What're you watching?

Topic

What movies and TV shows are you watching?

Replies

Dracula was good until the lawyer shows up… then it’s all tits up from there… =/
 
Also, I wish they’d touched up the prosthetics on Harker a bit, ’cause I kept fixating on the obvious latex mask, but other than that it was fine… kind of a combination of Bram Stalker’s Dracula and Inteview with a Vampire. They could’ve done a lot more on that 2nd and 3rd episode I feel… but oh well.

Saw Little Women again and liked it even more. The child Pugh stuff bothered me less, except for the scene with her and actual children, which feels like this scene from Elf:

The Social Network

I could easily have bought this due to the cast and creative crew a few years back instead of watching on Netflix. I’m glad I didn’t.

It’s a very good movie technically, well-written, well-shot, with only one self-inflicted flaw at the end.  Yes, Zuckerberg is a bad guy, the film pulling its punches at that point, after beating the crap out of him for just under two hours felt weird.  In that respect, I’m amazed the film, as it is, got made but perhaps because it is a matter of public record that stops a lot of attempts to stop it dead.

Lots of US TV shows have spent lots of time depicting the hell that is US high school, but this film shows how that same culture continues on into college study and it is that culture that gave birth to Facebook.  It explains a hell of a lot about internet culture, about how and why things are the way they are.  Sure, a lot of it is human nature, but a lot is also its particular view of human nature. how it engages with and what it encourages of that.

That Facebook, as a company, has a cavalier attitude to law goes all the way back to the start.  Right then, with the Facemash, Zuckerberg was breaking laws left, right and centre, but no consequences followed so why not conclude you can ride out any storm or controversy?  Having watched this film, the only real surprise with the Cambridge Analytica scandal is that it didn’t happen sooner.

So, yeah, a very smart film, essential watching for everyone but not easy viewing.  Disturbing, uncomfortable and it lingers in the head afterwards.

I’m watching Draccywho.

I’m up to episode 3 and my immediate thoughts are they stole the plot from Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. Also, Dracula actually had motivation and agency in that superior version.

Contrary to popular opinion I thought episode 2 was better than episode 1. I liked the kind of whodunnit tropes but it would have benefitted from … being better.

Episode 3 is pretty dumb so far. The show would have really elevated if the guy playing Dracula didn’t play Dracula and someone better at acting had played Dracula. Maybe they could have made the role interesting.

Oh well, I guess we’ll never know because this franchise is clearly dead.

 

I said I thought episode 2 was better too. I’m not popular. 

Still not watched the last episode.

I was hoping when they did the ripp-y face thing that Nicholas Cage would be underneath.

Oh, and yay, you’ve levelled up.   1000pts to Tim! Bet you can backflip all over the place now.

So you did!

We are two pod people in a pod peoples people pod!

 

I thought the first episode was better constructed (particularly compared to episode two’s slightly flabby ending) but they’re both good. I might just pretend that the series ended there.

Anonymous wrote:

So you did!

We are two pod people in a pod peoples people pod!

 

Oddly-poddly!

Anonymous wrote:

The show would have really elevated if the guy playing Dracula didn’t play Dracula and someone better at acting had played Dracula. Maybe they could have made the role interesting.

Really? I thought he was great, and only let down by the material in the final episode.

No he’s shit.

He’s shit Dave.

Who is he? He’s shit, that’s who he is.

He does have a Banging name.

So there is that.

I suppose so ..

But I don’t like his banging.

Oddly-poddingly enough, I don’t like his banging either.

Anonymous wrote:

No he’s shit.

He’s shit Dave.

Who is he? He’s shit, that’s who he is.

Cackula.

Your face is a cackula

Its a cackula face

Well I haven’t seen writing of this calibre since episode three.

Dave wrote:

Well I haven’t seen writing of this calibre since episode three.

You’ve now convinced me to watch cackulastical episode 3.

Idea board for episode 4:

Dracula in future?

Dracula vs aliens?

Van Helsing comes back as a robot.

Renfield stars, but as a twist, he’s a robot.

Turns out drinking blood can make you time travel!

Dracula vs dinosaurs? But in space!

Big twist! Dracula’s best friend is an accountant.

Anonymous wrote:

Idea board for episode 4:

Dracula in future?

Dracula vs aliens?

Van Helsing comes back as a robot.

Renfield stars, but as a twist, he’s a robot.

Turns out drinking blood can make you time travel!

Dracula vs dinosaurs? But in space!

Big twist! Dracula’s best friend is an accountant.

Needs more wee little muppet men

Need those gems for episode 5:

Dracula vs The Count from Sesame Street (but under the sea).

Sherlockula

As a total swerve, im watching Carole and Tuesday – the little anime on Netflix about two wannabe pop stars who live on Mars.

Look, it’s really fun and the characters, particularly those in the music industry, are pretty clever. Also the songs are pretty good and encompass a pretty wide variety of what’s considered to be modern ‘pop’  music.

I had a look at some of the artists theyve got to write season 1 and 2 and there’s some fairly medium sized names on there for people in the know about those particular genres (like me, i’m someone who is in the know about those particular genres).

I give it lots of good cackula faces so far out of a possible many great cackula faces.

 

If you want to watch a great TV series about vampires, you should watch What We Do In The Shadows. It is awesome and has Matt Berry which makes it ultra awesome!

Yes, it is awesome and it does have Matt Berry in it.

Todd wins the most correct post of 2020.

I’ve been watching it because Watanabe. Just the first season so far.

It’s a lot of fun. Bebopadudical

What We Do in the Shadows is Bebop Berry-awesome too!

Yeah its got Watanabe’s fingerprints on it and I think people will unconsciously know it shares some DNA with Bebop, Space Dandy and Samurai Champloo even if they don’t know who Watanabe is.

It’s different from the others – it’s definitely more mature than Space Dandy but it’s not like Samurai Champloo or Cowboy Bebop because it’s not at all an action show (also female protagonists).  It’s really enjoyable.

It’s very moving – finding new family/connections, etc. via music. And it’s nice to have female protagonists.

Ford vs Ferrari/Le Mans ’66

It’s well made, great cast, looks lovely and is entertaining but it does jazz it up a bit in obvious ways.

I’d prefer a bit more confidence in the story and the real people, and less relying on Hollywood slight of hand.

But it’s still fun.

Watched all of DRACULA on Netflix. Ultimately it was disappointing in much the same way as JEKYLL a few years ago. The ending doesn’t work and feels rushed. I didn’t mind the big shift in setting for the final episode but everything goes too fast and the bonkers nature of the story doesn’t have time to really work. It just stops being sensible.

however it does have some great ideas and scenes that it just crashes past to get to a very talkative and otherwise anticlimactic and inert ending.

So I cancelled my Netflix sub this month and instead signed up to a DVD rental by post service (yes, there is still one going). I recently read Hadley Freeman’s Life Moves Pretty Fast and came out of it with a list of 70-odd films to (re)watch, barely any of which are on streaming services. Netflix et al are great for their own content and some new releases, but they still don’t offer the breadth of DVDs. It’s oddly liberating to build a list from whatever you want instead of just scrounging through lists of recommendations and opaque categories.

Anyway, my first disc arrived today:

12 Angry Men – I’ve never seen this before, but the plot is very familiar thanks to decades of rip-offs (Veronica Mars did it, hell Maverick did it, in an episode where he convinces another juror of the accused’s innocence through the magic of cards!) and, well, it’s a premise simple premise and you can pretty much work out the entire thing from that: 12 jurors convene to deliberate on what they think is a slam dunk conviction, except one juror who insists on voting not guilty.

 

It’s not about the plot though, it’s about the characters and the performances, which are great. Each of the jurors feels like a fully realised person (impressive given they’re not given names) and the feuds and rifts that build between them are brilliant. I especially like #11 getting irritated with #7’s carefree attitude and lack of explanation for changing his vote.

 

Not all of it works, mind. The moment when the jurors all turn away from the ranting racist one is a bit stagey, as they all get up and stare at the walls and I don’t really buy him backing down from his prejudices then. The final moment, when #9 hurries over to #8 outside the courthouse is unintentionally hilarious too, as he asks his name, gives his and then after and awkward pause just says “well, goodbye”. I guess it’s meant to be some profound comment on them having no connection outside the jury room, but it’s just odd.

I was disappointed when I watched 12 Angry Men because it’s waaaay too old so I don’t like that sort of acting… But I like those kinds of movies.

But heroic Henry Fonda?

I went to an advance screening of Bombshell tonight (it comes out here next week).

It was fine. I think the message was more important than the movie, like Spotlight, but unlike spotlight the script isn’t as tight. Acting is great though , except the for Theron who veers into characature with her accent at times.

Not as good as the loudest voice but I’m increasingly becoming curious as to how the Murdoch boys are being portrayed in popular media. Bearing in mind the movie could not have been made without Foxs consent – the IP alone would have been impossible – and the credits indeed make a buried away thank you to Fox News…

I noticed this week that Sky Atlantic are showing Oz from the beginning and it’s a show I’ve heard mentioned now and then as being one of the big influential 90s HBO shows, but I’d never seen, so I gave the first episode a go.

Nope nope nope. Nope.

I really don’t know enough about prison (thankfully) to say how realistic it is but it feels like every hackneyed cliche and hammy stereotype about prison (like the kind of stuff an episode of Family Guy or American Dad would use) but played straight (so to speak). Except not that straight, because it has a weird tone and style to it that I can see having been revolutionary in 1997, but which hasn’t dated well at all.  Being shot on video means it looks more like an episode of Malcolm in the Middle than a serious drama.

Weirdly, it reminds me of late 90s Vertigo comics (especially the ads in them, for some reason) with a sort of hyper-awareness of their own transgressive story elements that just comes out a bit smug and self-satisfied. “Hey, here’s a guy who’s been tricked into becoming the prison bitch of a nazi. Wamp-wamp.”

I bailed when it became clear that it was just going to be about the “normal” middle class lawyer guy being put through the ringer endlessly.

Oz was the first premium cable drama, so yes, very revolutionary for the time. I watched it a decade ago and really liked the early seasons, but it quickly falls apart as it goes on. The final two seasons are awful.

Beecher is the gateway character, like Piper in Orange is the New Black, but the show is very much an ensemble. There’s a huge cast, some of whom only last for 2-3 episodes.

Hey y’all, I know I been away for a long minute (personal stuff that had to take priority these past few months), but I just had to break my silence in order to say that Underwater is a damn good B-Movie.

Nothing that unique or special, but like last year’s Overlord, it’s a genre film that plays to its strengths, and knows how to use it’s cast, characters, and cliches to full effect. I had a lot of fun with it and it’s definitely at least worth a mid-day matinee. It’s a shame that it’s being kinda disparaged for being something it’s not….I see a lot of comparisons to Alien, when it’s really more like a very polished version of every cheesy early 90’s sea monster gorefest.

Overall 7/10

I watched The Kid Who Would Be King and enjoyed it quite a bit. It’s a fun modern retelling of Arthurian legend with some decent child actors in the lead roles and a fair amount of wit and invention.

Sometimes it feels a bit stretched, with extended periods where not a huge amount happens, and the action setpiece moments are fairly brief when they do come. And it’s also pitched a little oddly age-wise – too adult for young kids but too sanitised for teenagers.

But it has a lot of heart – it reminded me of Wonder Woman in the way it told a classic-feeling story very sincerely – and it’s very charming overall (with the Merlins often stealing the show). A shame it didn’t do better.

All The Right Moves – It’s 1983. A 21 year old Tom Cruise is playing a high schooler who casually claims to be 5′ 10″. No-one bats an eye. The lie begins. (I’m not going to spoiler tag this btw)

I didn’t know much about this going in, just that it was an 80s teen movie with Tom Cruise and Lea Thompson. Given the title, I was expecting something kinda fluffy, a rom-com type thing about him winning her over. It turns out that it’s as much a sports movie as anything. In a way, it feels like there’s two different films struggling to break free from each other here, but regardless, the final result doesn’t really work.

Cruise plays Stef, a senior in high school banking on getting a football scholarship for college so he can become an engineer and avoid ending up in a dead end job in the steel mill that defines his working class town. Unfortunately, he gets on the wrong side of his coach and his scholarship hopes fade away.

This is really a film about poverty. It’s said that the general perception held in hindsight of decades aren’t really true until a few years in and that definitely seems the case here, with a film that shares more DNA with Cimino (long lingering shots of steel mill workers trooping home) than its contemporaries. The image of conspicuous consumption, economic boom and new money glamour tends to drown out that the early Regan years were more of the 70s, dominated by economic struggle (there’s an SNL sketch that always comes to mind, of Reagan shilling new White House Foods poverty chic meals), which is what this film depicts. Ampipe is a dying town. Its employment almost entirely comes from the steel mill, which is laying people off. The only way out is scholarships for the kids, but as Thompson’s character points out, those are only for football, she’s doomed for a life working in a supermarket because no-one will give her a music scholarship. This depression is true for everyone in Ampipe and the only respite is, weirdly, high school football. It’s a way out for the current school coach as much as the kids, who wants to get hired by a university and is also the only potential source of pride for all the former players and students now stuck in the dying town with nothing else to live for. Ampipe beating the nearby affluent school for the first time in years would mean everything to them, which is sad in its own way.

The trouble is, anchoring all of these elements is Cruise as Stef and he’s not at all likeable or sympathetic. He doesn’t even have any of that weird Cruise-brand anti-charisma, where you know he’s a bit of crazy weirdo asshole but you want him to succeed anyway (see Cocktail or real life when he talks about Scientology). Everything that happens to Stef is a result of his own conceitedness and hubris. He loses his scholarship hopes because he pisses off the coach. He thinks that’s petty and unfair – the film’s big emotional moment is when Stef, having left school and started working in the mill, confronts Nickerson and accuses him of playing god with people’s lives – and maybe it is a little. But the coach has a point, to a degree. Stef did cost them the game, for the exact same fault he was scolded for in practice and he did have an attitude problem. But the idea that Stef isn’t actually good enough – at football or engineering – to deserve a scholarship, isn’t ever considered. He’s a golden child denied, never mind that he passed on the first scholarship offered to him.

Weirdly, the most interesting things in the film happen to the people around Stef. His best friend has to give up his scholarship to California because he knocked up his girlfriend and ends up marrying her. There’s a scene where the friend tries to put a brave face of losing out on his dreams in order to become a teen parent, but Cruise is more obsessed with his own problems and I think we’re supposed to feel more sympathy for him. Then there’s the kid who ends up getting arrested for armed robbery in the middle of a lesson, forced into it by his family being laid off from the mill. Again, the film’s less interested in that than it is in Cruise.

There’s an impromptu happy ending which sees Nickerson, heading to a coaching job in a Californian uni, giving a scholarship to Stef, rescuing him from the steel mill. It’s meant to be a big happy moment, a redemption for Nickerson as he gives back what he “stole” from Stef. But all that scene really does is confirm Stef’s earlier rants in the worst possible way. His future is redeemed entirely on the whims of the football coach. Nickerson is playing god and chooses to be benevolent in this moment, which the film sees as a victory, but it’s not, it’s just another facet of the problem. This one self-obsessed kid gets what he wanted – largely thanks to his girlfriend, who is still seemingly doomed to a dead end job in a supermarket because there’s still no sign of non-football scholarships anywhere – and that’s it, everything is resolved, cue the music and credits.

It’s all a bit odd, which is fitting given how much time the film gives over to the bizarre high school football match and its build up. To an Englishman, that all feels like it’s from an alien world. The crowd for a school football game is crazy, let alone the huge pep rally thing in the school. I see that and think back to the football (soccer) team at my school and the contrast is stark. I don’t know anyone that ever went to watch their matches (even the home ones) and I didn’t even know most of them had happened until days after. Hell, when I was in y10, they won the local division and all it merited was a mention in passing in assembly. The very notion of having to sit around and cheer through some pre-game hype from the PE teacher and the team captain is absurd. And yet this is a reality that the film presents without question. The idea that this is somehow emblematic of all the problems the town has – that pouring all its hopes and dreams into teenagers playing sports is ridiculous – isn’t quite reached.

Hey y’all, I know I been away for a long minute (personal stuff that had to take priority these past few months), but I just had to break my silence in order to say that Underwater is a damn good B-Movie.

It’s nice to have you back, and to see your thoughts on this film. It looks like the UK has to wait until next month for it, but I’m okay to wait considering how stacked with releases this month is. Does the PG-13 rating water it down too much, or do the horror elements retain some weight?

 

I saw Seberg today, which is the Kristen Stewart movie that is actually out in the UK, and is a kind of drama/thriller based on the Breathless actress Jean Seberg’s time under surveillance by the COINTELPRO.

I enjoyed the movie, really liked Stewart in it, and thought that the rest of the cast was strong, all used in the right way so that nobody subtracted from the story or Seberg herself. It’s actually left me wanting to research the true story and see how much of the film was fabricated, since I’m sure that a couple of things were but I could be surprised and those are actually moments that are true.

I also want to watch some of Jean Seberg’s movies and revisit this later to see if it means more to me. Maybe not Paint Your Wagon though.

1917: Pretty much exactly what I thought it would be. It’s incredibly well made, but it didn’t do much for me. The two leads are good, even if the characters aren’t anything out of the ordinary for a war movie. There’s also a whole bunch of 2-3 minute cameos from big name British actors, which are fine, but were all over so quickly they didn’t leave much of an impact on me.

KandorLives wrote:

Does the PG-13 rating water it down too much, or do the horror elements retain some weight?

Nice pun hahah.

And, yes, and no. There are judicious cutaways, but the aesthetic and the environments help carry a good sense of exciting dread. Like, you’re never edge of your seat, but there’s a fun roller-coaster style sense of unease. I think there are two or so scenes where it does push the envelope in terms of what it shows, which work really well, but the rest is just the mood and the claustrophobic vistas.

And thanks, glad to be back Kandor!

JOKER finally became available to rent and in the end… mostly disappointing. Not terrible, but very trying and underwhelming. I think it picks up in the last 30 minutes but I would recommend skipping it.

Phoenix was the primary appeal. His performance was very captivating, but, in the end, he was the only performance in the movie. If you look back at it – mostly, he interacted with a character, the other character is never developed, and then the next time you see that other character, they are finished.

Obviously, there are a lot – a LOT – of references to TAXI DRIVER and KING OF COMEDY which is not that good for the movie since those films work much, much more effectively. This movie basically slavishly follows Arthur Fleck around while both the others not only spent time with other characters, but even in most of the scenes where, say, Travis Bickle or Rupert Pupkin interacts with other people, the other characters are really the most active people in the scenes.

Then at the end, you’re left wondering if anything in the story actually happened outside Fleck’s mind which is the worst sort of cop-out as far as this story is concerned.

The second season of Lost in Space is significantly less good then the first season.

I am on the second episode and I would throw rocks at the screen but

(a) I have no rocks; and

(b) It has drained me of the will to live.

Oh dear.

I had a similar reaction to most of Joker.

I’m surrounded by lots of granite rocks, but I’m afraid I’d miss and hit your face.

I watched Medical Police on Netflix. It’s a follow-up series to Childrens Hospital.

It’s 10 half hour episodes and if you liked CH, you should enjoy this. The quarter hour format worked will for CH. If they were going to go to half hour episodes, MP would have benefited if there had been around 6-7 episodes. There’s a lot of filler that slows everything down at times.

It was fun to revisit the characters and there are some good bits.

Overall, it was fun but could have been a tighter product.

Anonymous wrote:

JOKER finally became available to rent and in the end… mostly disappointing. Not terrible, but very trying and underwhelming. I think it picks up in the last 30 minutes but I would recommend skipping it.

Phoenix was the primary appeal. His performance was very captivating, but, in the end, he was the only performance in the movie. If you look back at it – mostly, he interacted with a character, the other character is never developed, and then the next time you see that other character, they are finished.

Obviously, there are a lot – a LOT – of references to TAXI DRIVER and KING OF COMEDY which is not that good for the movie since those films work much, much more effectively. This movie basically slavishly follows Arthur Fleck around while both the others not only spent time with other characters, but even in most of the scenes where, say, Travis Bickle or Rupert Pupkin interacts with other people, the other characters are really the most active people in the scenes.

Then at the end, you’re left wondering if anything in the story actually happened outside Fleck’s mind which is the worst sort of cop-out as far as this story is concerned.

I felt similarly. To the point that I’m actually very surprised that it’s done so well both critically and commercially. To me it was a movie that didn’t really seem to have anything at all to say. I’m a fan of Phoenix’s work, but, while good as always, I don’t really think this was anywhere near his most memorable performances. I was hoping for far more from the movie than I got, but oh well.

Echoing what others have said; I saw 1917. It’s very good at what it is.

It’s not a character piece, strictly a chase/quest with edge of your seat set pieces. It’s smart enough to hint that everyone is more complex though. Despite the fact that it doesn’t take the time to explore it.

I hope it doesn’t get Best Picture, but it’s a good film.

I’m in much the same place on Joker.  Laura loved it, but I felt it was an OK movie elevated by Phoenix’s amazing performance.

Swing Time – A few years back I went through a lot of Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire musicals and if you’d asked me (or, more likely, I’d brought it up for no reason) I’d have said Swing Time was the best of them, rather than the accepted favourite Top Hat. But rewatching it this weekend I think I’d reverse my opinion. I had a lot more fun with Top Hat when I rewatched it before Christmas and its ludicrous farce than Swing Time.

The first problem is that it takes ages to get going, about 20 minutes before it does a musical number* or Rogers appears. That wouldn’t be a problem if the plot was good or the jokes funny, but unfortunately neither are true. The story is banal and nonsensical (Astaire is a dancer who is also a great gambler who misses his own wedding – thanks to his own colleagues – and then placates his future father in law by saying he’s going to make a load of money in New York, but is ditched by the colleagues who were so desperate to prevent his wedding and… I don’t know – he ends up in New York bugging Ginger Rogers, who is a dance teacher and after taking a “lesson” they start auditioning for night clubs, for some reason?) and the jokes are spotty at best.

This is true throughout. What Swing Time has going for it is – as you’d guess – the musical numbers. The dance sequences are all great and there’s a bevy of truly great songs created for this film: Never Gonna Dance, Pick Yourself Up, The Way You Look Tonight, A Fine Romance. But the material linking them is largely flat.

The other big problem is that there’s a blackface number which is hard to accept all these decades later (and which I’d completely forgotten the existence of – in fact I suspect the BBC cut it out from the broadcast version of Swing Time I caught a few years back). While the choreography and staging is impressive, entertaining even, it’s uncomfortable to see Astaire do a ludicrous parody of black entertainers, with blackface, a ridiculous costume and rigid, bent elbows and an opening caricature on the soles of giant tap shoes.

The film itself is a bit of a disappointment, but I watched it this time on a Criterion Collection blu-ray release, the special features of which greatly compensated. As well as archival interviews, there’s a couple of really good featurettes about the film, and an archival commentary (from the late 80s – who knows how that was originally delivered). They go into a lot of depth on the film (highlighting parts of the choreography I’d never have noticed), including the blackface section, and it almost left me thinking I’d enjoyed the film more than I actually had.

Shaun the Sheep The Movie:

Vincent Adultman played by sheepses.

Animal catcher has gone into full-on Punisher mode. (I knew he was a bad ‘un – blue gloves!)

Oh no.

Shaun Sheep is crying. Babby sheep is all teary. There’s a cast reject-rodent hybrid from Isle of Dogs.

And now their music is broken.

 

Todd wrote:

I watched Medical Police on Netflix. It’s a follow-up series to Childrens Hospital.

It’s 10 half hour episodes and if you liked CH, you should enjoy this. The quarter hour format worked will for CH. If they were going to go to half hour episodes, MP would have benefited if there had been around 6-7 episodes. There’s a lot of filler that slows everything down at times.

It was fun to revisit the characters and there are some good bits.

Overall, it was fun but could have been a tighter product.

I enjoyed it a lot, especially the parts that tied in closer to CH at the start and end of the season. I was happy to see all the characters (except Chief) again, and to see Erinn Hayes get a leading role. I missed them doing a “behind-the-scenes” episode though, which were always great.

Ten episodes was probably a bit much, but it didn’t drag nearly as much as most serialized Netflix shows do. I’d watch more, either of this or them doing a different genre for a season.

It’s okay.

Wee lamb sheep is all right without his walkman. They’re singing for him.

Just keep singing sheepies…

…Okay, now the sheep are in Breaking Bad guise.

And there’s a giant yellow spotted Trojan horsey. What is this film?

 

Watched the first two episodes of Dracula and thoroughly enjoyed them however the end of episode 2 makes me think the series will shit the bed in episode 3 and fail the landing.

Bruce wrote:

Watched the first two episodes of Dracula and thoroughly enjoyed them however the end of episode 2 makes me think the series will shit the bed in episode 3 and fail the landing.

You’re not wrong.

Bruce is a wizard!

Rather that than a Dracula.

The Chris Packham punk thing that was on BBC4 on Friday. It wasn’t what I expected — it sold itself to me as “Chris talks to Alan Moore about counter-culture”, and I think Moore may have been in it for 15 seconds. But despite this, it was very interesting. Less about punk as music and more about it as a cultural movement, specifically in the UK, specifically in 1977. I still don’t really buy the notion that punk was this big transformative movement in society, but Packham’s (and his interviewees’) arguments are thoughtful and persuasive.

Shaun the Sheep gave me nightmares. I usually don’t remember dreams.

I’ll read some Alan Moore tonight instead. He’s a wizard.

The Report: Scott Burns manages to distill c. 7000 pages of the investigation re the CIA into a 2 hour film. Falters a bit here and there but Adam Driver is superb as Daniel Jones; all quietly clenched-jaw when he’s told not to get emotionally involved. Annette Benning is terrific as Feinstein. Spoilt with the cast overall including Hamm and Tierney. Tim Blake Nelson and Matthew Rhys reliably out-act pretty much everyone in their few scenes without being showy. Like Spotlight it’s about what happens when there’s no accountability until there is. How to confront redaction whilst adhering to the law. The film subtly acknowledges that bipartisanship can lead to too much compromise. Urgent and angry without being despairing and dramatic.

Just back from 1917. I thought it was incredible, very moving and difficult to watch in places, and also very cleverly made. One of the best films I’ve seen at the cinema in a long time.

Tammy and The T-Rex: Gore Cut – This was a lot better than I thought it would be. In the B-Movie sense, at least. It has the tone, energy, and attitude of one of those polished Roger Corman productions. Maybe it’s the HD transfer, but everything just seems a little more poppy and self-assured in itself. Silly, ludicious, and sometimes kinda vile (in a fun way) – but in the magical area where b-movies like The Toxic Avenger or Death Race 2000 thrive in. It definitely front loads a bunch of its punches though, the first half is maybe the most outright entertaining – and the second have slows down noticeably. But the tone and personality carries it through. Making for an expectedly uneven, but fun watch….if you’re into this style of movie.

Overall: 7/10

I’ve been reading about Kaufman’s upcoming film and realised I’ve never seen Synecdoche, New York.

So now I’m not watching Adaptation.

 

The ‘Burbs – this is a decent comedy. I always forget that it has Carrie Fisher in it, playing the epitome of rationality as all the characters around her succumb to utter paranoia. I can’t imagine this is anyone’s favourite movie, but it’s good.

I rented the Arrow Video release (which is like the Criterion Collection for films regular people have heard of) and the special features ended up having the opposite effect they had for Swing Time. There, they were so insightful and thoughtful, that I found myself wanting to have liked the film more than I did. Here, they – or rather the main one, which is an hour of interviews with director Joe Dante, a couple of senior crew members and actors Corey Feldman, Wendy Schaal and Courtney Gains – are so banal that it undermined how much I liked of the film. Dante’s consistently interesting, but the others come out with such bland answers that it feels like one of those parodies of DVD special features, like Garth Marenghi’s Darkplace, completely over-selling the value of the film.

One of the interesting things that does come out in the special features is how there’s several elements of the film that were in flux right up to the end of production. The ending, for instance, went through four different versions and I’m not convinced the one they ended up with is the best. It also turns out that Tom Hanks (who, reading between the lines, didn’t seem overly enamoured with the project) wanted his character to have recently lost his job, so the staycation he’s so set on having is him trying to cope with that and not tell his wife. And I think that element, which was only a few references and ended up getting cut out entirely, would have given a bit more texture to his character than he ends up with in the final cut.

Dave wrote:

Just back from 1917. I thought it was incredible, very moving and difficult to watch in places, and also very cleverly made. One of the best films I’ve seen at the cinema in a long time.

I’m really hoping that I agree with you when I get to see this thing.

‘The Two Popes’ on Netflix.

It’s smart, and often funny, and maybe a little too on the nose in places. But then I wonder how on the nose conversation like this really are? Maybe even more so, it’s possible.

Two great actors going toe to toe is a great time though. It’s ‘Rocky’ in cassocks.

I liked it.

Okay, so 1917 did work well for me. I liked it very much, with some big spectacle and big emotions going hand in hand. I would be perfectly happy with it winning Best Picture even though it’s not my first choice.

 

I was quite pleased to find that the film was immersive enough for me to stop comparing it to Dunkirk for the duration.

Wow Dark Fate was laaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy… Also, probably the worst effects on a Terminator movie ever… all the Terminator shots looked like a decade-old video game… not good at all… I liked Grace as a character, but the rest was pretty fuckin’ forgettable. So yeah, not good… though I’m gonna call it lazy, ’cause it’s not like it’s a “bad” movie or anything, but it sure is lazy, so there, I found a new term to describe these types of shitty ass movies… xD

OH also, godfuckin dammit you lazy americans, we’re in 2020, I’m sure it shouldn’t be much of an issue to cast ACTUAL mexicans in your movies… I can understand the faux-mexicans in movies from the 90’s but come the fuck on… again: laaaaazy. I’ll give them some points for using actual mexican slang, even though it was a bit forced and cringy, but that’s about it… also, the subtitles didn’t match what was being said, so yeah =/

Jon wrote:

Wow Dark Fate was laaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy… Also, probably the worst effects on a Terminator movie ever… all the Terminator shots looked like a decade-old video game… not good at all… I liked Grace as a character, but the rest was pretty fuckin’ forgettable. So yeah, not good… though I’m gonna call it lazy, ’cause it’s not like it’s a “bad” movie or anything, but it sure is lazy, so there, I found a new term to describe these types of shitty ass movies… xD

Jon wrote:

Wow Dark Fate was laaaaaaaaaaaaaaazy… Also, probably the worst effects on a Terminator movie ever… all the Terminator shots looked like a decade-old video game… not good at all… I liked Grace as a character, but the rest was pretty fuckin’ forgettable. So yeah, not good… though I’m gonna call it lazy, ’cause it’s not like it’s a “bad” movie or anything, but it sure is lazy, so there, I found a new term to describe these types of shitty ass movies… xD

OH also, godfuckin dammit you lazy americans, we’re in 2020, I’m sure it shouldn’t be much of an issue to cast ACTUAL mexicans in your movies… I can understand the faux-mexicans in movies from the 90’s but come the fuck on… again: laaaaazy. I’ll give them some points for using actual mexican slang, even though it was a bit forced and cringy, but that’s about it… also, the subtitles didn’t match what was being said, so yeah =/

Rick and Morty did the best Terminator with Season 4, Episode 5.

A sample:

I kinda forgot to say, but the de-aging at the begining was on point… but the rest of the FX and CGI was pretty pretty bad… like from the opening shot with the machines, it looked pretty bad, it only got worse from there =/

That’s my fuckin’ line!

Binged through Sex Education Season 2, today.

And, well, for the most part it’s pretty much as consistent as Season 1 was. There’s really not much of a dip, but the flipside is that there’s really not much improvement. It’s just altogether steady. It helps drop you back into the characters, the drama, the dynamics with ease and makes it quick to remember why the show works and how well it works. My only real complaint is that near the end the season starts to pile on the complications and the twists really heavily. It doesn’t feel natural, or like it has genuine flow, and kinda just feels like they wanted to pad things out. A lot of what that leads to is some great character work, but it still feels too jarringly placed and leaves to an even more overt open end than Season 1 had.

I mean, that season had plots hanging, but it felt a lot more concise and earned with those threads. This just….throws it all around. It’s still really funny, warm, and comfortably dramatic – but I hope a third season gets around sooner. Because it’s not so unmissable at this point, since it’s gotten into a worn groove.

Overall: 8/10

Third episode of Dracula was a let down. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it shit the bed but it definitely left skidmarks on the sheets.

I didn’t like the first two Bad Boys movies, but Bad Boys For Life is a lot of fun. Not great, but very enjoyable. It feels like the movie that Hobbs and Shaw should have been, including an airplane scene as funny as the one in Hobbs and Shaw is terrible.

Hobbs and Shaw is a god damn masterpiece* and you should apologise to the Rock and the Stath right now

 

* Ok I was really drunk watching it.

Dolittle is pretty much your standard early 00’s Nickelodeon family adventure film. It has the same humor, tone, and storytelling ability as any random, mediocre, and generic family adventure story from that era. It meanders, it makes easy jokes, gags, and punchlines, and is brimming with some unearned sentiment and littered with “power of friendship/family” morals. It’s….okayish for what it is.

I just find it really silly how much the reaction to it is being littered with insane takes on it, that I can really only chalk up to wanting more views. Because I’ve seen things where people take it way out of proportion, or are outright lying.

Is it a disappointing movie? Sure, if you’re looking for something with some actual depth or catharsis – but it has enough of a shallow end to work for a 6 or 7 year old crowd.

Overall 6.5/10

Terminator Dark Fate is a remix.

I’m sort of conflicted because when the other sequels tried to play fast and loose with the setup they produced bad films, but this one is equally bad, just in a different way.

Terminator played it straight.

Terminator 2 flipped it around.

Now this one tried to do both, but mostly it just retreads the old ground, picking darker or lighter as the mood takes it.

As a pilot for a TV show it would be promising, but as an intended blockbuster movie it’s just not interesting enough. The whole thing feels like one big “that’ll do”.

But it doesn’t.

Treadstone

For eight of the ten episodes this rolls along nicely.  It fuses its twin stories together effectively and far more clearly than The Witcher did in chronological terms.  Then you hit episodes 9 and 10 and….

It just goes off the fucking rails.  Not in a little way either, no, this is a blow up the tracks while going over the bridge off the rails.  This thing plummets off the edge with enthusiasm a lemming would envy.

There’s a guy in this, let’s call him Professional Arsehole, why?

Because every series he turns up in, he plays the same role – Professional Arsehole. So, when it turns out Professional Arsehole is indeed behind almost all of it, it’s not a surprise.  It would have been surprising if he was innocent, that would have been a shock.

On the one character that links both stories, Petra, it takes a weird approach. On the one hand they’re going for ‘strong female character’, but also try to play the sympathy card while also rendering her a total psychopath.  It’s all over the place in both stories.  Oh and young, elfin Petra is nothing older, built-like-brick-shithouse Petra.

Its biggest sins in those last two episodes are those of most US TV series – a lack of confidence in the product so the last episode is peppered with cliffhangers.  In Ep 9, it becomes very apparent this is not going to end well and, well, it doesn’t.  “Bad guys win” resolutions are, at this point old hat.  It also throws in the most convenient plot development ever right at the end of ep 9, with Tara being a Treadstone operative.  Nor, in the end, could I enjoy Professional Arsehole getting offed.  It made for an unsatisfying conclusion that dragged the series down with it.

Pity.

Inside Llewyn Davis is the Coen bros interpretation of Shrödinger’s cat.

And apparently, at some point, my cat was off making a movie with Oscar Isaac. She could’ve brought me along for the ride.

New way to ensure box office success – every movie should include at least one scene with Oscar Guitarman singing to a pub filled with puppies.

I saw 1917 tonight.

It’s definitely a good movie.  It’s sort of like Children of Men in that there’s a really tight shot on the main guy for most of the film and you feel like you go on the journey with him.  There are some really amazing shots that like Scofield pushing through the trenches at the end.  .

I don’t really see the comparison to Dunkirk aside from it being about the Poms.  They’re very different.

EDIT: I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman. I’m not sure if that’s strictly true because, bearing in mind my memory may be faulty, I think there are some small cutaways in the first 30 minutes when it’s not just Scofield.  I’m probably wrong though.

In any event it’s a great fil,.

It’s definitely worth seeing at the cinema.

Anonymous wrote:

EDIT: I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman. I’m not sure if that’s strictly true because, bearing in mind my memory may be faulty, I think there are some small cutaways in the first 30 minutes when it’s not just Scofield. I’m probably wrong though.

No, the only “real” cut is when he gets knocked unconscious and wakes up a few hours later.

Also, as far as I remember Children of Men has a lot of cuts, so you’re probably thinking about something else… =P

Thanks for keeping me informed but I’m not.  There are a couple of long one shot takes which is what I was referencing.

paul f wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

EDIT: I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman. I’m not sure if that’s strictly true because, bearing in mind my memory may be faulty, I think there are some small cutaways in the first 30 minutes when it’s not just Scofield. I’m probably wrong though.

No, the only “real” cut is when he gets knocked unconscious and wakes up a few hours later.

Ah ok.  Fair enough.

Extremely well done

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for keeping me informed but I’m not.  There are a couple of long one shot takes which is what I was referencing.

“I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman”
 
Yeah… there’s a lot of movies and series with plenty of long takes… that’s not the same as something “like Bridman” which is designed (and billed) as a single take. Point being CoM is nothing like Birdman, except they’re both directed by mexicans, but yeah whatever…

Jon wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for keeping me informed but I’m not.  There are a couple of long one shot takes which is what I was referencing.

“I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman”
 
Yeah… there’s a lot of movies and series with plenty of long takes… that’s not the same as something “like Bridman” which is designed (and billed) as a single take. Point being CoM is nothing like Birdman, except they’re both directed by mexicans, but yeah whatever…

Well actually, Children of Men is a lot like Birdman. Equally immersive experiences. (Not just because they’re both great movies). Think of it like sewing: the stitching is seamless – IIRC there are c. 100 or so stitches in Birdman to weave all the Steadycam shots together.

The most memorable long take in Children of Men is the car scene. Cuarón called cut because of a splash of ‘blood’ on camera: no one heard so they kept on rolling. Movie magic.

1917 takes it one stage further.

Jon wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for keeping me informed but I’m not.  There are a couple of long one shot takes which is what I was referencing.

“I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman”
 
Yeah… there’s a lot of movies and series with plenty of long takes… that’s not the same as something “like Bridman” which is designed (and billed) as a single take. Point being CoM is nothing like Birdman, except they’re both directed by mexicans, but yeah whatever…

Okay. Thanks for the response. I will cherish your words forever.

Avenue 5 is off to a pretty good start. It’s definitely seeming like it’ll be more strictly serialized than Veep or somesuch, but the pilot has enough bones for a good foundation. Didn’t find it all that funny or fascinating, but there’s potential there. Hopefully once we start to see more of the big picture, it’ll start feeling like can’t-miss television.

It’d been about a year, maybe more since we last watched any Better Call Saul. We were both enjoying it (for the wife a rewatch), but must have been busy a few weekends in a row and fell off the schedule.

It didn’t take long to figure out where we were up to, just over halfway through season 2 – we watched 6 episodes over two nights, so we’re up to S3E3 next.

It’s all very well done, though Saul’s brother really is one of the most annoying characters on TV, no? The more we see of Mike the better, and we’ve just had the first appearance of Gus. Looking forward to continuing with it over the coming weeks until we’re up to date.

Elvis Dutan wrote:

Avenue 5 is off to a pretty good start. It’s definitely seeming like it’ll be more strictly serialized than Veep or somesuch, but the pilot has enough bones for a good foundation. Didn’t find it all that funny or fascinating, but there’s potential there. Hopefully once we start to see more of the big picture, it’ll start feeling like can’t-miss television.

This starts here on Wednesday. Looking forward to it.

Andrew wrote:

It’s all very well done, though Saul’s brother really is one of the most annoying characters on TV, no?

I don’t know, I think the more the series goes on the more complex and layered their relationship is revealed to be, and you end up sympathetic on both sides to some extent.

Watched The Predator last night, the new Shane Black one. It’s ok in the sense of recreating that old 80s style of action movie but it’s also a bit of a mess plot-wise – loads of aspects of the story didn’t hang together or didn’t really go anywhere. There’s also no real suspense to speak of, so the action is a bit flat. And the ending was a really odd moment.

I liked the inventive use of force-fields in the climactic action sequence though, so there’s that.

Anonymous wrote:

Jon wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for keeping me informed but I’m not.  There are a couple of long one shot takes which is what I was referencing.

“I realise now that this is being billed as a ‘one take’ film exactly like Children of Men and Birdman”
 
Yeah… there’s a lot of movies and series with plenty of long takes… that’s not the same as something “like Bridman” which is designed (and billed) as a single take. Point being CoM is nothing like Birdman, except they’re both directed by mexicans, but yeah whatever…

Okay. Thanks for the response. I will cherish your words forever.

Man, you’d think you’d grow a thicker skin with how “funny” you can be sometimes… guess not…

I do not give a shit what you think. Please consider showing me the same courtesy.

I’m watching The Two Popes on Netflix.

It’s pretty good so far, really carried by the performances.  The cuts to real life news commentary and the occasional shakycam are a little jarring though, thankfully these are few and far between.

I’m going to try to watch a movie a day this week.  I usually have a whisky and listen to a record in the evenings but I’m taking two weeks off drinking (ending this weekend) and the record isn’t the same without the whisky. So movie it is.  Thankfully Playstation network has a lot of good new releases because im finding Netflix and Amazon Prime slim pickings for recent movies.

 

Jon wrote:

Man, you’d think you’d grow a thicker skin with how “funny” you can be sometimes… guess not…

Anonymous wrote:

I do not give a shit what you think. Please consider showing me the same courtesy.

 

 

That tie is pretty awful.

You’re right and I don’t want to get into a dick-measuring contest with Jon.  While I’ve no doubt his is tremendous I think maybe that discussion is better left back there and we can use the thread for how it’s intended.

Anonymous wrote:

…and we can use the thread for how it’s intended.