Batman: Under The Red Hood. To keep it short, all I'll say is that I really really enjoyed it.

Yep, it's pretty damn bad. No surprise though, it's based on really, really bad comic. It doesn't help that the art style of those new DC animated movies isn't very good in my opinion, and then ew guy voicing Batman is just miscast. It really surprises me - over the years we had many actors voicing Batman, and even if Conroy remains the best, they all were good, and brought something of their own. This guy is just terrible and so flat.

This on the other hand is one of the best Batman animated movies. Again, should not be a surprise since it's based on a very good comic, and actually improves upon some of it. It's a strong, emotional story, the action is really great, and Bruce Greenwood is probably the best Batman after Conroy. Even this movie's Joker is pretty damn good.

Just watched "Space Odyssey : Voyage to the Planets". Which a docu-fiction. From 2004. So, voiceover narration (by David Suchet) and uncertain identity, between traditional filming, fake interviews, fake spacecam footage.

But it's still interestingly realistic. It attempts to depict what an actual manned journey to Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and Pluto would look like. What would be the difficulties, the obstacles, the potential accidents. And how each planet (and a couple of satellites) would feel like.

So, while I don't like, in general, the merging of the documentary and fiction styles, I still enjoyed that weird ausiodisual object. Respectable product, there.

Different style, also watched that dubious "Batman vs Superman vs Dawn vs Justice" thingy. I expected much worse. I even, against all expectations, enjoyed the first half (apart from the distracting dream sequences, and the Keanu-Reeves-like Affleck performance). I liked the way it built on the antagonisms and the conspiracy fueling it, I appreciated its pace, and I found it coherent. But then, just when you expect it to pay off, the film goes full hateful eight, ditches its plot, and serves us hours of retarded superhero superpunches (yes, what the public actually came too see, just like the Tarantino shootouts). And so we're back to the boring tediousness of the genre. Followed with a neverending epilogue. So bleh. Nobody wins : the superhero fanboys will whine that the movie betrays the spirit of its characters (oh noes, the precious precious truth of super/batmen), while normal moviegoers will be reminded why superhero movies are shit (action figures smashed against each other for hours under pompous music). Better make one film to please each group, rather that bore everyone with half of it, I'd say, but, yeah, whatever strategy you're comfy with...

Different style, also watched "Conjuring 2". Ghosts go boo, and that's all I ask from them. But suspension of disbelief gets more and more difficult as the ghosts behaviours make only sense in a theatrality maximisation perspective (apparently only drama queens become ghosts after death), and damn the warren couple's self-glorification is irritating.

So, one more ghost movie to confuse with (most of) the others, and to put on the list of won't-remember-if-already-saw-or not. But again, I asked for it. Some will watch anything with spandex clowns punching holes in walls, others watch anything with moaning blankets walking through them. We all deserve what we get...

I don't know the details of their specific case, but, yeah, those movies, while well done in their genre, do give me the same impression as propaganda videos for cult gurus, and that's a disturbing aftertaste. I still expect an Avengers/JusticeLeague/LXG-style movie where the Warren would team up with Uri Geller and Ron Hubbard to defeat the satans from outer space and their skeptical minions.

But let's be honest. If you watch a ghost movie, you accept a Warrens-are-heroes point of view. Just like a vampires or a demonic possession movie implies that the bible belt is right. Fact is, their imaginary worlds (whether they endorse it dishonestly or sincerely) are fun. I'm okay with stepping in it for a couple of hours. Heck, even the coolest action movies are all basically windows into trumpworld.

See, that's also why I enjoy Lovecraft (and even, he's ignorant and multiphobic, not evil per se) and even Sax Rohmer. Bigotted universes are entertaining, and make the basis for spectacular action. The problem arises when real life gets approached like these imaginary worlds...

Yep, I agree on pretty much all accounts.

Farinelli. It was a good film, but I am not exactly decided whether I like pretend-biographical material like this.

When I saw it as a kid, I liked it for its kung fu fight scenes mostly (the few there were anyway), even if some of them even were a bit odd like those rotating blades or forks or whatever in one of the baddie's hands.

The story, acting etc., didn't really impress me even as a kid, but I liked the action (the fights, not rest of the action really). It was a campy movie already back then I think. But that was enough for me to actually like the movie, and yeah the overall feeling it was made completely tongue in the cheek. The movie didn't take itself seriously at all.

A friend of mine, who actually introduced me to the movie, liked the main character, how cool(?) he was and didn't give a shit about anything and all. I guess a kind of role model to him, considering what he became later in his life.

mmmm...... Now that surely draws my curiosity... Did he became a trucker and kung-fu expert? :o)

_____________________________________________________________________________


*** Cemetary Without Crosses (aka The Rope And The Colt) *** by Robert Hossein (1969)

A feud between two families leads to the hanging of a man. His widow asks a former lover to take revenge.

Even if it feels much like a classic Italian western (shot in Almeria, with even Sergio Leone who directed one sequence), it's actually one of the few French western in the history of cinema. While it's the second western directed by Hossein, it's much more known as it came after the highly popular "Angélique" movies series and brings back the on-screen couple Hossein and Michèle Mercier. But even if it's led by a star couple, this film is far from being commercial as Hossein wanted it as Shakespirian tale, beyond good and evil, where the morality of the protagonists is kind of undefined as they push forward in a vicious circle of retaliations leading to their own demises.

It also set itself apart from Italian western by relying heavily on unspoken relationships and feelings between the characters and overall, the film is very melancholic (the guitar tune becoming the true musical theme instead of the upbeat title song). I also liked the kind of fetichism Hossein's character has, as he alaways puts on on a black glove on his left hand before using his gun. Naturally, Michèle Mercier playing the widow all dressed and veiled in black looks really good as an iconic figure. The movie takes a bit of time to really start but once the turning point is reached then it gets into powerful stuff like Keoma or The Great Silence. A very good surprise.

The upbeat title song (not representative of the mood of the movie)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1U5WlMWiDSY

The sad guitar theme (starting at 1'26'')
https://youtu.be/DP2Qvy2yg7E?t=1m26s

OH NOES !!

"At the Devil's Door", was so, so brilliant, and so unpredictable, so originally done.

Why does it end with that cliché, directly taken from (even) better movie !?

This heavily straightforward déjà vu broke my heart at the very last second.

Just watched "Zodiac".


It is alright.

Edge of Tomorrow

As much as I don't like Cruise, I couldn't help being captivated by this film. It's incredible! Emily Blunt's character reminded me a little of Marlene from Blue Gender.

Rengô kantai shirei chôkan: Yamamoto Isoroku or Admiral Yamamoto

Saw this movie on friday. It depicts the life and career of Yamamoto, the commander-in-chief of the Japanese navy during a large portion of WW2. Felt a bit stiff at times and the CGI is pretty poor considering the movie was made in 2011, but it is more of a biographical movie. It was far from perfect, dragged slightly in some points and although Yamamoto did actually oppose the war against the United States, I felt the anti-war sentiment seemed quite forced at times.

If you're interested about the Japanese point of view at WW2, then definitely an interesting watch.

Doctor Strange

Certainly a somewhat different beast to the rest of the MCU, which at this point can only be a good thing given the rather samey nature of a lot of the movies of late.

That being said, the MCU's approach to comedy is slowly starting to descend into ridiculous and unintentional self-parody, and the movie felt like it was compelled to toss out gags left, right and centre, including in some very emotional and powerful scenes where the humour just felt completely out-of-place. It's one of the major things that's starting to make the MCU feel like a factory line franchise.

Benedict Bumblecatch is perfect in the role, despite rocking a rather dodgy accent (we got to see it in English), and there wasn't really a single actor that I could really fault in their role, although Rachel McAdams was basically just playing herself, and while Mads Mikkelsen played the villain as well as was possible, he suffered from the typical poor MCU villain writing, although he did get one of the best lines/comedic put-downs in the movie. Special kudos go to Tilda Swinton for perhaps the best performance in the movie though.

Overall, despite above criticism, certainly the best film in the MCU since Winter Soldier, and certainly miles better than Ant-Man and the imo grossly overrated Civil War.

A couple recently:

Lone Survivor Mark Wahlberg stars in a film about a Special Forces mission in Afghanistan that goes awry. All die except one guy. Bet you can't guess who played the survivor's role! Decent film. The stunt work, though... Holy mackerel!

Ghost in the Shell
English translation, and the voice work was pretty bad. Interesting movie, though it got a bit preachy toward the end. Maybe it fares better with the original voice actors. For a film made 25 or so years ago, I thought the animation was quite good.