Is this movie worth-watching?: a thread

It's not great, but I thought it was a lot better than its reputation suggested it would be. Winslet is really good in it, it's really nicely produced and everything, very, very lived in, and (if you're into this sort of thing) it's kind of economical with the chatter too, so a little more cinematic than the Sciamma movie where they never shut the fuck up. The writing completely lets it down to the point it feels incomplete, but it's worth watching if you like the people involved.

Oh honeys, it's been said that Winslet did use tongue... and I don't mean a stand in tongue.

lol

I looooooove God's Own Country and boobs, but this did not deliver.

To move on from Ammonite (which I haven't seen), I have another one.

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish

I have heard nothing but good things about this. However, I (1.) hated the first movie, and (2.) don't like anything. What precisely is it that makes the movie special? Sell it to me. Or don't, if you think it's crap. Push me one way or another.

Uhhhh, how about Southland Tales? Is it actually worth watching?

I didn't really see whatever it is that everyone is seeing. There's some nice voice work from a starry cast in true Dreamworks fashion. It does have very interesting stuff in it, but its a kids movie so it only half-heartedly touches on that and spends most of its time dabbling in far more by the numbers material.

Also, be warned, it is pro-dog propaganda. I was fine with that, but I'm sure there are many people out there (e.g. Taylor Swift) who would not be.

Depends on your view of cop movies. It doesn't really break new ground and hits every major cop movie cliché there is, but the performances are all top notch including Farrell. I do like that it is a much more character driven cop movie than you typically see. Also, fair warning, the conclusion may or not break your opinion of the whole thing. I, for one, liked it and thought it was a nice change-of-pace from other movies in the genre. Give it a shot! 

I like Dangerous. It's entertaining, well written, and yes, Davis is great in it. It can be a bit melodramatic at times, but that hardly plays against it as a whole. I would definitely recommend it, especially to a Bette Davis fan. 

Morning Glory, on the other hand, is a bit of a slog, and Hepburn is not particulary good in it... Not sure why they awarded her for that. I guess that was a banner year for her (she also had Christopher Strong and Little Women, where she played Jo March, so maybe they saw a hint of her innate talent or a potential star). See it, sure, but don't expect too much of it. She has one interesting scene, where, but that's about it. Ironically, Davis also has a similar scene in Dangerous.

I had not and now I won't a comment will always be appriciated guys

It's a very good film IMO, but it's an Abel Ferrara film, so it's stylistically unusual and very idiosyncratic, probably more so than any other film of his (with the exception of Zeros And Ones and Siberia as well). It's a vague and elliptical film and it's more interested in presenting the subjective nature of reality and how technology distorts one's view of events and characters, even themselves, than offering a solid narrative. It's a very acquired taste, so take that as you will.

Not on the level of Psycho 2, but I dig Psycho 4 - they brought back the original screenwriter and it costars CCH Pounder as a late-night radio host!  One of Showtime's first movies too, they put out some underrated fun stuff in the '90s.