What movies have you seen recently?

[oneamongthefence]

Paul. Really fantastic CGI and a funny movie. Worth watching several times.

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G Slide using Tapatalk

[gopadres]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

State of Play...I give it a B. Started out slow, kind of jumped around, but got better as it went along.

[goh]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Super

It was super. Especially Kevin Bacon but especially Ellen Page but especially Rainn Wilson.

Never thought I'd see a superhero sidekick...

Spoiler

rape the superhero! "It's all gooshey!" Oh my!

[CMH]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Once I watched it without my friends sitting there saying "So ****ing stupid" and all their negative comments, I've liked it the 2nd and 3rd times I watched it.

It's ridiculous and over-the-top. But, the action scenes actually helped move the plot rather than just be there for eye-candy entertainment. Of course, they also looked pretty damn cool.

When you watched it, did you ever think Matrix?

Guy works as an Accountant Manager. Upon meeting the female partner, she hovers over him asking questions, sort of figuring him out. The development of the character.

Super

It was super. Especially Kevin Bacon but especially Ellen Page but especially Rainn Wilson.

Never thought I'd see a superhero sidekick...

Spoiler

rape the superhero! "It's all gooshey!" Oh my!

Blah, people like you are the reason why I'm still waiting for this on Blu-ray. Give me a chance!

[daflyboys]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Miracle. Can't watch it enough. Even decided this time to go watch the gold medal game on YouTube afterwards. Yes, it's there!

[SPTO]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Let us Live! (1939)

Amazon Instant Video


This is a pretty interesting and little known Henry Fonda movie. While Fonda has top billing this is more of a vehicle for the leading lady Maureen O'Sullivan. I can't say this movie is any great shakes but the history behind it makes it at least interesting and Fonda's acting feels like an embryonic Tom Joad. (one of, if not his greatest role in The Grapes of Wrath ('40))

Here's the summary:

Two innocent men are wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death. The fiance of one of them convinces a police detective of their innocence, and together they try to find the real killer before the men's execution

It's a very slight film, in fact it was used as the back end of double bills for Columbia but there's a reason for this. This movie is actually based on a real life case in Mass. which Columbia was going to use as the backdrop to a much bigger movie with some big name stars however The Powers That Be down there threatened legal action and there was political pressure on Harry Cohn and Columbia not to make the film because they felt it would make the Police and legal system there look incompetent and corrupt. Well Cohn shelved the film rather than abandon it and made it a much smaller movie and a B picture.

Somehow me thinks politicians and law enforcement in a state wouldn't be able to get away with that kind of thing today.

As it is, the film isn't too bad except Maureen O'Sullivan's weepy and overly broad acting made it a bit tough. I also found that Fonda's pensive and almost elgaic reading of his character to be a little off putting in this movie. I understand what he was going for but it didn't quite fit the pace of the movie.

Where the movie shines though is in its depiction of the grindhouse nature of the legal system especially back in those days when the cops and the DA seemingly have their suspects and more or less throw em in jail with no remorse even though later on the actual criminals commit another robbery/killing and they don't lift a finger to see if maybe they jailed the wrong guys. In that manner the movie reminded me of a Warner Brothers film as it was very much about speaking out against some of the ills of society perpetuated against the "small guy" however this movie is a bit uneven and doesn't fully work.

Still it's entertaining enough and everyone does a good job in their parts. So despite a somewhat negative writeup I give it a solid 2 stars.



Sunrise at Campobello (1960)

Amazon

This was the capper to the Ralph Bellamy day on TCM that I recorded. (It's Summer Under the Stars month where every day is dedicated to a different actor) and it's the signature role for Bellamy one that he would go on to play two more times in The Winds of War (1983 TV) and War and Remembrance. (1988 TV) This movie has a lot going for it and is a wonderful film that I fully recommend even though the DVD is a bit pricy.

Ralph Bellamy plays FDR just about note perfect in a biographical film that centers on the years 1921-1924 as FDR is stricken with what was then known as infantile paralysis (polio) and his battle to come back into public life. This would also be the last great role for Greer Garson who in some ways was a bit miscast as Eleanor as Ms Garson was far too lovely physically. She worked extremely hard though and more or less pinned down Eleanor's rather high pitched voice even if the accent was a bit too affected. Finally I can't go on without mentioning Hume Cronyn's great portrayal of Louis Howe, FDR's closest confidant and political manager. Cronyn gets to be a bit of a comic relief but in a geniunely fun and jocular way.

Here's the summary:

In 1921, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, having been the losing vice-presidential candidate in the 1920 election, has few to no thoughts of re-entering politics, although he is still working tirelessly for the Democratic Party. That summer, he, his wife Eleanor Roosevelt and their five children are vacationing at their summer property on Campobello Island, New Brunswick, when he begins to have mobility problems with his legs. It is initially diagnosed as a minor medical problem, but is ultimately discovered to be infantile paralysis, also known as polio. Those around him must help him adjust to this physical disability, which they all hope is only temporary. But they must also help him discover what the paralysis means for his professional future. His mother, Sara Roosevelt, and his best friend and adviser, Louis Howe, are the most at odds with each other. Eleanor, on the other hand, must take over many of the public duties for her husband, which she feels ill equipped initially to handle. As the years pass and the paralysis remains, Franklin comes to the realization of his capabilities and he thinks of resurrecting his political career. These thoughts culminate at the 1924 Democratic presidential nomination convention, where Franklin must take the biggest ten steps of his life up to that point.

Bellamy as I said before gave the performance of his life in this role. He was virtually the spitting image of FDR and while his voice was slightly more deeper and richer than FDR's actual voice Bellamy had captured the cadence and accent of the former president perfectly. As noted in the summary the main conflict of the film other than FDR having to come to grips with not being able to walk again is the rancor between he and his mother played with nuance by Anna Shoemaker in a role that could've become mean and shrewish. There are a lot of GREAT scenes in this movie but the best is the sequence when FDR confronts his mother who believes that he's over-exerting himself in trying to get physically better and wants him to retire to Hyde Park for the rest of his life. The scene is powerful and though Bellamy is stuck in a wheelchair you really feel the power and emotion of what he's saying.

There are other scenes of greatness which are quieter such as when FDR tells Eleanor of how his greatest fear is of being stuck in his bed during a fire and later on when he talks of how the disease has made him a man of patience and how life's burdens can often be a blessing in disguise. The potency and the love between FDR and Eleanor is palpable when he talks about how he was a brute of a man when he was younger and that this disease has taught him the hard lesson of humility. It's quite effective and captures the heart of the audience. I also think in those quiet scenes you get a feel for the relationship between them while I don't think they were extremely romantic and such with each other (after all FDR did have his dalliances before and after the disease) but there was indeed a strong love between the two.

As I said earlier Hume Cronyn served as a bit of comic relief in that Louis Howe was somewhat cantankerous, boisterous and not a man of sentiment as portrayed here. It also helps to keep the movie from becoming TOO over wrought with the human emotion and drama. Cronyn does get his couple moments to shine dramatically as well too so it's not like he's being a buffoon.

This movie was based on the play written and produced by former MGM studio head Dory Schary in which Bellamy won a Tony Award and I believe the play also won a Tony for best dramatic production. When Warners got the rights to the play they were thinking of casting someone with bigger star power like Marlon Brando for the role but Schary insisted that Bellamy reprise his role or he would pull out of the film. (Schary had a big hand in this as he wrote and produced the film) now a word about the tone of the movie. You have to understand that for the Great Depression/WWII generation(s) FDR was seen almost as a deity. People who were involved in and grew up as Democrats revered and saw FDR in the same light as conservatives hold up Ronald Reagan as a paragon of virtue. Does this movie portray FDR maybe a little TOO favorably? Probably, especially when it came to his relationship with his children as there would be scenes where he'd snap at them then a few minutes later apologize. I'm sure that happened in real life too but I don't think the kids (at the time at least) took it as well as portrayed here. Still despite a little glorification the movie plays up FDR's admirable qualities in a way that doesn't make it hagiography.

This is an extremely wonderful and great film IMO as it's a bit of an under appreciated masterpiece. The only "negatives" I can hurl at it is the length and at times staginess of the production but that's it.

I give this 5 stars. Go out and watch this if you can!

[Buckeyes_Doc]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Morning Glory- Decent comedy. I think Rachel McAdams is my favorite actress, she makes every movie better.

[goh]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Blah, people like you are the reason why I'm still waiting for this on Blu-ray. Give me a chance!

Not my fault!

1. I don't use Netflix.
2. Even if I did it'd be Netflix Canada.
3. I went to the local store to rent it.
4. They only had it on DVD.



Your Highness

Didn't laugh much. Seems like if they had taken it seriously with much of the same plot and content it could've been pretty great. Instead it's just average. Kinda felt like a not nearly as good Princess Bride.

[areobee401]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

My hangover Sunday viewing party consisted of 2 movies this afternoon.

Unstoppable - Really enjoyed this one. Intense all the way through and another great performance by Denzel Washington. B

Get Low - Had never heard of this one before stumbling on it , while surfing On Demand. Robert Duvall plays a hermit who wants to throw a funeral party. Only thing is that hes still alive. Bill Murray plays the owner of the funeral home. Interesting watch with solid acting. B-

[trobinson97]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

The Help, damn good movie that really hit home on a couple of levels.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

RED

Pretty good mix of light moments with PG-13 intensity. If anybody hasn't seen it and wanted to know how prominent each character role was, despite how the front cover of the film bills the actors, the cast list would be as follows: Bruce Willis, Mary-Louise Parker, John Malkovich, Karl Urban, Helen Mirren, Morgan Freeman, Brian Cox. So, it's not a huge Willis/Freeman/Malkovich/Mirren band as the previews suggested, which was kind of unfortunate. The time with Willis/Parker/Malkovich in the first act of the film more than made up the time and fun with the others, though.

The plot lines built up with every act, one element of the story piled onto another. How it was executed was probably much more than what was needed for the film to work itself, but it still worked out in the end anyway. The action went from being humorous in one scene to being serious in the next (they were technically all "serious" as in the characters' lives were at stake, but some didn't feel that way), and for the sake of the film I suppose that was a little okay, as long as they wanted to keep it on some sort of realistic keel. Look at how it's done in Lucky Number Slevin: still light enough to maintain its seriousness.

I got this movie from GoHastings, and unfortunately as I listened to the dialogue, heavy fronts on the music aspect during city/scene transitions, and plenty of bullets whizzing in the second half of the film, I couldn't help but feel underwhelmed. Then I checked the track to see if I was listening to the master audio track, and low and behold... it was DD 5.1. There wasn't even an option for lossless on the disc. I looked it up, and was surprised when I saw reviewers glow over the sound, and noticed it was because they had the option for DTS-HD MA 5.1. Apparently, there is a special edition Blu-ray for this film, and I got the movie-only version. If you check out this film on BD and have a decent sound system, stay away from this compressed sounding crap that I got, and pay a little extra for the Best Buy exclusive of this film.

[Bellsprout]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

The Help, damn good movie that really hit home on a couple of levels.

So it's good? And here I wasn't looking forward to being obligated to see it at some point because Emma Stone's in it.

[marshallfever]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Pirates of the Caribbean Strangers Tide: 8.4

Hum watched the movie last night and sort of just walked away without truly feeling satisfied. I don't know what it was, but the magic wasn't there like it was for the other three. It was a fine movie but nothing special.

Definitely great seeing Johnny Deep and Geoffrey Rush again in their respective roles but the story could of been more.

Spoiler

for crying out loud, their looking for THE FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH. Yet the end point wasn't very satisfying. And i know a lot of people didn't like Orlando Bloom and Keria Knightly too much, but Bloom is freaking DAVEY JONES now. He has to make some sort of appearance eventfully seeing as he's the guy who looks over the sea

And, their talking about sequels, what more can they do? The way they ended the fountain of youth thing, sort of dispels anything major happening. This sort of stands on its own unlike the previous two.

Well, we'll see

[SlimKibbles]

Re: What movies have you seen recently? Part 1

The Joneses.


Decent movie with a good plot. Makes you wonder if companies actually do this sort of thing. Some parts were predictable, others weren't. Amber Heard was smoking hot.

Happened to catch this tonight. Agree on all points, especially Amber Heard.

[SPTO]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Gonna be a bit short with these two reviews


King of the Underworld (1939)


This was a remake of the '33 film Dr. Socrates so remakes aren't just a modern thing! This movie has Bogart smack in the middle of his gangster phase and he chews up the scenery with all he's got! The movie is a little bit laughable in some ways but it's entertaining. It's the conclusion however where it completely falls apart and turns into a joke.

Here's the summary:

Niles and Carol Nelson are married doctors who save one of ganglord Gurney's men. Gurney exploits them, then kills Niles leaving Carol to take the fall. He next kidnaps writer Bill Forrest to write his biography. Knowing Bill will be killed when the biography is finished, Carol takes matters into her own hands

Like I said Bogart as Gurney does a great job. One of the interesting things about his character is his fascination with Napoleon which leads him to kidnapping the writer and using him to write his (Gurney's) autobiography. The Carole character is played by Kay Francis who used to be a huge star during the pre-code era. By this point in her career she was being phased out as a top star as Bette Davis' star was rising. Francis gives a pretty uninterested performance and you can't really get invested in her.

2 out of 4 stars (mostly for Bogie)


Gueule d'amour (Lady Killer) (1937)

The next few movies are going to be French films starring Jean Gabin. I'm not the biggest foreign movie viewer but i've heard of Gabin and so I was interested to see him and his movies. This movie really surprised me and quite frankly blows away just about anything produced in Hollywood at the time in terms of frankness, handling things in an adult manner and being realistic. It's a tour de force acting job by Gabin in what was a very good film.

Lucien Bourrache, a good looking non-commissioned officer at the Spahis, is used to charm many women. He meets Madeleine Courtois at Cannes. She is beautiful and lives in luxury. He lends her a large amount of money, which she loses gambling. Then she drops him. But Lucien is now in love, and once demobilized, he goes to Paris to find her again. But he's not so sexy without his uniform, and Madeleine and him do not belong to the same milieu.

The summary isn't quite accurate so let me fill in the gaps. Once Bourrache is in Paris again as a civilian he chases Madeleine and there is indeed a spark as she finds him almost as irresistible as he does her but she's a woman that "needs" wealth. In fact, she's using Bourrache for his sex and as a plaything when in reality she's involved with a rich older man. Bourrache sees this as an affront and there's a great scene when he confronts Madeleine in her home after being spurned a few times and he finally meets the other man.

That's when the heartbreak occurs as Madeleine feigns as if she doesn't know who Bourrache is and orders him out. He leaves and goes back to Orange where he used to serve and owns a little cafe. He's clearly a wreck and when his very good friend finds him he tells Bourrache about this amazing girl he's met and who he's completely in love with....it turns out to be Madeleine.

I'm not going to give too much away because well it's a movie you have to find and watch for yourself. I didn't put up the amazon listing because it's a PAL disc and used for over 100 bucks!! I'm sure you can find it on ebay or some such for a cheaper price.

A couple things I want to touch on is the relationship between Bourrache and his friend Rene. They're the closest two men can be without getting into the homosexual overtones that most American movies end up perpetuating at times. They have a bond and an understanding that's there right to the bitter end which is well kinda given away with the English title. (though it's also ironic too) Nonetheless I was most impressed at how much depth their friendship has despite not sharing too many scenes together.

The other thing that I want to touch on is how this movie hit on the themes of fidelity, cheating and generally how the "loose" kind of lifestyle and being able to get whatever you want can sometimes have a boomerang effect when said person becomes totally in love. The character of Madeleine is also portrayed unflinchingly as a user, cold hearted and selfish. I really liked how the story went to the inevitable conclusion WITHOUT making the ultimate act being punished. (there wasn't really a code in that regard in Europe at the time)

The acting is FANTASTIC. Yes, it's in French with subtitles but i can tell by the inflections and such that this was a very well acted film. Jean Gabin really pulled off his part as Bourrache quite well especially in the second half of the movie when Bourrache is broken and beaten down emotionally by circumstances.

5 out of 5 stars