• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Last Movie(s) You Watched... (quick one or two sentence reviews)

While keeping with many aspects typical of the era, I would argue that there is a good bit of grey to Red River. Wayne's character for one is definitely not of the traditional heroic type, supposedly it was this performance that led John Ford to proclaim that he didn't know until then that his to-be frequent lead could actually act!
Fair, but it's all kind of relative, isn't it? Compare for example to High Noon, which some say is the first revisionist Western. Jimmy Stewart spends most of the film avoiding fighting and running around desperately begging for help. Wayne hated it so much, he called it "un-American". So, stack Red River up next to that and maybe the division becomes clearer.
 
Fair, but it's all kind of relative, isn't it? Compare for example to High Noon, which some say is the first revisionist Western. Jimmy Stewart spends most of the film avoiding fighting and running around desperately begging for help. Wayne hated it so much, he called it "un-American". So, stack Red River up next to that and maybe the division becomes clearer.
That certainly works as one interpretation, but conversely you could also say that High Noon is more traditional in the sense that Will Kane (Gary Cooper I believe) is a very clear cut "good guy" whereas Thomas Dunson's morals are more murky.

As with many things though, I think it can be very difficult to have hard boundaries when trying to categorise films into genres and sub-genres, traits of certain works often perceived as game-changing frequently turning up in earlier ones, though maybe not all at the same time.
 
Highlander (1986)

Is it a masterpiece? No. Is it a lot of damn fun? You bet! I get why the film was panned by critics at the time, but there's no way I can watch a film about a bunch of ancient Scots trying to decapitate each other with swords in the 1980s to a Queen soundtrack without grinning from ear to ear. I'm curious if a fanedit would improve this one. Maybe I'll give it a try just for the hell of it.
 
^Chad Stahelski is helming the remake, and wants it to be a series, either in film or TV. I'm beyond stoked.
 
As with many things though, I think it can be very difficult to have hard boundaries
I'm not really an "everything is subjective" guy. I'm happy to go along with popular consensus in the case of Westerns, so that's what I wrote above. But hey, Red River is your baby, if you want to fight the good fight and push at the definitions of all these things, be my guest. In the context of the original post, somebody who thinks they don't much like the genre (daedal), I don't think all these nuances are going to make a huge difference though.
 
^Chad Stahelski is helming the remake, and wants it to be a series, either in film or TV. I'm beyond stoked.

I'm not. I'm fatigued from so many inferior remakes lately that the only way for me to be even remotely interested anymore is if it has something interesting to offer. The just-released trailer for the remake of Road House is a rare exception that did that for me. I'm not so optimistic about Highlander. I hope the director of John Wick has something special in mind, but for now, my opinion is...

There Can Be Only One Highlander GIF
 
The King and the Mockingbird

Eh, it starts off fine, pretty good even, but once the protagonists get captured the pacing just grinds to a halt and never recovers. The weirdest part is how most of it feels like a dialog-free film but then on rare occasions characters speak and it's rather jarring, with the exception of the loudmouthed mockingbird and blind guy.
 
Last edited:
Anatomy of a Fall. I loved this movie. It’s a bit overlong, but that is a minor gripe. At first I thought we were dealing with a simple procedural/courtroom drama. But the way the film starts to explore the similarities between the cases presented in court to the fictions of writers and how for every inch of “truth” or “fact” there is a mountain of biased, isolated, one-sided perspective filling in the blanks. The titular fall is also not just the body that fell from the window; this is also a very compelling look at how relationships fall. More like dominoes here than a dramatic single fall. And it’s all done so beautifully without a hint of melodrama. The writers and director trust the audience implicitly. A wonderful movie.
 
You must be a mathematician then!
Nope, just not a philosopher.

I'm not. I'm fatigued from so many inferior remakes lately that the only way for me to be even remotely interested anymore is if it has something interesting to offer.
Yeah, hence my excitement. I mean, there were what, 5 Highlander sequels? Plus animated ones? It's a brand that's going to get new content, like it or not. So having the best working martial arts director on board is definitely offering something significantly more interesting than any previous film. At least in my book.
 
Nope, just not a philosopher.
To quote two representatives of The Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries and other Professional Thinking Persons...

Majikthise: "We are philosophers."

Vroomfondel: "Or we may not be!"

and

Vroomfondel: "What we demand is solid facts!"

Majikthise: "No we don't, that's precisely what we don't demand."

Vroomfondel: "Oh. We don't demand solid facts, what we demand is a total absence of solid facts!"
 
Yeah, hence my excitement. I mean, there were what, 5 Highlander sequels? Plus animated ones? It's a brand that's going to get new content, like it or not. So having the best working martial arts director on board is definitely offering something significantly more interesting than any previous film. At least in my book.

Or how about just not remaking it or throwing sequels at it at all? Is that too hard to imagine? And there are plenty of talented filmmakers who have tried to recapture the magic of the original films and failed at it. Look at the talents behind many of the Disney live-action remakes that have come out, and how even they couldn't save them. I don't have enough faith in Stahelski. Period.

And just because it's inevitable for this to get remade doesn't mean it should be celebrated. To paraphrase a man named Ian Malcolm, they're so preoccupied about whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.
 
I love the idea of Highlander, but despise the original film. I've only seen a couple episodes of the show, but I get the feeling that it is probably the definitive iteration currently. If we're really getting a remake, I welcome it with open arms, it can't possibly be worse than the previous movies (I do love the second film, but that doesn't matter right now).
That being said, I know that I'm in the minority with my opinions of the original film. If you're able to get more out of it than I was, I'm happy for you. I can respect being weary of a remake to a film that you're passionate about.
 
I watched some of the newish Jean Pierre Jeunet Netflix movie, BigBug. Unlike most of his films, to me this one was NOT great, even in the original French with subtitles. The Netflix subbing is always awful but I don't think it was the problem. A lot of characters are more cringe than charming or funny. It's also really cheap, the entire film takes place in the one house, and occasionally you see shots of the digitally rendered neighborhood. I think I fell asleep before it was over. I'll probably try again to finish it sometime.
 
The Organization (1971)
The 3rd and final film in Sidney Poitier's "Mr. Tibbs" trilogy. Doesn't have the class of In The Heat Of The Night, nor the Blaxploitation fun of They Call Me Mister Tibbs!, this film is instead a mostly forgettable TV-crime film.

Street Fight (2005)
Oscar-nominated doc about the Newark mayoral election that made Corey Booker a big name in US politics. Depressingly revealing in terms of how much corruption is readily apparent at the highest levels of US politics.

Daughters of the Dust (1991)

If people know of this film, it's as the first film directed by a Black woman to get US theatrical release. That doesn't mean it's particularly good. A pretty original film that is worth watching for Sight & Sound types, but probably won't hold the interest of people looking for a real story or deep characters.
 
Upgrade 2018 - been on a cyberpunk fix and a buddy recommended this saying he thought it was cyberpunk. And I liked it - doesn’t have all the elements of “cyberpunk” but I think my buddy was right. A little distracting that the main actor looks a lot like a more famous actor. I think a lot of the special effects/gore were done practical and it looks really cool. Like a lot of sci fi movies it turns into action/chase movie but whatever I had fun.
 
KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON

Disappointing.

The movie starts out so incredibly strong, and after the creative misstep of The Irishman, it really felt like Scorsese was back at the top of his game. But then the Third Act happens, the FBI arrive and the pacing and narrative completely falls apart for me.

The movie suddenly tries to turn DiCaprio into a sympathetic villain, which does not work at all. You also realize the movie has nothing new to say and is only using the Osage as a plot device. And then there is the Radio Play ending.... I dunno... it was a Big Swing that struck out badly for me.

Like most Scorsese films it is a gorgeous looking movie with an amazing score and an outstanding cast; with DiNero perhaps playing the most evil character of his career. The story is overstuffed with potential but it widely misses it's mark in the climax.
 
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Used to watch this on VHS all the time growing up. Saw the 85th anniversary screening today and it was a spectacle on the big screen. A truly timeless masterpiece. In retrospect the editing was way ahead of its time!
 
Ip Man - I think this is my first real non-American martial arts film. I really enjoyed it. I find myself curious about the real history behind it, it occured to me that the conflict depicted between Japan and China is something that I never learned about in school. I kinda want to check out more stuff with Donnie Yen, and I'll definitely seek out the sequels to this at some point.
 
Ip Man 2 - This was also really enjoyable! I think overall I prefer the first film, but the fights here felt bigger and more extravagant, it was awesome to watch. I really hope the series continues to rock.
 
Back
Top Bottom