The "last movie I saw" thread

[Uncle Ted]

Saw "13 Hours" Saturday. It was fair but I would just suggest that if you want to see this type of movie just find "Black Hawk Down" and watch it again.

Yeah, they are all about the same... What difference does it make?

[falafel]

The "last movie I saw" thread

Saw "13 Hours" Saturday. It was fair but I would just suggest that if you want to see this type of movie just find "Black Hawk Down" and watch it again.

I saw it on Friday. I thought it was great, but then again I've never seen Black Hawk Down.

John Krazinski was surprisingly good.

[cougjunkie]

Ride Along 2- if you like Kevin Hart (which I do) this movie is very funny.

[Omaha 680]

Yeah, they are all about the same... What difference does it make?

I see what you did there.

[Topper]

I saw it on Friday. I thought it was great, but then again I've never seen Black Hawk Down.

John Krazinski was surprisingly good.

BHD set the standard. You owe it to yourself to watch it.

[Armenag]

The Judge - Robert Downey Jr as a Chicago defense lawyer who has to defend his estranged father, a small-town judge, on a charge of murder for supposedly running down a former defendant over whose trial he presided. Pretty mediocre. Visually, it was bad. Too dark and too much contrast (I played around with my TV to make sure it wasn't my problem), and a few seemingly computer-enhanced shots that were ugly, unnecessary and jarring. RDJ and Robert Duvall, as the cartoonishly asshole dad/judge, were good, and Vera Farmiga was great as the ex-girlfriend (she had the best individual scenes, despite all the ACTING! by RDJ and Duvall), but overall not a particularly good movie. Too many cliches.

White God - A Hungarian parable/cautionary tale about discrimination and abuse in which a girl's mutt is thrown out by her dad and subsequently subjected to various abuses that turn it against humanity and into the leader of a small canine uprising. Not great, but had some very cool shots, especially of the horde of dogs running through the city. Definitely not for those who are sensitive to depictions of cruelty against animals (which is a strange warning since people regularly watch movies depicting worse treatment of actual human beings). The trailer gives you a sense of the style:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIGz2kyo26U

[Moliere]

The Big Short: Good flick but kind of "meh" in how the production was done. I didn't like the quasi-documentary feel to it. The way they explained stuff was different, in a good way (I mean Margot Robbie explaining CDOs in a bathtub???). It was kind of elementary to me given that I've lived part of my life in trading organizations and have already read a lot on the financial crisis. For these types of things, I prefer to read the book anyway, so I ordered it tonight. I also need to go back and reread "The Smartest Guys in the Room" which is a personal favorite of mine.

[falafel]

The Big Short: Good flick but kind of "meh" in how the production was done. I didn't like the quasi-documentary feel to it. The way they explained stuff was different, in a good way (I mean Margot Robbie explaining CDOs in a bathtub???). It was kind of elementary to me given that I've lived part of my life in trading organizations and have already read a lot on the financial crisis. For these types of things, I prefer to read the book anyway, so I ordered it tonight. I also need to go back and reread "The Smartest Guys in the Room" which is a personal favorite of mine.

I thought the "here's world famous chef Anthony Bordain to explain CDOs" (it was Bourdain, not Robbie that explained that) was kind of stupid. Took me out of the movie too much and felt too different from the tone of the rest of the film. Almost like these vignettes were tacked on at the end.

Otherwise, I enjoyed the movie. Steve Carrell is turning in to a very good actor. Brad Pitt was kind of wasted, but I guess his company produced it, so he can do what he wants there.

[Northwestcoug]

I thought the "here's world famous chef Anthony Bordain to explain CDOs" (it was Bourdain, not Robbie that explained that) was kind of stupid. Took me out of the movie too much and felt too different from the tone of the rest of the film. Almost like these vignettes were tacked on at the end.

Otherwise, I enjoyed the movie. Steve Carrell is turning in to a very good actor. Brad Pitt was kind of wasted, but I guess his company produced it, so he can do what he wants there.

I really liked the movie. I had read about these comedic scenes before watching it, and I thought those would bug me also. But when I watched it I actually appreciated them. I'm not a financial guru like Moliere, so I needed a lot of help getting up to speed. In fact, I think making these scenes outrageous helped me understand the financial aspects even better. I took my son who for some reason really wanted to watch this. I think a lot of the details went over his head, but those scenes helped him get the basics.

Steve Carrell was excellent, as well as Christian Bale. Solid acting all around, actually (except for Pitt).

[Katy Lied]

I also need to go back and reread "The Smartest Guys in the Room" which is a personal favorite of mine.

Love that book. I re-read it often, it's part of my trifecta of classic business books, along with Liar's Poker and Barbarians at the Gate.

With these books, who needs Sun Tzu? Michael Lewis does just fine instead, and now we are back to The Big Short.

[Green Monstah]

I loved the Revenant. I left the theater thinking that I hadn't seen a better movie in years. After giving it some thought, I think the film resonated with me for a few reasons: 1. the day before I saw it, my son came home upset at the way some of his classmates treated him. No big deal, typical schoolyard bullshit, but I was definitely in "Papa bear" mode, where you are pissed off, but cognizant that there's nothing you can do about it. 2. I recently had two friends die, and so I sympathized with Glass' mourning.

All that said, I loved the movie. The cinematography and imagery were amazing. As PAC said, there were obviously special effects, it just didn't look like it. Leo was superb. I don't understand why they chose the kid with crazy eyebrows for Bridger. That kid is milquetoast. Not a Jim Bridger-type.

Spoiler for Addressing JS:

I had no problem with Glass' need for revenge. I understood that it was his prime motivator, and I was okay with it (again, my state of mind may have made me more sympathetic). In the scene where he has to go into the river to escape the hostile Indians, he had started to scrape "FITZ" in the rock, and I was confused as to why until the scene in the snow cave just before he reached the fort. "Fitzgerald killed my son." Like you, I didn't understand the scene where Fitz finally dies, though. Maybe Glass was being disingenuous with reference to deity like Fitzgerald had done throughout the film. Maybe Glass was inferring that he was on God's errand. Not sure. I'll have to watch again, but that was a head scratcher.

[Paperback Writer]

I don't understand why they chose the kid with crazy eyebrows for Bridger. That kid is milquetoast. Not a Jim Bridger-type.

Was the real Jim Bridger a "Jim Bridger-type"? Maybe, its a man vs legend kind of thing. The artist depicting Bridger in sculpture seems to agree with your view while the casting in The Revenant seems to be closer to real life, IMO.

[creekster]

I loved the Revenant. I left the theater thinking that I hadn't seen a better movie in years. After giving it some thought, I think the film resonated with me for a few reasons: 1. the day before I saw it, my son came home upset at the way some of his classmates treated him. No big deal, typical schoolyard bullshit, but I was definitely in "Papa bear" mode, where you are pissed off, but cognizant that there's nothing you can do about it. 2. I recently had two friends die, and so I sympathized with Glass' mourning.

All that said, I loved the movie. The cinematography and imagery were amazing. As PAC said, there were obviously special effects, it just didn't look like it. Leo was superb. I don't understand why they chose the kid with crazy eyebrows for Bridger. That kid is milquetoast. Not a Jim Bridger-type.

Spoiler for Addressing JS:

I had no problem with Glass' need for revenge. I understood that it was his prime motivator, and I was okay with it (again, my state of mind may have made me more sympathetic). In the scene where he has to go into the river to escape the hostile Indians, he had started to scrape "FITZ" in the rock, and I was confused as to why until the scene in the snow cave just before he reached the fort. "Fitzgerald killed my son." Like you, I didn't understand the scene where Fitz finally dies, though. Maybe Glass was being disingenuous with reference to deity like Fitzgerald had done throughout the film. Maybe Glass was inferring that he was on God's errand. Not sure. I'll have to watch again, but that was a head scratcher.

I thought it was a gorgeous film but it left me feeling a bit unmoved. It is well wroth seeing, but it is not, IMO, the kind of movie that makes you think about the big issues. as to your spoiler comment:

Spoiler for Response to GM Spoiler comment:

Here's how I see it: I think Glass, at the last minute, recognized that he was no better than Fitzgerald and so stepped back, seeking to retain a shred of decency and humanity, trying to convince himself he would leave it to God (and the freezing water) to decide what to do with Fitz. The indians pay him back for having helped the chief's daughter by not killing him but they affirm he is just another white guy by not helping him, either.

Honestly I would have preferred to see the movie end the same way the real life Glass' story ended; he returned to the fort and was so wasted from his trip that he did nothing other than report his story. no killing, no wilderness chase scene.

One other thing; I was very bothered by the fact that he floated down an icy river hanging onto a log for many minutes and maybe many miles and then just walks out of the water without even any serious frostbite. The real Glass' journey took place in August through October, which makes more sense. The dicrapio Glass would have frozen to death several times over.

[Uncle Ted]

Was the real Jim Bridger a "Jim Bridger-type"? Maybe, its a man vs legend kind of thing. The artist depicting Bridger in sculpture seems to agree with your view while the casting in The Revenant seems to be closer to real life, IMO.

Yeah, Jim Bridger was a 19 year old kid at the time he was working with Glass. Of course, Fitzgerald wasn't much older.

Maybe Green Mons was thinking of the USPS's version of Bridger:

[Paperback Writer]

Spoiler for Response to creekster - How long do you pursue the real life Glass story?:

Honestly I would have preferred to see the movie end the same way the real life Glass' story ended; he returned to the fort and was so wasted from his trip that he did nothing other than report his story. no killing, no wilderness chase scene.

Do you pursue the real life Glass story to it's end? Where he suffers a violent death a decade later at the hands of the Arikara Indians. In film, Glass get his revenge against Fitzgerald. In real life, Glass spares Fitzgereld but the Arikara don't spare Glass years later. I find that interesting.

Also agree with your comments about hypothermia. While backpacking, I had the misfortune of falling while crossing a glacier fed stream at high altitude and was carried downstream a couple hundred yards. Fortunately, it was a sunny July day and I had a dry towel and sleeping bag. Agree that Dicaprio would have died from exposure and hypothermia and then would have been eaten by wolves; but, that wouldn't make a very good film.