What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Fading Fast]

Ok, so I probably shouldn't say this and take the chance of being ran out of the lounge on a rail but ...............I have never seen the Maltese Falcon! Hold on.........just when you thought it couldn't get any worse it does....... I also was an acting major! Sooooooo with that in mind and not a single excuse good enough to justify never seeing it, I think I am going to sit down this evening and watch it.

Enjoy - looking forward to your first impressions. That said, for me, when I have never seen a classic that I've heard about for years or decades - how wonderful it is / how iconic / how... - I tend to be disappointed the first time I see it and, then, blown away by how good it is the second or third time I see it when my expectations have been reset much lower.

 

[JC225]

Well it's official, I have seen the "Maltese Falcon"! It's funny because I can't remember having to watch it in any film classes or it being part of any required assignments. I did see "The African Queen", "Casablanca" and several others over the years but not the falcon and I can't believe I didn't catch it on the TCM channel. I do remember however the first time I became aware of the film. One of our instructors was a huge Humphrey Bogart fan and had framed photos of him all over his office. He said that "Maltese Falcon" was his favorite movie and even had a replica of the falcon sitting on his desk.

Well I'm glad I can say that I have seen it, enjoyed it and now own it.

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

About a week ago, it was China Seas (1935) with Clark Gable, Jean Harlow, Wallace Beery, and as a bonus, Robert Benchley. Gable is tough as nails captain of a steamer plying the - wait for it - China seas, and Harlow is his sometimes sweetie with a wildly checkered past. You should see this one for the vignettes with Benchley. No spoilers, but his conversations with other passengers are surreal.

Then, some time later, From the Earth to the Moon (1958) with Joseph Cotten, George Sanders, Debra Paget, and many more. The 1950s trying to replicate the 1870s via Jules Verne. Lots of speechifyin' then a trip to the moon with some complications. I paused the movie when Cotten declares he was going to the moon, and it was at 42 minutes into an IMBD-listed run time of 101 minutes.

The other night, One Fatal Hour, or as TCM presented it, Two Against the World (1936), with Humphrey Bogart and Beverly Roberts. A remake of the earlier Five Star Final from 1931, with a radio corporation in the place of a newspaper.

And as dessert, Goofy in Double Dribble from 1946. Most of the Goofy "how to" cartoons are laugh out loud funny, and this one, with University U. taking on upstate rival Polytechnic University (P.U.) in hoops, is equally hilarious.

 

[belfastboy]

TCM's...…"I Never Sang For My Father"....Hackman and Melvyn Douglas. What a master class in acting. Damn, that Hackman guy really can act. This is the finest movie I have ever seen dealing with the father/son dynamic. I might just watch it again....very seldom to never do I do that.

 

[redlinerobert]

The Unsuspected, with Claude Rains last night on TCM. Great movie.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Blade Runner 2049 - dull, derivative and pretentious.

 

[Fading Fast]

Over the past few weeks and for the first time in several years, I watched the first two Daniel Craig Bond movies, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

Casino Royale has held up very well with, for a Bond movie, a tight and engaging story (thank you Ian Fleming, as it was based on one of the original books); whereas, Quantum of Solace, while still superior to most, maybe all, of the Moore-Dalton-Brosnan-Bond pics, feels more generic action-adventure-hero like than an original Bond movie.

The good in both is that most of the cheesy, cliché Bond lines and tics are gone resulting in a Bond that feels more like a genuine secret agent than, as he had become, a comic-book version of one. Unfortunately - and I'm sure modern audience expectations and demands require this - the action scenes, while visual stunning, are completely unbelievable. I guess you just have to go with it, and most of the time I can, or you end up taking yourself out of too many movies altogether.

Craig and the new approach "saved" the Bond franchise, at least for another decade or so; so good on them, but for my money, there are only four must-see iconic Bond films - the first three plus Casino Royale.

 

[Formeruser012523]

Blade Runner 2049 - dull, derivative and pretentious.

Don't know why but this made me laugh really loud. This is how I felt about the first one. No offense to you that loved it. To each their own, I suppose.

 

[belfastboy]

"Lady from Shanghai" I thought Orson Wells and Rita Hayworth would be worth a watch.....damn, was I wrong. What a mess. Movie made no sense whatsoever. If I was not so lazy would have turned it off but it was early and if I turned it off would have had to find something else. One on my recorded "The First 48" episodes would have been better...hell anything would have been better.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Don't know why but this made me laugh really loud. This is how I felt about the first one. No offense to you that loved it. To each their own, I suppose.

You know, I thought that too as I was writing it down. I've met a lot of people who would describe the original this way too.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Over the past few weeks and for the first time in several years, I watched the first two Daniel Craig Bond movies, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

Casino Royale has held up very well with, for a Bond movie, a tight and engaging story (thank you Ian Fleming, as it was based on one of the original books); whereas, Quantum of Solace, while still superior to most, maybe all, of the Moore-Dalton-Brosnan-Bond pics, feels more generic action-adventure-hero like than an original Bond movie.

The good in both is that most of the cheesy, cliché Bond lines and tics are gone resulting in a Bond that feels more like a genuine secret agent than, as he had become, a comic-book version of one. Unfortunately - and I'm sure modern audience expectations and demands require this - the action scenes, while visual stunning, are completely unbelievable. I guess you just have to go with it, and most of the time I can, or you end up taking yourself out of too many movies altogether.

Craig and the new approach "saved" the Bond franchise, at least for another decade or so; so good on them, but for my money, there are only four must-see iconic Bond films - the first three plus Casino Royale.

I'm certainly no fan of Craig or Bond but I think this is a good assessment. Bond has now just become a kind of improbable lower tier Marvel superhero. Casino Royale really made the genre and the character viable again and for a while the franchise was diverted from kitsch and overstatement.

 

[Seb Lucas]

"Lady from Shanghai" I thought Orson Wells and Rita Hayworth would be worth a watch.....damn, was I wrong. What a mess. Movie made no sense whatsoever. If I was not so lazy would have turned it off but it was early and if I turned it off would have had to find something else. One on my recorded "The First 48" episodes would have been better...hell anything would have been better.

As a Welles aficionado there's some great stuff in this film (still just visible after studio re-editing) but simple narrative isn't one of these. Welles was never great with story or plot to be honest, but his vast artistic energy and visual ingenuity generally propels you. This film is really one for the fans.

 

[scottyrocks]

The last movie I watched that I hadn't seen before was Bladerunner 2049 (2017).

The story centers around a bladerunner (Ryan Gosling) in the year 2049 who goes on a quest to locate the 'infamous' bladerunner (Harrison Ford) from the original film, released in 1982, but took place in 2019. 2049 is not a remake of the original.

The tone of the newer film is certainly reminiscent of the original, which can be a good or bad thing, depending on your tolerance, lack there of, or enthusiasm for it.

Both films are bleak and slow, but in an interesting way, in my opinion. 2049 benefits from the computer-generated ability to achieve realistic, broad scope visual effects, which went a long way in making the story more science-fiction-like than the original, which has more of a neo-noir feel. This sense of realism also extended to the murders, some of which were brutal.

The character relationships were interesting, particularly the one between Gosling and his CGI companion. It was a pretty amazing concept, and their relationship, and how she achieves her ultimate physical goal with him, were fascinating and touching.

One thing I am not sure about is how I feel about Ford reprising all these characters from 30 years ago. Maybe my disappointment in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) is causing this, although it was nice to see him in The Force Awakens (2015), although I was very disappointed in the character's death, as it didn't serve any purpose to the story as far as I could see. But it has been reported that Ford wanted the character killed off as early as The Empire Strikes Back (1980).

There have been reports that Ford was happy that the character was killed off in TFA, that he was sad that the character was killed off in TFA, that he insisted the character was killed off in TFA, and that it was director J.J. Abrams' idea that the character was killed off in TFA. Regardless of which one or combination it was, my reaction is:

 

[belfastboy]

As a Welles aficionado there's some great stuff in this film (still just visible after studio re-editing) but simple narrative isn't one of these. Welles was never great with story or plot to be honest, but his vast artistic energy and visual ingenuity generally propels you. This film is really one for the fans.

Yes, I concede his use of shadow was effective in establishing the noir aspect. I also suppose in its time the mirror scene at the end was perhaps groundbreaking while to my modern eyes was over the top gimmicky. Rita Hayworth while not giving a great performance was certainly eye candy.

 

[Worf]

The Maltese Falcon is a good if not great movie, one the pillars of "Film Noire". Murders, thugs, bad women and hard boiled Private Eyes. I think you'll enjoy it.

Worf

 

[Worf]

The one, the only, the ORIGINAL "Gojira" (Godzilla) in all it's grainy B&W glory! They didn't mince words in this one about where and how Gojira acquired his radioactive breath... U.S. H-Bomb tests in the Pacific. And the best part is no stone faced Raymond Burr mucking up whats already a great movie! No cutesy wootsey kids in this one. Just a fire breathing city destroying monster with a roar ripped from the pits of hell and a tread like thunder!

Worf

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

Friday it was Them! (1954). The Missus had never seen it and was expecting Big Bugs Behaving Badly, but was surprised how well it told the story. I hadn't seen it for decades and was equally impressed.

 

[Fading Fast]

A Successful Calamity from 1932 with George Arliss, Mary Astor and Grant Mitchell

Some movies work by going the straightforward route of simply telling a story without multiple layers, "witty" distractions or complex plot ploys. A Successful Calamity is such a straightforward effort and, while it's not a great film, it's a fine 72 minute effort of whimsy that - one assumes (as they made many like it) - played well to Depression-Era audiences.

A successful international banker (Arliss) returns from a year abroad helping the President launch a foreign policy initiative requiring a bond issuance only to find his college-aged son and daughter and young second wife engaged in so many high-society events that they hardly have time to welcome him home.

But this is not a mean-spirited movie where the kids and wife are obnoxiously greedy or dismissive of the man paying for it all -- it's more of a blithe unawareness that their lives have become social dross leaving them "simply too busy" to spend a night at home having dinner with their dad or, for Mary Astor, her husband.

And Wall Street tycoon dad, played by bemused-by-it-all George Arliss, is more frustrated than angry as he, by default, spends his evenings with his long-time butler (wonderful played by Mitchell) who has become his friend and confident.

It is during one of those evenings that Mitchell inadvertently give Arliss an idea. He tells him the poor don't have these problems with their families as "the poor rarely go out." From here, Arliss contrives to tell that family that he's "ruined" (bankrupt).

Propitiously, the family quickly rallies by cutting its spending and social engagements and dad finally gets to have dinner and spend time with them. Trying to help, his daughter accepts a marriage proposal from a wealthy beau she had been putting off while his son plans to quit college to get a job. The wife, too, initially seems willing to help by stoping her spending and providing emotional support to her husband.

While not fitting today's accepted pieties, (but in possibly the best scene in the movie) the butler, upon learning of his employer's troubles, presents his employer with a $3000 check - his entire life savings - and says he will always do all he can for his friend and employer. Cynically chuckle all you want, but these men, as later events show, are friends in the best meaning of the word.

Now that he's spending time with his wife and children, the father has to somehow "unwind" his fake bankruptcy without alienating the family. Additionally, in the "you never really know" category, young wife Astor, after an initial show of fortitude, appear to, maybe, be jumping ship for greener (tee-hee) pastures.

From here, a lot happens in a hurry (a common occurrence in a just-over-an-hour movie). Dad, Arliss, with the inadvertent help of his looking-for-a-job son, successfully closes a major takeover deal; he also repays his butler-friend with a hundred percent bonus while his daughter gets rejected by the now-suspicious-of-her-motives wealthy beau. Additionally and concernedly, the wife, as noted, wobbles and disappears with her jewelry just before the father announces to the family that they are not "ruined."

The wrap-up from there is quick and fun, as is the entire movie. The message to Depression-Era audiences seems to be that, rich or poor, family and friends, not money, is what matters. This was a common movie message that the struggling population seemed to enjoy. Many movies of the time deliver a version of it, while, oddly, highlighting the wealth and opulence of the tippity top of society.

Two other small fun things to note. One, Mary Astor, playing what today we'd call of "trophy wife," as she's the much younger second wife of a wealthy Wall Street banker, is the exact same age as her step daughter - a somewhat awkward occurrence that still happens today and still generates snickers, derision and tabloid media attention.

And, two, Arliss is only able to pull off his corporate takeover deal by engaging in activities that would be illegal today, but since this is a '32 movie and the relevant security laws were enacted in The Security and Exchange Acts of '33 and '34, his machination, while looking dirty to us today, were perfectly legal at the time.

Hence, today, the law says you can no longer buy a controlling amount of a company's stock anonymously through a third party, but the law does still allow a man to marry a woman the same age as his adult daughter.

 

[Worf]

Friday it was Them! (1954). The Missus had never seen it and was expecting Big Bugs Behaving Badly, but was surprised how well it told the story. I hadn't seen it for decades and was equally impressed.

Yeah the first and truly the best of the "giant irradiated insect" movies. Solid story telling from beginning to end. The think the little yelp Arness lets out when the giant ant almost gets him in the end was probably unplanned.

Worf

 

[Fading Fast]

The Girl Downstairs from 1938 with Franchot Tone, Franciska Gall and Walter Connolly

• A society playboy (Tone) is banned from seeing his society girlfriend by her father (Connolly) so he tries to keep contact with his girlfriend via the girlfriend's family's kitchen maid who, owing to series of misunderstandings, comes to believe she is dating Tone (who tells her he's a chauffeur)

• It's as silly and forced as it sounds and it's not helped at all by Gall who plays the maid as a mental simpleton to the point of being irritating

• You've probably guess this already, but the maid falls hard for Tone, while Tone vacillates between wanting his society girl and seeing the inherent goodness of the maid

• The best part of this one is Connolly who - since he's played the aggrieved/bemused father of so many marriageable daughters, he could probably use the same dialogue from movie to movie - still brings a spark of enthusiasm to this flat effort

• And this goofy movie exposes the power of stars as Grant and Hepburn or Flynn and Davis would have been able to carry this fluff over the finish line; whereas, try as they do, Tone and Gall just can't quite do it