What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Bushman]

Ted 2. I think it's somehow funnier than the first one!

 

[Giftmacher]

Singin' in the Rain (for the first time)

 

[Formeruser012523]

Singin' in the Rain (for the first time)

How are you just now seeing this for the first time?

 

[Worf]

"Florence Foster Jenkins" - Great movie, sure Oscar nod for Grant and Streep. As a professional musician, I was worried that the "singing' was going to be too much to bear and it almost was. Poignant, funny, sweet and absolutely well done., but then again, I've aged into old softee territory. After reading up on her, she lived a helluva life.

"They may say I can't sing.... but they can't say I DIDN'T sing!"

Worf

 

[Giftmacher]

How are you just now seeing this for the first time?

I'm not much for movies, I prefer books

 

[Doctor Strange]

The Revenant. It was well done, but honestly, I think it was insanely overpraised. It's a remarkable true story, and it was beautifully photographed by the brilliant Emmanuel Lubezki, but geez, it's just Man In The Wilderness all over again. Leo won the Best Actor Oscar for a role that mostly consists of crawling and grunting?!? It didn't live up to the hype for me.

 

[Fading Fast]

The Revenant. It was well done, but honestly, I think it was insanely overpraised. It's a remarkable true story, and it was beautifully photographed by the brilliant Emmanuel Lubezki, but geez, it's just Man In The Wilderness all over again. Leo won the Best Actor Oscar for a role that mostly consists of crawling and grunting?!? It didn't live up to the hype for me.

I've avoided it for just the reasons you say. I had a feeling it was another example of "Gravity" an overhyped movie that Hollywood and its media acolytes convince themselves is great, meaningful movie making; when, in truth, it is, at best, just okay.

"Gravity" is a decent little film - that's it. I have no idea why it won all those awards and was a "must see" movie for all the "smart" people. I'll probably watch "The Revenant" in the next few years on cable sometime and might even enjoy it if it's been a long enough time from the hype-bubble and I go in with no expectations.

 

[Touchofevil]

I've avoided it for just the reasons you say. I had a feeling it was another example of "Gravity" an overhyped movie that Hollywood and its media acolytes convince themselves is great, meaningful movie making; when, in truth, it is, at best, just okay.

"Gravity" is a decent little film - that's it. I have no idea why it won all those awards and was a "must see" movie for all the "smart" people. I'll probably watch "The Revenant" in the next few years on cable sometime and might even enjoy it if it's been a long enough time from the hype-bubble and I go in with no expectations.

Having watched it on the big screen as well as television, I can tell you that you will have missed out on its impact. The cinematography has to be viewed on the big screen to understand why people were awed/wowed.
It was well acted and entertaining as well as too long. I think part of what made it enjoyable is that it is unlike most of what is out there and is of a time period I find interesting. Jeremiah Johnson, no, but it is better than many.

 

[Touchofevil]

Oh yeah, I have yet to watch Gravity partly because of reviews such as yours. At some point, I will get around to it.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I liked Gravity a lot more than this film. It's a far more remarkable example of Lubezki's amazing photographic skills than The Revenant (so is Birdman). It's one of the few films I've seen in 3D where I thought the 3D added anything (though it's nearly as effective on my 48" Sony with the sound pumped through my old four-speaker stereo). I thought the choice of casting likable and sympathetic Sandra Bullock for the main character was a masterstroke - the film wouldn't have worked without her. It gives a tangible sense of really being in space that few other space-set films have managed, and it keeps the tension going throughout.

And while much of what happens in the film is downright unbelievable or questionable scientifically, I love its use of mythic imagery: e.g., Bullock peeling off her spacesuit and falling asleep floating in the fetal position before her first "rebirth", then having to laboriously crawl onto land like our first ancestor who left the ocean at the climax, in yet another "rebirth".

Addendum: And Gravity is a short (91 min), fast-paced film that doesn't overstay its welcome. The Revenant is at least a half-hour too long (156 min).

 

[MisterCairo]

Two more Jack Taylor movies, The Pikemen and Magdalen Martyrs, both really good. Doing some research having seen German production credits, we've learned it's filmed partly in Bremen, Germany. Galway done via Bremen, interesting...

 

[Fading Fast]

Dr Strange and TOE all fair points. What gets me is not that these are bad movies - "Gravity" certainly isn't and, while I haven't seen "The Revenant," enough people, like you guys, that I respect leave me little doubt that it is, at minimum, a solid, entertaining movie - what gets me is the insane hype-machine that grabs onto one of these slightly "different" or "artsy" or "daring" movies trying to turn them into the next coming of "Citizen Kane."

It's off putting on the surface and, then, for me, sets up silly expectations that destroys my ability to just watch the film. Instead, I keep waiting for the "Moses is parting the ocean" aspect of this "great work" and it never comes. Had I heard nothing about "Gravity," I would have said it was a good, smart little film - well worth seeing. But it, IMHO, was so overshadowed by its hype, that I was disappointed when everything didn't wow me and I didn't reflect on it for days afterwards.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I understand completely. We have way too many "event films" that are overhyped these days.

For me, the most intensely disappointing film of the last year was Mad Max: Fury Road. I kept hearing it described as "the best film of last year" and an award-worthy four-star movie... and I found it to be a dumb action flick with zero character development, zero comprehensible plot, and "great performances" that were just poses. Okay, it had good action sequences and production design. But it was just a brain-dead action movie, a retread of a series that was junk to start with!

And don't even get me started on Abrams' Star Trek and Star Wars films...

 

[Touchofevil]

Dr Strange and TOE all fair points. What gets me is not that these are bad movies - "Gravity" certainly isn't and, while I haven't seen "The Revenant," enough people, like you guys, that I respect leave me little doubt that it is, at minimum, a solid, entertaining movie - what gets me is the insane hype-machine that grabs onto one of these slightly "different" or "artsy" or "daring" movies trying to turn them into the next coming of "Citizen Kane."

It's off putting on the surface and, then, for me, sets up silly expectations that destroys my ability to just watch the film. Instead, I keep waiting for the "Moses is parting the ocean" aspect of this "great work" and it never comes. Had I heard nothing about "Gravity," I would have said it was a good, smart little film - well worth seeing. But it, IMHO, was so overshadowed by its hype, that I was disappointed when everything didn't wow me and I didn't reflect on it for days afterwards.

I have felt towards much hyped films as you do towards Gravity. It is when I have viewed them again, with much lower expectations, that I have often enough changed my opinion and seen them to be much better than I thought. Of course, there have been enough moments where my opinion has not changed. I tend to avoid the views of critics until after I have watched a movie. Too often, we do not agree.

 

[Touchofevil]

I understand completely. We have way too many "event films" that are overhyped these days.

For me, the most intensely disappointing film of the last year was Mad Max: Fury Road. I kept hearing it described as "the best film of last year" and an award-worthy four-star movie... and I found it to be a dumb action flick with zero character development, zero comprehensible plot, and "great performances" that were just poses. Okay, it had good action sequences and production design. But it was just a brain-dead action movie, a retread of a series that was junk to start with!

And don't even get me started on Abrams' Star Trek and Star Wars films...

Yes. I looked forward to it with great anticipation, but felt let down. It had some nice cinematography, but was just okay as a story with entertainment value. It was, for me, the weakest of the series.

 

[Touchofevil]

I Wake Up Screaming

 

[Fading Fast]

I have felt towards much hyped films as you do towards Gravity. It is when I have viewed them again, with much lower expectations, that I have often enough changed my opinion and seen them to be much better than I thought. Of course, there have been enough moments where my opinion has not changed. I tend to avoid the views of critics until after I have watched a movie. Too often, we do not agree.

This happened to me with "Citizen Kane." I didn't see it as a kid - for whatever reason, this old-movie-loving kid missed that one. By the time I saw it as an adult, it sat atop all those "greatest movies of all time" lists and I had heard all the commentary about it being "brilliant" and "groundbreaking." When I finally saw it, of course I was disappointed, Jesus did not decent from heaven once while I was watching.

Then, after avoiding it for several years, I saw it again and fell in love with it. I didn't even want to watch it the second time, it just happened and with antipathy going in, I got it and now love the movie.

 

[Touchofevil]

This happened to me with "Citizen Kane." I didn't see it as a kid - for whatever reason, this old-movie-loving kid missed that one. By the time I saw it as an adult, it sat atop all those "greatest movies of all time" lists and I had heard all the commentary about it being "brilliant" and "groundbreaking." When I finally saw it, of course I was disappointed, Jesus did not decent from heaven once while I was watching.

Then, after avoiding it for several years, I saw it again and fell in love with it. I didn't even want to watch it the second time, it just happened and with antipathy going in, I got it and now love the movie.

This happened with The Third Man for me.

 

[Formeruser012523]

I'm not much for movies, I prefer books

Good answer.

This happened with The Third Man for me.

I've tried to love The Third Man, but I just . . . can't. Yes, it's beautifully shot. Yes, it's got Orson Welles everyone's seemingly perfect actor. I've seen it more than once trying to see what I've heard others love about it, but . . . nope.

 

[Touchofevil]

Good answer.



I've tried to love The Third Man, but I just . . . can't. Yes, it's beautifully shot. Yes, it's got Orson Welles everyone's seemingly perfect actor. I've seen it more than once trying to see what I've heard others love about it, but . . . nope.

I disliked it pretty strongly so the first time. It might have been the soundtrack or the expectations, I do not know. Like you, the cast, the cinematography, its reputation, I should have liked it. I couldn't stand it. Years later, somehow I found myself watching it and for whatever reason it clicked. I do not love it, but I now enjoy it. Although I still dislike the soundtrack.