What Movie Did You Just Watch

[gunswordfist]

R.I.P. Dean

[Dr. Insomniac]

So today, I got to watch the entire Apu Trilogy. It was interesting to finally see these works, and looking at the films in kind of an larvae-pupae-adult stage system. This was one of those coming of age stories that I thought most accurately depicted human growth. Few of the characters were really likable or interesting-Apu's mom was particularly unlikable-but it wasn't about them, it was a personal story about how bad events turn a happy kid into a somber adult. I'm especially thankful to the Criterion for repairing this film quality back to the closest to its original state. As for which one was better, I'd go with Apur Sansar  > Pather Panchali > Aparajito.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

In preparation of Creed (which honestly looks pretty good from the trailers, IMO), I'm going to be re-watching all of the Rocky movies on Netflix, except for Rocky Balboa which isn't on Netflix for some reason. If I can find that movie, though, then I'll watch that too.

From my recollection, the first two movies are legit good, the next two are extremely cheesy fun, and the fifth film is just bad. But, I'll see if I feel any different about any of them after my series re-watch.

[gunswordfist]

Backwards ass Netflix. I'd almost think they'd have none of the older flicks available and just Balboa if any of their madness actually made sense.

[Avaitor]

I've only seen the first and Balboa, but I quite like both.

I've never felt too compelled to watch the others, aside from maybe 2.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I re-watched the first Rocky and The Sixth Sense. I'll talk about both later: I'll wait until I re-watch all of the other Rocky movies and talk about each of them at one time, and I already have The Sixth Sense as one of my 31NOH picks.

That said, I really have to say that it's amazing how far off the mark M. Night fell after just two or three films. The Sixth Sense is a suspense masterpiece, IMO. It combines excellent acting, writing, and directing, and don't forget that it even got nominated for Best Picture. Even re-watching it now, it still holds up so well. How the guy who made this went on to make The Happening, The Last Airbender, and After Earth is beyond me.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Long story short, he got full of himself.

After Signs, when he was writing Lady in the Water, his ego got out of control which lead to him splitting from Disney. I had posted a link a while back about how he even went to an exec's kid's birthday party to argue about notes. Starting from Lady in the Water on, he refused to listen to any notes or criticisms, did whatever he wanted, and got worse and worse to deal with even as his films got worse and worse. It shows considering the tepid reaction to The Village did nothing to change his habits.

It's a real shame, because I still think his first three films are great, but it obviously was not due to him alone and, like George Lucas, he refuses to admit that he isn't as great as he is without help from a lot of talented people.

Until he either has an epiphany or someone who produces his films puts their foot down, he won't be back to making good films any time soon.

[gunswordfist]

It's a good thing I watched Unbreakable at least 5 years after his fall. I would be saying he could do anything if I didn't know better. 

[Avaitor]

There's supposed to be a great book about the production of Lady in the Lake. I need to pick that up.

[talonmalon333]

Last night, I saw the horror movie titled May. It's interesting in that it gives you an idea of what will happen eventually (and that's not a spoiler, as this is literally shown early on), and after that, is a slow build. It works well.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I finally got around to re-watching the first three Mission: Impossible movies. My opinions on them are generally the same as before, but I do think that it's worth noting a few things:

Mission: Impossible- It still holds up, but more so for it's brilliant first and third-acts, as well as its excellent set-piece moments, with the security vault heist still being the most iconic scene in the entire franchise. The second act, however, really drags, IMO, and the plot also makes no sense if you actually try to stop and think about it. To be fair, though, none of these movies have particularly exceptional stories to tell.

Mission: Impossible 2- I'm a big fan of John Woo, but this film is one of his weaker efforts. That isn't entirely his fault, as the script (which he didn't write) is incredibly bland as is. What I will say is that even a worse John Woo movie still has tons of great style and is beautifully shot, and this film is no exception. That said, the over-abundance of style here doesn't mesh well with the rest of the MI franchise, and the movie takes itself way too seriously to the point of being outright silly....though, in an odd way, that gives it a unique sort of charm that at least makes it worth one watch, if nothing else. It makes for a poor MI movie, but is at least more entertaining than your typical Hollywood action flick, even if for the wrong reasons.

Mission: Impossible 3- I'll give this one a little bit more credit than I did before. It's certainly very well-paced and never has a dull moment. And as always, Philip Seymour Hoffman turns in an outstanding performance, and makes for a memorable villain in this movie, which is easily its best feature. That said, the movie again suffers from a lack of substance, and J. J. Abrams' s erratic camerawork, shaky-cam, and meaningless lense-flair is annoying to put up with. If you can look past that stuff, though, it's a pretty entertaining action movie.

So, it's an uneven trilogy in terms of quality, but still mostly worthwhile for what it is. That said, Ghost Protocol and Rogue Nation blow all of them out of the water. Those movies breathed new life into this franchise, and elevated these from decent popcorn-flicks into flat-out great spy/action movies.

Next time that I get a chance, I'll probably check out the original 60's TV series.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I just saw Spectre. It's really fun if you enjoy the classic Bond-formula for what it is, silliness and all. That isn't to say that it's not a film to be taken seriously, but rather that it's a lot more action-oriented and light-hearted in tone than the previous Daniel Craig movies have been.

That may, however, also be a big problem for people who really loved the darker tone and trope-subverting nature of this film's predecessors. I absolutely love Casino Royale and Skyfall, but I could look past that and still enjoy this movie for what it tries to be, which is not like those movies. As a result, I don't find it to be anywhere near as good as those two, but as a Bond film it's still very entertaining and better than a lot of the other ones (especially Quantum of Solace), so I do feel that critics are being a little too hard on this movie. Had this come out right after the end of the Pierce Brosnan-era, the reception would have been more favorable. Following two well-beloved classics, it was just bound to disappoint a lot of people, so it's important to go into it with the right expectations.

Having said all of that, of the big three spy movies this year, while all were good, IMO, I'd rank them like this:

1. Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation; This just destroyed the competition this year, IMO, and it's not even my favorite in the series (though it comes close). It nailed everything from the characters, to the pacing, to the stunts. This and Ghost Protocol have really elevated this franchise to new heights.

2. Kingsman: The Secret Service; This was a great introduction to a potential new franchise. About the only things that hold it back for me are the fairly predictable nature of the plot and some questionable writing choices, but most of that only amounts to nit-picks for me. I love the sense of humor of this movie, and the main character is refreshingly relatable.

3. Spectre; As I just said, it's a ton of fun, but unfortunately is overshadowed by two far superior Bond-films, and even comparing it just to this year's competition, it basically has a similar plot to Rogue Nation, except that movie did it even better, IMO.

[Avaitor]

I wonder where Spy would rank here if you get the chance to see it.

I'll get to Spectre this weekend, when I get home. I'm also going to try to see The Martian, and possibly Bridge of Spies. We have cheap tickets here.

[Avaitor]

A friend of mine has been participating in a local Rocky Horror production, and this weekend she got the one role she was dreaming to do for it- Magenta. As such, I decided to go to show her my support.

I've only done Rocky Horror once before, when I was 15 and went with a friend and his mom, and wasn't impressed then. Now, I get the appeal of the camp, and this probably won't be my last time seeing this troupe. Especially if she gets to play Magenta again, since she was great!

[Avaitor]

I only paid for one of them, but I finally got to see The Good Dinosaur and Spectre tonight.

I'll edit my ongoing 2015 post with more detail about these later, but I think that they're both pretty good, but not great. Good Dinosaur is decidedly a little less "adult" and a lot less original than Pixar's normal stuff, which is probably why it hasn't resonated as well as Inside Out has, but it's still pretty entertaining. And Spectre is a more traditional Bond, given how big Skyfall felt, but it's still good Bond all around. Christoph Waltz and Lea Seydoux do a great job as the main villain and Bond girl, and Ralph Fiennes increasingly finds his voice as M as it goes.

But yeah, you can kind of see how tired Craig is becoming of the character.