What was the last movie you watched ....

Been working through the Marvel superhero movie in story order. Ultron was the last. I have to wait for Netflix to bring me Ant-Man now.

Of course I've seen them all more than once already, but never in such proximity to one another. I've noticed a lot of cool little details this time around that make the global storyline richer. The writers really did a good job of maintaining one big story from all of these separate stories.

I also noticed differences in the directing, that I hadn't noticed when I watched the movies piecemeal. I knew that "Happy" directed the Iron Man movies, but beyond that I never paid attention to who directed what. But without looking at the credits beforehand this time around, it sure seemed like they had different directors, because, well, the movies feel different. And indeed, when the end credits rolled, the different movies had different directors.

 

Kingsman #2 -- No.
The first one was pretty good, mostly because (1) Mr. Darcy goes full-on ninja like I've never seen anyone do in any kung fu movie, ever, and (2) who doesn't enjoy Samuel Jackson? But #2 is lacking almost everything that a movie needs to be good. It has discrete moments of very cool special effects inside the fight choreography, and Julianne Moore does a great job being an arrogant villain, but to be blunt, the movie lacks charm. And substance. And feeling. Neither Halle Berry nor Channing Tatum had enough material to make their characters interesting, and the leading actor "Eggsy" just wasn't strong enough to be a leading actor.

 

"Christopher Robin"
::crying:: ::crying:: So many "feels"! ::crying:: ::crying::
Entirely predictable movie, but very good because of the emotion. And Pooh and Eeyore were great. The writers gave them the best lines.

I need to see it again on Netflix or dvd.
::crying:: So many feels!

 

Die Hard 1 -- because Christmas
And yes, it's still as good now, as when it first came out.

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure -- because, um, nostalgia?
It's not as fresh as when it first came out, but it doesn't suck. The utter goofiness of Bill and Ted, and the likable grandfatherly Socrates, make the movie watchable still today.

The Spirit of Christmas (Netflix)
It's a Hallmark movie that's not on the Hallmark channel. Girl who can't feel love falls in love with a ghost, more or less. He's dead, but for 12 days in December every year, he comes back to life. I actually sat through the whole thing willingly, and the reason I sat through the whole thing is because the heartthrob ghost was stern to the point of being a jerk. He did not want the pretty lady anywhere near him. And that made it interesting. How will there be a Hallmark wedding ending when 1) the "Prince Charming" character can't stand to be in the same room as the princess? And 2) even if his heart melts, he's going melt in a few days like Frosty the Snowman in the classic holiday cartoon, and just like Frosty, he won't come back for a full year. Hmm. That's actually an interesting twist!

 

I watched the new Spider-Man Spider-verse movie with the whole family, because they wanted to. (sigh)

It's not very good, mostly because there's not enough character development. We get a tiny bit of backstory about Miles and his family, a tiny bit about Peter Parker, barely anything about Wilson Fisk, nothing at all about the real villain, Doc Ock, and hardly more than one line about each of the other Spider-heros -- including the pretty girl. I'm all, "What? Huh? Why do I care about these characters? Who are these characters?"

And also, it's blurry. I was thinking to myself, "Am I supposed to be wearing 3-D glasses?" And three times I literally turned to look around the room, to see if anyone was wearing 3-D glasses. Nope. After the movie I asked my family if it was blurry to them, too. They all said yes. (What? What's up with a blurry movie?!!!)

All of that said, the Peter Parker character grew on me as the movie progressed. I'd like to see a movie about him. There is tons of potential in that character.

 

Re-watched "Suicide Squad" to confirm that it was as bad as I thought back when it was new.
It is as bad as I thought back when it was new.

The whole witch heart thing is stupid. If she can pop herself across the planet to steal that foreign notebook, she can pop into Waller's office and steal her heart.
And then the mission being

Spoiler

to rescue Waller herself? What? Why couldn't Waller walk down the staircase on her own when it all first started? Or take the emergency secret tunnel? Am I really supposed to believe that she doesn't have an emergency secret tunnel attached to a panic room? This is Waller's secret base we're talking about. And what's up with her killing her entire staff?! That made no sense! The whole world is at risk by a super-powered witch, and her solution is to kill her entire staff of technicians?! What?!

And why couldn't Waller order an Air Force strike? One bomb hand-carried by one Seal took out one witch, and one bomb hand-carried by Col. Flagg took out the other witch, so you're telling me that a couple of "smart bombs" dropped by the U.S. Air Force wouldn't have solved all of the problems 12 hours before Flagg assembled this team?

Not even the eye candy of the pretty actors can overcome this stupid script. Bad bad bad bad.

 

I just finished Bird Box, with Sandra "looking-increasingly-like-Michael-Jackson-from-some-angles" Bullock.

I liked it, a taught thriller that lets your imagination supply the horror,* which is always a good bet.

I thought the ending was unsatisfactory,** as they sometimes are with post-apocalyptic stories; the writer has come up with a terrifying idea, which creates a good story, but if you actually follow it through to a logical conclusion there's no hope and humanity ends.

* Apparently the intention was to show the monsters. Having seen the models, it's a good job they didn't.
** The book has a different ending, somewhat darker, but I don't believe it fully confronts the logical conclusion of the set up.
*** There was no third footnote.
**** This footnote doesn't relate to anything either, I just like footnotes.

 

Watched Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey -- because I recently watched the first, so I thought I had to finish it.
Whereas the first is still okay after all these years, the "Bogus" one is, um, bogus. Not good. I don't remember if I liked it circa 1991, but even if I did -- it didn't stay fresh.

 

The House with a Clock in Its Walls --

I think if I was 10 years old, I would have liked this movie. But I'm not ten.
From the trailer, I thought it was going to be Harry Potter except with Jack Black. Magic house? Check. Little kid who didn't know he was part of a wizard family? Check. Lady with a magic umbrella or something? Check. Climactic battle of wizards? Check. It has all the right parts, and I thought Cate Blanchett in particular did a great job, but the movie lacks that, er, "magic" that pulls everything together. I think the underlying problem is that the script moved too quickly. The little boy is orphaned, but he never had time to grieve. He moves in with an uncle he's never met before, but we don't see them starting a relationship. They just pass each other in the hall. He's an outcast at the new school, but that aspect of his life is not developed. He's learning magic, except that we never see him practice. And the villain -- the most important part of a story -- is mostly a question mark. We learn very little about him, and nothing at all about his sidekick wife, which might be okay if like Voldemort this villain was growing a following, but he has no following. As far as the viewer knows, nobody else in the whole world even knows about this villain. But of course he's going to destroy the world. Of course.

In short, the fine acting by the lead characters could not overcome the weaknesses in the story, unless you're ten years old. Then it's probably a good movie.