Movie What's the last movie you saw? (7)

Remove this Banner Ad

Yep feel u on Zone of Interest.

For me incredible film making. I have not been able to get it out of my head.
My partner, about half the audience and I ,sat in the cinema right until The music stopped and the closing credits finished.
 
The Iron Claw… I know the story of the Von Erich family quite well, so I was prepared for all the major story beats, spotted the compressed storylines etc. Still, a very good movie, very sad, the story of a ‘cursed’ wrestling family and the tragedies that befall it. Good performances from Zac Efron and the rest of the brothers. Perhaps missing a ‘message’ or theme to take it over the top but the final line is genuinely moving . 8/10
 
Last edited:
The Zone of Interest.

It's more about what you hear and the character's ability to not 'hear it' than what you see. The film is more meaningful if you have some knowledge of Rudolph Hoss and Auschwitz-Birkenau. It's kind of slow and bland on the surface, but is absolutely boiling underneath in its menace and meaning.

A brilliant film, with a poignant finale that can leave you thinking long after.

I'll likely never watch it again, but it's an excellent achievement, and a worthy one.

9/10
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The Holdovers - Terrific movie again from Alexander Payne. I’m a big fan of Sideways and Nebraska. Good to see him working with Giamatti again, who as always was superb. IMO better than Cillian Murphy in Oppy. Just a really good human story, old fashioned story telling in a way. Randolph excellent as well and a terrific debut by Sessa. - 8.5/10
 
Liquorice Pizza. Delightfully weird, with some outstanding cameos. Tried to put together a better review but that just about sums it up for me.
 
I love Planes, Trains and Automobiles with him and Steve Martin. Classic. I'm overdue for another viewing.
The first half of 80s throwaway comedy Summer Rental is absolute gold. Candy in his prime.

Second half of the movie is awful but does include
Candy winning a sailing race by using his pants as a spinnaker
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hell or High Water

Couple of brothers in Texas robbing a bunch of banks, on Netflix currently

Jeff Bridges, Chris Pine, not a bad little film
 
In The Land of Saints and Sinners - Prime

Liam Neeson is Finbar Murphy who only knows killing .

Once again great scenery and greatly understated.

The pace is deliberately slow but It has its moments that come along quickly

Kerry Condon is menacing and brings the pace up every time she is on screen.
 
Drive-Away Dolls

Being a huge Coen brothers fan, I went along to take a look at this one. Directed and co-written by Ethan Coen with no involvement from Joel, safe to say that this is not in the same league as most of the brothers' work. Don't go in there expecting Fargo or No Country For Old Men or anything of that calibre, but in its own right it's an OK movie.

Kind of a buddy / road trip / lesbian sex comedy. 2 friends making a trip to Tallahassee, Florida, use a car transport service (some kind of cross between car transport and car rental where you drive somebody's car one way to deliver it for them, I've never heard of this and don't know if it's a real thing or not). Anyway, they get given a car which was supposed to be given to some other guys because it contains some stuff that some shady characters want, hijinks ensue.

Margaret Qualley and Geraldine Viswanathan are both good in the lead roles, Pedro Pascal and Matt Damon feature more in the promotional materials for the movie than their very limited screen time probably warrants - they're basically in one scene each so don't go in expecting to see a lot of either of them.

You can still see a few traces of the Coen brothers DNA in there in the dialogue and especially in the pair of incompetent heavies that are trying to hunt the girls down to retrieve the goods. In particular I liked Joey Slotnick, he plays it like a mix of Steve Buscemi and Nic Cage, his performance was pretty solid. It's fairly short (less than 90 minutes), which is a rare level of self-restraint these days. This is a good length for a comedy, too - the pacing is about right, it never really drags or feel too padded out like some comedies do when they stretch their good jokes too thin.

Overall not bad, but if anything it just highlights how great the Coen brothers used to be at their peak now that they're just making "not bad" movies individually.
 
Drive-Away Dolls: Ethan Coen going solo, similar to how Joel did his own thing with The Tragedy of Macbeth. It's about two young lesbians who go on a road trip but through circumstance rent a car that has a suitcase in the boot that dangerous mobsters are after. It's a very slight film at 84 minutes, but boy did I not feel this. If Killers of the Flower Moon felt like an effort from a far younger filmmaker, this is the counterpoint of that, feeling more like a promising early film from a 20-something director emulating the Coens. There are a few funny moments (though my cinema was silent for the entirety of it), but they're surrounded by significantly less funny sections, narrative diversions akin to The Big Lebowski that amount to significantly less and a film that doesn't really seem to serve a purpose.

I also watched a few films from Preston Sturges, a film director who peaked in the 1940s and whose madcap comedy and farcical satire proved to be an enormous influence on the Coen brothers (the Sturges film Sullivan's Travels is about a director wanting to make a movie named O Brother, Where Art Thou?).

The Lady Eve (1941) - Barbara Stanwyck is a part of a father/daughter pair of con artists travelling on a cruise ship hoping to swindle the wealthy but good-hearted and naive Henry Fonda. I'd not really seen Fonda do such broad comedy, and he was really funny! A love scene between the pair after riding their horses that gets constantly interrupted by the horse was one of the funniest scenes I've seen in a movie. This was a true delight, to be honest.

Sullivan's Travels (1941) - Joel McCrea is a Hollywood comedy director who wants, in this period of Depression, to make a socially conscious drama and so disguises himself as a tramp, befriending a struggling actress, Veronica Lake, along the way. It's a movie with a terrific reputation and there's a lot of progressivism for 1941 that's really impressive and doesn't inspire "oh boy, here we go" that you can say with other movies from the same era when an African American appears. That said, it loses its focus a little which dampens the satire, which until that point was quite stinging.

The Palm Beach Story (1942) and The Miracle of Morgan's Creek (1944) are both incredibly fast paced, wacky screwball comedies of their era. Both have a lot of goofy laughs, and both have insane endings that make you double take at the screen as everything goes full nutso for the final two minutes. The energy in Sturges' films is undeniable and keeps things fun and frenetic.
 
Anatomy of a Fall (2023)

I normally find courtrooms dramas a bit tedious but I liked this one. It slowly built on the exposition - you find out more and more detail about and surrounding the incident and the people involved which is quite interesting.

As has been mentioned, the civil/inquisitorial legal system of Europe is something different to what we are used to seeing from legal dramas - but at times I couldn't help thinking some of it was a little too preposterous. It too often deviated from facts into a swathe of 'potential narratives'.

I thought Sandra Huller was excellent - a really well played character, and quite stereotypically 'German' at times too. The dude who played the main prosecutor was really good too - this character is often a 'hateable' one but I don't think he came across that way.

The only thing letting it down was some parts that didn't ring true for me.

Reading passages from fiction as some sort of source of evidence was literary licence I could barely abide, just. The thing that got me though was the final part - we basically see witness tampering performed by the person that the court appointed (Marge) to stop just that from happening. When she and Daniel were alone and having the conversation about 'not really being sure what happened', Marge essentially says that one cannot go on with that ambiguity in your head, you need to make a call as to what you thought happened and live with that. Clearly, the decision that Daniel would find easier to live with was father suicide (and mother hence not in prison). He then all of a sudden has something new to say to the court that points toward possible evidence of that conclusion. (The story in the car on the way to the vet)

On balance, I think that conversation did happen - but we cannot be sure (a big theme in this movie btw) and it is plausible that he made the story up to get the outcome he wanted. Daniel came across as pretty smart to me. I just think that scene with Marge leading him that way was really, um, legally suspect.

4 stars
 
Last edited:
Rewatched Anatomy of a Fall with my mum because it's a banger.

Picked up so many little details on second watch.



Very well made movie which just scored a few cheeky Oscar noms. Well deserved as the acting and screenplay are top notch.

I removed your spoiler where you said "it's very clear that ........"

I'm not so sure -
look, on the balance of everything I agree the outcome was the most likely - but that is only because there was not enough evidence to convict. The boy's final testimony is really suspect in the context of the conversation about 'making a choice' he had with Marge. But I think the way the dog stared at the body at the start was a direct allusion to what that dog had seen six months earlier. That got me over the line with leaning toward the suicide outcome.

I note Sandra didn't seem to show much sorrow or grief at his death: When she wept at the restaurant at the end I thought this was it - she needed to park those feelings whilst her own arse was on the line, and only then could she mourn. But they chose not to show obvious mourning which I though was interesting. Their relationship was no doubt problematic but I got the feeling she still kind of loved him. I guess just another ambiguity which this film had plenty of.
 
Trees Lounge (1996). Written, directed and acted in by Steve Buscemi. Interesting cast. Daniel Baldwin, Mimi Rogers, Samuel L Jackson, Chloe Sevigny, Carol Kane, Anthony LaPaglia, Rockets Redglare and Steve's brother and son irl. For the Sopranos fans there's a different Bracco in there and Micheal Imperioli. Pretty boring film though. Probably the best thing was the blink and you'll miss it nod to Reservoir Dogs. Not even sure what the point of this movie was besides Steve Buscemi could all of a sudden get it done. Do not recommend. 2/5
 
I removed your spoiler where you said "it's very clear that ........"

I'm not so sure -
look, on the balance of everything I agree the outcome was the most likely - but that is only because there was not enough evidence to convict. The boy's final testimony is really suspect in the context of the conversation about 'making a choice' he had with Marge. But I think the way the dog stared at the body at the start was a direct allusion to what that dog had seen six months earlier. That got me over the line with leaning toward the suicide outcome.

I note Sandra didn't seem to show much sorrow or grief at his death: When she wept at the restaurant at the end I thought this was it - she needed to park those feelings whilst her own arse was on the line, and only then could she mourn. But they chose not to show obvious mourning which I though was interesting. Their relationship was no doubt problematic but I got the feeling she still kind of loved him. I guess just another ambiguity which this film had plenty of.
I think the fact that she went to sleep in his office/bed at the end showed that she did love him pretty clearly. Also, the movie kind of showed that everything she said throughout the movie proved to be true so I'd back her word at what she said about that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top