Movies you've seen recently (Part 1)

Time to start the “better late than never” Oscar catch up.

Bohemian Rhapsody.

First off, not a big time Queen fan. I do like Under Pressure quite a bit, but that’s more of a Bowie song. Of course the movie barely uses a couple clips of it. Mrs. FtG likes their music more so she enjoyed the way too many musical parts more than I.

I quickly became tired of Malek’s Mercury impression. Nice, but he wasn’t doing much with it. (Malik is weird enough looking on his own, the teeth just doubled down on that.) Nnear the end he finally started doing something with the character. Too bad he wasn’t like that the whole movie. But the later part was where the story got too juvenile.

The actors who play May and Deacon do a really good job.

Could have dropped a lot of the music scenes in favor of adding bits like where did Mercury get that voice before he met the band?

Give it 2.5 cats.

I finally watched Ready Player One, which far exceeded my low expectations for it. It had all the clichés of a 1980s teen film while basically being a deliberate homage to 1980s teen films (plus The Shining in one of the film’s better sequences). As long as you accepted it for what it was, it was worth watching. If you expected more advanced or subtle sci-fi, it’s probably not worth a watch.

Lego Movie 2 was an utter disappointment, consisting largely of barely-warmed-up rehashes of the material that was fresh and interesting in the first film (a film which was, to use the obvious word, awesome). Also, there is very, very little Will Ferrell in it and while that may seem like a blessing, one becomes aware of how much his comic style as Lord Business drove the first film. The child liked it but that’s about all I can say for it.

A philosophical movie-critic question that pertains to both Rami Malek in Bohemian Rhapsody, and Christian Bale in Vice: If somebody nails the voice and mannerisms of a real person, are we witnessing good acting, or a good impression?

Interesting question - never thought about it before. I guess I’d say that, if they have to do more than just utter a few catchphrases, it’s acting.

Yeah it’s funny seeing him get the oscar. When I heard that sacha baron cohen was initially pencilled in as mercury, I immediately realized what the film was lacking. Malek is OK but lacks charisma for a role like this.

Someone recommended the movie “Baran” and I saw it yesterday and liked it very much. 8.5/10

Today, I saw “T.R. Baskin” and liked it, and that kind of movie. Social realism with charm. 7.5/10

Free Solo (2018)- Holy shit!

Ok, I’ll expand on that. Holy fucking shit!
Nat Geo (I think or maybe BBC) aired it over the weekend. It is a documentary focusing on rock climber Alex Honnold’s free solo (no ropes or safety gear) ascent of the sheer 3,000 foot face of El Capitan in Yosemite National Park - a feat which has never been acheived. I repeat … holy shit. Simply amazing. The first 2/3’s of the movie is centered on Alex’s personal life as he preps for the climb, documenting a few set-backs/injuries along the way. The last third is the climb and it is straight up remarkable. It’s hard to believe a human being can do what this guy did. The photography is top-notch which really brings the harrowing nature of the feat to life. This is also hammered home by the documentarians talking about how they really hope that they’re not just about to film their friend’s death - as they make the point that pretty much every free solo climber ever is now dead after falling on a free solo climb.

If you can catch it, watch it. If you have a fear of heights or any sort of vertigo issues, reconsider watching it because you’ll shit your pants, but you should watch it anyway.

I’m watching PBS Newshour and reading this thread simultaneously – and they just started a story about Free Solo. WoooooOOooo…

It is absolutely amazing, so I second your recommendation. The climactic moment - where he accomplishes a particularly dangerous move, with a faint smile at the camera that says “Cool! I’m not dead!” is forever imprinted in my brain.

(I considered putting that in a spoiler box – but since he was on stage at the Oscars, the fact that he didn’t die is probably not a spoiler.)

Watched The Favourite last night. While the acting was fine, it didn’t seem like the director knew where he wanted to go with it. Farce or drama? Comedy or tragedy? Certainly historically inaccurate, including the costumes. Some of each, I guess. The farcical bits of over-the-top foppishness, and the hysterical dance moves were very funny, and Colman’s performance as a tragic Queen Anne was probably Oscar-worthy.

Just finished watching it and agree with your comments. When he negotiated that turn, my stomach was threatening to free solo into my shorts.

A month ago, I finally caught, “Logan’s Run,” for the first time. A. Damn. Shame. They had the makings of a SF classic; WTH happened?

“Cool Hand Luke,” was just outstanding. Despite all the prison films since it was released, it still felt fresh. And that cast!

I saw Gloria Bell, starring Julianne Moore, today and while it is a very good performance, it suffers from being in a remake (albeit from the same director/writer) of the 2013 Chilean film, Gloria.

The 2013 film featured one of the best acting performance of that year, by Paulina Garcia, and while the narrative arc of the two films and the beats within are more or less the same, the “amercanization” of Gloria Bell does it no favors. Still, it is one of the better films I’ve seen this year and I’d recommend it (especially if you haven’t seen the original).

I saw the original and liked it. But apparently didn’t make a post here. Interested in seeing the remake.

Anyway …

Our post-Oscar tour continues with If Beale Street Could Talk.

The title really throws me off. “Beale Street” to me means Memphis. But the opening text refers to Beale Street in New Orleans. But*2 the movie is set in New York.

This movie has some really great scenes. Just “wow” type stuff. And then it has a bunch of filler. So very uneven. Generally good acting. But isn’t going to be memorable for the story and such itself.

Give it 3 wigs.

(Best supporting Oscar winner Regina King has appeared 5 times on The Big Bang Theory. I think that ties a record for Oscar winners on the show. Keith Carradine appeared 5 times as well but his Oscar is for original song. Octavia Spencer appeared once. Billy Bob appeared once but his Oscar is for original screenplay. Laurie Metcalfe came close last year to blowing them all out of the water. Oops forgot Kathy Bates, 3 times.)

There is no Beale Street in New Orleans, other than there is a “Beale Street” wherever poor folks live, so Baldwin was using it as a collective name. My guess.

I wanted to watch something mindless, and had only seconds to decide, and ended up watching Pacific Rim – Uprising, even though I haven’t seen all of the original Pacific Rim, a movie I found so unbelievably silly that I couldn’t sit still for it. This was worse. Rotten Tomatoes seemed to agree, giving it a low rating. But Pepper Mill watched it with me.
I grew up watching Godzilla movies. But, my Og, that was dumb!

Great special effects, though.

Also, because I recently read part of the Kievan Rus myths, I obtained a copy of the original Russian Ilya Mourometz. It was restored by MosFilm in 2001, and the DVD has English subtitles. This is basically the same film that was recut and overdubbed around 1960 and released in the US as The Sword and the Dragon. I actually paid money to see this in the theater when it was first released in the US, so I got the advantage of seeing it in widescreen (it was the first Russian film made in CinemaScope). Every other time I saw it was on TV in pan-and-scan, so my latest watching of the film was the first time I’d seen it in full widescreen since the first time I saw it. The film became a staple on New York’s WWOR (channel 9). I remember recommending it to a friend, who later called me to ask what the heck this was.

It’s a traditional Russian bogatyr epic about mythical characters, which puts this on a par with those Hercules films of the same period, or the Harryhausen films (but with far inferior special effects). The titular Mourometz starts out virtually paralyzed. He is given a miraculous by three travelling bards and the sword of the older hero Svygator. He gains enormous strength and stomps off to fight the invading Tugars (actually the Mongols). The film is filled with pretty impressive sets, over-the-top characterizations (the Tugar ambassador to Kiev makes the ambassadors to Sparta in 300 look downright polite), and equally over-the-top feats and images (Ilya hurls boulders; The robber “Nightingale” blows down trees; The Tugar chief amasses a treasure heap of outrageous size, and later commans his men to throw themselves together to form a hill he can ride to the top of to see into the distance; the Tugars have a three-headed fire-breathing dragon at their beck and call) The quality of the Rioger Corman-edited US version was pretty poor, the dubbing was awful, and certain elements of the plot didn’t make much sense. In particular, Paul Frees’ dubbing of the Tugar chief made him sound like Boris Badenoff (who Frees also voiced), so I kept expecting him to send the dragon after Moose and Squirrel, or something. The film generated a Dell comics adaptation ( The Sword and the Dragon: The Dell Comic Book – Midnight Only ) . Eventually the film showed up on mystery Science Theater 3000, which mistakenly thought it was co-produced with Finland, and so made a lot of Finnish jokes. The other comments were pretty much spot-on, but making fun of the lack of logic in a myth is pretty easy to do.

The original version is of much better quality and color, the extra width helps. There are a lot of wide-screen shots that were obviously put in simply because tyhey looked neat. A lot of the motivations became more clear, and it’s overall easier to take (although my patience was definitely tried when Ilya’s lady love makes hi a magic tablecloth with the help of pre-audio-animatronic cute animals, singing all the while in Russian like the Russian counterpart to Disney’s Snow White or Sleeping Beauty. The animals look so incredibly fake.)

Saw Christopher Robin pop up on Netflix. I like the original The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh and I like Ewan McGregor, but I’d heard that Christopher Robin was another one of those overly sad Pooh movies that Disney seems to keep making these days, like The Tigger Movie.

So I went in with low expectations thinking McGregor wouldn’t be in a bad movie and was pleasantly surprised. The plot was not great and it’s never going to win an Oscar but I really liked the look and feel of the movie, especially they way they animated the characters. They looked more like the original book characters than the cartoon characters. For some reason they changed some of the voices, like Rabbit seemed to have an entirely different accent for some reason.

But overall it was a nice little movie.

Right you are!: Olivia Colman wins best actress Oscar for The Favourite | Oscars 2019 | The Guardian

From the Late to the Party Department: The Death of Stalin.

Steve Buscemi is Nikita Khrushchev dealing with stuff related to the title topic. With a host of interesting cast mates: Michael Palin as Molotov, Jeffrey Tambor as Malenkov, Jason Isaacs as Zhukov*, etc.

So, it’s a comedy, right? Not so fast. People are shown repeatedly being killed on screen. So it’s a dark comedy? Well, it’s a 1000 times better than all these so-called “dark comedies” I’ve seen lately.

Lots of good acting, although Tambor is channeling his standard schmuck character. Quite interesting. It helped that I already knew about the major characters. If you don’t know Beria from a hole in the grand it might be different.

Give it 4 red stars.

  • Who was on the outs with Stalin in a secondary, far off, post and didn’t have anything to do with any of this. And he didn’t have a facial scar. And a million other things the film played around with.

I sat through Triple Frontier last night. Good gawd, it was awful.

I’m sure I’m not exactly the target audience for such a movie, but I usually enjoy Ben Affleck, so I was pretty disappointed. Another wasted two hours of my life. sigh

This weekend I watched the 2015 BBC production of Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None. I have been disappointed by some film adaptations of Christie’s novels, but I highly recommend this one. It’s very faithful to the book, and the few plot changes are either unobjectionable or actual improvements over the book (especially the handling of the big reveal at the end).