Films you have seen at the cinema 2024

[Sue]

Good. I mean, not good for you. But I gave this a swerve on Mubi because I suspected I'd have been bored by it too.

Well everyone else seemed to like it so...could just be me!

 

[PR1Berske]

First film at the flicks was ‘Poor Things’ which I absolutely loved then loved some more for the costumes.

I went to the Odeon here to watch that this afternoon.

I managed fifteen minutes and walked straight out. Absolute nonsense. Awful.

 

[Orang Utan]

I went to the Odeon here to watch that this afternoon.

I managed fifteen minutes and walked straight out. Absolute nonsense. Awful.

A bit far-fetched innit

 

[Throbbing Angel]

A bit far-fetched innit

Oh I dunno, there are Odeons all over the place.

 

[Throbbing Angel]

The Boy and the Heron:
Enjoyable and visually beautiful, though I found a lot of the non-real world (if that makes sense) sections a bit difficult to follow. I think you basically have to give yourself up to the overall vision and experience it like someone else's dream with its own dream logic.

Fallen Leaves:
Catching up with a 2023 film...Liked this lot, especially the way the camera lingers in an unrushed, almost painterly way on each scene . Glad I didn't see this when I was depressed or I might have found the overwhelming bleakness of the life shown on screen as a bit too much: the grinding tedium and physical unpleasantness of work, the lack of any bright or cheerful colours in day to day life, the general level of poverty, the constant reminder of the invasion of Ukraine etc.

Seen these and Priscilla this month

Loved them all with Priscilla in 3rd place and Fallen Leaves and The Boy and the Heron in joint first, for me.

 

[Sue]

The End We Start From

A woman gives birth just as the whole of Britain is inundated by a great flood, starting a rambling (and brutal) adventure of survival through the post-disaster country. It's only 96 minutes long, but felt like it had been a bit longer when I came out. Normally that would be a criticism, but not in this case. It is a rich journey so it's just a surprise that so much was packed in to that running time given that nothing feels rushed. Brilliant lead performance by Jodie Cromer. It's both a very warm film and a very bleak one. That's a tricky combo to pull off. Recommended.

Just saw this. Thought it was okay in a made for TV kind of way. Good cast though including some biggish actors in v small/cameo parts.

 

[dessiato]

So far we've been to see Oppenheimer, Wonka, Barbie, Next Goal Wins, The Great Escaper. Next week we're going to see Poor Things. All thanks to Meerkat movies.

eta we've also got Amazon Prime movie cheap tickets.

 

[Flavour]

Fallen Leaves at the David Lean this afternoon.
Liked it a lot; disorientating in time, wonderfully bleak and minimalist and the film-maker clearly hates authority.

Yeah Fallen Leaves is fantastic, laugh out loud funny.

I've also seen Perfect Days which I was much less enamored with. Very twee.

 

[metalguru]

The Holdovers

This latest film from Alexander Payne with Paul Giamatti has got rave reviews, and been widely described as an "instant Christmas classic" (it's set at Christmas). Mark Kermode is also raving about this film. I found this really disappointing: a weak and predictable script, quite sentimental, and very long. I'm not sure why I'm so at odds with most of the reviewers.

 

[Maggot]

I've not seen the film but from what I've read I was under the impression that things like the kinder transport were more the exception than the rule and that certain refugees were favored over others with a spectrum of opinion among the population at large. It seems similar to today when for example refugees from Ukraine are treated quite differently to those from many other parts of the world and attitude vary also.

From Wikidepia on kindertransport:

The programme was supported, publicised, and encouraged by the British government, which waived the visa immigration requirements that were not within the ability of the British Jewish community to fulfil.[2][3] The British government placed no numerical limit on the programme; it was the start of the Second World War that brought it to an end, by which time about 10,000 kindertransport children had been brought to the country.

Very different to todays govt.

 

[CNT36]

From Wikidepia on kindertransport:



Very different to todays govt.

It apoears some programmes are still supported, publicised and encouraged even if the bureaucracy is still in place and ineptitude plays its part.

UK visa support for Ukrainian nationals

Guidance on support available to Ukrainian nationals and their family members.

www.gov.uk

Homes for Ukraine: record your interest

Record your interest in becoming a sponsor as an individual or organisation if you want to give people fleeing Ukraine a place to stay.

www.gov.uk

Rishi welcomes Ukrainian refugees

Rishi has welcomed Ukrainian families who have fled the war in their country to find sanctuary in North Yorkshire. The Richmond (Yorks) MP hosted an event in Northallerton for Ukrainian refugees – along with their hosts.

www.rishisunak.com

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pm-johnson-says-britain-will-gain-accepting-ukrainian-refugees-2022-03-09/

The kindertransports are often highlighted because they're seen as unique event. Only children were allowed and most adult applications were rejected. It was also paid for by charities and various Jewish groups with plenty in the press and on the right frothing at the mouth. I do think we're at a very hostile moment towards refugees but I'm not sure taking the odd counter example from the past illuminates much.

 

[Orang Utan]

Wonka
I expected more from the writers and the cast.
Disappointing.
Too many forgettable songs, not enough sandworms.

 

[DJWrongspeed]

First film at the flicks was ‘Poor Things’ which I absolutely loved then loved some more for the costumes.

Just saw this afternoon. It's super stylised and flamboyant and looks gorgeous. I think that works once you accept the crazy conceit at the beginning.
It is long but the last section is really important to build up to the final scene. I think Mark Ruffalo was mis-cast. It can be critical for a film to get right. They may have got him wrong, can't decide.

 

[Winot]

Just saw this afternoon. It's super stylised and flamboyant and looks gorgeous. I think that works once you accept the crazy conceit at the beginning.
It is long but the last section is really important to build up to the final scene. I think Mark Ruffalo was mis-cast. It can be critical for a film to get right. They may have got him wrong, can't decide.

I enjoyed Poor Things a lot. Surprised that more people haven't pointed out that it's standing on the shoulders of Terry Gilliam, but then so many films are.

Amazing performance from Emma Stone but also what a cameo from Kathryn Hunter!

 

[Sue]

The Holdovers. Paul Giamatti's curmudgeonly teacher looks after boys staying at their boarding school over the Christmas break. Funny, sad, with some great dialogue and excellent performances from the three leads. Also has a real 1970s feel to it.

 

[danny la rouge]

Poor Things.

Highly recommend. A very good interpretation of one thread of Gray’s complex and layered novel. This is not a criticism: any attempt to convey the full novel would be doomed to failure. But if you do watch it, be aware that the narrative presented is the one given by one character (McCandless), and is disputed by Bella/Victoria in the novel, and which she calls a male fantasy.

It was a pity that Glasgow was excised from the film, but it does convey the spirit of Gray’s work fantastically well and I hope people watch it and that it brings people to the novel and to Gray’s work in general.

 

[Elpenor]

Poor Things.

Brilliantly bonkers, genuinely funny throughout and some fantastic performances. I now want a dog-duck as a pet.

Can also report a couple of walkouts around 90 minutes in after one of the brothel scenes.

 

[danny la rouge]

I have some reservations that she seems to "plough her own course" by becoming a 'main pixie dream girl' character who

Spoiler: spoiler

dispays her agency by working in a Paris brothel

How far has this film escaped the infamous 'male gaze'?

I think it's a very enjoyable film, the performances are mostly great, the cinematography and design is fantastic - and I'd thoroughly recommend it. But I continue wonder about it after having seen it.

Please, please, please read the novel it is based on. I don’t want to spoilerify the film or the book, but the issue you raise is very much addressed in the book, and actually I disagree that the events in the film are presented in the way you characterise them [potentially] being.

 

[PR1Berske]

Never mind. Don't want to keep this going

 

[Elpenor]

Oh and I thought watching Poor Things a week after Barbie made for a few interesting comparisons

 

[Dr. Furface]

The End We Start From. Generally agree with what others have said about this eco-disaster road movie - its strong performances and pace held my attention for its 90-odd mins and it was quite thought-provoking. However as with many films or series of this kind there were some details which affected its believability, such as the unlikely abundance of cigarettes and how one character managed to wear so many different pairs of adidas pants - and I didn't really buy the scenario it was based on in the first place - but I still enjoyed it anyway.

 

[The39thStep]

.

 

[The39thStep]

The Holdovers. Paul Giamatti's curmudgeonly teacher looks after boys staying at their boarding school over the Christmas break. Funny, sad, with some great dialogue and excellent performances from the three leads. Also has a real 1970s feel to it.

Little gem of a film . I particularly liked how Giamatti’s character shared regular snippets of information about his physical health .
He’s an actor imo that can’t do any wrong

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The End We Start From. Generally agree with what others have said about this eco-disaster road movie - its strong performances and pace held my attention for its 90-odd mins and it was quite thought-provoking. However as with many films or series of this kind there were some details which affected its believability, such as the unlikely abundance of cigarettes and how one character managed to wear so many different pairs of adidas pants - and I didn't really buy the scenario it was based on in the first place - but I still enjoyed it anyway.

Yeah, I though that about the ciggies. I also wasn't totally convinced by the 'one parent only' rule of the camp. That didn't feel like a likely policy. Still enough good stuff and strong enough performances to carry it, I thought.

 

[Sue]

Yeah, I though that about the ciggies. I also wasn't totally convinced by the 'one parent only' rule of the camp. That didn't feel like a likely policy. Still enough good stuff and strong enough performances to carry it, I thought.

Spoiler

I thought that about nappies

 

[metalguru]

Please, please, please read the novel it is based on. I don’t want to spoilerify the film or the book, but the issue you raise is very much addressed in the book, and actually I disagree that the events in the film are presented in the way you characterise them [potentially] being.

I think the film has to be able to stand by itself..... I also think there's a range of ways of interpreting the events in the film and how they are portrayed, and it's interesting to see the spectrum of views collected in a Guardian article today:

‘She’s bound and gagged for laughs’: is Poor Things a feminist masterpiece – or a male sex fantasy?

 

[danny la rouge]

I think the film has to be able to stand by itself

I think it does. And I don’t think the nudity is male-gazey. It doesn’t present women’s bodies in an idealised or objectified way. Bella is not a passive object. She’s an active explorer, breaking away from men’s control and society’s control, and out of boxes, real and metaphorical. I think the film does that well.

However, I’ve been surprised how few people seem to know about Alasdair Gray’s novel. I wanted to see the film because I loved the novel. It’s slightly alarming to me that this has not been the majority experience.

The novel is about feminism, colonialism, socialism, capitalism. It isn’t an individualist fable - as I suppose the film could be read - but very much a collectivist story. Very much. And what we see in the film is the perspective of one character - Archie. The novel is structured much like Confessions of a Justified Sinner, with a version of Gray himself cast as editor of a collection of found texts with hugely differing perspectives of the “truth”. It’s my favourite of Gray’s novels.

 

[danny la rouge]

* I should say: I’m not claiming I have the definitive interpretation of the film, and of course others may feel differently. I’m just expressing how I saw it.

And in fact my one quibble, other than the omission of Glasgow, is ending where it ended. It was much more of an optimistic ending in one way, but also missing much of Bella/Victoria’s achievement in another. But like I said, you really can’t do the whole novel. You have to pick aspects. And I think the film is successful in what it picks.

 

[PR1Berske]

Poor Things is 15 minutes of a mentally ill woman being abused by professional men. It is a horrendous cavalcade of misogynist hatred and I can't believe the defence its getting from this forum.

I'm going to message editor to remove me from this forum as a result of this defence of Poor Things. How dare you defend its rampant sexist pornography.

 

[hitmouse]

I think it does. And I don’t think the nudity is male-gazey. It doesn’t present women’s bodies in an idealised or objectified way. Bella is not a passive object. She’s an active explorer, breaking away from men’s control and society’s control, and out of boxes, real and metaphorical. I think the film does that well.

However, I’ve been surprised how few people seem to know about Alasdair Gray’s novel. I wanted to see the film because I loved the novel. It’s slightly alarming to me that this has not been the majority experience.

The novel is about feminism, colonialism, socialism, capitalism. It isn’t an individualist fable - as I suppose the film could be read - but very much a collectivist story. Very much. And what we see in the film is the perspective of one character - Archie. The novel is structured much like Confessions of a Justified Sinner, with a version of Gray himself cast as editor of a collection of found texts with hugely differing perspectives of the “truth”. It’s my favourite of Gray’s novels.

I haven't seen it, and probably won't any time soon, but my interest in it was definitely increased by learning it was an Alasdair Gray adaptation, cos I've never got around to reading him either but am vaguely aware I should one day. And from my vague understanding of Gray his work does sound a bit unfilmable so what you say about them picking one aspect to film makes sense, a bit like Name of the Rose. Does this mean we'll be getting a big-budget blockbuster version of Lanark next?