Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Recently viewed movie thread - Rental, Streaming, Theater etc (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter Memphis Foundry
- Start date
BroncoFreak_2K3
sucker for Orange
Yep, that's why our Movie house downtown is playing Touch of Evil. He's playing Psycho for Mother's Day....
On The Rocks
Footballguy
"...get me a jury and show me how you can say 'in July' and I'll......go down on'ya."
My single all time favorite quote from Mr. Welles.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
If you people aren't watching Inside Amy Schumer, you're missing one of the funniest comedy series of the last five years.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Comedy Central. I know this is risky, but I think she's a female Dave Chappelle. She's very funny, and some of her skits feature some very witty, smart observations of society and gender.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Oh #### - voiceover??i think it's interesting to contrast "the final cut" and the theatrical release. IIRC, the most notable difference is how the studio release has the VO. it changes the storytelling.Dammit, had a long winded post about the Hitchcock movies I have watched that my son closed down to do math homework. Not going to retype all that. Long and short of it was that I think I am now closer to having seen about 1/2 of his movies, and am impressed that there has not been one that I have not liked. Nothing that I have seen recently was able to replace the tops of my favorites of his (Psycho, Rear Window, Shadow of a Doubt), but still damn good. Recently watched 39 Steps, Lifeboat, Frenzy, and Marnie. Still a few more of his I want to see, but it's time to move on down the list so I will sprinkle ones like To Catch a Thief, Trouble with Harry, Man Who Knew Too Much and Notorious in as I go.
Next on the list is Mr. Welles. Sad to say that I have not seen anything that he directed (or probably acted in for that matter). I have been avoiding Citizen Kane since it seems to have the rep of being that horrible, boring movie that you are forced to watch in film class that nobody likes. I have seen a lot of Touch of Evil, but have not actually sat down and watched it. I have a 5-6 of his movies at home now.
My wife watches movies here and there, but usually doesn't have a lot to say about them besides "that was alright" watched 50 Shades of Gray the other night. She told me that it was horrible the following morning. Must be really bad if she said something. Said the dialogue was amazingly bad. She had read the books and seemed to enjoy them for what they were.
Was going to rewatch Blade Runner soon. Is there a version that I should be watching? I have forgotten what the differences between the versions were. I believe I have the "Final Cut" at home.
regarding Welles, i assume you mean films he directed? listen, i love "Kane". it's not a purely academic love either. it stands up very well today but it also stands out from its contemporaries. i still think about it a lot for whatever reason. "Touch of Evil", "The Lady from Shanghai", "Othello", "Chimes at Midnight" are varying degrees of really good. watching them, you'll see why. i haven't watched "Mr Arkadin" or the recently re-released "F is for Fake". in part, there are so many different versions of those films and how they were released. some never made it to dvd until recently. i think Hulu has some of the Criterion videos available to view.
I'd be interested in hearing your impressions of those other Hitchcock's you saw.
I have only seen a couple of Hitch's movies from pre-40s, but 39 Steps was easily my favorite. Really ended up liking that one. Definitely felt the most like one of his movies than the others I have seen with the twists, mistaken identities, etc. Lifeboat was really good too. As far as a "confined space" movie I liked it a bit more than Rope. Sure, it is not shot with the long takes or as hard from a director standpoint, but having the different personalities and dilemmas on the boat was more fun to watch for me. I will be honest, I was in and out of dozing with Marnie. Nothing to do with the movie, just bad timing on my part and the wee one distracting me. What I saw I was liking more than AD seemed to, but agree that it was like watching a psychologist appt with Hitchcock displayed on screen. A lot going on, and want to revisit that one again. Frenzy I really liked (I keep repeating this) and watched back to back with 39 Steps so it was an interesting look at the bookends of his career. Definitely a De Palma vibe (I guess that would be more like De Palma has a Hitchcock vibe), and really gets you thinking what his movies would have looked like if he was able to make them for another decade or so. I think of those 4, I liked Frenzy the best. I have yet to see a Hitchcock clunker, but maybe Rope and The Lady Vanishes were at the bottom, but they are still 6.5 - 7/10 movies.
Looking over Welles' filmography, I had seen nothing he had been associated with (Ok, I have seen The Muppet Movie and the Transformers movie). So, I started off with the one at the top and watched Citizen Kane a few days ago. Don't know what the gripes are for, I really loved the movie. I will admit feeling that I was in trouble when the newsreel footage hit. But even that is an interesting way of telling the story first and then having more details filled in after the fact as the reporter investigates. It is easy to see why film schools would show this - felt like every type of shot was on display here. Amazing to think this was a rookie effort from Welles. I am sure there is a ton of stuff I missed out on, but was really noticing the use of shadows across the faces and how the camera is always seeming looking up at Kane and down on other characters, like his 2nd wife. It wasn't just technically impressive, I was actually interested in the story and the characters. Like I said, I really liked the way it jumped around and was told from the different POV. Thought it was an interesting study on the POV and left me wondering how much we really know about Kane since all the POVs are from and unreliable narrator who felt burnt by him and had a beef with him. Maybe all along he was the poor little boy sold off by his parents. I will stop rambling, but I loved it. Also ended up popping in Ebert's commentary on the film and was blown away by that as well. Felt like he could have gone on for 4 hours and was struggling to get what he wanted to say in. A lot in there about how to watch a film, how shots were composed, lighting done, etc.. Highly recommend for anybody who hasn't checked that out. easily 9/10
Also watched Touch of Evil, and had more of a love/hate relationship with that one. While also fantastically directed, I think the script was more of a mess and some of the acting was a little choppier. I like the bookends of the movie, of course with the fantastic opening scene, but it loses me in the 2nd act a bit and really couldn't get behind Heston in this one. Essentially any time we were following the escapades of Susan I was starting to check out - from the zany hotel clerk to the "evil" gang it just fell flat for me. Direction and the bookends of the movie saved me, but didn't like it quite as much as some. 7/10 If it matters I believe I caught the later edition that was edited based on Welles' notes on his vision for the movie. I think there were 3 versions floating around??
Starting to wonder if that is what you were warning me about with other of Welles' movies. Maybe mostly brilliance with a splash of hot mess in there?? Anyway, I am 1/2 way through The Third Man, and have The Trial, F for Fake, and The Stranger sitting by the TV. Looks like the others I ordered are delayed a little (probably a bad week to try to get his movies from the library if other people are watching because of his birthday), but have Magnificent Ambersons, Lady From Shanghai, and Mr. Arkadin on their way. Not sure how many I will watch, but wanted a variety. We have #### for internet where we are, so I have to go through the library for most of the movies I am watching.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
El Floppo
Footballguy
saintfool
Dead sexy
Kane is really possibly the first truly modern film. the storytelling in every sense is a breakthrough, i think. there's a reason it topped the best film of all time list for decades ("Vertigo" replaced it recently). you can watch it a 100 times and appreciate something new each time. the ebert "lecture" is supremely detailed, comprehensive and thorough. if you have the time, go for it.KarmaPolice said:
Touch of Evil is not a breakthrough film but it is really solid. it's fun, if nothing else. aside from the opening tracking shot, it is not really a technically interesting film. it's one of those films that rolls along.
JoeSteeler
Footballguy
jdoggydogg said:12 angry menKarmaPolice said:
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Don't make me walk over there.KarmaPolice said:Wait, Dave Chappelle is funny?jdoggydogg said:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
It would be a great double feature with There Will Be Blood.Walking Boot said:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
The Third Man:
Ok, I loved this one too. Now, there is no 'twist' anymore since you know that Welles is in the movie and probably who he plays. I just thought all the characters were interesting and ended up being not what you thought. Who we think of as the good guy is the boring shlub, and the bad guy is the charismatic one. Also just within the relationships - ie a long time friend not being who you thought they were. Ending was great as well. Of course, the movie looks amazing, especially shots at night as they are travelling in the streets and in the sewers. Glad I finally caught up with this one. 9/10.
Welles and his facial expressions remind me a lot of Jack Nicholson, but with him more on the charismatic side, and Jack teetering on the crazy side. Would have made a good Jekyll and Hyde movie if they were the same age.
Ok, I loved this one too. Now, there is no 'twist' anymore since you know that Welles is in the movie and probably who he plays. I just thought all the characters were interesting and ended up being not what you thought. Who we think of as the good guy is the boring shlub, and the bad guy is the charismatic one. Also just within the relationships - ie a long time friend not being who you thought they were. Ending was great as well. Of course, the movie looks amazing, especially shots at night as they are travelling in the streets and in the sewers. Glad I finally caught up with this one. 9/10.
Welles and his facial expressions remind me a lot of Jack Nicholson, but with him more on the charismatic side, and Jack teetering on the crazy side. Would have made a good Jekyll and Hyde movie if they were the same age.
El Floppo
Footballguy
caught a lot of Mr Arkadin last night, speaking of Welles. good gravy, what a bizarrely made movie. camera point of view was almost always low and askew- especially for shots of Wells in wacky makeup and beard (and eyebrows). seems like he was always in close-up, filling the screen with... eyebrows and beard.
badmojo1006
Footballguy
They Come Together A- Sorta spoof on Romantic Comedies. They fling jokes a mile a minute, some fail, others you are
Bill Hader steals the scenes he is in.
Bill Hader steals the scenes he is in.
rockaction
Footballguy
Huh. I keep wanting to watch this, but keep putting it off. Maybe I'll have to give it a late-night look.They Come Together A- Sorta spoof on Romantic Comedies. They fling jokes a mile a minute, some fail, others you are
Bill Hader steals the scenes he is in.
badmojo1006
Footballguy
It's worth it just for Colby Smulders being the really hot, really bad girlHuh. I keep wanting to watch this, but keep putting it off. Maybe I'll have to give it a late-night look.They Come Together A- Sorta spoof on Romantic Comedies. They fling jokes a mile a minute, some fail, others you are
Bill Hader steals the scenes he is in.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Birdman
Loved this movie from start to finish.
I didn't suspect it'd be as funny as it was. Michael Keaton is a phenomenal actor.
Loved this movie from start to finish.
I didn't suspect it'd be as funny as it was. Michael Keaton is a phenomenal actor.
sports_fan
Footballguy
badmojo1006
Footballguy
Which Godzilla are you talking about? Matthew Broderick's Godzilla or the one that came out last year?
Chaka
Footballguy
I thought this movie was awful. I may have laughed twice, maybe and only one of those was a true spontaneous belly laugh (the Michael Shannon scene). They kept throwing jokes out there at a frantic pace and I kept thinking okay maybe the next one is going to be a truly funny one, then I started hoping that there was going to be some funny ones then I thought is there going to be a funny one? It was just trying waaay too hard and it came up woefully short.It's worth it just for Colby Smulders being the really hot, really bad girlHuh. I keep wanting to watch this, but keep putting it off. Maybe I'll have to give it a late-night look.They Come Together A- Sorta spoof on Romantic Comedies. They fling jokes a mile a minute, some fail, others you are
Bill Hader steals the scenes he is in.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I liked it better than similar movies like Pacific Rim. All equally stupid, but I thought they did a good job with the look/size/scaling of the monsters here.
Chaka
Footballguy
Didn't like it and I even saw it in a theater that serves booze.
I think the biggest problem I had with it is that the director seemed to think that the audience cared about the protagonist and his family when, in reality, we couldn't give two ####s about that; all we wanted to see was Godzilla go around and #### #### up and but for a few brief moments that just didn't happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
I liked it better than similar movies like Pacific Rim. All equally stupid, but I thought they did a good job with the look/size/scaling of the monsters here.
JoeSteeler
Footballguy
Maps to the Stars -GF and I both enjoyed this twisted drama. 6.8/10
Directed by David Cronenberg
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2172584/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2
Directed by David Cronenberg
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2172584/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2
Last edited by a moderator:
badmojo1006
Footballguy
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Notorious - 8/10
Another Hitchcock winner. It took me a while to realize that it was a redemption story, but by the end I was totally sold.
Amazing how Bergman's performance pushes even that of Grant's to the side. Amazing.
And Claude Rains isn't remembered enough for being the great actor he was.
Another Hitchcock winner. It took me a while to realize that it was a redemption story, but by the end I was totally sold.
Amazing how Bergman's performance pushes even that of Grant's to the side. Amazing.
And Claude Rains isn't remembered enough for being the great actor he was.
El Floppo
Footballguy
Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
saintfool
Dead sexy
he gets mixed up with his contemporary, James Mason. Both are very good for what they were.
Run It Up
Footballguy
Watched the Kingsmen and The Lazarus Effect today.
Kingsmen is an enjoyable action movie, somewhere between Bond and John Wick. Liked it quite a bit.
The Lazarus Effect is pretty much what you expect it to be, generic spoopy sci-fi flick. Its alright.
Kingsmen is an enjoyable action movie, somewhere between Bond and John Wick. Liked it quite a bit.
The Lazarus Effect is pretty much what you expect it to be, generic spoopy sci-fi flick. Its alright.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
Interesting. I hate when action shots become so harried and frenetic that I can't follow what is happening but didn't have any problem following the action in PR. I remember that being a huge problem for me with the original Transformers film and most of that action was in full daylight. In fact I think it was a huge problem for a lot of people because IIRC in TF 2 virtually every punch, jump and TF Jazz Hands was in super slo-mo.Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
JoeSteeler
Footballguy
Yep...pretty ####ed upWhen Julianne Moore started singing "Hey Hey Goodbye" I was
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Nothing like that. Just remember being annoyed at the darkness/raininess of some scenes and not seeing what was going on. Also the scaling and thinking sometimes those things looked huge and sometimes they looked 10 feet tall. Just liked that Godzilla seemed to do a better job of always having the monsters look big and consistently so.Interesting. I hate when action shots become so harried and frenetic that I can't follow what is happening but didn't have any problem following the action in PR. I remember that being a huge problem for me with the original Transformers film and most of that action was in full daylight. In fact I think it was a huge problem for a lot of people because IIRC in TF 2 virtually every punch, jump and TF Jazz Hands was in super slo-mo.Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
El Floppo
Footballguy
I actually disliked the scale of the monsters in Godzilla. people were just ants to them- and nothing they did even remotely bothered them. so ultimately it was just a couple of monsters fighting each other and knocking down cities. and a bunch of people saying idiotic things because bad writers, but lacking the ability to affect any kind of control at all on the situation.Nothing like that. Just remember being annoyed at the darkness/raininess of some scenes and not seeing what was going on. Also the scaling and thinking sometimes those things looked huge and sometimes they looked 10 feet tall. Just liked that Godzilla seemed to do a better job of always having the monsters look big and consistently so.Interesting. I hate when action shots become so harried and frenetic that I can't follow what is happening but didn't have any problem following the action in PR. I remember that being a huge problem for me with the original Transformers film and most of that action was in full daylight. In fact I think it was a huge problem for a lot of people because IIRC in TF 2 virtually every punch, jump and TF Jazz Hands was in super slo-mo.Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Judgement At Nuremburg - 7.5/10
A bit too long but never boring. Replete with excellent monologues (and therefore, performances). I probably would have selected one for the movie draft we did a while ago.
The value of a single human being.
Might have to check out some more of Spencer Tracy's roles.
A bit too long but never boring. Replete with excellent monologues (and therefore, performances). I probably would have selected one for the movie draft we did a while ago.
The value of a single human being.
Might have to check out some more of Spencer Tracy's roles.
On The Rocks
Footballguy
"In The Bedroom" (2001)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0247425/
Watched this movie for the first time in a few years and it still holds up as one of my top 10 movies I've seen in the past 15 years.
Every performance is perfect. Tom Wilkinson who I like in just about everything I've seen him in is just great.
10/10
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0247425/
Watched this movie for the first time in a few years and it still holds up as one of my top 10 movies I've seen in the past 15 years.
Every performance is perfect. Tom Wilkinson who I like in just about everything I've seen him in is just great.
10/10
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
I guess I'm on a Hitch kick.
Foreign Correspondent - 7.5/10
Started off with a bang, then for some reason I lost interest in the middle, but it brought me back around at the end. I put it in the Rebecca/Marnie level of enjoyment for me - mid level.
Foreign Correspondent - 7.5/10
Started off with a bang, then for some reason I lost interest in the middle, but it brought me back around at the end. I put it in the Rebecca/Marnie level of enjoyment for me - mid level.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I haven't seen Godzilla yet, but surely it didn't have anything as dumb as not using your best weapon until like 80% of the way through the movie as a last resort like happened in PR. So I'm giving it the crown in this battle by default.Interesting. I hate when action shots become so harried and frenetic that I can't follow what is happening but didn't have any problem following the action in PR. I remember that being a huge problem for me with the original Transformers film and most of that action was in full daylight. In fact I think it was a huge problem for a lot of people because IIRC in TF 2 virtually every punch, jump and TF Jazz Hands was in super slo-mo.Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
Chaka
Footballguy
And, seriously? That's your criticism?FreeBaGeL said:I haven't seen Godzilla yet, but surely it didn't have anything as dumb as not using your best weapon until like 80% of the way through the movie as a last resort like happened in PR. So I'm giving it the crown in this battle by default.Interesting. I hate when action shots become so harried and frenetic that I can't follow what is happening but didn't have any problem following the action in PR. I remember that being a huge problem for me with the original Transformers film and most of that action was in full daylight. In fact I think it was a huge problem for a lot of people because IIRC in TF 2 virtually every punch, jump and TF Jazz Hands was in super slo-mo.Interesting. I think that was a huge beef i had with PR, that I felt too much of the fighting was at night or in the ocean and i couldn't see ####. Could just be a matter of 0 expectations for me as i assumed i would dislike Godzilla as much as I did Pacific Rim. Doubt i would watch either again, so we really are splitting hairs here.Even if PR delivered robots and monsters, i still thought is was stupid, but Godzilla was much worse. Plus, they managed to put all the action at night, which made for dark wtf moments for the limited action. Our friend was in The Marketeer, which felt similar in terms of poorly showing action.I am on the opposite end of that spectrum. At least Pacific Rim, which is certainly not high quality cinema, delivered on it's promise of lots of giant robots fighting lots of giant monsters. Godzilla gave us maybe 5 minutes of that type of content, while also not being high quality cinema.
I never said PR was a good movie just that it truly delivered on what it promised and I applaud it for that.
But for a few moments Godzilla just missed on every level.
