fireandwind
Hall of Fame
I like that emoji.lol when I first read this, I was thinking it was Autopsy of Jane Austen
I can imagine you are rolling around your floor while laughing so hard
What was the last movie you watched?
- Thread starter jamesblakefan#1
- Start date
I can imagine you are rolling around your floor while laughing so hard
CivicLx
Hall of Fame
I love borrowing emojis from other sitesI like that emoji.
I can imagine you are rolling around your floor while laughing so hard
fireandwind
Hall of Fame
I love borrowing emojis from other sites
Are you going to tell us where you get that in our secret meeting place?
Tell us all your secrets
Rafaisdabest
Hall of Fame
Why Him?! (2016) and Sing (2016)
CivicLx
Hall of Fame
There's a showing tomorrow for 2D at 10:40am so I might try and be like ninja and hit that one and then catch a Passengers 2D showing at 1:30
vanioMan
Legend
There's a showing tomorrow for 2D at 10:40am so I might try and be like ninja and hit that one and then catch a Passengers 2D showing at 1:30
I think you won't regret it
CivicLx
Hall of Fame
Good to hear. The one complaint I have seen to see the most is that they spend too much time in the present. I would prefer if they stayed more in the past but that won't stop me from seeing it.I think you won't regret it
Bagumbawalla
Talk Tennis Guru
Wife dragged me to see Manchester by the Sea. Horrible movie about horrible people living horrible lives.
meltphace 6
Hall of Fame
"Five Easy Pieces"
DRII
G.O.A.T.
the New England accents are enough to keep me away.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
NonP
Legend
Been a while since my last housekeeping and I hope to get around to it before too long, but since it's already the award season (as you may know the Globes are coming up later this evening) I thought I'd add a few words about last year's critical darling Moonlight, and perhaps provide some antidote to the inordinate praise lavished upon it, with the full caveat that I may well be wrong as just about every prominent critic including those I normally respect seems to disagree with me.
Barry Jenkins' breakout hit begins with a meretricious swirling shot of inner-city Miami around drug dealer Juan (played by Mahershala Ali who will probably grab tonight's Globe for Best Supporting Actor, though I'd probably give it to non-nominee Michael Shannon whose uncanny portrayal of the difficult manic character Lt. Bobby Andes was the only thing I liked about Tom Ford's vapid and derivative Nocturnal Animals), as if to announce to the world that we're witnessing a major new talent behind the camera. An annoyance, to be sure, but if this were the worst criticism I could make about the film it'd be churlish for me to object to its current status as one of the very best of 2016. Alas I came out of the theater feeling less enlightened than bedeviled, because the film turns out to be a slick PC marketing vehicle despite or perhaps because of the filmmaker's lofty aspirations.
An instructive comparison can be made between Jenkins' Moonlight and Andre Techine's Being Seventeen, which I happened to see within a few weeks of each other. There's a scene early in Techine's latest feature which I'm tempted to call a moment of genius: after Thomas, a biracial adoptee, is disciplined for picking on his classmate Damien, the latter's mother (who happens to be the doctor of Thomas' own adoptive white mother) is called to a meeting with the school principal who tells her that Thomas fits a "pattern" of similar troublemakers, upon which point Marianne asks in a barely discernible fit of righteous irritation what kind of pattern he is talking about. Turns out what the principal has in mind is nothing quite so sinister but rather garden-variety bullying, but it is ambiguous whether race factored in his calculation, and in the end we're left without a clear answer as that is as close as the film comes to broaching what role if any the issue of race plays in the two student protagonists' coming of age and sexual awakening. (Another fuzzy instance is provided by Thomas' father who shows less affection towards his adopted son than his caring wife. Again it's unclear whether this distance originates from the emotional detachment of the stereotypical male, the limits of non-biological parenthood, or the scourge of implicit racism itself). In other words, a slice of life as is rather than what it ought to be.
Now I grant that much of the same can be said of Moonlight, because I watched the entire movie wondering when it would tackle the issue of race head on until realizing my expectations had been thwarted and also because it's in hero Chiron's response to bullying and its aftermath that the film comes closest to delivering its most forceful condemnation of racial bias. But that "post-racial" lens also happens to be the biggest weakness of Moonlight: replace Chiron with a poor or working-class white boy and I doubt the film would lose much of its impact or relevance.
I believe I would be hardly alone, outside of the hype machine, in maintaining that in this Age of Trump such slippery colorblindness is not only regrettable but downright irresponsible. But then why am I taking Jenkins to task while giving Techine not only a pass but a veritable high-five? The most obvious reason, again, has to do with marketing: Jenkins has not been shy to claim the mantle of pioneer of "black queer cinema," while Techine as far as I know has not been as presumptuous and self-aggrandizing. But the bigger reason is that the Frenchman does more with less. Or more accurately, Techine knows how to work within the narrow limits of his conception while Jenkins is directionless in his grander vision.
To me the relatively low standing of race in Techine's pecking order is less an omission than an acknowledgement of the reality that in a world populated with major f*#%-ups (all of whom, as Jonathan Rosenbaum has rightly pointed out, the Frenchman loves equally) better known as adolescence there is little room for the kind of identity navel-gazing that almost certainly contributed to Hillary losing last year's election. (It would be interesting to find out, if possible, to what extent today's young liberal voters practice what they preach and how much of their political advocacy is based instead on our innate need to belong. And I'm still waiting to see more honest reflection from the older Democrats who seem to blame everything but themselves for the shellackings they received on every level.) On the other hand Jenkins follows his own schmuck's life through adulthood, the point at which one would think the grown-up issues take on a more prominent importance, but it turns out Chiron's most pressing issue is the age-blind need for sexual companionship. What's more, the film ends with Chiron finally getting laid with his old school bud who gave him his first hand job only to betray him (not entirely by choice) and virtually ruin him for life! It may be my own puritanism and/or cultural bias talking but I still found it interesting that Techine's film features full nudity that feels less exploitative than Jenkins' carefully shielded/omitted sex scenes (which by the way is only the latest illustration of how asinine the MPAA ratings are).
I'm still catching up on 2016 contenders and Moonlight may still make my ultimate top 10, but I'm truly mystified that in our identity-crazed world Techine's exquisite feature has attracted so little attention while its American counterpart has been lighting up the film awards. And this injustice can't be due to distribution or finicky chronology issues, because polls have included carryovers from 2015 and many foreign titles I hadn't even heard of. Being 17 certainly deserves more recognition than prettified trash like The Handmaiden or even more serious fare like Things to Come. Amazon tells me the DVD will be released on 3/17, and I'm hoping it'll be available for streaming as well. Look out for it. If you cared at all for Moonlight chances are you won't be disappointed.
Barry Jenkins' breakout hit begins with a meretricious swirling shot of inner-city Miami around drug dealer Juan (played by Mahershala Ali who will probably grab tonight's Globe for Best Supporting Actor, though I'd probably give it to non-nominee Michael Shannon whose uncanny portrayal of the difficult manic character Lt. Bobby Andes was the only thing I liked about Tom Ford's vapid and derivative Nocturnal Animals), as if to announce to the world that we're witnessing a major new talent behind the camera. An annoyance, to be sure, but if this were the worst criticism I could make about the film it'd be churlish for me to object to its current status as one of the very best of 2016. Alas I came out of the theater feeling less enlightened than bedeviled, because the film turns out to be a slick PC marketing vehicle despite or perhaps because of the filmmaker's lofty aspirations.
An instructive comparison can be made between Jenkins' Moonlight and Andre Techine's Being Seventeen, which I happened to see within a few weeks of each other. There's a scene early in Techine's latest feature which I'm tempted to call a moment of genius: after Thomas, a biracial adoptee, is disciplined for picking on his classmate Damien, the latter's mother (who happens to be the doctor of Thomas' own adoptive white mother) is called to a meeting with the school principal who tells her that Thomas fits a "pattern" of similar troublemakers, upon which point Marianne asks in a barely discernible fit of righteous irritation what kind of pattern he is talking about. Turns out what the principal has in mind is nothing quite so sinister but rather garden-variety bullying, but it is ambiguous whether race factored in his calculation, and in the end we're left without a clear answer as that is as close as the film comes to broaching what role if any the issue of race plays in the two student protagonists' coming of age and sexual awakening. (Another fuzzy instance is provided by Thomas' father who shows less affection towards his adopted son than his caring wife. Again it's unclear whether this distance originates from the emotional detachment of the stereotypical male, the limits of non-biological parenthood, or the scourge of implicit racism itself). In other words, a slice of life as is rather than what it ought to be.
Now I grant that much of the same can be said of Moonlight, because I watched the entire movie wondering when it would tackle the issue of race head on until realizing my expectations had been thwarted and also because it's in hero Chiron's response to bullying and its aftermath that the film comes closest to delivering its most forceful condemnation of racial bias. But that "post-racial" lens also happens to be the biggest weakness of Moonlight: replace Chiron with a poor or working-class white boy and I doubt the film would lose much of its impact or relevance.
I believe I would be hardly alone, outside of the hype machine, in maintaining that in this Age of Trump such slippery colorblindness is not only regrettable but downright irresponsible. But then why am I taking Jenkins to task while giving Techine not only a pass but a veritable high-five? The most obvious reason, again, has to do with marketing: Jenkins has not been shy to claim the mantle of pioneer of "black queer cinema," while Techine as far as I know has not been as presumptuous and self-aggrandizing. But the bigger reason is that the Frenchman does more with less. Or more accurately, Techine knows how to work within the narrow limits of his conception while Jenkins is directionless in his grander vision.
To me the relatively low standing of race in Techine's pecking order is less an omission than an acknowledgement of the reality that in a world populated with major f*#%-ups (all of whom, as Jonathan Rosenbaum has rightly pointed out, the Frenchman loves equally) better known as adolescence there is little room for the kind of identity navel-gazing that almost certainly contributed to Hillary losing last year's election. (It would be interesting to find out, if possible, to what extent today's young liberal voters practice what they preach and how much of their political advocacy is based instead on our innate need to belong. And I'm still waiting to see more honest reflection from the older Democrats who seem to blame everything but themselves for the shellackings they received on every level.) On the other hand Jenkins follows his own schmuck's life through adulthood, the point at which one would think the grown-up issues take on a more prominent importance, but it turns out Chiron's most pressing issue is the age-blind need for sexual companionship. What's more, the film ends with Chiron finally getting laid with his old school bud who gave him his first hand job only to betray him (not entirely by choice) and virtually ruin him for life! It may be my own puritanism and/or cultural bias talking but I still found it interesting that Techine's film features full nudity that feels less exploitative than Jenkins' carefully shielded/omitted sex scenes (which by the way is only the latest illustration of how asinine the MPAA ratings are).
I'm still catching up on 2016 contenders and Moonlight may still make my ultimate top 10, but I'm truly mystified that in our identity-crazed world Techine's exquisite feature has attracted so little attention while its American counterpart has been lighting up the film awards. And this injustice can't be due to distribution or finicky chronology issues, because polls have included carryovers from 2015 and many foreign titles I hadn't even heard of. Being 17 certainly deserves more recognition than prettified trash like The Handmaiden or even more serious fare like Things to Come. Amazon tells me the DVD will be released on 3/17, and I'm hoping it'll be available for streaming as well. Look out for it. If you cared at all for Moonlight chances are you won't be disappointed.
Bagumbawalla
Talk Tennis Guru
Saw La La Land. Safe to say it is the best movie I've seen this year (Manchester by the Sea was the worst). La La Land is a sort of musical, anti-musical, where the characters are riddled with angst and the plot is corrupted with reality and the actors can really act.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Is that accent worse than the Texan drawl, or the Forrest Gump accent ?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
DRII
G.O.A.T.
definitely, and i couldn't stand Tom Hank's vocals in Forest Gump. anything north of NYC cadence doesn't deserve cinematic celebration let alone worship. theres a whole movie section dedicated to New England accents, especially Boston - yuck...
CivicLx
Hall of Fame
hehe jooookingRafaisdabest
Hall of Fame
Paranormal Activity 3, love these movies...can't work out if they are real or not though?! 
Maze Runner, I love this series 
Maze Runner, I love this series
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
'Hell or High Water'.
I thought it was an excelllent contemporary outlaw movie. A great script and very well acted.
Like American Honey and to a lesser extent Nocturnal Animals it captures the bleakness and desperation of modern Americana.
I thought it was an excelllent contemporary outlaw movie. A great script and very well acted.
Like American Honey and to a lesser extent Nocturnal Animals it captures the bleakness and desperation of modern Americana.
Last edited by a moderator:
meltphace 6
Hall of Fame
Stroszek (1977)
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
"Never Let Me Go" (2010).
This is a dystopian movie based on the novel of the same name by Kazuo Ishiguro. It is a very dark movie, but very touching at the same time. One of those movies that kick you in the gut and which you can't help thinking about way after you have seen them.
Avoid any reviews about this movie, as they are sure to contain spoilers (it's one of those movies you have to watch yourself or else it loses its power because you learn of a crucial fact beforehand).
This is a dystopian movie based on the novel of the same name by Kazuo Ishiguro. It is a very dark movie, but very touching at the same time. One of those movies that kick you in the gut and which you can't help thinking about way after you have seen them.
Avoid any reviews about this movie, as they are sure to contain spoilers (it's one of those movies you have to watch yourself or else it loses its power because you learn of a crucial fact beforehand).
Garhi Shot First
Hall of Fame
The Three Musketeers (2011), which I found nearly unwatchable despite the engaging music and beautiful visuals.
I'm still waiting for the adaptation that realizes that Dumas was deconstructing the type of swashbuckling heroes these men are. They are rapists, thieves, and murderers whose self-interested choices occasionally overlap their duties. They are entertaining and a couple of them are enthralling as characters, but they are not good men. A lot of adaptations fall into constructing antiheroes who are essentially noble in sympathetically roughed-up ways--characters who are wronged by external forces and thus righteously disillusioned and who are ultimately self-sacrificing and heroic on their quest, rather than selfish actors who are out for their own comfort and advancement.
I guess the 70's Lester version comes closest, but I didn't find it particularly biting on this front. Maybe they overplayed the slapstick and lost the focus. I think it was originally intended as a Beatles film. lol
I'm still waiting for the adaptation that realizes that Dumas was deconstructing the type of swashbuckling heroes these men are. They are rapists, thieves, and murderers whose self-interested choices occasionally overlap their duties. They are entertaining and a couple of them are enthralling as characters, but they are not good men. A lot of adaptations fall into constructing antiheroes who are essentially noble in sympathetically roughed-up ways--characters who are wronged by external forces and thus righteously disillusioned and who are ultimately self-sacrificing and heroic on their quest, rather than selfish actors who are out for their own comfort and advancement.
I guess the 70's Lester version comes closest, but I didn't find it particularly biting on this front. Maybe they overplayed the slapstick and lost the focus. I think it was originally intended as a Beatles film. lol
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Sounds like the A-Team, without the van.
Garhi Shot First
Hall of Fame
Yeah, there's a similarity there. But I'd argue that the A-Team (at least the tv version; I haven't seen the recent film) is very much in the heroic antihero mold: wrongfully accused of treason, ultimately noble and often self-sacrificing in their endeavors although their methods are rough, and even the selfishly manipulative guy (Face) gets a sympathetic backstory for why he is a womanizer and such (his beloved girlfriend left him to become a nun, he's an orphan, etc...). I can't see any of them doing the kind of criminal/immoral acts that the musketeers and d'Artagnan commit on a regular basis, for their own benefit and without tragic backstories or nobility-for-hire jobs to provide them a reason.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Maybe more like The Suicide Squad, eh?
Garhi Shot First
Hall of Fame
Not sure, I haven't seen or read that one. I keep hearing about it, though.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Suicide Squad is rubbish and it doesn't have something like this to back it up.
I haven't seen the 2011 version, but I hear what you're saying. Hollywood can't do faithful adaptations. I guess it depends on the potential to make money. The true story wont do as good. BS like that.
Some day. Maybe.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Think of The Dirty Dozen or that Seven Samurai flick
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Am watching Wild River (1960), interesting movie. Montgomery Clift. Its about a dam that has been built where there is a lot of flooding and one family wont leave.
But yes, it does have good reviews. Around that time I also saw another dystopian movie, Children of Men, also got good reviews but somehow I did not care for that either. Lol, something must be wrong with me since I could not stand District 9, too, which others i know raved about.
I saw this in 2012, when I had just started watching movies. Did not particularly care for it.
But yes, it does have good reviews. Around that time I also saw another dystopian movie, Children of Men, also got good reviews but somehow I did not care for that either. Lol, something must be wrong with me since I could not stand District 9, too, which others i know raved about.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
How is it ?
I've been wanting to watch it with my folks, but am afraid of adult scenes ...
Garhi Shot First
Hall of Fame
Ah, that song brings back the memories! haha Now I feel like watching the 1993 adaptation again, just because. I am such a glutton for Three Musketeers adaptations; I just keep hoping... Maybe some day, as you say.Suicide Squad is rubbish and it doesn't have something like this to back it up.
I haven't seen the 2011 version, but I hear what you're saying. Hollywood can't do faithful adaptations. I guess it depends on the potential to make money. The true story wont do as good. BS like that.
Some day. Maybe.
2011 had some fun music, though. (Nothing as iconic as that trio, though.
)I love Seven Samurai. Great movie. The Magnificent Seven is one of those adaptations that works really well, too. Beautiful character studies in both films.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Alien Nation, Elysium, and Chappie have a similar themes,
meltphace 6
Hall of Fame
Great film. My mind is still occupied with it. I don't know how to rate it re "adult content" but I can tell you that there are no sex scenes.
The story about what made Herzog make this film in the first place and other details are interesting, too.
Last edited:
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
okay, will see it soon. Maybe something in the summary scared me off. Or i am mistaking it with Closely Observed Trains.
Thanks for the recommendation.
Rusty Shackleford
G.O.A.T.
I didn't like District 9 at all. I tolerated Children of Men, but didn't really like it.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Oh so that makes two of us. I thought i was the only one who did not get all the references to SA and their history of segregation or whatever.
