What Movie Have You Seen Today?


#201

I imagine witnessing these „fresh“ reactions to the films would add yet another perspective. As fans we often develop a tunnel vision towards the classics, a state where each viewing only serves to further support opinions shaped years, decades ago. We tend to forget that these classics* are today by no means common knowledge outside the fandom. There are now a couple of generations out there to whom the ‘lesser’ Bond titles are obscure at best.

And yet, judging by your recent experiences, the films still seem to hold themselves remarkably well with a modern audience, no doubt also because they are based comparatively closely on their respective books. We’ll see how well others fare.

*Just as classics of cinematography in general are in peril of falling into obscurity today sadly…


#202

Interesting write up there sir, of similarly aged people whose first viewing of a Bond leads to such bizarre reactions. Indeed I would have bet all my money on Everyone attending such screenings being proper fans who have seen all the films, multiple times.

The laughter in some places does strike me as odd. But the film generally holds up well from an action and story telling perspective because everything is edited in a way that is remarkably familiar to today’s audiences.

Not sure LALD will hold up as well, by comparison.

And, as a conceit, I think OHMSS is a perfect Bond film aside from how the film ends. For my part, immediately after the scene in the Aston, I mute the sound. Having the Bond theme blaring over the top of what is an otherwise sombre moment is overkill. The rolling credits in perfect silence allows you to stay in the moment of his dead wife. Try it.


#203

I saw BLACKkKLANSMAN and it was amazing. Within the context of a genre film–1970’s police procedural–Spike Lee was able to ruminate on not only film grammar and its evolution, but on audience reception and how cultural images shape the public imaginary–all providing the entertainment and suspense of a cop buddy movie.

It had the density and heft of old Hollywood movies that dealt in both text and subtext.


#204

I rewatched Casino Royale. Excellent story, excellent characters. What bothered me was this: the look of the film. It doesn’t have… the style of Sam Mendes’ two Bond films. Does anybody else feel this way?


#205

I think the risk taken with the b/w opening of CR really pays off. As does the post stairwell fight scenes in the bathroom and shower, which have a realism that felt new and welcome.

But aside from that it was pretty conventional. Campbell has a good eye, giving his 2 movies the best visual composition up to that point imo.

For me QoS went one better with its ‘hot’, burnt out look in the arid desert and the handheld cam in the opening car chase.

But when mendes has Deakins as DOP for SF everything before is bound to feel inferior. Not because his predecessors had shortcomings, but by virtue of Deakins absolute artistry.

Having upped the stakes so much, Spectre had to compete adequately and did so, though no one is really up to Deakins standard.

Boyle is another director with a good eye, so it’ll be interesting to see who his DOP is and I’m sure the look will be interesting at the very least…

While no DOP appears to be anywhere near as good as Deakins at lighting and photographing a scene (Blade Runner 2049 May be the most beautiful film I’ve ever seen), Boyle’s kinetic dynamism and understanding of how to let the picture do the talking could well give us the most visually accomplished - visually exciting - bond movie to date.


#206

I saw the 20th Anniversary Big Lebowski last week in celebration of its upcoming 4K release. Guess who the director of cinematography is? Roger Deakens! I could really tell in the scene outside the Hollywood Star Bowling Alley where it fades to black save the bright colors of the lighted stars on the wall.


#207

„Allied“: very good love story set during WW2, Robert Zemeckis is a fantastic director, stages and films wonderfully.
Very underrated film.

„Ready Player One“: very entertaining, Spielberg can still hook me with his ideas, composition and full throttle movie magic. Hated the book, loved the film!

„Phantom Thread“: Impeccably made and acted - but what does the story tell me? Love is a disease that one wants?

„Game Night“: Astonishingly funny and elegantly made. Fun!

„Paris can wait“: Unspectacular and therefore wonderfully told travelogue love story, beautifully acted and written. One of those films critics will call slight missing all the nuances.

„Black Panther“: Hmm. Overrated in my mind, rehash of every Marvel cliché, without the humour and the spectacular action. I do not get the excitement for this at all. Well made, yeah, women as warriors, great, but the rest was just uninvolving superhero routine.


#208

Have this one sitting in its red Netflix envelope ready to be watched. Rented it blind, so glad to hear that it’s a good one. :slight_smile:


#209

Quantum of Solace.

Much better than Casino Royale. Great cinematography. Fast-paced. Lots of action.

The standout moment was Mathis’ death. That scene was quite emotional. As far as Bond allies go, he’s even more likable than Kerim Bey. What a charming fellow.


#210

I really have to draw the line there :wink:


#211

Not sure i’ve ever seen anyone state that opinion before…

Sure you’re not referring to the 60s CR? :slight_smile:


#212

“A quiet place”: I know I’m very late to this party - but my, oh, my, what a magnificent film. Absolutely wonderfully written, acted, shot, edited, scored and directed. John Krasinski really put himself on the map as one of the great upcoming directors here. And I already loved him as Jim on “The Office”. Looking forward to his “Jack Ryan”-take.

“A quiet place”, by the way, would be my top choice for several Academy Award nominations - and not just the new “best popular film” (are the others so unpopular?).


#213

Not exactly “unpopular,” but more niche films addressing a (presumed and often actual) limited audience.

Hollywood studios rarely produce today movie that combine traditional heft with a focus on the human story of the present moment–BLACK PANTHER would be any exception. It is much more common to see that traditional Hollywood combination on television or streaming services.


#214

I think you’re being optimistic to assume they ever did.


#215

I believe they did so a lot. And they still do - but most films of these kind get no attention because mass audiences go for the latest blockbuster superhero stuff.

Or better put: mass audiences these days mostly consist of teenagers and twens. People over 30 or even 40 wait for the dvd/streaming availability and stay home. Therefore those “adult” films take longer to become profitable and so often don’t get enough screens on opening weekend, therefore underperform.

Still, I think that this new “best popular film” category is a horrible idea. Just as horrible as the “up to 10 best picture nominees (which rarely if ever really gets used to the max)”-idea.

In my mind, the Oscars made a huge mistake by moving their date too close to the onslaught of other award ceremonies. They should either be the first one or the last one with the two months between the others (as they used to do). That way it would really be a surprise who is winning, instead of the recent “sure, they won all the other awards too, now get the Oscar”.

And if they want to include more of the “popular” films they should define their categories much better. Don’t mix up comedies with dramas, get a best horror, best sci-fi and best action film as well. And why, oh, why do they stubbornly refuse to give a Best Stunt to all those hard working pros who really risk their lives for spectacular moments on film?


#216

Good point, might’ve been fairer to say that these sort of films never get the marketing budgets that block busters do, so if they’re successful, are often getting money over a longer period of time based on good word of mouth rather than the opening weekend, which of course only speaks to how good the marketing was, rather than the film itself.


#217

I think Otto Preminger, Joseph L. Mankiewicz, Billy Wilder, and Douglas Sirk (to name a few directors) did produce such films–maybe not the majority of Hollywood’s output, but significant.


#218

Or better put: mass audiences these days mostly consist of teenagers and tweens. People over 30 or even 40 wait for the dvd/streaming availability and stay home. Therefore those “adult” films take longer to become profitable and so often don’t get enough screens on opening weekend, therefore underperform.

First, I finally I figured out how to quote a previous post!

Exactly. Orson Welles’ THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WIND will get a courtesy release from Netflix (which I hope does well), but streaming will be its main source of encounter. Netflix/Amazon /Hulu are the new studios, but their platforms are not movie palaces.

Still, I think that this new “best popular film” category is a horrible idea. Just as horrible as the “up to 10 best picture nominees (which rarely if ever really gets used to the max)”-idea.

Agreed.

In my mind, the Oscars made a huge mistake by moving their date too close to the onslaught of other award ceremonies. They should either be the first one or the last one with the two months between the others (as they used to do). That way it would really be a surprise who is winning, instead of the recent “sure, they won all the other awards too, now get the Oscar”.

I think the problem is the great overlap of voters among groups. The Golden Globes are idiosyncratic and fun, but the Screen Actor’s Guild and The Academy share a good number of members/voters. Making the Oscars first would be great (and basically nullify the need for the other groups to give awards), but that also then means the potential increased box office from nominations becomes negligible which was the reason for the gap.

Don’t mix up comedies with dramas, get a best horror, best sci-fi and best action film as well.

Maybe, but how far do you slice the pie? For example: would you have nominated ALL ABOUT EVE (my candidate for the greatest of all Best Picture winners) in Best Comedy or Best Drama? I ask since in 1950, the Writers Guild nominated Joseph L. Mankiewicz for “Best Written American Comedy” and “Best Written American Drama” (the only time it has happened as far as I can tell, and I have worked with the archivists at the Guild on the question.) Should LORD OF THE RINGS been in a Best Fantasy category or Best Drama–I think there is an argument for both placements. Should there be a Best War Film category and/or Best Historical Drama?

Maybe the issue is that the category of Best Picture refers to a type of film that is no longer made: a film that is an exemplar of its genre, but also a film that at the same time transcends its genre such as UNFORGIVEN or THE GODFATHER PART II. Again, I would argue that Hollywood rarely makes such movies any more–the most recent ones I can think of are THE SHAPE OF WATER (which was a marvelous amalgam of several genres) and BLACKkKLANSMAN which was a 1970’s procedural genre-wise and so much more. Both of these films were independent productions.

And why, oh, why do they stubbornly refuse to give a Best Stunt to all those hard working pros who really risk their lives for spectacular moments on film?

They needed to implement that long ago–might be a way for Tom Cruise to finally get an Oscar.


#219

I saw “BlacKKKlansman” last night… Boy…what a great movie… Very poignant and tough at times, especially the end footage of the Charlottesville horror from 2017. I think this is perhaps Spike Lee’s best movie since “Do The Right Thing”. While its obvious that the film adds a lot of things that didn’t happen, for dramatic effect, it is a true event which happened in my home town of Colorado Springs, just about the time I was 1 years old. Loved John David Washington as Ron Stallworth. Funny coincidence (perhaps), my second grade teacher in Colorado Springs back in '85 was a Mrs.Stallworth (I think she was Ron’s sister, but I am not 100% sure)


#220

Oceans 8. Nothing really good to say about it. Casting was bad, no chemistry between actresses, Blanchetts acting was even less believable and natural than normal, plot was weak, predictable, felt like a movie about women written and made by men…

Really quite awful.

Edit: actually the soundtrack was alright and James Cordon was good in it. Not amazing, just good.