Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Kurug3n]

They Live 1988

5 out of 5. Carpenter probably at his best.

[dave jenkins]

Carnal Knowledge (1971) - 6/10. Upscaled DVD. The Jules Feiffer script isn't bad. Too bad about the direction. Nichols thinks it's clever to depopulate scenes so that only the principals remain, as if the characters are so solipsistic they can't take note of anyone else around them. Erm. Worse, he has his actors frequently playing directly to camera, where it's obvious that the characters they're supposed to be talking to aren't even present. Forget about two-shots. Forget about real drama. You do get some scenery chewing from Nicholson, if you like that sort of thing. Oh well, the photography by the great Giuseppe Rotunno is very nice.

All That Jazz (1979) - 7/10. 1080p. Death, The Musical. Yeah, Mr. Fosse, we get it--but Bob just keeps hammering away, extending the runtime needlessly. It all could have been so much more succinct, so much more pointed, especially if they'd Deep Sixed stuff like "Everything Old is New Again," where Ann Reinking and the girl playing Roy Scheider's daughter do their routine. How, um, Disney. Oh well, the photography by the great Giuseppe Rotunno is very nice. [Just listened to Scheider's commentary on the Criterion disc: although most of the film was shot in Astoria, Queens, the final number was done here in Purchase, NY--my home for the last 6 years! Must have been down the road at the PepsiCo Performing Arts Center . . .  cool!]

[Groggy]

Queen Margot - 8/10 - The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre reimagined in the style of Coppola or Visconti. Lots of sex, violence and scheming, complete with gruesome effects, pompous music and portentous photography. Isabelle Adjani is quite the looker.

[dave jenkins]

Play Dirty (1969) - 8/10

I think, in all seriousness, this must be a better movie than TDD (and I love that one). If for anything, then for the fact it doesn't detour to be funny when everybody around expects it. Plus it's wonderfully cynical... and solidly directed with the scenes set in exotic places a tad slower in order to be played with and finally enjoyed... and with memorable if not excellent performances... and yeah - it's very good for ya.

Thanks. I note there's a new Blu for this title. I may have to check it out . . .

[Dust Devil]

Victim (1961) - (maybe somewhat above) 7.5/10

This movie's not my cup of tea, but it has strenghts which are difficult to overlook. One of them is Dirk Bogarde. The second is the elegant English unobtrusiveness, despite the boiling premise. (I think at some point they say the boy had only half a dollar in his pocket when he died... Though I'm not sure. - And even if I was I couldn't label it as a mistake.) It glides very well for 3/4, but due to the lack of heavier action stumbles in the final act (for me). That's maybe its royal British charm... who knows. The psychology of the characters is constructed very well, very thoughtful, very considerate towards the structure of the story. What's more surprising, it seems much moire realistic and objective than in most present era sexual flicks.

[cigar joe]

Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid 7/10

La belle et la bête (Beauty and the Beast) (1946) great film 10/10

[PowerRR]

Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 1 - 7.5/10
First installment is awful; two follow-ups have been quality work. cheers

[drinkanddestroy]

Crack-up (1946) 5/10. A war veteran thinks he's been in a train wreck that never occurred--is he cracking up, or being manipulated by a ring of art forgers? I'll bet you'll never guess. Claire Trevor is the girlfriend, Herbert Marshall the man from Scotland Yard, and Ray Collins is the Prince of Darkness. This could have been a pretty decent film except for one thing: the lead was filled by Pat O'Brien. This blow-hard is pretty hard to take, and it wasn't long before I was rooting for the bad guys. I never thought anyone could make George Raft look good by comparison, but O'Brien did it.

I just saw this movie on TCM, I'll give it a 6/10
I disagree with you on Pat O'Brien; I thought he was good. One thing funny about that guy - his suit jackets are way too tight. It's hilarious, I was laughing half the time, it looks like he is wearing suit jackets that he bought 10 years earlier
Claire Trevor was (especially in her early scenes) really bad here, it feels like she is acting, she is forcing herself to say her lines and show emotions, nothing seems real about it.
I actually thought the movie was decent until the end, the last long scene or two killed it for me, I was set to give it a decent rating until the last few minutes.
That girl who played Mary, she's pretty, I looked her up on IMDB, her name is Mary Ware; she never had much of a career, looks like she was only credited in 4 movies, plus 1 uncredited appearance http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0912135/

[cigar joe]

I just saw this movie on TCM, I'll give it a 6/10
I disagree with you on Pat O'Brien; I thought he was good. One thing funny about that guy - his suit jackets are way too tight. It's hilarious, I was laughing half the time, it looks like he is wearing suit jackets that he bought 10 years earlier
Claire Trevor was (especially in her early scenes) really bad here, it feels like she is acting, she is forcing herself to say her lines and show emotions, nothing seems real about it.
I actually thought the movie was decent until the end, the last long scene or two killed it for me, I was set to give it a decent rating until the last few minutes.
That girl who played Mary, she's pretty, I looked her up on IMDB, her name is Mary Ware; she never had much of a career, looks like she was only credited in 4 movies, plus 1 uncredited appearance http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0912135/

Agree with you. The film's finale seems to take place on Park Ave along the tracks to Grand Central. Its funny  because you hear the sounds of steam locomotives passing by, but once the new Grand Central Terminal was built the tracks went underground below 97th street and the lines were electrified to Croton, so there shouldn't be steam locomotives running about. The electrics were almost silent comparatively unless they sounded their horns.

[drinkanddestroy]

Agree with you. The film's finale seems to take place on Park Ave along the tracks to Grand Central. Its funny  because you hear the sounds of steam locomotives passing by, but once the new Grand Central Terminal was built the tracks went underground below 97th street and the lines were electrified to Croton, so there shouldn't be steam locomotives running about. The electrics were almost silent comparatively unless they sounded their horns.

I don't know anything about steam locomotives, so couldn't comment one way or the other.
All I can say is, perhaps much of these sounds are going on in the O'Brien character's head, so the sounds are heightened, not necessarily supposed to be realistic, but supposed to reflect the crack-up going on in his head.

[cigar joe]

I don't know anything about steam locomotives, so couldn't comment one way or the other.
All I can say is, perhaps much of these sounds are going on in the O'Brien character's head, so the sounds are heightened, not necessarily supposed to be realistic, but supposed to reflect the crack-up going on in his head.

The guy wants the sound of the locomotive to drown out the coupe de gras gun shot. Maybe the original story was written for the turn of the century.

[drinkanddestroy]

But the movie clearly takes place in the present (i.e., 1946) cuz there is talk about the O'Brien character's past service in WWII. But today's electric trains definitely wouldn't drown out a gunshot.
(I am no more expert on music than I am on trains, but I doubt the crash of a cymbal would drown out a gunshot either - THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH )
 

[dave jenkins]

(I am no more expert on music than I am on trains, but I doubt the crash of a cymbal would drown out a gunshot either - THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH )

"Drown out", no. Camouflage, maybe. Two loud noises occur simultaneously after a noiseless pause--how many unprepared listeners would distinguish between the two? Most likely, they would hear the two sounds as one. Were I in the situation, I would be reacting to the surprise of the sound more than the sound itself. I almost never analyze audio stings on soundtracks, I simply respond and note my response. The sound itself goes unexamined.

[PowerRR]

Metropolitan (1990) - 2/10
Hated the characters, hated the humor, hated the narrative structure.

[dave jenkins]

Metropolitan (1990) - 2/10
Hated the characters, hated the humor, hated the narrative structure.

Hated the review, hated the rating, hated the writer.