I saw the original Thin Man a few months back, and it’s delightful. First, Myrna Loy is … hubba hubba. But mostly: jeez, the 2 of them put away a phenomenal amount of booze. They literally have a drink in their hand at all hours of the day and night.
And it opens with Nick talking about a cocktail called a “Bronx”, which apparently is a relative of a Manhattan. It involves gin and orange juice, which sounds nauseating.
The 21 amendment eliminating prohibitiion was ratified Dec 5, 1933. The Thin Man was released May 25, 1934. I guess they wanted to celebrate drinking. 
The family changes throughout the movies. Nora is pregnant by the end of the 2nd movie. That’s quite an accomplishment for people sleeping in twin beds. 
The boy is about 4 in the 3rd movie.
Shemp Howard is in the 3rd movie, Return of the Thin Man. Shemp kooks just the same and easily recognizable.
I’m going to read the Thin Man book. I’m curious to see any differences when it was adapted to the movies.
I watched The Lost Daughter on Netflix. It’s also in theaters. I’d been looking forward to it, based on reviews and the trailer. I found it hugely disappointing. The acting was great - Olivia Colman, Jessie Buckley, Ed Harris. I expect some nominations.
Wait, what? You have to tell us more than it was hugely disappointing but the acting was great and you expect nominations.
I just can’t say anything about the plot, such as it is, without giving it away. And the plot is what I was disappointed in.
Ed Harris was in an uncharacteristic role, and was understatedly masterful. Jessie Buckley is the daughter of musician Jeff Buckley, and did a very impressive job as the main character’s younger self. Olivia Colman is as good as she’s ever been, which is saying a lot. (Dakota Johnson left no impression on me.) I just wish I liked the story more.
I’d be curious to know what others think of it.
I saw it a while ago.
I was impressed by the acting (including Dakota Johnson). The film is basically a short story put to film (though it is based on a Ferrante novel). It seems to be more of a snapshot of time rather than a narrative arc. I was fine with the lack of resolution or enlightenment of the characters, so I think I liked it more than you did.
It is a surprisingly confident film for a first time writer/director and has already won a bunch of awards for acting, screenwriting, and as a best film. It will definitely be in the discussion as we head into the Oscars.
the bottom line is that I think you can admire it for its confidence and craft without loving it as a movie.
This I agree with.
I got roped into watching Fateful Findings by Neil Breen. My brother has Covid, so I’m kinda looking in on him to make sure he’s okay (he’s an idiot for not getting vaccinated, but he’s young - 42 yesterday - so his outlook appears to be at least decent), and a fan of bad movies (as am I), so we dialed that flick up and watched it.
Holy Christ, was it horrible. Even by bad movie standards. It makes Tommy Wiseau look like Federico Fellini. We knew we were going to be watching a bad movie, and we were still shocked by how horrible this was.
Breen wrote, produced, directed, edited, and starred in this movie, and was in charge of catering, set design, makeup, and casting.
That should have been our first clue. None of these were done with any more skill than a syphilitic donkey with all four legs missing could have mustered.
Tomorrow, it’s Birdemic 2: the Resurrection. I have a feeling I may feel the same way after it.
I haven’t seen the 2021 version yet.
Last night I watched the 1947 version for the first time. A great film. Acting is superb, with strong female leads. Excellent story. And since the length is only 111 minutes the pace of the film is very fast - you really have to pay attention.
I now want to see the 2021 version. But two and a half hours? Ugh.
It doesn’t seem that long. I saw the 2021 version in the theaters and it didn’t drag on at all.
I’m watching a themed list of movies, pulp heroes, for January. This weekend I watched Dick Tracy and Darkman.
Dick Tracy was largely panned when it came out, but it was notable for its comic book cinematography. Sadly the reviews were right, it’s lackustre. A great concept that was poorly executed. The plot is limp, the direction uninspired, the acting by Warren Beatty and Madonna atrocious (but by Glenne Headley beautiful, and Al Pacino suitably comic booky). It’s fine, but barely.
Darkman was Sam Raimi’s attempt to make a superhero film long before he got Spider-Man, and he tried to go noir with it, but his Evil Dead sensibilities interrupt too often, turning it into a strange combination of affecting and cartoonish. The dialogue is awful, and some of the melodramatic acting from Liam Neeson and Frances McDormand just embarrassing. But if you want to see the last of the ridiculous 80s action movies, it’s worth a couple of hours of your time.
Finaly watched No Time to Die.
Great Bond movie, I thought Spectre was a total mess so was happy with this one. Yes plot holes, inconsistencies, waitwhatabout moment, but it’s a bond movie and I think a great close out to the Daniel Craig arc.
I loved this movie when I was a teenager. I don’t want to watch it again, because I am certain it is much worse than I remember 
I saw Philomena when it first came out, and liked it very much. Judi Dench is excellent, as always.
Hugo disappointed me. I don’t know why, but it never really took off for me and left me with a big meh.
The Green Knight was good but not great, I’d say. An interesting version of the tale of Sir Gawaine which takes some major liberties with Arthurian legend but mostly held my interest. Visually stunning but also, unfortunately, overlong.
As for suggestions:
Casablanca - Classic WWII doomed romance.
Breaker Morant - Gripping Boer War courtroom drama.
Notorious - Post-WWII spy thriller, and my favorite Hitchcock.
Limitless - Terrific technothriller about a drug that unlocks your brain’s full potential (jive, I know).
The Big Lebowski - Slow-burn slacker comedy, and my favorite Coen Bros. movie.
Just saw that a few months ago, and really liked it. A very quiet, slow-paced, immersive vampire drama.
Yes! I saw that when it first came out - one of the best magazine profiles I’ve ever read. (I liked the movie, too, but they’re quite different).
Saw The French Dispatch (rented from Prime, I think), the newest from Wes Anderson. My initial impression is an A-, but its dialog, narrative, and visuals are dense and complex, so it begs for rewatching.
It’s an anthology film with three stories. The framing concept: A Kansas newspaper editor sends his son to France, the son develops a stable of quirky journalists and over the decades transforms the newspaper’s Sunday supplement into an internationally acclaimed literary journal. The three tales are enactments of stories printed in the journal.
The art direction is Oscar-worthy. The film is largely in English, but there’s also subtitled dialog which you’ll need to be close to your screen to read. The closing credits dedicate the film to about 20 early-to-mid 20th Century writers, I can only remember Thurber and maybe Shawn, but it seemed they were largely New Yorker people.
In fact, the movie is a tribute to the magazine The New Yorker:
Part of the Wikipedia article on The French Dispatch goes into detail on who and what inspired certain characters and segments in the movie. (E.g., “Arthur Howitzer Jr., the Kansas-born editor of the Dispatch, was based on the New Yorker founding editor Harold Ross, who came from Colorado.”)
I’ve seen Casablanca and The Big Lebowski multiple times and probably will again. I am always wary of the term “thriller” as I no longer want to be thrilled, I guess. I am done with Hitchcock, I’ve seen probably six of his films although not Notorious. But I will look up Breaker Morant.
I rewatched The Winslow Boy last week and enjoyed it even more than I did the first time. Although its adaptation from the stage is more obvious to me now.