What was the last movie you saw?

My 1000th post :cool:

Mars Express (2023). Whilst investigating the murder of a hacker, a private detective finds herself in an intricate plot where big corporations wish to hack robots.

Amazing animated movie. It manages to delve in many themes--such as alcoholism and the relationship between man and machine--in such a short runtime. It has comedy, family drama, a bit of romance, and great fight scenes (There’s an action scene that references The Ghost in the Shell (1995)). It really is a hidden gem, and it has all the qualifications to receive a cult following (including the box office bomb).

The French really (still) know how to make science-fiction!


Monkey Man (2024). In India, a man infiltrates high society to murder those who destroyed his village.

It’s directed by Dev Patel (Slumdog Millionaire) and produced by Jordan Peele (Us, Get Out). I don’t see the hand of Peele very much, but the movie is the perfect synchrony between Bollywood and Hollywood. It’s also very well edited. Its many flashback montages are kinda psychedelic, with a lot of closed-up angles.

John Wick is the first thing that comes to mind. They even reference it in the movie. Well, in theory, it really is an Indian John Wick; but its execution is very different. What differs most from John Wick and all its other clones (like Nobody, The Equalizer or Boy Kills World, just to name a few) is that his reason for revenge--his motive--isn’t just an excuse for an action movie. You must care a lot about his reasons for the movie to work. And it worked quite well for me.

Religion and politics are a main theme. The movie is a big call-out to Modi’s ultra-nationalist Hindu government.

A masterpiece. Strongly recommended.



Exhuma AKA The Unearthed Grave (2024). A shaman, her protegé, a feng shui master and a mortician join up to lift a curse that’s coming from a grave.

A South Korean movie starring the guy from Oldboy (2003), Choi Min-Sik. The director/screenwriter was no big deal, so Min-Sik was the main reason I watched it. Too bad. The text doesn’t ask much of his character. Anyone could’ve done it.

The movie has a vibe to The Wailing (2016), and it even features a similar ritual scene, but it doesn’t get close to the modern classic’s horror and philosophy. It skirts around the history of North Korea and Imperial Japan, but it doesn’t delve into it.

There was a concept that I liked though: the villain. It’s a monster that’s a mix of a slasher villain and a ghost. It’s a Jason Vorhees who teleports and possesses people’s bodies. Sadly, that’s not enough to recommend this movie.
 
FLARE UP 1969 - Terrible movie about a go-go dancer (Raquel Welch) being stalked (thanks to her go-go personality) by a murderer with Jim Carrey's Lloyd Christmas haircut (Luke Askew). Unlikable characters--including the dancer's boyfriend who has a room with Humphrey Bogart, James Dean, and Zapata posters, and enjoys taking photographs of bullfights off the tv. At least I finally learned what go-go dancing is. The title refers to what she does to get the killer off her back with some help from gasoline and matches.
 
Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey (2023).

For reference, I'm a sucker for shlocky, campy slasher films. I love Friday the 13th, Sleepaway Camp, and Hatchet for a few examples, so I went into this one with an open mind despite the wildly mixed responses I've seen to the film.

It's an extremely cheap production, made on a budget of only $50,000. For comparison, the original Friday the 13th was made for $500,000 in 1979, which is roughly $2 million in today's cash, and it shows. It's got some fun kills and some decent effects here and there, but they rely heavily on CGI blood that looks like it was hand-drawn by a five-year-old.

One kill in particular teases the use of a certain machine for a very grisly demise, but they pull away and use it in a manner that doesn't require much in the way of effects, and it comes across like they had a cool idea that they just couldn't afford to execute.

The setup for why the critters of the 100 Acre Wood are suddenly bloodthirsty killers is extremely thin, but I didn't exactly expect a compelling story, so I wasn't disappointed. It's perfectly adequate for a cheap slasher film.

The filmmakers never take themselves too seriously, and that comes across in the production. Granted, I laughed at the movie more than I laughed with it, but I still had a pretty good time watching.

Overall, it was competently made considering the budget, they knew what they were making, and they had fun making it. For me, it's a solid 6/10, and I'm cautiously optimistic about the forthcoming "Twisted Childhood Universe" and what they can do with it.

I'll add the caveat, however, that if you're not already a fan of this type of film, this definitely isn't the one that's going to change your mind.
 
ZroSkeerd said:
Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey (2023).

For reference, I'm a sucker for shlocky, campy slasher films. I love Friday the 13th, Sleepaway Camp, and Hatchet for a few examples, so I went into this one with an open mind despite the wildly mixed responses I've seen to the film.

It's an extremely cheap production, made on a budget of only $50,000. For comparison, the original Friday the 13th was made for $500,000 in 1979, which is roughly $2 million in today's cash, and it shows. It's got some fun kills and some decent effects here and there, but they rely heavily on CGI blood that looks like it was hand-drawn by a five-year-old.

One kill in particular teases the use of a certain machine for a very grisly demise, but they pull away and use it in a manner that doesn't require much in the way of effects, and it comes across like they had a cool idea that they just couldn't afford to execute.

The setup for why the critters of the 100 Acre Wood are suddenly bloodthirsty killers is extremely thin, but I didn't exactly expect a compelling story, so I wasn't disappointed. It's perfectly adequate for a cheap slasher film.

The filmmakers never take themselves too seriously, and that comes across in the production. Granted, I laughed at the movie more than I laughed with it, but I still had a pretty good time watching.

Overall, it was competently made considering the budget, they knew what they were making, and they had fun making it. For me, it's a solid 6/10, and I'm cautiously optimistic about the forthcoming "Twisted Childhood Universe" and what they can do with it.

I'll add the caveat, however, that if you're not already a fan of this type of film, this definitely isn't the one that's going to change your mind.
Click to expand...


Quite how they got away with making a dlasher movie involving a Disney character I have no idea.

Yes, no doubt there were legal loopholes, but surely Disney's lawyers could have used their unlimited budget to make it unaffordable for the movie's makers to appeal.
 
HareBrain said:
I'd forgotten that! I think Guinness ended up being more creepy than Sim would have been.
Click to expand...


The opening of the movie, with the shadowy figure trailing the old lady before the big revsal of Guinness' face was so well done. The thunderclap, the bird squawk and the train whistle that all herald, and try to warn the landlady about this devil in human guise was quite brilliantly done.

It's amazing how with seemingly apparent ease Ealing Studios could reel off these classics one after another. Even if the stories themselves weren't often that great (although they usually were) the acting and cinematography were so marvellously done.

It's a real shame that mainstream British cinema died a death and was replaced by Hollywood. It makes you wonder that if studios like Ealing had survived and thrived, how things may have turned out. Less blockbusters, and more concentration on making original movies than building and milking franchises for as much cash as they can.
 
paranoid marvin said:
Quite how they got away with making a dlasher movie involving a Disney character I have no idea.

Yes, no doubt there were legal loopholes, but surely Disney's lawyers could have used their unlimited budget to make it unaffordable for the movie's makers to appeal.
Click to expand...
Yes...odd that. I know the copyright has expired in the US, though not yet UK. But Disney must own trademarks.

But then I'm sure US law allows for "parody" of protected TMs.
 
The Curious Case of the Campus Corpse - 1977 - Indie film about a blue collar kid Craig (Jeff East) who gets a sports scholarship to attend an Ivy League type of school and is invited to join a fraternity. His construction worker older brother warns him about it since he had an altercation with it when he was involved in a protest march. Nevertheless, Craig hesitantly goes along with the hazing initiation since he befriends a student named Barney (Charles Martin Smith) who is also looking to join. But something goes wrong with the initiation and the latter is killed after a fall from a cliff--so the fraternity leadership covers it up--threatening Craig with a murder rap if he doesn't play along with the plan to store the body for a week until they can dump it on a ski slope as an accident.
The acting is first-rate--it was due to this film that East was cast in Superman and it is a good rehearsal. There's a surprise twist towards the end and then another turn which is interesting for the fact that it goes against the usual tropes about rural living vs the city and academia.
Some people seem to hate the film for the twists but I think it was so bizarre and unexpected that it worked for me.
 
The Breaking Point (1950) Interesting, TCM had a clip of Muller & Robert Osborn talking about this film, years before R.O. died. I think that was to celebrate TCM's anniversary. They compared this film to To Have and Have Not, in its faithfulness to the novel from which both films had been adapted.

Harry Morgan (John Garfield) 'owns' a fishing boat, though the lien holder really does. He cannot make enough money taking people on fishing trips, and resorts to illegal means in a last-ditch attempt to keep the boat and thus retain his way of life. His wife Lucy (Phyllis Thaxter) continues reminding him about a job picking lettuce, working for her uncle. He wants nothing to do with picking vegetables, and clings to his dream vocation. Finally, he gets a well-paying client, who leave him without paying. Broke and in Mexico, he 1st agrees to smuggle people into the USA, and insists his helper make his own way home, so he is not involved with the scheme. That fails, and the authorities seize the boat. ...
...
things happen, and the boat is restored to him. Once more, he decides to earn money illegally, and again, he tries to leave his helper behind.

His partner, or helper? Wesley Park (Juano Hernández), shows up, just before the crooks arrive, and is killed as though he were trash, and dumped into the sea. Having stashed two, count 'em, 2 revolvers in the engine compartment, Morgan intends to capture the crooks, and reap the reward.
At the end, Park's son is standing alone on the dock, as all attention is on Morgan, who was wounded by the crooks. :cry: Neither Muller nor R. O. commented on this. I find this disturbing, both for the way the film ended, and the lack of comments on the boy standing there, wondering where is his daddy?
 
Bad for Each Other (1953) NOIR ALLEY, though I do not agree with Muller that it ought to be. Especially given the ending; true, some NOIR even have if not happy, but not tragic endings, but there just was not enough content here that typically identifies a film as noir.

Other than that, I did enjoy this film.

Dr. Tom Owen (Charlton Heston) just returned from the Army, still in it, but had not been home in 10 years. His mother (Mildred Dunnock) was quite happy to see him, but he intended to stay in the Army. Owen's brother had been the safety engineer in the local coal mine. When it collapsed, he was blamed for it and the resultant deaths, including his own. Those who lost loved ones in that incident, greeted Owens with hostility, one even sucker-punching him. Dan Reasonover (Ray Collins) the guy who owned the local coal mine agreed that the catastrophe was the fault of Owen's brother, and I definitely expected something to come of this, but the issue was forgotten. Reasonover's daughter, Helen Curtis (Lizabeth Scott), twice married, twice divorced, sets her sights on Owen, and they become engaged. Owen had since abandoned his former ethics, preferring wealthy patients over those middle class families associated with the coal mine. As Owen is the new doctor surgeon in town, he takes an associate role working for the town's most prominent surgeon, and even acting as his ghost surgeon.

Things happen, ideals change. Given that I was expecting a noir film, I might be disappointed. But, no, I give this an 8/10.
 
Wild Bill Hickok Rides (1942) A very predictable Western, if ever I saw one. Entertaining, yes, but very predictable.

Harry Farrel (Warren William) moves from Chicago to the West, and buys up most of the land in a certain Area. Yet, in order to carry out his plan, he must obtain a certain ranch, owned by Edward Nolan (Russell Simpson), who refuses to sell. so, Farrel hires lowlife scoundrels, and has them resort to every trick in the book. But, Wild Bill Hickok (Bruce Cabot) is the hero.

6/10
 
The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) dir. Irvin Kershner; starring Faye Dunaway, Tommy Lee Jones, Brad Dourif, Rene Auberjonois

Opens as Laura (Dunaway) awakes from a dream of one of her friends being murdered. That night she goes to a gallery opening displaying her photography, much of it purposely provocative (actual photos by Helmut Newton). As she listens to a man who doesn’t recognize her criticize her work, she’s pulled away by an associate and informed that her friend was killed; she comes to see this, and other such premonitions as visions.

The critical man turns out to be Detective Neville (Jones), who is assigned the murder case and becomes closer and closer to Laura as one after another of her friends is killed.

Several familiar faces, including Raul Julia, and with a theme song sung by Barbara Streisand, who had considered playing Laura, but it was too different from her image.

Scripted in part by John Carpenter, this has some of the feel of a giallo with the gloss of a ‘70s Hollywood feature, but none of the more flamboyant direction of, say, Dario Argento or Mario Bava. Too bad Carpenter didn’t direct it. Still, worth a watch if you’re in the right mood and even though the answer to who-dun-it feels pulled out of – er – thin air.
 
Take Shelter

Very good, psychcolgical (in more ways than one) film. A pretty much perfect way of demonstrating how to successfully build tension in a movie. Michael Shannon was superb , and it's a real shame that he wasn't even nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor.
 
Last Tango in Paris (1972) the other month, TCM was showing Marlon Brando films, & this, as a TCM premiere, was among them. I had heard it was very naughty, & could not resist watching it. it was not what I thought it would be, and did have a few scenes that were very naughty, but not in the way I thought; very little nudity.

Meh.

I would have rather watched Zombie Lake!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
squibble One last Goodbye Art 0
The Judge FEMMES FAE-TALES -- LAST CHANCE TO BUY!! Promotions 5
Extollager Garth Hudson, 87 -- last member of The Band Obituaries 0
Extollager Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn (1968 novel -- not movie) Classic SF&F 11
N Y: The Last Man, movie or telly series? Graphic Novels & Comics 3

Similar threads


Back
Top