Last Movie You Watched

[Bogey]

Wow, my impression of GUN CRAZY was way different from you guys'.  When John Dall's face lights up at Peggy Cummins' pistol acumen (no need to invoke psychoanalytic guff to see the penile agency of gunplay here....that look on his face, a revelation that I imagine is more rare than we think: "I know what I want!  I know what I want!"....and what he wants isn't....exactly....Peggy), it is a great moment: something comes alive.  (Oddly enough, I got a similar feeling in a scene with Bogart in THE HARDER THEY FALL, where early in the picture you see a perfect, horrible, perverse picture of joy and corruption curl together across the man's face as he makes some kind of terrible concession that he's going to have to spend the rest of that film wriggling out from under.) 
And the intensifying spiral into the bog at the end, like a lid settling over that brief, strange life-form that flares up between the lovers...it's the antithesis of the razzmatazz, celebrated ending of BONNY AND CLYDE, whose easy, lurid coup de grâce finished the hard, dirty work done on the cheap by GUN CRAZY.  Considering the evidently considerable debt that B&C owes to GUN CRAZY, it seems odd that you'd deprecate GC in relation to its blockbuster nephew, while asserting that GC lacked originality.  Even just in terms of of technical accomplishments, I wonder if the rigged sedan interior of that celebrated GC long take (the heist) was in its way the antecedent to (if not an original of) the really cool ~360-degree terror of the vehicle interior in CHILDREN OF MEN.

Even avoiding reading much about the film before I saw it, I realize that hype works virulently, as though by osmosis; but the evidence of one sitting really made me think this was easily a four star picture, regardless of its budget and suggestively squalid dialogue, delivered sometimes with the kind of pomo flatness/falseness that makes me think of styles that took shape in 1970/80s edge (Cronenberg, Lynch). 

There are plenty of probably great movies that I don't like and some probably bad ones that I do like.....but GUN CRAZY is a great movie that you guys don't like.   
Of course, there is also no shortage of hype or love for it, so it's not exactly a bold position for me to take; it's not like this stuff is conclusive or 'obvious'.  But I was still knocked out!

Nice review. 

Let me suggest to you one scenario that may have made the film a bit more engaging for me, or made me say, "Uh, oh.":

....had her double cross her husband toward the end by somehow getting to the police the direction he was going in his car and him figuring out that she had done just that.  That would have been a great femme fatal move.

Then they are eventually both captured, cross paths heading in the pen and she restates:

"I want a lot of things - big things, but you wanted to return to your small world and I just couldn't."  (Or something like that.)

The other piece that this was missing was the lawman that kept just missing them or trying to track them down.  Maybe had his friends been called in by the FBI because they knew him so well, or something to that effect.  As for the swamp scene.....just seemed to be thrown in.  It did not resonate the mountain vista (see High Sierra for it being done right ) that they fled to and seemed random for an effect out of place.  Just my take.  Either way, even when I pan some of these old noirs, they are still a kick.

[Bogey]

Thread duty:



This one was a winner.  Easily 4 out of 5 stars.  Raymond Burr (again as the heavy) was incredible and the story stayed tight with just enough correctly placed twists to throw positive wrenches into the plot.  Some great noirish shots and settings, as well as a perfect noir ending.  Here are a couple of the cooler frames:

 

[SonicMan46]

Jobs (2013) w/ Ashton Kutcher as Steve (good match) - streamed tonight from Amazon for $4 SD - watched w/ Susan; we enjoyed the film - however, the reviews have been quite mixed (so will not quote but check Amazon, IMDB, & Rotten Tomatoes) - this is just a 'capsule summary' from the emergence of Apple until he was hired back as CEO; I've read the bio by Walter Isaacson which is probably your best choice to understand this visionary but the film is a fine start and Kutcher 'looks' the part!

Savannah (2013) w/ Jim Caviezel et al - streaming this one off Netflix for free - worth a watch just to see how the Georgia (and Carolina) coast appears w/ the wetlands, rivers, Spanish moss, etc - I live here and have visited the coastal Carolina/Georgia many times - a true story and also mixed reviews; enjoyed but probably would do a 3*(of 5) rating on Amazon.  Dave


 

[Bogey]

Neat story line, but hard to get behind any of the characters at the outset.  Picks up about two thirds through, imo.  Some neat shots like the merry go round sequence and the tennis crowd audience clip. Cool to see Hitch with a stringed instrument!  4 out of 5 stars for me.

[snyprrr]

Transformers vs Godzilla, er, Pacific Rim.  Visually impressive, but the story is really weak, and the dialogue seems almost like it was written by a random text generator.  I shall not be watching this again, and I think I shall skip any sequels.  This makes me think that Pan's Labyrinth may be the exception among Del Toro's work, the one good movie he will make.

For fans of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, this could be subtitled "Charlie bridges a Kaiju".

Finally saw Pacific Rim. Probably some of the best CGI I've seen. Plays like a vintage 70's Japanese Kaiju (perhaps the one with King Seeser?) It really is an idealized love letter from del Toro. Yes, it's kind of murky at times, but for the most part, most everything is well done. Some shots from the fight scenes are pretty rippin'- actually, it really reminds me of Ultraman.

And the parallel universe- the entire mythos- del Toro has really niched out territory for himself. Hopefully the Golden Age of Modern Kaiju is before us?

Really liked the crab monster- the monsters in general were pretty convincing- like Cloverfield- though, they are shown a lot, and some of the underwater stuff suffers a bit perhaps.

I liked it! More please!

[snyprrr]

What's Mulholland Dr. about??? Have I asked this before???

[TheGSMoeller]

What's Mulholland Dr. about??? Have I asked this before???

I think you have. Don't ask, don't seek. Lynch films are more enjoyable if you get lost in the mystery.

[TheGSMoeller]

Finally saw Pacific Rim. Probably some of the best CGI I've seen. Plays like a vintage 70's Japanese Kaiju (perhaps the one with King Seeser?) It really is an idealized love letter from del Toro. Yes, it's kind of murky at times, but for the most part, most everything is well done. Some shots from the fight scenes are pretty rippin'- actually, it really reminds me of Ultraman.

And the parallel universe- the entire mythos- del Toro has really niched out territory for himself. Hopefully the Golden Age of Modern Kaiju is before us?

Really liked the crab monster- the monsters in general were pretty convincing- like Cloverfield- though, they are shown a lot, and some of the underwater stuff suffers a bit perhaps.

I liked it! More please!

Yes, snyprrr, very cool film. Del Toro nailed the genre perfectly.

[Cato]

We saw this today:



The main character has a narration very reminiscent of Hugh Grant in Notting Hill.  And in the first half-hour, I kept thinking how the movie was perhaps almost too reminiscent of Groundhog Day.

Fortunately, the movie takes a different direction, and avoids the brutal cliche' of "boy-finds-girl, boy-gets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-finds-girl-again, boy-marries-girl."

Highly recommended!

[Todd]

Only God Forgives.  The latest, and not the greatest, from Nicolas Winding Refn.  Lots of violence of course, lots of beautiful shots and recurring motifs (what's the deal with dividing the screen into tripartite rectangles so often?), lots of primary color lighting – blues and reds everywhere – and some interesting shots here and there can't detract from the pretentiousness of the whole thing.  Some of the shots of Bangkok made me think of Gaspar Noe's shots of Tokyo in Enter the Void, and sure enough, Mr Noe receives thanks in the credits.  Ryan Gosling is there just to make sure a star is in the film, though I suppose he's OK-ish, though not as good as in Drive, and an almost unrecognizable Kristin Scott Thomas chews some scenery as the bad ass criminal mastermind-cum-mother from hell, though ultimately she can't hold a candle to Jacki Weaver in the superior Animal Kingdom.  Not a terrible movie, but not an especially good one.  One saving grace is the positively gorgeous Yayaying Rhatha Phongam, who draws attention away from everything else whenever she is on screen.

[Octave]

Let me suggest to you one scenario that may have made the film a bit more engaging for me, or made me say,

I do like your vintage noir fluency...make sure not to miss your "second calling", unless you are already a hardboiled novelist and I am the last to know.   

Just recently:



HOLLANDS LICHT [DUTCH LIGHT] (Pieter Rim and Maarten de Kroon, 2003)
I find the subject fascinating and incredibly relevant to my interests, especially to film (and about what seems most vexing to me about putative advances in film art/tech) and questions about how light behaves and might behave.  I need to read more books on the subject as well as tracking down the original source of Joseph Beuys' assertion, the film's nettle, i.e. that as of the ~mid-20c the so-called "Dutch light" had changed [possibly due to  land reclamation projects] or even dissipated altogether.  The filmmakers take Beuys at his word, conducting the film in part as an experiment.....I find myself wondering if this missed the shamanic artist's point? 

This might be why I felt let down by the doc, overall; my disappointment seemed to coincide with the voiceover text and the ultimately ridiculous 'empirical' footage, which footage seemed to know that it was pointless (the filmmakers spiced it up with a marching brass band, joggers, etc): it started to seem like the makers of the film became bored with the subject matter (and/or in this case the sky and landscape) and lost faith in their thesis or the question in its place.  On the other hand, the talking heads were rather consistently interesting, including the somewhat digressive inclusion of American artist James Turrell and his Arizona 'observatory' project....a person and site perhaps worthy of their own documentary. 

The more the film talks about ways of seeing (the talking heads), the more I liked it; the more it seemed to be a kind of visual-ecological investigation, the more pressing but unfinished (and halfhearted) it felt.

[Bogey]

I do like your vintage noir fluency...make sure not to miss your "second calling", unless you are already a hardboiled novelist and I am the last to know.   

No worries, I won't quit my day job.

[SonicMan46]

World War Z (2013) - Brad Pitt et al - well was on my 'to watch' list and was a free streamer from Netflix - synopsis of the film from IMDB quoted below.  PLENTY of CGI, especially of explosions & rampaging hordes of zombies (reminding me of those barrels full of monkeys!).

Ratings - Amazon (3.6/5*); IMDB (7.1/10); and Rotten Tomatoes (67%, 6.2/10 Critics; 73%, 3.7/10 Audience) - well, held my interest to the end and Pitt's character was somewhat developed, but.....    I would go 3* if leaving a review on Amazon - only recommended to those who love CGI explosions, crashes, and masses of zombies.  Now on my 'Movies Seen' list never to be watched again!  Dave

Life for former United Nations investigator Gerry Lane and his family seems content. Suddenly, the world is plagued by a mysterious infection turning whole human populations into rampaging mindless zombies. After barely escaping the chaos, Lane is persuaded to go on a mission to investigate this disease. What follows is a perilous trek around the world where Lane must brave horrific dangers and long odds to find answers before human civilization falls.

[George]

[Todd]

This Is The End.  Crude 'n' crass 'n' funny.  Danny McBride is the highlight of the main cast, but Channing Tatum's cameo is perhaps the funniest thing of all.  Hardly great cinema, but good for some guffaws.

[SonicMan46]

Somm (2013) - just searching on Netflix and streamed the documentary below about 4 guys wanting to become Master Sommeliers which requires taking a grueling 3-part test; now this is separate from the MW (Master of Wine) award, both having somewhat different objectives - check HERE, if interested.

Reviews: Amazon (4.5/5*); Rotten Tomatoes (77%, 6.7/10 Critics); IMDB (6.0/10) - as a wine enthusiast, I would certainly agree w/ the Amazonians, i.e. at least a 4* rating for me - highly recommended to enophiles like myself!  Dave

Four men will do anything to pass the most difficult test you've NEVER heard of... SOMM takes the viewer on a humorous, emotional and illuminating look into a mysterious world - the Court of Master Sommeliers and the massively intimidating Master Sommelier Exam. The Court of Master Sommeliers is one of the world's most prestigious, secretive, and exclusive organizations. Since its inception almost 40 years ago, less than 200 candidates have reached the exalted Master level. The exam covers literally every nuance of the world of wine, spirits and cigars. Those who have passed have put at risk their personal lives, their well- being, and often their sanity to pull it off. Shrouded in secrecy, access to the Court Of Master Sommeliers has always been strictly regulated and cameras have never been allowed anywhere near the exam, until now. How much do you think you know about wine? SOMM will make you think again. SOMM takes you on the ultimate insider's tour into a world of obsession, hope, and friendship in red, blanc and sometimes rose.

[Artem]

The Uninvited by Lewis Allen



Enjoyable ghost story.

[Karl Henning]

Oh, I think I neglected to report . . . Thanksgiving Day, we three sat down to watch Enchanted April together.

[TheGSMoeller]

Time for some mindless fun...

Hunger Games: Catching Fire - Went for the wife and nephew, but had a good time. Definitely stepped its game up from the first Hunger Games, more intense, and broadened the plot a bit more. At one point you do feel as if it's a rehash of the first, but some twists at the end set up a turn of events that will begin with the finale of the trilogy. Not a masterpiece, nor a film I'm rushing to for a repeat viewing, but nice on a big screen, and even better with a sprite and trash can of popcorn.

Ted - Rude, crude, offensive, inappropriate, drugs, etc.... All from a talking teddy bear. Many moments I found myself cringing in my chair while chuckling simultaneously. I'm not a fan of Family Guy so I was skeptical going into this film, as both being created by Seth McFarlene. But the concept is intriguing, and it had enough funny moments to keep me interested.

Now time for some Godard to balance my brain...

[SonicMan46]

Over the last few nights, a recent 'action' film streamed on my local cable & an 'oldie' recorded on the DVR from the TCM channel:

White House Down (2013) w/ Tatum & Foxx; Foxx as the president; White House captured; one of the tourist (Tatum) saves the day (is this a sequel to Die Hard? ) - plenty of CGI, explosions, etc. - the main characters (and Tatum's daughter) actually had some character development.  Ratings: Amazon, 3/5*; IMDB, 6.0/10; Rotten Tomatoes, 50% (5.4/10) - I'd pretty much agree w/ these ratings; only for lovers of CGI destruction!  Personally, Die Hard is a much better flick - 

There's Always Tomorrow (1956) w/ Fred MacMurray & Barbara Stanwyck - another Douglas Sirk soaper from the 1950s (Rock Hudson seemed to be his actor to go to for these roles, e.g. Magnificent Obsession, All That Heaven Allows, & Written on the Wind - all of which I prefer to the one just watched for the first time).  Ratings: Amazon, 4.6/5*; IMDB, 7.4/10; Rotten Tomatoes, 82% (3.7/5*) for the audience. I'd likely go just under 4* on Amazon (vs. 4-4.5* for the other 3 mentioned, but I love these '50s soapers from Sirk).  Dave