What have you watched recently? 3D!

pixelburp

Rififi (1955)

The darkest film with the silliest (sounding) name.

The heist genre as we know it now has somewhat crystallised into one of the slicker, glossier forms of blockbuster entertainment out there; with a predominance of Robin Hood set-ups, loveable rogues putting one over contemptible antagonists, where the theft of their wealth is mere karmic punishment for Act 1 villainy. The first three Oceans films stand as the high watermark of the cinematic heist played out as an extremely arresting, almost aspirational & cool crowd-pleasing thrill-ride. Interpersonal drama or twists would often be part of the machine or Last act Rug-pull; acrimony usually limited to one Con Artist getting one over another, raw emotional collateral damage non-existent. Indeed the heist film has become a bit of vicarious anarchy as flawed-but-loveable heroes get one over The Man. So all my waffling in mind, here came Rififi: prototypical to a lot of the precision engineered thievery we'd later see; still something of a pinnacle in the cinematic execution of a heist; and something of a thematic cold shower where its surprisingly bleak worldview & tone left everything feeling grubby - not glossy. 

From what I can see, this has enjoyed a bump in interest & a renaissance through a bit of retrospective appreciation as a true progenitor for nearly every "Heist Caper" film since; and assessing the film purely by that specific set-piece, I can see why it's argued as a lasting Best in Class example of the tension derived from watching experts efficiently - but slowly - dismantle a jewellery store's security. It was an unbroken sequence that lasted silent for 30+ minutes, with neither soundtrack played nor dialogue spoken through the whole enterprise. Nor were there any narrative cheats, showy gadgets, swagger or bravado by the characters. Indeed there was little flourish from the cinematography either: just a taut masterclass of professionals doing what they do with something akin to hardened efficiency. It was gripping stuff by dint of its own stripped-down nature.

Perhaps ultimately that's the key concept when it comes to this genre's mechanics: efficiency. Not so much a cinematic structure wherein nothing can go wrong, but the fundamental syncopation that occurs when you put an array of cunning, contrasting experts together and watch them figure it all out on the fly. Yet showboating for its own sake can be thrilling but also hollow; there's little satisfaction from clenched tension finally released when the problems were solved without stress or any smarts. And while the heist itself was relatively pain-free, the lead up in Rififi had some great moments of real-time problem solving as the thieves tried to figure their way around then state-of-the-art technology. It was akin to a procedural drama, albeit told from the other side of the societal fence.

Given I mentioned the series already, this was perhaps why the attempted franchise restart Ocean's 8 failed so badly (and why anyone reading this probably forgot it existed 'til now). The script forgot to make any particular scenario especially taxing or nerve-wracking; every problem that came up had an immediate solution, sometimes a mere tap on the keyboard. And while the former 3 Ocean's movies rarely flirted with true disaster, their scripts often at least subverted that sense of crisis management with retroactive flourishes, where what went wrong was part of the plan all along.

All that said, if I keep comparing Rififi with the Ocean's movies it's certainly not 'cos the older movie's criminals were lovable scamps screwing over a larger & more morally questionable antagonist: these were pragmatic tradesman jumping at the chance at an irresistible payout, the victim immaterial in their thoughts against the lure of the reward.

These were actions born from boilerplate, straight-shooting greed in an already violently pragmatic & seedy world; a world of drugs, beatings, shootings and where kidnapping occurred in broad daylight on a crowded street. And that greed inevitably overrode senses, proving the downfall when it all invariably untangled. And as if to underline the cynical beating heart at the centre of the film, the undoing was born from boyish, previously gleeful infatuation: unrequited love aggressively punished; the moment of realisation in the eyes of the character as pathetic as it was tragic. As the saying goes, no good deed goes unpunished and the back half of this film was a procession of almost nihilistic glee. Ultimately, we would watch as everything turned to ash, and all the professional craft of the crew would fall apart as the ugliness of reality caught up with each of them. The final scene was superficially "good" sure - a life saved and removed from the orbit of a criminal world - but the price paid left the victory truly pyrrhic

Pdoghue

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121307458#Comment_121307458

Agreed. Such a brilliant film. Can see why why it won the Palme D'or. And now available to rent on Google Movies.

buried

Carlitos Way (1993)

One of the greatest and one of the most underrated films of the 1990's. Brian de Palmas entertaining gangster movie concerning the Puerto Rican underworld of New York is one of the most entertaining films Al Pacino was ever involved in, but every single person involved in this thing just puts in a truly epic performance, from Sean Penn, Luiz Guzman all the way to Viggo Mortensen and John Leguizamo, the whole thing is just dripping with a fantastic flow concerning the criminal underworld that's highly intelligent and also highly, highly, laugh your arse off entertaining. I hadn't seen it in years and had totally forgotten about it, but its as better now as it was back then, 9/10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-043a58Mgo

pixelburp

Manhunter (1986)

With the Hopkins starring vehicles becoming the dominant emphasis in the "Hannibal Lecter Shared Universe" - which must be the oddest of all franchises - this early-doors Michael Mann feature has become a bit of a black sheep in some ways; while in other respects, its existence as a footnote was perhaps somewhat self-wrought? This wasn't a film without charms or nuance, and certainly the main components that lifted it all out of pure 1980s schlock were where Mann's predominant thematic obsessions and technical approaches shone through.

Mann's almost mythic use of protagonists with an obsessive, often self-destructive drive towards their chosen profession was in full show - and perhaps never more precarious, psychologically speaking - than with William Peterson's brooding Will Graham. Vincent Hanna might have been off his head on coke, but at least he wasn't identifying with the murderers he chased; I did think the concept of a profiler getting into the headspace of the killer, thus revealing insights and eureka moments otherwise missed, was and remains a bit of a daft concept but it was to the credit of Peterson and Mann that they executed with enough sobriety to make it work. It was all a bit surface level mind you, the corruptive effect not seemingly as pronounced as the script liked to declare it.

Perhaps then the most gripping part of the whole film was the direct, linear thrills of watching Graham and his colleagues workshopping the mystery of the Tooth Fairy from their (impossibly stylish) office. The best scene within all that a literal ticking clock as they tried to divine meaning in a found message they had to return to Lektor's cell before the prisoner realised it was discovered; that love of procedural legwork of Mann's fully on show as technicians and police poured over the evidence with diligent haste; and even though it was only Mann's second fully-functional film (I'm just gonna write-off The Keep as nothing you can truly assess - certainly Mann has!) you already saw the director's rigorous sense of kinship with & passion for showing the drive and unshakable professionalism of those with a singular, propulsive craft. Again, it could have been irreparably cheesy and instead was a fabulously tense sequence of conference calls.

Yet even with those arresting elements present, I'm not sure this somewhat aesthetics-dominant phase of Michal Mann's career was a natural fit for the material: all throughout this prototypical Serial Killer movie that arguably predated the genre by a few years in many respects, there was this constant pulse and energy of a stylish music video - a distraction not helped when moody 80s tracks played over certain scenes of quiet contemplation. Or indeed the fact this film ended on a freeze-frame; yeesh. Like many great directors Mann's aesthetics would grow and mature over the years, and you could certainly see those later elements in places with Mann's overall exacting clarity of image, and aforementioned moments of introspection - but other elements felt like he still had a foot in Miami Vice's wardrobe.

Tom Noonan was always the tonic here mind you: while he was surrounded by gaudy 80s excess, his performance of Dollarhyde was a quietly simmering presence of focused malevolence. Again a driven man, like all Mann's leads, however corrupted and villainous he might have been; Noonan's unconventional appearance did somewhat scream "hello I am a serial killer", but the overall package wasn't that overplayed either. This was an internalised performance of an obsessive briefly waylaid and conflicted by an unexpected emotional connection, and I think it worked better than Petersen's own performance.

Then there was the cannibalistic elephant in the room. In regarding Brian Cox's performance as "Lektor" (whose eating habits never came up, interestingly), I honestly don't think there was enough to form a comparison with Anthony Hopkins' own turn - or indeed Mads Mikkelsen's; here, 3 small scenes felt like thin gruel to formulate an opinion on a character only tangential to the overall story. What could be said is that by all accounts this was a less affected, theatrical performance (sticking to the two cinematic versions): Hopkins' hissing, bug-eyed monstrousness was not of this earth in Silence of the Lambs - and rightly praised mind you - but his subsequent two appearances swung the wrong side of hammy. It was always the kind of performance easily lampooned - all the easier for Hopkins to slip into self-parody.

With Cox, what we got here was him playing the infamous cannibal as more performative with his apparently relaxed manner, but the performance here was Lektor's, not the actor's; ostensibly affable but always tensed, like that of a predatory animal putting on a show of indifference. That's me spinning a lot from a few minutes of screen-time, but it was certainly the first impression left; that this Lecter was suppressing an urge for violence - but the raw primal kind, not a cannibalistic one.

nachouser

The Beekeeper (2024)

The latest Jason Statham vehicle wherein Jason Statham gets to do Jason Statham-y things. A lot of fun, if you like that sort of thing. They may as well have just named it The Beequalizer.

monkeyactive

Boy ,

A kiwi comedy Drama coming of age kind of thing.

Has a certain Wes Andersoness to it but isnt so overly Quirky and has more serious dramatic tones.

I enjoyed it and thought it was funny.

NIMAN

The Holdovers.

Excellent film, really enjoyed it. Was always a fan of Paul Giamatti.

For me, a more enjoyable film than Oppenheimer.

sterz

Ah yes, The Holdovers and Oppenheimer are totally comparable.

Albert Einstein: You just earned yourself a detention, sir, now, get back here!

J. Robert Oppenheimer: Being here with you is already one big fúcking detention!

Albert Einstein: Son of a bitch! That's another detention!

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121724420#Comment_121724420

I'd assume the comparison is down to them both being nominated in a lot of the same categories at the Oscars.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121724420#Comment_121724420

Well, in fairness, Robert Oppenheimer was detained in the lab and wasn't allowed to hear Niels Bohr give a lecture in the movie. So there's some overlap.

😄

pixelburp

Monsieur Hulot's Holiday (1953)

Broadly speaking, a "conventional" narrative shouldn't ever be a prerequisite to good or enticing cinema: a boilerplate A to B plot isn't some essential kernel for growing enjoyment or engagement in any given film. Case in point: My Neighbour Tortoro lives rent free in my brain and heart, despite having almost no ostensible plot structure beyond it exists as a heartwarming sequence of little vignettes in the Japanese countryside. Pacing, momentum - or even an arresting theme, subtextual or otherwise - can be essential in the absence of formal structure; there needs to be some kind of gravity well at the centre of a film to pull the viewer along. Aimlessly doodling away, presuming that amiable charm will see you through, will only go so far before boredom rears its head.

Now, by all accounts the gentle whimsy and occasional Chaplin adjacent comedy was intermittently enjoyable, but they were slim moments often suffocated by pacing that was lethargic to the extent the film became functionally dead in places. Oh sure, it captured the atmosphere of pleasantly lazy ennui of a seaside holiday, and the somewhat daft ways people contrive their relaxation - but that never made for an engaging movie experience. It certainly looked well enough: there were some nice compositions here and there, and the more visual gags were often well staged with a craft you'd see accentuated across Tati's career (though that shark gag sat the wrong kind of stupid for me) but ye GODS: my patience was routinely tested. A restless irritation only continuously stirred by Tati's constant use of the same musical loop; that chintzy little sting that became a Sisyphean curse as oh no, there it goes again. Maybe this time there'll be a joke?

Even Mr. Hulot himself was a bit of a dud: a half-sketched lead who lacked any kind of defining traits or personality you'd later see in the descendants of this kind of comedy (see the likes of Rowan Atkinson's Mr Bean). Yeah, the physical comedy shared its own lineage with Chaplin, but Tati forgot to imbue his creation with the kind of distinct voice or persona you saw with the Silent Era icons.

Having only recently watched Tati's masterpiece Playtime, it must be clarified that even though it wasn't exactly a procession of thigh slapping gags either, there was still a degree of momentum and intent - however meandering. Equally, the film had a much stronger sense of thematic messaging threaded into all its gags or the mesmerising (and colossal) set design. You could tell it was "about" something the director wanted to share - even if there wasn't really any plot as such. I'm not sure ultimately either film would necessarily keep a mainstream audience engaged, but Playtime had an overwhelming sense of itself this earlier film completely lacked.

I look forward to the Netflix remake starring Kevin Hart.

johnny_ultimate

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121728802#Comment_121728802

Mon Oncle is much more akin to Playtime than the films that preceded it - in some ways, it’s the dry run for the bigger project that followed - so would definitely recommend that if you want more of the Tati goodness. Traffic too is worth a look, but it’s a much more constrained, smaller film than Playtime. It’s not as much of a home run as Mon Oncle or Playtime, though for me still had plenty of that Tati magic.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121729052#Comment_121729052

I'll keep Mon Oncle in mind, though after Hulot I might take a break from Tati; as I said Playtime wasn't exactly a cavalcade of gags either and its beautiful aesthetics often did a lot of the heavy lifting through the slightly duller quieter moments. I have seen it read all right that Mon Oncle was a bit of a precursor. Still think of Playtime a lot, still taken aback by the scale of that film's production.

Think I'll give Ferrari a whirl after taking on Manhunter; seems like a neat little way to bookend Mann, going from the ... uh, third film to his last(?)

HalloweenJack

Suburbicon

This caught my eye as it was written by the Coen brothers and directed by George Clooney. Some big names here: Matt Damon, Julianne Moore x2, Oscar Isaacs but the most impressive was the boy playing the lead role.

The story was fairly standard and predictable (for the Coen brothers, something of a mix between Raising Arizona and Fargo). The big reveal wasn't surprising whatsoever and a lot of the story seemed to fall too nicely into place, though there was one continuity error I spotted.

It did have the feel of a Coen brothers film, between the script and the look of it, but I feel that they would have gone further in terms of detail. It felt like an homage to a Coen brothers film but didn't quite succeed at it.

Its worth a watch but wouldn't be the best thing out there.

Society of the Snow

I've actually seen this twice. The story of the Andes plane crash in the 70s where the survivors resorted to cannibalism.

It's not an easy watch, though the cannibalism is mostly off-camera. There is a good explanation of the why while addressing the characters' shame. It is beautifully shot and the score hits at the right time. The acting is good and it does a good job at dealing with a troubling topic. Its definitely worth a watch.

Homelander

The Wicker Man (2006)

Had heard of how infamously bad this is, but never got around to watching it and I was in the Cage mood after watching Dream Scenario.

Firstly, imagine my surprise to learn the infamous and completely impossible to take seriously "Noooo, not the bees!" scene isn't even - and never was - in the theatrical version/streaming version. I waited the whole movie for a meme that never came. Anyway, for the best as the movie is better without it.

Overall, unlike the original, this isn't a good movie, and the vibe isn't creepy or compelling, it's just plain absurd and played in such a way you have to question if they made a terrible movie inadvertently, or if they were deliberately trying to lean into the borderline comic territory.

Cage's performance is completely over the top ham for the most part, but its complemented by virtually every other actor behaving in similar fashion, I really can't understand what the director was going for with this movie. Every now and again there'll be a brief flash that shows how much better the movie could've been, but those moments are rare.

I will say Cage just being classic Cage is also the one thing that made me stick with the movie at the same time so it's a double edged sword, it's really a sort of "guilty pleasure" type of viewing experience.

The climax is actually decent enough, the reveal of The Wicker Man is creepy and effective in a similar way to the 1973 version. It's the only thing I felt worked in the entire movie, Cage sells it well with easily his most convincing and dialed back acting in the entire film when he first lays eyes on it.

Overall I don't think it's quite as bad as is made out, but I suppose it does demand a tolerance for camp and cheesy - which is pretty much the last thing anyone should be expecting from a remake of something as iconic as The Wicker Man.

Anyone who holds the original in high regard and expects something faithful in tone and intent will probably find extremely little to be positive about. For what it is - a wierd sort of unhinged, incoherent fever-dream that's more often funny than creepy - I'd give it 5/10.

That might seem like a high score for a bad movie and a dreadful remake - and it is both those things - but it's got a certain charm to it I just can't deny, objectively it's more like a 3/10 but I enjoyed it despite its faults.

Original movie (directors cut) is still a terrific movie that has aged well considering it's now over 50 years old, and it's far more effective than the remake too. But I would imagine a huge amount of people who watch the 2006 version are never going to - and never were going to - watch the original.

Decuc500

Dunkirk

Looks as amazing as expected in 4K. I think I even enjoyed it more this time than on its cinema release.

Yes it's a bit cold and clinical in that Kubrickian way but it's a fantastically entertaining film. The tempo of the soundtrack and the cutting between timelines (that so confused me first time around) gives it a relentless forward momentum. It's a war movie made in the style of a thriller.

El Gato De Negocios

Frontier(s)

Second Sight in the UK recently began releasing a number of the new wave of French extreme horror movies from the 00s in rather lovely collectors editions and I watched this tonight.

It starts with the backdrop of civil riots due to far right politics in Paris and a group of friends going on the run, having arranged a rendezvous in an isolated motel.

Things go sideways fast and the group end up fighting for their lives against a family of nazi cannibals.

Stealing beats from the likes of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Descent this is a claustrophobic, nightmarish piece of cinema. While not as bloody as the likes of Switchblade Romance or as downright cruel as Martyrs, this is still a pretty brutal movie, even by modern standards.

Well worth a watch for horror fans that are looking for something nasty or that doesn't rely on jump scares or sound effects to get a reaction.

I also picked up Inside and Switchblade Romance from the same label so looking forward to rewatching them.

Fysh

I caught streaming rentals of a couple of recent-ish releases over the weekend.

Femme stars Nathan Stewart-Jarrett (aka Curtis the time-traveller from Misfits) and George Mackay in a queer revenge thriller that is much stronger than its trailer suggests, by being much more interested in getting under the skin of both Jules, a gay man and drag queen who is brutally assaulted at the start of the film, and Preston, Jules' attacker. Both characters are given more than enough depth to avoid simplistic "victim/attacker" designations, and I found it interesting that in both cases we see how their immediate social group imposes constraints on aspects of their identities that they want to explore.

Vesper sounds like it's going to be some derivative YA/SF affair in the Divergent or Mortal Engines mould - heaps of plot guff, little to no character to speak of, money spent on Big Effects Shots, and so on. Happily it turns out not to be that - it is more in the vein of Tales From The Loop or Rover, than the kinds of YA film I mentioned above. The plot is not particularly complex, but the charm of the film is its depiction of a dystopian neo-feudalist near future, and how the titular Vesper struggles to survive without compromising either her principles or those she cares for. Special note goes to Eddie Marsan who puts in a great, creepy turn as an antagonistic force, and Richard Brake who, even when playing someone completely paralysed, still manages to project a strong sense of character and presence.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121783815#Comment_121783815

Re. Vesper, I loved its environmental storytelling, and that sense of a creeping alien world that was pushing local fauna and flora out - including people. No info dumps or expository dialogue either, just lots of inference and dots left for the viewer to join up. Really great slimy, evocative FX work too on what must have been a non existent budget (which you could sorta tell cos there were basically 2 locations and almost zero plot)

If you're looking for more stories set around worlds of "weird nature", seek out Scavenger's Reign; which took that idea of a totally alien ecosystem and ran with it - using an animation style lifted from Moebius comics

pixelburp

The Exorcist (1973)

Hot Take incoming: this was a great movie 'til the Exorcism started & then it kinda went a bit ... well. Downhill? Now, that got your attention eh? Hear me out though.

Firstly, my immediate wondering in the aftermath of this long belated rewatch was if modern audiences would have patience enough for the 2/3s of this that operated more like a slow Domestic Crisis drama than some iconic supernatural tale of terror; but the emotional and personal drama that unfolded was where the Exorcist's gravity had the strongest pull on my attention. Sure, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't rattled by the constant vibe of dread saddling the narrative, or arresting moments like the "spider-walking", but the more Regan became a snarling movie monster, the more my brain and heart decoupled itself from the existential anguish of the still-human leads. For me the lodestone here wasn't as much Regan's possession, but a mother's despairing impotence in the face of her child withering in front of her, or the crisis of career & faith that left Father Karras wondering about his choices and sense of Imposter Syndrome; his own impotence born as his ageing mother lessened and died in front of him, incapable of providing the succour expected of him. We're powerless to watch our loved ones grow ill and suffer, the real horror not one created by the devil but our own vulnerability and impermanence; grief is the monster, always coming and never far from our shoulders.

Ellen Burstyn's Chris felt like the fundamental heart of the story here alongside the manifestation of the sub-text I picked up about the lies we tell ourselves as parents; that no matter how robust our determination to love, protect and nurture our children can be we are ultimately powerless creatures if and when sickness takes hold. I dunno, maybe this is yet another meandering gearshift born from fatherhood; the new chemicals sloshing around in my brain triggering different reactions to on-screen emotional torment - where before I'd have thought nothing of it? I do think our age and experiences change how we perceive films content - so maybe this is just another case of that.

So for me the first couple of acts weren't about the horror of the devil but a sort of horror of paralysis: sitting in sterile waiting rooms or behind glass screens and wondering if the cure was as bad as the disease while doctors debated giving Regan yet another spinal tap. Throughout all this, there were few musical stings or cinematographic artifice but a fairly rudimentary, procedural approach that kept it all grounded in a primal reality; sure there was the odd subliminal flash of Captain Howdy, or the occasional creak from an otherwise empty attic, all reminding there was a dark malevolence behind it all but Friedkin played his hand with a restraint almost non-existent in a genre now overtaken by superficiality & bombast. The widely slammed Exorcist: Believer testament to that. Indeed it was funny how little Tubular Bells actually figured in that spartan score; and iconic track but not deployed ad nauseam either.

And I was moved so much by the intimacy of the crisis in the first half, I'd be inclined to agree with suggestions by some that the film became lesser the more Regan's possession manifested through spinning heads and projectile pea soup; in fact I'd go so far as to suggest the spinning head itself came off goofy not terrifying, a party trick really, while the psychological manipulation Regan conducted on the emotionally brittle Father Karras a more effective scalpel of unease, this child deftly fragmenting Karras' resolve.

That's not to dump on the entirety of when the horror took centre-stage 'cos by all accounts the production on the last acts was absolutely fabulous; the choice to shoot the bedroom scenes in an ice locker a choice of malevolent genius. Sure, the modern day approach to use CGI to insert some puffs of fogged breath are the safer, less cruel option but damn: the obvious physical debilitation and utterly frozen faces of the actors did sell the sheer intensity and misery of the entire scenario; Friedkin was clearly a maniac and borderline monster - but you'd struggle to argue with the end results.

buried

Only God Forgives (2013)

Thought this was very good, almost like a chapter of 'Pusher' set in the seedy neon night-time world of modern day Bangkok. Ryan Gosling plays Julian, one half of a drug smuggling operation ran out of his and his pervert brother Billy's Thai-boxing club. Long story short, the pervert brother catches the ire of a almost supernatural like, local detective, brilliantly played by Vithaya Pansringarm, who has Billy clipped by a vengeful victim. Gosling is then sent by his demented mother to enact revenge upon this local detective and all Hell literally breaks loose. Brilliantly shot and highly violent, it's been widely panned but I thought it a far better effort than the director's (Nicolas Winding Refn) previous work, which was 'Drive', also starring Gosling. 8/10

Barbie (2023)

Fell about the place laughing at Gosling in this, his comedic timing is absolutely brilliant. Almost executed like a Terry Gilliam/Monty Python work. Was thoroughly entertained and surprised as it wasn't what I was expecting at all. 7/10

Anatomy of a Fall (2023)

Went into this thing blind not knowing anything about it, but I should have checked it out. Courtroom drama shtick ain't my thing. Relationship breakdown drama shtick even less. Didn't enjoy it. Everybody is portrayed like a total pain in the ar$e. 3/10

Massacre Time (1966)

Fine Spaghetti western directed by Lucio Fulci, hot off the success of 'Django', Franco Nero plays 'Tom Corbett', a prospector who is begged by a local in his home town to come back and help rid the place of the violent corporate banking glamgang that have the place taken over. Starts off well, lags a bit in the middle and then kicks back the final third. Typical Spaghetti western but some very entertaining pieces in this. Well worth a watch if you like westerns. 6/10

Oppenheimer (2023)

Thought it was alright, seemed very rushed in parts but I suppose it has to be, being a mainstream effort pushed out for numbers and awards. The rushed parts were very rushed though, and constantly dragged me out the fourth wall. Despite what a lot of people say, I found the sound to be fine, but I blast mine out of two hi-spec Marshall speakers, a few people I have talked to just watched it through their TVsb and they had a awful time of it. Cillian Murphy probably deserves the oscar, he carries so much of this, obviously, but he puts a lot of soul into his performance. Soundtrack is very good, production design also very good. Just that some of the writing really let it down a good bit. 7/10

Tony EH

A lot of people seem to hate 'Only God Forgives'.

Thought it was pretty good myself.

buried

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798852#Comment_121798852

Have you seen any of the 'Pusher' trilogy, Tony?

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798881#Comment_121798881

Not a single second. 😁

buried

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798945#Comment_121798945

I'm envious, you should rent them immediately. Think you would really like them. The first one from 1996, the second one 2004 and the third 2005. Refn's best work IMO, definitely Mads Mikklesen's best performances.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798986#Comment_121798986

Heard they're a bit gritty. Mikkelsen's has done some quiet dark comedic stuff in the past.

Did anyone see Riders of Justice?

buried

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121799068#Comment_121799068

Have you not seen them either sil? Yeah, they are gritty as Hell, gritty probably being kind ,especially the last one, the whole thing is ramped up over the course of the three chapters. The last one ramps it up bigtime. If you haven't seen them I'd also highly recommend.

Never seen Riders of Justice myself

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121798986#Comment_121798986

I'll put them on the list.

The ever growing list...

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121799085#Comment_121799085

After seeing Mikkelsen in Hannibal I wanted to check out some of his Danish roles but could never get them on streaming, I saw them a while back but to be honest in recent years some darker stuff doesn't seem as appealing to me (same as another of his, The Hunt).

Riders of Justice is an odd one, definitely an odd sense of humour going on and it touches on some heavy topics with some dark humour.

El Gato De Negocios

The Pusher Trilogy are absolutely outstanding and Umbrella in Australia recently released them in a lovely blu ray boxset.

Fysh

@buried if you haven't already seen it, Lars and the Real Girl is a surprisingly sweet comedy-drama featuring an excellent early performance from Gosling. It works primarily because despite the core premise sounding like a goofy sex comedy, it's handled very gently with Gosling's character being treated with sympathy and compassion.

Edit: He also delivers a great turn in a buddy-comedy setup alongside Russel Crowe in The Nice Guys.

pixelburp

The Mist (2007)

Rewatched mostly off the back of @Fysh 's mention of the B&W version, even if it was a búgger to track down.

There's a niche but noticeable trend of late where a film gets a "black and white" release, born perhaps from a reductive logic that washing out the colour imbues a film with a headier sense of prestige or the classically cinematic - sometimes with mixed results. There's more to black & white photography as an effective art-form than turning down the saturation after all, with Godzilla Minus One's limited greyscale run the most recent example of this affectation.

So here was an intriguing situation where the reverse scenario played out: a film intentionally shot for black and white from the outset, yet a studio's aggressive lack of caution insisted either Frank Darabont cut the theatrical release in colour - or it would never darken a cinema's projection room. The B&W version only existing as an extra on the Blu-Ray here was a chance to put the two versions side by side ... and watching the "proper" cut it suddenly answered the question about why the original's look was so ... off. There was an odd & muddy texture to the colour version, plus a lack of craft or clarity in the image and it all became clear watching this director's cut: because Darabont's lens and lighting had always been thinking in shades of grey and how those might accentuate any given scene - so without that creative choice the predominantly single-location of this supermarket became neutered and achingly televisual in full colour.

Truly the studio revealed Hollwood's reseting creative myopia in that decision - not that the true version would have guaranteed better box office - because in undercutting its own product, the enforced colour version had the effect of robbing the film of much of its tone, while also throwing more attention on the frankly subpar FX. It took the removal of colour to give this film a greater pulse of life, becoming a much grislier and more visceral and primal beast when the compositions became starker and more attuned to the use of light & shadow; scenes with previously odd camera choices suddenly became positively noir'ish when the colour was removed, the depth of the blacks broadening that sense of both the dramatic and horrifically uncanny. It also helped soften the blow of those inescapably shoddy FX (the budget was < $20 million, in 2007), even if it couldn't outright "fix" some moments that reminded you the actors were swatting away at tennis balls on sticks. While even some of the creature designs themselves felt a bit "stock".

Even so: any arresting premise and execution can do much of the heavy lifting bad FX can't, and what was already a good film about the descent into communal madness during crisis became leagues better presented in all those inky shades. External scenes within the titular mist became haunted abyssal grey limbos, while set-pieces like the pharmacy run became creepier by dint of the extra atmosphere added by the new aesthetic. Presentation aside, this film was always an atmospheric and gleefully bleak supernatural horror, one with a grim misanthropy within its genetics until that last act that deserved both an open jaw and slow golf-clap; a stone-faced swing of brutal fatalism that elevated the whole thing into a twisted, steroid-infused Twilight Zone episode. Final moments that asked that audience that hey: just before you commit to a decision, just wait 5 minutes and think about it, eh?

Now. All that put aside: what the hell happened to Frank Darabont? a mere 5 films, with 4 that ranged from stone-cold to cult classics; followed by the best [first] season of the Walking Dead then ... nothing. Perhaps it's as simple as the fact the combination of the studio's clumsy hand here, plus AMC's unceremonious sacking of Darabont 'cos he dared to make an ambitious zombie show, created a Road to Damascus Moment where like John Carpenter before him Darabont realised he was spending much of his time fighting an industry that was causing more trouble than it was worth. But even so, you'd think with streamers now clamouring for material and pop-cultural hand-holds, Netflix with its bottomless slushfund of cash would throw a few shekels Darabont's way, had the man an idea or two.

Fysh

Re: whatever happened to Frank Darabont? It seems plausible that he's been doing script & screenwriting work for a while, although he may also have tired of that, based on this quote from his IMDB page about his rejected script for Indiana Jones 4 (apparently Spielberg loved it but Lucas didn't):

 You can only waste so much time and so many years of your life on experiences like that, you can only get so emotionally invested and have the rug pulled out from under you before you say, "Enough of that".

Sad Professor

Darabont got a massive 200m payout for The Walking Dead and doesn't need to work anymore. I think the success of Shawshank probably went to his head and he developed the mindset that he's made his masterpiece and can die now. He was also apparently difficult to work with and threw massive tantrums.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121807082#Comment_121807082

Oh wow that's a nice number and clearly AMC effed up, though I'm reading it also went to the agency so wonder how much of the payout actually went to Darabont's bank account? Certainly the bits I've read about his time in The Waking Dead made it sound like some of the acrimony was due to Darabont's own intransigence so there's definitely blame to go around.

TWD was a show that never ever recovered from the loss of Darabont, not that the viewing figures spoke of that mind you. But that first season had such potential, with the quality drop something of a cliff face.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121806779#Comment_121806779

Ah yeah forgot he has a go at Indiana Jones 4 - wasn't that the "saucerman" draft that kind found its way into the final thing?

I suppose what I'm lamenting enough are the Darabonts, Donners, McTiernans of this world being an extinct species: absolutely top of the line pros who stop short at being auteurs or geniuses but consummate craftsmen who could helm mid-budget mainstream (sometimes blockbuster) entertainment that got bums on seats. They simply don't exist anymore, though the likes of Mangold or Stahelski are kinda keeping the flame lit.

silliussoddius

I find it funny that Darabont adapted two King stories with open endings, took them in completely different emotional directions and they both worked.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121808907#Comment_121808907

IIRC King even said Darabont's choice for The Mist was the better ending; the author of course famous for his often less than satisfying endings.

buried

Rolling Thunder (1977)

Never heard of this at all save for the fact the screenplay was written by Paul Schrader, who wrote or helped co-write some of Martin Scorsese's finest stuff. Absolutely fantastic 70's revenge thriller. Basic plot is two former POW Vietnam veterans, played by William Devane and Tommy Lee Jones, who come back home to Texas, totally traumatized from the event, one of them is brutally attacked by a gang of thugs and then the two veterans go out on the hunt for ultimate frontier revenge.

There are serious and blatant nods from this film that were shown in 'No Country For Old Men', which as everyone knows, also starred Lee Jones. I wouldn't be surprised if the Coen brothers seriously studied this thing because some of the shots set along the same Texas/Mexico border in this thing are visually carbon copies of the fantastic work they made for 'No Country...'

It's just great craic, violent as hell, shoddy pulpy sequential editing but intertwined with some fantastic writing especially some of the dialogue. Great way to spend a hour and a half, its free up on youtube too. 8/10

pixelburp

Reservoir Dogs (1992)

This felt like watching a slightly sketched out stage play, albeit one that crackled with naked provocation to the extent I could still absorb how and why it caused such a cultural splash when it first landed; but also a film whose production limitations could be quite obvious, no matter how much Tarantino's script, editing structure or notably cinematic direction tried to work around the constraints. Or indeed just leaned into the lack of shekels through the form of an in media res bank heist, the disparate criminals arguing over the particulars of events we never got to see; the character drama fuelled by a predominance of addled paranoia. I had forgotten just how little of the job itself was shown across the story, at most only ever seeing a few scenes in the aftermath but nothing at the jewellery store itself.

And because it was a first film, the various ingredients that would come to inform Tarantino's more visceral films often felt a little embryonic in places; tropes and tics that would become iterated over across the director's subsequent features felt a little half baked in places - or in the case of the intentionally vulgar, epithet riddled dialogue, perhaps a tad too Try Hard. Mind you, I was never much of a fan of that particular bullet in Tarantino's gun in the first place, so that element was always gonna chafe. But like I said, I could still perceive that sense of something that was a grenade in the room when it first came out.

Tony EH

^

I think it's still Tarantino's best film. 'Jackie Brown' being a close second.

Decuc500

Seen at the Dublin Film Festival:

Monster

The new film from Hirokazu Kore-eda. This starts off as a story about a boy who is being bullied by his teacher but as the film progresses we see the same scenes being played out from different characters viewpoints to gradually reveal what is really happening. That old narrative device but it’s done so brilliantly here. There’s a level of humanity in Kore-eda’s films that feels so natural and real. Monster is one of his best (which is really saying something). The emotional payoff is so powerful and well earned. Just a beautiful film.

Stolen

An Indian film that proves there’s more to Indian cinema than Bollywood. A man witnesses a baby being stolen from her sleeping mother at a train station and he and his brother get involved in the police investigation. Through a combination of social media, misunderstanding and the power of mob mentality, local people in this rural area come to believe that the brothers and mother of the baby are the actual child kidnappers. What follows is basically one long chase movie as the trio try to escape from the angry mob and get the baby back.

It’s got the immediacy of an Alfonso Cuaran film, the camera right in the middle of the action, long takes and great sound design, building to an anxiety inducing ending.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121822938#Comment_121822938

It definitely doesn't suffer the kind of bloat that would plague his later work; that lack of time, money or clout probably stopping impulses he'd later indulge. Agree about Jackie Brown being his best work, it's a shame he drifted so far from that as he went on, though Once Upon a Time... definitely seemed to claw back that more mature, reflective tone.

Fysh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121823008#Comment_121823008

Some of the drift is down to the death of Sally Menke, his editor through to Inglorious Basterds - although tbh as early as Kill Bill Part 2 you could already see the excessive preciousness and baggy writing creeping in, but it's impossible IMO to look at the jump from Inglorious Basterds to Django Unchained and not attribute it to a change of editor.

silverharp

1st episode of a Danish show Prisoner, Prison show from the guards perspective. Its good so far, I dont know if its one series and done?

edit I see not the TV thread, still worth a look though

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121823008#Comment_121823008

'Once Upon a Time in Hollywood' is fine up until the ending where it takes a turn into stupid land. And this has been a problem for me with Tarantino's films for a long time. There is always a point where he loses me because he cannot restrain himself and he puts in a dumb scene or two that effectively ruins the movie to a certain degree. His best efforts, by a country mile, have been his first three films. But by the time we get to 'Kill Bill' you can see he's losing the run of himself. Although the nadir of his output will probably always be 'Inglorious Basterds'. That movie is out and out dreck. There's just too much dumb going on in that film.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121823150#Comment_121823150

'Once Upon a Time in Hollywood' is fine up until the ending where it takes a turn into stupid land

What's more, the ending only even makes any kinda of "sense" if one's aware of the life of Sharon Tate, and what the ending uppends; like Tarantino thought he could do the Inglorious Basterds ending again and it'd be as effective. So it was just a completely out-of-nowhere about turn into Grindhouse madness when up 'til that moment was a mature reflection on creeping obsolescence - and felt a bit introspective on Tarantino's part.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121823054#Comment_121823054

Funny how often some of our biggest creative minds have these unsung people who were so quintessential to their success. Though like I said it'd probably be near impossible now for Tarantino to make a film as low-budget as Reservoir Dogs, which itself forced him to focus.

Jump_In_Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121822938#Comment_121822938

I respect all well made views so far, but Pulp Fiction is a masterpiece for me. Best Tarantino film IMO. Also appreciated The Hateful Eight.

Inglourious Basterds had one great scene about asking for 3 drinks in German. The whole build up was so tense. Also the opening scene was great, meeting Christoph Waltz for the first time, mesmerising performance.

pixelburp

I can't deny I'm dead curious to know what his Star Trek 4 treatment / script looked like, apparently centring around that famous "Gangster Planet" episode from the original 1960s series. It sounds so stupid, and there's not a hope in héll it'll get made (thankfully), but I'd love to know more, even if it was probably written as a joke.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121825755#Comment_121825755

'Pulp Fiction' is an excellent movie, no doubt. But 'Reservoir Dogs' pips it at the post. But I really like his three first films and would highly recommend each to someone who's never sat down to them.

As to 'The Hateful Eight' and 'Inglorious Basterds'...the former film is brilliant, until everyone starts spewing geysers of blood and we turn from a well made series of events into stupid land. In other words we reach the point where Tarantino loses me. The latter film contains, for sure, some tense scenes. Namely the two scenes you mention. But the rest is terrible.

pixelburp

The Animal Kingdom (2023)

Suffered a touch from being underwritten within its two main narrative pillars: the family drama angle didn't really have much sustenance in its plotting, but the broader & more arresting concept itself went a shade under-explored too. The idea of humans suddenly mutating into animals - in a manner that was brutal, painful and distressing as one's sapience evaporated - invited a spectrum of avenues to explore; not least how society and authorities would react to these sudden & random changes. There's something uniquely intriguing to me about these kind of stories of bodily change, whether they're played as metaphor, horror, aspiration or what have you - and this felt like a fresh idea, played straight.

Frustratingly little of those storytelling possibilities appeared though, outside of a few stock prejudicial comments from side characters & ones that hit all the tropes we've seen since the days of X-Men; the text of film content to render the public's perception as automatically hostile or fearful, even if more diverse opinions might have added layers of interest. While equally, the main "creep" (as the mutating people were called) we met was a violent and hostile bird man, leaving any potential thematic nuance a bit intangible, not even achieving something as hackneyed as "hey, maybe we're the animals here". It was like the writers came up with this singularly arresting concept then failed to think up anything interesting to do with it - bar one fun, macabre sequence at the fish counter in a supermarket.

Still, to the positives, starting with the absolutely fabulous creature effects that were deft combinations of practical FX and CGI augmentation, with results that straddled the line between something evocative - almost alluring after a fashion - and outright body horror; as said the transformations weren't cute or playful (take a look at Netflix's Sweet Tooth as a contrast, where its animal-children often sport different ears or fluffy tails - but rarely anything repulsive or distinctly "other"), but looked painful and disorienting as people's bodies slowly contorted and changed, their sense of self slowly ebbing away in tow. And while sure it was thinly sketched the family drama of the son's own change worked well enough: it sidestepped many lazy clichés of teenage angst that might have otherwise added a yawn inducing source of conflict; the son and dad's struggles founded on love and support, even as it became clear the father was about to lose a son, his wife already mutated. Both actors did the heavy lifting here and a bittersweet ending felt earned because little before it felt overcooked. Praise for Paul Kircher's physical performance in particular with the little ways he changed his stance and movement as he slowly changed, coupled with the practical FX.

Perhaps the most egregiously underwritten aspect of the movie though was the policewoman played by Adèle Exarchopoulos: taking the gong for the most superfluous character I've seen in a film in a long while. Removed from the plot her absence would have left no imprint and it left me wonder why she was a main character at all. I wondered if she was the victim of rewrites here: that maybe the initial point of her was to be a potential future path for the dad; where he'd have to weigh continuing the quixotic emotional tether of his wife, now a wild animal and beyond him, against the potential of a new partner and more human connection. Heck, there was even a specific moment when I thought OK, here we go; the classic accidental moment where two characters accidentally fell on each other, they stared into each other's eyes for a minute then ... oh wait; he just stood up. Never mind. Granted, the age difference felt a little much - but that never stopped films before when the writer/director externalised their midlife crisis.