That Quincy documentary. Makes my life look a bit shit.

MoBettaBliss said:

Hudson said:

MoBettaBliss said:

Midnight in Paris... 4.5 out of 5

possibly because i was recently in Paris and am in love with the city

If you love Paris watch this: https://www.rottentomatoe..._midnight/ I don't think it's available in hd but it's got beautiful shots of Paris. I love the architecture.

cool... haven't seen it... i'll check it out

MoBettaBliss said:

Hudson said:

MoBettaBliss said: If you love Paris watch this: https://www.rottentomatoe..._midnight/ I don't think it's available in hd but it's got beautiful shots of Paris. I love the architecture.

cool... haven't seen it... i'll check it out

Midnight in Paris is a wonderful movie. It's one of my favs. Owen Wilson is so good and the writing is excellent too. You can't beat the location either.

While waiting for this NL wild card game to end, I finally wrote my Animal House review. RodeoSchro has given me enough hints that he's anxiously awaiting it.



National Lampoon's Animal House (1978)

[Edited 10/2/18 22:32pm]

sexton said:

While waiting for this NL wild card game to end, I finally wrote my Animal House review. RodeoSchro has given me enough hints that he's anxiously awaiting it.



National Lampoon's Animal House (1978)

I'm not really into comedies--especially sophomoric ones like this. So prepped with a few shots of Jameson to make it go down smoother, I watched Animal House for the very first time this weekend. I didn't know it was set in the early 60s and that the end is a clear spoof of American Graffiti, another period teen film I love so bonus points for all that. (I was going to ask how in the world does a fuckup like Blutarsky become a senator and then I remembered that a known college drunk is currently being considered for the United States Supreme Court so there you go.) Also, John Belushi, while featured fairly prominently, wasn't as omnipresent in the film as I feared--because for me, a little John Belushi goes a long way. In summary, more enjoyable than not. 3/5

[Edited 10/2/18 22:32pm]

Glad you enjoyed it more than not!

The Phantom Thread 4/5 I did an excellent job not reading anything revealing the plot, I really thought I knew what was going to happen going in based on the tidbits I heard here and there but I had no clue, no spoilers were given away. Talk about a strange relationship, but it satisfied my senses, made me think afterward, not deeply but still thought. Worth me watching again.

the seventh seal (1957) 4.5/5 a knight plays chess with death to save his soul. bergman's classic arthouse film perhaps felt a little too heavy-handed at times, might even seem a little quaint to modern sensibilities, though i'd completely forgotten that it has some pretty light, almost slapstick elements as well. whatever its flaws, it's still a mostly compelling film that's chock full of great images.

a picture of you (2014) 3.5/5 at first, this plays like the most generic sundance-ie indie film. 'a quarreling brother/sister return home to clean out their dead mother's house' is about as rote an indie film setup as i can imagine. but this takes a nice, unexpected turn & pivots into a quirky & fun if not completely believable low-key comedy that i ended up liking quite a lot.

[Edited 10/3/18 19:26pm]

The worse ending to a slasher movie ever

RodeoSchro said:

sexton said:

While waiting for this NL wild card game to end, I finally wrote my Animal House review. RodeoSchro has given me enough hints that he's anxiously awaiting it.



National Lampoon's Animal House (1978)

I'm not really into comedies--especially sophomoric ones like this. So prepped with a few shots of Jameson to make it go down smoother, I watched Animal House for the very first time this weekend. I didn't know it was set in the early 60s and that the end is a clear spoof of American Graffiti, another period teen film I love so bonus points for all that. (I was going to ask how in the world does a fuckup like Blutarsky become a senator and then I remembered that a known college drunk is currently being considered for the United States Supreme Court so there you go.) Also, John Belushi, while featured fairly prominently, wasn't as omnipresent in the film as I feared--because for me, a little John Belushi goes a long way. In summary, more enjoyable than not. 3/5

[Edited 10/2/18 22:32pm]

Glad you enjoyed it more than not!

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

A Star Is Born 2018- 6.5/10 It’s the same exact story as the previous one but with an amazing naturalistically charming performance by Bradly Cooper. His performance as well as that of Sam Elliot are so good, that ultimately it makes Lady Gaga’s inexpereince at acting stand out more than it would with any other actors. Every time she is on the screen it takes you away from the immersiveness that the other actors create. Lady Gaga loos beautiful and sings great of course, but she is the weakest link of this movie. The film looks AMAZING. The cinematography is beautiful to look at, but the film in ultimately too long and plodding. This movie is NOT going to win Best Picture or even be nominated for it so avoid the hype and keep expectations low. It will get Bradly Cooper a nomination for best actor and might even get Sam Elliot a nom for supporting actor. If you avoid the hype and go in with low expectations will have a good time as long as you have a strong bladder. I’ve never seen so many rushing for the restroom as I did after a showing. [Edited 10/5/18 5:31am]

Supposedly going to see it tonight.

This is something I found. I've only seen one of these and it has been a while seeing that one.

onlyforaminute said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

A Star Is Born 2018- 6.5/10 It’s the same exact story as the previous one but with an amazing naturalistically charming performance by Bradly Cooper. His performance as well as that of Sam Elliot are so good, that ultimately it makes Lady Gaga’s inexpereince at acting stand out more than it would with any other actors. Every time she is on the screen it takes you away from the immersiveness that the other actors create. Lady Gaga loos beautiful and sings great of course, but she is the weakest link of this movie. The film looks AMAZING. The cinematography is beautiful to look at, but the film in ultimately too long and plodding. This movie is NOT going to win Best Picture or even be nominated for it so avoid the hype and keep expectations low. It will get Bradly Cooper a nomination for best actor and might even get Sam Elliot a nom for supporting actor. If you avoid the hype and go in with low expectations will have a good time as long as you have a strong bladder. I’ve never seen so many rushing for the restroom as I did after a showing. [Edited 10/5/18 5:31am]

But does it get the tear ducts activated?

That's what everyone's going to see this for.

CynicKill said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

onlyforaminute said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

I was unlucky that the one I saw previously was the god awful Streisand one after seeing the trailer for the new one. The Garland one is next on my list.

Yeah the 1976 is the one I saw. Now I wanna see the 1954 version. We went. And I liked it quite a bit better than you did. I give it 4/5. I think Gaga sold the hell out of that character, but yes Bradley shined. Unfortunately I'm already sick of the song Black Eyes, somebody in my house loves it and damn I have an obsessive household. Just over and over again. Don't get me wrong I like the song but dang.give me a break.

Garland's is the best IMO.

purplethunder3121 said:

onlyforaminute said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said: Yeah the 1976 is the one I saw. Now I wanna see the 1954 version. We went. And I liked it quite a bit better than you did. I give it 4/5. I think Gaga sold the hell out of that character, but yes Bradley shined. Unfortunately I'm already sick of the song Black Eyes, somebody in my house loves it and damn I have an obsessive household. Just over and over again. Don't get me wrong I like the song but dang.give me a break.

Garland's is the best IMO.

and Judy's version of The Man Who Got Away is sheer IMO she was robbed of the Oscar in 1954 I give A Star is Born (1954) a 4 out of 5

[Edited 10/6/18 21:26pm]

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

A Star Is Born 2018- 6.5/10 It’s the same exact story as the previous one but with an amazing naturalistically charming performance by Bradly Cooper. His performance as well as that of Sam Elliot are so good, that ultimately it makes Lady Gaga’s inexpereince at acting stand out more than it would with any other actors. Every time she is on the screen it takes you away from the immersiveness that the other actors create. Lady Gaga loos beautiful and sings great of course, but she is the weakest link of this movie. The film looks AMAZING. The cinematography is beautiful to look at, but the film in ultimately too long and plodding. This movie is NOT going to win Best Picture or even be nominated for it so avoid the hype and keep expectations low. It will get Bradly Cooper a nomination for best actor and might even get Sam Elliot a nom for supporting actor. If you avoid the hype and go in with low expectations will have a good time as long as you have a strong bladder. I’ve never seen so many rushing for the restroom as I did after a showing. [Edited 10/5/18 5:31am]

Thanks I plan to watch this because I loved Lady Gaga in AHS:Hotel (2015), and I have seen all the versions of A Star Is Born, and want see how this one fairs.

Goddess4Real said:

purplethunder3121 said:

Garland's is the best IMO.

and Judy's version of The Man Who Got Away is sheer IMO she was robbed of the Oscar in 1954 I give A Star is Born (1954) a 4 out of 5

[Edited 10/6/18 21:26pm]

Another embarrassing Oscar misstep.

Rumor has it inexplicable studio cuts to the movie hurt her chances but who knows.

Apparently she was deeply hurt by the slight.

CynicKill said:

Goddess4Real said:

Tonight we introduce a new-and-sure-to-be-controversial feature - Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See! This will probably be the first, last, best and worst episode of RAMIANGTS because who else could inspire me to rate a movie I will never see except...

...Ryan Gosling.

Ugh. I think my computer contracted a virus just typing his name. Since when did thumbs with noses become movie stars?

Oh - the movie I am never going to see is "First Man". What a farce.

First of all, this movie was made for absolutely no reason but to capitalize on NASA's 60th anniversary and the upcoming 50th anniversary of the greatest achievement in human history - landing men on the moon. And bringing them back alive!

Therein lies the problem with this upcoming turkey. WE KNOW HOW IT ENDS. IT ENDS GREAT!

But you wouldn't know that from the trailer/commericals. "This might be the last time you ever tell your son 'Good Night'!" wails some hysterical actress. "Daddy, are you coming back?" slobbers some child actor.

OF COURSE HE IS. WE KNOW HOW THIS STORY ENDS. NEIL ARMSTRONG WALKS ON THE MOON, SAYS SOME COOL STUFF, DOES SOME COOL STUFF WITH BUZZ ALDRIN, AND THEN THEY ALL COME BACK SAFELY.

I would have no problem if this pooper was marketed as a celebration of our greatest achievement. That's what is SHOULD be marketed as. But to market it as a suspenseful film?

WHY?

WE KNOW his rocket isn't going to explode. We KNOW he makes it to the moon. We KNOW he returns to Earth as a human and not some alien hybrid. We KNOW he gets to tell his son "Good Night" many many more times.

BOO.

Based on the ridiculous marketing of this flim, I wouldn't go see it even if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. Well, OK - I would go see it if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. But only to support Arnold, not to see a movie that I already know how it ends.

This has been the first, last, best and worst episode of Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See. I hope the Pulitzer people are reading this.

Ant Man And The Wasp 4 / 10

RodeoSchro said:

Tonight we introduce a new-and-sure-to-be-controversial feature - Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See! This will probably be the first, last, best and worst episode of RAMIANGTS because who else could inspire me to rate a movie I will never see except...

...Ryan Gosling.

Ugh. I think my computer contracted a virus just typing his name. Since when did thumbs with noses become movie stars?

Oh - the movie I am never going to see is "First Man". What a farce.

First of all, this movie was made for absolutely no reason but to capitalize on NASA's 60th anniversary and the upcoming 50th anniversary of the greatest achievement in human history - landing men on the moon. And bringing them back alive!

Therein lies the problem with this upcoming turkey. WE KNOW HOW IT ENDS. IT ENDS GREAT!

But you wouldn't know that from the trailer/commericals. "This might be the last time you ever tell your son 'Good Night'!" wails some hysterical actress. "Daddy, are you coming back?" slobbers some child actor.

OF COURSE HE IS. WE KNOW HOW THIS STORY ENDS. NEIL ARMSTRONG WALKS ON THE MOON, SAYS SOME COOL STUFF, DOES SOME COOL STUFF WITH BUZZ ALDRIN, AND THEN THEY ALL COME BACK SAFELY.

I would have no problem if this pooper was marketed as a celebration of our greatest achievement. That's what is SHOULD be marketed as. But to market it as a suspenseful film?

WHY?

WE KNOW his rocket isn't going to explode. We KNOW he makes it to the moon. We KNOW he returns to Earth as a human and not some alien hybrid. We KNOW he gets to tell his son "Good Night" many many more times.

BOO.

Based on the ridiculous marketing of this flim, I wouldn't go see it even if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. Well, OK - I would go see it if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. But only to support Arnold, not to see a movie that I already know how it ends.

This has been the first, last, best and worst episode of Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See. I hope the Pulitzer people are reading this.

So I take it you're not a big fan of Romeo and Juliet or Titanic?

logger said:

A Star is Born - 4 stars out of 5

While it did not quite live up to the hype due to the predictability of the story, the acting was fantastic and there were several special songs. Bradley Cooper definitely deserves a best actor nomination here. While Gaga is not quite at the level of a best actress nod, she is good and perhaps more important is that her music here re-establishes her music career. When I last checked the Amazon charts, she had the top selling single and 5 of the top 11! I guess her haters will be quite depressed for some time . As an aside, the movie is on track to be the biggest musical in years at the box office. Even the early estimates underestimated it's performance and word of mouth. On Sunday alone, it made 3 million more in the US than predicted by it's early weekend performance, which means it has almost unheard of word of mouth.

CynicKill said:

RodeoSchro said:

Tonight we introduce a new-and-sure-to-be-controversial feature - Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See! This will probably be the first, last, best and worst episode of RAMIANGTS because who else could inspire me to rate a movie I will never see except...

...Ryan Gosling.

Ugh. I think my computer contracted a virus just typing his name. Since when did thumbs with noses become movie stars?

Oh - the movie I am never going to see is "First Man". What a farce.

First of all, this movie was made for absolutely no reason but to capitalize on NASA's 60th anniversary and the upcoming 50th anniversary of the greatest achievement in human history - landing men on the moon. And bringing them back alive!

Therein lies the problem with this upcoming turkey. WE KNOW HOW IT ENDS. IT ENDS GREAT!

But you wouldn't know that from the trailer/commericals. "This might be the last time you ever tell your son 'Good Night'!" wails some hysterical actress. "Daddy, are you coming back?" slobbers some child actor.

OF COURSE HE IS. WE KNOW HOW THIS STORY ENDS. NEIL ARMSTRONG WALKS ON THE MOON, SAYS SOME COOL STUFF, DOES SOME COOL STUFF WITH BUZZ ALDRIN, AND THEN THEY ALL COME BACK SAFELY.

I would have no problem if this pooper was marketed as a celebration of our greatest achievement. That's what is SHOULD be marketed as. But to market it as a suspenseful film?

WHY?

WE KNOW his rocket isn't going to explode. We KNOW he makes it to the moon. We KNOW he returns to Earth as a human and not some alien hybrid. We KNOW he gets to tell his son "Good Night" many many more times.

BOO.

Based on the ridiculous marketing of this flim, I wouldn't go see it even if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. Well, OK - I would go see it if Arnold played Neil Armstrong. But only to support Arnold, not to see a movie that I already know how it ends.

This has been the first, last, best and worst episode of Rate A Movie I Am Never Going To See. I hope the Pulitzer people are reading this.

So I take it you're not a big fan of Romeo and Juliet or Titanic?

I've never seen either movie but of course, my high school English teacher made me read "Romeo and Juliet". But that's not the point.

The point is - "First Man" is being marketed as some sort of suspenseful cliffhanger. COULD this be the last time Neil Armstrong will tell his kids "Good Night"? IS Daddy coming back or not? WILL the spaceship blow up on the launch pad? Who knows????????

EVERYBODY KNOWS.

It would be like trying to sell "Romeo and Juliet" by saying "Will Juliet drink the poison? Who knows????" or by trying to sell "Titanic" by saying "Will the ship sink or not? Who knows????"

Aside from the fact that "First Man" (a stupid title, if you ask me) stars this generation's greatest conundrum, it is a movie about the greatest thing the human race has ever achieved. Why it's not marketed that way is this generation's second greatest conundrum.

Now, please excuse me as I have to go yell at some clouds.

Vampire in Brooklyn
classic 80s movie and classic Eddie Murphy. loved it!

wild strawberries (1957) 5/5 the bergman film i like to go back to the most. it has some of the same weighty elements that sometimes can make his films feel a bit self-serious, but here those things are nicely offset by a pleasant sentimentality. one of my favourite movies.

the poukeepsie tapes (20070 3/5 i've occasionally seen people bring this up whenever there's a discussion of the best found footage horror. it definitely has some creepy elements, almost plays like a snuff film at times, but it didn't quite add up to much for me. watchable, & worth a viewing for gore-hounds, but not great to me.