Recently Watched Movies 2024 | Page 10 | The Boneyard
.

Recently Watched Movies 2024

nwhoopfan said:
Amazon just did a remake of "Road House" starring Jake Gyllenhaal. You are taking chances when you remake a cult classic, people are most likely gonna hate it (the original is a cruddy movie, let's be honest, but it has a loyal fan club). I thought it was decent enough, but the end went off the rails. Cuz that's where endings usually go. The fight scenes were pretty brutal. It being 2024, if you want a guy to be really tough, he can't just be a brawler, he's gotta be a MMA dude. So Jake was. And they went out and got Conor McGregor apparently in his film debut to play the nemesis. It's not particularly memorable, but it's okay for 2 hours of entertainment.
Expand ...
Light and entertaining...I didn't regret those 2 hours! McGregor is hilarious with his walk and glares...
 
Oiuja: Origin of Evil. 2016. Was looking for a supernatural horror movie and every list had this one high up. What? So we watched it. And yes, it was good. Quite scary at times. Well paced, not too long., set in 1969 Stars Elizabeth Reaser who is a bit of a screen queen, as the attractive mom. She's a fake psychic trying to get by after her husband was killed. Her two daughters help out. The older one (Annalise Basso) uses a Ouija Board at a party and suggests it to the mom. Then the younger daughter (a very spooky Lulu Wilson) uses it and well, seems she has some actual psychic juice. Bad things follow. Written and Directed by Mike Flanagan who did the Haunting at Hill House (some of the same cast), Midnight Mass Netflix series and Oculus movies. Naturally, he's from Salem, MA. The reviews said the original Oiuja is awful but this prequel was universally liked and I agree.
 
I finally watched Atomic Blonde, after several web critics raved about it.

I won’t waste time commenting on it, but I rather should have watched reruns of Barnaby Jones.
 
"Restore Point" is pretty interesting. Czech film I believe. Fairly low budget sci fi that isn't dependent on special effects. More of a detective story really, set in the near future. Had to pay to rent it on Prime. Human brains can be backed up like computers, so if you die you can be set to a restore point. Of course there is more going on behind the scenes with the institute that developed the tech.


edit--I see something claiming this was made for $2 mil Euro. It looks quite good given it's budget. Compare that to many Hollywood films that spend $150-$200 mil and look like junk. Bright, shiny junk, but junk all the same.
 
Last edited:
"Zero Effect" (1997). Saw it way back when, remembered absolutely nothing about it, although my recollection is that I enjoyed it. Kinda different. Bill Pullman plays a brilliant detective but very flawed human. Ben Stiller is his assistant. This is not a comedy. Ryan O'Neal is the client, Kim Dickens becomes a person of interest in the case (blackmail). It's slow, my attention lagged at times, yet there is some nuance and intrigue to it. A bit noirish. It was filmed in and around Portland, OR. I have to tell ya, I was pretty darn happy when there was a scene near the end filmed at Vista House at Crown Point, a very cool local landmark. East of Portland, a stone observatory perched on an outcrop nearly 1000 feet above the Columbia River, on the old scenic highway (pre-I-84). Don't think I've ever seen it in a movie before. Well I did see this movie more than 20 years ago probably and apparently forgot about that detail.
 
Given the time of year, I went looking for J esus C hrist Superstar. It is on Peacock. I don't love the movie because it has too many lulls and dragged out, 60's style musical songs, but Carl Anderson is simply freaking amazing as Judas. I know Anderson had a good stage career, but he is one of the more puzzling "why didn't this guy do more" actors of that generation.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Given the time of year, I went looking for J esus C hrist Superstar. It is on Peacock. I don't love the movie because it has too many lulls and dragged out, 60's style musical songs, but Carl Anderson is simply freaking amazing as Judas. I know Anderson had a good stage career, but he is one of the more puzzling "why didn't this guy do more" actors of that generation.
Expand ...

My wife loves the movie "J esus C hrist Superstar", and I enjoy it quite a bit as well. We own a DVD copy of it, and we tend to watch both it and "The Ten Commandments" around Easter time almost every year.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Given the time of year, I went looking for J esus C hrist Superstar. It is on Peacock. I don't love the movie because it has too many lulls and dragged out, 60's style musical songs, but Carl Anderson is simply freaking amazing as Judas. I know Anderson had a good stage career, but he is one of the more puzzling "why didn't this guy do more" actors of that generation.
Expand ...

Agree with you about Carl Anderson in this movie, he is terrific in this film.
 
After watching "Along Came a Spider," finally got around to "Kiss the Girls." It is pretty creepy, my memory served me correctly. Strong cast, some good performances. To me it kinda derailed when it shifted to California and never quite got back on track. End dragged out a bit too.
 
Ricky Stanicky. Typical Farrelly stuff. Crude with about half the jokes missing. Stars Zach Efron and John Cena. Three friends make up a third friend to blame things on and use an excuse (idea borrowed from Bunburry in Oscal Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest). Now adults, these morons still use Stanicky to avoid things they don't want to do. This causes trouble and they hire Cena to be Stanicky when the ploy begins to unravel. So this is where it gets funny. 90% of the good things in the movie and John Cena, the other 10% are Lex Scott Davis being very attractive as Efron's wife (he doesn't deserve her). Before his role as Stanicky, Cena sang altered cover songs with lyrics changed, and while crude, that was very funny (and well done by Cena). 2.5 stars at best.
 
The Beekeeper Formula, one super dude against the world. Jason Statham is great in these roles. Same here. Lots of fun. Different sort of bad guy. It escalates for a long time. Yes, suspension of reality is required. If you like these kid of movies -I do- you'll enjoy it. Most of the movie takes place in New England. Two and a half stars.
 
I'm not sure how that works, but sometimes hoopla gets stuff that was just in theaters (or even simultaneous releases I think), and isn't streaming on any of the major platforms. I don't usually watch horror but I decided to give "Night Shift" a try because I like Phoebe Tonkin. Short, only about an hour 20 minutes. Most of the run time was just atmospheric and creepy, trying to make you nervous but nothing actually happening. Finally kicks in about the last 20 minutes. It was okay. I like Lamorne Morris too but he wasn't on screen much. Phoebe is running from her past, moves to a new place and takes a job at a terrible, run down motel as the night shift manager.
 
Watched Poor Things last night. Spent a bit of today thinking about it and reading random reviews to see what I may have misinterpreted or missed.

I honestly don’t know what to make of it. I didn’t like the movie but I didn’t hate it. I never really liked Emma Stone’s character at any point in the movie. There were interesting parts or scenes and a lot of the movie was clearly well done but in the end? I don’t even know if i liked it or not.
 
How to Be Single (2016, on Netflix) - a by the numbers, big-cast romcom that is above average. A strong cast (Leslie Mann, Jake Lacy, Rebel Wilson, Allison Brie, Nicholas Braun) help the movie along quite a bit, although I am amazed that this movie grossed over $100 million.

Dakota Johnson is gorgeous, but has no charisma at all, so it is strange that she is an A list star. Unless the camera is right on her, you end up looking everywhere else but at her.

The movie is based on a book by Liz Tuccillo, who also wrote He's Just Not that Into You, which was also turned into a movie. Those are her only two books, and both were turned into hit movies. I wouldn't say either are that good, but she clearly hits a chord, and I am surprised she has not done anything else.
 
Dune 2. The special effects were very well done and seamlessly woven into the film. The problem with Dune 2 is we know the story so it doesn't hold many surprises. It is a top flight cast who gives underwhelming performances. It pretty much chugs along well polished with no sharp edges. A+ movie making, visuals, cinematography, editing, sound. But it adds up to less than the sum of it's parts. I was disappointed bordering on bored. Two and a half stars.
 
Palatine said:
Dune 2. The special effects were very well done and seamlessly woven into the film. The problem with Dune 2 is we know the story so it doesn't hold many surprises. It is a top flight cast who gives underwhelming performances. It pretty much chugs along well polished with no sharp edges. A+ movie making, visuals, cinematography, editing, sound. But it adds up to less than the sum of it's parts. I was disappointed bordering on bored. Two and a half stars.
Expand ...
I think that's the first lukewarm review of it I've seen. That pretty much describes exactly how I felt about the first one. I had hopes part 2 was better.
 
nwhoopfan said:
I think that's the first lukewarm review of it I've seen. That pretty much describes exactly how I felt about the first one. I had hopes part 2 was better.
Expand ...
It is, only because a bit more of the interesting part of the story happens. It's very well executed, but it doesn't deviate much from the book other than accelerating some timelines.
 
Deepster said:
Watched Poor Things last night. Spent a bit of today thinking about it and reading random reviews to see what I may have misinterpreted or missed.

I honestly don’t know what to make of it. I didn’t like the movie but I didn’t hate it. I never really liked Emma Stone’s character at any point in the movie. There were interesting parts or scenes and a lot of the movie was clearly well done but in the end? I don’t even know if i liked it or not.
Expand ...
I know what you mean, I felt similar leaving the theater. But once I realized later it was a comedy, I give it a thumbs up. I thought Defoe was hilarious, he should have gotten the Oscar nod instead of Ruffalo.
 
Waquoit said:
I know what you mean, I felt similar leaving the theater. But once I realized later it was a comedy, I give it a thumbs up. I thought Defoe was hilarious, he should have gotten the Oscar nod instead of Ruffalo.
Expand ...
I'm glad I didn't watch it in a theater. Don't know if my head would've exploded. As I mentioned in my earlier post on the movie, I had to shut it off maybe 40 minutes in as I couldn't wrap my head around everything that was going on and make sense of it... or whether I should've even been enjoying it or offended. And beyond the plot, it was incredible moviemaking - the cinematography, the sets, the colors, the effects. It was one of the more mind-blowing movies I've seen in quite some time. After I took my break and digested the part I watch, I was then able to thoroughly enjoy it. I enjoyed both DaFoe and Ruffalo.
 
"Molli and Max in the Future." Wow, now that was different. Very inventive. Splice "When Harry Met Sally" w/ Woody Allen, set it in the distant future and send it on an acid trip. That might describe it. Molli and Max meet cute, but aren't into each other, but become friends. A series of time jumps allows them to know each other for a long time. They are the classic couple who aren't a couple. All kinds of bizarre, fun stuff going on on the sideline. I really enjoyed it. Starring Zosia Mamet and Aristotle Athari (never heard of him before).
 
storrsroars said:
I'm glad I didn't watch it in a theater. Don't know if my head would've exploded. As I mentioned in my earlier post on the movie, I had to shut it off maybe 40 minutes in as I couldn't wrap my head around everything that was going on and make sense of it... or whether I should've even been enjoying it or offended. And beyond the plot, it was incredible moviemaking - the cinematography, the sets, the colors, the effects. It was one of the more mind-blowing movies I've seen in quite some time. After I took my break and digested the part I watch, I was then able to thoroughly enjoy it. I enjoyed both DaFoe and Ruffalo.
Expand ...

Agree with you and Waq. And I’ll say. I have talked about it with various folks since seeing it and for a movie to spur that conversation means it did its job for me.
 
Palatine said:
Dune 2. The special effects were very well done and seamlessly woven into the film. The problem with Dune 2 is we know the story so it doesn't hold many surprises. It is a top flight cast who gives underwhelming performances. It pretty much chugs along well polished with no sharp edges. A+ movie making, visuals, cinematography, editing, sound. But it adds up to less than the sum of it's parts. I was disappointed bordering on bored. Two and a half stars.
Expand ...
nwhoopfan said:
I think that's the first lukewarm review of it I've seen. That pretty much describes exactly how I felt about the first one. I had hopes part 2 was better.
Expand ...
I think casting is a part of the problem. Timothée Chalamet can't pull off being a charismatic leader or a lethal fighter. For me at least, I had difficulty connecting with the character enough to really care what happens to him. Similarly, though to a lesser extent, Zendaya may not have been the best choice. She looks terrific and has an "exotic" look which is perfect for the role, but she is an adequate actress. Not great, but perfectly serviceable. Rebecca Ferguson also doesn't do a great job. There should be more sense of menace/power behind a Bene Gesserit. That may be more a directing issue though. That's three major characters that are kind of "meh."

On the other hand, the movie is visually stunning and manages to tell what is a pretty complex storyline reasonably effectively. For all of the flowers I listed in the first paragraph, I enjoyed part one. Full disclosure, I haven't watched part two yet, but I definitely will and am looking forward to it, but that is partially out of fondness for the story and partially due to my appreciation of the cinematography.

For what it's worth I also think that epic novels that happen on a very grand scale often are exceptionally difficult to transfer to the big screen. The notable exception that comes to mind is Lord of the Rings which did an outstanding job with a complicated, and much beloved story. I have a few quibbles with it, like the creation of storylines so that female characters had a higher profile and the elimination of the battle in the Shire which highlights the evolution of the main characters, but overall it was incredibly well done.
 

Online statistics

Members online
232
Guests online
1,974
Total visitors
2,206
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,300
Messages
4,391,089
Members
10,199
Latest member
OLD MAN UCO


..
Top Bottom