What was the last film you watched?

[DallasFanForever]

The Wizard of Oz (1939)

I watched it over the weekend. I know it’s not considered a Christmas movie but for some reason I have to watch it over the holidays every year. It’s a film that never gets old for me. I remember seeing it for the first time when I was six, and about 41 years later I’m still very much hooked on it.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Forget about Airplane! and Hot Shots!, this is the real thing.
A previously unseen blockbuster from the 1970s so I figured I was going to enjoy it regardless, but it's exceeded those expectations.

CAPRICORN ONE is an everything but the kitchen sink satirical/parodic take on both the conspiracy theory and disaster movie genre, including a few nods to movie dialogue staples.
Even though it's obvious from the very beginning that it's not meant to be taken seriously, the movie manages to create the dread of a no-win situation for everyone involved. Once it's happening there's no turning back and the story largely focuses on that part rather than the "what if?" of the scam itself.

This is 2021 and we've seen it all and we've become very smart and yet I had no idea where the story would take me, especially in the first half of the movie.
The performances are convincing when it matters but because it's not serious-epic there are no seriously epic theatrics in the style of the Bruce Willis heroes. And thank God for that.
There's enough suspense and action thrills to keep the viewer engaged for the whole two hours (it didn't feel like two hours) and in a funny twist the Mars-landing-that-didn't-happen turns into a survival-on-Planet-Earth story and the encounters with its alien-esque inhabitants.
The ending is rather abrupt and intentionally cheesy but that's all right because I didn't need more information, and the idea that it stops one moment before it ends kinda gives it a heartrending quality.
And if that's still not enough: Brenda Vaccaro is in it too.

It's not as quirky as Twin Peaks or Fargo (except that a younger and sexy O.J. Simpson is a surreal thing to watch, but that has nothing to do with the movie) but because it works on both - well, all - levels it achieves the same thing.

 

[Seaviewer]

No Down Payment (1957)
I've been meaning to watch this for some time. It's David Jacob's "other" inspiration for Knots Landing and it really is very like Knots's first season - much more so than Scenes From a Marriage.
It's like all the various character traits have been thrown up in the air and fallen into different combinations.
It's also interesting to see actors like Pat Hingle and Cameron Mitchell in their prime - previously I'd only ever seen them older in supporting roles. For instance, a heavier Hingle as Commissioner Gordon in 1989's Batman. I had no idea that he'd ever been a leading man. Tony Randall also does well in a dramatic role - the Richard Avery of the piece, if you will - rather different from the light comedies for which he's now best remembered.

 

[Willie Oleson]

A remake of CRAIG'S WIFE (1936) which was based on a Broadway play.
This third version still has a lot of that theatre style in both the physical and vocal performances, and if you're looking for subtlety then you're not going to find it here.
The movie opens with a jolly, faux-hysterical scene reminiscent of the typical kitchen havoc in UPSTAIRS DOWNSTAIRS (or any of those light-hearted British "bonnet" dramas) and for a moment I thought that this movie wasn't for me.
After that, the reason for all the panic is revealed as being Joan Crawford who delivers her lines at high-speed, and for the second time I began to doubt my choice for youtube-movie-of-the-day.
Thankfully it doesn't take long to see what this Harriet Craig is all about: a bossy control freak who makes it very clear that the main staircase is not meant to be trampled on by servants, and that was reason enough for me to take the bait.

Her diva-esque behaviour is rooted in a fear of loss and abadonment which is based on her belief that all men are genetically designed to cause exactly that, intentional or not.
In a way it reminded me of Sable Colby who was also fighting a problem that wasn't really there, and that problem became a reality because of her shenanigans.
The problem (real or not) was more high-stakes in THE COLBYS but I find the angle rather similar.
The wife of Mr. Craig's boss is the Constance Patterson who complicates the situation even further, and not without a whiff of glee.

All of that still isn't an excuse for the way Harriet treats the people around her and yet I found myself rooting for her a little bit.
She's created her imaginary "perfect" world and she desperately tries to hold on to it which suggests an appreciation for what she has, her warped interpretation thereof notwithstanding.
But at least she's not greedy, she doesn't want more.

The uploader has classified HARRIET CRAIG as film noir so I expected something more sinister in the style of ALL ABOUT EVE.
Harriet's niece Clare (played by LeAnn Rimes look-alike K.T. Stevens) seems a little too devoted to her aunt's well-being and Harriet's know-nothing-about-anything husband Walter seems a little too comfortable with his wife's endless list of rules and demands.
Influenced by the misguided "film noir" tag I was waiting for the murder plot to happen. That doesn't happen and that itself is not a problem but it does make Walter and Clare look very weak and gullible, to the point of suspending disbelief.
Oddly enough that makes them even more unlikeable than the could-have-been murder plotters. It's almost as if they deserve the Harriet Craig treatment.
This also applies to the widow neighbour and her cute kid (I found him terribly annoying).

The soapiest part is when Harriet sabotages Walter's promotion, a promotion that could lead to the top of the company. Again, Harriet is not interested in more or bigger, she wants exactly what she already has.
The sabotage scene looks remarkably subtle (by soap standards anyway) and it's yet another thing that would suit THE COLBYS very well.
I'm not sure where to place the reveal of her faked barrenness other than being the final nail in the coffin, a coffin that had looked pretty nailed down from the outset.
The momentum just isn't there.
And so the story ends with everything she's desperately tried to avoid, but since I simply couldn't expect a different outcome it all feels a bit underwhelming.
Not that the ending or final twist is the most important part of a movie - to me it's more important to enjoy what's happening on screen rather than the analyses afterwards - but it does help to make the story linger on.
Perhaps I've watched it the wrong way, perhaps it was meant to be watched as a comedy of sorts. Come to think of it, that makes more sense.

 

[Angela Channing]

Being The Riccardos (2021)

I have seen a few episodes of I Love Lucy when they used to repeat them on Channel 4 in the UK around 30 years ago at 6 o'clock in the morning. I liked the show so I thought this film would be an interesting watch. I wasn't wrong. I found the film to be engrossing. The casting seemed a bit odd as neither of the leads look like the characters they played but their performances are so good that you don't mind that in the slightest. I am overly emotional in most circumstances and the J Edgar Hoover bit at the end (can't say more as I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen it) did move me even though it was pure fiction. A film that is well worth watching.

 

[Biggie]

E.T The Extraterrestrial (1982)

40 years after the original release, I finally watched this. I have nothing but praise for this movie.

I was drawn in very quickly and by the end I was lost for words.
E.T was just excellent excellent excellent!

 

[darkshadows38]

my folks watched that recently and found it boring well my mom did i dunno about my dad i forgot to ask him, as for E.T. i can't remember the date it came out on but i was either 3 or 4 when it came out and it's the 1st movie i ever saw on the big screen the only part that i remember to this day cause i fell asleep on it is when they are sick or rather when they get sick and are taken into that chamber of sorts.

as for the last film i watched the last of the year it was a bad one called "Mary" (2019) with Gary Oldman a horror movie i bought for a buck at Dollar Tree and it wasn't painfully bad like so many others the acting was good the fx were decent. and it had a couple decent ideas it just wasn't all that scary for one thing, plus it's pretty much a movie that's been done a thousand times a family finds a haunted ship and it starts killing people off.... i was waiting for the twist ending and it came for those who have seen Ghost Ship (2002) which is a pretty decent film i just didn't like the ending with the twist at the end that's all well this one ends like that but unlike that

which had a far better script and that one was pure horror not about a family but a group of people being killed off. for those who want a better horror film that's about a haunted ship pick that one instead. it's a far better movie and it's got this damn good flashback scene at the end where when you see the start of the film it makes more sense when you watch the flashback at the end and you find out how it got haunted this film Mary? nope you don't even get that my rating for Mary i think i gave it a 5/10 or was it 6/10? i forget

 

[Karin Schill]

The last movie I watched was a Swedish Christmas movie called "Jag Kommer Hem Igen Till Jul" from 2019. I loved it since it was not your traditional Christmas movie but actually dealt with some rather heavy subject matters I wasn't expecting to see in a Christmas movie. At the core of the story are two brothers, one who is living in the hometown and one who became a star who moved to LA. Then for Christmas the brothers are reunited. The father has recently died and the mother is sick. The movie is in Swedish but if anyone is interested to check it out here's a trailer for it.

 

[DallasFanForever]

Mommie Dearest (1981)

A thread we had recently discussing Joan Crawford made me feel like going back and watch this for the first time in many years. It wasn’t as great a movie as I remembered but it’s still very entertaining to say the least. Whether you agree or disagree with its content or whatever you think of Christina Crawford for writing the book in the first place, this movie is quite interesting to see. I feel it holds up well for a 40 year old movie that was mostly set even a few decades before that.

 

[Angela Channing]

Don't Look Up (2021)

An end of the world drama. A comet is identified as being on a collision course with the world that will wipe out all life on earth when it impacts. It's a serious subject matter made more palatable by having a lot of humour in the film. It's very dark in some places and hilarious in others. The film is packed with Hollywood A-listers and there isn't a weak performance in it. It's a good film, thought-provoking too and well worth watching.

 

[Angela Channing]

Tick Tick... Boom! (2021)

I like film musicals and prior to this, the last new one that I saw was also directed by Lin-Manuel Miranda, In The Heights (2021), but I didn't like that one too much, nor did I like his filmed stage production of Hamilton (2021) so I went into this with low expectations. How wrong was I? This is a superb stage to screen adaptation of Jonathan Larson's semi-autobiographical novel and Steven Levenson surely must get nominated for the Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar for his work on this film. Andrew Garfield, an actor who I'm normally indifferent about, gives a performance so intense and believable that I found it totally captivating. This film even changed my opinion of Lin Manuel Miranda as his direction was brisk and visually engaging. The film felt modern and current even though the original play was first performed in the 1990s and it was set in that era too and that mainly due to Lin-Manuel Miranda's direction.

The plot is about a playwright who is determined to write his first Broadway play before he is 30 and we see how his single-mindedness impacts on his relationships with those around him. The songs were ok, not particularly memorable but they worked within the context of the film. I think overall it's a great piece of cinema that will do will in awards season.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I've seen many versions of the classic ALICE story and I think I liked most of them. The child in me still enjoys the old fairy tales and that's how most of the AIW movies are presented, basically all remixes of the Disney version.

This TV version from 1966 has been on my radar for quite some time because (apparently) it was done in a different style.
But what makes this movie so unique and (imho) superb is that you can watch it as an Alice In Wonderland movie and as a movie that truly captures the art of movie making.
It's not exactly big news that human creativity peaked in the 1960s and 1970s but somehow it never stops surprising me, and speaking of surprises, apart from being haunting and atmospheric ALICE '66 is also the funniest version I've ever seen. I was still chuckling while I was doing the dishes.

The scripted dialogue, the actors, the effects created by filming technique and by the actors themselves, the otherworldly Indian folk soundtrack (a stroke of genius because it really shouldn't work with these images) - it just played with all my senses.
The Victorian period setting as opposed to the more fantastical fairy tale versions makes more sense from Alice's point of view. All those questions that can't be answered, the suffocating, conventional and bombastic self-imposed importance of the stiff-upper-lipped upper class who keeps its daughters hatted and buttoned up, I mean, if this is Alice's Wonderland then what was her sister dreaming of?

The dream itself looks exactly like that, without any narrative manipulation. Like we are in our dreams, Alice is powerless and aimless, mildly pondering something that may or may not be important. She's not an active heroine and her half-hearted commentary here and there suggests that part of the intelligence that tries to be part of the subconscious (but usually fails) or, for example, when you're able to recognize danger and you try to run away but you're not making any progress because that part of your brain that's supposed to stimulate your physical strength is muted.
The Wonderland dialogue sounds like a mathematical language problem that moves in two opposite directions, to ridicule and sabotage sanity and to make sense (one way or another) of something that has been ridiculous and insane from the outset. Which could refer to Alice's painfully Victorian oblivious state of mind, but with a rebellious undercurrent.

Most ALICEs I've seen "escaped" from the "terror" of Wonderland, in this case it felt a bit sad. I don't know what's going to happen to her and I don't know if she'll ever dream like this again.
It was Anne-Marie Mallik's first and last role and of course that adds to the oomph and obscurity of this movie.

10/10

Edit: don't be fooled by the DVD artwork, it's all in glorious black & white.

 

[Willie Oleson]

From the makers of PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK



And just like PICNIC, the mystery (or mysteries) in SUMMERFIELD 1977 kind of play second fiddle to the setting, time and gorgeous cinematography.
The narrative serves the atmosphere rather than vice versa.
The Australian backdrop is both mesmerizing and brutal, like a Haunted House movie that isn't about ghosts and monsters. The ghost is the situation itself in Summerfield.
The interior sets are equally beautiful in that seventies offbeat kind of way, and then there's Nick Tate sporting a super-tight hot pants generously captured from various angles.
The suspense part has a whiff of WICKER MAN but it's mostly about the idea that things are not the way they are supposed to be and to be honest I didn't care very much what was going to happen or what the outcome would be. But I was glued to screen from start to finish.

An excellent quality upload can be found on you-know-what-site, I suggest to snap it up before it's gone. I think the DVD is hard to find.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Another one I've watched recently...



A.k.a. the original "Fatal Attraction". I knew this was going to be a challenge, not because I had seen it before but because it's impossible to pretend that I haven't watched the many stalker movies that came after this one. It makes it difficult to rate MISTY fairly.
Of course it still works if you're able to adjust your frame of mind but I don't feel I should have to do that in order to enjoy it.
That said, the late 60s groovy Californian vibe is very pleasant, and I like the cool cabin-style houses teetering on the edge of a cliff. In the case of Clint Eastwood's house I couldn't even figure out where the house ends and the garden begins. I like that.

The scripted dialogue is rather unconventional and it kinda plays out as if the viewer is already in the know of the characters and their backgrounds. Like watching MISTY LANDING season 2 without having watched season 1.
The good thing is that it forced me to pay attention to what was being said.
Again, being so familiar with the theme, the story of PMFM looks as straightforward as a cheesy TV film and the feeling of real terror is almost non-existent.
Eastwood's character is not very likeable and also not too smart but there's a love making montage with his ex-girlfriend (accompanied by Roberta Flack's "First Time Ever") to signal that he is indeed the guy to root for. I thought it looked clumsily manipulative.

On the upside, the movie allows Jessica Walter to pull out all the stops as the neurotic psycho and often in an unintentionally funny way. I suppose that qualifies as good "camp".
Donna Mills does a lot with a little and I found her more convincing than Clint Eastwood. But then again, he was also doing everything else behind the scenes of PMFM.
It's one of those movies that deserves the recognition and accolade for an obvious reason but I'm not in a hurry to rewatch it again.

 

[Willie Oleson]

It certainly looks very Christmas with its warm, chocolate-y colour palette. The scarce shocking moments are incredibly effective (the dead body is actually more frightening than the idea of a serial killer, well, not so serial) and the effort to make it more than "just a bunch of unfortunate, bland characters just happening to be in the same place" is certainly appreciated.
But the sum total is quite a different experience. My goodness, how it drags and plods, and it's not that the characters are so fascinating that I enjoy them out of the horror context.
The lack of focus really made this a chore to sit through and there's very little to connect, certainly not enough to justify the final twist that doesn't feel like anything at all. Again, it's only the image of the dead girl in the attic that made my skin crawl, as it were.

Generally speaking I would dismiss a miss as just a miss, but since a) it's from 1974 and b) there's too much in it that could have worked I'll allow myself to rate it more harshly.

3/10

 

[Willie Oleson]

I finished watching this movie just a few minutes ago and I think it's....bizarre, but not necessarily in a bad way.
Narrative-wise it's a bit all over the place, it builds up and tones down again and again only to have it end in a rather underwhelming way.

But it works as a sexy, Gothic guilty pleasure with lots of wickedness and a few surprisingly endearing moments.
I think the best way to watch this movie is to gobble it up and not think too much of it.
Clint Eastwood is great as the scheming charmer although it's a characteristic I'd normally associate with men from The South because the South has the bastards and the devious Southern belles, isn't that correct?
Either way he's very handsome and I wish he had shown more flesh.
The group of female characters has all the stereotypes: the "hag" with a dirty secret, the tramp, the Jane Eyre, the slave who had killed her master (deservedly so) but there's also a Laura Ingalls type who becomes instrumental in the fate of Johnny McBurney. She's creepier than Damien Thorn.
And speaking of creepy and sensational, that kiss between her and Clint Eastwood sure got me invested from the very beginning.

I had never heard of this movie until @Alexis mentioned it on this forum, a few years ago I think? Thanks again!

 

[Alexis]

View attachment 33841
I finished watching this movie just a few minutes ago and I think it's....bizarre, but not necessarily in a bad way.
Narrative-wise it's a bit all over the place, it builds up and tones down again and again only to have it end in a rather underwhelming way.

But it works as a sexy, Gothic guilty pleasure with lots of wickedness and a few surprisingly endearing moments.
I think the best way to watch this movie is to gobble it up and not think too much of it.
Clint Eastwood is great as the scheming charmer although it's a characteristic I'd normally associate with men from The South because the South has the bastards and the devious Southern belles, isn't that correct?
Either way he's very handsome and I wish he had shown more flesh.
The group of female characters has all the stereotypes: the "hag" with a dirty secret, the tramp, the Jane Eyre, the slave who had killed her master (deservedly so) but there's also a Laura Ingalls type who becomes instrumental in the fate of Johnny McBurney. She's creepier than Damien Thorn.
And speaking of creepy and sensational, that kiss between her and Clint Eastwood sure got me invested from the very beginning.

I had never heard of this movie until @Alexis mentioned it on this forum, a few years ago I think? Thanks again!

I love The Beguiled but don't watch the remake with Colin Farrell and Nicole Kidman. It's awful, Really bad.

 

[Angela Channing]

That film poster looks like the cover of a cheap romantic novel.

 

[Angela Channing]

The Power of the Dog (2021)

It's not a bad film even though not a great deal happens in it. It's the kind of film that wins awards (it recently won a Golden Globe) because it looks beautiful and the acting it first rate but the film is a bit lacklustre overall. It's about 2 brothers, a curmudgeonly one called Phil played by Benedict Cumberbatch who no one seems to get on with and the other is more easy going and is called George. George marries and gains a stepson but both mother and son don't really get on with Benedict's character after he mocks the boy for what he considers to be his effeminate manner. Later in the film Phil befriends the boy and teaches him varies cowboy type skills. There is some suggestion that Phil is gay and attracted to the son, who may also be gay, but none if this is firmly established.

 

[Willie Oleson]

That film poster looks like the cover of a cheap romantic novel.

Like so many DVD covers it has very little to do with the original artwork, or even the theme of the movie.


I totally despise the overly bright remake artwork for the Disney DVDs but I guess it's got everything to do with marketing.

Maybe we should start a thread about good and bad DVD covers.