Last Movie You Watched

[Karl Henning]

Star Trek, the Motion Picture (Director's cut) on the big screen. This I found great fun. I cannot even hazard a guess as to whatever quarrel I .thought I had with the movie back when I first saw it (at college.)

[Karl Henning]

Anything Else. Of the last six Woody Allen pictures I've seen, this is easily the runt of the litter. But as with all great artists, even when he's just riffing, the result id engaging entertainment.

[DavidW]

Star Trek, the Motion Picture (Director's cut) on the big screen. This I found great fun. I cannot even hazard a guess as to whatever quarrel I .thought I had with the movie back when I first saw it (at college.)

It is much closer to the style and tone of the tv series than any of the other movies, going for hard scifi instead of space opera.  The beautiful cinematography and high production value takes it well beyond what you would see on tv (excepting the new shows which have enormous budgets).

It is funny to see how they were clearly setting up to have another Star Trek series with the original cast and then it never happened. 

Anyway I also loved seeing it on the big screen!

[71 dB]

Love the movie, love John Hurt in the movie. 

The BFI Blu-ray has interesting info about this production. It was supposed to be a TV miniseries originally, but Margaret Thatcher, a close friend of Profume, pressured the TV stations to turn the idea down. So, they made the movie instead which explains why the scenes are so short and why the movie is so jump-cut-heavy. There is just so much to cover within two hours. even Harvey Weinstein was involved, because his company bought the American rights.

[SonicMan46]

Star Trek, the Motion Picture (Director's cut) on the big screen. This I found great fun. I cannot even hazard a guess as to whatever quarrel I .thought I had with the movie back when I first saw it (at college.)

Hi Karl - the original movie series below (and the followers) - believe that I've seen most of these films over the years, but own only two as Amazon 4K streamers, i.e. The Wrath of Kahn (1982) and The Voyage Home (1986) - probably need to watch that first one (1979 - the year I was promoted to an Assistant Professor - long time ago!).     Dave

[Karl Henning]

Hi Karl - the original movie series below (and the followers) - believe that I've seen most of these films over the years, but own only two as Amazon 4K streamers, i.e. The Wrath of Kahn (1982) and The Voyage Home (1986) - probably need to watch that first one (1979 - the year I was promoted to an Assistant Professor - long time ago!).     Dave

Cheers, Dave! Tell me your thoughts on The Voyage Home

[SonicMan46]

Well last night, I talked Susan into watching a 'Double BD' package - she could not remember the films and may not have seen them?

The Pelican Brief (1993) w/ Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington, as stated in the quote; much more at the link - reviews mixed although rated 3*/4* by Roger Ebert which would be my rating; we both enjoyed and recommended if a fan of this sort of movie - 

The Pelican Brief is a 1993 American legal thriller film based on the 1992 novel by John Grisham. Directed by Alan J. Pakula, the film stars Julia Roberts in the role of young law student Darby Shaw and Denzel Washington as Washington Herald reporter Gray Grantham. (Source)

A Time to Kill (1996) w/ Matthew McConaughey, Sandra Bullock, and a host of other stars - short summary below but check link - also mixed reviews, and again a 3*/4* by Roger Ebert - I'd likely add a half star - enjoyed this was more.  Recommended if the story is of interest.  Dave 

A Time to Kill is a 1996 American legal drama film. It is based on John Grisham's 1989 novel of the same name. Matthew McConaughey, Sandra Bullock, and Samuel L. Jackson star with Donald and Kiefer Sutherland appearing in supporting roles. (Source)

[VonStupp]

Star Trek, the Motion Picture (Director's cut) on the big screen. This I found great fun. I cannot even hazard a guess as to whatever quarrel I .thought I had with the movie back when I first saw it (at college.)

Great Karl! Even though I hardly ever watch it, I would think this is the one to see in the theatre. The money shot (of Mr. Scott endlessly cruising around the first views of the Enterprise) seems made for that experience.

VS

[SonicMan46]

Cheers, Dave! Tell me your thoughts on The Voyage Home

Hi Karl - well, you probably know the story (Wiki intro below - check link for much more) - by far my favorite and about the only one I really like to re-watch (even Susan enjoyed it!) - directed by Nimoy w/ a lot of humor - one of the best received in the series (7.3/10, IMDB; 82%, RottenTomatoes; 4.8/5, Amazon) - and Ebert's favorite, 3 1/2*/4 - review HERE - IMO, a MUST see in this first movie series.  Dave

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home is a 1986 American science fiction film directed by Leonard Nimoy and based on the television series Star Trek. It is the fourth feature installment in the Star Trek franchise, and is a sequel to Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984); it completes the story arc begun in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) and continued in The Search for Spock. Intent on returning home to Earth to face trial for their actions in the previous film, the former crew of the USS Enterprise finds the planet in grave danger from an alien probe attempting to contact now-extinct humpback whales. The crew travel to Earth's past to find whales who can answer the probe's call. (Source)

[Karl Henning]

Hi Karl - well, you probably know the story (Wiki intro below - check link for much more) - by far my favorite and about the only one I really like to re-watch (even Susan enjoyed it!) - directed by Nimoy w/ a lot of humor - one of the best received in the series (7.3/10, IMDB; 82%, RottenTomatoes; 4.8/5, Amazon) - and Ebert's favorite, 3 1/2*/4 - review HERE - IMO, a MUST see in this first movie series.  Dave

Heartily agreed, Dave!

[Karl Henning]

It is much closer to the style and tone of the tv series than any of the other movies, going for hard scifi instead of space opera.  The beautiful cinematography and high production value takes it well beyond what you would see on tv (excepting the new shows which have enormous budgets).

It is funny to see how they were clearly setting up to have another Star Trek series with the original cast and then it never happened. 

Anyway I also loved seeing it on the big screen!

A curious tale, c/o Wikipedia:

Leonard Nimoy as Spock, the Enterprise's half-Vulcan, half-human science officer. Nimoy had been dissatisfied with unpaid royalties from Star Trek and did not intend to reprise the role, so Spock was left out of the screenplay. Director Robert Wise, having been informed by his daughter and son-in-law that the film "would not be Star Trek" without Nimoy, sent Jeffrey Katzenberg to New York City to meet Nimoy. Describing Star Trek without Nimoy as buying a car without wheels, Katzenberg gave Nimoy a check to make up for his lost royalties, later recalling himself "on my knees begging" the actor during their meeting at a restaurant to join the film; Nimoy attended the March 1978 press conference with the rest of the returning cast. Nimoy was dissatisfied with the script, and his meeting with Katzenberg led to an agreement that the final script would need Nimoy's approval. Financial issues notwithstanding, Nimoy said he was comfortable with being identified as Spock because it had a positive impact on his fame.

[DavidW]

I didn't know about that!  I did know that after the screening Nimoy said that it seemed more like 2001 than Star Trek!

[Karl Henning]

I didn't know about that!  I did know that after the screening Nimoy said that it seemed more like 2001 than Star Trek!

Well, and now I've seen why!

[LKB]

Well, and now I've seen why!

Nimoy had a hard time living with Spock for years, once the original series had ended. He wrote two memoirs ( and, l believe, at least one other book ), the first entitled I am not Spock, and years later one called, l am Spock. I've read them both and found them interesting, particularly the latter.

[Karl Henning]

Nimoy had a hard time living with Spock for years, once the original series had ended. He wrote two memoirs ( and, l believe, at least one other book ), the first entitled I am not Spock, and years later one called, l am Spock. I've read them both and found them interesting, particularly the latter.

I've heard of both memoirs, through interviews with Nimoy available on the blu-rays. I should seek them out. Tangentially: love his contributions to Rod Serling's Night Gallery.

Oh, and thanks for reminding me of Thriller: High time I watched that show!

[71 dB]

James Bond films - I own just over a half dozen, most on physical BDs, but a smaller number as Amazon 4K streamers - last few nights I've been watching the pic below as my newest 4K purchase (the BD will go to a local charity):

GoldenEye (1995) w/ Pierce Brosnan in his first film as the British spy; also Sean Bean, Izabella Scorupco, Judi Dench, Joe Don Baker, and others - Wiki article HERE - enjoyed and looked great on my 4K HDTV - on Rotten Tomatoes, 27 Bond films are ranked and this one is at No. 10, most of those in my collection are in the top 10 except for The Living Daylights (1987) w/ Timothy Dalton - it's at No. 12 but is my all time favorite Bond film (own that as a 4K streamer).  Dave

P.S. I think that Izabella Scorupco is a knockout in this film - there are plenty of 'Bond Girls' ratings (one HERE) which are quite variable - she hovers about No. 10/11 or so in some of these lists.

 

In 2019 I bought the Blu-ray boxset of all Bond movies (up to Skyfall), because I calculated that's the easiest and most cost efective way to get the Connery/Moore movies I really like. Roger Moore is my favorite Bond and I really like the movies of that era. After Moore, the movies have been too serious and they have been too much about insanely intense action sequences. Quantum of Solace especially is really bad entertainment in my opinion and far from my taste. Inspired by your post, I watched Goldeneye again. While I think it has the problems of post-Moore bond movies (too serious + over the top action as the main incredient), I think it is one of the best bond movies after Roger Moore. At least it does well and with style what it is doing.

Mid 90's, the time when Goldeneye came out, movies changed stylistically, especially this type of action movies. The quality of camera work dropped and cuts became faster. The ADHD age started. Goldeneye feels like a swan-song to the style that dominated the 80's.

[Karl Henning]

In 2019 I bought the Blu-ray boxset of all Bond movies (up to Skyfall), because I calculated that's the easiest and most cost efective way to get the Connery/Moore movies I really like. Roger Moore is my favorite Bond and I really like the movies of that era. After Moore, the movies have been too serious and they have been too much about insanely intense action sequences. Quantum of Solace especially is really bad entertainment in my opinion and far from my taste. Inspired by your post, I watched Goldeneye again. While I think it has the problems of post-Moore bond movies (too serious + over the top action as the main incredient), I think it is one of the best bond movies after Roger Moore. At least it does well and with style what it is doing.

Mid 90's, the time when Goldeneye came out, movies changed stylistically, especially this type of action movies. The quality of camera work dropped and cuts became faster. The ADHD age started. Goldeneye feels like a swan-song to the style that dominated the 80's.

Interesting.

[DavidW]

The quality of camera work dropped and cuts became faster. The ADHD age started.

I still remember one critic being in an uproar about The Phantom Menace having like twenty cuts in the first couple of minutes.  Now of course we just see it as ordinary, even tv shows have that top of choppy editing.  If you want the polar opposite check out Stalker or Solaris.

[71 dB]

I still remember one critic being in an uproar about The Phantom Menace having like twenty cuts in the first couple of minutes.  Now of course we just see it as ordinary, even tv shows have that top of choppy editing.  If you want the polar opposite check out Stalker or Solaris.

20 cuts in 120 seconds means 6 seconds in average between cuts. That's not bad at all and of course the cuts should be fast when a lot happens in short period of time. George Lucas' "around the movie" shooting style is based heavily on cuts. It works, because Lucas uses a lot static camera and wide lenses to calm down the visuality. That one critic should go back and watch the first couple of minutes of A New Hope again.. I think it has 20 or so cuts too, because Lucas drops the viewer in the middle of action from get go.

The problem with ADHD movies is that the fast cuts don't support story telling. Combine that with shaky camera with longer lenses and the result is what I call visual noise.

Especially Stalker goes to the other extreme in this regards. My taste is positioned in the middle ground where movies made between 1965-1995 typically are.  0:)

[Dry Brett Kavanaugh]

Watched this last night. Ken Branagh as "the Woody Allen character" (albeit played straight) was both fascinating with a strain of self-destructive pathos. It was touching that things turned out so well for Robin (Judy Davis)

If you liked Celebrity, you may like Truffaut's Two English Girls as well.