What you seen Good or Bad recently?

[small_world]

Yes. I'm really doing this.

You see, I was a great fan of the "Movies Worth/Not Worth Watching" threads and I think the ban on such threads has failed.
It used to be the case that I'd hear of a few decent movies a month on here through those threads.
While I can understand the concern that discussions may get lost, I'd far rather have that then not have the discussion at all.

Posters are obviously put off starting a new thread to discuss a movie if they think it'll get just a few views and no replies.
Whereas in the past, I've seen lurkers post in the bulk threads.


What I'd far prefer is for Neil or an Admin to appoint a Deeper in to Movies Sub-Forum admin.
Someone reliable who posts on here regularly.
This person could then pull out posts if a discussion takes off.
I'd offer myself up, but I'm not on here all that much at the minute. (I'd still do it though, if no one else fancies it)

So, yeah.
Don't just auto-ban this thread. See how it goes.

[Van Dammage]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1196948/
The Necessary Death Of Charlie Countryman...With Shia LaBeouf. No wait! Come back! It's actually good!
This is a strange movie about Shia who at the very start of the movie sees his mother dying in hospital but then she comes back to him as a ghost, they start talking and for some reason she tells him to go to Bucharest, and he does...It's not "quirky" but its one of those odd alternative sort of movies. Anyway, He gets to Bucharest and falls in love with Evan Rachel Wood but her ex boyfriend is a massive gangster (Mads Mikkelson) and of course this can't end well. He also meets James Buckely and Rupert Grint along the way. 
The cast is amazing, Even Shia was pretty good. Overall it's an odd romance drama crime movie, with some fairly funny moments courtesy of Buckely and Grint.

[Sal Vicuso]

Il Divo - incredible, spent hours on Wikipedia after this researching Andreotti. I also highly recommend the COnsequences of Love, same director and actor

Parts of Ratatouille while my kid was watching it - good but seemed to be a bit amiss structurally towards the end

The Friends of Eddie Coyle - love this film, must have seen it 5 times over the last few years and never get tired of it

The Package - entertaining, nothing special, a generic action thriller lifted by Hackman and Jones

The Spanish Prisoner - was intrigued until I absent-mindedly googled the term Spanish Prisoner halfway through and quickly found it all too predictable and stagey. Steve Martin was good though

Winter Kills - always like Jeff Bridges but found this a bit confusing. Would rewatch

Wolf of Wall Street - second watch, decided I don't like it at all, it glamourises Belfort's cunty behaviour all too much. Thought Jonah Hill the standout

[chand]

I watched Red Lights on TV the other night, a film about a pair of skeptics (Sigourney Weaver as Scully, Cillian Cheekbones as a man who is also somehow Scully instead of Mulder) investigating fraudulent psychics and mediums, except suddenly one of them, the one that's Robert De Niro, is actually maybe a REAL psychic? The film kind of plods along for a bit, the stakes get raised until This Time It's Personal, and it all heads inexorably towards a boring paranormal showdown of some nature. Then in the last five minutes it takes a crap in its own pants with one of the stupidest and most unearned twists I've ever seen in a goddamn film.

The worst part is that having done the twist it then flashes back to a couple of statements earlier in the film that hint at the twist, as if to say "There, look, we totally seeded it! Now you don't need to rewatch the film to see if you could've figured it out!", which is probably just as well because I'm certain that the first 105 minutes of the movie make no fucking sense once you know the end.

[zomgmouse]

Some highlights from recent viewing:

The Cook the Thief His Wife & Her Lover. Got to see this in the cinema on 35mm. Absolutely blown away. The meticulous artistry and design of it coupled with the scatalogical elements and dark humour really sold it to me. Great visual work and I loved the theatricality.

Loves of a Blonde. Managed to disguise bleak social commentary as a light and touching love story.

Nights of Cabiria. Beautiful and effective, simple and deep. The character of Cabiria quite resonated with me.

Kiss Me Deadly. Quick, explosive noir. Very very good.

Sweet Smell of Success. Acidic, slimy and unpleasant in the best of ways. Also beautifully shot.

There's heaps more but that's enough for now.

I might add in the "bad" section that I watched a few of the Bob Hope/Bing Crosby Road films (Singapore, Zanzibar, Utopia) and was quite disappointed. Utopia was probably the most enjoyable of the three.

[Pepotamo1985]

The Wave

2008 German film loosely based on a 1967 social experiment which attempted to explain how Nazism could have gained such popularity and prominence to a bunch of Californian students (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave).

Firstly, there's a lot to like about The Wave - very strong performances from all involved (shockingly, the teen actors who make up the bulk of the cast are generally fantastic - and all fairly uniquely realised), stunningly shot (aesthetics in general are fantastic; very rich colours and strong angles), a dialogue orientated script, and a fascinating central concept (made all the more fascinating because, as noted, a lot of the material in the film has some basis in reality).

However, the finished product ends up feeling a little hurried and insubstantial. Part of this is a problem of length - clocking in at just over an hour and a half, there isn't enough screentime to properly explore the concept to a satisfactory degree, leaving lots of psychological questions unanswered and unevaluated. This is in turn makes the film's plot a little difficult to swallow; the transformation of the characters in the space of a week from a disparate bunch of egotistical, obnoxious teens to a

Spoiler alert

deeply committed and unified neo-fascist collective

[close]

never really rings true, which means the film's core big idea falls flat. I reckon an additional 20-30 minutes would've made for a much better film - although, even the 100 minutes the film has to play with seems criminally ill-employed. For instance, only one character's motivations and psychology are explored in any depth (or at all), and even then it's done by implication and fragments; it would've been nice to spend more time meditating on the appeal of the movement, or investigating the insecurities and failings at the core of the characters that made the movement so alluring to them. Considering how quickly and deeply the movement progresses, we need a better explanation than the one we're provided.

Ultimately, it strikes me as the kind of film that would've seemed incredibly mindblowing back when I was 16 and thought Fight Club was a bit deep and alternative. There are elements of greatness aplenty, but this underscores the films failings all the more severely. Don't get me wrong, as far as frat movies go, it's undoubtedly up there with the most intelligent and challenging, but in real terms The Wave is a perfectly enjoyable way to spend an approximate hour and a half and no more than that.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Everything else I've seen at the pictures lately has had its own thread, but I don't think there was one for...

The Guest

Directed by Adam Wingard (who made last years well received horror flick You're Next) The Guest stars Dan Stevens as David, a demobbed soldier who turns up out of the blue at the home of a fallen comrade and is welcomed with open arms by the grieving family. It's difficult to say much about the plot without spoiling things, but suffice to say this seemingly perfect southern gentleman isn't all he appears and his attempts to help his hosts lead to chaos.

Reviews have made comparisons to Drive: Both are about mysterious strangers who involve themselves in troubled families, with violent consequences, both hark back to the '80s (complete with cracking synthpop soundtracks) but where Drive was all arty Michael Mann minimalism, The Guest is lurid John Carpenter-esque entertainment.

There's fine supporting work from the rest of the cast, but the film really belongs to Stevens. I don't know if it can be called a star-making performance, the film is possibly too niche for that, but it certainly makes for one hell of a Hollywood calling card. Stevens was formerly resident  at Downton Abbey and this couldn't be much further removed from that[nb]I'm guessing. I've only seen one episode of it.[/nb]. If he isn't snapped up for bigger things then casting folk are missing a trick.

[Thomas]

I watched Amélie (2001) today, after a few years of putting it off because I thought it might be too saccharine and twee, and I loved it. I found it moving, funny, and the cinematography was lurvely, as was the use of sound.

GOOD.

[Pepotamo1985]

I watched Amélie (2001) today, after a few years of putting it off because I thought it might be too saccharine and twee, and I loved it. I found it moving, funny, and the cinematography was lurvely, as was the use of sound.

Jeunet's work is generally very good. Delicatessen is a ton of fun.

The Guest

Thanks for the rec.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Two Days, One Night (2014)- Very good Belgian drama. The entire story is just a woman going door to door trying to get her work colleagues to vote for her not to lose her job, in exchange for them losing their bonus. Sounds dull, but it holds the interest very well, mostly due to Marion Cotillard's amazing performance. Seriously think she's one of the greatest living actresses.

I also watched The Maltese Falcon (1941) which I really didn't like. I know it's considered a classic but I found the overly wordy script, 2d characters and awkward action really grating. I'm sure if I saw it in 1941 I'd think it was amazing, but now it seemed really dated to me.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

Thanks for the rec.

No, I was talking about The Guest. Rec. is a Spanish zombie film.

[newbridge]

I watched Amélie (2001) today, after a few years of putting it off because I thought it might be too saccharine and twee, and I loved it. I found it moving, funny, and the cinematography was lurvely, as was the use of sound.

GOOD.

I think its popularity among people who want to move to Montmartre clouds Jean-Pierre Jeunet's pathos. Not saccharine or twee at all, in my mind (or a romance for that matter).[nb]Oh, but you already said you liked it.[/nb]

[Noodle Lizard]

I rewatched Under The Skin and liked it a lot more this time.  The first time it just didn't jump out to me all that much, probably just a case of being in the wrong mood for it.  So yeah, that was a Good. 

Also the scene where she picks up a disfigured man and attempts to seduce him is exactly what I'd make if I were to make an abstract short about CaB's dating experiences.

[zomgmouse]

Jeunet's work is generally very good. Delicatessen is a ton of fun.

Has anyone seen his latest, The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet? I found it fairly charming and nicely shot - for the first half. The second half kind of lost its steam.

I also watched The Maltese Falcon (1941) which I really didn't like. I know it's considered a classic but I found the overly wordy script, 2d characters and awkward action really grating. I'm sure if I saw it in 1941 I'd think it was amazing, but now it seemed really dated to me.

I'm with you. I find The Big Sleep much more satisfying.

[Milverton]

I watched the Guardians of the Galaxy last night. I was really looking forward to it, but Jesus. The characters change, but the stories stay the same. I grew up on Marvel comics, but I don't think I'll be able to watch another superhero movie for a very long time.

[Phil_A]

Has anyone seen his latest, The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet? I found it fairly charming and nicely shot - for the first half. The second half kind of lost its steam.

Is it better than MicMacs? I found that a horrible disappointment, all empty artifice and paper-thin characters.

[monkfromhavana]

I was forced to watch that Disney film with Angelina Jolie. Something about fairies.

It was shit. I think that they attempted to make it dark for kids, but most 4 year olds would probably just laugh at it and go back to playing Grand Gang Rape on the Xbox.

The darkest thing about was that she kills the kid's father and the kid doesn't give one solitary shit.

Fuck spoilers, it's crap. I'm saving you.

[Nobody Soup]

well, I already moaned about it, but mr turner, which is getting raved about but I thought was boring.

[checkoutgirl]

Parts of Ratatouille while my kid was watching it - good but seemed to be a bit amiss structurally towards the end

I watched that a couple of days ago and instantly proclaimed it my favourite Pixar film.

[small_world]

I was forced to watch that Disney film with Angelina Jolie. Something about fairies.
It was shit. I think that they attempted to make it dark for kids, but most 4 year olds would probably just laugh at it and go back to playing Grand Gang Rape on the Xbox.
The darkest thing about was that she kills the kid's father and the kid doesn't give one solitary shit.
Fuck spoilers, it's crap. I'm saving you.

Maleficent then?
I've got it waiting to watch, but think I'll write it off now, unless someone else comes along and proclaims it to be decent.

I saw Starred Up recently.
It was mentioned in the 1001 films not worth watching thread, but I thought it was decent.
In that thread, the mentioner said that it could have done with a few extra scenes of the group therapy and some greater depth of some other characters would have been good. I totally agree with this, but still thought it a decent film.


I haven't seen anything in a while that doesn't have it's own thread either.


But for anyone posting, please do update the relevant thread if you've watched a film that a thread already exists for[nb]That's how you do a sentence[/nb].
This thread has been working for me, I've got a few good suggestions to go with.

If anyone watches a film from a recommendation, DO start a thread for it and maybe quote the person who recommended the film and what they said, even if you disagree.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Maleficent then?
I've got it waiting to watch, but think I'll write it off now, unless someone else comes along and proclaims it to be decent.

I liked it. It's worth watching at least for Angelina Jolie's performance and some good visuals.

[Pepotamo1985]

I saw Starred Up recently.

Same!

I thought it was decent.

Same!

it could have done with a few extra scenes of the group therapy and some greater depth of some other characters would have been good.

Same!

Just to make this post ever so slightly less pointless, I think Starred up is the first three asterisks of what could've and should've been a four asterisk film. So many aspects of the film were marvelous; O'Connell was incredible (the whole 'I'M A WELL HARD NUTTER' schtick is very easy to do, but quite difficult to pull off these days, and JO did it with panache and tremendous nuance - Big Things are undoubtedly round the corner for him); the father/son elements were intriguing; the aesthetics were fantastic and extremely claustrophobic; many of the minor characters were endearing and fascinating; the internal politics and maneuvering (between inmates, staff and inmates and staff) was very well rendered indeed. However, so few of the interesting topics and plot segments raised were explored properly or even remotely satisfactorily. The film had an unpleasant habit of just ending particular strands abruptly, leading to a staccato, stuttery feel; the group therapy sessions - by far the most interesting part of the film - just end out of nowhere, with corresponding characters written out - even the ending itself just sort of happens out of nowhere, leading the film to fade away weakly. The film kept on building a nice head of steam and a powerful feeling of nameless dread, only to reach a cul-de-sac each time.

Well worth a watch though, I'd wager.

[monkfromhavana]

I liked it. It's worth watching at least for Angelina Jolie's performance and some good visuals.

Really? Even my girlfriend who is happy to watch this kind of guff didn't like it.

[El Unicornio, mang]

A lot of people didn't like it. I enjoyed it though. Not on par with other recent big Disney films but close enough.

[checkoutgirl]

I have a problem with the word Maleficent, it annoys me more than it should i.e a little bit.

[monkfromhavana]

That's what I get for watching a film that isn't Lethal Weapon.

[Cerys]

I watched Filth the other day.  A film adaptation of a hard-to-adapt Irvine Welsh book, but tapeworm aside, they managed it.

GOOD.

[zomgmouse]

Is it better than MicMacs? I found that a horrible disappointment, all empty artifice and paper-thin characters.

Well, I did quite like Micmacs, and found it to be the good kind of empty artifice. So I'll so that no it wasn't.
Spivet was better than Micmacs visually (maybe I'm just saying that cause it's in 3D and there's some beautiful shots of trains) but not overall. It really gets bad in the second half.

[Lost Oliver]

Really enjoyed La Cabina (1972). Creepy, interesting and intense https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CABpfvOgbjw

[small_world]

Same!
Same!
Same!
Stuff about it cutting everything short.
Well worth a watch though, I'd wager.

Yeah, SAME!
Really. It was just that wasn't it.
It was 106 minutes long and I think they could have ran it to 210 or 220 and got around to completing a few of those story lines.
I suppose you could look at it like he was going to be spending a lot of time in prison, so all of this was just a small part of his prison life, and there'd be countless groups that would start off promising and would just fizzle out or end abruptly, there'd be a lot of friends he'd make who'd just suddenly leave (be let out).
But if that was what they were trying to highlight, they could have done that better too.