Recently Watched Movies 2024

[storrsroars]

Second stop on my Tubi Cary Grant quest was Charade. I'd never seen it. I saw it described as a Hitchcockian rom-com. The plot is actually pretty interesting as if you don't know the film, you don't know what the object (worth $250K) is that everyone is trying to find until the very end. And it's always hiding in plain sight. I enjoyed it, but while critics gave good marks to the supporting cast, I found them hammy and awkward, particularly George Kennedy and James Coburn. I also figured out very early on that Walter Matthau's character was not what he seemed - that wasn't hidden well. Grant was good, but as with a lot of his later roles, the age gap between him and his love interest (Audrey Hepburn) was a bit off-putting. Too bad Grant was far too old to play James Bond, he would've made a great one.

I then went on to Bringing Up Baby, which I'd never seen in its entirety. But it was late and truthfully, the sheer amount of rapid-fire dialogue was too much for the late hour. The sound quality of the print Tubi is showing could also use some tweaking. I will try again over the weekend as I did really like Hepburn in what was probably her most comedic role.

 

[dbmill]

Second stop on my Tubi Cary Grant quest was Charade. I'd never seen it. I saw it described as a Hitchcockian rom-com. The plot is actually pretty interesting as if you don't know the film, you don't know what the object (worth $250K) is that everyone is trying to find until the very end. And it's always hiding in plain sight. I enjoyed it, but while critics gave good marks to the supporting cast, I found them hammy and awkward, particularly George Kennedy and James Coburn. I also figured out very early on that Walter Matthau's character was not what he seemed - that wasn't hidden well. Grant was good, but as with a lot of his later roles, the age gap between him and his love interest (Audrey Hepburn) was a bit off-putting. Too bad Grant was far too old to play James Bond, he would've made a great one.

I then went on to Bringing Up Baby, which I'd never seen in its entirety. But it was late and truthfully, the sheer amount of rapid-fire dialogue was too much for the late hour. The sound quality of the print Tubi is showing could also use some tweaking. I will try again over the weekend as I did really like Hepburn in what was probably her most comedic role.

"Bringing Up Baby" and "Charade" are a couple more Cary Grant movies that I just love. "Bringing Up Baby" is one of my favorite film comedies of all time.

 

[Waquoit]

We just caught The Featherweight, a new movie about the great Hartford boxer, Willie Pep. Shot like one of those 60's documentaries, it covers Pep planning a comeback to the ring at the age of 42. It's no hagiography but not a complete downer either. The actor playing Pep was tremendous. Bill Lee, the longtime Courant writer/editor has a nice part. FWIW, the New Yorker just gave it a rave review calling it "an instant classic of a boxing movie".

 

[Bomber36]

Just watched Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice. I wanted to love it. I didn’t . Meh.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Civil War:

The movie probably isn't about what you think it might be. It's trying to be an honest portrayal of what the violence you see on the news in Ukraine and Israel or anywhere would like like here.

This is a road trip movie that bears a ton of similarity to Apocalypse now and Heart of Darkness. A group of combat/war journalists are racing to get to DC so that they can interview and photograph the President before the Western Alliance kills him. Along the way they encounter people and places that show us how badly the nation has unraveled, while it's clear that other parts are trying to pretend that nothing is happening. The violence and dysfunction that they encounter is contrasted by the mentality of this group of "pure" reporters. They take pictures of what is happening and then let other people decide what it all means and what is right and wrong. For them it is all about getting the shot. This is the subtle cleverness in this film. Because people going into it expected one thing, but instead got an examination of Journalism Ethics and a somewhat questionable statement that journalists are now the only sane people left.

The writer smartly shuffled things up. Floriduh, Texas and California seceded. The split doesn't seem to happen on the lines that would make sense through the lense of our current politics, its not Red or Blue, left or right. In fact, since both sides seem to be wearing the same uniforms (with one exception) they went out of their way to make things seem as ambiguous as possible. Both sides are not above committing what most people would agree are war crimes.

To give another really specific example, there is gun battle scene between one group of troops and another group of Bros wearing Hawaiian shirts. If you don't know, Hawaiian shirts have become de riguer among groups of white supremacist militias. But in this movie the Bros are led by an Asian and has some African Americans in it.

I think the purpose behind the shirts was twofold. It's meant to jumble things up and to be stick in the eye to the wackjobs.

The President is clearly a Totalitarian who abolished the FBI and bombed American Citizens and we don't know why and we do now he's on his third consecutive term. He resembles most of the Totalitarian Dictators that you know of. The opposition takes no prisoners and they are fabulously equipped. Texas is one of the main players. And I thought one really brilliant touch of authenticity was that many of their helicopters had 1st Cavalry Division markings all over. And yes that's exactly what it sounds like to be under a bunch of CH-47s doing their thing. But all of the helos were CGI so the effects were pretty amazing.

I liked it for the most part. I didn't get as annoyed by the journalist focus as some reviews have. Making the journalists the focus avoids the perspective problem of a traditional war movie, where the audience only sees one side's viewpoint.

The movie is about the horrors of war, and uses a war in the U.S. to make it feel more visceral for American audiences. While reviewers, and Zoo, focus on which side in the movie represents which side in modern America, I don't think it matters. The movie is a cautionary tale about a modern society unraveling, and does not want viewers cheering for either side. America is not immune to a society getting so unstable that it turns on itself.

I do think the movie is too optimistic about what an America fighting a Civil War would look like. America has such a complicated and urbanized economy that deindustrialization would result in mass starvation and rapid fragmentation of our society.

The movie itself is OK. It has some slow spots, and the slow motion shots would be more effective if the director didn't do one every 5 minutes. The acting was decent. I like Wagner Maura and Caelee Spaeny, Dunst was OK and Henderson plays the same character in everything he does. I didn't love the ending for Dunst's character, and thought it undermined the movie a bit.

The movie was decent, and it makes an important point. I would give a mild recommendation.

 

[CL82]

Second stop on my Tubi Cary Grant quest was Charade. I'd never seen it. I saw it described as a Hitchcockian rom-com. The plot is actually pretty interesting as if you don't know the film, you don't know what the object (worth $250K) is that everyone is trying to find until the very end. And it's always hiding in plain sight. I enjoyed it, but while critics gave good marks to the supporting cast, I found them hammy and awkward, particularly George Kennedy and James Coburn. I also figured out very early on that Walter Matthau's character was not what he seemed - that wasn't hidden well. Grant was good, but as with a lot of his later roles, the age gap between him and his love interest (Audrey Hepburn) was a bit off-putting. Too bad Grant was far too old to play James Bond, he would've made a great one.

I then went on to Bringing Up Baby, which I'd never seen in its entirety. But it was late and truthfully, the sheer amount of rapid-fire dialogue was too much for the late hour. The sound quality of the print Tubi is showing could also use some tweaking. I will try again over the weekend as I did really like Hepburn in what was probably her most comedic role.

Charade is a underappreciated and oft forgotten. Yes, it is kitschy in many ways... in the performance by Ned Glass, or the nightclub scene, and especially the shower scene but it is a very entertaining movie. The chemistry between Hebburn and Grant is surprising, given their age difference, but undeniable. It's well worth a watch for people who haven't discovered it yet.

Bringing Up Baby is absolutely worth another attempt. It actually was a box office flop. I agree with you about the rapidfire patter. It reminds me of Hepburn's dialogue in the movie Philadelphia Story. Of course, the characters she is playing are similar.

 

[ZooCougar]

I liked it for the most part. I didn't get as annoyed by the journalist focus as some reviews have. Making the journalists the focus avoids the perspective problem of a traditional war movie, where the audience only sees one side's viewpoint.

The movie is about the horrors of war, and uses a war in the U.S. to make it feel more visceral for American audiences. While reviewers, and Zoo, focus on which side in the movie represents which side in modern America, I don't think it matters. The movie is a cautionary tale about a modern society unraveling, and does not want viewers cheering for either side. America is not immune to a society getting so unstable that it turns on itself.

I do think the movie is too optimistic about what an America fighting a Civil War would look like. America has such a complicated and urbanized economy that deindustrialization would result in mass starvation and rapid fragmentation of our society.

The movie itself is OK. It has some slow spots, and the slow motion shots would be more effective if the director didn't do one every 5 minutes. The acting was decent. I like Wagner Maura and Caelee Spaeny, Dunst was OK and Henderson plays the same character in everything he does. I didn't love the ending for Dunst's character, and thought it undermined the movie a bit.

The movie was decent, and it makes an important point. I would give a mild recommendation.

I actually didn’t focus on that. I focused on how the sides were opaque intentionally, but with a few digs like the Hawaiian shirts.

I watched it a second time and I found that I hated the journalists in this movie. I’m not sure that real life ones are as awful as the ones in the movie.

 

[dbmill]

Charade is a underappreciated and oft forgotten. Yes, it is kitschy in many ways... in the performance by Ned Glass, or the nightclub scene, and especially the shower scene but it is a very entertaining movie. The chemistry between Hebburn and Grant is surprising, given their age difference, but undeniable. It's well worth a watch for people who haven't discovered it yet.

Bringing Up Baby is absolutely worth another attempt. It actually was a box office flop. I agree with you about the rapidfire patter. It reminds me of Hepburn's dialogue in the movie Philadelphia Story. Of course, the characters she is playing are similar.

"Philadelphia Story" is another old film comedy that I love to watch.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I then went on to Bringing Up Baby, which I'd never seen in its entirety. But it was late and truthfully, the sheer amount of rapid-fire dialogue was too much for the late hour. The sound quality of the print Tubi is showing could also use some tweaking. I will try again over the weekend as I did really like Hepburn in what was probably her most comedic role.

"Bringing Up Baby" is one of my favorite film comedies of all time.

Bringing Up Baby is absolutely worth another attempt. It actually was a box office flop. I agree with you about the rapidfire patter. It reminds me of Hepburn's dialogue in the movie Philadelphia Story. Of course, the characters she is playing are similar.

Bringing up Baby is one of a very few movies that I will stop and watch regardless of what point in the movie I stumble upon it. It may have been Hepburn's best performance (which is saying quite a bit) and Grant was perfect as a (for the most part) passive, people pleaser. The remainder of the cast also turned in a number of great performances.

I've heard for decades that it performed very poorly when it was first released and that has me baffled. Considering the era and the type of movie, that it didn't do at a minimum reasonably well in the box office defies logic.

SR, find the time to watch it from the start and be sure to pay attention to everything (some characters appear in different parts of the movie, which adds to the story line). It will be well worth the time invested.

 

[storrsroars]

Bringing up Baby is one of a very few movies that I will stop and watch regardless of what point in the movie I stumble upon it. It may have been Hepburn's best performance (which is saying quite a bit) and Grant was perfect as a (for the most part) passive, people pleaser. The remainder of the cast also turned in a number of great performances.

I've heard for decades that it performed very poorly when it was first released and that has me baffled. Considering the era and the type of movie, that it didn't do at a minimum reasonably well in the box office defies logic.

SR, find the time to watch it from the start and be sure to pay attention to everything (some characters appear in different parts of the movie, which adds to the story line). It will be well worth the time invested.

I don't recall whether I saw it on IMDB or Wikipedia, but I read something to the effect that at the time BUB was made, Hepburn was considered box office poison. Hard to believe, but that might explain nobody going to see it.

 

[dbmill]

I don't recall whether I saw it on IMDB or Wikipedia, but I read something to the effect that at the time BUB was made, Hepburn was considered box office poison. Hard to believe, but that might explain nobody going to see it.

Yup, Hepburn movies did not do well at the box office in the late 1930's. "The Philadelphia Story" revived her film career and did very well at the box office.

 

[CL82]

I don't recall whether I saw it on IMDB or Wikipedia, but I read something to the effect that at the time BUB was made, Hepburn was considered box office poison. Hard to believe, but that might explain nobody going to see it.

I actually think of Bringing up Baby cemented that belief since it was a box office bomb. I think she was a big Broadway star, but for whatever reason, it didn't translate immediately to the big screen. Part of that may have been the characters that she played. Spoiled characters of privilege may not have resonated with the public at the tail end of the Great Depression. Later on where she played tough as nails working woman, she may have been more easy to identify with. I'm just speculating.

For reason, I don't enjoy some of the more famous movies with that character as much. I want to like her movies with Spencer Tracy, such as Adam's Rib or Desk Set but I really don't feel the chemistry. Obviously, that's a me thing, since they were hugely popular at the time.

 

[dbmill]

I actually think of Bringing up Baby cemented that belief since it was a box office bomb. I think she was a big Broadway star, but for whatever reason, it didn't translate immediately to the big screen. Part of that may have been the characters that she played. Spoiled characters of privilege may not have resonated with the public at the tail end of the Great Depression. Later on where she played tough as nails working woman, she may have been more easy to identify with. I'm just speculating.

For reason, I don't enjoy some of the more famous movies with that character as much. I want to like her movies with Spencer Tracy, such as Adam's Rib or Desk Set but I really don't feel the chemistry. Obviously, that's a me thing, since they were hugely popular at the time.

By the way, Hepburn won the 1933 Oscar for best actress for her role in "Morning Glory", before she got tagged with the box office poison notation in the later 1930's.

As for "Bringing Up Baby", while it did not do well at the box office, it is still considered a very good film by critics. That film was directed by Howard Hawks, one of my 3 favorite film directors of all time, the other 2 being Hitchcock and John Ford.

 

[superjohn]

I really didn't understand "Civil War." There was no context given to anything. We don't know who the two sides are, we don't know why they are fighting, we're given nothing. I guess the whole thing is to show how important photo journalists are, but did the movie actually do that? They captured a bunch of images of dead bodies, but again didn't provide us any idea what was actually happening. And the movie did show the media deliberately broadcasting inaccurate info, so the movie seemed to undermine it's own point about the importance of media, since you can't trust them.

Brutally bad movie. Didn't care about a single person in the movie or if they had their heads splattered. Not only did I not care about any of the characters or what happened to them, I was kind of rooting for the photo journalists to take head shots. If that's what the director was going for I guess he achieved it.

It's shocking how bad the movie industry is now.

 

[nwhoopfan]

It's shocking how bad the movie industry is now.

I've been thinking that for several years. The whole covid world wide shutdown and various writers strikes hasn't helped, but I gotta think Hollywood has done this to themselves.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Finally saw "Inside Out 2." I didn't enjoy it as much as the first one. It was really chaotic and I found my interest waning around halfway thru. They finally brought it home at the end, but overall it just doesn't measure up to what Pixar used to be.

 

[Palatine]

We just caught The Featherweight, a new movie about the great Hartford boxer, Willie Pep. Shot like one of those 60's documentaries, it covers Pep planning a comeback to the ring at the age of 42. It's no hagiography but not a complete downer either. The actor playing Pep was tremendous. Bill Lee, the longtime Courant writer/editor has a nice part. FWIW, the New Yorker just gave it a rave review calling it "an instant classic of a boxing movie".

Where did you see it?

 

[Waquoit]

Where did you see it?

At Real Art Ways. I think it's only playing in NYC, LA and CT right now.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Just saw "Rez Ball" on Netlifx. A bit cliched as sports movies can be. Apparently it was at least loosely based on a book. It was set on the Navajo Reservation, although the book was in Chinle in Arizona and they moved it to Ship Rock in New Mexico. About a high school basketball team struggling to continue with their season after their star player takes his own life (he lost his mom and sister the year before). It's about a lot more than basketball though, follows several characters, both students and adults. Among the cast there were two from the series Dark Winds. Jessica Matten was the coach and Ryan Begay was the father of the star player (that guy has tough luck, he lost a child in Dark Winds too). Amber Midthunder was in it too but she had a very minor part. Anyway I liked it, thought it was fairly well done.

They got some real ballers for small roles. Nicole Kornet played at Oklahoma and UCLA, she portrayed the girls coach at Ship Rock. Pretty sure there have been multiple Kornets, even multiple generations, that have played college and pro hoops. The superstar from the rival school who they played for the state title is a guy named Sam Griesel. I wasn't familiar with him but he was at North Dakota St. for 4 years and then grad transferred to Nebraska.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Went back to Amazon Prime after an absence, they've accumulated some things I want to watch in the interim. Kind of a rough start, but I did get to check some things off my list.

First up was "Snack Shack," a coming of age story set in Nebraska in '91. Two scheming, entrepreneurial doofuses have some of their plans blow up in their faces. They then spend the summer running the snack shack at the city pool, which turns out to be a goldmine. One of them has the gorgeous cousin of the neighbor staying next door. Both guys are into her. Jealousy and hurt feelings ensue, interrupting their profitable partnership. There's also an older kid a year out of high school who spent some time in Desert Storm and is back in town, inexplicably hanging out with the younger kids. It starts out going for irreverent comedy but then switches gears to more serious. The comedy didn't really land for me. I almost quit fairly early on, stuck with it, it was okay but definitely once was enough.


You know the drill, the 3 actors involved in the love triangle, playing 15 year olds, are 22, 23 and 24. And the Gulf War vet, probably supposed to be about 19...is 29. Hollywood, you are so weird!

 

[nwhoopfan]

Then I watched "Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose." Not sure what I expected from this. Good cast. I kept waiting for it to build to something, but it just never got there for me. If a 90 minute film feels long, that's not a good thing.

 

[nwhoopfan]

My dad recommended "The Keeper" to me. He also said don't read up on it, just watch it. With that in mind I won't spoil it with details. Suffice it to say it's a different way of looking at the World War II era than any other film I've seen before. It was well done I thought.

 

[nwhoopfan]

"Killer Heat" was decent. I don't know if I'd call it a thriller exactly. Fairly slow burn. A bit neo noirish in my view. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Shailene Woodley were good as the leads.

 

[storrsroars]

Watched Wolfs (Apple) earlier. Clooney and Pitt together are enough to merit a watch. It wasn't a great movie, but entertaining enough. The underwear chase scene was different and fun. Apparently was supposed to get a wide theatre release, but Sony thought it might not do well, so gave it a limited release before Apple streamed it. Not sure there's much of a theatre audience these days for a couple of 60 year old marquee names, but I think it would've recouped costs. Anyway, I found it worth a watch, but probably not two. There is a sequel being planned.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Watched Wolfs (Apple) earlier. Clooney and Pitt together are enough to merit a watch. It wasn't a great movie, but entertaining enough. The underwear chase scene was different and fun. Apparently was supposed to get a wide theatre release, but Sony thought it might not do well, so gave it a limited release before Apple streamed it. Not sure there's much of a theatre audience these days for a couple of 60 year old marquee names, but I think it would've recouped costs. Anyway, I found it worth a watch, but probably not two. There is a sequel being planned.

The economics of streaming are so different from those of theatre based distribution. Netflix prints cash churning out just enough semi-decent stuff to keep people from cancelling. Apple, Hulu/Disney, Paramount, Peacock Universal and Max are trying to replicate that model.