|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2024 10:13:03 GMT -5
The family went and saw Beetlejuice Beetlejuice yesterday, much better than I was expecting!
Hard in general to capture the same magic after so many years, but honestly Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, and Catherine O'Hara all were in top form and did great jobs. Keaton was actually hysterical with all his lines, you could tell he was having a blast. Willem Dafoe was a smaller part cast addition and he too seemed to be having a blast.
Solid 8/10 was the family consensus walking out, definitely worth a view (especially if you enjoyed the original) whether you wait for video/streaming or opt for the theater.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Sept 15, 2024 10:45:36 GMT -5
The family went and saw Beetlejuice Beetlejuice yesterday, much better than I was expecting! Hard in general to capture the same magic after so many years, but honestly Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, and Catherine O'Hara all were in top form and did great jobs. Keaton was actually hysterical with all his lines, you could tell he was having a blast. Willem Dafoe was a smaller part cast addition and he too seemed to be having a blast. Solid 8/10 was the family consensus walking out, definitely worth a view (especially if you enjoyed the original) whether you wait for video/streaming or opt for the theater. I saw it last weekend and kind of forgot to mention it. My wife and her friend wanted to go so I tagged along. I thought it was inoffensive, but mostly kind of boring. I found it drug. I didn’t think any of the main players fell down on the job, and Jenna Ortega was adorable as usual, but I just kept wondering when it was going to find some oomph. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Sept 15, 2024 14:55:10 GMT -5
The family went and saw Beetlejuice Beetlejuice yesterday, much better than I was expecting! Hard in general to capture the same magic after so many years, but honestly Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, and Catherine O'Hara all were in top form and did great jobs. Keaton was actually hysterical with all his lines, you could tell he was having a blast. Willem Dafoe was a smaller part cast addition and he too seemed to be having a blast. Solid 8/10 was the family consensus walking out, definitely worth a view (especially if you enjoyed the original) whether you wait for video/streaming or opt for the theater. You know, I wasn’t sure if the original film needed a sequel - or what possible storyline they could use. But I did briefly read the episode guide for the animated series (while researching it for a possible 35th anniversary post), and some of the plots sounded fun - and while plots for 22-minute episodes wouldn’t necessarily translate to a film, I do think a little more could be done with the character. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2024 7:23:49 GMT -5
The new Conjuring movie is in the works and should be in theaters one year from now. I sometimes wish I had a bit more Lorraine Warren in me...
|
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Sept 22, 2024 8:28:36 GMT -5
The new Conjuring movie is in the works and should be in theaters one year from now. I sometimes wish I had a bit more Lorraine Warren in me... Saw all of those recently (in chronological order rather than release date order). Didn’t enjoy all of them equally, but I’m glad they’re doing another one. |
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Oct 6, 2024 13:14:29 GMT -5
Just watched Splashback, a short, low-budget Croatian indie film from 2023...
Set against the backdrop of the moon landing, it tells the (fictional) story of how an unassuming clerk working in the supply depot at NASA invents something to deal with a vexing problem that plagues any man using a urinal. It's pretty well-made all things considered, and pretty funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 7, 2024 0:44:14 GMT -5
New movies I plan to see soon:
Megalopolis, which has been in theatres here for a week or more already but my schedule has interfered so far. I hope to get to it this week or next. Yes, I know it's getting some bad reviews but I don't care. I'm keeping an open mind about this one until I see it for myself.
Eno - as in Brian Eno, a documentary about the ex-Roxy Music member and then solo artist, producer, etc. In addition to being responsible for some of my all-time favourite records, I always find he has interesting things to say so I'm looking forward to this. It's playing one night only so I hope nothing comes u to prevent me going.
Rumours, the new Guy Maddin movie, that's all I need to know. But there is a bit of added interest because the subject or premise sounds odd for him - a fictional G7 summit? Can't wait to see what he does with that.
Those are the ones I definitely want to see, there are a few others I'm less sure about but might take a chance on depending on my mood at the time, schedule, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 11, 2024 0:40:09 GMT -5
Eno (2024), a "generative" documentary on Brian Eno by Gary Hustwit. The generative tag refers to the fact that the film is comprised of segments extracted from a collection of hundreds of hours of films, videos, interviews, etc - extracted not at random but by a software program that selects and puts them together, on what sort of basis or set of rules I have no idea. So in this sense it's an experimental film - but any individual viewer would only experience this aspect by watching the movie several times (the idea is that it will never be exactly the same twice, which makes me wonder why they it didn't play here at least twice).
Anyway, apart from all that, I really liked it because I've always found Eno interesting both as an artist and as a thinker. And not only does he have interesting ideas but he's very good at articulating them, he speaks well. He also has a great sense of humour and playfulness - and perhaps that's the biggest thing that doesn't come through so much when reading his texts or interviews (which is mostly what I've done over the years) as when you hear and see him talking.
So all in all a very enjoyable viewing experience - I was about to say satisying but then realised that wouldn't be accurate, since I was left wanting more. I'll have to try to find if I can watch this again, in another iteration, before the details of this one fade, to see how much change there is. Perhaps I can find something online ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Oct 12, 2024 21:00:35 GMT -5
The Painted Bird (2019) is a brutal, difficult film that got progressively so hard emotionally that I had to fast forward it after an hour and a half. It succeeds admirably in making us feel sick without being too graphic, but... whether you see it plainly or just indirectly, child abuse remains intolerable.
I'm not sure what the film is about. Man's inhumanity to man? The unavoidable persecution of those who cannot fight back? The hellish reality of life? I couldn't decide. I'm just relieved that there was a smidgen of hope at the end, because otherwise it would have been a film that must come with a warning: "not for anyone the least bit subject to clinical depression".
It is beautifully shot and acted (Stellan Skarsgard and Harvey Keitel make appearances), and the black and white photography is lovely, but damn! I'm talking "Last House on the Left" or "Irréversible" levels of unease. According to Wikipedia, despite the high praise the film received from critics, many moviegoers walked out during presentations at the Venice or Toronto film festivals. I understand why.
It's probably a great film to analyze in a cinema class, but I don't care to see it ever again and cannot truly recommend it.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Oct 12, 2024 21:12:13 GMT -5
The Painted Bird (2019) is a brutal, difficult film that got progressively so hard emotionally that I had to fast forward it after an hour and a half. It succeeds admirably in making us feel sick without being too graphic, but... whether you see it plainly or just indirectly, child abuse remains intolerable. I'm not sure what the film is about. Man's inhumanity to man? The unavoidable persecution of those who cannot fight back? The hellish reality of life? I couldn't decide. I'm just relieved that there was a smidgen of hope at the end, because otherwise it would have been a film that must come with a warning: "not for anyone the least bit subject to clinical depression". It is beautifully shot and acted (Stellan Skarsgard and Harvey Keitel make appearances), and the black and white photography is lovely, but damn! I'm talking "Last House on the Left" or "Irréversible" levels of unease. According to Wikipedia, despite the high praise the film received from critics, many moviegoers walked out during presentations at the Venice or Toronto film festivals. I understand why. It's probably a great film to analyze in a cinema class, but I don't care to see it ever again and cannot truly recommend it.
I've long had the book on my to-read list but still have never gotten around to it. It's supposed to be a harrowing read, maybe I've been avoiding it subconsciously.
|
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Oct 13, 2024 4:15:53 GMT -5
The Painted Bird (2019) is a brutal, difficult film that got progressively so hard emotionally that I had to fast forward it after an hour and a half. It succeeds admirably in making us feel sick without being too graphic, but... whether you see it plainly or just indirectly, child abuse remains intolerable. I'm not sure what the film is about. Man's inhumanity to man? The unavoidable persecution of those who cannot fight back? The hellish reality of life? I couldn't decide. I'm just relieved that there was a smidgen of hope at the end, because otherwise it would have been a film that must come with a warning: "not for anyone the least bit subject to clinical depression". It is beautifully shot and acted (Stellan Skarsgard and Harvey Keitel make appearances), and the black and white photography is lovely, but damn! I'm talking "Last House on the Left" or "Irréversible" levels of unease. According to Wikipedia, despite the high praise the film received from critics, many moviegoers walked out during presentations at the Venice or Toronto film festivals. I understand why. It's probably a great film to analyze in a cinema class, but I don't care to see it ever again and cannot truly recommend it. I've only read the book upon which it's based (yes, berkley , it's a harrowing read), so I'll take your word for it that the movie is a similar experience. And I recall having similar thoughts about the book, i.e., what the point was supposed to be, besides some kind of grotesque allegory for the Holocaust - by the time I had read it, well over 20 years ago, it was already common knowledge that it was entirely a work of fiction and not a thinly-veiled account of Kosinski's own experiences as a child witnessing the horrors of WW2 in Poland (which many had apparently believed when it was first published, and Kosinski did little to dissuade such assumptions). The only thing that would interest me in seeing it is the fact that it uses Interslavic instead of any actual Slavic language - but given what I know about the story itself and your review, I'm in no hurry to see this. By the way, what you said about not ever wanting to see it again and not recommending it reminds me of my own feelings about Tideland, co-written and directed by Terry Gilliam. It is an extremely well-made film in many ways (i.e., as you said, great fodder for a film analysis class), but, jeez, it is so harsh and bleak.
|
|
|
|
Post by MRPs_Missives on Oct 15, 2024 22:36:03 GMT -5
James Gunn announced today that Krypto will appear in the upcoming Superman movie... MRP's reaction...  -M |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 23, 2024 21:06:38 GMT -5
Alien : RomulusI was fully ready to hate that movie, but I didn't. Admittedly massively derivative, it was like a good issue of Dark Horse's many Aliens series. I enjoyed it. It doesn't add anything much to the Aliens mythos; it's just another adventure (although we do see how the chest buster turns into a grown-up Alien, so there is that). While many scenes are retreads of what we've seen before, it may actually be a plus for fans of the original two movies. The technology depicted, the sound effects, the musical cues, all hark back to the original Scott movie and its Cameron sequel. The integration of this story into the previously established continuity is very good, with several Easter eggs that will please old fans without feeling forced. The cast does a honest job, although the characters will be very familiar to everyone as they're all walking stereotypes. There's the stand up guy, the moronic jerk, the nice girl, the angry girl, the pretty girl and the friendly-but-you-never know android. I wish they had been given a little more personality. The plot has a noticeable hole... While the Weyland corporation did recover the drone from Alien and found out it was still alive, where did all the Face Huggers come from? That specimen wasn't a queen and shouldn't have been able to lay eggs. Did the reverse engineering the company did on its DNA lead to the creation of a new queen? Is the drone capable of impregnating its victims the way it did in the novelization of the original film?
The CGI Ian Holm was more convincing than similar recent attempts at resurrecting dead actors. And since his character is a machine, the artificial look technology still can't get over worked well.
The Alien-human hybrid was way creepier than the pink abomination from Alien Resurrection.
The Face Huggers were a lot clumsier than in previous movies, to the point of being borderline ridiculous. It still worked, but felt odd.
People acting stupidly because the plot demands it really grates on my nerves. Luckily, it didn't happen too often here; but when it did, I seethed.
And I don't care that the plot required it... That a space ship that's suddenly out of control, crashes into massive fuel tanks and heads for a space station would make an uncontrolled soft landing right into a landing bay makes no sense at all. Change the script.
Verdict: another unnecessary film trying to milk nostalgia for all it's worth by taking us back to things we've seen before, but not a badly made one. I enjoyed it more than Alien III and IV.
|
|
