What was the last film you watched?

[Angela Channing]

Three Wise Men and a Baby (2022)

A reworking of the French film Trois Hommes et Un Couffin (1985) which was reasonably well remade by Hollywood as Three Men and a Baby (1987) but lack the charm and humour of both of those films.

Christmas film cliché watch:

• Lead characters are destined to be with someone but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• The wider community come together to contribute to a Christmas event.
• Lead male character rescues woman

The film differs from the original in that the three men are brothers who do not get on with each other. One brother is a fireman and in the run up to Christmas someone leaves a baby with a note asking that he looks after the child. Circumstances mean the brothers have to work together to do this and they bond over the child care.

Not a terrible film but not a patch on the original.

 

[Angela Channing]

The 12 Days of Christmas Eve (2022)

Unusually, even though this film is a reworking of familiar stories it's not really riddled with the usual Christmas film clichés but it does have some:

• Family business is in trouble.
• Boss of business too focused on profits to have any Christmas cheer.
• Daughter is estranged from father.

The film is a combination of Groundhog Day and A Christmas Carol. Kelsey Grammar plays Brian, the owner and CEO of a large electrical repair company who dies in a car crash on Christmas Eve. Santa appears to him and gives him the chance to relive the day up to 12 times during which he must prove he understands the true meaning of Christmas. To achieve this he realises he has to repair his relationships with his family, friends and employees and as each day is relived, he learns from his experiences and gradually morphs from a bad-tempered, mean-spirited individual to a kindly and generous man. Kelsey Grammar is very watchable in the lead role. There are some nice moments of humour and the film was quite good, although quite predictable at the same time.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Probably my least favourite Christmas film I've seen this year.

And yet the film title looks so intriguing.
Seriously, what's going on here? Why is our highly esteemed World Cup of Soaps moderator watching all these super-lame christmas movies?
To quote the worst line from Nicole Kidman's acting career: "what....have....they....done...to you?"

Scuttle it, scuttle it!

The big plot twists are predictable (well, they are in 2022) but the fun part is that the picture-perfect Cutlers are indirectly involved. It's almost a National Lampoon's Niagara honeymoon.
With characters constantly walking in and out of cabins and shops it also has a sense of a whodunnit, as in: where was he or she at this or that particular time?
That relentless force of nature that's almost never out of sight even adds a bit of "disaster movie" to it. The on-screen murder looks surprisingly unsettling.

Then there's the older but exhaustingly energetic couple - Mr. Kettering calls Ray Cutler's wife "Polly-O". Incidentally, Jean Peters reminded me of Lara Flynn Boyle and the strange thing is that I noticed that at the time I was comparing Marilyn Monroe's character to Twin Peak's Audrey Horne.
NIAGARA is entertaining from start to finish.

Speaking of disaster movies...

Weeeeh...what shall I say about this one?
The special effects are awesome but when "it" happens....it doesn't stop! Did I really need to see every tree and building being destroyed?
There are no fabulous guest stars and I disliked every character in this film, especially the kids and their "ain't I mature for my age?" antics.

Additionally....

If someone would tell me what SHREK is all about then I'd probably run for hills (or volcano, for that matter).
But all that classics-mixed-with-contemporary that didn't work for me in the Disney stories (starting with the renaissance films) works brilliantly in SHREK 2.
I assume that one of the reasons is that it's naughtier, which allows them to pick the fun contemporary stuff.
But the humour is in so many details and film fragments, blink and you'll miss it. All the more reason to watch it again.

Of course I'm too old for the fart jokes but thankfully these are kept to a minimum and in a way they are related to the characters.
At some point in the story we can hear Eddie Murphy scream "police brutality, police brutality!" - I'm sure it's not too difficult to connect the dots here. I found it so daring and funny.
Puss in boots is fantastic, I also love his spin-off film. Or is it purr-off?
Everything I hate about MALEFICENT (and what's not to hate there?) looks great in the Shrek universe.
Fairy Godmother as a villainous Hollywood guru who happens to be the mother of the callous and narcissistic Prince Charming, Captain Hook as the local sea shanty singer and Pinocchio as a closeted femboy - these are all pretty interesting twists.
The mixed up world of Medieval and contemporary is over the top and yet strangely believable. Either way, none of it gets so much attention that it becomes annoying.
Before you've had the time to form an opinion, the story has already moved on to another scene.

I watched the first SHREK film on the back of it and I have to admit that it doesn't look very awesome. I'm glad that the sequel was my introduction to SHREK otherwise I may not have bothered.

 

[Angela Channing]

Seriously, what's going on here? Why is our highly esteemed World Cup of Soaps moderator watching all these super-lame christmas movies?

I recently listened to a great podcast series called Christmas Movies Wars about the battle for viewers primarily between the Hallmark and Lifetime channels but also when streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon joined in the fight. It covered a lot about their approach to production, their business plans, the strengths and weaknesses of their output and how they make popular films on a relatively small budget. I decided to watch some of this years Christmas films to give some context to some of the issues that the podcast raised.

The films weren't all "super-lame"; I thought 2 were really good (Your Christmas or Mine and This Is Christmas) and recommended for viewing during the festive season.

 

[Angela Channing]

Tar (2022)

This is a film in which Cate Blanchett plays Lydia Tar, a renowned music composer and conductor and her fall from grace. For large parts of the film I found the plot to be dull and was dominated by Tar in a succession of meetings talking about administrative issues around the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra for which she is its first female chief conductor. However, the film isn't boring at all, in fact it's riveting due to the phenomenal performance by Ms Blanchett. She is in every single scene in the film and involved in every piece of dialogue and completely dominates the screen. Her performance is so real and believable I had to do a Google search to see if Lydia Tar was a real person or not (she's fictional). She deserves every award she gets for this film and if she misses out on any it would be an injustice.

 

[Jimmy Todd]

View attachment 42240

ALIEN is even more frightening when you know what's going to happen, and the time it takes to build up to that Very Shocking Scene is almost nauseating.
But it isn't only suspenseful sci-fi horror, it's also a very beautiful space movie.
This was my second or maybe third re-watch but somehow I keep forgetting that Ash is a robot.

View attachment 42241

57 years later Ripley wakes up in an eighties movie: irritating characters, juvenile dialogue, ugly and sterile sets and props - and of course there's a kid in it. Is it Drew Barrymore? No, but it could have been.
Gone is the warm and organic atmosphere, this is "let's rock!" and showing more in flat lightening. I think even STARSHIP TROOPERS was more fun than this ALIEN sequel.
I had planned on watching the other sequels too but I think I'll pass.

INNER SANTUM (1948)

I loved both movies. The first is more science-fiction whereas I see the second one as an action movie set on space. What makes Aliens so exciting for me is Sigourney's performance. She's a great action hero.
I didn't care for the third one and despised the fourth. However, I actually liked Prometheus.

 

[Seaviewer]

I loved both movies. The first is more science-fiction whereas I see the second one as an action movie set on space. What makes Aliens so exciting for me is Sigourney's performance. She's a great action hero.

Yes, perhaps it's unfair to even compare the two since, despite being linked, they're really from different genres. Perhaps it just comes down to whether one prefers horror or action-adventure.

 

[Seaviewer]

Miracle on 34th Street (1947)

 

[Jimmy Todd]

Miracle on 34th Street (1947)

I love this movie! It could have been treacly or schmaltzy, but the performances elevate it. Edmund Gwen is perfect in his role. He deserved his Oscar. O'Hara, Payne, and Wood are wonderful, and there's even a cameo by the great Thelma Ritter

 

[Jimmy Todd]

Miracle on 34th Street (1947)

I love this movie! It could have been treacly or schmaltzy, but the performances elevate it. Edmund Gwen is perfect in his role. He deserved his Oscar. O'Hara, Payne, and Wood are wonderful, and there's even a cameo by the great Thelma Ritter

 

[Willie Oleson]

I decided to watch some of this years Christmas films to give some context to some of the issues that the podcast raised.

Ah ha, so it's more like a science project.



I had added all Daniel Craig/James Bond films to my Prime list although I wasn't in a hurry to watch them. However, since they're no longer available to stream for free after December 31 I figured it was now or never.

It's been a long time since I've watched James Bond (actually that's not true, I've rewatched From Russia With Love not so long ago) but I had almost forgotten how outrageous and over-the-top they can be.
The chase sequence that starts the story of Casino Royale is absolutely ridiculous, it's like Spider Man without his web-shooter, or Batman without his batarang.
And that's just the guy who's being chased by James Bond.

The first thing I liked was Judi Dench as M, and Mads Mikkelsen looks delightfully sinister.
James Bond himself is no longer the cheeky bon(d) vivant, he doesn't have much self control and basically he's become a DIE HARD's John McClane (or any other bloodthirsty action hero). Daniel Craig's got balls, he made that very clear. It sure was an interesting scene!
Another thing that has changed is the dialogue, it sounds quite interesting for a James Bond film and I'm glad that the cheesy banter was virtually absent.
Eva Green looks criminally gorgeous and there was something about her that made me think of Sarah Douglas.

It has some very suspenseful parts (and twis 'n turns) but many times I couldn't help laughing out loud. The sinking house! Self-CPR!
Why does it often look much funnier when they don't play it for laughs?
Roll on Quantum Of Solace.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Perhaps it just comes down to whether one prefers horror or action-adventure.

Hmm, for me it wasn't just the change of genre.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Christmas Eve (2015)

​

There were two surprising discoveries I made after watching this film that I'm glad I didn't know before watching.

Firstly, it is classed as a "comedy", which I found odd because it wasn't funny. It felt more like an overly earnest attempt at drama with a few attempts at funny moments that mostly fell flat.

Secondly, it appears to have been shown in cinemas. The thumbnail for the film on Prime looked very TV movie-ish, and this was borne out by the production values which suggested quite a tight budget. Indeed, I've watched many TV episodes which looked far more impressive than this.

Based on the little information I had ahead of watching, expectations were low, and with that starting point it was at best a serviceable time passer.

Other than Patrick Stewart I didn't know anyone else's name, though several faces were low key familiar and I was able to place a couple afterwards through some IMDb detective work.

Many of characters were played as rather one-dimensional caricatures - especially the muscle Mary and the two vacuous young women with squeaky voices (I had some vicarious embarrassment moments watching the blonde woman. The actress's energy and delivery suggested she thought what she was doing was really funny when it really wasn't).

Even those that weren't badly played were quite poorly written. The atheist was the militant, vocal type (which, to be fair, does exist). He is criticised (justly, given the way he's written), for wanting everyone to share his lack of faith. Then in the last act his redemption comes when he is forced to go against his own beliefs and pray with someone. Ugh.

And that was just one of many predictable arcs: There's the man who's just been sacked and is stuck in a lift with the very employer who just sacked him. Patrick Stewart essentially plays Ebenezer Scrooge (again) who goes from giving his workers a hard time on Christmas Eve to realising... well, you know how it goes. Most of his scenes are either soliloquies or interacting with faceless voices at the end of a phone line, which sounds wonderful but in reality they were quite lifeless and felt like a waste of his talent.

Many characters were given a "thing", perhaps in order to be able to single them out in a sea of faceless characters. In addition to Militant Atheist and Bodybuilder With The Sensitive Soul, there's Smart Guy. And Mr OCD. And the one who spends most of the film furiously chewing gum while delivering dialogue which is beyond annoying. I think it's meant to be annoying, but that doesn't really doesn't make much difference when one is suffering through such unpleasantly intrusive noise pollution in glorious surround sound.

The premise of most characters being stuck in different lifts across the city and forced to interact with either strangers or colleagues is a good one, particularly with New Yorkers having a reputation for avoiding eye contact and interaction with others (I've never visited so I have no idea how warranted that reputation is). It's a very intimate and theatrical idea that I can see playing out on a stage with minimal sets. The problem is that it ultimately feels like a play that hasn't translated well to film. And, static as it is, it feels a little like there are too many different characters, a good number of which aren't particularly interesting. This dilutes the film and makes it feel less intimate than it should.

In the last act, there's some attempt to tie some of the disparate characters in different lifts together by dropping certain connections into dialogue. These are a real opportunity for a few little intakes of breath from the viewer and the desire to watch a second time with these added new layers. In execution, though, it's so clunky and unsubtle, that only my goodwill at the film's impending ending kept me from rolling my eyes.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Roll on Quantum Of Solace

The chase sequence that starts the story of Casino Royale is absolutely ridiculous

But I said that before I watched the first 10 minutes of QUANTUM.

I'm sure they thought they were making a good action movie but I can hardly see what's happening in those scenes; James Bond wins, of course, but it doesn't feel like a payoff. There's a difference between unbelievable and impossible, and I noticed that I started to zone out.
This turned out to be a very short-lived Bond-fest.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I'm not usually one for festive films at all. I've never watched Love Actually

Perhaps I should have revised my earlier statement to say "I've never watched all of Love Actually". Or "I've never actively watched Love Actually". Or "I don't remember ever watching Love Actually".

Having sat down and watching it, an awful lot of the film was incredibly familiar. Of course, there are the iconic moments such as the cue card scene that are simply part of pop culture. There are the moments that are homages to other films, like the PM's Risky Business dance (oh my - I've just realised that he's interrupted by Hazel from Upstairs Downstairs). And there are moments that obligatory in any Britcom, such as Rowan Atkinson popping up randomly, Colin Firth getting wet or Emma Thompson alternating between being the gutsy, tell-is-like-it-is friend and crying alone in her bedroom.

At one point - when the British guy walked into the bar in America - I found myself excited because I clearly remembered the upcoming scene in which the girls point to various objects (bottle, straw...) and ask him to pronounce them in his British accent before attempting to mimic him. I've definitely seen that bit before. Loads of other scenes felt as though I was rewatching them rather than seeing them for the first time.

Anyhow, it was an entertaining film with lots of big names. Having watched the rather bad Christmas Eve a night or two before, I now realise that film was probably largely "inspired" by Love Actually's pockets of stories that linked up along the way.

 

[darkshadows38]

i watched one called Easy To Love (1953) with Esther Williams and it was awful she was working for Van Johnson and she was in love with him he had apparently taken her in at age 15 this is in the film i mean, anyways she did various things for him and i'm not talking about sex and he treated her like dog shit. he was good in the role of course but than she meets a singer who's i think just out to get laid but of course they aren't gonna put that in a film back than lol. than you have a nice guy who ends up rich who's in love with her and since it's hollywood and Van Johnson is the one who got top billing she ends up with him.

that makes no sense, if you are gonna and i mean in film have the female lead end up with someone don't let me him be a f... dick that's all i ask. you can have him start out as one in the film but as time went on he overcame that & learned not to be one that's different. the music wasn't that great either to be honest, there's one part at the end where she gets hit in the head with a ski that was pretty funny actually.

the other i watched however was even worse called Athena! (1954) with Debbie Reynolds and i forget who else was in it to be honest it's that forgettable though i will say that Steve Reeves in it in & this and the Ed Wood film Jailbait also (1954) are the only movies where his real voice is used. he's an okay actor to be honest, Jane Powell i did remember who was the female lead it's hard to explain how to describe her not her looks i mean her character, she and her sister Played by Reynolds came from a family that was really weird. not eating isn't what i mean i love a good steak myself but i am not gonna give it up for someone though eating some food that has no meat also has a lot of really good food there too. that's not the weird part the weird part was Powell and her 6 sisters came over to the Lead played by Edmond Purdom his house and changed it around without telling him.

that would have pissed me off she didn't at least talk to him about it she just showed up and moved all his furniture out and replaced it with what she prefers saying it took up too much space. it was a huge house he lived it and she and her sisters took the screens out of the windows saying it was better that way being more open. i don't care what anyone says that's not normal that's what i mean by weird. Ray Collins of Perry Mason fame was also in it as well. i don't care who you are i'm not gonna take the screens out of my windows for more open space. it's not worth getting bit up by any type of bug or stung either. what's she gonna do in the winter time leave the windows open and die when they get a snowstorm? from being cold i mean her character was really weird this film was different in that aspect and that's fine but the script was awful the vast majority of the music wasn't memorable though it had a couple decent songs it was better than the one i watched before that, the worst one i've seen to be fair that i watched about a week ago or so was I love Melvin (1953) that one was simply painfully to watch though to be fair there were some pretty good songs in that one. has anyone seen these? let's see Easy to Wed (1953) was i'd say 3/10. and Athena! (1954) i'd give let's say a 5/10 cause it was a tad better than Easy to Wed (1953) to be fair.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
A.K.A. WW84

@Angela Christmas's comments below sum up my own experience with the film:
​

Wonder Woman 1984 is not Oscar winning material but as a piece of pure escapist action film entertainment it worked for me. I totally get your reservations about films based on magic and wishes, and I'm normally the same (e.g the latest Dune film) but because it was a superhero film I didn't really have much of a problem buying into that. I'm the one that is out of step though because most people seemed to be critical about the film but I loved it.​

Well, I can't say I actually loved it, but I thoroughly enjoyed watching.

Frankly, I'd expected to dislike this film and wasn't even sure I wanted to watch it at all. I knew it had been poorly received and I'm also a former comic book reader who regularly subscribed to WW's title, so I have a very specific vision of a number of characters.

Perhaps the timing was good for me to watch this film. Had I watched it back-to-back with the original film or around the time I was watching some of the better MCU films it might have fared a lot worse. In isolation, I found it entertaining enough. I liked the little nods to the comics and the Lynda Carter series with the invisible plane and Gal Gadot's styling as Diana Prince (very Carteresque at times with the flowing designer clothes and long ponytail).

Cheetah is my all-time favourite WW villain (one of the first WW comics I bought had Debbi Domaine's first appearance in the role. Years later, it was Barbara Minerva's first outing as Cheetah that got me to buy George Perez's version of WW, and I didn't miss an issue afterwards for many years). I was never going to love the version presented here. Barbara Minerva is very clear in my mind as a frail, dark haired British archaeologist, so the quirky blonde American with Hollywood white teeth and annoying vocal fry was never going to float my boat. However, accepting her as a completely different character, I found her arc watchable enough, though when she finally showed up in her Cheetah guise, I did find myself reflecting (even as I watched) that it should feel far more exciting than it did to fulfil a childhood wish of seeing one of my favourite villains in live action. Instead it felt rather like watching a video game.

The backstory was fine. Steve Trevor coming back to life was fine (how many times has he died and been reincarnated in the comics? It's kind of his thing and so completely in character). Maxwell Lord was fine (I know very little about the character beyond that infamous neck-snapping moment. The actor who played him reminded me of a bizarre cross between Justin Whalin and Gordon Thomson). The Eighties fashions were fun. Yes, it was a pretentiously long film, but I've sat through MCU films of similar length that felt far longer.

To balance things out, after sitting quietly through the film my partner (usually happy to take films on face value without thinking too deeply about them or voicing opinions) pulled the film to pieces for being overlong, boring, making no sense and having no plot.

My own biggest gripe with the film is a weird and pedantic one that I'm not even sure is valid: the superlative "amazing" was used. A lot. There's one scene where Diana and Steve say it back and forth around four times in succession. I might be misremembering (and I'm not American anyway, so I'm only basing this on what I would have seen and read on film, TV in books and comics of the time), but the way I remember it, the word "amazing" was rather unfashionable as a superlative during the Seventies and Eighties (other than on a certain Marvel Comics title, where it felt very much like a Sixties throwback), and didn't really make a comeback until the early-to-mid Nineties. I found myself wondering if its use was somewhat anachronistic here.​

 

[Biggie]

Star Trek, the one prior to Insurrection I think. But not that important

If the needs of the many really outweigh the needs of the few... this movie wouldn't have been made.

More of the same thwarting of mutant space zombies and our man I command saves his wizz bang spaceship and all those that sail through the galaxy at beyond light speed and never collided with a cloaked Klingon Bird Of Prey. Or drop anchor at a bordello for some down time. Madness it was. The space zombies would just like to be left alone to do space zombies stuff.

 

[Payton Cross]

For the first time in my life i have seen the complete movie from "The Exorcist" 1973, i really enjoyed it. Why did i wait so long to see it.

 

[Angela Channing]

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
A.K.A. WW84

@Angela Christmas's comments below sum up my own experience with the film:



Well, I can't say I actually loved it, but I thoroughly enjoyed watching.

Frankly, I'd expected to dislike this film and wasn't even sure I wanted to watch it at all. I knew it had been poorly received and I'm also a former comic book reader who regularly subscribed to WW's title, so I have a very specific vision of a number of characters.

Perhaps the timing was good for me to watch this film. Had I watched it back-to-back with the original film or around the time I was watching some of the better MCU films it might have fared a lot worse. In isolation, I found it entertaining enough. I liked the little nods to the comics and the Lynda Carter series with the invisible plane and Gal Gadot's styling as Diana Prince (very Carteresque at times with the flowing designer clothes and long ponytail).

Cheetah is my all-time favourite WW villain (one of the first WW comics I bought had Debbi Domaine's first appearance in the role. Years later, it was Barbara Minerva's first outing as Cheetah that got me to buy George Perez's version of WW, and I didn't miss an issue afterwards for many years). I was never going to love the version presented here. Barbara Minerva is very clear in my mind as a frail, dark haired British archaeologist, so the quirky blonde American with Hollywood white teeth and annoying vocal fry was never going to float my boat. However, accepting her as a completely different character, I found her arc watchable enough, though when she finally showed up in her Cheetah guise, I did find myself reflecting (even as I watched) that it should feel far more exciting than it did to fulfil a childhood wish of seeing one of my favourite villains in live action. Instead it felt rather like watching a video game.

The backstory was fine. Steve Trevor coming back to life was fine (how many times has he died and been reincarnated in the comics? It's kind of his thing and so completely in character). Maxwell Lord was fine (I know very little about the character beyond that infamous neck-snapping moment. The actor who played him reminded me of a bizarre cross between Justin Whalin and Gordon Thomson). The Eighties fashions were fun. Yes, it was a pretentiously long film, but I've sat through MCU films of similar length that felt far longer.

To balance things out, after sitting quietly through the film my partner (usually happy to take films on face value without thinking too deeply about them or voicing opinions) pulled the film to pieces for being overlong, boring, making no sense and having no plot.

My own biggest gripe with the film is a weird and pedantic one that I'm not even sure is valid: the superlative "amazing" was used. A lot. There's one scene where Diana and Steve say it back and forth around four times in succession. I might be misremembering (and I'm not American anyway, so I'm only basing this on what I would have seen and read on film, TV in books and comics of the time), but the way I remember it, the word "amazing" was rather unfashionable as a superlative during the Seventies and Eighties (other than on a certain Marvel Comics title, where it felt very much like a Sixties throwback), and didn't really make a comeback until the early-to-mid Nineties. I found myself wondering if its use was somewhat anachronistic here.​

I'm glad someone else has positive things to say about Wonder Woman 1984 because as I said previously I think the negativity that a lot of people had about the film was nothing like my opinion of the film.

I agree with how you referenced "Gal Gadot's styling as Diana Prince (very Carteresque at times with the flowing designer clothes and long ponytail)" because I thought she looked fabulous in the film. There was a scene where she wore a long white dress and glided majestically across the screen like an angel descended to earth (which in a way is a bit like who Wonder Woman is) and I couldn't help but notice how stunning and elegant she was at times in the film in contrast to how she looked in warrior mode as Wonder Woman, although still stunning but in a very different way.