What was the last film you watched?

[Seaviewer]

Hailey Dean Mysteries: Deadly Estate (2017)
I've been a fan of Kelly Martin since watching her in Life Goes On, and later Christy, so it's like I've watched her grow up.
Like a lot of other stars, she chose to make a series of murder mysteries and the Hailey Dean character suits her very well in her signature empathic style. This is evidently the second of nine but I've not seen any of the others. The murder investigation wraps up in two hours but there is a backstory that continues.

 

[Seaviewer]

Back to the Future, Part II (1989)
Still fun; literally doubling down on the original, and technically very well done, but not in the rarified category of being superior.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

American Graffiti (1973)

For my entire life this film has eluded me. I don't think it appealed that much when I was younger, then I'd missed my window. It's been in my Prime watchlist for a long time, and I noticed last night it had become free to view so I dived straight in.

While I don't believe I've watched a single frame of this film, there are snippets I've picked up about it here and there. I knew it had an impressive cast, most of whom were in their early days but went on to much bigger things: Richard Dreyfuss; Harrison Ford; Ron Howard and Cindy Williams to name a few. I knew it was a coming-of-age film that looked back at a slightly earlier decade.

The time setting is a strange one. It was set eleven years before its release date, which I'd have thought would not be long enough for it to be truly nostalgic to most people outside of George Lucas's age group (which includes most of the cast, since it invariably has the aged-almost-thirty high school graduates so prevalent in film and TV at the time). I recently watched Beautiful People, a short-lived TV sitcom which evidently failed in part because it was set only eleven years before real time (made in 2008 but set in 1997) and therefore neither truly nostalgic nor bang up-to-date. And there's nothing older than yesterday's news. These things don't really become time capsules until decades later, by which time it's too late, and it lacks the authenticity of something set in the time during which it's made. For these reasons I could be puzzled by America Graffiti's success at the time. Perhaps it reflects how much the Sixties were a time of change. Perhaps it's down to the strong support of those nostalgic twenty-somethings. Perhaps the themes are timeless enough to make it work even though it shouldn't Or it could be a combination of all three.

I'd laboured under the misconception that the film was set almost entirely in and around a diner, rather than car cruising culture. I suppose it captured it well enough to hold my attention. With retrospect the film's influence on projects such as Grease or Happy Days can be seen, as well as contemporary set films such as Saturday Night Fever, Thank God It's Friday or some of the coming-of-age films in later decades from the likes of John Hughes.

As I'd have expected, the performances are pretty good, the story (such as it is) engaging) and the aesthetics pleasant.

The sound was another matter. This feels very much a jukebox film, where the vintage pop soundtrack is an important and evocative character. Sadly, this element is also where the film lost me. The sound design seemed quite poor, and much of the sometimes-muffled dialogue was lost among the lyrics, particularly in scenes such as the hop, where they clashed with very unpleasant results.

Overall, I can see why this film is so well-regarded. Really, though, I view this more as a curiosity given the famous cast and crew. It didn't really speak to my heart. Perhaps it's a George Lucas thing.

 

[Seaviewer]

Back to the Future Part III (1990)
The Western setting ironically gives this third instalment a much-needed fresh look and allows for a more self-contained story, as well as wrapping up loose ends. And Mary Steenburgen is a welcome addition to the cast, bringing with her her previous experience with time travel in Time After Time (1979).

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Malice (1993)

As is usual of late, this is a first-time watch. Back when it came out I wasn't into thrillers, and this definitely fits into that category. Wikipedia calls it a "neo-noir thriller", but to me it feels more like a contemporary psychological thriller such as Fatal Attraction, Single White Female or The Hand That Rocks The Cradle. It also has an iconic poster, which was purloined by several other films of the era (it was recently name-checked as the inspiration for the Scream 2 poster in a video I watched on that film).

I suspect my avoidance back in the day might also be down to an aversion to Nicole Kidman (which is better managed these days to the point I could happily watch The Others a second time despite her central role). Further testing me, this film also has appearances from Gwyneth Paltrow and Brenda Strong. Fortunately, both have only minor roles (even more fortunately one of their characters is killed after their first scene).

The male leads are Bill Pullman and Alec Baldwin, neither of whom feels like a Hollywood A-lister to me. Not that this has to be a bad thing. It's just that I don't associate them with any specific knockout film roles. Pullman is an actor I'm lukewarm towards, in the sense that I rarely notice him. I can't decide if this is because he's bland or because he's too good an actor and disappears into his roles. He's very good here, but, again, I had to really think about that because nothing really jumps off the screen. Alec Baldwin takes top billing, which is interesting because his role feels smaller than Kidman or Pullman's. He certainly commands the screen more than his cast-mates doing his intense, cocky-but-charismatic thing which is used to excellent effect here.

I knew nothing of the plot, which is the best starting point. I like when I think a film is going to go in one direction then it goes in another, and that happened here. But it was so twisty that it eventually became what I thought what it originally was. Along with a host of other things. Each turn and revelation is exciting, and they keep coming right to the end. It's clever without being smug or showy. There is one very significant plot (the serial rapist-killer) which is compelling enough but feels unconnected from the main story. It's a Macguffin, but for the fact that one important piece of information comes to light as an outcome of one of the key players briefly becoming a suspect. The information could have surfaced in a less convoluted way, so I still say it's a Macguffin. But it's a watchable one (which is fortunate given the amount of screen-time it eats up).

This morning I've looked at a few reviews which point out what they view as flaws. Yes, it's melodramatic. Yes. It's soapy. Yes, it's borderline ludicrous. It's also gripping and highly entertaining. I'm very glad I took the time to watch this one.​

 

[Willie Oleson]

The performances really sell this as a feasible scenario, and this is really Bill Skarsgård's film. He's on-screen for every frame and doesn't let up with the intensity of the situations in which he finds himself.

When I watched the trailer for Locked my first reaction was "I've already seen this". I *think* it was an episode of the fabulous Inside No. 9, but now I'm not sure anymore. Did it dream it?

Funnily enough, and I'm absolutely sure of this, there was a one-man-show-inside-a-car film in 2013 called LOCKE. The title only refers to the character's name and I think I once mentioned that "Olivia Colman is in every movie even when she's not" and she can be heard over the phone.
The nondescript title is kinda rubbish imo but the film itself is fantastic. Not a typical thriller but a very tense and dramatic ride, almost like an audio-soap on screen.

The time setting is a strange one. It was set eleven years before its release date, which I'd have thought would not be long enough for it to be truly nostalgic to most people outside of George Lucas's age group (which includes most of the cast, since it invariably has the aged-almost-thirty high school graduates so prevalent in film and TV at the time). I recently watched Beautiful People, a short-lived TV sitcom which evidently failed in part because it was set only eleven years before real time (made in 2008 but set in 1997) and therefore neither truly nostalgic nor bang up-to-date. And there's nothing older than yesterday's news. These things don't really become time capsules until decades later, by which time it's too late, and it lacks the authenticity of something set in the time during which it's made. For these reasons I could be puzzled by America Graffiti's success at the time.

I had expected much more (or better) from this well-regarded film. But if I have to be perfectly honest I'm not a big fan of these 1950s/1960s period dramas made in the 1970s or even 1980s. It usually focuses on a greatest hits scenario, the most memorable part of that pop culture. Everything happens inside a diner with rock&roll ballads coming out of the jukebox, I find it so over the top pastiche.
And as you've already pointed out, the "where were you in '62?" doesn't feel like a blast from the past in '73. But it rhymes, that's true.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Never Take Sweets From A Stranger (1960)​

This story about a problematic obsession/fetish looks particularly daring in a film from 1960, and it's almost ironic that the big scandal is partially caused by what doesn't happen at the beginning of the story. If it had been full-on abuse then that's the word they could have used over and over again, and at the risk of losing its power. Instead, they're telling the story of sordid details that can make the difference between morally wrong and lawfully wrong.
It is considered "debatable" by various characters, not to mention how it all came about in the first place.

However, that is clearly not the intention of the film (hence the cautionary title) and it becomes a story of good people and bad people, action and reaction, a soapy small town torn apart.
The last act eliminates any sense of doubt or opinion the viewer could have had, and while the result is surprisingly dark it also takes the creepiness and the unknown out of the character.
It's like saying that all our wrongs are equally bad, that the disturbing desire equals the tragic outcome of a crime.
But what do we know about other people's thoughts and fantasies? I'm sure it's better that we don't know.

Since this is a topic that is still very difficult to discuss it would be foolish to expect a lot of nuance from such an old film, but I think they did quite a lot with it, at least in the first act.
The actors are very entertaining to watch, especially Alison Leggatt in the role of grandmother.
Patrick Allen plays the young girl's father - and there's an interesting courtroom revelation that is immediately nipped in the bud which made me wonder why it was brought up in the first place.
According to IMDB he also played a role in a super-cheesy episode of Brian Clemens' THRILLER.
Gwen Watford as the girl's mother reminded me of Anne Hathaway.

Sweets has been in my watchlist for ages but it was always frustratingly unavailable. Today it popped up in a YT feed when I was browsing films from the 1950s. I believe it was uploaded only two weeks ago so I decided not to delay.
Uploads that have been around for several years aren't likely to be removed, but fresh uploads need to stand the test of time (e.g. not being flagged for whatever reason).

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Funnily enough, and I'm absolutely sure of this, there was a one-man-show-inside-a-car film in 2013 called LOCKE. The title only refers to the character's name and I think I once mentioned that "Olivia Colman is in every movie even when she's not" and she can be heard over the phone.
The nondescript title is kinda rubbish imo but the film itself is fantastic.

Oh, this intrigued me enough that I went dashing off to see if I could find it. I don't mind Olivia Colman (who, incidentally, stars in Beautiful People, mentioned in the very quote in your post), and I rather fell for Andrew Scott in Pride, and watching some interviews in its wake.

But then I saw it stars Toms Hardy and Holland - with the former evidently taking up almost all the screen time - which I'm afraid makes it hard pass from me.

I had expected much more (or better) from this well-regarded film.

Yes. I have to say I had high expectations for this, which made it doubly disappointing. I still feel I might just not care for the George Lucas characterisations. I think the only films of his I've cared enough to rewatch were a couple of the Indiana Jones films... and they had Steven Spielberg's hand to guide them. I've had similar experiences with other acclaimed director/producer/writer types like James Cameron and Joss Whedon where, after watching several of their classics, I realise they just don't do it for me (and I cannot see what the fuss is about).

I'm not a big fan of these 1950s/1960s period dramas made in the 1970s or even 1980s. It usually focuses on a greatest hits scenario, the most memorable part of that pop culture. Everything happens inside a diner with rock&roll ballads coming out of the jukebox, I find it so over the top pastiche.

Yes, and it doesn't help that I have no real connection with Fifties and Sixties Americana. Somehow it feels so far removed from the more modest, kitchen sink drama or cheeky comedies that is my frame of reference for Britain in the same period (which of course was back when Britain had distinct identity that was removed from America).

I liked the fact that American Graffiti was pretty shameless about being a kind of jukebox greatest hits film. It felt strongly that the story was build around the songs, rather than the songs fitting in with the story (as confirmed by the always-infallible Wikipedia). As mentioned, though, the film really suffered from poor sound design with the dialogue blending into the music so much that it was impossible to hear. Very unpleasant.

 

[Willie Oleson]

But then I saw it stars Toms Hardy and Holland - with the former evidently taking up almost all the screen time - which I'm afraid makes it hard pass from me.

Well, that comment certainly popped.
Should I ask why you feel that way?
For me it's the only Tom Hardy performance I've seen (or remember) therefore I only have the one positive reference.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Should I ask why you feel that way?
For me it's the only Tom Hardy performance I've seen (or remember) therefore I only have the one positive reference.

It was the opposite for me. I thoroughly enjoyed the film remake of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy in which he had a small role which I consider the worst thing about it. I said this at the time:

It's also very nicely cast, again with a passing exception or two (I really wish Michael Fassbender had been available to play Tarr as the actor they ended up with didn't do subtle.

I'm sure he's fine at playing the angry alpha male type but his character here was meant to be nervous, edgy and reticent but he was just trying too hard for my liking and I found his performance for this part overly mannered, amateurish and unconvincing which briefly took me out of the otherwise-compelling story.

​

Incidentally, I've just watched a few scenes from Locke and found myself thinking he did a passable Newcastle accent.... Then I looked further and discovered it's meant to be Welsh. Seems he took a lot of stick over that (and rightly so). It is a nice concept though, and does look very well-made.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I thoroughly enjoyed the film remake of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy in which he had a small role which I consider the worst thing about it

Oh...I've tried to watch that a few weeks ago, but turned it off after 30+ minutes or so.
I have never watched the original series therefore it's all new to me. I found what I've seen (set up, characters, purpose etc) incomprehensible but I can blame that failure on my own nitwittery.
But it's also boringly incomprehensible and surely I shouldn't be blamed for both.
There's nothing outrageous about this situation, it's happened many times before....but probably not with films starring Gary Oldman.
On the upside, I never got to the part of Tom Hardy's (alleged) problematic performance which means that my opinion of Hardy & Locke remains untarnished.

I have been thinking about watching the original TTSS series (and its sequel) because I usually like to watch characters who pretend to be someone else. I'm sure it traces back to the children's stories about bad wolves pretending to be sweet grandmothers and whatnot.
Come to think of it, wasn't Gary Oldman in a modern version of Red Riding Hood?

 

[Willie Oleson]

The Unbelievable Truth (1989)



It's a combination of deadpan humour, pseudo-ambitious scenarios and a pseudo-earnest romance, but relatively lite on the quirks.
It's not a great or fascinating film and it's not super-quotable, but at the same time it never looks as if something comes out the wrong way. I believe this film looks exactly the way it was meant to be, aware of its limitations and to make the very best of it.
I'm easily persuaded if you show confidence and I think that's what makes this "underwhelming" romcom so oddly appealing.

In a rather soapy fashion it starts with the return of an ex-convict (a "mass murderer!") who may or may not have killed someone. So that's Elliot Carson from Peyton Place.
There's a recurring joke about I don't drink/I don't smoke, and the more I think about it the funnier this film gets.
Meanwhile, the daughter of the town's main and only family ponders the end of the world and she breaks up with her perfectly awful boyfriend Emmet. He may have been the inspiration for South Park's Eric Cartman.
She also becomes an international supermodel but no attempts have been made to make that look remotely believable (I'm sure that was the point).
And then other stuff happens blablabla mostly courtesy of the father's endless quid pro quos.

I like it very much, and I'll probably go back to it in the foreseeable future. It's sort of post-Repo Man (1984) and pre-Clerks (1994).




Barfly (1987)



CHEERS - The Movie
Not sure if I had seen it before, but what appears to be a draining session of drunks sharing their woe-is-me's turns into a delightful screwball romcomedy.
Mickey Rourke outbrandoes Marlon Brando and Faye Dunaway is always a good watch even when the film isn't (except for Laura Mars, perhaps).
Also starring Alice Krige in a catfight with Faye (was it a homage to the bar catfight in Get Carter?) and Frank "Far From Over" Stallone as the short-tempered bartender.
Story-wise there isn't much for me to comment on. Apparently it's autobiographical but I had never heard of this writer. Doesn't matter, the film is great regardless of the reason behind it.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I found what I've seen (set up, characters, purpose etc) incomprehensible but I can blame that failure on my own nitwittery.
But it's also boringly incomprehensible and surely I shouldn't be blamed for both.

Oh, interesting. I can't say either way as I must confess I remember very little about it now (other than I came out thinking it was a really good film).

On the upside, I never got to the part of Tom Hardy's (alleged) problematic performance which means that my opinion of Hardy & Locke remains untarnished.

Ha ha. Well I'm glad. It does look a good concept, and perhaps one day (probably some long way off) I'll get over my first impression and be able to watch and enjoy it.

I have never watched the original series therefore it's all new to me.

I have been thinking about watching the original TTSS series (and its sequel)

Ditto on both counts. It sounds like you've thought more actively than me about watching. It's just one of many vintage TV series on a long-and-growing viewing wish list.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Yes, and it doesn't help that I have no real connection with Fifties and Sixties Americana. Somehow it feels so far removed from the more modest, kitchen sink drama or cheeky comedies that is my frame of reference for Britain in the same period

On that subject, have you seen this film?


I can't post the link because it's already been removed and the trailer shows too much of the highlights (not to mention the horrible and very obviously manipulative trailer score).
Purely based on the description it didn't seem like a film I needed to watch so I guess it was recommended in one of the online "forgotten gems" lists.
I wouldn't say that it was the story that won me over, but it has a certain vibe and attitude similar to Rita, Sue And Bob Too (also released in 1987).
Emily Lloyd is very convincing in her debut performance of the subversive protagonist, and she made me think of Julia Garner in Ozark.
And instead of the cheerleaders and milkshakes and big red glossy cars you'll get a strong sense of drab, post-WWII England. That's the main difference with America, Europe was still in the process of rebuilding, to make it normal again - and supersized milkshakes were not a priority yet.

Btw, this is definitely not to suggest that it was a walk in the park for Americans to make a living in the 1950s. They've always had their own issues to overcome, and personally I think there's something frightening about being part of such a huge and complex country. And there are horror stories of people who are forever lost in one of the extremely large supermarkets. "The exit is here, up down left right, or maybe not".
But in the fantasy of consumerist pop culture it certainly looks a lot friendlier, like, being in high school with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Dead Poets Society (1989)



I want to give this film the benefit of the doubt and say that it might have looked sufficiently autre in the 1980s (well, more like the 1990s) but that doesn't change the fact that, even at the time of release, it should have been observed that this film looks like a friendly, heroic remake of The Prime Of Miss Jean Brodie.
The finale made me think of the Lost Boys cheering for Peter Pan.
Furthermore, I'm not completely sold on the idea of teaching Carpe Diem to adolescents who only think of the present, girls and booze.
It's as if the story wants to take it away and then give it back in a meaningful and wholesome way, enhanced by poetry wanking.
The feeling of carpe diem usually comes after suffering or something lost, as it would happen in, say, a midlife crisis story. Educating Rita, and that sort of stuff.
Conveniently, there is one character who cannot do as he pleases and this results in Morte Diem. It feels a bit cheap and insincere but nevertheless, the death of a pretty young character is always going to look very tragic.

I'm sure there is an audience for this type of film, people love schmaltz and it's as simple as that. The problem is, I had not expected to find it in such a beloved classic that has cemented its place in pop culture history.
Dead Poets Society isn't just a title anymore, it has become a definition. In my opinion, the film does not live up to that reputation.
Yes, I was entertained, but not so much that my life has become richer for it.
And I think it was anxious pretty snotface Ethan Hawke who deserved the spanking but it didn't happen. An additional disappointment!

 

[Mel O'Drama]

On that subject, have you seen this film?

Do you know, I couldn't swear either way. I certainly remember the poster, and I seem to remember seeing it listed on TV over Christmas time, but with a very late start (probably after the News At Ten or something).

I feel I may have seen it (or parts of it), but then I may also be confusing it with another film made around the same time with a similar period setting. One scene from a film that sticks vividly in my mind is of a boy walking along a street when something can be seen silently gliding in the sky behind him and then there's a massive explosion as a shell drops. If it's not from this film then I probably haven't seen it.

When I just looked to see if I could jog my memory, I notice it's loosely based on the early life of Cynthia Payne, just as the same year's Personal Services was based on a slightly older Cynthia as she became an infamous madam. I loved Personal Services, so this has certainly piqued my interest.

And instead of the cheerleaders and milkshakes and big red glossy cars you'll get a strong sense of drab, post-WWII England. That's the main difference with America, Europe was still in the process of rebuilding, to make it normal again - and supersized milkshakes were not a priority yet.

This is very true.

 

[Willie Oleson]

just as the same year's Personal Services was based on a slightly older Cynthia as she became an infamous madam.

Aha, there's a sequel.


Bad Timing (1980)



The film poster promotes it as a double title but I only go by the title as seen in the film itself. There's enough tomfoolery going on with films getting re-titled to suit whatever demographics.
Having said that, the DVD I got has the translated Italian title "Il Lenzuolo Viola". If it's not one thing it's another!

I'm pretty sure this is not the first film about a toxic sexual relationship that I've seen, but the editing here is fantastic. There's a constant flow and overlapping between past events and present events and it never becomes confusing. It's somewhat similar to Altman's Images except that he did it with changing characters and situations.
Theresa Russell's character is the force of nature but Art Garfunkel and Harvey Keitel are also consistently very watchable.
For singer/songwriter Arty Fartyfunkel it seems to be an acting career "on the side" but I remember that he was also very good in Carnal Knowledge.
And so we can add another gem to the elusive year 1980. It's actually more like a mini-decade because it doesn't belong to the seventies or the eighties.

Theresa Russell also starred in Roeg's Track 29 (1988) which has my favourite Gary Oldman performance so far. Highly recommended if you like the zany stuff.

I just checked Nicolas Roeg's filmography (or directorography) to see if there's something else that would interest me, apart from his most successful/popular films like Don't Look Now, Walkabout and The Witches.
I found out that Theresa has been a recurring special guest star in his movies, just as it happens now with Emma Stone and Yorgos Lanthimos, and Tilda Swinton with every filmmaker.
I've watched a lot of seventies psychedelic films and that's the reason why I've put Performance on hold. I will watch it because I need to see what almost destroyed James Fox.
Eureka (1983) is rated negatively but maybe that's a good thing because the main reason it "sucks" is because it's too soapy. I wonder if Rutger Hauer plays the Peter De Vilbis we couldn't see in Dynasty.

 

[Toni]

Aha, there's a sequel.


Bad Timing (1980)

View attachment 58001

The film poster promotes it as a double title but I only go by the title as seen in the film itself. There's enough tomfoolery going on with films getting re-titled to suit whatever demographics.
Having said that, the DVD I got has the translated Italian title "Il Lenzuolo Viola". If it's not one thing it's another!

I'm pretty sure this is not the first film about a toxic sexual relationship that I've seen, but the editing here is fantastic. There's a constant flow and overlapping between past events and present events and it never becomes confusing. It's somewhat similar to Altman's Images except that he did it with changing characters and situations.
Theresa Russell's character is the force of nature but Art Garfunkel and Harvey Keitel are also consistently very watchable.
For singer/songwriter Arty Fartyfunkel it seems to be an acting career "on the side" but I remember that he was also very good in Carnal Knowledge.
And so we can add another gem to the elusive year 1980. It's actually more like a mini-decade because it doesn't belong to the seventies or the eighties.

Theresa Russell also starred in Roeg's Track 29 (1988) which has my favourite Gary Oldman performance so far. Highly recommended if you like the zany stuff.
View attachment 58002
I just checked Nicolas Roeg's filmography (or directorography) to see if there's something else that would interest me, apart from his most successful/popular films like Don't Look Now, Walkabout and The Witches.
I found out that Theresa has been a recurring special guest star in his movies, just as it happens now with Emma Stone and Yorgos Lanthimos, and Tilda Swinton with every filmmaker.
I've watched a lot of seventies psychedelic films and that's the reason why I've put Performance on hold. I will watch it because I need to see what almost destroyed James Fox.
Eureka (1983) is rated negatively but maybe that's a good thing because the main reason it "sucks" is because it's too soapy. I wonder if Rutger Hauer plays the Peter De Vilbis we couldn't see in Dynasty.

Thanks for the review! Now I want to see "Images", with one of John Williams´ early scores... And underrated Theresa Russell was Sharon Stone before Sharon Stone existed (or almost).

 

[Willie Oleson]

And underrated Theresa Russell was Sharon Stone before Sharon Stone existed (or almost).

I have a suspicion that she may be Kathleen Turner's sister.

 

[Toni]

I have a suspicion that she may be Kathleen Turner's sister.

Russell played her own Catherine Tramell a few years before, in a little gem called "Black Widow". Debra Winger in her usual fantastic in this too.