What have you watched recently? 3D!

Retr0gamer

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Was it not just the last shot was on an iPhone? The Disneyland one? The director's previous film, Tangerine, was all on iPhone.

You're right. Not sure why then those few scenes don't look great then.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You're right. Not sure why then those few scenes don't look great then.

It was shot on film and seemingly entirely in real locations so maybe it was just poor choice of shots or settings. For what it's worth, I hated everything about The Florida Project

shrapnel222

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It was shot on film and seemingly entirely in real locations so maybe it was just poor choice of shots or settings. For what it's worth, I hated everything about The Florida Project

real marmite kind of film. i have to say i really enjoyed it.

4Ad

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Murder on the Orient Express (2017) Dir Kenneth Brannagh

A fairly needless filming given the 1974 version is fine but not too bad, it improved from a shaky opening with a bit too much flimflam and annoying swooping "CGI camera" nonsense as the train moved through the mountains. When the avalanche arrived things calmed down visually and we could do the story. Obviously if you have read the story or seen previous film there's no real tension or revelation.

I see the sequel Death on the Nile is pencilled in for December release and Brannagh has ambitions for a series. Back in the 70s/80s they quickly lost steam after "Nile" and ended up as desperate low budget, non-star star-studded productions.

I enjoyed it, I didn't know the ending beforehand..found it hard to understand Poirot.....

Harry Palmr

I agree! Too much accent and moustache so you couldn't even use mouth movement to help. I tried subtitles but in playback mode they were no good

shrapnel222

finally got around to watching antiviral, Brandon Cronenberg's first film. Crazy if not implausible future, crazy film. Overall found it a little laborious in parts but a great debut. much preferred his 2nd film though (possessor) as it seemed a lot more polished.

definitely one to watch for the future

Fysh

Over the last couple of days, I caught Scare Me, which was a pleasant surprise - it's essentially an anthology horror film, wrapped in a meta-narrative about writing and subtext. It's a different beast, but it reminded me a bit of Michael Dougherty's Trick 'r' Treat in terms of trying to present stories in a different way.

I also resumed my long-delayed watching of Almodóvar's filmography on Mubi by watching Bad Education (a title that loses a bit of meaning in translation, since in Castellano the literal meaning is "bad education" but the contextual meaning is "ill-mannered"). It was, as I expected, really good - fairly dark subject matter (akin to The Law Of Desire in more than one way) but gripping throughout. As ever, if you speak Spanish therre are flourishes to the dialogue that the subtitles can't replicate but either way it's a really good watch. I have a hankering to watch I'm So Excited next, but that might have to wait a while...

pixelburp

Official Secrets (2019)

Slightly dry in places, lacking those vital edges of tension found in better films of journalism pursuing political corruption. That the endeavour failed, with our world irrevocably changed by the resulting illegal war, left a flavour of regret & melancholy to the story too (most evident in its sober postscript of the death toll in Iraq). Good performance by Keira Knightley though, earnest without adding too much of that cloying martyrdom you sometimes get with these stories of whistle-blowers.

flasher0030

pixelburp wrote: »

Official Secrets (2019)

Slightly dry in places, lacking those vital edges of tension found in better films of journalism pursuing political corruption. That the endeavour failed, with our world irrevocably changed by the resulting illegal war, left a flavour of regret & melancholy to the story too (most evident in its sober postscript of the death toll in Iraq). Good performance by Keira Knightley though, earnest without adding too much of that cloying martyrdom you sometimes get with these stories of whistle-blowers.

Check out the directors earlier film - Eye in the sky. Edge of the seat stuff. For me anyway.

Tony EH

'Winchester 73'

I've been saturating myself in westerns lately, even though (outside of the revisionist westerns) it's never been a genre that I've been overly fond of. But, even so, within its realm there are a number of genuine old time classics that are a must see for anyone who's interested in film in general. Along side 'Shane', 'Who Shot Liberty Valance' or '3:10 to Yuma', 'Winchester 73' is definitely one of them. Based on the famous "gun that tamed the wild west" (although the Colt may disagree) 'Winchester 73' stars the great Jimmy Stewart as Lin McAdam, who rides into Dodge City with his ever faithful friend High-Spade Frankie Wilson (Milard Mitchell) and they enter a shooting competition in which the prize is a Winchester repeating rifle model 1873. Upon surrendering their six shooters, as was the historical policy in Dodge City, McAdam is surprised to find Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally), a man who he's been looking for. What's more, Dutch has also entered the competition. After some, frankly unbelievable shooting even for Hollywood standards, McAdam wins the rifle, much to the consternation of Dutch, who seeks to steal it back. Thus a series of events is set in motion as we follow a number of characters and their overlapping circumstances, and the Winchester 73 macguffin as it goes through a number of different hands.

'Winchester 73' was made in 1950 and while it certainly has the tendency to fall into cliche here and there, it is nevertheless a compelling story, well directed and more than capably performed by all concerned. Directed by Anthony Mann, it eschews the stupidity of a John Ford film and eliminates the weaknesses of Howard Hawks, to result in a Hollywood cowboy movie that can enjoyed today on today's terms and not purely its own. That is to say, the viewer doesn't have to enter into a state of forgiveness or make excuses for its shortcomings to be entertained by it. Of course, that is not to say that it's completely free of period issues, such as white actors as Indians, but this is one of the few (if only) transgressions the film makes with regards to 1950's movie making.

The film was also largely responsible for kickstarting the second wave of Hollywood westerns, which had been suffering from a lull in popularity. It also did wonders for Stewart's own profile, not to mention his bank account and, while he was already a major actor, it catapulted him into the bracket of Hollywood superstar. Stewart is his usual consummate self in the "everyman" role of Lin McAdam, delivering everything you'd expect from his, admittedly, limited range. He effortlessly draws the viewer into the adventure and invites us to follow him. But the support is also fantastic, with genuinely entertaining performances all round. Even the second tier support from the likes of John McIntire as the Indian trader, or Will Geer (Grandpa from 'The Waltons') as Wyatt Earp are great and make their roles much larger than they were written and special mention should go to Dan Duryea as Waco Johnnie Dean, a charming and smiling, yet utterly ruthless killer. And the only female lead of the piece, the brilliant Shelly Winters, goes toe to toe with the men on the screen and is just as entertaining to watch as she smart mouths her way through one perilous situation to the next. There are also a couple of future stars in very minor roles that will reward the observant, one of whom was quite a surprise.

The director, Anthony Mann, who up til 1950 had only helmed B movies, keeps tight hold of a great but potentially rambling script. In the hands of another director, the film could have been a bit of mess, but Mann steers a contained, focused, story and manages to get the best out of his actors with, perhaps, the only weak exception being Charles Drake as the Stephen Miller. In fairness to Drake, he probably has the most unappreciative type of role in the movie, so we can cut him a bit of slack.

'Winchester 73' is a film that I have long known about, but always dismissed as a "50's western", thinking it was just another movie from that era that would end up being a tired exhibition of the usual tropes and cliches of the genre from that particular period. But, contrary to that, it's an authentic gem that's worth every second of the viewer's time.


9/10

Harry Palmr

Stewart's agent (Lew Wasserman) struck a very big points deal (for this and another film) with Universal the first example of that as we understand the tactic. Made about 600,000 in the end and everyone said "what a brilliant idea" and followed suit where possible. Wasserman later became the head of Universal Studios when he took it over.

Tony EH

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Stewart's agent (Lew Wasserman) struck a very big points deal (for this and another film) with Universal the first example of that as we understand the tactic. Made about 600,000 in the end and everyone said "what a brilliant idea" and followed suit where possible. Wasserman later became the head of Universal Studios when he took it over.

True. As part of the deal, too, he got to choose his director and the actors that would star along side him.

Hard to believe that kind of deal could be entered into in 50's Hollywood. Although, as well as making Stewart a lot of money, it had a great effect on the outcome of the picture's quality as well.

Fuascailteoir

shrapnel222 wrote: »

finally got around to watching antiviral, Brandon Cronenberg's first film. Crazy if not implausible future, crazy film. Overall found it a little laborious in parts but a great debut. much preferred his 2nd film though (possessor) as it seemed a lot more polished.

definitely one to watch for the future

Possessor was a really slick movie. Definitely must have went to work with his dad regularly as is unmistakably influenced by him but in the best way possible.

Harry Palmr

True. at the start of the 50s actors were usually tied to a 7 picture deal and you took what you got. No questions!

AMGer

Tony EH wrote: »

'Winchester 73'

The director, Anthony Mann

Winchester 73 is easily in my top 10 Westerns of all time. And on Anthony Mann, I’m a big fan of his Westerns. He did 5 in total with James Stewart, Winchester 73 is the best but the others are good aswell (Bend of the River seems to get the most praise but The Far Country is my personal favourite). He had a few good Westerns without Stewart aswell, The Furies, Tin Star, and Man of the West with Gary Cooper & Lee J Cobb. Man of the West would definitely be worth checking out.

Stewart himself actually said he didn’t think he’d have survived in the movie business if he hadn’t done Westerns post WWII, and it started with Winchester 73.

Tony EH

AMGer wrote: »

Winchester 73 is easily in my top 10 Westerns of all time. And on Anthony Mann, I’m a big fan of his Westerns. He did 5 in total with James Stewart, Winchester 73 is the best but the others are good aswell (Bend of the River seems to get the most praise but The Far Country is my personal favourite). He had a few good Westerns without Stewart aswell, The Furies, Tin Star, and Man of the West with Gary Cooper & Lee J Cobb. Man of the West would definitely be worth checking out.

I've seen 'The Furies', 'Bend in the River' and 'Tin Star'. I never sat down to 'Man of the West' though. Out of the first three, I remember 'The Furies' the best. It's another "non-representative" 1950's western, in that it doesn't fall into the cinematic traps of the times.

I probably skipped 'Man of the West' because of Gary Cooper though. Alongside Randolph Scott, I've never found him particularly interesting to watch.

I guess I better stick it on the list so...

AMGer wrote: »

Stewart himself actually said he didn’t think he’d have survived in the movie business if he hadn’t done Westerns post WWII, and it started with Winchester 73.

Stewart was on the way out. He'd been thinking of giving up the acting game after a few uncomfortable experiences when he came home after the war. The success of 'Winchester 73' and 'Harvey' changed his mind. He made a mint out of both films and realised he was being a bit silly I reckon.

Harry Palmr

The Assassination Bureau (Limited) 1969 Dir Basil Dearden

Jack London's unfinished posthumously published novel gets the big screen treatment from Paramount UK rather than USA with Oliver Reed and Diana Rigg leading the cast with Telly Savalas, Curd Jurgens and plenty more in a daft but enjoyable tale set round Edwardian Europe as title organisation turns it's guns and bombs on its leader who naturally outwits them all, as he is the star name above the title. Intriguing to know this was first optioned by Burt Lancaster before he dropped it. Very much the sort of thing they just don't make any more - frivolous, jaunty, black comedy with a dashing lead and a terrible closing theme song. In the States Paramount didn't quite know what to do with a film that featured assassination in the title at such a time.

North By Northwest 1959 Dir Alfred Hitchock

Another viewing! Still giggle at the most efficient wrap up in film history.

15 seconds from imminent death to coital shenanigans and "The End"

El Gato De Negocios

Possessor

New movie from Brandon Cronenberg, son of the (in)famous cult director David. Without giving much away, the story follows Tasya, an assassin for a covert organisation that specialises in "possessing" the mind and body of innocent parties to get close to their target and do the necessary.

At first glance, there are elements of the plot to Inception here but thats where the similarities end. This is a visually stunning, exceptionally violent thriller. Cronenberg the senior made his name in body horror, while there are certainly elements of body horror here, its very much mind horror thats at the forefront.

The cast is very small with a few familiar faces cropping up (Sean Bean and Jennifer Jason Leigh) and everyone is excellent in it, particularly Andrea Riseborough who plays Tasya and Christopher Abbott who plays one of the "possessed".

I really loved this movie, there are rare occasions where I get surprised by something and aside from rumblings Id heard about a controversial Sundance screening, it had flown under the radar but Im glad I downloaded it.

As mentioned previously, this movie is exceptionally violent. Think more along the lines of Kill List rather than something more cartoony like Rambo so those of a nervous disposition should steer clear. If you want something to grip and shock though, Id highly recommend it.

It hasnt gotten a physical release yet but Ive already preordered the 4k version from Diabolik, this is certainly one I will revisit again and again.

9/10

4Ad

Enola Holmes, a nice innocent kind of film, watched it with my niece, both enjoyed it..

RasTa

Akira in the cinema on imax. Glorious

Fysh

I caught H.P. Lovecraft's The Deep Ones as part of the Grimmfest line-up. It was somewhere around the "ok" mark - felt very much like a throwback to the Stuart Gordon & Brian Yuzna Lovecraft films, in terms of quality and narrative. It's basically "Dagon" only with an AirBnB owned by a Californian cult in place of a boat accident off the coast of definitely not Barcelona some unspecified part of the USA.

I like cosmic horror and have enjoyed the likes of The Colour Out Of Space, Mandy, Spring and The Endless. TDO didn't really work for me as it's clearly trying to be something more like Dagon, Reanimator or From Beyond.

Tony EH

Fysh wrote: »

I caught H.P. Lovecraft's The Deep Ones as part of the Grimmfest line-up. It was somewhere around the "ok" mark - felt very much like a throwback to the Stuart Gordon & Brian Yuzna Lovecraft films, in terms of quality and narrative. It's basically "Dagon" only with an AirBnB owned by a Californian cult in place of a boat accident off the coast of definitely not Barcelona some unspecified part of the USA.

I like cosmic horror and have enjoyed the likes of The Colour Out Of Space, Mandy, Spring and The Endless. TDO didn't really work for me as it's clearly trying to be something more like Dagon, Reanimator or From Beyond.

I don't think Lovecraft makes much sense outside of the 20's. 'The Color Out of Space' kinda gets away with it and it's only my affection for the Stuart Gordon movies that gets them a pass, but I haven't seen anything else that does justice to the original stories unfortunately. Most of the efforts really only trade on a name and have nothing to do with the Lovecraft story at all.

H.P. Lovecraft's mythos is ripe mining though, but they have to be period pieces to be truly successful. In a world of 24hr surveillance, mobile phones and hi-tech, his cosmic entities can't compete.

There was a crowd called the HPLHS who tried a couple of (very) low budget films. One was a faux silent effort of 'Call of Cthulhu' which wasn't bad, and the other was a talkie of 'The Whisperer in Darkness' which was pretty good, albeit with accepted limitations. I'd like to see them do something with a larger budget. But there's as much chance of that happening as there is of Cthulhu awakening from his slumber.

Fysh

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't think Lovecraft makes much sense outside of the 20's. 'The Color Out of Space' kinda gets away with it and it's only my affection for the Stuart Gordon movies that gets them a pass, but I haven't seen anything else that does justice to the original stories unfortunately. Most of the efforts really only trade on a name and have nothing to do with the Lovecraft story at all.

H.P. Lovecraft's mythos is ripe mining though, but they have to be period pieces to be truly successful. In a world of 24hr surveillance, mobile phones and hi-tech, his cosmic entities can't compete.

There was a crowd called the HPLHS who tried a couple of (very) low budget films. One was a faux silent effort of 'Call of Cthulhu' which wasn't bad, and the other was a talkie of 'The Whisperer in Darkness' which was pretty good, albeit with accepted limitations. I'd like to see them do something with a larger budget. But there's as much chance of that happening as there is of Cthulhu awakening from his slumber.

I thought both of the HPLPS efforts were really good, but I think they've pivoted largely to audio dramas now. I expect it's more cost effective for them.

In larger terms, i think part of the problem woth Lovecraft on film is that Lovecraft's writing is both pretty damn purple to begin with, but also very poor in terms of character - so it lends itself badly to direct adaptation. So e.g. the likes of Panos Cosmatos' films, or the Benson/Moorhead collaborations are a better approach because they borrow the things that work while building new stories around proper characters and storytelling techniques.

branie2

Independence Day and White House Down on Blu-ray

Tony EH

Fysh wrote: »

I thought both of the HPLPS efforts were really good, but I think they've pivoted largely to audio dramas now. I expect it's more cost effective for them.

In larger terms, i think part of the problem woth Lovecraft on film is that Lovecraft's writing is both pretty damn purple to begin with, but also very poor in terms of character - so it lends itself badly to direct adaptation. So e.g. the likes of Panos Cosmatos' films, or the Benson/Moorhead collaborations are a better approach because they borrow the things that work while building new stories around proper characters and storytelling techniques.

Oh Lovecraft's writing is a load of baloney :pac: . His overly flowerly prose is a chore to get through and completely unnecessary too. I just cannot be bothered these days. But as a kid I had more patience and the stories would shine through the nonsense. I rather think that H.P. went to ridiculous lengths to show off, more than anything else, but ended up just kinda making his work impenetrable for a lot of folk. But he was an insufferable New England snob, even for the times.

Even so, his influence on horror and sci-fi is remarkable. But, it's also period bound. Putting a Lovecraft story into the 21st Century doesn't and won't ever work 100%. I think even the Ramsey Campbell stuff in the 60's wasn't that compatible either.

As far as character is concerned, they are nearly always the same type of dilettante who stumbles upon an "eldritch horror" of some sort and goes mad. But I'm fine with that and they don't really have to be anything else. After all, most people are there to see the monsters. I think that's what was so great about the loose mythos he created. The idea that these creatures were here long before us and long after, while being completely mindless of us is fantastic. Humanity is not important in Lovecraft's world ( in fact it may have been a side effect of their actions) and he was one of the first writers to pursue that.

The bits and bobs of each mythos story also form a greater whole, while not being fully connected. This is another reason why the films don't work too. You cannot have one Great Old One and not mention another, even if they aren't directly connected. Having Nyarlathotep in a film, without understanding what his purpose is just won't be complete and he's one of the most important figures in Lovecraft's mythos.

It would be great if some studio took a punt on a series of connected films, Marvel style, based on Lovecraft's writing. But that ain't going to happen. They'd probably make a balls of it anyway.

Del Toro was trying to get a film of 'At the Mountains of Madness' off the ground for years, but it ended up in the bin. Can't say I'm too disappointed in that though. I've never been a fan of his. He always loses me at some point in his work. I also read, years ago, there was interest in 'Call of Cthulhu' from some big studio, but that seemed to have ended up in the bin as well. I reckon that they just can't see modern audiences going for it.

I reckon the guys that made 'The Lighthouse' would have a bloody good stab at it though.

Ninthlife

Yummy (2019)

Really enjoyable horror/zombie movie

Fun story, great fx, lots of blood n gore and some genuinely funny moments.

Mr Crispy

The Wolf of Snow Hollow (2020)

Being a sucker for werewolf movies, I was hoping this might scratch that itch but, despite some promising reviews, I was left disappointed. The tone was at best uneven, at worst all over the place. Some of the dialogue was ropey, though one or two of the supporting cast did their best with what they had. Having said that, not even Robert Forster could elevate it in what turned out to be his final role in a feature. A disappointing two full moons out of five.

Tony EH

There is an absolute glut of third rate cheapo horror movies being churned out in 2020.

johnny_ultimate

World of Tomorrow: Episode Three - I'm not sure if Don Hertzfeldt has basically committed his career to making these 30 minute masterpieces every few years, but I'm not going to complain if he has.

Animated sci-fi at its best and most playful. Stunningly tactile and eerily beautiful sci-fi landscapes; existential dread mixed with outrageous humour; rich sci-fi ideas that explode and expand on the lore and characters of the first two chapters. A tragic comedy about doomscrolling; a bleakly comic doomed romance; a triumphant celebration of the artistic capacity of animation in all its mixed-media forms.

An American Werewolf in London - if you're going to build your film entirely around one setpiece, you'd better hope it's damn good. It's pretty damn good here.

That transformation scene aside, this is an exceptionally strange film in many ways. Almost sarcastically narcoleptic pacing - it takes an hour to get to the real action after a bloody opening act. It's full of amusingly indulgent dream / nightmare sequences that serve little narrative purpose but are certainly entertaining. But yeah when the werewolfing gets going, this is thoroughly mad - the transformation and the casual carnage of the finale (people just start being hideously and hilariously offed in extended cutaways that have little to do with the main monster action ) are basically doing 95% of the heavy lifting here, but hey it's all in good fun.

Host - a Zoom-based horror filmed in lockdown should almost by law be OK at best, so what a surprise that this is actually better than that! It's precisely what you expect it to be, but naturalistic performances and some inventive effects work make this more thrilling than I'd have thought possible in the format. A gimmick horror that actually works!

Life and Nothing More / Through The Olive Trees - god, I miss Abbas Kiarostami. Thankfully he left lots of films I'm still going through. These second and third entries in his Koker 'trilogy' (a description he didn't like, but hard not to apply given the way these films function) see him at his best: metaxtextual experiments married with a deep sense of compassion for his fellow human beings. Life and Nothing More is my favourite of the two, beautifully pulling the curtain back on its predecessor Where is the Friends' House and carefully blurring the lines between documentary and fiction. But Through The Olive Trees reveals further depths again to the cinematic Matryoshka doll, gazing just beyond the frame (literally) of a single scene from LANM to be a rich commentary on cinematic storytelling itself. All of this, of course, composed with the delicate, careful command of form that defined one of cinema's greatest artists.

AMGer

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

An American Werewolf in London

One of my favorites, I absolutely love it. Scares, gore, comedy, special effects (not CGI), incredible makeup, great soundtrack, a retelling of a classic story, Jenny Agutter An absolute gem of a film.