Last Movie You Watched

[George]

Grown Ups 2 - tons of manic fun!

[Sergeant Rock]

How is this? A couple people have told me to watch it, and my ex was crazy about it.

It's AWESOME!! The "kids" (played by adults) are hilarious! Give it a shot.

I love the Archer Bob's Burgers parody (season 4 epidode 1):

http://www.youtube.com/v/q0_fRZi2lbU


Sarge

[Drasko]

I don't remember thinking it was a masterpiece, but I'll be damned if I can shake its spell.

That.



Not my favorite Renoir. I actually like the ideas, but the execution is too clunky too often. For comedy in a farce-like style timing is essential and neither Bergman nor Ferrer really have it, acting in French is probably part of the problem. There are still few very nice scenes: crowd scene at the parade and all back and forth at the inn are snappy as the whole film should have been.

[George]

Can You Watch the World Series for Free Online Anywhere?

If so, please PM me?

[Octave]

EL CID (Anthony Mann, 1961)
I barely enjoyed it at all, finding Sophia Loren remarkably terrible throughout, and the Mann mise-en-scene somehow less in effect than usual.  I couldn't get a fix on the alternating Islamophobia and liberal tolerance, so I just assumed it was the usual offend-no-one ideological mishmash typical of hugely expensive productions; the upshot was that this film sometimes seemed like a "clash of civilizations" Xian/Muslim buddy movie, i.e. "Don't worry, Christendom, they're not all bad!"  Turns out there was some seedy wheeling and dealing done with the Franco regime in order to get funding for the movie*, and a film history scholar and the producer's own son both assert in the DVD commentary (so I have read) that the script, as shot, makes veiled references to the greatness of Franco as a hero of Spain and/or natural, anti-communist order.  The enemy of our enemies!  Interesting, the conflation of multiple 'barbarisms': the North African Muslim hordes carry what appear to be zebra-skin shields that somehow to me do not seem to be customary to Northern Africa, though what do I know of 11c Berber warfare?

This is all beside the point, though; because aside from the Cold War trappings and funny ambiguities (the film was apparently scripted by blacklisters!), somehow it just seemed like an expensive, bad movie, bloated in every aspect.  I've read a bit of eloquence on it since seeing it, and the consensus seems to be that it was a better movie than THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, which was a catastrophic commercial failure, to the point of ending Pierre Dupont's career as a captain of international industry.  (And this latter failure [FRE] has only improved for me since I saw it; in fact, since jotting a few notes about it here, I've had vivid memories of it that have been much more moving than when I first saw and in some cases scoffed at them.  FRE might be a truly great epic.  Part of me wonders if it's as good and even a bit better than SPARTACUS, from which production Anthony Mann was fired.)  But maybe I am wrong about EL CID (a big commercial hit)?  Even the notable film scholar Jeanine Basinger, author of a key monograph on Mann, made a comment on the DVD about EL CID being perhaps Mann's last great movie.  (Even though FRE followed it.  I do not understand, but she definitely knows Mann's movies better than I.  And movies in general: she's rather brilliant.)

* I rarely ever find myself interested in the lives of movie producers or in the handshake/egotrip/moneymania/showbiz side of filmmaking [virtually unavoidable], but the DVD extra on the life of producer Samuel Bronston (who ~independently produced both EL CID and FALL OF ROMAN EMPIRE) was actually quite interesting and made me chuckle many times.  A relative of Leon Trotsky (both born Bronshtein, Samuel in Bessarabia, his family emigrating to flee the revolution) who ended up hustling in bizarre and oddly (apparently) rather ~honorable ways for the rest of his life.  I'm pretty skeezed out by what little I know about his coziness with the Franco regime (a huge component of the making of these two huge epics), but it adds a dimension of interest to those films and maybe even the films that owe a debt to them, even a debt of parody.  Bronston was a character, and seemed to be "insanely" motivated by a devotion to undying optimism and creativity, over profit.  In fact, his relationship to keeping hold of money seemed almost nihilistically inept.  This adds adds some perspective to the crazy, wasteful nature of those two late, more or less independent productions.


General Ben Yusuf: All-Purpose Muslim Boogieman Deluxe

[Octave]

PARADISE: LOVE (Ulrich Seidl, 2012)
PARADISE: FAITH (Ulrich Seidl, 2012)

This is the guy of whom John Waters apparently said, "Fassbinder died, so God gave us Ulrich Seidl."  These are the first two parts of a trilogy.

I was primed for succulent offense, but both films were so wearisomely tidy: offensive exactly as they were supposed to be, and in just the right proportions.  'Austrian' transgression?  (No offense to our Austrians.)  Of these two, LOVE was by far the most interesting, partly because the layering---of abuse, loneliness, exploitation, table-turning, isolation, boredom, and moments of beauty (dirty-Super16 Raphael)---did cause me a bit of dizziness and offered some material to chew on.

As an aside, I was really annoyed (rather than offended) by the strawmannery of the presentation of faith in PF.  I think it's a film about loneliness "rather than" belief, but it just felt like no serious attempt was made to show what that kind of concentration, hope, desperation, contemplation, humbling, supplication, ordering, etc ('from the deep') might look like, feel like, from without.  Lots of people 'without faith' still know what it's like to call out 'from the deep'.  The point of irritation really has nothing to do with piety; it's a problem of seriousness.

LOURDES (Jessica Hausner, another Austrian?) seemed to me to be a much, much more interesting film ~about faith....religious or otherwise.  I found its mixture of cruelty and compassion and 'mute' presentation to be rather more respectful of viewers than Seidl's PF, which latter ended up seeming a tidy set of caricatures stranded in the director's mildly condescending ('we're all educated here, aren't we?'), obedient, toothless calculation.  With Seidl all bases are covered.

I did like the look of Seidl's films, after getting used to its disgusting griminess...the colors could be almost supernaturally vivid while the image remained gritty and dirty, not sure how else to say this.  The mise-en-scene, however, was another issue; dead, flat, boring, pain/paint-by-numbers pictorial: one diorama after another.
One of the two cameramen was Ed Lachman, famous for his work with Werner Herzog, Todd Haynes, and many others.

[vandermolen]

The Freedom Writers - terrific. One of the few films that the three of us (me, wife, daughter) enjoyed. Fine performance by Hilary Swank.

[TheGSMoeller]

Geek Alert: Just purchased my ticket for a November 23rd simulcast screening of the Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Special in 3D at a Cinemark theater in Fayetteville GA. Very surprised that I had to buy tix for the fourth added show as the first three were already sold out. Will be very cool to see this show on a big screen in HD/3D. 

[Todd]

I wasn't part of the target demographic when The Verdict came out originally, but now I can appreciate it more.  Paul Newman is superb, and James Mason is spectacular.  Dig those 70s cars and the dilapidated look of Boston and New York, too.

[snyprrr]

Rainbow Bridge (1971)

If you need to remember why you hate hippies, this is the Holy Grail. See what happens when beasts become enlightened. Prostate yourself before a sadly wasted Jimi Hendrix as he regales you with dosed 'the man' assaults. The concluding concert is ok, but, if this was the '60s, it was waaay over and they all NEEDED to die (but, gulp, now they run the country).

[snyprrr]

Paranormal Activity (2009)
Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)

Wow, the most boring New Horror film ever, or just deceptively draw-you-in? The first one had me glued due to reputation, but most- MOST- of the film is staged to be realistically boring in a 'real TV' kind of way. But, the simple thuds and noises begin to cumulate, and I found a genuine atmosphere that I haven't found elsewhere.

Then there are the few big shocks that make you jump, which almost seems to be worth it. The characters seem incidental (and are cast that way), so, it's staged so that you imagine that it's you who are in the house.

I found them ingeniously cheap, with little or no real effects, that provide the same kind of thrills as the original The Haunting (yes, I found them pretty effective). The ending of the first one I found random, though the second one comes around full circle and seems a little more satisfying.

The 'demon' is effective as long as it's relegated to the aural, and the occasional opening/closing door, but when the 'possession' happens, I was slightly less enthusiastic, though, I will give them credit for coming up with a nice original creepy idea (which apparently extends to PA4!!).

As Chambernut noted, if you're prone to squeamishness, these two are for you. Nothing but bumps in the night, but surely you will almost pee yourself. I know a few people who would! I dare you to watch them.


Insidious is up this evening. I've seen the commercials for the new one, and I'm not impressed in the least, so, we'll see- some of you think it's hot stuff.

[Parsifal]

Ok, I'm going to ask.  How are you watching television if you are homeless?

[snyprrr]

Ok, I'm going to ask.  How are you watching television if you are homeless?

Tomorrow one month staying at friend's, that has been going very badly. I have now learned that the word 'homeless' connotes a certain image which seems manipulative emotionally. I mean, I'm one bad conversation from the actual concrete street, but, yea, I'm thankful for every pillowed night and every shower.

I don't know if I mentioned last year, one of my old high school buds was found in the local mall parking lot- he could've stayed with friends but preferred not to be a nuisance, and he was-gah- smoking salvia or something and probably had a heart attack. And I grew up in defence contractor heaven, so, it's pretty shocking to me for him to be basicqlly homeless in the county of plenty.


I guess it's hard for me, because I need so little, but I have to MAKE as much as a family because the costs for just a studio are so outrageous. They're not m olding this world for singles, but families. I mean, dig what happens when you go shopping for single person- it just seems more expensive because no one's really catering to the volumes I consume (maybe the amish?). Every meals seems to cost $6 whether you eat out or go shopping?


btw- TV was probably my biggest friend growing-like many of us-I went to film school- I think the whole industry should perhaps die, but I just can't take my eyes off that screen- once I reralized I was watching Barney, I

[Brian]

Every meals seems to cost $6 whether you eat out or go shopping?

Not really. Since I have my own kitchen, I cook gigantic servings at a time - like last week I cooked 8 enchiladas, followed by a big helping of stew - and most of my meals cost about $2.50-3.50. If I needed to, I could get the cheapest ingredients and have meals that only cost maybe $2.

Chicken breast cutlets can be on sale for $1.99 at times. Grab some then, cook the chicken however you want (I recommend baking them with mustard, mayo, and parmesan on top), and then serve them along with one-third or so of a $3 bag of salad, a tomato, and some dressing. For snacks use a bag of apples or a box of wheat thins.

Weirdly, I found old-fashioned deli meat sandwiches with sliced bread to be the most expensive meal I was making.

[Todd]

Every meals seems to cost $6 whether you eat out or go shopping?

Top Ramen is $0.10 - $0.20/bag.

[kishnevi]

Success Rice can be had rather cheaply  (boil in a bag), perhaps 50 cents a bag.  Boiling pot--about eight minutes--cut open and put in a Tupperware container;  one bag gives me two meals, and could be made into three--add fruit or whatever you want to garnish it up when you reheat in the microwave.

[ibanezmonster]

Trailer for Wes Anderson's new film. It's become quite clear that Anderson has created his own world of cinema with every new film he releases, and I hope he never changes or stops...

Now that looks like something I'd wanna watch.

[snyprrr]

Paranormal Activity (2009)
Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)

Wow, the most boring New Horror film ever, or just deceptively draw-you-in? The first one had me glued due to reputation, but most- MOST- of the film is staged to be realistically boring in a 'real TV' kind of way. But, the simple thuds and noises begin to cumulate, and I found a genuine atmosphere that I haven't found elsewhere.

Then there are the few big shocks that make you jump, which almost seems to be worth it. The characters seem incidental (and are cast that way), so, it's staged so that you imagine that it's you who are in the house.

I found them ingeniously cheap, with little or no real effects, that provide the same kind of thrills as the original The Haunting (yes, I found them pretty effective). The ending of the first one I found random, though the second one comes around full circle and seems a little more satisfying.

The 'demon' is effective as long as it's relegated to the aural, and the occasional opening/closing door, but when the 'possession' happens, I was slightly less enthusiastic, though, I will give them credit for coming up with a nice original creepy idea (which apparently extends to PA4!!).

As Chambernut noted, if you're prone to squeamishness, these two are for you. Nothing but bumps in the night, but surely you will almost pee yourself. I know a few people who would! I dare you to watch them.


Insidious is up this evening. I've seen the commercials for the new one, and I'm not impressed in the least, so, we'll see- some of you think it's hot stuff.

Insidious

Directed by James Wan ('Saw'), written by Leigh Whannel ("Saw'), and produced by the 'Paranormal Activity' folks, this movie really does seem like 'ParaAct' in execution of thrills, but to me it came off like remake of 'Poltergeist'.

For me, the most effective single shot was the 'fire-face' appearing behind the father's head, but wow, this film devolved into a get-the-kid-back-from-the-extoshere just like

[snyprrr]

'Poltergeist'. And, the 'people from the dead world' looked ridiculously like the dead in 'Carnival of Souls' without being in the least bit convincing to me, which was a shock, seeing as how many films have gotten this right over the last decade of New Horror.

The lead actor looked just like Will Arnett, and I had trouble taking him seriously (am I getting this confused with 'This Is 40'?). The kid-in-a-coma routine, cribbed from what, I forget, seemed hackneyed to me.

The ghost in the form of the pro-wrestler The Undertaker just was shocking to me that Wan took this image seriously.

The 'fire-face' demon was pretty good, and is really the only generator of frisson.


The low rumbling music/soundtrack/effects are straight out of 'Paranormal Activity', but Wan's filmic style as opposed to PA's more DIY camerawork really made this seem like 'A Nightmare on Elm St.' as a made-for-TV movie. I just did not get the filmmaker's choices in this project. The whole 'poltergeist' aspect seemed truly out of the '80s, as did some of the special effects, which I found embarrassingly arcane for what they were.

The locations, like 'ParaAct', are potentially creepy L.A. locations, that seem to be wasted here for me (whereas they worked beautifully for me in PA).

Most of the cast seemed hopelessly stuck, and Barbara Hershey looks like the poster-child for Hollywood PlasticSurgery Nightmares (her face truly is something to pause for)- SHE was scary!!,... buuut, the two paranormal researchers are probably the most wonderful thing in the movie. The one played by writer Lleigh Whannel is a marvel of subtle slapstick. they are written loosely as a laurel&Hardy thing, but their back-and-forth is the most interesting thing in this film for me. That Whannel wrote himself the best lines makes me wonder about what was going on behind-the-scenes. I really expected something musch better from Wan&Co.

The shocks here are generated just like they are in 'ParaAct': shock-cuts are accompanied by loud bass stabs to make you jump- everything's a shock-cut,... and, i'll admit it's effective, but it's also manipulative as all get out (it's cheap, and I scare easy). I mean, ParaAct was just soooo much more effective with a whole lot less:

There's a crying baby, and crib action, and mommy in the baby's room, juuust like ParaAct- I mean, there are so many elements in Horror today that are similar that it just seems like they're whoring out ideas to any and all comers.


I haven't seen 'Paranormal Activity 3-4', but the first two, taken as a pair, form a very strong and original horror concept (and the makers seem to know it by whoring out their conceit in this film). If people are saying that 'Insidious' is better than 'Insidious 2' (which commercial look laughable to me), then, well,...


I had wanted to discuss the rise of the NewHorror,... when did it start? Is the 'Scream' franchise the last of the '80s-HorrorRevival, or is it the first of the NewHorror? I'm almost going to have to chart the NewHorror by the string of remakes that has been flooding the market in the '00s.

[snyprrr]

Dredd (2012)

LOOOVED IT!!

Pretty much totally awesome- best 'RoboCop' EVER- best 'Raid the Apartment' film (the others being the disappointing 'The Raid: Redemption' and the French zombie 'The Horde')- best skyscraper falls (the bodies thud and splash wonderfully on the street below)- best slo-mo gunshot wounds going through faces and such-

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhAWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Karl Urban's ridiculous helmet in the gravitational pull, and his perpetual scowl (the only part of his face ever shown) the orbiting moon.

The scenes of drug-induced euphoria are great too, reminding me a bit of 'Strange Days' (there are similarities).

Honestly, one of the most entertaining films- what do I have to do to convince you? I'm jumping up and down and screaming at the top of my lungs!!!!

One of the best schwantzenegger films ever!!!!!