What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

Kind of the old jungle adventure movies by way of mondo, not a cannibal film as some say.

Eh, I feel like it could go either way.

There was only one, brief sequence of cannibalism, and it wasn't as central to the story as say, Cannibal Ferox or Cannibal Holocaust.

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

Kind of the old jungle adventure movies by way of mondo, not a cannibal film as some say.

Eh, I feel like it could go either way.

There was only one, brief sequence of cannibalism, and it wasn't as central to the story as say, Cannibal Ferox or Cannibal Holocaust.

But it also lacks the...framed narrative, I guess you would call it, of a mondo film. It lacks the documentation aspect.

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

Kind of the old jungle adventure movies by way of mondo, not a cannibal film as some say.

Eh, I feel like it could go either way.

There was only one, brief sequence of cannibalism, and it wasn't as central to the story as say, Cannibal Ferox or Cannibal Holocaust.

But it also lacks the...framed narrative, I guess you would call it, of a mondo film. It lacks the documentation aspect.

Absolutely, I only meant to compare it to mondo as a stylistic choice. The camera angles, cuts, and even title font evoke Mondo Cane, as does the European in an exotic locale. Even Ivan Rassimov looks kind of like Gualtiero Jacopetti. The plot, however, is pure 30s jungle adventure movie.

Halloween. Saw it for the first time (lame!) and liked it. Never found it scary, but at least a couple of scenes were effective and chilling.

Peeping Tom. All I can say is, if you haven't seen it, go out and watch it. This is a great movie.

Yesterday say X-Men First Class. It was better than the last two....

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

The Dude wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

Kind of the old jungle adventure movies by way of mondo, not a cannibal film as some say.

Eh, I feel like it could go either way.

There was only one, brief sequence of cannibalism, and it wasn't as central to the story as say, Cannibal Ferox or Cannibal Holocaust.

But it also lacks the...framed narrative, I guess you would call it, of a mondo film. It lacks the documentation aspect.

Absolutely, I only meant to compare it to mondo as a stylistic choice. The camera angles, cuts, and even title font evoke Mondo Cane, as does the European in an exotic locale. Even Ivan Rassimov looks kind of like Gualtiero Jacopetti. The plot, however, is pure 30s jungle adventure movie.

I just felt that stylistically, mondo and cannibal films were always fairly similar, the obvious namesake differences aside. Since Man From Deep River isn't really a cannibal film, and isn't really a mondo film, but has elements that the two styles share in common, I felt it could go either way.

Anyways, I had a double feature last night; I caught The Thing from Another World and It! The Terror from Beyond Space on TV. TCM should make these Thursday Night Drive Marathons a year-round thing, istead just a summer special.

Dune - I love this movie. Maybe not so much after the third time, but it's still pretty awesome.

Man on the Moon - Andy Kaufman was a pretty cool guy, so I saw this to learn more about him. It's a great, funny movie too, although it starts to lose steam during the second act.

Badlands - Brad would not be proud, but I thought this was a pretty good movie. It really bugged me, though, that the characters were hard to relate to. Either way, it was beautifully shot, and had a pretty rad car chase.

Tommy Wiseau wrote:

Dune - I love this movie. Maybe not so much after the third time, but it's still pretty awesome.

Man on the Moon - Andy Kaufman was a pretty cool guy, so I saw this to learn more about him. It's a great, funny movie too, although it starts to lose steam during the second act.

Badlands - Brad would not be proud, but I thought this was a pretty good movie. It really bugged me, though, that the characters were hard to relate to. Either way, it was beautifully shot, and had a pretty rad car chase.

I've been meaning to see Man on the Moon for a while now, being a huge Andy Kaufman fan. Did you know Tony Clifton is doing tours?

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

I've been meaning to see Man on the Moon for a while now, being a huge Andy Kaufman fan. Did you know Tony Clifton is doing tours?

That's pretty neat. It probably wouldn't be as interesting as it would if Kaufman/Zmuda were playing him, unfortunately.

Tommy Wiseau wrote:

Mondo a Go-Go wrote:

I've been meaning to see Man on the Moon for a while now, being a huge Andy Kaufman fan. Did you know Tony Clifton is doing tours?

That's pretty neat. It probably wouldn't be as interesting as it would if Kaufman/Zmuda were playing him, unfortunately.

Rumor has it it's Zmuda.

Reservoir Dogs and El Mariachi.

Rewatched The Shining. I'm not sure why, but I wasn't a huge fan of it the first time around, perhaps because of Shelley Duvall and the kid who played Danny. This time, though, I loved it, and I even really appreciated Duvall's performance. Danny still gets on my nerves.

Days of Heaven - Again, Brad would not approve, but this movie was quite excellent. Even if it has a couple of faults (shoddy editing, especially), it was a beautiful film and really involved me.

The Omen (1976) - Pretty good horror movie, but mostly for the atmosphere and Gregory Peck's performance. With the exception of the balcony scene, the horror scenes tended to be sort of silly, though.

True Grit, the new one. It was ok. Cannot understand why it gained so much praise amongst so many people, but then again, I never can.

Evil Dead II, which I watched for the first time. Hahahaha! It gave me everything I expected. The time travel ending was not half bad either.

Tron, the old one. No idea why I like this film. Its just a very average story with flashy stuff... but, its cool, in a retro way.

Star Trek, the newest film of the tepid franchise. Meh. It worked for what it was. I'm not liking the thing modern movies do with their protagonists in how they are always around twenty years old. Its so demeaning and far fetched, even to a relatively young person like myself. Youth based culture... bleh! I'll take Bogart-Noir or Biblical Heston over these wimpy douchenozzles anyday.

28 Weeks Later - yawned my way through this one.

Phantasm. A film before my time period, and yet something I've been meaning to see for about 10 years. Good stuff.

The Thing. Yeah, almost forgot to add this one. What isn't there to like about these simple, grimy and effective pre-90s movies?

Horrible Bosses - Decent comedy, nothing spectacular or really memorable, except Colin Farrell who is by far the funniest part of the film, yet sadly is only in about three scenes.

Indiana Groans wrote:

True Grit, the new one. It was ok. Cannot understand why it gained so much praise amongst so many people, but then again, I never can.

Loved this one. Leaps and bounds ahead of the original version.

True Grit, the new one. It was ok. Cannot understand why it gained so much praise amongst so many people, but then again, I never can.


Couldn't agree more. The original will always be a fav of mine and this just felt like an OK redux. Beautiful cinematography, and some fine performances. But it's just not different enough to be it's own thing. It's luke warm water when you really wanted a hot bath. Long live the John Wayne version.


Evil Dead II, which I watched for the first time. Hahahaha! It gave me everything I expected. The time travel ending was not half bad either.


What can I add? It's a movie that simply could not be remade as it is perfect already.



Tron, the old one. No idea why I like this film. Its just a very average story with flashy stuff... but, its cool, in a retro way.


Just love it. Nothing more, nothing less.



Star Trek, the newest film of the tepid franchise. Meh. It worked for what it was. I'm not liking the thing modern movies do with their protagonists in how they are always around twenty years old. Its so demeaning and far fetched, even to a relatively young person like myself. Youth based culture... bleh! I'll take Bogart-Noir or Biblical Heston over these wimpy douchenozzles anyday.


I beginning to believe you and I may think alike. What bothered me most though was the friggin' shaky cam. You just do not need a shaky cam for a Star Trek movie. Period.



Phantasm. A film before my time period, and yet something I've been meaning to see for about 10 years. Good stuff.



Still one of the few "horror films" that holds me transfixed from beginning to end.



The Thing. Yeah, almost forgot to add this one. What isn't there to like about these simple, grimy and effective pre-90s movies?



Now this is what the True Grit remake should have aspired to. A remake with a purpose. Seriously, they just don't come any better than this.


Thanks for sharing Indiana.

Thanks, no problem. I didn't consider Star Trek to be a Trek film to begin with, just a pretty blockbuster with the Trek brand strapped onto it. No wonder it was full of today's camera and flare gimmicks.

The Dude wrote:

Loved this one. Leaps and bounds ahead of the original version.

While I've not seen the original, I genuinely liked True Grit's style and the performances were, I think, top notch. But personally I couldn't connected with anything more in it. Even so, the fact that it is a true western instead of another weak, disheartened and overly remorseful modern film dressed up in a cowboy hat and spurs is something to be appreciated.


Phantasm II. Entertaining and most watchable in that laid back early-mid 80s style - 2000-era films of a similar ilk feel so cynical in comparison. As expected, it is missing that eerie, exploratory quality of the original.

Pirates of the Caribbean 4. Like a water balloon covered in oil, there is nothing to grasp or hold onto whatsoever. Each time I try to express what this non-entity was I feel like the Men In Black have erased a portion of my mind where I should be remembering this movie. Where did it go? What happened? And do I care?

Midnight in Paris. It was funny, though most of my love for it came from the cameos. Ignore the awful trailer and see the movie, especially if you like the 1920s.

I watched The Hurt Locker finally, and...I just don't get it. I mean, it was decent, but no way anywhere past like, 2.5/4 stars.

I just don't get what was so great. It literally had almost nothing going on, and what was going on was pretty unrealistic considering that even a basic knowledge of how the military works would totally destroy any suspension of disbelief I had for this.

I'm still pretty certain Black Dynamite was the best film of '09 really.

I just saw Horrible Bosses, not bad. What made it was the bosses. I'll just say it, I think she's overrated, but Jennifer Aniston was REALLY FUCKING HOT, in this movie.

Kevin Spacey put on a great preformence and like Brad, I wanted to see more of Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx in it.

2010: Moby Dick. It was actually pretty boring except for the occasional good line by Barry Bostwick. I also watched Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. I kind of like John C. Reily, and I really liked the music, but wow was that an unfunny movie, except for one or two parts (the Bob Dylan part in particular was pretty funny).

As much as I wanted to hate it for some reason (mostly due to what I consider misrepresentation by the horrible marketing) I actually kinda liked Thor. It wasn't perfect but it was at least watchable...I just wish I knew, however, why most current Marvel movies have been skimping on the fucking ACTION. All I want is a great action flick every once in a while with a Marvel license, but when they make one (Punisher: War Zone comes to mind) it just gets totally ignored for being an action flick instead of just some deeeeepppppp origin story like BOTH Iron Man flicks.

I still don't know how Iron Man 2 managed to have LESS action with a bigger budget.

Brakywaki wrote:

I still don't know how Iron Man 2 managed to have LESS action with a bigger budget.

Just looked on imdb. I was shocked by the 140M budget for the first film. The second nearly blew my ass off - two hundred million?! Thats god damn disgusting. Yes, I am completely out of touch with modern films in that respect, but stuff from my youth like Aliens had 19M, Robocop 14M, or Commando 10M. Dang.


Sunshine. It was most worthy... until the last half an hour or so at which point it became another monster in a station film, as it ran toward the end of the plot without any of that godly atmosphere it was trying to communicate throughout the rest of it. Massive letdown. Ah, there were glimpses of a truly brilliant film in this when it detached itself from the pretense of story to use the Sun, Space, and journey therein to highlight with awe this reverent introspection into... Man? The Universe? There were many times in its devoid melancholy I could almost reach out and touch a fundamental truth or somesuch.

Holy shit, Hobo With a Shotgun was badass. I move my original notion of Drive Angry for best picture 2011 to Hobo With a Shotgun. They make a hell of a double feature though.