last movie you watched

[pmp]

After watching The Maze Runner a couple of night back, tonight I got around to the second film in the trilogy, The Scorch Trials. I remembered it being the most problematic of the three films when I first saw it a few years back, and watching it back to back with the first movie really emphasises that. That's not to say it's a bad movie - it's certainly not - but there is a feeling throughout that it's doing little more than setting up the epic finale. Whereas the first film had a number of mysteries running through it alongside the action sequences, the second film is set-piece after set-piece, making it feel strangely episodic and with no real narrative drive. In fact, watching it tonight it reminded me rather of a computer game - when you get to the end of one level, you get faced with another problem and off you go again. This isn't helped by the lack of time we spend with the youngsters other than Thomas. The first film is a genuine ensemble piece, but here the other characters are on screen for a lot of the time, but there is no character development - it's pretty much all running around and shooting things with relatively little dialogue. Harris is a case in point - new to the group, we find out virtually nothing about him. But this is often the problem with second films in a group of three - they are either a repeat run of the first movie (which this certainly isn't) or they feel like they are there to set up the final movie.

[pmp]

Announced by Kino:

Straight Shooting (1917)
Directed by John Ford
Starring Harry Carey
NEW 4K RESTORATION!

Straight Shooting is a landmark in the history of the Western – the first feature directed by the legendary John Ford. Presented here in a new 4K restoration from Universal Pictures.

Special features:
Audio commentary by film historian Joseph McBride, author of Searching for John Ford: A Life
Hitchin’ Posts (1920, directed by John Ford, fragment preserved by the Library of Congress)
Booklet essay by film critic Tag Gallagher (Blu-ray only)
Video essay by film critic Tag Gallagher
Score by Michael Gatt

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1916)
Directed by Stuart Paton
Starring Allen Holubar

Stuart Paton’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1916) is an epic retelling of Jules Verne’s classic novel, shot on location in the Bahaman Islands. Allen Holubar stars as the domineering Captain Nemo, who rescues the passengers of an American naval vessel after ramming them with his ironclad, steampunk submarine, The Nautilus. Incorporating material from Verne’s The Mysterious Island, the film also follows the adventures of a group of Civil War soldiers whose hot-air balloon crash-lands on an exotic island, where they encounter the untamed “Child of Nature” (Jane Gail). Calling itself “The First Submarine Photoplay Ever Filmed,” the film is highlighted by stunning underwater photography (engineered by Ernest and George Williamson), including a deep sea funeral and a diver’s battle with a giant cephalopod. In honor of the film’s extraordinary technical and artistic achievement, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was added to the National Film Registry by the Library of Congress.

Special features:
Audio commentary by film historian Anthony Slide
Musical score by Orlando Perez Rosso

The Shakedown (1929)
Directed by William Wyler
Starring James Murray and Barbara Kent

The Shakedown is a heartwarming boxing drama directed by Hollywood legend William Wyler (The Big Country), presented in a new 4K restoration from Universal Pictures.

Special features:
Audio commentary by film critic Nick Pinkerton
Booklet essay by film historian Nora Fiore (Blu-ray only)
Score by Michael Gatt

*

The above were announced this week, and will be Region A only. I have to say that I think they are a perplexing bunch. I see the historical importance of the John Ford film but, having seen a rather ropey copy of it a few years back, I confess that it's not really very good.

20,000 Leagues under the Sea is an epic from 1916, and probably the best known of the three films. It's also the only one, I think, to have had a significant DVD release in the past. It's important partly because of its underwater photography, which was very impressive for 1916, but at close to two hours and a cast that most people (including myself) know nothing about, if I was listing 100 silent films for a novice to watch, it wouldn't be in the list - and probably not in the next hundred either.

The Shakedown is probably the best of the three films, and is notable because of the Wyler directing credit. It's a good, solid late silent, with a fine cast, but I can't for the life of me see why this deserves a blu release over any other silent films made by Universal.

And that, I guess is my problem with all three films - why? Kino have come out with some strange choices in recent years for blu ray releases (Clambake, anyone?). I realise that they are governed to some degree by which films Universal have restored, but there seems no logic to these films appearing before films such as most of the Universal Lon Chaney films (The Shock, Outside the Law etc), Cat and the Canary, Merry-Go-Round, The Goose Woman, Heart of Humanity, or the part-talkie Show Boat.

[keninlincs]

I watched Exorcist II: The Heretic for the first time in years a few nights ago, with very low expectations, I might add. Because this film was - and still is - one of the most woefully inept sequels to any major motion picture. Granted, there is some reverence on John Boorman’s part for the original, and despite a premise that has been far better-realised since in The Cell and Inception, the plotting is ill-conceived and takes huge leaps of credibility on almost every page of the script.

The story follows on from The Exorcist in finding Linda Blair’s seemingly well-adjusted performing arts student, Regan MacNeil, undertaking therapy sessions to appease her guilt-ridden - but absent - mother. Regan takes this with a pinch of salt, until Richard Burton’s Father Lamont steps in, pursuing a quest to discover if Max Von Sydow’s Father Merrin (from The Exorcist) had lost his faith in the exorcism of Regan.

Plagued by thoughts of the demon, Pazuzu, Lamont wants Regan’s therapist, played by Louise Fletcher, to use a new mind-synchronising device to enter the mind of Regan to watch the exorcism itself. Regan, spirited and carefree, overhears and asks for this to be done, to which a lame recreation of the exorcism from the first film is replicated, complete with Max Von Sydow cameo.

This makes no sense, especially when Regan shows zero effects or even has any memory of the event, and when Lamont brilliantly takes over the experiment with no prior training or experience, what little credibility this film had diminishes about as much as it can, until Lamont flies across Africa on the back of a giant locust. Truly, a dire film.

..

I agree with you there Ex 2 was woeful.

[keninlincs]

Last night we watched Knives Out featuring a stellar cast incuding Jamie Lee curtis,Christopher Plummer ,Frank Oz and Daniel Craig in a good old fashion who dunnit murder/suicide thriller.

[keninlincs]

Last night we watched Knives Out featuring a stellar cast incuding Jamie Lee curtis,Christopher Plummer ,Frank Oz and Daniel Craig in a good old fashion who dunnit murder/suicide thriller.

I enjoyed Knives Out a great deal, Ken. And it will be interesting to see where a follow-up goes with Daniel Craig’s character at the centre of a new mystery.

I am looking forward to a sequel!

[keninlincs]

Wasnt the knife chair something to do with one of
Plummers famous bestselling books with a title about a 1000 knives?

[pmp]

I got to the end of the Maze Runner trilogy tonight, watching The Death Cure. Scouting about online, it's very clear that most fans of the books hated the film and said it was nothing like the book. I don't know if that's true or not, but it makes a very fine conclusion to the films, nonetheless, and is a vast improvement over the second installment. It helps that it centres on a much smaller group of people, and that we know the aim of the film from the very beginning - something we're never really told in the second film, in which the aim seems to be to join a group of survivors that the characters no nothing about. Which is rather vague. The premise of the final film is a little rocky, though - would someone really risk the lives a dozen others to rescue his mate? We have to put that hole in the plot to one side and go along for the ride. The films starts off well with a lengthy action pre-credits sequence - one that nearly cost Dylan O'Brien his life. But it really is an exceedingly well done sequence - far better than any of the set pieces in the second movie. We also get a reappearance from Will Poulter who Greystoke likes much better than me, but his character at least propels the story forward.

What is perhaps most refreshing, though, is the lack of bloat (something which can be said for the whole series). Films based on young adult sagas so often divide the third book into two films (Harry Potter, Twilight, Hunger Games), but that doesn't happen here, and it's not like this is a three hour epic, either, and it even allows itself for a relatively lengthy epilogue which is very well done and rather moving.

Out of all the young adult sagas of the 2010s, I still see this as the best of the bunch, and that's despite significant reservations about the second movie. It didn't really get the attention or respect it deserves probably because it came along so late in the cycle, and maybe because it deviates from the books - at some point I'll read books 2 and 3 and find out. Not for a while, though, as I'm re-reading Chaplin's autobiography and he goes on a bit!

[pmp]

I watched the attempt at assembling a director’s cut of William Peter Blatty’s Legion again tonight, or as it was known on its theatrical release, Exorcist III. The director’s cut, for anybody who hasn’t seen it, is a patchwork of VHS quality cut scenes interlaced with most of the theatrical cut, but not all of it. And whilst it was ultimately touted as the next film in the Exorcist series, it’s very much an individual picture. And more of a detective story with a horror element than a thoroughbred horror.

Blatty’s direction is good and the film is certainly atmospheric, although the scenes that are inserted are jarring in being very poor quality next to an otherwise beautifully restored print. George C. Scott stars as a detective who is friends with a member of the clergy, in a part of Georgetown where the events of The Exorcist took place. And with a spate of gruesome murders, he’s on a case that reminds him of a serial killer that was supposedly put to death some fifteen years earlier.

Scott is very good here, and dependably so, and with a cinematic sensibility in the narrative, which was present in The Exorcist itself, this is a common thread that I really like, whilst the story has its roots in the spiritual fantasies of the 1940s, which are alluded to, although that’s warped into something sinister in this film.

There are aspects of the theatrical release that I miss here, and that’s a good film in its own right, if compromised on release. It’s just unfortunate that all of the original elements haven’t survived, because what’s perhaps a curio in many ways, has the bones of a well-crafted thriller at its core. Familiar elements appreciated.

I haven't seen this, but I find the mixing together of disparate film sources rather off-putting. It's rather par for the course with silent cinema, but it's problematic in more modern films. They have done the same thing with the director's cut of "54" - the film might be better than the original, but you just sit there noticing the joins.

[pmp]

I was talking about the Dylan O'Brien romantic comedy "The First Time" earlier in the week - it's in full on Youtube and in HD, I notice. Well worth a look.

[rocknroller]

Wow can't believe thread is still here after all these years. watched the classic Little Caesar tonight not seen it in years.

Nice to see you around again.

Hi Greystoke cheers mate. great your keeping this thread alive with you amazing movie knowledge

And it’s still the most civil and harmonious thread on the forum.

Im glad to hear it

[rocknroller]

Wow can't believe thread is still here after all these years. watched the classic Little Caesar tonight not seen it in years.

Nice to see you around again.

Hi Greystoke cheers mate. great your keeping this thread alive with you amazing movie knowledge

And it’s still the most civil and harmonious thread on the forum.

Im glad to hear it

Looks good will check it out cheers

[rocknroller]

Watched Terminator Dark Fate last night i enjoyed it once i started to understand the story line.

[keninlincs]

Watched Terminator Dark Fate last night i enjoyed it once i started to understand the story line.

I thoroughly enjoyed dark fate!

[Walter Hale 4]

Last evening, I re-watched "Klute" after near 20 years. To me it has held up beautifully test of timewise (made in 1971). Great psychological thriller. New York at its seediest. Creepy music, wonderful Gordon Willis cinematography - he would go on to do The Godfather films, and great performances by Jane Fonda and Donald Sunderland.

Anyone here a fan of the movie and should there be a re-make?

[pmp]

Tonight I went back to the mid-1920s for Battling Butler, a feature-length movie featuring Buster Keaton as a dandy who inadvertently finds himself mistaken for a prize fighter. Rather like Seven Chances, which I watched a few weeks back, this is based on a Broadway show - in this case a musical. As with Seven Chances (which was based on a farce), the stage source doesn't help an actor/comedian/director like Keaton, as there is a great deal of preamble and it all builds up to a final reel where the film finally gets going - but it's a bit late. Also, a comedy based on mistaken identity based on two people with the same name, and people overhearing others, doesn't really lend itself to a silent movie. All of that said, this is better than Seven Chances for the most part - although the finale suffers in comparison to Keaton being chased by hundreds of women wanting to be his bride. As is quite often with Keaton features, the laughs are more chortles than belly laughs, but it's all harmless fun (except for a gag about a man beating his wife and giving her a black eye), and the film moves along at a fair lick. But there is the feeling that it's missing something - and that is probably the big set pieces that Keaton is known for. There are no huge stunts here, for example. In short, it's not The General or Sherlock Jr, but it's good enough - and we shouldn't forget how popular boxing films were in the mid-1920s. The 4k restoration put out by Eureka looks very good indeed for the most part - although there is some nitrate damage on a couple of short sections.

[rocknroller]

Watched Terminator Dark Fate last night i enjoyed it once i started to understand the story line.

I thoroughly enjoyed dark fate!

You guys enjoyed Dark Fate a lot more than I did. Do you think that’s it for Terminator with Arnold involved, or for the franchise? At least for the foreseeable future.

Don't get me wrong i enjoyed the action in the movie but said to the wife as the credits rolled by these movies still can't touch T2.i would think this would be the last one with Arnie, but knowing hollywood they may reboot the franchise in a few years.

[MikeFromHolland]

.

Yesterday my son surprised me with a fantastic gift. He bought it for Father’s Day but couldn’t wait giving it to me. He made me the happiest father of The Netherlands

C73B43F1-0749-467A-9892-8E12316BE9B1.jpeg

3CF528FA-7D7D-4912-AD8F-5E5F91A594C2.jpeg

.

[Rob]

[Johnny2523]

I watched ''The Wrong Missy'' a netflix movie today.. which was highly entertaining.. just a mindless comedy featuring David Spade... thou i have to say Geoff Pearson and Rob Schneider (who had a smaller role) stole the movie for me

[pmp]

A nice piece in the Observer this week about Talking Pictures' fifth anniversary. Nice to see King Creole listed in their top ten most popular shows/films.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/may/17/inside-talking-pictures-the-ultimate-in-lockdown-comfort-tv

[pmp]

A nice piece in the Observer this week about Talking Pictures' fifth anniversary. Nice to see King Creole listed in their top ten most popular shows/films.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/may/17/inside-talking-pictures-the-ultimate-in-lockdown-comfort-tv

That’s good to see, and a nice article. Both for the channel, and with regards to King Creole continuing to find new exposure, minor as this may be in some regards, but there’s been positive conversation surrounding this film for a few months now, and that’s always good. In fact, it’s the most this film has been discussed in decades, I would think.

It’s also good to see BBC2 showing some great RKO films every afternoon, although they have shown many of the same films quite recently, both on Saturday mornings at one point, and a few late night slots with regards to Cat People and I Walked With a Zombie. But they’ve got more on the iPlayer, too. And some gems, including The Magnificent Ambersons, and the curio that is Miracle of the Bells. Which, coincidentally, has also been on Talking Pictures TV quite recently, and has been on BBC2.

I had missed the late night bbc2 films. Will keep an eye out!

[pmp]

It’s interesting to see a new adaptation of Giant in development through Amazon as a series. Alfonso Gomez-Rejon, who was one of the producers on Hunters, and directed The Current War and Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, along with several episodes of Glee and American Horror Story, is currently attached to direct.

I haven’t managed to watch Hunters as yet, but Gomez-Rejon is certainly able and he’s developing a good relationship with Amazon and associated companies that may be working with them, and Giant is certainly ideal for a treatment of this sort. Casting will be interesting, of course, and with regards to who else is on board or is driving this project. It’s one to keep an eye on.

It's interesting that Hunters still hasn't been renewed for a second season. It will be interesting to see if it limps back on to our screens.

[luckyjackson1]

Good question. Didn't watch a movie in quite a while. I enjoyed the heck out of "Wilson", starring Woody Harrelson and Laura Dern.

Oh wait, last sunday I watched "Donne-moi des ailes" from 2019, based on the real story of Christian, a specialist on wild goose migrations, and the adventure he and his son embarked (sorry, had to borrow the description from IMDB ).
Good, clean and harmless fun for the whole family, which me and my girl enjoyed a lot.

[pmp]

I watched Attenborough's biopic of Chaplin today - the first time I've seen it since it came out, when I saw it at the cinema. I've been re-reading the autobiography, and thought it was a good time to revisit it. While it's a good film, it all seems to clean and too polished compared to the book it's based on. In twenty minutes, it skips over the first 150 pages of the book that deals with Chaplin before he was around twenty. Sadly, without that first chunk it loses the mud and guts of the story. Downey is superb though, but nearly thirty years after it was made, it rather oddly looks like a sumptuous 80s TV mini series.

[Walter Hale 4]

Watched The Family (2013) last night starring Robert de Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer.

To summarize - a Mafia man and his family in a witness protection in Normandy, pursued by baddies.
It's meant to be a dark comedy, but to me it was more dark than comical, if you get my drift, with excessive violence played for laughs early on mostly.
But it wasn't too bad. De Niro wasn't going through the motions, he was actually acting, and the film benefited as a result.

Anyone here seen or liked The Family?