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

Movies You've Seen Recently III: The Third Chapter

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Last of the Mohicans (1992) - Well crafted movie and I liked the mid-17th century setting when the Americas were being fought over and still mostly unexplored. It make me sad when I thought about the ultimate American-Indian tribes fate that culminated in exile/genocide in the ensuing one and a half century.
I don't known the book were it was based on but all the romance part felt rushed and actually some parts of the whole story seemed somehow pushed forward. 3.5/5

And God Created Woman (1956) - Gorgeous Bardot playing a young temptress in a Côte d'Azur town, giving her ill fame but driving crazy the males and specially a tycoon and three brothers that ultimately will mark her fate. No wander Bardot was such an icon in the 50s/60s. Incredible to see young Jean-Louis Trintignant when we know about his recent participation in "Amour". This was almost 60 years ago! To watch in HD, the Technicolor source was simple marvellous to watch. 3/5

Dark Knight Rises (2012) - Definitely a step below Dark Knight, maybe because of the story itself (I don't know how faithful is to the source), some parts gave me the same "what/why!?!" feeling as Prometheus did and it was not so well directed as the previous instalments. 3.5/5
 
Why do horror movies usually get bad reviews? I've seen a lot of horror movies that are great because they're scary and suspenseful, but they always get bad reviews. It seems to me that critics don't get that horror movies aren't about a great story with good characters and superb acting. If a horror movie is scary and thrilling it's good IMO.
 
NiklausMikaelson said:
Why do horror movies usually get bad reviews? I've seen a lot of horror movies that are great because they're scary and suspenseful, but they always get bad reviews. It seems to me that critics don't get that horror movies aren't about a great story with good characters and superb acting. If a horror movie is scary and thrilling it's good IMO.
Click to expand...
Do you have some examples? To be honest I don't watch a lot of horror any more, primarily because they don't seem to be able to carry that suspense right through the length of the film. I've been disappointed with so many films that start brilliantly, but I'm in full on WTF mode by the end of the film.

Perhaps it's me, or perhaps I'm watching the wrong films.
 
NiklausMikaelson said:
Why do horror movies usually get bad reviews? I've seen a lot of horror movies that are great because they're scary and suspenseful, but they always get bad reviews. It seems to me that critics don't get that horror movies aren't about a great story with good characters and superb acting. If a horror movie is scary and thrilling it's good IMO.
Click to expand...

That'll be why. Those are the metrics critics use. I like horror movies, but most of them are not what I would call 'good' films.
 
Blader5489 said:
The Big Gundown
lZVXOjt.jpg


Holy shit, this was great! Thoughtful but not overly political, sparse but intense action, nice chemistry between Lee Van Cleef and Tomas Milian that develops (mostly) logically and concludes nicely (though their pairing doesn't top Eastwood and Van Cleef's in For a Few Dollars More). I really enjoyed Van Cleef's lawman character in this. Spaghetti westerns (or at least the ones I've seen) seem to led by protagnists who are mostly amoral or self-interested, so after watching Eastwood's Man with No Name and Nero's Django, it was refreshing to have a lead character that was so completely motivated by the law and doing the right thing.

Maybe my only regret in watching it is not being able to hear Van Cleef's voice in it (though the Italian dubber was pretty good). But even still, I loved this movie.
Click to expand...

One of my favorite movies. Everyone should see it.
 
Watched another one over the weekend.

Death Rides A Horse

Death_rides_a_horse.jpg


Didn't like this one as much. Van Cleef is good as always (though this is definitely my least favorite of his roles I've seen), but the film moves along a little too slowly and nothing exciting really happens until the ending. What really drags the movie down more than anything though is John Phillip Law. He's half the story, essentially the heart of the whole film, and he's so fucking wooden and dull that he drags everything else down with him. That role needed a way better actor in it; as is, he's an enormously important hindrance to the movie.

The final shootout was cool though. Also loved the movie's main theme, it never failed to make me think of the House of Blue Leaves. :lol
 
Dark Skies - An enjoyable movie. There aren't enough alien abduction horror-esque movies made, imo, so I'm glad this one was fairly competant. Very tense in some scenes. There was a scene late in the movie (end movie spoilers)
that bugged me, at first, when the older son starts seeing some freaky shit that's only in his mind, I thought for a bit the movie's creators were going to pull the ol' "It was all only a dream, there were no aliens at all!" but thankfully that didn't happen.

In the end, I liked it quite a bit. It was well-acted, the kids in the movie weren't annoying, and the plot was fairly well constructed. 8/10
 
I can honestly say that Morvern Callar is Lynne Ramsay's best now that I've seen her entire filmography. Samantha Morton sells the fuck out of this role, and it makes me wonder why she isn't in more stuff. Can't wait for the Moby Dick in space thing she's doing.
 
I've been playing some Dead Space 2 (its boring) and it put me in the mood for some trash sci-fi:

Alien Cubed: 6/10. Better than Aliens.
Alien Resurrection: 4/10. Pretty lame but has near-peak Nona cuteness, which she achieved two years later in Girl, Interrupted. Adding cloning to a story is the easiest way to invalidate everything that's ever happened or ever will, except of course for the delightful Multiplicity starring Michael Keaton.
Pitch Black: 6/10. Have you ever noticed how sci-fi movies have incredibly strong openings and then quickly fade once they actually have to tell a story? They always start out with some crazy action and all this neat future tech and shit and you're like fuuuuuuuck this is awesome, and then Vin Diesel opens his mouth and you're like uggh. I honestly think the perfect sci-fi movie would be about 17 minutes long. Anyway this was not awful, with allowances made for it's genre. Talk about your dumbfuck premises though, the guy that can see in the dark gets stranded on the planet with the creatures that only come out in the dark? Eat a dick. Radha Mitchell is so fucking hot, you know like in a sharp white girl kind of a way. I thought the same thing when I saw her in Man On Fire, I was like where has this gorgeous woman been all my life and why did I never see her? Oh right it's because she's in shit movies I don't watch.
Chronicles of Riddick: 3/10. ....what does this have to do, with anything? Video game-tier story complete with QTEs and final boss fight, including tacked-on supernatural elements, the second worst thing you can add besides cloning to ruin a story. This isn't even sci-fi, I got tricked in to watching this. Sweet Jersey Shore haircut, Karl Urban. Fun fact: Vin Diesel has starred in 5 movies where he's either a Furion or a Furious.

The Big Red One: 7/10. Total Saving Private Ryan rip off. So far this is my favorite Sam Fuller movie, I think because it's like more normal kind of stuff, though we still take a trip to a mental hospital in this. Is this the only other legit Mark Hamill performance in a movie other than Luke Skywalker? He must have done this before Empire before everyone realized he could only do Skywalker.
Key Largo: 5/10. Kinda boring since we never really leave the hotel lobby. I don't like Edward G. Robinson as the bad guy.
Body Heat: 8/10. Hottttttttttt, seriously I got many boners watching this. Prime Kathleen Turner, and a surprisingly good supporting Ted Danson. Dude could have been a real guy if he tried. I guessed Florida.
Heathers: 9/10. This is one of those ones that I'm sure I've been quoted endlessly without realizing it. Absolutely hilarious, great dark comedy, totally my thing. Kinda gets dumb and serious at the end but the first part more than makes up for it. Totally rips off Mean Girls.
 
The Devils Double. 7/10

The trailer made this seem like it might be the greatest movie ever. It was good, but not great. The pacing was weird at times, and the editing was strange. Other than that, the women were beautiful, and Dominic Cooper killed it, I mean he really killed it.

I recommend this movie to you all.

I want to give this a higher score, because I would watch it again, maybe the fact that my GF and I had a huge fight in the middle of the movie soured my thoughts on it. I don't know.

Will try again.
 
Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows - 8/10 - fun movie with some really cool Sherlock/Moriarity moments. Jude Law is still awesome as Watson.

Clash of the Titans (2010) - 1/10 - waste of time. what a POS.

Wrath of the Titans - 7/10 - better than the first movie altho the lack of character development really hurts it. it was good for the action only. Ares was LAME.

Bourne Legacy - 4/10 - some good action scenes but the story was dumb and the ending was lame.
 
NiklausMikaelson said:
Why do horror movies usually get bad reviews? I've seen a lot of horror movies that are great because they're scary and suspenseful, but they always get bad reviews. It seems to me that critics don't get that horror movies aren't about a great story with good characters and superb acting. If a horror movie is scary and thrilling it's good IMO.
Click to expand...
I mean give some examples? I think horror movies are given just as fair a chance as a lot of other movies by critics, but I feel they're more likely to be bad given the stigma of the genre, the idea that anyone can scare someone draws bad filmmakers who thus make bad movies. also you're making it sound as if suspense and tension are distinct from strong characters and acting when in fact they're so closely linked it's ridiculous. scarier movies have better characters, movies with better characters are scarier. it also also sounds like you're holding horror to a lower standard yourself, excusing huge errors just because there were a few jump scares is silly.
Borgnine said:
Heathers: 9/10. This is one of those ones that I'm sure I've been quoted endlessly without realizing it. Absolutely hilarious, great dark comedy, totally my thing. Kinda gets dumb and serious at the end but the first part more than makes up for it. Totally rips off Mean Girls.
Click to expand...
this movie is indeed very
 
NiklausMikaelson said:
Why do horror movies usually get bad reviews? I've seen a lot of horror movies that are great because they're scary and suspenseful, but they always get bad reviews. It seems to me that critics don't get that horror movies aren't about a great story with good characters and superb acting. If a horror movie is scary and thrilling it's good IMO.
Click to expand...

What's your damage? Sounds like u just mad cause mainstream critics are calling out your favorite movies for the pieces of shit they are. If you're gonna be a genre guy then stick to reviews by other genre guys. I don't bother watching horror or splatter unless it's Dookakke approved.
 
I'm too much of a bitch to watch horror movies. Hell, I get scared of shit unintentionally, and then I can't get it out of my head for days.
 
ViewtifulJC said:
I'm too much of a bitch to watch horror movies. Hell, I get scared of shit unintentionally, and then I can't get it out of my head for days.
Click to expand...

I was this way, probably watched 3 horror movies my whole life before age 17 or so (one of those being Halloween 2 on VHS when I was a kid, which I watched at midnight in the musty basement of an old, dark lakeside cabin; after 10 minutes I hid the tape and cowered in bed for the whole night). to fix it here's what I did:
1) watch one horror movie
2) watch another horror movie
steps 3-n) watch n more horror movies
 
I'm also a complete pussy with them. My remedy is to watch them alone, at night in the pitch black.

What's the point of horror films if it's not to scare? Might as well come along for the ride.
 
Finally saw Battleship and Snow White and the Huntsmen...Battleship was a very slow and weird start but man those last 30 minutes I thought where awesome...I also was pleasantly surprised by Snow White,great performance by Theron and Stewart and those Dwarves lol...the scene with the Deer was pretty awesome.

Tonight,it's The Cabin in the Woods,heard good things about that one...(I have a Movie Network channel so thats why I am late on a lot of movies and I rarely go to the theater anymore or rent them)
 
Borgnine said:
I honestly think the perfect sci-fi movie would be about 17 minutes long.
Click to expand...

Well, there are quite a lot of good sci-fi shorts that are able to express their ideas clearly and left to be thought-provoking, without a predictable plot or potentially bad acting getting in the way.

The Second Renaissance (part of Animatrix)

The Silent City

Black Button

Alive in Joburg (mostly became District 9)

The Cathedral

The Ark
 
Hugo (2011)

Watched this pon Netflix. Pretty great movie apart from the Georges Méliès scenes/sequences/shots...which were fucking INCREDIBLE. So great to see that stuff paid tribute to, all the way in the year 2011. And the kids (Asa Butterfield and Chloë Grace Moretz) did a good job of not making me want to blast my own legs off with a shotgun before proceeding to beat myself to death with them. The balance of whimsy, ripping adventure and biopic elements worked together wonderfully.

Four out of five creepy automata.
 
JFK 5/10 - For the most part I had no idea what anyone was talking about, nor did I have any reason to care. It honestly felt like one big info dump. Stone doesn't really delve too much into Costner's character, other than the expected stuff about how obsession can ruin your life. The last thirty minutes were well done and the only time it truly had my attention. Back and to the left.

Damsels in Distress 6/10 - My first Whit Stillman, and I think I liked it? It didn't obsess over empty relationships like so many of these movies do. Violet's total honesty about herself surprised me. The overall quirkiness was issued in small doses and felt like a natural part of the characters and their world. Is Stillman's trilogy similar to this?
 
Dojoji Temple (Kawamoto)

Letterboxd said:
Jiri Trnka: meet Mr. Kawamoto.

That's largely how it went, too. Kihachiro Kawamoto never bothered with puppet animation before he met the Czech master, and he didn't create too many animated shorts after he began his new, middle-aged career. But short films like Dojoji Temple are not to be underestimated—after all, it takes preparation and a mature sense of direction to scare the living daylights out of someone with artificial actors. There are reasons why Thunderbirds feels so tongue-in-cheek to this day and why this Kawamoto tale shall retain its dramatic relevance for years to come; I'll admit, of course, that Thunderbirds is awesome and, like the best TV shows, knows what it's doing.
Click to expand...
Some crazy mono no aware stuff going on in this one; of course, it's just damn great. ****/*

Mysterious Medicine (Tadanari Okamoto)

Letterboxd said:
The Noboru Ofuji Prize, named for the famed animator and awarded to animated movies in competition at the Mainichi Film Concours, was introduced in 1961 to herald a new golden age of Japanese independent animation. Regular winners included Osamu Tezuka (who received it three times) and Kihachiro Kawamoto (who got it a whoppin' six times!). 1965 was the big year for versatile auteur Tadanari Okamoto, fresh out of both film school and the Bass/Rankin-related MOM Productions, and Mysterious Medicine took home the Ofuji Prize.

When it comes to this prestigious award of considerable worth, only he would achieve it eight times
Click to expand...
And behold! The film's not as good as Dojoji Temple. Feh. It's still an enjoyable Bass/Rankin-like affair. ***/**

The Private Life of Henry VIII (Alexander Korda)

Letterboxd said:
I initially thought there was more than meets the eye to this movie, at least when I saw that ironic cut between Anne and Jane. Even before that, though, the sight of Anne approaching a lit window—as if she were reluctant to face the holy light—injects a kind of formal awareness of 16th-century English culture that I find rather pleasing. It's an advanced beginning for what is essentially a psuedo-historical comedy of manners. So much of what makes this film work isn't the stellar photography, nor any interesting plays on form and viewer expectations, but solid execution of contemporary conventions. In short: Korda needed Charles Laughton, and he got him.
Click to expand...
As far as comedies of manners go, this one's a bunch of fun. ****/*

Jumping (Osamu Tezuka)

Letterboxd said:
For a side-project following a string of consistently depressing and gruesome manga works from the big man himself, Jumping's quite the feat. It manages to stray away from displaying any authorial attitudes, instead leaving the imagery within up to interpretation. But, once the technical marvels of this short have worn off, I think it all degrades to some extent. There's nothing particularly interesting about jumping through an idyllic forest with nothing to offer in the way of commentary; even the city shots, sweeping as they are, feel devoid of content. It's all style and no substance, at least until the most provoking message—that of an individual's inability to avoid and recoup from disaster—comes up at the very end. When an animation starts out novel and quickly reveals itself as little more than a colored pencil test, that's when I start to wonder if I should be using my time a bit more wisely.
Click to expand...
—But, man, it's quite te sight for sore eyes. A beautiful little animation without that much to it? No biggie. ***/**

The Diary of Tortov Roddle (Kunio Kato)

Letterboxd said:
Frank Zappa's fifth child could have been named Tortov Roddle. But that will never happen; neither will The Diary of Tortov Roddle ever strike someone as Zappa-esque.
Click to expand...
Nor will I discuss this one again, decent as it may be. ***/**
 
Done watching Dancer in the Dark. I hated it, I absolutely hated this movie. I thought Bjork was great and performances were fine, but still hate it; I didn't even like the style much either. I heard a member here say the movie was like watching someone slowly drown a blind puppy, I agree, only I wasn't moved. 4/10

Count Dookkake said:
No!

Bad movie watcher, bad!
Click to expand...

Well, I had to vent a little. I try to no pause or stop watching a movie anymore, but this one got to me.
 
I watched Bonnie & Clyde today. I thought it was pretty good. Some parts had me in stitches ("I'm 33 years old"). I also liked how quick it felt; the movie moves at an extremely fast pace. I will say that I didn't care for the two protagonists at all. I know they aren't supposed to be endearing figures, but I couldn't relate to them on any level so I had a hard time keeping interest in Clyde's inability to get down. Other than that I thought it was a fun ride with an interesting stance on murder/crime. I'd give it a solid 7/10.
 
Life of Pi - At the end of the day the movie really didn't have much of a point. For some bizarre reason I liked it though. The cinematography was great and probably kept my attention. It definitely didn't need to be as long as it was and the whole premise was ridiculous but I still thought it was pretty good.
 
Charles Foster Kane said:
Done watching Dancer in the Dark. I hated it, I absolutely hated this movie. I thought Bjork was great and performances were fine, but still hate it; I didn't even like the style much either. I heard a member here say the movie was like watching someone slowly drown a blind puppy, I agree, only I wasn't moved. 4/10
Click to expand...
Was it your first Von Trier?
I've only seen Antichrist and Melancholia, which were both enjoyable, in their own special ways.
What didn't you like about it?
 
Charles Foster Kane said:
Done watching Dancer in the Dark. I hated it, I absolutely hated this movie. I thought Bjork was great and performances were fine, but still hate it; I didn't even like the style much either. I heard a member here say the movie was like watching someone slowly drown a blind puppy, I agree, only I wasn't moved. 4/10
Click to expand...
Was it icarus? Wait, that would be too upfront for her.
 
I think you're supposed to hate them aren't you? I've hated nearly every one I've seen. They're great.
 
HoJu said:
Was it your first Von Trier?
I've only seen Antichrist and Melancholia, which were both enjoyable, in their own special ways.
What didn't you like about it?
Click to expand...

I've seen those too, and I enjoyed them much more. It was kind of the same problem I had with Precious; where it feels like the movie is pulling all shit possible to make the character's story sadder. It just didn't feel genuine to me, so I wasn't moved; the fact that I didn't like the style didn't help. I don't say the movie is shit or anything, but I found it mediocre. Bjork pulled an excellent performance though.


Femmeworth said:
Was it icarus?
Click to expand...

I think so.
 
Watched The Master tonight.....as with any PT Anderson movie I've seen I feel like my opinion on it might grow over time, having said that, my initial thoughts are that I enjoyed it quite a bit. There were a few scenes in particular where I thought Freddie was about to lose his shit just from a extremely subtle shift in his facial mannerisms.

Joaquin killed it basically. Excited to see that PT's next movie has him in it as well.

Anyone here see his first movie Hard Eight? I'm thinking about doing a PT Anderson filmography, and it looks like that would be the first one if I go in chronological order.
 
Papa Steve said:
Watched The Master tonight.....as with any PT Anderson movie I've seen I feel like my opinion on it might grow over time, having said that, my initial thoughts are that I enjoyed it quite a bit. There were a few scenes in particular where I thought Freddie was about to lose his shit just from a extremely subtle shift in his facial mannerisms.

Joaquin killed it basically. Excited to see that PT's next movie has him in it as well.

Anyone here see his first movie Hard Eight? I'm thinking about doing a PT Anderson filmography, and it looks like that would be the first one if I go in chronological order.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed Hard Eight quite a bit. That said, I am a Boogie Nights and Magnolia kinda guy - not as impressed by TWBB and The Master.
 
NZer said:
I enjoyed Hard Eight quite a bit. That said, I am a Boogie Nights and Magnolia kinda guy - not as impressed by TWBB and The Master.
Click to expand...

Feels like I've rarely heard anyone even mention Hard Eight. Figure it could be attributed to it being his first film, and it being before he blew up big with Boogie Nights, or that maybe it's just not that great of a film period, or compared to his subsequent work. Curious to find out for myself.
 
Papa Steve said:
Feels like I've rarely heard anyone even mention Hard Eight. Figure it could be attributed to it being his first film, and it being before he blew up big with Boogie Nights, or that maybe it's just not that great of a film period, or compared to his subsequent work. Curious to find out for myself.
Click to expand...

Hard Eight is a 'small' film, in that it feels like a single thread from one of his multi-threaded epics (think: Magnolia). But it's good, and it demonstrates his talent for character and mood (and unpredictability).

It's a bit like his 'Reservoir Dogs', I guess.
 
NZer said:
Hard Eight is a 'small' film, in that it feels like a single thread from one of his multi-threaded epics (think: Magnolia). But it's good, and it demonstrates his talent for character and mood (and unpredictability).

It's a bit like his 'Reservoir Dogs', I guess.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Hard Eight and Magnolia are the only two I have yet to see. Gonna get on that soon.
 
Primer

I'd have to say it's too clever for its own good since it basically requires investing time in rewatching and thinking about it to fully work out all the nuances of what's going on, but I had a blast doing just that which made it compelling for me in a way few films manage. The low budget aesthetic was done really well too. 9/10 but not for everyone.
 
ThanksVision said:
I watched Bonnie & Clyde today. I thought it was pretty good. Some parts had me in stitches ("I'm 33 years old"). I also liked how quick it felt; the movie moves at an extremely fast pace. I will say that I didn't care for the two protagonists at all. I know they aren't supposed to be endearing figures, but I couldn't relate to them on any level so I had a hard time keeping interest in Clyde's inability to get down. Other than that I thought it was a fun ride with an interesting stance on murder/crime. I'd give it a solid 7/10.
Click to expand...
That's actually the best part of the movie - really gives off a "nice" sense of disconnect between the viewer and the film.
 
Tim and Eric's Billion Dollar Movie: What in the holy fuck did I just watch, it had some decent jokes and the expected cameos were alright but seemed way too long for its 80 mins. 6/10
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The worst commercials you've ever seen.
2
84
2K
Beretta replied
Film Limbo: 18 High-Profile Movies That Were Shot But Haven’t Seen The Light Of Day
12
508
Panajev2001a replied
What is the weirdest/creepiest thing you've seen while you had sleep paralysis?
2
68
1K
Dr.Morris79 replied
Greenland Movies
4
175
saintjules replied
Movies You’ve Watched Lately | OT | - 2026
|OT| Social  2 3 4 5
209
2K
jshackles replied
Top Bottom