What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)

[Urinal Cake]

The girl is an idiot, the donkey has no agency.

[hedgehog90]

Yeah, she really is a thicko.
C'est la vie or something.

[Ferris]

Rewatched The Trip. Still good, knockabout fun.

[zomgmouse]

Outrage, 1950 film by Ida Lupino. Terrific and gripping depicting the repercussions of a sexual assault. Especially the first half.

[Sin Agog]

Ida Lupino was so sharp and wonderful.  I almost wish people at the time weren't told that she directed that until afterwards, as I bet they'd be forced to evaluate the film all over again when they found out it came from a woman.  Same with her other noirs about male gaslighting and aggression.

[Cuellar]

Watching The Limehouse Golem, because Netflix seemed so insistent.

Currently got Karl Marx in a big top hat murdering a prostitute.

Gubbins.

I know Bill Nighy has done some shit, but what the hell is this

[Sin Agog]

Is Bill Nighy a good actor?  I know he started late in life, but his line delivery is sometimes really off, and his face at least was being a shit actor in that Limehouse thing.  Yeah, I don't think he's a good actor.

[Cuellar]

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. I imagine it was hard to get enthused by this script, but christ.

I'm struggling to think of something he actually 'acted' in now.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Tonight I watched Lady Vengeance. It was good but not quite as cool and stylised as Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance or Oldboy.

[DukeDeMondo]

He was really good in Pride, I thought, Bill Nighy. He might've been good in The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel too but I dunno, I can't remember anything about that or about any of the things that I saw him doing in it while it was on.

Liked him in Pride, though. "There is power in a factory, power in the land..." Pride. Good.

Oh and I enjoyed him well enough as Rattlesnake Jake in Rango, I suppose. Dunno if he did all his own hissing and rattling or not.

[sevendaughters]

two today

Bride of Frankenstein (1935) - begins as 30s horror and becomes a sort of romantic talkie halfway through, the monster accepts sacrament and becomes a blessed child of Christ, whilst man is debased through science. the exact kind of moralising i can accept and with added gay subterfuge. 6/10

Peeping Tom (1960) - huge Michael Powell fan but still unsure on this one, i think it's incredibly well done and it is one of few 'horror' adjacent films that does work on me, and i do think of it as a critique of watching as sublimation (rather than as a grotty morality tale), though few sublimated so royally as Powell. something about it slightly worms at me. 7/10

[hedgehog90]

I didn't get on with Peeping Tom at all.
Very boring film as I recall without any vitality.

[surreal]

Finally got round to watching my "Sorcerer" 40th Anniversary blu-ray.  Not seen the movie before, can definitely see why it has a reputation (the bridge scene is amazing), but it really jars with the style of movie-making I'm used to seeing these days.  Everything on location, and god knows how they did some of the stunt work.  Awesome soundtrack too.

[hedgehog90]

I was going to watch The French Connection last night, but decided against it. I haven't seen Sorcerer yet, figured I shouldn't watch one before the other.
Instead I went for something quite different, The Phantom Carriage (1921), directed by and starring Victor Sjöström (from Wild Strawberries).
I really enjoyed it, particularly the setup. It goes a bit Scrooge towards the end but that's no bad thing.
There's some wonderful use of double exposure - the image of the Grim Reaper extracting souls, filmed almost 100 years ago, is still perfectly convincing and effective.
I watched the Criterion release with Matti Bye's Chamber Score, which was great for the most part, but there's also an experimental score by KTL that I'm curious to try.

It's very satisfying to find enjoyment from early cinema. To know that I can still connect with these people on some level, despite the fact they've been dead for the better part of half a century. I get a similar kind of kick knowing that my grandfather (born in 1920, died only last year) was alive during the making of this. It makes it seem more tangible and relevant.

[zomgmouse]

there's also an experimental score by KTL that I'm curious to try.

I think that's the one that was attached to the film when I watched it. Very good and atmospheric if I remember correctly. Terrific film! I first heard about it because it was cited as an influence on The Shining, particularly the axe scene.

P.S. you're both wrong about Peeping Tom.

[Shit Good Nose]

Finally got round to watching my "Sorcerer" 40th Anniversary blu-ray.  Not seen the movie before, can definitely see why it has a reputation (the bridge scene is amazing), but it really jars with the style of movie-making I'm used to seeing these days.  Everything on location, and god knows how they did some of the stunt work.  Awesome soundtrack too.

A film I've been banging on about for over 20 years.  I once was in a position of being interviewed by Empire magazine's Ian Nathan (for a competition that Empire were running, that I didn't win) and, on answering Sorcerer being among my favourite films, he scoffed and incredulously said "what, that shitty Wages of Fear remake?!?!?!"  Fast forward to when the American blu-ray came out (a couple of years before the 40th anniversary release over here) and he couldn't sing its praises highly enough.  Prick.

But yeah, all of the actors doing most of their stunts, including a lot of the bridge scene (leading stunt co-ordinator Bud Ekins to wonder why the hell he was hired given he was barely doing anything), long stretches of minimal or no dialogue, filth, ugly bastardly men - it's a type of film that we'll never really see the likes of again (also cf. Wake In Fright, 70s and 80s Herzog, etc).  I first read about it in the very early 90s and spent several years trying to track down a copy, but every tantalising VHS or laserdisc import had either been sold or was far too expensive for my pockets (this was in the days before eBay and the internet, when the only way you could get films from America was to import them via the likes of Bensons or Laserdisc World, and that was a VERY expensive hobby).  But then the internet and DVD happened and Sorcerer got released in 1997, and I immediately snapped it up.  For the next 10 years or so it remained a completely unknown film, and I showed it to everyone I could, and the reaction was always the same - stunned silence, and then at the end, when the camera zooms out and the main theme comes back in, everyone looks at each other and then exhales as they compare in their mind what they've just seen with everything else they'd seen up to that point.  I finally got to see it on the "big" screen (it was actually a tiny club cinema screen, but there you go) earlier this year, expecting it to be full of people who had seen it with the release of the American blu ray (which is region free), but no - I would say over 90% of that room hadn't seen it and had only turned up because of its rapidly spreading internet reputation.  And it was the same reactions again - stunned silence, exhaling of air and uncertain giggles at the end, all from an audience basically used to being spoonfed Star Wars and Marvel films.

Three times in my life I've latched onto films quite early on in their legacies and felt quite lonely in my undying love and obsession with them, feeling like the only fan they have - Sorcerer, Wake In Fright, and Blade Runner, all three spending several years as, at best, "oh yeah, that one" or "what?  Never heard of it" and, at worst, "fucking hell, THAT pile of shit????"  And here we are in 2018 and all three are now considered by the masses as masterpieces (Blade Runner's positive reception having begun a lot earlier than the other two, of course).  Which, oddly (or perhaps not) kind of hurts too, because none of them are MY thing any longer.

[thecuriousorange]

I watched Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail for the first time in about 15 years this evening. It holds up, apart from the Tale of Sir Gallahad scene with all the teenage women offering themselves to the knight, which left a bad taste. Felt like something from a Carry On film.

[zomgmouse]

Which, oddly (or perhaps not) kind of hurts too, because none of them are MY thing any longer.

There's a real bittersweetness to loving obscure/underappreciated/overlooked/etc films - or indeed anything - that then get more widely accepted. Kind of like following a band from their early days, or latching on to some underground act that then breaks into the mainstream. It almost feels like your connection to them has been diluted.
I remember reading a column by David Mitchell who compared it to the notion of rarity bringing value, and that if you own a car that is one of a thousand it is inherently more special than owning a car that is one of a million. I think he was talking about the popularisation of Apple, but the principle remains.
And though you don't really "own" a film or a band or a show or a book or an artist, there's that sense that because you discovered it yourself and fell in love with it all alone without anyone else there to a) tell you to do that and b) share it with you, that it has something very personal to you. And then other people discover it and embrace it through channels other than you and it all somehow feels like a letdown. Though somehow if it's you introducing people to it then it still feels like it's "yours", and that the more widespread acceptance is because of you.
It's a weird phenomenon.

[Large Noise]

Suspria (1977)

Not sure what I thought of this really. Looks stunning, cool soundtrack, but there are also things about it that are ridiculously bad. I get that it's a 70's European gory horror and you've got to take it for what it is. But the way I'd heard it discussed (for example, the recent Projection Booth episode on it) takes no account of the fact that you've got to enjoy it in a campy so-bad-it's-good kind of way.

I suppose the idea of it being a film that's all about the sensory experience rather than the plot is fair enough. And I can see the claim that it's the closest thing to a nightmare caught on screen. But it's not scary, the characters are flat, and the plot is thin as can be.

[greenman]

Suspria (1977)

Not sure what I thought of this really. Looks stunning, cool soundtrack, but there are also things about it that are ridiculously bad. I get that it's a 70's European gory horror and you've got to take it for what it is. But the way I'd heard it discussed (for example, the recent Projection Booth episode on it) takes no account of the fact that you've got to enjoy it in a campy so-bad-it's-good kind of way.

I suppose the idea of it being a film that's all about the sensory experience rather than the plot is fair enough. And I can see the claim that it's the closest thing to a nightmare caught on screen. But it's not scary, the characters are flat, and the plot is thin as can be.

I remember having the same reaction on first viewing but as you say its really more an "experience" film I'd say within a very limited framework, you could argue its the best music video ever made for the Goblin soundtrack.

Rewatched Blue is the Warmest Colour a couple of days ago and beyond still holding up as well as I remember as a drama increasingly I'd say its was quite prescient politically. I think you could argue that part of the mixed reception it got at the time was due to it being somewhat of an early assault on Guardianesque(although Bradshaw himself gave it a good review didn't he?) liberalism, a story you'd expect to normally be focused on a pretty straight anti homophobia message ends up being more about class and elitism. Indeed I think even all the sex ends up rather in opposition to whats typically viewed as acceptable from such quarters, basically you can get as graphic as you like as long as its showing some form of dysfunction(abuse, mental illness, etc) rather than just being erotic, hence the difference in reaction between this and say Shame.

On that subject as well whats happened to Kechiche's next film? it was getting festival showings a year ago wasn't it? no UK release?

[Sin Agog]

Suspria (1977)

Not sure what I thought of this really. Looks stunning, cool soundtrack, but there are also things about it that are ridiculously bad. I get that it's a 70's European gory horror and you've got to take it for what it is. But the way I'd heard it discussed (for example, the recent Projection Booth episode on it) takes no account of the fact that you've got to enjoy it in a campy so-bad-it's-good kind of way.

I suppose the idea of it being a film that's all about the sensory experience rather than the plot is fair enough. And I can see the claim that it's the closest thing to a nightmare caught on screen. But it's not scary, the characters are flat, and the plot is thin as can be.

It can be a bit jarring throwing on an Italian movie from the period before they regularly introduced on-set sound ('50s all the way up the '90s).  Their industry played out like no one else's.  But just like how you can lock into the rhythm of a dusty old movie after awhile, it should click eventually.

As to the nightmare point, your criticisms are probably why it works so well as a lurid, primary-coloured nightmare.  Create something more lucid with the same filmic logic and emphasis as everything else and you wake up.  Fuck plots, anyway.  Not every film has to be a bedtime story, the same way not every movie has to have a love interest.

[Z]

On that subject as well whats happened to Kechiche's next film? it was getting festival showings a year ago wasn't it? no UK release?

I get the impression no one wants to touch it. 3 hours long is a hard sell to begin with, add in the controversy he got for Blue is the Warmest Color, and from what I gather its from the perspective of a young guy so is quite leery as a result.

The mixed reviews at the time had me cautiously optimistic tbh.


The way people tried to downplay his responsibility for that film really confused me at the time. He was an abusive dictator on the set who forced them to do takes dozens of times and whatnot, you just can't praise the performances without acknowledging that it took some pretty ruthless means to get them.

[greenman]

I get the impression no one wants to touch it. 3 hours long is a hard sell to begin with, add in the controversy he got for Blue is the Warmest Color, and from what I gather its from the perspective of a young guy so is quite leery as a result.

The mixed reviews at the time had me cautiously optimistic tbh.

The way people tried to downplay his responsibility for that film really confused me at the time. He was an abusive dictator on the set who forced them to do takes dozens of times and whatnot, you just can't praise the performances without acknowledging that it took some pretty ruthless means to get them.

It does sound like his response to the criticism of Blue is the Warmest Color's raciness was to pushed further in that direction which I can imagine UK/US distributors being a bit wary of in the current environment plus isn't 3 hours just the first half of a Kill Bill like spilt? Really though I suspect most arthouse releases like this make their money in the US/UK on home release anyway, actually looking on the net there does seem to have been an Italian home release already.

Honestly I would say that for all its length Blue actually feels pretty tightly focused to me, its moreso that it lets its scenes play out at length rather than including much extraneous material, feels more like an Apoc Now style situation than a Once Upon A Time In America one where pressure to edit actually helped the end result. I'm guessing with some more success maybe less of that pressure and he's let things spread out as a result? I'd still be interested to see it though as he does extended conservations/flirting so well.

I wasn't paying the closest attention at the time and didn't actually see it until the home release but looking back there seems to be really a bit of confusion about what was being objected to with Blue, seems like people were fishing for the nudity to have been somehow abusive on set and mixing that up with his general ruthlessness across the production deliberately. Maybe a bit of a fued with the Palme d'Or being awarded to the stars as well? I mean I can partly see the motive behind that but it could be viewed as a bit of a slap in the face as well by him.

[zomgmouse]

Suspria (1977)
you've got to enjoy it in a campy so-bad-it's-good kind of way.

er... no

[Large Noise]

er... no

Come on mate.

Nobody's watching Suspria in 2018 and taking it as a face-value scary horror film. Whereas the likes of Texas Chain Saw Massacre or The Shining could still scare new audiences.

And obviously with most older films you've got to cut them a bit of slack when it comes to visual effects, stylistic choices, etc. That doesn't make them so-bad-it's-good. But there are elements of Suspiria that are absolutely comical, so you've got to enjoy it with a sense of ironic detachment. I mean the scene with the bat for fuck sake, or the room full of wire. It's Garth Marenghi stuff.

[Thursday]

Punishment Park (1971)

Main thoughts: Fucking Hell! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fucking Hell!

[Shit Good Nose]

Come on mate.

Nobody's watching Suspria in 2018 and taking it as a face-value scary horror film. Whereas the likes of Texas Chain Saw Massacre or The Shining could still scare new audiences.

And obviously with most older films you've got to cut them a bit of slack when it comes to visual effects, stylistic choices, etc. That doesn't make them so-bad-it's-good. But there are elements of Suspiria that are absolutely comical, so you've got to enjoy it with a sense of ironic detachment. I mean the scene with the bat for fuck sake, or the room full of wire. It's Garth Marenghi stuff.

Have to say I thoroughly agree - I've always thought most of Argento's films look absolutely amazing, but are so melodramatic and over the top that there's little chance of them putting the willies up anyone.  But then I think that can be said for a good chunk of Italian horror from the 70s and 80s - a bit like Hammer during their studio-set bound and bust-heaving years, but with a bit of extra claret.

Punishment Park (1971)

Main thoughts: Fucking Hell! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fucking Hell!

Brilliant film.


Dr Strange - it was alright.  Better than I expected.  Certainly better than Guardians 2.

Ready Player One - it was alright.  You can lose yourself in it just spotting all of the visual references, which I know doesn't necessarily make a film good.  Contrary to popular opinion, I thought Rylance was alright - he made a believable 80s fanboy/techie spod.  Simon Pegg, on the other hand, is no longer able to act.

Barfly - only my second viewing, 20-odd years after the first.  I'd forgotten how light-hearted it was.  I'd also forgotten how odd Rourke's performance was - no wonder Bukowski wasn't sure.

Magnificent 7 (remake) - again, it was alright.  Could've done without the abysmal CGI graves at the end, though.  Fuck were all that about?  Almost as bad as CGI Indy shadow in Crystal Skulls.  NO NEED!  Just do it for real.

Gang Related - another second viewing, having seen it at the cinema when it came out.  Not as good as I'd remembered, although it is one of (Jim) Belushi's finer moments.

The Bear (or, as I've just bought the French blu ray release on account of the infinitely better remaster - L'Ours) - still an amazing film, and another one that wouldn't get made today.

Death Rides A Horse (having only previously seen the heavily cut version that did the rounds on UK TV in the 80s and 90s) - good, but I can't help but think it's a tad over-rated, mainly due to John Philip Law's ropey performance.

And, as it was mentioned earlier in the thread it got me in the mood to watch it again...

Fitzcarraldo - still my favourite Herzog films, and one of my favourite films of all time.  Just a masterpiece.

[greenman]

Have to say I thoroughly agree - I've always thought most of Argento's films look absolutely amazing, but are so melodramatic and over the top that there's little chance of them putting the willies up anyone.  But then I think that can be said for a good chunk of Italian horror from the 70s and 80s - a bit like Hammer during their studio-set bound and bust-heaving years, but with a bit of extra claret.

I'm not much of a viewer of Italia horror besides him but it does actually seem like the film is reasonably aware of its cheesiness, as if its almost accepting you work withing a certain framework.

I wouldn't say its really all that focused on telling a conventional story were your reaction is driven by the stories of the characters so much as it is the general atmosphere and in that respect I do think it manages to be quite creepy at points with its general strangeness as mentioned more like a fevered dream.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Sitcom (1998) - Has a stunning opening sequence that had me laughing out loud due to the shock factor. Then it becomes deeply amusing and fucked up as Francois Ozon takes all of the elements of a traditional family sitcom and makes them twisted and perverse. I really enjoyed this, and somehow the ending is even better than the beginning. 8.2/10

[greenman]

Part way though watching the Arrow remastered Bluray of Withnail and I, not really something I'd considered very visually focused previously but it does actually make for a somewhat different viewing experience seeing it in so much better quality bring it a bit more down to earth, sells the sense of squalor better and some of the countryside shots really are very nicely done.