Amph What was the last movie you saw?

Jurassic Park, I have seen it numerous times...love it

 

Spiderman: Homecoming

Liked it a lot. One of the best MCU films. Good acting. Keaton is awesome as Vulture. Will definitely rewatch this one.

 

The Finest Hours. Excellent Chris Pine shipwreck drama.

 

Way, haul away, we'll haul away, Joe

I saw it on the big screen and had the whole theater to myself, so when they started singing one of my favorite shanties there was no one to complain when I sang along with the movie. I suppose I can do that at home too, but it's just more fun in the theater.

 

I read the book and recently listened to the audiobook and they actually excised a lot of the story. The rescue of the crew of the Fort Mercer was equally as wild and probably could have been an entire movie in and of itself.

 

Columbus (2017) – Kogonada

It would be reductive to call Columbus the antidote to the ever bigger, faster and louder blockbuster mentality of modern moviemaking because it is so much more than that, but it would also be accurate. In this quiet, placid indie film, two people find themselves making an unlikely connection among the surprising architectural riches of Columbus, Indiana. Haley Lu Richardson plays a young woman who works in a local library and lives with her mother, a recovering drug addict; John Cho is a Korean-American who has come to Columbus because his demanding architect father has fallen into a coma. The film is incredibly slowly paced with no real plot to speak of; it simply offers a look into the lives of these people and the growing friendship between the two of them after a chance encounter. Writer-director Kogonada makes an astoundingly assured debut; he makes no concessions to audiences, but instead crafts what is clearly a labor of love, a near perfect evocation of loneliness and lostness and stillness. The visuals are stark, but beautiful, capturing architecture in a really beautiful way, but also putting us up close and personal with these characters. The performances are wonderful. I’ve seen Richardson in a couple of things and thought her better than average if not much more; she’s a pure revelation here, one of the best performances of the year, a minimal portrait of sadness and uncertainty. John Cho is typically excellent, giving what is easily his most reserved and interior performance, a richly complex piece of work. The supporting cast boasts a lot of fine work as well. Rory Culkin steals every scene he’s in as a gangly co-worker of Richardson’s character. Parker Posey is wonderful as the harried assistant to Cho’s father. The film really digs deep into these characters and gets inside them in a very real and natural way. It’s a film that’s absolutely transportive. Like the architecture of the film or like a walk through a medieval labyrinth or an afternoon next to a Japanese rock garden, this film is soothing to the soul, a still pond that reveals immense depth. 4 stars.

tl;dr – quiet, minimal character drama features beautifully restrained performances, an evocative screenplay and moody, atmospheric direction; a tranquil, soothing, moving masterpiece. 4 stars.

 

There Will Be Blood. It' a good film, but I don't think it's as good as people make it out to be. Daniel Day Lewis' performance is too over the top and silly at times, which takes away from some of the drama.

 

Unforgiven

While the length and pacing of Client Eastwood's directed and produced western can be felt at times, is not without its highlights. Richard Harris effortlessly steals the show while Gene Hackman serves as the cold blooded antagonist whose vision of purity and harmony in his town has escaped even his own logic. Unforgiven is unmistakably a western because of its attention to detail in its core elements; the morally ambiguous hero, the town that is prey to corruption and evil, while there being a sense of geographical and moral remoteness from the human condition. The score is suitably quaint which acts as an appropriate underscore to the slower pacing of the film. Overall, Unforgiven is a very well made movie but could have been a stronger film if just a little shorter and with some fewer characters.

Some scenes which may belong to either Hackman or Eastwood are at times under serviced simply by making the scenes too long where the dialogue seemingly clarifies something we already know about a character. For example, we are reminded all too often that Will, played by Eastwood, is meant to be a changed man who cherishes the memory of his wife. While this is an important aspect to the story, the continual references to his past scars and healing do little to elaborate upon the character because the writing had perfectly established this point earlier in the film.

However, the slower pacing rewards the film during its most violent moments where the deaths are not swift or en masse but rather visceral, bloody and focused without taking away from the moral ambiguity of the characters. Each shot, kick, punch, cut and act of bloodshed is an extension of the on screen drama. In fact, Unforgiven is not as black and white when it comes to who stands for good and evil when compared to a John Ford type film where it is apparent as to whom is the western hero. Eastwood's Unforgiven takes the ambiguous western hero into some darker places which is a fitting tribute to his heroes.

Very strong work from Eastwood but still not his best work compared to his Directorial credits which would follow after Unforgiven.

3.5 out of 5

 

Where Eagles Dare (1969) Solid WWII rescue mission with some interesting surprises, though Richard Burton couldn't convince me of his character. That's what Clint Eastwood and other cast members are for. Good but somewhat creaky. Still, it's Clint doing his action thing. What's not to like?

 

Ordet

regarded as one of the masterpieces of cinema, 100% on RT, in the top 25 on the sight and sound list. and i really loved it, until the ending. i know the movie is old but didn't want to spoil it anyway

Spoiler

i'm not religious, and i really tried to not make it effect my enjoyment, but the way the miracle is presented, i can't help but think it's a massive cheat. and the conversion as a result. i almost rolled my eyes to be honest. all the other reviewers must be better people than I

 

Pirates of the Carribean 5 .

well its better than 4 . there's some good cartoony bits , one where Jack is on a guillotine , and generally it just plays better , no idea why Paul McCartney is in it tho , Ringo would've fitted in way better

 

I think he was drunk throughout the entire shoot .

 

That wouldn't surprise me. He looked somewhat drunk, and given his reputation as a drinker I'd tend to agree this. Never been a fan of his, but I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt here.

 

I always liked Richard Burton , but was amazed at how he got so highly paid , I mean none of his movies were that big . But him and Liz were kind of the only big stars there for a while .
One of my favorites of his is The Medusa Touch , it's in the vein of the Omen but is a bit more campy , terrific fun .

 

"Wings" (1927). This was the third time I'd seen it in a theater with live organ accompaniment by Bernie Anderson of the Garden State Theater Organ Society. This time, it was at the restored Brook Theater in Bound Brook, NJ, with their newly-installed old-style Wurlitzer. Great movie, and Clara Bow was adorable, especially in uniform. They also showed a silent Liberty Bonds short with Charlie Chaplin.

 

Romancing the Stone - it was on Neftlix and I hadn't seen it in years (perhaps decades even?). I loved it all over again. It's so cliche, but they really don't make them like this anymore.

 

Murder On The Orient Express

It was entertaining, great cast, Daisy Ridley was awesome, beautiful cinematography and an excellent score.

Only complaint? It's unnecessary. The original is much better, imo.

 

Double post.

 

The original was not a great movie. Neither is this, but I agree it was suitably entertaining. It's a Branagh directed Branagh vehicle that serves as a showcase for the usual Kenneth Branagh hammery and is downright sappy in parts, but overall I enjoyed it a lot.

 

Courtesy of Channel 7, The Force Awakens. They broadcast all the Star Wars films before the new movies were/are being released. T.F.A. was the only one I saw. I think it held up pretty well in comparison to when it came out, but commercial television is not by any stretch of the imagination a good way of watching a film and being able to enjoy it to the fullest possible extent.

 

La La Land (2016)
The leads are special, the music isn't (imo). Still worth watching, but really I would have liked it as much if not more without the singing.

 

Outlaw Genes (1982) - No matter how hard formerly incarcerated triad boss Lo Kan (Chan Wai Man) tries to make a go at a normal life, his old ways keep trying to pull him back in. A rival boss Sam (Ko Fei) has taken over Kan's club and territory while his enemy was in prison. Meanwhile the police chief has a huge axe to grind with Kan (who physically disfigured him during their last run in before Lo Kan wound up in the slammer.) Any opportunity to bust Kan would make the chief's day. To complicate things, Kan's little brother Wah wants to be a gangster too and winds up getting himself killed.

That hit is Sam's way of attempting to get rid of his old foe. Sam eventually kills every one of Kan's immediate relations, which brings Kan out of retirement.

So, of course, Lo Kan and his loyal brother Ching put the death stare on Sam and you know what happens. I have to commend the scriptwriter that it took almost the entire movie for Kan to snap back into his old life.

Finally seeing this with some English subtitles made a big difference. That revealed the second act is not good (too much time is wasted on Kan's kid brother.) I only sit through these early Chan Wai Man triad movies to see him kick butt, and while 1981's vastly superior The Club had a lot of talking in between the furious fu fights, it was much more interesting and engaging all around.

This has a great end chase though, one of the best I've seen. So there is that. It's just a bummer there wasn't more time with Ko Fei who was great as the adversary Sam.

 

Ip Man 2008. Finally got around to watching this one, and I liked it. A lot more laughs than I expected in the first act, and it had a good build-up to a powerful conclusion. Should have been hackneyed and clichéd, but somehow it was filmed so that it was simply moving.

 

Wind River (2017) - Taylor Sheridan

The trailer for this film got my attention, as it looked like a tense murder mystery that will have shocking moments throughout. The main problem is that it wasn't a murder mystery, it was just a murder. There was no mystery. Everything was laid out for you from start to finish. It was like getting a colouring book with numbers on every section telling you exactly what colour to use. When I'm watching these types of films I like to be constantly guessing and questioning everything, but I didn't at all. In fact, the killers weren't actually introduced until near the end, which took away a lot of the suspense. Imagine watching a whodunnit where you've got a room full of suspects, but at the end of the film a completely new character walks in and it turns out they did it. It didn't make much sense to have the killers absent from the first acts of the film. Maybe this wasn't the path Sheridan wanted to take. Either way, it was poor writing.

Getting over the fact that the genre was handled wrong, the film itself was fine. It had a good structure and kept the same serious and dark tone throughout, besides during the final showdown where the shootout took place. It may have been one of the best parts of the film, but it felt completely out of place from what we'd seen so far. It was almost like they'd changed directors towards the end of the film. I saw one critic compare it to Quentin Tarantino's style, and he's not wrong. I feel like if they'd kept this style going throughout the entire duration, we would've gotten a much better film. The emotional moments were good, and the couple of action scenes were too, but overall it was nothing special.

This is Sheridan's first major directing credit, so I'll cut him some slack, and it certainly is a good first film to have on your resume. Because Sheridan was doing the screenplay as well, I was always cautious that I wouldn't like it, as he did the screenplay for both Sicario (a very average film) and Hell or High Water (one of the worst films I've ever seen in my life), but I gave him another chance. Sadly three strikes and your out is the rule, isn't it? The problem with Sheridan is that he's an extremely boring writer and never gives us anything more than average. Wind River is certainly an improvement on his last two screenplays, but it still doesn't cut it.

I'll give most of the credit to the actors, who gave great performances all round and really sold every moment of it. Jeremy Renner in particular was fantastic and completely stole the show, giving us one of the most real performances of the year. Elizabeth Olsen added some nice chemistry between them both, and Gil Birmingham gave us some very touching moments. For the short amount of time Jon Bernthal was in it, he still delivered a great performance too. The cinematography was very nice and set the mood really well.

6.5/10.

 

A Knight's Tale. A gleefully anachronistic riff on the Middle Ages, it sits somewhere short of parody, given how it genuinely wants us to invest in its romance and drama (and constant jousting action), but it's definitely out to be a comedy. It's never really laugh-out-loud funny, but it's so good-natured and has such a winning cast that you can't help but like it. That cast could carry just about anything. Heath Ledger, Paul Bettany, Alan Tudyk, Mark Addy, Rufus Sewell, and James Purefoy (as Edward the freakin' Black Prince!)? The cast is way overqualified. Bettany especially is a blast as a showboating, charismatic, con-man version of Geoffrey Chaucer. Lightweight but tremendously likable.