead. It eventually became apparent that he was afraid of seeing a woman's head being chopped off, and the closer we got to the theater, the more he was in a panic about it. When we reached the box office we flat out told him we were going to see Conan, and if he didn't want to  then he could either go home, or we split up once inside the multiplex and he could watch Rocky III while we went to see Conan the Barbarian.

We thought everything was settled, until we were inside the Multiplex, and the friend started talking really loud in front of one of the roving ushers: "You guys bought tickets for Rocky, and are now going to sneak into see Conan, right!?" I mean, he practically told the Usher to his face. But somehow the usher didn't hear him, or didn't care, and kept walking away. So we continue walking towards the door to the Conan theater when the friend yelled at the top of his lungs, loud enough  for everyone in the building to turn and look in our direction "YOU GUYS CAN'T SEE CONAN! YOU BOUGHT TICKETS TO SEE ROCKY! THAT'S WRONG! CONAN IS AN R RATED FILM!" At witch point someone in a red business suit we assumed must be the manager began walking in our direction while random ushers began circling around us while two of them walked right next to the Conan door and stood there with their arms crossed. So the rest of us kept walking as if we were planning to go into Rocky all along, right past the Conan door and into the packed Rocky theater. When we periodically looked back we saw the man in the red suit and an usher standing at the enterance door looking in. We watched Rocky III, and as we left the multiplex, every door to every R film suddenly had two ushers keeping guard and inspecting every ticket. He didn't just ruin it for us, he ruined it for every kid planning to sneak in to see an R film that day, and probably ruined it for the rest of the summer as well. Oh, and we never invited him to come with us to the movies again.

The coda to this story: we never attempted that multiplex trick again. There was a grindhouse theater in another part of town that didn't give a crap if you were under 18 and let anyone in to see R films. The only problem was they didn't get current films untill months after their release date. But I did finally get to see Conan the Barbarian there. And that scene my former friend was so worried about? You never actually see the head chopped off. You see the villain swing his sword in the woman's general direction, then the angle cuts to just the woman's torso in frame when something blurry passes the camera for a split second, then the body slumps sideways. You don't even see the head on the ground or a headless body. There was a lot of gory and violent stuff that followed, and you do see someone else beheaded at the end of the film. But the one scene that guy was so afraid to see was nothing.

The movie is your basic origin plot. A group of marauders lead by a warlord named Thulsa Doom ( James Earl Jones ) attack a village, killing all the adults, and enslaving all the children. One child is forced to turn a gigantic millstone with a group of adult slaves. Years go by and one by one the slaves die of exhaustion until only the kid is left. But thanks to years of pushing the millstone, he has grown up into Arnold Schwarzenegger. Someone buys Conan and forces him to become a gladiator. After years of fighting Conan's master unexpectedly sets him free for no reason. He soon befriends two thieves, one a girl he falls in love with. Together they rob a tower belonging to a cult. This impresses the king, who hires Conan and his friends to steal back his daughter, who has run away and joined the cult. Conan has his own reason for confronting the cult. It's leader is Thulsa Doom, the same man who killed his parents years earlier.

I could not remember if I liked or hated this film back when I saw it in the theater. By the time I did see it, I had already read the Marvel comic book adaption, so already knew the entire plot. I noticed when popping the disc into the DVD player that it was over two hours long. If I didn't like the film, or if it was another film that didn't age well, that extra half hour could end up being interminable. I do remember all those Conan rip offs that followed, like Beast Master, felt like they were nothing but padding.

Fortunately Conan doesn't seem to lag anywhere, even though it is a bit thin on plot. The action is very decent, for an 80s Hollywood film. Mind you, the action in Golden Swallow, which was also mostly sword fighting, was ten times more energetic. And that came from an early old school era film where Shaw Brothers was just beginning to learn how to stage fight scenes. But where the sword fighting in Conan may be slow and lethargic, director John Milius makes up for it with plenty of gore. This was probably the most blood spilled in an American action film since Sam Peckinpah stopped making Westerns. And there is also that great theme music from Basil Poledouris which makes a scene seem more action packed then it actually is. Conan the Barbarian is an entertaining film, although today's generation would have seen much better in any random episode of Game of Thrones. ( And yes, I am including that last episode. )


Flying Deuces ( 1939 )
It would have been awkward if I had been hosting a L&H LoC the same time I reviewed this. Believe me, it is pure coincidence this movie is in my viewing que as I ordered it a month before the poll. I first began buying L&H films back in the late 80s when Nostalgia Merchant released 9 volumes of their shorts on VHS. I bought their other films whenever they got a VHS release, and that included Flying Deucse. Since the film was public domain, a lot of companies were releasing it, but all from the same low quality print. I paid $3 for a copy from Goodtimes Home Video. The boxes artwork sucked, but it was cheap for a film I could have easily videotaped off of PBS for free.

I began buying L&H films on Laserdisc in the mid 90s, mostly because at first Image was only releasing their silent films on that format. Then Laserdisc was replaced with DVD. I originally had a strict "no double dipping" policy. If I already had the movie on VHS or Laserdisc then I wouldn't get it on DVD because I already owned it. But then Image made that impopssibl with the DVD releases of the silent films, each volume having both previous unreleased films, and films already released on Laserdisc. Eventually I abandoned the no double dipping policy because the DVD releases were sourced from far better quality prints than the previous VHS releases.  As of a few months ago I had every one of their films on DVD, except for the two lost films and the two public domain films. Why upgrade from VHS on A-toll K and Flying Deuces if they were just being sourced from the previous VHS releases, and probably looked worse than the Goodtimes release?

There is no financial incentive to remaster or restore a public domain film. Why go through all that expense when any rival company can legally source your release and release their own "remaster" of it? And yet a few years back Kino released what was called a "deluxe collectors edition" of the film.  It was sourced from an European release of the film sourced from first generation prints. Unfortunately it was a conversion from PAL, and the conversion somehow sped up the film. Perhaps not enough to be noticable unless you noticed the shorter run time on the clock, but enough for a lot of buyers to give the release one star for the flaw. So I decided to wait and see if Kino fixed the problem. They didn't. Instead the disc went OOP.

Fortunately another first generation print was used for the first Blu-ray release of the film. It is supposed to be the best copy ever released on home video in North America, and had some decent extras.  So my first  L&H Blu-ray turns out to be one of their public domain films. The quality of the print is stunning. There was some evidence of possible dropped frames, especially in the opening credits. And in some scenes it did appear as if they switched back and fourth between two different prints. But otherwise this was the quality you wish all the L&H films were available in.

Okay, enough of that. What about the film itself? Film historians William K. Everson once assessed that Blockheads was Laurel and Hardy's last great film, with everything from that point on being inferior to the rest of their body of work. And no L&H fan has ever disputed this. Even the final two films made for Hal Roach were compromised by being paced to be released as Streamliners. ( B Feature films with a 40 minute running time. ) Both ended up being padded out to 60 minutes at the last minute. Then, of course, there were the FOX and MGM films everyone hates, and their last film which was made while Stan Laurel was very sick.

Flying Deuces comes off as the best of their final films. But it's still nowhere as good as most of their previous films.  There are a few gags that are very funny. But much of the film isn't funny at all. Actually, it is a miracle that Stan was able to turn this into a decent enough comedy at all.

Hal Roach had leant L&H to another studio that was remaking a French film called The Aviators. The plot of which had two incompetent Frenchmen get into an airplane while drunk and take off, and once sobering up, realizing they had no idea how to fly. When they finally crash the plane they discovered they set an endurance record for longest flight and become national heroes. The American adaption was a wildly inappropriate script that split Laurel and Hardy up for most of it's running time, and had them doing mean-spirited gags. An emergency meeting was called with Stan and his gagmen ( Charles Rigers and Harry Langdon ) to completely gut the script and write a new one within a few weeks. The only thing kept from the original was L&H flying an airplane, and that it took place in the French Foreign Legion. This made it extra hard for the writers because L&H had already done a Foreign Legion comedy eight years earlier and now had to write a second film with the same premise, but with a different plot and gags. And with the shorter shooting schedule, L&H had far less time to develop improvised gags on the set as they had done in their previous films, or reshoot scenes that didn't work. They were also stuck with a director who insisted they stick to the script and do as few takes as possible.

But despite all of that,  you do get a few decent laughs here and there. But not from the ending. For some reason Hollywood thought the idea of two comedians accidentally flying an airplane was hilarious. ( I can't tell you if the original French version was funny because I can't find a review on IMDb Rotten Tomatoes, or anywhere else on the internet. ) Just two years after this film Abbott and Costello made Keep Em Flying which also had them accidentally taking off in an airplane. And there are more examples of this. But every time, the flying scenes are neither funny nor thrilling. It's as if the script writers don't get that the various gags with the airplane are too dangerous to actually film, or that the studio would ever let one of their stars do airplane tricks. So everything ends up being unconvincingly back projected on a studio set with the occasional model plane shot for the near miss tricks. Unfortunately Flying Deuces builds up to this unfunny climax, and is only saved by a charming freak ending gag Stan tagged onto the ending of the film.


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18708 on: July 08, 2019, 07:05:10 PM »
I saw Child's Play today. Now most everyone here knows I am no fan of horror, but several factors drove me to see this. One, Aubrey Plaza, who is smoking hot as hell. Two, the voice of Mark Hamill is always a treat, whether he's Luke, the Joker, or Chucky, he's amazing. Three, I heard good things about this remake. It's not very often you get a remake that is almost as good as the original, but even I as a not that big a horror fan have to admit, this is a pretty good remake! *SPOILERS AHEAD*

It all starts in... some country in southeast Asia I'm assuming, and some floor manager gets pissed at his poor employee and starts chewing the poor guy out for no reason. Said employee decides to reprogram the "Buddi" doll so that all his moral safeguards are off, so yes it's basically the equivalent of turning the switch on the talking Krusty doll from Good to Evil. The funniest part happens just as a whole bunch of Buddi dolls are being loaded onto a truck, a body from right the fuck out of nowhere falls onto the top of a car. It almost made me laugh my ass off because it was just completely unexpected and never addressed, ever again in the film!

Anyway, then we meet the very beautiful Aubrey Plaza as Karen Barclay, single mom to Andy, who's trying her best to keep her son out of trouble. One day a Buddi doll is returned to the store and Karen finds a way to take the doll home for her son Andy. Eventually as you can imagine this doll who's already had its programming parameters starts reeking havok.

Eventually Chucky flips his shit and kills Andy's poor cat, then he sets his sights on Karen's new Boyfriend. Horror deaths are a lot more effective in my opinion if the victim is someone we actually care about. In the case of Karen's boyfriend however... he's scum. As we follow him home he arrives... to his wife and children(we see him put his wedding ring back on). So yeah, go ahead and fuck this guy up Chucky I really don't give a damn about what happens to him from this point on. Believe me, Chucky fucks this guy up and it is NO joke what happens to him! It's definitely the goriest death in the whole movie. I do have one question though... since when are rotor tillers self-propelling?

Anyway, from there Andy and his friends devise a plan to shut Chucky down before he does anymore killing. Unfortunately a curious basement dwelling perv(He installed hidden cameras to spy on Karen) discovers the disabled doll and brings him back to life by... putting an arc reactor into the dolls chest. From there, Chucky is reborn and fucks up this overweight doofus and cuts the living fuck out of the guy with a butcher knife over and over. Just let me ask you one thing... if you're bleeding and on the verge of hitting the floor, why in God's name would you ever climb onto a table saw?! I think you can see where this is going and all I can say is... you are absolutely right.

The next kill in the movie is actually pretty tragic, just as much as Andy's poor cat. I was thinking to myself "no, no, not her!". I'm serious, I was honestly thinking that. So honestly, this kill is pretty effective as far as emotional impact goes.

So Karen thinks Andy has flipped his shit, the Cop down the hall thinks Andy murdered the boyfriend, leading to the final confrontation at the... Zedmart. Sigh.... I just know if they thought a little bit harder they could have come up with a better name.

So it's actually pretty suspenseful at the end! I had NO idea what was going to happen, I was just sitting back and letting the movie take me to a pretty cool ending, that even has a callback to the first Child's Play. It ends kind of typically for a horror film and honestly? I thought it was pretty good, and I'm no horror fan.






« Last Edit: July 08, 2019, 07:07:13 PM by Russoguru »


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18709 on: July 10, 2019, 07:38:42 PM »
I finally got to watch Get out today. Damn, that was some fucked up white people shit. Oh wait... I'm white... oh well! Anyway, Chris Washington(Daniel Kaluuya) and his girlfriend Rose Armitage(Allison Williams) are headed out to her parents house for the weekend. One of the first questions Chris asks Rose is "Did you tell them I'm black?". It's a sad culture we live in when a person of African American descent actually has this question(for perfectly legit reasons), and yet here we are. We seem to be one of the most backwards countries on the fucking planet when it comes to racial equality and discrimination. Good job United States!!

Anyway things get weird fast, as people that Chris meets at the residence feel that they have to resort to what I like to call "verbal fellatio". Rose's father goes out of his way to say "I would have voted for Obama a third time if I could". Of course Chris can't help but notice that this all-white family has African American servants. I won't spoil the later events, just know that things take a turn for the really fucking bizarre.

The movie's intent(IMHO) was to be thought-provoking, funny, suspenseful, and dramatic all at the same time and this movie really does pull off that amazing trick. The acting was amazing, the twists were clever and surprising and the writing was inspired. Get out is like a feature length modern day Twilight Zone movie... it really is THAT good.


Offline MartyS (Gromit)

  • Not Quite Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 11680
  • Liked: 2614
  • Weirdies!
    • My homepage
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18710 on: July 11, 2019, 07:47:51 AM »
Alita: Battle Angel

 It's fun, mostly well acted, and the visuals and fight scenes are amazing.

 The various plots are actually pretty good ideas, but there are so many crammed into the movie that none of them get enough of an in depth treatment to feel like a good story.  And at the end it just seems like the whole movie was a setup for a sequel.  So there are good pieces of story scattered in with the action that do leave you wanting more, if there is a sequel this movie did it's job, if there is no sequel then this movie is just meh.

 One plot point was so easy to predict,
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Most of the other plots were fairly formulaic but since there were so many and interspersed with action sequences the next obvious turns don't seem so obvious.


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18711 on: July 11, 2019, 08:20:21 PM »
I didn't like Alita... but honestly I think that has mostly to do with the design of the main character. To be fair, under the circumstances I think my bias prevents me from fairly rating or reviewing the movie so I will refrain from doing so.

I saw this a LONG ass time ago... like I don't know 2006 or so, but tonight I watched Reefer Madness The musical. The movie has some great actors, like Kirsten Bell(of The Good Place and Veronica Mars fame), Neve Campbell(of Scream fame and of course Party of five who is REALLY underused in this movie), and... the guy who played the Crypt Keeper is even in this! Oh, and it also features the brilliant Alan Cumming of The Good Wife, and of course X2.

You know, in theory doing a musical parody of an ancient propaganda film vilifying the "evils" of marijuana sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately even for an unbelievably ridiculous parody this thing still goes WAY over the top in the musical numbers. One even features a special appearance of... heaven? Complete with singing Jesus! You know what? Christmas in heaven from Monty Python's The meaning of life was SO much better.

So the film is at least trying, but there were too many points during the movie where I was internally saying "Okay, you're losing me movie!". The performances are good, and despite how off the rails the movie gets at times, the overall message is not exactly something you can disagree with. During the credits I saw the name Kevin Murphy pop up several times. Of course I had to head on over to IMDB only to discover... OHHHHH THAT Kevin Murphy!(The one who worked on Desperate Housewives).

Maybe I'm being a little too tough on the film, to be fair you might like it... but then again...



Offline wihogfan

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1279
  • Liked: 255
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18712 on: July 12, 2019, 06:53:32 PM »
Crawl (2019)
Well, it was pretty much what I expected. CGI gators done well despite not behaving like actual gators (not intelligent killing machines, but behaved more like a pack of wolves than gators would behave). Back story corny and plot holes galore. Better than a lot of killer reptile movies- moved at a good pace once the back story was set up- but kept from being great by the hitting the back story too hard and a lack of explanation of why the gators were so enormous (being a bit more over-the-top with the back story and a nuclear accident or something causing the enormous gators would have been an improvement).


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6049
  • Liked: 1518
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18713 on: July 14, 2019, 04:03:29 PM »
Just saw Midsommar.  It's sooooooo good!  My favorite movie of 2019 so far.  It's the true spiritual successor to The Wicker Man.  I love it.  It's my favorite kind of horror film.  The kind that isn't reliant on jump scares.  At all.  There's only one (ok mayyybe two) things that could be considered a jump scare.  The rest is just pure unsettling atmosphere. 

Almost everyone in the movie is treated as a real person with real motivations and real reasons behind their actions.  It's refreshing, and beautiful.  And unlike Hereditary (the director's last film), the ending of Midsommar was the best part.  I highly recommend it if you were a fan of the original Wicker Man. 


Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18714 on: July 14, 2019, 05:01:07 PM »
Gamera: Guardian of the Universe ( 1995 )
I decided to watch the Shusuke Kaneko Gamera trilogy again, beginning  with Gamera: Guardian of the Universe again. ( the English title never made sense as he is only ever on Earth. The Japanese title is "Gamera: Kaiju Midair Battle" )  I have praised this film before, and it is just as good as I remembered it. This is the first time I watched the Mill Creek Gamera Legacy collection on a modern television set instead of the old tube set, and the films all appear to look cubed. Fortunately the Shusuke Kaneko films seem to be sourced from a different transfer and don't have that flaw. But at some point I am going to need to upgrade. Perhaps some day some company will put out all the films ( including Gamera the Brave which is missing from the Legacy set ) as Blu-ray remasters with working subtitles and the English dub which the Legacy set also doesn't have.

Conan The Destroyer ( 1984 )
Seems I made a mistake. According to some sources Red Sonja was the third and final film in the Robert E Howard trilogy. The story goes that there were supposed to be three Conan films with the third being the story of how Conan becomes king. But then Conan the Destroyer bombed at the Box Office, so De Laurentiis decided the character had ran it's course and went with another Robert E Howard character, Red Sonya. He still had Arnold under contract and stuck him in that film as a supporting character that wasn't Conan. That's the story I had always heard. And it made sense because my recollection was that Conan the Destroyer was a box office and critical bomb. That would explain why me and my friends never attempted to see it in the theaters, or later rent it on home video, or why I never bothered watching it on television.

The real story, Conan the Destroyer did underperform at the box office, but still made a huge profit. De Laurentiis still intended to make a third and final Conan film and had begun adapting The Hour of the Dragon, the final Conan story published. In the meantime, De Laurentiis decided to start a second franchise with Red Sonja. And since Arnold was under contract, stuck him in as a supporting character. Huge mistake. At the time that decision was made, Arnold Schwarzenegger wasn't Arnold Schwarzenegger yet, but still just the guy who played Conan. Nobody wanted an actor with an unpronounceable name and thick German accent. As far as De Laurentiis could tell, he didn't really need Arnold under contract, because the Conan movies were his only option. But then James Cameron thought Arnold would make a perfect robot and cast him in The Terminator, followed soon after by Predator and Running Man and Twins. And by the time Conan the Conqueror was ready to be filmed, Arnold wasn't interested. His legal obligation for a third Conan film blown on Red Sonja. The final Conan film? After years of trying to get Arnold back, they decided to recast him with Kevin Sorbo, then changed the character from Conan to Kull and released Kull the Conqueror in the late 90s using the final Conan script. So basically I should have bought Kull the Conqueror and didn't, so it will not be part of this run of Conan films.

Apparently Conan the Destroyer got mixed reviews rather than just unfavorable reviews. So it wasn't really the disaster I thought it was. But it does have a lot of weaknesses that could have been avoided. The original Conan film was going to use a story written by Roy Thomas, the writer of the Marvel Conan comics. But after De Laurentiis and director John Milius took over the film, the script went to an up and coming film maker named Oliver Stone. Milius had a vision of turning Conan into a franchise that ran for three to five films, leading to  Conan becoming king. The first film was the beginning of that story arc, and ended with a teaser of an older Conan sitting on a throne with the caption "This is another story". But for the sequel, De Laurentiis went with a different director, and he chose a story written by Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway, perhaps the same story originally intended for the first film. The sequel still ended with a teaser of King Conan, once again with captions that it  would be ".....another story". But otherwise the carefully planned Milius/Stone story arc was abandoned. New director Richard Fleischer wanted a more lighthearted film, and both De Laurentiis and Universal wanted to avoid the R rating so that more teenagers could buy tickets.  The change in tone is a bit of a disappointment. The first movie had more of an epic feel to it. This had the feel of a cheesy B picture. And at the time, the theaters were full of Conan knock off films like Beatsmaster ( 1982 ) and Yor, Hunter From The Future ( 1983 ), all cheesy B pictures. The tone of the first film was it's advantage over the others, and De Laurentis had abandoned it.

There were other disappointing things about this film. While Basil Poledouris was back to write the score, the fantastic theme music from the first movie was replaced with a cheap annoying new theme, that once again made the Conan series no better than it's competition. Conan's companion in the first film was the thief Subotai,  played by surfer Gerry Lopez. For some reason Subotai is replaced with an identical character called Malak. The big difference, Malak is a fool, a klutz and a coward.  He is there only as comedy relief, and unlike Subotai, offers nothing else to the story. Had I not bothered to look the character up on IMDb then I would have thought both characters were the same, and that they dumbed down the character from the first film. Originally the part was to be played by David L Lander, a character actor best known as Squiggy from the series Laverne & Shirley, but had to leave the film due to a medical condition. So did they get Gerry Lopez back? No! They recast the role to Tracey Walter, a character actor best known as Angel on the series Nash Bridges and as Joker's henchman Bob in Batman ( 1989 ).  They also brought in Grace Jones to play a Grace Jones type character, who also adds almost nothing to the plot other than being in the background.  The film already had more characters than it needed, so they could have easily written Malak and the Grace Jones character out without effecting the plot at all.

On the positive side, the Roy Thomas story has more of what you want from a Conan story that the first film was lacking. Lots of wizard battles and magic. Forbidding castles. Battles with monsters. It was the closest the films came to being exactly like the Marvel comics.  While I enjoyed the first film a lot more, I was entertained by the sequel. It's just that it felt more like an appetizer rather than a meal.

The Big Broadcast of 1938
 The musical director of this film was Boris Morros, who shortly after began a short career as a producer, the first film being Flying Deuces. I just brought that up because I am always surprised when a name pops up in the credits of a film that ties into another film I had seen recently.  Perhaps he shouldn't have given up his day job because the list of films he did the soundtrack for is impressive, while his producing credits... well, the highlight was Flying Deuces, a film Stan Laurel needed to completely rewrite the script for in order to make it a halfway decent comedy.  But as the musical director of this film, Boris was responsible for picking the song Thanks For The Memories for Bob Hope to sing, which not only became one of the most famous songs in motion picture history, but from that point on Bob's theme song. The reason I got this film is because W.C. Fields gets the star billing. The simple plot: two ocean liners are having a race across the ocean,  and each night Bob Hope hosts a live radio broadcast from the bridge featuring performers. There are a few minor subplots going on that makes this seem more like an earlier draft of The Love Boat than a 30s musical. ( In fact, I think some of the cast members actually did end up in an episode or two of The Love Boat ) This was Field's final film for Paramount, and unfortunately most of the routines here are reworkings from his previous films, where they were all executed better. Supposedly Fields was in poor health while doing this film, and in no mood to write new material.  Still, a mildly funny musical comedy with one very memorable song.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2019, 05:05:52 PM by stethacantus »


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18715 on: July 16, 2019, 02:29:48 PM »
After Captain Marvel and Avengers  endgame I decided I was a huge fan of Brie Larson.  I figured the hate train for Brie Larson  would probably go away as time went on.  It appears however as though that the hate for Brie Larson is still alive and kicking. One of the more maligned movies featuring Miss Larson over the past couple years is the musical in titled Basmati blues.  I’m pretty sure most if not all the negative reviews about the movie contain the word racist or racism. Having watched it for myself today I can say with at least some certainty that this movie isn’t racist, not even a little bit.

It’s not like I’m an expert on the culture of India but at the same time I do feel I am at least somewhat qualified to know whether or not a piece of media I am being visually fed is racist. In the end Basmati blues  ends up being a fairly typical musical that is actually pretty good at least as far as musicals go anyway. I certainly liked it a lot better than reefer madness the musical.

Brie Larson  portrays Linda, a scientist working for the evil conglomerate Mogil. This is another unfortunate accusation that is leveled at the movie, that the scientist is like the white savior of India or something which is just not true if you’ve seen the entire damn movie.  Late in the film Linda Realize she has made a terrible mistake and being the optimist that she has didn’t suspect that her company  and boss was in fact evil.

 The musical numbers aren’t bad yet acting is pretty good and like I said this movie isn’t racist at all.  I didn’t feel like the movie reinforced already existing negative stereotypes or added new ones  for any specific race of people.  When it comes to scoring a certain genre all scores are relative to other movies in the same genre so I’d probably give Basmati  blues a four out of five. It’s certainly nowhere near as bad as everyone has been saying.


Offline stansimpson

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5068
  • Liked: 379
  • Show yourself! Otherwise, we'll kill some diffrum!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18716 on: July 17, 2019, 07:02:49 AM »
If you like Brie Larson, you might like Netflix's The Unicorn Store, her directorial debut. I saw the first hour or so a couple days ago. Samuel L. Jackson has a small, eccentric part. Kinda reminded me of a female version of Garden State... but quirkier (I liked Garden State much more ftr). Very indie film type comedy. My wife seemed to like it. And of course Room is a must-see if you haven't seen that yet.


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18717 on: July 17, 2019, 03:35:05 PM »
 I’m definitely going to check that out sometime. Thank you for the recommendation Stan.  :)


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18718 on: July 18, 2019, 11:39:30 PM »
Well I went to see the remake of the Lion King tonight.  Believe it or not I thought it was actually really good.  I somehow managed to grin and bear it even though there were kids talking and making noise pretty much throughout the whole film. The performances were of course magical, James Earl Jones and John Oliver are especially wonderful in their respective roles as Mufasa and  Zazu. The only thing That may put this movie at a disadvantage Is that since the faces are not classically animated the expressions are limited. Of course we’re dealing with real live creatures here so naturally their facial expressions are bound to be limited. However I never felt that this came off as a limitation. In fact I think I enjoyed the movie all the more because of it. In the end I had to applaud because this movie was a joy to sit through in spite of the rowdy audience. I’d give this one a solid four out of five.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2019, 11:44:08 PM by Russoguru »


Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 27864
  • Liked: 5675
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18719 on: July 19, 2019, 05:49:31 AM »
Well I went to see the remake of the Lion King tonight.  Believe it or not I thought it was actually really good.  I somehow managed to grin and bear it even though there were kids talking and making noise pretty much throughout the whole film. The performances were of course magical, James Earl Jones and John Oliver are especially wonderful in their respective roles as Mufasa and  Zazu. The only thing That may put this movie at a disadvantage Is that since the faces are not classically animated the expressions are limited. Of course we’re dealing with real live creatures here so naturally their facial expressions are bound to be limited. However I never felt that this came off as a limitation. In fact I think I enjoyed the movie all the more because of it. In the end I had to applaud because this movie was a joy to sit through in spite of the rowdy audience. I’d give this one a solid four out of five.
Is it as much of a beat for beat redo of the original as critics are saying, or did they change some things up?