• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Movies You've Seen Recently: Return of the Revenge of the Curse of the...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cosmic Bus said:
I don't know how interested long-term you are in Cassavetes, but there are some really excellent books on his work and they give an absolutely fascinating view of his methods and how he put these films together. You could check the library for The Films of John Cassavetes, which is my favorite -- even though Carney is a bit of a loon and apparently an asshole, he's also a peerless scholar on the man. Cassavetes Directs is pretty solid, and I'm pretty sure someone got me Cassavetes On Cassavetes for Christmas, so that's exciting.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot for this!
Cassavetes, alongside Hawks and Godard, probably had the biggest impact on my outlook on cinema and yet despite this I've never read up on him!
I think I was put off by the Constant Forge documentary.
These books look great though, I've just ordered the Cassavetes on Cassavetes book, I have a few in that series (Scorsese, Hawks, etc) but didn't realise a Cassavetes one was available.
I'll try and track the others down when I finish it.

Carney is one slimy fuck btw, I knew of him from the debacle over the alternate versions of Shadows and Faces but hadn't heard at all about this Rappaport situation.
Holding a filmmakers own work to ransom is beyond sad :(
 
swoon said:
i don't understand why people hate brave so much, it has an actual interesting relationship between two characters, something only ratatoullie even attempts
Click to expand...

Because I got the Blu-Ray a couple of days ago I watched it again. It's actually a good movie with really nice visuals, humor and a nice reversal in the mother-daughter relationship halfway through the movie. Tangled obviously was the better movie, but still Brave was far above average. It was a lot better than Up (only the first ten minutes were worthwhile) and Cars 2. As a whole it's actually better than Toy Story 3. TS3 had an exciting finish and an ending that tugged the heartstrings, but everything leading up to it was lesser Pixar. Brave didn't have extreme emotional highs and lows, and is therefore less fondly remembered.
 
My problem with Brave was that
the bear was not a very expressive character, certainly not enough to help carry a mother/daughter relationship.
Also, I found all the slapstick tiring.
 
ymmv said:
Because I got the Blu-Ray a couple of days ago I watched it again. It's actually a good movie with really nice visuals, humor and a nice reversal in the mother-daughter relationship halfway through the movie. Tangled obviously was the better movie, but still Brave was far above average. It was a lot better than Up (only the first ten minutes were worthwhile) and Cars 2. As a whole it's actually better than Toy Story 3. TS3 had an exciting finish and an ending that tugged the heartstrings, but everything leading up to it was lesser Pixar. Brave didn't have extreme emotional highs and lows, and is therefore less fondly remembered.
Click to expand...

i don't think people think of non animation movies in terms of emotional high and lows? I think the core mother daughter relationship feels as real and nuanced as any drama and the heartbreak the mother goes through during the reversal is scary and real and something that happens as we all get older sadly.

i wouldn't mind if people just thought brave as average or just okay - but people hate hate like cars 2 which is kinda of a bummer because it is pixar's most mature movie.
 
ymmv said:
Because I got the Blu-Ray a couple of days ago I watched it again. It's actually a good movie with really nice visuals, humor and a nice reversal in the mother-daughter relationship halfway through the movie. Tangled obviously was the better movie, but still Brave was far above average. It was a lot better than Up (only the first ten minutes were worthwhile) and Cars 2. As a whole it's actually better than Toy Story 3. TS3 had an exciting finish and an ending that tugged the heartstrings, but everything leading up to it was lesser Pixar. Brave didn't have extreme emotional highs and lows, and is therefore less fondly remembered.
Click to expand...
This is my biggest issue with the film bar none, in no way did I get any humor out of it. When Pixar are on their game, I'm either giddy, emotional, or laughing. Brave lacks the excitement thing for me, it did have some heart, which is nice, but it was never, for even a moment, funny.
 
Mifune said:
My problem with Brave was that
the bear was not a very expressive character, certainly not enough to help carry a mother/daughter relationship.
Also, I found all the slapstick tiring.
Click to expand...

the scenes at the river are fun and awfully sad i think. but actual designs and emotions through their eyes i think is pretty solid.

i don't think
bears
are very good at situational comedy.
 
I'm actually not a huge fan of Close Encounters. I absolutely love it in bits and pieces, but as a whole it feels less than the sum of its parts for me.

To say it's his best film besides Munich is actually kind of mind blowing for me.
 
StuBurns said:
It's more a statement of my low regards for Spielberg than anything else. Although Catch Me If You Can is probably better thinking about it, maybe.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't hold Spielberg in very high regard personally. I think he's just the kind of director that most people who don't watch a lot of movies cling on to say they know about films.
 
Close Encounters is great and contains my favorite mashed potato joke that I perform for my family every Thanksgiving.
 
StuBurns said:
It's more a statement of my low regards for Spielberg than anything else. Although Catch Me If You Can is probably better thinking about it, maybe.
Click to expand...

etouchd6k8v.gif
 
ET always freaked me the hell out. It's one of those films I saw very young like Edward Scissorhands that has basically turned me off to it because I was so freaked out by it then.
 
omgkitty said:
Yeah I don't hold Spielberg in very high regard personally. I think he's just the kind of director that most people who don't watch a lot of movies cling on to say they know about films.
Click to expand...

Where I have found many people who want to elevate their opinion on films tend to shit on him because he is so widely affiliated with mainstream audiences. You will find a lot of those people in film school, and they're even worse than the people who limit themselves to mainstream Hollywood.
 
Scullibundo said:
Where I have found many people who want to elevate their opinion on films tend to shit on him because he is so widely affiliated with mainstream audiences. You will find a lot of those people in film school, and they're even worse than the people who limit themselves to mainstream Hollywood.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's a bad director and I enjoy a good portion of his films. I just don't think he's up there with the true great directors.
 
I don't have any problem with Spielberg, I tend to really dislike 'adventure' films generally, so I don't like Indiana Jones, or Jurassic Park, I don't like any of the Star Wars films either, so I have an even lower opinion of Lucas. Some of his other films are aimed squarely at kids, like Hook. In terms of films which are specifically aimed at me, there just isn't that many considering how many films he's made.
 
StuBurns said:
I don't have any problem with Spielberg, I tend to really dislike 'adventure' films generally, so I don't like Indiana Jones, or Jurassic Park, I don't like any of the Star Wars films either, so I have an even lower opinion of Lucas. Some of his other films are aimed squarely at kids, like Hook. In terms of films which are specifically aimed at me, there just isn't that many considering how many films he's made.
Click to expand...

You've seen Schindler's List, Empire of the Sun, Saving Private Ryan and his thrillers like Duel, right?
 
Scullibundo said:
You've seen Schindler's List, Empire of the Sun, Saving Private Ryan and his thrillers like Duel, right?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen Duel, I've seen the other three, Jaws of course, The Color Purple, Amistad, AI (which I really hated, unlike all these others), Minority Report (which I really like), Terminal, War of the Worlds and Tintin.

Not seen the last two, but I will.
 
StuBurns said:
I will, and I'll watch Sugarland too, I've been meaning to for a couple of years.

I think it's dreadful.
Click to expand...

A.I. is beyond terrible. Only BR I've owned and sold back.

Duel is tense and mysterious and great !

omgkitty said:
If only Stanley Kubrick had gotten to direct it......if only.
Click to expand...

I wish he had more time/money for Napoleon instead. AI is so bad I've lost the ability to even imagine he could've done anything decent with it.
 
Everything Spielberg made in the last decade was great. Except Terminal. But that shit was hilarious so I give it a pass.

And Crystal Skull is a George Lucas film.
 
Scullibundo said:
He wanted Spielberg to direct it because it matched his sensibilities more than Kubrick's. Spielberg directing was Kubrick's decision until Spielberg decided to drop it. Then Kubrick died.
Click to expand...

I think it would have been great had Kubrick decided to do it. Would have been cool to see what Kubrick could have done with the new technology available at the time seeing as he only ever worked with practical effects.
 
omgkitty said:
I think it would have been great had Kubrick decided to do it. Would have been cool to see what Kubrick could have done with the new technology available at the time seeing as he only ever worked with practical effects.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Spielberg was the one affiliating Kubrick with visual effects houses for the film and showing him what could be done.

I still think Teddy is an amazing creation of practical work and CG.
 
The New World (2005)

After all the Malick talk I decided to watch The New World, and I don't hate it like I said in the Malick thread.

This movie is gorgeous, and shot with all natural light except for some scenes, what angered me most was the score, James Horner had written a beautiful score, but it was rejected with some Wagner and Mozard stuff, that stuff was good and all but I would loved the Horner to have been heard more. Both Farell and Bale did a wonderful job, and of course Q'orianka Kilcher who played Pocahontas, she's pretty.

There's no doubt this movie will make some people fall asleep, but I was glued from the start.

Malick is a very talented director.
 
Strafer said:
The New World (2005)

After all the Malick talk I decided to watch The New World, and I don't hate it like I said in the Malick thread.

This movie is gorgeous, and shot with all natural light except for some scenes, what angered me most was the score, James Horner had written a beautiful score, but it was rejected with some Wagner and Mozard stuff, that stuff was good and all but I would loved the Horner to have been heard more. Both Farell and Bale did a wonderful job, and of course Q'orianka Kilcher who played Pocahontas, she's pretty.

There's no doubt this movie will make some people fall asleep, but I was glued from the start.

Malick is a very talented director.
Click to expand...

First of all, the parts with Wagner's Das Rheingold's Prelude are the best ones (partly thanks to the music) second of all, Horner still had a lot of stuff to score.
Journey Upriver for example is great.

Too bad they couldn't fit in "An Apparition in the Fields" i love that track from the OST, but still, Mozart's #23 and Wagner's prelude beat it hands down.

I mean you can't not feel goosebumps during the final innuendo, with
the ships sailing off for the New World again
, with that piece of music in the background.
 
I always thought the more muted tones of classical music were a better fit for The New World than the outright romanticism Horner went for in his score. But then when I read his complaints about the movie, saying that it should have been an epic tragic romance in the vein of Titanic or something, I questioned if he'd ever seen a Malick movie, and consequently, how he landed the job in the first place.
 
Scrooged. First off, after Frank is being escorted to the elevator after the Ghost of Christmas Present scenes, a single subtitle "to work for the great Frank Cross." shows up. Anyone else seeing that? Either way, I loved this take on A Christmas Carol, that allows it to keep the classic structure, but it's not telling the exact same story again. I do recommend it.
 
FYEO_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg


For fuck's sake. Okay, so this is definitely an improvement on The Spy Who Loved Me, insofar as I wasn't hating myself for watching this. But it's still just...not good. I really appreciate the more grounded approach, and the stunts looked great, but I just can't buy Roger Moore as Bond at all. I mean, he's an old man! He's not suave, he's not charming (he never doesn't sound like he's just reading off a script), he's not funny (his one-liners don't make any sense!), and...fuck, he's old! Even ignoring the very obvious stunt doubles, Moore just doesn't have the physicality to sell himself as Bond.

I can't say this movie would have been better off with someone else as Bond instead. It's easily one of the most forgettable movies I've ever seen. Not only could I not tell you what happened in this movie, I couldn't remember what was happening while I was watching it.

Had enough of Moore, skipping Octopussy and A View to a Kill because I can't take another four hours of this, and these two aren't regarded well enough to even seriously consider them.


TLD_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg


But this is more like it! A nice Cold War spy plot, decent Bond girl, great looking action scenes. And Timothy Dalton! Going chronologically, he's easily the best Bond since Connery. Extremely light on the charm, but I actually believe he's a dangerous agent capable of doing the stunts he's doing (a lot of which I think Dalton did himself?), which is a hell of a nice breath of fresh air. Shame he only got the two films. The new Monneypenny is also a huge upgrade.

I also really liked the music in this one. Some shitty synth stuff, but there were a couple great orchestra pieces too.

Only main complaint I had about this one was Joe Don Baker. Kind of an odd/poor choice of villain.
 
Blue Valentine

Really didn't like the script and how clichéd it was. The ex-boyfriend was a cartoon character, among other things. The
abortion clinic
scene was on groan inducing side too. Everything else was fine or better, I suppose.
 
Rewatched the 1999 remake of The Thomas Crown Affair again. Absolutely love this version. The score remains amazing (although I can see it being a very love or hate thing)
 
Blader5489 said:
Had enough of Moore, skipping Octopussy and A View to a Kill because I can't take another four hours of this, and these two aren't regarded well enough to even seriously consider them.
Click to expand...

Haven't seen it in over a decade, but A View to a Kill does have Walken as the villain, which is pretty cool.



TLD_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg


But this is more like it! A nice Cold War spy plot, decent Bond girl, great looking action scenes. And Timothy Dalton! Going chronologically, he's easily the best Bond since Connery. Extremely light on the charm, but I actually believe he's a dangerous agent capable of doing the stunts he's doing (a lot of which I think Dalton did himself?), which is a hell of a nice breath of fresh air. Shame he only got the two films. The new Monneypenny is also a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...


Yeah, Dalton was great. Living Daylights is one of my favorites.
 
Just watched the Bourne Legacy.

WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY more inferior than the previous Bourne movies it's not even funny, blargh. However, Rachel Weisz was utterly and unbelievably drop dead gorgeous in this movie.
 
Blader5489 said:
[


TLD_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg


But this is more like it! A nice Cold War spy plot, decent Bond girl, great looking action scenes. And Timothy Dalton! Going chronologically, he's easily the best Bond since Connery. Extremely light on the charm, but I actually believe he's a dangerous agent capable of doing the stunts he's doing (a lot of which I think Dalton did himself?), which is a hell of a nice breath of fresh air. Shame he only got the two films. The new Monneypenny is also a huge upgrade.

I also really liked the music in this one. Some shitty synth stuff, but there were a couple great orchestra pieces too.

Only main complaint I had about this one was Joe Don Baker. Kind of an odd/poor choice of villain.
Click to expand...

yep really like dalton
 
Before I saw The New World, I thought Pocahontas was a fictional story, just by Disney, and I've never seen that film, but I had a rough idea of they story. I was talking to a friend about Malick, and he was talking about The New World, and how inaccurate it was, so I was reading up on her, and I was really surprised, we lived in the same town (Brentford), while we were the same age (21/22), and that year I even had to visit the postal sorting office to collect a guitar neck, on the very same land as she lived.

I feel an affinity to the story. All of Malick's films are visually stunning, but The New World is the only one that had a story that affected me, Badlands' story is pretty bad, Sheen's character is cool, a man who chooses to completely abandon law and society but Sissy Spacek was just awful. Days of Heaven is a stupid concept, it makes sense for The White Stripes, it doesn't make sense for low paid labor workers. TTRL is just a mess. The New World told a beautiful, and simple story, wonderfully.
 
Despite utilizing the Pocahontas/John Smith myth (which works well as a film either way so w/e). The New World is pretty awesome in how historically accurate it was in regards to set design costumes etc. Malick was pretty dedicated in making everything feel as authentic as possible despite the myth-like nature of the storytelling and direction in how he used historically accurate locations for the filming of the story.
Days of Heaven is a stupid concept, it makes sense for The White Stripes, it doesn't make sense for low paid labor workers.
Click to expand...
Eh I strongly disagree; I thought the concept is perfect from a story standpoint, esp the whole biblical allusion to abraham and sarah for that whole premise. I mean maybe it's a little unrealistic, but malick films never really strive for that anyway.
I always thought the more muted tones of classical music were a better fit for The New World than the outright romanticism Horner went for in his score. But then when I read his complaints about the movie, saying that it should have been an epic tragic romance in the vein of Titanic or something, I questioned if he'd ever seen a Malick movie, and consequently, how he landed the job in the first place.
Click to expand...
The love story in The New World is so perfect because of how low-key it is. I just love the whole
scene where john rolfe proposes to pocahontas
just beautiful film-making.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Film Limbo: 18 High-Profile Movies That Were Shot But Haven’t Seen The Light Of Day
12
549
Panajev2001a replied
The worst commercials you've ever seen.
2
84
2K
Beretta replied
What is the most rewatchable movie of the 21st century?
2 3 4
154
1K
CGNoire replied
J.R.R. Tolkien's The Return of the King released 70 years ago today
2
63
1K
Atomicfear replied
THE BEAUTY OF FOOTBALL
2
54
700
Ellis replied
Top Bottom