Movie What's the last movie you saw? (6)

[Chief]

Continued in Part 7:

Movie - What's the last movie you saw? (7)

Continued from Part 6: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/whats-the-last-movie-you-saw-6.1287849/ I've retained Asgardian as the OP. Rest in peace, mate. ================ Starting this up for the mods. Watched Judgment in Berlin, a simple tale of a hijacking from Poland to West Berlin...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[phantom13]

I thought Not Okay was ordinary until the end. Loved it and raised it from a 5 to a 7 for me.

Yeh fair comment, i must admit i was pretty invested the whole way through but the ending was impressive.

 

[Kong]

Beginners

A really well made comedy-drama starring Ewan McGregor (who I normally don’t enjoy, but thought was good), Mélanie Laurent and Christopher Plummer.

It’s a semi autobiographical film by Mike Mills about a late 30s cartoonist in West Hollywood that meets a love interest while dealing with the death of his father, who came out at the age of 75 just before his death.

I thought it captured the “feeling of life” pretty well, as pretentious as that sounds. All three performers were good, including Plummer who won an Oscar for it.

Interestingly, Mike Wills also made 20th Century Women about his upbringing, so in a way the two films are about the same character and their relationships with each parent at different stages of life, although there is no direct link mentioned in the film.

 

[crafty_bernardo]

Top Gun Maverick

Absolute goddamn piece of cinema art.

Chef's kiss.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

Family Man and Face Off

Still good

 

[Lethality]

The Gray Man

it was alright. Acton was a bit convoluted and messy, the villains were two dimensional and cliche


Ryan Gosling was perhaps wooden in parts, but also an amusing and likeable hero. Not as dry and quippy as Tony Stark, but in that same style.

I kept thinking this was what the plot of the John Wick sequels should have been.
It looks like they set it up for sequels, but I don't know if there will be one.

7/10

 

[ShooterMcGavin8]

The most recent Halloween. 1/10

 

[GreyCrow]

Disney +

Prey

A good Saturday night flick that is a nice call back to the original

Really the only complaint is wondering how CGI can be so bad in 2022

 

[2006_Eagles]

Watching Ragnarok tonight, I never realised how much of that film is green screen. Must be at least 92%

Knocked it down a few notches from how good I thought it was

Obviously Marvel/Sony isn't raking in enough profit to build actual sets

Pathetic

 

[BuddysBiggestFan]

Let Him Go

Hopefully a Kevin Costner hasn’t made many more films after this turkey

Really stupid film

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The Sting

Had never seen it. Great fun

 

[Kong]

Cop Land

A packed cast of Sylvester Stallone, Ray Liotta, Harvey Keitel, Robert De Niro, and quite a few others, directed by James Mangold (Logan, Ford v Ferrari).

Even though I’d read good things, I didn’t expect to like this, but I did.

A pretty simple story of police corruption and gross masculinity with enough tension throughout to keep you interested from the beginning, and with what I’d say is Stallone’s best performance, playing a grounded and simple sheriff. It felt a bit like when you see Adam Sandler playing straight characters, both without their regular stupid put on voices.

A super 90s feel to this, and one I’d happily watch again.

 

[Gralin]

Watching Ragnarok tonight, I never realised how much of that film is green screen. Must be at least 92%

Knocked it down a few notches from how good I thought it was

Obviously Marvel/Sony isn't raking in enough profit to build actual sets

Pathetic

There's quite a bit floating around on twitter about how the MCU treats CGI.

They basically use it for everything, and they do it dirt cheap and overwork the artists.

why build sets when you can stick them in digitally for much less money

its a worry on multiple levels because if you're employing less actual physical artists to build sets, do hair and makeup, costumes, finding less physical locations to use, so less staff needed

it all becomes part of cost savings and everything will start being exactly the same

 

[phantom13]

There's quite a bit floating around on twitter about how the MCU treats CGI.

They basically use it for everything, and they do it dirt cheap and overwork the artists.

why build sets when you can stick them in digitally for much less money

its a worry on multiple levels because if you're employing less actual physical artists to build sets, do hair and makeup, costumes, finding less physical locations to use, so less staff needed

it all becomes part of cost savings and everything will start being exactly the same

I agree with this and the sentiment but then you see how well recieved something like Top Gun Maverick is from doing it all practically and remember that some film makers will always opt to do it right.

 

[Gralin]

I agree with this and the sentiment but then you see how well recieved something like Top Gun Maverick is from doing it all practically and remember that some film makers will always opt to do it right.

Yeah there will be movies that do things the other way, but Disney is such a large force now with how many studios they own.

It's an issue

 

[edgie]

I remember when the Star Wars prequels were bashed non stop for using too much CGI.

Also, the prequels

So on and so forth, etc...

 

[Gralin]

I remember when the Star Wars prequels were bashed non stop for using too much CGI.

Also, the prequels

So on and so forth, etc...

It's Grant!

I have nothing against CGI being used, but I do have an issue with lets do it all in a computer to save money

 

[Gralin]

Like apart from some things just working better if done for real, also sometimes the limitations of reality lead to better creative choices

being able to stick anything you can think of on screen has led to some really ****ing stupid action sequences

 

[edgie]

It's Grant!

I have nothing against CGI being used, but I do have an issue with lets do it all in a computer to save money

I think not making any clone trooper outfits was way too much, but other than that the use of CGI in those movies was quite sensible.

In so many modern films though, everything is just a CGI shitshow. Everything. Guys like Samuel L or Ewan or Natalie probably look back on their time in the prequels and think 'you know what, there was actually a fair bit of practical effects and sets going on in hindsight'

 

[phantom13]

The Star Wars prequels almost felt like the definition of using it just because it existed in alot of instances. Which is natural given the timeframe was a pretty big leap forward at the time.

The good film makers use it when and where its needed and benefits the story telling and plenty of bad film makers just use it cause they can.

 

[edgie]

The Star Wars prequels almost felt like the definition of using it just because it existed in alot of instances. Which is natural given the timeframe was a pretty big leap forward at the time.

The good film makers use it when and where its needed and benefits the story telling and plenty of bad film makers just use it cause they can.

Lucas wanted to push boundaries like he did 20 years prior. 20 years ago it needed it though.

The final space battle from Return of the Jedi is still the best looking spaceship action scene in cinema, and it was made in 1983.

In the early 2000s, you didn't need it as much.

 

[JackOutback]

I agree with this and the sentiment but then you see how well recieved something like Top Gun Maverick is from doing it all practically and remember that some film makers will always opt to do it right.

The new Star Wars TV shows use their immersive CGI screen The Volume and things feel a little off. Andor is the first to ditch it and film on set and the trailers look much better. It's a wonderful bit of tech and has its place, but you need to know when and how to use these things.

 

[Kong]

Films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Jurassic Park, and Terminator 2 still look better and more realistic than most Disney action films such as Marvel and Star Wars.

With film studios having bigger budgets than ever, it seems pretty unforgivable.

 

[edgie]

Jar Jar aside, I found Phantom Menace to be in the sweet spot of mixing CGI with practical effects. Same with Titanic perhaps.

 

[FRUMPY]

New top gun movie - was really good. Alot of throwback to the original (maybe a bit too much at times) but overall very enjoyable.

On CPH2005 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[rumply]

To Die For - this one popped into my head the other day for no particular reason so watched it again last night. I had forgotten how good the cast is - Kidman just starting to take off in the states I guess, Pheonix would have been about 20 when they shot it & he almost steals the show. + a bunch of other well known faces.

Probably as socially relevant now as it was then, well worth revisiting.