Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[stanton]

A woman's husband cheats on her with the woman's sister, and that doesn't cause a permanent rift between the two women? Sorry, not on any planet I'm familiar with.

Why not? Not everything in life happens like it usually does.

It is believable the way it is presented here. For me.
And despite that it is one of those films which seem to be "real", it is still only a film. Something constructed.

The masterful and elegant directing makes it the masterpiece. Soderbergh's best film so far.

[Groggy]

Uh huh. http://redlettermedia.com/red-letter-media-talks-about-prometheus-spoilers/

Fuck Red Letter Media.

[dave jenkins]

Fuck Red Letter Media.

This is weird. Turns out that Richard W and Groggy are the same person! That may explain why, on another board, Hancock the Superb could claim that he saw Lawrence of Arabia "when it first came out."

[Groggy]

What planet are you smoking?

[Groggy]

American Gangster - 8/10 - 2nd viewing. This time I watched the "unrated extended version" which adds nothing aside from an awkward post-script. Very derivative of The French Connection, Heat and Serpico, but also a well-crafted movie so I let it slide. One of Denzel Washington's best turns and a good supporting cast. If Mr. Scott is going to pollute our screens I'd rather he make good genre flicks than overwrought epics.

[drinkanddestroy]

American Gangster - 8/10 - 2nd viewing. This time I watched the "unrated extended version" which adds nothing aside from an awkward post-script. Very derivative of The French Connection, Heat and Serpico, but also a well-crafted movie so I let it slide. One of Denzel Washington's best turns and a good supporting cast. If Mr. Scott is going to pollute our screens I'd rather he make good genre flicks than overwrought epics.

I saw this movie at 12:01 AM the morning it was released, at the AMC in Times Square. Didn't love it at the time; Denzel is always great, but I thought that Russell Crowe did not give his greatest performance. But my views on movies have completely changed in the past 4 years, so I am going to have to watch this again sometime and reevaluate it.

RE: Ridley Scott: I'd never say a bad word about him, because Hannibal is one of my favorite movies. I've never found much of an opportunity to discuss it on these boards, but now I have one!
 I know I am in the great minority here when I say that it is the best of the trilogy; The Silence of the Lambs is great but  IMO Hannibal is better. And Scott had the guts/nerve/audacity to really change the feel of the story and the character; in TSOTL, there is a very dirty feel to it all; in Hannibal, there is an operatic feel to it. This is one of those times where the music really creates the whole feeling of the movie. Dr. Lecter has gone from being a dirty character, a monster, to being operatic. I think it's just brilliant. The dinner scene is simply wonderful. One of my favorite all-time scenes, outside of a Leone movie. And who can forget Mason Verger! I am sure many people thought the movie was instantly illegitimate once Jodie Foster refused the role of Clarice, but IMO Julianna Moore was nothing short of spectacular (but only if yo give her the room to breathe; if you decide beforehand that Foster is the only legitimate Clarice, then there's no reason to even watch the movie). Thankfully, the movie did not use the ludicrous ending of the book.... Yeah, I know that most people will equate this with saying that The Godfather 3 is the greatest of that trilogy, but I very firmly feel that Hannibal is the best of the trilogy.

I should add one point: by the time I saw Hannibal, I wasn't yet a member of TSOTL's cult. (I had seen it once, years before, but didn't like it much. After seeing Hannibal I re-watched TSOTL many times and I love it, it is a great movie), but the point is that at the time I saw Hannibal, I could judge it on its own merit and not against the cult of TSOTL. If you are such a huge fan of TSOTL, you may have a hard time dealing with how things have changed in Hannibal. But judge it on its own merit, and Hannibal is one of the all-time greats. It's definitely one of my Top 10 non-Westerns of all-time.

[drinkanddestroy]

TCM just showed Rio Bravo and Fort Apache , two of my Top 5 AW's. I hope y'all watched 'em  

[rrpower]

Fellowship of the Ring - 5/10
The Two Towers - 3.5/10
Return of the King - 7.5/10

Probably the worst trilogy I've seen. But how/why the fuck did Return of the King end up being so much better than the first two? Would've been like an 8 if I didn't have to sit through about 40 endings.

And Kevin Smith is totally right. I paraphrase: The first of 40 endings shows all the little hobbits jumping on Frodo's bed, while Frodo and Sam gaze at each other in slow motion from across the room. What if they kicked everyone out, and just had a hardcore blowjob scene for 10 minutes straight between Sam and Frodo? No music, just 10 minutes of the sloppy sound of Frodo getting his dick sucked. It would be so much more fitting than anything else in the movie.

Frodo and Sam's "relationship" throughout the story is by far the most unintentionally (or who knows, maybe intentionally?) gay scenario ever put into a mainstream movie (out-gaying even Top Gun in my opinion). Not that there's anything wrong with that. I just wish Peter Jackson would come out and admit that that's what he was going for.

There's some laughably bad dialogue in the whole trilogy (especially the first two), and it took a good six hours for any of the characters to be developed enough to have even a little interest in. This is probably what makes the third so much superior. The 'comedic relief' throughout the whole trilogy just doesn't fit, and nor it is funny. The movies take themselves so seriously overall that the few jokes feel way too forced.

All of the acting is pretty terrible (with the exception of Viggo Mortensen and kind of Ian McKellan), for some reason up until Return of the King where it gets slightly better. This is strange considering they were all shot at the same time.

Just as strange is the cinematography. I don't think I've ever criticized a movie for having 'bad' cinematography, but man I fucking hated the look of the first two. Everything looked like over-lit, phony garbage that took me completely out of the movie. This still exists in the third, but is toned down considerably and it even has some moments of occasionally very good cinematography.

The music in the first two is overused and often used out of place. It's used almost perfectly in the third.

So yeah, apparently everything in Return of the King is way the fuck better. Somehow. I might even watch it again someday. Not the whole trilogy...but the third installment.

Summer of '42
The last 20 minutes is master film-making, especially the love scene. Everything before that kind of sucks due to awful dialogue and worse overacting than everyone in Lord of the Rings combined.

[Groggy]

Return of the King is the worst of the trilogy. Like, by far. Rarely have I been so bored by a blockbuster movie.

[drinkanddestroy]

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? - 7/10 - Not a bad movie, but it's hard for me to really enjoy watching four obnoxious people yell at each other for two hours. I don't like this sort of thing unless there's some sort of point behind it all, and there didn't seem much beyond sadism here. The script is pretty good but like with Lion in Winter I find it perhaps a bit too rich for my taste; here though the obnoxiousness is deliberate rather than failed wit and cleverness, so it gets a point or two more than Lion. Burton is Burton and Liz is a slightly-more-dowdy-than-usual Liz; I don't like either of them much but they're reasonably suitable for their respective parts so not too many complaints there. Nichols does some nice things directorially though the film is far from cinematic. Alex North's score is meh (though I'm sure DJ will try and argue it's a symphonic masterpiece).

I'm REALLY hankering to watch something fresh and new that's really, blow-my-socks-off good, not just 7/10 good. It's been ages. Maybe Ran will do the trick when I finally get around to it.

I just saw Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf for the first time,on TCM. The guest host who chose the films for that night was Ellen Barkin -- who said it's one of her 3 favorite movies -- and I note that because as I was watching the movie, I said to myself, "I am sure that middle-aged women just love this movie, and especially the Liz Taylor character." (And the next thing I said to myself was, "I am sure that middle-aged men are terrified of having their wives see this film!")


It's hard for me to rate this film, because the movie was indeed done exceptionally well, but it was a ludicrous story. (I think Groggy's rating of 7/10 is the highest possible rating I could posibly give this film, if I did have to rate it). A movie can only go so far with a ridiculous story. Yes, Liz was absolutely terrific in this role. One of the greatest lead performances, and most memorable characters, that I've ever seen by a female.
While watching the film, I didn't realize that Taylor was in her early 30's at the time it was made -- she gained 30 pounds for the role, and obviously had a terrific makeup job as well.  There are many middle-aged women who  take care of themselves and are attractive and slim. But that weight gain was essential -- although she certainly was attractive for a woman of that age and her flirtations can definitely seduce a man, her slightly-too-tight pants make it evident that she is somewhat past her prime; it is a very important effect: she tries to look hot and probably visits the beauty parlor 3 times a week and is flirtatious and promiscuous and dresses sexy --  but is just a tad past her prime.

And Richard Burton was very good as her husband. This movie won 5 Oscars: Taylor for best Actress, Sandy Dennis for Best Supporting Actress, and for best Art Direction, best Cinematography, and Best Costume Design, all in the Black and White Categories, (in  the final year for which there were  separate categories for Black and White and Color). It was nominated for 13 Oscars. I am sure that the Best Costume was won for one simple reason: Taylor's iconic outfit that she changes into in order to seduce George Segal -- a shirt that provides a very, er... generous view, and black slacks that accentuate a little too much flab south of the border. But I digress...

I agree with many of these Oscars nominations -- this movie was made as well as it could be, with the Direction, the Cinematography, the Editing, etc. The opening scene is simply wonderful. That whole thing in the kitchen where Taylor is munching on the cold chicken drumstick while trying to remember what movie a certain line came from, was just unbelievable.

So they did about as good a job as could be expected with this story, but that's the limitation. Eventually, all the screaming becomes ridiculous, and more importantly this whole game that Taylor and Burton are playing gets tiresome and stupid. No plausibility whatsoever, and there is no way in hell that Segal would have stayed around that long. I don't care if he doesn't want to insult the daughter and son-in-law of the President of the college. Ain't no way he would have stuck around that long.

It's a shame that such a great performance by Taylor was wasted on such a ridiculous story  


p.s. at one point during a scene with Burton, I said "this role would have been perfect for James Mason" -- not that Burton wasn't good; it's just that I thought it was so perfect for Mason. Well, it turns out that Jack Warner and Edward Albee (upon whose play the script was based) actually wanted Mason for the role http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who%27s_Afraid_of_Virginia_Woolf%3F_%28film%29#Casting  

[cigar joe]

La baie des anges, entertaining 7/10

[rrpower]

Return of the King is the worst of the trilogy. Like, by far. Rarely have I been so bored by a blockbuster movie.

No way. The first two were waaaay more boring. The only part of ROTK that dragged were the endings.

[rrpower]

Hugo
Gets much worse with repeated viewings. Kingsley and Baron Cohen are excellent though, and the Georges Meleis flashbacks are among Scorsese's best work. The movie as a whole though is boring, cheesy, poorly written and a mess. I'm surprised I liked it as much as I did the first time through.

[noodles_leone]

It's hard for me to rate this film, because the movie was indeed done exceptionally well, but it was a ludicrous story. (I think Groggy's rating of 7/10 is the highest possible rating I could posibly give this film, if I did have to rate it)

[...]

It's a shame that such a great performance by Taylor was wasted on such a ridiculous story 

I'd give it 11 out of 10. It's one of the greatest movies ever, because of everything you say AND because the story is wonderful
The most amazing part is that it was Mike Nichols' first film. He said himself in the audio commentary that he was very self confident on set (he "knew what [he] was doing"), and that he's became less and less self confident all along his career. I guess the themes of the movie really meant something to him.

[dave jenkins]

Yesterday was another scorcher, so I headed for the Cineplex and their all-day air-con. Needless to say, choice of titles was not my main concern--I pretty much took whatever they were offering.

Seeking A Friend For The End of the World (2012) 7/10. I actually expected to enjoy this based on the amusing trailer, and wasn't disappointed. An asteroid is set to collide with the earth in 3 weeks, prompting everyone to go into End of the World mode. For some this means the end of all inhibitions, for others, it's business as usual. These two reactions are what provide most of the laughs throughout the film: one scene will have stodgy middle-class parents blithley feeding liquor to their underage kids; another will show a small-town cop still operating his speed trap in order to make quota. Steve Carell plays an insurance agent who begins by adopting the business-as-usual approach. However, after meeting Keira Knightly, a woman in his building who he'd never spoken to before, events are put in motion that cause him to change. One night there's a riot; Carell realizes how dangerous it is to remain in the city. He decides to get out of town and go in search of a lost love. He takes Knightly along because she has a car; he also agrees to help re-unite her with her family. Suddenly, it's a road-trip rom-com in the manner of The Sure Thing--except that everyone will be dead soon. A number of comic episodes ensue, sometimes featuring surprising cameos. One such cameo suddenly ends with the death of the character--I've never laughed so hard. (There's a fair amount of dark humor throughout.) Eventually the rom-com tropes assert themselves and threaten to extinguish what makes the film interesting. We learn that it's important to reconcile with estranged family members (!), that the love partner you are seeking is often right under your very nose (!!), that true love is all about having quiet time together so that you can snuggle and share your feelings (!!!). I feared the film was going to pussy out with a feel-good ending: the asteroid would end up just missing, or something, and Carell and Knightly would go on as a couple, having bonded over the putative crisis. To the film's credit, though, the DOA ending is honored. The film works because of the casting--Carell I don't usually care for, but he's good in this. Knightly impresses me more all the time. With London Boulevard and A Dangerous Method and now this she's demonstrated that she can be very appealing--too bad she's built like a boy.

Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter (2012) -3/10. [Yes, that's a minus 3]. I expected to hate this based on the title, I just hadn't imagined how much. It turns out that winning the Civil War and freeing the slaves was the least of Honest Abe's accomplishments. He's also responsible for, get this, ensuring that ours would be a nation of men and women rather than vampires. I was willing to go along with the premise so long as we were dealing with the Young Lincoln, but once the story moved to Lincoln in the White House it was all I could do to keep the dry heaves down. We see Jefferson Davis conspiring with the vampire leader to provide undead soldiers for the Confederate cause (the filmmakers are complete bastards). When Lincoln gets the battle losses (in real time) for the "first day of Gettysburg" he knows just what to do. In a single afternoon he collects all the silver in D.C., has it melted down into rifle balls, then shipped over night to the battle. Apparently there's a train line that runs directly from the capital to Gettysburg. And knowing that evil vampire minions will attempt to interdict the train, Abe and his team of vampire slayers ride along. The predictable battle royal then commences--ending in a coflagration atop the largest train trestle CGI could produce--but, hold on, the silver wasn't on the train after all, it was just a decoy! The real cargo got to Gettysburg via an alternate route. As Abe says with a wink, "This is not the only railroad." See, the silver was carried over night the 80 miles from D.C. to Gettysburg on the Underground Railroad!!! This is not the first film to make a travesty of historical fact. But this movie is something that actually approaches a kind of blasphemy. It is not enough that this film fail and lose money. The people involved in its making need to be hunted down and beheaded and have wooden stakes pounded through their hearts. And that's just for starters.