What have you watched recently? 3D!

Fysh

I caught Weathering With You, having missed it when it was released in 2019. I am glad I watched it but found it somewhat disappointing - where Shinkai's previous film Your Name was great, the narrative here was a bit more sloppy. It looked stunning for the most part, although occasionally there were moments that inadvertently highlighted what I assume is the use of 3D modelling for environment design. Narratively, though.... It doesn't have enough story to properly fill 2 hours, the pacing is weird (because of a very sloppy mcguffin used to justify chase scenes), and it leans a bit too much on J-Pop ballad moments to tell the audience what to feel.

One thing I remember when this came out was criticism of its apparent scepticism of man-made climate change. For the first half of the film, I was thinking "oh, this is fine, it's quite clearly meant to be a fantasy world etc" but then towards the end the film leans into it really hard, literally -

at the end of the film Tokyo is now flooded, with one character having explained that Tokyo used to be a bay hundreds of years prior, and the protagonist - whose actions have ensured continuous rainfall and flooding - literally says in voiceover "it's nobody's fault that things are like this".

In short, glad I watched it but I wouldn't be fussed about watching it again.

MisterAnarchy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Rewatched Heat tonight.
The 1995 classic by Michael Mann strring De Niro and Pacino.
It gets better with age, an absolute masterpiece.

Bizarrely it didnt receive one Oscar nomination.
Heat, Seven and the Usual Suspects were all released in the same year 1995, and none was nominated for best picture.
3 absolute classics.

I find that Al Pacino's acting in some movies, particularly during the "Whoo Ha" phase (1992 starting with "Scent of a Woman" to about 2000), has dated very badly.

Characterised by an overblown and caricatured acting style.

Ruins this movie in retrospect to a large degree imo

e.g. https://youtu.be/FjJotKwr4M4?t=77

De Niro is much much better in it but the damage was done by Pacino

flasher0030

glasso wrote: »

I find that Al Pacino's acting in some movies, particularly during the "Whoo Ha" phase (1992 starting with "Scent of a Woman" to about 2000), has dated very badly.

Characterised by an overblown and caricatured acting style.

Ruins this movie in retrospect to a large degree imo

e.g. https://youtu.be/FjJotKwr4M4?t=77

De Niro is much much better in it but the damage was done by Pacino

Can't see that at all. Pacinos character was an egotistical brash loudmouth - which is well suited to Pacino's acting style. Contrasts superbly with DeNiros character, who is more withdrawn and quieter. I thought both were excellent. Didn't see any annoyances.
Pacinos character thought that he was the superior one and would take DeNiro down. But it was only on account of DeNiro's deep stubborn characteristic that the good guy got the bad guy in the end.
I, like many I'm sure, was shouting for DeNiro at the end, but sadly wasn't to be.
Great film.

it's chew-the-scenery, over-dramatic and artificial over-acting.

terrible stuff.

branie2

Bullitt on Blu-ray. Steve McQueen's best film in my opinion

MisterAnarchy

glasso wrote: »

I find that Al Pacino's acting in some movies, particularly during the "Whoo Ha" phase (1992 starting with "Scent of a Woman" to about 2000), has dated very badly.

Characterised by an overblown and caricatured acting style.

Ruins this movie in retrospect to a large degree imo

e.g. https://youtu.be/FjJotKwr4M4?t=77

De Niro is much much better in it but the damage was done by Pacino

Pacinos character was coked up for most of the film, which would explain some of the larger than life moments.

https://www.gq.com/story/heat-anniversary-screening

The 76-year-old actor kicked off the panel discussion with the revelation that his character, Det. Vincent Hanna, "chips cocaine" throughout the film, though it's never portrayed on screen.

"There is a scene where it goes by really quick, which never got into the film, and I've always wanted to say it, just so you know where some of the behavior's coming from," he said to a laughing and all too understanding crowd.

I think both actors gave excellent portrayals.

ShagNastii

Watched Bloods this week and last. So so funny.

Sky have been killing it with their original comedy lately. Brassic was another amazing series. It's a pity them being on Sky they are going under the radar.

NIMAN

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Heat, Seven and the Usual Suspects were all released in the same year 1995, and none was nominated for best picture.
3 absolute classics.

Yeah, all fantastic films, yet sh1t like Nomadland can win an Oscar, shows you how things have changed.

4Ad

Nobody.

Surburban dad seeks revenge after his house is robbed..

Worse than terrible..
-10/10...

MisterAnarchy

NIMAN wrote: »

Yeah, all fantastic films, yet sh1t like Nomadland can win an Oscar, shows you how things have changed.

The standard of Oscar winning films over the last decade has been pretty woeful.

Other notable films in 95 were 12 Monkeys, Devil in a Blue Dress, Braveheart,Get Shorty, Casino.
The previous year there was Pulp Fiction, The Shawshank Redemption, Leon, Forest Gump.
It was a golden period.

Tony EH

glasso wrote: »

I find that Al Pacino's acting in some movies, particularly during the "Whoo Ha" phase (1992 starting with "Scent of a Woman" to about 2000), has dated very badly.

Characterised by an overblown and caricatured acting style.

Ruins this movie in retrospect to a large degree imo

e.g. https://youtu.be/FjJotKwr4M4?t=77

De Niro is much much better in it but the damage was done by Pacino

Pacino's such a knob in that movie, you end up rooting for the criminals. :pac:

De Bhál

Just watched The Snowman on RTE 1 there this evening. Not the animation about the young boy and the flying snowman as I initially wondered and not as good either.

Not a movie I'd be recommending to people.

De Bhál

De Bhál wrote: »

Just watched The Snowman on RTE 1 there this evening. Not the animation about the young boy and the flying snowman as I initially wondered and not as good either.

Not a movie I'd be recommending to people.

Try Headhunters if you're looking for a great Nesbo film.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

I find that Al Pacino's acting in some movies, particularly during the "Whoo Ha" phase (1992 starting with "Scent of a Woman" to about 2000), has dated very badly.

Characterised by an overblown and caricatured acting style.

Ruins this movie in retrospect to a large degree imo

e.g. https://youtu.be/FjJotKwr4M4?t=77

De Niro is much much better in it but the damage was done by Pacino

One of the greatest movies ever made and you let this ruin it for you? Crazy.

Pacino's body of work in incredible. He has done every role possible, many of them very understated. To go after him he shouts because in a few films, I really don't get this from people. Scent of a woman is a brilliant performance and movie. So what if he made a couple of films where he choses characters who have a temper? Tony Soprano the greatest character in the history of television lost his **** in every episode. The very reason he was so iconic, was this temper. David Chase coached it out of him.
And as far as Heat goes if some guy was fu***** my wife AND watching my TV, I'd be upset as well

If we compare the stars of today - The wooden Ryan Gosling and the 1 speed can only act when im eating Brad Pitt, I mean is this preferable? The best of them Leo is always shouting in his movies. Always taking it up dramatically in this way.

There is a difference between acting and cartoon over-acting / scenery chewing which is actually a lazy way out compared to acting well.

It's possible to be pretty dramatic at times and not be a cartoon character - e.g. Daniel Day Lewis in "There Will be Blood" would be the ultimate example of this craft.

Pacino has put in some very good performances obviously - the 2 godfather movies and "Dog Day Afternoon" probably being among his best imo with a good few other ones in "Glengarry Glen Ross" , "Serpico" etc

But I'd agree with this list for example where most of the movies listed are during the "Whoo Ha" period.

And yes Scarface is not a good movie. It's fun in parts but the crazed cartoon representation is just silly even if it's about a coked-up headcase.

https://www.timeout.com/london/film/the-nine-worst-al-pacino-performances

Sad Professor

In fairness to Pacino, his character in Heat was supposed to be high a lot of the time. Mann cut out the scene of him doing coke.

pixelburp

Sad Professor wrote: »

In fairness to Pacino, his character in Heat was supposed to be high a lot of the time. Mann cut out the scene of him doing coke.

Yeah, TBH a scene of him doing coke wasn't needed to make it clear Pacino's character was spinning completely out of control - acting as a dramatic contrast with DeNiro's cooler, more detached character. The obvious thematic link being that both men were living isolated, emotionally barren lives.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

There is a difference between acting and cartoon over-acting / scenery chewing which is actually a lazy way out compared to acting well.

It's possible to be pretty dramatic at times and not be a cartoon character - e.g. Daniel Day Lewis in "There Will be Blood" would be the ultimate example of this craft.

Pacino has put in some very good performances obviously - the 2 godfather movies and "Dog Day Afternoon" probably being among his best imo with a good few other ones in "Glengarry Glen Ross" , "Serpico" etc

But I'd agree with this list for example where most of the movies listed are during the "Whoo Ha" period.

And yes Scarface is not a good movie. It's fun in parts but the crazed cartoon representation is just silly even if it's about a coked-up headcase.

https://www.timeout.com/london/film/the-nine-worst-al-pacino-performances

That link is absolute garbage. Scent of a Woman is a great film. There are iconic scenes in that like dancing the Tango that are some of the best ever to hit the screen. Any Given Sunday a great film. Al Pacino's speech in the locker room is the greatest sports speech in the history of film.
Merchant of Venice is fantastic. Devils advocate fantastic. I mean to say Scent of Woman is one of Al Pacino's worst performances it might as well be a click bait ad luring you to a porn site. Come on man this is nonsense. Reminds me of people crapping on Forrest Gump as a crap film. Sure if you are completely devoid of emotion and feeling you might think that.

Just to reiterate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4tIrjBDkk

The Raging Bile Duct

4Ad wrote: »

Nobody.

Surburban dad seeks revenge after his house is robbed..

Worse than terrible..
-10/10...

I thought it was mighty craic. I'd add about 17 or 18 to your score.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2004/dec/03/2

In some more recent roles, such as Scent of a Woman and The Devil's Advocate, he has hammed it up to great effect. His critics suggest that he's also hammed it up in his serious roles. He looks a little hurt when I mention it. "You can't call Shylock hammy," he protests. No, I say, but there are certain films ... "Yes, certain roles you go too far," he concedes. "Some-times-you-go-too-far," he says, syllable by syllable. "But part of what you hope to do is not censor yourself, and then find a way to pull back, and sometimes you don't censor yourself and you get caught off guard."

He says it's the director's job to rein him in, and they don't always bother. "Sometimes it seems that directors just say, 'Give me more Pacino, more Pacino,'" I say. " Yeaaaaaah ," he roars. "That has happened, yes." At his best, directors such as Sidney Lumet seem to ask him for less rather than more. "Well Sidney is a great director, one of the greatest I have known. And one thing Sidney does do is rehearse you. You have three weeks' rehearsal, like you're doing a play. And in the rehearsal these things are sorted out. And the more rehearsal I have, the more likely I am to find the right levels. I think Michael Radford did that to me in The Merchant. If I was concerned about anything it was that it was so low-key."

p to the e

Deleted User wrote: »

That link is absolute garbage. Scent of a Woman is a great film. There are iconic scenes in that like dancing the Tango that are some of the best ever to hit the screen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR5qybydEzY

glasso

glasso wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2004/dec/03/2

Pacino has done plenty of crappy films like all the best guys from his era ended up doing. City Hall was one where he was very shouty and I would concede it was over the top.
Devils Advocate he did over the top stuff too, but it was fitting because he was playing the devil and he indulged in the role, which for me made it all the better for the film, he fit the role like a glove.

But to **** on Any Given Sunday and Scent of a Woman as bad performances, not buying that whatsoever. I must of watched Any Given Sunday half a dozen times, its a wonderful all round performance capped off by that speech, which while watching the film would rouse any human even be they devoid of emotion.

the discussion is about over-acting / over-dramatic acting, not crappy films, although they frequently correlate.

Pacino has a tendency to be over-dramatic.

Pacino as in the article in the guardian says expects directors to rein him in and also that his performances in several films have gone too far where this hasn't happened.

Irish Aris

My opinion is that it's all down to preference.

I am generally a big fan and like most of Pacino's "louder" performances.
Recently in Scorcese's The Irishman, I thought the contrast between him and DeNiro and (especially) Pesci was perfect.

I think both Scent of a Woman and Heat are great films and really liked Pacino's acting in both.
Not a big fan of The Devil's Advocate as a film (I found it only OK) but again I thought the contrast between Pacino and Reeves was very effective.
Don't recall much about Any Given Sunday. I remember that I didn't like it - but that could be down to the subject matter (zero interest in American Football) and the fact that I generally dislike Stone's style (bar a couple of 80s exceptions)

flasher0030

Life
Alien type fare with Ryan Reynolds and Jake Gyllenhal. Much better than I expected. Fairly tense. And worth watching even just for the final 2 minutes.
I'd give it an entertaining 8 out of 10

Out of Time
An old Denzel thriller. I've never seen it before. Plenty of twists and turns to keep the mind occupied. Never a dull moment in it. Bit daft overall, but if you switch the brain off, and just take it for what it is, it's quite good. Pretty similar to an older Kevin Costner movie - Nowhere to Run.
A 7 out of 10

City of Lies
Johnny Depp movie about the investigation into the murder of Notorious BIG. It's ok. I knew nothing about the case, so it was nice to get up to speed on it. The ending just fizzled out, but it is based on a true story so not a lot that could be done there.
A 7 out of 10

dubstepper

Suspiria 2018

Really enjoyed this. It's one of the better horrors I have a seen in a while. It really pulls you into the place and time. I have not seen the original so I watched this on it's on merits, rather than through the lens of a remake.

7/10

Mad_maxx

one way to Denmark with Rafe Spall

peculiar little British movie about a small town welsh loser who heads to Denmark in order to get sent to prison as he believes Danish prisons look an improvement on his own dead end life

not as bad as it sounds , not great but i liked it enough to see it through

Those that wish me dead

Hitmen trying to track down their prey when park firewoman Angelia Jolie (whose face looks like it's had some obair done) intervenes in fiery forest flick. Nothing complicated here in a 100 minute runtime. Aidan Gillen is a baddie. It's passable brain-bubblegum even if it's been done and seen before

5.6/ 10

I watched it the other day and at the time I didn't realise it was by Taylor Sheridan. But it did kinda remind me of his stuff by the music. Watch Hell or High Water and Wind River if you haven't already.