10
votes
Midweek Movie Free Talk
Have you watched any movies recently you want to discuss? Any films you want to recommend or are hyped about? Feel free to discuss anything here.
Please just try to provide fair warning of spoilers if you can.
Just saw The Naked Gun with some friends! Never saw the originals, but I think it captured the spirit really well. I love how older comedies would play stuff straight with silly background gags, and this version did that too. The theater was cackling pretty much the whole way through.
Watched two movies recently, The Fantastic Four: First Steps (2025) and 6/45 (2022).
The Fantastic Four movie was alright, I don't really have much analysis to give here. I've never actually watched any Fantastic Four media before this movie so I went into it with a completely open mind, I didn't even know about the backstories of the various characters. I will praise the retro-futuristic 1960s aesthetic, I did enjoy that. The pacing of the story was also great, it never really felt like it was dragging on to meet its 2 hour runtime.
6/45 on the other hand was an amazing movie. It's a South Korean light-hearted comedy about the hijinks that ensue between North and South Korean soldiers when a winning lottery ticket worth 5.7b KRW gets carried by the wind over the DMZ. The movie caught my attention originally because its cast includes Lee Yi-kyung and Kwak Dong-yeon, two of my favorite comedic South Korean actors. Both play significant roles in this film and just nail the comedy. Much of the comedy comes from over-the-top character antics, misunderstandings between characters, and more and that just had me laughing out loud. Definitely recommend watching this if you can.
I watched The Shop Around the Corner (1940). Fun little movie based on Parfumerie by Miklós László, and later remade into the musical In the Good Old Summertime (1949) and loosely into You've Got Mail (1998) (in this, Meg Ryan's store is called The Shop Around the Corner.)
Anyway, fun little picture... but I do think they rushed a few key decisions. Its often said that Tom Hanks is the modern day Jimmy Stewart... I can sort of see it, but it just isn't quite there.
I just turned off The Taste of Things (2023) because... well, they're trying to make this food porn movie, but her omelette was over, the two of them are super messy... he moved the lamb over to her and a towel fell to the floor, next thing she's using it again... then later she's pouring this stock from a height and its going everywhere... also, his nails are dirty! good god.
I just started watching Taste of Things last night and have very unkind feelings towards it - mostly just because I find it unconscionably boring. But I did not expect to see it mentioned here!
i was so disappointed in it. i’ve had it in my queue for ages and decided to finally bang it out — only to get that bullshit. it’s just sloppy. might as well watch Menus-Plaisirs — Les Troisgros and fabricate some sort of love story.
I’m glad i’m not alone in this. it got so much praise.
Same, I felt like an uncultured swine because I was fast-forwarding through the excessive cooking detail in the first 20 minutes and thinking "what a terrible premise for a film." I didn't even notice the grossness!
...I do have Menus Plaisirs on my list, but I was under the impression that it's a documentary, and so the excessive focus on the cooking might actually be interesting because it's nonfiction (and presumably might have some kind of narrative or context). Should I consider not watching it?
its absolutely a documentary and just watch it passively. Some of it is interesting, but in reality, its just people working. Babette's Feast is better than both. If you want to go through some food movies, I can probably crank out a decent list (fiction and non.)
I just couldn't believe how sloppy that other movie was, though. Its like they didn't have a script supervisor or anyone paying attention on set. He's slopping shit everywhere and they're treating it like he's a master of his craft. haha
I don't think I necessarily need to watch a food film, but if there is some kind of documentary that describes how certain kinds of foods are prepared, or the logic behind different flavours or plating or specific cultural elements, I would find that interesting. I don't get much of a kick out of watching people make food with no context, although watching people who are very expert at, say, chopping vegetables, gutting fish, or decorating is fun to watch from a purely aesthetic perspective. I was hoping to give the documentary a shot because usually they're done pretty well, even if I don't think initially that I'm super keen on the topic, but if you have any food film ideas, I would definitely appreciate your perspective!
not a movie, but have you watched Mind of a Chef? I think its one of the best shows for this sort of thing outside of watching straight up technical videos or master classes (which are hit or miss --- Keller's are good, though.) There's way more TV with this sort of thing. I also really like Stanley Tucci's shows about Italy. I never would have expected his shows to be as good as they are, but there's some decent technique in there.
Movie-wise,
I wish there were more like this. There's probably a long list buried somewhere on reddit.
So I just watched 2001: Space Odyssey for the first time and I have some thoughts.
literally just finished I went straight from the tv to the compute to type this.
Many thoughts actually.
While I understand that this film is widely regarded as one of the greatest and most influential films ever made1, I don't think the movie is without flaws. The following is my opinion as a non-film critic.
Positives:
The visuals and VFX are stunning. (I was watching the 4k UHD DVD so that probably helps) Especially the scenes of the space ships (both inside and out). Hard to believe that everything was done in 1968 (before my parents where born!).
There were also lots of little details I noticed what made the world feel more cohesive. I could tell the director but a lot of thought into it. some bits in no particular order:
side tangent: the props, sets, environments, etc felt more real/weighty to me to me than many other movies that were made recently. I can't tell if its lighting, staging, direction, vibe, or a subconscious trick because I already knew the movie didn't have CG in it. While watching there were times I was amazed that what I was seeing was practical effects and tried to think of how it was done.
Negatives
The first 3-4 minutes of the runtime was just black screen with some music. (I thought my DVD was broken for a bit)
Spoilers
I don't get the monkey bit at the start. Before coming into the movie I knew (from cultural osmosis) there was a scene with monkeys at the beginning and that it was controversial. I didn't think the scenes itself were bad but I was expecting a scene later to reference it or that us back to the apes with some new grand reveal. From what I can tell without googling the meaning behind the scene, I think its purely symbolic but whatever symbols it was trying to show were lost on me.
the entire sequence in the Jupiter exploration craft up until they arrive at Jupiter was a masterpiece. HAL 9000 was great. nothing felt contrived or forced.
The scenes with all the flashing lights where Dave sees the black monolith floating around Jupiter is way too long. I was temped to fast forward but I stuck it out. I didn't time it but doesn't need to be several minutes long.
The ending went over my head for the most part. Like I could tell it was trying to say something about time/ human lifespan but couldn't connect the dots. This biggest issue I had was the there wasn't a conclusion to the Jupiter exploration mission. Like I am fairly sure the room Dave's its isn't actually real. Its in his head or symbolic of something that I don't understand.
Did Dave make it back to earth? did they ever find out what the black monoliths are? The ending felt unsatisfying because its just ends and the main mystery wasn't revealed (or maybe it was through symbolism and I just missed it). I was also expecting a reference to the monkeys from the beginning to tie stuff together but nothing there as well.
Well I'm going to sleep on it and maybe somethings will click into place for me.
1 Wikipedia
A lot of the so-called greatest films don't seem to be the greatest outside of the context of their release period. 2001 was one of the first sci-fi properties to take it seriously while also using a lot of abstract concepts -- not even ahead of its time, but creating its own time, if that makes sense. Also, its kind of left open for the viewer to interpret, where most films up to this point had a clear story and resolution. So for this film that is massive in risk and scope to combine so many genres --- for its time and within that context, it kind of is the best or one of the best.
I have the same feeling with Citizen Kane -- but there are technical things done in that film that took fancy tricks (e.g. Chaplin's rollerskating shot) and pushed them even further. If you haven't already, Ebert did a great commentary track for this and broke down this sort of thing in great detail. Neat stuff.
I think there are definitely some films that feel more like cultural artifacts or like homework. I certainly felt that way watching The Rules of the Game and La Dolce Vita. I think 2001 and Citizen Kane transcend that were it is great entertainment on top of being essentially museum pieces.
what would you say is the most brutal homework movie with the most significance (not counting Shoah)?
I actually haven’t seen Shoah, I remember I was going to but that runtime is daunting.
Jeanne Dielman was definitely a challenge when I watched it when I was 17. I think I did that all in one go too which I don’t think my attention span can handle today, and it’s not a movie I will ever rewatch.
Mirror I thought was kind of a drag and it’s why I put off Solaris. So was Seventh Seal.
Wavelength I don’t get and I ended up just putting on 2x speed
A few years ago I made dialog-free edit of Jeanne Dielman by patching in other sounds from the scenes... it didn't take too long and it holds up, but I think it'll be a bit before I watch it again. I love it, though, and I wish I kept that silent edit.
I love Mirror but I've only done Solaris completely once, but I've done the first half about four times.
I haven't finished Shoah. Its too much. Episodically, they're cut into 2h30m films, which is still too much for me. 45m episodes would be perfect. Its just too heavy... as terrible as that is to say.
I found an eleven year old thread in truefilm where a guy was thinking about editing it to get that runtime down. I'm waiting to hear back :)
I have never watched the film, but I have read the book! My understanding is that Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick worked on their respective media (book and film) very closely, checking in with each other regularly. The non-spoiler answer is that the beginning and the ending are described more clearly in the book, and I guess it doesn't come across as clearly in the film.
Spoiler answer
The monkeys at the beginning are proto-humans. They were doomed to die and so an alien super race, wanting to "grow" different younger alien races, steps in to make sure they don't perish. The monoliths are signs of their civilization (and interference). His discovery of the monolith at the end allows him to visit the home system of the alien super race.Evolution of humanity from its humble beginnings to what we see in the film
I have a friend who could rant for hours about this movie. He hates it lol
The Naked Gun
I remember loving the films as a kid, loving Leslie Neilson specifically in all those parody films especially in Superhero Movie. The first teaser made me laugh and the full trailer left me a little cold.
Overall I would say this is not as funny as I wanted it to be. I seem to be in the minority here but I think a lot of the gags don't hit as hard as they should. I think the moments when MacFarlane's humor is more present are the better ones.
I prefer Akiva Schaffer's Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping more. That is what I would consider a laugh riot, and it's gags are a lot more memorable. I bring that up not just because it's Schaffer's last film, it's also the last time this type of comedy was released theatrically (almost 10 years ago). It's funny in box office forums discussing this since we all have no idea how it's performing relative to its genre since it's not a thing anymore.
Together
This got a lot of buzz out of Sundance. I'm more wary of these types of horror films now, I don't know how many metaphorical prestige horror movies I can take.
This is really uneven. And I don't mean from my personal enjoyment, but from a structure and thematic stand point. The first half is a typical prestige horror film like this year's Bring Her Back. And then it turns super gory and gets funny, almost a horror comedy and it becomes self aware. And then the ending throws out all it's themes out the window and sours the rest of the film.
The horror-comedy is the best part of the film. Neither Brie or Franco are good at drama, but their comedic timing is impeccable. It makes no sense to me why they did not build this movie around their comedic ability instead.
I don't know when this late 2010 prestige horror aesthetic will go away. I'm not a big fan of it. It's why I'm so quick to praise other types of horror films like Abigail and Alien: Romulus.
Relatively new to film here. Could you please help me understand what you mean by "prestige" horror instead of the regular horror genre?
Yeah!
Elevated horror or art-house horror are the more common terms. It became popularized in the mid-2010s. Throughout the 2000s and early 2010s horror was filled with trashy slashers, and the genre had been on the decline until 2013's The Conjuring. Which was a huge box office hit, it didn't really have gore, and it was only rated R because it was too scary (that's true). The Conjuring doesn't really fall into the art-house horror category but I bring it up since I think it's a pretty important precursor to the genre.
The first three major works for the current elevated horror landscape (I suppose in my opinion) are Under the Skin (2014), The Babadook (2014), and It Follows (2015). They were small scale, focused on atmosphere over jumpscares, and were metaphors for trauma. They all had their own angles, Under the Skin was about alienation and loneliness, Babadook was about parental trauma, and It Follows was about sexual trauma. They were all also highly stylized which made them stand out from the previous horror landscape.
The next few years we had movies such as The Witch (2016), Get Out (2017), Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017), and probably the biggest ones Hereditary (2018) and Midsommar (2019). All films were critically acclaimed and most were financial successes. Again, they all dealt with trauma metaphors one way or another. Hereditary was about generational trauma and Midsommar about the trauma we experience both with the lost of a loved one and a break-up.
So we've had a lot of these types of horror films that feel the need to be about something and that are paced like a funeral. Longlegs (2024) being one of the higher profile releases like this of the decade.
I'm personally tired of that stuff. Radio Silence, a directing duo, gave us Ready or Not (2019), Scream (2022), Scream VI (2023), and Abigail (2024) are the antithesis to this type of filmmaking. There's no pretense with them, they're not saying something they're making entertainment. And that's a more noble goal than making a movie to show how smart you are (like how I believe Ari Aster makes films). Fede Alvarez is also along the lines of the Radio Silence guys with Alien: Romulus (2024) where there's a clear technical precision with his films without it feeling like he's saying something even if the whole film is an immigration metaphor. That theme is hidden beneath the entertainment and it isn't at the forefront.
I rewatched Sunset Boulevard (1950). Fathom Events rereleased it in theaters for its 75th anniversary. It wasn't in my local theater, but was showing in a theater about an hour away from me, and that was worth it to see it on the big screen. The showing was about half full, and I think I was the only person under 40. Best movie crowd ever - quiet, never took their phones out, but still made it feel like a group experience.
Even though I had seen it before and remembered the plot right before things would happen, I still enjoyed it. The plot is simple enough for an idiot like me to understand, but still interesting. I'm not smart enough to go "movies these days," but Gloria Swanson's performance feels like something you would never see today. She totally sells it as a crazy has-been, while modern movies prefer more naturalistic acting.
I think this Billy Wilder guy really knows how to make a movie! I've enjoyed all of his movies I've seen so far (Sunset Boulevard, Sabrina, Some Like It Hot, and The Apartment). Can someone help me decide what to watch next out of Double Indemnity, Stalag 17, or Witness for the Prosecution?
My vote would be for Stalag 17. Excellent ensemble cast, with William Holden in the lead.
My local theater is rerunning The Wild Robot (2024), so I decided to go see it again. I enjoyed it even though I had already seen in during its original run. I expected a mostly empty theater, but it was packed with only three seats open in the back corners. Apparently a day care had booked most seats at this showing, so I got to watch the movie in a room full of kids. It honestly didn't hurt the experience that much since it's a family movie anyway.
However...
The power went out for a few seconds after about 55 minutes. It took them about 15 minutes to reboot the projector and resume the movie, but... they basically just skipped over the time we had missed. The 15 minutes we missed were critical to the plot moving from the second to the third act, and we missed scenes with important emotional payoff. I wasn't super confused since I had seen the movie once before, but much of the audience was clearly confused for a bit after the restart.
They gave everyone a free pass to any movie they want to apologize. I feel like that's a fair trade for screwing up this movie. Now, can anyone convince me (without spoilers) to finally go see F1?
Going back to very old movies sometimes need a prepared mindset of looking for how the movie has influenced later films and why it is part of cinematic history to appreciate it. Other times it still holds up as a very effective engaging narrative, which was the case for me with Fritz Lang's M from 1931. It is the simplicity that wins. Modern films about serial killers will have multiple layers, characters, themes, subplots and variety, but this is just in every sense of the word just pure and simple. There is tension right from the start with incredibly simple film techniques, that works so well because they are so clear and effective. A shot of a poster with a reward for capturing a serial killer of children, a girl playing with a ball and a the shadow of a man asking her a question. Easy to understand the implication in mere seconds, backed up by a scene of a mother waiting for her daughter to get home and things are already scary and fully grabbed my attention.
This simplicity holds up while keeping things interesting with a rather hilarious development of both the police and the criminal underworld wanting to catch the killer, all leading to a chilling finale. Worth watching not merely as a history lesson, but as a thriller that still holds up and can rival the crippling tension of many modern movies it has influenced.
I watched Wes Anderson's 'The Phoenician Scheme' last night and really enjoyed it. As far as I can tell, this seems to be one of his most divisive movies but I don't understand the complaints. His signature aesthetic is very much intact here; it screams Wes Anderson. The plot is a good deal more straightforward than just about anything else he's made. There's a good deal less character development, but it's tighter and closely aligned to the plot. Also, there are plenty of the absurd moments/vignettes he's known for.
Long story short, as a committed Wes Anderson fan I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it.
I watched Black Bag 2 days ago. I liked it! I have a very hard time finding any new movies that I like. So much of it is either some superhero movie, a remake, or just another recycled plot. Hmm... maybe this one is a recycled plot? If so, I do not know the source, so it felt fresh to me. I like the actors, I liked the story. It felt tight, focused, kept me interested. I recommend it.