• A little forum update...We're planning an upgrade.

    Find out more about what's planned and how you can help support the forum

    Click here for the details

What was the last film you watched?

Seaviewer

Telly Talk Warrior
It's partially kitchen sink commentary, partially a music culture war, partially coming-of-age drama and it's also based on The Who's rock opera album.
I have no idea what that album is all about but I'd be hard-pressed to mention something from this film that looks rock opera-esque.
I saw this on TV some time ago and was disappointed because I was expecting something like Tommy.
I have never heard the Quadrophenia album, so have no idea what it has to do with it, but I don't remember the film being musical at all.
 
In & Out (1997)

iu

The tone is best explained by pointing out that it's directed by Frank Oz with music by Mark Shaiman. So we're not going for subtle. There's a sunny, quirky artifice that's simultaneously attractive and a little wearing. It's always safe and comfortable and aiming for feelgood like an eager to please puppy.

This feels like an animal that could only really be of its time, which is a double-edged sword. It's a gay-themed film, with its gay characters played by heterosexual men. This is the good news. I don't buy into the more recent movement for gay roles to be played by gay people. And so we have Tom Selleck trying to encourage Kevin Kline out of the closet. The performances are nice enough, but coming so soon after The Birdcage I can't help thinking this similarly-toned film is another example of Kline risking being viewed as Robin Williams-esque.

The broadness of the humour means that it leans into the stereotypical at times, with Kline's character being a Streisand fan who wakes up to Village People tunes on his alarm and cannot stay still when he hears I Will Survive playing (this is the Diana Ross dance version because Nineties).

It's also a typically sexless film, and there are mixed feelings about that. The film's one same-sex kiss - long as it is - is mechanically choreographed for minimum contact and appears to have been filmed from the next county (tasteful or cowardly. The viewer will decide). Still, better this than the gay characters being over-sexualised.

Overall, this is a nice little time-passer with an excellent cast, even if most don't get enough to do.
 

Willie Oleson

Telly Talk Schemer
Planet Of The Apes (1968)

1793844268246.png

It's a madhouse! A maaaaaadhouse!

An 8.0 rating on IMDB so I was expecting to see something brilliant.
Instead I got a lot of ham (teethy Heston) and a lot of cheese (on the nose commentary).

The question in this story is, what if civilisation has to start all over again? It seems to me that the apes are in the process of copying human history and that probably means that the iconic cliffhanger would happen again.
Interesting to see some male nudity, and Burt Lancaster did that the same year in The Swimmer.
I like the quasi-Flintstones set of Ape Town - they only control a very small part of the planet - and the good old American guns are going to survive any kind of catastrophe. Or so it seems.
As it happens in Disney animal stories, the apes of "the planet of" are based on human characters, complete with matching vocals, but where did they get those character traits from? Surely not the beastly humans they keep in cages.
Overall, a mildly amusing and somewhat campy sci-fi film but I won't bother with the sequels or the remakes.

For what it's worth, the 1968 monkeys scene in Space Odyssey looks better than this film, imo.
 

Seaviewer

Telly Talk Warrior
Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
There seem to have been a lot of rock biopics lately. I don't know how accurate this one is but the screen story is quite involving and of course the songs are first rate.
 
Rent-A-Pal (2020)

iu

Not a film I'd heard of until a minute before watching, and probably not surprising. It's a quiet little low-budget independent film that doesn't seem to have gained a lot of attention.

Not that budget needs to be a block to creativity, and it's good news in that regard. At first, the filming style was jarringly showy - all flickering screens and choppy editing. As the credits ended and the first scene began, I commented that I would switch off in ten minutes if it didn't improve. I'd meant it, as well, so the fact that I forgot my own threat and watched to the end possibly speaks volumes.

With a very small cast and a focus that straddles the line between intimate and mundane, this film relies on the quality of its casting to make it fly, and it certainly has that. There are four main characters (five if you count the girl at the video store) and the only real "name" among the actors is Wil Wheaton, who is in the news this week for telling some White House staffer to keep Patrick Stewart's name out of his "f-cking Nazi mouth".

Looking at the blurb for the film, Wheaton's performance seems to have garnered praise for being disturbing. It certainly works well, especially considering we only see him on a screen and he doesn't directly interact with anyone else. And even more so now that I've watched clips from Ben Hollis's 1986 Rent-A-Friend video on which this premise is based, since the character model and a number of the interactions were lifted directly from this. You'd expect the fourth wall breaking to become extreme, but I like that it takes its time and crosses those lines in a way that's subtle enough for even the viewer to question if they heard something correctly.

Really, though, Wil's extroverted performance relies on its opposing force, which comes here from lonely, abused and needy Brian Landis Folkins as David. It's important that the viewer can sympathise with David , and Brian's performance provides the crucial grounding. Here's a character who is looking after the mother who made his childhood hell - now living with advanced dementia - ten years after his father's suicide. He hasn't had time to find out who he is, much less meet friends or partners. There's a transactional element to his relationships - most clearly shown at the video dating service where the receptionist's courtesy and friendliness is dependent on the payment she knows is coming, and the cameraman watches David pour out his heart, then orders him to do it again while keeping to a thirty second window (and he sends out the second, shorter, terrible take), practically ensuring David will remain on the shelf. Brian, by the way, seems to have a mostly theatrical acting background, and it adds weight to this role. I can see why this role would appeal to a stage performer. It looks as though it could easily adapt to a play.

On paper, I wouldn't have thought I needed David to find the perfect match, but this actually turns out to be the thing that really makes this work. Because then he has to choose between a very real person where there is a connection and understanding between the two, and the first friend he ever made - who just happens to be someone he's never met reading out lines on a grainy video. There's also a vein of homoerotic subtext, which is mostly about connection and dependence rather than sex, but lines are crossed there as well.

Although set in 1990, this has never been more relevant than in 2026, where social media neediness and AI dependence is everywhere. David and Andy are essentially Sue and Linda from Ann Droid.

American Psycho
also came to mind with this film, with the question of how much is truth, and how much is coming from the central character's own mind. And I like that it's unresolved.

It's a fairly miserable experience, watching this film. It's dark and tragic and ugly. I highly doubt I would ever watch it again, but there's something about it that has been hard to shake, and that's usually a good thing in a film.

iu
 
The Hitcher (2007)

iu

Going in this remake's favour, I am unfamiliar with the original beyond a passing awareness that there is a late Eighties film of this name starring Rutger Hauer which has a cool poster of the eyes in the rear view mirror and the shadowy figure through the windscreen. How I knew even this much is a mystery. I can only suppose it's either from video shops, billboards or bus stops. If I had to guess, I'd place the original as one of those that's become a cult classic for people in the know. But it's passed me by.

Apart from the hope of some glossy Noughties thriller visuals, the selling points of this remake are its brevity (it runs just over an hour and twenty), the presence of the always-reliable Sean Bean and One Tree Hill favourite Sophie "Brooke" Bush, and the fact that it was free on Prime.

I'd expected something atmospheric and tense, and something that built slowly with an emphasis on characters' anxieties. It certainly started in a promising way, setting up the two protagonists and introducing Bean in a way that makes one wonder if it's the situation rather than the person who is creating the red flags in the mind of the two young leads. It's dark, and raining, and they are in an isolated and unfamiliar rural location.

This changes practically immediately as soon as Bean gets into the car with them. Things go from 0-100 in around twenty seconds and from that point on it's relentless.

There are some very effective jump scares that got me almost every time, but objectively they are of the cheap and schlocky variety. Any suspense comes from anticipating these regular peaks to the pulsometer.

When it came to suspension of disbelief, the biggest problem for me was buying into the fact that the antagonist was practically invincible. Accepting that one man - even a psychotic one - could do most of what he did during this film was simply a lot to ask. Everything was just too convenient. The unknown may be more frightening than the over-explained, but that needs to be rooted in its own reality to convince.

The responses of the protagonists was also often frustrating in a slasher kind of way, but the writing and performances did their best to sell why they would end up jumping through the hoops held up by the antagonist and cause more problems for themselves - and others - with each bad choice.

And yes - the performances are good. These are decent actors and that goes a long way. There are clearly influences of films like Spielberg's Duel (one scene in particular, where Bush's character, from the window of a rest-stop-cum-diner, sees an offending vehicle parked outside seemed lifted directly from that film), but The Hitcher leans heavily into the lurid with every opportunity, making it more predictable and less frightening. Naturally, the 21st Century appears to give the female lead more "agency" than its progenitor.

Still, it does its thing effectively enough, and was perfectly acceptable as a Saturday night popcorn flick. And while I don't wish to watch it back-to-back, I'm now curious to see how the original film compares.
 

Willie Oleson

Telly Talk Schemer
I'm not 100% sure but I think that the original The Hitcher generated some buzz when it came out in 1986.
But that's from a Dutch perspective, I'm not saying it was a thing in other countries, and of course it could be connected with a Dutch actor playing the film's titular role.
I've been wanting to rewatch the 80s classic (?) for quite a while but prime is having none of it.

Somewhat related to the topic of remakes:
I gleefully noticed that prime had accidentally listed Psycho as both a rental and a free-with-prime (it happens sometimes) and the thumbnail image clearly shows a screaming Janet Leigh.
I decided to rewatch it before prime noticed their error...and it turned out to be the awful remake. One of those moments when it feels as if the screen is laughing back at me. Oh, the humiliation, the embarrassment!
 
I think that the original The Hitcher generated some buzz when it came out in 1986.
But that's from a Dutch perspective, I'm not saying it was a thing in other countries

It could well have been a thing here. Somehow it got logged in my brain and I had no interest in and very little awareness of horror/thrillers at the time.




I gleefully noticed that prime had accidentally listed Psycho as both a rental and a free-with-prime (it happens sometimes) and the thumbnail image clearly shows a screaming Janet Leigh.
I decided to rewatch it before prime noticed their error...and it turned out to be the awful remake.

Oh dear. Should I ask how far into it you got?

And related to The Hitcher, I'm fairly sure Psycho is another of those examples of me watching the remake before the original. Sacrilege, I know.

Still, I have watched Psycho '60 many, many times since, while I haven't watched Psycho '98 since some time in the early Noughties. (I do have Danny Elfman's excellent interpretation of the original score, though).
 
Top