Last Movie You Watched

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Slow and unfocused, imho. Not for me. Plus Timberblake is a little annoying.

[Karl Henning]

The Empire Strikes Back

... and now, of course, The Return of the Jedi. I retain fond memories of seeing all three movies of the original trilogy in the cinema. Still, I remember that the final instalment had more things that made me cringe, than either of the first two, Nevertheless, I'm in it to enjoy it this evening.

[Karl Henning]

... and now, of course, The Return of the Jedi. I retain fond memories of seeing all three movies of the original trilogy in the cinema. Still, I remember that the final instalment had more things that made me cringe, than either of the first two, Nevertheless, I'm in it to enjoy it this evening.

The shade of Obi-Wan, offers Luke, instead of a frank admission that the statement that Luke's father had been killed was false, a weaselly "from a certain point of view" rationalization. So Lucas tarnishes Obi-Wan's character, rather than admit his (Lucas's) shortcomings as a writer.
And Luke proves correct in his refusal to kill his father, and Obi-Wan's shade is mistaken and unbecomingly fatalistic in suggesting, "then the Emperor has already won."

[Karl Henning]

The shade of Obi-Wan, offers Luke, instead of a frank admission that the statement that Luke's father had been killed was false, a weaselly "from a certain point of view" rationalization. So Lucas tarnishes Obi-Wan's character, rather than admit his (Lucas's) shortcomings as a writer.
And Luke proves correct in his refusal to kill his father, and Obi-Wan's shade is mistaken and unbecomingly fatalistic in suggesting, "then the Emperor has already won."

All that said, I found Luke's reconciliation with Anakin more affecting this evening than earlier. 

[NumberSix]

Pleasantville

Never get tired of this one. More relevant today than 25 years ago.

[Ganondorf]

The shade of Obi-Wan, offers Luke, instead of a frank admission that the statement that Luke's father had been killed was false, a weaselly "from a certain point of view" rationalization. So Lucas tarnishes Obi-Wan's character, rather than admit his (Lucas's) shortcomings as a writer.
And Luke proves correct in his refusal to kill his father, and Obi-Wan's shade is mistaken and unbecomingly fatalistic in suggesting, "then the Emperor has already won."

Yeah, Obi-Wan was definitely full of shit with his certain point of view crap. Prequels (which I don't in any way like) show other aspects of Jedi's shortcomings such as taking children away from their parents and using child soldiers. As said, I don't like the prequels but that at least is consistent with obi wan's moral failings. I think Christopher Lee's character left the Jedi specifically because he grew tired of the corruption of the Jedi.

Kreia from Star Wars Knights of the old republic 2 is one of the expanded universe's most brilliant characters and she shows with her sharp logic how Jedi were certainly not the goody Two-shoes in a way some people seem to think they are. She also shows the Sith's potential for being good.

[relm1]

The shade of Obi-Wan, offers Luke, instead of a frank admission that the statement that Luke's father had been killed was false, a weaselly "from a certain point of view" rationalization. So Lucas tarnishes Obi-Wan's character, rather than admit his (Lucas's) shortcomings as a writer.
And Luke proves correct in his refusal to kill his father, and Obi-Wan's shade is mistaken and unbecomingly fatalistic in suggesting, "then the Emperor has already won."

You might enjoy the Obi-Wan tv series.  It acts as a great prequel to SW and sort of fixes this issue (I found it satisfactory).  Also helps establish how he becomes the weird Ben Kenobi isolationist.

[DavidW]

The shade of Obi-Wan, offers Luke, instead of a frank admission that the statement that Luke's father had been killed was false, a weaselly "from a certain point of view" rationalization. So Lucas tarnishes Obi-Wan's character, rather than admit his (Lucas's) shortcomings as a writer.
And Luke proves correct in his refusal to kill his father, and Obi-Wan's shade is mistaken and unbecomingly fatalistic in suggesting, "then the Emperor has already won."

This kind of overthinking is done when you put movies with talking muppets and robots on a pedestal!  Lucas meant to recapture his childhood fun of watching serials on the big screen.  He didn't intend to have every single decision and line of dialog examined under a microscope.

[Karl Henning]

This kind of overthinking is done when you put movies with talking muppets and robots on a pedestal!  Lucas meant to recapture his childhood fun of watching serials on the big screen.  He didn't intend to have every single decision and line of dialog examined under a microscope.

"Why is a raven like a writing desk?"

This is one of those "both things can be true" deals. The idea could be to have fun, and the writing could be better.

As to the microscope, there's a kind of tradition of looking arguably too closely at "kid stuff."
When Lewis Carroll wrote that raven riddle, I'm prepared to think it was just good-naturedly absurdist, yet we've had people theorizing actual solutions. The only one which I recall offhand being: the notes for which they are noted are not noted for being musical notes. 

[71 dB]

Two older movies I had never seen before

The Last Starfighter (1984)
Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory (1971)

I liked both.

[ritter]

Jacques Demy's Lola (1961).



Anouk Aimée in memoriam.

[Karl Henning]

Two older movies I had never seen before

The Last Starfighter (1984)
Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory (1971)

I liked both.

I saw The Last Starfighter in the cinema, back when. I should re-watch it. Willy Wonka, of course, is a classic!

[Karl Henning]

The Last Starfighter (1984)

I saw The Last Starfighter in the cinema, back when. I should re-watch it.

Thanks to your reminder, @71 dB  I've reserved a copy at the Library.

[Cato]

I saw The Last Starfighter in the cinema, back when. I should re-watch it. Willy Wonka, of course, is a classic!

Gene Wilder gave you the impression that he really believed himself to be Willy Wonka, much like John Astin playing Gomez Addams. 


In recent days, back to working our way alphabetically through the collection:

John Candy as Uncle Buck:



Very funny!

Also, a comedy/drama with Joan Allen and Kevin Costner, nearly 20 years old now!

It succumbs to a few cliches (e.g. marijuana puffing by adults and teenagers), but otherwise is fairly funny and dramatic at the same time.


The Upside of Anger

[Karl Henning]

Revisiting Revenge of the Sith, the only prequel movie I've seen. Lucas is the sole screenwriter, and we already know how wooden his dialogue can be. But I'm not here to warm over complaints I've already lodged. R2-D2 is less like the character established in the first three movies. Sonically, he sure does squeal a lot. And he's like a little metallic "Q" with all the gizmos and weapons or near-weapons he readily deploys. And considering everything R2 experiences in this episode, we seem to have to assume that he was given a factory re-set before A New Hope. (Senator Organa only commands that 3PO's mind be wiped.) Always good to see Christopher Lee, although his role here suggests that he is underutilized. I'm more aware that the heart of the story is Anakin's moral decay, and his embrace of that descent. One only wishes that the story were better told. Maybe the trouble is too much war and politics, trying to do too much in the movie. There's quite a bit that is reasonably good, but altogether a mixed bag. Lucas started out as something of a wunderkind. He seems, though, not to have learnt that, when you're telling a story, you don't have to throw everything onto the screen. The announcement of the establishment of the First Galactic Empire is rather peculiar. Why First? While making the first movies, Lucas announced that he planned a trilogy of trilogies. But his writing skills plus the inevitable technical advances in the medium resulted in unevenness on a number of planes. 

[relm1]

Exodus Gods and Kings (2014) was a surprisingly lame historical epic from Ridley Scott making me think it was a Chris Nolan film.  Felt very phoned in by everyone involved.  God was a whinny brat kid (not kidding, an 11 year old who just whines while trying to look playground tough).  No character development - Moses (Christian Bale) going from disengaged, grumbling general who lacks faith in any god(s) to complete allegiance after speaking to a kid on a mountain.  Avoid this film like those involved with it did.  Did Ridley Scott even see the film he made? 

[DavidW]

Did Ridley Scott even see the film he made? 

He is a wonderfully inconsistent director, isn't he?    

 

[Karl Henning]

He is a wonderfully inconsistent director, isn't he?  

 

Is a puzzlement.

[relm1]

He is a wonderfully inconsistent director, isn't he?    

Yes, maybe he makes too many films and starts working on the next one before the prior one is finished handing off critical tasks to staff.

[relm1]

Godzilla (1954) was on tv and I found it to be a very compelling historical document and sci-fi thriller.  I'm sure I've seen it before, probably when I was a kid and loved all things dinosaur related but hadn't seen it in a while so experienced it like it was a first viewing.  I had just seen the 1953 film, "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" and can imagine Godzilla owes much to that quite good film.  One thing I was struck with was how the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just nine years earlier than Godzilla which carries the metaphoric weight of that trauma heavily (as does the excellent Godzilla Minus One from 2023).  This was just 79 years ago and one can imagine how much that horrifying event must still impact the culture.   

Godzilla was reborn from H-bomb explosions as his footprints contained radiative signatures from the unimaginable power of the thermonuclear bombs first tested just two years before the film premiered.  Just imagine, the first H-bomb was detonated in 1952 and was already 700 times more powerful than Hiroshima detonated just 7 years earlier and only 7 years after this film, the Tsar Bomba was detonated at 4,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima!  It must have been a terrifying time to live through.

I was surprised to discover the director of the original film, Ishirô Honda, directed so many sequels.  I haven't seen that many of the other Godzilla films but definitely loved what I saw as a kid (come on, who didn't love "Destroy All Monsters"?) so perhaps I should pursue some of the others.   I'm aware there is an Americanized version staring Raymond Burr which I've not seen understanding it's a watered down version.  I don't really like the modern CGI fest godzilla movies, but I felt Godzilla (1954) was imaginative, finely crafted, and an ultimately terrifying metaphoric film from those who lived through that nuclear experience and the anxiety of that time.