What's new

What's The Last Movie You’ve Seen?

Actually I take that back. It does dig a little deeper into their characters.

I started watching Touch of Evil last summer and remember the opening scene if which you speak but it wasn't enough (at least on that particular day) to grab me. Maybe I'll Netflix it.
 
I watched the A-Team at the dollar theaters, it's a entertaining movie even though the action scenes are a bit too over the top, Jessica Biel is smokin hot.
 
drunken_master_dvd1.jpg
 
I just saw "The Switch" yesterday and unless you want a cat to take a diarrhea dump on your face, DO NOT see this movie.
 
A lot of the reson the movie is considered the greatest of all time by a plurality of film critics has to with a stunning array of technical and storytelling innovations. Particularly famous are the development of deep focus photography, the dark scene in the theater with the only light being provided by the film projector (a direct ancestor of the Third Man's sewer chase lighting choices), and the use of breakaway sets to allow the camera to move through what should be solid spaces.

These are all things we take for granted today but were entirely new inventions at the time.

It helps that the story is pretty good and that Welles' has what the Madame refers to as the "id gleam" in spades for a good chunk of the film until he gets beaten down by life.

It is also the only film that I have ever watched multiple commentary tracks on the DVD version because of the wealth of information available.
So in other words, it used to be the best film of all time and now no longer is.

I've never understood the HUGE overrating of old movies. You look at rotten tomatoes and metacritic and you'll see what I mean: a mediocre movie by today's standards has like a 95% on rotten tomatoes. And it's because it "innovated" something. Which is great, but how many moviegoers seriously derive their entertainment from a film by spotting its various innovations? I don't, I take it for what it is, a movie.

And in that respect, Citizen Kane isn't the best movie of all time anymore, it just isn't. I think the movie that seems to have that title these days by being the most universally transcedent and appealling movie is Shawshank Redemption. Some might say The Godfather, but in my opinion, that film is slightly decaying just like Citizen Kane did.
 
a mediocre movie by today's standards has like a 95% on rotten tomatoes.

Curious what film you're thinking of.

For the record, I feel there are a great number of old films that are overrated. I have listed them in other threads and won't repeat a full list here but I've got particular disdain for the historical reputation of Lawrence of Arabia for example.

But I think that many of the old films that survive to current prominence have done so precisely because they were the very best of the era in which they were produced. Most of the crap is essentially entirely gone. I'd be willing to bet, for example, that the vast majority of users on this board (which is nominally selected by sports interest rather than film interest) have seen fewer than 50 films that were produced in the 1940s. That sounds like a lot, but as a functional matter it's the equivalent of seeing only the five best movies produced every year in the decade. Those top 50 films probably attract the most intense interest and what you're seeing when you look at old films are the cream of the crop. There was certainly a lot of crap back then too, but the 1943 equivalent of "Cloverfield" is of only the most niche interest at this point in time while Casablanca survives.

EDIT: I picked the number "50" for films from the 1940s somewhat arbitrarily, only to make a point regarding the math of the situation. I then got curious how many films from that era I personally had seen and counted up my netflix ratings. To hammer the point home, I don't even fit the criteria of having seen 50 films in the decade because I've seen, according to my netflix ratings, exactly 49 films from that span of time. This is despite the fact that I have a much greater than average interest in older films. Given that, I'd be curious if there are even more than one or two people on the board who could claim to have seen 50 movies from the era.

Also, in terms of why the classics are considered to be epic consider this list of films from the 1940s: Citizen Kane, Casablanca, It's a Wonderful Life, The Grapes of Wrath, The Maltese Falcon, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, The Third Man, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The Big Sleep, Seargant York, Adam's Rib, The Philadelphia Story, His Girl Friday, The Great Dictator, Arsenic and Old Lace, The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer, Rebecca, and the Bells of St. Mary's.

What an absurd murderer's row. And I would say at least two of those (Casablanca and It's a Wonderful Life) have extraordinarily strong cases even on purely modern terms against your pick of the Shawshank Redemption.
 
Last edited:
EDIT: I picked the number "50" for films from the 1940s somewhat arbitrarily, only to make a point regarding the math of the situation. I then got curious how many films from that era I personally had seen and counted up my netflix ratings. To hammer the point home, I don't even fit the criteria of having seen 50 films in the decade because I've seen, according to my netflix ratings, exactly 49 films from that span of time. This is despite the fact that I have a much greater than average interest in older films. Given that, I'd be curious if there are even more than one or two people on the board who could claim to have seen 50 movies from the era.

Also, in terms of why the classics are considered to be epic consider this list of films from the 1940s: Citizen Kane, Casablanca, It's a Wonderful Life, The Grapes of Wrath, The Maltese Falcon, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, The Third Man, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The Big Sleep, Seargant York, Adam's Rib, The Philadelphia Story, His Girl Friday, The Great Dictator, Arsenic and Old Lace, The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer, Rebecca, and the Bells of St. Mary's.

I looked at a list of Top 50 films from the 1940's, and I counted 17 that I'm positive I've seen. There are probably more that I've seen when I was younger, but I can't remember just from the titles. Since I'm older than most people on these boards and have seen a fair number of movies over the years, I'm quite certain that it will be tough to find people here that have seen 50 movies from the 1940's.
 
220px-At_close_range_poster.jpg


I finally saw it and liked it a lot. Walken and Penn were great. The supporting cast with Chris Penn, Crispin Glover, Mary Stuart Masterson (who is so freakin' cute) and the guy who played the cook in Vision Quest were also very good. David Strathairn and Kiefer Sutherland were also in it but to a lesser degree. The directing was solid and the script was good but a bit lean in some spots. I would give it a 7.5/10.

This could have been an amazing movie had the deep familial betrayal resonated more with me. For whatever reason, it did not reach such Shakespearean levels.
 


I like Russell Brand's characther even though his songs are incredibly bad(intentional or not). Not the funniest movie(really uneven) but it had it's moments.
 
28 Weeks later, I know I'm quiet late on this one, but I usually avoid sequels, since 99% of them end up being bloody terrible and a waste of a couple hours of my life. Man was I wrong about this one, 28 weeks later is even more intense then 28 days later already was. An absolute must see for everyone who loves zombie flicks.
 
Back
Top