Of Leon?
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
Of Leon?
Lots of the songs got moved around but the original opened with The Killing Moon by Echo and the Bunnymen and the Directors Cut replaced it with INXS's Never Tear Us Apart - they wanted INXS for the original release but couldn't afford it. The Killing Moon was still used but that meant removing Under The Milky Way Tonight by The Church - another truly horrible decision.
I also can seem to "find" a copy of the original anywhere.
Horrible is an over-exaggeration, but it was too long and lost its way at times. The new cut (Final cut or something) keeps it tighter but expands on certain things that were a little superficial in the initial cut. It was a lovely experience seeing it at the cinema last summer too.
I really disliked redux. It was a major downgrade on the original.
I've downloaded the new cut and I'll give it a watch.
Enjoy!
Kid Detective
20 years after he was a well respected child detective, life hasn't moved on for Adam Brody, who is solving petty crimes in his town. However, Things change when he is asked to help solve the mystery of a murdered teen. Adam Brody was excellent in this mystery movie with a lot of heart. Paced well with a theme that most of us can relate to. I just wish there were more important characters and thus leading to more suspects. Definitely worth a watch 7/10
20 years after he was a well respected child detective, life hasn't moved on for Adam Brody, who is solving petty crimes in his town. However, Things change when he is asked to help solve the mystery of a murdered teen. Adam Brody was excellent in this mystery movie with a lot of heart. Paced well with a theme that most of us can relate to. I just wish there were more important characters and thus leading to more suspects. Definitely worth a watch 7/10
Fuku-Chan of Fuku-Fuku Flats
If you're a fan of quirky Japanese comedies like Turtles are Surprisingly Fast Swimmers, Instant Swamp, Fine Totally Fine, Adrift in Tokyo, Fish Story, Funky Forest and Love & Peace... then you'll definitely like this.
Like those, it's a slice of life about a disparate group of nerds and outsiders who like to build kites, take photography and fart in each other's faces. It also has artists who enjoy committing sexual harassment and a man with a serious knack for drawing cartoons blind-folded, while harbouring pent-up anxiety over starting relationships because of a traumatic childhood incident.
All in all, it's good fun and better yet, available 'free' on Amazon Prime.
4/5
If you're a fan of quirky Japanese comedies like Turtles are Surprisingly Fast Swimmers, Instant Swamp, Fine Totally Fine, Adrift in Tokyo, Fish Story, Funky Forest and Love & Peace... then you'll definitely like this.
Like those, it's a slice of life about a disparate group of nerds and outsiders who like to build kites, take photography and fart in each other's faces. It also has artists who enjoy committing sexual harassment and a man with a serious knack for drawing cartoons blind-folded, while harbouring pent-up anxiety over starting relationships because of a traumatic childhood incident.
All in all, it's good fun and better yet, available 'free' on Amazon Prime.
4/5
Just read up on this - looks really good. Where did you see it? Netflix / Prime / Cinema?
It's on Sky Cinema.
Yeah. I find somewhat obscure cuts of films tend to be easier to find on well, torrent sites. Buy the directors cut after if your conscience requires it.
Directors cut probably only adds one fairly short scene but it just completely changes the tone of the film.
Free Guy
Awesome video game fun. It was really really fun. Loved some of the cameos in the movie too.
Awesome video game fun. It was really really fun. Loved some of the cameos in the movie too.
Black Widow
Better than I expected. Florence Pugh was good. There were some really fun action set pieces. The comedy worked. I wasnt a fan of Taskmaster though. One of my favourite Marvel characters, that turned him into a random vessel woman... Why? Also I felt the opening sequence was brilliant but the film never really delivered on that properly, which is a shame as it had a chance to be more than the usual fight, fight, fight, CGI, setup the next movie 6/10
Better than I expected. Florence Pugh was good. There were some really fun action set pieces. The comedy worked. I wasnt a fan of Taskmaster though. One of my favourite Marvel characters, that turned him into a random vessel woman... Why? Also I felt the opening sequence was brilliant but the film never really delivered on that properly, which is a shame as it had a chance to be more than the usual fight, fight, fight, CGI, setup the next movie 6/10
Sweet Girl
After losing his wife to cancer because of a greedy manufacturer, Jason Mamoa and his daughter go on a mission to exact revenge on those who were responsible. I thought the first two thirds of this movie were good dumb fun. Typical action stuff. Then they introduced the dumbest twist in the final third that retrospectively ruins the entire movie. It was so dumb that I couldn't believe it at first. Avoid 4/10
Fast & Furious 9
These should have stopped after 7. The series needs Paul Walker. I know these films are dumb, and I'm so up for that but this was beyond stupid. From Han's survival explanation to cars swinging around like they're Tarzan to cars actually flying in space
This shit needs to stop. John Cena was ok, there were some good action scenes and I enjoyed the post credit stinger. The addition of flashbacks to show Vin Diesels younger days was a good shout. That probably could have been a film of its own 6/10
After losing his wife to cancer because of a greedy manufacturer, Jason Mamoa and his daughter go on a mission to exact revenge on those who were responsible. I thought the first two thirds of this movie were good dumb fun. Typical action stuff. Then they introduced the dumbest twist in the final third that retrospectively ruins the entire movie. It was so dumb that I couldn't believe it at first. Avoid 4/10
Fast & Furious 9
These should have stopped after 7. The series needs Paul Walker. I know these films are dumb, and I'm so up for that but this was beyond stupid. From Han's survival explanation to cars swinging around like they're Tarzan to cars actually flying in space
This shit needs to stop. John Cena was ok, there were some good action scenes and I enjoyed the post credit stinger. The addition of flashbacks to show Vin Diesels younger days was a good shout. That probably could have been a film of its own 6/10Machete Kills is up there for oddest cast with Mel Gibson, Lady Gaga, Cuba Gooding Jr, Elon Musk and Charlie Sheen.
Bad Trip - silly hidden camera movie where Eric Andre & Lil Rey Howery play some pranks on the unsuspecting public, which does have some genuinely funny moments. Good way to kill an hour and a bit when you don't know what to watch. 6.5/10
This had me laughing like a drain over the weekend. So many funny scenes. I was fairly stoned though.
I was dying at the scene where he meets Maria in the juice bar and makes all the other customers wait, and then puts his hand in the blender. Also, the actress that plays Trina is scary af. I would shit my pants if she approached me.
Yeah, she was great.
I really enjoyed the closing credits too.
The whole thing had quite a nice feel good vibe about it. People were so kind to them, despite them behaving like complete freaks (knife-wielding barber aside)
The Andromeda Strain
Hadn't seen this for years. Great opening set up, with the mystery of what happened in the town. Some might find the procedural science part slow or a bit po-faced, but the lab is coolly stylised and the very early use of split screen for some sequences is really good.
The end almost feels a bit quick, but well worth a watch.
7.5/10
Hadn't seen this for years. Great opening set up, with the mystery of what happened in the town. Some might find the procedural science part slow or a bit po-faced, but the lab is coolly stylised and the very early use of split screen for some sequences is really good.
The end almost feels a bit quick, but well worth a watch.
7.5/10
I love this man.
Candyman (2021)
To start with the positives. I liked the kills, The way they told the backstory, the acting was good, And the makeup was nicely done. Other then that. It was a shit movie overall. I came for the horror of Candyman and ended up being a message saying "Feck white people amirite". The og movie had subtle racial undertones and they did it well enough without taking away the main plot. But this movie it was all messages and messages. Didn't even feel like I was watching Candyman. Just another Peele movie about all white people are bad. If you didn't hear it the first 5 times in the first 5mins. It'll keep telling you. And the ending made me laugh and roll my eyes. Like wtf just happened? I liked the last 5 seconds. That was the only good part.
4/10.
To start with the positives. I liked the kills, The way they told the backstory, the acting was good, And the makeup was nicely done. Other then that. It was a shit movie overall. I came for the horror of Candyman and ended up being a message saying "Feck white people amirite". The og movie had subtle racial undertones and they did it well enough without taking away the main plot. But this movie it was all messages and messages. Didn't even feel like I was watching Candyman. Just another Peele movie about all white people are bad. If you didn't hear it the first 5 times in the first 5mins. It'll keep telling you. And the ending made me laugh and roll my eyes. Like wtf just happened? I liked the last 5 seconds. That was the only good part.
4/10.
Last edited:
Interstellar. Hm. Nolan obviously has a lot of skill as a film maker. It's very well shot, a lot of great images, and so on and so forth. The craft is all there. Also cool that they tried to get a lot of the science right, or at least realistic for everything that's as yet science fiction. It's the script where the issue is though. I read that it's essentially two stories stitched together, one by Christoper Nolan and the other by his brother (and common collaborator) Jonathan. I think that really shows.
Apart from that, I never felt like the movie had real stakes. In most action films, you know exactly how scenes will end, as the good guy has to survive and the bad guy eventually has to lose. Yet that doesn't usually get in the way; scenes can still be tense and gripping. In Interstellar, I never had that. Instead, there were quite a lot of drawn-out scenes where I am sure I was supposed to be tense ('will this go well?') - and I instead I was just bored ('come on and get it done already!'). Finally, in true Nolan fashion, every bit of dialogue was Important; characters never say random, day-to-day things. That too got on my nerves. I also thought the ending was enormously contrived and hurried.
So I'm not a fan. For me, if Nolan wants to continue creating sci-fi, maybe he should try creating a film based on somebody else's script for a change. Cause I've disliked Inception and Interstellar, and based on everything I've read and seen, I can't imagine I'd like Tenet. (Not that Nolan will care, of course. 
)
The dust bowl bit takes up a lot of time, but is ultimately entirely inconsequential. Human survival at Earth is at risk, that's all that matters for the rest of the film; yet we get about an hour of dust bowl scenes at the beginning, and further on the bit about Cooper's son's wife and son being sick. None of that matters for the overall theme though, nor does it have any consequences for Cooper's actions or personality. It's redundant, and feels that way. Worst here is when they set fire to the crop to save that woman and child. Nothing actually comes of that; in the end, all it provides is a little time for Murph to figure our the watch. An entirely pointless plot twist.
That bit inside the black hole with the five-dimensional structure is just a Space Odyssey type of way to resolve the plot (the psychedelica at the end); it's absurd. And of course the film does very cleanly finish everything on a high note, with Cooper surviving, the tearjerker scene with Murph, and the promised reunion with Dr. Brand - all in quick succession.
)Interstellar. Hm. Nolan obviously has a lot of skill as a film maker. It's very well shot, a lot of great images, and so on and so forth. The craft is all there. Also cool that they tried to get a lot of the science right, or at least realistic for everything that's as yet science fiction. It's the script where the issue is though. I read that it's essentially two stories stitched together, one by Christoper Nolan and the other by his brother (and common collaborator) Jonathan. I think that really shows.
Apart from that, I never felt like the movie had real stakes. In most action films, you know exactly how scenes will end, as the good guy has to survive and the bad guy eventually has to lose. Yet that doesn't usually get in the way; scenes can still be tense and gripping. In Interstellar, I never had that. Instead, there were quite a lot of drawn-out scenes where I am sure I was supposed to be tense ('will this go well?') - and I instead I was just bored ('come on and get it done already!'). Finally, in true Nolan fashion, every bit of dialogue was Important; characters never say random, day-to-day things. That too got on my nerves. I also thought the ending was enormously contrived and hurried.The dust bowl bit takes up a lot of time, but is ultimately entirely inconsequential. Human survival at Earth is at risk, that's all that matters for the rest of the film; yet we get about an hour of dust bowl scenes at the beginning, and further on the bit about Cooper's son's wife and son being sick. None of that matters for the overall theme though, nor does it have any consequences for Cooper's actions or personality. It's redundant, and feels that way. Worst here is when they set fire to the crop to save that woman and child. Nothing actually comes of that; in the end, all it provides is a little time for Murph to figure our the watch. An entirely pointless plot twist.
So I'm not a fan. For me, if Nolan wants to continue creating sci-fi, maybe he should try creating a film based on somebody else's script for a change. Cause I've disliked Inception and Interstellar, and based on everything I've read and seen, I can't imagine I'd like Tenet. (Not that Nolan will care, of course.That bit inside the black hole with the five-dimensional structure is just a Space Odyssey type of way to resolve the plot (the psychedelica at the end); it's absurd. And of course the film does very cleanly finish everything on a high note, with Cooper surviving, the tearjerker scene with Murph, and the promised reunion with Dr. Brand - all in quick succession.
Posted about that a loooooooooooooong time ago. The original draft is probably still online in places. If you're curious, just look for "Interstellar original script" or variants thereof. The latter half of the movie turns into a Contact ripoff - or at least riffs on it very very heavily - with some A.I. thrown in for good measure, and at the time the rumor was that Spielberg (for whom the script was written) was not happy at all (since he's friends with Zemeckis).
Mank. This film, I did like. There is plenty to criticize: why shoot in black and white? Why bring in the political angle, which ultimately contributes next to nothing to the story? (As if Mank would have had any doubts about Heart's or Mayer's political leanings or scruples beforehand!) Why doesn't it do its material more justice, instead portraying Mank as old and Marion as young, and going (nearly) full in on the heavily criticized Mank/Welles dispute theory? (To rehash some points brought up earlier by R.N7 (here and here) and @dumbo (here).) Oldman also portrays Mank a little too stereotypically - the typical wise-cracking, experienced drunk at the end of his career.
Despite that, I really enjoyed the film. The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. (@entropy) I think the black and white might actually have helped here, as the contrast and setting of some scenes would not have worked the same way in colour. I loved the camera placements as well. Most modern films I see are very impatient: cameras are constantly following people, and the image switches between cameras all the time. I love it when a well-composed angle is just maintained while a scene plays out. A couple of good examples in this film are from cars coming and going. Another great shot was when Mank arrives at Shelly's house: the camera starts on the street a bit away from the car, and Mank is right next to it once he's at the door (the camera did move along here, but in a straight line). Wonderful composition as far as I'm concerned. And the film is full of that.
Although I did think the political angle added little (apart from some colour locale, or historique, I suppose), I do think the story was otherwise well chosen. This film isn't about the making of Citizen Kane, or about the writing of its script; it's about what brought Mank to a place where he would write this particular story. That's less interesting to people that love Citizen Kane, I suppose, but I thought the portrayal of the period was otherwise interesting. I agree with @dumbo that watching any jetset isn't really fun, but as it happens, I do like portrayals of this period of Hollywood more generally. And as a period piece, I think it works pretty well - I agree a lot with @Rooney in Paris on that front (here).
So yeah, that was a good watch.
Despite that, I really enjoyed the film. The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. (@entropy) I think the black and white might actually have helped here, as the contrast and setting of some scenes would not have worked the same way in colour. I loved the camera placements as well. Most modern films I see are very impatient: cameras are constantly following people, and the image switches between cameras all the time. I love it when a well-composed angle is just maintained while a scene plays out. A couple of good examples in this film are from cars coming and going. Another great shot was when Mank arrives at Shelly's house: the camera starts on the street a bit away from the car, and Mank is right next to it once he's at the door (the camera did move along here, but in a straight line). Wonderful composition as far as I'm concerned. And the film is full of that.
Although I did think the political angle added little (apart from some colour locale, or historique, I suppose), I do think the story was otherwise well chosen. This film isn't about the making of Citizen Kane, or about the writing of its script; it's about what brought Mank to a place where he would write this particular story. That's less interesting to people that love Citizen Kane, I suppose, but I thought the portrayal of the period was otherwise interesting. I agree with @dumbo that watching any jetset isn't really fun, but as it happens, I do like portrayals of this period of Hollywood more generally. And as a period piece, I think it works pretty well - I agree a lot with @Rooney in Paris on that front (here).
So yeah, that was a good watch.
I can't find your post back. But yeah, what I understand is that Jonathan Nolan first wrote a script based on a concept by Lynda Obst and Kip Thorne, which is what the basis of the dust bowl part; and that Christoper Nolan changed the second half a lot, merging with a script he had already. What Spielberg would have seen (according to Wikipedia), was first the original concept by Obst and Thorne, and then Jonathan Nolan's script; but I suppose some bits of the second half may have been present in it anyway.
Larry Crowne. No, not quite Mank or Interstellar. A very light bit of filler where Tom Hanks (also directing) is a mid-life guys that fired from his superstore job, and decides to go to college. Somehow, college is a place where everyone is super nice and inclusive to this older guy, even some kind of weird scooter gang (well, gang; hippy commune?) that he gets to hang out with. It's also the place where a some kind of public speaking class changes lives, and he gets to meet Julia Roberts, the teacher.
It's fun enough if you turn off your brain while watching, but really not fun if you expect any kind of edge, something else than cuddles, or want to think back about it later. There's better drivel to watch.
It's fun enough if you turn off your brain while watching, but really not fun if you expect any kind of edge, something else than cuddles, or want to think back about it later. There's better drivel to watch.
Reminiscence
Gorgeous cinematography, but it’s almost like everyone sleepwalks through it. Every time Hugh Jackman starts his moody voiceovers, I half expected a perfume bottle to pop up on screen.
Reminiscence by Marc Jacobs, at a Boots near you.
Gorgeous cinematography, but it’s almost like everyone sleepwalks through it. Every time Hugh Jackman starts his moody voiceovers, I half expected a perfume bottle to pop up on screen.
Reminiscence by Marc Jacobs, at a Boots near you.
Love and Monsters
Standard Netflix cheese monster flik, or so I thought going in but I really enjoyed this. Likeable lead character, they reigned in the monsters enough they they were either in the background or the focus of scenes, and it didn't take itself too seriously lead to an enjoyable movie.
7/10
Standard Netflix cheese monster flik, or so I thought going in but I really enjoyed this. Likeable lead character, they reigned in the monsters enough they they were either in the background or the focus of scenes, and it didn't take itself too seriously lead to an enjoyable movie.
7/10
I haven't seen this but the message of "white people are evil cnuts" seem to be ingrained too heavily in Jordan Peele's work, to the point where it puts me off wanting to watch anything he's involved in. I find it hilarious that despite this, he'd married to a white woman.
Either she's evil or they have an awfully awkward drive home after attending one of his premieres.
I really enjoyed this the one time i've seen it (in the cinema) but it went a long way to turn me off Christopher Nolan for a lot of the reasons you list.Interstellar. Hm. Nolan obviously has a lot of skill as a film maker. It's very well shot, a lot of great images, and so on and so forth. The craft is all there. Also cool that they tried to get a lot of the science right, or at least realistic for everything that's as yet science fiction. It's the script where the issue is though. I read that it's essentially two stories stitched together, one by Christoper Nolan and the other by his brother (and common collaborator) Jonathan. I think that really shows.
Apart from that, I never felt like the movie had real stakes. In most action films, you know exactly how scenes will end, as the good guy has to survive and the bad guy eventually has to lose. Yet that doesn't usually get in the way; scenes can still be tense and gripping. In Interstellar, I never had that. Instead, there were quite a lot of drawn-out scenes where I am sure I was supposed to be tense ('will this go well?') - and I instead I was just bored ('come on and get it done already!'). Finally, in true Nolan fashion, every bit of dialogue was Important; characters never say random, day-to-day things. That too got on my nerves. I also thought the ending was enormously contrived and hurried.The dust bowl bit takes up a lot of time, but is ultimately entirely inconsequential. Human survival at Earth is at risk, that's all that matters for the rest of the film; yet we get about an hour of dust bowl scenes at the beginning, and further on the bit about Cooper's son's wife and son being sick. None of that matters for the overall theme though, nor does it have any consequences for Cooper's actions or personality. It's redundant, and feels that way. Worst here is when they set fire to the crop to save that woman and child. Nothing actually comes of that; in the end, all it provides is a little time for Murph to figure our the watch. An entirely pointless plot twist.
So I'm not a fan. For me, if Nolan wants to continue creating sci-fi, maybe he should try creating a film based on somebody else's script for a change. Cause I've disliked Inception and Interstellar, and based on everything I've read and seen, I can't imagine I'd like Tenet. (Not that Nolan will care, of course.That bit inside the black hole with the five-dimensional structure is just a Space Odyssey type of way to resolve the plot (the psychedelica at the end); it's absurd. And of course the film does very cleanly finish everything on a high note, with Cooper surviving, the tearjerker scene with Murph, and the promised reunion with Dr. Brand - all in quick succession.
I think in many ways i liked the dust bowl scenes more than the rest of the movie. I think dragging the action back to the farm was a good substitute for, I dont know, Cooper having a flashback or daydreaming about them. Once you go the time jumps it just lost all impact and the end was clumsy and badly executed. It had me going for a time though. What little emotional impact the film had was tied to it and it would have probably been a fairly dry 2001 with a rubbish, contrived ending otherwise. It looked pretty as hell at least.
Thought both Dunkirk and Tenet were terrible and didn't have the pretty visuals to fall back on, you're probably right to skip Tenet.
I'm a bit of a Nolan fan boy, Tenet was a very poor film from start to finish.
Absolutely adore Interstellar though.
Absolutely adore Interstellar though.
I’m used to Nolan’s films pushing the boundaries of logic & reality (Interstellar & Inception are 2 of my favourites), so I was excited to see Tenet. I finally watched it last week & found it to be so confusing I really disliked it.
Yeah, there's the seeds for two interesting stories in there, and the dust bowl one would have the most promise. It's also what my wife complained most about: she didn't care so much about the space part (even if she's a physicist and got it better than me), but she would have liked to see the dust bowl part explained and developed further. But then she will like anything post-apocalyptic, so that's to be expected.
Obviously Jordan Peele probably doesn't genuinely think white people are evil. I think I can safely make that assumption. But there is an audience for that "make fun of white people" sentiment movies.
I was thinking of Mank again this morning, and I got to thinking that its narrative sttucture is rather unmotivated.Mank. This film, I did like. There is plenty to criticize: why shoot in black and white? Why bring in the political angle, which ultimately contributes next to nothing to the story? (As if Mank would have had any doubts about Heart's or Mayer's political leanings or scruples beforehand!) Why doesn't it do its material more justice, instead portraying Mank as old and Marion as young, and going (nearly) full in on the heavily criticized Mank/Welles dispute theory? (To rehash some points brought up earlier by R.N7 (here and here) and @dumbo (here).) Oldman also portrays Mank a little too stereotypically - the typical wise-cracking, experienced drunk at the end of his career.
Despite that, I really enjoyed the film. The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. (@entropy) I think the black and white might actually have helped here, as the contrast and setting of some scenes would not have worked the same way in colour. I loved the camera placements as well. Most modern films I see are very impatient: cameras are constantly following people, and the image switches between cameras all the time. I love it when a well-composed angle is just maintained while a scene plays out. A couple of good examples in this film are from cars coming and going. Another great shot was when Mank arrives at Shelly's house: the camera starts on the street a bit away from the car, and Mank is right next to it once he's at the door (the camera did move along here, but in a straight line). Wonderful composition as far as I'm concerned. And the film is full of that.
Although I did think the political angle added little (apart from some colour locale, or historique, I suppose), I do think the story was otherwise well chosen. This film isn't about the making of Citizen Kane, or about the writing of its script; it's about what brought Mank to a place where he would write this particular story. That's less interesting to people that love Citizen Kane, I suppose, but I thought the portrayal of the period was otherwise interesting. I agree with @dumbo that watching any jetset isn't really fun, but as it happens, I do like portrayals of this period of Hollywood more generally. And as a period piece, I think it works pretty well - I agree a lot with @Rooney in Paris on that front (here).
So yeah, that was a good watch.
Cutting between different time periods usually serves to make the most of some kind of mystery or turn of events. But that doesnt work here. First, you can assume that most viewer already know that Citizen Kane is about Hearst. Second, no specifics about Mank's decision to focus on Hearst are provided in the writing scenes. And third, there isn't much of that in the flashbacks either, it builds up just to a general disillusionment with and dislike of everything he stands for. That's all bot very surprising or revelatory; and as such, the narrative structure becomes nothing but a tool to break up a linear story, and hence falls a little flat.
Also, I heard most of the film through headphones, and noticed that all the dialogue had a small indoors reverb to its sound. Is that a hommage to soundstage recordings of the period? It's not something I notice normally in films. (Although I don't normally listen through headphones, and I didn't notice this in Mank either when listening through proper speakers.)
Been watching a few Bong Joon-Ho movies this weekend. The man loves a double flying dropkick.
Which ones did you watch? I've only seen Parasite and Snowpiercer, but both were really good.
I watched Doctor Sleep last night and was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. I hadn’t really heard much about it before, but it sucked me straight in. It starts a little slow, but there’s an intriguing storyline with a subtle sense of creepiness running throughout, without the usual cliches and naff shocks you get with the horror genre.