Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?

[angelo]

Ya, there were no scenes that were bad, just a lot that were unecessary and served to drag the story out, as opposed to adding to it. There wasn't a significant difference between De Niro as a young man, De Niro as a middle aged guy or De Niro as an old man. It was just a gangster doing gangster stuff and then he did some gangster stuff again and later on he went and did some gangster stuff. Each one of the scenes were good, but they kind of blended into the other scenes which were just like them. If you took half of them out, you'd have pretty much the exact same story, so the different scenes don't particularly add anything to the movie, despite them all being executed well. Contrast that with some of his other work like Casino, which had close to the same run time, but had a lot of different tones and styles to differentiate the various parts of the movie and kept it fresh the entire time.

Additionally, there weren't any scenes in the movies which particularly stood out. Other films that he's made have had iconic scenes which were incredibly memorable and stuck with the audience over time. Things like "You talking to me?", "What do you mean I'm funny?", "I never went down", etc. Ten years from now (or even ten days from now), is there anything you're going to particularly remember about this movie apart from "It was the first one done on Netflix"? That's not to say that any of the scenes in the movie were bad, they were just ... kind of generic and similar.

Did you notice Joe Pesci's nose looking like a penis, or is that just me?

You look like a penis?

You're quick with your wit ain't you!

 

[angelo]

Behold penis nose.

 

[The Colourful Jester]

Star Wars
Episode IX
The Rise of Skywalker

Well worth the price of a ticket. If you hated The Last Jedi, then you (thoughtless feckless you ) will be pleased to know it spits on it. A shame, but this whole trilogy was never planned out from the beginning anyway. This movie is written and directed by fanboys and feels like it. Which for once isn't a terrible thing, but despite some big surprises (well maybe), There's not alot new here. What is here is so good though you probably won't care. It's a rush, and had this trilogy been thought out from the beginning wouldn't have had to be. This really does feel like it's trying to be the last movie in the saga - but the door is left open. Well worth a look. No end credit scenes.

 

[Ford]

Never Surrender

A documentary about the making of "Galaxy Quest," the film that was at once a gentle nudge and loving tribute to Star Trek fandom. A movie that wasn't wildly successful at the box office, but has become a cult favorite and hailed as one of the best Trek movies.

This keeps the love train going. They pull a few Trek actors into the discussion, talk to just about everyone involved in the film (along with fond remembrances of Alan Rickman) and even follow some fans who attend conventions dressed unironically as the Thermians from the movie.

Yeah, it plays the nostalgia card to the hilt, and of course everyone's 100 percent "team Galaxy Quest," but it just made me smile over and over again. If you loved Galaxy Quest, you need to see this. It's available for rental on Amazon, was the first movie I've ever rented from them, and was money well spent.

9/10.

 

[angelo]

After watching the Godfather franchise again and again. [Gawd Marlon Brando was a great actor.] I intend to watch Casino with the then delicious Sharon Stone again. All the Godfather movies average out to 8/10

 

[The Colourful Jester]

Jumanji The Next Level - Okay.

Cats - an acquirred taste, but not as bad as everyone made out. The songs don't seem as good as Phantom of the Opera or Jesus Christ Superstar and Certainly they should have got some actually good singers. The cat designs are pretty good in action - where the character of Victoria is concerned, I'm now a furry.

 

[angelo]

The only way I'd watch any musical would be if I was jailed and as part of my punishment I was tied to a chair and somehow forced to watch it under threat of 100 lashings of a birch.

 

[Playball40]

Gary Oldman is an actor who 'acts' IMO.

Nicholson is a great actor, but one of the best all-time actors seems a stretch to me.

he's one of those actors who doesn't really "act" so much as just shows up and reads his lines and is distinctive and charismatic enough to make it work. there's nothing wrong with that, there is a long list of "actors" who just show up and line read, and as long as the part is right for who that person is, it works fine.
jack nicholson, morgan freeman, tom cruise, paul rudd, about 50 character actors, gwenyth paltrow, michael fassbender, jennifer lawrence, on and on.
really, it's a much shorter list of who actually does *act* most of the time.

 

[Tharmas]

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 7/10

Watched this the other night. It’s Tarantino’s historical fantasy set in Los Angeles in 1969, combining factual events along with completely fictitious ones. It features Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt as a B-list washed-up television star and his best friend, his stunt double. There are also secondary roles (and cameos) for Bruce Dern, Al Pacino, Kurt Russell and many others too numerous to mention.

A main feature of the movie for Mrs. Tharmas and me was the incredible detail of period props, including fleets of 60s era cars and everything else you could imagine – tape recorders, telephones, etc. The cultural references were myriad, with a sound track of 60s hits and obscure songs that must have barely charted. The missus and I really enjoyed that part of the production. The action culminated in a Tarantino blood-bath of violence; altogether the ending was satisfactory. Perhaps it was a tad long.

There were some completely unrealistic plot elements but, like I said, it was a fantasy. Although we enjoyed it a lot, I’m only giving it a 7 out of 10 because if you didn’t come up during the fifties and sixties 2/3 of the visual, audio, and cultural references would be lost on you.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Saw episode 3 of the Mary Sue Space Chronicles. Er I mean Rise of Skywalker. And to be fair, it's a much better film that the one before it was and Rey is actually given some actual challenges to overcome.

But I cant recommend the film. The acting, special effects and music are all top notch, bit the script is just horrible. So many plot holes that will have your jaw dropping. Just very badly written and obviously rushed. So very clear that this trilogy was not planned out even a little bit.

Also saw the whole first season of the Manadolian, and wow is that better. It's actually really good and the lady who directs it should take over directing any future star wars movies.

 

[angelo]

Has anyone else ever watched Rock Hudson in an oldie SF series titled : The Martian Chronicles? All but forgotten, but I remember thoroughly enjoying it. Rated At least 7/10

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Lion King (Live Action... err... -ish) - This film didn't need to be made. What I didn't like most was that Seth Rogan can't sing... at all... absolutely nothing. Pharrel Williams couldn't drag two notes out of Rogan's mouth. So why did he get the gig.

Casting Call - Pumba... must be able to sing at least a little.

Is it that hard? Does Rogan provide anything to this character that another person couldn't?!

Otherwise, the film seemed more of an advertisement to computer animated technology. One comment I heard from another was that they managed to do Aslan better in a much much older movie. While I understand the goal was to make these animals as real life as possible, I think the trouble becomes that this does limit the range of what they can do.

Granted, children will like this a bit more than I did. They are more forgiving.

2 of 4

Gary Oldman is an actor who 'acts' IMO.

Nicholson is a great actor, but one of the best all-time actors seems a stretch to me.

he's one of those actors who doesn't really "act" so much as just shows up and reads his lines and is distinctive and charismatic enough to make it work. there's nothing wrong with that, there is a long list of "actors" who just show up and line read, and as long as the part is right for who that person is, it works fine.
jack nicholson, morgan freeman, tom cruise, paul rudd, about 50 character actors, gwenyth paltrow, michael fassbender, jennifer lawrence, on and on.
really, it's a much shorter list of who actually does *act* most of the time.

DiCaprio used to be the worst of the worst, but at some point, he actually began to act.

 

[Artemus]

Lion King (Live Action... err... -ish) - This film didn't need to be made. What I didn't like most was that Seth Rogan can't sing... at all... absolutely nothing. Pharrel Williams couldn't drag two notes out of Rogan's mouth. So why did he get the gig.

Casting Call - Pumba... must be able to sing at least a little.

Is it that hard? Does Rogan provide anything to this character that another person couldn't?!

I felt the same way about the live-action Beauty and the Beast. As it ended I commented that Emma Watson was horribly miscast, which did not go over well with the family. If I watch a musical I want someone with a great voice in the lead, not someone who is just passable (and apparently passable only with the help of autotune.

The animated Beauty and the Beast was great, but having seen it approximately 4000 times in the early 90s (those with a daughter of the ight age will understand), I don't really want to see it again.

 

[bilby]

Lion King (Live Action... err... -ish) - This film didn't need to be made. What I didn't like most was that Seth Rogan can't sing... at all... absolutely nothing. Pharrel Williams couldn't drag two notes out of Rogan's mouth. So why did he get the gig.

Casting Call - Pumba... must be able to sing at least a little.

Is it that hard? Does Rogan provide anything to this character that another person couldn't?!

Otherwise, the film seemed more of an advertisement to computer animated technology. One comment I heard from another was that they managed to do Aslan better in a much much older movie. While I understand the goal was to make these animals as real life as possible, I think the trouble becomes that this does limit the range of what they can do.

Granted, children will like this a bit more than I did. They are more forgiving.

2 of 4

Gary Oldman is an actor who 'acts' IMO.

DiCaprio used to be the worst of the worst, but at some point, he actually began to act.

Nah, he's always been a superb actor, but when he atarted doing blockbusters, he played the role of a typical Hollywood screen-filler who didn't steal every scene from his less talented colleagues (IMO a very smart move). His career has three phases - brilliant actor proving his worth; blockbuster actor making loads of dough; and squillionaire actor picking roles he likes and wants.

There's little need for quality acting in the middle phase, and indeed it can be harmful to earnings to show up just how awful ones co-stars really are.

If your first exposure to Di Caprio was 'Titanic' or similar, you could easily be forgiven for thinking he couldn't act - but if you first saw him in 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape' or earlier, then you should have no doubt that his inherent ability is astonishing. He just didn't need to apply it in the mainstream blockbusters that had teen girls gushing over him while everyone else yawned.

 

[abaddon]

DiCaprio used to be the worst of the worst, but at some point, he actually began to act.

Nah, he's always been a superb actor, but when he atarted doing blockbusters, he played the role of a typical Hollywood screen-filler who didn't steal every scene .... if you first saw him in 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape' or earlier, then you should have no doubt that his inherent ability is astonishing.

Yes. I first saw DiCaprio in Gilbert Grape, and I thought they'd included in the movie a person with whatever the cognitive development issue that "Arnie Grape" had. I knew someone exactly like that when I was a kid. And then this kid in this movie was behaving exactly like what I remembered IRL. DiCaprio nailed the behaviors down in every aspect, right down to the eyelids blinking just a bit out of sequence a few times (very subtle, you got to watch very close or you won't see). I had to go watch again after I found he was an actor acting the part, and see it again... very amazing.

I saw him in later movies, and the total immersion into the character wasn't happening anymore, so I thought he'd lost his talent. But then it was more apparent again in some movies.

 

[OLDMAN]

Jumanji Newest version...8/10 Works as a comedy, with the characters trapped in avatars bodies. But I was stoned...so there's that...

 

[angelo]

The Blob is an independently made 1958 American science fiction-horror film in widescreen color by De Luxe, produced by Jack H. Harris, directed by Irvin Yeaworth, and written by Kay Linaker and Theodore Simonson. The film stars Steve McQueen (in his starring feature film debut, as Steven McQueen) and Aneta Corsaut and co-stars Earl Rowe and Olin Howland. The Blob was distributed by Paramount Pictures as a double feature with I Married a Monster from Outer Space.

The storyline concerns a growing, corrosive, alien amoeboidal entity that crashes to Earth from outer space inside a meteorite. It devours and dissolves citizens in the small communities of Phoenixville and Downingtown, PA, growing larger, redder, and more aggressive each time it does so, eventually becoming larger than a building.

Starring the brilliant late Steve McQueen. Typical 50-60's SF movie which was above avarage. I rate it highly simply because of McQueen. 7/10

 

[Playball40]

The Lighthouse

Not sure how to rate this. It was weird and artsy, but really showed the acting talent of Robert Pattinson. It was very DARK and I'm still thinking 'what did I just watch' but my husband wanted to watch, so.

It followed a young lighthouse keeper (Pattinson) doing a stint for four weeks with a seasoned keeper (Willam Defoe) and the madness that ensues.

 

[TSwizzle]

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, 8/10; A stylish Quentin Tarantino drama that stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt and Margot Robbie. The story has a sixties Hollywood backdrop for telling the tale of an over the hill TV actor and stuntman as they try to make a living in the movie and TV industry as the sun sets on their careers. The climax of the movie is a very violent confrontation between the two men and a dog with members of the Manson Family who were initially going to target the house next door where Sharon Tait and friends were staying. There are some great scenes in this movie with a nostalgic look at old school Hollywood. The acting performances were excellent. The movie is a little longer than necessary perhaps but very enjoyable throughout.

The family of Bruce Lee took umbrage at the way Lee was portrayed in the movie. I can understand why they were bent out of shape as the portrayal of Lee was nothing like my understanding of the man. But it was a fictional portrayal so I think they should understand this and the context of the scene in the movie and move on.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The Grudge 2 - 1/10

A really crap horror movie. It relied mostly on jump scares for "horror" and it seems like the writers had a few ideas for what they thought would be cool scenes and then randomly strung some filler together inbetween them. It had a bare bones plot which made no sense and ignored the rules for how things happened over and over again. The ghosts made no sense and they may rip someone apart in one scene and then slightly annoy them in the next by pulling on the blankets and then running away or something. Once the ghost tried to slightly annoy a lady by pretending to be a dog and licking her leg - they seriously had a murderous ghost lick someone's leg and then hide. They kind of made it seem like the ghosts drove people insane until they killed themselves and others, but then the ghosts actively turned around and killed people themselves or were nice to other people for some reason. Also, it was very unclear whether this was the same ghost from the first movie or another group of ghosts (single ghost that took different forms?) who were marginally connected to that ghost.

My main reaction at the end of the movie was "Huh? WTF did I just watch?". If you have an opportunity to see this movie in the theaters, do not take that opportunity. If you see it comes onto Netflix or something in the next few months, only watch it if you've literally watched everything else you possibly could and have absolutely nothing else to do with an hour and a half of your life. It's terrible.