Movies you've just watched

[Zen]

How do you rank No Country For Old Men?

Had some intelligent casting and some nice performances. Is it a "Coen" film though? I dunno.

Re. True grit; It is a fine film and Jeff Bridges, was fabulous. It was also a fine film before they remade it. My overriding impression is that it was an needless exercise and an unforgivable was of their time.

I watch a Coen brothers film, to see a "Coen brothers" fiim, if you get my meaning. Not to see them treading water.

[GaijinPunch]

Serious question - What has happened to Scott? There was a time he was flawless.

I wouldn't go that far
I'll take a stab at an answer though. He, like most other human beings, simply did not know when to fucking stop.

I think it's pretty hard to fault Alien and/or Blade Runner in any aspect... especially considering what the cinematic landscape was like then. Alien was likely a much more uphill battle, but neither were a walk in the park. He still came out smelling like roses. Not sure what the fuck happened after that.

[Mischief Maker]

Serious question - What has happened to Scott? There was a time he was flawless.

He's a visuals director who cut his teeth doing commericals, where the actual product and what it did was the least important part.

Give him a good script and he'll make it stunning. Give him a crappy script and he'll make a crappy movie that's very pretty.

Don't forget he made "Legend" at his height.

[GaijinPunch]

Re. True grit; It is a fine film and Jeff Bridges, was fabulous. It was also a fine film before they remade it. My overriding impression is that it was an needless exercise and an unforgivable was of their time.

I watch a Coen brothers film, to see a "Coen brothers" fiim, if you get my meaning. Not to see them treading water.

Fair enough. Full disclosure: I never saw the original. However, John Wayne was before my time, and I assume growing up I probably would have always thought "that's something my Dad would watch". Maybe I should give him his day in court, but everything I've seen is basically him playing the same roll. Maybe he's just a victim of his time.

[Zen]

Is it a bad film? No.

Gave it a more thought and I have to say I disagree. I stand by my review. This was a fuckin stinker. You fellas are being too soft on it.

It comes as no surprise that the only reason I'd be willing to watch the movie twice, as with Prometheus, is Fassbender. He's simply brilliant.

Agreed. One can only hope that a new and fresh genius calibre director emerges to make full use of him before age takes hold. I smiled when he mimicked O'Toole. Fassbenders "Lawrence" when?

[Mischief Maker]

There's always "Shame"

[Stevens]

He, like most other human beings, simply did not know when to fucking stop.

This is probably part of the correct answer.

Don't forget he made "Legend" at his height.

Yeah forgot about that. Alien and BR make it easy to forget though.

[Skykid]

It comes as no surprise that the only reason I'd be willing to watch the movie twice, as with Prometheus, is Fassbender. He's simply brilliant.

Agreed. One can only hope that a new and fresh genius calibre director emerges to make full use of him before age takes hold. I smiled when he mimicked O'Toole. Fassbenders "Lawrence" when?

My only issue with Fassbender is his lack of performance diversity. It doesn't detract from his ability, in the same way Nicholson always being Nicholson never stopped him turning in terrific performances every time. But being conscious of his acting range, I find he doesn't deviate greatly from part to part. I've also seen better Shakespeare deliveries than his - he's no Ian McKellen.

That said though he's great at bringing the Fassbenderieness, and I think the synthetic roles in these two reboots are perfectly delivered and wonderful to watch.

He was pretty good in Shame too.

Is it a bad film? No.

Gave it a more thought and I have to say I disagree. I stand by my review. This was a fuckin stinker. You fellas are being too soft on it.

I've seen plenty of "fucking stinkers" in my time - too many to remember by far - and this doesn't quite qualify. It was poor in many places but not unwatchable. There was an entertainment factor therein and it didn't drop the ball like Prometheus did with jarringly bad performances and casting (sorry GP, I disagree with you - there was nothing here that came close to Prometheus's Scottish doctor or idiot English pierced scientists).

A fucking stinker is a movie that is barely watchable and has me closing my eyes in cringe, and Covenant didn't quite manage that. It just had a lot of dumb stuff, sadly missed opportunity stuff, and some totally misguided and wrongly approached stuff - and it fell down in the writing department about equal to when it got it right. Where it was saved was by Fassbender's roles - he genuinely carried the entire thing on his shoulders.

[GaijinPunch]

Is it a bad film? No.

Gave it a more thought and I have to say I disagree. I stand by my review. This was a fuckin stinker. You fellas are being too soft on it.

Whoa, bessie. I never said it was good. I stand pretty confident to say it's a bad film. While Fassbender was great, it's not enough to make me watch it again (plenty of other things featuring him being amazing). I just pointed out the few redeeming qualities it has, which are far outnumbered by the shit things.

[supergrafx77]

Just got back taking the daughter out to see It.

It was great. I had my doubts, but highly recommend it.
Perhaps best blockbuster of 2017?
Daughter thinks it is going to top the upcoming Star Wars. And jury is still out also in regards to the upcoming Blade Runner.
We shall see.
My review for what it is worth: 5 out of 5 stars.

[GaijinPunch]

And jury is still out also in regards to the upcoming Blade Runner.

I believe that's the case for all upcoming films.

[supergrafx77]

And jury is still out also in regards to the upcoming Blade Runner.

I believe that's the case for all upcoming films.

yes and "doh!"

[Vexorg]

Batman Returns: ***

This is your Batman on drugs. Any questions?

This movie is just plain bizarre, but that's pretty much par for the course when it comes to Tim Burton movies. At times it can look awfully cheap for a movie with an estimated $80 million budget (equivalent to around $140 million adjusted for inflation). They also lay the half-baked biblical allegory on thick (trying to turn the Penguin into some weird "tragic backstory" amalgam of Moses, Jesus and probably 2 or 3 other Biblical prophets) and mostly end up with a confused mess. Danny DeVito as the Penguin also comes off mostly as annoying (certainly not in the same league as Jack Nicholson as the Joker) and for the most part the plot is utter nonsense.

That said, I still thought it was a more entertaining movie than the first Tim Burton Batman film. Both look really dated by now though.

[Zen]

Danny DeVito as the Penguin also comes off mostly as annoying

Always considered this DeVitos film. Which was no mean feat, sharing screen time with Keaton, Pfeiffer and Walken.

[Ixmucane2]

The Devil's Candy

A classic horror movie setup: the house with a valid reason to be very inexpensive.
This time it's in generic sunny farmland just outside some large Texas city, the unhappy new residents are very nice people (a young painter, his wife and his teenager daughter), and the heart of the problem is a very creepy man who used to live there.

Reasonable characters, although unusually bulletproof and fireproof, good paintings, a well done but traditional treatment of Satanic aspects, some ambivalent irony about heavy metal music.

[GaijinPunch]

Sicario

Watched this on the return flight. Figured I should get this in before Blade Runner 2049 to reassure myself it wouldn't be some action packed extravaganza, and I have been reassured. The movie is not without it's faults but overall it is a pretty intense ride into a legal gray area of the Mexican cartels in US/Mexico border cities. There's not a lot here to give the viewer the warm and fuzzies: from the get go we learn we are dealing with monsters. What could have turned into a guns ablaze action movie was well thought out and for the most part well-paced. Biggest problem is Emily Blunt being... well... very blunt. She doesn't have much subtlety and by the end of it, I found her by-the-book attitude a rather boring trope seen many times before. There were a few other elements that I didn't buy, but they were easily overlooked. Alas, it is a pretty intense ride. I like to think that it's highly fictionalized, but one only has to read the newspapers to realize that part of the world is no picnic.

[copy-paster]

Unbreakable

Loved it. Arguably the most "real" superhero movies, moreso than Nolan Batman trilogy. The only thing I want to know, is the main character would be able to survive gunshot?

[ChurchOfSolipsism]

Arrival - 9/10
Whether you like the film as a whole will probably depend heavily on whether you're willing to accept its main premise (at least for the of the duration of the film), namely that the Sapir-Whorf-hypothesis is true. Even if you don't, you'll have to admit that he visuals, the sound design and the performances were great... it's poetry in motion. So looking forward to the new Bladerunner film after seeing this.

[GaijinPunch]

Arrival - 9/10
Whether you like the film as a whole will probably depend heavily on whether you're willing to accept its main premise (at least for the of the duration of the film), namely that the Sapir-Whorf-hypothesis is true. Even if you don't, you'll have to admit that he visuals, the sound design and the performances were great... it's poetry in motion. So looking forward to the new Bladerunner film after seeing this.

Sound design was next level shit.

[KennyMan666]

Just watched the Sakigake!! Otokojuku live action movie. As a movie, it's really not that good - the special effects are hilariously bad, the fights are pretty shoddily done, and a few important characters don't appear. Apparently it had a production time of two weeks and a budget of about $400k, but it was still kind of charmingly bad and definitely had a lot of respect for the source material. Helps that the source material itself is practically over the top to the point of self-parody, so it lends itself well to a low-budget but very passionate adaptation. I don't really recommend watching it if you haven't at least watched the anime series.

[ChurchOfSolipsism]

Arrival - 9/10
Whether you like the film as a whole will probably depend heavily on whether you're willing to accept its main premise (at least for the of the duration of the film), namely that the Sapir-Whorf-hypothesis is true. Even if you don't, you'll have to admit that he visuals, the sound design and the performances were great... it's poetry in motion. So looking forward to the new Bladerunner film after seeing this.

Sound design was next level shit.

I'll try to watch the other films by this director asap. I've heard many good things about SIcario...

[GaijinPunch]

Incendies is apparently dope. Might get that for my flight coming up.

[ChurchOfSolipsism]

Cheers for the tip - I usually enjoy films based on theatre plays since, in my experience, they're more focused than other films.

[kaicooper]

watched these:

Run Lola Run - great philosophy movie..its a lesson
Blue Jay - if u like Before Trilogy..u'll like this alot..amazing movie
IT (Remake) - finally a great remake in this generation..
The One I Love - original movie with great twist

guys is there any similar movies to The One I Love?

[BIL]

It Comes At Night (2017) Quite liked this. Terse, doom-laden psychological horror in which two families uneasily weather an apocalyptic plague. Action is sparing and blunt - nightmare imagery, conversely, is richly dark and unsettling. The slow pace and minimalist scope won't be for everyone; I can only imagine the misleading 28 Days Later-evoking trailers that've been cut for this. Recommended for fans of the bleak, unhurried horror dirge.

[lilmanjs]

Rush Hour 2
Not the best movie out there but it is the best of the trilogy. The original has its moments, but I've always enjoyed this one more. Jackie Chan has done many better movies of course, but in hollywood he just at some point decided to do anything and everything after Rush Hour 2.

[Zen]

It Comes At Night (2017) Quite liked this. Terse, doom-laden psychological horror in which two families uneasily weather an apocalyptic plague. Action is sparing and blunt - nightmare imagery, conversely, is richly dark and unsettling. The slow pace and minimalist scope won't be for everyone; I can only imagine the misleading 28 Days Later-evoking trailers that've been cut for this. Recommended for fans of the bleak, unhurried horror dirge.

I thought it well done also. Its getting some pretty salty reviews

Spoiler

Still wondering who opened the door at the end though

If you have not already seen it The Ghoul (2016) - Gareth Tunley might be of interest. Director is a Mate of Ben Wheatley, who is executive producer on this one. Dark and complex script.


The Limehouse Golem (2016) - Juan Carlos Medina
Shite

[Skykid]

Watched Alien Covenant again. Like every movie ever it is improved hugely by the big screen. I don't think any movie really ever reaches its full potential unless it's in the cinema or close enough.

It was much better this time around. When you've already experienced the errors and expect them, you focus more on the other elements, in particular the fairly fetching sterile atmosphere. It's tonally bleak and somehow dangerous in feel, aided by a very good - if simple - original soundtrack.

I think Scott recalled some of the original movie's viciousness, and did so by making the Alien here in its various incarnations a kind of Lovecraftian nightmarish thing. It's all buoyed totally by Fassbender of course, but generally there is a decent sense of dread to it all. The body horror and graphic elements are kind of a new angle for Alien, if you discount Jeunet's brand of macabre, and reminds me a little of the Japanese guro sci-fi stylings. David's whole occupation with genetic experimentation particularly, and those Giger drawings that made the cut.

There are still stupidities of course - even some I forgot to mention on first viewing. Things like trained professionals saying "nobody wants to get back in those lifepods", as if the chances of ever having the same disaster strike was a guarantee rather than a near impossibility. Or two crew members agreeing to take a vessel to a storm when your computer warns you of absolute catastrophic failure if you do so, and you have 2000 sleeping people on board.

But whatever. I suppose I got more from it on repeat. I certainly feel it's better than Prometheus and that while not entirely perfect, Scott did better than expected (do we all remember how bad it looked from that teaser?)

And yes, post production color toning, the general design and cinematography are all excellent; and there are a surprising number of well built sets too. Script is a mixed bag: for every overused 'fuck' shoved in recklessly, the Fassbender dialogue is conversely absolutely excellent. David particularly has some excellent repartee wonderfully delivered. It's just a shame there's so little of that happening with the rest of the crew. And the one thing about Danny McBride and folks finding him jarring because of the show and character they know him from - well I've never seen it. For me he's a new actor and I thought he worked well in the role and was fairly competent at achieving basic naturalism.

So I raise my opinion a notch. I feel slightly bad for Scott that it was a relative failure for the Franchise when he seems to have gotten a slightly better grip on it, and how to instruct his cast. I'd be ok with him doing another.

[Xyga]

David irritates me, the film is more about his character playing a creepy witty pokemon philosopher than xenomorphs or anything else. He's too much.

I mean okay not every film has to be like 1, even 2 was a survival shmup featuring Super Ripley, but at least it was well damn about space xenomorphs coming for everyone's guts, no question.
3 was like 1...yet considerably more bleak than scary.
Prometheus was about the yawny cosmic background story, Covenant about David-Jesus, both films contributed to demythify the signature 'extreme hostile nightmare monster in the shadows' of the franchise. 4 kinda made a similar mistake by taking too many liberties with the monster's mystique.

They're free to write what they want using the 'alien' name of course, even a comedy, but I'll remain conservative about what a good 'alien' is meant to be.
There's one thing about Prometheus though I insist I still found more alien~ish than a vast majority of what we've seen of the franchise in decades, not much but a moment of style/tonality done right; the medipod scene.
Spaceship, machine voice, alarms, monster foreign body, splatter and panic. Not even Covenant being overall better has that.

[Skykid]

But what are our expectations really? Can you think of any yesteryear reboot or remake bar Planet of the Apes that hasn't been a complete shambles or thereabouts?

Once you have committed to the path, demystification of the subject and Alien is already in effect, so you may as well attempt to tell a story. I don't think the general outline of Prometheus or Covenant are that bad in overall sci-fi terms; it's just the execution that falls down. Some of Prometheus's amateur cast were dreadful to the point of distraction, which is surprising as much as it is disappointing.

There are obviously pros and cons here, but I'd say there's a certain level of intrigue achieved and some fairly interesting ideas at play, which is more than I can say for much of anything I've seen in cinemas in the last 15 years or whatever.

I just sometimes remember Aliens vs Predator, gag a little and try to dispel the memory from my mind, after which Scott's revisit to the lore is somehow rendered far more palatable.