What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Julian Shellhammer]

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, with Youngest Shellhamer. This was the super-extended-enlarged-extra-mega-jumbo-double-wide edition, with lots of non-canonical characters, events, and plot points. But we both dug it, nonetheless. We want to watch the multitude of extras, but neither of us have that kind of time...

 

[Bushman]

I personally couldn't figure out what gave the extended edition its R rating. Perhaps it was the CGI violence against CGI trolls as bouncing Dwarves spilled their CGI blood everywhere? Truth be told, that entire part was more lighthearted than anything. Seemed like the perfect kind of violence you'd find in a "The Hobbit" movie.

 

[PeterGunnLives]

I'm finally watching John Ford's Cheyenne Autumn, separating it into a few viewing sessions as it is rather long and ponderous. Midway through the movie, there's a shift to a humorous tone with James Stewart as Wyatt Earp and some comical happenings. I find this kind of odd.

Oh-kayyy. So I finished the movie, and James Stewart and co. never come back after this sequence! It stands out as its own little completely unrelated "vignette" sandwiched between two sections of the main story. That was weird.

 

[Otter]

Kubo And The Two Strings. Beautiful example of stop motion animation, coupled with a great classic story.

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

I personally couldn't figure out what gave the extended edition its R rating. Perhaps it was the CGI violence against CGI trolls as bouncing Dwarves spilled their CGI blood everywhere? Truth be told, that entire part was more lighthearted than anything. Seemed like the perfect kind of violence you'd find in a "The Hobbit" movie.

Agreed. Lots of CGI orc squashing and decapitations. At the end of the credits it does say no orcs were harmed in the making of this film.

 

[AmateisGal]

Hidden Figures. An incredible film. I loved every minute of it. And it was the perfect film for a mother-daughter evening! Girl power!

 

[Fading Fast]

"Crossfire" form 1947

• A movie you could only have a major male part in if your first name was Robert - Robert Mitchum, Robert Ryan and Robert Young
• Solid film noir with some great pre and post-war architecture / sets / clothing (Young's suit is a herringbone tweed humdinger - over the top, but what the heck)
  • If you do watch it, try to catch the insanely cool "cab call" box outside the hotel
• Good murder mystery (spoiler alert) that becomes chilling when anti-semitism is revealed as the motive
  • The message was more effective before the preachy anti-racism speech - it took that part of the movie down to the level of an "After School TV Special"
• Not sure the movie's name fits as the victim was not caught in any crossfire, but instead, was specifically targeted
• You could tell a young Mitchum was headed for stardom - he stood out in a strong cast

 

[Doctor Strange]

Crossfire is notable for being pretty much the first significant mention of anti-Semitism in a Hollywood film - tied with Gentleman's Agreement, made the same year. The men who ran the Hollywood studios were nearly all immigrant Jews, but they'd spent decades avoiding broadcasting that, working overtime at presenting a predominantly WASP universe in their films. (Think Louis B. Mayer vs. the white-bread world showcased in M-G-M films.) The awful revelations of the Final Solution at the end of the war increased sympathy for Jews and opened the way to talking about the dangers of anti-Semitism.

The more interesting thing about Crossfire was that the film's big reveal of the motive was originally homophobia, but it was changed to anti-Semitism in a rewrite. That subject would remain forbidden a lot longer.

 

[Fading Fast]

Crossfire is notable for being pretty much the first significant mention of anti-Semitism in a Hollywood film - tied with Gentleman's Agreement, made the same year. The men who ran the Hollywood studios were nearly all immigrant Jews, but they'd spent decades avoiding broadcasting that, working overtime at presenting a predominantly WASP universe in their films. (Think Louis B. Mayer vs. the white-bread world showcased in M-G-M films.) The awful revelations of the Final Solution at the end of the war increased sympathy for Jews and opened the way to talking about the dangers of anti-Semitism.

The more interesting thing about Crossfire was that the film's big reveal of the motive was originally homophobia, but it was changed to anti-Semitism in a rewrite. That subject would remain forbidden a lot longer.

Of the two, IMHO, "Gentleman's Agreement" is more effective as it plows straight into the muck and proclaims loudly, "this is anti-semitism, this is how ugly it is - look at it." But the movie is so darn good, that it doesn't become a preachy / lesson movie - it's a darn fine movie, well written and well acted that thoughtfully shows how, quietly but insidiously, anti-semitism was part of "polite" society.

Separately, "Gentleman's Agreement" is in the top three of movies where the man chooses the wrong woman. Peck's character should have married Celeste Holm's character and not Dorothy McGuire's. It drives me nuts when Hollywood is so motivated to give the audience what it thinks it wants - a safe, conventional love story, which fits the prevailing "narrative" of marriage - that it misses the exciting, but obvious to the aware, unconventional love story in its midst.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Of course Gentleman's Agreement is more effective: here anti-Semitism is the central theme of an A-production "social problem" film based on an important book, not the surprise motive in a crime investigation in a film noir. And we're talking Elia Kazan, a brilliant director of actors whose films are nearly always focused on relationships/society, not Edward Dmytryk, a more "average" director. (They were on opposite sides in the Hollywood blacklisting mess, but that's another story.)

Totally agree with you about the wrong woman aspect. I suspect that's from following the plot of the source novel, so I don't know that I'd "blame" the filmmakers.

 

[Fading Fast]

Of course Gentleman's Agreement is more effective: here anti-Semitism is the central theme of an A-production "social problem" film based on an important book, not the surprise motive in a crime investigation in a film noir. And we're talking Elia Kazan, a brilliant director of actors whose films are nearly always focused on relationships/society, not Edward Dmytryk, a more "average" director. (They were on opposite sides in the Hollywood blacklisting mess, but that's another story.)

Totally agree with you about the wrong woman aspect. I suspect that's from following the plot of the source novel, so I don't know that I'd "blame" the filmmakers.

All good points and - you are correct - he goes for the wrong woman in the book, so I owe "Hollywood" an apology. Regardless, still kills me that he went for the wrong woman.

The "slightly sarcastic because she 'gets' and has lived life" woman who can throw a drink back with a man or hear a ribald joke without blushing, but is still feminine - and has a good heart - is the keeper even if she's a bit "rougher" around the edges.

 

[Bushman]

"White Fang" - the Jack London story of a boy and his wolf-dog.

Don't think the director knew what he wanted from the time period of this movie. The main villain wears a 1930s style fedora, and sometimes switches it up to a western style hat. And Alcatraz apparently just opened as a federal prison despite the film taking place during the Klondike Gold Rush.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Grace of Monaco on Netflix. I'll watch Nicole Kidman in anything... but it was just as terrible as all the reviews said.

 

[Touchofevil]

Finally got around to watching Black Mass last night. Entertaining enough once I got past the makeup on Johnny Depp.

 

[PeterGunnLives]

Grace of Monaco on Netflix. I'll watch Nicole Kidman in anything... but it was just as terrible as all the reviews said.

That's too bad. I've been kind of curious about this movie for a while. Now I'll avoid it!

 

[Fading Fast]

We had a "The Man Who Knew Too Much" marathon yesterday (Sunday's are different without football) and watched both the '34 and '56 versions.

1934

• Had the charm of the early English Hitchcock films: fast dialogue, fast plot development, modest budgets and early Hitchcock touches on camera angles, etc.
• Second movie I've seen with Nova Pilbeam - possibly the best kooky-crazy name ever, literally, ever
• The climactic gunfight scene was too long and suffered from fatigue - maybe the intent was to be operatic, but it fell flat
• I enjoyed it, but more as a 1934 early Hitch artifact than a great movie

1956

• Clearly Hitch had budget clout as the location shots were impressive and expensive - as were the clothes, cars and other period details
• The story was expanded and slowed down, but other than adding some details around the "bad guys," I didn't feel much value was added
• Hitch didn't handle the Macguffin with his usual deftness as he dwelled on it - the assassination attempt - so much, that I noticed that I didn't care about it
  • A good Macguffin either stays mysterious or is revealed but engaging - here it was revealed but ho hum.
• Doris Day didn't have an elegant or ethereal voice, but she could belt out a song

 

[Benzadmiral]

1947's The Lady from Shanghai, with Rita Hayworth and Orson Welles (who adapted the screenplay from a novel and apparently also directed). Not a bad thriller, despite Welles' lead character falling for a trap that either of my cats would have seen coming. Broadway actor Glenn Anders, however, as attorney Grimsby, clearly projects something on the verge of -- if not outright -- madness. And the film is visually stunning.

 

[Edward]

"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was 12.
Jesus, does anyone?" (Gordie)

I watched - and loved - that film when I was about fifteen. Saw it again in my late thirties; still loved it, but found I realted to it in a totally different way as an adult thinking back to being that age, as distinct from being a kid myself. Twenty odd years before my tiem when I was that gae, but some things are universal.

In Berg's biography, we're told that was an actual trait of Perkins in real life. Began when he was an adult and working at Scribner's, though I don't recall what started it.

Male pattern baldness, by any chance?

Bullitt (1968)

The '68 Mustang GT & '68 Dodge Charger car chase set the style for dozens of cop
films to come.

But for my money, I'll take the green VW Beetle.

I counted several times in which both cars had to pass the beetle.
Now that's speed!

Isn't that the car chase where the Mustang loses five (count 'em!) hubcaps, or am I thinking of something else?

It is the first of the "fake" beetles.....anything post 1967 is a downmarket beetle when they tried to jazz them up to enlarge their appeal. To me the 1967 was the finest of the beetles but then you would have the crowd that eschews anything past the first gen split windows models. I still miss my dark blue '67 that I rescued from a farmer's field. Scrapped it when the motor mounts rusted out.

The splits ans the ovals have a real aesthetic beauty, but certainly that later, big back window makes reversing a heck of a lot easier!

Some little know "Beetle" history

Not a lot of people are aware that The Love Bug was a remake of the German original,
Herbie geht in den Krieg....

As far as Star Trek goes, I'm a millennial, and the original series is the only Trek that I really watch on a regular basis. None of the others fit with a vintage lifestyle.

Do you deliberately avoid shows that don't fit within the 'vintage' period?

Watched the end of Beneath The Planet Of The Apes (1970) I finally figured out why these movies, with their low tech special effects and make up, were so much more scary then the new movies with great special effects and make up. Back then, being killed in a blink of an eye, from a missile flying thousands of miles was a real fear! Now, I fear my fellow drivers a lot more!

I have a feeling that the way the world is going, that won't be a 'change' you'll see much more of before long.

Of the Connery films, From Russia with Love is my favorite followed by Dr. No, Thunderball, and Goldfinger.

I don't watch the Roger Moore ones. Ick. (I know I may be in the minority, but I cannot stand Moore as Bond).

I think Timothy Dalton was a great Bond (again, I'm in the minority). I liked Brosnan as Bond at first, but when I look at those films now, ick again. They just don't hold up over time.

Of course, Daniel Craig is right after Connery in my list. Casino Royale was excellent as was Skyfall. Quantum of Solace was more of a character piece and showed Bond's quest for revenge more than anything, and SPECTRE, well, should have been better.

There is one true Bond - Connery. Then they tried five times to find a halfway credible replacement, which they found in Craig. There are no other Bonds, merely a series of rip-off films which present sub-standard actors in the Connery role.

Dalton seemed plausible, a human being. Brosnan slipped and became the caricature.

Fleming's Bond was a Royal Navy officer, WWII vet, and Cambridge graduate-by definition a man with some polish. A difficult character perhaps to capsulize.

I remember liking Dalton at the time, but looking back now he is diabolically awful in it. I can only assume that even he looked like a positive change after Roger Moore, so bad was Moore. Brosnan, a much better actor, suffered from poor writing (c/f Peter Capaldi being perfectly cast as Doctor Who, then having his tenure ruined by Steven Moffat's sub-par writing). Essentially, in the Brosnan era Bond had no idea what it was - the Cold War was done with, Bond's unironic misogyny outdated, and the whole fast disappearing into directionless, unintentional self-parody. (Mind you, with the exception of the Cold War being over, I'd apply the same critique to every one of the films from Live and Let Die onwards.) Craig had the advantage that the Bond people had seen the Bourne films, so had new inspiration. Casino Royale was great, Quantum I've tried to watch twice and couldn't make hider nor hair of, Skyfall was Bond stepping out of Bourne's shadow to be comfortably Bond again. I've not yet seen SPECTRE.

As I've said many times before, what they really need to do to refresh Bond is to go back to the original books and then start over, make it as a series for Netflix, as a period piece, true exactly to the books as and when they are set. The books shoulds be good for one or two to a series - that's a good, solid quantity for eight or nine series with the same cast.

 

[Edward]

Last week we went to see LaLa Land. It was..... okay. I felt it was extremely oversold as a "musical". The first two or three songs work, as they should, to drive the plot forward. After that, though, the music gradually drops off to the point where it's just a film with a couple of songs in it. Neither of the leads do very well with the (largely unmemorable) songs they are given. I was left with the feeling that either or both of them might have the potential to sing well, but the material is simply all wrong for their voices. Emma Stone seems like all her songlines are just half or a full octave above where she's entirely comfortable delivering them. I very much appreciated the 'realistic' ending (it was actually a pleasant surprise, for Hollywood). I liekd too how the two leads were dressed, and the nods to various classics (not all of which, I know, I picked up). Herself was disappointed in the sloppiness of the dancing, though it didn't bother me so much. I liekd how they were both dressed, though I found myself wishing throughout that they'd put Gosling in some decent, fifties-cut pegs rather than the low-waisted, narrow modern trousers. It felt somehow that that would have been more accurate to his character, without going overboard. Overall, I was left with the impression that this could as well have been a Woody Allen film with a little bit of music in it (not a musical), which I'd have watched on a plane and found it entertaining enough but wholly forgettable. I might watch it again one day if it's on TV or a plane and I have nothing else to do, but equally I won't seek it out. It's refreshingly different from a lot of the pap mainstream cinema throws up, but I'm mystified by the Oscars buzz (mind you, I have notihng but contempt for the Oscars in general, so...). We're going to see T2:Trainspotting tonight. I'm expecting much more from that.

 

[Feraud]

We're going to see T2:Trainspotting tonight. I'm expecting much more from that.

Was this released already??? I am so curious about it. Please give a review after you've seen it!