What was the last film you watched?

[Willie Oleson]

THE MISFITS (1961)



It took me only 5 minutes to realise I was watching an unusual film, an almost experimental mix of classic Hollywood and Indie cinema.
The acting, editing and cinematography looks excitingly vibrant even though the story starts somewhere in the middle of another story.
Thelma Ritter plays a landlady of sorts and she has devoted her life to the guidance of soon-to-be-ex-wives, maybe that's why I got Australian vibes from her.
Her arm is bandaged and I wonder if it was a real injury because story-wise it doesn't serve any purpose.
It was Knots Landing's Ben Gibson all over again .

Marilyn Monroe is the weak link in this otherwise great ensemble cast, but perhaps the story wouldn't make sense without her Marilyn Monroeness.
While the physical attraction is addressed, sometimes even in a crude way, it seems rather unlikely that three single men would be content with her friendship.
But if a filmmaker wants to tear up the rulebook of "movie romance" then I'm all for it.
And it's very nice to see that Marilyn is a champion in solo-pingpong.

Some histrionic outbursts come out of nowhere, and Clark Gable's scene in which he can't "find" his daughters could rival Patty Duke's infamous meltdown in Valley Of The Dolls.

Gayloooooord! Rose-Mae!

I get the feeling that Huston and Miller have tried to inject a bit of Eurocinema into their black & white Americana, and if that's true then the effort is very much appreciated.

But all these unusual an entertaining goings-on disappear in the second part of the film, it's almost as if a new team has taken over.
Marilyn Monroe's character's childlike idealism and mid-sentence deep breaths become increasingly challenging to watch, and the feel of the story becomes more explanative in dialogue and I think it's a pity that they decided to hammer it home in such a traditional way.
Incidentally, Thelma Ritter doesn't star in the second part, but I'm not completely sure if that has anything to do with it.

It's difficult to rate a film that is partially wonderful and partially underwhelming, but I don't regret watching it.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

THE MISFITS (1961)

View attachment 53270

It took me only 5 minutes to realise I was watching an unusual film, an almost experimental mix of classic Hollywood and Indie cinema.
The acting, editing and cinematography looks excitingly vibrant even though the story starts somewhere in the middle of another story.
Thelma Ritter plays a landlady of sorts and she has devoted her life to the guidance of soon-to-be-ex-wives, maybe that's why I got Australian vibes from her.
Her arm is bandaged and I wonder if it was a real injury because story-wise it doesn't serve any purpose.
It was Knots Landing's Ben Gibson all over again .

Marilyn Monroe is the weak link in this otherwise great ensemble cast, but perhaps the story wouldn't make sense without her Marilyn Monroeness.
While the physical attraction is addressed, sometimes even in a crude way, it seems rather unlikely that three single men would be content with her friendship.
But if a filmmaker wants to tear up the rulebook of "movie romance" then I'm all for it.
And it's very nice to see that Marilyn is a champion in solo-pingpong.

Some histrionic outbursts come out of nowhere, and Clark Gable's scene in which he can't "find" his daughters could rival Patty Duke's infamous meltdown in Valley Of The Dolls.
View attachment 53271

I get the feeling that Huston and Miller have tried to inject a bit of Eurocinema into their black & white Americana, and if that's true then the effort is very much appreciated.

But all these unusual an entertaining goings-on disappear in the second part of the film, it's almost as if a new team has taken over.
Marilyn Monroe's character's childlike idealism and mid-sentence deep breaths become increasingly challenging to watch, and the feel of the story becomes more explanative in dialogue and I think it's a pity that they decided to hammer it home in such a traditional way.
Incidentally, Thelma Ritter doesn't star in the second part, but I'm not completely sure if that has anything to do with it.

It's difficult to rate a film that is partially wonderful and partially underwhelming, but I don't regret watching it.

One of my faves, so era-specific in its forlorn appeal.

 

[Monzo]

I saw the 1956 film Around the World in 80 Days for the first time. Having already seen both TV versions from the 1980s and 2020s, I was curious to see how the 1956 film approached the topic.

I knew nothing about the film other than the plot, that David Niven starred in it, and that it won the Oscar for best picture. What confused me was that the French Passepartout was played by a Mexican actor. When I saw Fernandel briefly in the first scenes and he didn't reappear again, but other stars were briefly seen, I realized that the cameo appearances were a theme of the film and perhaps the most interesting part of it. However, I wondered if all the stars participated voluntarily or if some were forced into it by the studio.

While watching it, I asked myself whether the competition was so weak that year that Around the World in 80 Days won best picture at the Oscars. What bothered me was that nothing was really explained. The hot air baloon seemed to suddenly be there when it was needed, as was the wind-powered sledge.

Although I'm glad I finally saw the film, I probably won't watch it a second time.

 

[Seaviewer]

The Butler (2013)
Inspired by the life of a real African-American butler who worked at the White House during the turbulent 60a and 70s.
The history of that era is fairly well-trodden cinematically but still pack a punch, especially given the personal treatment it receives here - although I thought it was bit too coincidental that one of his son's was involved in the Civil Rights movement and the other was sent to Vietnam - the two most controversial events of the time. Perhaps that was true to the subject's life, I don't know. It's also a bit jarring that some of the presidents are portrayed by actors and some through historic footage, but maybe that's just me.
Overall, though, a stirring depiction.

 

[Willie Oleson]

A MOST VIOLENT YEAR (2014)



It looks good as an eighties period drama, and it's unique in being the first anti-gangster film I have seen - but there's nothing in it that climaxes, not even on an emotional level.
I regret this choice.

 

[Seaviewer]

The Other Mother (2017 TV Movie)
A twist on Gaslight. A divorced mother finds herself the target of her ex-husband's new wife in a scheme to paint her as a neurotic.
Annie Wersching stars. I regard her a one of the great underrated actresses and was very sad to hear that she died last year at only 45.

 

[DallasFanForever]

Bad Boys 4 (2024)

After the third movie a few years back, which I wasn’t a big fan of, I was kind of apprehensive about this one. To my surprise it far exceeded my expectations. Tons of laughs and a good enough plot for the fourth installment of a franchise they seem to intend on moving forward.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Muriel's Wedding (1994)

Last time I gave this one a spin was the 25th Anniversary. This year it's the 30th!

These days it takes an exceptional film for me to be able to revisit at all, even if it is just twice a decade. I've had a yen for something Australian for a while. And yesterday evening I also craved something familiar and comforting. Throw in that I've been on an ABBA jag for the last couple of weeks and there really was only one film.

After a number of watches and rewatches, Muriel has become a little bit of a Rocky Horror Show experience, where every utterance of "what a coincidence" or "you're terrible, Muriel" is anticipated and relished. This also goes for the one-off classics like "I'm a parking inspector"; "Are you black?" and "I'm not alone... I'm with Muriel".

Muriel never gets old for me. It's everything. Quirky. Hilarious. Daft. Touching. Joyous. It breaks my heart then puts it back together again.

 

[Seaviewer]

May December (2023)
A while back I watched Julianne Moore in The Kids Are All Right (2010). Here she is in another unconventional family as a woman who had been jailed for her relationship with an underage boy to whom she has subsequently been married for 24 years.

There have been some similar cases in the news over the years but this doesn't seem to be based on any one in particular.

Natalie Portman also stars as an actress who wants to get to know the family as preparation for playing her in a movie.

It's an unusual way of telling the story and comes across a little like a sequel to an earlier movie that was never made.

 

[Crimson]

Sadly, my feelings about the film overall are more mixed than I'd hoped. Much as I enjoyed the opening scenes of young George saving the pharmacist from making a fatal error, it went a bit downhill after that. I found it very slow and sluggish, which in itself would have been fine were it not for the cloyingly saccharine tweeness prevalent in American films of the era. I know George's optimistic spirit needed to be there to be broken but he was so damned chipper that I found him very irritating. Then there was all that business with his brother and the stupid honking noise and accompanying gesture they'd do upon parting (these are actual adults). And every time Donna Reed sang at him I heaved (I really wasn't sure what to make of her character. She came across as manipulative and shrewish much of the time which didn't garner much empathy).

I skipped by your review when you posted it back in late 2022. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE isn't just one of my favorite films, it's one I regard as among the best ever made. My mom watched IAWL annually, a tradition I've continued. I've also seen it in theatrical re-releases at least six times. I consider it a bellwether film -- when someone says they don't like it, my opinion of their opinions takes a hit. At the time, I didn't want to seem like I was attacking your view of the movie or, worse, smugly implying that I thought you didn't get it. Since your memories of the movie seem to be more positive than your immediate reaction, I'm more inclined to give my counter view.

There are many virtues of the film that I could extol, but I think its technical prowess is remarkable. For years, I assumed the movie was filmed on location; a rarity for the era. It's amazing to me that Bedford Falls was conjured up on a Hollywood backlot. It feels like a real place, grounding the film in one of the most important elements of fiction: verisimilitude. Sure there are elements of the movie that are dated; it is nearly 80 years old. I'm never not vexed by Sam Wainwright's "Hee-Haw!" -- but also think that irksomeness is intentional. If Sam was less annoying, George would have likely have gone into business with him. A poor decision made for a dumb reason that changed the course of his life -- something I suspect most of us can relate to.

I really reject any notion that the movie is saccharine or picture perfect. George is resistant and resentful about his life every step of the way: his job, his wife, his kids. Even when he appears happy, there's always an undercurrent of discontentedness. The failure to appreciate what one has is, again, something I think everyone can relate to at some point. The ending -- sometimes celebrated, sometimes mocked -- is one of the most earned emotional releases of any movie.

I don't think I'd feel I was missing out if I never watched it again.

Since your recollection of the film has drifted more towards the positive, I'd encourage you to rethink this.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I skipped by your review when you posted it back in late 2022. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE isn't just one of my favorite films, it's one I regard as among the best ever made. My mom watched IAWL annually, a tradition I've continued. I've also seen it in theatrical re-releases at least six times. I consider it a bellwether film -- when someone says they don't like it, my opinion of their opinions takes a hit. At the time, I didn't want to seem like I was attacking your view of the movie or, worse, smugly implying that I thought you didn't get it. Since your memories of the movie seem to be more positive than your immediate reaction, I'm more inclined to give my counter view.

There are many virtues of the film that I could extol, but I think its technical prowess is remarkable. For years, I assumed the movie was filmed on location; a rarity for the era. It's amazing to me that Bedford Falls was conjured up on a Hollywood backlot. It feels like a real place, grounding the film in one of the most important elements of fiction: verisimilitude. Sure there are elements of the movie that are dated; it is nearly 80 years old. I'm never not vexed by Sam Wainwright's "Hee-Haw!" -- but also think that irksomeness is intentional. If Sam was less annoying, George would have likely have gone into business with him. A poor decision made for a dumb reason that changed the course of his life -- something I suspect most of us can relate to.

I really reject any notion that the movie is saccharine or picture perfect. George is resistant and resentful about his life every step of the way: his job, his wife, his kids. Even when he appears happy, there's always an undercurrent of discontentedness. The failure to appreciate what one has is, again, something I think everyone can relate to at some point. The ending -- sometimes celebrated, sometimes mocked -- is one of the most earned emotional releases of any movie.



Since your recollection of the film has drifted more towards the positive, I'd encourage you to rethink this.

And photographed by the great Joe Biroc!

Have you seen the disturbing SNL satire? I'm guessing you have.

EDIT: actually two SNL skits:

 

[Crimson]

And photographed by the great Joe Biroc!

Yes, it's a beautiful film assuming one is viewing the restoration and not the degraded, public domain versions that were so common on TV for decades.

Have you seen the disturbing SNL satire?

I love the first one, the alternate ending with Potter getting his comeuppance and a good thrashing.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Murder & Cocktails (2024)

When a free film on Prime has this year as a production date, it's a bit of a red flag so expectations were low. I also realised within five minutes that I wasn't enjoying it, but found myself continuing out of some kind of perversity (along with a need to find something to like about it).

I suppose it can be summed up by saying it's a nice concept, but the creators' reach exceeded their grasp. It was difficult to invest and I know I'll have forgotten it by this time tomorrow. But it killed 90 minutes.
​

I consider it a bellwether film -- when someone says they don't like it, my opinion of their opinions takes a hit.

I can understand that and relate to it.

If it helps, my comments on the film didn't mention not liking it. Since I praised Capra's direction, said I viewed this as James Stewart's "finest performance", used superlatives including "terrific" and "wonderful" and described having chills as I watched, I'd say I took away more positives than not.

(But we may be in trouble if Murder & Cocktails is one of your favourites).

Since your recollection of the film has drifted more towards the positive, I'd encourage you to rethink this.

Oh, I'd still be open to watching it again sometime.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I suppose it can be summed up by saying it's a nice concept, but the creators' reach exceeded their grasp. It was difficult to invest and I know I'll have forgotten it by this time tomorrow.

I guess it won't be in your WHODUNNIT Movie Top 10 (oops. spoilers)

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I guess it won't be in your WHODUNNIT Movie Top 10

No, but it will probably come near the top of my WHYDIDIWATCHIT Top Ten.

(oops. spoilers)

How exciting. Previews of coming attractions.

 

[Seaviewer]

IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE

It's never been a Christmas tradition here (unlike Miracle on 34th Street). I believe I've seen it once on TV a long time ago but I've seen it excerpted so many times than I feel I'm over-saturated by it.

 

[Willie Oleson]

SLEEPAWAY CAMP (1983)



The uploader had the good foresight to turn off the commentary section because it's easy to imagine the shitstorm of modern-day, trolling disapproval this film would get.

Let's start with the best part: the wardrobe.




And then there are a few scenes without - and again, only the male characters.

The summer camp is the real thing, it's not about a bunch of adults-passing-for-teenagers trespassing a closed camp.
In some ways it looks like a slasher for children except that it's bafflingly contradicted by the overt erotic undertones. And, no, that's not me "seeing" what I want to see.


It's true that the clothing reflects the fashions and attitudes of that time but it seems that no opportunity has been missed to highlight it, almost as if they already knew how it would be perceived a few decades later.
The result is a mix of camp and sleaze that doesn't look as innocent as it should be.
There's also some intentional campy comedy that makes it even harder to figure out what they were going for, although it makes a little more sense in the story's twist reveal.

That "most shocking reveal" that gets mentioned in the various reviews isn't that shocking by today's standards, but perhaps it was in 1983.
I must say, the imagery looks properly freaky.
Nevertheless ,the film disappoints as a thriller because there's zero suspense, and the slasher aspect is peculiar to say the least.
There's enough gore in it, but not in the way you would expect it to see.
The cinematography is much better than what you'll see in the average eighties slasher films, and I couldn't help but thinking that it had been possible to get more out of these actors. They're not exactly The Redgraves but the enthusiasm is there, and it's obvious that the editing leaves a lot to be desired.

I honestly can't recommend this as good film - not even as a good slasher - but if you're looking for a genuine cult classic, SLEEPAWAY CAMP has all the hallmarks. And then some.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Permanent (2017)

I clicked into this one on a whim, scrolling past the image of the girl with the frizzy hair and a line of text about her trying to fit in at her new school by getting a perm.

One huge selling point was the Eighties period detail, which was spot on (apart from the Farrah Fawcett reference since I doubted she'd have been on a teenage girl's radar as much by 1982. But it's easily explained away considering the person who wanted the Farrah Flick is not one of the cool girls). As well as the aesthetics, it captured some of the attitudes of the times with the bullying, the disinterested teachers and the only black girl in the class being "othered" and placed into a class for remedial students despite her clear intellect). The knockout moment was with the Nina Simone poetry scene, but it's a little odd that this wasn't even a main character.

I hoped for quirk, and I suppose I got it. A lot of it felt like quirk for quirk's sake, though. Like Willie's description of Sleepaway Camp, the "camp" felt intentional, and it's just not that easily manufactured. It didn't go as deep as I'd have liked, nor was it laugh out loud funny. It wasn't even weird enough to astound. The tone felt curiously like The Kids From Degrassi Street or something. It's strangely engrossing, and I ended up being drawn in even as I wondered why. And I still couldn't tell you what the appeal was.

Incidentally, while I know "perm" is a diminutive of "permanent wave", I've never before heard it called a "permanent", which is the go-to name repeatedly used for it here. I wonder if this is a regional thing.​

 

[Willie Oleson]

One huge selling point was the Eighties period detail, which was spot on

It's nice when they put a lot of effort in the details but somehow it always ends up looking like an effort, and therefore less convincing.
The TV series THE AMERICANS didn't do very much* to make it look like an eighties period drama and I think it was precisely that relaxed attitude that made it much easier to buy into it.
Our lives in the 1980s didn't look like a garish studio set, it was quite boring for the most part.

Incidentally, while I know "perm" is a diminutive of "permanent wave", I've never before heard it called a "permanent", which is the go-to name repeatedly used for it here. I wonder if this is a regional thing.

The Dutch version is also "permanent" but I agree that it sounds a little unusual in English.



*unless they did, and did it so well that it looked effortlessly.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

It's nice when they put a lot of effort in the details but somehow it always ends up looking like an effort, and therefore less convincing.
The TV series THE AMERICANS didn't do very much* to make it look like an eighties period drama and I think it was precisely that relaxed attitude that made it much easier to buy into it.

I'm not sure how much effort was put into Permanent, but with such attention to small details, I'd say there was a lot. All the same, it didn't feel that way. There was nothing flashy about the period setting and it captured the boredom of the era that you mentioned, so I fully believed it. At one point I even questioned whether it was anothe case of Amazon not having their dates right (this happened to me a while back when I thought I was watching a new film with a period setting until a teenage Jodie Foster appeared on screen).

Even though the film itself didn't wow me, the tone of it did. There was ugliness to it - from the big square cars to the decor and that extended to the way people communicated - that I really appreciated.

Even the kids felt like Eighties kids, even though they'd all have been born this side of the millennium. Whoever coached them to the nuances of the time did so really well.

The Dutch version is also "permanent" but I agree that it sounds a little unusual in English.

I suppose it makes as much sense as "perm", but I just wasn't used to hearing "permanent" used. When I was young, half my family members and most kids at school (girls and boys alike) seemed to be obsessed with perms so I heard the word a lot. I was one of the few who never experimented there, and I'm glad now because I know I'd have ended up with the one that made me look like the girl in the film (fortunately, nature gave me thick lustrous curls throughout my Twenties and into my Thirties, before it cruelly decided that was it with me and hair).

A couple of characters discussed Sun-In as well, which reminded me of this being the only thing I was permitted to use when everyone else was getting highlights. And by the time my parents relented this much, it was far too late anyway and everyone else had moved on.