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

I know I'm not supposed to say this but - I've never really liked Some Like it Hot. And I'm a big fan of all the talent : Curtis , Monroe, Lemmon, Wilder. I just don't find it very funny.

 

Picked up A Cure for Wellness cheap and am looking forward to seeing it. It looks pretty out there.

 

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm. This has the look and feel of a two-parter animated series storyline; the animation just isn’t up to theatrical snuff, and with the short length, it’s not really operating at full-length film scale. But the animated series was pretty great, so it’s no knock against it that it feels like a strong storyline from the show.

The writing is the outstanding feature, exploring Bruce Wayne’s decision to become the Batman by giving him the choice of happiness with his fiancee. The flashbacks are more interesting than the present-day plot, which has a mysterious figure hunting down various mobsters connected to the ex-fiancee’s father after she returns to town. Throwing the Joker into the mix livens things up, but also is mostly an attempt to distract from the fact that the resolution is going to be pretty obvious. If it’s not a great mystery, though, it works as an exploration of Batman as a character. It’s helped by strong performances, most notably the late, great Kevin Conroy as the definitive Batman. And if the animation isn’t quite theatrical-quality in sharpness and detail, it’s got that fantastic Art Deco style from the TV series and the action is drawn well. It looks good in the ways that count most. It’s a good, solid Batman story.

 

Somewhere in Time. It’s not surprising this film has a cult following that feels passionately about it. It stars Christopher Reeve as a playwright who becomes captivated by a portrait of Edwardian actress Jane Seymour in his hotel. He researches her, realizes she was the old woman who approached him years ago in a strange encounter, and falls so in love at a distance that he hypnotizes himself to travel back in time and romance her. It’s appealing to several powerful romantic ideas: soulmates meant for each other across seemingly impossible boundaries, love at first sight, all-consuming passion, star-crossed romance, and the nostalgia for visiting a past era that so appeals to so many people passionate about the past. It’s such a powerful romantic combination, of course it will draw a fervent response.

And with Reeve and Seymour, it has very strong leads. Both are good-looking and charming, and Reeve is very likable as he plays the fumbling, awkward, love-struck time-traveler. The film’s air of sweetness and earnestness is quite winning. Its biggest issue, and it’s a big one for a romance, is that it never quite sold me on the romance. It’s overly distracted by plot machinations — first getting Reeve back in time, then getting him past Seymour’s extremely protective, controlling manager Christopher Plummer, who wants to develop her into a star and forbids the distraction of romance, so he can spend time with her — and doesn’t take the time to develop a convincing one-night world-shakingly passionate romance. Reeve’s obsession with Seymour comes off more as fascinated curiosity and doesn’t quite make the depths of his passion believable, but even worse, there’s never really any sense of why Seymour falls desperately for this pushy stranger she goes on a walk with. Sure, she’s sheltered by Plummer, but what makes Reeve specifically so enthralling? The film never quite seems to feel it needs to answer that, taking it as a given that she has to return the leading man’s affections.

The end result is a very likable romantic fantasy, but one that falls short in the critical department of romance and doesn’t really succeed in its central mission of stirring the heart the way it should. I get the appeal of the subject matter, but the construction keeps it from fully working for me. It has all the romantic elements, but not the emotional fire to make them effective.

 

Just started watching the sentinel 2006.

Right off the bat it has a in the line of fire feel.

Keither Sutherland is in this it appears.

Eva Longoria

OK I'll watch it now

 

Constantine: The House of Mystery (2022)

Set after the events of the Apokolips War, John Constantine finds himself trapped inside a haunted house where it's a never-ending nightmare of facing demons. The entire feature film consists of several shorts, the others having nothing to do with Constantine, but other comics from the past.

 

North by Northwest (1959).

A classic example of the “I rewatched this well-regarded movie for a podcast” genre. Actually also a classic example of a movie I apparently didn’t remember in the slightest, because I’d forgotten some of the iconic beats that Mel Brooks’ High Anxiety parodies (like the stuff at the UN), why Thornhill eventually doesn’t go to jail (the CIA is actively aware of and, indeed, some complicit in his situation), what was going on in the first place… you know what, I think I only remembered the plane scene and the finale. Which is a shame because the whole movie is actually pretty well put together, that rare combination of smarts and spectacle. Yes, Hitchcock movie good, says guy on Star Wars forum. That definitive endorsement should convince the holdouts.

 

A Christmas Story Christmas (HBO 2022)

Parts of this movie are bang on perfect and capture the exact spirit and tone of the original. I even laughed once or twice. Most of the movie feels like a weird Nickelodeon kids movie. And given that all the original kid actors are back, but are now in their 40s, it really feels like you're trapped in some sort of nostalgic limbo. Some of it clearly feels way too modern for its 1970s story era. I will most likely never watch this again.

 

100% agree with your take on this. The only thing you didn't mention is John Barry's score, which I think is exceptionally good and is doing a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to conjuring what romanticism the film does have. It's a romantic score in the grand old Hollywood tradition.

 

Somewhere in Time is one of those movies where the idea is better than the actual movie. It was based on a book right? I imagine the book was better. I loved Reeve as Superman but found him a bit stiff in other roles.

 

I like it but as a big Superman fan I feel I'm very biased.

 

The Guardians of the Galaxy Christmas Special. Drax and Mantis kidnap and Kevin Bacon as a Christmas surprise for Starlord. This goes pretty as you’d as expect. Over all very, very funny.

 

I finally watched Planes Trains and Automobiles for the first time the night before Thanksgiving, after intending to do so for the last few years but then never getting around to it. To be honest, I don't understand the hype around this movie. People talk about it like it's this absolute holiday classic. It's not a bad movie. Standard fare for the late 80s white collar boomer audience that I'm sure was relevant at the time. And I get that the end reveal of John Candy's character is very touching. There were a few entertaining moments. But overall I found the movie to be sort of bland. The two leads didn't have as much chemistry as the hype around this movie makes it seem like they do, and the situations they found themselves in were pretty mundane and seemed easy to get out of if he had just rented a car from the get-go. There was hardly anything in it that would indicate it takes place during the holidays. The music selection was odd. And the sappy reunion between Steve Martin and his wife felt like a little too much over something as simple as this guy needing to get home for Thanksgiving. Again, it's not a bad movie. But I do not understand why it's considered such a holiday classic.

 

It's based on Bid Time Return by Richard Matheson. I read it years ago, but can't really remember enough to effectively compare it to the movie. I do remember that, in the book, Collier is terminally ill with a brain tumor, and going back in time possibly negates the effect of it.

 

Cats. I thought that the humour mostly fell flat, and Judi Dench was miscast Old Deuteronomy, but overall it wasn’t as bad as people have made it out to be. It’s not as good Tom Hooper’s adaptation of Les Miserable, but it’s a mostly serviceable adaptation otherwise.

 

Cats is the best movie of this decade

 

It was somewhat uneven, but it wasn’t the disaster that a lot of people made it out to be.

 

It deserves to be seen with a riotous, sexual crowd

 

Funny, that was my exact review for Mad God!

 

What happened to AOTC?

 

A Cure for Wellness 2016
I really liked it. Gore Verbinski (The Ring, Rango) directs this horror movie about a young man who goes to remote Swiss health resort to bring back a coworker. The movie plays out like a hallucination. Everyone seems brainwashed and does not want to leave. There are clearly sinister things going on. It has some of the most beautiful cinematography I've ever seen in a movie. Very impressive production values including the music. Reminded me of Shutter Island a bit. Goes spectacularly off rails in the third act and is overlong, but a well made film. Not for the squeamish. Jason Issacs does a good job in a mad scientist/doctor type role. Was a spectacular bomb at the box office but worth it if you like strange, Cronenberg type films.

 

Obama was not inaugurated this year.

 

Putney Swope. In this 1969 absurdist counterculture comedy, the titular black executive is elected chairman of an advertising agency when everybody votes for him because they can’t vote for themselves and they think nobody else will vote for him. He promptly fires everyone, hires a black staff, refuses to promote products he considers immoral, starts making avant-garde and transgressive ads, and generally makes the place a hotbed of radicalism. That’s all just the premise, though; what plays out afterward has barely a hint of plot, just a kaleidoscope of chaos. Many of the gags individually are funny, but they don’t really add together into anything, while the Swope character is all over the place, lacking definition. Even the premise makes it sound like a cleverer satire than it is; it’s mostly just a parade of counterculture absurdist wackiness and questionably tasteful jokes that throw around enough radical patter to disguise the fact that the film doesn’t actually have any focus for its scattershot satire. Writer-director Robert Downey, Sr. has provided a lot of good one-liners and out-there gags, but nary a hint of a film around them. It has potential, but it doesn’t work.