What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Zombie_61]

The Accountant (2016) starring Ben Affleck as Christian Wolff, an accountant, an Autistic, and a math "savant" who has difficulties dealing with "normal" people, but can perform complicated mathematical equations in his head. Co-starring Anna Kendrick as an in-house accountant for the company Wolff works for (and presumably a love interest for Wolff in the sequel), and J.K. Simmons as the Director of the same company and who knows who Wolff is and what he's capable of. There are, of course, other actors playing other characters, but the plot of this movie isn't much more complicated than involving these people and watching them interact as they do what they do until the words "The End" appear on the screen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

The Lady from Shanghai (produced 1946, released 1948) with Rita Hayworth, Orson Welles, Everett Sloan, Glenn Anders, Ted De Corsia, and quite a few others. Welles directed and wrote part of the screenplay. Reading the background to the film on IMDb, it is impressive that it was made. Rich lawyer Sloan is married to Hayworth, Welles is an Irish sailor who gets hired to crew on Sloan's yacht, Anders is someone with a connection to something, and De Corsia is supposed to be monitoring Hayworth. A lot of Wellesian flash in the camera work mixed in with huh? shots. IMDb says that the film was turned in with no close-ups, which could explain why a lot of close-ups seem plugged in rather jarringly. The courtroom scene is fun, with Sloane cross-examining himself. Some quirks interrupt the story-telling, like Sloan tagging his dialogue with Hayworth with "right, lover?" or "Whaddaya think, lover?" or something with "lover" at the end, and Anders seems to punctuate his lines with "fella." The picnic in Acapulco is pure Kane, and the Hall of Mirrors finale has Cabinet of Dr. Caligari liberally referenced.

British Intelligence (1940) with Boris Karloff, Margaret Lindsay, Holmes Herbert, and some folks I don't know. Set in a English cabinet minister's home, during The Great War, Lindsay seems to be a nurse who is a spy, and Karloff is a spy, too, and the spymaster is the leader giving orders to German spies. How is the bad guy getting all the plans of the Allies, ambushing the troops, and thwarting military efforts? We see double agents abounding, some twists and turns, and a wrap-up that is sort of poetic.

 

[Fading Fast]

Suddenly from 1954 with Frank Sinatra, Sterling Hayden, Nancy Gates, and James Gleason


The setup in Suddenly isn't complicated: the President is passing through a small town, so the local police and the Secret Service work together on security, especially with rumors of an assassination attempt prompting concern.

Those rumors prove true when potential assassins take over a nearby house with a perfect view of the train platform where the President will alight. Things are a bit more complicated now.

There's also a small side story about the local sheriff, played by Sterling Hayden, having a bumpy romance with the war widow who lives – with her dad and young son – in the house the assassins take over, but the main plot is clear: will the assassins be successful?

The layers fold in slowly as we learn Hayden is a vet who turned his World War II experience into a career in law enforcement. The war widow, played by Nancy Gates, turned her traumatic war experience into a pacifist ideology that hates ***s. It's no wonder their relationship is bumpy.

In Act Two, Hayden, Gates, her son, and her dad, played by the outstanding character actor James Gleason, are being held hostage by the assassins, whose leader is played by Frank Sinatra – a methodical planner whom we come to learn is quietly insane.

Like several other movies at this time, Suddenly has by now morphed into a home-invasion story as Sinatra and his two partners set up for the assassination, while holding the others hostage in a normal-looking middle-class American home.

All the things you'd expect to happen, happen: a few Secret Service agents show up to do a routine check, Hayden makes an attempt to stop the assassins, Gates' boy becomes a leverage point, and Hayden and Sinatra engage in a tense head game.

That head game includes Hayden probing Sinatra – a WWII vet, too – for psychological weaknesses, while Sinatra uses the game to show off. He says he's killing the president not for ideological reasons, but for cold hard cash. Yet we quickly see that killing fuels Sinatra's ego.

Sinatra – a killing machine – inadvertently explains how he was created by Uncle Sam. Before the war, he felt weak, unimportant, and ignored, but as a good soldier – a good killing machine – he felt he was a man others respected. War taught him all the wrong lessons for civilian life.

Hayden turned his wartime experience into a career as an officer of the law who judiciously uses his *** to keep the peace; Sinatra turned killing into his complete identity, leading to this moment – the ultimate killing moment – assassinating the president.

There's a lot of back and forth between Hayden and Sinatra as horrified Gates looks on. The climax, not surprisingly for the era, forces Gates to acknowledge through word and deed that people, not ***s, kill – that a *** is just a tool that can be used for good or evil.

Hayden's performance, like most of his, is a study in understated ego-free acting. He lets Sinatra, the billed top star, be the top star, while he just quietly adds to the realism and tension. Gleason and Gates, too, know exactly why they are in the movie.

Sinatra as the top star doesn't disappoint. He seems normal at first, but his increasingly insane monologues are a masterclass in acting, as there's no one moment, just a slow build to where you finally realize he is a very sick man who can present normal.

With a modest budget – but with the just-noted excellent cast, a solid screenplay, and smart, straightforward directing – the movie is short, tense, professional, and engaging.

Adjusting to civilian life was a major post-war theme. Right after the war, understandably, most movies tried to offer solutions and sympathy. But by 1954, almost a decade after the war was over, Hollywood was willing to show that the war had simply, irreparably broken some men.

Suddenly, stripped to its core and driven by Sinatra's performance, shines a spotlight on one of those very broken men.

 

[Fading Fast]

6 Day Bike Rider from 1934 with Joe E. Brown, Maxine Doyle, Gordon Westcott, and Frank McHugh


Maybe you had to be a kid in the Depression to appreciate – heck, to just tolerate – Joe E. Brown's style of humor, as today, his obnoxious jerk persona is very hard to take. Yet, in his day, he was a successful comedian.

In 6 Day Bike Rider, Brown is in full obnoxious-jerk mode playing a small-town railroad clerk engaged to a pretty local girl, played by Maxine Doyle. But then a trick cyclist, played by Gordon Westcott, arrives in town to do some shows and starts hitting on Doyle behind Brown's back.

After several misunderstandings – misunderstandings are the stock-in-trade of these movies – the engagement is off, and Brown is leaving town to put all the embarrassment behind him. The town, led by Doyle's parents, should have thrown the largest block party ever.

But alas, we are only shifting into Act II, where Brown, using twisted logic, plans to win Doyle back by winning a six-day bike race, in which his nemesis, Westcott, will also be racing. As stupid as that is, there's much more idiocy coming.

Brown takes a temporary job as a bike messenger, only to end up in a fight with Westcott – indirectly over Doyle – that lands Brown in jail, where it looks like he'll miss the race. Sane people are thinking, "Good, maybe we can wrap things up now."

Brown, however, with Doyle's family's help, is freed from jail just in time to avoid disqualification. Doyle's family finally sees that Westcott is a cad. Brown now joins his racing partner, played by Frank McHugh – the last man on earth, physically, who would ever be in a bike race.

The race itself is more slapstick and farce, with Westcott being a cheating jerk and Brown being a bumbling fool – but also a speed demon racer. Proving that no gag is too infradig for this picture, there is the old-even-for-this-era slipping-on-the-banana-peel joke woven in.

You can guess the ending, if you, one, care and, two, stick around as these formula movies assume you are rooting for Brown. And that is the crux of it – are you rooting for him?

Perhaps a charming man in real life, Brown's on-screen persona is that of a braggart and a know-it-all. He is also loud and officious. Worse, he is not only quite often wrong, but he is unable to admit it. And of course, his voice is grating and he just looks like an arrogant jerk.

Finally, physically, he is often breaking things and knocking other people over – it's crude slapstick. He's an exaggerated version of the guy for whom you'll quit your train seat just to not have to sit next to him, even if you can't find another seat and it's a long ride.

How this style of humor became popular is a mystery, but how the practitioner of it became a star you're supposed to root for is Area 51 conspiracy theory level stuff.

It's hard to find much that is good in 6 Day Bike Rider at all, but Doyle is likeable in a poor man's Janet ***nor sort of way, and Frank McHugh is an actor who always puts in a professional effort, no matter how ridiculous the role or production.

The Depression saw hardship current generations cannot appreciate. Maybe a jerk who ignored all rules of decency and common courtesy and just did what he wanted appealed to some part of the broken spirit of the time. Maybe that's why even Joe E. Brown was successful.

 

[Fading Fast]

The Dig from 2021 with Carey Mulligan, Ralph Fiennes, and Lily James


The rebuttal to the lament "They don't make movies like that anymore" is The Dig. It's not perfect – what is? – but it's a movie that tells (with some liberties) a historically accurate story driven by talented actors creating engaging characters – all beautifully filmed and scored.

Based on the archeological find of 1939 at Sutton Hoo in Suffolk, England, you don't have to be an archeology geek to enjoy the movie, but a little interest in history doesn't hurt. Especially since it’s meta history – with its 1939 setting so thoughtfully done – it feels like time travel.

Carey Mulligan, showing no vanity as, true to her character, she is often without makeup and looks older than her thirty-six years, stars as the estate owner who hires a local amateur archeologist, played by Ralph Fiennes, to investigate the odd mounds of earth on her property.

She's low-key English proper and he's introverted and honest, which makes them a nearly perfect match as neither one wants to get close or reveal themselves until trust is built. After a few hiccups, he uncovers a major archeological find, which leads to the movie's second act.

The local Suffolk and the British National museums, both recognizing the importance of the find, try to bully their way in and to force Fiennes out. Yet frail Mulligan – she has a weak heart – is no pushover, so Fiennes stays engaged as part of the professional team now working the site.

Other than an inquest as to ownership and the final decision of where the unearthed treasures will be housed, that's it for the main plot. However, there is a contrived side story about a female archeologist, her aloof husband, and a tepid love triangle.

Because Lily James, a talented actress, plays the archeologist and the writers didn't go full virtue-signalling crazy – and because James' clothes are so darn period cute – the side story doesn't ruin the movie, but it is another example of modern politics intruding where it doesn't fit.

What works best is Mulligan's relationship with Fiennes – two quietly kind people who slowly build that aforementioned trust in a genuine way, and without a forced ***ual angle – Fiennes is married; his wife is nice; and Mulligan and she like each other.

What also works is the beauty of the picture. Director Simon Stone captures the stark charm of Suffolk's countryside. In his hands, rain, thunderstorms – even mud – have an earthy appeal as archeology is, itself, first about the soil.

There is a little historical framing with England on the brink of war – English fighter planes flying overhead, "wireless" reports of failed peace efforts, and a character enlisting in the Air Force – but it's done appropriately as the war did impact the dig in a "speed it up" way.

You'll care about Fiennes getting the credit he'd never ask for; you'll care about Mulligan living to see her dream realized, and you'll be awed by what they did – in a beautifully filmed movie, where characters and intelligent plotting drive an engaging story.

CGI, action adventure, Marvel versus DC, and summer blockbusters are all fine and can be entertaining if that's your thing, but for those looking for a movie that could have been made fifty years ago or, heck, in the period it's set in, The Dig has a non-pandering throwback feel.

It's old-fashioned storytelling, which means it's thoughtful storytelling that doesn't let the wizbang of movie making dominate the narrative, emotions, or characters. The visual – as beautiful as it is in The Dig – enhances the storytelling; it doesn't overwhelm it.

 

[Zombie_61]

The Accountant (2016) starring Ben Affleck as Christian Wolff, an accountant, an Autistic, and a math "savant" who has difficulties dealing with "normal" people, but can perform complicated mathematical equations in his head. Co-starring Anna Kendrick as an in-house accountant for the company Wolff works for (and presumably a love interest for Wolff in the sequel), and J.K. Simmons as the Director of the same company and who knows who Wolff is and what he's capable of. There are, of course, other actors playing other characters, but the plot of this movie isn't much more complicated than involving these people and watching them interact as they do what they do until the words "The End" appear on the screen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The Accountant 2 (2025). Also starring Ben Affleck, J.K. Simmons if you look quickly, Jon Bernthal again as Christian Wolff's also adopted brother Braxton. Anna Kendrick was not included this time around, so not intended to be Christian Wolff's girlfriend.

The problem with this sequel is that it bears little resemblance to the first movie. Ben Affleck's character has essentially turned into Dustin Hoffman's "Raymond Babbitt" from Rain Man. Jon Bernthal's Braxton is pretty much the same, they've just decided to not give him much to do.

If you're really interested, watch the first movie, then move on to another franchise, 'cause the #2 movie in this one isn't worth #2.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Werner Beinhart (1991)

 

[Trenchfriend]

Star Trek II & III.

Self-recorded VHS, the real thing!

 

[Fading Fast]

St. Ives with Charles Bronson, John Houseman, Jacqueline Bisset, and Maximilian Schell


St. Ives has so many flaws, it's surprising that it's still kind of entertaining – but that's why stars get paid a lot of money. With its unnecessarily hard-to-follow story, stars Charles Bronson, Jacqueline Bisset, and John Houseman definitely earn their salaries by keeping you engaged.

Without giving away any key spoilers, the plot has Bronson playing a struggling author and former crime-beat reporter, hired by an eccentric millionaire, played by Houseman, to retrieve some stolen journals.

This launches Bronson into a 1970s-style noirish trip through the seedier side of Los Angeles, featuring dead bodies, dirty and clean cops, an ice-pick murder, bags of money changing hands as ******s fly, and old-school noir regular Elisha Cook Jr. popping up in a small role.

It also launches Bronson into Bisset, well eventually, as she's Houseman's enigmatic operator in whatever mysterious business he's involved in (you'll learn that in time). Rounding out Houseman's strange household is Maximilian Schell playing an odd Freudian psychologist.

You'll spend a lot of this 1970s vigilante–noir mashup not knowing what is going on as new players get involved but not introduced, so there's a lot of "who the heck is that" running through your mind.

Eventually, the good-but-not-great climax explains it all – sort of – but the problem is it's too late as you no longer care that much about the plot; although, you do want to see what happens to Bronson, Bisset, and Houseman.

That's really it – the stars hold your attention and, today, the 1970s zeitgeist also keeps you engaged in a decade where most cars are bigger than army tanks, almost everybody has long hair, downtowns are combat zones, and even expensive things look a bit shabby.

Bronson was a big star at the time, often playing his own version of the Clint Eastwood lone-justice warrior, but why they made him an author – the least physical job on earth – and never let his hair move even a quarter of an inch are two of those odd Hollywood mysteries.

In his mid-fifties and sporting an overgrown mustache – another 1970s thing – he looks a bit like the father of one of the Village People. Still, the actor has a screen presence that simply says, "Take this man seriously," which helps shepherd the plot over some big flaws.

Houseman, with his deep, resonating voice, also has a screen presence that says "Take this man seriously." Yet, like everyone else, he's lost a bit in a plot that never really untangles itself until it's too late.

This leaves us with Bisset. When God gives a woman incredible beauty and talent to match, it's something to behold, which leaves you wondering why Ms. Bisset wasn't used much until the Third Act.

She then energizes the effort – her acting in the climactic scene is outstanding. Watching her wield a *** like a pro and then negotiate on the fly for her life using *** and money is impressive – but it also reminds you that she was idle for too long in this one.

Director J. Lee Thompson flirts with noir stylistically and thematically, mostly in settings and attitude, but never fully embraces the genre's philosophical outlook.

The moral ambiguity here is less fatalistic than traditional noir: instead of a doomed loner spiraling toward ruin, we get Bronson shrugging through the chaos. It’s noir by way of the '70s vigilante-justice movie – coarser and a bit more checked-out.

St. Ives was never going to be a great movie. One imagines the writers, producers, and director knew this, but heck, they figured with a good noirish script and a talented cast, they could make a good movie – and they almost got there.

 

[Doctor Damage]

The Accountant 2 (2025). Also starring Ben Affleck, J.K. Simmons if you look quickly, Jon Bernthal again as Christian Wolff's also adopted brother Braxton. Anna Kendrick was not included this time around, so not intended to be Christian Wolff's girlfriend.

The problem with this sequel is that it bears little resemblance to the first movie. Ben Affleck's character has essentially turned into Dustin Hoffman's "Raymond Babbitt" from Rain Man. Jon Bernthal's Braxton is pretty much the same, they've just decided to not give him much to do.

If you're really interested, watch the first movie, then move on to another franchise, 'cause the #2 movie in this one isn't worth #2.

Thanks for posting this. Too bad, I really liked the first film.

 

[Fading Fast]

Turn the Key Softly from 1953 with Yvonne Mitchell, Joan Collins, and Kathleen Harrison


Post-war British Cinema is a treat. The budgets, especially for a B picture like Turn the Key Softly, are modest, forcing the Brits to focus on character and story development – and on-location shooting – making them, today, invaluable time capsules of mid-century England.

Three unrelated women who became friends in prison – played by Yvonne Mitchell, Joan Collins, and Kathleen Harrison – happen to be released on the same day and then go on to have vastly different experiences, all on their first day out.

Harrison plays a senior who just wants to go home to her dog and see her family – but the latter is clearly tired of, and embarrassed by, their congenital shoplifting relative. Today, in many cases, we see shoplifting as a disease – as it is here – but that was not the view back then.

Collins, playing a prostitute, talks a good game about going straight and marrying her honest, hard-working, bus conductor boyfriend, but once out, her old profession and its easy money quickly tempt her and her spendthrift ways.

Mitchell defies easy categorization. She was clearly raised with good manners and bearing and wants to do nothing more than get an honest job, pay her bills, and put prison behind her. Then we learn she was in prison because her criminal boyfriend let her take a fall for him.

Worse, he's back and tempting her with – and it's a really well-done scene – *** (she's been in prison for a year, after all) and talk of having gone straight himself. Whether he has gone straight or not will drive the climax, but for the moment, she's now aglow and wants to believe in him.

Before that, though, she plans to host a "first night out" party for the girls from prison at a fancy restaurant, which Harrison, in particular, is excited about, as she's never been to "a really nice place." There's a sweetness to her excitement and Mitchell's kindness.

That's the setup – if it sounds dull, the spice is in the characters whom you quickly come to care about. You want Harrison to hug her dog, be welcomed by her family, and enjoy her night out.

You'll also want Collins to not go back to the oldest profession. Yet you come to see that she might not be wired to marry a bus conductor as that is not the life of luxury that compels her. You can't just logic your inherent nature away.

Mitchell, as always, is the most complex as you have no doubt she was set up, isn't a criminal, and wants to stay straight, but she's so out of sorts – even though, on the surface, she's perfectly calm – that you worry her boyfriend will crash her life again.

The pace of the movie is swift, as director Jack Lee moves you back and forth among the three women as each one's first day out takes shape. Their days then intersect for their dinner, which is strained because each one's day was strained.

There's a big climax related to Mitchell, a dramatic one for Harrison, and a too-neat one for Collins. Yet this is a movie more about the journey – about their all-in-a-day trip from inmate, without personal freedom, to woman and ex-con trying to find her new place in the world.

That contrast is part of the movie's subtle appeal. Collins and Mitchell almost look prettier in prison without all their makeup and fussy hairdos. Still, the transition is stunning as Collins – overly made up as a, umm, er, working girl – seems like a different woman.

The first day out is so tension filled and dramatic, the power of the movie is simply in the showing. If you enjoy the premise, see The Getaway (1972) for Steve McQueen's impressive take on a "first day out" where it's Ali MacGraw who gets him aglow.

The performances, too, are impressive with Mitchell's stiff-upper-lip British stoicism providing the center of gravity for the three women. Harrison is so simple and natural in her elderly convict role that you forget she's acting.

Collins would go on to have the biggest career of the three – it's obvious here that the camera loves her. When she's in a scene, your eyes just keep going back to her. Still, all three actresses engage you with smartly drawn characters facing an intense day.

Most of us, thankfully, will never be ex-cons, but you feel some of that experience, some of that exhilaration, some of that awkwardness, and even some of its ennui through the lives of these three very convincing actresses. That's an impressive feat for a modest-budget B movie.

In that era, Hollywood had the money, the stars, and the whiz-bang technology, while British cinema just toiled away in its small corner of the filmmaking sandbox, releasing one after another powerful "little" movie like Turn the Key Softly.

 

[Zombie_61]

Thanks for posting this. Too bad, I really liked the first film.

You're welcome! I liked the first one too, but the second movie is really a weak effort by comparison. If they make a third one I'll probably see it, but I don't know why they would or what story they might think they have left to tell.

 

[Preppy Climber]

View attachment 715254
Turn the Key Softly from 1953 with Yvonne Mitchell, Joan Collins, and Kathleen Harrison


Post-war British Cinema is a treat. The budgets, especially for a B picture like Turn the Key Softly, are modest, forcing the Brits to focus on character and story development – and on-location shooting – making them, today, invaluable time capsules of mid-century England.

Three unrelated women who became friends in prison – played by Yvonne Mitchell, Joan Collins, and Kathleen Harrison – happen to be released on the same day and then go on to have vastly different experiences, all on their first day out.

Harrison plays a senior who just wants to go home to her dog and see her family – but the latter is clearly tired of, and embarrassed by, their congenital shoplifting relative. Today, in many cases, we see shoplifting as a disease – as it is here – but that was not the view back then.

Collins, playing a prostitute, talks a good game about going straight and marrying her honest, hard-working, bus conductor boyfriend, but once out, her old profession and its easy money quickly tempt her and her spendthrift ways.

Mitchell defies easy categorization. She was clearly raised with good manners and bearing and wants to do nothing more than get an honest job, pay her bills, and put prison behind her. Then we learn she was in prison because her criminal boyfriend let her take a fall for him.

Worse, he's back and tempting her with – and it's a really well-done scene – *** (she's been in prison for a year, after all) and talk of having gone straight himself. Whether he has gone straight or not will drive the climax, but for the moment, she's now aglow and wants to believe in him.

Before that, though, she plans to host a "first night out" party for the girls from prison at a fancy restaurant, which Harrison, in particular, is excited about, as she's never been to "a really nice place." There's a sweetness to her excitement and Mitchell's kindness.

That's the setup – if it sounds dull, the spice is in the characters whom you quickly come to care about. You want Harrison to hug her dog, be welcomed by her family, and enjoy her night out.

You'll also want Collins to not go back to the oldest profession. Yet you come to see that she might not be wired to marry a bus conductor as that is not the life of luxury that compels her. You can't just logic your inherent nature away.

Mitchell, as always, is the most complex as you have no doubt she was set up, isn't a criminal, and wants to stay straight, but she's so out of sorts – even though, on the surface, she's perfectly calm – that you worry her boyfriend will crash her life again.

The pace of the movie is swift, as director Jack Lee moves you back and forth among the three women as each one's first day out takes shape. Their days then intersect for their dinner, which is strained because each one's day was strained.

There's a big climax related to Mitchell, a dramatic one for Harrison, and a too-neat one for Collins. Yet this is a movie more about the journey – about their all-in-a-day trip from inmate, without personal freedom, to woman and ex-con trying to find her new place in the world.

That contrast is part of the movie's subtle appeal. Collins and Mitchell almost look prettier in prison without all their makeup and fussy hairdos. Still, the transition is stunning as Collins – overly made up as a, umm, er, working girl – seems like a different woman.

The first day out is so tension filled and dramatic, the power of the movie is simply in the showing. If you enjoy the premise, see The Getaway (1972) for Steve McQueen's impressive take on a "first day out" where it's Ali MacGraw who gets him aglow.

The performances, too, are impressive with Mitchell's stiff-upper-lip British stoicism providing the center of gravity for the three women. Harrison is so simple and natural in her elderly convict role that you forget she's acting.

Collins would go on to have the biggest career of the three – it's obvious here that the camera loves her. When she's in a scene, your eyes just keep going back to her. Still, all three actresses engage you with smartly drawn characters facing an intense day.

Most of us, thankfully, will never be ex-cons, but you feel some of that experience, some of that exhilaration, some of that awkwardness, and even some of its ennui through the lives of these three very convincing actresses. That's an impressive feat for a modest-budget B movie.

In that era, Hollywood had the money, the stars, and the whiz-bang technology, while British cinema just toiled away in its small corner of the filmmaking sandbox, releasing one after another powerful "little" movie like Turn the Key Softly.

View attachment 715255

Just finished watching the movie after reading your review. I really enjoyed it--both the movie and your review. Thank you!

 

[Fading Fast]

Just finished watching the movie after reading your review. I really enjoyed it--both the movie and your review. Thank you!

That makes me feel great – I'm so glad you enjoyed the movie and my review. Thank you for letting me know.

 

[Fading Fast]

Pickpocket from 1959, a French film


Pickpocket is not just a French film, it is a very, very French film, where the journey is more philosophical than physical, with the twist being the physical and philosophical switch places. Only the French could make a movie about a pickpocket that is more existential than criminal.

Michel is a young man with no direction. He is also a loner with a quietly rebellious instinct that has him rejecting the traditional path in life – entry-level job to a career – for a life as a pickpocket. Furthermore, being French, Michel wraps his choice in metaphysical apprehension.

To some extent, he does, however, walk the walk. He all but taps the local police chief on the shoulder and says, "I plan to be a pickpocket in your neighborhood, try and catch me." Never explained, he also clearly loves his dying mother, but refuses to see her. He's an odd duck.

He also avoids contact with the stunningly beautiful girl Jeanne helping his mother. She is clearly interested in him, but being a loner, he all but shuns her (which is proof he's insane). Adding to his weirdness, his tiny one-room apartment is more a monk-like cell than a home.

If there is any action in this slow-moving picture, it's first seeing Michel build his pickpocketing skills through home study and practice, trial and error, and teaming up with a few other pickpockets. Then it's onto the hard-core pickpocketing itself.

The scenes of his hand slowly finding its way into the pocket of someone standing next to him on a jam-packed subway or in the crowds at the racetrack are oddly engaging. You'll come away thinking the only safe choice is to leave your wallet and money at home – all the time.

Michel is French in the Camusian way. He is dispirited with life even when he is successful – as when the police arrest him but let him go for lack of evidence or when he picks a particularly lucrative pocket. American crooks have spirit; French ones, philosophical angst.

Much of the movie is shot in Paris, which juxtaposes Michel's emotional disengagement with a lively post-war city bustling with people and commerce – both things Michel disdains, but not enough that he won't live illegally off of them.

Director Robert Bresson's budget probably forced black-and-white cinematography, but the film's gestalt demanded it. Michel's thoughts and world are bleak – all black, white, and gray. Color would have thrown the movie's feng shui off.

Michel himself is never fleshed out for us. We don't know what in his past caused him to be this way – we just know that he is. You'll have to watch the climax to see his philosophical and physical worlds switch places at the end that argues prison is just a mental state.

That is a highly refined intellectual thought – very deep and very stupid. Spend a few nights in jail and see if you still feel that way. Kidding aside, yes, we can become prisoners of our mental state and intellectual freedom of a sort can even be achieved behind bars, but come on.

The few other characters are even greater enigmas than Michel. The gorgeous – in a very European way – Jeanne is a cipher who might be the only arrestingly beautiful girl in the world not awash in men trying to get her attention.

Even the police chief, who plays a cat-and-mouse game with Michel, is just an incomplete picture of an inspector. He enjoys the game, but as opposed to Michel, he also knows he has a real job to do, and plans to do it.

Pickpocket is generally recognized as a minor classic, and maybe it is, as its existential themes and spartan shooting were an early French version of the "rebel without a cause" movement sweeping cinema at that time.

America had Brando on a motorcycle and James Dean yelling at his parents "You're tearing me apart," while England had its kitchen-sink dramas with actors like Albert Finney playing an early version of an angry and obstreperous young man avoiding "adulting."

But the French would never do personal rebellion in such a crass, loud, and obvious manner. The French version is a deeper, brooding inner rebellion, not just against commercialism and societal hypocrisy, but against man's insignificance in a vast uncaring universe.

Okay, sure, man's insignificance in a vast uncaring universe is irritating, but most of us just get on with life – get a job, date someone, have drinks with friends, and so on – but not a good Camusian Frenchman. As seen in Pickpocket, for him, the insignificance becomes his identity.

 

[Flos]

Mad Max Fury Road. Helped to drown out the sound of fireworks for my dog on the 4th!

 

[rickc007]

F1 Cool Movie if you like racing

 

[Fading Fast]

F1 Cool Movie if you like racing

View attachment 715816

Thank you for posting. How does it compare to "Ford v Ferrari," which IMHO, is the best racing movie yet made.

 

[rickc007]

Thank you for posting. How does it compare to "Ford v Ferrari," which IMHO, is the best racing movie yet made.

Different, but equally good
See in imax if you can

 

[Fading Fast]

A Day in the Country from 1946, a French film


To understand A Day in the Country, one has to know a bit about its production background, including the fact that it was never completed by director and screenwriter Jean Renoir. Instead, about ten years after filming was interrupted, the existing footage was edited and released.

Based on a Guy de Maupassant short story, the truncated filming works in the film's favor, as it now carries a sort of cinematically romantic "what if" – could this have been another Renoir masterpiece if finished? Its length and enigmatic style also echo de Maupassant's short story.

Set in 1860, it starts with a Parisian shop owner taking his family on a day trip to the countryside, where they stop at a roadside restaurant along the water. The family proceeds to spend the day, eating, napping, fishing, and boating on the banks of the river.

There is a countryside idyll and beauty to it, but this is also a family that fights a bit, shouts a bit, and pouts a bit, so there's also an edge that keeps the movie from slipping into sentimentality. This imperfect 1860 family will be familiar to modern ones.

The day is complicated by two young men who take a shine to the shop owner's daughter. They plot to seduce her and her mother – it's odd, but they do – by taking the women boating, while distracting the men with fishing. The amazing thing is this slapdash plan works.

It works in part because the family is idiotic. Dad's a loud, blundering idiot and the mother is a loud, flighty idiot. The daughter, who's there with her fiancé, is smarter, but she's been handicapped by her upbringing: it's hard to be young and smart when raised by stupid parents.

Since it's only a forty-minute-long movie, you'll want to see the climax and the epilogue of a few years later fresh. Know that a quietly big thing happens on the titular day, which has emotional ramifications in the epilogue. It's the standard we all have regrets, writ poignantly.

You feel like the family is trapped somewhere between Tolstoy's two-types of families – paraphrasing – all happy families are alike, but each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. This family is happy – except when it isn't.

The film has an artsy vibe, with its panning shots of nature that sometimes harmonize with the action and sometimes contrast. For the 1930s – and compared to Hollywood's more popular offerings – it feels French and sophisticated, but still, it's just good, not great.

It also feels artsy because there is depth to several of the characters, despite our brief time with them, which is a credit to de Maupassant and Renoir as writers. Yet none of this adds up to the "masterpiece" title some wish to bestow on this abbreviated offering.

The film also has a bit of a throwback style to the silent film era, either because the actors hadn't yet dropped all those mannerisms or because Renoir proactively wanted that effect to give the movie an 1860s feel.

A Day in the Country is more interesting than brilliant. Take Renoir's name off the movie, and it would probably be much less fussed over today. It’s a good movie – well worth seeing – but it's more of an interesting sketch than an "unfinished classic."