What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

Me either. She absolutely deserves her rep as one of the greatest silent film actresses.

Some of her later performances are damn good too, if a bit stilted or stylized: e.g., The Night of the Hunter.

Mona Lisa Smile. Julia Roberts is just gorgeous.

AmateisGal said:

Mona Lisa Smile. Julia Roberts is just gorgeous.

Click to expand...

I'm not really a fan of Julia Roberts - she tends to overplay her adorableness enough to induce insulin shock - but I do like this film. It's a bit of a guilty pleasure.

Sure, its breaking-out-of-just-being-fifties-housewives message is sledgehammered way too hard, but the cast is just outstanding from top to bottom. And beyond the phalanx of ascendant young actresses in the leads (Kristen Dunst, Julia Styles, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Ginnifer Goodwin) and dependable supporting players (Marcia Gay Harden, Marion Seldes, Juliet Stevenson) are people years away from making their marks who are a real trip to see, like John Slattery, Dominic West, and Krysten Ritter.

Doctor Strange said:

I'm not really a fan of Julia Roberts - she tends to overplay her adorableness enough to induce insulin shock - but I do like this film. It's a bit of a guilty pleasure.

Sure, its breaking-out-of-just-being-fifties-housewives message is sledgehammered way too hard, but the cast is just outstanding from top to bottom. And beyond the phalanx of ascendant young actresses in the leads (Kristen Dunst, Julia Styles, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Ginnifer Goodwin) and dependable supporting players (Marcia Gay Harden, Marion Seldes, Juliet Stevenson) are people years away from making their marks who are a real trip to see, like John Slattery, Dominic West, and Krysten Ritter.

Click to expand...

Ditto to every single word you said.

And the movie is just gorgeous to look at - by the start of this Century, Hollywood had learned how to make period pieces visual wonders.

Caught Dunkirk on its HBO premiere last night. A mixed bag for me, certainly no four-star masterwork.

It exemplifies both Christopher Nolan’s strengths and weaknesses. Technically, it’s totally awesome, with tremendous sequences and remarkable effects work. Story-wise, it’s underwhelming: not enough characterization to really identify with anybody, frustrating cross-cutting between different timeframes, a pervading chilly remoteness even with life and death stakes. I mean, young George’s death is supposed to register as a war-is-hell sacrifice… but it just lays there, a trivial accident vs. four entire shiploads of soldiers going into the drink. And I somehow got the odd feeling that Kenneth Branagh as the admiral was channeling Theoden King from LOTR.

No question it's a great technical achievement, but I would have preferred more detailed characters and straightforward pacing a la The Longest Day and other, more traditional war flicks.

Doctor Strange said:

Caught Dunkirk on its HBO premiere last night. A mixed bag for me, certainly no four-star masterwork.

It exemplifies both Christopher Nolan’s strengths and weaknesses. Technically, it’s totally awesome, with tremendous sequences and remarkable effects work. Story-wise, it’s underwhelming: not enough characterization to really identify with anybody, frustrating cross-cutting between different timeframes, a pervading chilly remoteness even with life and death stakes. I mean, young George’s death is supposed to register as a war-is-hell sacrifice… but it just lays there, a trivial accident vs. four entire shiploads of soldiers going into the drink. And I somehow got the odd feeling that Kenneth Branagh as the admiral was channeling Theoden King from LOTR.

No question it's a great technical achievement, but I would have preferred more detailed characters and straightforward pacing a la The Longest Day and other, more traditional war flicks.

Click to expand...

Very good analysis. My girlfriend told me exaclty the same thing. I have not seen the film as of yet, but the more and more I hear, the more and more less interested I become.

Doctor Strange said:

Caught Dunkirk on its HBO premiere last night. A mixed bag for me, certainly no four-star masterwork.

It exemplifies both Christopher Nolan’s strengths and weaknesses. Technically, it’s totally awesome, with tremendous sequences and remarkable effects work. Story-wise, it’s underwhelming: not enough characterization to really identify with anybody, frustrating cross-cutting between different timeframes, a pervading chilly remoteness even with life and death stakes. I mean, young George’s death is supposed to register as a war-is-hell sacrifice… but it just lays there, a trivial accident vs. four entire shiploads of soldiers going into the drink. And I somehow got the odd feeling that Kenneth Branagh as the admiral was channeling Theoden King from LOTR.

No question it's a great technical achievement, but I would have preferred more detailed characters and straightforward pacing a la The Longest Day and other, more traditional war flicks.

Click to expand...

I quite agree with you. I was underwhelmed by it, as well. I couldn't connect to any of the characters. The Longest Day is a far superior film.

1mach1 said:

Very good analysis. My girlfriend told me exaclty the same thing. I have not seen the film as of yet, but the more and more I hear, the more and more less interested I become.

Click to expand...

I went from wanting to see it in the movie theater (but didn't), to must get it on Netflix (but didn't), to I'll catch it on HBO when it hits there (and still I haven't seen it), as, like you, the reviews here and comments from friends kept driving my enthusiasm down. I will watch it now that it's on HBO, but I'm all but indifferent.

"The Green Mile" from 1999

For some reason, I had never seen this one until now. The acting (an incredible number of well-known actors are in this one), directing, writing, cinematography and period sets and details are all outstanding - just top notch. As a straightforward movie, it does it all well with maybe the exception of the opening and closing nursing home scenes being a bit hokey (but that construct - bookending a modern day connection to a story in the past - seemed very popular in the '90s for period pieces).

Regardless, the movie really lifts off to another plane as a parable / modern interpretation of the Christ story. And John Coffee - a gentle giant of a black man falsely sentence to death in the South in the '30s - is a Christ blended from the Old and New Testaments. He has Jesus' qualities of charity and kindness - and a willingness to suffer for others' sins - but an Old Testament view of good and evil - evil does exists and good should fight to eradicate it / kill it / stomp it out. There's no five-steps to a better person lessons here; the message is fight evil with everything you got. It's a "judge and be ready to be judged" philosophy.

The movie's political bent is clearly liberal - there's a not subtle at all, very anti-death penalty message - but it's wrapped in a Christ fable at odds with much of modern liberalism's secular view. It's an interesting blending of ideologies.

But as noted, the movie works simply as a wonderful film with Oscar-level acting and story telling; however, it reaches another plane with its impressive and (for this agnostic) inspirational take on the story of Christ. You don't have to believe or be converted to be awed by a smart interpretation of the Christ story and moved by its message of a merciful God sending a Messiah to earth to fight evil, inspire good, heal the sick and, ultimately, die for man's sins.

The Narrow Margin, from TCM's Noir Alley. Charles McGraw and Marie Windsor in the same noir, with not a wasted shot or line of tougher than nails dialogue, and directed by Richard Fleischer add up to a movie that pulls you along at a fast pace. Fleischer has some of the actors recite their lines while strolling right past the camera lens, drifting in and out focus. The fight scene in the sleeper car cabin must be seen to be believed.
Eddie Muller's intro and outro segments are excellent.

Fading Fast said:

"The Green Mile" from 1999

For some reason, I had never seen this one until now. The acting (an incredible number of well-known actors are in this one), directing, writing, cinematography and period sets and details are all outstanding - just top notch. As a straightforward movie, it does it all well with maybe the exception of the opening and closing nursing home scenes being a bit hokey (but that construct - bookending a modern day connection to a story in the past - seemed very popular in the '90s for period pieces). . . .

Click to expand...

It's a riveting novel as well. The deal was that Stephen King wanted to write a serial novel the way Dickens used to, and so the six (I think) parts, each with a strong cliffhanger, appeared once a month on the paperback racks. I read it all at one time, though I can see where SK put the breaks. He's said that Frank Darabont, the director of Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption, really gets into line with his, SK's, vision of his stories.

Never thought about it being a modern (well, mostly 1930s) Christ story. . . .

Benzadmiral said:

It's a riveting novel as well. The deal was that Stephen King wanted to write a serial novel the way Dickens used to, and so the six (I think) parts, each with a strong cliffhanger, appeared once a month on the paperback racks. I read it all at one time, though I can see where SK put the breaks. He's said that Frank Darabont, the director of Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption, really gets into line with his, SK's, vision of his stories.

Never thought about it being a modern (well, mostly 1930s) Christ story. . . .

Click to expand...

I haven't read the novel. No matter how closely a movie tracks a book, it will give a different impression and, of course, we all bring our own history, background, viewpoints and experiences to how we see and interpret fiction. To me, the Christ story jumped out - I didn't look for it or try to build a "smart" metaphor, it was just there before my eyes.

Talking of Stephen King.....

Just watched the 2004 movie Secret Window starring Johnny Depp as a New York writer who murders his wife and her lover. He buries their bodies in the back yard and plants a small corn field over their bodies. Local sheriff knows that he did the crime but can't prove it. The story, based on a Stephen King book, is set in upstate New York.

The Guns of Navarone while at work. I love Watch TCM because I can have a classic movie playing in the background while I toil away at the day job.

SGF and I are taking the afternoon off (feels like playing hooky) to see TCM's presentation of "Sunset Boulevard" in a movie theater. Really excited to see this one on a large screen.

Fading Fast said:

SGF and I are taking the afternoon off (feels like playing hooky) to see TCM's presentation of "Sunset Boulevard" in a movie theater. Really excited to see this one on a large screen.

Click to expand...

As Max said, ever so stolidly:

"Madame is the greatest star of them all."

(Be sure to take the Isotta-Fraschini when you head to the theatre.)

"Sunset Boulevard" from 1950 on a big screen in a real movie theater (with unnecessarily oversized and fully reclining seats - I love not being jammed in, but these were crazy oversized - whatever, it's what the 18-34 year old demographic must want)

Wild guess is that I've seen this movie seven or eight times on TV over the past thirty or so years, so I was curious to see what "felt" different on the big screen. The first thing that I felt right away was its noir-ish-ness. In a dark theater with a giant screen in front of you, you felt the weight of Holden's character's failure, the brooding ominous of both Norma Desmond's house, and, well, Norma Desmond, and the foreboding of Eric von Stroheim as the perfectly imposing and laconic butler Max.

I don't know if this is attributed to the big screen, but Desmond's relationship with Joe (Holden) was more clearly one of young gigolo gets lifestyle - place to live, fancy clothes, jewelry, etc. - while older woman gets handsome boyfriend for show and sex (much clearer on the big screen - despite the code - that, yes, they are having sex). And if the one-second-before-sex cut of their first consummation scene didn't alert you, then the let-me-take-you-shopping-for-expensive-clothes scene (with a wonderfully smarmy salesman telling Joe, "if the lady's paying for it, take the vicuna coat") probably tipped you off.

Also, the relationship between Joe and the young female writer at the studio - played by a glowingly fresh Nancy Olson standing, intentionally, in start relief to Gloria Swanson's aging and fading Norma Desmond - seemed more involved and pivotal to the storyline. There was a lot of cheating going on there - Joe cheating on Norma, Olson's engaged character cheating with Joe (at least emotionally) while Joe was cuckolding his best friend (again, a lot of cheating happened quickly).

And lastly, all the wonderful well-known moments and lines - "you were big once," "I am big, it's the pictures that got small," "Mr DeMille, I'm ready for my closeup," Holden's dead body floating limply in the pool, etc. - are more powerful coming at you from a big screen. I've never seen a movie on a big screen that didn't gain something over the small screen, but "Sunset Boulevard" jumped to another plane where its "mood," its "atmosphere" closed in on you in a thematically perfect way that isn't fully captured on even a good-sized TV.

Benzadmiral said:

As Max said, ever so stolidly:

"Madame is the greatest star of them all."

(Be sure to take the Isotta-Fraschini when you head to the theatre.)

Click to expand...

I'd have to practice to say that name correctly. Quite an impressive automobile and quite the pivotal and symbolic role it plays.

It's interesting to hear the generation gap from 1950s Hollywood to 1920s Hollywood discussed in detail and, frankly, to hear much disdain from both sides of the divide: '20s Hollywood, as represented by Norma Desmond, has no more respect for '50s Hollywood, as represented by Joe (Holden) than '50s Hollywood has for '20s Hollywood (with the Isotta-Fraschini staunchly and proudly carrying the flag for '20s Hollywood).

When you think about the fact that the silent era in 1950 had been gone for a little more than twenty years, you realize just how voraciously the Hollywood beast chewed up and consumed its victims. Norma Desmond in 1950 was, I dunno, name your favorite late-1990s megastar, in 2018.

Aside from that there's two things I love to see everytime I watch that film. One is the sheer bizarreness of the dead chimp laid out in state, and the other is delightful gusto with which Jack Webb bites into his role as Gillis's buddy. He'd been playing Joe Friday on radio for just under a year when the film was released, and it was the last time he'd ever really make an impression on the screen without Friday's shadow looming over his performance. He could have been a fun little character actor if he'd chosen to go that route.