Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[stanton]

Sex, Lies and Videotape - Steven Soderbergh, 1989

I'm glad how well this film has aged. This is still a fascinating masterpiece, one of the most suspenseful films ever. The directing, the acting, the writing, all a pure pleasure. 10/10

Picnic - Joshua Logan, 1955

The contrast program. A painfully dated film in Stanley Kramer style with terrible dialogues and also often a terrible acting, theatrical of course, but even for a theatre not in a good sense. Shows how bad Hollywood is when it tries to make a "serious" drama for a mainstream audience. The best scene was a dance scene, maybe because of the absence of dialogues.
The directing is academically boring.


Don't know why this was shot in Cinemascope, cause most of the film happens in the centre, so that a pan & scan version could have been made without much scanning

[cigar joe]

Cornered (1945) Director: Edward Dmytryk, Stars: Dick Powell, Walter Slezak, Micheline Cheirel and too many to count to its detriment. On being demobilized at the end of the war, Canadian flyer Laurence Gerard returns to France to track down who ordered the killing of a group of Resistence fighters including his new bride in a convoluted plot that has Buenos Aries as its centerpoint. Still a 7/10.

[drinkanddestroy]

Black Hand (1950) 6/10  

This movie was not done very well, and it's a shame because this story has potential. It's based on the true story of a group of Italian gangsters who would terrorize the local community into complying with a protection/extortion racket. This is also interesting because some of the flashback sequences in The Godfather Part II refer to this gang; the  Gastone Moschin character is mentioned as being from this group.

Flamingo Road (1949) 7/10

This drama about small-town political corruption manages to be entertaining, largely thanks to solid performances by Joan Crawford and Sidney Greenstreet, and Zachary Scott.

[dave jenkins]

Sex, Lies and Videotape - Steven Soderbergh, 1989

I'm glad how well this film has aged. This is still a fascinating masterpiece, one of the most suspenseful films ever. The directing, the acting, the writing, all a pure pleasure. 10/10

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.

I like the film in spite of this point, but no way could I give it a 10.

[dave jenkins]

Prometheus - 7/10 - A decent stab at cerebral sci-fi, with lots of creative visuals (excellent even in 2-D) and plenty of interesting ideas that aren't fully realized. The story is well-executed aside from a silly, pointless twist two-thirds of the way through. Lots of gruesome gore but the aliens are less interesting than Scott's earlier beasts, even with a xenomorph walk-on. The cast too is disappointing: only Charlize Theron (icy hot as ever) and Michael Fassbender (playing an android playing Peter O'Toole playing T.E. Lawrence) make much impression. Ridley Scott's best film since American Gangster, showing he's still capable of competence.

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

[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  

[PowerRR]

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