Movie Thread

Page 43 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Thought Pacino was outstanding in the first two Godfather movies but he made a lot of good movies. Scarecrow, Sea of Love, Dog Day Afternoon, Serpico, Glengarry Glen Ross, The Insider, City Hall and so on. He was good in all of those movies especially the first six. I didn't care much for Scent of A Woman and I thought Scarface was overrated. His peak years were probably the 70s and 80s just like his contemporary Robert De Niro.
 
Papillon: not too bad, a good way to pass two hours. I like movies that are based on true stories.

I haven't seen the '70s film based on the same guy (his memior).
Not that you intended it as a suggestion, but being I had never seen it before I had just watched the original Papillon from 1973, because, well, what else is there to do during lockdown? Believe it or not it's even slightly longer than the newer version...

The 70s film was good. Hoffman and Steve McQueen were on form.. The so called memoir according to some former prisoners was more like fiction but the book was a good read as well, true or not !
I haven't read the book or seen the newer version, so can't make comparisons, but with the older version I'm not sure what I was watching at times. The beginning was very gritty like Escape From Alcatraz and perhaps a bit of The Deer Hunter, and then midway it somehow turned into South Pacific. And the very ending reminded me of Seinfeld where Papillon was like Kramer where Kramer had just invited himself over to Seinfeld's place and borrowed (or took) one thing or another from Hoffman's character...

Having said that the movie was quite an adventure where (thankfully) it never got too dark, I think 2.5 hours of pure darkness would be a little too much of an emotional investment to make. So yeah, I think it's worth a looky, I really liked the very, very ending
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Not that you intended it as a suggestion, but being I had never seen it before I had just watched the original Papillon from 1973, because, well, what else is there to do during lockdown? Believe it or not it's even slightly longer than the newer version...


I haven't read the book or seen the newer version, so can't make comparisons, but with the older version I'm not sure what I was watching at times. The beginning was very gritty like Escape From Alcatraz and perhaps a bit of The Deer Hunter, and then midway it somehow turned into South Pacific. And the very ending reminded me of Seinfeld where Papillon was like Kramer where Kramer had just invited himself over to Seinfeld's place and borrowed (or took) one thing or another from Hoffman's character...

Having said that the movie was quite an adventure where (thankfully) it never got too dark, I think 2.5 hours of pure darkness would be a little too much of an emotional investment to make. So yeah, I think it's worth a looky, I really liked the very, very ending
I liked the interplay between Hoffman's timid character and McQueen's more rebellious one. Yes no doubt it was an odd movie and a long one and the book was much grimmer. The ending was nicely done and if anything that was probably more mythic than the rest of it !
 
I liked the interplay between Hoffman's timid character and McQueen's more rebellious one. Yes no doubt it was an odd movie and a long one and the book was much grimmer. The ending was nicely done and if anything that was probably more mythic than the rest of it !
I think it was the ultimate buddy movie. While McQueen was living out his South Pacific fantasy I kept wondering what had happened to Hoffman's character. I'm glad they were reunited toward the end.

I'm just now reading up on the making of the movie (Hoffman was apparently very irked he got paid less than McQueen, but they still managed to act professional on set), and the source material - there do seem to be many embellishments in the original book. In a movie embellishments are sometimes necessary, but the author of the book had seemingly taken many liberties with the truth as well.

It's still very interesting though, both the movie and the factoids about the author. It's a good way to kill some time on a Sunday afternoon.
 
For those interested here's a bit more on Henri "Papillon" Charrière...

I watched several documentaries yesterday about his alleged prison break and about the French penal colonies in French Guiana, this one is a little more modern and fast-paced. But, I thought it was fairly well-balanced being it tells Charrière's story as well as those who doubt his accounts.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfMkCW3vZDE


And this one is a little more somber in tone, but it mentions the artist Francis La Grange, whom I've never heard of before. I thought his penal colony paintings were just stunning, but being he was imprisoned for art forgery one can only hope they were truly his own originals. :tearsofjoy:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qy3_hTgjGiI


Not sure this facebook link will work, but it's the only place I could find a whole collection of La Grange's paintings.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.977431988934395&type=3
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: movingtarget
Watched Mimic (1997) a horror film from Guillermo del Toro. Good example of a big budget movie resulting in a B grade product. The film looked good but if you can't set a horror movie in a subway and make the visuals look good, I don't think you are trying ! There were nods to Alien and The Fly but the story was predictable and some of the acting was a bit hit and miss. One of those don't mess with mother nature movies. Pretty forgettable but better than watching politicians drone on about the Coronavirus or the economy !
 
Citizen Kane (1941) - So, I found a stream that came from a, um, questionable source, and it didn't have close captioning, which I dearly missed. And I fell asleep about 30 minutes into the movie and woke up for the last 10 minutes... that's not say I found the movie a total bore, I was probably just tired.

From what I did see I thought the whole Rosebud thing was fairly clear, and clearly Kane was what nowadays one would call a hoarder. (I chuckled when they found an old jigsaw puzzle among his possessions, I have a few of those myself.)

Anyway, the cinematography was nice, and I will probably revisit this movie again some time when I'm feeling a little more perky. For now I can at least say I've partly seen Citizen Kane.
 
Citizen Kane (1941) - So, I found a stream that came from a, um, questionable source, and it didn't have close captioning, which I dearly missed. And I fell asleep about 30 minutes into the movie and woke up for the last 10 minutes... that's not say I found the movie a total bore, I was probably just tired.

From what I did see I thought the whole Rosebud thing was fairly clear, and clearly Kane was what nowadays one would call a hoarder. (I chuckled when they found an old jigsaw puzzle among his possessions, I have a few of those myself.)

Anyway, the cinematography was nice, and I will probably revisit this movie again some time when I'm feeling a little more perky. For now I can at least say I've partly seen Citizen Kane.
I liked Citizen Kane and it was revolutionary when it was released but I'm always surprised to see it included in the top five or 10 movies of all time, the lists that critics like to put together now and then. Some of his other movies were butchered by the studios when he would go over budget etc....which was why people never trusted him with big budget movies later in his career. He always had trouble with financing his movies and he was considered a maverick and didn't like to collaborate. His acting and writing was underrated and never gets the kudos his directing received. Keep in mind that he was often writing, acting, producing and directing many of his movies. Think of the pressure ! Something that usually only happens in low budget movies these days. The studio gave him total control over Citizen Kane which was unheard of for a young director's first time Hollywood movie but many of his movies were not financial successes.
 
Watched House on Haunted Hill (1999) which was okay at best. Then I tried to watch Return To House On Haunted Hill which was a mistake. Made use of the fast forward button. I surprised my self by not falling asleep. The original Vincent Price version wasn't that good either. I watched it last year and it's not one of his better movies.
 
I liked Citizen Kane and it was revolutionary when it was released but I'm always surprised to see it included in the top five or 10 movies of all time, the lists that critics like to put together now and then. Some of his other movies were butchered by the studios when he would go over budget etc....which was why people never trusted him with big budget movies later in his career. He always had trouble with financing his movies and he was considered a maverick and didn't like to collaborate. His acting and writing was underrated and never gets the kudos his directing received. Keep in mind that he was often writing, acting, producing and directing many of his movies. Think of the pressure ! Something that usually only happens in low budget movies these days. The studio gave him total control over Citizen Kane which was unheard of for a young director's first time Hollywood movie but many of his movies were not financial successes.
Yes, Citizen Kane is consistently ranked as the top movie ever made in the US, wonder how the rest of the world feels about that. I mean, innovative filmmakers certainly came from other countries as well. Speaking of other countries...

I watched Eastern Promises (2007) again yesterday, I didn't even realize it was one of Cronenberg's films. But, it is such a good crime movie, this time we are visiting with the Russian mafia in London.

Viggo Mortensen had immersed himself in the Russian culture and language, and he did extensive research on Russian prison tattoos. So his temporary prison tattoos were all accurate, and I didn't even notice this, but he also sports a real tattoo written in Elvish language. Evidently the entire cast of The Lord of the Rings had gotten it, I think that's pretty funny

Some parts were pretty rough, and who can forget the infamous bathhouse scene where we get more than an eyeful of Mortensen? Unfortunately the scene was so brutal that one could not even enjoy seeing Viggo's manly assets.

Anyhoo, the cast is stellar (in addition to Mortensen we also have Vincent Cassel and Armin Mueller-Stahl), I think this is one of the better mob movies. So I would definitely recommend it.
 
Last edited:
Watched House on Haunted Hill (1999) which was okay at best. Then I tried to watch Return To House On Haunted Hill which was a mistake. Made use of the fast forward button. I surprised my self by not falling asleep. The original Vincent Price version wasn't that good either. I watched it last year and it's not one of his better movies.
I'll have to check out the new one, think I saw the Vincent Price one not too long ago and had even posted about it. But being I go through so many movies I can't even be sure I've already seen it.
 
I watched Eastern Promises (2007) again yesterday, I didn't even realize it was one of Cronenberg's films. But, it is such a good crime movie, this time we are visiting with the Russian mafia in London.

I remember watching Eastern Promises in cinema and loving it. Although it's brutal, it had a huge effect on me and I found the brutality, physical and psychological, authentic and real. Then one day I watched it again and was very disappointed - still a good movie, but in a way I found the story cheap, going for effects, and unnecessarily brutal. That second time now lies years in the past, too. I wonder what I would think about it if I watched it a third time.
 
I remember watching Eastern Promises in cinema and loving it. Although it's brutal, it had a huge effect on me and I found the brutality, physical and psychological, authentic and real. Then one day I watched it again and was very disappointed - still a good movie, but in a way I found the story cheap, going for effects, and unnecessarily brutal. That second time now lies years in the past, too. I wonder what I would think about it if I watched it a third time.
Frankly I didn't care for the baby angle cause things can get very cutesy with the baby stuff, but I was glad there at least wasn't some forced romance between Mortensen and Naomi Watts' character. It's so transparent when they manufacture some love angle that doesn't really need to be there, if I wanted to see love and romance I would just watch some chick flick.
 
Yes, Citizen Kane is consistently ranked as the top movie ever made in the US, wonder how the rest of the world feels about that. I mean, innovative filmmakers certainly came from other countries as well. Speaking of other countries...

I watched Eastern Promises (2007) again yesterday, I didn't even realize it was one of Cronenberg's films. But, it is such a good crime movie, this time we are visiting with the Russian mafia in London.

Viggo Mortensen had immersed himself in the Russian culture and language, and he did extensive research on Russian prison tattoos. So his temporary prison tattoos were all accurate, and I didn't even notice this, but he also sports a real tattoo written in Elvish language. Evidently the entire cast of The Lord of the Rings had gotten it, I think that's pretty funny

Some parts were pretty rough, and who can forget the infamous bathhouse scene where we get more than an eyeful of Mortensen? Unfortunately the scene was so brutal that one could not even enjoy seeing Viggo's manly assets.

Anyhoo, the cast is stellar (in addition to Mortensen we also have Vincent Cassel and Armin Mueller-Stahl), I think this is one of the better mob movies. So I would definitely recommend it.
I like Cronenberg movies but haven't seen that one yet. Cronenberg also directed Mortensen in A History of Violence which I thought was quite good. Some of Cronenberg's cult movies from his early years are worth checking out. Low budget , bizarre but interesting. Scanners was probably the movie that put him on the map and led to Hollywood interest. It became a big VHS hit in the 80s which led him onto later projects such as making Stephen King's book The Dead Zone which I always thought was one of the better Stephen King adaptations with a nice performance by Christopher Walken.
 
Watched The Pianist (2002). The Roman Polanski movie about the Holocaust and life in the Warsaw Ghetto. Amazing story, the book is also worth reading. Polanski himself was in Warsaw as a child during the German occupation so it's a subject he knows well. One of the best Holocaust movies i have seen.
 
Watched Pandorum (2009) a B grade sci fi/horror movie. Lots of shouting and running around dark corridors as well fight scenes with pasty faced critters. Some of the visuals were nice but I couldn't stop hitting the fast forward button. Dennis Quaid must have needed some cash ! Forgettable.
 
Watched The Pianist (2002). The Roman Polanski movie about the Holocaust and life in the Warsaw Ghetto. Amazing story, the book is also worth reading. Polanski himself was in Warsaw as a child during the German occupation so it's a subject he knows well. One of the best Holocaust movies i have seen.
I saw this a long time ago, I remember there was a big stink about Polanski getting nominated for an Oscar for The Pianist because of his criminal past and ongoing extradition requests to the US. As a person I find him repulsive, but as a filmmaker he's quite good.

I think The Pianist is quality, and my fave movie of his is The Fearless Vampire Killers (1967). The cinematography in the latter is just charming.
 

Latest posts