What was the last film you watched?

[Willie Oleson]

Charlie And The Chocolate Factory (2005)



There was no reason for me to rewatch this film but my mouse accidentally hovered over the thumbnail which caused it to autoplay a preview.
I didn't instantly recognise the scene or character therefore I wondered if this was a new version or a version no one ever talked about.
As soon as the big fat WB logo appeared I realised I had been a little bit too gullible, or maybe I just wanted to believe that there was a third Wonka (excluding the prequel which I'm definitely not going to watch).
I guess this was my cue to move on to the next film but then I thought, it's a Christmassy wintery movie and I've only seen it once 20 years ago so let's see how I feel about it today.

Starting with the best part: the title, because it's the one we got for the Dutch translated title of the seventies classic.
Then there's little Charlie himself who looks criminally adorable. Every time he said something I started to sob uncontrollably. Sometimes it really feels good to be manipulated.
Then that moment of the golden ticket, almost as iconic as the sword of Camelot. I know it's going to be there but that never stops me from feeling nervous.
The other kids are great, too, but perhaps a bit too unlikeable, especially Mike Teavee. It's probably done to emphasise Charlie's saintly character but that really wasn't necessary.

The biggest difference is, of course, the two Wonkas. Gene Wilder's character is unpredictable and very passionate, and Johnny Depp plays it childlike and timidly.
I guess "the best"will be a matter of taste. I wasn't particularly moved by Depp's interpretation but there also wasn't anything about it that bothered me.
The fabulously psychedelic and garish look of the original has been replaced with Tim Burton's trademark gothic style, but it's supposed to be a remake after all.
Everything about this remake is more and bigger and sweeter, but I think the first film is more impressive, suspenseful and emotional.

Well I guess I have to mention the Oompa Loompas.
To be honest, that also wasn't my favourite part in the original but it looked kinda harmless. Unfortunately, there's no escape from the remake Oompa Loompas which is just one actor multiplied by CGI.
The music is forgettable at best and I could hardly hear the lyrics.
Another issue I have with CGI is that all these films basically look the same. It simply prevents a film from standing out from the rest. I haven't seen the new Frankenstein yet but I already know exactly what it's going to look like. It just takes the fun out of it.
So I'll say that super-loveable Charlie and his super-loveable family are the main attraction in this remake.

 

[Seaviewer]

Charlie And The Chocolate Factory (2005)

There were two funny lines in this remake which I liked - one intentional, and the other I think not.
One, when Wonka says that everything is edible he adds "even me but that's cannibalism and frowned on in most cultures" whereas in the original Wilder just fumbles with the pronunciation of "edible."
Two, when one of the kids asks why everything there is pointless. I think that's funny, but probably not intended to be.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Don't Say A Word (2001)

Another blind watch. The name sounded familiar, but I don't recall having any awareness of this film until I added it to my watch list this week based on the description:

A New York psychologist is forced to treat a mentally unstable patient with a violent past to secure the freedom of his kidnapped daughter.

Reading this, I'd assumed the patient was the one who kidnapped the daughter, but no... it's much more twisty than this. I thoroughly enjoyed the way we began watching several different plots play out, particularly the police officer investigating a series of murders, which seemed like its own separate little story. It was only when the various strands dovetailed that I noticed how separate they had been, so I thought it was nicely done as skeins go.

The above blurb doesn't seem to be entirely accurate, by the way, since I'm pretty sure Douglas's character introduced himself as a psychiatrist.

With faces like Oliver Platt and Famke Janssen who seemed to be popping up all over the place in the late Nineties and early Noughties, before falling off the radar again (well, my radar, certainly), it feels rather of its time, but not necessarily in a bad way. Incidentally, I was convinced that Tim Roth played the treacherous gang member we were trying to find out more about, but also fascinated that he was prettier here than he was in The Incredible Hulk (which I put down to this being some years earlier). Turns out he was another actor entirely, Shawn Doyle. Meanwhile, his namesake, Sheffield's own Sean Bean is the baddie here, and as reliable as ever.

To me this film has some of the same energy as some of the post-Silence Of The Lambs thrillers that followed that film's template to become almost their own sub-genre around this time. Think The Bone Collector, Copycat and the like. All have the professional interacting with the law enforcement in strange circumstances in a time-critical race to save abductees from The Big Bad before something terrible happens, all while facing up to some terrible unspoken trauma from years past. That familiarity is a double-edged sword. It might not be the best of the bunch, but at least it's somewhat familiar, and it's a treat to discover one of these sub-Silence films quarter of a century on.

One of the joys of reading up on films after watching, rather than before, is I can watch the film free of bias and pre-judgement. It appears this one was very poorly received by critics and reviewers, but I don't have to jump on that bandwagon. This viewer felt it was 100 minutes well-spent, and I'm perfectly happy to be in the minority on that.

Yes, that BAFTA reference looks more impressive than the OSCAR.

It could well be. Having seen some of the names on the New Year Honours list, I find myself thinking (not for the first time) that awards are all meaningless anyway. Every other person seems to get one just for showing up these days.

Johnny Depp plays it childlike and timidly.

It's a while since I've watched, but my overall impression was of Depp channelling Michael Jackson (who also sought the role himself).

(But a quick peek on Wikipedia suggests he based it on various children's TV hosts and Anna Wintour, with a dash of George W. Bush).

It’s impossible to watch this movie without seeing the glaring parallels to Trump’s America.

I recently watched the BBC's Rise Of The Nazis documentary series and found myself unsettled by the parallels with the way politics have gone in recent years. And not just in America.

 

[Willie Oleson]

There were two funny lines in this remake which I liked - one intentional, and the other I think not.
One, when Wonka says that everything is edible he adds "even me but that's cannibalism and frowned on in most cultures" whereas in the original Wilder just fumbles with the pronunciation of "edible."
Two, when one of the kids asks why everything there is pointless. I think that's funny, but probably not intended to be.

My favourite quote, although not a joke, is Veruca's line Daddy, I wants another peuny . ("wants" and "peuny" deliberately misspellt to make it sound better).
I've been quoting it out loud ever since I watched this film for the first time. So, actually, this remake has had a huge cultural impact on my life.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Unlawful Entry (1992)

Not a film with which I was familiar beforehand. I might have seen the name at the time, but it completely passed me by.

I suppose it fits into the same category as Fatal Attraction and the "cuckoo in the nest" psycho-stalker films that followed it. Notably, this was released in 1992 between the same year's Single White Female and The Hand That Rocks The Cradle, both of which are better known examples of the genre for me. Differentiating Unlawful Entry from the other three mentioned, the stalker in this case is a male. And a cop.

There's no sexual liaison that sets off the obsession here. Liotta's character simply covets Madeleine Stowe from the moment he sees here. And she is so radiant it's easy to see why. Indeed, Stowe and Kurt Russell pull of something incredible here. They're rich, successful, beautiful, perfectly coiffed, confident and very much in love. On several of those bases we should dislike them, but there's something very sweet and charming about them, as a couple but even more so as individuals. Even though I wouldn't have thought it possible, I completely believe she is a teacher who is kind and thoughtful to kids and colleagues alike. And Kurt Russell looks so good in his Nineties getup it should be sickening, but I believe he's a decent man with a good moral compass, even if his character has more of an edge and a shorter fuse than his wife. On the subject of the Nineties, with its fashions and occasional nightclub scenes, this felt like a fascinating little glimpse into that time, while remaining timeless in its writing.

This ticked a lot of boxes for me. The performances were good, and they helped sell the story even when it went to extremes (but still nothing that couldn't happen. And has). The direction is interesting enough without being showy. I believe this is the first Jonathan Kaplan film I've watched and I'd be interested in watching more. The Accused has been on my radar since it was released, but I am put off by the idea of the much talked about graphic and prolonged rape scene. This film takes a similarly unsentimental approach to violence, with a fight between the two lead men feeling particularly real. The fact that it conveys the idea of being cornered so well means that I found myself thinking about how I would fare in the kind of situation where I had to come out swinging (sadly, probably not too well, I decided). There's one staircase moment where I inwardly cheered in relief as it ended the immediate threat.

I'd say this is a top notch example of its kind, definitely worth a couple of hours of my time.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Kiss The Girls (1997)

​

Firstly, I've opted to use an edited version of the poster here because the teaser text on the proper poster is spoiler-ish. Had I read it before watching it would have affected the tension and suspense in the first act or so, and those were some of the best moments for me.

Stumbling upon this film on iPlayer I was momentarily confused because of the two actors on the poster. Morgan Freeman and Ashley Judd were both in (the later) High Crimes which I had watched the other day not realising until too late that I'd already seen it. I wondered if it had a different name in different regions and had to read a little about the film to be absolutely certain I wasn't about to be fooled into watching High Crimes for a third time. How curious that the High Crimes Wikipedia page never mentioned the two having previously been paired here.

To me this film has some of the same energy as some of the post-Silence Of The Lambs thrillers that followed that film's template to become almost their own sub-genre around this time. Think The Bone Collector, Copycat and the like. All have the professional interacting with the law enforcement in strange circumstances in a time-critical race to save abductees from The Big Bad before something terrible happens, all while facing up to some terrible unspoken trauma from years past.

The story was another example of the above, though it had more in common with The Bone Collector, Copycat or indeed High Crimes. In fact, upon reading that there's a sequel called Along Came A Spider, I mentioned this to my partner who was convinced we'd seen it, but went on to describe Denzel Washington in The Bone Collector ("he's paralysed in it"). Slightly spookily, Along Came A Spider does star The Bone Collector's Angelina Jolie, so it seems everything is somehow connected. Considering I found this a compelling watch, Along Came A Spider is certainly on my radar (and I do already have Jerry Goldsmith's film score, which sounds really good).

There was one face I couldn't place all the way through and it was beginning to frustrate me. Upon looking afterwards, I found that Alex McArthur was the one who knocked Madonna up in the Papa Don't Preach video, and the reporter who gained Cathy's confidence after Joshua's death in Knots Landing.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Shadow Of Doubt (1998)

​

Not to be mistaken for the similarly-named Hitchcock film, but I suppose this does have Hitchcockian themes running through it.

I hadn't heard of this film, and chose it on the basis that the imagery looked rather akin to the kind of psychological thrillers I've been enjoying of late. I enjoyed it, and I'm even more impressed having seen that this was a straight-to-video Showtime kind of affair. To my mind, it's a pretty decent film by big screen standards, if not a great one. It's kind of like an extended episode of L.A. Law, with a bit of Columbo thrown in, albeit we still have to attempt to solve the murder mystery (I failed, despite having a couple of potential suspects).

There are lots of familiar faces. The future Papi from Ugly Betty is a violent cop. The future Keith Scott from One Tree Hill is a crazed stalker and confessed rapist. Kenickie from Grease is on the stand, while John Ritter watches. Nina Foch was probably the best thing in it as a controlling matriarch (it's the kind of role where I can easily imagine Bette Davis or Angela Lansbury chewing up the scenery in the role). Wade Dominguez is unapologetically nasty as an Andrew Tate type misogynist whose hit rap single about slapping bitches round soars to the top of the charts after he is framed (or is he?) for murdering a woman with whom he's had some rough sex. This would be the last film his released before his untimely death later that same year. This is my second Tom Berenger film in the last six weeks, and once again there's a Lifestyles Of The Rich & Famous aspect to the homes on display. I came away with some serious estate envy.

I find Melanie Griffith hit-or-miss in this film. She's good in some parts and in other parts she comes across as "my husband produced this film" (figuratively).

During this film I found it really difficult to work out her performance. There were times when I couldn't quite decide whether she was a terrible actress or she was being deliberately wooden as part of her screen persona to hide how canny and intelligent she actually was (à la Marilyn Monroe). I'm still none the wiser, but overall I'm leaning towards the former.

And in this film she's playing a clever lawyer. It's weird, because she sometimes feels quite half-hearted in her performance, as though her mind is somewhere else. She speaks softly and quickly and in a kind of monotone that lacks any conviction in what she's saying. And yet somehow she pulls it off . She has some snappy lines ("if you're asking me do drop the case", she tells the controlling powerful matriarch "the answer is 'no'. If you're telling me, the answer is 'hell, no'") that inexplicably work.

I suppose I'd describe her as "competent". She appears to have the skill of knowing her lines and not tripping over the furniture. And she has a photogenic thing going on that helps her work the screen. And it's just enough to not be too troubled by the lack of enthusiasm. And even enough to make me wonder if she might actually be better than I'm giving her credit for.

All the same, this has reminded me that I've never seen Working Girl (which I remember being huge at the time). And any film with Sigourney Weaver has to be worth a peek.

And two + years on, this has re-reminded me. One of these days...

 

[Willie Oleson]

Coherence (2013)



The first (and only) time I heard about this film was in a kermode&mayo review on youtube. It seemed like a story I would enjoy but somehow I forgot all about it.
Today, completely out of the blue, I thought about that review but couldn't remember the title. I gave our A.I. friend at Google the premise of the story (or what I believed it was) and he came up with a few suggestions. Coherence was the only title I didn't recognise and so I figured it had to be it.
Neither prime nor dutchflix had it but luckily I found it on you-know-where (has algorithm already figured out what "you-know-where" means? maybe it's time to create a different code name).
Anyway! For heaven's sake.

Coherence is mindf**k movie in the style of Triangle (2009) and it has something to do with a comet which makes it more science fiction. Incidentally, I had forgotten about the comet part.
It's like watching Blair Witch Project or Paranormal Activity for the first time, and especially the first half of the film when they are still trying to figure "what's going on" almost made me hyperventilate with anxiety.
No monsters, blood, gore or jump-scares - just a bunch of people in a dining room and it's absolutely terrifying. Just like that other low-budget indie horror film In Fear released that same year (I want to see it again!).
The actors are very convincing and it helps that nobody stops acting even if their performances aren't centre stage. It needs to be relentlessly lively.
I'm so worked up that I expect a loud and scary bang on the door or something like that.
This is one of those love-it-or-hate-it films therefore I'm not* sure if I should recommend it.

*not

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The Big Easy (1986)

How interesting that this came out around the same time (and just a little before) Dave Lee Burke's first Robicheaux novel, since - from what I know - they have a similar approach: showing the dark underbelly of New Orleans with its beautiful backdrop and charming, colourful, ostensibly laid back characters.

First, let's get this over with: I had initial reservations about Dennis Quaid's Cajun accent. I don't claim to be overly familiar with it, but it just sounded fake and over-stereotypical. This wasn't helped by the fact that I've heard him speak without the accent in other films, which made it harder to buy. For ten minutes or so, I really thought I might have to stop watching as it was distracting. At some point, I adjusted to it and was too drawn in to overthink it (even if I did find myself wondering if this character was the model for X-Men's Gambit, who would appear a few years down the line).

A lot happens in this film, and yet it doesn't feel as though it does. Because the main focus is on the simplicity of the will they/won't they/they just did element which increases the emotional stakes (for the characters, at least), the series of executions that leaves a trail of bloody, mutilated bodies lying around seems almost incidental. The chemistry between Quaid and Ellen Barkin is good, but after their sexiest scene (interrupted by a pager or a prehistoric mobile phone) practical me found myself noticing that Remy hopped out of bed and left without so much as rinsing that hand. The directorial objectification is happily gender-balanced in this film (I don't know if Levi's had any sponsorship, but it would explain the focus on the McSwain brothers' jeans).

Familiar faces abound. There's Ned Beatty and, because it's 1986 John Goodman had to be in it. Meanwhile, in between shooting Karen Fairgate MacKenzie and grieving Laura Palmer, Grace Zabriskie is Quaid's Mama. She has one of my favourite moments, where Anne has been practically abducted while running and brought to her home so Quaid can sing to her. Mama asks Anne why she's wet, and Anne explains she was running. Mama, brow furrowed, looks at Anne as though she's speaking in tongues, and repeats "runnin'", before walking away, perplexed at the very thought of something so un-Southern. Ebbe Roe Smith has perhaps the biggest laugh where his character cross examines someone on the stand. After listening their perfectly reasonable explanation he thanks them, turns away from them towards the courtroom and shrugs with a look that says "I have no idea what they were blathering about". A simple-but-effective way to gain a few cheap points.

The film looks nice enough. It's kind of noir-in-colour (contradictory as that may sound). There are lots of saturated warm ochres and other earth colours, with blues sometimes making their way in for contrast.

As mentioned, the whodunnit was almost incidental to me, but the denouement should satisfy anyone invested on that basis.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I have the 1990s neo-noir China Moon in my watchlist.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I have the 1990s neo-noir China Moon in my watchlist.

Out of interest I just watched the trailer. How funny that Madeleine Stowe has shown up again when I don't remember ever watching a film of hers until a few days ago.

I'm even more curious about the reasons for it being shelved for three years before it was released on home media.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Other "shelved" films are often connected with distribution issues and companies.
But now that I know it was made in 1991 it just makes perfect sense to me.

The image looks so Cape Fear meets Chris Isaak, with a little bit of The Rapture in it.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Sightseers (2012)



An intentional choice because the premise seemed like my cup of tea. And it is, I mean it wasn't completely different from what I expected it to be.
It's sort of a mundane blue-collar Natural Born Killers but there's nothing specific about the these Sightseers characters. On the other hand they are so unhinged that it doesn't look random enough.
It has a few funny moments and the mother character is very good but overall the film didn't get much reaction out of me.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Carry On Teacher (1959)



Never thought I'd watch my first Carry On on netflix, and I also discovered that they stream lots of British classics including the Studiocanal/Vintage Series of which I have several on DVD.
It goes without saying that these films don't show up in the standard browser mode, you have to look for it.
Now I can't remember why I thought these films would be inaccessibly British, or why that idea would enter my mind to begin with.

The first giggle happened with the introduction of Ms. Allcock., but apart from that and some double entendre here and there it's almost sleaze-free.
I was surprised that it was mostly the slapstick scenes that made me laugh out loud, I guess it really brought out the child in me, helped by a cast of schoolchildren.
Speaking of kids, when you watch a film like this then the hope for them to "be on their best behaviour" is reason enough for them to not fulfil that hope.
In this particular case that bad behaviour will jeopardise the headmaster's transfer to another school, and I didn't quite understand this part.
I paused the film, looked it up on wiki and read that the students actually like Mr. Wakefield, and they don't want him to leave.
Ah, leave it to me to feel confused about the plot of a slapstick movie.
On the other hand, that motive was explained and very emphasised at the end of the story, so maybe I wasn't supposed to know? (there may still be hope for me).
Because of the Billie Turf/Billy Bunter legacy I simply expected every headmaster to be hated.

A blossoming romance is always the easiest fantasy to buy into, and it even works in a Carry On story.

Miss Wheeler, I love you.

Do you?

Don't question the facts. It's most unscientific.

Oh, I'm sorry.

There's also a happy ending for Ms. Allcock and child psychiatrist Alistair Grigg, with the promise that their children won't avoid physical punishment in case they misbehave. There's something disturbing about that optimistic note, but eventually the discussion is going to end with exasperated parents saying "so now I'm supposed to discuss the misbehaviour with my child??"
I have experienced a few correctional slaps and it was always more than justified.
There was also an evil female teacher who hated me and she used to pull my ear and this actually happened quite often.
She had a ring with a big stone on it and she used that to knock on another boy's head. I remember it vividly and I feared his head was going to crack.
And that's not cool.

Anyway, a few more Carry Ons added to the watchlist although I'm sure there will be a few duds.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Carry On Teacher (1959)

Oh Willie. You have no idea how exciting it was to find this post from you this morning. How thrilling to enjoy your discovery of the films, and I await your thoughts with antici........pation.

As you possibly know James had a terrific Carry On rewatch thread on the old site, and there is a slightly more general one here on Telly Talk which you may (or may not) want to peek at once you're more familiar with the series.

Never thought I'd watch my first Carry On on netflix, and I also discovered that they stream lots of British classics including the Studiocanal/Vintage Series of which I have several on DVD.

Since it's Studiocanal, I'd think you would have access to the first twelve films, which will give a nice flavour of the series. Some you will probably like better than others, but the really terrible ones came towards the end of the series, way past the EMI/Studiocanal era.

There are two main Carry On writers. Norman Hudis wrote the first six (of which Teacher was #3) and you may notice certain similarities between the character arcs in his films. Talbot Rothwell is the other writer (he ended up writing 20 consecutive Carry Ons). His style is generally less-restrained, but if you've enjoyed the slapstick you'll be safe with his films also.


Incidentally, there are several "sub-Carry On" films that were made during the same era from the same team (producers/director/actors/writers) but never had the Carry On title. Some of these are as good assome of the main films, so if you're hungry for more I can give you some pointers.

Now I can't remember why I thought these films would be inaccessibly British, or why that idea would enter my mind to begin with.

Oh, this is an interesting comment. I'd thought the same from time to time, so it's good to read that this one was accessible.




A couple of my thoughts on the Carry On Teacher from last time I watched, back in 2017:

While I knew Richard O'Sullivan was in this one as a child actor, I had convinced myself that Dennis Waterman, too, was in this one. I was rather surprised at my level of disappointment on being reminded this is not the case. The majority of the kids in the film are notable for their lack of precociousness. At least one of the girls, unfortunately, appears to have had elocution lessons, but there's nothing jarringly syrupy or twee about them.

There are some great lines here. Joan Sims is involved in my two personal favourites, both of which seem rather daring for the late '50s.

One of them comes from Joan blowing her whistle which makes no sound. Looking inside she furiously ejaculates "they've taken the pea".

The second exchange is after Joan's tiny gym shorts rip when she bends over (is this the first Carry On wardrobe malfunction?), something she bemoans repeatedly in the staff room. Asked to shut up about her shorts, Joan wails "You haven't seen the hole in them", to which blatantly gay Charles Hawtrey does one of his trademark horrified stage jolts and retorts "I've no wish to".

The latter example in particular seems as filthy as anything the Carry Ons were able to get past the censors over the next decade and a half. At least to my smutty mind.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

A Few Good Men (1992)

Yet another classic I'm only just getting round to watching. I knew a few things about this: Jack Nicholson; Tom Cruise; military court marshal; "I want the truth"/"You can't handle the truth". Oh, and Larry Hagman appeared in some role as a judge or something. Turns out I had all but one correct.

I'm not sure why I didn't watch this years ago. Perhaps it's the length. Perhaps it's the genre. Perhaps it's because Demi Moore is in it. Actually, she's pretty good here, there were a couple of her lines that made me laugh out loud, especially when her character makes a complete knorrs-up of asking her superior if she could be assigned after rehearsing her request so meticulously. Kevin Pollak is very watchable as well, and adds a gravitas and sense of experience to the main triad (Cruise/Moore/Pollak). Seeing them standing together in the courtroom, though, I couldn't help wondering if both Moore and Pollak were selected because they were shorter than Tom Cruise (and I think the gap looked even bigger than it actually is).

Interesting that Tom Cruise got top billing here, over Jack Nicholson (and did I imagine his credit was slightly larger as well?). I found Cruise's character very annoying at times. I think this is partly intentional, and wondered if they were going for a Columbo sort of vibe with his initial introduction as a bumbling kid who appeared to not know much about his own business, therefore setting us up to be surprised by the end. Intentional or otherwise, though, sometimes annoying is just annoying. It's also the one role where I found myself wondering how another actor might play it. Nicholson inhabited his character completely, but Cruise - even though he brings the requisite arrogance - felt more reliant on busy body language, gesticulating, raising his voice or distractions such as noisy eating and apple or throwing a baseball bat round to hold the attention. It's a perfectly serviceable performance, but there's nothing in it that feels great, and it's animated almost to the point of caricature (some might even say ham). It's also difficult to imagine the character being able to truly hold his own against Nicholson's, which at least helps sell the story, even if I had to suspend disbelief when it came to the outcome. In my mind, Nicholson's character would have been far too disciplined to have been goaded into confessing, even if it helped that I fully believed Cruise's character rubs people up the wrong way and used that to his advantage here. In the end, what we got was so satisfying that I accepted it.

The rest of the cast is a who's who of small and large screen actors of the era: there's Kevin Bacon; Kiefer Sutherland; Cuba Gooding Jr.; the good-looking one from Twin Peaks, the good-looking one from ER...

This was the recently-departed Rob Reiner's follow-up to Misery, which followed up When Harry Met Sally. What a time this would have been for him, with hit after hit. It's produced by none other than David Brown which immediately elevated it in my mind, and it met expectations. Aaron Sorkin's screenwriting must also get credit for giving such a solid and compelling film.

The two hours and twenty minutes went by very quickly (mercifully, there were no ad breaks on Prime, which is always a bit of a lottery, so that helped as well).

 

[Willie Oleson]

I've read A Few Good Men review not so long ago, I haven't seen the film myself but I remember the comments saying that it was very hammy and that the reveal came because of an inexplicably uncharacteristic, emotional outburst rather than being cleverly checkmated - which I interpret as a deus ex machina.
Do you recognise any of that or was the review exaggerated?

but the really terrible ones came towards the end of the series

I imagine these are the more overtly sleazy ones, and while that doesn't offend me at all I do think it takes the "double" out of the double entendre, and then the joke doesn't land anymore.

Incidentally, there are several "sub-Carry On" films that were made during the same era from the same team

Yes, several related titles came up in the Carry On search and I've randomly added She'll Have To Go and On The Buses to the list.
With all my series on DVD to watch plus the 60+ titles I found on netflix I think I might be overstretching myself, therefore I have no idea when the next Carry On will be shown in Cinema Mercantile.
My plans for 2025 have been ruthlessly sabotaged by many detours and distractions. I got lots of great stuff instead and I like to think that it was necessary for my "personal growth" as Oprah would say it, but the fact remains that it happened at the expense of other and earlier ambitions.

One more thing (how Columbo of me) I'd like to mention about CARRY ON TEACHER is that the school play disaster is surprisingly similar to CARRIE's iconic prom scene. Minus the kill count, of course.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I remember the comments saying that it was very hammy and that the reveal came because of an inexplicably uncharacteristic, emotional outburst rather than being cleverly checkmated - which I interpret as a deus ex machina.
Do you recognise any of that or was the review exaggerated?

The review was pretty accurate about the flaws that required suspension of disbelief. I thought Tom Cruise provided most of the ham, but overall performances were good.

I imagine these are the more overtly sleazy ones, and while that doesn't offend me at all I do think it takes the "double" out of the double entendre, and then the joke doesn't land anymore.

You've nailed it, really. The innuendo and double ententre just weren't as funny once things were more up-front (so to speak). But also the writing went downhill terribly, and there are only so many puns one can recycle. And it also had the Dallas problem of the ageing cast beginning to drop out, with those left not able to achieve the same magic.

Yes, several related titles came up in the Carry On search and I've randomly added She'll Have To Go and On The Buses to the list.

Oh, On The Buses was quite fun. Hammer Studios made many big screen versions of sitcoms around that time, and many of them were pretty good. I enjoyed watching the OTB films for the first time a couple of years ago.

I'd thought I watched She'll Have To Go for the first time last year, but it turned out it was 2020. Scary how quickly the time has gone. Here's what I said about it after that only watch:

It was a little abundant in the SFX department to the point of being cartoony at times. All the same, I found it very enjoyable. Shades of Kind Hearts and Coronets and Blithe Spirit with a dash of early Carry On. And, inexplicably, a character bursting into a serious romantic song at a random moment.

A couple of recommendations (as if you don't have enough to watch) from the Carry On team:

• Please Turn Over (probably coincidentally, this basically uses the "local girl writes book about her family and neighbours" plot of Return To Peyton Place)
• Nurse On Wheels
• Raising The Wind

I think I might be overstretching myself, therefore I have no idea when the next Carry On will be shown in Cinema Mercantile.

Well, I'll conceal my disappointment and stiffen my upper lip as I wait patiently and hopefully for your second entry in the series.

My plans for 2025 have been ruthlessly sabotaged by many detours and distractions. I got lots of great stuff instead and I like to think that it was necessary for my "personal growth" as Oprah would say it, but the fact remains that it happened at the expense of other and earlier ambitions.

Sometimes things just unfold organically despite all plans. I hope you get to tick a few of those boxes in 2026.

One more thing (how Columbo of me) I'd like to mention about CARRY ON TEACHER is that the school play disaster is surprisingly similar to CARRIE's iconic prom scene. Minus the kill count, of course.

Oh yes. You're not wrong.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Prometheus (2012)



I like the world-building of the Engineers, with all its over-the-top CGI set pieces. If android David had been the main protagonist then it could have been a new 2001 Space Odyssey, or a cheesier version thereof.
But no, it also has to be that Alien film so how do we get this creature on board? Stupid characters.
They are on a multi-billion dollar mission to the Ultimate Answer in Space, they have the most advanced technology at their disposal and they can scan everything. Everything, there's no limit.
So what do they do? Take off the safety helmets and touch everything with their hands. For crying out loud.
After that it all becomes predictable routine, and there are several dangerous scenes with lots of physical activity that are impossible to watch because it's all fast-moving CGI images.
Bodies flying through the air, but who is who? You can't tell, and that's why the spectacle becomes the most boring part of the film.

There's no logic in David bringing the alien species into the ship. The man he answers to wants to meet the Engineer who can make him immortal. That's being 90 years old for all eternity.
I only kept watching to see if it could get any worse, and I was not disappointed.
For example, to ramp up the tension, someone has to outsmart a sexist self-operation bed. It's almost awesomely bad.
It even becomes Alien Vs. Engineer. Almost everything is exactly on that Freddy Vs. Jason level.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Scooby-Doo (2002)

I wasn't expecting art, and I appreciate I'm quite some decades too old to be the core demographic, but I still hoped for a bit of fun with some affectionate nods towards the classic animated series. Mostly, I hoped for a bit of atmosphere.

What I watched was a film that was frustratingly noisy and busy, with a loud rock soundtrack, terribly dated CGI and a "plot" that made me weary almost as soon as I began watching. The visuals were overly vibrant, with no moody backdrops or spooky atmosphere at all.

The cosplay element of the main characters (apart from the computer animated titular one) was probably the most watchable part. They were instantly recognisable and wore something approximating their classic outfits, though Velma's jumper was redder than her classic pumpkin one, while Daphne leaned a bit too hard into fuchsia instead than Cadbury purple. Shaggy was perfectly cast. Finally there's a place where Matthew Lillard's brand of acting feels appropriate. (Also, I kind of crave his corduroy trousers). The soon-to-be-Prinzes are incredibly photogenic. Freddie is one of the few people on earth who could pull off that shock of blonde hair and still look gorgeous. The auburn hair really suits Sarah Michelle Gellar and I'd say this is the most stunning I've seen her look (albeit I only really know her from I Know What You Did Last Summer, Scream 2 and one or two scenes of Buffy). The auburn hair suits her.

Still though, a terrible film that made me instantly remove the sequel from my watch list. I hope Rowan Atkinson was paid well to get anywhere near this.

I like the world-building of the Engineers

From my viewing I was on the same page here:

what was most impressive about this Alien-adjacent project was the degree of world-building taking place. New concepts, ideas and innovations are to be found left, right and centre, and the balance between the familiar and the new was spot-on.

After that it all becomes predictable routine, and there are several dangerous scenes with lots of physical activity that are impossible to watch because it's all fast-moving CGI images.

And here I had a different experience:

There's obviously more CGI than in 1979's Alien, but it seems to be used relatively sparingly and stops short of unnatural artifice. It's most noticeable during scenes featuring holograms and suchlike, when one would expect it to look artificial. For the rest of the film there seem to be plenty of practical sets and effects.

(I couldn't back up my comments at this point since the film has long since vanished from memory).

someone has to outsmart a sexist self-operation bed

Ha. Yes, that scene did irritate me.




By the way, after watching Prometheus I ended up watching the bonus features and especially liked this fake TED Talk which was part of its viral marketing campaign. It may be of interest: