Film What's the Last Film You Saw? v. Tell Us What You Thought!

[herbavore]

I have loved so many films both this past year and the beginning of 2018. Ladybird was definitely one of them. 3 Billboards was at the top of my list along with The Florida Project. I wasn't as in love with The Shape of Water as most of my movie-going cohorts were but I liked it. Get Out! is also at the top of my list. For documentaries both Jane and City of Ghosts are excellent. This week I'm going to see The Post having heard great things about it.

edit: forgot to mention I, Tonya. Surprised me on many levels. Worth seeing for sure.

 

[Larimar]

Coco. Another great movie by Pixar . Tear jerker. Great song Remember Me ?.

 

[Larimar]

Can?t wait to start the new season of Black Mirror.

 

[herbavore]

Coco. Another great movie by Pixar . Tear jerker. Great song Remember Me ��.

I just got back from Oaxaca when Coco was first out and I saw it twice! Loved the art and it was so true to the Oaxacan scene.

I just saw Call Me by Your Name and it was way better than I thought it was going to be. The Dad's talk with his son in the end of the movie is worth the whole thing. Plus, who couldn't sit for 2 + hours just watching the lush landscape of Northern Italy in the summer?

 

[Cream Gravy?]

The Last Jedi

Sub-par film; but equally as good as TFA. Anyone who thought the TLJ was bad but liked TFA clearly has rose tinted glasses. Anyways, not much to say, the film really sucked, was full of BS and one-liners. Again though, it was just as 'good' as The Force Awakens. Never plan to see it again, but I don't feel ripped off, at least no more ripped off than I felt after TFA and Rogue One.

4.5/10

 

[Blue_Phlame]

I'll quote my repsonse to you about TLJ in that other thread here.

I saw a ripped copy of the last jedi and found it to be a visually appealing, relatively structured and a character driven story (but *rolleyes* 8) @ the side-quest following Rose and Finn to some pointless side-mission [and their dialogue is something I would have heard from kids reenacting their scenes). The amount of plot holes in the story, and lame humor dropped the movie to "just another kids movie" for me. The Luke scenes were more mature, so there's that.
I wish there were more solid stories and plots in Hollywood, rather than the glitz and glamor of shiny visuals and loud explosions. I guess my kind of films are the ones that don't leave me with more questions than answers. Where the questions are life lessons and the answers tell a thorough and plausible story (even if in fantasy or science fiction), and the characters are more deeply developed to be relatable; or mysterious and leaving you curious, rather than a placeholder character where the audience can 'just fill in' the rest of their story depending on their own interpretation 8) .

I rolled my eyes a few times during TLJ

 

[Cream Gravy?]

^The Luke scenes were indeed the only redeemer. People bemoaned he wasn't the Luke of old... I thought his part was the only mature, plot driven character. It was exactly what i wanted out of Luke, and every other character was just a flop.

 

[mal3volent]

The Last Jedi

Sub-par film; but equally as good as TFA. Anyone who thought the TLJ was bad but liked TFA clearly has rose tinted glasses. Anyways, not much to say, the film really sucked, was full of BS and one-liners. Again though, it was just as 'good' as The Force Awakens. Never plan to see it again, but I don't feel ripped off, at least no more ripped off than I felt after TFA and Rogue One.

4.5/10

I have never met anyone who hated TFA, TLJ, and R1 equally. I would rank Rogue One (good) the best, then Force Awakens (mediocre), then Last Jedi (bad). The Vader scenes in R1 were some of the best Star Wars scenes ever. Force Awakens had nothing new to offer really but it was a competent Star Wars film. I felt really hopeful for the future with Snoke, Phasma, Poe, Ben, etc. Last Jedi ruined all those things.

 

[mal3volent]

I just saw Call Me by Your Name and it was way better than I thought it was going to be. The Dad's talk with his son in the end of the movie is worth the whole thing. Plus, who couldn't sit for 2 + hours just watching the lush landscape of Northern Italy in the summer?

Just watched this today. You are so right...what a dream to have that man as your dad! He knew exactly what to say and how to say it. The movie was beautiful. Wasn’t all that realistic, but I thoroughly enjoyed just getting lost in it. Timothy Chalamet is a great talent. I loved him in this and Lady Bird as well.

I still like Lady Bird of the Best Picture nominees I have seen. I still need to see 3 Billboards and Shape of Water, though.

Edit: I slept on it, and I think Your Name is closer to Lady Bird than I thought. There was something very special about that film.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

I have never met anyone who hated TFA, TLJ, and R1 equally. I would rank Rogue One (good) the best, then Force Awakens (mediocre), then Last Jedi (bad). The Vader scenes in R1 were some of the best Star Wars scenes ever. Force Awakens had nothing new to offer really but it was a competent Star Wars film. I felt really hopeful for the future with Snoke, Phasma, Poe, Ben, etc. Last Jedi ruined all those things.

Arguably Rogue One was decent, but if people can't see that TFA was almost as bad as TLJ, then again like I said, that's rose tinted glasses. Though the scene where a certain someone who should have died didn't and came back miraculously was a total load of horse shit and honestly ruined the film from the get go. So yeah, I guess it was worse, but marginally imo. To be upset about how bad TLJ was is to ignore the failures of previous Star Wars films.

 

[Asclepius]

When you say you liked it on that basis, do you mean you had other significant problems with it? I try not to be a prisoner of the moment but I do sometimes get carried away when a movie strikes an emotional chord with me. And I do have a proclivity for coming of age tales.

No 'significant' problems no - you make me out to be a mechanic lol

I found it warm and comforting. ...how and ever...

I thought the secondary characters werent built-on enough - for e.g., the Father with depression was just a stereotype who supported the protagonist. TBH the story was a tad too ego-centred;concerning the main character (every trajectory was built around her and any other character was left as a supporting role with no scope for their character development ( which reeks of a movie whose scope is based on specific demographic propoganda - which is imaginatively laxy imho) - despite this being common ( in traditional novels c. 1960 etc . in contemporary film ( even those reflecting on the 90's; I rekon it falls flat; I just thought it lacked gravity, depth and decent story development).

Entertainment wise; it was a genuinely, a lovely story and though this was pleasing - it didnt stimulate me; was too cotton-wool wrapped-up in mild discomfort- which for me, personally, is dissapointing for film ( tv or, netflix but movies should be feeding us more info; more insight imo ( doesnt have to be shocking, however the way its envisioned should hopefully bring a new perception. I like movies like this; dont get me wrong but as the barometer of a great film - it doesnt do it - movies should add something new ( whether it's in my ( or the collective) comfort zone, or not; this is what culture is about - creativity).

It was too self-masturbatory, to get me to invest completely in it, ya know?

I did like it though tbf - the acting was pretty sweet, given the script.

 

[mal3volent]

Interesting. Do you tend to grade movies on a different scale based on the genre? I was just thinking about this today after watching the Shape of Water. Don?t get me wrong, I thought it was a brilliant film. The production and the effects were gorgeous. It was pretty damn bold the way they handled the human/humanoid relationship. It was honestly a little uncomfortable for me at times, which I liked. They did all these things to portray the creature as animalistic, and at times their relationship seemed more like that of a woman and her dog, but then they would just drop in these sexual overtones which eventually led to actual intercourse. But I digress...

My point is, some of the points you bring up about Lady Bird I don?t consider to be as relevant because of the type of movie it was. I went in knowing it was a coming of age story about an eccentric girl (they even named the movie after her), so the fact that all the character development was centered around her didn?t strike me as lazy or egotistical. I knew Shape of Water was going to be a stylized, dark fairy tale...so I never found myself looking for plot holes or logical inconsistencies. But as I?m typing now I am almost angered by them. I could rant all night about it. Ultimately though, I won?t end up judging the film as a whole based on the plot because it let me know up front this is a fairy tale. It?s going to have a fairy tale ending.

I guess what I?m trying to say is, Shape of Water had to deliver on artistry...on production...on style...in order to be successful. I think it did. I loved it. If it had gotten bogged down with realism it would have defeated the whole purpose. Lady Bird had to deliver on emotion...on heart...on growth...and for me it did.

On the specific point of LB?s dad being a stereotype, yeah, a little. Philip Seymour Hoffman did it better in Synecdoche, New York. I didn?t think it was as egregious as you did though. Richard Jenkins character in Shape of Water was the typical aging-and-lonely gay man stereotype.

Right now, for me, I?m still pulling for Lady Bird. I?d probably put Call Me by Your Name second, and then Shape of Water after that. How can you even compare them though? They?re all so different. All that being said though, I guarantee you I will change my mind three times between now and Oscar night. Last year I thought Moonlight was miles ahead of everything else. This year it seems closer to me.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

Overall an enjoyable murder mystery. I thoroughly enjoyed Poirot's character. Unfortunately, the big reveal and ending were not to my taste and ruined my overall opinion of the film. Supposedly it follows the book's ending fairly well, but if so, I wouldn't like the book either. Worth a watch though if you're bored and into mysteries.

6/10

 

[CFC]

^ That's interesting. A few friends of mine who saw it thought it was abysmal, which was a big disappointment given the impressive cast. I'll have to watch it anyway though at some point

 

[hydroazuanacaine]

Please Stand By

this is exactly what i thought i was going to be. garbage feel-y porn. i needed something to watch with my mother, and between us it?s hard to find indie content neither of us has seen that does not contain uncomfortable sex. only thing i liked about it was how much dakota reminded me of elle. in a character that?s perfectly innocent, it was easy to crush.


The Killing of a Sacred Deer

this is a pulp comedy. and watched as one with the right people next to me, it was entertaining. the weird dialogue made it. like good tarintino. the spageghttie story and ?can i please have your mp3 player? were both quality scenes. the actor playing the vengeful boy was my favorite. my expectations were low after The Lobster, which helped. watching it by myself expecting something as great as Dogtooth would have lead to disappointment. all of this guy?s movies (or is it a duo?) should be watched alongside a fun audience with expectations not exceeding being entertained for a couple hours.


i had a third but can?t remeber it now. rewatched Bottlerocket a few nights ago. i hope cinema isn?t downhill from there.

 

[Cream Gravy?]

^ That's interesting. A few friends of mine who saw it thought it was abysmal, which was a big disappointment given the impressive cast. I'll have to watch it anyway though at some point

I'm not gonna say it was great, and I haven't seen the 1974 version. But it was an enjoyable film, and I feel the actors all did a stellar job. Well... save for Daisy Ridley. I'm not a big fan of her. She's pretty but sort of the new Kristen Stewart on the block imo.

I think people are too ready to compare it to the 1974 film. Idk, I had a good semi-nod going at the theater, maybe my judgement was clouded, but i really didn't think it was as bad as people made it out to be. My fiance enjoyed it as well.

 

[nightranger]

the last movie I watched was Baywatch

 

[Cream Gravy?]

^Care to elaborate?

 

[Asclepius]

Interesting. Do you tend to grade movies on a different scale based on the genre? I was just thinking about this today after watching the Shape of Water. Don?t get me wrong, I thought it was a brilliant film. The production and the effects were gorgeous. It was pretty damn bold the way they handled the human/humanoid relationship. It was honestly a little uncomfortable for me at times, which I liked. They did all these things to portray the creature as animalistic, and at times their relationship seemed more like that of a woman and her dog, but then they would just drop in these sexual overtones which eventually led to actual intercourse. But I digress...

My point is, some of the points you bring up about Lady Bird I don?t consider to be as relevant because of the type of movie it was. I went in knowing it was a coming of age story about an eccentric girl (they even named the movie after her), so the fact that all the character development was centered around her didn?t strike me as lazy or egotistical. I knew Shape of Water was going to be a stylized, dark fairy tale...so I never found myself looking for plot holes or logical inconsistencies. But as I?m typing now I am almost angered by them. I could rant all night about it. Ultimately though, I won?t end up judging the film as a whole based on the plot because it let me know up front this is a fairy tale. It?s going to have a fairy tale ending.

I guess what I?m trying to say is, Shape of Water had to deliver on artistry...on production...on style...in order to be successful. I think it did. I loved it. If it had gotten bogged down with realism it would have defeated the whole purpose. Lady Bird had to deliver on emotion...on heart...on growth...and for me it did.

On the specific point of LB?s dad being a stereotype, yeah, a little. Philip Seymour Hoffman did it better in Synecdoche, New York. I didn?t think it was as egregious as you did though. Richard Jenkins character in Shape of Water was the typical aging-and-lonely gay man stereotype.

Right now, for me, I?m still pulling for Lady Bird. I?d probably put Call Me by Your Name second, and then Shape of Water after that. How can you even compare them though? They?re all so different. All that being said though, I guarantee you I will change my mind three times between now and Oscar night. Last year I thought Moonlight was miles ahead of everything else. This year it seems closer to me.

Ladybird was lovely, but didnt do anything extrordinary and was worthty of netflix - not a great film. It lacked any creative zeal; no imagination - was weak in anything but traditionally comforting, storytelling ( granted would have been a sweet bed-time book). It was sweet but boring; staid and predictable; the character was lackluster; shallow beyond belief- it was creatively lazy imo; ive seen 90's dramas on tv with better narrative-twists and more engaing, writing techniques/narrative plots, with a semblence of depth into the human condition - this was weak imo - nice but no insight; no fucking trajectory toward anything other than the banal 'success' crap - boring.

However, I do hope she does well ( director/producer - but its a pity hope - meh) - she made a good show - but the bar ( especially after Moonlight) is set low and is more about PC, stories than artistic merit and art.


Anyhoo, comparing LB to TSoW, is Apples and oranges - it's not an NFL game - I wont even go there. It's silly and inane to do so.

 

[mal3volent]

I was just comparing the expectations going into each film, not the two films themselves. I just completely disagree with your assessment of Lady Bird. Every movie doesn’t have to drip with imagination or creative zeal in order to be successful. This day and age unpredictability has become pretty predictable. Besides, Greta Gerwig was channeling her own experience through Saoirse Ronan and her character. When you are making a semi-autobiographical, light hearted indie film about a girl growing up in Sacramento is not the time to make too many overly artistic statements. Gerwig has plenty of time for those things...this was pretty much her directorial debut.

Speaking of originality and creativity, what do do you think about all the plagiarism accusations swirling around Guillermo del Toro and The Shape of Water?

The similarities to Let Me Hear You Whisper seem a bit harder to ignore, though. For starters, Del Toro’s movie is about a mute woman working as a custodian at a laboratory where the government is conducting mysterious experiments. Zindel’s play is about the same thing, though the woman is simply very introverted instead of mute. Del Toro’s movie has the woman develop a relationship with a fish man who is being experimented on, and Zindel’s play has the woman develop a relationship with a dolphin that is being experimented on. Eventually, both women attempt to free the captured aquatic creature.

Del Toro denies ever having seen it although I find that hard to believe given how well versed he is in this particular genre...I mean, he admits the creature is directly inspired by the Creature from the Black Lagoon...but “inspired by” doesn’t really go far enough imo...

what did you mean by the Moonlight comment btw? I didn’t get that.