What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2021 Edition)

[Blumf]

I didn't have much better luck this evening.  Saw Assasins Creed (2016) on the tv guide and it said it was a Scifi so i thought I'd watch it.  (I'm not a gamer and know nothing of the game, I don't know if that helps or hinders things.)  Bailed after about 15 minutes because I couldn't suspend disbelief enough to get over the multiple layers of utter bullshit.

You should watch the Resident Evil films[nb]How are there six of them?? How?[/nb], completely grounded and sensible.

[Dex Sawash]

I'm kicking off a Resident Evil powerwatch right now off this recc.

[St_Eddie]

Total Recall (2012 remake).
What a pile of shit.  They took out the Mars part and replaced Mars with 'The Colony' who were being menaced by some robots.  Included a scene where they had to access some information in Colin Farrell's head, including his brain having a firewall and someone using the phrase 'I'm In!'.  They needed to access a long number, a 'kill code' to deactivate all the robots.  They never got the kill code and it was never mentioned again, although some robots were blown up in a building but the whole point was to deactivate all of them and this never happened.  A horrible mess and very much poorer than the original.

The different setting was weak.  If you're going to replace the Mars bit with something else it has to be at least as good.  The script should have been binned before they even got to the casting stage.

You are aware that both the 1990 and 2012 movies are loose adaptations of the short story 'We Can Remember It for You Wholesale' by Philip K. Dick, right?  I'm not defending the 2012 adaptation because it is indeed a terrible, soulless movie but it seems a bit daft to expect it to more faithful to the "original" 1990 adaptation.  Neither cinematic adaptation is particularly faithful to the original short story.  Both adaptations take the short story and use it as a jumping off point to do their own thing.

[Dex Sawash]

8 out of 10 film festivals die within the first hour

[Gulftastic]

You should watch the Resident Evil films[nb]How are there six of them?? How?[/nb], completely grounded and sensible.

I love me some Resident Evil. They get dafter as they go on. Complete bollocks but lots of fun.

[Sebastian Cobb]

It's a shame Cronenberg launched his attempt at Total Recall, given he was a fan of the original text and thought the 1990 version was sacrilege.

I love the 1990 one for what it is but christ I'd love to have seen what Cronenberg could've done with it.

[Small Man Big Horse]

The Water Babies (1978) - It's the Victorian era so people fight in the street, women empty chamber pots in the street, and pickpockets, er, pick pockets in the street. But when poor old chimney sweep Tom is accused of being a thief he plunges in to the water and isn't sure how to get out, though he's told some water babies can help him out in this mixture of live action and animation with the latter making up the underwater sequences. It has a very seventies feel, especially some of the weirdness with Mrs Tripp (Billie Whitelaw), a maid who works for Ellie and her rich Uncle and Aunt, while Tom's underwater adventures are a strange affair where Tom meets a number of unusual characters, some friendly some not, including a Scottish lobster, a camp seahorse, a scouse otter and an evil shark. A rare film where Bernard Cribbins is a bit of a shit alongside  main villain James Mason, it also features the vocal talents of Jon Pertwee and David Jason along with members of the live action cast, and is a very offbeat movie, but one that's quite unique and entertaining. 7.4/10

[JesusAndYourBush]

^^ Well I know The Water Babies is based in a book because I had the book when I was a small child.

You are aware that both the 1990 and 2012 movies are loose adaptations of the short story 'We Can Remember It for You Wholesale' by Philip K. Dick, right?  I'm not defending the 2012 adaptation because it is indeed a terrible, soulless movie but it seems a bit daft to expect it to more faithful to the "original" 1990 adaptation.  Neither cinematic adaptation is particularly faithful to the original short story.  Both adaptations take the short story and use it as a jumping off point to do their own thing.

I wasn't aware it was based on a PKD short story (or if I did I forgot long ago), but regardless of that, I'm not opposed to them doing something different compared to the first version - just that if you're going to do something different it has to be at least as good or there's no point in doing it.  This was so much poorer.  Many scripts probably get rejected because they're not up to scratch, or the scriptwriter gets told to go away and improve it.  This is one of those times when that should have happened.

[JesusAndYourBush]

You should watch the Resident Evil films[nb]How are there six of them?? How?[/nb], completely grounded and sensible.

I've seen the first 5, I quite liked them.

[zomgmouse]

Rewatched Nine Queens the other night, hadn't seen it in around a decade, still held up very well. Great con film, quite lowkey but packs an enormous amount of thrills.

Finally got to see Sons of the Desert and it was honestly rather disappointing. There were maybe 2 or 3 good jokes in the whole thing and it felt incredibly plodding. Sorry.

Footlight Parade. Not nearly as sharp as 42nd Street but Cagney is fun to watch and the final dance numbers are striking (in particular the water sequences). Script is kind of slapdash.

Viktor and Viktoria. Charming but I did not like the (off-stage) musical interludes in this, of which there were many, though they did grow on me Bit of a sagging middle but enjoyed this a lot. Forgot Anton Walbrook was in this and his entry caused a cheer in my head.

Las Hurdes aka Land Without Bread. One of the many Buñuels I hadn't seen. Short documentary on the titular region, deliberately somewhat exaggerated to create what is essentially a parody of poverty porn ethnographies.

[greenman]

Rewatched Nine Queens the other night, hadn't seen it in around a decade, still held up very well. Great con film, quite lowkey but packs an enormous amount of thrills.

Although I remember thinking it didnt really need the twisty plot, just as a low key drama about two con men it was effective enough.

[zomgmouse]

Although I remember thinking it didnt really need the twisty plot, just as a low key drama about two con men it was effective enough.

Yeah for sure - though I thought that that made it much more entertaining

[Inspector Norse]

Rushmore Since watching this and Royal Tenenbaums and disliking both I've always considered myself one of the people who doesn't like Wes Anderson. I was dragged along to see Moonrise Kingdom and thought it a bit better, though, and then genuinely enjoyed The Grand Budapest Hotel, so when this popped up on Disney+ I thought I'd give it a rewatch to see if my feelings had changed.
Nope.
I just find this an incredibly frustrating film. There is evidence throughout of Anderson's eye for detail, imagination, and technical skill; it's just that what he uses them for has so little charm or appeal. Inconsistent, inexplicable characters and a mechanical, heartless plot. There were some amusing scenes and lines but mostly near the beginning, and eventually I found myself thinking that it had pretty much worn out its welcome but at least we were nearing the end, only to pause and find I wasn't even halfway through.
I think that what I liked about TGBH was that Anderson just dropped all the pretence and made a piece of fast-paced, light-hearted fluff: this one was much more muddled and uneasy in its tone and the appeal wore off pretty quickly.
It's a very cheap shot to criticise the director for what others see in him, I guess, and hard to know whether there's even supposed to be any meaning behind all of it. Whatever, there is something that rubs me up the wrong way about the man and his work.

[greenman]

Besides Budapest though I like Rushmore and Moonrise Kingdom more than the rest of Andersons stuff, his style does seem to fit more with a teenager/childs view of the world plus I think sticking to his upper class east coast nostalgia grates less than turning foreign locations into exotic playgrounds.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Me And Orson Welles (2008) - Richard Linklater's film concerning Richard (Zac Effron) an actor who briefly worked for Orson Welles (Christian McKay) on his 1937 production of Julius Caesar, and the romance he has with production assistant Sonja (Clare Danes). It portrays Welles as a charismatic if cunty playboy  egomaniac, while Danes is okay and Effron is watchable but sometimes annoying, and I struggled to care about either. Linklater stressed a dislike for biopics and factual retellings and Richard's story is completely fictional (with surviving cast member Norman Lloyd elaborating on that here: https://film.avclub.com/norman-lloyd-on-upstaging-orson-welles-and-playing-tenn-1798286982), but it's a shame Linklater doesn't dislike bland and tiresome stories as that's what we largely get here, and only McKay's Welles and the little we see of Julius Caesar is any fun. 4.4/10

[zomgmouse]

The Bowery. This was Twentieth Century Fox's first feature. Wallace Beery, George Raft, Fay Wray. Made in 1933 but set in the 1890s, it's like if we made a film now but set in the 80s, which was an interesting bit of perspective to see. Raoul Walsh is a fantastic director.

The Mascot. Mostly silent stop-motion animation short about a toy dog that goes out in the streets to get the little kid that owns it an orange and the dangers it encounters along the way. Incredibly inventive especially for the time.

A Song of Lisbon. Broad Portuguese comedy about a medical student who fails his exams but tries to convince his wealthy aunts that he passed to get their money. Charming!

Alice in Wonderland. Bit muddled but not without its moments. Definitely odd to get a bunch of stars and shove them in surreal animal costumes but I suppose that's not unlike them providing their voices to animations.

The Little Giant. Edward G. Robinson is electric. Plays a gangster who decides to leave the crime business post-prohibition and join high society. Really fun, quick, light comedy. A blast.

^{(Yes I'm going through the year 1933. A forum I'm on goes through polls of various years at a time and the current year is 1933.)}

[kitsofan34]

Me And Orson Welles (2008) - Richard Linklater's film concerning Richard (Zac Effron) an actor who briefly worked for Orson Welles (Christian McKay) on his 1937 production of Julius Caesar, and the romance he has with production assistant Sonja (Clare Danes). It portrays Welles as a charismatic if cunty playboy  egomaniac, while Danes is okay and Effron is watchable but sometimes annoying, and I struggled to care about either. Linklater stressed a dislike for biopics and factual retellings and Richard's story is completely fictional (with surviving cast member Norman Lloyd elaborating on that here: https://film.avclub.com/norman-lloyd-on-upstaging-orson-welles-and-playing-tenn-1798286982), but it's a shame Linklater doesn't dislike bland and tiresome stories as that's what we largely get here, and only McKay's Welles and the little we see of Julius Caesar is any fun. 4.4/10

How do you decide on the decimal points?

[Small Man Big Horse]

Viktor and Viktoria. Charming but I did not like the (off-stage) musical interludes in this, of which there were many, though they did grow on me Bit of a sagging middle but enjoyed this a lot. Forgot Anton Walbrook was in this and his entry caused a cheer in my head.

I saw that earlier this year and really enjoyed it, and was especially impressed by the opening where the camera all but floats through the theatrical agency in an Altman-esque way.

How do you decide on the decimal points?

There's no real method, it's just based on a rough feeling I have after watching the film.

[Small Man Big Horse]

The Princess And The Frog (2009) - New Orleans set Disney flick where an evil magician turns a prince (Bruno Campos) in to a frog and when our heroine Tiana (Anika Noni Rose) kisses him instead of transforming him back in to a man she turns in to a frog too. An odd couple road movie sort of affair follows as they go on various adventures, team up with a jazz playing alligator (Michael-Leon Wooley) and a firefly called Ray (Jim Cummings), and

Spoiler alert

eventually a happy ending is found for all, apart from the one character who is viciously murdered

[close]

. Randy Newman's songs are some of his best, the animation is delightful and the only real downside is that it'll make you miss this style and wish that not every single f***ing Disney film was cgi these days. 8.1/10

[dissolute ocelot]

More Disney!

Pete's Dragon (2016) - pleasant Disney remake, about a feral boy living in the forest of the Pacific Northwest with a dragon (which is furry when not invisible), whose life is upset by an evil logger played by Karl Urban and a saintly conservationist (Bryce Dallas Howard), while Robert Redford is the crazy old man who keeps talking about dragons. The first couple of minutes are very saccharine but it nicely undercuts that by

Spoiler alert

killing the boy's parents

[close]

. It doesn't have the moral complexity and depth of the best Studio Ghibli, but it's beautifully filmed, the dragon looks great (despite being furry), the cast is impressive, there's some nice folk music, and the invisibility effect looks more like a flatfish than something out of Harry Potter. From director David Lowery who made sheet-over-head fantasy A Ghost Story, there's a similarly gentle air, and not much in the way of drama (even the loggers aren't that evil), although a bit of action later

Spoiler alert

and even some fire-breathing

[close]

. I saw the 1977 original as a small child but remember nothing about it, and would guess this is better: the mix of live action and CGI is a good replacement for the cartoon/live action blend of the original.

[Blumf]

It's funny how some Disney[nb]Trad Disney, not any of that MCU/Star Wars stuff[/nb] films are massive (Frozen), yet other films (like the two mentioned above) just seem to come and go without anyone noticing.

[Small Man Big Horse]

More Disney!

Pete's Dragon (2016) - pleasant Disney remake, about a feral boy living in the forest of the Pacific Northwest with a dragon (which is furry when not invisible), whose life is upset by an evil logger played by Karl Urban and a saintly conservationist (Bryce Dallas Howard), while Robert Redford is the crazy old man who keeps talking about dragons. The first couple of minutes are very saccharine but it nicely undercuts that by

Spoiler alert

killing the boy's parents

[close]

. It doesn't have the moral complexity and depth of the best Studio Ghibli, but it's beautifully filmed, the dragon looks great (despite being furry), the cast is impressive, there's some nice folk music, and the invisibility effect looks more like a flatfish than something out of Harry Potter. From director David Lowery who made sheet-over-head fantasy A Ghost Story, there's a similarly gentle air, and not much in the way of drama (even the loggers aren't that evil), although a bit of action later

Spoiler alert

and even some fire-breathing

[close]

. I saw the 1977 original as a small child but remember nothing about it, and would guess this is better: the mix of live action and CGI is a good replacement for the cartoon/live action blend of the original.

I watched the original last year and it's lacking in drama a little, and is a more a selection of sketches with Eliot getting up to daft antics, but it does have a right old bastard of a villain in the form of Shelley Winters and her two sons who have clearly abused Pete pretty horribly before he managed to run away. I do plan to watch the remake at some point too, but am in no real rush.

It's funny how some Disney[nb]Trad Disney, not any of that MCU/Star Wars stuff[/nb] films are massive (Frozen), yet other films (like the two mentioned above) just seem to come and go without anyone noticing.

Yeah, neither of them were exactly box office disasters and didn't lose money, but they seem to have failed to set the world on fire. There is supposed to be a Disney+ series based on The Princess And The Frog coming in 2022 though, so maybe that'll raise its profile, I hope it does as it is one of my favourite Disney movies.

[greenman]

I'd guess when your dealing with younger audiences especially theres arguebly a larger divide between what gets watched once at the cinema and what gets watched 300 times at home.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I'd guess when your dealing with younger audiences especially theres arguebly a larger divide between what gets watched once at the cinema and what gets watched 300 times at home.

Bought by kids but acclaimed by parents is probably what happens, the fact it doesn't drive the parents completely potty after 300 watches is probably the decider.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Uncle Peckerhead (2020) - Judy (Chet Siegel), Max (Jeff Riddle) and Mel (Ruby McCollister) are in a band together and about to go on tour when their van is repossessed, but they meet Peckerhead (David Littleton) who seems to be a nice enough fella who lets them use his vehicle as long as he can roadie for them. But it turns out that he has a slight problem in that every night at midnight he turns in to a flesh eating monster for 13 minutes, and the band discovers this when he eats a promoter who cheated them out of their money. Judy's horrified but the others are strangely accepting, and as Peckerhead is otherwise seemingly sweet natured and friendly even when he murders more people they don't call the police, in this comedy horror which sends up genre tropes, pricks the pomposity of pretentious bands, but is only intermittently funny, The AV Club gave it a positive review which is why I watched it but I thought that it stretches its central concept far too thinly and as a whole it ultimately disappointed. 5.0/10

[SteveDave]

Get Carter

After watching "Pulp" the other weekend I was up for some more Mike Hodges/Michael Caine knockabout action. I was not disappointed. I think I've only seen the scene where he sees his daughter/niece in the film before but somehow had it in my head that I'd seen the whole thing. I loved seeing Peter Kay in it. We're watching the remake next.

[phantom_power]

The Wrong Man - fairly grim Hitchcock thriller starring Henry Fonda as a regular schmo accused of a crime he didn't(?) commit. Based on true story. Felt oddly lightweight and empty

The Truth About Cats and Dogs - I know this is what the kids these days call problematic and Garofalo as since disowned it, saying it has changed from the film she signed up for and is anti-feminist, but I still enjoyed it. I can't argue with what she says but the leads are so likeable and the atmosphere so light that it is still quite charming, despite the odd cringe, and the idea that Garofalo is somehow ugly. Ben Chaplin should have stuck to romcom leads rather than trying to be a serious actor as he is very good at it. It is uber-90s though, in terms of the colour palette, clothing, music choices

[dissolute ocelot]

Yeah, neither of them were exactly box office disasters and didn't lose money, but they seem to have failed to set the world on fire. There is supposed to be a Disney+ series based on The Princess And The Frog coming in 2022 though, so maybe that'll raise its profile, I hope it does as it is one of my favourite Disney movies.

The Princess and the Frog (which IMO is a good, entertaining film in a solidly traditional Disney way) is quite big with girls of a certain age and some of their parents, and Tiana has joined the growing ranks of Disney Princesses, but it never had the wider cultural impact of something like Frozen. There are a lot of Disney films, especially with the live-action remakes, and not all can be Frozen-big. Pete's Dragon doesn't seem to have made an impact even with kids and parents: reviews were generally positive at the time, and you can buy toy dragons, but maybe kids just prefer that syrupy Disney pop sound and princesses in long dresses to a quiet, picturesque drama with a soundtrack that includes Bonnie Prince Billy, Leonard Cohen, and the Lumineers.

[Small Man Big Horse]

The Princess and the Frog (which IMO is a good, entertaining film in a solidly traditional Disney way) is quite big with girls of a certain age and some of their parents, and Tiana has joined the growing ranks of Disney Princesses, but it never had the wider cultural impact of something like Frozen. There are a lot of Disney films, especially with the live-action remakes, and not all can be Frozen-big. Pete's Dragon doesn't seem to have made an impact even with kids and parents: reviews were generally positive at the time, and you can buy toy dragons, but maybe kids just prefer that syrupy Disney pop sound and princesses in long dresses to a quiet, picturesque drama with a soundtrack that includes Bonnie Prince Billy, Leonard Cohen, and the Lumineers.

Ha, I didn't know that about the soundtrack but it's moved it higher up in my queue to watch now as I'm intrigued as to how they'll use such artists in what was sold as a kid's film.

The Green Butchers (2003) - Danish comedy about butchers starring Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Mads Mikkelsen and some bizarre haircuts, where they open a butchers shop which does badly until Mads accidentally freezes to death an electrician, serves his flesh to his butcher enemy, and suddenly is a huge success. It's not that original a premise then, somewhat weirdly, and despite the bleaker aspects is quite a gentle comedy about two unusual men, but while it has a very funny ending most of the time it's only mildly amusing fare, likeable for sure but little more than that. 6.4/10

[dissolute ocelot]

The Devil Wears Prada (2006) - fun, snappily directed and excellently-acted workplace comedy/drama that's free on Amazon Prime. Anne Hathaway is the frumpy (yeah, I know) graduate seduced by the world of fashion magazines, and Meryl Streep (auditioning for Margaret Thatcher) is her boss. It does a good job of communicating both the excitement/glamour of this world, and the costs (especially for women, who're held to different standards). Amazing clothes, and some nice jokes too; Stanley Tucci (bitchy but kindhearted magazine designer) and Emily Blunt (bitchy co-worker) are both at the top of their game.

Sadly lurches into rom-com mode late on, with an ending which makes little sense:

Spoiler alert

she stays with her whiny passive-aggressive boyfriend whose only accomplishment is to cook her the American equivalent of a cheese toastie, rather than choosing the cool, handsome, talented journalist who actually shows interest and helps her AND after evoking the excitement of fashion so well, we're supposed to believe our heroine gives it up to write about the labour disputes of janitorial staff (this is literally what they say).

[close]

Plus, parodied by the Simpsons, and Roger Ebert hated it.