Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What DVD / Video did you watch last night? (pt3)

First 3 episodes of Mr. Robot seeing as its popped up for free on our Virgin thingy. Theres enough to keep me interested, i think its pretty good so far.
 
Faults. A once successful academic expert on cult behaviour and manipulation, now a desperate and penniless has-been, is approached by an elderly couple who need his help in a last-ditch attempt to free their daughter from a religious cult, or so it seems.

Very good even though you can see what's coming. It's also good to see Leland Orser in a leading role.
 
Premium Rush.

Chase movie with Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a Noo Yawk bicycle courier, who tangles with a corrupt cop played by Michael Shannon (TV favourite Van Alden off Boardwalk Empire).

When I rented it (yes, I still rent actual physical DVDs, so fuck you all) I thought it would be a bit meh, but that it would pass the time. As it turned out, I really, really enjoyed it, and I'd recommend it to anyone.
 
Watched some late season (bearded sisko) DS9 and was suprised at the quality. I remember sisko as quite wooden but re-watching I can see that the actor is doing the character of a tightly controlled man, this shows in his odd, terce cadence while speaking

There was an episode where quark steals a klingon woman that Worf was blatantly ganting on which was both funny and reminded me why I find any episode where Worf has emotional issues hilarious.
 
Getting on with series 3 of The Americans on Amazon. Getting a bit formulaic in the 'new wig, surveillance operation, moral dilemma and near-lethal punchup of the week' way, but still full of wonderful performances and ever-deepening psychological insight into what being deep-cover operatives does to your head. Keri Russell is astonishing.

It's complete hokum, of course - despite being based on a real-life case - and there's absolutely nothing to suggest Soviet spies in the US really worked in quite this way. Understandably, too, the American scriptwriters/producers are a bit at a loss on how to write or treat the real meat of the matter i.e. how the spies, such elite products of the finest indoctrination the KGB had to offer, could live so comprehensively 'normal' American lives and not notice, or not care about, the difference between US and Soviet society. It is just not credible that they never, ever, ever broke character and spoke Russian to each other, or judged the US by Russian mores.
 
High Rise. Nice art direction and soundtrack, not much else. Halfway in the film abandons any sort of narrative or momentum and it doesn't come up with much of value instead. Snowpiercer did the whole dystopian class struggle in a contained space so much more entertainingly. Ben Wheatley's career is becoming increasingly dissappointing. Maybe he should get someone else but his wife to write his screenplays.
 
Know what you mean with the comparison with Snowpiercer, but High Rise is kind of supposed to descend into chaos. The book certainly does. There's no way to sustain an institution like that so chaos ensues.
 
Know what you mean with the comparison with Snowpiercer, but High Rise is kind of supposed to descend into chaos. The book certainly does. There's no way to sustain an institution like that so chaos ensues.
A film can still maintain a narrative thread while depicting a society which descends into chaos. I simply lost interest half way through, it just becomes a random jumble of orgies and destruction which I didn't find hugely interesting or enlightening. Cronenberg did a better job with Crash which is also thin on narrative but is carried through by its icy atmosphere.
 
Funny you should mention Cronenberg because High Rise reminded me of Shivers
Wheatley was clearly aiming for a mix of Kubrick and early Cronenberg. Jeremy Irons even looks like David Cronenberg in this and of course he starred in Cronenberg's Dead Ringers.

Shivers came out the same year High-Rise was published, not sure if it was inspired by the novel, they certainly are quite similar.

Wheatley's films are stylish, but I found both this an A Field in England rather uninvolving and dissappointing.
 
Shivers was my first thought of comparison with High Rise when I read the book - wasn't aware they both came out at more or less the same time though. Has anyone ever seen Ballard and Cronenberg at the same place and time?!

I couldn't get a handle on A Field in England either, and Sightseers was fun but kind of went nowhere, but I actually thought High Rise had a stronger narrative than either of those.
 
Shivers was my first thought of comparison with High Rise when I read the book - wasn't aware they both came out at more or less the same time though. Has anyone ever seen Ballard and Cronenberg at the same place and time?!

I couldn't get a handle on A Field in England either, and Sightseers was fun but kind of went nowhere, but I actually thought High Rise had a stronger narrative than either of those.
Kill List is the only film by Ben Wheatley I really liked, one of the best horror films of the last decade.

Ballard and Cronenberg did an interview together when Cronenberg's adaptation of Crash wound up being wildly controversial. I never understood why that film was considered so scandalous, getting banned by Westminster Council among other things. It always struck me as fairly tame even by the standards of its time. Good film though, I actually preferred it to the novel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sue
Kill List is the only film by Ben Wheatley I really liked, one of the best horror films of the last decade.

I enjoyed Down Terrace and Sightseers, have to catch up with the rest of his work, but Kill List is by far the best of the ones I've seen, some genuine chills :eek:
 
Kill List is the only film by Ben Wheatley I really liked, one of the best horror films of the last decade.

Kill List is by far his best work, but I am fond of Sightseers. Down Terrace was a good watch, but I have no desire to see it ever again. High Rise I lost after about 30 mins, I just got angry with it. Field in England I've yet to see.
 
Kill List is by far his best work, but I am fond of Sightseers. Down Terrace was a good watch, but I have no desire to see it ever again. High Rise I lost after about 30 mins, I just got angry with it. Field in England I've yet to see.
A Field in England is narratively even more frustrating than High Rise. This year's The Witch does 17th century folk horror far better than Wheatley's film.

Still chasing that Stranger Things vibe, I rewatched Poltergeist last night. Still great and what makes it work so well is that the family is so likeable, especially the mother played by JoBeth Williams. I always liked that when her kids say there are ghosts in the house, she isn't a sceptic like adults usually are in these films, she believes and trusts them, which makes her ready to fight for them when they are in danger. If you need a mom to snatch you from demons of the great beyond, she's the one. Williams is so great in the film, it's a shame she never had another memorable role. Her character was clearly the main influence on Winona Ryder's, who plays a crazier version (and to be honest, isn't quite as good in that role)
 
Kill List is the only film by Ben Wheatley I really liked, one of the best horror films of the last decade.

Well looks like everynoe's agreed Kill List is a bit of a proper film then :) Easily my favourite of Wheatley's too, very british I thought (felt like it was channelling The Wicker Man something chronic)

Ballard and Cronenberg did an interview together when Cronenberg's adaptation of Crash wound up being wildly controversial. I never understood why that film was considered so scandalous, getting banned by Westminster Council among other things. It always struck me as fairly tame even by the standards of its time. Good film though, I actually preferred it to the novel.

Never understood the furore over Crash either (but was only dimly aware of it as I hadn't really gotten serious/po-faced about cinema when it came out).

I rewatched Poltergeist last night. Still great

Hack, spit, bleurgh, etcetera! Never understood the appeal of Poltergeist, always seemed clunkily written and completely lacking in anything resembling suspense or internal self-consistency to me. Felt more like a demo reel of "ideas for student horror film" than an actual story to me. C'est la vie. Talking of horros from 1982... must watch The Thing again at some point.

Back on topic - first three episodes of Mr. Robot last night. Mildly impressed at the much-more-realistic-than-usual depiction of Hollywood Hacking (but still quite a few technical howlers) but yet to start caring that much about the characters.
 
Hack, spit, bleurgh, etcetera! Never understood the appeal of Poltergeist, always seemed clunkily written and completely lacking in anything resembling suspense or internal self-consistency to me. Felt more like a demo reel of "ideas for student horror film" than an actual story to me. C'est la vie. Talking of horros from 1982... must watch The Thing again at some point.

Back on topic - first three episodes of Mr. Robot last night. Mildly impressed at the much-more-realistic-than-usual depiction of Hollywood Hacking (but still quite a few technical howlers) but yet to start caring that much about the characters.

I can understand people not liking Poltergeist, because they generally don't like Spielberg but I disagree that it is badly written. One of the things which I really like about it is that it still has many virtues of films from the 70s, when studio genre films still put some effort into characterisation. You wouldn't get a scene now like the one where the parents smoke pot and lark around because execs would be afraid audiences will get impatient and will want to get to the action. It's a scene which is just there for us to get to know these people and it tells us so much of where they've come from, who they are now and it illustrates the shift from the 70s to the 80s.
 
Both are great (don't bother with the other two versions).
There are other versions?

I've loved both of these for many years, and have them on DVD. I saw the 50s version as a kid as part of a sci Fi series on TV, before the Sutherland one came out. I've been hooked on 50s sci Fi ever since.
 
You wouldn't get a scene now like the one where the parents smoke pot and lark around because execs would be afraid audiences will get impatient and will want to get to the action.

True (to a degree), but I don't think a bit of risk-taking willing to show people indulging in a bit o' weed and a wee chance at characterisation does much to counter the plot holes, seemingly artificial stupidity and lack of overall cohesion. That's the kind of bad writing that even good direction and production can't save... but I stray offtopic again. Doubtless there's a Hideously Overrated Films thread languishing somewhere in need of a necro-bump ;)

I plan to watch the Sutherland one on Saturday.

One of the really thoroughly excellent horror movies of the 70's IMHO. If anything I think it's better than the (awesome) original because its pessimistic themes tie in perfectly with the national mood of the time (something I felt that was muted in the original when a mandatory happy ending was added).
 
Back
Top Bottom