The Official Last Movie You Saw Thread (Part 2)

[Joneslab]

The Guest.

This is on Netflix and got big reviews when it came out last year. It's made by the same guy who made the excellent You're Next, but I thought this one was stale and at times campy. It sort of sits in that netherworld between horror and suspense, and the reveal when you find out what's going on just elicits a shrug rather than the shock the filmmakers want you to feel. The performances are good but the overwrought--intentionally in some ways, I think--action sequences end up giving the film an almost darkly comic feel without generating many laughs.

Oldboy is a similar type of movie on Netflix that gets the balance between "What in the world is going on?" and hilarity just right. Skip The Guest.

[KCKUKFan]

Hail, Ceasar! - Probably the worst Coen Brothers film that I've ever seen. Certainly on the lowest tier of their work. A lot of vignettes that go nowhere and a whole lot of big celebrities with next to nothing to do. No plot to really speak of, and no real laughs, either. This film doesn't even work as a lark. 1.5/4.

The Finest Hours - Almost shockingly old-fashioned Disney flick about a Coast Guard team dispatched to rescue the a sinker tanker in the middle of a Noreaster. The film is charming and durably well-made, but you've seen it a thousand times before. Sure to entertain non-judgmental moviegoers, probably a pass for everybody else. Seems better than it really is because of it's spring release date, amongst a sea of garbage. 2.5/4.

The Witch - Well-made, well-acted, well-written, well-paced, but almost ZERO entertainment value. Felt like a pretentious film school project made by a talented filmmaker with no grasp on how to actually entertain the audience. 2/4.

[KCKUKFan]

The Guest.

This is on Netflix and got big reviews when it came out last year. It's made by the same guy who made the excellent You're Next, but I thought this one was stale and at times campy. It sort of sits in that netherworld between horror and suspense, and the reveal when you find out what's going on just elicits a shrug rather than the shock the filmmakers want you to feel. The performances are good but the overwrought--intentionally in some ways, I think--action sequences end up giving the film an almost darkly comic feel without generating many laughs.

Oldboy is a similar type of movie on Netflix that gets the balance between "What in the world is going on?" and hilarity just right. Skip The Guest.

What about "Oldboy" was hilarious, exactly?

That was one of the most depressingly nihilistic movies I've ever seen.

[Joneslab]

What about "Oldboy" was hilarious, exactly?

That was one of the most depressingly nihilistic movies I've ever seen.

I don't know, I just find it fiendishly funny for some reason.

But dark, dark humor. It is one of the only "suspense" movies that I can think of where I laughed out loud a few times. Usually I like when thrillers kind of stay in their lane. There's a fine line between comedy and silliness.

[KCKUKFan]

Room - A masterpiece of mood and acting. Brie Larson should take home the Oscar gold, and the kid who plays her son is almost as good. A mini masterpiece, this is a must-watch.

The Big Short - Wildly funny... until it's not. Adam McKay (Will Ferrell's career director) steps out of his comfort zone and makes a meta, goofy movie about a deadly serious topic, the financial crisis on the late 00s. All the A-list actors are at the top of their game, and McKay presents all the convoluted details in creative ways so that it's easier to swallow. Highly recommended.

[Joneslab]

Circle.

Another one from Netflix, this is a sort of high-concept social experimentation film in the design of something like Exam or Cube. The set-up: a group of people wake up in a circle on what appears to be an alien spacecraft, and every couple of minutes they have to vote to see which person is killed off next. It's simplistic in scope and design, and the filmmakers try to compensate for this by adding in these philosophical arguments about who should die. Generally the characters act in absurd ways, and there's this patina of comments-section preachiness that runs through the entire movie.

But for all that it kind of sticks with you, and has three or four genuine surprises--including the person who ends up escaping. Recommended if you like single-setting, stripped-down movies about ideas.

[TrueblueCATfan]

Triple 9........pretty good if you like movies about dirty cops.....

[Wonderstruck]

The Revenant.

3 out of 5

*Cinematography was outstanding
*Scenery was fantastic
*That bear scene was ridiculous
*Tom Hardy was excellent

But the story plodded along and I kept thinking, "Are we ever going to get to the end of this?"

For what it is, I'm not surprised it was nominated for an Academy Award, but for my tastes, it was just okay. I'll likely never watch it again.

[TrueblueCATfan]

The Revenant.

3 out of 5

*Cinematography was outstanding
*Scenery was fantastic
*That bear scene was ridiculous
*Tom Hardy was excellent

But the story plodded along and I kept thinking, "Are we ever going to get to the end of this?"

For what it is, I'm not surprised it was nominated for an Academy Award, but for my tastes, it was just okay. I'll likely never watch it again.

Well it didn't win best picture last night but Leo did get the best actor award

[surveyor]

Finally saw The Martian yesterday.

That film would have been totally different if the crops Watney grew was marijuana instead of potatoes.

He would have ended up not doing a damned thing and die from abject laziness.

[Joneslab]

Goosebumps

A clever iteration of the R.L. Stein children's books. Begins in sappy YA-novel land, but by the second half it's a lot of fun. The special effects are sometimes a little flat, and the ending opened all kinds of weird philosophical quandaries that I don't think the filmmaker's intended, but for what it is it's fun if you have kids.

Jumanji is better, but this is still recommended for a rental.

The Revenant.

A lot has been written on this in this thread, but I have to say that I really enjoyed it. As everybody in the free world has said by now, the visuals are what make it. I loved the swirling, restless camera; I loved the fact that these natural events--a meteorite crashing to earth, an avalanche--keep happening in the background; I liked the way the camera gets so close to the actors that you can sometimes see their spit on the lens.

This is a movie about breath and smoke and nature and blood and death, and it's wrenching and unforgettable. Highly recommended.

[George]

Goosebumps

A clever iteration of the R.L. Stein children's books. Begins in sappy YA-novel land, but by the second half it's a lot of fun. The special effects are sometimes a little flat, and the ending opened all kinds of weird philosophical quandaries that I don't think the filmmaker's intended, but for what it is it's fun if you have kids.

Jumanji is better, but this is still recommended for a rental.

The Revenant.

A lot has been written on this in this thread, but I have to say that I really enjoyed it. As everybody in the free world has said by now, the visuals are what make it. I loved the swirling, restless camera; I loved the fact that these natural events--a meteorite crashing to earth, an avalanche--keep happening in the background; I liked the way the camera gets so close to the actors that you can sometimes see their spit on the lens.

This is a movie about breath and smoke and nature and blood and death, and it's wrenching and unforgettable. Highly recommended.

I agree with all of this, but I don't think it was the master class in storytelling and realism that some have made it out to be. I got annoyed by lots of little things - arrows fired from dinky homemade bows that were able to plunge six inches deep into the hull of a boat; Glass' ankle ****************ed at a 90 degree angle, only to be healed up and ready to support weight within a couple of weeks. Nothing major, individually, but as a whole the small stuff nicked up the film enough to cause problems for me.

And the story, as much of a natural, visceral, minimal experience as it was supposed to be, was still pretty thin. And made up. I knew the story pretty well going into the movie, so I was aggravated by the complete fabrication of the half-Indian son and his subsequent murder. There was enough complexity in the actual (as "actual" as we know, anyway) decisions made by Glass' companions to have made for a compelling on-screen story. In fact, I think it would have been more effective to remain faithful to the source material and let the audience decide whether or not Fitzgerald was villainous or justified. I can easily sympathize with the "true" version of the story, which would have made a film adaptation all the more complex.

[surveyor]

The Revenant.

A lot has been written on this in this thread, but I have to say that I really enjoyed it. As everybody in the free world has said by now, the visuals are what make it. I loved the swirling, restless camera; I loved the fact that these natural events--a meteorite crashing to earth, an avalanche--keep happening in the background; I liked the way the camera gets so close to the actors that you can sometimes see their spit on the lens.

This is a movie about breath and smoke and nature and blood and death, and it's wrenching and unforgettable. Highly recommended.

If such effects and overall cinematography were available in 1970, we'd have been talking about how Richard Harris won the Oscar for his performance and this one was a mere copy. As it is, The Revenant is a hugely more riveting adaption of Glass's story than was Harris' turn, and that's not a knock against Harris. I loved the original growing up, but it plods along in a number of places.

[Joneslab]

And the story, as much of a natural, visceral, minimal experience as it was supposed to be, was still pretty thin. And made up. I knew the story pretty well going into the movie, so I was aggravated by the complete fabrication of the half-Indian son and his subsequent murder. There was enough complexity in the actual (as "actual" as we know, anyway) decisions made by Glass' companions to have made for a compelling on-screen story. In fact, I think it would have been more effective to remain faithful to the source material and let the audience decide whether or not Fitzgerald was villainous or justified. I can easily sympathize with the "true" version of the story, which would have made a film adaptation all the more complex.

Actually the movie is an adaptation of the novel by Michael Punke, not the actual history.

I read this week that Punke, because he's a high-ranking government employee bound by ethics rules, has never been able to do any kind of publicity even though the book came out a decade ago. Don't think he's ever been allowed to even give interviews.

[George]

Actually the movie is an adaptation of the novel by Michael Punke, not the actual history.

I read this week that Punke, because he's a high-ranking government employee bound by ethics rules, has never been able to do any kind of publicity even though the book came out a decade ago. Don't think he's ever been allowed to even give interviews.

I knew that. When I said "source material," I was referring to the actual history. Should've clarified.