Return of the RECENT VIEWING

..and why not?
User avatar
^^^^^ great post. Thank you.
funky thigh collector
Posts: 28115
Joined: 29 Dec 2006, 16:00
Location: In the naughty North and in the sexy South

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby ^^^^^ great post. Thank you. » 06 Aug 2017, 14:11

Saw 'Play it Again Sam' for the first time last night and was crying with laughter. Gorgeous view of San Francisco too.
You come at the Queen, you best not miss.

Dr Markus wrote:
Someone in your line of work usually as their own man cave aka the shed we're they can potter around fixing stuff or something don't they?

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Aug 2017, 05:27

Image
The Freshman

Great Harold Lloyd film from the mid '20s with a college football theme. You could remake it today with a few tweaks and it would still do well.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 3272
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 07 Aug 2017, 08:52

Image

So-so mid 70s conspiracy thriller, with Warren Beatty doing the downtrodden newspaper hack who gets on the trail of a murderous corporation. Very earnest and straight, a bit too po-faced to be really successful.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Aug 2017, 16:20

Darkness_Fish wrote:Image

So-so mid 70s conspiracy thriller, with Warren Beatty doing the downtrodden newspaper hack who gets on the trail of a murderous corporation. Very earnest and straight, a bit too po-faced to be really successful.



It's not great, no - but I always kinda liked it. Another one of those '70s conspiracy thrillers along with 3 Days of the Condor & The Conversation. Not in the same league, mind...
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 51818
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Snarfyguy » 07 Aug 2017, 18:41

Image

Jim Jarmuch's latest, an ode to routine and simplicity in (very) uneventful daily life, with some musings on the nature of poetic inspiration tossed in. It's really a visual poem, with repeating motifs and patterns, about the forbearance and endurance of its protagonist (and by extension the working class) as an art in itself.
Jimbo wrote:In some ways, personality-wise, Trump and I are similar.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 08 Aug 2017, 18:31

Image
Panic in the Streets

Pretty good Kazan picture which was Jack Palance's first movie. Not a top tier noir, but I'd never seen it before and it didn't disappoint.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
joels344
Posts: 587
Joined: 17 Dec 2016, 17:37
Contact:

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby joels344 » 08 Aug 2017, 19:43

Wow, this was fucking brilliant. I love Polish cinema so much.

Image

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 3272
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 08 Aug 2017, 20:35

Off work to look after my son today, he's feeling a bit run-down, and I haven't slept for two nights, so the plan to go swimming or have a bike ride went out the window. Watched this instead, with some doritos:

Image

I gather it doesn't have a particularly good reputation, even amongst people with a high tolerance for superhero films (not me). It seemed like a bit of a confused mess to start with, and I can't think of much worse casting than Frasier play a hairy blue monster-hero-thing. However, it had lots of action set-pieces, and not much dialogue, so it did the job of keeping the little 'un entertained. Special effects are remarkably ropey, even for the CGI era. Still, it has the bravery to kill off some of its main characters.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 09 Aug 2017, 04:04

Image
Death Wish 2

First of the Death Wish sequels and the only one with a Jimmy Page soundtrack. Dumber, sleazier, but almost as fun as the original. Bronson is too old for the role but it doesn't really seem to matter. By this point it's all just a right wing fantasy anyway. There's not one, but two rape scenes, the first of which goes on forever in the unrated version. A very grimy picture, indeed.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 41643
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Nationwide

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Still Baron » 09 Aug 2017, 05:03

Matt Wilson wrote:
Darkness_Fish wrote:Image

So-so mid 70s conspiracy thriller, with Warren Beatty doing the downtrodden newspaper hack who gets on the trail of a murderous corporation. Very earnest and straight, a bit too po-faced to be really successful.



It's not great, no - but I always kinda liked it. Another one of those '70s conspiracy thrillers along with 3 Days of the Condor & The Conversation. Not in the same league, mind...


I loved it. It's got that ineffable magic 70s shit.
toomanyhatz wrote:I honestly don't care for most Beach Boys car songs

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 29390
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Goat Boy » 09 Aug 2017, 11:49

Image

The Night of the Hunter

It is a great film and its themes (corruption of childhood innocence and its consequences) resonate more and more as I get older. It touches on other things too like linking sexual repression to violence which seems quite ahead of its time. It looks wonderful, the music is great and it has the strange, haunting quality of a fairy tale. The whole riverboat sequence, in particular, is stunning but the shot of Winters body under water is also strange and beautiful. I do have a minor quibble with Shelly Winters performance which isn’t the most convincing and the slightly stagey acting although the movie isn’t really concerned with realism per se (the scene where Mitchum kills Winters is very stylised for example) so it doesn't really bother me.
Copehead wrote:You are making a fool of yourself.


Muskrat wrote:I'm undemonstrative during shows; no matter how much I enjoy them. People who get up and move around ("dance," if they will) strike me as show-offs

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 3272
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 09 Aug 2017, 11:59

Still Baron wrote:
Matt Wilson wrote:
Darkness_Fish wrote:Image

So-so mid 70s conspiracy thriller, with Warren Beatty doing the downtrodden newspaper hack who gets on the trail of a murderous corporation. Very earnest and straight, a bit too po-faced to be really successful.



It's not great, no - but I always kinda liked it. Another one of those '70s conspiracy thrillers along with 3 Days of the Condor & The Conversation. Not in the same league, mind...


I loved it. It's got that ineffable magic 70s shit.

It looked good, and it looked ineffably 70s, I'll give it that. I just thought Beatty was a weak lead, and this ultra-mysterious company seemed to be a bit free with giving out flyers to dumb shits like the local sheriff. That scene near the dam is awesome though, more fitting to a Bond film than the otherwise claustrophobic nature of the film.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 10 Aug 2017, 03:02

Image
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

I've always enjoyed it, and though I think it misses the nuances (the political overtones, for one) of the book, I don't think we're going to ever get a better filmic adaptation of a Hunter Thompson novel. I met both Thompson and Depp when I went to Book Soup on Sunset Blvd in 1998 to get Thompson's signature on a book of his letters. Hunter was a giant, over six foot, while 'lil Johnny couldn't have been more than 5'6", maybe 130 lbs. Only in Hollywood would they think to get Johnny Depp to play Hunter Thompson... Alex Cox was originally going to do the picture so when Gilliam came onboard he was basically a director for hire.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 3272
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Darkness_Fish » 11 Aug 2017, 09:22

Image

Cheap and cheerful horror-sex-comedy that's low on laughs, sex, and horror. It was watchable rubbish, basically, though the central performance of the geeky journalism student by Alison Scagliotti was remarkably good amidst the crappy supporting ensemble.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 51818
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Snarfyguy » 11 Aug 2017, 22:55

Image

Strong cast (esp. Cranston, who's very good in a kind of reverse Walter White role), good yarn, production values on point, etc, yet this somehow fails to fully engage because it can't overcome the inherent familiarity of the premise. We've seen this movie so many times that it's impossible not to be fatigued by its predictable deployment of the usual tropes, no matter how well done it is.

I'll give it a B+ though. It's really pretty good.
Jimbo wrote:In some ways, personality-wise, Trump and I are similar.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 12 Aug 2017, 00:26

Image
Complete Billy Jack Collection

All four Billy Jack movies. Born Losers is actually a pretty good biker flick. Billy Jack, the best of the lot, is a counter culture classic. The Trial of Billy Jack, at three hours, tries to pile on everything from American Indian issues, abused kids, college campuses like Kent State, and much more. Shout Factory didn't use the correct aspect ration for this film, by the way. The weakest of the films, Billy Jack Goes to Washington, was originally three hours long, and the version here cuts out about 40 minutes.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Sneehosifatz
Posts: 9518
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Sneehosifatz » 12 Aug 2017, 21:54

Oops.
Last edited by Sneehosifatz on 12 Aug 2017, 22:59, edited 1 time in total.
There is Titus Andronicus,
Titus Andronicus
wearing a snorkel
in my pool

User avatar
Sneehosifatz
Posts: 9518
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Sneehosifatz » 12 Aug 2017, 22:32

Matt Wilson wrote:Image
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

I've always enjoyed it, and though I think it misses the nuances (the political overtones, for one) of the book, I don't think we're going to ever get a better filmic adaptation of a Hunter Thompson novel. I met both Thompson and Depp when I went to Book Soup on Sunset Blvd in 1998 to get Thompson's signature on a book of his letters. Hunter was a giant, over six foot, while 'lil Johnny couldn't have been more than 5'6", maybe 130 lbs. Only in Hollywood would they think to get Johnny Depp to play Hunter Thompson... Alex Cox was originally going to do the picture so when Gilliam came onboard he was basically a director for hire.


I actively dislike the movie. I know it's much loved and I've tried making my peace with it but I think they missed by a mile. My problem is essentially one of tone. Things that strike me as hilarious in the book strike me as mean spirited in the movie. I like Gilliam's psychedelic touches visually but I think, overall that it's pretty much a travesty of one of my most beloved books.

I think it's too bad that Alex Cox & HST didn't hit it off. I think Cox's ideas about structuring the thing more straightforward and consolidating things would have made for a more engaging film. Still, you never know about tone. That's a genie in a bottle and hard to get on the page.

Cox has gone on record saying that he thinks he was only attached to the project in order to secure financing. He seems to think everybody was in it to score some big bucks. (Like with Barfly). He seems to feel that his "indie" approach was only really of value to the producers as a bargaining tool and that it wasn't really in anyone's interest to do something modestly budgeted.

Well, if you don't want a modest budget then Gilliam is your guy!

I know a lot of people thought Cox was being a primadonna. Maybe he was. I'm a Gilliam fan but I don't think he understood what was marvelous about the book. The draft of Cox's screenplay on his website makes me think that maybe Cox did. Gilliam said he thought Cox's script was shit and bragged that he banged his script out in 8 or 10 days. The writer's guild didn't agree and Gilliam Insisted the Cox script wasn't used at all. When the Cox script was given co-writing credits, Gilliam had a pissing match with the Writer's Guild so intense that he publicly resigned from the Guild..

The movie may have been a bomb but it's certainly well on the road to "cult classic" at this point.

I'd like to say some thing flattering about Gilliam's style. According to Cox - the mere mention of Ralph Steadman's name would throw HST into a rage. I thought Gilliam did a wonderful job of giving the movie a visual style anyway. Certainly it refers to Steadman's style but I guess they might have been trying not to over rely on it. This aspect of the film and Depp's performance ARE very accomplished. Even I can see that. I still spit on it. :x
There is Titus Andronicus,
Titus Andronicus
wearing a snorkel
in my pool

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28087
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Matt Wilson » 13 Aug 2017, 00:07

I haven't read Cox's script, but he may not have been the guy to bring the book to the screen either. Sid and Nancy suffers from tone as well - though I bet I like it more than you do Gillam's FALILV. Criterion's about to upgrade their DVD of Sid & Nancy to blu, so I'll be reviewing it on this very thread shorty.
John 'master of temperance and tolerance' Coan wrote:Oh calm down for fuck's sake!

User avatar
Sneehosifatz
Posts: 9518
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Return of the RECENT VIEWING

Postby Sneehosifatz » 13 Aug 2017, 02:34

Oh, I love "Sid & Nancy"
There is Titus Andronicus,
Titus Andronicus
wearing a snorkel
in my pool


Return to “Screenadelica”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Tactful Cactus and 2 guests