Rate the Last Movie You Saw

[dannyboy121070]

I've been frantically watching everything that I can on our streaming channels before we have to ditch them all and cancel our cable at the end of the month. I watched an excellent documentary about Folk-Horror on Shudder called WOODLANDS DARK AND DAYS BEWITCHED, which I highly recommend, another documentary about the films and life of Al Adamson called BLOOD AND FLESH, which was both hilariously funny and terribly disturbing, also highly recommended. I have never seen an Al Adamson film, and this documentary didn't make me want to change that, but, wow...what a life, and what a death.

Last night my wife and I watched THE KING'S MAN, which I was really looking forward to, but it just didn't connect with me. My wife, oddly enough, loved it.

[Ben Staad]

Death on the Nile. 3.75 out of 5 stars. This was a standard murder mystery that was visually striking, well acted, and had some characters I greatly enjoyed. The few issues I had were related to elements of the film which pushed it outside of the period piece this was meant to be. These were mild indulgences by the director/writer/whoever meant to pander to today's societal views.

I would imagine that this is a film that would be most enjoyed in the theater. It has that movie theater feel.

Spoiler!

The score took a minor hit because I guessed the main plot early on in the film. It didn't really take away from my enjoyment.

[JJ123]

I recently watched The Final Wish. Nothing spectacular about it, but I do really enjoy these simple, formulaic horror films that are shot decently and present not necessarily the most original story/plot (although this one had a neat riff on the whole genie/wish thing, at least in the way I thought about it) but one that is nevertheless entertaining. I believe this was from either someone or some team responsible for Final Destination.

Also rewatched Midnight in Paris, by Woody Allen. Really enjoyed that one. One of the funniest scenes was when the Owen Wilson character tells the director of The Exterminating Angel that he should consider an idea for a movie that centers on a dinner party where no one can leave the room; the director asks why wouldn't they just leave, if I recall. Never actually saw the referenced movie, but will try to at some point. I think there was another Allen film that referenced this, might have been Anything Else.

I also rewatched this week one of my favorite movies of recent times, Limitless. That is a master class in high-octane, intelligent screenwriting. It is packed with smart, plot-propelling ideas I would never think of as solutions for segueing to the next sequence. It's a terrific Friday-night film (too bad I watched it earlier in the week!). It's also a case where the movie is far better than the book...I almost imagine the author must have been heartbroken when he saw it, thinking how they took his blueprint and polished it into such a gem. I've read the book too (after the fact of the film) and enjoyed it, especially the certain sequences that had this technical poetry of what was going on during the mind-altering affects afforded by the drug, but the choices on the pages were simply put not as exciting as the choices on the silver screen (and now in its post-theatrical life, on the digital screen). That's okay, though, because as soon as I locate my copy of the tome (don't you hate it when you have a lot of stuff in containers down in the basement, and it's a pain to go through them, especially when you haven't cataloged anything properly), I want to give it another read (or at least, sections of it another read). Cooper really did well in the movie, which reminds me I am currently making my way through Nightmare Alley. Not my type of film, honestly, and I am not a big fan of the director, but I am still watching and getting something out of it, especially (some of) the atmosphere and Dafoe's supporting thespianism (would Dafoe be a poor man's Jeff Goldblum or a Goldblum's Goldblum?).

[Ben Staad]

I didn't make it to the point where Arnold shows up. However according to IMDB he is in the movie.

Is Escape Plan also with Schwarzenegger? Haven't seen this one, but I believe I remember when it was being promoted.

[JJ123]

Is Escape Plan also with Schwarzenegger? Haven't seen this one, but I believe I remember when it was being promoted. I haven't watched movies like that lately, but I did sort of want to get around to that someday. I've never seen Expendables either, but keep meaning to. Then again, judging by what you say, maybe I should just avoid all these action films that have a direct-to-video feel.

I finished watching that film I mentioned before, Dead of Night. Turned out pretty well. The grand finale story with the ventriloquist dummy was creepy, even for a film from so long ago. Also had a Magic feeling to it.

The other day I caught Scorsese's The King of Comedy. Enjoyed it a lot, even if the Rupert Pupkin (which I at first thought was Pumpkin, which perhaps was the idea) character could have been played a little differently, in my opinion (the name itself almost made the movie, and maybe should have been the title!). Seems the Joker film from a few years ago was influenced by it. For those who have seen it, I am still thinking over the ending...

[Ben Staad]

Woo. Watched the first 10-15 minutes of Escape Plan starring Sly Stallone. Maybe the movie improves from there but I felt after the first sequence I had seen enough. To me this is a real stinker. 0 out of 5.

The opening sequence involved a ton of vague, ludicrous, improbable, and stupid events.

[JJ123]

I saw Going in Style as well, a while ago. I would agree with your assessment...it was a skillfully-made, plot-driven film. I laughed at the part about the dogs - if they weren't agitated by it, one can assume they approved as well! However, I should point out I have never seen the original, and want to (with George Burns). Interestingly, seems that show Good Girls was based on this premise (have seen that series; not bad, although it went off track sometimes).

I sometimes try to watch classic films. This week I watched Coppola's The Conversation with Gene Hackman. It was a cool movie, but I unfortunately did not experience it in the way I should have; I found this out after reading about it after I was confused by the ending. While reading about the ending, I found out another aspect - that I missed the whole thing about the conversation itself (and by that I mean a very specific thing, not the twist itself; I got the twist, but not what generated the twist)! (I presume those who have seen the film or read about it will know what I mean; otherwise, I won't say what it is). One criticism: wish it was more a plot-driven (there's that term again) thriller than a character-driven work, although that is really more a thing of taste as opposed to a criticism.

Also watching a movie called Dead of Night from 1945. An anthology. One of the stories is based on a tale by H.G. Wells. Hope that turns out well in the end (so far, so good, entertaining enough, even with the dated presentation; the film looks cleaned up, though, and it implies a Twilight-Zone-type setup).....

[Ben Staad]

Going in Style starring Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, and Alan Arkin. This is a standard fare movie about a group of old buddies screwed over by the man and look to get even by planning a bank heist. The surprising thing is this lighthearted comedy was fun, easy to watch, and just enough cheese to be entertaining.

If your looking for a basic old school buddy film this one may be for you. I liked it, my wife liked it, and our two dogs -well- they slept through the whole thing. 3.5 out of 5 stars.

[JJ123]

Here's a unique one I just finished watching, Gallery of Horror with John Carradine. It's an interesting picture, an anthology that almost is a series of stage plays. In fact, any location footage one sees is stock footage from something else. (And I have to ask: what is that famous castle you sometimes see, almost used at times as insert shots denoting scene breaks/setups - if you understand what I mean - within episodes of Gilligan's Island or Night Gallery? That seemed to be used here, and it's a castle beside an ocean, I think, sometimes with animated lightning. Must be from some other film.)

I guess the word on this isn't too good, but I really appreciated the atmosphere and so much wish I had discovered the movie this past October, it begs to be watched on Halloween. It's low low-budget, but I appreciated the cleverness of the presentation. Carradine sets the tales up like a lecturing professor, one who is dedicated to educating students on werewolves, vampires, and witches. The acting is bland, but not offensive (to me, anyway); it is purposefully stilted and simply a recitation of dialogue that actually is done pretty well by the actors (many will disagree with my generous assessment; maybe I was in a good mood while watching!). The episodes are short and to the point, basically no effects, any horror is economically stowed offscreen, and seriously, I appreciated the creativity of that, it must have stretched the budget, heck, even spaghettified the budget. These segments are more like vignettes, nothing plot-driven, no true characters. Sometimes it's nice to watch a movie that is not so busy, something that is simply a celebration of mood and decorum and nostalgic film stock. I want to say this was from 1967. Lon Chaney (Jr?) was in it as well, which was cool (one comment at a review site said he looked bad in it, but I didn't think that was the case; it reminded me of Chaney in another low-budget affair, Dracula vs. Frankenstein, also a great Halloween watch...I even like the song playing in the beach scene!).

Anyone ever see this one?...(might not be for everyone, I should add)...

[JJ123]

Brian, I am eagerly anticipating the new Cage film coming out from Lionsgate (I want to say). In a way, it seems to be something along the lines of Adaptation in terms of intent. I have to say, that's cool that you haven't seen the latter yet...like they say, I envy someone watching it for the first time. If you end up doing so at some point, I just hope you like it...

I will try to see Get Out and Us at some point as well. I sort of know the basic plot of the former, and I have to see, there's one plot point in there that has me confused, so perhaps watching it will answer my question. It seems pretty scary too, probably because it is a comment on our own social reality. Hope Peele continues to surprise us with these concept-driven films (I enjoyed some of his Twilight Zone)...

[Brian861]

I enjoyed Get Out more vs Us. Although, I thought the twist in Us was very well done. It wouldn't hurt to waste a few hours watch each film.

Saw Saturday Night Fever and Staying Alive when I was really young. Probably should revisit them now that I can probably truly understand what's going on lol.

I'll have to check out Adaptation. Don't recall ever hearing of that one. The new Nicolas Cage film looks to be really funny.

[JJ123]

I really have to catch up on movies. I too have never seen American Werewolf, and would like to rectify the situation as the previous poster did. I also need to see Get Out and Us.

I did recently see A Nightmare on Elm Street, the original, after having never seen it. Enjoyed it. Same goes for New Nightmare, thought that was clever (Wes Craven, and I'm sure he would not mind someone saying this and probably would agree and get a kick out of it - well, just wasn't up to par acting-wise, I'll say it like that, but of course, it didn't really matter, that wasn't the point of the film...but it was so noticeable anyway!). Saw the Freddy remake, and liked that one too; I always tend to like these remakes that are done in what I call the post-Scream manner, which has steadily evolved into the Blumhouse paradigm.

Also watched Saturday Night Fever and Staying Alive. Had seen Fever before of course; really cool film, a weird mixture of tones but a sustained 1970s grittiness to it. Never saw Alive. Some interesting choices there, but in the end, even though in its own weird way it's entertaining in the context of cinema history, I have to wonder how disappointed viewers of the first film were with the second. They could have done something different...perhaps have Tony coming to grips with the disco backlash, maybe fighting with his friends and others because of it, and maybe doing one last dance. The choices in the sequel really created an unexpected tone.

Just finished watching (yet again!) what I think is one of the best films around...Adaptation with Nicolas Cage, written by Charlie Kauffman. Have watched that many times. Always see a new nuance on each viewing. Incredibly intellectual presentation, all the way down to the fictional quote at the end of the credits taken from a fictional screenplay written by a fictional twin brother (for those who know what I am talking about).....and they say that fictional screenplay idea inspired Identity, I think. Probably didn't, probably a coincidence, but still, cool notion...

[Sock Monkey]

Sock Monkey Thanks for the review. I wasn't overly interested in this remake as I thought the original was very good. I am also not on the Jordan Peele bandwagon. Get Out was okay but somehow lacking and I couldn't get into US.

Fairly disinterested in most remakes to be honest.

Some remakes work, most don’t. I find the idea of most remake boring. This one is definitely more of a sequel to the original than a remake, which I did appreciate. I’m sure on paper this movie seemed like a masterpiece as the ideas are compelling. The execution just couldn’t make it work. It’s a frustrating movie to watch.

[Ben Staad]

Sock Monkey Thanks for the review. I wasn't overly interested in this remake as I thought the original was very good. I am also not on the Jordan Peele bandwagon. Get Out was okay but somehow lacking and I couldn't get into US.

Fairly disinterested in most remakes to be honest.

[Sock Monkey]

CANDYMAN (2021): I'm the first to admit that I have not jumped on the Jordan Peele bandwagon. I thought that GET OUT was a smart little thriller and enjoyed it quite a bit, but thoughtUS was not nearly as clever and interesting as most reviewers thought it was. So when his name was attached as a producer, it wasn't a natural "sale" for me. His movies did have enough interesting ideas in them, that I couldn't just dismiss the new Candyman movie out of hand. Now after watching it, I wish I had.

I loved the original CANDYMAN. It's a smart, atmospheric movie that didn't quite get the love it deserved upon release, but is now almost universally praised as one of the few great horror movies to come from the '90s. Bernard Rose took Barker's original story and crafted a scary urban legend that still speaks to the racial tensions in America without getting didactic or preachy. It was a horror movie first and foremost. It unnerved with it's hook-handed killer, but also with the poverty-and-crime-stricken Cabrini-Green and it's residents who constantly live in fear of the terrors of the real world.

Nia Dacosta's new movie on the other hand almost forgets it's a horror movie. It absolutely wants the viewer to know that it is about something. And it almost gets there. Almost. The ideas of gentrification, police violence against African-Americans, and this same violence used as subjects of art are all touched upon and how this relates to the legend of Candyman is interesting. The problem is the movie is too interested in those ideas, about being about something that it forgets to give us reasons to care about the characters, to give the viewer something to latch onto. The movie is even confused about who the protagonist of the film is, switching POV in a manner that leaves the viewer disengaged.

This new movie also commits the gravest of sin that a horror movie can make: it forgets to be scary. The movie lacks tension even as it ramps up the supposed horrors. In fact, the majority of the violence of happens just off-camera. I'm not a gorehound by any means, and leaving things to the imagination can be extremely effective, if shot properly. Unfortunately, that's not the case here. The scary scenes lay flaccid on the screen, bored. Even some of the line delivery in these scenes are laughable and out of step with the tone with rest of the movie ("Is this real?" One character asks as his lover bleeds out on the floor in front of him, her throat slit before his eyes.)

There is some great ideas in this new film (and the animation sequences are outstanding), but more than anything, it just doesn't work. An interesting misfire, but a misfire nonetheless.

Grade: D