The Last Movie You Watched?

Joe.

Man kills a punk who nearly killed his daughter with drugs. Another man who happens to cross paths with this man, figures out he has killed a man. He approaches the man and does not want to blackmail him, but he sort of relates to the killing. A strange friendship develops between the men, and is fascinating stuff. Both men come from different cultures and backgrounds, with one of the men being rich and the other on the poor side. Probably the best role I have seen Peter Boyle in as the drunken racist bigot, in this excellent character study of a film. Comes with a suitably 70’s ending.

Drive (2011) - Reminded me a lot of some 70s euro crime flics. Some great chase sequences and about half an hour in, some serious gore starts and the film gets pretty violent. Synthpop soundtrack combined with the subdued dialogue, and performances, all work together to create an interesting tone to this film.

I loved it, but I imagine it doesn’t work for many people… one of the better recent movies I’ve seen of this type, great stuff

[size=14pt]Profondo rosso [/size] 1975 Dario Argento

I understand why someone can not relate to Dario Argento films, like many Italian directors of the period, he had his own signature a trademark, like the work of a painter. That fact could be of great advantage in making unique films; the particular vision of Fellini, Visconti and others is so powerful that you would recognize who directed any o film by those directors, just by the images, so it happens with Argento.
The problem with this it’s the lack of versatility but that is another story.
Argento’s late work is nothing special Non ha Sonno was Ok thanks to Von Sydow, and The third mother is perhaps his best work in years.
Actually this was one of the few Argento films that I’ve never watched in an appropriate way, the climax of the cinematographic path started with L’uccello dale piume di cristallo or the animal trilogy that would lead to the other the famous sequence of films.
The script of the movie has the Fellini mark via Bernardino Zapponi, the usual writer for Fellini, but like in most of Argento films the story is not of importance, it’s the scenes that matter, the all thing works like a theatre play with several acts, the story just holds things together, to deception us or to make us follow the correct path, as several clues are presented along the film.
The film comes with a view of nightmare and dreams, very well manipulated by Argento, perhaps I made a mistake when I mentioned theater, an operatic vision is a more truthful way to describe Argento work, particularly here, the libretto was indeed great.
Of course the character don’t exist outside this oniric world, there’s not what we can call characters study, they are there only cause of the story and don’t go any further, normally this could kill a film, the relation between Hemmings and Nicolodi is platonic at best, not explored at all, cause all it matters is the story, and like in other Argento films it works fine. Some scenes are strange coming out of nowhere, like the one when Hemmings wake up after being hit in the house, with Nicolodi nursing him like an Angel or a Devil we really can’t tell.
The only thing coming out, of this connection between both main characters is some going nowhere dialogue, not important for the story (once again the story rules), and some comic reliefs real funny by the way, like the one concerning Nicolodi car (an amazing Fiat 600, I think), or the picture of Hemming old girlfriend, maybe Nicolodi trying to say something to Argento in that scene.
So without many things normal in a film, oo me the all think works cause of the visual aspect of the film, its just plain great, the way the camera works, or how the death scenes are staged are a 10 out of 10, really amazing work. I’ve read somewhere that the photographic work of Argento was mostly influenced by painters like Giorgio de Chirico and US Edward Hopper, some of their work even appears in the film.
Also of importance is the soundtrack by legendary band Goblin, this film influenced other directors and set the standard in many ways for future slashers, one of those ways was in the way music was use in terror films, and those Tangerine dream soundtracks didn’t appear out of nowhere.
In terms of acting every bet here is winner, with many Italian actors with long careers in Theatre (let’s not forget the starting scene of the film), even the then unknown Daria Nicolodi was a good bet, but Hemmings is particularly very good here, he suffered a bit from being recognized only as the Blow-up man, he was in several thrillers before this one, so it was a especially good choice for the part. I confess that for a long time I though he and Oskar Werner were the same actor.
The end with the usual twist is very well done, and the last death is pretty amazing and cruel at the same time.
So I confess I’m a sucker for every Argento film until Fathom of the opera, this one is no exception it’s a fine work, maybe overlong (like an opera), but keeps your interest till the end, and visually it’s a real feast for the eyes.
Sometimes form can overcome substance, if substance is present to us like a dream or a nightmare

Yeah, great stuff and one of the best movies of recent years.

Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark (2010) - Some good old, haunted house type atmosphere and one really great scare… I’d be interested to see some future work from director Troy Nixey, as the film showed some promise but overall it didn’t quite win me over

Attempted to watch the recent Piranha remake - lots of eye candy in bikinis but really bad movie, turned it off

I don’t know why producers get talked-into throwing money into this series. There’s nothing there.

Dr.No Got myself the Blu Ray box set so am gradually going to work my way through them. Never thought much of this years ago, I enjoyed it more now I’m a bit older but still prefer Connery’s other Bond’s.

I’ve always had mixed feelings about this one too. Not a bad film, but quite different from the other Bonds. Today I tend to think that’s not a bad thing. Too many Bonds were formuliac, and when you watch too many of them within a relatively short period, this may become a little irritating. But Bond movies are still a lot of fun. This one too.

I’ve always enjoyed Dr. No - it’s quite sexual and violent for a film for its time. Sean Connery also plays Bond a good deal harder here than he does in later Bonds; the cold blooded murder scene is still a surprising moment and not something I think will ever get repeated. A solid 4/5 for me.

I don’t dislike it, but I feel that Bond was not yet Bond if you know what I mean. The only only I did dislike was Die Another Day, haven’t seen it since it was on at the cinema.

Dr. No is one of the weakest Bonds with Sean Connery IMHO. The story is very generic and it stinks to me like every spy movie from that decade.
I don’t dislike it. At last it has cool soundtrack, but just like Yodlaf put it Bond was not Bond yet.

I consider it Bond and superior to other Connery entries such as Diamonds are Forever and You Only Live Twice where Our Man Sean looks pretty bored and suffering from a lack of interest in the material.

I actually prefer Diamonds to Dr. No. But yeah - You Only Live Twice is pretty cheesy.

Disney’s 1975 Escape To Witch Mountain - Not so great as an adult in 2012. A bit of a struggle to put up with the cheesy child acting, and not a lot else to redeem it aside from the strange story

[url]http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/713/220pxcontagionposter1.jpg/[/url] [size=12pt]Contagion[/size] (2011, Steven Soderbergh)

I’ve never been a fan of this director, but I had expected more from this ā€˜adult’ medical thriller/disaster movie about a rapidly spreading virus.
There are no super heroes nor are is there any Roland Emmerich schmaltz, which is of course a good thing, but there’s also hardly any suspense and the cast may look impressive, but the only one who turns in a good performance is Kate Winslet, most other actors aren’t that bad, but have very little to work with.

Shot to make it look like a documentary, but this seemed to backfire a little: all the time I was aware of the fact that I was watching a movie that was shot to give us the impression that we’re watching a documentary.

En route there are a couple of interesting ideas, but not of them is properly developed.
Dissapointing movie, 5 out of 10.

Oh well … at least we got Shalako as the result of this boredom :wink:

And he looked very inspired in it!

[/URL]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[url]http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/18/1190182361bbshalako21.jpg/

Note: it’s Imageshack, not shag

Who wouldn’t be inspired? :wink:

I have this on DVD actually… but only with French audio and no subs (another blind buy ffrom Tunisia)… I may watch it one day just to test my French (is it a dialogue ridden film?).

The Book of Eli - A mismanaged post-apocalyptic fantasy, with Denzel Washington as an ass-kicking prophet armed with assorted weaponry, but more importantly a ā€˜mysterious’ tome said to contain the key to salvation and/or the means to control the masses. Gary Oldman wants it for evil purposes, Denzel chops up numerous heavies to protect it. This could have made an effective parable had the book in question not actually been the Bible (that’s not a spoiler - the ā€˜twist’ really is that obvious), but something of more practical use in a blasted world. Instead, Denzel’s message is that faith alone will lead to salvation, and the film comes to resemble little more than crude religious propaganda. It looks the part, but even the design is nothing we haven’t seen before. The same goes for the tightly choreographed fight scenes.

The Hughes brothers’ comments on their film suggest they intended it to be more opaque, a richer philosophical experience. It could have been, with major changes to the script, but I think it simply got away from them during production.