What movies have you been watching?

[OtherJen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_to_Busan

What was interesting to me was not one gun was ever fired in the movie. Lots of character story. And then all the zombie action mixed in.

Yes! That was a very entertaining movie.

[Noodle]

Lorna Doone...the super old one with Clive Owen. Polly Waker, and Sean Bean?  I always meant to get around to it, but never did. (ETA: Having just googled, I had no idea so many versions of this story were made...I guess the one I mentioned isn't the 'super old' one, after all).

Yep, that's the one. I love British costume dramas and those are three good actors, so I thought it would be terrific. Not for me, anyway. There was a LOT of acting by staring in between the murders/kidnappings/lost heirs/galloping over moors/falling into rivers (TWICE)/ambushes, etc.

[wenchsenior]

Meh I watched Annihilation last night and aside from having my weakness Natalie Portman in it the movie was forgettable.

I quite liked it, but it needed more Oscar Isaac LOL.

[Kris]

Meh I watched Annihilation last night and aside from having my weakness Natalie Portman in it the movie was forgettable.

I quite liked it, but it needed more Oscar Isaac LOL.

Everything needs more Oscar Isaac.

[wenchsenior]

Meh I watched Annihilation last night and aside from having my weakness Natalie Portman in it the movie was forgettable.

I quite liked it, but it needed more Oscar Isaac LOL.

Everything needs more Oscar Isaac.

True.

[GuitarStv]

After last night's failure with Annihilation, I'm gonna watch Alien tonight on the home theater turned up loud and it's going to be magnificent.

I thought that Annihilation was a pretty good movie . . . but it's not the kind of movie I want to ever watch again.  Not exactly uplifting.  :P

[Tyson]

I loved Annihilation but it's not exactly a "turn it up loud, things are going to be awesome" kind of movie. 

[big_owl]

After last night's failure with Annihilation, I'm gonna watch Alien tonight on the home theater turned up loud and it's going to be magnificent.

I thought that Annihilation was a pretty good movie . . . but it's not the kind of movie I want to ever watch again.  Not exactly uplifting.  :P

You didn't like Blade Runner 2049 so your movie judgement is suspect.  You ever finish Three Body Problem trilogy?  But really the movie sort of just felt like it was thrown together and was rather disjointed.  Character development was minimal and Natalie's marriage didn't feel real at all.  The ending was seen coming a mile away and I didn't really feel any emotional connection with either character when it was revealed.  Plus, sorry Natalie, you just aren't at all believable with an automatic rifle (I still think you're hot tho).  It wasn't until today that I learned that the movie was based on some books, maybe I'll DL those on the kindle and try reading them.  I will say that the ending sequence with the ?alien morphing into Natalie was pretty intense and the effects/soundtrack were nice and intense. 

I just got my amazon prime delivery today and for tonight I'll be watching Grave of the Fireflies.  Supposedly one of the most depressing movies of all time...and I love Japanese anime so I'm pretty pumped.

[GuitarStv]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the new Blade Crawler.  I do have the second three body book on hold at the library but it hasn't come in yet.

Grave of the Fireflies was sad.  Not the most depressing of all time  . . .  Requiem for a Dream holds that title for me.  :P

[big_owl]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the new Blade Crawler.  I do have the second three body book on hold at the library but it hasn't come in yet.

Grave of the Fireflies was sad.  Not the most depressing of all time  . . .  Requiem for a Dream holds that title for me.  :P

Oh just buy the books already before you forget what happened in the first novel.  If your mind isn't expanded to a new dimension then you can come on here and call me out on it.

Change of plans, I've decided to instead watch Princess Mononoke instead of Grave.  I'll save that one for next weekend.  I'm "fortunate" enough to suffer from major depression and that along with the combination of having to go back to work tomorrow after 10 days off would be enough for    me to want to hang myself!  Hopefully Princess Mononoke isn't quite so sad.  Plus Gillian Anderson is a voice actor in it.  She's in third place behind Kate Beckinsale and Natalie Portman for my movie actress kryptonite. 

[wenchsenior]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the new Blade Crawler.  I do have the second three body book on hold at the library but it hasn't come in yet.

Grave of the Fireflies was sad.  Not the most depressing of all time  . . .  Requiem for a Dream holds that title for me.  :P

Oh just buy the books already before you forget what happened in the first novel.  If your mind isn't expanded to a new dimension then you can come on here and call me out on it.

Change of plans, I've decided to instead watch Princess Mononoke instead of Grave.  I'll save that one for next weekend.  I'm "fortunate" enough to suffer from major depression and that along with the combination of having to go back to work tomorrow after 10 days off would be enough for    me to want to hang myself!  Hopefully Princess Mononoke isn't quite so sad.  Plus Gillian Anderson is a voice actor in it.  She's in third place behind Kate Beckinsale and Natalie Portman for my movie actress kryptonite.

Well, I haven't seen GotFF (I'm not that masochistic), but I remember Princess Mononoke putting me into such a sobbing nonfunctional heap that we had to pause it for several minutes so I could become halfway functional. Husband also cried, as I recall. It was a good film, though...too good in a way. Touched a very personal thing in me.  That was a long time ago, but I've been too wary to ever try to revisit it.

On a shallower note, Gillian Anderson is one of my long-standing 'sexual preference fence-jumping' freebies.  Given that she used to be (maybe still is?) one of husband's freebies also, would that even count as a freebie?

[GuitarStv]

Ugh.  You can't watch dubbed anime!  It's really not the same at all.

[techwiz]

Watched V for Vendetta this weekend.
Based on a British graphic novel written by Alan Moore and illustrated by David Lloyd starting in 1982.  The movie based on an alternate vision of Britain in which a corrupt and abusive totalitarian government has risen to complete power. Some real-life parallels in this movie from in the areas of government surveillance, torture, fear mongering and media manipulation. 

[GuitarStv]

Watched V for Vendetta this weekend.
A 2006 movie based on an alternate vision of Britain in which a corrupt and abusive totalitarian government has risen to complete power. Some real-life parallels in this movie from in the areas of government surveillance, torture, fear mongering and media manipulation.

Not 2006, Alan Moore wrote it in 1982.  :P

[soccerluvof4]

Watched Criminal yesterday. Definately your typical guy action flick but I was into it. Starred Kevin Costner and others. Was good flick. I watched it on Hulu

[Tyson]

Watched Heathers 30th Anniversary edition with my daughter last night.  She loved it.  I liked it too, holds up pretty well for an 80s movie. 

[Noodle]

Watched Friends with Benefits last night. It's a very slight romantic comedy--it's just about two people who meet, become friends, and then fall in love without much in the way of weird plot contrivances--but the leads have nice chemistry. It was a nice Friday night watch.

[Monocle Money Mouth]

I saw Ford v Ferrari yesterday. I thought it was pretty entertaining.

[sui generis]

We watched Kinky Boots last night. Based (lightly) on a true story. It was totally totally predictable, but still a bit of fun, given the predictable story line was applied to a unique situation.

[Tyson]

Finished up "Through the Olive Trees", which is the last movie in the Koker trilogy.  It was good.  Interesting to see films made in Iran. 

[slackmax]

I loved Annihilation but it's not exactly a "turn it up loud, things are going to be awesome" kind of movie.

Saw Annihilation on DVD. Thought it was pretty good.

But maybe I missed something. Why didn't anyone try entering the shimmer, then come right back out? No, they enter, and keep going deeper and deeper. Not realistic. Would never happen in real life with normal people.   

[Tyson]

I loved Annihilation but it's not exactly a "turn it up loud, things are going to be awesome" kind of movie.

Saw Annihilation on DVD. Thought it was pretty good.

But maybe I missed something. Why didn't anyone try entering the shimmer, then come right back out? No, they enter, and keep going deeper and deeper. Not realistic. Would never happen in real life with normal people.   

Maybe.  But what would happen in real life with normal people would be super boring to watch, haha.

[LaineyAZ]

"The Farewell" - really liked it, an insight into middle-class Chinese culture.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8637428/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1

[slackmax]

Watched the previous version of The Joker/Batman movie cadre, starring Heath Ledger as Joker. It was not as enjoyable for me as the newest one, with Joaquin Phoenix. The older movie was much more devoted to the Gothic, comic book genre than the new one. I didn't get into that style. An OK movie. I watched the whole thing. Just prefer the new one.   

[slackmax]

Took my mom to see The Good Liar starring Ian McKellen  and Helen Mirren. It was OK. The plot was a little bit unbelievable. OK acting from the leads. Chemistry between them questionable.  $10 for a matinee senior ticket. Pretty high, huh?  Wanted to take Mom to see a movie and this seemed like the best bet.   

[Samuel]

The Irishman.

I liked it a lot, but that was kind of a foregone conclusion. It would be pretty hard to go wrong with Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, and Pesci doing the gangster thing again. Having it on Netflix was nice as I watched the 209 minutes over 3 days. It doesn't feel like 3.5 hours but would be a long sit in a theater. Apparently used quite a bit of VFX to "de-age" the ancient cast for the many flashback scenes, but I didn't find it as distracting as some reviewers have complained (perhaps it is more noticeable on a huge screen?).

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

[ketchup]

Rewatched Horrible Bosses over the weekend, saw it in theaters back in 2011.  It remains exceptionally funny, but seeing Kevin Spacey onscreen now is just uncomfortable.  Certainly a good actor, but... yeah.

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

It's new subscribers, retaining current subscribers, AND a play for awards and prestige (long-term brand loyalty).  They want to stay in the public consciousness, especially with the streaming wars about to ramp up.  $159M is peanuts for NFLX these days.  They're throwing billions each year at original content, because they know their survival depends on it.

[Roadrunner53]

Watched The Salvation on Netflix.

Pretty good western with lots of violence.

[sparkytheop]

The Irishman.

I liked it a lot, but that was kind of a foregone conclusion. It would be pretty hard to go wrong with Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, and Pesci doing the gangster thing again. Having it on Netflix was nice as I watched the 209 minutes over 3 days. It doesn't feel like 3.5 hours but would be a long sit in a theater. Apparently used quite a bit of VFX to "de-age" the ancient cast for the many flashback scenes, but I didn't find it as distracting as some reviewers have complained (perhaps it is more noticeable on a huge screen?).

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

I need to put this on my list for this week.  I like to have something playing in the background while I work on quilting/knitting.  Finishing (hopefully!) a huge quilt this week after working on it off and on for 3 years.  Want to get it to my parents for their anniversary on the 10th, or for Christmas.  I find that if I really like something in the background, but need to focus on it more, I'll watch it again later without the crafting as a distraction. 

[Noodle]

Went to see Knives Out this weekend as a family outing. I thought the first half was a little slow, but in the end really enjoyed it. Most of the performances go pretty big, but all of the actors could pull it off. Daniel Craig as the opposite of his James Bond character was pretty fun. It's a good film for a multi-age audience although I think kids under middle-school age would be bored.

[Raenia]

Went to see Knives Out this weekend as a family outing. I thought the first half was a little slow, but in the end really enjoyed it. Most of the performances go pretty big, but all of the actors could pull it off. Daniel Craig as the opposite of his James Bond character was pretty fun. It's a good film for a multi-age audience although I think kids under middle-school age would be bored.

We saw it over the weekend as well and also found it very enjoyable.  There were some good twists that I wasn't expecting.

[wenchsenior]

The Irishman.

I liked it a lot, but that was kind of a foregone conclusion. It would be pretty hard to go wrong with Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, and Pesci doing the gangster thing again. Having it on Netflix was nice as I watched the 209 minutes over 3 days. It doesn't feel like 3.5 hours but would be a long sit in a theater. Apparently used quite a bit of VFX to "de-age" the ancient cast for the many flashback scenes, but I didn't find it as distracting as some reviewers have complained (perhaps it is more noticeable on a huge screen?).

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

I think your guess on 'prestige' is correct.  This movie is probably a lock for Oscar nods for Best Actor (which is an unbelievably stacked category this particular year, from what it looks like...gonna be at least 5 or 6 people left out that could easily get a nom in any other year), Best Picture, and at least one or possibly two Best Supporting Actor slots.  Probably a good bet for Best Director, as well.

I don't know that I will see it, though.  On the one hand, I usually like Scorsese films, but I don't care for De Niro's acting style (though to be fair, I haven't seen 2 of his supposedly greatest roles...Taxi Driver and Raging Bull), which has always struck me as very showy and mannered. Plus, there's something so greasy and off-putting about De Niro's entire vibe, it creeps me out (kind of funny, b/c my aunt had an affair with him back in the day, and I can't even enjoy any good gossip she has about it b/c the idea of sleeping with De Niro just revolts me LOL).

I also don't usually care for movies about mobsters.   I watched the Godfather movies exactly once for the sake of being a well-rounded cinephile, but I don't plan on revisiting unless forced.  I found Goodfellas super irritating when I watched it in the 1990s.  That might be mostly the casting, though.  DeNiro AND Ray Liotta. Ugh, no thanks.  Maybe I'd feel different if I watched it now.

But on the other hand, I do enjoy Al Pacino (another mannered, hammy actor....I never said my taste was consistent). And I'm happy for the entire aged crew of old pros that they are getting such a victory lap with this movie...good for them! 

[Kris]

The Irishman.

I liked it a lot, but that was kind of a foregone conclusion. It would be pretty hard to go wrong with Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, and Pesci doing the gangster thing again. Having it on Netflix was nice as I watched the 209 minutes over 3 days. It doesn't feel like 3.5 hours but would be a long sit in a theater. Apparently used quite a bit of VFX to "de-age" the ancient cast for the many flashback scenes, but I didn't find it as distracting as some reviewers have complained (perhaps it is more noticeable on a huge screen?).

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

I think your guess on 'prestige' is correct.  This movie is probably a lock for Oscar nods for Best Actor (which is an unbelievably stacked category this particular year, from what it looks like...gonna be at least 5 or 6 people left out that could easily get a nom in any other year), Best Picture, and at least one or possibly two Best Supporting Actor slots.  Probably a good bet for Best Director, as well.

I don't know that I will see it, though.  On the one hand, I usually like Scorsese films, but I don't care for De Niro's acting style (though to be fair, I haven't seen 2 of his supposedly greatest roles...Taxi Driver and Raging Bull), which has always struck me as very showy and mannered. Plus, there's something so greasy and off-putting about De Niro's entire vibe, it creeps me out (kind of funny, b/c my aunt had an affair with him back in the day, and I can't even enjoy any good gossip she has about it b/c the idea of sleeping with De Niro just revolts me LOL).

I also don't usually care for movies about mobsters.   I watched the Godfather movies exactly once for the sake of being a well-rounded cinephile, but I don't plan on revisiting unless forced.  I found Goodfellas super irritating when I watched it in the 1990s.  That might be mostly the casting, though.  DeNiro AND Ray Liotta. Ugh, no thanks.  Maybe I'd feel different if I watched it now.

But on the other hand, I do enjoy Al Pacino (another mannered, hammy actor....I never said my taste was consistent). And I'm happy for the entire aged crew of old pros that they are getting such a victory lap with this movie...good for them!

I will say this. I hate mobster movies, and this one didn’t really attract me when I saw the teasers or the buzz. Plus I find watching Pacino unpleasant in general.

But I really enjoyed this movie. Maybe because it was historical. But for whatever reason, I definitely recommend it.

[sui generis]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_to_Busan

What was interesting to me was not one gun was ever fired in the movie. Lots of character story. And then all the zombie action mixed in.

Just watched this and noticed that as well.  Also, being very familiar with American zombie movies (and American culture generally), I noticed several times the script departed from what I would have predicted, based presumably on cultural differences.  Mostly similar to your standard zombie fare, but enjoyed being able to look for those kind of differences.

[slackmax]

The Irishman.

I liked it a lot, but that was kind of a foregone conclusion. It would be pretty hard to go wrong with Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, and Pesci doing the gangster thing again. Having it on Netflix was nice as I watched the 209 minutes over 3 days. It doesn't feel like 3.5 hours but would be a long sit in a theater. Apparently used quite a bit of VFX to "de-age" the ancient cast for the many flashback scenes, but I didn't find it as distracting as some reviewers have complained (perhaps it is more noticeable on a huge screen?).

This is reportedly a 159 million dollar movie. Kind of blows my mind that Netflix is willing to spend that much on a movie, can they really expect to gain that back in new subscribers? Or is it a play for awards and prestige? I get they have 158 million subscribers globally so they have a ton of cash but it's still an interesting business decision to me. The entertainment industry is a changin'.

I think your guess on 'prestige' is correct.  This movie is probably a lock for Oscar nods for Best Actor (which is an unbelievably stacked category this particular year, from what it looks like...gonna be at least 5 or 6 people left out that could easily get a nom in any other year), Best Picture, and at least one or possibly two Best Supporting Actor slots.  Probably a good bet for Best Director, as well.

I don't know that I will see it, though.  On the one hand, I usually like Scorsese films, but I don't care for De Niro's acting style (though to be fair, I haven't seen 2 of his supposedly greatest roles...Taxi Driver and Raging Bull), which has always struck me as very showy and mannered. Plus, there's something so greasy and off-putting about De Niro's entire vibe, it creeps me out (kind of funny, b/c my aunt had an affair with him back in the day, and I can't even enjoy any good gossip she has about it b/c the idea of sleeping with De Niro just revolts me LOL).

I also don't usually care for movies about mobsters.   I watched the Godfather movies exactly once for the sake of being a well-rounded cinephile, but I don't plan on revisiting unless forced.  I found Goodfellas super irritating when I watched it in the 1990s.  That might be mostly the casting, though.  DeNiro AND Ray Liotta. Ugh, no thanks.  Maybe I'd feel different if I watched it now.

But on the other hand, I do enjoy Al Pacino (another mannered, hammy actor....I never said my taste was consistent). And I'm happy for the entire aged crew of old pros that they are getting such a victory lap with this movie...good for them!

I will say this. I hate mobster movies, and this one didn’t really attract me when I saw the teasers or the buzz. Plus I find watching Pacino unpleasant in general.

But I really enjoyed this movie. Maybe because it was historical. But for whatever reason, I definitely recommend it.

Thanks for this review, Kris. Now I think I will see the movie.  Gangster movies bore me usually, but the historical aspect here makes it more attractive. I liked DeNiro in Taxi Driver. I like Pacino in everything.   

[LaineyAZ]

"Motherless Brooklyn" directed by and starring Edward Norton.  Playing a detective in 1950s who has Tourette's Syndrome.  Really engrossing, would definitely recommend.

[slackmax]

Just saw the 4 PM showing of The Irishman along with 3 other moviegoers (in the entire theater)  at my local 'no advertising' theater, for $8.

Good movie!  Al Pacino was my favorite actor. It's a story about the life and death of Jimmy Hoffa, labor union organizer.    3.5 hours long, but never boring.

In some scenes they have DeNiro glancing at the camera. I guess you're supposed to feel like you're part of the scene.   

 

[Kris]

Just saw the 4 PM showing of The Irishman along with 3 other moviegoers (in the entire theater)  at my local 'no advertising' theater, for $8.

Good movie!  Al Pacino was my favorite actor. It's a story about the life and death of Jimmy Hoffa, labor union organizer.    3.5 hours long, but never boring.

In some scenes they have DeNiro glancing at the camera. I guess you're supposed to feel like you're part of the scene.

Ooh, I'm glad you liked it! I was biting my nails a little after you said I convinced you with my review, lol!

[Samuel]

But I really enjoyed this movie. Maybe because it was historical. But for whatever reason, I definitely recommend it.

Thanks for this review, Kris. Now I think I will see the movie.  Gangster movies bore me usually, but the historical aspect here makes it more attractive. I liked DeNiro in Taxi Driver. I like Pacino in everything.

Note: It's historicalish. The characters are all real and most of the general arc, but the more sensational parts are almost certainly BS exaggerations from Frank Sheeran's (the titular "Irishman") deathbed "confessions".

Doesn't really matter, still a great movie. And I actually thought Pesci's work was the best of the big three but they're all great.

"Motherless Brooklyn" directed by and starring Edward Norton.  Playing a detective in 1950s who has Tourette's Syndrome.  Really engrossing, would definitely recommend.

Written (based on a novel), produced, directed, and starring Norton, and apparently in the works for 20 years. He recently made the podcast rounds to promote it and I'm sold. Haven't seen it yet but the audiobook hold I placed at the library came through and I'm halfway through that. Can't wait to see how they adapted it for the screen. So much happens in the protagonist's head (and the book is set in the late 1990's!) that it must be significantly different. I think it will actually be my first theater movie of the year.

[Warlord1986]

I watched the new Aladdin. Will Smith is fun, and Hot Jafar was an unexpected treat, but the older movie was better.

[sparkytheop]

The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot.

The movie had some good parts, it had some bad parts (laughably bad).  But it shows that I could have Sam Elliot, and his good boy, on screen in the background and be happy enough.

[Roadrunner53]

Just started watching Ozark on Netflix. Watched 4 episodes so far. There are two seasons with 20 episodes in all. Very good show.

Binge worthy!

[GuitarStv]

The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot.

The movie had some good parts, it had some bad parts (laughably bad).  But it shows that I could have Sam Elliot, and his good boy, on screen in the background and be happy enough.

I remember having trouble deciding if this movie was a work of genius or total crap.

[sui generis]

I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's for the first time this weekend. I know it's super hard to evaluate such a cultural work in a wholly different time... But my god that was hard to watch. Apart from that, I also felt like the storyline was patchy and superficial, like I knew where it was trying to go, but it just glided over all of those places without diving in. I can't say I feel like I accomplished much by watching it, though I guess I should be glad I can finally say I have.

[Kris]

I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's for the first time this weekend. I know it's super hard to evaluate such a cultural work in a wholly different time... But my god that was hard to watch. Apart from that, I also felt like the storyline was patchy and superficial, like I knew where it was trying to go, but it just glided over all of those places without diving in. I can't say I feel like I accomplished much by watching it, though I guess I should be glad I can finally say I have.

Agreed. It is aggressively painful and horrific to watch.

[sui generis]

Last night we watched The Last Black Man in San Francisco.  This was a good movie!  I often don't really love artsy movies.  Like it always feels like there's something I'm not quite sophisticated enough to understand, below the surface level story.  But, this one didn't feel like that to me.  It had some interesting cinematography that wasn't gimmicky or over the top.  Just added dimensions and was a great complement to the whole film, which always kept me slightly off-kilter.  Not in a bad, uncomfortable way, but just because it wasn't predictable at all and I felt like every scene would be a little surprise.  The actors were great.  I don't know, it's not the best movie I've ever seen, but it was fun and different and I'm really glad we watched it.  I definitely recommend it for a diversion from your typical rom-com, drama or the latest Avengers movie.

One notable moment near the end: a couple of women on a bus were exclaiming over hating San Francisco and the protagonist interrupted them to tell them that they can't hate it.  Typical protestations about hating what they pleased (same thing I was thinking tbh) and then he said contemplatively, to himself as much as to them, "You don't get to hate San Francisco.  You don't get to hate it unless you love it."  This is how I feel about so much in life.  In particular about politics and my larger home, America.

_{For others from the area, it was fun to see all the familiar sights.  If you've watched it, there's one scene I could just not make sense of, showing a cable car on a long uninterrupted stretch uphill with a bridge in the very near background.  It was light gray, so not the GG, but didn't even look very much like the BB.  And even if it did, you wouldn't ever be watching a cable car going uphill toward the BB, particularly with how close it looked.}

[BZB]

I checked out The Queen (2006) and Unbroken (2014) from the library. Helen Mirren deserved her Best Actress award in The Queen. I love the corgis!
Unbroken made me want to learn more about the Pacific Ocean theater of WWII. I also want to read the book.

[Zamboni]

We'll have to check out The Queen.

We just watched The Judge, which was great.

[OtherJen]

I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's for the first time this weekend. I know it's super hard to evaluate such a cultural work in a wholly different time... But my god that was hard to watch. Apart from that, I also felt like the storyline was patchy and superficial, like I knew where it was trying to go, but it just glided over all of those places without diving in. I can't say I feel like I accomplished much by watching it, though I guess I should be glad I can finally say I have.

Agreed. It is aggressively painful and horrific to watch.

I couldn't get through it. Thank you for letting me know that I'm not the only one who really doesn't get the appeal.

[GuitarStv]

I watched Breakfast at Tiffany's for the first time this weekend. I know it's super hard to evaluate such a cultural work in a wholly different time... But my god that was hard to watch. Apart from that, I also felt like the storyline was patchy and superficial, like I knew where it was trying to go, but it just glided over all of those places without diving in. I can't say I feel like I accomplished much by watching it, though I guess I should be glad I can finally say I have.

Agreed. It is aggressively painful and horrific to watch.

I couldn't get through it. Thank you for letting me know that I'm not the only one who really doesn't get the appeal.

I remember trying to watch it years back and turning it off when an aggressively racist Mickey Rooney dressed up as a Japanese man came on screen.