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

[Politesse]

Lincoln
8/10

A political satire where a quirky president tries to get a law passed during a civil war. Starring ... everybody in Hollywood, I guess? I particularly liked, in addition to Daniel Day-Lewis' Lincoln, Tommy Lee Jones and James Spader. Looking forward to a sequel.

That was definitely a film in which the acting was the best part, there were some seriously odd editing decisions. I always enjoy watching Daniel Day-Lewis perform, though. I am a very distant relation to both Mr. Lincoln (my quadruply removed cousin married his grandaughter) so I always took a bit of a special interest in the history surrounding the family; I thought he was pretty well-characterized in this one compared to some other incarnations.

A sequel would... probably cause riots.

 

[Politesse]

My watch of the week: Pride and Prejudice (2005)

Rating: 7/8, because I found myself deeply enjoying the viewing, despite being distinctly unfond of the book its based on. The screenwriter did a phenomenal job of trimming the fat (and there was so much it to cut) from the story and finding likeable protagonists somewhere within it. Actually made me rethink and recontextualize the book, in fact, and why it speaks to others more than to me.

 

[Wiploc]

Star Wars IX - I'm assuming I was the last human to watch the film, so mild spoilers.

I'll add my impressions:

Star Wars was wonderful. Blew us all away.

The first sequel was also excellent.

The second sequel was a flat and tedious tying up of loose ends.

The three prequels were aggressively bad.

After that, two stand out:

- Solo was so uninteresting I didn't finish it.

- The one with Felicity Jones was good, even though everything about it seemed recycled.

The rest are an indistinguishable muddle. I can't even tell you whether I've watched IX.

Felicity Jones:

 

[TSwizzle]

Joker, 5/10; Stars Joaquin Phoenix in the title role of the comic book character "Joker". These types of comic book movies are not my cup of tea and although I didn't think it was great, it was a fairly interesting story. Phoenix was brilliant and his portrayal of Joker was phenomenal. The mood of the movie is perfectly captured in the way it is filmed. I can see why the comic book hero buffs liked this movie but unless you are into that genre it's not really worth watching the entire thing. The ending was a bit weird too.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Star Wars IX - I'm assuming I was the last human to watch the film, so mild spoilers.

I'll add my impressions:

Star Wars was wonderful. Blew us all away.

The first sequel was also excellent.

The second sequel was a flat and tedious tying up of loose ends.

The three prequels were aggressively bad.

After that, two stand out:

- Solo was so uninteresting I didn't finish it.

- The one with Felicity Jones was good, even though everything about it seemed recycled.

The rest are an indistinguishable muddle. I can't even tell you whether I've watched IX.

Felicity Jones:

View attachment 28817

I think it's as simple as that Star Wars is for children. We all seem to have a wish that series we loved as children grow up with us and mature with us, because they become embedded in our identity. But they never do. Children loved the three prequels. They love all the Star Wars movies.

Isn't it as simple as you didn't like the ones you didn't like because they weren't written for you?

I'm not so sure I'd enjoy the original trilogy if I'd seen them as an adult. The plot is stupid. The dialogue is rediculous. Why is a rebellion trying to restore a monarchy to a throne any better than keeping the emperor? It's dumb. It's all stupid. I'm still a huge Star Wars fan.

I never watched any of the Marvel films as a child. I never read the comics as a kid. So I just can't get into them. Because they are not written for me. They are written for children. I can't connect to an inner child loving it and feel amazed. To me it's adults in Halloween costumes for no reason who have motivations that make no sense. Which is how I felt about watching the prequels or any later Star Wars film. There's no limit to how much I can rewatch the original trilogy

 

[marc]

Why is a rebellion trying to restore a monarchy to a throne any better than keeping the emperor? It's dumb. It's all stupid. I'm still a huge Star Wars fan.

It isnt. There was no monarchy before, it was a republic.

I never watched any of the Marvel films as a child.

Good. The few Marvel movies prior to the MCU were pretty bad, with Blade being an exception.

I never read the comics as a kid. So I just can't get into them. Because they are not written for me. They are written for children.

I would disagree. Many comics include social commentary and serious themes. I've long felt X-Men were a good example of that, with bigotry being a central theme to the series since the beginning. The heroes fighting for the dream of their founder of equality and peaceful co-existence, with their main enemy believing a race war is inevitable and he intends to win it. And they have had to work with that enemy at times against threats intent on genocide. Great example of that is the graphic novel 'God Loves, Man Kills'.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It isnt. There was no monarchy before, it was a republic.

No, it wasn't. This was something added in the prequels. Republics don't have princes and princesses. This was not at all explained in the first three films. It makes sense if we think about what Star Wars is. It's a Sci-fi mishmash of swords and sorcery with aliens and spaceships. It was supposed to be camp, trashy and dumb. But beautifully executed. A homage to the adventure films and pulp litterature George Lucas loved growing up. They were also stupid. That's the fun of the genre. It's all dumb dumb dumb, including Star Wars. That's why there's a princess in the rebellion.

We are never given a reason to think that the rebellion are the good guys and the empire the bad guys. There's not enough information in the film to draw that conclusion. We're shown it via "kick the dog"-type tropes and light vs dark imagery. The blue/green vs red contrasting colours.

The stupidity of Star Wars is one of the things I love about it. It's a roller coaster ride. It's all surface. There's nothing to understand. No deep messages. There's nothing to learn from it. No preaching. Just turn off the brain and get swept away.... into space!!!

I never read the comics as a kid. So I just can't get into them. Because they are not written for me. They are written for children.

I would disagree. Many comics include social commentary and serious themes. I've long felt X-Men were a good example of that, with bigotry being a central theme to the series since the beginning. The heroes fighting for the dream of their founder of equality and peaceful co-existence, with their main enemy believing a race war is inevitable and he intends to win it. And they have had to work with that enemy at times against threats intent on genocide. Great example of that is the graphic novel 'God Loves, Man Kills'.

These two things don't contradict eachother. I don't doubt Marvel has many serious themes and has a lot of depth to it. If it had no depth I doubt it could be as popular as it does. Most things that target children are deep. I have spent a lot of time around a childrens author discussing how to write it. I know the secrets. The tips and tricks. Children and teen books that have an impact are almost always extremely deep. Otherwise we won't feel connected with the characters and it will be flat. Childrens books are harder to write than adult books because the depth needs to be boiled down to it's barest essence, and delivered in a way that isn't boring to a child. No child is going to slog through 100 pages in case it gets better later in the book.

But it still needs to be written for the reader. The characters need to have problems the intended readers share. The problems in life children and teens have are incredibly fundamental. Who am I? What's the meaning of it all? Why am I doing what I'm doing? What's the point in going to school? Will life always be suffering? Will I ever get laid? How do I know if a partner is good for me?

The super hero genre is written for an audience with no power in life, who dream about one day being powerful, but have no idea of how to get there. They feel insecure in life. It's the same type of mental excercise as the boy who who day learns that he is the "chosen one" from the prophecy. Adults know that we never get powerful. Even the powerful people on TV aren't really powerful. So the super hero trope doesn't excite me any longer. It has become flat. I don't have the fantasy of one day becoming powerful any longer. I've accepted that I'll never be and I'm cool with that.

That's what I mean with that super hero movies are written for children. If we weren't engaged and sucked into a universe as children we will never be.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That's what I mean with that super hero movies are written for children. If we weren't engaged and sucked into a universe as children we will never be.

You are conflating too many things here, especially what you find compelling verses what others will find compelling.

Star Wars, yes, the first two trilogies have more hooks in there for kids than adults. The Ewoks are definitely the beginning of the end. But the third trilogy was a poor remix of the first two, recycling nearly every character and plot line. The third trilogy doesn't suffer from being a bit too juvenile. It sucks because it is terribly written and appeared to think if they just moved the plot fast enough, people wouldn't notice. The second trilogy sucks because Lucas couldn't direct people to save his life, so while the plots are soft, they weren't nonsensical until Lucas phoned in Skywalker -> Vader.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

AIRPLANE! - I have seen this movie more times than any other movie. When I was younger it hit the very sophomoric funny bone. Today, in middle age? There is serious craft to this movie. Running gags that are well thought out, but not over done. References and gags involving older movies that are sprinkled through out. Small details like the prop engine noise for a jet airplane. A large competent cast of actors that in general are all acting straight except a bit of Bridges and his assistant, the only screwball character in the entire slapstick film.

It is a testament to writing of the movie that there is only one slapstick character in one of the best slapstick films ever. There are a couple gags that are probably dated, but overall, this movie is still a classic comedy.

4 of 4

 

[Ford]

The one with Felicity Jones was good, even though everything about it seemed recycled.

I quite liked Rogue One, for a simple reason: There's not going to be a Rogue Two.

Show

Because everyone dies in the end.

That makes it stand out...because it stands alone. It was designed to be a one-off in a sea of sequels and I like it because of that. Some say the characters were shallow. I content that they were economical. They served the story just enough and no more.

In that sense, it's a far better prequel than Lucas' bloated prequels. It efficiently tells the story of how the rebels came to be in possession of the Death Star plans. No need to delve into politics or history. It just took the opening crawl of the original and turned it into a movie.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That's what I mean with that super hero movies are written for children. If we weren't engaged and sucked into a universe as children we will never be.

You are conflating too many things here, especially what you find compelling verses what others will find compelling.

Star Wars, yes, the first two trilogies have more hooks in there for kids than adults. The Ewoks are definitely the beginning of the end. But the third trilogy was a poor remix of the first two, recycling nearly every character and plot line. The third trilogy doesn't suffer from being a bit too juvenile. It sucks because it is terribly written and appeared to think if they just moved the plot fast enough, people wouldn't notice. The second trilogy sucks because Lucas couldn't direct people to save his life, so while the plots are soft, they weren't nonsensical until Lucas phoned in Skywalker -> Vader.

Tying a neat ribbon on an arc is hardly the crime of recycling characters and plot lines. That's what the last in a trilogy is supposed to do. I have no problem with the Return of the Jedi. I think it's a good film. There's enough new stuff for me to forgive anything repeated. The Death Star 2 is ok. Especially since it was still in construction in RoTJ. But reusing this in the Star Killer/Death Star 3. What?!? And with emperor Palpatine 2 that also gets killed in the end. Lol. That's reusing plot lines in an unforgivable way.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

Just watched The Mindbenders.

I thought it must have been older, being B/W, but it was made in 1963. Interesting ideas, having been made around the time of the Milgram experiments.

 

[DBT]

Unhinged. - Russell Crowe.

An extremely bad case of road rage....

 

[spikepipsqueak]

Fog in August.8/10

Harrowing but well worth watching.

True story, which isn't what you want to hear.

 

[ZiprHead]

Fog in August.8/10

Harrowing but well worth watching.

True story, which isn't what you want to hear.

After reading the wiki, it sounds like a delightful film, not.

It doesn't say anything about being a true story though it would not surprise me.

 

[Playball40]

Rogue One was my favorite. It took one-line from the original series and made an entire story around it. A good one at that. And yes, it had a SAD happy ending. I think it was a more adult Star Wars.

The one with Felicity Jones was good, even though everything about it seemed recycled.

I quite liked Rogue One, for a simple reason: There's not going to be a Rogue Two.

Show

Because everyone dies in the end.

That makes it stand out...because it stands alone. It was designed to be a one-off in a sea of sequels and I like it because of that. Some say the characters were shallow. I content that they were economical. They served the story just enough and no more.

In that sense, it's a far better prequel than Lucas' bloated prequels. It efficiently tells the story of how the rebels came to be in possession of the Death Star plans. No need to delve into politics or history. It just took the opening crawl of the original and turned it into a movie.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

The Square.

See this. Really.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The one with Felicity Jones was good, even though everything about it seemed recycled.

I quite liked Rogue One, for a simple reason: There's not going to be a Rogue Two.

Show

Because everyone dies in the end.

That makes it stand out...because it stands alone. It was designed to be a one-off in a sea of sequels and I like it because of that. Some say the characters were shallow. I content that they were economical. They served the story just enough and no more.

In that sense, it's a far better prequel than Lucas' bloated prequels. It efficiently tells the story of how the rebels came to be in possession of the Death Star plans. No need to delve into politics or history. It just took the opening crawl of the original and turned it into a movie.

My problem with Rogue One is that IV implies lots was lost getting those plans. But the people on the ground weren’t anybody. And once they got the plans into space, the ships just sit around waiting to be caught.

The concept was good, but the battle planning made no sense.

We’ve got the plans, shall we hit light speed?
No, there is a large spaceship coming in, I wanna get a better look at it.
But we really need to get these to a base!
There is time...
They are blowing our armada into oblivion.
So is it a true sphere?
Fuck, no wonder we lost!

 

[Patooka]

I liked Rogue One.

I had issues with it erasing my efforts in Dark Forces, Dark Forces 2, which is also called Jedi Knight, Jedi knight II; Jedi Outcast, Dark Forces 4/Jedi knight III: Jedi Academy, anything Timothy Zahn wrote and every Star Wars game I played in the 90s. But it was still a good movie.

Loved the battle of Scarran though.

 

[TSwizzle]

Hanna, 6/10; A mildly entertaining action movie starring Eric Bana and Olivia Williams. The plot revolves around a very young female super assassin and her father who are being hunted by the CIA culminating in a weird game of hide and seek in an amusement park for the final showdown between Hanna and the female CIA agent. It's a fairly standard action movie, car chases, fights, shootouts, skulduggery and what not and the usual super violent, sadistic henchmen.