What is the last movie you saw? and rate it.

[skib]

Just watched The Life of Brian. Still waiting for my ears to stop hurting so I can think about what the hell just happened.

[AimusSage]

Recently saw Sherlock Holmes, it was actually quite enjoyable.

Also, on Avatar, Yes the story is weak, but all else is just pretty much awesome, best picture isn't just about the story....

James Cameron is a visionary, he managed to take cinema to a technical level not seen before on multiple occasions. That is also a part of cinema, he is a bit of a phenomena, he manages to appeal to people on a large scale. Having said all that, I'm not convinced he deserved to win either.

[manolia]

Just watched The Life of Brian. Still waiting for my ears to stop hurting so I can think about what the hell just happened.

Hehehehe I love that film!!

[DanielBenoit]

Also, on Avatar, Yes the story is weak, but all else is just pretty much awesome, best picture isn't just about the story....

Yes, it is about the writing, the acting, the direction, etc. Avatar had none of that IMHO.

James Cameron is a visionary, he managed to take cinema to a technical level not seen before on multiple occasions. That is also a part of cinema, he is a bit of a phenomena, he manages to appeal to people on a large scale.

And a strange phenomena indeed, for I completely don't understand his wide-appeal.


Okay, I really need to stop my hate-Avatar campagin and just let the people who enjoyed it, enjoy it.

[Madhuri]

The focus of the movie was only special effects and nothing else, I guess.

Yes, it is about the writing, the acting, the direction, etc. Avatar had none of that IMHO.

I agree.

[Koa]

Oooh finally somewhere where I can vent!

Last week I was pretty much dragged to see Where The Wild Things Are.

Oh my god. I never, ever, ever saw anything that bad. It was like watching my brother and my dad fighting for fun, and trust me it's not a show you can stand for more than 10 seconds without feeling rage. Then it turned into watching children play. And I don't even like children. And the child in the movie was so annoying you don't even want to get me started on that. I felt insulted. I felt that whoever wrote that screenplay has been insulting human intelligence.

And yes I know it's from a book, which I had never heard about, and I sincerely hope it is better than this terribly awful screen adaptation.

It's been almost a week and it still enrages me

[DanielBenoit]

Oooh finally somewhere where I can vent!

Last week I was pretty much dragged to see Where The Wild Things Are.

Oh my god. I never, ever, ever saw anything that bad. It was like watching my brother and my dad fighting for fun, and trust me it's not a show you can stand for more than 10 seconds without feeling rage. Then it turned into watching children play. And I don't even like children. And the child in the movie was so annoying you don't even want to get me started on that. I felt insulted. I felt that whoever wrote that screenplay has been insulting human intelligence.

And yes I know it's from a book, which I had never heard about, and I sincerely hope it is better than this terribly awful screen adaptation.

It's been almost a week and it still enrages me

Omg are you serious? I found it to be the best film of 2009 and the fifth best film of the decade. If you were expecting a straight-forward plot, then I'm sorry. It's about the angst of childhood pitted against a world of despair. It is a beautiful and quite sad film. Oh how I wish to go back and see it again.

[The Comedian]

Saw the movie "Local Color" the other night. It was about a couple of artists: one old and angry, the other young and romantic. The young one wants the old one to teach him.

This movie is like the Karate Kid, only instead of doing karate, they're doing art.

It was a pretty good movie, as movies go. 7/10

[Koa]

Omg are you serious? I found it to be the best film of 2009 and the fifth best film of the decade.

I assume you enjoy watching kids play and would be delighted to enter an epic mock-fight with my 20-year-old brother...

If you were expecting a straight-forward plot, then I'm sorry.

Well I suppose I was hoping for some Disney-like thing, but the way it manage to exceed my already low expectations was spectacular. I considered leaving, I was with this guy I don't even know too well... some girls came in and left after about 10 minutes but they were in a group. I thought of taking a trip to the toilet but I would have never brought myself to come back.

It's about the angst of childhood pitted against a world of despair.

It might want to be that but all it does it showing an incredibly annoying child playing with equally annoying monsters, all with the best Hollywood accent (which I find hard to understand as my exposure to American English is minimal, where I'm from everything is dubbed and I don't watch that much American stuff)

It is a beautiful and quite sad film.

Beautiful, yeah, some images are well-shot. Sad yeah, the way I gave 90-odd minutes of my life to that. The guy I was with didn't even thank me (he knew I didn't really want to see that, damn me trying to be nice. Why didn't he go on his own...)

Oh how I wish to go back and see it again.

It STILL fills me with rage. I thought the previous film I had seen (Men who stare at goats) was as low as the art of cinema can get, but at least it was about adults and there were a couple of mildly funny jokes. I recommend you go to any playground where children play with each other, if they still do these days without Nintendos and such crap. Or watch Dragon Ball or some other cartoons where there's little more than fighting and screaming, I had the same feeling of irritation.

[DanielBenoit]

Okay, I don't want to sound patronizing because everyone has different tastes. I'm very happy that everybody kindly respected my opinion of Avatar, and just as they did, I respect yours. But as you have responded to me, I may as well respond back and present my opinion.

I assume you enjoy watching kids play and would be delighted to enter an epic mock-fight with my 20-year-old brother...

Please do not personalize this. I'm not saying this to appeal to elitism, but many critics loved this film (particuarly A.O. Scott) and they are certainly "adult" enough not to go out and start playing with each other in the sand. You seemed to have missed the point of the movie entirely.

Well I suppose I was hoping for some Disney-like thing, but the way it manage to exceed my already low expectations was spectacular. I considered leaving, I was with this guy I don't even know too well... some girls came in and left after about 10 minutes but they were in a group. I thought of taking a trip to the toilet but I would have never brought myself to come back.

Well what's wrong with Disney? I think when one realizes the difference between a film like Where the Wild Things Are and say Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, have they developed a rationality in their taste in movies.

It might want to be that but all it does it showing an incredibly annoying child playing with equally annoying monsters, all with the best Hollywood accent (which I find hard to understand as my exposure to American English is minimal, where I'm from everything is dubbed and I don't watch that much American stuff)

Well I hate Hollywood too, about 95% of the stuff it puts out each year is crap. But if you don't like movies and don't respect them as an art form, or even just a form of entertainment, then why watch them?

It STILL fills me with rage. I thought the previous film I had seen (Men who stare at goats) was as low as the art of cinema can get, but at least it was about adults and there were a couple of mildly funny jokes. I recommend you go to any playground where children play with each other, if they still do these days without Nintendos and such crap. Or watch Dragon Ball or some other cartoons where there's little more than fighting and screaming, I had the same feeling of irritation.

Again, like I said you seem to have completely missed the point of the film. Maybe those who look back on childhood innocence and angst in nostaliga will understand it better. All accusations of adversiting aside, if you want to understand the value that I found in the film, you may read my review here.

And again, I respect your opinion and do not expect you to change it, I'm just giving you my very opposite opinion as well.

[NickAdams]

Book of Eli - 4/10
Observe and Report -

Oooh finally somewhere where I can vent!

Last week I was pretty much dragged to see Where The Wild Things Are.

Oh my god. I never, ever, ever saw anything that bad. It was like watching my brother and my dad fighting for fun, and trust me it's not a show you can stand for more than 10 seconds without feeling rage. Then it turned into watching children play. And I don't even like children. And the child in the movie was so annoying you don't even want to get me started on that. I felt insulted. I felt that whoever wrote that screenplay has been insulting human intelligence.

And yes I know it's from a book, which I had never heard about, and I sincerely hope it is better than this terribly awful screen adaptation.

It's been almost a week and it still enrages me

I wouldn't advise you to read the book then, because the film adaptation is the one with a plot.

[applepie]

The last movie I saw was Boondock Saints, All Saints Day.

I loved it, but then it was exactly what I was looking for in a sequel to The Boondock Saints. I would give it a 7 or 8 easy.

[DanielBenoit]

The Hurt Locker - I was writing a nice long review, but then I lost it. Damn. Either way, this is a great film, the Iraq War masterpiece, and Katherine Bigelow better win the best director award or else .. . . . . well, or ELSE. 10/10

Miller's Crossing - The Coens seem to be a divided bunch of fellas (no pun intended). They either make masterfully subtle and humorous films (Fargo, A Serious Man, Barton Fink, No Country for Old Men, though the latter isn't humorous) or they make big obnoxious, but extremely well made self-conscious comedy-dramas (Miller's Crossing, Raising Arizona, O Brother Where Art Thou?). The latter catagory is in my opinion not the real Coens, but merely a mainstream version of them. And while Miller's Crossing is extremely well made, has some pretty good acting and a great poetically vernacular script, it doesn't make the cut because of its lack of substance besides the fact that it is pretty much a hommage to gangser films. Now you can make a substancless pastiche film and make a masterpiece (Tarantino has done it on numerous occasions, such as Kill Bill), but your characters and script have to have some life in them, and we all know that almost nobody makes more lively dialouge and characters than Tarantino. And so do the Coens, well when they want to, but here, despite the fact that we are able to marvel at everything in the movie, we never become involved in it, and for the most part, don't care all that much. But there are some really great moments in here that make the film worth seeing. Once that is. 6/10

[DanielBenoit]

The Killers (short film) - Oh how Tarkovsky's student film adaptation of Hemningway's short story shames all of the other more recent student adaptations I've seen on youtube. Why? Why is it that every single film today, especially ones concerning gangsters have to have some kind of Tarantinoesque postmodern tone to it. The Killers is not a story about "wise guys" but about a man who has surrendered himself to death. Tarkovsky masterfully captures the sense of subtle tension in the cafe scenes, as well as the silent melancholy of the latter scenes. After watching all of those mediocre adaptations in which the student director for some reason finds it necissary to have a pop or rock or jazz soundtrack creeping under every scene obviously do not understand the story at all. One particular version, which was shot very well had a jazz soundtrack, and while I have a particular soft spot for jazz in films, this was utterly unnecissary. Yes, we know that the story was written and takes place in the 20's, but that doesn't mean that jazz has to be played in every single film that takes place during that time! Also, the overacting of most of the films are so artificial and disingenuious, as the actors are acting like actors acting like gangsters. Now I don't have a problem with self-referecial and self-conscious films, but these postmodernist tricks are inappropriate for a modernist story like The Killers.

And now at last to Tarkovsky's version. It is truly a blessing that Tarkovsky chose to have no soundtrack whatsoever, so that the melancholy silence of the story can seep in. What's fascinating is that Tarkovsky's film revealed to me some things I didn't notice in Hemingway's story; that silence is used in three different ways in the story for the three different scenes: the first as tension, the second as indifferent surrender and the third as melancholy.

The acting is suprisingly great, this being a student film one would usually expect for their to be at least a little overracting, even if it is directed by a master like Tarkovsky. But here the tone of the acting is at a pitch perfect level, everything is very subtle and casual, the gangsters aren't trying to be "cool", in fact here they appear as cold, indifferent and almost indistigushable induviduals who are just doing what they're told and a rather just going through what seems to be a daily process.

And then the scene between Nick Adams and Ole Anderson (which was in fact directed by Tarkovsy's friend), oh that is the gem of the film. I was almost shocked to see how well done and how well it conveyed the emotion and atmosphere of Hemingway's story. It's silence and melancholy is clear and vivid.

I've been working on a cinematic adaptation of The Killers for almost a week now, and I must say that after seeing Tarkovsky's version I am almost shamed. I sat there thinking "how can one surpass this?" 10/10

[Janine]

The Life and Death of Coloniel Blimp ~ Powell and Pressburger (The Archers)

Another amazing film from the creative British team. I am too tired to write up a very long review. If curious about the plot, please look up the synopsis and reviews on Amazon. Highly creative, melodramatic in a touching way, beautifully filmed, art direction incredible and stunningly beautiful; very fine cast, most notablably Roger Livesey (best performance of his career, role from youth to old man), Deborah Kerr (she plays a triple role), and the incredible actor, Anton Walbrook (I am a big fan of his work).

I have been wanting to see this film for a long time; I have to say I loved this film; I should add that it was a little confusing at first; but not too long into the film, I began to understand the opening flashback. A brilliant social commentary on war/military formality and also very witty.

I think the highlight of the film for me involved two scenes - one of the duel between the two main characters; the way it is shot is incredible and ahead of it's time. I kept thinking throughout the movie of scenes I have now seen used in more modern movies. Obviously, those film-makers have seen the Archer's films and their techniques. They really were ahead of their times! The scene entailed two figures dueling in a large empty gymnasium; the camera suddenly pans upward through the panned glass paneled roof/ceiling, until you are taken outside to view the full building and landscape (snow falling gently), very magical scene with the blue and the white snow, otherworldly looking and beautiful; took my breath away; so unexpected. This could have been from a Tim Burton film or other creative directors, I have seen in the past 10 yrs; it became apparent to me how much influence the Arhers had on modern cinema. My other favorite moment, is when Walbrook's character returns to apply for admittance into England, as a refuge. His speech, relaying his story of the loss of his two sons to Nazism and his wife to death is truly captivating and tragic, yet beautiful/poetic at the same time....amazing control and a wonderfully nuanced speech...I never once felt like he was acting at all, but rather stating a truth about his life in Nazi Germany. Here is a YT clip of that scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0Dl_BtJKqk

I would rate this film a definite 10/10

It's quite unlike any other film I have seen before. I had to buy a region 2 PAL DVD; therefore, I watched it on my computer. The picture quality was pretty amazing for an old film. It's a true classic. I have been on a kick lately of the films of the Archers, who I greatly admire for their content and their artistic style.