What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Just Jim]

The original was the best drive-in movie ever made, bar none.

The original Star Wars? I never considered that. . . the drive-in in my hometown closed before I got my first car, so I missed out on a lot of the "drive-in mindset". But the space action would be incredible on the Really Big Screen. Lacking a drive-in, IMAX would work but it just wouldn't be the same.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Star Wars is no different from any other movie franchise--people either like them and are interested in seeing more, or they don't and aren't. When the first Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings movies were released I had a number of well-intentioned people tell me that I should see them 'cause they were "Your kind of movie." Nope. I have no interest in wizards and magic and trolls and dwarves and orcs and/or whatever else is in those movies; it's just not anything that appeals to me. And, yes, based on what little I know about them I can see parallels between those movies and the Star Wars movies, but the difference is in the way they're presented in the various franchises. Besides, I made the mistake of trying to read "The Hobbit" decades ago and found J.R.R. Tolkien to be one of the most long-winded and boring authors in the history of the printed word. That being said, at the urging of a few friends I did make a sincere effort to watch The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) when it came to cable. About 20-30 minutes in I was so bored that I fell asleep, and when I woke an hour later it seemed as if I hadn't missed anything so I found something more entertaining to watch.

Star Wars is different because it now has 40 years of dubious tradition to draw on. The overstated Lord of the Rings films and the insipid Harry Potters are not so venerable. I too fell asleep during The Fellowship of the Ring (at the cinema) and I was utterly bored during two Potter films I had to see (with a young child). Agree about author Tolkien, unutterably tedious prose. But Star Wars is especially grating to me because it was marketed at my generation in '77 and many of my friends absorbed it like it was a religious cult. I resisted it immediately. Vacuous cod mythology, atrocious dialogue, indifferent performances and lots of people flitting about in silly costumes - with possibly the most banal bad guy in the history of Cinema (this side of almost any Bond film).

But you're right: kid's franchised special effects films don't do it for me.

 

[Seb Lucas]

I was poisoned against the franchise before even seeing the first movie, thanks to my dad. He & his wife had walked out: "It was RIDICULOUS! Talking animals and s***!!" So, I was never into Star Wars.

And part of it was my "If it never happened, or never COULD happen, I won't waste time with it" mentality. Even at six, I thought that Dr. Seuss was ridiculous: I'd rather spend my time reading the encyclopedia and actually learning something real.

Interesting. I enjoy a good fantasy, there's 3000 years of major imaginative literature to draw upon, but 'good' is the operative word. Talking animals are fine (not that there are any in Star Wars - it's talking robots) if the writing is accomplished enough. But in fantasy films the lowest common denominator generally results in a screenplay that turns your brain into porridge.

 

[Seb Lucas]

The original was the best drive-in movie ever made, bar none.

Do you mean that when you hit the drive-in you are too busy making out to watch anything? If so, you may be right.

 

[OldStrummer]

I went to Star Wars: The Last Jedi last night as a guest of one of my employers, who rented a theater to entertain employees as a sort of holiday party. At the end, the millennials clapped and raved, and the older folks, like myself, just went "Hummph." In short, too much emphasis on the CGI and not enough on character development. The addition of the Disney "cute animals" was pitiful and needless. And it's a complete reboot (for the aforementioned millennials: A new Jedi Order, a new Resistance, and a new evil Supreme Leader. Yawn.

 

[Doctor Damage]

I was poisoned against the franchise before even seeing the first movie, thanks to my dad. He & his wife had walked out: "It was RIDICULOUS! Talking animals and s***!!" So, I was never into Star Wars

Why not make up your own mind?

And part of it was my "If it never happened, or never COULD happen, I won't waste time with it" mentality. Even at six, I thought that Dr. Seuss was ridiculous: I'd rather spend my time reading the encyclopedia and actually learning something real.

I bet you were a bore then, too.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Star Wars is different because it now has 40 years of dubious tradition to draw on. The overstated Lord of the Rings films and the insipid Harry Potters are not so venerable. I too fell asleep during The Fellowship of the Ring (at the cinema) and I was utterly bored during two Potter films I had to see (with a young child). Agree about author Tolkien, unutterably tedious prose. But Star Wars is especially grating to me because it was marketed at my generation in '77 and many of my friends absorbed it like it was a religious cult. I resisted it immediately. Vacuous cod mythology, atrocious dialogue, indifferent performances and lots of people flitting about in silly costumes - with possibly the most banal bad guy in the history of Cinema (this side of almost any Bond film).

But you're right: kid's franchised special effects films don't do it for me.

Nothing but negativity. Many months ago I gave up on posting in this movie/tv part of the forum because of this sort of ranting, mouthbreathing negativity and cheap chest-puffing attempts at signalling superiority. Thank goodness people like you are a minority around here.

 

[scottyrocks]

Why not make up your own mind?

I bet you were a bore then, too.

Opinions on movies are one thing, but getting personal is quite another. That was really uncalled for.

 

[AmateisGal]

Opinions on movies are one thing, but getting personal is quite another. That was really uncalled for.

Yes it was.

 

[Harp]

...the real reason to see this picture is Melissa Leo's absolutely searing Oscar-bait performance as the Reverend Mother, a soft-spoken, terrifying drill sergeant in a habit who is compelled to readjust her thinking in the wake of Vatican II despite her personal rejection of its reforms.

Concilium Vaticanum II perstringit ITERUM.
I spent eight years with the Sisters of Mercy and four years with the Christian Brothers and Jesuits.
My last conversation with a nun was with a Dominican, a lady with an English Lit
Oxford PhD, a most delightful sister, and a wonderful raconteur of her days
at Oxford. I was most fortunate to have been given a parochial education and my life
has been all the better for this.

 

[Trenchfriend]

It's bitter, that Warren Oates died already in 1982.
I always like him, because of his very strong, charismatic presence.

Say, what you want. When you're watching "Stripes", it's not Bill Murray and Harold Ramis. It's Warren Oates, upstaging all the others!

He didn't play Sgt. Hulka, he "was" Sgt. Hulka.

 

[Fading Fast]

... I was most fortunate to have been given a parochial education and my life
has been all the better for this.

I didn't go to parochial school but had many friends who did growing up and today know many adults who went as kids. Their views run the full gamut from hating it to loving it and everything in between.

The School in my neighborhood, Saint Francis of the Cabrini, was strict but not like in the movies - a slap on the wrist or tug at the collar was the extent of their physical punishment (at least as they told me) - so better than many of those schools in the '60s/'70s.

And while they hated some of the nuns, they also had strong and positive relationships with others.

Hence, I was glad to read your quote as I believe the experiences with parochial schools are varied and not as presented by movies and TVs which is almost always negative / sadistic / etc.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Previwed "Wonderstruck," which starts a three-day run with us tomorrow.

This is the most remarkable picture I've seen this year. It's based on a popular young-adult novel, the story of a young deaf girl in 1927 and a young deaf boy in 1977, and the mysterious connection they share, and while I haven't read the book, I have to imagine that the addition of visuals really does something special to the story.

The two stories interweave thruout the film, with the 1927 sequences shot in black and white, and the 1977 sequences in that queasy yellowish Eastmancolor familiar to viewers of 70s films. The period recreations are excellent -- the 1920s New York depicted in the little girl's story is not any kind of art-nouveau fantasy, but rather a thin layer of watery paint laid over the dowdy remains of previous decades: you can see the grimy ghost of the 1910s lurking in every scene. And the New York of the Abe Beame 70s shown in the boy's story has all the disagreeable reek of a dead rat decomposing in the sun, with some kind of telephoto lens being used to foreshorten the crowd scenes to make them seem even more uncomfortable. The 1920s scenes are also creatively shot, with the result being an evocative cross between the suffocating German Expressionism of Fritz Lang and the itchy gloom of a "Little Orphan Annie" comic panel.

All that aside, the story and the acting are pitch-perfect. The little girl, one Millicent Simmonds, is herself actually deaf, and she is a very gifted young performer, saying more with her eyes than any dozen actresses you can name can say with their mouths. All of her scenes are shot silent with musical accompaniment, as are many of the 1970s scenes -- the film is basically the first real part-talkie released in the US since 1930 -- but the performances are so uniformly good that you don't realize that there is actually very little dialogue in the film until the last third.

If you have kids, say eight to twelve, take them to see this picture when it comes to your town. Highly, highly recommended.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Why not make up your own mind?

I bet you were a bore then, too.

You find robust opinion distressing and here you go being abusive to another person. Much worse. If you can't take opinions different to your own that's perfectly reasonable but making it personal crosses a line, doesn't it?

Incidentally, I was not aware that we can't post opinions on movies.

 

[Benzadmiral]

It's bitter, that Warren Oates died already in 1982.
I always like him, because of his very strong, charismatic presence.

Say, what you want. When you're watching "Stripes", it's not Bill Murray and Harold Ramis. It's Warren Oates, upstaging all the others!

He didn't play Sgt. Hulka, he "was" Sgt. Hulka.

To this day I remember his sarcastic police captain (? I think that was his rank) in Blue Thunder. On MeTV and H & I as they run the old episodes of Have Gun Will Travel, Trackdown, and Wanted Dead or Alive, you can watch him move from minor thug walk-on (credited as Warren "Oats") to major thug characters. He also was one of only 3 people to play Rooster Cogburn, along with John Wayne and Jeff Bridges.

ETA: And I'd forgotten, but he also played Bogart's role, Charlie Allnut, in a TV-movie sequel to The African Queen (with Mariette Hartley as Rosie!).

 

[Harp]

To this day I remember his sarcastic police captain (? I think that was his rank) in Blue Thunder. On MeTV and H & I as they run the old episodes of Have Gun Will Travel, Trackdown, and Wanted Dead or Alive, you can watch him move from minor thug walk-on (credited as Warren "Oats") to major thug characters.

Warren Oates-a favorite character actor of mine-also appeared in the 1960s series Stoney Burke with Jack Lord.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Warren Oates-a favorite character actor of mine-also appeared in the 1960s series Stoney Burke with Jack Lord.

I faintly remember that series existing -- I mean I probably saw promos for it when I was small, and maybe even an episode or two -- but recall nothing else about it but the title. A sort of "modern" Western, was it?

 

[Harp]

A sort of "modern" Western, was it?

Rodeo bronc riding was the show's background. Stoney Burke; Lawman; Johnny Yuma; Have Gun Will Travel; Gunsmoke; Cheyenne;
The Rifleman; Bat Masterson; Maverick-all featured across the dial.

I recall a Have Gun Will Travel episode where Paladin informed a potential client that
he attempted to solve problems without resorting to violence-and he accordingly charged more.
This made a vivid impression, and I found his character deeper and more interesting for this fact.
All those shows were usually scripted around a moral story line.

 

[EngProf]

Paladin was, I think, unique in being a college-educated (West Point) hired-gun. He quoted the classics on a regular basis and I always felt a bit lacking in education by not recognizing most of them.

 

[belfastboy]

After watching Richard Gere in "Norman" and loving it and his performance I clicked on "The Dinner" another Netflix offering. Well not sure why I stuck with it til the ending as the movie was a complete dog (apologies to any canines reading this post)
The movie had no redeeming characteristics, the writing sucked, Steve Coogan doing his best (worst) Woody Allen. The whole movie was a big mess that made no sense whatsoever, on any level. I know it is futile and I am responsible but still I want my two hours of life back.