Last Movie You Watched

[Drasko]

Maybe this is more a question for Drasko (our specialist in weird flicks  ), but: Do you mean that Justine's version directed by Jesús Franco and starred by a young Romina Power and Klaus Kinski?

No, it's some later version.

[Papy Oli]

Watched last night on netflix : The Hunters (Jägarna). Will most likely watch the 2nd instalment "False Trail" this week-end.

[North Star]

THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR
(Sidney Pollack)

Robert Redford plays a CIA researcher trying to survive and find out who killed his coworkers before the hitman played by Max Von Sydov finds him. Redford follows Faye Dunaway into her apartment and kidnaps her while trying to figure out what to do.

An enjoyable thriller with less action and more sophistication than usually.

     
      

[Cato]

"I want my truck back!"

[asin]B0028ZDJF8[/asin]

"May the wings of liberty never lose a feather."

Kurt Russell doing a great bad John Wayne voice in a great satire on Hong Kong epics from the '70's and 80's.

[TheGSMoeller]

"I want my truck back!"

[asin]B0028ZDJF8[/asin]

"May the wings of liberty never lose a feather."

Kurt Russell doing a great bad John Wayne voice in a great satire on Hong Kong epics from the '70's and 80's.

That was one of my favorite movies from the 80s, my brother and I had it on VHS and would watch it about twice a month. So much fun.

[DavidW]

I rewatched it recently too.  Funny to see how inept Jack is, given how much he talks himself up.

[George]

[DavidW]

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...


http://www.youtube.com/v/1Fg5iWmQjwk

Looks like it should be funny!

[DavidW]

I watched Europa Report.  Great scifi, it is awesome to see some hard scifi on film, not too much of those.  I would change the ending though, what happens seems a little far fetched.  Even though anticlimatic, I think the story would be better if after they find algae they simply leave without event.

[Todd]

Sweeet!  I've added it to my queue at Netflix.  To sate my thirst for raunchy and vulgar and offensive entertainment, I rewatched Bad Santa for the first time in eight or nine years.  It did the trick. 

[George]

Bad Santa is so fucking Good.

[Octave]

Bad Santa is so fucking Good.

I agree!  Some critic commented on Billy Bob Thornton reminding him, here, of Humphrey Bogart.  I cannot see that, but the theory makes me itch enough to want to see the film again.  I regret I am not from a family that would designate this an official Holiday Family Flick.  It's also too bad that women totally do not exist in the squalid little world of this film, but that itself is part of the calculus and the comedy.  "Store Dick don't want shit."
I think it is terrible that Terry Zwigoff has gone so long without making a film.  I didn't love his last one (ART SCHOOL CONFIDENTIAL) but it wasn't bad and I am rooting for him.



IN THE FOG (Sergei Loznitsa, 2012)
More ambivalent feelings toward a film, but in the interesting, careening way, i.e. "this is brilliant" to eyes rolling, repeat.  For example, a bravura-on-the-cheap long handheld opening shot comes to rest on a distracted sheep and a cart piled with bones....a bit on the nose, no?  A bit overladen with portent, no?  But then the sound of creaking nooses blends almost imperceptibly into the next scene: trees cracking and murmering in the cold air.  Nothing revelatory, but it sets the tone for a subtle and almost constant use of ambient sound design throughout.  (Another great moment comes in the middle of crucial flashback, where our hapless protagonist says, "You mustn't do this," and the sound of insects [?] and other outdoors noise seems to surge up around him.  I almost missed it, it's so gentle, but after accidentally rewinding and catching it, I watched the sequence a few times and found it really dramatic.  I think it would have been pronounced in a proper theater.)

I really "liked" (if that's the word) Loznitsa's previous/first narrative fiction film, MY JOY (2010), which was every bit the downer that ITF is, plus more puzzling to boot.  I thought IN THE FOG had so much to imply beyond its immediate "period" subject matter (Belorussians under Nazi occupation) about motives and heroism and reputation and cowardice and scapegopating and the way communities are built and maintained even before they face hardship "from without"......it's hard to buy into the common (understandable) impression that Loznitsa is a nihilist (see Ignatiy Vishnevetsky's last sentence in the review liked below).  I thought the film had an enormous relevance to what countercultures and "resistance" subcultures in the United States are like, for decades, but especially right now.  At times the relevance was overwhelming: "This guy is talking to us [Americans]!" was the thought that stung me repeatedly.  Of course, it's much broader than that, that's jsut the toolkit/luggage I brought to the film.  Still, pretty remarkable.  Not "just" an anti-war film or a survival film.

Also impressive and commendable that most violence was "tactfully", forcefully placed outside the frame.  That and the sound design really set this film apart and won me over, not that I'm a happier person for "liking" it.  Loznitsa seems [if this can be said at all] like a guy with a powerful moral vision, but who finds himself unable, "incapable" (just as the protagonist here describes himself), of offering reassurance.

Here's a review by Ignatiy Vishnevetsky, a critic I find consistently interesting even when I am not completely sure what he's talking about (cf. Manny Farber).
http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/notebook-reviews-sergei-loznitsas-in-the-fog
Vishnevetsky was one of Roger Ebert's selections, along with Christy Lemire, as hosts of the final (short-lived) incarnation of AT THE MOVIES.  Vishnevetsky's critical style is quite different from Ebert's, in most respects.  I admire Ebert for choosing someone this young and cerebral and with such a relatively low profile, though it wasn't an "heir apparent" kind of choice (all the more admirable).

[The new erato]

Bad Santa is so fucking Good.

Watching this is the closest we come to a Christmas tradition at my home (along with Champagne in front of the fireplace on Christmas eve).

I regret I am not from a family that would designate this an official Holiday Family Flick.

As you see, I am.

[Todd]

Rewatched Eyes Wide Shut for the first time in a while.  It was even better than I recall.  The scathing commentary on class exploitation is more evident from the outset than I remembered, too.  Kubrick also criticizes the culture of voyeurism and obsession with the sex lives of others with the use of the two stars, and seems to make a few jokes – were the young punks calling Cruise gay there to make fun of the public interest in the rumors surrounding Cruise as well as providing a possible motivation for him to prove his manliness by sleeping with some new girl in revenge for his wife's quasi-confession?  The scenes with naked, beautiful women that nonetheless come across as cold and not really sexually appealing are still quite magnificent.  Nicolas Winding Refn isn't quite there yet. 

I also noticed a few details, some small, some not, that I didn't really before.  For instance, when Cruise and Kidman argue, with her sitting against the wall, the stack of CDs behind her has some discs move from shot to shot.  Given Kubrick's perfectionism, that could not have been a mistake.  Whether it means anything is a different matter.  Much more obvious was the placement of a sociology textbook in the prostitute's apartment, and the neon red 'eros' sign before Cruise enters the costume shop.  Did Kubrick intend to use Leelee Sobieski partly as a reference or homage to Lolita?  And I can't be the only person who sees a bit of Ryan O'Neal, the jawline especially, in Cruise's mask for the, um, party. 

Visually, the film is wonderful, with masterful use of movement and lighting and composition, and it serves as a reminder of what has changed, and been lost, with the switch away from film.  The exposure latitude of film just hasn't been replicated yet, and the smoother look of film is pretty obvious. 

Not Kubrick's best, but outstanding, and possibly great.

[Brahmsian]

Not a particularly great (or good) film (so-so).  However, incredibly grotesque and disturbing.  Must admit that Elijah Wood does play a good creepy guy (I think it's that innocent look, that makes it more shocking)

Maniac

[asin]B00EALTWPO[/asin]

[HenselFlaeder]

Rewatched Eyes Wide Shut for the first time in a while.  It was even better than I recall.  The scathing commentary on class exploitation is more evident from the outset than I remembered, too.  Kubrick also criticizes the culture of voyeurism and obsession with the sex lives of others with the use of the two stars, and seems to make a few jokes – were the young punks calling Cruise gay there to make fun of the public interest in the rumors surrounding Cruise as well as providing a possible motivation for him to prove his manliness by sleeping with some new girl in revenge for his wife's quasi-confession?  The scenes with naked, beautiful women that nonetheless come across as cold and not really sexually appealing are still quite magnificent.  Nicolas Winding Refn isn't quite there yet. 

I also noticed a few details, some small, some not, that I didn't really before.  For instance, when Cruise and Kidman argue, with her sitting against the wall, the stack of CDs behind her has some discs move from shot to shot.  Given Kubrick's perfectionism, that could not have been a mistake.  Whether it means anything is a different matter.  Much more obvious was the placement of a sociology textbook in the prostitute's apartment, and the neon red 'eros' sign before Kubrick enters the costume shop.  Did Kubrick intend to use Leelee Sobieski partly as a reference or homage to Lolita?  And I can't be the only person who sees a bit of Ryan O'Neal, the jawline especially, in Cruise's mask for the, um, party. 

Visually, the film is wonderful, with masterful use of movement and lighting and composition, and it serves as a reminder of what has changed, and been lost, with the switch away from film.  The exposure latitude of film just hasn't been replicated yet, and the smoother look of film is pretty obvious. 

Not Kubrick's best, but outstanding, and possibly great.

But why the pre-Cambrian piano music? It's so brutal and resolutely barraging,... I mean, it's genius no doubt, but I just don't get it.

And this film is just commentary on the elite? Am I looking for something deeper that isn't there? I mean, if it's saying that the "Illuminati" is real and dangerous, ok, but it seems a whole other film would have made that point better. I happened to see this alongside The Ninth Gate, and honestly,the two make a great pair, the biggest commonality being the elite devil-type rituals.

Maybe I've just never seen a film with a naked evil styled ritual NOT be a horror movie. I don't know, maybe I'd prefer the "Room 327?" movie better, rofl!

I want to like any film with the types of spectacular breasts on display here, but Kubrick certainly knows how to drain the life out of things. "Dr. Strangelove" was on last night, and there I get the "Kissoff", "Burbleson", and "Turgidson", but with EWS,... is the evil so great in EWS that it has to purposely be so very flat (otherwise the powers that be wouldn't have released the film?). This film has got under my skin a bit.

[Todd]

And this film is just commentary on the elite?

No, but that's a big part.  Never seen Ligeti's piano music called pre-Cambrian before.

[TheGSMoeller]

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Finally got around to watching the first of The Hobbit trilogy, and I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed it, for what it is. Similar to the LOTR trilogy, this film makes good as a fun and thrilling adventure-fantasy film that lays thick on emotion. Now I have not read either The Hobbit or the LOTR books so I cannot properly comment on how the transition from book to film was successful or a failure, but based on what I've read from others, including some strong thoughts here on GMG, I would say there is quite a difference between the mediums. These scripts are filled with modern day cliches, quotes and some unwarranted goofiness, but the production value is top-notch which once again creates another world that is realistic but very dreamlike. I'm a big fan of Martin Freeman, starting from his turn on the original UK The Office, and he's highly likable here as Bilbo. And of course Ian McKellan is back in what will likely be his most memorable roll of his lifetime as Gandalf. I'm officially excited to see the final two parts of The Hobbit, but in the theaters this time around.

Also, big points for using the Wilhelm scream, always a joy to recognize it. 

[Karl Henning]

In a way, a pity, as his Richard III is (keep it clean, Karl) superior work 

Thanks for unwarranted goofiness . . . that did my soul some good!

[North Star]

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Finally got around to watching the first of The Hobbit trilogy, and I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed it, for what it is. Similar to the LOTR trilogy, this film makes good as a fun and thrilling adventure-fantasy film that lays thick on emotion. Now I have not read either The Hobbit or the LOTR books so I cannot properly comment on how the transition from book to film was successful or a failure, but based on what I've read from others, including some strong thoughts here on GMG, I would say there is quite a difference between the mediums. These scripts are filled with modern day cliches, quotes and some unwarranted goofiness, but the production value is top-notch which once again creates another world that is realistic but very dreamlike. I'm a big fan of Martin Freeman, starting from his turn on the original UK The Office, and he's highly likable here as Bilbo. And of course Ian McKellan is back in what will likely be his most memorable roll of his lifetime as Gandalf. I'm officially excited to see the final two parts of The Hobbit, but in the theaters this time around.

Also, big points for using the Wilhelm scream, always a joy to recognize it. 

I have read the books and like some things of the LotR movies, even though there is much to hate in them, but those three are more than enough for me to watch it on TV when it will appear there. I can always read the book again if it's too disgusting