What was the last film you watched?

[Seaviewer]

Mary Poppins Returns (2018)
I'm only now catching up with this. In a word, excellent. It obviously can't recapture that sense of newness, but it has just the right combination the familiar and unexpected.
Like the first one, many of the incidents are drawn from the books, but set against a new plot, but one which also ties into the first one. Absent characters are honoured, and the new ones introduced logically - if logic is something that is required with Mary Poppins.
And I do believe that Emily Blunt is closer to the Mary Poppins of the books. She has a haughtiness that Julie Andrews never quite achieved. "Spoonful of Sugar" might be her motto but the Poppins of the books is not that sweet.

 

[Angela Channing]

Ghosted (2023)

The film is part romcom and part action adventure but never quite hit the mark in either of these 2 genres. It stars Chris Evans and Ana de Armas as Cole and Sadie, two strangers who meet at a farmers' market and later go on a date which extends into them spending the night together. The next morning they part ways. Cole tries to contact her over the next few days by sending her numerous text messages but she ghosts him and he can't understand why. By a contrivance that only seems to happen in romcoms, during the date, she looked after something of his in her handbag which contained a tracker from which Cole is able to determine that she is now in London. He decided to fly there to meet her. While there, he discovers that Sadie is actually a secret agent on a mission and she makes use of his presents to help her stop a rogue French spy from unleashing a deadly bio-weapon.

The film is ok but not great. It's main saving grace is the performance of Ana de Armas who brings charm and energy to her role, making her totally unbelievable character likable and sympathetic. Chris Evans on the other hand is bland and one dimensional but that probably has as much to do with how his character is written it has to do with his performance.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Kill List (2012)



Those who live by the sword....
Soul-suckingly grim and gritty and the only way to enjoy it is to allow yourself to be defeated, and that's without considering the on-screen violence.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Dead In A Week (Or Your Money Back) (2018)

It's a little surprising to find that a black comedy about botched suicide is endorsed by The Samaritans, but there you go.

Mixed feelings about the film. It's kind of dark and kind of funny but I feel it could have been significantly more of both. Most of the performers are very good (I was less sure of the girlfriend whose delivery felt a bit too knowing and American), but the low budget production values didn't help it achieve its full glory.

There are far worse ways to assassinate an hour and a half. But, frankly, there are also better. I'd recommend this so long as expectations are kept in check.

 

[Angela Channing]

Invitation To a Murder (2023)

Six seemingly unconnected people get invited by a billionaire to a remote island. While there, as the title of the film suggests, someone gets murdered. In order to identify the killer, they must work out what it the connection between them and why they were invited to the island in the first place.

This feels a bit like a update Agatha Christie story and its main character, Miranda, is like a young Miss Marple, a civilian who likes playing detective. The film feel a little low budget and I haven't seen any of the actors in anything previously. The plot has way too many plot holes, not least why they would accept the invitation from a complete stranger in the first place. It's all nonsense but moderately entertaining nonsense.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The Secret Life Of Pets (2016)

Not exactly the most challenging film I've watched, but it really hit the spot for a laugh a minute. The animators did a great job of capturing characteristics that pet owners will recognise and connect with.

Surprisingly for an animated film, this also felt like a love letter to New York and got across the energy and vibrance of the big city as well as the warm heart of gentrification with the Brooklyn scenes. I've rarely felt any desire to visit New York, but this film gave me just that.

​

This feels a bit like a update Agatha Christie story

Yes, as I read your first paragraph describing the film it immediately made me think of And Then There Were None (with a bit of Christie satire Murder By Death thrown in).

I'm quite fond of moderately entertaining nonsense, so I wouldn't rule out watching this one.

 

[Angela Channing]

The Madness of King George (1994)

I always have a fascination of film posters and the scene depicted this one doesn't appear in the film, it is an amalgam of 2 different scenes.

I previously had no interest in ever watching this film but recently I watched the Netflix series Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story which I thought was excellent and because this film was about part of the same story, but from a different perspective, I was interested to see how this 30 year old film covered the events.

In this film, King George III (played by Nigel Hawthorne) is getting old and starting to show signs of mental health deteriorataion, but nobody really knows what's going on since it's 1788 and they don't understand mental illness very well. The doctors try to treat him with the best methods they have at the time, but nothing seems to work. Meanwhile, Queen Charlotte (played by Helen Mirren) and Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger (played by Julian Wadham) are trying to stop the king's enemies, led by the Prince of Wales (played by Rupert Everett), from taking over the throne.

It's not always fair to compare different productions but I didn't like this anywhere as much as I like the Netflix series. This film focussed almost entirely on the George's mental health (I guess the clue is in its title) so there was a lot of ranting, raving and chaotic running around from him which I felt never gave the character enough depth. In contrast, in the series Queen Charlotte there was greater emphasis on how the mental illness affected the King's relationship with those around him which allowed the character to have more light and shade, and consequently, more interest. It was still a good film with some top notch performances.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Grace and Goliath (2018)

I watched this one on a whim when glancing at the description and seeing that it was set in Belfast. Irish films have often appealed to me for their grit and frank humour. I wouldn't really put this one in that same league. It's mostly bland and predictable and the humour misses for me as often as it hits, being so broad and clunky that it only needs the "Ba-Bum-Tsssshhh" to tell us how funny the powers that be think it is. Likewise, the few twists can be seen coming from miles away.

Not that it's unpleasant to watch. I appreciate having a cast of mostly - to me at least - unknowns, and it's such a mosaic of unlikely relationships that it works on curiosity value alone. Even the performances that aren't great are at least endearing (the two fat comic relief neighbours are given little enough screen time that they never wear out their welcome). It's good news/bad news with the child actors. The two boys do a nice job with their arc. The girl is far too nauseatingly cutesy-wutesy for my taste (there's nothing less cute than a kid who is trying to be cute).

Unfortunately, much of the final act rides on the viewer being invested in the young girl's adorability, and it gets into some seriously saccharine mawkish territory with the threat that she may die (I may or may not have tutted out loud when they started singing Amazing Grace at her bedside). What the film lacks is a real edge, which means it's understood that they'd never be bold enough to kill off a kid. All of which takes away any sense of jeopardy and, ultimately, purpose.

There's some good stuff, and I particularly liked the sense of community. But by the end everything just felt a bit too neatly wrapped and cosy.





​

It's not always fair to compare different productions but I didn't like this anywhere as much as I like the Netflix series.

My benchmark for this film was The King's Speech, since I have a DVD of that film which packaged The Madness Of King George as a special bonus. While it felt inferior to The King's Speech, I do remember feeling it felt a little unfair of me to be comparing them and that it would probably do better taken on its own merits since it had some good performances.

I just had a look back to see what I wrote about it in this thread after watching it in 2017, but it turns out I'd written nothing. Perhaps that's a statement in itself. But equally, I'd also like to re-watch it in isolation now that I have nothing against which to directly compare it.

 

[Angela Channing]

My benchmark for this film was The King's Speech, since I have a DVD of that film which packaged The Madness Of King George as a special bonus. While it felt inferior to The King's Speech, I do remember feeling it felt a little unfair of me to be comparing them and that it would probably do better taken on its own merits since it had some good performances.

I just had a look back to see what I wrote about it in this thread after watching it in 2017, but it turns out I'd written nothing. Perhaps that's a statement in itself. But equally, I'd also like to re-watch it in isolation now that I have nothing against which to directly compare it.

I did wonder if I saw The Madness of King George without having watched Queen Charlotte first if I would have been even more critical of it. There were things in the film which I didn't entirely like but I was more charitable about because I felt my opinion was coloured by comparing it to the Netflix series. For example, I felt on a few occasions that Nigel Hawthorne was being a bit hammy in how he was running around and shouting in a very in your face, unsubtle portrayal of mental illness. I did wonder whether he had played the role on stage and was repeating his theatrical performance which needed to be bigger and bolder to fill a theatre, or maybe that was what the script demanded because of its theatrical origins. I probably wouldn't have made that observation had I not seen Queen Charlotte in which the mental health of the king was portrayed in a much more sympathetic and sensitive way which made him far more likeable and, in my opinion, more believable. So although I said it's not always fair to compare different productions, it's sometimes interesting to do so.

I never thought about it before but there are themes in The Madness of King George and The King's Speech that are similar so I can see why both films would be packaged together and I agree that The King's Speech is the better film.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I felt on a few occasions that Nigel Hawthorne was being a bit hammy in how he was running around and shouting in a very in your face, unsubtle portrayal of mental illness. I did wonder whether he had played the role on stage and was repeating his theatrical performance which needed to be bigger and bolder to fill a theatre, or maybe that was what the script demanded because of its theatrical origins.

Looking it up, Nigel had appeared in the stage play The Madness Of George III* before playing the same part in the film adaption, so I wouldn't be surprised if both were true.

It was a big performance, and the entire film feels theatrical which I suppose I factored in when I watched. But I also took the symptoms of his mental illness (the nature of which, as I remember, wasn't too specific in the film) at face value and assumed there was at least some accuracy in it. It's interesting to see it's treated quite differently in the Netflix series.



* Something that made me smile was the reason for the title change. It was partly because the director felt it important to stress royalty to the intended international audience by having the word "King" in the title, but also partly because there was concern that Americans might see the title "The Madness Of George III" and be put off watching thinking it was a sequel and they'd missed the first two films.

There were things in the film which I didn't entirely like but I was more charitable about because I felt my opinion was coloured by comparing it to the Netflix series.

I probably wouldn't have made that observation had I not seen Queen Charlotte in which the mental health of the king was portrayed in a much more sympathetic and sensitive way which made him far more likeable and, in my opinion, more believable. So although I said it's not always fair to compare different productions, it's sometimes interesting to do so.

Good point. And I suppose each version comes with its own balance of researched historical accuracy and dramatic licence.

 

[Angela Channing]

Prom Pact (2023)

I couldn't get a more different film from the last one I watched which was a critically acclaimed, multi Oscar nominated period drama. Prom Pact is a light romcom set in a high school which is probably aimed primarily at girls and young women but I ended up liking it way more than I expected.

Prom Pact is a Disney movie that follows Mandy, a feminist who dreams of going to Harvard University, and her best friend Ben, who is awkward around other people. They decide to go to prom together as friends, but things get complicated when Mandy tries to befriend Graham, the son of a US senator, to get him to ask his father to write her a reference. Along the way, Mandy learns that there is more to life than getting into her dream university, and that love, friends and loyalty can be more important.

It's all cliched romcom stuff but a lot of fun.

 

[supermanfan]

The og amitty vill horror

 

[Mel O'Drama]

E. T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)

For my entire adult life I've been meaning to re-watch this, but never got round to it until last night. All these years later it's still a beautiful, magical film.

A couple of things in particular struck me about it last night.

First was the choice to make it a kids' adventure by showing things almost entirely from their POV. For the first three quarters of the film the only adult face we see is that of Mary. All other adults are either shown from waist down (like the teacher during the frog dissection scene) or completely covered up (the hazmat suit wearing agents who invade the family home) or in the shadows or in extreme long shot. This doesn't shift until Keys arrives and E.T. is no longer just the kids secret. This choice never registered with me as a child, but it leapt out at me last night.

Secondly, I was surprised at how aesthetically dark it is. Many of the scenes take place at night, in shade or in darkened rooms. This all gives the film an air of mystery and secrecy.

Steven Spielberg always presents suburbia in an interesting way and I love the way it's done here. The juxtaposition of the newly broken family in the house which is the image of middle class comfort works well. There's also a big heart and a great deal of emotional intelligence (at one point it occurred to me that if Knots Landing had done an alien storyline, this is pretty much what we'd have got). Themes of grief and loss and trust are all present and correct.

I also noticed (for the first time) a couple of familiar Spielberg techniques used in this film... most notably the dolly zoom:

And an axial cut just before the flying sequence (at 1:05 here):

For all the limitations of the time with SFX, E. T. himself is as effective as ever. He has such a brilliantly expressive face that every look is filled with meaning.​

 

[supermanfan]

Backdraft

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The Breakfast Club (1985)

​

This one's been on my radar for quite some time. I know it's a favourite of our @Ome's which is a good enough reason to delve into this one.

I'm always intrigued by a film that draws in different opinions...

The Breakfast Club - was probably a ground breaking film in the 1980s but looks a bit dated now.

I've never liked THE BREAKFAST CLUB and I'm not sure I've ever watched it in its entirety.

I used to love THE BREAKFAST CLUB, but I won't watch it anymore because the language is too rough.

I love " The Breakfast Club" it is my favourite. I still watch it from time to time.

Another reason for me to watch!


Going into this one, I knew it was something of a cult Eighties favourite and a Brat Pack film (of which I don't believe I've seen any, with the possible exception of portions of Weird Science), so that felt exciting. I also knew it was a John Hughes film which excited me less since the JH projects I've seen in part or full (Ferris Bueller; Home Alone; National Lampoon's Something Or Other) haven't done anything for me.

Like Fame (which I love) and American Graffiti (which I may also never have seen), this conjures up an image of hormonal teens thrust into an intense situation leading to deep discussions and possibly high emotions. I craved a journey into that world, and to be reminded of some of the extremes of feeling that come with being in one's late teens.

There's lots about this film that I loved. The unapologetically ugly way the characters act. The conflict. The anger. In particular I appreciated the lengthy, real-time, verbose scenes which gave a very character-driven piece. And the music, of course.

It missed the mark for me slightly when it came to getting me to feel something. It didn't successfully get me to empathise with the kids and their feelings. In fact I found myself watching their tearful confessions with almost complete objectivity. I could see that the heart was there, but personally I never quite got to it.

If there's a reason for this besides John Hughes's direction, I'd put it down to where I am in my life having this first watch. I'm old and jaded and cynical. I suspect if I'd first watched this as a teenager or even twenty-something when my heart was more open and my hormones exposed it would have been a much more emotional and meaningful experience. Without the benefit of any kind of nostalgia, I probably didn't get the best from the film.

That said, it was a good film with great performances from the ensemble. I'm really glad I finally watched it, and I can see what all the fuss is about (even if it's mostly objectively). I'd certainly be open to watching more Brat Pack/John Hughes films at some point.

 

[Angela Channing]

If there's a reason for this besides John Hughes's direction, I'd put it down to where I am in my life having this first watch. I'm old and jaded and cynical. I suspect if I'd first watched this as a teenager or even twenty-something when my heart was more open and my hormones exposed it would have been a much more emotional and meaningful experience. Without the benefit of any kind of nostalgia, I probably didn't get the best from the film.

This got me thinking. When I described the film is being a bit dated, maybe I was wrong and the film is still contemporary and relevant, but it's me that's dated!

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Strictly Ballroom (1992)

I've been curious about this one for a long time. Not being a fan of musicals or dancing films I struggled to get beyond the title and poster back in the day. I also hesitated upon realising this is a Bad Luhrmann film. For some reason I've never wanted to watch any of his films since they appear to be too heavily stylised and gaudy and I feared they might be style over substance.

But I also love Aussie humour and I know that there were some great Australian films coming out around this time (Priscilla's great, and Muriel's Wedding would be a Top Ten film of mine). I didn't want to miss out.

I felt a little edgy watching the first ten or fifteen minutes where all the dialogue came in time with rhythms of the various dances and there were various documentary style "talking to camera" scenes cutting away to flashbacks of the story. But once the story was underway and people started speaking normally I breathed a sigh of relief and enjoyed it.

As it turns out, I loved this film. The humour was great. The dancing was energetic and accessible. The story was compelling - its familiar ground a tribute to the likes of Grease, Dirty Dancing and West Side Story but presented in a creative and original way. And, yes, Baz Luhrmann's incredible composition made this the visual equivalent of feasting on an expensive box of chocolates.

Familiar faces included Muriel Heslop's future father (sporting Trump-esque hair) and even stiff old Nick Benson from Sons And Daughters as a glamorous dancing champ.

I'm still no fan of dancing films, but this is a definite exception to the rule.

 

[Angela Channing]

Paint (2023)

I felt a bit cheated by this film or maybe I should have read a description of the film before watching it. The poster shows Owen Wilson wearing a permed wig and dressed like Bob Ross so I thought this was going to be a biopic about the star of the TV series The Joy of Painting but instead it's a lame comedy about a character called Carl Nargle who clearly was inspired by, but not based on, Bob Ross.

Carl Nargle, a television painter on a public service broadcaster who faces competition from a younger and more talented artist named Ambrosia. The film follows Carl's attempts to reclaim his fame while navigating his crumbling relationship with his partner and a affair with a groupie. For a comedy it was very short on laughs and the weak plot was so painfully slow it was like watching paint dry. I should have given this film the brush off.

 

[Angela Channing]

AIR (2023)

It’s very seldom I leave the movie theatre and am left speechless. As an avid sports fan, I have to say that this may very well be the best sports movie I’ve ever seen. The story of how a struggling shoe company called NIKE put it all on the line and all in the hands of an 18 year old rookie named Michael Jordan is quite intriguing. It’s an inspiring film, with terrific acting and some well placed, but not overdone, humor. This movie made me a little emotional I have to admit. If you grew up in the 80s like I did it’s a nice walk down nostalgia lane.

@Angela Channing I have a feeling you will be seeing this movie soon? I patiently await your review.

Well, I finally got around to watching.

Air (2023)

A film about a training shoe on paper sounds a bit dry but this film is anything but that. In fact it's an exciting and feels a bit like a thriller in it's pacing and intrigue. It really is superbly made considering it is a just film about a shoe and Ben Affleck did a fantastic job in directing this. He far better behind the camera than he is in front of it (Batman vs Superman anyone?)

More broadly the film is the story of how struggling sportswear company Nike signed a young and upcoming basketball player called Michael Jordan and created the Air Jordan basketball shoe. The major sportwear shoe brands (Adidas, Converse and Nike) all have identified Michael Jordan as the player they most want sign to help boost their shoe sales. Michael Jordan is already favouring Adidas but Nike desperately need to sign him so they can become a genuine rival to the bigger sportswear brands. Nike can't compete with money so they have to be more creative in how they sign the basketball star.

It's the tension and the rivalry between the companies that make this film so compelling. It draws you in and holds you attention until the very end. The only thing I didn't like was the decision not to show Michael Jordan. Every time he was on screen it was brief, shot from a distance or he had his back to the camera and sometimes all three. I think he only said one word in the entire film which was "hello" on the other end of a phone. How can you make a film about Michael Jordan and not have Michael Jordan in it? Ben Affleck said it was because Michael Jordan is so well known no one could do him justice. Whatever the reason, this decision made the scenes with him feel like they didn't have the energy they could have had. However, that's a minor gripe for what was a very good film.

 

[Seaviewer]

Bye Bye Birdie (1963)
Musical lampooning the hysteria surrounding Elvis Presley's induction into the army.
This is one of those films I can watch over and over.
Apparently, the screenplay by Irving Brecher diverges quite markedly from its Broadway source so the film is unloved by purists.
Brecher was also wrote two the Marx Brothers' movies and some of the dialogue and wacky situations would not be out of place there - which may be why it appeals to me so much.