|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 4, 2021 18:50:48 GMT -8
Always love starting the new year with a new thread.
I'm going to try to watch a lot of new movies (new to me, anyway) this year. I checked a lot of films off my list in 2020, but would love to improve those numbers. With that in mind, here are some films I watched this week:
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015): Believe it or not, I had never watched this film before. And... not sure there's much else I can say. It's an excellent film, with gorgeous action (both well-staged and impressively edited), plus a story that just zips along from one scene to the next. That this came from the same director as the Happy Feet movies is incredible (though those films also boasted some phenomenal staging, albeit with fewer scenes of crazy despots getting their faces ripped off). Phenomenal stuff, and now I'm nostalgic for those debates the rest of you used to have about the film on the old forum.
The Green Mile (1999): This film has some great performances (RIP Michael Clarke Duncan) and the best of its prison scenes are both tense and powerful. The downside is that it's three hours long, and never comes close to justifying that timeframe. I appreciate the unusual and ambitious twists the film takes, but someone needed to pare this down by at least 30 minutes. It was intriguing to see Goodspeed from Lost as a sadistic prison guard; feels like that guy should get more work.
Death Becomes Her (1992): Having seen nearly every Zemeckis film at this point, I feel confident calling this one of his better works. A very funny black comedy with plenty of pep in its step, featuring inventive special effects (even if some of them haven't aged especially well) and Meryl Streep playing against type but still doing spectacular work. The film has fun deconstructing soap opera tropes, with more laughs than I expected. It does lose some steam by the end, but remains a twisty and enjoyable ride.
Molly's Game (2017): Certainly not Sorkin's worst film, but it hits all the usual clichés of his recent work. Characters rattling off their resumes, speechifying when they should be talking, and some painfully predictable courtroom drama. Jessica Chastain is great in the role, and she rattles off Sorkinian dialogue like nobody's business, but the film runs out of tricks long before she does. The story starts off as a mischievous biopic and exploration of the gambling world; after a while, it turns into a shallow character study, with the main question being how many revealing outfits can they put Chastain in before the credits roll.
House (1977): That's right, folks, I watched a Japanese arthouse film from the Seventies. And honestly? Better than expected. The first 30 minutes are kind of a drag, but after that... it gets pretty bonkers. A fairly outrageous horror comedy, with so-bad-they're-hilarious VFX, and enjoyably cardboard characters (so cardboard, in fact, that each girl is named after her own personality). Not a film that invites logic - and I didn't care for the spiritual undertones of the finale - but the madcap nature of the story was great fun. One of the weirdest films I've ever seen, but please take that in a positive way.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Jan 5, 2021 4:42:25 GMT -8
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015): Believe it or not, I had never watched this film before. And... not sure there's much else I can say. It's an excellent film, with gorgeous action (both well-staged and impressively edited), plus a story that just zips along from one scene to the next. That this came from the same director as the Happy Feet movies is incredible (though those films also boasted some phenomenal staging, albeit with fewer scenes of crazy despots getting their faces ripped off). Phenomenal stuff, and now I'm nostalgic for those debates the rest of you used to have about the film on the old forum. I'm not sure if this is in refence to me; I remember spending a quiet evening in Laos refreshing the old Sopranos debate with this film at its crux and how 'reputation' didn't really figure into my personal pursuits. I assumed I'd saved all that text; now I'm not so sure. House (1977): That's right, folks, I watched a Japanese arthouse film from the Seventies. And honestly? Better than expected. The first 30 minutes are kind of a drag, but after that... it gets pretty bonkers. A fairly outrageous horror comedy, with so-bad-they're-hilarious VFX, and enjoyably cardboard characters (so cardboard, in fact, that each girl is named after her own personality). Not a film that invites logic - and I didn't care for the spiritual undertones of the finale - but the madcap nature of the story was great fun. One of the weirdest films I've ever seen, but please take that in a positive way. Well, that was unexpected, and I think you must be the first person I've known to have seen this ahead of Suspiria. What prompted this particular venture? And if it was well-received, I would recommend (amongst many other things) The Legend of the Stardust Brothers, which has a similarly madcap tone sans the horror trappings. It's practically the urtext on the MTV generation, and therefore about as Western-accessible as Japanese cinema gets.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 5, 2021 15:53:36 GMT -8
I'm not sure if this is in refence to me; I remember spending a quiet evening in Laos refreshing the old Sopranos debate with this film at its crux and how 'reputation' didn't really figure into my personal pursuits. I assumed I'd saved all that text; now I'm not so sure. The text is all available somewhere, certainly on my end. My computer kind of died on me a couple of years ago, but most of my files are saved on a backup. That I will get around to moving. Eventually. In any case, it wasn't a reference to you specifically, although I do remember that was around the time your username became a verb for "avoiding such-and-such piece of pop culture entirely." Someone mentioned it on a film podcast I was listening to, and the description sounded bizarrely interesting. I wasn't too keen on checking it out, but I noticed it was on HBO Max and under 90 minutes, so I decided to give it a whirl. (I have reached the conclusion that HBO Max has the best film library of any streaming service - Disney Plus is also impressive, but I've already seen most of their tentpole offerings.) House reminded me a bit of those offbeat Adult Swim vignettes like Too Many Cooks - lots of random and illogical visuals, characters who oscillate between being horrified and blasé toward the events around them, a general sense of insanity that manages to be creepy and hilarious at the same time. It doesn't surprise me that the film was apparently dismissed by critics upon release and only gained popularity in the last decade or so; it seems pretty well-suited for the Internet meme generation.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jan 5, 2021 17:47:56 GMT -8
I think we all have to come to terms with the reality that no matter how praised this or that thing is, we're never going to have the inclination to watch everything that receives acclaim from critics, or praise from friends and acquaintances. I recall that guttersnipe's resistance to watching Fury Road was primarily rooted in him not enjoying the director's previous work, even in the same franchise. I noted that I myself wasn't really a big fan of the earlier Mad Max pictures, but simply found the recent film to be far more accomplished in virtually all areas. At any rate, we can use our time any way we please, and we all have our specific individual sensibilities, as it relates to the arts. I'm not really a car person, but I nonetheless greatly enjoyed the wild vehicular spectacle, and vivid (if certainly not deep) characters of Fury Road.
We'll see how the star of Queen's Gambit handles Charlize Theron's Furiosa character in the upcoming sequel (prequel?).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 5, 2021 19:47:18 GMT -8
Yes, I read your Letterboxd review of the film and thought it was quite good. Really nailed all the things that distinguished the film from standard action pics.
Furiosa is indeed intended as a prequel. Which is interesting, as my understanding is that Fury Road is itself a prequel to earlier Mad Max films. Time is a construct, I tell ya.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jan 5, 2021 20:08:54 GMT -8
Ah yes, Letterboxd. Haven't used that site in years. Got tired of logging every movie I watched, which became such a chore. Also, the (videogame console) mobile browsers I'd been using the past few years didn't render the site properly, making it impossible to use. (I finally grabbed a new laptop, so that's no longer an issue.)
Anyways, glad you enjoyed the flick. I think it's quite visually breathtaking.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Jan 6, 2021 5:20:38 GMT -8
I recall that guttersnipe's resistance to watching Fury Road was primarily rooted in him not enjoying the director's previous work, even in the same franchise. That's true, it is a kind of once-burned thing, although I do actually like the second Mad Max. But with the hitherto-trilogy as a whole, it's become for me one of those situations where I tend to prefer a film best described as "like such-and-such with this-or-that" over the source, so for example I thoroughly enjoyed Turbo Kid, which everyone describes as "Mad Max with BMXs" over the actual catalyst, much in the same way that I prefer most films that riff on the concept of The Most Dangerous Game over the actual The Most Dangerous Game itself. Ah yes, Letterboxd. Haven't used that site in years. Got tired of logging every movie I watched, which became such a chore. To this day I'm surprised that I can work up the effort to maintain a (very unsophisticated) film log, because the actual act of dropping countless titles into text documents is ridiculously boring. What's far tedious is updating my ranked Best Directors list, as IMDb's clumsy-ass interface has rendered it the most tedious bean-counting task imaginable.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 10, 2021 18:37:57 GMT -8
This week, on Stuff I Watched:
There Will Be Blood (2007): I think this is a prefect example of "film I appreciated and respected on every level but which did not click with me at all." It is well-written, skillfully directed, distinctly scored, and excellently acted... but much as I followed and appreciated the character arc for Daniel Day-Lewis' character and the themes and messages the film dealt with, none of it hit me beneath the surface level. I did enjoy the first ten minutes as an excellent use of silent storytelling, but the remaining two-and-a-half hours couldn't live up to that intro. I also have nothing against Paul Thomas Anderson as a director (Punch Drunk Love was excellent); this just wasn't my kind of film. Cinematic purists, feel free to turn thy noses upward.
Smiley Face (2007): Kind of hit-and-miss in spots, but quite funny overall. The film's key ingredient is Anna Faris, who spends the entire film playing a woman who is high on pot. (It never occurred to me before, but Faris can pull off that role like nobody else.) There are creative visuals and amusing non-sequiters, and a lot of great supporting actors - plus the 80 minutes just zip right by. What was the purpose of Carrot Top's three-second cameo?
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984): I watched Raiders years ago and found it pretty good, but it didn't inspire me to check out the sequels. But I'm back now with Indy 2, and it was... pretty lame. The love interest is annoying and loud, Short Round is annoying and racist, and the whole film is just kind of a bore. It does pick up in the last half-hour with the mine chase, though. Every action film worth its salt should be willing to throw in a mine chase.
Stay Tuned (1992): This is a very dumb film, but it does kind of feel like it was made for me. The story is packed with TV in-jokes and bad puns, and it has a lean, goofy vibe running throughout. (Though it's offset by some mean-spirited humor along the way.) The highlight is an animated sequence parodying Tom and Jerry - supervised by Chuck Jones! That scene is worth checking out for cartoon buffs; whether you'll enjoy the rest of the film depends on whether you chuckle when an elderly woman gets hit by a car in the Driving Over Miss Daisy scene.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jan 10, 2021 20:31:26 GMT -8
There Will Be Blood (2007): I think this is a prefect example of "film I appreciated and respected on every level but which did not click with me at all." It is well-written, skillfully directed, distinctly scored, and excellently acted... but much as I followed and appreciated the character arc for Daniel Day-Lewis' character and the themes and messages the film dealt with, none of it hit me beneath the surface level. I did enjoy the first ten minutes as an excellent use of silent storytelling, but the remaining two-and-a-half hours couldn't live up to that intro. I also have nothing against Paul Thomas Anderson as a director ( Punch Drunk Love was excellent); this just wasn't my kind of film. Cinematic purists, feel free to turn thy noses upward. This is precisely how I figured you'd respond to that film. It's very Artistically-made, but involves very unpleasant, single-minded people being very unpleasant and single-minded for its duration. In any case, though I rate the film higher than you do, I also think its best moments are when characters aren't speaking. In addition, Paul Dano (a fine actor, in general) didn't bring much nuance to his role, IMO (I didn't find much interior life in his work). You should still check out Phantom Thread, though, because the dynamics of the central relationship are more complex and engrossing...and darkly funny! As is Day-Lewis's character's relationship with his sister.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 11, 2021 6:40:24 GMT -8
The tonal rigidity was probably what put me off more than anything else. And that fed into the characters, who were pretty rigid in their morals throughout, even as we learn more about DDL's character as the film goes on. Paul Dano didn't click with me much, either, though I thought he did well for the role itself. (Curious to see how he does as the Riddler.)
Indeed, you've recommended Phantom Thread to me before, and I still want to check it out. Thankfully it's streaming on my new favorite service, so I hope to get to it shortly. (And maybe some other PTA films, if I like it.)
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jan 11, 2021 7:44:46 GMT -8
To be honest, it's not so much Dano as what he's given to work with. I just don't feel the character has much dimension, and is just there purely as a foil for Daniel Plainview.
Phantom Thread is on Netflix in Canada, but I imagine a different streaming service in the States. That said, if you want to see something lighter and more playful from PTA's filmography, perhaps check out Inherent Vice (if you haven't already seen it). It shares some qualities with The Big Lebowski, being a shaggy-dog detective story. Joaquin Phoenix is a lot of fun in it. The Master, on the other hand, might leave you colder than TWBB did: it leans heavily on behavioural repetition, which can prove a bit exhausting (it looks great in 70mm, though).
Anyways, I watched First Cow and If Beale Street Could Talk yesterday. Both fine films. I'll now return them to the library and pick up Portrait of a Lady on Fire (which I've been meaning to watch forever) and The Hunt.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 11, 2021 10:27:42 GMT -8
Yeah, Phantom Thread is on HBO Max currently in the US. There Will Be Blood is on Netflix; it looks like most of PTA's films are currently split between those two services. Thanks for the tips.
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on The Hunt, since it seems to have earned something of a polarizing reputation from critics and audiences. (I thought it was quite entertaining, beyond the uber-violent intro.)
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jan 11, 2021 11:19:13 GMT -8
Well, you're gonna have to wait quite a while for my thoughts on The Hunt, because I accidentally put a hold on the recent Richard Attenborough-narrated nature documentary instead. The stupid thing is, I think I had a hold on the Betty Gilpin film on DVD a while back, but then I saw (what I thought was) a Blu-Ray version, so I deleted one hold and replaced it with another. Oops.
Whatever, I'm sure it'll show up on the Canadian Netflix soon enough.
Back to Phantom Thread, I think you'll enjoy it more than TWBB partly because it's a battle of the sexes, rather than a lot of male posturing. Day-Lewis's character is an asshole in both pictures, but he's a bit more cartoonish in TWBB, which fully embraces caricature.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Jan 11, 2021 11:47:02 GMT -8
This week, on Stuff I Watched: There Will Be Blood (2007): ...none of it hit me beneath the surface level ...this just wasn't my kind of film. Cinematic purists, feel free to turn thy noses upward. I'm absolutely fine with this, as I've always felt that feel is a big part of art. I'd much rather that people are honest about not warming to something than pretending to do so (or even feeling obligated to do so) when the treatment comes off as distant, esoteric or calculated. I'd agree with J.C.'s statement that you might find The Master even more hard work, as it's practically Greenaway-cold.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jan 11, 2021 15:28:22 GMT -8
Yeah, I meant that "cinematic purists" line as a joke, since obviously most people reading this aren't going to get upset with my opinions. (Especially since I've had so many terrible ones in the past!) I'll hold off on The Master, but Phantom Thread does sound pretty interesting. And I like battles of the sexes. (Except Battle of the Sexes. That movie was lame.) Well, you're gonna have to wait quite a while for my thoughts on The Hunt, because I accidentally put a hold on the recent Richard Attenborough-narrated nature documentary instead. The stupid thing is, I think I had a hold on the Betty Gilpin film on DVD a while back, but then I saw (what I thought was) a Blu-Ray version, so I deleted one hold and replaced it with another. Oops. Ouch. A similar thing happened with me and Dunkirk a few years ago. The BBC released a new DVD version of their 2004 documentary in 2017, presumably as a way to cash in on the Nolan film. I put the film on hold, and was quite surprised when I got the disc and could not find Nolan's name anywhere on it.
|
|