The Movies Thread!

[SnowAngel]

I've watched three movies lately that are based on true events: Hidden Figures, Dunkirk, and The Darkest Hour.
My favorite of the three was The Darkest Hour, hands down. I don't know how accurate it was to real life events, but it felt the least fake. Both Dunkirk and Hidden Figures suffered from trying to cram all the bad things that happened at that point in history into a limited number of characters and as a result, they both felt incredibly fake to me. I think it does a disservice to people who actually went through those things to have their stories "embellished" for the sake of making a good movie.

I saw Dunkirk earlier this year and was disappointed in it...way too dramatic especially the soundtrack.

This past weekend I watched The Hunt For Red October (1990) with my younger brothers. We had so much fun. I have seen Red October more than a few times over the years and I always have a blast watching it, but I especially enjoyed watching it with my brothers.

SnowAngel

[Ryadian]

Well, I haven't seen any new releases. I've been dreading The Last Jedi, because even though I don't know what happens, I have strong suspicions. Star Wars I'm burned out.

I understand the Star Wars burnout (I think that releasing a new movie every year was a horrible mistake on their part), but something I will say about TLJ: my sister and brother-in-law, who both liked TFA without reservation, liked TLJ without reservation. I have another friend who liked TFA but felt it was wanting in a few areas, and was disappointed with TLJ. My brother and I disliked (but didn't hate) TFA and we disliked (but didn't hate) TLJ. It's hard to call it "more of the same", but I do think that whatever your opinion of TFA, your opinion of TLJ will likely be similar.

I'm going to be keeping up with the Marvel movies that I find interesting (for example, I want to see Captain Marvel because she's a character that I've enjoyed in other mediums), but I'm not all that interested in Ant-Man, GotG 3, Spider-Man 2, etc. I'll probably try to watch them on DVD if I can when they come out, but I'm not likely to buy my own DVDs. They just don't capture my interest like they used to.

@Rya, so, The House with a Clock in its Walls is a good book. I just read it last year for the first time and enjoyed it. It's properly creepy, but at the same time, it's a very simple read. The trailer... eh. I really want to like it because Cate Blanchett + Jack Black. … I think I'm still interested in seeing it, just because I want to watch something that's not a sequel or franchise.

Admittedly, the reasons you mentioned are part of the reason I'm interested, too. I also thought the world looked interesting. Concerning what you said in the spoilers, I'll just say that I'm not as surprised as I should be. Movies seem to always insist on "spicing up" magic, often without understanding what made the magic mysterious and interesting in the first place.

I've seen The Incredibles 2 and it's very good. The sequel has a lot to live up to, but it delivers! The short film before it, Bao, is also excellent. ... I like how it built on the themes from the first film and added to them. Violet, in particular, was wonderful. One of the things that was great about the first film was how high the stakes were. ... It's been a while since I went to see a film twice in the cinema, but I think I may be seeing this again.

Man, I really need to get around to seeing this! (Packing and moving this past month has basically put a hard stop on thinking about anything else. ) I keep hearing good things, and it makes me happy. I was so worried that they wouldn't be able to live up to the original. I'm also glad to hear that Violet gets some development - I felt like she was a bit neglected in the last movie.

Kat, Christopher Robin was a movie I was also interested in seeing - though admittedly, part of that was almost just to reward Hollywood for actually using Jim Cummings for Pooh and Tigger instead of hiring a A-List celebrity (apparently they almost did for Tigger... and they definitely did for the other characters ). (I'm a huuuuge proponent of hiring professional voice actors for voice acting work when appropriate, because for every Tom Hanks as Woody you get, you also get Angelina Jolie in Kung Fu Panda. It helps that I can probably name more voice actors than on-camera ones so I have a vested interest.) But hearing your praise of it makes me want to see it because it just sounds like the kind of movie that I've been yearning for for a while now. I really need to get to the theater in the near future.

I really need to see The Hunt for the Red October all the way through sometime. I've seen quite a bit of the movie in bits in pieces since it's one of my mom's favorites, and it does seem like a good one, I just never had the patience for it as a kid and I don't have the time as an adult.

Speaking of my mom, the two of us watched The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Society together last night on Netflix. It's based on a book that both of us like (my mom has read it several times), but we both found it... disappointing. The premise of the book is that it takes place entirely as written correspondence or journal entries between the main character and other characters, primarily a group of people from the island of Guernsey, right after WWII ended (and with it, the German occupation of Guernsey). The book's style gave it a very natural way of introducing you to the characters naturally and getting you attached to them, while also letting the story unfold in a natural way, and giving ample reason to give a lot of interesting and sombering details about the occupation without feeling like reading a textbook.

Unfortunately, when the movie lost that means of developing the story, they didn't adapt well. They took a book that actually reminds me a lot of NarniaWeb in that sense of developing a friendship over correspondence, and basically made the main character an invader in the lives of the people of Guernsey instead of a long-awaited friend. Even if you ignore the source material, the movie tries to sell deep friendships (and a romance) that was developed over letters in the book, but is never earned in the movie. Highly recommend the book, but give the movie a pass.

[johobbit]

I've watched three movies lately that are based on true events: Hidden Figures, Dunkirk, and The Darkest Hour.

Yay!
I enjoyed each one of these films, but after reading the book, Hidden Figures, realized how different the movie was. Same premise, but, boy, they changed things up. Still, the overall story in film was well done, and covered that part of recent history not many of us know about.

We liked the second half of Darkest Hour so much better than the first, which just seemed silly and needlessly trying to entertain at times. Now, don't get me wrong, I love good humour, but this was just ... doltish. And I am not at all fond of how Clemmie (Clementine Churchill) was portrayed. After seeing a couple of films on the Churchills lately (The Gathering Storm, Into the Storm), there is no comparison of Kristin Scott Thomas to the actresses who played in these older films and were superb (Vanessa Redgrave and Janet McTeer).

Dunkirk I found very moving, even with the few inconsistencies with history. For one, from the film, it looks like the civilian ships were the saving grace of the evacuation. This was not the case, although without them, certainly fewer men would have been saved. (But without other larger navy ships, fewer men would have been saved, as well.)

Something that appealed to me in the soundtrack was the almost constantly ticking clock motif, lending urgency to every scene. I found the cinematography spectacular in every way.

This past weekend I watched The Hunt For Red October

Well done war submarine movies are favourites of ours: we just watched Red October, as well. Even though it was not an historical event, it sure is realistic. Ryadian, I hope you can take time to watch this at some point. It is so worth it!

We saw U-571 awhile back, which is based on the true stories of disguised American submariners attempting to capture the Enigma cipher machine by boarding a German sub. Terribly intense, with hardly a let-up. This particular film was inspired by historical events, 'though the historical U-571 was never captured and was later sunk by a torpedo.

K-19 is another favourite—the tale of the malfunction of Russia's first nuclear submarine on its maiden voyage.

We hardly ever go to the theatre, but we recently took in the new Christopher Robin. I will not hesitate to say that a few tears were shed between the four of us (daughter and friends). It was really lovely. In terms of the big picture and lesson of the story,I found it nicely paralleled Disney's beloved Mary Poppins.

Other movies we have seen (on DVD) over the past year or so are below. I recommend each one.
*The Case for Christ
*AD: The Bible continues (TV series, 2015)
*Eye in the Sky
*a couple of movies on Martin Luther (older and newer), plus one excellent documentary released on the 500th anniversary (2017) of Luther nailing his 95 theses to the door of Wittenberg church.
*The Last Samurai
*Sophie Scholl: the final days (an especially strong favourite, as are the books)
*The Pianist
*Paul, the apostle of Christ
*The Man Who Never Was
*Valkyrie (although casting totally should have been Thomas Kretschmann as Claus von Stauffenberg)
*Denial
*Bridge of Spies
*Selma

[johobbit]

Posting again after 24 hours, because this covers a film that is releasing today, Operation Finale. The movie tells the historical event of Adolf Eichmann's capture, arrest, and conviction ... by the Jews, themselves! I believe this is the only Nazi war criminal who was prosecuted by the Jewish people. Eichmann was the brilliant mind and evil heart behind the Final Solution in WW II/the Holocaust. I really want to see this, but am not sure if I can handle seeing the horrific atrocities on the big screen, so may have to wait until the DVD releases. The film looks strongly character-driven, which should be very compelling.

[220chrisTian]

johobbit: you have excellent taste in films. I prefer serious, historically-based dramas to most other genres. I also liked Dunkirk and Hidden Figures. They aren't perfect, but they're a starting point for someone who knows little or nothing about the era/event/person. Personal research can do the rest. For me, historical films are free education. (I rent DVDs from the library.)

[AJAiken]

As a person who for artistic/personal reasons has never seen any Disney versions of Winnie the Pooh (stories, music, movies - can't avoid seeing the vast amount of merchandising), I can only hope that it will cause some people to go back to the actual books by A.A.Milne, and read them to themselves, and then aloud to themselves and their children.

I have seen The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh and the newer one, Winnie the Pooh, and I can't stand either of them! (I watched them when I was making my way through all of Walt Disney's animated features. Otherwise I would have avoided them.) For this reason, I do not want to see Christopher Robin ... I've heard it's good, but I really dislike what Disney's done to the character.

And coracle I am also horrified at the Peter Rabbit film, though I don't agree with your comparison of it to Fantastic Mr Fox. One of the books that changed the most on the journey to film is The Little White Horse whose adaptation, The Secret of Moonacre, is pretty much unrecognisable from the original. It has some nice moments but misses a lot of what's great about the book. When The Princess Diaries came out as a film I was shocked at the changes. For seemingly no reason whatsoever the setting is different, Mia's father is dead, and her cat is black and white not orange. (I've since learned that one of the cats who played Fat Louie belonged to Hathaway, but I didn't know it at the time!) And yet then I love the How to Train Your Dragon and The Princess and the Frog movies despite them being completely different from their books.

I saw Ant-Man and the Wasp and liked it. The film was fun, and a good breath of fresh air after Infinity War, but it doesn't hold up to the first one. I love the premise but I feel it was under-utilised in this film, which was a real shame ... I guess I was expecting more of a heist-type story again, but it wasn't. The story wasn't very focused - so many things went on and it was hard to really care about what happened to Janet when we only knew of her through Hank and Hope. Though I liked Ghost as a concept she felt underused and, as a problem to be overcome, solved too easily. However, despite all that, it was funny (especially Luis) and there were some great action sequences.

I've also seen Mission: Impossible - Fallout. I think the last film was better, but it ran at a cracking pace and had some truly excellent chase scenes. My main issue was that the trailer was so spoilery! I assumed from watching the trailer that Henry Cavill was a bad guy, but that wasn't touched on until a good way into the film. Once it was teased I thought it was maybe a red herring, as it had seemed so obvious, but it wasn't. So either the film was structured poorly or the trailer revealed way more than it was meant to. However I did enjoy the moments where Ethan Hunt's motivations were questioned. It would have been fun to delve into that more. What a difference it makes watching real stunts, though! Great fun.

[SSBN_Dawn_Treader]

This past weekend I watched The Hunt For Red October (1990) with my younger brothers. We had so much fun. I have seen Red October more than a few times over the years and I always have a blast watching it, but I especially enjoyed watching it with my brothers.

SnowAngel

I've always enjoyed that movie as well, it's even one of the reasons why I chose my nickname...

And yeah, the Peter Rabbit movie was a crime against the original novels!

And regarding the Winnie Pooh stories, if you guys can find a subtitled version or speak some Russian, I can recommend you the Soviet Winnie Pooh cartoons... It's definitely something else, but it's a great watch!

[ValiantArcher]

SSBN_Dawn_Treader, welcome to NW! This is the first I've heard of the Soviet Winnie the Pooh cartoons! How do they compare to the original stories and to other adaptations?

[SSBN_Dawn_Treader]

They... don't compare. It's not supposed to be bad or good, it's just radically different, as if you were to compare a pigeon and a pair of headphones. I don't think there's a link to the original stories apart from most of the cast, instead it depicts "Soviet folk wisdom" in a comedic way.

I don't really find how to describe it, so here's the first episode :


https://youtu.be/bEwE4wyz00o

[SnowAngel]

This past weekend I watched The Hunt For Red October

Well done war submarine movies are favourites of ours: we just watched Red October, as well. Even though it was not an historical event, it sure is realistic. Ryadian, I hope you can take time to watch this at some point. It is so worth it!

We saw U-571 awhile back, which is based on the true stories of disguised American submariners attempting to capture the Enigma cipher machine by boarding a German sub. Terribly intense, with hardly a let-up. This particular film was inspired by historical events, 'though the historical U-571 was never captured and was later sunk by a torpedo.

K-19 is another favourite—the tale of the malfunction of Russia's first nuclear submarine on its maiden voyage.

I got U-571 from the library last week, it's currently sitting by the TV waiting to be watched. I haven't seen it before, but it looks interesting. I love historical fiction that's what it seems to be?

My older brother made me watch K-19 once, never again, I didn't like watching that one at all.

My younger brother and I watched Gray Lady Down (1978, starring Charlton Heston) for the first time a couple weeks ago, it was interesting and intense. Probably more enjoyable second time around once you know the pacing and how the movie ends.

This past weekend I watched The Hunt For Red October (1990) with my younger brothers. We had so much fun. I have seen Red October more than a few times over the years and I always have a blast watching it, but I especially enjoyed watching it with my brothers.

SnowAngel

I've always enjoyed that movie as well, it's even one of the reasons why I chose my nickname...

Cool! Welcome to NarniaWeb.

Been on a bit of classic war films kick in the last month. I have watched The Bridge At Remagen (1969), Flying Tigers (1942) and A Bridge Too Far (1977) with my brothers, and The Frogmen (1951) with the whole family. My younger brother wants to watch Twelve O'Clock High (1949) and I want to rewatch Destination Tokyo (1943), haven't seen it for years, so those are probably going to be a couple of the next films we watch.

Last night one of my sisters and I watched Night Train To Munich (1940, starring Margaret Lockwood and Rex Harrison). It was terrific, I love classic spy thrillers. It was fun to see Margaret Lockwood in an role besides that of Iris Henderson in The Lady Vanishes. One problem though the final scene of the movie has me wanting to watch Where Eagles Dare really bad.

SnowAngel

[stargazer]

Red October is a movie I've enjoyed too.

Right now I'm wondering about seeing the soon-to-open First Man, starring Ryan Gosling as Neil Armstrong and adapted from the book of the same name.

I like well-done space movies and I hope this is one of those, like Apollo 13.

[Col Klink]

I saw Mary Poppins Returns and it was great! However, before I give a review, you should probably know that while I enjoy the original Mary Poppins movie a lot, it isn't an untouchable classic for me like it is for some people. (I'm a bigger fan of the books.) So other people might not enjoy this new movie as much as I did if they're constantly comparing it to its predecessor.

I will say that I thought the original movie was funnier than Returns. Though the new movie definitely has some funny moments, the original captures more of the humor of the books. I also thought that some of the script was a bit didactic. They had the kids explicitly stating how the lessons of the songs related to the story. I'd have preferred for the audience to figure it out on their own.

If you haven't figured it out from the marketing, you should be prepared for that fact a lot of the movie consists of variations of scenes from the first movie. Some people might find this annoying. It's kind of appropriate though since the books tended to be similarly formulaic and rehash a lot of ideas and even specific dialogue. It never bothered me reading the books because I felt the variations were always so fun and imaginative. And I basically felt the same way about the movie. Part of me does wish the filmmakers hadn't tried so hard to pick scenes from the books to adapt which were similar to scenes from the first movie because there were so many other scenes from the books which would have been great to see. (They even made some of the scenes more similar to scenes from the first movie than they had to be. While a character does travel into a picture on a royal doulton bowl in Mary Poppins Comes Back, there are no talking animals and Mary Poppins does not sing a song in front of an enthusiastic audience.) But this honestly didn't bug me much when I was watching the movie, just analyzing it in retrospect.

The song were a bit hit and miss and some of them slowed down the movie's pacing. (That's how I felt about the songs from the first movie so that wasn't a huge comedown for yours truly.) There were definitely more good songs than bad songs. I'll even say I liked "Can You Imagine That" better than its classic equivalent, "A Spoonful of Sugar." (Remember what I said about this movie having a lot of scenes that were similar to the first one?) Not necessarily better as a song but as a summary of Mary Poppins' personality. Plus it reminded me of the song, "Impossible" from Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella. It's seldom bad for a musical to remind me of Rodgers and Hammerstein.

They did a great job of casting an actress who looked like an older version of Jane from the first movie. Ellen the maid also sounded like uncannily like an older version of her original actress. While Jane and Michael didn't have a great deal of characterization in the old movie, (they weren't really supposed to; they were audience surrogates) the script did a great job making them seem like older versions of themselves, with Michael being more cynical and argumentative and Jane being perkier.

This may sound heretical but I think I like Lin Manuel Miranda (who plays the Bert equivalent in this movie) and Emily Blunt better than Dick Van Dyke and Julie Andrews in the roles. I don't hate Dick Van Dyke or anything but his style of comedy (in Mary Poppins anyway) is a bit too broad and cartoony for my taste. The Van Dyke heavy scenes tended to be the ones that dragged in the original for me. And while Julie Andrews is pure class and I love watching her performance as the original cinematic Mary Poppins, Emily Blunt's performance just evoked the character I have in my head more. She was helped by the script which did a great job writing dialogue for the character which was original but sounded exactly like what Mary Poppins would say. In general, the movie did a great job of evoking the world and characters of Mary Poppins and I got a kick out of it. But like I said, people with more reverence for the first movie than I have might feel differently. So might people who are fans of the books but not the first movie since it's definitely trying (and IMO succeeding) in evoking that movie. I still would recommend giving this movie a shot though. I've actually been a tad depressed lately but Mary Poppins Returns was so joyful and fun that it cheered me up.

[Cleander]

Can anybody give me a review of the 1989 version of Shakespeare's "Henry V", starring Kenneth Branagh, in terms of family-friendliness and overall quality?

[daughter of the King]

It's been awhile since I saw it, but I remember it being very good. I think as far as family-friendliness it was fine except maybe for the battle? Typical blood shed in pitched battle sort of thing.

[Col Klink]

I watched it a couple of times but I can't remember that much. I do remember it being a well made film with really good actors, music, etc. I'm a casual fan at the most of Shakespeare's Henry V so I can't analyze it as effectively as a more ardent admirer. (If you had asked me to review an adaptation of one of Shakespeare's comedies that's much more up my alley.)

The battle scenes are pretty graphic, if my memory serves, though not R-rated. I believe there is some sexual language and humor in the script but since Shakespeare's language is so different from ours I'm not sure if people would understand it enough to be offended by it.

[coracle]

Henry V is part of a sequence - so there are people in it who were also in Henry IV (parts 1 &2). I saw the Olivier film during high school, and didn't understand a lot of it because I didn't know the background.

Thus when we hear about an old man called Sir John Falstaff dying during Henry V, it's useful to know that he was once a friend and mentor to Henry in his youth (a heavy drinking rogue as well), but young Henry gives him up near the end of Henry IV part 2 when he takes on his responsibilities.

Some of the criminal types in Henry V were Falstaff and Henry's drinking mates from even earlier, and one of them is executed in the play, under Henry's orders.