Rate The Last Movie You Watched
Oct 6, 2016 at 1:43 PM Post #19,741 of 24,635
   
I've always taken it literally myself, but I doubt anyone's going to jump down your throat if you don't 
bigsmile_face.gif

My feeling is that the greatest purpose this thread can have, is to help others find movies they might have missed but would enjoy, or to share thoughts on movies. The "last movie you watched" rule seems arbitrary and does not contribute to the greater purpose IMO. It seems to me the original post was kind of a casual, almost frivolous thought, but has caught on and now have a lot of serious film buffs posting in it. Which means it really should be just a general movie review/discussion thread at this point. 
 
Oct 6, 2016 at 1:58 PM Post #19,742 of 24,635
rewatched a few 90s classics

Silence of The Lambs 

8.4/10

(Hopkins ftw)

Carlito's Way

8.8/10 

 
(this was the 5th viewing or sth, probably De palma's best , along with scarface)
 
Oct 6, 2016 at 6:32 PM Post #19,743 of 24,635
Last movie I watched was Star Trek Beyond. 3/5. I think I already forgot most of what it was about....
 
Oct 7, 2016 at 4:29 AM Post #19,745 of 24,635
   
Without general movie discussions this thread would have died already. 

Yeah and the general movie discussion thread I started years ago died quickly so better keep it all here :)
 
Oct 9, 2016 at 9:55 AM Post #19,746 of 24,635
St. Vincent - 9/10
 
Really liked this one, but kind of slow going at first.
Too many things are kind of left unexplained at the end and that was kind of annoying.
Another problem is that in some scenes I really couldn't tell if they were supposed to be sad or they were trying to be a little funny (not the ones with Bill Murray!).
These are really minor issues and did not take any points away.
 
This is labeled as a comedy, but it has a lot of serious stuff in it which even makes you think a little.
It's actually kind of a sad movie IMO. Not a good one to watch when you're depressed!
 
Oct 9, 2016 at 6:05 PM Post #19,747 of 24,635
Just watched Tucker and Dale vs. Evil on a friend's recommendation- 8/10
 
I should qualify my rating by noting that I am a huge fan of campy horror movies, and although some of the tropes in this movie were overplayed, it did a good job overall of turning the genre on its head. 
 
Oct 9, 2016 at 6:23 PM Post #19,748 of 24,635
Creepy - 5/10
 
A return to the horror genre for Kiyoshi Kurosawa, this slow burning mystery / thriller initially intrigues but spirals into mediocrity, almost in slow motion. You could shave at least half an hour, possibly even an hour, off its run time, and it wouldn't hurt it at all - in fact, it would make it much tenser. As it is, by the time it moves into its macabre third act, the pace is so glacial that its impact is barely felt. Another facet of the pacing, the understated sobriety of the acting and cinematography is that some preposterous implausibilities go almost unnoticed. The actor who puts the creep in Creepy though, delivers a genuinely creepy performance.
 
Chameleon - 7/10
 
Assured directorial debut from Chilean writer / director, Jorge Riquelme Serrano. It's a home invasion movie with a twist or two, that relies mainly on extracting vibrant, naturalistic performances out of the three lead actors. The film tackles the class divide in Chilean society through the interactions of (upper) middle class couple Paula and Paulina and the outsider, Gaston.
 
Gaston would be the obvious chameleon of the piece, adapting his behaviour to suit the situation and disguising his true nature, but I think it's actually Paula. For Gaston, she has betrayed her roots and is living a lie with Paulina.
 
It's an interesting film - tiny budget of course, and according to Serrano, shot in a total of four days, which is impressive. If there's one criticism, it's that he doesn't go deep enough into the characterizations; Gaston's motivations are sketchy to say the least. It's quite raw and brutal in places, which I think works well, but will doubtless offend some (for at least a couple of reasons!)
 
Notably the two questions from the audience during the Q&A related to violence against women and violence against the LGBT community. This was wide of the mark, for me - Serrano was interested in dramatizing the events of an actual home invasion case he read about, and also in drawing attention to the issue of violence in South American society; I didn't detect the kind of political agenda in the film they seemed to be accusing it of having.
 
Oct 9, 2016 at 6:26 PM Post #19,749 of 24,635
Jungle Book 7/10. To bad about some musical moments but they are minimal. 
 
I think they made a misstake with Bagheera. His is an indian leopard but the body is kind of more like a jaguar or something :p 
 
Oct 9, 2016 at 7:28 PM Post #19,750 of 24,635
Steve Jobs (2015) [8.6/10]
 
Another one that surprised me. Was actually going to give it a higher rating but i think it fizzled out at the end, which while it works within the context of the movie, was a bit anti-climactic for a generally well controlled movie, to say nothing of it's open ended aspect.
 
What they really did well here was control the viewer, which is really such a parallel to the story and the reality distortion field concept that i find it incredibly impressive. The writing was very precise and the directing and editing just forged the hand of a puppet master... or rather a conductor of sorts. Much like watching an Apple keynote, your eyes go exactly where they want, you shift in your seat right when they want, and your breath is held for how long they want. It all orchestrates into almost a master class of film design. When you take a step back and look at it, not much happened here. It was 2 hours or conversations, flashbacks and wit in a context that most of the viewership probably couldn't relate. And they went by at a startling pace, which makes it all the more impressive.
 
While i didn't really agree with Fassbender's delivery for the first 30 minutes or so, where Sorkin and Boyle kept it together, but after that he really hit the stride and started to pull away.
I think @Hutnicks 's review was really on point regarding the theme of reconciliation and just in general. 
 
I started out with giving it an 8 for the above noted issues, but when i started writing about and considering the execution, it was just difficult to leave it there.
 
I actually wonder if they had left out the entire parallel and story arc of Lisa, would it have been better or worse, or even how it would have been different.
 
Oct 11, 2016 at 6:00 AM Post #19,751 of 24,635
The Eyes of My Mother - 7/10
 
Unsettling neo noir / horror that defies expectations at every turn. The choice to shoot in black and white is a stylistic one - evoking the remote pastoral eeriness of Night of the Hunter - and the DOP gets some beautiful shots. But It's also a plot device: creating certain ambiguities in interpretation and also keeping you in the dark about exactly when and where the movie is set - it gives it a sort of timeless quality.
 
The Untamed - 6/10
 
To say almost anything about this one would be a spoiler, so I'll just say it's an intense family drama with an interesting take on extra-marital relations. 
wink.gif

 
Raw - 8/10
 
Gleefully visceral body horror which follows Justine's freshman year at veterinary school. After a particularly vicious hazing, Justine starts to explore her identity, going from wallflower to hellraiser, in a way that recalls De Palma's genre classic, Carrie.
 
There's a rich vein of jet black humour in this, which is meat and drink to the French. Also some surprisingly tender moments amid the carnage, with musings on feminine identity and coming of age. Someone in Q&A asked whether the director was influenced by extreme Asian cinema, but with directors like Gaspar Noe and Pascal Laugier leading the way, France are arguably in the vanguard of extreme horror, so Julia Decournau may not have needed to look so far afield for her inspiration.
 
Strangely, the second film of the day to begin with a road accident.
 
Dearest Sister - 5/10
 
A bit of misfire for me. The central idea of lottery-number-whispering ghosts just seemed too ridiculous. I'm told this is a thing in Laos but I didn't find it made for a particularly creepy or effective ghost story. If anything, it detracted from the more interesting examination of class conflict and the tensions created by Westernization; the rapid rise of aspirational material culture in urban areas.
 
Oct 12, 2016 at 12:47 PM Post #19,752 of 24,635
Shin Godzilla [Godzilla Resurgence] (2016): 7/10
 
I'm hardly a Godzilla expert (excluding the Hollywood films and the original, I've probably only seen a half dozen Godzilla films in their entirety, and it's probably been over a decade since I've seen the original), but to my mind this is easily the best Godzilla film since the original. The 1954 film was famously a response to the atomic bombings of Japan toward the end of World War II, a theme that is honored again in this film, but the obvious points of reference here are the 2011 Japanese earthquake/tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear incident. Interestingly, the film also seems to be an almost direct reaction to 2014's Godzilla--in many ways, Shin Godzilla takes a World War Z (the book, not the film) approach to Godzilla by treating an inherently unrealistic, ridiculous situation with as much political/strategic/tactical realism as possible (without weighing down the proceedings needlessly), and the bulk of the movie is concerned with behind-the-scenes political/military maneuvering, which takes on a strongly satirical tone as sub-committees within sub-committees within sub-committees shuffle between different meeting rooms on different floors of a government building and debate what to do and how much to tell the general public. It's clever film-making (if a bit long-winded), and genuinely quite funny--I particularly like how the main protagonist's official title grows as the film goes on. However, this heavy focus on politics (and lack of strong characterization) does limit the film's international appeal--while many of its jabs at needlessly complicated bureaucracy are something I think everyone can get behind, Japan's unique political structure and position on the world stage does lend itself to a few moments that might go over some heads. Additionally, some questionable casting choices make it clear that the filmmakers did not take into account the fact that eventually native English speakers would watch the film--one character in particular is severely miscast. She's supposed to be an American politician with designs on the American presidency, but of all the Japanese cast who also speak English, her English is easily the worst, leading to some unintentional comedy.
 
So that's all well and good, but what about Godzilla itself? The filmmakers opted to mix the old with the new by motion-capturing the traditional man-in-a-monster-suit performance and enhancing it with CGI, and I personally found the results to be spectacular... eventually. Part of the redesign of Godzilla here is that it goes through several stages of evolution before reaching its final form, and the early stages, while charmingly designed, are poorly integrated, and the bad CGI really sticks out. Godzilla proper, however, is fantastic, and again appears to be a direct reaction to 2014's Godzilla, whose titular monster I believe I described here as 'portly and soulful.' This Godzilla, on the other hand, while properly portly, completely lacks soul. It's stiff, moves mechanically, and seems hardly to be alive--it's less a giant monster and more an unknowable force of alien power, and is in some ways reminiscent of the angels from Neon Genesis Evangelion (which makes perfect sense, given this film's creative pedigree). It's also genuinely terrifying--while undeniably old-school in design, its behavior and nature are unpredictable and exciting, and its novel use of the famous 'atomic breath' partway through the film results in a sequence of stunning destruction that far exceeds in elemental beauty and power anything that we saw in 2014. Unfortunately, shortly after this scene the film begins to fall apart somewhat--the scenes of political satire are largely replaced with long scenes of pseudo-scientific babble, the solution for stopping Godzilla is lazily integrated, and the film lacks a proper climax, opting instead for what is essentially a pause in the story and a tease of more to come in the future. Nonetheless, auteur Hideaki Anno's dynamic directing is captivating throughout, and those who love his work will find much to appreciate here, even as the film winds towards its dry climax. Had the film's back-half been stronger this would have been a solid 8, but as is it's still quite good (for my money the best giant-monster movie in years), so long as you approach it with an open mind. I'm curious to see where Toho takes Godzilla in the future--the thought of sequels to this one done in a similar style is an exciting one. Hopefully they can pull it off.
 
 
 
Oct 12, 2016 at 3:09 PM Post #19,753 of 24,635
Thought I would make things a bit more interesting and add a bit of movie trivia to the recent movie ratings. I will put a random screenshot and see if someone can guess the movie that I am rating (shouldn't be too hard!) 
 
-----------------? - 7.5/10
 
 
 
It wasn't a perfect movie, but a refreshing thriller that used some pretty interesting techniques to make the tension and suspense really effective. I actually really enjoyed it even though these kind of movies are not really my cup of tea. If you have some friends over or just want to get a bit nervous and on edge, get some popcorn and discconect parts of your brain for awhile and let your adrenals elevate your blood pressure, then highly recommended! 
biggrin.gif
 
 
Oct 13, 2016 at 5:31 AM Post #19,755 of 24,635
  Shin Godzilla [Godzilla Resurgence] (2016): 7/10
 
some questionable casting choices make it clear that the filmmakers did not take into account the fact that eventually native English speakers would watch the film--one character in particular is severely miscast. She's supposed to be an American politician with designs on the American presidency, but of all the Japanese cast who also speak English, her English is easily the worst, leading to some unintentional comedy.

 
I really don't know why Japanese casting agents do this. I picked up on the same thing in the recent Psycho-Pass movie. There seems to be no reason, other than a lack of effort or resources, why they couldn't hire a native speaker to play the role of a foreign diplomat.
 
I might have to seek this one out. I actually wasn't impressed at all with the 2014 Godzilla - a combination of bad acting, bad plotting and the fact that most of the movie focuses on other monsters rather than Godzilla - so a return to a more primitive style is appealing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Back
    Top