Movie opinions thread (what have you seen, what did you think?)

Heinz

Parteizeit
15 Year Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Posts
22,485
I finally got around to watching Captain Phillips tonight, thought I'd see the movie 10 years after the meme.

USA! USA! USA!
:keke:
 
Last edited:

terry.330

Time? Astonishing!
20 Year Member
Joined
May 4, 2004
Posts
11,964
Sweet Smell of Success- Set in Manhattan (1957) Tony Curtis plays a publicist that has to scrounge for every lead and relies on table scraps of information as he desperately tries to manipulate his way through the underbelly of the cut-throat New York newspaper gossip columnist game. Burt Lancaster plays the Walter Winchell like king of the gossip world and uses Curtis as his errand and whipping boy. Curtis is tasked with breaking up the engagement of Lancaster's young sister to a rising star jazz guitarist. If he's willing to play dirty and sink low enough it could be Curtis' big break.

This is an incredible movie. Curtis plays his character with a sweaty desperation and eagerness to morally corrupt himself rarely matched by even the lowest of lowlifes. Lancaster eats everybody he encounters alive and and swallows them whole. Impeccably shot almost entirely in the bustling neon streets and crowded night clubs of Manhattan. With dialogue that out paces and causes more damage than a machine gun, this is a master class of a script. There isn't a second of wasted screen time. This is the type of old movie that runs laps around lesser attempts and imitators. Highly recommended.
 
Last edited:

Teddy KGB

Капитан Борода
10 Year Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Posts
2,744
Stumbled upon The Long Goodbye (1973) on the Criterion Channel last weekend. Elliott Gould is just about a perfect casting for the main character, private eye Philip Marlowe. Fantastic casting of a pet cat too, lol... his neighbors in the film aren't bad eye candy either. It has a little bit of everything for a "crime drama" including some great comedic charm I must say.

All in all, it quickly became one of my fave's from Altman. Worth a watch with some better than decent replay value.
 

terry.330

Time? Astonishing!
20 Year Member
Joined
May 4, 2004
Posts
11,964
Elliott Gould, Philip Marlowe, Altman.
Man that's a weird mix. Looked it up and it seems to be a very divisive movie. People either praising Altman and Gould for making bold choices or shitting all over it as a total misfire and an outright insult to Chandler's writing and the character of Marlow. Interesting.
 
Last edited:

100proof

Insert Something Clever Here
10 Year Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2014
Posts
3,688
Never seen that, never seen Little Mermaid, never seen Lion King (got dragged to the stage play, though), never seen Pochohantas, Mulan, none of that shit. I did see 5 minutes of Tarzan but turned it off. I have a super low tolerance for musicals other than Blues Brothers. Perfectly happy to watch The Goofy Movie or the Duck Tales movie, but that singing teacup shit can fuck right off.

I never watched any of the Disney 2D animated movies after Aladdin save for Emperor's New Groove. Are grown men expected to watch princess movies if they don't have kids and aren't married to a Disney weirdo?
 

Teddy KGB

Капитан Борода
10 Year Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Posts
2,744
Man that's a weird mix. Looked it up and it seems to be a very decisive movie. People either praising Altman and Gould for making bold choices or shitting all over it as a total misfire and an outright insult to Chandler's writing and the character of Marlow. Interesting.
It’s a totally weird mix. And I almost didn’t watch it as a result. The Marlowe character seems tailor made for Gould (who I’m not necessarily a fan of to begin with) however.

I’m glad I gave it a shot.
 

HornheaDD

Viewpoint Vigilante
Fagit of the Year
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Posts
4,391
Never seen that, never seen Little Mermaid, never seen Lion King (got dragged to the stage play, though), never seen Pochohantas, Mulan, none of that shit. I did see 5 minutes of Tarzan but turned it off. I have a super low tolerance for musicals other than Blues Brothers. Perfectly happy to watch The Goofy Movie or the Duck Tales movie, but that singing teacup shit can fuck right off.

Little mermaid is wildly, WILDLY overrated. Except for Buddy Hackett, that is.

I saw Pocahontas on a date and it wasn't worth it. Got to see some pretty pink nippies that night. Still wasn't worth it.

Mulan, on the other hand is entertaining. Yeah it's got it's typical Disney musical BS but apart from that it's a fun and entertaining cartoon. The previews back then had zero indication that Eddie Murphy was in it as the little dragon sidekick. When the wife and I went to watch it he cracked us up.

It's typical 90s Disney through and through but entertaining. I was happy to see there was a live action version but then read they were taking out all the fantasy stuff because it offended the Chinese or some shit. They wanted the live action version to be 'true to the history' of it, so they nixed the fantasy shit.

Watched it and it was boring as shit, droll, and wholly unentertaining. What was weird is that it still had some lady that could shape shift.

You know, just like the real historical record said it went down. Fucking idiots.

If nothing else - nothing else.... watch Emperor's New Groove. It's David Spade goodness, one of Eartha Kitt's best voice roles and breaks the 4th wall quite a bit. Plus Patrick Warburton as a pretty great Putty-esque henchman.
 

SouthtownKid

There are four lights
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Posts
27,074
Man that's a weird mix. Looked it up and it seems to be a very divisive movie. People either praising Altman and Gould for making bold choices or shitting all over it as a total misfire and an outright insult to Chandler's writing and the character of Marlow. Interesting.
It's a solid movie as its own thing. I hated HATED it the first time I watched it, because the novel is my favorite book of one of my favorite authors -- easily in my top 5 novels -- and not only is the characterization of Marlowe completely different, but they changed the ending of the movie to the complete opposite of the book (which again, goes completely against the character). As a straight adaptation of the source material, it's one of the least respectful, shit on the author, shit on the work pieces of garbage ever. Big Lebowski is almost a more authentic attempt at a Philip Marlowe character and story than Altman's Long Goodbye is, and the Coen Bros. weren't even attempting that.

But over time, I've grown to really like the movie not only as it's own thing, but as kind of a "What If?" story. Like what if instead of growing up in the 1930s and operating in the '40s and '50s, Marlowe was a guy who grew up in the '60s through all the counter culture stuff and was then operating in the 1970s. How would the drastic shift in American culture have changed him on a fundamental level and what would he have looked/acted like? And then, him being a fundamentally 1970s guy helps excuse the changes to the story.

If you're not a huge fan of the book, the movie is an easy recommendation. And even if you are a fan of the book, I think it's worth watching if you can go into it with an open mind.

And honestly Philip Marlowe movies don't have a great track record for authenticity anyway. The most famous is The Big Sleep with Bogart, who is awesome as always, but I think a terrible fit for the character (Bacall was perfectly cast, though). Everything that made Bogart perfect for Sam Spade made him all wrong for Marlowe. Too small, and he doesn't come off as a Los Angeles native at all. His cadence, his accent, he's a fully New York guy. Plus, that movie changed the end of the novel as well. Made the ending happier, more Hollywood. Still a good movie, though. Just rewatched it a week or so ago.

The best choice Hollywood ever cast as Marlowe was probably Robert Mitchum, but they got him at least 20 years too late, which ruined it. If they'd had him in the mid-1950s instead of the mid-1970s, he could have been perfect. Then to top it off, in order to save money, they changed the setting of one of his movies from Los Angeles to England, with no explanation.

I haven't seen the James Garner Marlowe movie, but I've always wanted to, because Garner in Rockford Files is closer to the Marlowe character than almost all of the actual Marlowe movies have been, and his attitude is about as close as you're ever going to get. In fact, if I'm in a Chandler mood, I'd probably choose to watch some Rockford Files or Big Lebowski over any actual attempted Philip Marlowe movie. Or I'd just reread the novels again.
 

terry.330

Time? Astonishing!
20 Year Member
Joined
May 4, 2004
Posts
11,964
It's a solid movie as its own thing. I hated HATED it the first time I watched it, because the novel is my favorite book of one of my favorite authors -- easily in my top 5 novels -- and not only is the characterization of Marlowe completely different, but they changed the ending of the movie to the complete opposite of the book (which again, goes completely against the character). As a straight adaptation of the source material, it's one of the least respectful, shit on the author, shit on the work pieces of garbage ever. Big Lebowski is almost a more authentic attempt at a Philip Marlowe character and story than Altman's Long Goodbye is, and the Coen Bros. weren't even attempting that.

But over time, I've grown to really like the movie not only as it's own thing, but as kind of a "What If?" story. Like what if instead of growing up in the 1930s and operating in the '40s and '50s, Marlowe was a guy who grew up in the '60s through all the counter culture stuff and was then operating in the 1970s. How would the drastic shift in American culture have changed him on a fundamental level and what would he have looked/acted like? And then, him being a fundamentally 1970s guy helps excuse the changes to the story.

If you're not a huge fan of the book, the movie is an easy recommendation. And even if you are a fan of the book, I think it's worth watching if you can go into it with an open mind.

And honestly Philip Marlowe movies don't have a great track record for authenticity anyway. The most famous is The Big Sleep with Bogart, who is awesome as always, but I think a terrible fit for the character (Bacall was perfectly cast, though). Everything that made Bogart perfect for Sam Spade made him all wrong for Marlowe. Too small, and he doesn't come off as a Los Angeles native at all. His cadence, his accent, he's a fully New York guy. Plus, that movie changed the end of the novel as well. Made the ending happier, more Hollywood. Still a good movie, though. Just rewatched it a week or so ago.

The best choice Hollywood ever cast as Marlowe was probably Robert Mitchum, but they got him at least 20 years too late, which ruined it. If they'd had him in the mid-1950s instead of the mid-1970s, he could have been perfect. Then to top it off, in order to save money, they changed the setting of one of his movies from Los Angeles to England, with no explanation.

I haven't seen the James Garner Marlowe movie, but I've always wanted to, because Garner in Rockford Files is closer to the Marlowe character than almost all of the actual Marlowe movies have been, and his attitude is about as close as you're ever going to get. In fact, if I'm in a Chandler mood, I'd probably choose to watch some Rockford Files or Big Lebowski over any actual attempted Philip Marlowe movie. Or I'd just reread the novels again.
Have you seen Murder, My Sweet?
 

SouthtownKid

There are four lights
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Posts
27,074
Have you seen Murder, My Sweet?
Yeah, but a long time ago. Powell was okay, I thought. I should watch it again. It's hard to get the wife to watch black & white movies too often, though. She'll go for that maybe once or twice in a year at most, and then not again right away. And like I said, we just watched Big Sleep maybe a week ago (after it being on the list for at least a year). I don't really have the free time to watch movies on my own during the day.

Farewell, My Lovely (which the movie is based on) is considered by many to be Chandler's best novel, although it's closer to the bottom for me, for whatever reason.
 

lithy

Most Prominent Member of Chat
20 Year Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Posts
22,083
Minions - Rise of Gru was solid enough. In fact, all of the Despicable Me movies are as good as any other kid movies.
 

famicommander

Tak enabled this rank change
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Posts
13,541
Creed III looks pretty good. Besides Rocky V this franchise has been super consistent over the years. Rocky III and IV are more cocaine fueled cheesy 80s movies that seem to fit less and less with Rocky, II, Balboa, and the Creed trilogy as time goes on but I still love them.
 

basic

back to basics
15 Year Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Posts
4,712
Creed III looks pretty good. Besides Rocky V this franchise has been super consistent over the years. Rocky III and IV are more cocaine fueled cheesy 80s movies that seem to fit less and less with Rocky, II, Balboa, and the Creed trilogy as time goes on but I still love them.
i watched rudy again. one of the best, if not the best, sports movies ever.
 

basic

back to basics
15 Year Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Posts
4,712
Is that because it's not a team based in CO?
fami is a 200 IQ mental elite and was too good for college. he also says he is pound for pound one of the strongest people in colorado...but didn't wanna play college sports. therefore, all college sports are beneath him.

Correct.

And also that college sports suck ass across the board.
see?
 

famicommander

Tak enabled this rank change
15 Year Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Posts
13,541
college sports fans be like
"It's better because all the players, coaches, refs, commentators, stadiums, and rule sets are worse than the pros! I love that only 2 or 3 of 130 football teams ever have a chance to win anything!"

They're basically merc defending his VCR over 4K Blu Ray. It's not better because it's worse, it's worse because it's worse.
 
Top