last movie you watched

Chat talk and light discussion

Moderators: FECC-Moderator, Moderator5, Moderator3, Site Mechanic

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:05 am
pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:02 am
Tonight I saw Amityville: The Awakening, which is one of the dullest, most ridiculous, and not to mention tasteless films I have seen for some considerable time. Quite how Jennifer Jason Leigh and Thomas Mann (at the height of his film career) got involved in such cobblers is a complete mystery - much more mysterious than the film.

Leigh, her two daughters and her brain-dead son move into the infamous house and odd things start happening. That's roughly it. Using the ill son as the centre of the events is reminiscent of A Haunting in Connecticut, but that looks like a masterpiece compared to this. The movie looks like it might get vaguely interesting for all of about five minutes in a meta type of way when the earlier films are talked about and the friends of one of the daughters bring the dvd over to the house to watch, but then it all gets silly as you realise that somehow the daughter has never heard of the films, the house or the case, which seems a little unlikely.

According to Wikipedia, the release of the film was pushed back 6 times over the course of three years, and had reshoots some two years after it was originally meant to be released - and we thought Death on the Nile had problems.
I think it's on Prime and passed me by on release. I'll have a look.
nooooooooo! don't do it!
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:37 am
On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.
There's usually one title on any given Warner Archive slate that's a bit dubious, but there are a number of factors at play, no doubt. It's Criterion that have grown more inconsistent, in my opinion -- and with no move to 4K yet. Even with titles that seemed possible - even likely - for a transition to this format, especially the Wong Kar-Wai box set. But they're also treading familiar ground in a lot of ways. Although I do see Flowers of Shanghai coming to Blu-ray which is great news. And Merrily We Go to Hell is a great release.

I am slightly wary of certain Arrow titles, given how quickly some releases are now turning up on UHD. Oldboy and The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, for example. Night of the Hunter has already been released by Arrow, so it would need to be a major upgrade for me to double-dip on the Criterion release. But this is where a UHD option would make sense.

The Oscar is quite poor, in my opinion. I don't think it's nearly as sharp or funny as it aspires to be -- and it certainly isn't well-acted or directed. It isn't a film I'm likely to buy on Blu-ray. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't turned up on YouTube, given its pedigree and how disposable it is.

I am very eager to see The Good the Bad and the Ugly on UHD, though. This film has had several Blu-ray releases over the years, but this is promising.
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:01 am
pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:37 am
On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.
There's usually one title on any given Warner Archive slate that's a bit dubious, but there are a number of factors at play, no doubt. It's Criterion that have grown more inconsistent, in my opinion -- and with no move to 4K yet. Even with titles that seemed possible - even likely - for a transition to this format, especially the Wong Kar-Wai box set. But they're also treading familiar ground in a lot of ways. Although I do see Flowers of Shanghai coming to Blu-ray which is great news. And Merrily We Go to Hell is a great release.

I am slightly wary of certain Arrow titles, given how quickly some releases are now turning up on UHD. Oldboy and The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, for example. Night of the Hunter has already been released by Arrow, so it would need to be a major upgrade for me to double-dip on the Criterion release. But this is where a UHD option would make sense.

The Oscar is quite poor, in my opinion. I don't think it's nearly as sharp or funny as it aspires to be -- and it certainly isn't well-acted or directed. It isn't a film I'm likely to buy on Blu-ray. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't turned up on YouTube, given its pedigree and how disposable it is.

I am very eager to see The Good the Bad and the Ugly on UHD, though. This film has had several Blu-ray releases over the years, but this is promising.
I shall avoid The Oscar in that case. I have to admit that, once we get into May, there aren't as many things of interest to me heading our way. I think the Karloff set is now put back to May, and I shall certainly pick up the BFI Piccadilly, but probably a couple of lean months otherwise. Which is no bad thing!
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:59 am
Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:01 am
pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:37 am
On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.
There's usually one title on any given Warner Archive slate that's a bit dubious, but there are a number of factors at play, no doubt. It's Criterion that have grown more inconsistent, in my opinion -- and with no move to 4K yet. Even with titles that seemed possible - even likely - for a transition to this format, especially the Wong Kar-Wai box set. But they're also treading familiar ground in a lot of ways. Although I do see Flowers of Shanghai coming to Blu-ray which is great news. And Merrily We Go to Hell is a great release.

I am slightly wary of certain Arrow titles, given how quickly some releases are now turning up on UHD. Oldboy and The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, for example. Night of the Hunter has already been released by Arrow, so it would need to be a major upgrade for me to double-dip on the Criterion release. But this is where a UHD option would make sense.

The Oscar is quite poor, in my opinion. I don't think it's nearly as sharp or funny as it aspires to be -- and it certainly isn't well-acted or directed. It isn't a film I'm likely to buy on Blu-ray. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't turned up on YouTube, given its pedigree and how disposable it is.

I am very eager to see The Good the Bad and the Ugly on UHD, though. This film has had several Blu-ray releases over the years, but this is promising.
I shall avoid The Oscar in that case. I have to admit that, once we get into May, there aren't as many things of interest to me heading our way. I think the Karloff set is now put back to May, and I shall certainly pick up the BFI Piccadilly, but probably a couple of lean months otherwise. Which is no bad thing!
I've got quite a few pre-orders in place, and there's Indicator/Powerhouse’s new Hammer and film noir box sets, although I generally buy from them closer to release, since they take payment right away. And I haven't bought the Wong Kar-Wai box set yet. But I'll probably order two or three more Warner Archive Blu-rays before the end of the month.
User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 3196
Registered for: 18 years
Has thanked: 657 times
Been thanked: 1309 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by ForeverElvis »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:03 am
ForeverElvis wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 11:17 pm
Greystoke wrote:I'm hoping Arrow has a UHD release of Big Trouble in Little China to come, although I'm sure The Thing will be on UHD sooner rather than later. It's 30 years old in 2022, whilst there is a new 4K master, which was supervised by John Carpenter and was used for Arrow’s Blu-ray release, which looks incredible, incidentally.
Interestingly, in 1982 “The Thing” got lousy reviews and poor box office. I remember being surprised that the theatre was empty when I went it’s first week.

I really liked the film then and now.
Reviews and box office returns often say absolutely nothing about how good a film is, and are rarely indicative of how any film may endure. As I've said before -- who is saying what, and why, is important to consider. And whilst even the most astute of film journalists can get it wrong, time and place can be a determining factor, too. Which has a bearing on how well audiences will accept a film. This being further to my point about the pitfalls of test screenings.

Take this review of Evil Dead. Not only does the writer fail to understand the film, she doesn't understand its audience, yet it's tarred with a typically provocative headline, as was common in reviews of horror films at the time. The same was true of The Thing and even Big Trouble in Little China, in fact.


Image
Reviews and box office are not an indicator of a film being good or not, agree. That's why I found it interesting at the time that it performed so poorly and had average to poor reviews. The Thing had a BO Gross of $19.6 million, finishing behind Kenny Rogers in Six Pack at #42 for the year.

In the pre-internet world some critics could make or break a film, getting a thumbs down from Siskel and
Ebert could really hurt your film.

Siskel and Ebert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2ezQuxOZhA

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-thing-1982
The Thing
Roger Ebert January 01, 1982

"The Thing" is a great barf-bag movie, all right, but is it any good? I found it disappointing, for two reasons: the superficial characterizations and the implausible behavior of the scientists on that icy outpost. Characters have never been Carpenter's strong point; he says he likes his movies to create emotions in his audiences, and I guess he'd rather see us jump six inches than get involved in the personalities of his characters. This time, though, despite some roughed-out typecasting and a few reliable stereotypes (the drunk, the psycho, the hero), he has populated his ice station with people whose primary purpose in life is to get jumped on from behind. The few scenes that develop characterizations are overwhelmed by the scenes in which the men are just setups for an attack by the Thing.
Advertisement

That leads us to the second problem, plausibility. We know that the Thing likes to wait until a character is alone, and then pounce, digest, and imitate him--by the time you see Doc again, is he still Doc, or is he the Thing? Well, the obvious defense against this problem is a watertight buddy system, but, time and time again, Carpenter allows his characters to wander off alone and come back with silly grins on their faces, until we've lost count of who may have been infected, and who hasn't. That takes the fun away.

"The Thing" is basically, then, just a geek show, a gross-out movie in which teenagers can dare one another to watch the screen. There's nothing wrong with that; I like being scared and I was scared by many scenes in "The Thing." But it seems clear that Carpenter made his choice early on to concentrate on the special effects and the technology and to allow the story and people to become secondary. Because this material has been done before, and better, especially in the original "The Thing" and in "Alien," there's no need to see this version unless you are interested in what the Thing might look like while starting from anonymous greasy organs extruding giant crab legs and transmuting itself into a dog. Amazingly, I'll bet that thousands, if not millions, of moviegoers are interested in seeing just that.
Always Elvis
Anthony
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

ForeverElvis wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:33 am
Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:03 am
ForeverElvis wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 11:17 pm
Greystoke wrote:I'm hoping Arrow has a UHD release of Big Trouble in Little China to come, although I'm sure The Thing will be on UHD sooner rather than later. It's 30 years old in 2022, whilst there is a new 4K master, which was supervised by John Carpenter and was used for Arrow’s Blu-ray release, which looks incredible, incidentally.
Interestingly, in 1982 “The Thing” got lousy reviews and poor box office. I remember being surprised that the theatre was empty when I went it’s first week.

I really liked the film then and now.
Reviews and box office returns often say absolutely nothing about how good a film is, and are rarely indicative of how any film may endure. As I've said before -- who is saying what, and why, is important to consider. And whilst even the most astute of film journalists can get it wrong, time and place can be a determining factor, too. Which has a bearing on how well audiences will accept a film. This being further to my point about the pitfalls of test screenings.

Take this review of Evil Dead. Not only does the writer fail to understand the film, she doesn't understand its audience, yet it's tarred with a typically provocative headline, as was common in reviews of horror films at the time. The same was true of The Thing and even Big Trouble in Little China, in fact.


Image
Reviews and box office are not an indicator of a film being good or not, agree. That's why I found it interesting at the time that it performed so poorly and had average to poor reviews. The Thing had a BO Gross of $19.6 million, finishing behind Kenny Rogers in Six Pack at #42 for the year.

In the pre-internet world some critics could make or break a film, getting a thumbs down from Siskel and
Ebert could really hurt your film.

Siskel and Ebert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2ezQuxOZhA

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-thing-1982
The Thing
Roger Ebert January 01, 1982

"The Thing" is a great barf-bag movie, all right, but is it any good? I found it disappointing, for two reasons: the superficial characterizations and the implausible behavior of the scientists on that icy outpost. Characters have never been Carpenter's strong point; he says he likes his movies to create emotions in his audiences, and I guess he'd rather see us jump six inches than get involved in the personalities of his characters. This time, though, despite some roughed-out typecasting and a few reliable stereotypes (the drunk, the psycho, the hero), he has populated his ice station with people whose primary purpose in life is to get jumped on from behind. The few scenes that develop characterizations are overwhelmed by the scenes in which the men are just setups for an attack by the Thing.
Advertisement

That leads us to the second problem, plausibility. We know that the Thing likes to wait until a character is alone, and then pounce, digest, and imitate him--by the time you see Doc again, is he still Doc, or is he the Thing? Well, the obvious defense against this problem is a watertight buddy system, but, time and time again, Carpenter allows his characters to wander off alone and come back with silly grins on their faces, until we've lost count of who may have been infected, and who hasn't. That takes the fun away.

"The Thing" is basically, then, just a geek show, a gross-out movie in which teenagers can dare one another to watch the screen. There's nothing wrong with that; I like being scared and I was scared by many scenes in "The Thing." But it seems clear that Carpenter made his choice early on to concentrate on the special effects and the technology and to allow the story and people to become secondary. Because this material has been done before, and better, especially in the original "The Thing" and in "Alien," there's no need to see this version unless you are interested in what the Thing might look like while starting from anonymous greasy organs extruding giant crab legs and transmuting itself into a dog. Amazingly, I'll bet that thousands, if not millions, of moviegoers are interested in seeing just that.
I doubt very much that Ebert’s review had much bearing on The Thing’s performance at the box office. It isn't one of his better reviews in any regard, whilst he wasn't typically fond of horror as a genre. However, The Thing and Blade Runner were on release at the same time as, and in the shadow of, E.T., which was proving to be hugely successful and was No. 1 at the U.S. box office the same week The Thing and Blade Runner debuted.

This was a major factor for both films, and unfortunate timing -- Poltergeist was also doing well at this time, as was Rocky III. Whilst Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan was doing good business. Every film can't and won't be successful when there's so much competition, especially something as bold and transgressive as The Thing, or a film as unique and individual as Blade Runner. Neither were box office failures for failure’s sake.

Tron also struggled at the box office around the same time. And this was a film Ebert raved about. It was also a film that had the promise of greater commercial appeal than The Thing, certainly. And probably Blade Runner. But this was an especially competitive market -- and an era on the cusp of VHS. Still, The Thing has genuinely endured and deservedly so. 1982 was a great year for film.
User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14062
Registered for: 12 years 9 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2356 times
Been thanked: 2516 times
Age: 56

Re: last movie you watched

Post by keninlincs »

Greystoke wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:54 pm
keninlincs wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:11 pm
Last night i revisited Tod Browning's "Dracula"from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, had not seen it for many years,still looks good 90 years after it was made.
Image
I think it looks fantastic on Blu-ray, too, Ken.
yes the bluray was what i watched,its a fantastic print.
-instagram kenh1964
User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14062
Registered for: 12 years 9 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2356 times
Been thanked: 2516 times
Age: 56

Re: last movie you watched

Post by keninlincs »

dd.jpg
last night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-instagram kenh1964
User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14062
Registered for: 12 years 9 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2356 times
Been thanked: 2516 times
Age: 56

Re: last movie you watched

Post by keninlincs »

ForeverElvis wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:59 pm
keninlincs wrote:Last night i revisited Tod Browning's "Dracula"from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, had not seen it for many years,still looks good 90 years after it was made.
I’ve been watching a few 80’s and 90’s Kurt Russell films the last few days. I revisited “Breakdown” (1997) the other day. This still holds up as a solid little thriller involving a cross country trip and a kidnapping. I think it is one of Russell’s best performances. JT Walsh is also excellent.

Image


In contrast I tried to sit through 1989’s “Tango & Cash” tonight. My goodness what crap used to pass for entertainment. I remember liking this when I saw it in Cinemas 32 years ago.....what the hell drug I was on I don’t know.

A poor man’s Lethal Weapon. The writing is terrible. It goes from one bad pun to another. This isn’t dialogue it’s a succession of sound bites they could use in the trailer.

The plot is simple - bad guys frame cop duo that is causing them most trouble. Cops break out of prison, get help from a very young Teri Hatcher and ...........

This is where I fell asleep. I never fall asleep watching a film. But, this campy drivel for simpletons couldn’t hold my attention.

I can NOT recommend this any stronger.

Image

The other night I watched, with Russell again, “Soldier” (1998). I hadn’t seen this. A standard, tired SciFi about a super soldier thrown away by the military to a garbage planet. He eventually has to defend the settlement there from extinction by those that tossed him aside. But not before we are bored with scenes of the Soldier trying to fit in with the settlers. Real mundane dialogue and narrative structure here. Unimaginative direction - Blade Runner this isn’t, the final confrontation plays out a bit like Predator with Schwarzenegger. There are much better movies in Russell’s filmography. Russell has 104 words of dialogue in total.

Image

Russell has been a very solid actor since 1962 and has grown into character roles in recent years. With over 100 films to his credit I look forward to what might be next.

For me - “Big Trouble In Little China”
i quite enjoyed Tango and Cash for what it was ,a comedy so i guess im an imbecile.but i have been called worse so no biggie.
-instagram kenh1964
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

keninlincs wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:48 am
Imagelast night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
I think it's actually a better film than Dracula itself, and far less stagey.

Tonight I watched The Naked City, with Barry Fitzgerald and Don Taylor, which I enjoyed very much. I didn't realise the latter went on to a successful directing career that included the second Omen film, but mostly he was directing TV shows and movies. The Naked City is really excellent, crossing the boundaries between drama-documentary and film noir, and filmed on the streets of New York. The blu ray from Arrow is also very good apart from a few scratches here and there on the print.
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

pmp wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:12 am
keninlincs wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:48 am
Imagelast night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
I think it's actually a better film than Dracula itself, and far less stagey.

Tonight I watched The Naked City, with Barry Fitzgerald and Don Taylor, which I enjoyed very much. I didn't realise the latter went on to a successful directing career that included the second Omen film, but mostly he was directing TV shows and movies. The Naked City is really excellent, crossing the boundaries between drama-documentary and film noir, and filmed on the streets of New York. The blu ray from Arrow is also very good apart from a few scratches here and there on the print.
The Naked City is very good, indeed. I'm eager to see what the new 4K restoration looks like. This was an easy double-dip for me.

I certainly agree with you regarding Dracula’s Daughter, although the earlier film compensates for a want of better style and more creative direction, with an eerie atmosphere.

Tonight, I watched The Norliss Tapes, a 1973 television movie which is told via flashback and narrated from a tape left by a journalist who was exploring the occult. He goes missing in the first act, after telling his publisher that he can't finish a book debunking the supernatural, because of what he found.

It's very similar to Kolchak, in fact. With Dan Curtis directing and in familiar territory, although some subtlety is amiss. And a better sense of ambiguity early in the film. It's brief, but engaging enough. With Roy Thinnes and Angie Dickson heading a cast that includes Michele Carey and Claude Akins playing, unsurprisingly, a cop.

It's in watchable quality on YouTube, and worth spending 71 minutes with.

..
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:47 am
pmp wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:12 am
keninlincs wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:48 am
Imagelast night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
I think it's actually a better film than Dracula itself, and far less stagey.

Tonight I watched The Naked City, with Barry Fitzgerald and Don Taylor, which I enjoyed very much. I didn't realise the latter went on to a successful directing career that included the second Omen film, but mostly he was directing TV shows and movies. The Naked City is really excellent, crossing the boundaries between drama-documentary and film noir, and filmed on the streets of New York. The blu ray from Arrow is also very good apart from a few scratches here and there on the print.
The Naked City is very good, indeed. I'm eager to see what the new 4K restoration looks like. This was an easy double-dip for me.

I certainly agree with you regarding Dracula’s Daughter, although the earlier film compensates for a want of better style and more creative direction, with an eerie atmosphere.

Tonight, I watched The Norliss Tapes, a 1973 television movie which is told via flashback and narrated from a tape left by a journalist who was exploring the occult. He goes missing in the first act, after telling his publisher that he can't finish a book debunking the supernatural, because of what he found.

It's very similar to Kolchak, in fact. With Dan Curtis directing and in familiar territory, although some subtlety is amiss. And a better sense of ambiguity early in the film. It's brief, but engaging enough. With Roy Thinnes and Angie Dickson heading a cast that includes Michele Carey and Claude Akins playing, unsurprisingly, a cop.

It's in watchable quality on YouTube, and worth spending 71 minutes with.

..
I might take a look at that!
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

Arrow has announced an alternatively packaged UHD release of Bird With the Crystal Plumage, which I like more than the previously announced edition. If it's the the same price, I'll cancel and re-order, although I hope this doesn't become a trend for them.

IMG_20210408_152427.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

One more from Warner Archive that I've ordered is Flying Leathernecks, which promises to be quite stunning, due to a new, 4K restoration.

FLYING LEATHERNECKS.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 3196
Registered for: 18 years
Has thanked: 657 times
Been thanked: 1309 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by ForeverElvis »

I took advantage of Kinos recent sale and ordered these four, shipped, yesterday:

Duel in the Sun
Image
Always a favorite of mine, should look fantastic on BluRay.

The Big Country
Image
A excellent film with a wealth of extras

The Nude Bomb
Image
I love Get Smart, this was a bad film but Don Adams was still great as Agent 86. This release is loaded with extras.

S.O.S Titanic
Image
This release has two versions of the film. I’m a long-time Titanic nut.
Always Elvis
Anthony
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

ForeverElvis wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:36 pm
I took advantage of Kinos recent sale and ordered these four, shipped, yesterday:

Duel in the Sun
Image
Always a favorite of mine, should look fantastic on BluRay.

The Big Country
Image
A excellent film with a wealth of extras

The Nude Bomb
Image
I love Get Smart, this was a bad film but Don Adams was still great as Agent 86. This release is loaded with extras.

S.O.S Titanic
Image
This release has two versions of the film. I’m a long-time Titanic nut.
Duel in the Sun is a film I've yet to get on Blu-ray. And I love The Big Country's score.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

If anybody is buying from Arrow’s sale that's currently on, enter the code FERALBUNNY when checking out and you'll get 10% off.
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:41 am
Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.
Coincidentally, I almost watched that particular version of The Lost World a few days ago, and was thinking of buying the Blu-ray. Although it was the BBC adaptation, with Bob Hoskins, that I was looking to watch again. I had this on a nice DVD release in the early-2000s, but I don't know what I've done with it.

I thought The Visit was very poor, though. I saw it on release and haven't watched it a second time -- one night with Nana and Pop Pops was enough. It might still be Shyamalan’s worst film. Which is no mean feat. It done fantastic business all the same.

Tonight I watched The Horror at 37,000 Feet, which isn't far removed from Horror Express, albeit with an ancient evil taking hold of a plane, as opposed to a train. It was made for television and it shows in the standards all round, despite a worthwhile premise in the remnants of a cursed abbey being transported on a plane.

Chuck Connors is the pilot, with William Shatner playing a defrocked and self-loathing priest, complete with customary gasps, glances, and pauses as he speaks. Will Hutchins, showing how much better he was in Clambake, is an actor whose career is now in Italian westerns, whilst Buddy Ebsen is just loud.

Acting aside, and less than keen direction, the writing is rather inept at times, but there are intriguing elements, and even a turn in which the passengers become akin to villagers with pitchforks. Basically, a bloated episode of The Twilight Zone.
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 2:38 am
pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:41 am
Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.
Coincidentally, I almost watched that particular version of The Lost World a few days ago, and was thinking of buying the Blu-ray. Although it was the BBC adaptation, with Bob Hoskins, that I was looking to watch again. I had this on a nice DVD release in the early-2000s, but I don't know what I've done with it.

I thought The Visit was very poor, though. I saw it on release and haven't watched it a second time -- one night with Nana and Pop Pops was enough. It might still be Shyamalan’s worst film. Which is no mean feat. It done fantastic business all the same.

Tonight I watched The Horror at 37,000 Feet, which isn't far removed from Horror Express, albeit with an ancient evil taking hold of a plane, as opposed to a train. It was made for television and it shows in the standards all round, despite a worthwhile premise in the remnants of a cursed abbey being transported on a plane.

Chuck Connors is the pilot, with William Shatner playing a defrocked and self-loathing priest, complete with customary gasps, glances, and pauses as he speaks. Will Hutchins, showing how much better he was in Clambake, is an actor whose career is now in Italian westerns, whilst Buddy Ebsen is just loud.

Acting aside, and less than keen direction, the writing is rather inept at times, but there are intriguing elements, and even a turn in which the passengers become akin to villagers with pitchforks. Basically, a bloated episode of The Twilight Zone.
The blu ray looks good, but The Lost World really comes over as a rip off of The Land Unknown from a few years earlier - which is also available on 101 Films blu ray, and considerably better than Lost World, which doesn't really know if it's a comedy or an adventure or a horror film. I really want to see the "new" restoration of the 1925 film, but it's a flicker alley effort and costs a small fortune.
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 4:33 am
Greystoke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 2:38 am
pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:41 am
Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.
Coincidentally, I almost watched that particular version of The Lost World a few days ago, and was thinking of buying the Blu-ray. Although it was the BBC adaptation, with Bob Hoskins, that I was looking to watch again. I had this on a nice DVD release in the early-2000s, but I don't know what I've done with it.

I thought The Visit was very poor, though. I saw it on release and haven't watched it a second time -- one night with Nana and Pop Pops was enough. It might still be Shyamalan’s worst film. Which is no mean feat. It done fantastic business all the same.

Tonight I watched The Horror at 37,000 Feet, which isn't far removed from Horror Express, albeit with an ancient evil taking hold of a plane, as opposed to a train. It was made for television and it shows in the standards all round, despite a worthwhile premise in the remnants of a cursed abbey being transported on a plane.

Chuck Connors is the pilot, with William Shatner playing a defrocked and self-loathing priest, complete with customary gasps, glances, and pauses as he speaks. Will Hutchins, showing how much better he was in Clambake, is an actor whose career is now in Italian westerns, whilst Buddy Ebsen is just loud.

Acting aside, and less than keen direction, the writing is rather inept at times, but there are intriguing elements, and even a turn in which the passengers become akin to villagers with pitchforks. Basically, a bloated episode of The Twilight Zone.
The blu ray looks good, but The Lost World really comes over as a rip off of The Land Unknown from a few years earlier - which is also available on 101 Films blu ray, and considerably better than Lost World, which doesn't really know if it's a comedy or an adventure or a horror film. I really want to see the "new" restoration of the 1925 film, but it's a flicker alley effort and costs a small fortune.
The Land Unknown Blu-ray is really good and it's great to have that film available on the format. 101 has done some good releases.
User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14062
Registered for: 12 years 9 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2356 times
Been thanked: 2516 times
Age: 56

Re: last movie you watched

Post by keninlincs »

Im continuing with the Universal monster cycle and last night i watched "Son of Dracula"with Lon Chaney as Count Alucard aka Count Dracula (not his son)set in Louisianna Lon is à bit wooden as the Count but still a decent enough film.
Next up was "Werewolf of london" starring Henry Hull as the titular werewolf i enjoyed this one as i cant recall seeing it before, and for a 1930s horror film it was quite good.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-instagram kenh1964
User avatar

Greystoke
Posts: 9867
Registered for: 6 years 5 months
Has thanked: 6467 times
Been thanked: 9565 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by Greystoke »

keninlincs wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 3:27 pm
Im continuing with the Universal monster cycle and last night i watched "Son of Dracula"with Lon Chaney as Count Alucard aka Count Dracula (not his son)set in Louisianna Lon is à bit wooden as the Count but still a decent enough film.
Next up was "Werewolf of london" starring Henry Hull as the titular werewolf i enjoyed this one as i cant recall seeing it before, and for a 1930s horror film it was quite good.
Image
Image
Image
It's good to discover something new years later, Ken. I'm surprised Werewolf of London had passed you by, though. I really like it, too. Although I think I like Son of Dracula a bit more than you do, despite feeling much the same about Lon Chaney, Jr. as Dracula.
User avatar

pmp
Posts: 3664
Registered for: 1 year 11 months
Has thanked: 533 times
Been thanked: 2885 times

Re: last movie you watched

Post by pmp »

I have Return of the Vampire ready to watch tonight.
Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.