Printable View
Really? Man I had a lot of fun with this movie. I really enjoyed it and the discussion I have had with many people afterwards... things I missed VS things they missed. A solid 9/10 for me, especially in a world that has so few original thought provoking films coming out!~Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingfan24
Yeah, I don't get that at all. The film is paced perfectly, the characters are well fleshed out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingfan24
I could understand you not liking it, but Peele has done nothing poor thus far in his short career.
Like Web said, there are so few original films released nowadays, it's great to get out there and support them the best we can.
I loved it. Want to see it again because I know I missed many things.
I really want to see it again as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by becca69
I also will never be able to listen to Good Vibrations by the Beach Boys the same way ever again. :lol:
That reminds me, the soundtrack and score are top notch.
I really enjoyed it. And I completely agree about the soundtrack and score. The music in the film fit perfectly.
I'm curious, was anyone surprised by the ending? I had a strong suspicion that they had switched early on in the film. That didn't deter my enjoyment of the film though.
Just saw it and enjoyed it. Wasn’t blown outta the water but was worth seeing
Usually I pick up on that stuff, but I didn't see it coming until the end. I just figured she was messed up from the whole experience when they showed her as a kid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather19
I thought it was okay. It tried to be too much, and it didn't make it. Get Out was a much better movie in pretty much all respects. The first 20 minutes or so of the film, where all the characterization is, was extremely boring. I was far more invested in Get Out from the get go. The characters were incredibly thin. The father mostly just made jokes. The son liked magic and masks. The daughter did track and field. And it seemed whatever characterization was done on the mom was...undone by the end? I think the twist at the end really hurt the movie and made it make a lot less sense. Very Shyamalany.
I think all in all, I can only give it ***
I agree with Matt. This one felt more scattershot than Get Out, although I still very much enjoyed it once the tension ramped up.
Hovering around a 3.5/5 for me right now.
It's not undone at all. In fact, it plays into the idea of nature vs. nurture. Yes, she did what she did, but she still lived a fulfilling, productive life, proving that when given the means, anyone can succeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Still ServantIt's not undone at all. In fact, it plays into the idea of nature vs. nurture. Yes, she did what she did, but she still lived a fulfilling, productive life, proving that when given the means, anyone can succeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattrick
I think it plays more into privilege. If those on the surface were privileged, then the only reason an uprising started was someone needed revenge for her privilege being taken away. But the twist itself doesn't make much sense. The trauma doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't be memories of a moment of triumph? Why would the memory of the supposed trauma be so remembered, but the whole life underground be forgotten? Why didn't Red express her need for revenge? For what was a personal need for vengeance, it was framed as a unified vengeance, seemingly for the sake of a late game twist. It all felt very unnecessary.
Yeah this was bugging me when I left the theater too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattrick
There were so many red herrings and weakly explained plot points that all worked toward the unmasking of a frankly underwhelming plot twist.
It's a shame that the narrative let the film down because the visual, technical aspects of the film are elite. Jesus Christ does Peele have an eye for visuals.
Wow. I'm surprised you guys didn't enjoy it more.
As for Red, I'm not so sure she remembered her prior life the entire time. I think it's something that she may have forgotten as she got older. Maybe she thought it was a dream or whatever, but I'm not sold on the idea that she remembered everything from the start.
So my interpretation was that they both remembered switching places. It makes sense that Adelaide wasn't speaking because she was from below, and I don't think they spoke, did they? Also that was perceived as trauma by the parents, and I'm sure to some extent it was because she was also thrust out into the world which would have been a huge shock to her. She probably had anxiety about returning to the place where this happened because she knew how close she was to her doppelganger, and how easily she could come forth.
I assumed Red remembered and wanted her rightful place back, but maybe you're on to something Mike, and she had forgotten it as so much time went on. But she also orchestrated this whole thing of freeing them all, so that leads me to think she wants to be above ground again and remembered everything?
Curious if Get Out didn't happen, would some of you like it more? I definitely think Get Out is a superior film, but I also think this one hit all the points of being a really effective well made film.
And has Jordan announced what he's working on now because I can't wait for his next film :lol:
Don't get me wrong, I actually enjoyed the film very much. My friend wants to go see it and I'm thinking of joining him so I can pick up on all the clues this time around. I just wish he would have taken different choices in his writing.
My thoughts are that both of them remember everything. Red at some point coalesced her need for personal vengeance and the desire to play Liberator into one. Adelaide tried her best to suppress the memory of her treachery but it was always a part of her, thus her apprehension of going back to the scene of the crime.
First time I'm hearing they're splitting Dune into two films. I guess they want to set up a franchise and do the other books.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SlrwCntsnM
I think you're both probably right. I'm leaning towards thinking like you guys mentioned that Adelaide kind of always remembered what happened but was kind of repressing it over the years.
As for Red, she 100% remembers everything. In fact, the best part of the film for me is that moment the film turns into a revenge film. Red is hellbent on revenge and I get it. Honestly, I'd love to see a film from her perspective.
My girl ComicBookGirl19! Guess where she gets the 19 from?
https://thefilmstage.com/news/franci...lis-this-year/
Quote:
In the eight years since his last feature film, Twixt, Francis Ford Coppola has stayed busy with various projects, some of which have never reached their full form and others which will soon be seen, such as a new edition of his war epic, titled Apocalypse Now: Final Cut, which will premiere at Tribeca Film Festival. However, there’s one unmade project that he’s been developing for decades that looks like it might finally see the light of day.
First written in the 1980s, his sci-fi epic Megalopolis concerns an architect dreaming of a utopic version of New York City in the near future and his battle with the conservative mayor, who has other ideas of the city. Contained within the epic are myriad storylines and characters with Warren Beatty, Parker Posey, Robert De Niro, Russell Crowe, Nicolas Cage, Paul Newman, James Gandolfini, Edie Falco, Claire Danes, Kevin Spacey, and Meryl Streep all having been previously attached at one point or another. Coppola even shot second unit footage in preparation, but then after 9/11 happened, his idea of a NYC-set utopia was deterred, both because of an eerily similar disaster sequence in the film and the director’s focus on his smaller projects. Now, it looks like it may finally be back on.
“So yes, I plan this year to begin my longstanding ambition to make a major work utilizing all I have learned during my long career, beginning at age 16 doing theater, and that will be an epic on a grand scale, which I’ve entitled Megalopolis,” Coppola told Deadline. “It is unusual; it will be a production on a grand scale with a large cast. It makes use of all of my years of trying films in different styles and types culminating in what I think is my own voice and aspiration. It is not within the mainstream of what is produced now, but I am intending and wishing and in fact encouraged, to begin production this year.”
The trade also reports that Jude Law is circling one of the many available roles, but no additional details were given for the project, which has earned comparisons to Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead. Considering the dearth of ambitious original projects in today’s Disneyfied Hollywood, one sincerely hopes that Coppola–who turns 80 this weekend–can pull the resources together for this film with his renewed enthusiasm.
For more on the project Niles Schwartz has a detailed history, which one can read an excerpt from below:
Coppola wrote a first draft during a rush of inspiration in 1983: a 400-page screenplay-as-novel about an architect determined to design the city of the future. Coppola’s utopian science-fiction film, constantly revised throughout the next two decades, details art’s aspirations and bureaucracy’s stagnancy as the libertine architect and scientist Serge Catiline is embroiled against the virtuous and conservative Mayor Frank Cicero. With his discovery of an adaptable material, “molecular-modulated polymers,” called “megalon,” Catiline’s team believes that their new city design will wipe out the need for a labor force.
Has anyone seen The Silence on Netflix? I watched it last night and it was...not great. I know that it was a novel before A Quiet Place was being made, but man, the similarities are jarring. From the creatures, to the can't-make-noise aspect, to the deaf lead, and more, it's like A Quiet Place from a parallel universe. It was mindless and easy watching, but it was rushed, had a few random plot threads that went nowhere, and pretty boring (I kept checking the time remaining--never a good sign).
:o Oh no! Don't say that Ricky! I saw it was put up on Netflix but haven't had a chance to watch it yet. I loved the book so much, and have been anxiously awaiting the movie. It was supposed to come out in theaters, but then it was never released. The first time I saw the trailer for A Quite Place I thought it was a trailer for The Silence. I feel like it's inevitable that it's going to be compared to A Quiet Place, and people will think it's a ripoff which is a bummer. I'll report back once I watch it.
I haven't seen it yet, but I haven't heard good things. I know a lot of people have been getting on A Quiet Place saying that it plagerized The Silence. Regardless, A Quiet Place is the superior film it looks like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather19
Yeah, I mean, it wasn't terrible, but I would go in with lowered expectations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather19
But the book was good? It has a lot of good reviews on Amazon, so maybe I'll check it out one day.
I actually just read a review where the reviewer said that the book of The Silence inspired John Krasinski to make A Quiet Place. I can't confirm whether or not that's true, but there's just so many similarities that it makes you wonder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Still Servant
I highly recommend the book, it's so good! And whether or not John Krasinski ever admits he was inspired by The Silence, I can pretty much guarantee that's the case. They are so similar in so many ways.
https://www.indiewire.com/2019/04/ac...rg-1202127543/
Quote:
No more Spielberg vs. Netflix headlines. The filmmaker and Academy governor skipped this year’s annual rules meeting on April 23. He may have recognized that the possible rule change requiring a longer exclusive run would not fly. He’s changed his tune, it seems.
As expected, the Academy’s Board of Governors voted to maintain the 2012 status quo for Rule Two, Eligibility for the 92nd Oscars. To be eligible for awards consideration, a film must have a minimum seven-day theatrical run in a Los Angeles County commercial theater, with at least three screenings per day for paid admission. Motion pictures released in nontheatrical media on or after the first day of their Los Angeles County theatrical qualifying run remain eligible.
“We support the theatrical experience as integral to the art of motion pictures, and this weighed heavily in our discussions,” stated outgoing Academy President John Bailey. “Our rules currently require theatrical exhibition, and also allow for a broad selection of films to be submitted for Oscars consideration. We plan to further study the profound changes occurring in our industry and continue discussions with our members about these issues.”
One post-“Roma” rule change: the foreign-language category is now renamed the “International Feature Award.” Last year’s Oscar-winner Alfonso Cuarón memorably complained that when he watched Spanish-language movies in Mexico, they weren’t “foreign.” “We have noted that the reference to ‘Foreign’ is outdated within the global filmmaking community,” stated Larry Karaszewski and Diane Weyermann, co-chairs of the International Feature Film Committee. “We believe that International Feature Film better represents this category, and promotes a positive and inclusive view of filmmaking, and the art of film as a universal experience.”
And recognizing the large number of foreign films submitted every year–and the burgeoning ranks of global Academy members– the Academy is expanding the number of international films on the shortlist from seven films to be chosen by the Phase I International Feature Film Committee, with three more added by the International Feature Film Award Executive Committee, for a total of ten. (It used to be nine.)
The category name change is not accompanied by any change in existing category rules, the submission process, or eligibility requirements. An international feature film is defined as a feature-length motion picture produced outside the United States of America with a predominantly non-English dialogue track. Animated and documentary feature films are permitted; and each country is permitted to submit one official selection.
And in the Animated Feature category, there are now so many features released every year that the Academy no longer requires the theatrical release of eight eligible animated features in the calendar year to activate the awards category. As the Academy tries to make voting easier for members, nominations voting will automatically be available to all active members of the Short Films and Feature Animation Branch. Other active voting members of the Academy must opt-in to participate in the animation feature nominations round.
In the Makeup and Hairstyling category, the number of nominated films is increasing from three to five, and the shortlist is increasing from seven to ten. In addition, the bake-off reels for the films shall not exceed seven minutes in total running time.
In the Short Film categories, Animated and Live Action Short Films now have the option to qualify theatrically in either the City of New York or Los Angeles County to be eligible for submission.
Rules are reviewed annually by individual branch and category committees. The Awards and Events Committee then reviews all proposed changes before presenting its recommendations to the Board of Governors for final approval. Other amendments to the rules including standard date changes and “housekeeping” adjustments are here.
The 92nd Oscars will be held on Sunday, February 9, 2020, televised live on the ABC Television Network, which goes to 225 countries and territories worldwide.