Square jerk surely?
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
Welcome aboard, mice!
Not crap no but not parti good either and nowhere near the best comedies of the 00s.
Shaun is pretty funny. Hot Fuzz isn't horrible. World's End is a piece of shit.
No Country For Old Man. The Coen Brothers' 2007 adaptation of the Cormac McCarthy novel. Set in Texas, the slow-burn story is about a guy (Josh Brolin) who founds a briefcase full of cash, a calm psychopath (Javier Bardem) who is looking for him, and a sheriff (Tommy Lee Jones) who is trying to figure out what's going on. (I got round to it, @The Corinthian!)
I saw this almost a decade ago and didn't like it: too slow, too dark, too pointless. I read the book last year though, and I liked that, so I tried the film again. I liked it better this time round, maybe because I could better position everything that's happening. (Although the film's not a puzzle, so not sure what wasn't working for me previously in that regard.) I still don't like the ending though. It's too flat, too little resolution, too little of anything. I know that's partly the point of the whole thing, which is about setting a mood and portraying a feeling rather than telling a story per se. But well, I guess I like my films with a clearer ending.
Other than that, this is amazing from an artistic point of view. It's kind of a minimal film. Slow, quiet, deliberate - but all in good measure. All the shots are right, and the acting is also exactly in tune with everything else. 7/10
The Incredible Jessica James. A 2017 romantic comedy featuring Jessica Williams as a young woman that is struggling to make it as a playwright and just broke up with her boyfriend, and then meets a recent divorcee (Chris O'Dowd) - although the story is really about her herself rather than the relationship they may or may not develop.
I wasn't impressed. There are some fun scenes and dialogues, but the film is not as funny as it thinks; and the main character is kinda annoying half the time, while it seems she's supposed to be really cool. It wasn't a waste of my time but I'd anyway give it 2/5.
I saw this almost a decade ago and didn't like it: too slow, too dark, too pointless. I read the book last year though, and I liked that, so I tried the film again. I liked it better this time round, maybe because I could better position everything that's happening. (Although the film's not a puzzle, so not sure what wasn't working for me previously in that regard.) I still don't like the ending though. It's too flat, too little resolution, too little of anything. I know that's partly the point of the whole thing, which is about setting a mood and portraying a feeling rather than telling a story per se. But well, I guess I like my films with a clearer ending.
Other than that, this is amazing from an artistic point of view. It's kind of a minimal film. Slow, quiet, deliberate - but all in good measure. All the shots are right, and the acting is also exactly in tune with everything else. 7/10
The Incredible Jessica James. A 2017 romantic comedy featuring Jessica Williams as a young woman that is struggling to make it as a playwright and just broke up with her boyfriend, and then meets a recent divorcee (Chris O'Dowd) - although the story is really about her herself rather than the relationship they may or may not develop.
I wasn't impressed. There are some fun scenes and dialogues, but the film is not as funny as it thinks; and the main character is kinda annoying half the time, while it seems she's supposed to be really cool. It wasn't a waste of my time but I'd anyway give it 2/5.
Yes!
I enjoyed them all but Shaun Of The Dead is of course by far the best.
I didn't get thought it the first time when it came out. I then tried again recently. I got through but wasn't hugely impressed.
Roadhouse Watched last night. Remake of a film that wasn't great to begun with, but enjoys cult status. Starts with some really shaky cgi fights which kind of tells you what to expect for the rest of the film, but I was actually enjoying it. Not sure why Jake Gyllenhall agreed to this, but he's great as usual and it was enjoyable enough. Until they introduced Conor Mcgregor. He was fecking awful and it went right off the rails when he came into it. Shame, as the setup was good.
They’re cult classics for a reason. They all of the same humour and appeal to a lot of people. I didn’t really enjoy them all that much but I can see their appeal. Hot Fuzz is awful to me. The Worlds End is worse. Shaun of the Dead was very fun though.
Paul wasn't at all good.
Yup I enjoy them all. I like the small Easter eggs between each other and Spaced. They’re all very good comedy flicks.
Agreed Paul was pretty average, way worse than the Cornetto Trilogy.
Asteroid City
Really liked it. Didn't get the best reception upon release so my expectations were low but it ticked all the usual boxes you'd expect a 2010/20s Wes Anderson flick.
Got a little confused about the whole play within a play within a movie at the beginning but it soon made sense. What a cast, too. I live for the one or two moments of pure hilarity in his movies, properly tickles my funny bone.
8/10
Really liked it. Didn't get the best reception upon release so my expectations were low but it ticked all the usual boxes you'd expect a 2010/20s Wes Anderson flick.
Got a little confused about the whole play within a play within a movie at the beginning but it soon made sense. What a cast, too. I live for the one or two moments of pure hilarity in his movies, properly tickles my funny bone.
8/10
Watch Ponyo with her. It's fantastic, and one of the first I watched with my daughter several years ago.
Thanks. Pretty sure I got the BR somewhere but not so sure I've actually ever watched it. Good call!
Too bad you didn't like it more this time around. I think it's pretty much the perfect film. The direction is sublime, Coen's build tension like no others, the choice of having no music works wonders and Bardem crafts one of the most memorable villains. I used to dislike the ending a bit as well, but with time I've come to the opinion that it fits perfectly overall with what is trying to be said here. I think overall a masterful piece of work, one of the few true classics of the past 20 or so years.
I think it was in contention, but I do think not enough people actually saw it to make it to the Academy Awards. It got a lot of nominations at the BAFTAs, but I think their process of selecting the nominees differs a lot from the Academy Awards.Glad to see another glowing review for All of us strangersIt should get a lot of love! All 4 actors were incredible in it really. I wonder whether it wasn't released a bit late for awards consideration? Because otherwise, Scott absolutely should have been nominated for best actors, and the 3 others should have received nods for supporting actor/actress.
I like your list mostly for last year
Yeah, I saw Aftersun in 2023 as well (and it came here that year) but I usually go by the year they were first released. Monster I would definitely recommend, brilliant work, and About Dry Grasses requires a lot more patience, but if you have seen and liked anything by that director before (Nuri Bilge Ceylan) I would absolutely recommend to check it out.
Paris, Texas
My first Wim Wenders' film (Perfect Days is on my list too). The first 2 hours are beautifully shot but the story didn't really captivate me. And then the last 30 minutes happened. That was something else!
There is something oddly "modern" about this 40 year old film? I would not be surprised if a lot of directors got inspired by it.
My first Wim Wenders' film (Perfect Days is on my list too). The first 2 hours are beautifully shot but the story didn't really captivate me. And then the last 30 minutes happened. That was something else!
There is something oddly "modern" about this 40 year old film? I would not be surprised if a lot of directors got inspired by it.
I watched Uncharted tonight, the 2022 action-adventure film based on the video game series (which I never played), featuring Tom Holland and Mark Wahlberg.
It's ok. The action is mostly fun, but the film kinda constantly stumbles forward without properly developing its plot - and then suddenly kicks into overdrive at the end with two huge action scenes where lots of people die violently (which didn't really happen before). It makes the whole thing a bit of weird, unbalanced experience, which cancels out some of the fun. 5/10
It's ok. The action is mostly fun, but the film kinda constantly stumbles forward without properly developing its plot - and then suddenly kicks into overdrive at the end with two huge action scenes where lots of people die violently (which didn't really happen before). It makes the whole thing a bit of weird, unbalanced experience, which cancels out some of the fun. 5/10
It’s a great film, good call.
I haven't seen it in decades but I loved it at the time.
Poor Things. Lots to like here. The acting is mostly very good, Emma Stone is great in particular, and it is an interesting concept set in a steampunk universe that works for the Frankestein vibe. It looks beatiful in all respects, the sets, the costumes and the cinematography.
So why did I only like it instead of love it? The fisheye lens thing got a bit old, but I think it was mainly that it had too little to say about feminism, and nothing about socialism which was hinted at/mentioned a couple of times but was then ignored. Given these were the main themes of the book it seems an odd scripting choice imo. This resulted in a very mediocre ending, which left me thinking "So what?". That and the run time of 2hrs 22mins was at least 30 or 40 mins too long. However, I think the worst thing was that there was an air of pretentious smugness about the whole thing. Much like his previous films. I liked it far more than The Lobster or The Killing of a Sacred Deer but for me that is a very low bar. But it was worth watching. 7/10
So why did I only like it instead of love it? The fisheye lens thing got a bit old, but I think it was mainly that it had too little to say about feminism, and nothing about socialism which was hinted at/mentioned a couple of times but was then ignored. Given these were the main themes of the book it seems an odd scripting choice imo. This resulted in a very mediocre ending, which left me thinking "So what?". That and the run time of 2hrs 22mins was at least 30 or 40 mins too long. However, I think the worst thing was that there was an air of pretentious smugness about the whole thing. Much like his previous films. I liked it far more than The Lobster or The Killing of a Sacred Deer but for me that is a very low bar. But it was worth watching. 7/10
Yes!!! Well said. I’d also add that Mark Buffalo sucked balls in it.
Watch Until The End of the World next!
The phone booth conversation is one the greatest thing ever. Completely heartbreaking.
Wim Wenders calls this his best work.
I'm about 2/3 of the way through it but am struggling to find a reason to continue.
Didn't even realise it was based on a book. I take it you've read it?
Honestly think it might be the film I’ve enjoyed over all others. I was on shrooms when I watched it, to be fair. I’ve never rewatched it as I don’t want to spoil the magic! I think about them staring into those dream recorders every time I’m on a bus or train full of people on their smartphones. So prescient.
Nope but numerous articles about the original book have been written recently which is where my expectation and disappointment comes from.
Although I think I will read the book now. It sounds very good.
2 articles I can find but not the one I was looking for that examined the book plot and themes in more details.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...ece-male-sex-fantasy-oscar-emma-stone-ruffalo
https://www.theguardian.com/film/20...as-cut-from-the-oscar-tipped-film-poor-things
Last edited:
I like him in general but he was scripted and directed poorly.
Thanks, I'll have a nosey.
I just looked into that as I also loved Paris, Texas. I see the director's cut (supposedly the superior version) is almost double the length of the theatrical version, and five hours long!
Fair to say that time lost most of its meaning when I watched it.
I'd hazard a guess that a 5 hour film is very hard work.
Love Wim Wenders.
Wings of Desire is great as well.
For his documentaries, Buena Vista Social Club is quite good. Great soundtrack.
Anyone seen any Fassbinder films? Veronika Voss and Ali: Fear Eats the Soul are the best ones I've seen from him.
Also World on a Wire is a great sci-fi one too.
Woman in the Maze
A young woman rents a cursed house, forcing her to solve the mystery to find a way out.
Daft film, with bad acting and a dreadful ending, with is a shame because the actual story is OK and it should've been so much better.
Budget was $5m , spent on what god only knows only took $11,672 worldwide, pretty much sums it up
3/10
A young woman rents a cursed house, forcing her to solve the mystery to find a way out.
Daft film, with bad acting and a dreadful ending, with is a shame because the actual story is OK and it should've been so much better.
Budget was $5m , spent on what god only knows only took $11,672 worldwide, pretty much sums it up
3/10
I read the book a few weeks back and it’s part novel/diary/map of Glasgow. It’s good. But there’s not that much socialist or feminist stuff. The book is not told from Bella perspective. The sex work is barely mentioned(And it isn’t pro sex work like the film)and the old lady character on the boat isn’t in the book but instead there’s a English racist/imperialist man. I could be wrong but I think there’s more women characters in the film than the book.
It’s worth reading and it’s got me into Alasdair Grey other work but overall I preferred the structure of the film over the book.
I seen a few people mention the 90’s horror/comedy film Frankenhooker is genuinely the best version of this story.
Nice that must have been some experience. There’s a few films I’m like that with. The experience was so good the first time I almost worried about a rewatch ruining it.
I recently watched another Wenders film called
The American Friend which was incredible but also pretty bleak. Imo Him and Veroheven make the best films about America.
Last edited:
We live in interesting times. Never thought I'd see the day when Frankenhooker was talked about reverently, yet here we are. Not disagreeing with your idea that it's the best version, just feels like I'm in an alternate universe where people not only know this movie exists, but also like it.
I’m glad you watched it a second time round and enjoyed it more but I agree with pretty much everything CoopersDream has said here. It’s a rare 10/10 movie for me - and a pretty perfect adaption of the book (not saying it’s a faithful adaption but a perfect adaptation from book to screen).
What you have to remember with this movie is that our protagonist is Tommy Lee Jones’ character, so the bleakness and emptiness of the situation comes from his framing of the story. He’s not saving the day and killing the bad guy. He’s retiring because he doesn’t understand the world and society he’s been a sheriff for all of this time. In fact he’s fearful of this world now and he doesn’t recognise it (that scene where he enters the motel room and he imagines Javier Bardem hiding behind a cupboard with a gun for example). The other element to consider is the lack of control from all three central characters - no one gets what they want in the end. Bardem doesn’t kill Brolin or recover the cash, Lee Jones doesn’t save Brolin, and Brolin doesn’t survive. Bardem tries to force his own warped form of order and control on the world but even he is left walking into the sunset half broken due to a car crash which happens out of the blue.
Anywho, can I recommend you read Blood Meridian next @Cheimoon
it’s the same author as No Country for Old Men.Roadhouse was decently entertaining right up to the point at which Conor entered the movie, then it became a cartoon. What the hell were they thinking? I usually avoid any film that makes these stupid casting choices, but I liked the original and I like Gylenhaal so I thought I'd give it a go. I wish I hadn't.