Author Topic: Antares' Short Summations  (Read 139087 times)

Offline Piffi

  • Heavy Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Country: no
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #300 on: October 09, 2013, 11:40:07 PM »
Thanks for some great reviews! And for the forums! :) I've allready got me som ideas for what to look for. A lot of great old classics that i havent seen yet.  The Big Parade and Umberto D. Thats two that looks real interesting.
We'll Always Have Paris.


Thomas

Offline Piffi

  • Heavy Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Country: no
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #301 on: October 09, 2013, 11:46:24 PM »
Can i ask you this? Do you have a favorite movie? Or is that a difficult question?
We'll Always Have Paris.


Thomas

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #302 on: October 12, 2013, 07:37:46 PM »
Can i ask you this? Do you have a favorite movie? Or is that a difficult question?

Here's my review for my favorite film of all time. The only film that even comes close to this one, is Leone's Once Upon a time in the West. As you can see, I used to write longer reviews back then, but time and the disappearance of Jon from this forum have lessened my interest in writing in depth reviews. I've lost my muse.  :laugh:

Here's a link to all my longer reviews. If you see Jon disagreeing with me on something, dive into the rest of the thread, because everyone here will agree with me, there's bound to be fireworks.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2013, 05:29:16 AM by Antares »

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #303 on: October 12, 2013, 07:39:29 PM »
Billy the Kid versus Dracula (1966) 28/100 - OK, so first, a little backstory. For the last ten days I've been dealing with a severely pinched nerve in my upper back, which doesn't really let me sleep at night. TCM is showcasing horror films on Thursday nights all this month, and given the choice between Infomercials, Moonshiners, Botox bitches or bad B-movie horror schlock, I'll take the schlock. It's amazing that they wasted what little money they spent on this 'film', because the acting was horrid, even John Carradine, who played Dracula as if he had his hand out waiting for the miniscule paycheck he would receive for being the lone 'star' of this movie. I'm definitely being overly generous with my rating, but it passed the time I was unable to sleep, so it gets a few points for that.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #304 on: October 12, 2013, 07:44:06 PM »
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) 67/100 - Overly long and a bit confusing at times understanding who they are talking about in regards to characters involved. There is a bit too much exposition on the part of Lisbeth's character and not enough on those potentially involved in the disappearance of Harriet. I never read the book, but my wife did, and she said that they changed a lot of the story, and sadly, not for the better. Seems like another mis-fire by Fincher and it's not a film I see my self re-visiting in the future. I was also wondering if it's worth it to check out the Swedish version of this film, even though I didn't care for this one?

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #305 on: October 12, 2013, 07:45:23 PM »
36 Hours (1965) 76/100 - I had never heard of this film and caught it on TCM about a week ago. At first I thought it was going to play out a little like The Americanization of Emily, another war film starring James Garner. But then I was quite surprised when it turned out to be a rather exciting tale of espionage and intrigue which used the D-Day invasion as a backdrop. James Garner plays an OAS operative who is kidnapped in Lisbon by the Nazis, just days before the invasion. He is taken to a special encampment near the Swiss border which is fabricated to look like an American military hospital. Here, he is made to look a few years older by some temporary kind of plastic surgery, in order to create the ruse that he has suffered from amnesia for the last 6 years and that the war is over and the Allies have won. By convincing him of this scenario, they hope by treating him for the amnesia, that he will communicate the actual invasion plans to his physicians. All in all, this film kept me engaged throughout, and the ending of the film is quite satisfactory.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #306 on: October 12, 2013, 07:45:51 PM »
The Descendents (2011) 60/100 - Is it me, or are films of the last few years sorely lacking in creativity and re-watchability? One of the criteria in my reviews is whether or not I would ever want to watch a film again down the road. Sadly, many films I've watched from the last five years or so, fail miserably in this aspect. This was a film that my wife really wanted to see, and after seeing George Clooney in his last couple of roles, seemed like a good choice for me too. But this film's screenplay is so weak and flimsy, that it had me looking at the clock more times than I wanted. It just kind of meanders along without any concern on the part of the director, to make it either interesting or entertaining. And one final note...George Clooney should have it written into future contracts that his character will never run at full speed as part of his role. I thought it was bad watching Steven Seagal run like a girl in his films, but Clooney looks like he's about to keel over when he's on a sprint. That being said, if you decide to give this a whirl, at least the cinematography is first rate, but then again, it would take a complete hack to make Hawaii look bad.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #307 on: October 12, 2013, 07:47:59 PM »
The Green Man (1956) 74/100 - I love Alastair Sim, he's one of my favorite English actors and comedians. I bought an R2 DVD set of his films a couple of years ago, and haven't really explored it yet. This was the first film I've watched in the set, and if it's any indication, I'm going to enjoy the others immensely. Sim plays an assassin named Hawkins, famous for his ability to kill anyone, anywhere with his meticulously crafted time bombs. His latest job is the elimination of a member of Parliament, who will be at the the Green Man hotel for a weekend with one of his secretaries. Hawkins knows of his plans because he has been romancing the MP's head secretary, to find out the information he needs to carry out his assignment. But when he finds out the MP's itinerary, he mistakenly writes the info on some typing paper on the secretary's desk, not knowing that a few pieces below is a piece of carbon paper. When the secretary returns to work after Hawkins leaves her office, she finds the paper under the carbon and deduces that Hawkins has been using her for information. She calls Hawkins and demands an explanation, and when he is not forth coming, she heads over to his home to confront him. Hawkins is about to leave for the hotel and has his assistant change the signs on his and the neighbor's newly purchased house, so the secretary will think that he has left. But the assistant isn't quick enough and he has to kill the secretary when she warns of going to the local constabulary. At this moment, a door to door vacuum salesman, who has an appointment with Hawkins' maid, makes the same mistake as the secretary and rings the wrong house. The salesman tries to demonstrate the vacuum for Hawkins' assistant, who is visibly rattled by his predicament, and he finds a way to exit through the back door. The salesman spots blood on the carpet and when the woman who owns the house returns, he explains about his appointment, and asks her about the blood on the carpet. From here on out, the madcap hijinks and dry, dark British humor comes fast and furious as the salesman and the woman, deduce Hawkins plans to assassinate the MP, and set off to warn him. It's a quick, fun little film, and if you're a fan of this kind of British humor, I'm sure you'd enjoy.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #308 on: October 12, 2013, 07:49:56 PM »
Animal Crackers (1930) 44/100 - Flat, stagey and without even the slightest hint of decent comedic timing, Animal Crackers is the Marx Brothers at their cringe worthy worst. So many of the jokes, or should I say puns, dangle before the viewer with what can best be described as anticipated humor. Anticipated in that most of the Marx Bothers films suffer from the same syndrome, it's as if they are screaming out to the audience, Hey folks, trust us, this crap is really funny and you should be laughing!. I honestly believe that if you took every film they made from The Cocoanuts, up to A Day at the Races, and edited out the musical numbers, Harpo and Chico's obligatory solo bits and pieced the remaining 'comedy' together, you'd be hard pressed to fill the standard two hour film time frame and still have a decent comedy. These guys were made for the vaudeville stage, and that's where they should have stayed. I haven't seen the MGM films from the 40's, which I've been told are even worse. But of the Paramount films I've seen, this is rock bottom.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #309 on: October 12, 2013, 07:51:47 PM »
We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011) 56/100 - I really couldn't wait for this film to end. A few times, I mentioned to my wife, that it seemed like the work of a first time director who was desperately trying to impress by using everything learned in film school. OK, I get it, the red metaphor denotes her inability to wash the horror of her son's actions away. Also, it seemed like many scenes could have been cut back once a point was made, but for some reason, tended to linger on for what seemed an eternity. Tilda Swinton was great as were the three actors who played Kevin throughout his growth, but the story lets these performances go to waste as the scenario was just a bit to convenient for the director to manipulate. You mean that no teacher at school could see the bipolar swings in this kid's emotions as a forewarning of bad things to come? The mother, when her husband or doctors didn't believe her stories, couldn't find a way to videotape the child without his knowledge so that she'd have some proof to back up her concerns? My wife read the book and she was also very disappointed in this.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #310 on: October 12, 2013, 07:52:08 PM »
Pal Joey (1957) 55/100 - Everything that you could possibly hate in a portrayal by Frank Sinatra is in abundance in this quasi-musical. Sinatra is stuck in his Maggio character from his Oscar winning performance in From Here to Eternity, but whereas that performance was fitting to the screenplay, his turn as lounge lizard Joey Evans is one non-stop, grating bit of fantasy. Whenever I see Sinatra play one of these somewhat cocky, tough guys, I always think of those Hollywood parodies that Looney Tunes would do, caricaturing him as a stick thin weakling. Throughout this film, I was waiting for someone, even Rita Hayworth, to cold-cock him and make him fold like a cheap suit. The rest of the cast seem to be sleepwalking through their performances also, as Rita Hayworth looks old beyond her years at the time, and the ever somnabular Kim Novak looks like a deer in the head lights. The only redeeming part of this film is the soundtrack, which features a few of Sinatra's best songs, including The Lady is a Tramp. The rest is garbage.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Kathy

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3600
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #311 on: October 12, 2013, 08:45:33 PM »
As you can see, I used to write longer reviews back then, but time and the disappearance of Jon from this forum have lessened my interest in writing in depth reviews. I've lost my muse.  :laugh:

Here's a link to all my longer reviews. If you see Jon disagreeing with me on something, dive into the rest of the thread, because everyone hear will agree with me, there's bound to be fireworks.

I miss Jon too...and the fireworks were amazing!

Offline Piffi

  • Heavy Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Country: no
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #312 on: October 12, 2013, 11:45:38 PM »
Thanks for the links! Some really great reviews there :) havent seen the seven samurai tho. But looked interesting ;)
Glad to see i'm not the only one that enjoyed 'Casablanca' one of my all time favorite movies  :-[
We'll Always Have Paris.


Thomas

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #313 on: October 14, 2013, 06:52:13 PM »
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) 71/100 – This was the first film in my re-introduction to Hammer horror. I had probably seen almost all of them back when I was in my youth, thanks to the creature double feature on my local UHF channel back in the early seventies. But for the life of me, I can’t remember a single film from their vast output. This was a good place to start as I love Gothic horror. While not having much in the way of shrieks or screams, I found it to be entertaining, with a very good performance from Peter Cushing. The monster, played by Christopher Lee, really is almost an afterthought in this version of Mary Shelley's famous novel. Overall, it's a good start, but hopefully, successive films from Hammer will prove to have a bit more bite to them.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is

Offline Antares

  • Super Heavy Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 4100
    • View Profile
Re: Antares' Short Summations
« Reply #314 on: October 14, 2013, 06:52:50 PM »
A New Leaf (1971) 78/100 – I was never a fan of Mike Nichols and Elaine May’s comedy routines, I just couldn’t register even the slightest chuckle. So for many years, whenever this film would show up on TCM, I would avoid it like The Plague. But after reading 1SO’s rather scathing review, I decided to see if it was available on YouTube and see if was as bad as I thought and as pitiful as Chuck had described it. Well…sorry Chuck, but we either were watching completely different films, or maybe I’m just more attuned to the style of film making that was prevalent in the early seventies, because I found myself laughing continuously throughout this film's duration. I’ve always been a big fan of black comedy, with Harold and Maude and Kind Hearts and Coronets as two of my all time favorite films. A New Leaf, which has its moments of brilliance, almost ranks right up there with both of those great films. Walter Matthau is excellent as the spoiled trust fund baby with the Monsieur Verdoux complex, but my favorite character has to be George Rose as the sympathetic butler. As I was watching, I kind of wondered if his character was the basis for the Hobson role in Arthur, as they both shared the same verbose quips and motherly feelings for their charges. It’s a pity that we’ll probably never get to see the film that Elaine May really wanted to make, as from what I’ve read, she supposedly owns the rights and the only full 3 hour version of what I think could be considered a lost masterpiece.

What the color coding means...

Teal = Masterpiece
Dark Green = Classic or someday will be
Lime Green = A good, entertaining film
Orange = Average
Red = Cinemuck
Brown = The color of crap, which this film is