What have you watched recently: Electric Boogaloo

MilanPan!c

krudler wrote: »

If you liked Prometheus watch Alien, it's literally a hundred times that movie is. "classic" gets bandied around a lot, but Alien is truly a classic film.

As a massive Sigourney Weaver fan, I couldn't agree more.

Mickeroo

MilanPan!c wrote: »

As a massive Sigourney Weaver fan, I couldn't agree more.

Well deserving of the best actress Oscar nom for Aliens. You'd never see a role like that get nominated today imo.

MilanPan!c

Mickeroo wrote: »

Well deserving of the best actress Oscar nom for Aliens. You'd never see a role like that get nominated today imo.

Agreed, completely!

She's done a few she should've been nominated for:

- Ice Storm
- Death And the Maiden
- The Year of Living Dangerously

She was nominated for at least Gorillas in the Mist and Working Girl as well.

Mike Litoris

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I dunno, Sci-fi and Horror are two genres I've never had any interest in. I haven't made a conscious decision not to watch Alien(s), they're just not ones I'd go and put on and nobody's ever forced me to watch them. I'll probably get around to it eventually.

A good brilliant movie is still a brilliant movie regardless of genre imo. Think of Aliens as a war movie and The Thing as a who done it.

Mike Litoris

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Can I ask how old you are?

It's AMAZING to me that you've never seen them if you're over say 30.

Not kidding here, I work with a dude who hasn't seen them or any well regarded mainstream movies of the last 40 years. He has no problem telling people his favourite movies are Fast and Furious 1-6 and his favourite actor is Jason Statham.

Is that you Elmo?:P

Baked.noodle

Pandora's Promise (2013)

A very interesting look at the legacy and future of nuclear power. Some of this documentary was very surprising, particularly when natural background radiation is compared to nuclear fallout. Definitely worth viewing if you care about the negative and positive aspects of this divisive issue.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Can I ask how old you are?

It's AMAZING to me that you've never seen them if you're over say 30.

Mike Litoris wrote: »

Not kidding here, I work with a dude who hasn't seen them or any well regarded mainstream movies of the last 40 years. He has no problem telling people his favourite movies are Fast and Furious 1-6 and his favourite actor is Jason Statham.

Is that you Elmo?:P

I'm under 30, the first film would already have been considered a classic before I would even have been old enough to watch it I don't even think I was old enough for Alien: Resurrection when it was in the cinema

I will watch them....... eventually........ probably

I like to think I have better taste than Fast and Furious, I've just never branched out into the Sci-Fi genre much. Although as someone said above there are different ways to look at films regarding what genre they are. I don't like war films as a genre but I've seen some really good film and TV shows that are good story telling that just happen to be set in war times. So... yeah, maybe I need to start looking at Sci-Fi in a different light.

MilanPan!c

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I'm under 30, the first film would already have been considered a classic before I would even have been old enough to watch it I don't even think I was old enough for Alien: Resurrection when it was in the cinema

I will watch them....... eventually........ probably

I like to think I have better taste than Fast and Furious, I've just never branched out into the Sci-Fi genre much. Although as someone said above there are different ways to look at films regarding what genre they are. I don't like war films as a genre but I've seen some really good film and TV shows that are good story telling that just happen to be set in war times. So... yeah, maybe I need to start looking at Sci-Fi in a different light.

C'mere, intelligent sci-fi (from Blade Runner through Primer including the works of Terry Gilliam, etc. etc.) is better than Fast and Furious... not even a close comparison

jcsoulinger

I love sci fi, but rarely enjoy fantasy films, lotr bored the arse off me. I realise this voids any opinions I have of films in that genre.


Seen inside llewyn davies recently thought it was amazing. I would describe it as a dark comedy/drama. I would imagine it captured exceptionally well what it was like to be a struggling musician in 60s New York.

Robert2012

The Counsellor is complete and utter sh1te...

Tony EH

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I'm under 30, the first film would already have been considered a classic before I would even have been old enough to watch it I don't even think I was old enough for Alien: Resurrection when it was in the cinema

I will watch them....... eventually........ probably

I like to think I have better taste than Fast and Furious, I've just never branched out into the Sci-Fi genre much. Although as someone said above there are different ways to look at films regarding what genre they are. I don't like war films as a genre but I've seen some really good film and TV shows that are good story telling that just happen to be set in war times. So... yeah, maybe I need to start looking at Sci-Fi in a different light.

Honestly, Tickles, 'Alien' is a triumph of set design alone and worth watching just for that. there are definitely some clunky moments in the film, no doubt, you'll know them when you see them. But, regardless of genre, it's a fantastic effort, nonetheless.

Baked.noodle

The Inevitable Defeat of Mister & Pete (2013)

Two young lads from the projects spend the summer without parental supervision. Young Skylan Brooks has talent in spades, as has his adorable friend played by young Ethan Dizon. Really enjoyed it right through. 8/10.

Mickeroo

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I'm under 30, the first film would already have been considered a classic before I would even have been old enough to watch it I don't even think I was old enough for Alien: Resurrection when it was in the cinema

I will watch them....... eventually........ probably

I like to think I have better taste than Fast and Furious, I've just never branched out into the Sci-Fi genre much. Although as someone said above there are different ways to look at films regarding what genre they are. I don't like war films as a genre but I've seen some really good film and TV shows that are good story telling that just happen to be set in war times. So... yeah, maybe I need to start looking at Sci-Fi in a different light.

If you do decide to watch Alien buy the Blu-Ray, the picture quality is amazing, you'd swear it was only filmed in the last few years. It can be gotten fairly cheap too!

As for not liking specific genres, I used to hate westerns until I gave them a proper chance, still a lot I don't like but there's a fair few I would count among my all time favourites now. Anymore I don't discriminate based on genre, I either like a film or I don't but I'll always watch it first to find out.

Baked.noodle

The Selfish Giant (2013)

Another film about two young lads, this time in working class UK. Bleak but compelling look at young unprivileged people exploited by criminal elements with tragic consequences. 7/10

crazygeryy

Robert2012 wrote: »

The Counsellor is complete and utter sh1te...

Now that's my kind of review!never mind your camera angles and cinematography bull.tell it like it is.

e_e

crazygeryy wrote: »

Now that's my kind of review!never mind your camera angles and cinematography bull.tell it like it is.

Yeah why not just have the camera pointed at the ceiling for 2 hours? :rolleyes:

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Mickeroo wrote: »

If you do decide to watch Alien buy the Blu-Ray, the picture quality is amazing, you'd swear it was only filmed in the last few years. It can be gotten fairly cheap too!

As for not liking specific genres, I used to hate westerns until I gave them a proper chance, still a lot I don't like but there's a fair few I would count among my all time favourites now. Anymore I don't discriminate based on genre, I either like a film or I don't but I'll always watch it first to find out.

Westerns are another good example of a genre I had no interest in until I started watching Hell on Wheels on TV. In my mind Westerns were the awful cheesy ones of the 50's and 60's where the good guy is pure good and the bad guy is pure bad and nobody gets dirty and it takes an hour for someone who gets shot to lie down and die, they have to fall off things and down things first. "Indians" were evil incarnate and yay for the guy in the white hat who kills them all!

This is probably a good example of TV having more time to build a world and flesh characters out whereas film has less time and seems inclined to forsake characterization or reality in favour of entertainment.

But yeah... some TV shows, like Hell on Wheels and Generation War, have opened my mind up to some genres that I would previously have ignored, they just happen to be genres where there is a lot of nonsense to wade through to get to the good stuff.

EDIT: Another problem I have with Sci-Fi is a lot of them can be very CGI heavy. I can't stand CGI, that's one of the things I liked about Prometheus, it was kept to a minimum, real sets were built and real locations were used. I suppose the likes of Alien though wouldn't have had that much CGI available to it so it's probably not a worry there.

Tony EH

Most Westerns, like most films in general, are pretty rubbish. But, there are the greats.

I dislike the western genre myself, but like the so-called "revisionist western" sub-genre. This sub-genre largely eliminated the usual tropes of the western and went back to basics, introducing the anti-hero and other more rounded characters, making for a more satisfactory whole.

It's utterly impossible to take the likes of a John Ford/John Wayne picture seriously again, after you've seen a few.

Ironically, he's actually in one; 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance'. It's a Ford movie as well. But it's very different to anything else he ever produced.

MilanPan!c

e_e wrote: »

Yeah why not just have the camera pointed at the ceiling for 2 hours? :rolleyes:

And now we're talking about Lost Highway.

PunkFreud

Tony EH wrote: »

It's utterly impossible to take the likes of a John Ford/John Wayne picture seriously again, after you've seen a few.

Ironically, he's actually in one; 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance'. It's a Ford movie as well. But it's very different to anything else he ever produced.

I watched The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance relatively recently. My enjoyment was definitely curved by beginning Deadwood a few weeks previous. It was just too difficult to take Jimmy Stewart seriously in the West. He plats the same goddamn character in every film. The whole film seemed too clean and neat. Even Lee Marvin's bad guy seemed dated in comparison to modern "drunk outlaw" interpretations.

While I enjoyed the story and many of the themes, the film has just aged badly. The Eastwood westerns of the 60's are superior in terms of atmosphere and believability.

Tony EH

It is kind of dated now. But you have to watch it in the spirit of the times in which it was made really, which is difficult to do at times.

It's probably a bad example of a revisionist western, in truth. But, it's certainly considered one of them.

Mickeroo

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Westerns are another good example of a genre I had no interest in until I started watching Hell on Wheels on TV. In my mind Westerns were the awful cheesy ones of the 50's and 60's where the good guy is pure good and the bad guy is pure bad and nobody gets dirty and it takes an hour for someone who gets shot to lie down and die, they have to fall off things and down things first. "Indians" were evil incarnate and yay for the guy in the white hat who kills them all!

This is probably a good example of TV having more time to build a world and flesh characters out whereas film has less time and seems inclined to forsake characterization or reality in favour of entertainment.

But yeah... some TV shows, like Hell on Wheels and Generation War, have opened my mind up to some genres that I would previously have ignored, they just happen to be genres where there is a lot of nonsense to wade through to get to the good stuff.

EDIT: Another problem I have with Sci-Fi is a lot of them can be very CGI heavy. I can't stand CGI, that's one of the things I liked about Prometheus, it was kept to a minimum, real sets were built and real locations were used. I suppose the likes of Alien though wouldn't have had that much CGI available to it so it's probably not a worry there.

CGI wasn't even a thing when Alien and Aliens were made, most of the classic sci-fi movies were made before it or when it was in it's infancy. There's plenty of great modern sci-fi films too though, Sunshine and Moon spring to mind and neither of them are overly reliant on CG. Like the western though, the term sci-fi says very little about the actual content of a film other than giving implications of what kind of setting it is. Like the western a film can still be sci-fi yet also be a comedy, action film, psycho-drama, psychological horror, romantic comedy, straight up romance, political thriller etc. An open mind is always a good thing when it comes to films.

I still hate the type of westerns you describe btw, you should look into the spaghetti westerns like Sergio Leone's the dollars trilogy,or stuff like Once Upon a Time in the West. A lot of Clint Eastwood's directorial efforts in the gene are brilliant too such as The Outlaw Josey Wales and Unforgiven. More modern one like the 3:10 to Yuma remake with Christian Bale and Russell Crowe are also well worth a look as is the Coen's True Grit. I have very little time for the likes of John Ford or John Wayne though I will get around to watching The Searchers someday.

FloatingVoter

Unforgiven is one of the greatest films ever made. The fact that some people wear hats and ride horses is just coincidental. Like Alien it stands above and alone from the "genre" in which its set. The fact that a past master of oaters like Clint made it only makes it better.
Anybody watching Out of the Furnace and thinking that its a great revenge flick needs to watch Unforgiven. True revenge is revenge on a life barely lived and half remembered.
I always put Alien / Aliens down as intelligent horrors that happened to be set in space. The woman as action hero / first lead I didn't get at the time due to my being a child / teenager. But who goes to movies to read a thesis. They're both still great films. And Sigourney Weaver a lady I'll always watch.

ButtersSuki

Bad Teacher at the weekend, recorded from Channel 4 a few weeks back. OMG, just awful. Cameron Diaz is muck, the support (Jason Segel aside) were equally brutal. Even Justin Timberlake who appears genuinely funny in his Jimmy Fallon sketches and when he cameos with The Lonely Island was awful. 2/10.

After that, I needed something to make up for it so I went for Cocaine Cowboys, a documentary rewatch. Excellent - 8/10. A fascintaing documentary about late 70s/early 80s cocaine importation into the US (mainly Florida/Miami). Not sure if I mentioned it or scored it previously on here, but well worth digging out. Watched it on DVD, but it's on youtube if you look……..I can't post a link as that's against forum rules.

Heard Peter Berg (whose work I almost always like) on The Picture Show on Newstalk the week before last discuss a fictional series based on this story which is in early development - could be very interesting depending on the casting and writing etc. Comparisons to Breaking Bad will be inevitable I assume though.

Dman001

It took me four attempts to actually sit down and watch Iron Man (2008). I don't know what it was about the film, it didn't appeal to me and could never sit through it all. I then watched Thor and Captain America, and really enjoyed them and seeing as Iron Man is usually rated higher than the other Avengers' films, I gave it another shot and actually watched it all. And by the end, I thought it was quite the decent flick!

So the weekend I sat through Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3. Iron Man 2 I thoroughly enjoyed, possibly more than the first, and Whiplash made a great villain (Mickey Rourke was great in the role, albeit a bit cliche at times). Iron Man 3 wasn't quite as enjoyable. I saw enough of the Rich-Guy-of-a-MegaCorporation-being-an-arrogant-villain from the second film, and a million other films, so was a bit fed up by it. I did enjoy, however, seeing

a more vulnerable Tony Stark and the effects the happenings in the Avengers had on him.

The Action scenes were fantastic though, except for one explosion which was horrifically done - haven't seen CGI as bad as it since 1999, which is odd as all the rest was top notch. Although, but the end of the film I'm not sure if I fully understand

why Tony left his Iron Man days behind him - was it due to the anxiety? His lab being destroyed? For Penny's sake? Maybe I was blinded all the way through the film, but it seemed to be a spur the moment decision at the end?

And one final, minor disappointment:

the post-credits scene- No hint as to what's to come, or a nod to the final scene in the Avengers. But Ruffalo's appearance was great.

Having seen all the Marvel (Avengers) Universe films, the team behind each really should be commended for their effort at piecing them altogether. It was great watching Iron Man 2, and seeing all the hints of Captain America and vice-versa. It really was a great achievement in producing all the films to equal one major blockbuster come-together, and I really hope they can achieve the same level of quality and success for Chapter 2.

Just finished the rather forgettable and generic Cleanskin.

Cleanskin is yet another by the book British action thriller that strives to say something unique and interesting but instead gets lost under some hackneyed storytelling and familiar action. With it's sweeping shoots of London, the film calls to mind every other London set action thriller of the past decade and while it admirably tries to tell a story with a little substance by offering a fresh perspective on terrorism, it simply doesn't have the intelligence or script to back it up and relies on a number of slick action set pieces to keep viewers interested.

Sean Bean stars as Ewan, a grizzled counter terrorist agent whose seen it all. He's the kind of hard assed, rugged bastard that would sooner burn a suspect alive than have a discussion with them. Ewan feels very much like a modern spin on Edward Woodward's classic Callan, they share a disdain of authority and find themselves in a world that has no idea how to use their talents. Sadly, while Callan had the benefit of great writing, Ewan has a playbook right out of genre cliches 101.

Running parallel to Ewan's story is that of Ash, the leader of the Muslim suicide bombers that Ewan is tasked with stopping. The sympathetic light in which Ash is shown is refreshing and the contrast between how Ash is exploited and used and how Ewan's superior use him is interesting but rather than concentrate on this the film finds itself far more concerned with getting to the next fist fight.

Cleanskin is the kind of film that wants you to think it's raising important questions when in fact, it's really little more than a generic action thriller that asks some moral questions but simply doesn't know how to answer them. As the minutes tick by Cleansking offers little more than the same heavy handed messages and imagery while relishing in sequences of excessive violence and the kind of macho posturing that went out of fashion with the end of the 80s.

In the hands of a more capable writer/director then there's a lot that could be done with the material here, but sadly Cleanskin is just another forgettable 24 clone without any of the wit or fun of an average Jack Bauer day. It's obvious what writer/director Hadi Hajaig set out to accomplish and as such it's a real shame that Cleanskin is such a forgettable experience. Cleanskin is the kind of film you'd expect to find on Movies4Men at 4am on a Friday morning and even then is best avoided.

johnny_ultimate

Pusher 1 + 2 - Nicholas Winding Refn directs this pair of gritty, unromantic pair of Danish crime dramas. In terms of portraying raw, miserable characters and events the films are undeniably successful. Each film's protagonist - played brilliantly by the always reliable duo of Kim Bodina and Mads Mikkelsen - are desperate and inept, but Refn attempts with mixed success to humanise these nasty characters with some curious results. There are interesting things about each film, and the handheld camerawork suits these two descents into Copenhagen hell. But for a film that proudly attempts to shock (

and there's an extraordinarily unpleasant suicide scene

) the narratives are sadly quite conventional in their overall structure and ultimate destinations. The first film's 'ticking clock' structure particularly unfortunately seems overfamiliar at this stage (not necessarily the film's own fault, it should be said).

Like all the other Refn films I've seen, they portray a cartoonish masculinity gone wild, but while Refn is clearly casting a critical eye in some respects - more so even than his more recent films - I'm not sure there's much depth to the deconstruction. Obviously the viewer is meant to be repulsed by the aggression, the casual misogyny (female characters aren't this man's strong suit), the cruelty. But I can't shake the feeling that Refn himself is enjoying all this far too much, loving the adolescent debauchery, and that keeps me at something of a distance. One director I'm starting to think simply isn't for me: there are things I can admire about his bold direction, but his recurrent themes and fascinations leave me uneasy.

The Spectacular Now is an ordinary story, which is both its strength and alas its undoing. The first half of the film sees the film at its most 'spectacular', and interestingly also at its simplest. The beating heart of the film is the romance between Sutter and Aimee, and it's extraordinarily effective thanks to the graceful performances of Woodley and Teller - which wouldn't count for a whole lot if their chemistry wasn't so obvious. Somehow they, fairly anonymously directed by James Ponsoldt (a great director of actors, less interesting in other respects), capture the giddy joy of young love. It's the small but formative moments in their relationship that resonate most powerfully, and familiar moments like the first date, the first kiss and their first sex are intimately, elegantly realised.

Then the film expands its scope, and it almost collapses. Now taking the form of any number of coming-of-age melodramas, that relationship takes something of a backseat in favour of Sutter coming to terms with various demons. A trip to visit his estranged father holds no surprises. His spiraling alcoholism hits all the dramatic beats you'd expect (

yes, poor Aimee is destined to become something of a victim

). The 'grown ups' receive increased screentime, but are underwritten and ultimately struggle to make much of an impact. An optimistic, redemptive conclusion is rushed and quite unsatisfying. Woodley and Teller are utterly committed, but the material they have to work with lacks the depth to support their work. Even the way their relationship grows more turbulent feels contrived and awkward, several climactic beats in the traditional 'romantic drama' structure haphazardly shoved into a too short fifteen minutes.

It's ultimately emerges as a film glued together by the performances and the more intimate moments. It's when the film is constricted by grander character arcs and generic tropes that it struggles. 'The Middling Now' has less of a ring to it, but the truly spectacular moments are regrettably rare.

Judgement Day

"Dublin Murders" (1973) on DVD. aka “A Likely Story” aka “Horowitz in Dublin” aka “Assassinatos em Dublin”

Starring Harvey Lembeck, Sinead Cusack, Al Lettieri, Cyril Cusack and a host of other well known names.



A recently widowed New York detective (Harvey Lembeck) travels to Ireland to honour the dying wishes of his wife to look up her family. No sooner has he arrived than he finds himself propelled into a murder investigtion and is persuaded to lend the Gardai a helping hand. The late Al Lettieri plays a blinder as a homicidal loose cannon...



An absolutely impossible movie to find and this is the only DVD copy I've found in two years of trawling the internet. I found my copy in Taiwan and the only other one I've come across is a VHS copy in Brazil. Entertaining enough in its own right but it was as a time capsule of Dublin fadó fadó that I wanted to see the movie and it didn't disappoint and the picture quality was superb.

ButtersSuki

Judgement Day wrote: »

"Dublin Murders" (1973) on DVD. aka “A Likely Story” aka “Horowitz in Dublin” aka “Assassinatos em Dublin”

Jeez, you got me there. Always thought my knowledge of cinema in general was right up there with the best nerds, but you've got me stumped with this. Normally I'd never ask this, but I don't suppose you'd let a fellow boardsie borrow this - given the rarity you detail it's unlikely I'd ever find a copy!

PunkFreud

Trance
For such a great looking film, it had such a lacklustre plot. The leads were inconsistent

and the twist was so predictable it was pathetic

.

This is not a good movie: it was so goddamn boring.

Punch-Drunk Love
Adam Sandler leading a P.T. Anderson movie? Does Anderson know what he's doing? He certainly does. Sandler, a man known for destroying cinema, has at least one sublime film on his filmography.

Sandler brings this nervous energy to the role, he was perfect. The film shows his world dismantling, followed by it's recreation through love. The frantic mechanical soundtrack is overpowering at times, drowning out the film's audio, this perfectly encapsulated the mind of the protagonist. A simple technique that worked so well.

A darkly humorous film with great performances and an accomplished director. It really surprised me with its impact.