 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"....Will there be an infirmary Ward 2? Of course there will- that’s where I had my wisdom teeth out."
Tg effortlessly wins post of the day.
In fact he watched the film just so he could make the gag! 
It was a tap in for me and a huge assist for Wanderer
I looked up and saw a white shirt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The moonlighter
1953
Fred macmurray. Unusual b&w western about a night-time cattle rustler (thats why they call them moonlighters) who gets caught but another is lynched in his place after a mix up with the cells! He sets out on revenge to get the main culprits from the mob (one is Jack Elam). Then he gets involved with his long lost ex wife (Barbara Stanwick) - who is now seeing his brother Tom - but then macmurray gets sidetracked robbing the local bank with a crooked associate and tom, macmurrays innocent brother.
Not bad. Slightly glib but unexpected upbeat ending.
6 out of 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping 3.5/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping 3.5/10
"Lebron!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drango
1957
Jeff chandler
Interesting premise set in the aftermath of the civil war as the north sends officers to administer southern towns that were sacked in the war. Major Drango (Chandler) is sent to govern such a town in georgia and tries to win the respect of the rabidly-distrustful southern townsfolk, who are being secretly whipped up by confederates among them to restart hostilities.
Quite powerful stuff.
The Bernstein score is noticeable but uncharacteristic of his later 60s scores.
7 out of 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 19, 2018 - 10:11 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thgil
(Member)
|
Battlefield Earth: 1/10
This one is a head-scratcher. How did no one realize they were making an absolute turkey? The script is fraught with plot holes, the characters are the thinnest archetypes I’ve ever seen, the villain is basically Skeletor, and the cinematography is horrendous.
Battlefield Earth (as an oddity): 5/10
As a curiosity, it’s got much more merit. It almost becomes a game of “When’s the Next Plot Hole Going to Arrive?” or “How Did No One Realize That Was a Bad Idea?!?”. Even in this context, I’ve seen better, but I’ve still seen worse (but not by much).
Arrival: 7/10
This is a strong film from a conceptual standpoint, but the characters are two-dimensional and the plot has its share of predictable turns; however, the rug-yanking moment is a surprise that nearly makes up for all of that. The first half is a bit repetitive, but when it hits its stride it does it well. I just wish more care had been taken with the characters and the first section of the film. Definitely worth a look though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISLE OF DOGS
6/10
A big improvement over the lackluster MR. FOX.
Strikingly original use of stop-motion puppets, hand drawn and cg.
Pretty dark story concerning a dictatorial and corrupt politician plus the de rigeur dystopian landscapes.
Worth seeing!
brm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Springfield Rifle
1952 gary cooper.
Never been a massive Cooper fan, he always seemed a bit old and worn out and a bit feeble as a leading man. This was about a union officer who deliberately puts himself in disgrace in order to be discharged and go undercover to find both a gang of horse thieves and the union traitor who is providing them with information.
Watchable 7.3 out of 10.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 20, 2018 - 10:54 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob DiMucci
(Member)
|
THE TOUCH (1971) - 7/10
THE TOUCH is rare and unique among the films of famed Swedish director Ingmar Bergman. Rare in that it is one of his least-seen films. Unique in that it was Bergman’s first film in English and starred one of the hottest actors of his time—Elliot Gould. Indeed, Gould was the first non-Scandinavian actor to play a starring role in a Bergman film. After his breakout role in 1969’s BOB & CAROL & TED & ALICE, Gould starred in four films in 1970, including Robert Altman’s M*A*S*H. After completing filming on Jules Feiffer's LITTLE MURDERS, he started his work on Bergman’s film.
Gould’s co-stars were two long-time Bergman collaborators: Bibi Andersson and Max Von Sydow. As usual, Bergman also produced and wrote the film, and his onscreen credit merely says "A film by Ingmar Bergman." Frequent Bergman cinematographer Sven Nykvist photographed the film.
THE TOUCH concerns a seemingly happy Swedish housewife and mother who begins an adulterous affair with a foreign archaeologist who is working near her home. Production on the film began on 15 September 1970 and continued through mid-December 1970. Location scenes were shot on the Swedish island of Gotland, in Stockholm, and in London. Interiors were filmed at Film-Teknik, in the Stockholm suburb of Solna.
The picture was a co-production of ABC Pictures (New York) and Cinematograph A.B. (Stockholm). It premiered at the Berlin Film Festival on 26 June 1971. THE TOUCH was released first in the U.S. by Cinerama Releasing Corp., opening in New York on 14 July 1971. The film’s later Swedish premiere was on 30 August 1971. The film received more negative reactions than most of Bergman's films.
Reviewing the film from the Berlin Film Festival, Variety’s “Hawk” praised THE TOUCH as “both a romantic film of great poignancy and strength and an example of masterful cinema honed down to deceptively simple near-perfection.” But upon the film’s U.S. release, the majority of the critics found it to be a disappointment. Typical was the New York Daily News’ Wanda Hale. “THE TOUCH cannot be included among Bergman’s greatest,” she wrote. “The Swedish director lapses into mediocrity” with a “Gothic soap opera.” Time’s Jay Cocks found the film “disappointing” because it was “reminiscent of those sober and slightly dreary ‘women’s dramas’ that Bergman made back in the mid-‘50s, films like A LESSON IN LOVE and BRINK OF LIFE.” The New Republic’s Stanley Kauffmann charged that “one reason for [the film’s] failure is unique for Bergman: it has very small ambitions . . . Everything in this film is laid out, nothing is created; because I think, there wasn’t much to create.” Yet for all these complaints concerning theme and tone, the most frequent and vociferous complaints centered around the performance of Elliott Gould. Kauffmann said that “Gould apparently doesn’t know what he’s doing or why.” New York’s Judith Crist found him to be “simply incredible” – “He completely shatters the realities his co-stars create.” And the San Francisco Chronicle’s Anitra Earle felt that “Gould appears a stranger in his own language.”
Still, the film had its defenders. Saturday Review’s Roland Gelatt thought the picture “an ordinary story made extraordinary by Bergman’s subtle illuminations.” (“Is there any other moviemaker working today who can express so much with such economy of means?”) The New Yorker’s Penelope Gilliatt hailed the film as “the best about love he has ever made” and praised Gould’s “great technique and responsiveness.” Molly Haskell, writing in the Village Voice, admitted that “I found THE TOUCH almost unbearably moving.” Gould “or what he represents, is what raises the film from the relative banality of a housewife’s extramarital affair to the doomed and unfathomable passion the film actually chronicles.” Finally, it was Charles Champlin of the Los Angeles Times who spoke for the divided critics by saying that “The perspective to be maintained is that THE TOUCH is a disappointing film by Ingmar Bergman. But in its visual beauty, the sureness of its telling method, the reality of time and space it creates, and the subtleties of relationships and confrontations it captures, THE TOUCH is a work no more than a handful of directors in the world are capable of. And it may well be that a man’s least work is the truest measure of his greatness.”
THE TOUCH was shot in two versions - one where English was spoken by those who were comfortable in English and Swedish by those who were most fluent in Swedish, and one where only English was spoken. The full English version was the one released in the U.S., and the two-language version has been infrequently seen. But that was the version that was shown at the American Film Institute's Silver Theatre last week. That is also the version that is likely to appear when the film makes its digital video debut (Blu-ray only) in November, as part of a massive 39-film collection from Criterion, entitled "Ingmar Bergman's Cinema."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 21, 2018 - 9:16 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mr. Jack
(Member)
|
-Alpha (2018): 9/10
In the dog days of summer, it's heartening to find an actual piece of actual cinema amongst the cast-away dreck like The Happytime Murders. Alpha is a marvelous experience, like a PG-13 cross between The Revenant and Never Cry Wolf. A resonant Boy & His Dog epic filled with gorgeous visuals, elegant storytelling with a minimum of dialogue (what is there is subtitled, and -- frankly -- if the Blu-Ray offers an option to turn them off, I will, because the film is plenty easy to follow without them) and exciting action sequences, the new film from a solo Albert Hughes (who, with twin brother Allen, made fine thrillers like Menace II Society, Dead Presidents and the underrated Jack The Ripper shocker From Hell) is a real feast in an era drowning with audiovisual overkill and past-their-prime franchises bellowing like mastodons as they sink into a morass of pricey CGI goo. Kodi Smit-McPhee delivers a fine central performance as "Keda", a young (cave)man left behind by his tribe after he's presumed dead from a fall, and gradually befriends a wolf (played winningly by "Chuck", with occasional, subtle CG enhancement) left behind by his pack after being injured. The two develop the same kind of lyrical, unhurried bond that fueled classic films like The Black Stallion and Never Cry Wolf, and in a genre I'm admittedly a sucker for, this stands as one of the best examples of its kind. There are minor cosmetic flaws (like an opening action sequence followed by a "One Week Later" title card, an annoying affectation of modern movies that plays like they left a trailer for the movie you're already watching at the beginning, those unnecessary subtitles, which are intrusive and perfunctory, and a typically generic modern musical score for a movie that cried out for the melodic gifts of a James Horner or Basil Poledouris), but overall this is a tonic coming after a particularly anemic summer movie season. It'll probably be gone from theaters inside of two weeks, so see it on the big screen while you can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...past-their-prime franchises.."
Aint that the truth! Good phrase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
