Last Movie you Watched?

1319320322324325983

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    1) 2001
    2) Blade Runner
    3) Sunshine (Danny Boyle)
    4) Alien

    Serenity is somewhere there too.
    Hey Darth, I got my BD of Sunshine, and the PIP commentary can't be switched off, research shows it's a problem with many discs... did you have to return a defective disc or did you get a good one first time out?

    @chrisisall
    I own the film on DVD, twice even. :) And both copies work very well.
    I . LOVE . SUNSHINE!!!

    sun1.jpg

    Okay, I just watched my new copy and it was crazy. Liked it a LOT more this time. Bits of Silent Running in there, 2001 of course, with a touch of Armageddon (I LOVE that flick SO much). Very impressionistic at times... still, I can't say it's a fave, merely a good experience. Well made.
    The stardust/God references were particularly nice.
    Totally great last two minutes.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 6,432
    @chrisisall Quite alot has been put into this Bluray surprised its not available in States. I was worried initially as thought it was Region 1, though took a chance. Amazon UK don't always say what region it is.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    @chrisisall Quite alot has been put into this Bluray surprised its not available in States. I was worried initially as thought it was Region 1, though took a chance. Amazon UK don't always say what region it is.
    All we have here is a cruddy 'full screen' (that's a laff now) DVD.

  • edited April 2016 Posts: 7,653
    Coogan's bluff - In which a deputy from Arizona comes from the desert to bring back a prisoner from NYC to his state, and of course stuff goes wrong. I like this movie a lot because the hero of the story does some questionable stuff, but Clint Eastwood is always fun [bridges from Madison county excepted, even if I suspected Clint did this movie to have a big laugh at his fans].

    Fort Apache - John Ford movie starring John Wayne & Henry Fonda, epic and Shirley Temple was actually quite a dish when she grew older.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    @DarthDimi have you ever seen Supernova? Seems like a movie you'd like a lot.
  • Posts: 6,432
    chrisisall wrote: »
    @chrisisall Quite alot has been put into this Bluray surprised its not available in States. I was worried initially as thought it was Region 1, though took a chance. Amazon UK don't always say what region it is.
    All we have here is a cruddy 'full screen' (that's a laff now) DVD.

    Hope it gets a release, its worth buying for the Ellis Island sequence alone. Looks fantastic in HD wide screen, there is a real clarity to the transfer in daylight sequences.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    chrisisall wrote: »
    @chrisisall Quite alot has been put into this Bluray surprised its not available in States. I was worried initially as thought it was Region 1, though took a chance. Amazon UK don't always say what region it is.
    All we have here is a cruddy 'full screen' (that's a laff now) DVD.

    Hope it gets a release, its worth buying for the Ellis Island sequence alone. Looks fantastic in HD wide screen, there is a real clarity to the transfer in daylight sequences.
    I'm sure it looks amazing. Even my cruddy 1.33:1 DVD looks crystal clear.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    So, doing a television show marathon later for this one, but prior to that, I decided to go through the Pilot episode for the well renowned Starsky & Hutch and after that, here I came to the film that supposedly takes place three years before the events of the television series.

    Starsky-and-Hutch-10-Years-Later.jpg

    Anyways, I even enjoyed it more than I ever did before (the film, that is), and surprisingly, it isn't that different from the show, but the comedic tone is noticeable in this. Come on, if you have Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson in a movie, you can't expect a dead serious something from the flick, can you? Opposed to what "the original fans" claim, the original Starsky and Hutch do have humourous moments more than you know. So, I am appreciating the movie a lot more than I did before, as I stated. It's probably the greatest parody of a 1970s period piece ever done.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 6,432
    @chrisisall forgot what a fun movie it is, loved the soundtrack. Bluray really does breath new life into forgotten films.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    @chrisisall forgot what a fun movie it is, loved the soundtrack. Bluray really does breath new life into forgotten films.
    Yeah, I'm still waiting for a Blu Ray in MY country...
    [-(
    @Birdelson, I love JCS, I own it & it always brings me to tears it's so great.
  • Posts: 12,466
    Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992). Very, very disappointed.
  • Posts: 12,466
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It was upon release as well. I had such high hopes.

    Oh my gosh; it just got worse and worse. I really really disliked this film. Can't even believe it's Coppola.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    I did not like Bram Stoker's Dracula when I first saw it in 92; since then it has really grown on me. I like the, even the, old school techniques used by Coppola. One major flaw is the casting of Keanu Reeves. He should never do period pieces.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 6,432
    I like Bram Stokers Dracula for the off the wall performances of Oldman and Hopkins. I studied the Novel a few times at college, to me its one of the better interpretations admittedly liberties were taken. The design of the film is bizarre and other worldly which works for me.

    @talos7 Keanu is shocking not his best performance and he has had some stinkers.
  • Posts: 12,466
    Ugh I disliked it so much. It was so confusing and oddly paced. Not for me. Also apparently quite an unfaithful adaptation.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 12,466
    Birdleson wrote: »
    If you want to see one more great Coppola film, watch PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED (1986).

    Will do. Godfather 1 and 2 are two of my favorite films ever, Godfather 3 I like okay, The Conversation is extremely good, Apocalypse Now was epic (admittedly not my cup of tea), The Rainmaker was decent, Dracula.... Did not like. Those are what I've seen.

    EDIT: Also saw The Outsiders. So-so.
  • Posts: 7,653
    talos7 wrote: »
    I did not like Bram Stoker's Dracula when I first saw it in 92; since then it has really grown on me. I like the, even the, old school techniques used by Coppola. One major flaw is the casting of Keanu Reeves. He should never do period pieces.

    The musical soundtrack of this movie is amazing, one of the most haunting and powerful you will ever hear.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 5,993
    For me, Dracula is and always will be Christopher Lee. And he's not even the first Dracula I saw (that was Frank Langella). Gary Oldman doesn't compare. Neither does Langella nor Lugosi, BTW.

    As for the filming, I found it to be too stylish. It worked in parts, but only in parts. Plus, there was that romantic plot between Drac and Mina, which doesn't exist in the original novel (in the novel, when Mina is bitten, it is treated, rightly so, as a rape). So, that wasn't the right adaptation for me (I'm still waiting for it). Kenneth Branagh was more successful with his Frankenstein.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Star Wars The Force awakens - Gave me the same thrill when I saw the original trilogy in the cinema and far more of a thrill than any of the prequels ever did. TFA was a grand return to the Universe that was originally created. Harrison Ford was awesome as he often is. The movie is a great and interesting start into the new trilogy. The extra's on the BD were a lot of fun even if I missed the face of Craig telling that je was a SW as well and did a faceless cameo because of it.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Play Misty for me - another brilliant Eastwood vehicle which makes Fatal attraction a bit of a bore in my opinion. Clint Eastwoods characters have always been these questionable characters who try to be good but are bot always doing so well.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    SaintMark wrote: »
    Play Misty for me - another brilliant Eastwood vehicle which makes Fatal attraction a bit of a bore in my opinion. Clint Eastwoods characters have always been these questionable characters who try to be good but are bot always doing so well.
    Ever since I've seen it, I can't really imagine myself playing that beautiful music Misty without Jessica Walter standing up behind me in the dark with a big kitchen knife. Lol!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Irresistible (2006)

    I'm on a bit of an Emily Blunt kick at the moment. The recent The Girl On A Train trailer and a recent Sicario rewatch have whetted my appetite for all things Emily.

    So I sought out and purchased this little known Aussie made thriller starring Blunt, Sam Neill, and Susan Sarandon in the lead. It's an interesting little film. Sophie (Sarandon) and Craig (Neill) are a married couple with two young daughters living a perfect suburban life. He's a successful architect and she's a budding painter. Her mother has just passed away, leading her to a little depression. Soon she is having fears that Craig's new sexy employee Mara, played by Blunt, could be having designs on her hubby and family. Is this real, or is it just a fantasy obsession? The remainder of the film focuses on Sophie getting into binds due to her view on Mara, and leads to an interesting unexpected twist at the end.

    It definitely has a made for tv vibe, but the excellent performances by the 3 leads more than makes up for it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY

    The local cinema are running a sci fi festival this weekend. Unfortunately I missed Blade Runner on Friday as I was working. Never saw that on the big screen.

    Never saw 2001 on the big screen before either, so I took my son and went this morning.

    A few people left during the first segment, maybe they had a weekend pass and knew nothing about the film. Guess they missed the laser guns.

    This film is something else. It s themes of evolution and conciousness make a good backdrop for the sheer marvel of this state of the art artistic achievement from 1968. The majestic music by Strauss (both Richard and Johann) adds another dimension to those gorgeous pictures. The effects are still impressive, nearly 50 years later.

    The copy broke down five minutes before the film ended, and that was a real disappointment as it was during my favourite part of the movie. No tears from me though, as I have seen it many times before and got my money back.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Deception (2008)

    I just watched this thriller starring Hugh Jackman, Ewan McGregor & Michelle Williams as the leads. Maggie Q, Natasha Henstridge & Charlotte Rampling play supporting roles.

    McGregor is a workaholic accountant/auditor Jonathan McQuarry, who runs into Jackman's lawyer Wyatt Bose during a late night working at an office. Bose introduces him to secret sexual escapades among New York's corporate crowd. During one of these trysts, he meets and falls for William's character. Then she disappears, and McQuarry is blackmailed into using his audit position to swindle money out of a client.

    This was a pretty dull thriller, that's been done before and better. It's a bit of a cross between the superior 1990 Rob Lowe/James Spader starring Bad Influence and the 2005 Clive Owen/Jennifer Aniston starring Derailed, but not quite up to the levels of either.

    Worth watching only if you really like the lead actors.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,043
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ugh I disliked it so much. It was so confusing and oddly paced. Not for me. Also apparently quite an unfaithful adaptation.

    It's about the most faithful adaptation there is, the Christopher Lee Dracula sent me to sleep when I saw it a few years back. I'm sory I don't get the hammer love.

    Also that is as far removed from Stokers novel as you can get. Oldman's Count is also the most literary accurate.

    Lee's look is nothing like the character Stoker wrote about.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 12,466
    Shardlake wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ugh I disliked it so much. It was so confusing and oddly paced. Not for me. Also apparently quite an unfaithful adaptation.

    It's about the most faithful adaptation there is, the Christopher Lee Dracula sent me to sleep when I saw it a few years back. I'm sory I don't get the hammer love.

    Also that is as far removed from Stokers novel as you can get. Oldman's Count is also the literary accurate.

    Lee's look is nothing like the character Stoker wrote about.

    I don't doubt what you say (haven't seen the Lee version), but apparently a lot of the timeline was messed up in the one I saw. Just watched it with someone else who said it was very unlike the novel. Either way I didn't enjoy the film.

    Watching American Graffiti (1973) now. Decent film.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I think it's one flawed film with an incredible performance from Oldman plus an amazing score.

    Everyone else bar Waits as Renfield is sub standard to utterly dreadful.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    @Shardlake, try the 1970 film Count Dracula with Christopher Lee. That was a really faithful adaptation of the gothic horror novel with Italian production instead of Hammer. The only complaint you'd get is his Jason King-like mustache. But, other than that, it was a really good quality horror.

    As for the Hammer love, I think it's the way the portrayals are made that I love about them, and at times they haunt me, really. But, we can all agree that Horror of Dracula (1958) is definitely their best. Hammer lost their quality ground by the time the 1970s came around.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Shardlake wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ugh I disliked it so much. It was so confusing and oddly paced. Not for me. Also apparently quite an unfaithful adaptation.

    It's about the most faithful adaptation there is, the Christopher Lee Dracula sent me to sleep when I saw it a few years back. I'm sory I don't get the hammer love.

    Also that is as far removed from Stokers novel as you can get. Oldman's Count is also the literary accurate.

    Lee's look is nothing like the character Stoker wrote about.

    I don't doubt what you say (haven't seen the Lee version), but apparently a lot of the timeline was messed up in the one I saw. Just watched it with someone else who said it was very unlike the novel. Either way I didn't enjoy the film.

    Watching American Graffiti (1973) now. Decent film.

    American Grafitti has a wonderful score. Bram Stoker s Dracula is one of my all time favourites.
  • Artemis81Artemis81 In Christmas Land
    Posts: 543
    Avengers: Age of Ultron
    1st time seeing this film since seeing it in theaters last year. Entertaining, I though the actions scenes were cool, Cap and Thor work well with each other. I still think the first Avengers movie is better story wise and it has a better villain. Ultron started off cool and then he became too "blah" and not as menacing. B+
Sign In or Register to comment.