What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Zombie_61]

The Caine Mutiny (1954). The only thing I could say about this movie that probably hasn't been said already would be that I wish they had cast someone other than Robert Francis in the role of Ensign Keith--I found his rather wooden performance annoying and not believable, especially compared to the performances of the otherwise stellar cast. Aside from that, I enjoyed it a lot and would recommend it to anyone.

 

[Doctor Strange]

It's not just his performance, it's the familiar syndrome of the narrator/POV character who's reasonably compelling in a novel coming across as a non-entity, an uninteresting observer of the action in a film adaptation.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Portions of 1971's spaghetti western-like Hannie Caulder, with Raquel Welch and Robert Culp, plus the character-actor strengths of Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin, and Jack Elam. I don't know how the film begins; when I picked it up, Culp is just leading her off to Mexico, to have a gun made for her (by Christopher Lee!), and teach her how to shoot. The entire sequence I thought was well-done -- the script does not make it easy for her to learn to draw and fire a six-shooter and hit what she aims at. And while Raquel is nobody's Helen Mirren, she's fine, and Culp is dynamite, as usual.

 

[MRB1248]

"Dead Pool" - Well it's got an "R" rating and it sure earnt it! Definitely NOT your Dad' superhero flick.... and I wouldn't let kids under 15 see it either! Insane and profane is the best way to describe it. You should really be a long time Marvelite (denizen of the Marvel Universe... Captain America, the X-Men and Spiderman) to get all the inside jokes. And there are a TON of inside jokes. I'd rate it somewhere between Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant Man... but way dirtier than both. We laughed a ton. I recommend it!

Worf

So glad I read this, I was thinking of taking my son to see Deadpool this weekend. Maybe next year.

 

[Worf]

So glad I read this, I was thinking of taking my son to see Deadpool this weekend. Maybe next year.

No problem. Kids hear that kinda language enough without paying for it and as a "modern" kid I'm sure he's seen more things than are presented in the movie. But... he can pay to see them when he's older.

Worf

 

[Lean'n'mean]

'Jauja' (2014)
'Backcountry' (2014)
'Forsaken' (2015)
'Diablo' (2015)

In that order.....

 

[Doctor Strange]

The recent Pixar "masterpiece" Inside Out. It didn't live up to the hype for me. Some very cool ideas and sequences throughout, and beautifully done with the usual Pixar skill... but I just couldn't emotionally engage with it.

 

[Touchofevil]

Killer's Kiss right now on the MGM HD channel.

 

[nick123]

Foreign Correspondent

A++++

 

[AmateisGal]

Foreign Correspondent

A++++

Great movie!

 

[Bushman]

Currently watching "Gandhi".

 

[Worf]

"Revenant" - A decent film that's about 30 minutes too long. Too many dream sequences... too many scenes of abject frigid misery. Plenty of gore and violence and very realistic on both counts. Still, after all these months it was almost sold out. Lots of legs with this film. The median age of the audience must've been about 65 though.... interesting.

Worf

 

[cw3pa]

"Manhattan Melodrama" (1934) Good movie with a good cast. William Powell & Myrna Loy pre "Thin Man". A bit preachy toward the end. Also has an early version of "Blue Moon" sung by Shirley Ross at the Cotton Club.

 

[Fading Fast]

"Revenant" - A decent film that's about 30 minutes too long. Too many dream sequences... too many scenes of abject frigid misery. Plenty of gore and violence and very realistic on both counts. Still, after all these months it was almost sold out. Lots of legs with this film. The median age of the audience must've been about 65 though.... interesting.

Worf

Funny you mention the age being 65 as I read an article in this weekend's Wall Street Journal that said people over fifty engage with movies like the "Revenant" more than the Millenials because the Millenials have a more cynical, "it's all fake" view of movies. Not that they don't go to or enjoy movies, but that they are more removed - not as emotionally involved in them - as older generations were. The author of the article said, "... I have kids in their 20s, intelligent, well aware of film, who find it far-fetched that I might go to movies to be “involved” with characters, to identify with their situation." Seems very consistent with your observation and makes you wonder what movies will be like in thirty years.

 

[MisterCairo]

"Manhattan Melodrama" (1934) Good movie with a good cast. William Powell & Myrna Loy pre "Thin Man". A bit preachy toward the end. Also has an early version of "Blue Moon" sung by Shirley Ross at the Cotton Club.

John Dillinger loved every thing about it, except the ending.

 

[Fading Fast]

Caught about thirty minutes of "Chariots of Fire" last night on TCM. I knew I only had about a half hour, so I just watched the scenery, the sets, the lighting, the clothes, the cars, etc. and they are all outstanding. Despite being done in the early '80s, the movie showed an attention to detail that was rare then, but that we've come to expect today even from period TV shows.

 

[Fading Fast]

"Manhattan Melodrama" (1934) Good movie with a good cast. William Powell & Myrna Loy pre "Thin Man". A bit preachy toward the end. Also has an early version of "Blue Moon" sung by Shirley Ross at the Cotton Club.

Agreed - a good solid pre-code whose plot is a bit too contrived, but still a fun picture, that has a bit of a modern feel and, as you noted, an outstanding cast before they all became super famous.

 

[Worf]

Funny you mention the age being 65 as I read an article in this weekend's Wall Street Journal that said people over fifty engage with movies like the "Revenant" more than the Millenials because the Millenials have a more cynical, "it's all fake" view of movies. Not that they don't go to or enjoy movies, but that they are more removed - not as emotionally involved in them - as older generations were. The author of the article said, "... I have kids in their 20s, intelligent, well aware of film, who find it far-fetched that I might go to movies to be “involved” with characters, to identify with their situation." Seems very consistent with your observation and makes you wonder what movies will be like in thirty years.

Well, with a 22 year old in the house I get to watch this close up. I think that's why they prefer comedies and Superhero flicks because all they need to do is laugh or watch the pummeling and over the top violence knowing no one dies or gets hurt. But movies, especially bio pics like "Run", "Unbroken" and "42" they tend to avoid like the plague. Maybe they don't want to be reminded of man's true inhumanity towards his fellow man. However every once in a while my son will mention a movie, something deep and thoughtful, and totally catch me off guard. He hasn't watched a movie with us in years... but he must be hittin' the flicks with someone.

Worf

 

[Touchofevil]

"Revenant" - A decent film that's about 30 minutes too long. Too many dream sequences... too many scenes of abject frigid misery. Plenty of gore and violence and very realistic on both counts. Still, after all these months it was almost sold out. Lots of legs with this film. The median age of the audience must've been about 65 though.... interesting.

Worf

We also thought that the film went about thirty minutes too long. The liberties with what did and did not happen are somewhat annoying and yet they do not detract From the fact that it was a nicely done intense flick.

 

[green papaya]

I saw "APOCALYPSE NOW REDUX" picked up the DVD for one dollar at the swap meet , lots of extra scenes not shown in the original theatrical release back in 1979

the extra scenes are not really necessary, they are interesting, but make the movie last too long, almost an hour longer than the original movie I saw in the theater in 1979

I also have the original version without the extra scenes