Amph What was the last movie you saw? (Ver. 2)

Mean Streets. The prototype of the Scorsese film: a New York crime film with Robert De Niro and a killer soundtrack. It hits all kinds of notes that would show up throughout Scorsese’s work, but it’s more than just an early-work curiosity; it’s a solid, hugely atmospheric film. It never really musters much in the way of plot, but it’s such an absorbing hangout you never even notice. It follows four friends drifting around the edges of the criminal world, as they hang out in bars, get in basement-pool-hall brawls, scam kids for money to hit the movies, and horse around on the streets in the middle of the night. The lead is Harvey Keitel as an earnest mob boss’s nephew, trying to keep his knucklehead friend De Niro out of trouble, with David Proval as a bar owner and Robert Romanus as a loan shark/black marketeer. They’re compelling characters in a richly fleshed-out world, and even if it’s low-budget and hardly Scorsese at the height of his powers, it’s confident and skillful, with some really good shots that show Scorsese’s native talent. I really liked it.

 

The Detective (aka Father Brown) Yet another 1950s British film that’s got a different name since I last saw it as Father Brown. (Turns out it was called The Detective for the US). Anyway Alec Guinness plays the titular character who as well as being a vicar also has a side venture of being a detective. In this film he sets himself the task of tracking down a master thief named Flambeau. No one knows what he looks like as hes a master of disguise and Father Brown tries to lure him in to stealing a valuable cross that hes transporting to Rome. After his first encounter with the thief, he doesn’t want to just catch him and turn him over the law, he wants to convert his soul to good. But can he get to him in time and also shake off the attentions of the British police who are following his every move? Yet another great example of post war British cinema, it’s a whos who of British stars with not only Alec Guiness but Cecil Parker, Bernard Lee, Joan Greenwood, Sid James & Peter Finch all playing prominent roles. Its got that innocence of British cinema at the time, I wonder if that was a deliberate move from film makers after the grim war years and subsequent rationing and poverty? The only disappointment is the ending, it kind of peters out a bit and theres an important scene in French that isn’t subtitled so we have no idea what was said to lead to the ending.

 

There's a TV series of Father Brown as well - currently the older episodes run on the Alibi channel in the UK. (Sky channel 132).

 

I've always meant to see the Alec Guinness Father Brown movie. I absolutely love the original short stories by G.K. Chesterton. The "priest as detective" cliché is as old as the hills, but Chesterton's personal faith really informed his work with Father Brown and the drive for Father Brown is often more toward restoring rightness more than dispensing justice, if that makes any sense. Sounds like they got that part right in the movie, so that's a good thing.

 

John Wick

I've seen this a couple times before. Really, really great film. It's got so much style packed into it. The cinematography is amazing, especially with the use of lighting, which was really effective. The acting was fantastic from every single cast member. The script was really well written. The soundtrack was awesome, especially during that club scene. Hot damn! That scene is absolutely amazing, and I had a grin on my face the entire time during it. And the fight choreography was done so well. I can't wait for the third chapter early next year. 9/10.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

This was a pretty messy film. Definitely not on the level as the first one. It felt like a whole lot of random stuff slapped together to fill in time between the first and third films, and there was just not much structure to it. And there wasn't a satisfying conclusion, especially after that let down of a final fight, if you can even call it that. It also felt like a lot of the characters from the first film were pushed aside and didn't get a chance to shine like they did the first time, especially Tina. Don't get me wrong, there was plenty to like about this one, but lots to complain about too. The biggest positive I can say is Grindelwald. He was the best and most interesting character in the film, and Johnny Depp gave a fantastic performance. The returning cast were all good, and so were the new additions. Jude Law played Jude Law more than he played Dumbledore, but I still really liked him as a character. The film felt pretty weird overall, but in a good way. The effects were fantastic, especially during that scene with the roof exploding over and over. It had a good amount of humour. 7.5/10.

 

A Simple Favor (2018) – Paul Feig

Stephanie, I need your help.

Are you okay?

I’m fine. But I do just need a simple favor. Can you come over?

If you’re looking for a night out of delicious entertainment, then, yes, this movie is here to do a favor and provide it for you, but, make no mistake, there’s nothing simple about the tonal juggling act required to create this delightfully manicured souffle (there’s a mixed metaphor for you). Anna Kendrick is the lead in this mystery-satire and she commands the screen so effortlessly and so perfectly that you’ll be floored. A crank would say she could play this part in her sleep and she’s certainly no stranger to the adorkably neurotic mommy vlogger vibe she plays here, but her charisma is massive and if you’re somehow still not onboard with her having true star quality, this movie really should settle things for you. When the film opens, Kendrick’s Stephanie Smothers is barely making it through her recipe livestream because her best friend Emily has been missing for several days. In a series of flashbacks, Emily is portrayed by Blake Lively and she is as instantly glamorous and iconic as the film needs her to be, not just wearing, not just owning, but absolutely rocking the **** out of some of the most idiotic outfits this side of Newt Scamander. You wouldn’t think a pair of cuffs, unconnected to any other item of clothing, would really look right resting delicately at the wrists of a woman wearing only a pin-striped vest for a top and you’re right: it doesn’t look right – it looks fabulous. This is the balancing act this movie wants to walk and it nails it to perfection. This is a glossy sweet dessert, nothing but calories and the sugary gloss of a perfectly assembled candy. But it’s delicious in, if this makes any sense, in the sincerity of its campiness. It’s campy, and it definitely knows it, but it’s never going to mock you for loving it. This movie is a guilty pleasure that doesn’t want you to feel a bit of guilt.

And, honestly, I didn’t. It’s silly at times, but it’s consistently fun. It never allows itself to get super dark or grim; when it does go there, it’s with the same teasing grin Emily uses to pry dark secrets out of Stephanie, assuring you all along that this is just for a little fun. Kendrick is really appealing as a protagonist and I’ve basically decided that I’m ready to watch an entire franchise built around Kendrick as a mommy vlogger who solves mysteries. The supporting cast is also quite good. Henry Golding is suitably callow as the mysterious husband of the Emily character. Linda Cardellini gets in a fantastic one-scene cameo as a mysterious figure from the past. Bashir Salahuddin really steals every single scene he’s in as Detective Summervile, a sneaky, passive-aggressive police officer; he seems to be relishing every moment he gets to be in the movie and he’s a real hoot. Kelly McCormack, Andrew Rannells & Aparna Nancherla are about the least likely and most wonderful Greek Chorus in history as a trio of local school “moms” that are forever turning up to snarkily comment on things. And what’s a campy thriller send-up with Jean Smart showing up to chew the scenery mightily late in the proceedings? Anyway, this isn’t a classic for all time or anything, but it’s a mightily entertaining film, anchored by a unique tone and a cast that’s down for anything as long as it’s fun. I mean, sure, the kids are pretty terrible and there’s a moment near the end that, even for the camp level of this movie, goes too far and crosses over into stupidity. But see it. Really, do. It’s a hoot. Just take my advice and thank me later. You can owe me one. 3 ½ stars.

tl;dr – gleeful, witty thriller is anchored by a true star turn by Kendrick and a fantastic gallery of supporting performers; campy, but not silly, it’s a pure pleasure with no guilt necessary. 3 ½ stars.

 

Red Heat I don’t think it was too long ago that I watched this but as it was again on I gave it another go. Arnold Schwarzenegger plays a Russian cop sent to America to bring back a Russian criminal (Viktor) whos killed his partner, fled the country and plans to brings drugs back in to Russia. In the US Arnies reluctantly paired with James Belushi and they have to form an unlikely and uneasy alliance, both with differing methods, as they set about trying to capture Viktor using his American wife (the gorgeous Gina Gershon), stop the drug deal going through and at the same time combat the drugs gang that are working for Viktor.

I think this is one of Arnies overlooked 80’s movies, it’s a decent buddy cop movie which ticks all the boxes for one of these action films from the era….. Wise cracking partner, lots of blood, villains flying through the air after being shot, dark streets backlit with plenty of steam, a soundtracks that uses lots of wind instruments, swearing, thick accents, machoism, the obligatory naked woman caught in the cross fire, a seedy hotel scene. You could watch this back to back with 48 hrs and Commando especially because its so similar in its action, score and tone. When you look at the team behind the film then its no wonder.

Its well worth a watch. Guinness is fantastic in portraying the innocence of Father Brown, almost verging on being unintentionally comedic at times. The supporting cast is excellent and for me I love British films from this era.

 

Fantastic Beasts. It wasn't a bad film per se but it definitely felt disjointed and messy. Not to mention crammed and that is with a 2+ hour run time.

 

This is definitely one of my favorite films of the year. Perhaps top 3.

 

In A Valley of Violence (2016)
Spaghetti western homage with Ethan Hawke and John Travolta. Not highbrow but watchable.

 

Following the recent (ish) discussions about The Girl with all the Gifts. One of the locations is now going to be flattened. An old outdated and unused shopping precinct.

Demolition of Hanley's former East-West Precinct is finally underway :

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/bulldozers-move-eyesore-east-west-2242961

 

The Incredibles

Bought the boxset with Incredibles 2 in it as it was only £7.50

 

American Assassin (2017)

 

Kingsglaive: Final Fantasy XV (2016)
It was pretty good; even if I could only understand maybe three quarters of what was going on. It's a precursor to the game itself; of which I've played through the first chapter. It's really incredible the things the movie makers can do these days with motion capture. The characters on screen are among the most lifelike I've ever seen in a completely CGI film.

 

Ralph Breaks the Internet

Spoiler

Going in, I knew the general premise was that the Sugar Rush steering wheel was going to break and the goal for Ralph and Vanellope was to get a new one to save the game so all the characters had a home to go back to since having your game unplugged was a huge deal, based on the events of the first movie. And how would they get a new steering wheel? The internet.

So I kind of figured they'd get the steering wheel with relative ease, maybe a hiccup here or there, while going on some fun adventures in the internet based on what I saw in the trailers specifically in reference to the Disney Princess scene.

I was slightly disappointed to learn that getting the steering wheel would be the goal throughout the entire movie. On their way to accomplish their goal, while creative at times, sometimes felt contrived based on the worst parts of the internet.

So while on their way to eBay to win the auction for the steering wheel, they meet characters that represent a pop up. They decide to use the pop up which brought them to the racing game which makes sense because, pardon my pun, as that's in Vanellope's wheel house. We meet Gal Gadot's character Shank who gets way too many lines and way too much screen time. It felt like the people in the game were trying to be the Fast and the Furious family, but I never got a sense of family from them.

After failing to achieve their goal in the racing game per the direction of the pop up character, Shank tells them to go see Yes who runs Buzz Tube or something very similar to Youtube. Yes helps Ralph make videos which get likes which gets them money. They get enough money to buy the steering wheel and their mission is accomplished.

But the steering wheel wasn't, again sorry for the pun, driving the story, but the friendship between Ralph and Vanellope was supposed to be focus. Vanellope was tired of the same thing day in and day out and dreamt of something bigger / more out of life, while Ralph liked things the way they wre for the past six years. Their friendship is tested, they fight, and eventually Ralph learns to deal with his insecurities and is able to let her go. So Vanellope decides to stay in Shank's game and Ralph still gets to talk and visit his friend when he can i.e. when an upgrade is happening for the online game that Vanellope is now a part of.

So while I appreciated the overall message, I think the execution was a little lacking. I loved the Disney Princess stuff and wish they were more involved with the story than they were. I would have much rather had more of them and less of fake Youtube and fake Fast and the Furious plot lines.

In summary, I enjoyed the original more. It needed more Disney Princesses. C+

 

Diner. A bunch of up-and-coming actors play a gang of twentysomething guys who hang around in 1959 Baltimore shooting the **** and confronting their various personal problems. It’s a hangout movie, low-key and plot-light, but unlike most of these nostalgic period-hangout movies, it’s not really a warm-and-fuzzy movie. It clearly has affection for its knucklehead protagonists, and they’re pretty funny, but they’re all varying degrees of jerk. They’re terrible boyfriends and terrible husbands who still bum around all night doing stupid, selfish, immature crap like they’re still a bunch of highschoolers. Even the most mature, intelligent one of them, the only one who doesn’t treat women like crap, is going around punching some random guy because of a baseball-diamond fight back in high school. They’re a bunch of self-destructive man-children, and while recognizing these issues drives the entire film, it ends up unwilling to really call them on any of it or force any consequences on them in a sweet, affectionate ending. It’s a very interesting film, but it’s too dark to have the warmth of something like American Graffiti or Dazed and Confused, but not willing to commit to the darkness enough to be really good on those terms, as a character study of aimless, self-destructive arrested development in a bunch of twentysomethings who don’t know how to leave behind childhood and enter adulthood gracefully.

 

The Little Stranger (2018) – Lenny Abrahamson

The Little Stranger came and went in what seemed like a matter of days, pretty roundly disliked by audiences, audiences that were already incredibly small by mainstream theater standards, and only liked a bit more by critics. I think the movie was really mismarketed as a standard horror movie, while it’s really more of a brooding psychological drama with horror elements. Domhnall Gleeson plays a surgeon who returns to the small town where he grew up poor and soon finds himself embroiled with the decrepit family that live in the decaying mansion in town; they were rich once, the toast of the town, but they’ve fallen on hard times due to a series of tragedies that are only partly explicated. But maybe it’s the sorrow of the family that’s leached into the walls and makes the house feel so unhealthy and sick; or maybe it’s something else, something more supernatural. The performances are really fantastic in this movie. Ruth Wilson, one of the most consistently overlooked actresses of our time, is nothing short of phenomenal as the daughter of the family; she’s hunched over with care, socially awkward, trapped by her responsibilities and all of this comes across in her hunted look and her strange body language. Domhnall Gleeson meanwhile gives what is perhaps his best performance; his performance is minimal and locked down – his character is emotionally seething, but he can’t or won’t ever really say what he’s feeling and he hides behind a completely dispassionate façade, hides, I should say, as well as he can, which is increasingly poorly as the film progresses. Will Poulter seems miscast at first as Wilson’s brother, but he’s actually quite good; he’s been scarred both physically and mentally by the war and Poulter does a good job at capturing the abrasiveness that he uses as a defense. Liv Hill is also very good in a small role as a maid that can feel the foreboding atmosphere more than most.

The film, ultimately, is really very much about class. Faraday, Gleeson’s character, has resented the Ayres family because of their wealth and position in the community, but he takes no pleasure in their downfall. Rather, he’s still drawn to the markers of their superiority, even as tarnished as they are. A successful surgeon with a flourishing practice, he still sees their life as better than his, even in its decayed and sickly state. I found the characters incredibly compelling and the exploration of these themes to be very interesting and thoughtful. Of course, that isn’t exactly the stuff of a gripping horror film and if you go for visceral scares, you’ll be disappointed, though the film is atmospheric and often really creepy (and does feature one really effective jump scare). As well, I found the ultimate revelation of the source of the spiritual malevolence to be really disturbing. I don’t want to give too much away, but I will say that the movie spends a fair amount of time misdirecting you as to the source of the spiritual activity and the ultimate source is intriguing and something I don’t recall really seeing in a horror movie before. Abrahamson, of course, does have to gild the lily a bit with a final shot that makes explicit what the film has implied with its final scenes; I question whether it might have been a studio mandated addition. It might not be though; I’ve struggled with Abrahamson in the past, honestly. I think this might be his best film, actually, even better than the critically acclaimed Room. It’s certainly a brooding, haunting psychological drama, an intellectual ghost story that is an intriguing twist on the genre and it features a really, really excellent cast. It’s kind of a masterpiece really and one that’s stayed with me since I saw it in the theater a while back now. It’s meticulous, methodical and, if never really terrifying, ultimately chilling. 4 stars.

tl;dr – marketed as a horror film, this is more a psychological drama with horror elements; methodical, atmospheric & slow, it rewards close attention & features brilliant performances. 4 stars.

 

Hadn't watched a SW film since Solo was released on blu ray, so on Monday I rewatched The Phantom Menace, and on Tuesday I rewatched Attack Of The Clones. Both were enjoyable, as always. I love all the new characters, aliens, and planets. I see something fresh everytime I watch the PT.
GL's original 6 film saga will always be my favorite SW.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone. I hope you have a great holiday. Cheers!

 

watched Won't You Be My Neighbour. It's really good and it did make my Grinch heart grow two sizes at times but I'm not quite seeing the magically transcendent blubbering documentary masterpiece that some touted it as. but good on Fred Rogers for using the medium to reach out to a underserved and misunderstood audience!

 

Point Blank. Lee Marvin is a taciturn, professional thief out to get his money back with businesslike ruthlessness after he’s double-crossed by his best friend and his wife. It’s a stripped-down, nasty, cold revenge flick with a rock-solid cast and an arty, minimalistic late-sixties sensibility. It’s no Get Carter, though it might have been with a stronger lead than Marvin, who’s capable but lacks the ability to do as much with as little as an Eastwood or Bronson might have. It is a tight, sharply-directed thriller, though, and that’s enough.

 

Eighth Grade - It's good, but at the same time, I couldn't help but feel that Lady Bird and The Edge of Seventeen both handled this sort of material significantly better.

 

Ready Player One
Finally saw this film, and I thank all my friends on the JCF and IRL for suggesting I watch it. I liked it a lot.
Spielberg is one of my favorite directors and I love 1980s culture, so this was a real treat. I will make a proper review after I see it a second time.

Hereditary
My second viewing of this polarizing horror film.

Present company, or lack thereof, can determine a lot about how one will react to a film. The first time I saw this, we were streaming it at a friends house and there were several interruptions along the way: friendly chit chat during the film, rewinding a section here or there to read a document presented onscreen, or simply pausing the movie for someone to grab some snacks or use the restroom.
As fun as it was to watch this film for the first time with good company, the interruptions inevitably altered and affected my response to this film.

My second viewing just ended 20 minutes ago. I was alone, watching Hereditary on blu ray, shrouded in darkness, in the middle of the night with no interruptions of any kind.

So, it was much more suspenseful and harrowing this time around, even though I knew everything that was to happen, including having read reviews on here, elsewhere and watching spoiler reviews online.
This is a freaking creepy movie, no kriffing doubt about it.
Various plotholes aside, a major one involving the lack of an epipen with this haunted family, this is one of the most psychologically taxing horror films I've seen in the last ten years.
The actors' performances are sensational, especially the mom and dad roles in the family. The music and cinematography are top notch.
The only real weakness is the story itself, yet, it is a horror after all, so, like, who really cares about that? The last 20 minutes are disturbing as hell.

Comparisons to benchmark films like The Exorcist and The Shining are overblown and based on wishful thinking, although compared to todays standard of quality, Hereditary comes closer to those old horror masterpieces than most of its contemporaries. This is a well crafted and executed film.

I would say this is must see viewing for fans of the genre. The only recent films in the same league in terms of quality would be Insidious, It Follows, and The VVitch.

 

I really like Marvin's performance in this , it goes really strange at times . Boorman said that there were takes when when he just didn't say the dialogue he had and they went with that instead , he has this zombie like attitude at times which takes the film beyond the predictable revenge thriller routine .

.

 

Bohemian Rhapsody

Very well worth watching in the theater. Yes, the story is obviously sanitized to preserve the dignity of Freddy and the band, but in spite of that it is a very good movie and very enjoyable. Would watch again.