Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[stanton]

I'm sure there is something I don't "get" about this movie. Something on the relationships that just doesn't speak to me... yet.

For me neither, as long as we speak about Heat. Never understood why others liked it that much. Pacino is again terrible.

But honestly, none of Mann's films is really interesting.

[drinkanddestroy]

Pacino is great here

[dave jenkins]

Beat the Devil (1953) - 9/10. 4K restoration of "the unseen complete, uncensored version." After disastrous previews in 1953, the film was re-cut (we're told) and the cut version is the one we've seen ever since until now. There is only about 4 minutes of extra running time in the original; most of the cuts have to do with toning down some of the risqué humor. The most egregious change was at the beginning: A scene from the end of the film was placed first, and a Bogart VO explained things, creating a needless flashback structure. Worse, the very start of the film was dumped, an amusing conversation between Jennifer Jones and her character's husband; they were to have been the first characters introduced, but in the re-cut version Robert Morley and his gang get introduced first, and only then do we see Jones and hubby. As I said, the earlier conversation is gone, which is a shame because it establishes the kind of character Jones is playing.

The scene where Jones invites Bogart to make a pass is also fooled with; the pair move off screen in the re-cut version as a dissolve takes us into another scene. Originally there was an ellipsis, indicating some love-making, before returning to the characters in an "after" scene. It is here that the Jones character makes up a story about finding uranium on her Africa property, a statement we see that Peter Lorre overhears (nicely achieved with an impressive reverse dolly shot). We kind of need to know about this, as it is at that moment that the criminals start worrying about what Jones and her husband know and whether or not they should be killed.

(There was actually a short piece comparing the two cuts of the film after the movie finished ((apparently commissioned by the Film Forum especially)), which is why I can talk about this. I would not have remembered the re-cut version well enough to have made the comparisons stated above.)

With everything put back in place the film plays very well. I've seen it on Turner a couple times and never really got into it much. It's actually pretty funny if you're properly attuned to the film's witty tone. The new restoration looks incredible. One very nice point, it actually looks like a b&w film from 1953, they haven't tried to give it a high-contrast look and turn it into a noir. I'm hoping when it comes out on blu that look is preserved (please, please don't let Criterion do the transfer!).

I had a lot of fun watching this. I can't remember when I've enjoyed myself as much at a movie theater in recent months.

[Novecento]

For me neither, as long as we speak about Heat. Never understood why others liked it that much. Pacino is again terrible.

But honestly, none of Mann's films is really interesting.

I think he is a mann of talent. I'm looking forward to "Enzo Ferrari" coming next year.

[stanton]

I think he is a mann of talent. I'm looking forward to "Enzo Ferrari" coming next year.

He has talent, and I like several other films of him more than Heat, but I think I enjoy neither of his films enough to give one a 9 on my entertainometer.

[XhcnoirX]

John Wick Chapter 2 (2017) - And . . . it's not very good (yeah, yeah, I should have gone to Lego Batman). Bad photography, badly directed, badly plotted. The Keanu Kurse continues to operate: no good sequels may be made with him aboard. All the best moments are in the trailer. There will be a John Wick 3, apparently. I still like the first one, but Chapter 2 gets a 5/10.

Saw it in the cinema last night... It's not as good as the 1st movie, and as the trailer suggested, the movie favors gun-fu action over any sort of story (BUT, spoiler alert, his current dog is still alive at the end of this one!). What I liked about this one was that it showed a bit more of how things work in Wick's universe. It's not what I had hoped for, but it is what I expected, and in that respect it delivered.  Also liked the set-up for an even more ridiculous John Wick: Chapter 3. 7/10

[cigar joe]

Saw it in the cinema last night... It's not as good as the 1st movie, and as the trailer suggested, the movie favors gun-fu action over any sort of story (BUT, spoiler alert, his current dog is still alive at the end of this one!). What I liked about this one was that it showed a bit more of how things work in Wick's universe. It's not what I had hoped for, but it is what I expected, and in that respect it delivered.  Also liked the set-up for an even more ridiculous John Wick: Chapter 3. 7/10

Someone over on the TCM boards called John Wick (2014) a Neo Noir, sounded more like a kung fu or gun -fu action flick, what's your take?

[XhcnoirX]

Someone over on the TCM boards called John Wick (2014) a Neo Noir, sounded more like a kung fu or gun -fu action flick, what's your take?

The first one has a beautiful stylized neo-noir look to it. But it's a standard antihero on a quest for revenge action movie otherwise (nothing wrong with that, neither movie pretends to be something it's not).

[dave jenkins]

The Eagle Huntress (2016) - A documentary about a Kazakh girl of 13 who becomes a bird-of-prey huntress in a culture where only males are allowed to partake. Yes, it's a girl empowerment film! It's also a film that teaches us that hunting foxes is OK. If only those damn UKers knew! Great photography. The needless voice over telling us things we can figure out for ourselves brings this down to a 6/10.

[dave jenkins]

The Swindle / Rien ne va plus (1997) - 3/10. A father-daughter team who make their living pulling small cons suddenly step up to the big time. Too much talk, too little charm. Chabrol at his most self-satisfied.

[dave jenkins]

Prince of Foxes (1949) 7/10. A titoli-like tyrant, Cesare Borgia (Orson Welles), is mentoring a phony aristocrat (Tyrone Power) in the ways of duplicitous statecraft. When Borgia sends his protégé on a mission, the young man suddenly grows a conscience and turns against his employer. Because Wanda Hendrix. I'd thought I'd never before seen this film but the eye-gouging scene is familiar and I must have watched at least that part on TV in my youth. Welles is good but under-used (which everyone recognizes). Power here is the very emblem of masculine beauty. Hendrix looks like one of my cousins. The new blu does justice to the nice b&w photography.

The production was one of the first US films shot in Italy. The filmmakers take pride in announcing before the credits the fact that scenes were shot on authentic locations (which does give the picture a unique look). But look at this comment I found over at IMDb:

This story takes place during the time of Cesare Borgia, who died in 1507; however, the first scene of the movie--which shows Borgia with other characters--takes place in a room decorated with a fresco of Saint Michael by Federico Zuccari, who was born around 1540, and who started to work in Rome during the reign of HH Pius IV (1559-1565).

OMG, what were the filmmakers thinking?

[titoli]

Prince of Foxes (1949) 7/10. A titoli-like tyrant, Cesare Borgia (Orson Welles), is mentoring a phony aristocrat (Tyrone Power) in the ways of duplicitous statecraft.

Me "duplicitous"?

[drinkanddestroy]

Mister Roberts 7/10

First viewing. Saw it on TCM's 31 Days of Oscar
(Yeah, once every seven blue moons, I may watch a comedy  )

Decent enough

I have no idea why Cagney tried that silly accent

Does anyone know - or is it written anywhere - which scenes were directed by Ford, which by Logan, and which by LeRoy?

[dave jenkins]

Me "duplicitous"?

You question duplicitous, but you're OK with tyrant? Li'l Duce, you're too much!

[titoli]

You question duplicitous, but you're OK with tyrant? Li'l Duce, you're too much!

Well,  a neat "tyrant" is sure an improvement on that diminutive "Li'l" Duce.