What Films Have You Seen Recently?

[SilverSurfer]

Originally Posted by Rik

Was talking to my brother-in-law about this earlier, he was saying that he wants to get it on blu ray because his dvd copy looks crap now, so I said to get the Arrow one, looks fantastic

There was a reissue DVD (Universal) that was much better than the old one.

[Rik]

Originally Posted by SilverSurfer

There was a reissue DVD (Universal) that was much better than the old one.

That’s the one he has, which he says looks crap

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Frankie Teardrop

MOTHER! – To some extent dissed on its release, ‘Mother!’ comes across like a mash-up of Bunuellian home invasion and Polanskian sinister pregnancy before blowing its wad on a free-form apocalypse under a single roof and becoming a metaphor for the world situation. Or something. I really liked it – when is mainstream cinema this daring? Not very often. Arguably, the first hour is stronger, with Ed Harris and Michelle Pfieffer bringing simmering dynamics and bad vibes into J Lawrence’s fragile household, although the mad idea of having a societal melt-down take place in someone’s kitchen takes some beating, as do some surprisingly brutal scenes involving the fate of Lawrence’s young one. Definitely a recommend.

I watched this last night and spent the first hour wondering what the **** was going on, and coincidentally the names Buñuel and Polanski were in my mind as possible influences for Aronofsky. As the third act unfolded and things gradually slotted into place, I became increasingly impressed with what I was watching – Lawrence was mesmerising throughout – but the final scene was one of those 'I want to watch this again very soon' moments, and I'll do so this evening.

It's strange that I was almost expecting the worst because of its 'Razzie' nominations, but at no point did it feel like a film with poor construction, performances or aspects which should be condemned. It's confounding, beguiling and absolutely compelling.

[SilverSurfer]

Originally Posted by Rik

That’s the one he has, which he says looks crap

Must be viewing it on a crap tv or something as it looks fine to me.


The reissue dvd


The original was pretty good

[Rik]

Originally Posted by SilverSurfer

Must be viewing it on a crap tv or something as it looks fine to me.

They’ve got a brand new 47” 4K TV

[SilverSurfer]

Regarding The Thing (1982)

Please note that the Blu-rays have had some deletions to content in the audio commentary track available on previous Laserdisc and DVD releases.

[Rik]

I’m not bothered when the picture looks as good as it does, I’ve listened to the Carpenter/Russell commentary enough times now to not bother again anyway

[SilverSurfer]

For many uncut and a good picture is the way to go.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Going back to mother!, I love the essay Martin Scorsese wrote for The Hollywood Reporter about the immediate negative reviews and his experience of the film ("experience" is probably a good word because that's exactly what it is) and this passage in particular:

"Before I actually saw mother!, I was extremely disturbed by all of the severe judgments of it. Many people seemed to want to define the film, box it in, find it wanting and condemn it. And many seemed to take joy in the fact that it received an F grade from Cinemascore. This actually became a news story — mother! had been "slapped" with the "dreaded" Cinemascore F rating, a terrible distinction that it shares with pictures directed by Robert Altman, Jane Campion, William Friedkin and Steven Soderbergh.

After I had a chance to see mother!, I was even more disturbed by this rush to judgment, and that's why I wanted to share my thoughts. People seemed to be out for blood, simply because the film couldn't be easily defined or interpreted or reduced to a two-word description. Is it a horror movie, or a dark comedy, or a biblical allegory, or a cautionary fable about moral and environmental devastation? Maybe a little of all of the above, but certainly not just any one of those neat categories.

Is it a picture that has to be explained? What about the experience of watching mother!? It was so tactile, so beautifully staged and acted — the subjective camera and the POV reverse angles, always in motion … the sound design, which comes at the viewer from around corners and leads you deeper and deeper into the nightmare … the unfolding of the story, which very gradually becomes more and more upsetting as the film goes forward. The horror, the dark comedy, the biblical elements, the cautionary fable — they're all there, but they're elements in the total experience, which engulfs the characters and the viewers along with them. Only a true, passionate filmmaker could have made this picture, which I'm still experiencing weeks after I saw it."

I encourage you to read the entire article, whether or not you've seen the film – it's a thought-provoking critique on the modern move for reviews that will fit into a tweet or simple soundbite, and whether or not this instant judgement is, or indeed a new phenomenon.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...column-1047286

[keirarts]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

Going back to mother!, I love the essay Martin Scorsese wrote for The Hollywood Reporter about the immediate negative reviews and his experience of the film ("experience" is probably a good word because that's exactly what it is) and this passage in particular:

"Before I actually saw mother!, I was extremely disturbed by all of the severe judgments of it. Many people seemed to want to define the film, box it in, find it wanting and condemn it. And many seemed to take joy in the fact that it received an F grade from Cinemascore. This actually became a news story — mother! had been "slapped" with the "dreaded" Cinemascore F rating, a terrible distinction that it shares with pictures directed by Robert Altman, Jane Campion, William Friedkin and Steven Soderbergh.

After I had a chance to see mother!, I was even more disturbed by this rush to judgment, and that's why I wanted to share my thoughts. People seemed to be out for blood, simply because the film couldn't be easily defined or interpreted or reduced to a two-word description. Is it a horror movie, or a dark comedy, or a biblical allegory, or a cautionary fable about moral and environmental devastation? Maybe a little of all of the above, but certainly not just any one of those neat categories.

Is it a picture that has to be explained? What about the experience of watching mother!? It was so tactile, so beautifully staged and acted — the subjective camera and the POV reverse angles, always in motion … the sound design, which comes at the viewer from around corners and leads you deeper and deeper into the nightmare … the unfolding of the story, which very gradually becomes more and more upsetting as the film goes forward. The horror, the dark comedy, the biblical elements, the cautionary fable — they're all there, but they're elements in the total experience, which engulfs the characters and the viewers along with them. Only a true, passionate filmmaker could have made this picture, which I'm still experiencing weeks after I saw it."

I encourage you to read the entire article, whether or not you've seen the film – it's a thought-provoking critique on the modern move for reviews that will fit into a tweet or simple soundbite, and whether or not this instant judgement is, or indeed a new phenomenon.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...column-1047286

I raved about mother! After seeing it at the cinema. I still think it's possibly the best film of 2017. Scorsese is absolutely bang on in his assessment of the film.