What's new

What's The Last Movie You’ve Seen?

Don't Breathe


Was pretty good. Kept me tense all the way til the end. Good 'clean' fun but unfortunately it was let down by some pretty blatant inconsistencies though, namely:


/////// *** Spoiler *** ///////


- The upstair windows were all barred except for the one that the boy fell through?


- Why did the guy keep spare sperm in the fridge when the 1st girl was already pregnant and about to give birth?


- The police could not find the torture chamber in the basement? Really???


- The guy survived the fall at the end with blood rushing out of his head? Really???


- How was the blind man able to capture and woman in the first place in broad daylight???

///// *** Spoiler *** /////
 
upstream-color_0.jpg


I haven't a clue what I just watched. Not one clue.
 
so, it's pretty straightforward, then?

Haha. Some crazy ****. I'm gonna have to watch it again. I did make that post with about 20 minutes left in the film and the ending cleared some things up for me but I still need to rewatch and/or think about it some more.
 
Haha. Some crazy ****. I'm gonna have to watch it again. I did make that post with about 20 minutes left in the film and the ending cleared some things up for me but I still need to rewatch and/or think about it some more.

premature postulation. "beautifully shot", I'm sure.
 
Not all art does; not every movie is about "story telling."

Complaining about lack of plot in a movie such as Upstream Color is like complaining about lack of plot in a painting or abstract poem.

Sent from my SM-G930P using JazzFanz mobile app
It delends how you define a movie. Upstream Colour would have made a very good video installation you often see at art galleries and museums, but to me movies need a story and this had none.


Another movie that I would put in the 'video installation' category would be Inland Empire by David Lynch.
 
It delends how you define a movie. Upstream Colour would have made a very good video installation you often see at art galleries and museums, but to me movies need a story and this had none.


Another movie that I would put in the 'video installation' category would be Inland Empire by David Lynch.

how do you define a movie?
 
Yes, please. Can someone please ask hotttnickkk to give us his definition of a movie? That's very germane to the discussion he has opened up.
 
I'm going to see the Jack Reacher movie tonight to escape the endless election speculation that I would be compelled to watch if I were at home. I want to leave the movie theater at 9:30pm and be told who the next president is without all the drama.

I'm really hoping I don't turn into one of the detestable people who look at the phone during the movie.
 
I'm going to see the Jack Reacher movie tonight to escape the endless election speculation that I would be compelled to watch if I were at home. I want to leave the movie theater at 9:30pm and be told who the next president is without all the drama.

I'm really hoping I don't turn into one of the detestable people who look at the phone during the movie.

Doesn't Trump have to win Florida to have any sort of shot? So, you should know who the winner is around 5:30 MST, or before most of America has voted.
 
Doesn't Trump have to win Florida to have any sort of shot? So, you should know who the winner is around 5:30 MST, or before most of America has voted.
Another thing that makes me crazy. Not only can we not vote in reality TV show instant votes dye to being in the wrong time zone , but our votes hardly matter.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app
 
We went to see Dr. Strange. I liked it except for Cumberbatch's performance. Just seemed forced and kind of off for him. I am a huge Cumberbatch fan, love the new Sherlock Holmes shows on BBC, but his american accent in Dr. Strange seemed so forced it kind of overwhelmed the rest of his performance. I wish they had just let him have an english accent and I think he would have loosened up a bit and it wouldn't have been so stilted. But still, really liked the concept and the twist at the end, even though it was pretty obvious that the time thing was going to play a large role and I told my wife before he flew off to confront the entity or whatever it was exactly what he was going to do, I liked the way they pulled it off. It was a good transformational moment for character which was sorely needed to outweigh his pomposity through much of the film. Overall I would give it a 4/5 stars.

As an aside, we watched Captain America: The Winter Solder over the weekend and I caught a Dr. Strange reference. Cap had just caught one of the bad guys from hydra and had him on a roof where they got him to admit their plan. He stated they had identified individuals that needed to be killed including cap america, Stark of course, and among the names he said "Steven Strange". Pretty cool to catch that easter egg that I hadn't caught before. It also raises the question, does that mean that the events of Dr. Strange happened before the events in CA: TWS, or was it just that Strange's name came up from the algorithm from the dead hydra scientist?
 
Nocturnal Animals (2016)


Everyone has a favourite Director. Some may say Speilberg. Some may say Nolan. Some may say Fincher. But for me, my favourite Director has to be Tom Ford. It's not because he's a master at filmmaking or that he has had an industrious directorial career. Instead, it's because he has NOT made many films and is still relatively new to filmmaking that I follow him. He is a director I can get behind. A director I can root for, and can follow from his first films and follow his progress. It also doesn't hurt that he'd directed one of my most favourite films of All Time - A Single Man.


After an acclaimed first feature 'A Single Man', Nocturnal Animals is Tom Ford's second Directorial Feature. It features an eclectic cast that includes Jake Gyllenhaal, Amy Adams, Isla Fisher (yes you read that right, this film features 2 strikingly similar actresses, and yes Ford put this peculiar feature to good use here). If you've seen 'A Single Man' you would instantly be be able to tell that 'Nocturnal Animals' is Tom Ford's movie, by its styling, its music, how the film is shot, its pace, it is again a carefully crafted movie.


But unlike his first feature, this film is a psychological thriller, done with Ford's personal touch. He writes his own screenplay based off of an original material, because of that the film felt very 'personal'. The film itself is set in Texas, which is where Ford was born. While thriller directors often intentionally leave the audience in the dark to create that 'suspense', I love how Ford doesn't try to do too much of it here. Instead Ford's story focusses more on the emotional aspects of his characters, making his characters felt real, genuine, believable, and ultimately we very quickly become involved in the story and not merely as a spectator, but as a carer for the characters.


Nocturnal Animals felt very personal to me due to its subject matters, I can relate to the sensitivity of its main protagonist, how one chooses to live and follow certain paths in life, how some decisions are made in haste but has enormous impact to another person for years and years, and also our desire to create 'art' and why sometimes we want to create and contrasting that with why sometimes we 'need' to create art ....


It is not a 'perfect' film. There are flaws, there always are. But like following the Jazz, our favourite basketball team - they don't always win - but it's still your team and you root for them no matter what. The Jazz plays with passion and plays the right way with the right attitude - no 'cheap shots'. We may not have the kind of money GSW or NY have to play with, but we love them all the same.


I will always root for Ford because his heart is in the right place. He doesn't create 'plastic characters' *cough* Nicholas Winding Refn *cough* Neon Demon *cough*. He creates films that make me want to reflect on my own life and think a bit more deeply about it through his lens. He has a meaningful message worth talking about and worth sharing amongst friends, and he portrays it in a way that is memorable to us. And to me that's all you could ever hoped for from a film.


It easily gets a 4.5/5 for me.


Go see it.


nocturnal-animals.jpg
 
^
Nice. I thought the trailer for that looked awesome. Sort of Coen-Lynch-ish. But on imdb, the ratings aren't super-high and most of the criticism IIRC seems to be that it feels too disjointed. I'm not looking for a response to that necessarily. I just wanted to throw it out there.

As I've said before, I think this could wind up being a very understated and strong year at the movies. There are few Spielberg, Tanarantino, PTA, Fincher, or name your other huge director, flicks out there. But the ones that are coming out or have come out look damn good and are by damn good directors. Here's my list of flicks I want to see this year or just past January 1. I'll probably wait and hope many of them are on on demand and check them out over my spring break.

Nocturnal Animals
Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk
Arrival
Hacksaw Ridge
Manchester by the Sea
Allied
Passengers
Silence
Loving
American Made


To a lesser extent, I want to see...

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
Paterson
Collateral Beauty
Patriot's Day
Gold
Split


I could be forgetting a few too. The only flicks I've seen in the last 3-4 months are Hell or High Water (I'd give it a 7.7/10), The Accountant--I'd give it a 7.5 (solid popcorn flick), and Sully (very solid--I'd too give it a 7.5) I think.
 
downloading Hell or High Water right now. Excited for this one.
 
Back
Top