Last Movie you Watched?

1540541543545546983

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I loved that ending. The score made it even more of a thrill.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    @Thunderfinger Oh don't get me wrong, the ending was fine enough. It just wasn't a major twist ending that caught me off guard like everyone made it out to be. I actually guessed what was going to happen the last few minutes of the film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @QsAssistant, I understand your concerns about Dunkirk. I should have mentioned in my review that if anyone goes in expecting a character or exposition heavy traditional Nolan film they are going to be severely disappointed. Leave all expectations at the door except for experiencing a visceral thrill ride. I believe it's his response to all those whiners who've been complaining about the angst in his films.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    @bondjames Maybe had I known it was a very different film from Nolan's previous work and that it lacked any main character or character development I might have enjoyed it more. Maybe in the future I'll give it another chance now that I know what it is.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    It was a bit of a surprise to me too @QsAssistant, but I got wrapped up in the spectacle of it all. Don't you think the actors all did a great job though? Without any background development and/or exposition, I still felt connected to them all and related to their plight, and that is a testament to the power of the visuals and Zimmer's score (which may have been bare, but also helped to create the mood which is what I think he was going for).
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    @bondjames I will say that the acting was good from everyone and the movie looked great visually. My two biggest issues are the lack of any real character(s) to follow and the jumping back and forth of time. I was lost throughout most of the movie. It would be interesting to see a version that was edited differently and have everything play in order. A director's cut maybe?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006)
    We've had the remake, so here's the prequel to the remake. Whereas the remake was surprisingly reserved when it came to the violence, this one is a lot less reticent when it comes to the violence. Well, when I say reticent, I mean the film happily showed characters getting a chainsaw through the chest, a bear trap to the foot, both legs smashed with a sledge, but when it came to Leatherface's er... face, the film did it's best to keep it covered when not behind a mask.

    Chainsaw Rev-ometer:
    1. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)
    2. Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre III (1990)
    3. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
    4. Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006)
    5. Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986)
    6. Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994)

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,715
    @bondjames I will say that the acting was good from everyone and the movie looked great visually. My two biggest issues are the lack of any real character(s) to follow and the jumping back and forth of time. I was lost throughout most of the movie. It would be interesting to see a version that was edited differently and have everything play in order. A director's cut maybe?

    Everything was played in order, wasn't it? Only the time-span of the 3 'viewpoints' differ widely in duration, but I think all 3 'stories' were taking place in a linear fashion.
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 17,753
    Just finished Rear Window (1954). Such a fantastic movie, and possibly my Hitchcock favourite, if you ask me. Every time I watch it, I can't help being amazed by that enormous courtyard set. Such attention to detail!

    Chose to watch Rear Window over Strangers on a Train, which I have a copy of, by have never seen. How does it compare to the former?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    THE GREY (2011)
    the-grey.jpg

    Another "survival" movie, set in the wild. Sounds boring, but it really isn t and Neeson is always great.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,967
    @Thunderfinger, it took me years to get around to seeing that one, and when I finally did I was quite surprised by how high-quality it felt. Very tense and well-shot, I loved it.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,715
    giphy.gif
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    THE GREY (2011)
    the-grey.jpg

    Another "survival" movie, set in the wild. Sounds boring, but it really isn t and Neeson is always great.

    Who wouldn't want to watch Neeson fight some rabid wolves with shards of smashed bottle glass tied to his hands? Solid film. It's also a film with substance to it, one of the better entries in the sub-genre Liam has been typecast into.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    THE GREY (2011)
    the-grey.jpg

    Another "survival" movie, set in the wild. Sounds boring, but it really isn t and Neeson is always great.
    That is a good movie. I recommend The Edge for a similar flavour.
    @bondjames I will say that the acting was good from everyone and the movie looked great visually. My two biggest issues are the lack of any real character(s) to follow and the jumping back and forth of time. I was lost throughout most of the movie. It would be interesting to see a version that was edited differently and have everything play in order. A director's cut maybe?

    Everything was played in order, wasn't it? Only the time-span of the 3 'viewpoints' differ widely in duration, but I think all 3 'stories' were taking place in a linear fashion.
    Yes, @DaltonCraig007, it's definitely linear but at points it appears like jumping back and forth due to the intersection of the disparate timeline durations. If one didn't catch the duration messaging on the screen at the start it can be confusing. This film demands a 2nd viewing pronto!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited July 2017 Posts: 17,789
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Spider-Man 3 (2007). Concluded my Spider-Man Trilogy marathon tonight. I know most won't agree with me, but I honestly believe this movie is way over-hated and has a lot going for it. Though I agree it is the weakest of the trilogy, it still serves as a mostly satisfying conclusion for me. Harry's arc is wrapped up nicely, the Sandman is a great villain and has a good story, and both Peter and Mary Jane overcome bad times for a hopeful future.

    The flaws are obvious; Venom was shoehorned in - and Eddie Brock is really just a meh character in the film, Gwen wasn't used well, the Emo Parker scenes are cringey, etc. However, the flaws don't ruin the film for me, and I think while it's weaker than the first two, it still fits in the trilogy nicely. I have always loved this trilogy, warts and all.
    Wow, It's Like I wrote this. Obviously, I agree wholeheartedly.

    We just watched The Night Stalker & The Night Strangler this week while vacationing at the lake. Just SO good! Richard Matheson is my favourite writer. When we got home I ordered the series on DVD (yeah, no Matheson, but Darren McGavin & Simon Oakland are such a hoot together!!!)
    In-battle-with-Tony-Vincenzo.jpg
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,779
    KOLCHAK is a favorite and I saw them when originally broadcast.
    Its only season dips in quality episode by episode, but knowing that it's a lot of fun. Some great terrifying moments in the first few. Love that theme.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    KOLCHAK is a favorite and I saw them when originally broadcast.
    Me too, but not since. I remember good scares & fun cheese...

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,173
    SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING

    I loved the film, truly I did. I admit that the comedy was a bit simple and aiming at the younger crowd, and they too will probably grow tired of the jokes after one or two viewings, but I don't mind. It was fun and Michael Keaton really shined.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited July 2017 Posts: 4,043
    Dunkirk, simply incredible, I don't think I have had a more profoundly emotional and immersive experience on the big screen, this is extraordinary cinema.

    There is no one else like Nolan working in Cinema today, this films was filled with tension from the start and it doesn't let up, performances were great but Nolan is the star.

    If he doesn't get best director for this there is no justice, best picture as well. If guff like Titanic can get Oscars then Dunkirk most certainly should.

    Shows Cameron that you can make films about historic moments and not have to tack on schmaltzy unconvincing love stories to sell it.

    Dunkirk needs to be seen.


  • Posts: 3,336
    Just finished Rear Window (1954). Such a fantastic movie, and possibly my Hitchcock favourite, if you ask me. Every time I watch it, I can't help being amazed by that enormous courtyard set. Such attention to detail!

    Chose to watch Rear Window over Strangers on a Train, which I have a copy of, by have never seen. How does it compare to the former?

    I definetly prefer Rear Window (my #7 movie of all time), but Strangers on a Train is also great stuff (in my top 100 aswell). It features a brilliant and chilling performance from Robert Walker.
  • Posts: 463
    The Outlaw Josie Wales and Jackie Brown. First time viewing both of them. Both were great.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    Dunkirk
    Absolutely loved this one, possibly one of the most visually and aurally spectacular films of the last decade.
    The shot of the plane gliding over the beach towards the end was orgasmic.
  • Posts: 3,274
    Dunkirk. Was utterly disappointed. A 30 minute movie stretched to 106 minutes by using 3-4 different camera angles showing the same thing. Oh, here Hardy shooting down yet another plane. Oh.. here's another Stuka divebombing the beach. Oh.. here's Branagh looking up in the sky for the 7th time. No dialogue, no character development. Just felt like a long cutscene from a game. Imagine if 'Braveheart' would have begun right before the battle of Sterling, 'Titanic' begun right when the ship was sinking or 'Saving Private Ryan' was one long take from the Omaha beach.

  • Zekidk wrote: »
    Just felt like a long cutscene from a game. Imagine if ... 'Titanic' begun right when the ship was sinking or 'Saving Private Ryan' was one long take from the Omaha beach.

    This actually probably would have made both of these better movies.
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575

    jake24 wrote: »
    Dunkirk
    Absolutely loved this one, possibly one of the most visually and aurally spectacular films of the last decade.
    The shot of the plane gliding over the beach towards the end was orgasmic.
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Dunkirk. Was utterly disappointed. A 30 minute movie stretched to 106 minutes by using 3-4 different camera angles showing the same thing. Oh, here Hardy shooting down yet another plane. Oh.. here's another Stuka divebombing the beach. Oh.. here's Branagh looking up in the sky for the 7th time. No dialogue, no character development. Just felt like a long cutscene from a game. Imagine if 'Braveheart' would have begun right before the battle of Sterling, 'Titanic' begun right when the ship was sinking or 'Saving Private Ryan' was one long take from the Omaha beach.

    Dunkirk goes from Hero to Zero so quickly :)
  • Posts: 17,753
    Just finished Rear Window (1954). Such a fantastic movie, and possibly my Hitchcock favourite, if you ask me. Every time I watch it, I can't help being amazed by that enormous courtyard set. Such attention to detail!

    Chose to watch Rear Window over Strangers on a Train, which I have a copy of, by have never seen. How does it compare to the former?

    I definetly prefer Rear Window (my #7 movie of all time), but Strangers on a Train is also great stuff (in my top 100 aswell). It features a brilliant and chilling performance from Robert Walker.

    Noted! How is Farley Granger in Strangers on a Train? I remember him from The Rope, another brilliant Hitchcock-film.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    001 wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    Dunkirk
    Absolutely loved this one, possibly one of the most visually and aurally spectacular films of the last decade.
    The shot of the plane gliding over the beach towards the end was orgasmic.
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Dunkirk. Was utterly disappointed. A 30 minute movie stretched to 106 minutes by using 3-4 different camera angles showing the same thing. Oh, here Hardy shooting down yet another plane. Oh.. here's another Stuka divebombing the beach. Oh.. here's Branagh looking up in the sky for the 7th time. No dialogue, no character development. Just felt like a long cutscene from a game. Imagine if 'Braveheart' would have begun right before the battle of Sterling, 'Titanic' begun right when the ship was sinking or 'Saving Private Ryan' was one long take from the Omaha beach.

    Dunkirk goes from Hero to Zero so quickly :)

    Apart from the incredible opening sequence I've never rated Ryan, it never competes with that and almost feels like a different film after that.

    As for Titanic dispensing with all that bollocks before the sinking would have made it much better.

    For me Dunkirk begins building tension and just continues.

    I just saw it on a standard screen no 70mm or IMAX and I felt like I experienced this not watched it, this film affected me like I haven't felt on the big screen for years possibly the most effective big screen event I've ever had.

    Tom Hardy for his short screen time was superb, the little and at time in audible dialogue from his character didn't detract from his performance.

    Some might wonder why use Hardy for such a role but I think Nolan knew he needed someone who could convey his performance through his eyes and boy can Hardy do that.
    Also noticed Nolan managed to sneak Michael Caine in there, making that having him appeared in all his films since Batman Begins, his good luck charm some what.

    Zimmer's score is vital to making this work, shades of Herrmann I detected but his ability to create atmosphere and tension is unparalleled in cinema today, no it's not the kind of score you can imagine buying and listening outside the film but then again it's not just noise it's so integral to showing what Nolan is doing here.

    To think he would do the same with Bond if Nolan got the job is just being closed minded, I think Zimmer would pull out all the stops and possibly give us one of the best scores since the heyday of Barry.

    To me this is milestone in film making, the idea of the 3 different events happening separately, different time lengths and separate times from each other and then the way he brings it all together at the end. Also having 3 different moments shown after each other with tension and suspense building as he cuts back from one to the other is just astounding.

    Nolan been doing this since Memento and he's the master of it, when it was announced he was doing this film, I figured he wanted to step into making a film from a historical stand point and expected it to be meticulously researched and shot but never expected he'd approach it this way and the film is all the better for it.

    Where he goes from here who knows be it Bond somewhere down the line but after underwhelming me with this last film, I just didn't like it and have no reason to see it again after my one time theatrical viewing. He has returned with a work that just stands out so much, there is no one quite like him working in film today and as far as blockbuster film making he's possibly the most significant film maker since Spielberg in his heyday.

    I still regard Memento has is outright masterpiece but this is so close behind, just magnificent and I doubt another film will impress me more this year.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I can already see that Dunkirk is set up to be the divisive film of the summer.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    jake24 wrote: »
    Dunkirk
    Absolutely loved this one, possibly one of the most visually and aurally spectacular films of the last decade.
    The shot of the plane gliding over the beach towards the end was orgasmic.
    Agreed. Money shot of the summer and quite moving given what had come before. I wanted to mention it in my review but decided to allow folks to experience it in full glory first.
  • QsAssistantQsAssistant All those moments lost in time... like tears in rain
    Posts: 1,812
    @bondjames I will say that the acting was good from everyone and the movie looked great visually. My two biggest issues are the lack of any real character(s) to follow and the jumping back and forth of time. I was lost throughout most of the movie. It would be interesting to see a version that was edited differently and have everything play in order. A director's cut maybe?

    Everything was played in order, wasn't it? Only the time-span of the 3 'viewpoints' differ widely in duration, but I think all 3 'stories' were taking place in a linear fashion.

    That's what I meant. I just didn't like how it showed the same stuff again, just from a different point of view. It felt unnecessary and, at times, confusing but the latter may have just been me.
    Now that I think about it there was a time jump back and forth. Cillian Murphy's character was on the fishing boat with the old man and the two boys at one point but then later it switches to a night scene when one of the boats is sinking and he's on a rowing boat back at Dunkirk. Then later it's suddenly daytime and he's back on the fishing boat.
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Dunkirk. Was utterly disappointed. A 30 minute movie stretched to 106 minutes by using 3-4 different camera angles showing the same thing. Oh, here Hardy shooting down yet another plane. Oh.. here's another Stuka divebombing the beach. Oh.. here's Branagh looking up in the sky for the 7th time. No dialogue, no character development. Just felt like a long cutscene from a game. Imagine if 'Braveheart' would have begun right before the battle of Sterling, 'Titanic' begun right when the ship was sinking or 'Saving Private Ryan' was one long take from the Omaha beach.

    I pretty much agree. It just felt like this movie was unnecessarily stretched out because of the different points of view. Like I said before, it would be nice if we get some edited version that blends the scenes together rather than going back and seeing it from a different point of view. I doubt we'll get it but it would be nice.
Sign In or Register to comment.