What have you watched recently? 3D!

Tony EH

'The Haunting of Hill House'

If ever there was an example of a TV show or movie spectacularly stretching out its source material (which, ironically, it also largely ignores), it's Netflix's adaptation of Shirley Jackson's novel of the same title. 'The Haunting of Hill House' which could easily have had its story wrapped up in around 6 episodes drones on and on for a seemingly interminable 10 instead, and by the half way mark really starts to feel it. Perhaps it was a fault with my binge watch and such a malady wouldn't be felt if one were to watch it week by week. But I remain unconvinced.

'The Haunting of Hill House' is about, well...a haunted house, which is the current work effort of upper middle class couple, Hugh and Olivia Crain, who along with their five children, Steven, Shirley, Theodora, Nell and Luke move into the huge property in order to do it up and flip it so they can buy their "forever home". As one could suspect, things don't go so well.

'The Haunting of Hill House' shares so little with the original novel that one would be forgiven for wondering why it was even called that in the first place. Aside from the name there are some overlaps, of course, such as some character names, the ghostly goings on, and some passages of dialogue and text. But there's precious little here you could call Jackson's work. And, in a way, that's fine as 'The Haunting of Hill House' was more successfully brought to the screen in 1963 in Robert Wise's 'The Haunting' and trying that again would have probably resulted in an exercise in redundancy. But if a production isn't going to even try and adapt an existing story, then why even bother using the name? Especially when the name doesn't really have an awful lot of clout these days?

That aside, the TV adaptation is littered with some of the most unlikeable people possible. I don't know what it is about modern American TV show/movie writing, but the ability to write compelling, interesting, and attractive characters seems to be a really tall task for the contemporary screenwriter. But most of these people, at least in their adult form, are horrible folk. People who you'd just never wish to be around, which the exception of Nell who manages to hold onto some appeal at least. Perhaps that was the point, though, as they've all been carrying around so much excess baggage that it makes them into husks of awfulness that any grounded person would want to run away from them.

In kid form, however, they are far more charming and it's the little folk that end up acting the adults off the screen. I, increasingly, found myself drawn more toward what was happening to the children over the course of the show and checking my watch when the grown ups were on, because the kids ended feeling a lot more authentic than their adult counterparts. Especially trying in this area are Hugh and Olivia Crain, played by Henry Thomas and Carla Gugino, who never, ever, feel like they are genuine people. They are full to the brim of fake parenting skills and cardboard family values, although both Thomas and Gugino try their best. But I never once felt that I was watching the real parents of five children, or even just a real married couple.

In fairness, though, the show does start off very well with a genuinely interesting first and second episode. But by episode three, the writing is on the wall and you know you're in for a long haul. And while the show, over all, feels lengthy and a bit of a chore it does have enough in it to keep you relatively into the events unfolding on the screen. In addition, episode six is one of the better hours of TV I've sat down to in quite a while and with a bit of tweaking could work as a self contained short story in its own right.

Acting wise, the show can be uneven, and the tendency for the story to meander can really test the patience, especially by episode 7 onwards. But there's a couple of good casting choices going on too. Elizabeth Reaser and Lulu Wilson are excellent as the adult and child Shirley. Both even look so alike that you can easily buy into each actress being one in the same. Victoria Pedretti plays adult Nell and is the only adult sibling that could be called pleasant, and she is well supported by Violet McGraw who's adorable as the little button nosed version.

There's also some great subliminal and shifty things going on in the background of image too. Statues can appear to be moving as light falls on them. The odd spooky, silent, presence can be glimpsed for just a moment, off to the side or standing in a doorway, and there's a real sense of foreboding happening when the Crain family are in the house. Other more prominent ghosts can be hair raising to a degree, like the "bent neck lady" that seems to specifically haunt the young Nell or the creepy man that Luke sees in the basement. But trying to spot the "hidden" ghostly beings was, probably, the most interesting thing about the whole show and director Mike Flanagan uses the 2.00:1 frame excellently, even if the over all image is very dull and muddy in that modern digital way.

Ultimately, what hangs over Netflix's effort is that Shirley Jackson's source material is just far, far, superior. But even if the show had been called 'The Haunting of Crain Mansion', it still would have tumbled to an unsatisfactory and foreseeable conclusion, even if there is quite a bit to be enjoyed along the way.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120586709#Comment_120586709

Yeah I see that now. That thread only really kicked off on mcgregor this morning after my comment you quoted. Typical timing 😅.

pixelburp

Pitch Black (2000)

Accidentally the second Rhadha Mitchell starring vehicle watched in about a week. Ha.

At once economic and canny in how it made good use of a limited budget & setting, while also suffered from visual flourishes best described as After Effects filters. Much of the location shooting had a really effective & oppressive use of overexposed shots, all to drive home how hostile and scorching the environment was - the picture searing the eyes with digital intensity; but then David Twohy would throw in some deeply cheap-looking lens flares, incoherent editing cuts or - most distractingly - a sudden switch to a negative image as a way to release tension. So when this film didn't look surprisingly striking, it kinda looked a bit shít.

But still. That wasn't enough to hobble the goodwill generated from a very entertaining bottle / monster thriller & Alien knock-off, one with an excellent and engaging central gimmick powering the tension. Maybe with a few extra dollars and creativity more could have been done with the idea of being trapped within infinite darkness - but what we actually got still worked just fine as a B Movie. Performances all had the right amount of ham, stereotypes never excessively over-cranked - though I'm not even sure what to make of the fact that this film gruesomely (budget notwithstanding) killed off 3 of its 4 child characters. If I had one grumble about the script's structure, it'd be how Keith David's character seemed relatively unbothered by the fact all three of his sons were killed in front of him.

We know where the "Riddick" universe went after this: The Chronicles of Riddick morphing something robust and simple into a glorious folly, Vin Diesel's grumbling killer turned into a messianic figure; but the starting point has endured along the strata it was made. The third film tried to reset back to type while also encompassing all that madcap Space Opera of Chronicles... but as is often the case, it's very hard to recapture the magic that worked the first time. Part of that perhaps being how Riddick himself was a side character in this; the true lead here was Radha Mitchell's ethically compromised pilot. The subsequent films fell too much in love with the Bad Boy schtick of Vin Diesel's second(?) most famous character, pushing him too far into the limelight - ironically enough given this film's premise. As with many of these types of characters, they're arguably best used sparingly and as a Wild Card - and certainly not as the Chosen One.

flasher0030

Watched the Covenant tonight. Very good film. Very intense. Quite like Argo. If you liked Argo, you'd love this.

tesla_newbie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120577397#Comment_120577397

I saw that back in 2016, it’s excellent

awec

Dead Shot.

Sky Original movie, IRA member chasing down a British Army soldier on a personal vendetta.

A big fat meh. Like practically every movie I’ve ever seen about The Troubles it fails to hit the mark for me.

Colin Morgan is excellent, no complaints about the acting in any of the lead roles. As a nordy myself, I was glad to see (or hear) no fake northern accents, an immediate movie killer for me.

The story though is somewhat nonsensical and also has massive pacing issues. I felt like it lacked a middle, we went from the beginning straight to the end.

A few events happen that are so obviously for the sake of advancing the plot, it’s not even disguised.

The ending was just stupid, far beyond the realms of believable.

5/10 for me, an inflated score because Colin Morgan does as good a job as he could with this script.

buried

Dungeons and Dragons : Honour Among Thieves (2023)

Thought this was godawful. Too much lame sarky dialogue shoehorned all over the place, after 20 minutes it felt like being trapped in a youtube comments section with everyone trying to be a comedian, and it got very boring, very fast. Hugh Grant was good but that was about it. 3/10

ButtersSuki

Haven't posted in years on this thread but used to be a frequent poster. Last Saturday I was in HMV Belfast and had the pleasure of spending a couple of hours browsing their very impressive physical media sections.....apparently the Belfast store is the largest HMV in the world now, strange! I'd forgotten how enjoyable browsing can be, and then I see today HMV are going to re-open (again) on Henry Street - I hope their movie selection mirrors Belfast's in terms of quality and selection.

Anyway, brought a tonne of stuff that I don't need (lol), but first watch was Thief on Arrow Blu Ray. I last watched this 30+/35+ years ago and whilst I had some memories of the plot (to be fair I was but a teenager) , a lot of it was relatively fresh. It screams Michael Mann from the start, from the shot selection, the darkness combined with neon colour, the rain, etc. I have to be honest, I liked it way more than I expected to - and considering it's a Mann production I had high expectations. I absolutely loved the Tangerine Dream Soundtrack too, though I'm always partial to moody instrumental electronic music. Parts of it feel a bit dated, but that's to be expected. James Cann is by his usual standards very under-stated in this, and I had forgotten Willie Nelson was in it (and he looks so young). Dennis Farina and William Peterson have very minor roles. The restoration is great. I'd recommend it to anyone who likes Michael Mann's work. 7.5/10

ButtersSuki

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120546940#Comment_120546940

I love SOTL, it usually gets a yearly viewing. I have god knows how many versions on god knows how many formats. Almost everyone takes the two lead performances for granted at this stage, but I've always felt Ted Levine's work in this is hugely under-rated. How he didn't get a Best Supporting Actor Award - let alone nomination - for this is utterly baffling.You could even argue Scott Glenn deserved a nomination! Considering how SOTL got so many nominations that year, these two seem like huge omissions. Levine's performance is the one I admire most TBH.

1992 was a very strange year for the Best Supporting Actor Category. A win for Jack Palance in City Slickers. A nomination for Tommy Lee Jones in JFK - whilst ignoring Donald Sutherland's altogether better performance in the same film. Very strange indeed.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120613796#Comment_120613796

Yeah, every performance was near flawless and as subsequently problematic as the character of Bill might be to some, the performance itself was remarkably nuanced given how easily "gimmick serial killer" tends to be played in Hollywood. As I said only Dr. Chilton came close to something like a caricature - but even that ultimately worked within the framework of the subtext and Starling's perspective.

It's a quality movie and one of those ones people know through cultural osmosis and mimicry - but it absolutely stood up to that weight and subsequent stereotype. Even the style of the cinematography felt unique: it's one thing to push a camera wayyyyyy into the actors' faces, but to make it work and not look amateur takes talent.

Ninthlife

IMDb: : Sisu 

 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14846026/

Tarantino meets John Wick

Has a spaghetti western feel and very simple story, no overly drawn out dialogue. Very good fx. Its violent, gruesome, gory and over the top. Got to suspend belief in parts but overall a very enjoyable action flick

7.5/10

billyhead

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120613879#Comment_120613879

Is it subtitled or in English?

Ninthlife

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120613896#Comment_120613896

All English

nachouser

I was kinda avoiding Renfield because it sounded like too much of a good thing - Nic Cage as Dracula - but it's pretty fun so far.

Decuc500

The Witch Part 1: The Subversion

Bit of a convoluted title.

It’s a South Korean film that’s like a mix of Brian De Palma’s The Fury, The Matrix and Stranger Things.

A young girl escapes from a facility that seems to be home to children with telekinetic powers. She is taken in by an old couple who found her collapsed on their farm. Ten years later she gains national attention on a tv talent show and heavily armed soldiers from the facility are sent to kill her.

There’s a quirky tone to the film. It goes from light hearted to dark and violent very quickly. Kind of typical of a lot of South Korean films I have seen.

Five American/Korean kids with telekinetic powers are also introduced. They are also trying to kill the girl and I wasn’t sure exactly why. I just went with the flow at that stage.

When the impressive action set pieces finally arrive they are inventively filmed. A lot of these South Korean sci-fi or action films are like grown up versions of silly Hollywood superhero movies and, without sounding snobby, are so much better.

Sugarlumps

Fatal Attraction – Tis an awesome film. Glenn Close is terrifying. Holds up really well.

I could watch Michael Douglas in just about anything.

Irish Aris

In Greece at the moment, where Mubi has a Krzysztof Kieslowski retrospective. I got the opportunity to rewatch the Three Colours Trilogy. I haven't watched any of them individually or collectively in many many years and have almost forgotten how good all of them are, I viewed them with a renewed interest.

Blue is the one that has given me the harder time in the past due to the subject matter and the slow pace. I think I enjoyed it much more this time and appreciated the small details. White is still an easy watch as the story is somewhat lighter. Not much to say about Red: my favourite Kieslowski film and I reckon it would place fairly high in my "best films of all time" list... if I ever make one.

Special note to the direction of photography - that utilises the three colours across all 3 films. I especially liked the use of red in the first film.

Preisner's music is fantastic - it's amazing that he was able to create these superb scores with what sounds as very uncomplicated themes.

And superb performances all across the board.

pixelburp

How to Blow Up a Pipeline (2022)

A conflicting watch, given I've lately slumped to a resignation the alt-right, conspiratorially minded and those riven by denial have, ultimately, won and our path towards climate collapse is now irrevocable. What lasting value has an indie film that might present a group of desperate people's act of "self defence" as something necessary and sacrificial - when we have past the point of no return, all the while those with the most power (and greatest ability to weather the changes) are doing the least amount to curtail our slide towards an inhospitable planet?

Ughhh... so, movies!

Anyway, divorcing my creeping fatalism, this turned out to be a really taut procedural of all things: one where there was an exacting, methodical tone & structure rather than an over-cranked reach for melodrama or lofty pretension towards a lecture on environmental morality; instead an approach that never robbed the tension from a balanced escalation as events began to swirl towards their conclusion. Indeed, the (very textual) morality was presented with a shrug of the shoulder and resolute mentality that what was about to happen was unavoidable - and had to happen. No equivocation, no "both sides" cake-eating ... the pipeline had to go.

A pulsing, swirling soundtrack (one that perhaps aped Tenet's a little too closely) worked in tandem with really canny, propulsive editing; only broken by choice moments to snap away from a moment of shock & suddenness - but in a manner that teased more than it frustrated. This all creating a sense of being at once an exciting ticking-clock thriller and quasi-documentary at the same time; the conspiracy presented with a methodical energy & execution. The actors all played their roles with understated determination, it was all very naturalistic and unfussy.

Really, the story structure operated like some inverted Ocean's Eleven: these people weren't "The Best of the Best"; some dazzling array of disparate talents all coalescing into something slick & effortless. No, instead this was a collective of messy, ordinary people fumbling towards their goal. Never presented as incompetent or idiotic however, but shown to possess that kind of determined, trial-and-error amateurism someone at our level might bring - if, ya' know, we decided that we might die waiting for the Corporate Class to save us, if we didn't take action ourselves.

I'm not sure the whole thing was quite as incendiary as the film thought it was; but then again, that might just be the aforementioned fatalism speaking for me. It certainly had a relatively radical notion within the topic of discussion that is Climate Change: that these people were acting out of self-defence, the first shots fired by those who would willingly poison the air and water while others shrugged concerns off as "woke, lefty liberals".

flasher0030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120643395#Comment_120643395

I like many of your reviews Pixelburp. Sorry but I don't understand some of the others. You're on a different intellectual scale than me.

But I have watched about half hour of this, and put it off. Was going to get back to it again to finish it. But something has always put me off.

Did you think it was any good. Is ti worth seeing it out. Does it get a little more like a thriller/action piece than what the first half hour suggests. so far just seems to be going through a few back-stories, and shows them pouring bomb mixtures into containers. Or overall is it more of an arty type movie.

johnny_ultimate

Not really anything ‘arty’ about How To Blow Up A Pipeline. It is, in its essence, a grounded, gritty and tense movie about a group of people trying to pull off a dangerous job. It intercuts the immediate drama with flashbacks to give context (a standard heist movie would have frontloaded those sections as opposed to the in media res opening here), but is also a very tense piece of cinema that harkens back to something like The Wages of Fear - maybe not as relentlessly tense as that, but similar sense of things could go awry at any moment. It very much ratchets up the tension as it goes.

The main thing that separates it from the mainstream is its unapologetically radical political viewpoint - the film makes no qualms about its perspective that blowing up a pipeline is a just and worthy cause in the face of overwhelming corporate power. But the filmmakers (and very much plural here - there’s a rare multi-person ‘a film by…’ credit, in what feels like an apt acknowledgement of the film’s themes) have packaged that in an immediately compelling and high-stakes thriller.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120643822#Comment_120643822

Don't think I'm on any intellectual scale different to other people but thanks, I guess? I'd have said I'm as thick as mince 😂

As to the film, yes I'd say it's worth finishing - but I'd say that for any movie. 30 minutes isn't enough to know the full picture, where something might be going. Manys a movie doesn't doesn't make sense til the twist comes, after all.

Here though, the tension cranks up as D Day gets closer and various small wrinkles present themselves (as they invariably do with heists and "job" movies). It's a crime caper film, and something like Ocean's 11 albeit featuring a bunch of (crazy?) amateurs.

flasher0030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120644103#Comment_120644103

Ok. Thanks.

I watched new film called Influencer last night. Its quite good.

Will throw on the rest of Pipeline tonight. Actually, I'll out it back to the beginning cause its a few weeks ago since I watched the beginning. Better to watch it all again in one go to appreciate it better.

ButtersSuki

Another purchase from my recent trip to HMV Belfast was Melancholia on Artificial Eye Blu Ray (I subsequently found that I already have this as part of a Lars Von Trier Shock and Awe Boxset, but not the first time I've done this 🙄). Not the easiest watch at time, but wow, this is simply a masterpiece. The super slow-mo opening images (and sporadically throughout the film) are breathtaking beautiful - this really is putting the art in arthouse cinema. The accompanying music to those scenes are powerful in their own right, and perfectly chosen to add to the cinematography. Its brutal depiction of depression is not an easy watch, but the reward is worth the journey. Kirsten Dunst's performance is simply incredible (prob. her best since Drop Dead Gorgeous or Marie Antoinette) and worth watching for alone. I avoided it in the cinema on release (and clearly in my own Blu Ray collection - lol) for years as I didn't really want to delve too deeply into the subject matter but I'm so glad I did.

It's not for everyone. If you like mainstream/blockbuster movies you'll most likely be better off avoiding this.

An easy 9/10, and I say that as someone who rarely gives anything over 7.5.

brokenbad

Watched "The Football Factory" on Netflix last night - good movie with a graphic and realistic portrayal of football hooligans.

flasher0030

Knock at the Cabin

What a pointless film. Nothing to it at all. No storyline. Considering the Director involved, I was expecting some a bit entertaining, something clever after sitting through 100 mins of nothing happening. But alas no. Closing credits rolled and I was left thinking - what the hell was the point of that.

I am normally generous in my movie ratings, but I'd give this 2 out of 10.

buried

Sisu (2022)

Highly entertaining, nothing you haven't seen before really with this sort of thing but its crafted very well. Almost comic book like delivery of the narrative and the sequential editing, so like ninthlife said, you have to suspend the disbelief a fair bit. But its very well paced and the characters are also very well crafted even though there is a limited amount of dialogue. Good auld noise action fun. 7/10

Renfield (2023)

This was going along really nicely until that cop character showed up after 10 minutes and the creators somehow decided this wan was going to be the main feature for the rest of the film. Awful character, awful acting, totally ruined the experience because Hoult and Cage are really brilliant and the action scenes are off the wall hilarious. But the cop character totally ruined the entire thing. Whoever was in charge of this really destroyed the dinner. 4/10

pixelburp

The Hidden Fortress (1958)

A bit of an odd duck this: insofar as being a film made by a Master of Cinema that has been broadly unheralded stacked up against the rest of his CV - except for the caveat of its legacy arguably amounting to how it influenced George Lucas to fashion the bickering married-couple energy of R2D2 and C3P0. And even that genetic link required a little conscious acknowledgement as I watched Hidden Fortress - it wasn't quite as obvious as I was expecting? Maybe that's on me, bringing an incorrect estimation to the viewing. And overall, I can sort of appreciate why this has disappeared into the ether: while undoubtedly handsome with occasional flashes of genuinely arresting action, it had a knockabout and borderline frivolous vitality; some little interstitial or hangout, rather than a narrative that grabbed the viewer by the scruff of the neck.

And part of that sense of being "between" something larger and more interesting was precisely because of that progenitor duo of characters. Matashichi and Tahei lacked any agency or the kin of comedic insertion the Star Wars droids possessed, these ostensible main characters here were instead some of the dimmest bulbs and most grasping myopic idiots I've watched in many years. At least R2-D2 sometimes saved the day. I'd be lying if I said I didn't grow a little weary of the two peasants' unbending lack of nous or self-awareness. Compounded by the frustration that a demonstrably more interesting and engaging story kept happening outside their orbit or ability to comprehend. Structurally maybe that was the point, and we still spent time with Toshirō Mifune's general and his point of view, but more often than not the two peasants inserted their "will" into events to the story's detriment.

El Gato De Negocios

Still : A Michael J Fox Movie

Documentary / biography of MJF tracing his life from childhood to his big break in Family Ties to his Parkinsons diagnosis, this is a beautiful, heartbreaking but ultimately uplifting story. Not once does it play the sympathy card, he is the antithesis of it. Its as painfully honest as any documentary I've ever seen, it doesn't shy away from showing him at his most vulnerable but it also shows that he is an absolute fighter that has raised billions for research into this awful affliction. Brilliant, inspiring stuff.

10/10

tesla_newbie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120672025#Comment_120672025

Michael J Fox is a fantastic guy

Decuc500

House of Gucci

Probably the least 'Ridley Scott' film Ridley Scott has made. It looks like a passion project for somebody else that was brought to him and his heart wasn't in it. The storyline just wasn't that interesting. The performances were mainly poor. Lady Gaga was predictably dreadful. Utterly charisma free. If I never see her act again I'll be happy.

There were some good things. Scott of course can't make a bad looking film. Al Pacino and Jeremy Irons brought a bit of class. The music cues were pretty great.

But I'm looking forward to seeing Scott go back to familiar ground with his Napoleon movie.