Last Film You Watched?

Gangster Squad. I didn't like it all that much, and I think that says a lot since I tend to like pulpy flicks. There's just a lot of wasted potential. It's beautifully shot, the costumes and set pieces are meticulously designed, and the cast is stellar. What's lacking is the script -- what's happening on screen is simply just not that interesting. There's no rising action in the second act, the stakes for the main characters are non-existent, and the character motivations are surface level at best. I mean, I wasn't expecting a great movie in the first place and I was still let down.
 
What's lacking is the script -- what's happening on screen is simply just not that interesting. There's no rising action in the second act, the stakes for the main characters are non-existent, and the character motivations are surface level at best. I mean, I wasn't expecting a great movie in the first place and I was still let down.
Word is that the same writer just turned in a draft for the Justice League movie, and it was so bad the studio scrapped the project for now.
 
Silver Linings Playbook

I was surprised how much I liked this film. There is a lot of depth here, beyond just "romance" Really enjoyed it.
 
Silver Linings Playbook

I was surprised how much I liked this film. There is a lot of depth here, beyond just "romance" Really enjoyed it.

Yeah, I liked it too. Jennifer Lawrence didn't impress me much in The Hunger Games, but here she proved herself a great actress. Simple but moving film.
 
I watched BRANDED, it was interesting but not quite what I wanted it to be. The Paperboy was good but depressing. Cosflopolis put my wife to sleep. I fast forwarded through the rest of the movie. As interesting and bizarre as some of the events were the whole thing was weighed down severely by lengthly, dry monologues. All the dialogue was very stiff and dry and often preachy.

Right now I'm in the middle of Fat Kid Rules The World, which is well paced with characters that aren't total cliches, well acted with a good script. Funny but the humor isn't forced. Directed by Matthew Lillard which made me think he might have directed SLC Punk as well as starred in it, he didn't but it sort of explained the punk rock connection. EDIT: This movie goes to a dark place. It's about addiction in some aspects. The end is kind of a blue baller. Still worth watching. Not really a comedy though.
 
Last edited:
I just watched "Company of Heroes" Tom Sizemore, Chad Michael Collins, Vinnie Jones . For someone who's a WWII fan I'm sure this will satisfy them. Tom Sizemore and Vinnie Jones both performed as expected. The cinematography was fine as was the directing but storywise it just didn't do anything for me. Maybe Inglorious Bastards was an exception but in 2013 and we are still making movies about killing germans - who cares. I'm sure there are thousands of stories to be mined from WWII ... but lets see something new.
 
Lawless.

Lawless.

I couldn't look away from "Lawless". The era is beautifully and accurately recreated. Tom Hardy never falters, never slips out of character. And even Shia LeBouf, (who I've never been too impressed with before), did a good job.

I'd watch it again. :)
 
Yeah, I liked it too. Jennifer Lawrence didn't impress me much in The Hunger Games, but here she proved herself a great actress. Simple but moving film.

I think Jennifer Lawrence has a huge future ahead of her, Batutta. As long as she picks her projects carefully, she can hardly go wrong.
 
Hunger Games, for my sins. DP needs to take his ritalin and sit in the naughty corner.

Yes, EBS, it would have been much better with a stable camera. Still, it wasn't a bad story, and Jennifer Lawrence's presence made up for it, I thought.
 
I'll give you that Jennifer Lawrence was okay in it but this really is the shallowest film of its genre. I know it's for kids but it was an awful story with a couple of okay moments. The fantasy world could have run as obfuscation for real world structures and issues...not that I saw. Maybe the briefest touch on fame (or something) with the sponsor thing. If you look for it (really hard) I guess you could argue they paid lipservice to the stale playground stereotypes. But it was half-arsed, tipped the hat without any meaningful exploration. This was no Battle Royale. It was derivative without understanding, lacking in credible motivations and full of logic holes. All of which could have been easily forgiven if treated to a cohesive production design, interesting baddies or even just a sense of fun. All MIA.

Not a terrible film, just mediocre. A bland paint-by-numbers affair with only grey left in the pot. It doesn't become a bad film until you add the cameraman hopped up on red cordial! On the other hand I watched it again with alcohol, company and the rifftrax replacement audio track and enjoyed it a whole lot more. :)
 
The good shepherd. DP Bob Richardson on 35mm.

Stuff shot on film the past 5 or 6 years just looks gorgeous.
 
Finally caught up on a couple of movies by my favourite director Rolf de Heer.

Dr Plonk - a chance discovery of some perfectly preserved raw film stock from the silent era found in usable condition prompted the director to make a silent movie (4 years before The Artist). Unfortunately, as much as I wanted to love it because it is a Rolf movie, it fell flat for me. It is a silent b+w time travel movie. It's nods and references, bending forgotten conventions of early cinema to a new purpose is interesting. But while the core idea is cute, doesn't sustain the movie for anywhere near it's slight 70 minute play time. The performances and locations are spot on but on the whole it doesn't really work as more than a curiosity. From a technical point of view it's interesting if you've never seen a good transfer of an old film. When I was younger watching b+w movies on tv I thought the film stock was of lower quality back then but it was just the transfer. This is made on genuine raw film stock that miraculously survived for decades in an old trunk and the resultant footage is crystal clear. Just a pity such a rare find wasn't used to capture a greater movie.

Ten Canoes - in contrast this unusual movie was fascinating. Inspired by a photograph of aborigines taken in the 30s by an anthropologist that fascinated Rolf and David Gulpilil (the narrator in the movie), the director's goal was to facilitate the telling of indigenous story. It is an examination of the role of story in indigenous culture, a story within a story used to educate an impetuous young man on the path he has chosen and an elder's use of the story to defuse approaching conflict in the tribe. It was filmed on location in arnhem land in the north of australia and spoken entirely in dialects local to the region (excepting some narration). The key filmic device is use of black and white to show the present day (in the film - set before contact with white colonials) in the style of the inspiring photo, while the dreamtime past of the story within a story is filmed in colour. A very interesting film, one of Rolf's best. He's a very much a 'road less taken' kind of director and while Dr Plonk is something of a failed experiment this one is a worthy addition to his eclectic body of work.
 
I watched Pitch Perfect the other night. It wasn't terrible. Had some funny moments. Nothing really to write home about cinematically, but nothing too terrible either. Had typical plot holes and short comings, but had some unexpected moments and the cast made it work. Bit more on the Bridesmaids side than the Bring it On.

The night before that I watched Perks of Being a Wallflower. I've never read the book, but know a bunch of friends did in our teens and loved it. I can definitely see why. This was pretty average too. Watchable, certainly, and I do love me some Emma Watson. Couple really cheesy cuts/editing decisions pulled me out of it, an overall mehhhhh affair.
 
Haha, well, I watched it first with alcohol, so I suppose that helped me overlook its flaws. On sober reflection, I think you're quite right in your assessment. Unlike its protagonist, it did miss a lot of targets. I think they tried to put all those eggs into one basket, the Woody Harrelson character. He's good, but I'm not sure he's big enough to carry so much responsibility.

Still, Jennifer Lawrence was a very nice diversion. :)
 
Back
Top