Last Movie You Watched

[Karl Henning]

Hi Karl - well, I guess 'radium girls' were 'topical' at the time but a tragic occupational hazard as noted below (much more at the link for those interested) - BUT the movie is definitely a comedy - 

At first, it read a bit like Silkwood, ahead of its time

[relm1]

I am currently watching Wolfgang Petersen's Troy (2004) but with Gabriel Yared's original score.  His original score was fantastic but more complex than James Horner (who I'm a fan of) score but Horner made this film more of a Hollywood spectacle (think action film where Gabriel Yared's score considered this more of a classic literary myth). 

[Madiel]

Nothing Sacred (1937) - several quotes below w/ short synopsis and cast. An Amazon HD streamer restored by Kino Lorber w/ 4*/5* AV ratings HERE - well done for a film around 85 years old!  Carol Lombard (1908-1942; airplane crash) just beautiful in color and a great comedic role for her.  Ratings: 92% Rotten Tomatoes and 3 1/2*/4* both VideoHound and Maltin.  Dave

 

I have access to this film on streaming. I might just try it out.

[brewski]

Since I'm going to a small Oscars party on Sunday night, I decided to do some homework and see some of the nominees this week (a first in awhile).

Tonight, Everything Everywhere All At Once, and it is quite an achievement. Star turns by Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis (!), but the real stars are the directors ("the two Daniels") and Paul Rogers, nominated for direction and film editing, respectively.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/04/everything-everywhere-all-at-once-editor-never-saw-oscar-nod-coming.html



-Bruce

[Karl Henning]

High Noon

[Fëanor]

Since I'm going to a small Oscars party on Sunday night, I decided to do some homework and see some of the nominees this week (a first in awhile).

Tonight, Everything Everywhere All At Once, and it is quite an achievement. Star turns by Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis (!), but the real stars are the directors ("the two Daniels") and Paul Rogers, nominated for direction and film editing, respectively.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/04/everything-everywhere-all-at-once-editor-never-saw-oscar-nod-coming.html



-Bruce

I saw Everything Everywhere All At Once and was underwhelmed.  Personally I'd give it at most 7/10*.  Yes, Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis gave nice performances. However so many Oscar nominations for this flick is puzzling IMO.  Does it have to do with today's "diversity" obsession?

[Brian]

I saw Everything Everywhere All At Once and was underwhelmed.  Personally I'd give it at most 7/10*.  Yes, Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis gave nice performances. However so many Oscar nominations for this flick is puzzling IMO.  Does it have to do with today's "diversity" obsession?

I'd give it like an 8.2/10. With that out of the way:
I don't think the "diversity" obsession (as you put it) is a particularly good explanation compared to three others:
1. it represents a younger generation of filmmaking, and the Academy could be keen to appeal to younger people;
2. it is an original story, not an adaptation of a comic book or a historical figure;
3. it was relatively popular and seen by a lot of people. Domestically it ranks only 27th in ticket sales, but if you take out all the sequels and comic books, it actually ranks 10th.

The real test is which categories it wins. I have not seen Tár, but from what I've heard, a Yeoh win for Everything would be a "diversity" win (and she even seemingly considers it so herself, having shared social media posts about how Cate Blanchett has won enough already).

My own view is that the acting and technical achievements are exhilarating, the sense of humor is lively, and the fight scenes are wonderfully choreographed, but that by the end, once you've realized that it's all a big metaphor, things drag on much too long. The climax in particular takes forever. After I'd realized where the movie was heading, I became impatient for it to just go ahead and get there. The first half, introducing all the running jokes, was much more entertaining for me.

[brewski]

I'd give it like an 8.2/10. With that out of the way:
I don't think the "diversity" obsession (as you put it) is a particularly good explanation compared to three others:
1. it represents a younger generation of filmmaking, and the Academy could be keen to appeal to younger people;
2. it is an original story, not an adaptation of a comic book or a historical figure;
3. it was relatively popular and seen by a lot of people. Domestically it ranks only 27th in ticket sales, but if you take out all the sequels and comic books, it actually ranks 10th.

The real test is which categories it wins. I have not seen Tár, but from what I've heard, a Yeoh win for Everything would be a "diversity" win (and she even seemingly considers it so herself, having shared social media posts about how Cate Blanchett has won enough already).

My own view is that the acting and technical achievements are exhilarating, the sense of humor is lively, and the fight scenes are wonderfully choreographed, but that by the end, once you've realized that it's all a big metaphor, things drag on much too long. The climax in particular takes forever. After I'd realized where the movie was heading, I became impatient for it to just go ahead and get there. The first half, introducing all the running jokes, was much more entertaining for me.

All fair, and yes, some of the imagery that returns near the end has already made its (spectacular) appearance earlier, so yes, perhaps 20 minutes off might be fine. That said, you clearly put more pieces together than I did, since I didn't quite know where it was heading!

In any case, much to enjoy. Planning to watch Tár and The Banshees of Inisherin over the next few days, just so I've seen a handful of the nominees. Really looking forward to the latter, especially, since Martin McDonagh is one of my favorites, both in theater and film.

-Bruce

[Madiel]

I saw Everything Everywhere All At Once and was underwhelmed.  Personally I'd give it at most 7/10*.  Yes, Michelle Yeoh and Jamie Lee Curtis gave nice performances. However so many Oscar nominations for this flick is puzzling IMO.  Does it have to do with today's "diversity" obsession?

Maybe other people just like it a lot better than you do. 

I mean, both the average critic scores and average user scores on Metacritic are higher than yours. You could either accept that at face value or you could look for racially based explanations because you're convinced your own reaction is "objective".

[Madiel]

Next stop in the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Spiderman: Homecoming



A lot of fun (although the Washington Monument sequence definitely triggered my vertigo). One of the more entertaining of the MCU movies I've watched so far. There were parts where I genuinely laughed out loud.

[Karl Henning]

Quite a lot of fiction, particularly in the last half hour, which is more fiction than fact. The sets and costumes are old school clumsy, as is Korngolds score. But Bette Davis performance is still remarkable all these years on.

Hadn't known this was in color, one of the initial big impact 1939 colors, along with Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind and Robin Hood.

I'm in!

[Karl Henning]

I'm in!

Enjoyed this very well. Nice Korngold score, of course, and with some wisps of Berlioz's Scène d'amour.

[brewski]

I saw Tar today.  Interesting to see a film set around classical music conducting but that is really not what the film is about.  It just happens to be the setting.  Amazing performance by Cate Blanchet.  I've seen professional conductors way worse than she is.  One small thing that really blew me away was how she so subtly tried to cajole a different emotion in Mahler's Adagietto.  It just felt so real.  She really conveyed an idea and emotion the orchestra wasn't conveying as if she's had this piece in her mind for decades.  That's amazing acting!  BUT, important for people to understand, that is not what this film is about. 

Watched Tár last night, and found it quite interesting. You're right: the film isn't really about conducting—or Mahler, for that matter. (One of the many reasons I wanted to see this film is its use of the Fifth Symphony.)

And yes, Blanchett is quite wide-ranging in her abilities. I noticed in the credits that she is given actual conducting credit, as well as for writing, singing, and playing accordion (!) in "Apartment for Sale," among other signs of her deep involvement (e.g., one of the co-producers). So yes, some considerable acting, research, and study on display.

Still sorting it all out. The most incisive comments I've seen so far have been from Zadie Smith in the New York Review of Books. (You can read it with a free trial.)

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2023/01/19/the-instrumentalist-tar-todd-field-zadie-smith/?lp_txn_id=1434130

PS, I don't have regular subscriptions to any streaming or online services (e.g., Hulu, Showtime, HBO, etc.), but rented it for $5 on YouTube—well worth it, even if my big TV isn't as enormous as the screen in a movie theater.

-Bruce

[DavidW]

I'm glad you loved it Bruce.  I came back to the forum because I was expecting to find a long, juicy thread about this movie.  I was surprised to discover back then that nobody was talking about it!  But it was good to get back to the forum. 

[brewski]

I'm glad you loved it Bruce.  I came back to the forum because I was expecting to find a long, juicy thread about this movie.  I was surprised to discover back then that nobody was talking about it!  But it was good to get back to the forum. 

Well, just to be fair, "love" may be premature . But I was totally engrossed through the entire 2-1/2 hours, thought the whole cast did a great job, and found the visual style magnificent. (In the article above, Zadie Smith mentions directors Michael Haneke and Andrei Tarkovsky. There's a lot of stunning imagery and presumably, symbolism to go along with it.)

But yes, perhaps more conversation about it is elsewhere, which is surprising given the subject matter. I found this list of classical music films and have only seen 2 or 3 of them—most recently, The Pianist, and that was 21 years ago!

https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/periods-genres/film-tv/best-movies-about-classical-music/

-Bruce

[Brahmsian]

Well, just to be fair, "love" may be premature . But I was totally engrossed through the entire 2-1/2 hours, thought the entire cast did a great job, and found the visual style magnificent. (In the article above, Zadie Smith mentions directors Michael Haneke and Andrei Tarkovsky. There's a lot of stunning imagery and presumably, symbolism to go along with it.)

But yes, perhaps more conversation about it is elsewhere, which is surprising given the subject matter. I found this list of classical music films and have only seen 2 or 3 of them—most recently, The Pianist, and that was 21 years ago!

https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/periods-genres/film-tv/best-movies-about-classical-music/

-Bruce

Thanks for sharing that list, Bruce.  Haven't seen Tár yet, but I anticipate that will be not very long from now.

Of the ones mentioned in that link you provided, I love Amadeus, The Piano, The Pianist and Florence Foster Jenkins was a real nice surprise!

[DavidW]

Well, just to be fair, "love" may be premature . But I was totally engrossed through the entire 2-1/2 hours, thought the whole cast did a great job, and found the visual style magnificent. (In the article above, Zadie Smith mentions directors Michael Haneke and Andrei Tarkovsky. There's a lot of stunning imagery and presumably, symbolism to go along with it.)

But yes, perhaps more conversation about it is elsewhere, which is surprising given the subject matter. I found this list of classical music films and have only seen 2 or 3 of them—most recently, The Pianist, and that was 21 years ago!

https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/periods-genres/film-tv/best-movies-about-classical-music/

-Bruce

Some of those movies I haven't seen and some I've seen so long ago that I might as well have not seen.  I'm going to keep that list for some movie watching ideas.

[brewski]

Some of those movies I haven't seen and some I've seen so long ago that I might as well have not seen.  I'm going to keep that list for some movie watching ideas.

I'm surprised that one more didn't make the list: All the Mornings of the World (1991), about 17th-century music, with a soundtrack by Jordi Savall. Saw it in the mid-1990s with some viola da gamba fans, and at the time I was totally jet-lagged and likely dozed off.   But would definitely give it another chance.

-Bruce

[SonicMan46]

Paths of Glory (1957) w/ Kirk Douglas and many others; one of my favorite WW I films (and one of Kirk's top picks) - rated No. 8 on Rotten Tomatoes (HERE); of course there are other rankings but this film usually comes in the top 10 or 20 - definitely worth a watch.  Dave

Paths of Glory is a 1957 American anti-war film co-written and directed by Stanley Kubrick, based on the novel of the same name by Humphrey Cobb. Set during World War I, the film stars Kirk Douglas as Colonel Dax, the commanding officer of French soldiers who refuse to continue a suicidal attack, after which Dax attempts to defend them against charges of cowardice in a court-martial. (Source)

 

[SimonNZ]

Watched half of this before becoming too frustrated at their choice to crank the silliness and slapstick up to 11. A complete waste of a fine cast.