Rate The Last Movie You Saw.

[Mattrick]

Me watching Up:

Credits: Wall-E is amazing and I've heard such good things about this film.
20 min in: What a fantastic opening scene, 10/10 for sure.
40 mins in: This is still pretty humourous.
50 mins in: A talking dog? I guess I can accept that, it's for the kids so it's okay.
60 mins in: Now there is a lot of talking dogs and how convenient his hero is down here too...
70 mins in: Geez, this film sure is starting to go downhill a bit...it's like they forgot adults are watching.
80 mins in: The talking dogs are flying planes, I am done...I mean, they can explain the talking with the computer but how do their quadraped, none opposable thumbed paws even manage to use the stick to fly the planes? That's it, I'm done.
100 mins in: I re-watch the first 15 mins again to make sure that wasn't a short film before Up began. No, it was the same film. I'm still confused as to what happened.

[Still Servant]

FROZEN... worst movie ever. My wife made me watch it... I read while it was on... man that is soooo for kids...

Are you kidding? I loved Frozen and I'm not a kid. Maybe you went into it with that notion and didn't give it a chance. The character of Olaf is one of the best Disney characters in decades. He has some truly laugh-out-loud moments. You're telling me you didn't find Olaf's song funny? I didn't think that was possible. Frozen had great themes of sisterhood and being who you are regardless.

I can see not loving the film, but saying it's the worst film ever? I find it hard to believe it's your least favorite film of all time, unless you don't watch a lot of movies.

I would also like to know how you read while it was on. The film isn't even out on DVD yet I don't think. I'm really hoping you didn't read while in a movie theater.

Maybe worst film ever was harsh. But I really did not like it. First I cannot stand signing in movies (do not like Musicals at all) so for me this was not a good pic. Everyone has different tastes and this truly did not fit mine at all. To be honest my wife did not even finish it either... I went into this wrong as well. I was expecting a more Ice Age kind of feel not a fairy tale musical.. sorry if I offended you but I was trying to be honest. I really disliked this film.

I have no problem with your opinion, if you didn't like Frozen, that's fine. I just like trying to figure out why. I also took exception to the blanket statement that Frozen is just for kids. It's clear to me now that you just don't like singing in movies. That makes more sense now. Of course you're not going to like Frozen if that's the case.

The only thing that would offend me about your statement is the fact that you started reading while the movie was still on. If you're at home, that's fine, but if you're in a movie theater, I think that's just plain rude.

I can honestly say that animated films are some of the best films being released by Hollywood today. Wreck-It Ralph, Toy Story 3, Up, Wall-E, How to Train Your Dragon, Brave and a few other I'm forgetting, are some of my favorite films of the past decade.

Also, Let It Go from Frozen is an extremely catchy song. I've been singing it off and on for months and I'm not ashamed to admit it. An instant classic if there ever was one.

No worries... and let me address what you may be offended by. I have never, nor ever would lug a book with me to a theater. That is rude and how could you even see the text? haha It was home in front of my TV and there was lots of light and it lasted until my wife turned it off. I am glad you liked the movie but I alas did not....

I didn't think you brought a book into the theater. I thought maybe you were reading on an iPad or a Kindle or something. It's good to know that wasn't the case.

[fernandito]

I watched I Heart Huckabees lol.

[Randall Flagg]

Sat down and watched the Blu-Ray version of "Blue Velvet". I had seen it 20+ years ago and forgot how trippy the movie is. Deep rich colors, bizarre imagery, and a story that though bizarre and dreamlike, unfolds in linear fashion. Isabella Rossellini laid it all out (literally) in this murder mystery, masochistic/sadist, film noir.
5/6 Beers on the RFSRS

[fernandito]

I was on the cusp of finishing a long ass review I was writing for I Heart Huckabees and I accidentally closed the fucking window :lol: ... :cry:

Instead, I'll just say that I enjoyed it immensely, abstract and erratic though it may be.

8/10

[Still Servant]

My post Oscar slump continues. I haven't watched a movie since February 23. <_<

[Mattrick]

I was on the cusp of finishing a long ass review I was writing for I Heart Huckabees and I accidentally closed the fucking window :lol: ... :cry:

Instead, I'll just say that I enjoyed it immensely, abstract and erratic though it may be.

8/10

The second viewing is better since you've got more of an idea of what happened. It's actually a really tight narrative when you get down to it.

[Ricky]

Bad Words

What if an adult entered a children’s spelling bee? That’s the central premise behind Jason Bateman’s directorial debut, Bad Words, and it answers the question…and then some.

Pulling double duty, Bateman also stars in the film as Guy Trilby, a forty-year-old warranty proofreader—could a job get any more exciting?—who’s recently set out on a journey of spelling bee victories leading to the Golden Quill tournament. Like the many ticked off parents, the audience, too, is wondering how this man could possibly enter a contest clearly meant for children. Well, he can—he’s found a loophole in the rulebook. Although the Bee only allows competitors under eighth grade, Guy can technically compete since he never graduated eighth grade.

This sense of sliminess is our first of many insights into Guy’s character. He’s inappropriate, crude, and unapologetic, generally all characteristics of an unsympathetic character. However, Bateman plays him with a certain sense of compassion (is it possible for there to be kindness behind the R-rated insults?) that we can almost see the hurt and disappointed inner child behind the barrage of f-bombs and racial slurs.

At an incredibly short runtime of 88 minutes, it almost seems like the film is advertising itself as a dirty-joke-a-minute film where raunchiness substitutes for humor. Surprisingly, not a moment is wasted here. The script is tight, and the jokes—as often as they come—are genuinely funny rather than throwaway jokes just for the point of adding in humor.

This is especially true in scenes with Chaitanya Chopra (Rohan Chand), Guy’s competition and tagalong. He follows him around like a puppy, wants to study his Spelling Bee binder together (which he names Todd, his only friend), get ice cream, and other innocent things. Then, however, Guy introduces him to the wild world of cars, women, and cursing. The clash of Guy’s inappropriateness with Chaitanya’s innocence really amps up the film’s comedy and is especially funny since he, in the end, isn’t corrupted by Guy. If anything, he admires him. That the film has such raunchy comedy while allowing its child character to stay a child—uncorrupted, but more worldly—is commendable.

Some of the film’s best scenes take place at the Golden Quill tournament. Though fictional, it can easily seem based on real-life Bees like the Scripps and perfectly captures their perceived blandness, arrogance, and the parents that take it so seriously. Everything from clothes to furniture to lighting is done in a palette of browns, grays, and whites; adults wear big, itchy sweaters and have mousy hairdos; there’s a sense of stuffiness in the air. And it’s funny. It’s an exaggeration of spelling bees, but is hilarious in its intelligent and well thought-out parody.

The film also stars Allison Janney as the director of the Bee and Kathryn Hahn as Jenny Widgeon, the online reporter/casual lover who sponsors and follows Guy from Bee to Bee in hopes of getting a good story out of his endeavors. Both characters are interesting enough that you want to spend a little more time with them than what we’re given, so it’s disappointing that they’re not given more to do. Hahn has a little more screen time than Janney, but you can’t help but feel that there was more potential for development that wasn’t present on screen.

Throughout the film we know how Guy enters the Bee and while we’re curious as to why, any explanations that follow are just an added bonus to the already compelling (and hilarious) story and antics. And when his actual reasoning is revealed, it gives another layer to Guy’s hardened exterior, showing that the mix of smart comedy and heart is what makes Bad Words so good.

9/10

[Still Servant]

Wow, what a surprise to see a review for Bad Words. Great job! I've been looking forward to this one for a while. Did it open up in a theater near you? I hope my theater has it.

[Ricky]

I went to an advanced screening earlier this week. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did, Mike. I was totally blown away by how funny and smart it was. The trailer makes it look like a plain old raunchy comedy, but it's actually way better than that.

[Still Servant]

Lucky!

I think I will enjoy it. I'm a big Bateman fan. I heard the screenplay for Bad Words was on "The Black List" for a while so it must be very good.

[Mattrick]

I'm hoping Bad Words will be good, the fact Bateman is directing will give him more freedom. Studios have been casting him in Arrested Development type roles which was dumb because he was rarely funny in Arrested Development, he was funny but his humour came from being the one normal character on the show and his normal personality conflicting with all the zany personalities around him.



I watched The Prestige finally and I was underwhelmed by it. The performances and everything was good but it seemed like it was building up to some mind-bending conclusion and it simply didn't happen. Was the conclusion supposed to be All of Jackman's 'doubles' in the tanks? Like, I figured that out back with the hats and the cat and when he tried the machine for the first time and he had the gun I'm like 'it must be to shoot the double'...I thought the reveal of Bale really being twins was well done and it made a lot of sense with his character and then Nolan is like LOOK AT ALL THE DEAD JACKMAN'S IN THESE TANKS and I know some people watched it and jumped up like HOLY SHIT WTF even though Nolan tells us that ending about ten times before he shows it. And is it just me or did they just forget about Scarlet Johanson's character? She just vanishes without a trace and they never say where she went or anything...maybe that was the real disappearing act, where did Scarlet go? Was she ever in the movie? YOU'LL NEVER KNOW

[Still Servant]

You make some valid points about The Prestige. I still prefer it over The Illusionist though.

Also, Bateman is a great straight man. It will be nice to see him playing for laughs. Although Bateman was the straight man on AD, he had some wickedly funny lines at the expense of his quirky family. He got overshadowed by the superb cast of crazy characters, but he had some great lines.

[Mattrick]

The Prestige wasn't bad but I didn't think it was anything special. On the other hand, The Illusionist was awful and if it was for Giamatti being so great it wouldn't have had a single redeeming quality...talk about a movie that obviously tried very hard to be good...no time for an original conclusion? Just steal from Shakespeare!

[Jean]

The Prestige wasn't bad
It wasn't.


but I didn't think it was anything special.
It wasn't.

[Heather19]

You make some valid points about The Prestige. I still prefer it over The Illusionist though.

I saw them both around the same time, and I definitely preferred The Illusionist. For whatever reason I couldn't really get into The Prestige. Although thinking back now, I can't even really remember what happened in The Illusionist :lol:

[fernandito]

I love The Prestige.

The Illusionist was aight.

[alkanto]

The Prestige is one of my favorite movies.

[Ricky]

Thank you for talking some sense, Jen.

[Still Servant]

Ricky, I watched Sound of My Voice. I enjoyed the film and I'm really loving Brit Marling as an actress/writer. I think she's one to watch. I didn't enjoy the film as much as The East. My biggest problem with the film is the "write your own ending" climax. I know I've ranted about this before, so I won't repeat that, I just hate when Indy films do that. I knew going in that it was probably going to conclude in a manner like that, but I still wanted a more concrete ending.

I'm not sure what your thoughts are on the film, but my theory is as follows:

I don't think Maggie was from the future. I actually think the little girl is her daughter. She was a wild teen, got knocked up and then left the home, leaving the baby in the care of her parents. I think the handshake is something the father taught both of his daughters. I also think the father was abusing both of the children. Evidence of this is when he gives Abby a shot between her toes. You only inject in the feet if you are trying to conceal the needle marks. My alternate theory is that Abby is Maggie's little sister.

[Ricky]

Glad you enjoyed it , Mike.

It's been awhile since I've seen it, but I remember thinking that you could make a solid argument both for Maggie to be from the future, or not from the future. I loved that the film throws us off so many times so we never really know what to think. I do agree with you that the ending was a little too open-ended, though. Some definitiveness would've been nice, especially since the central mystery (is she from the future or not?) IS the film.

Also, she didn't have any involvement in writing it, but Brit was also really good in Arbitrage.

[Still Servant]

Glad you enjoyed it , Mike.

It's been awhile since I've seen it, but I remember thinking that you could make a solid argument both for Maggie to be from the future, or not from the future. I loved that the film throws us off so many times so we never really know what to think. I do agree with you that the ending was a little too open-ended, though. Some definitiveness would've been nice, especially since the central mystery (is she from the future or not?) IS the film.

Also, she didn't have any involvement in writing it, but Brit was also really good in Arbitrage.

Yeah, the film does a wonderful job of sucking you in like a real cult. Making you believe in what they are selling and not questioning logic.

Yeah, Arbitrage is the first time I ever saw her. I thought she was really good and she stood out to me. She also has small role as Robert Redford'd daughter in The Company you Keep. Very talented woman.

Not sure if you saw it, but I did a little write-up on Marling in the Future Stars thread.

http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?17145-Stars-of-the-Future&p=826131&viewfull=1#post826131

[Randall Flagg]

Viewed "Bad Words yesterday and loved it. It starts out so brutally funny, and so completely politically incorrect that it had to lag a bit at the end, and get just a bit maudlin.
5/6 Beers on the RFSRS

[Jean]

the last movie bears saw was Cold Fish by Shion Sono. It is brilliant.

if you have seen Visitor Q by Miike, you have some idea of this particular type of films. It's crazy, oveboard, dark, hysterically funny and deeply disturbing not on the "yuck, what a shitload of gore!" level (although gore is in ample supply there), but on the "what the fuck is wrong with life" level. Will definitely make my personal top 100.

[mae]

It's definitely one of my top films of 2010. Since that year fell just outside all those Top of the Decade lists I was making, it'll be interesting to see where it lands once this decade is up.

[fernandito]

Jean - how does Visitor Q compare on a gore level against something like.. Ichi The Killer?

[Jean]

you know I haven't gotten to watching that one yet! You would have been the first to know if I had.

(it is currently unavailable where I usually take them; have been looking forward to watching it with your guidelines ever since we last talked about it)

Nonetheless, I know that you'll love Cold Fish!! it's just impossible not to love, it is, all other stuff (like meaning and the like) aside, immensely enjoyable.

[divemaster]

the last movie bears saw was Cold Fish by Shion Sono. It is brilliant.

if you have seen Visitor Q by Miike, you have some idea of this particular type of films. It's crazy, oveboard, dark, hysterically funny and deeply disturbing not on the "yuck, what a shitload of gore!" level (although gore is in ample supply there), but on the "what the fuck is wrong with life" level. Will definitely make my personal top 100.

"Cold Fish has been added to your Netflix Queue at position #187"

"Move to position #1? Click here."

Click

[Jean]

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/bear_thumb.gif (http://s91.photobucket.com/user/mishemplushem/media/Facilitation/bear_thumb.gif.html)

[Heather19]

Jean, is it like torture gore/horror? Will I like it? I was intrigued, but then you compared it to a Takashi Miike film (although I haven't seen Visitor Q) I'm worried it'll be too much for me.

[Jean]

no, no! there's a lot of dismembering and blood, but nothing like those needle scenes; the murders are so exaggerated that they don't even look real

and you must see Visitor Q

[Heather19]

Oh ok, that sounds so much better. I can handle that :lol:

As for Visitor Q, I fear that I've been scarred too much by Takashi Miike that I'm really worried to check it out :unsure:

[fernandito]

After watching Ichi The Killer I fear no evil. :lol:

[mae]

I watched Miike's Audition completely blind at 2 AM alone in the house in headphones.

Worst. Decision. Ever.

[Jean]

Visitor Q is not like any other Miike I've seen so far. It's a comedy, and once you can accept the grotesqueness of it, it's hilarious.

[Ricky]

Divergent

On the tail of successful film franchises (Twilight and The Hunger Games) and some not-so-successful ones (The Moral Instruments and Vampire Academy) comes Divergent, the newest addition to the young adult book-turned-movie sub-genre, based on the best seller by Veronica Roth.

Despite their differences, a comparison to The Hunger Games is inevitable. Both feature young female heroines in a dystopic future, rebelling against some kind of government control. Though, Divergent avoids beings a mere carbon copy of The Hunger Games; it offers enough originality for it to stand on its own.

In the world of Divergent, a future Chicago is divided into five factions—Candor, Amity, Dauntless, Erudite, and Abnegation—and, on their sixteenth birthday, each resident gets to choose which faction they will enter for the rest of their lives. Will they remain in the faction they’ve been in since birth and, by extension, remain with their families? Or will they instead pick a new faction, one that they feel better suits their personality, and risk never seeing their families again?

But it’s not that easy for Beatrice ‘Tris’ Prior (Shailene Woodley) who is ‘Divergent’; rather than fitting into one particular faction, she fits into many—she has the selflessness of Abnegation, the bravery of Dauntless, and the knowledge of Erudite. The film revolves around her faction choice and the repercussions and discoveries that result from it, in addition to a relationship with Four (Theo James), an enigmatic Dauntless leader.

While some fans of the book will no-doubt be upset at the changes from page to screen, Divergent takes the occasionally episodic nature of the book and makes it more fluid. Some scenes are added, spliced, or omitted altogether to effectively streamline and cover the book’s 400+ page count in just under a two and a half hour runtime. But for all the good things from the book that the film is faithful to, it’s also faithful to the bad as well. At times, there’s too much exposition, too much downtime in between pivotal scenes, and not enough supporting character development.

Much like Jennifer Lawrence in The Hunger Games (see, it’s inevitable), Divergent is Shailene Woodley’s film. She plays Tris with a cautious bravery and inner strength that really allows you to get inside her head. And it’s telling that in a pivotal scene, Woodley injects it with such raw emotion that it blows its source material out of the water. It’s also a plus that director Neil Burger allows Tris to narrate the film’s opening minutes. It’s a short time, but the addition of the first person narration gives us a deeper connection to Tris in an addition that The Hunger Games (unfortunately) decided to omit.

Despite the inevitable changes from book to film, Divergent ends up being an otherwise faithful adaptation. It may be too heavy on exposition at times, but its unique twist on dystopia drew me into its unique world enough for me to anticipate the next one.

8/10

[Melike]

Ricky; I have ran out of good movies, I thought so at least. I think Divergent sounds good enough to watch.

I am not good at writing at reviews; also I feel way too tired to give it a try.
I just wanted to say; I totally agree with James. Filth is one of the best movies I have seen this year. 10/10 from me.


Filth

Ever since seeing the initial red-band trailer, this film had my attention, for several reasons. For one thing, it seemed to be aiming for an excess of crudeness and disgust that wasn’t done purely for comedic or stupid reasons. For another, it was a chance to see James McAvoy in a role that was very different to the usual upper class pretty boy English characters he played – oh don’t get me wrong, he usually played them well, but the role of Bruce Robertson seemed a far cry from everything he’d done before. And lastly, the fact that it was based on a book by Irvine Welsh, who wrote Trainspotting, suggested that, as long as it was done right, there might be more to it than what the trailers were showing. But, having just seen this film, even I was surprised by how much I loved it....

Also Mike's and Ricky's reviews about Gravity are also well written, I nodded thinking "definitely" - of course in Turkish :) - while reading every sentence.
Gravity is 9 out of 10 to me.


Gravity - 9.0/10

(Randall, totally agree with about that one shot. It was perfect.)

Gravity is an intense, pulse-pounding, edge-of-your-seat cinematic experience. Am I forgetting any movie review clichés? Regardless, they all apply to this instant classic that redefines the rules for every film about space exploration that has been put to celluloid over the past 50 years.

Gravity is directed by Alfonso Cuaron whose previous film, Children of Men, stands among the very best films of the past decade. Much like Hitchcock’s Rope, Cuaron’s signature is the use of lengthy single-shot sequences. The climactic scene from Children of Men is one of the reasons the film is so memorable. Cuaron once again expertly uses this technique...

[Ricky]

I think you'd like Divergent, Melike. I'd also recommend the book.

And I'm glad you enjoyed Gravity as much as I did. I haven't talked to many people that feel the same way.

[alkanto]

I have absolutely no ambition to pen a review, but I saw Captain America: The Winter Soldier yesterday. It was freaking amazing. I liked it a lot better than Thor 2. Overall, it might be my favorite sequel in the Marvel universe so far (except Iron Man 3. That was brilliant)

[Merlin1958]

"Captain America, The Winter Soldier". Go forth and view!! Awesome film in the "Marvel" universe!!!

[Melike]

I think you'd like Divergent, Melike. I'd also recommend the book.

And I'm glad you enjoyed Gravity as much as I did. I haven't talked to many people that feel the same way.

Really? They didn't like? Oh.


I have absolutely no ambition to pen a review, but I saw Captain America: The Winter Soldier yesterday. It was freaking amazing. I liked it a lot better than Thor 2. Overall, it might be my favorite sequel in the Marvel universe so far (except Iron Man 3. That was brilliant)

It must be really good. :excited: I recently saw Thor Dark World; and it was awesome.

[DoctorDodge]

Yeah, I'm really itching to see Winter Soldier after how much I really enjoyed Captain America (probably my favourite Marvel film apart from The Avengers), so I'm really looking forward to checking it out after hearing so many great things about it.

Oh, and thanks for posting your thoughts on Filth, Melike. It's coming out in the US later this month, so I'm hoping a few members will be able to check it out soon and join us in the discussion of such an insane film.

[fernandito]

Captain America : The Winter Soldier -

Marvel extends it's impressive track record with another solid entry it's ever expanding universe. The film plays out like a political-conspiracy-espionage thriller where high powered individuals are used as pawns in a game of shadows.

With Captain America, Fury's, and Black Widow's background already established, the Russo brothers were free to take these characters in a path of their choosing. Because of the intrinsic nature of the source material, Marvel films have traditionally favored high octane spectacle over character development, but in WS the creators decided to give equal focus to Caps moral conundrums. Finding himself in a world where the line between right and wrong is blurry, and where his superiors often have hidden agendas, he wonders if the world he's woken to is the same he left behind prior to his cryogenic sleep, and whether or not his endless fighting is doing any good.

The action sequences are some of the best the MU has to offer. Since Cap is limited in what he can do in comparison to his superhuman companions, the fighting here focuses instead on Caps Olympic like capabilities and uses close quarter combat to underscore his superior physical prowess. There is a particularly exhilarating car chase sequence early into the film that will have you at the edge of your seat during it's duration.

By way of complaints, very little. Perhaps the one that sticks out the most in my mind is Marvel's penchant for an 'everything and the kitchen sink' approach to each of the MU films climaxes. I know it's kinda erroneous to complain about too much action in a film of this ilk, but at times it feels like too much is happening on the screen at once and it offsets the beauty of the more 'intimate' fight sequences earlier in the film. There's also a plot device revealed halfway through the film which seems a bit outlandish, but in a series where synthetic aliens enter our realm via a blackhole, I suppose I can't dwell too much on it.

One of the things that impressed me most about this film is how much of a game changer CA:WS is in relation to it's extended universe. Make no mistake, the events of this film will have serious ramifications for the MU as a whole and it will be interesting to see the ripples across the rest of the franchises. Frankly, I'm excited as hell.

In closing, if you're a fan of Marvel's films, or just a fan of action films in general, you'll end up loving this.

8/10

[Still Servant]

Nice review, Feev! I'm looking forward to seeing Captain America. I really enjoyed the first film.

I enjoyed Divergent, but no where near as much as Hunger Games. I agree with much of Ricky's review, except I liked it a little less. I too thought the film lagged at times and the supporting characters could have been fleshed out more. I also thought the film seemed kind of blah at times.

Melike, thanks for the kind words on my Gravity review. It was one of my favorite films of the year. I too have run into a lot of people that didn't like Gravity. Most of the people I talked to that didn't like it are what I would classify as "average movie goers", so take from that what you will.

I saw Noah this weekend with a few other people. They hated it, I didn't mind it so much. It's also kind of a blah film with lots of earth tones. The film suffers from the fact that the audience pretty much knows how the story is going to turn out.

I haven't watched anything recently that I felt compelled to write a real review about. Except maybe for Sound of My Voice, but I was just too busy to sit down.

[Jean]

have just watched Chasing Sleep (2000, by Michael Walker). Loved it. Predictable, yes, for those accustomed to this type of film; but very good nevertheless. Also loved what one imdb commentor said, giving it 1 star:

"This movie was horrible because I had no clue what was going on at any given moment."

I understand that the director had watched Repulsion, The Tenant, Barton Fink and a lot of Lynch. No, Chasing Sleep is not as good, but it is wonderful anyway. (and, talking about Lynch, it is much better than Lost Highway to which it has been compared by some)

[Mattrick]

From what I've heard the new Captain America is better than The Avengers which I thought was average. It seems they did a comic book film right from the reviews I've read so I'm hoping I won't be disappointed. Hasn't been a solid comic book movie outside of Nolan for almost a decade. It seems Jackson and Johannson actually had something to work with, which is good..she felt like such an afterthought in The Avengers.

[Heather19]

have just watched Chasing Sleep (2000, by Michael Walker). Loved it. Predictable, yes, for those accustomed to this type of film; but very good nevertheless. Also loved what one imdb commentor said, giving it 1 star:

"This movie was horrible because I had no clue what was going on at any given moment."

I understand that the director had watched Repulsion, The Tenant, Barton Fink and a lot of Lynch. No, Chasing Sleep is not as good, but it is wonderful anyway. (and, talking about Lynch, it is much better than Lost Highway to which it has been compared by some)

Well you have me intrigued. I just looked it up on Netflix, and it looks somewhat familiar. I think I might have had it in my queue awhile back. Just added it again.

[Jean]

:rose: :rose: :rose:

[mae]

I watched At Middleton this weekend. Love Vera Farmiga, so beautiful. Very fun movie, but I'm a sucker for chick flicks :fairy:

[DoctorDodge]

First off, I just gotta get this out of the way first: whatever you're expecting from Berandal, do not expect The Raid. Despite the title (where in the UK, it has the even simpler title of just "The Raid 2"), it's an incredibly different film altogether. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is an important thing to keep in mind for fans of the first film.

For those that didn't see the first film, it was one of the most beautifully simple yet intense action films I had seen in years. The story of a police raid on a drug lord's building gone horribly wrong, what it lacked in originality plotwise, it more than made up for with an incredible mix of amazingly choreographed martial arts fights, gunfighting and exploding fridges, some beautiful cinematography, and a hint of some nice claustrophobic survival horror to boot. Virtually non-stop, by the time you finished the Raid, you didn't feel like you had watched it or even enjoyed it - you survived it. And trust me, that's an incredible achievement in storytelling that I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find these days, not just in action movies but in general.

The sequel, on the other hand, is something else. While it still has a decent amount of stylishly violent action and martial arts, it's also a much slower paced and larger scale affair, focusing on the main character going deep undercover to infiltrate one of the main gangs ruling the city in the hopes of bringing down the numerous dirty cops that the first film barely hinted at. I must admit, when I first heard that the story of the sequel was going to be more complex and with a wider scale (and a noticeably larger budget, of course), I must admit, I was more than a little bit worried. What made the original film so, so great was just how refreshingly simple it was - it allowed a tighter focus on the amazing wall-to-wall action that grabbed action fan's attention in the first place. Was aiming for a more epic scale the right approach?

Honestly, I needn't have worried. While the plot of Berandal is hardly the most original (think the Raid crossed with the Godfather and the Departed and you're pretty much there), the story it does tell is a pretty engrossing one at times. What helps is that, unlike a lot of action movies I see being made by Hollywood these days, a number of criminals and villains have a lot depth, especially Uco, the son of a powerful crime boss who has a great deal of ambition that leads him to making some terrible decisions, but isn't entirely unsympathetic, especially in his friendship with our hero Rama. Prakoso is another great character, especially as he's played by the actor who played the truly fucking psychotic "Mad Dog" in the first film, leading you to expect one thing from this new character but in actual fact, you're given something else entirely, and it works.

But there are even characters in this film who aren't given much depth (or rather, exploration on screen, so to speak) that you can't help but love. This is especially true of the fucking ruthless assassin's that are simply credited as "Baseball bat man" and "Hammer Girl". Trust me, they more than live up to their names, and fuck me, do they do it in style.

Speaking of which, the violence and action in this film, while not as high ratio wise as what we got in The Raid, still remains exceptional to watch in this film. This is due to a combination of being beautifully shot, amazingly choreographed, and of course JUST BEING SO DAMN FUCKING AWESOME TO WATCH!!! Seriously, this is a film that will make you and a great deal of people you're watching it with at the cinema go, "FUCK!", "SHIT!", and other common reactions to seeing something that's both ridiculously painful and ridiculously fucking awesome to watch, including laughter.

As you can probably tell, I really loved this film. However, at the moment, I'm really reluctant to rate it just yet. Like I said, it's a very different beast to The Raid, and I'll expect that, for some, that may affect the level of enjoyment of the film for fans of the first installment. However, for those who still love truly great action movies as well as for those looking for something more than a little remiscent of the classic gangster epics, a film full of greed, ambition, betrayal and a lot of shades of gray, you can't go far wrong with Berandal.

[Still Servant]

Great review, James. I'm even more excited about seeing this film. The Raid isn't for everybody, but I beg anybody who loves action to give this franchise a chance. I wish more American films were like this. Oddly enough, the director of the films isn't even Indonesian.

[DoctorDodge]

Even stranger - he's Welsh! I was genuinely shocked by that! :lol:

[Mattrick]

I love action. I just require something more than choregraphy and skulls being smashed and limbs being broken and jugulars being sliced to bring me in...like, a plausible story and a great lead character. The original has the dumbest plot in any movie ever...why fight from the ground floor to the roof when you can land a chopper on the roof? And what bad guy thinks he's safe at the top of a building he can't escape from? And what was being redeemed to qualify the subtitle of 'Redemption'? Clearly not action films. This just makes me realise there hasn't been a great action movie in...I can't even remember what the last one was. Probably Rambo and The Negotiator before that. I blame Jason Statham for the state of action films these days. I'm more jaded with action movies than horror movies, whose torch is being cared by the guy who refuses to be as good as he can in James Wan and whatever combinations of producers of SAW/Paranormal Activity/Insidious they slap on EVERY poster to sell the crapfest they're selling and I am sure this Occulus movie will be no different than the rest of the awful horrors in recent years.

P.S. When I scrolled up and saw James posted a review I was hoping it would be for Dom Hemingway, as I seem be one of the few out there who really, really loved The Matador...and I mean I mean LOVED and about that I am as serious as an erection problem.

[Still Servant]

Sometimes you just have to turn your brain off. The Raid is easily one of the best action films of the last decade. Barebones story and characters or not.

Also, Dom Hemingway is really good. I predict a Matthew McConaughey like run at some point for Jude Law.

[DoctorDodge]

I liked Dom Hemingway, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would. Some pretty great dialogue, and a very different performance from Jude Law, but there were moments when it dragged a little too much for me. Still, like I said, a pretty quotable film (if not quite as quotable as I hoped it would be), especially with the added presence of the continually wonderful Richard E. Grant. 6/10, I'd say.

Last film I watched: Inferno. Finally got around to watching this one last Sunday, and after I finished, I asked myself: "dafuq did I just watch?" Not to say I didn't enjoy it, but definitely one of the strangest plots I've seen from an Argento movie, and this is coming from someone who saw Suspiria and Phenomena. Not that the story was complicated, with people stumbling across one of three powerful witches and continually dying in spectacularly gruesome ways (my favourite involved a lot of rats), but more that it didn't feel quite fleshed out enough at times, especially in terms of its characters: there's a lot of times when characters are literally entering dangerous as fuck places with very little or even no clear motivation given, and in fact, the motives of the villain of the piece didn't exactly seem to be clear either. In fact, the strangest thing about the film is that it actually makes more sense of another film altogether, in this case Suspiria, as it reveals more background on the witch in that film as well as who aids the witches.

But then again, no one watches Argento films for the plot or for rich character development - they watch them for gorgeously shot imagery and brutal death scenes, particularly when the two come together, and Inferno is no exception. Like Suspiria, it uses a lot of bright colours, including blues, reds and yellows for its lighting, maintaining some of the dreamlike, almost fairytale atmosphere of the previous film. The death scenes are as painful and strangely beautiful as ever, showing Argento to be a true master of the genre in his prime.

I didn't enjoy this movie quite as much as Deep Red or Suspiria, but it was still a great watch. 7/10

[Jean]

But then again, no one watches Argento films for the plot or for rich character development - they watch them for gorgeously shot imagery and brutal death scenes, particularly when the two come together
that's exactly what I was going to say while reading the first two paragraphs of your post

[Still Servant]

I can see where you are coming from with Dom Hemingway. I thought the first half of the film was great, but the second half was just so-so. It didn't go where I wanted it to go in the second half. I could have done without the cliche storyline about him trying to reconnect with his daughter.

[DoctorDodge]

But then again, no one watches Argento films for the plot or for rich character development - they watch them for gorgeously shot imagery and brutal death scenes, particularly when the two come together
that's exactly what I was going to say while reading the first two paragraphs of your post

:lol: Can't say I'm surprised. How would you rate Inferno, bears?

[DoctorDodge]

I can see where you are coming from with Dom Hemingway. I thought the first half of the film was great, but the second half was just so-so. It didn't go where I wanted it to go in the second half. I could have done without the cliche storyline about him trying to reconnect with his daughter.

Mike: you hit the nail on the head. The first half was pretty good, especially Dom trying to get his money and enjoying his freedom, but yeah, when it drops us back in England...despite still having some great moments (particularly the safe cracking ("FUCK YOU! AND FUCK YOUR CAT!"), which I think was another problem with me enjoying the film - we didn't get to see enough of Dom's safe cracking skills imo), it seemed to go for a very different plot from the 'crime' film I was hoping for (which was something a little similar to Lock, Stock and Snatch, in other words. First half was like that, but the second? Sadly not so much). I had a similar problem with Looper - adored the first half, but then everything seemed to slow right down with the 2nd, and didn't explore enough of its key ideas that made me so interested in watching the film in the first place.

[Heather19]

DD, have you seen Opera yet?

[DoctorDodge]

Nope, not yet.

[Jean]

But then again, no one watches Argento films for the plot or for rich character development - they watch them for gorgeously shot imagery and brutal death scenes, particularly when the two come together
that's exactly what I was going to say while reading the first two paragraphs of your post

:lol: Can't say I'm surprised. How would you rate Inferno, bears?
I liked it, but I don't differ between Argento films. They are all for me one continuous Argento.

[Heather19]

Nope, not yet.

What are you waiting for?

[DoctorDodge]

It's always great reading your perspective on things Jean, as to you, there's usually very little (if any) stories you've enjoyed entirely because of the actual plot, but rather the mechanics of the work, for lack of a better word. Even to me, surface plot does help enjoyment of a work - for example, the reason Deep Red is my favourite Argento is (despite some weak elements in the plot, including one or two rather ridiculous coincidences,) the fact that the visuals work rather well in conjunction with the mystery part of the plot, especially the vital clue that both the main character and we see but don't realise until the director reveals it towards the end. It's why I also enjoyed your perspective on Life on Mars - unlike me, neither the time travel nor the old-school cop element had a great deal of appeal to you, but it was always great reading about other countless parts of what made the show as great as it was.



Nope, not yet.

What are you waiting for?

Finding it.

[fernandito]

I watched Cold Fish earlier this week. I really liked the first half, but the final act and beyond seemed kinda rushed. It felt like if it was building up to some monumental finale but it ended rather abruptly. It felt tame in comparison to some of the stuff by Miike or Wook Park, maybe that's more my fault than the films though. Idk, maybe I need to watch it again.

6.5/10

[Heather19]

Nope, not yet.

What are you waiting for?

Finding it.

Ah, hopefully you'll find it soon.

[Merlin1958]

Not sure if this qualifies here, but I just watched the "special features" from "The Hobbit II" and they were really fascinating and informative.

[Jean]

James: you're so right! bears really hardly ever enjoy a film for its plot (come to think of it, they don't even really follow plots... it's some fault built into ursine perception), but what you said definitely makes me want to re-watch Profondo Rosso.

Also,

: sarcasm :

thank you very much for reminding me of LoM!

: double sarcasm :

I just have nothing to do, nothing to watch, nothing to read, and altogether plenty of time!

doctors obviously want bears to never watch anything new, but to keep re-watching ancient dusty stuff that doesn't even have special effects to speak of!

***


I watched Cold Fish earlier this week. I really liked the first half, but the final act and beyond seemed kinda rushed. It felt like if it was building up to some monumental finale but it ended rather abruptly. It felt tame in comparison to some of the stuff by Miike or Wook Park, maybe that's more my fault than the films though. Idk, maybe I need to watch it again.

6.5/10

Maybe you do! Now that some time has passed since I watched it, it amazes me, among other things, by the precise balance it has between the parts: the pace, the tone, the swing from depressing to hilarious to gruesome to tragic to unpalatable to comic to absurd to grotesque, all in the exactly right measures.

[Mattrick]

I've download David Gordon Greene's 'Joe' and will be watching it in a few days. Looking forward to flexing my film muscles again after putting them through the mandatory oscar season ringer.

Jean, since you're watching a lot of horrors now you should check out Beneath. Probably the best horror movie to feature the most ridiculous premise I've ever heard of. It's very smart in it's dissection of modern personality types and in the manner which today's youth define themselves in specific roles within society and their group of friends but that sometimes our friends are only there for show. It is both a clever tongue-in-cheek satire of horror films an it's own expertly crafted mark in horror.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Nskpe4Iws

[Ricky]

Looking forward to flexing my film muscles again after putting them through the mandatory oscar season ringer.

This is exactly how I've felt since Oscar season. I've probably watched two movies since then.

[Mattrick]

I've mostly watched TV shows...new season of futurama I haven't seen, Walking Dead, finished Dexter...played some video games through. My entire 2014 movie list is basically only until end of February lol. It doesn't help a few of the movies I have watched since then, like The Prestige, disappointed me. Even this horror movie tournament hasn't been able to get me to toss a film up and watch it. I usually watch a movie with my friend once a week but with baseball back on and the hockey playoffs those are sports nights for the time being and can't get myself to do it at home. I've been telling myself, 'I'm going to watch The Innocents today' for about three weeks.

[Still Servant]

Looking forward to flexing my film muscles again after putting them through the mandatory oscar season ringer.

This is exactly how I've felt since Oscar season. I've probably watched two movies since then.

I've mentioned it before, but I also go into what I like to call a post Oscar slump or funk. Like Matt, baseball and video games have taken up more times recently. Once more movies that I want to see start hitting theaters, I will get more into it again.

[Lookwhoitis]

Under the Skin blew me away!

[Jean]

Jean, since you're watching a lot of horrors now you should check out Beneath. Probably the best horror movie to feature the most ridiculous premise I've ever heard of. It's very smart in it's dissection of modern personality types and in the manner which today's youth define themselves in specific roles within society and their group of friends but that sometimes our friends are only there for show. It is both a clever tongue-in-cheek satire of horror films an it's own expertly crafted mark in horror.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Nskpe4IwsI'll try, if I can find it; only since you say so, because neither the trailer nor the synopsis looks/sounds like anything bears could like

[fernandito]

Under the Skin blew me away!
I really, really want to watch that.

I read that some of the hitchhikers in that film were actual civilians and not actors.

[Mattrick]

Jean, since you're watching a lot of horrors now you should check out Beneath. Probably the best horror movie to feature the most ridiculous premise I've ever heard of. It's very smart in it's dissection of modern personality types and in the manner which today's youth define themselves in specific roles within society and their group of friends but that sometimes our friends are only there for show. It is both a clever tongue-in-cheek satire of horror films an it's own expertly crafted mark in horror.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Nskpe4IwsI'll try, if I can find it; only since you say so, because neither the trailer nor the synopsis looks/sounds like anything bears could like

If you get a copy it helps to remember the fish is really only a metaphor for the viewer, as with the way things play out, it is more the eater of the the characters chosen to die instead of being the killer.

[DoctorDodge]

First thing's first: I enjoyed this movie a lot more than ASM. That wasn't ASM's fault, as it's main plot - of Peter discovering his powers while battling a massive green villain and getting closer to his high school crush - all seemed to have been done before in Spider-Man. However, it did introduce a few new threads, including raising questions about what happened to his father and several hints of Oscorp's involvement in a lot of plotlines in the movie, and in this movie, those threads truly start to develop, a massive plus right there.

This includes a completely fresh take on Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan, playing a not too dissimilar role to his character of Evan Andrew in Chronicle a couple of years back), as he and Peter, although old friends in this film, haven't seen each other in years, and Harry realising he truly needs Peter's help on a serious problem. The love story of Peter and Gwen is developed further too, and while it almost overbears on the plot at times, its powerful resolution is a great payoff. I'd also like to say that Gwen Stacy is, along with Anderson in Dredd, one of my favourite female protagonists in a comic book movie in recent years, both to how well she's written as a three dimensional character who's even smarter than Peter as well as the brilliant performance by Emma Stone in the role.

Andrew Garfield also continues to play Peter well, especially when finding out some major revelations about his father that tie in beautifully to the events of the first film. The development of Jamie Foxx's character as Electro, a surprisingly sympathetic villain at times, was also cool to see, although towards the end, he does end up losing some of that development and starts coming across as a standard villain, though considering the events of the climax, that's no real surprise. There's also a couple of moments in the plot that made me think, "Wait, WHAT?" at how dumb they were (seriously? A single massive generator that powers an entire city (plus one backup)?), but overall, I thought the film was a pretty entertaining one to watch. It's not one of the best comic book films you will ever see, but it's a good one, especially if you weren't too keen on some of the repetition of the first film and wanted to see more originality, which this installment provides more of. 7/10

[Mattrick]

That's out? Can't believe I've seen no marketting for it.

[DoctorDodge]

Don't think it's out in Canada or USA for a couple of weeks yet.

[alkanto]

I watched Sleepaway Camp last night. It's a sort of horror movie from 1983. And it's magically bad. I really enjoyed it :lol:

On a completely different but related note, have any of you heard of or listened to the podcase "How Did This Get Made?" That's where my roommate Steph heard about this movie and all of their recommendations are simply ... special. If you like podcasts and horrible movies, I'd really recommend it.

[Jean]

I saw Sleepaway Camp. I agree with your assessment. Magically bad is the definition.

[alkanto]

It's just ... it's so bad, it's almost good. that's almost not fair :lol:

[Jean]

yes. I love such films time to time.

[harrison ryan]

I watched Sleepaway Camp last night. It's a sort of horror movie from 1983. And it's magically bad. I really enjoyed it :lol:

On a completely different but related note, have any of you heard of or listened to the podcase "How Did This Get Made?" That's where my roommate Steph heard about this movie and all of their recommendations are simply ... special. If you like podcasts and horrible movies, I'd really recommend it.

I love HDTGM, it's one of my favorite podcasts. I never watch (or rewatch) the movies, though.

[Still Servant]

First thing's first: I enjoyed this movie a lot more than ASM. That wasn't ASM's fault, as it's main plot - of Peter discovering his powers while battling a massive green villain and getting closer to his high school crush - all seemed to have been done before in Spider-Man. However, it did introduce a few new threads, including raising questions about what happened to his father and several hints of Oscorp's involvement in a lot of plotlines in the movie, and in this movie, those threads truly start to develop, a massive plus right there.

This includes a completely fresh take on Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan, playing a not too dissimilar role to his character of Evan Andrew in Chronicle a couple of years back), as he and Peter, although old friends in this film, haven't seen each other in years, and Harry realising he truly needs Peter's help on a serious problem. The love story of Peter and Gwen is developed further too, and while it almost overbears on the plot at times, its powerful resolution is a great payoff. I'd also like to say that Gwen Stacy is, along with Anderson in Dredd, one of my favourite female protagonists in a comic book movie in recent years, both to how well she's written as a three dimensional character who's even smarter than Peter as well as the brilliant performance by Emma Stone in the role.

Andrew Garfield also continues to play Peter well, especially when finding out some major revelations about his father that tie in beautifully to the events of the first film. The development of Jamie Foxx's character as Electro, a surprisingly sympathetic villain at times, was also cool to see, although towards the end, he does end up losing some of that development and starts coming across as a standard villain, though considering the events of the climax, that's no real surprise. There's also a couple of moments in the plot that made me think, "Wait, WHAT?" at how dumb they were (seriously? A single massive generator that powers an entire city (plus one backup)?), but overall, I thought the film was a pretty entertaining one to watch. It's not one of the best comic book films you will ever see, but it's a good one, especially if you weren't too keen on some of the repetition of the first film and wanted to see more originality, which this installment provides more of. 7/10

Nice review, James. I enjoyed Garfield's first film as Spiderman. I prefer him to Tobey Maguire. In fact, I pretty much loathe Maguire as an actor. I'm looking forward to this one.

I find it funny how UK sometimes gets films a few weeks before US and sometimes weeks after US. I would love to know the reasoning behind this.

[Heather19]

I watched Sleepaway Camp last night. It's a sort of horror movie from 1983. And it's magically bad. I really enjoyed it :lol:

On a completely different but related note, have any of you heard of or listened to the podcase "How Did This Get Made?" That's where my roommate Steph heard about this movie and all of their recommendations are simply ... special. If you like podcasts and horrible movies, I'd really recommend it.

Oh man, I love that movie :lol: I've never heard of that podcast but I'm definitely going to have to check it out.

[fernandito]

The Ninth Gate -

An excellent contemporary thriller with super natural overtones deftly handled by Polanski. It's a slow burner to be sure, but once the film has its hooks in you you will be on a one way ticket to the films brilliant climax/ending.

What impressed me most about this film was the near perfect pacing - events unfold at just the right moment - and the restrained yet strategically used strands of super natural.

Johnny Depp and Polanski didn't sound like it would have been a particularly fruitful partnership on paper, but it worked out wonderfully. I think I'll watch this again just to spot all the different clues towards the ending.

7/10

[Still Servant]

Nice one, Feev. I truly believe Johnny Depp needs to get back to doing films like this.

It should be really interesting to watch him over the next decade and see what kind of work he starts choosing. He's in somewhat of a creative slump right now.

[Mattrick]

Insidious Chapter Two: I was expecting this film be very Whahnelly and it definitely was, much more so than Insidious was. The atmosphere was entirely manufactured (the red stained glass windows were an obvious 'look at this creepy set' attempt) which ruins the only thing that worked about the first movie was a very unassuming haunted house and it worked. I'm not sure what Wan's fascination with dolls and rocking horses are but they surely aren't creepy. Whannel is far more interested at explaining his scripts and having some multi-layered plot that his characters are simply going from point a to point b to point c to have things jump out at them but we never feel afraid for them because these ghosts are all BWAH! and no DEATH. And his ghost hunters the worst ghost hunters ever, they freak out anytime something slightly paranormal happens despite being surrounded by it seemingly all the time, they try too hard to be comic relief in a film that should have no comic relief and after five or six scenes with them clunking about the film making me groan instead of laugh, I was hoping they'd just die already, but, alas, we'll get these meandering nincompoops in Chapter Three. They open the film with a police investigation into what happened to Elise, which you think, a husband being pretty much accused of strangling an old woman being allowed to not only walk around free but move his family is pretty silly to begin with, but they brush that entire plotline off with a half-assed phone call 20 minutes into the movie which makes you wonder, why include that at all, when you could have avoided having to reference at all with a simple cover up of the death. There were jump scares that tried too hard and the film was basically nothing but a pointless subplot to delay the demon until they make an inevitable third film, which I will probably see and also be disappointed with because the demon is pretty much the only thing this franchise has going for it and they've pretty much done nothing with it and wasted our time with a bunch of other malarky. Also, Mr. Wan and your editor, when you jump cut to some picture a kid drew from earlier in the movie when Patrick Wilson sees what was drawn in that picture, you insult my intelligence and you do this constantly througout these movies: I'm not an idiot, I can remember what happened twenty-five minutes ago, okay?

2/5

[Heather19]

I watched Sleepaway Camp last night. It's a sort of horror movie from 1983. And it's magically bad. I really enjoyed it :lol:

On a completely different but related note, have any of you heard of or listened to the podcase "How Did This Get Made?" That's where my roommate Steph heard about this movie and all of their recommendations are simply ... special. If you like podcasts and horrible movies, I'd really recommend it.

Oh man, I love that movie :lol: I've never heard of that podcast but I'm definitely going to have to check it out.

So I just listened to the podcast on Congo, it was hilarious :lol: Now I need to go back and rewatch the film.


The Ninth Gate -

An excellent contemporary thriller with super natural overtones deftly handled by Polanski. It's a slow burner to be sure, but once the film has its hooks in you you will be on a one way ticket to the films brilliant climax/ending.

What impressed me most about this film was the near perfect pacing - events unfold at just the right moment - and the restrained yet strategically used strands of super natural.

Johnny Depp and Polanski didn't sound like it would have been a particularly fruitful partnership on paper, but it worked out wonderfully. I think I'll watch this again just to spot all the different clues towards the ending.

7/10

So glad you enjoyed it.

[Jean]

bears too!

feverish, I posted one of my endless reviews here (http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?10975-Roman-Polanski&p=797893&viewfull=1#post797893), would be happy if you gave it a look

[Mattrick]

Watched Fly Away Home (starring Jeff Daniels and a young Anna Paquin) which I haven't seen since I was younger. It's a very close to home movie for me as it's loosely passed on the true story of a Bill Lischman, an inventor, sculptor and lightweight aviation enthusiast who lived in Blackstock, Ontario (about 35 minutes away from me) and created a system for using small, lightweight aircrafts to teach migration patterns to Canadian Geese. Much of the movie was filmed in Linsday, Ontario (An hour away from me, ten mins from Pontypool; the beloved A Christmas Story was filmed there too) so it really contains the landscapes and sounds that I'm familiar with. The fictional plot of a girl from New Zealand who had to move to Canada to live with her father after her mother dies in a car accident is handled well by two capable actors and really helps gel the true story with the fictional story in a way that is believable and even affecting during some scenes, espcially a few with Daniels quiet intensity. In terms of photography it's such a nice move to look at, from the non-CGI flying scenes which feature (not actually shown of course) the real Bill Lischman flying the geese around Port Perry, Ontario; there are stunning landscape and wildlife shots, a lot of very effective visuals shot in and around the skies of Toronto and it's all excellently constructed by the same director/cinematographer dup that did The Black Stallion and the adaptation of the recently passed Farley Mowat's Never Cry Wolf. There were plenty of oppourtunities where they could have gotten preachy with talk of saving wildlife and the environment etc, but it comes in at just the right dose. It's a really good movie to watch with the kids, as I am sure they will be enthralled by it as I was as a kid.

Here is the Wilde Beaste sculpture Lishman made at Canada's Wonderland amusement park, which is pretty wicked looking in person.

http://www.themeparkreview.com/forum/files/cw6_437.jpg
http://www.williamlishman.com/images/gallerypics/whog01.jpg

He also did a wicked Dragon sculpture for the park and you see him working on it in the movie which is a nice though. Lishman still to this day flies birds down south.

[Randall Flagg]

Saw Neighbors yesterday. Very funny, and they resisted some sappy ending. Laughed my ass off. Seth Rogan just nails his part as does Zac Efron, Rose Byrne, and Dave Franco. The Robert De Niro party was fabulous.
Also gives new humor too a woman's "choker" necklace.
5/6 beers on the RFSPRS.

[Mattrick]

I'm seeing Neighbours with the family tomorrow night. I'm not expecting much which leaves more room to be surprised.

[Mattrick]

The World's End: I'm not sure exactly what this movie was even trying to be. It's like it wanted to be everything and in wanting to be everything it became nothing. Simon Pegg tried way too damn hard and I saw all the 'twists' coming miles away. I laughed maybe five times during the whole movie and most of the dialogue I could tell wanted really hard to be funny but I just wasn't laughing. Then all the action sequences were ridiculously over the top in that these five drunk guys who don't have an athletic bone in their bodies are kicking a bunch of ass which makes even less sense when you consider they're drunk. The first real laugh I got out of the movie is when Nick Frost was drunk and was pushing the pub door open and put his his arm through the glass, that was a nice touch. And I think Edgar Wright wanted to set some kind of record for the longest out running an explosion sequence...it might have been longer than Dante's Peak's outrunning the paraclastic cloud sequence. I give this movie two stars only for the final parts of the film when it depicted what the future was like and I was left thinking...why wasn't this last five minutes the entire movie? It was far more interesting than the hour and a half that preceeded it, other than that it gets one star for having Pierce Bronsnan in several scenes.

[Still Servant]

This is why I love movies and talking about them. Everybody is so different.

The part of The World's End that you liked was my least favorite part. The ending felt tacked on and out of place. I loved the rest of the film and put it ahead of Hot Fuzz.

[Mattrick]

The ending was tacked on but I enjoyed it more than what it was tacked on too lol.

[DoctorZaius]

Captain America: Winter's Soldier for the second time. Loved it!

[Merlin1958]

Captain America: Winter's Soldier for the second time. Loved it!


As did I. I am also sooooooo looking forward to the release of "Godzilla" the trailers seem to show that they freaking nailed it!!!

Side Note: The last "Godzilla" film was shot, in large part right down the block from my office on 23rd St. I recall driving to work and seeing them break down the set each morning. They shot the scene where they "feed" the monster right across from the "Flat Iron" building. They had a tarp with fish sewn in and a balloon underneath that they inflated and wet down to look like a pile of fish!!! LOL I often saw crew members walking with building pieces that looked real, but were made of styro-foam!! LOL

[DoctorDodge]

This was a film I had been eager to see ever since finding out that Joseph Gordon-Levitt had both written and directed it. The subject material of a man's addiction to porn also promised something both a little more subversive and a little more frank than the usual rom-com, but even with my high expectations for something a little different, this film really surprised me in so many ways.

Firstly, it's a great examination of how some people can have unrealistic expectations of both sex and relationships, not just because of porn or even how much media and advertising use sex to sell easily, but with movies too, particularly more traditional, generic romantic films (there's a wonderful example with cameos from Channing Tatum and Anne Hatherway doing a little bit of self parody at one point). It also avoids telling the story you'd expect it to tell with the romance angle, and while I won't give much away, it's wonderful to see a romantic film where neither of the leads are exactly perfect.

Also, gotta say that while this film does have more than a few unexpected layers (particularly in the development of Jon), it also has to be said that this film is fucking hysterical. This is partially due to Don's rather frank narration (his reasons for why he actually prefers porn to actual sex are just brilliant to listen to), but also it's full of little things like the expressions Jon's mostly silent sister keeps making as she texts. Oh, and I have never found a log-on sound funnier than in this movie. (Well, maybe with one nsfw exception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaSQBHgH-0) Its repeated use throughout the film is just so brilliantly done, especially when it comes up when its least expected. As it goes on though, you do hope to hear it less, not because it's annoying, but because you begin to realise just how addicted to porn Jon really is.

This film is definitely one of the best rom-coms I've seen in a while, and it's a film I wished I had been able to see at the cinema when it came out. Needless to say, I'll be keeping an eye out for any more JG-L directed films. 9/10

[fernandito]

The Orphanage - 8/10
Timecrimes - 7/10

[Mattrick]

Godzilla: What a terribly unbalanced movie. The first half told a very good, family centric and character driven story that really surprised me and having Bryan Cranston to help hit those dramatic notes really helped, but the second half just simply forgot it's characters, which wouldn't be so bad in a film that forgot it's characters from the beginning as opposed to one who spent the first thirty developing and getting us to know these characters just for them to set absorbed in an on-rails, go from point A to point B to setpiece C to disaster D and it's very good narrative was lost. The second half of the movie almost had no plot and I actually thought the main character died numerous times because he was playing Finding Nemo with a nuclear warhead. Aside from the complete devolution of everything that made the first half good, it's all very well made: the CGI is rarely flashy and really helps set up an atmosphere, there is no slow motion or really any tricks and there was a definite Cloverfield approach in rarely showing us the full scope of the monsters for most of the movie, mostly from the smaller perspectives watching it on the ground or the TV and there are some really nice shots in it as well. From a production value it's a pretty top notch Blockbuster except for one small problem: it's not the least bit exciting. There are many sequences in the movie that are understated spectacles locked into fixed perspectives that really allow the scope of the monsters and the film to breathe. This final gripe is spoiler filled so don't read unless you haven't seen In this film presumably tens to hundreds of thousands of people die, entire cities get laid to waste, a nuclear bomb goes off, a nuclear plant crumbles to dust and a husband tragically loses his wife (in the first five minutes or so at that) but they can't kill a kid (who also conviently finds his family without actually looking in the midst of the confusion and chais) or a dog who magically frees himself from his leash like it was made of paper...grow some balls...are you telling me in all those people that died there wasn't a single kid or dog or cat or horse or whatever in there somewhere? I just watched Mimic and two kids die brutal deaths in it!

After the first half this was getting a solid four stars from me, and if it wasn't for how nice the second half was to look at, it would have gotten two stars from me, so I'm going in the middle. 3/5

[Mattrick]

The Orphanage - 10/10
Timecrimes - 7/10

Fixed it.

[fernandito]

Nope, 8/10 is just fine. :)

[Mattrick]

http://wickedhorror.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/orphanage-tomas.jpg
Thomas is sad now.

[fernandito]

Godzilla - 6.5/10

[thegunslinger41]

Neighbors 8.5/10

[Still Servant]

This was a film I had been eager to see ever since finding out that Joseph Gordon-Levitt had both written and directed it. The subject material of a man's addiction to porn also promised something both a little more subversive and a little more frank than the usual rom-com, but even with my high expectations for something a little different, this film really surprised me in so many ways.

Firstly, it's a great examination of how some people can have unrealistic expectations of both sex and relationships, not just because of porn or even how much media and advertising use sex to sell easily, but with movies too, particularly more traditional, generic romantic films (there's a wonderful example with cameos from Channing Tatum and Anne Hatherway doing a little bit of self parody at one point). It also avoids telling the story you'd expect it to tell with the romance angle, and while I won't give much away, it's wonderful to see a romantic film where neither of the leads are exactly perfect.

Also, gotta say that while this film does have more than a few unexpected layers (particularly in the development of Jon), it also has to be said that this film is fucking hysterical. This is partially due to Don's rather frank narration (his reasons for why he actually prefers porn to actual sex are just brilliant to listen to), but also it's full of little things like the expressions Jon's mostly silent sister keeps making as she texts. Oh, and I have never found a log-on sound funnier than in this movie. (Well, maybe with one nsfw exception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaSQBHgH-0) Its repeated use throughout the film is just so brilliantly done, especially when it comes up when its least expected. As it goes on though, you do hope to hear it less, not because it's annoying, but because you begin to realise just how addicted to porn Jon really is.

This film is definitely one of the best rom-coms I've seen in a while, and it's a film I wished I had been able to see at the cinema when it came out. Needless to say, I'll be keeping an eye out for any more JG-L directed films. 9/10

Really great review, James. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm a huge fan of JGL's work and I can't wait until he writes and directs another film. I must say that I feel Don Jon is one of the more misunderstood films to be released in recent memory. It's right up there with Lars and the Real Girl. People watch the trailers for both of these films and automatically think they know what they are getting. In reality, both films have way more to offer than what is at the surface.

I haven't found the time or desire to write full reviews for some of the films I've seen recently. Hell, I can barely find the time to watch movies. I worked 7 days straight last week and 8 to 8 on Sunday. Needless to say, I took today off and went to the movies to watch not one but two films. There's nothing like spending the day in a dark theater. Even though both films I saw are hardly great, I had a fun time.

Godzilla - 7.0/10

Most of the problems I have with Godzilla, Matt already covered. I won't repeat them, but I will add one of my own. The male lead was a big problem for me, at least when he is on the screen, which is sometimes rare. I like Aaron Taylor-Johnson, I just don't think he's a very good actor. I liked him in Kick-Ass and well, that's about it. He hasn't done much. I thought he was at his best in Nowhere Boy where he played a young John Lennon. In Godzilla, Taylor-Johnson literally has 1 facial expression. Needless to say, Godzilla actually has way more facial expressions.

Like Matt also mentioned, Godzilla has a lot going for it. The film looks good and the special effects are downright jaw-dropping. I also thought the music was very good. Easily some of the best music I've heard in a summer blockbuster since Jurassic Park.

I will say that I've never been much of a Godzilla guy, so I don't know much about the Godzilla lore except what has seeped into my pop culture knowledge. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Godzilla wasn't the villain in the film. He was the hero. Like some kind of prehistoric bounty hunter or an Old West gunslinger that strides off into the sunset as the dust settles.

Pretty cool actually.

Neighbors - 7.5/10

I'm a sucker for Seth Rogen. I've pretty much seen everything he's been in. Neighbors is a harmless enough comedy, but it certainly doesn't reinvent the wheel or take its place among other similar sophomoric comedies. Once you get past the fact that somebody that looks like Seth Rogen can attract somebody as beautiful as Rose Byrne, the film settles in quite nicely.

Although I don't have kids yet, I'm at the same age as the characters and I can relate to their plight. I feel like the world has passed me by and I'm no longer cool, at least in the eyes of the tweeting teens and college kids. Growing up seems to be a constant battle for me. It's great to be an adult, but the problems and stress that come with it do not outweigh the carefree lifestyle of my youth.

One of the best parts of the film is Zac Efron. I know he's kind of been typecast, but he does a nice job here as the pretty-boy, hard body and even harder partying frat dude. I think Efron has some acting chops and even a little bit of comedic timing. The biggest problem with Neighbors is the fact that most of its funniest moments were spoiled by multiple trailers. A growing plague in the industry.

[fernandito]

Godzilla - 7.0/10

Most of the problems I have with Godzilla, Matt already covered. I won't repeat them, but I will add one of my own. The male lead was a big problem for me, at least when he is on the screen, which is sometimes rare. I like Aaron Taylor-Johnson, I just don't think he's a very good actor. I liked him in Kick-Ass and well, that's about it. He hasn't done much. I thought he was at his best in Nowhere Boy where he played a young John Lennon. In Godzilla, Taylor-Johnson literally has 1 facial expression. Needless to say, Godzilla actually has way more facial expressions.

Like Matt also mentioned, Godzilla has a lot going for it. The film looks good and the special effects are downright jaw-dropping. I also thought the music was very good. Easily some of the best music I've heard in a summer blockbuster since Jurassic Park.

I will say that I've never been much of a Godzilla guy, so I don't know much about the Godzilla lore except what has seeped into my pop culture knowledge. I was pleasantly surprised to see that Godzilla wasn't the villain in the film. He was the hero. Like some kind of prehistoric bounty hunter or an Old West gunslinger that strides off into the sunset as the dust settles.

Pretty cool actually.


One of my biggest problems with Godzilla was that he didn't feel like the main character of his own movie! I know the director was going for the classic Godzilla film where the monster is hyped up during the first half of the film and then have it pay off during the second, but it just didn't work in this film where all of the actors (save Cranston) were so one note.

[Still Servant]

Totally agree, Feev. Also, Elizabeth Olsen is too good of an actress to be wasted in a role like that. Also, I'm not sure I see why you needed Juliette Binoche in the role of Cranston's wife.

[Heather19]

So I watched this movie The Reincarnation of Peter Proud this past weekend. It takes place in one of my neighboring towns, and a lot of it was filmed around here. Kinda funny to see so many places I know featured prominently in a movie, especially how they put them all together. They really should film more movies out here.

[DoctorDodge]

This was a film I had been eager to see ever since finding out that Joseph Gordon-Levitt had both written and directed it. The subject material of a man's addiction to porn also promised something both a little more subversive and a little more frank than the usual rom-com, but even with my high expectations for something a little different, this film really surprised me in so many ways.

Firstly, it's a great examination of how some people can have unrealistic expectations of both sex and relationships, not just because of porn or even how much media and advertising use sex to sell easily, but with movies too, particularly more traditional, generic romantic films (there's a wonderful example with cameos from Channing Tatum and Anne Hatherway doing a little bit of self parody at one point). It also avoids telling the story you'd expect it to tell with the romance angle, and while I won't give much away, it's wonderful to see a romantic film where neither of the leads are exactly perfect.

Also, gotta say that while this film does have more than a few unexpected layers (particularly in the development of Jon), it also has to be said that this film is fucking hysterical. This is partially due to Don's rather frank narration (his reasons for why he actually prefers porn to actual sex are just brilliant to listen to), but also it's full of little things like the expressions Jon's mostly silent sister keeps making as she texts. Oh, and I have never found a log-on sound funnier than in this movie. (Well, maybe with one nsfw exception: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaSQBHgH-0) Its repeated use throughout the film is just so brilliantly done, especially when it comes up when its least expected. As it goes on though, you do hope to hear it less, not because it's annoying, but because you begin to realise just how addicted to porn Jon really is.

This film is definitely one of the best rom-coms I've seen in a while, and it's a film I wished I had been able to see at the cinema when it came out. Needless to say, I'll be keeping an eye out for any more JG-L directed films. 9/10

Really great review, James. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm a huge fan of JGL's work and I can't wait until he writes and directs another film. I must say that I feel Don Jon is one of the more misunderstood films to be released in recent memory. It's right up there with Lars and the Real Girl. People watch the trailers for both of these films and automatically think they know what they are getting. In reality, both films have way more to offer than what is at the surface.

Cheers, Mike. As for watching a trailer for a film and believing you know exactly what you're getting, along with Don Jon, I had the exact same experience with Filth. The red-band trailer made it look like a very black comedy in excess, but both myself and Melike were pleasantly surprised when we discovered there was a great deal more to it. I was glad to see that with Don Jon, although a noticeably more optimistic film by comparison, gave me a similar experience of discovering some wonderful hidden depths, as well.


So I watched this movie The Reincarnation of Peter Proud this past weekend. It takes place in one of my neighboring towns, and a lot of it was filmed around here. Kinda funny to see so many places I know featured prominently in a movie, especially how they put them all together. They really should film more movies out here.

I know what you mean. There was a British gangster film in the late 90s, Essex Boys, that was very loosely based on a true story. One thing I liked about it was that it was (for this particular Essex boy, at least) very recognisably shot in my home town, particularly down the seafront, which I really appreciated. It has to be said that Southend seafront does look great at night, with its mix of clubs, pubs and arcades all brightly lit. There was a James MacAvoy film, Starter for Ten (great British romcom, by the way) that had some scenes supposedly set in Southend, but it's one of those movies where if you're a local, you'd laugh your fucking arse off at how it clearly wasn't shot where you live.

Then again, there was a line of dialogue at least ("It's my ghetto blaster." "Which ghetto's that?" "It's Westcliff-on-Sea!") that was so incredibly spot-on that it just about made up for it! :lol:

[Mattrick]

Neighbors - 7.5/10

I'm a sucker for Seth Rogen. I've pretty much seen everything he's been in. Neighbors is a harmless enough comedy, but it certainly doesn't reinvent the wheel or take its place among other similar sophomoric comedies. Once you get past the fact that somebody that looks like Seth Rogen can attract somebody as beautiful as Rose Byrne, the film settles in quite nicely.

Although I don't have kids yet, I'm at the same age as the characters and I can relate to their plight. I feel like the world has passed me by and I'm no longer cool, at least in the eyes of the tweeting teens and college kids. Growing up seems to be a constant battle for me. It's great to be an adult, but the problems and stress that come with it do not outweigh the carefree lifestyle of my youth.

One of the best parts of the film is Zac Efron. I know he's kind of been typecast, but he does a nice job here as the pretty-boy, hard body and even harder partying frat dude. I think Efron has some acting chops and even a little bit of comedic timing. The biggest problem with Neighbors is the fact that most of its funniest moments were spoiled by multiple trailers. A growing plague in the industry.

Effron was good and I thought Neighbours was a good film for him to molt from his teenage image while still kind of tying it around his neck. I'm hoping for him to have a bright future. But to me, the most surprising part of the film was David Franco who didn't have near the screentime as Rogen/Byrne/Effron but made more of his scenes than they did. It was nice to see Rose Byrne in a lighter role too where she gets to show some personality because it's been a few years sine Bridesmaids. I've always thought she was a good actress whose either been diluted in an ensembled like X-Men First Class or given a limited range in genre films like Insidious 1/2, 28 Weeks Later and Sunshine.

[Still Servant]

Good point about David Franco, Matt. I meant to mention that I really enjoyed him in Neighbors. I actually really like Franco as an actor. The first time I saw him was on Scrubs and I've seen much of his work since. I think Neighbors is actually his best stuff. I know a lot of people are annoyed by him, but I think he has talent.

I also love Rose Byrne. The first film I saw her in was Troy and she really caught my eye for multiple reasons. Even though the war is said to be started over the beauty of Helen, played by Diane Kruger, I felt Byrne's character was way more beautiful. I think Byrne is a great actress too and I'm not sure why she hasn't become a household name yet.

[Ricky]

Godzilla

I’ve never seen a Godzilla movie. That may be hard to believe, but it’s true. I know the basic pop-culture knowledge about the creature and its film legacy, but not much more. But the marketing campaign and teasers (that showed just enough intrigue and monster-induced havoc) for Gareth Edwards’s reboot of the classic franchise made me think to change that.

In a suspenseful prologue, two scientists (played by Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins) are called to investigate a giant skeleton and two (related?) egg-shaped pods, while a nearby nuclear plant experiencing seismic activity collapses. While it’s publicized that the disaster was attributed to an earthquake, plant supervisor Joe Brody (played by a fully-committed Bryan Cranston) is convinced that something else, something bigger, is to blame.

15 years later, it seems as if whatever caused the seismic activity is about to emerge again, and in addition to Cranston’s determined, truth-seeking Joe, we’re introduced to his military son, Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), and his wife, Elle (Elizabeth Olson), who, while great in her role, isn’t given much to do. Taylor-Johnson’s Ford is good in small doses—playing the concerned son or the contented husband—but just doesn’t have the charisma (or character development) for him to become the film’s main protagonist. This could have been remedied by switching Cranston’s position in the film with Taylor-Johnson’s. We sympathize much more with Cranston than the stone-faced military husband. Such a reversal of focus would have made for a more intrigue-based film (while also giving us more of an emotional attachment to the character and his successes and failures in unraveling the mystery and attempting to prevent disaster) rather than a military-focused one. After all, wouldn’t we rather learn about and revel in the unfolding history of the iconic beast, rather than inside information about the military’s plan to destroy it?

To see whether or not these characters are working is to ask ourselves: would we care if any of them met their demise in the film? Probably. But not for the right reasons. When they’re put in actual danger we find ourselves thinking, Aw, she’s such a good wife! or But he loves her! or Aw, what a cute kid! rather than having real, emotional ties to the characters like we do with Cranston’s Joe Brody.

Godzilla’s first half is an interesting, character-driven creature film giving us a chance to discover and wonder and fear along with the characters. Then, however, in a strange twist of events, Godzilla is usurped in his own movie—and he (and the filmmakers) don’t seem to care. Rather than honing in on his origins and the threat that he poses to the world (after all, multiple countries are affected), all sense of a mystery unraveling is abandoned in favor of the appearance of the MUTOS (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organisms). Following their arrival, the film’s second half, though considerably more action-packed, is also, ironically, considerably less thrilling. When the MUTOs are on screen, the CGI is impressive and visually immersive, but the creatures as a whole are kind of silly (they look like metal-plated bat-crickets). They don’t evoke the same sense of intrigue that we have for the titular creature, and their presence seems justified to give Godzilla something to fight, providing epic battle sequences and the destruction of entire cities that the filmmakers believe the audience craves. As the minutes tick by, their time on screen lengthens which instead should be focused on the creature for which the movie is titled. (Some possible alternate titles for the movie: Where’s Godzilla?, Find the Nuke!, MUTOS: The Movie, How to Reunite with Loved Ones in the Midst of Disaster with No Trouble at All.)

My familiarity with the source material isn’t too extensive, but I’m not sure how I feel about Godzilla’s involvement in the film’s climax—and the film as a whole. Should we be rooting for the mysterious creature? Or should we be as terrified as the movie’s characters, fearing destruction, the loss of lives, and all that he is capable of?

Despite its flaws, Godzilla boasts an incredibly well-made, focused, and dramatized first half. The music—composed by Alexandre Desplat—is fantastic, doing exactly what a film’s soundtrack should do in this type of film: setting the scene and heightening our sense of intrigue while hinting at things to come. The film overall hits a lot of good points, but it’s also missing a crucial one: letting Godzilla—and the intrigue surrounding him and his history—be the focus of his own movie.

7/10

[Ricky]

Godzilla: What a terribly unbalanced movie. The first half told a very good, family centric and character driven story that really surprised me and having Bryan Cranston to help hit those dramatic notes really helped, but the second half just simply forgot it's characters, which wouldn't be so bad in a film that forgot it's characters from the beginning as opposed to one who spent the first thirty developing and getting us to know these characters just for them to set absorbed in an on-rails, go from point A to point B to setpiece C to disaster D and it's very good narrative was lost...Aside from the complete devolution of everything that made the first half good, it's all very well made: the CGI is rarely flashy and really helps set up an atmosphere...and there are some really nice shots in it as well. From a production value it's a pretty top notch Blockbuster except for one small problem: it's not the least bit exciting.

Totally agree 100%, Matt.


In Godzilla, Taylor-Johnson literally has 1 facial expression.

:rofl:


Like Matt also mentioned, Godzilla has a lot going for it. The film looks good and the special effects are downright jaw-dropping. I also thought the music was very good.

I agree with you, Mike, especially about the music. I thought it was really, really good.


I was pleasantly surprised to see that Godzilla wasn't the villain in the film. He was the hero.

See, this was one of the main things I had a problem with. Godzilla being the hero then puts all the character development on the MUTOs' shoulders, and there's not a lot in the film to make us care or be intrigued about them like we are with Godzilla.


One of my biggest problems with Godzilla was that he didn't feel like the main character of his own movie! I know the director was going for the classic Godzilla film where the monster is hyped up during the first half of the film and then have it pay off during the second, but it just didn't work in this film where all of the actors (save Cranston) were so one note.

Agreed.

[Still Servant]

Fabulous review, Ricky. You and Matt captured so much of my feelings about the film.

You're totally right about Godzilla having his own movie hijacked from him. I kind of felt cheated in a way that the other creatures were getting so much screen time. I paid to see Godzilla fuck shit up, not some massive insect.

Interestingly enough, some of the people I've talked to were actually confused. They thought the first creature introduced was actually Godzilla. Granted, some of these people are stupid, but I can kind of see where they are coming from. At least at first.

[Ricky]

Thanks, Mike! I appreciate that.

And I can understand where those people are coming from, especially since--if I'm remembering correctly--the first MUTO is shown on screen before Godzilla is.

[Mattrick]

The music was good but there's a reason Alexandre Desplat just got an oscar nom for Philomena, because he's awesome. I didn't actually like Godzilla at all and found the MUTO's to be far more interesting (probably because they reminded me so much of the Cloverfield monster) and I enjoyed how National Geographic they felt, watching them kind of going through a mating ritual with offering the nuke as a mating gift and their dance and I think it would have been better to actually kind of see them mate but the film, of course, took the safe approach. Someone on Ebert's site in the comments was defending the movies dark realism of a monster attack and I said Dark realism? You mean the film that went out of it's way to show people falling out of a train EXCEPT of course for the kid who gets not only saved but miraculously finds his family in all of five seconds without even actually looking for them in a city of millions of dislocated people (I mean, The Impossible was an underwhelming film to me but it's best aspect was how well it conveyed dislocation in the wake of disaster) and Ford was like 'plot tied unrealistically mended' and went off for the nuke (again), and not to mention the dog that summons super canine strength to break snap his leash and outrun a storm surge that kills hundreds of people (but not the dog) and the camera pans over to more children who get inside a store whose plate glass windows barely crack against the pressure of millions of tonnes of rushing water filled with people and debris and cars etc...yeah, that's real dark realism there!

If there is one thing I can thank Godzilla for is that it made me appreciate Cloverfield 200% more when I re-watched it the other day...goddamn that is an awesome monster movie and I'm waiting for the sequel even more now, which has a slate on imdb.

[Randall Flagg]

Viewed "Her" on an in flight movie. I really enjoyed the film. In a slightly futuristic Los Angeles people are so "connected" (everyone walks around talking to to their self or others via an ear bud) that they are literally dysfunctional when interacting with others on a one-on-one personal basis. Joaquin Phoenix is a "personal note" writer for a future gift card company. He's bored, stifled and an extreme introvert. His life changes when he loads a brand new Operating System on his phones and computers. A sentient, digital (never physically seen) Scarlett Johansson becomes his personal assistant and "lover".
Johansson does a phenomenal job as a voice. Slowly paced, but never boring.
Don't want to spoil it so just go see it.
5/6 Beers on the RFSPRS.

[Mattrick]

Her quickly became one of my favourite movies. The second time through you really see how well constructed it is. I especially loved Jonze's use of silent images with music or dialogue playing over it. And for all the serious, contemplativeness of the film there are some very good laughs thrown in to balance it out.

[fernandito]

I need to do a review of X-Men, I fucking loved it.

Fucking loved it/10

[webstar1000]

I need to do a review of X-Men, I fucking loved it.

Fucking loved it/10

LOOOOL That is so good. I heard it is in the same category as Dark Knight... and that is one of my favs of all time! I seen Non-Stop last night and I loved it till the end... kind of let it go a bit but I would say 7/10. kris

[pathoftheturtle]

I need to do a review of X-Men, I fucking loved it.

Fucking loved it/10

LOOOOL That is so good. I heard it is in the same category as Dark Knight... and that is one of my favs of all time! No way. Like First Class, it's still just in the Batman Begins category.

[Roden]

Viewed "Her" on an in flight movie. I really enjoyed the film. In a slightly futuristic Los Angeles people are so "connected" (everyone walks around talking to to their self or others via an ear bud) that they are literally dysfunctional when interacting with others on a one-on-one personal basis. Joaquin Phoenix is a "personal note" writer for a future gift card company. He's bored, stifled and an extreme introvert. His life changes when he loads a brand new Operating System on his phones and computers. A sentient, digital (never physically seen) Scarlett Johansson becomes his personal assistant and "lover".
Johansson does a phenomenal job as a voice. Slowly paced, but never boring.
Don't want to spoil it so just go see it.
5/6 Beers on the RFSPRS.

Agreed. It's one of the "way too slowly paced" movies I really enjoyed. It's almost like it gives you time to think about what's going on, the repercussions for humanity and so on. And it's all done in such a believable way. I think drinking enhances the experience also :)

[DoctorZaius]

X-Men - easily a 9/10. Not Dark Knight good, but in many ways more entertaining than Dark Knight, but no where near as brooding. Loved it!

[pathoftheturtle]

The Wolverine was a fairly brooding film, and like TDK explored the essential nature of the main character, but still there was no Aaron Eckhart or Heath Ledger. Days of Future Past The Movie had some great actors and all around good performances, it did not gag itself at any point like the corny Juggernaut scene or the ludicrous Deadpool scene in the two rough installments this franchise is still just now fully getting over, and there are pretty cool special effects if you go to movies to be entertained by cool FX. As far as story, though, there's practically nothing that didn't appear in the cartoon series "Wolverine and the X-Men" which already distilled decades of comics into an even less logical plotline. So this is basically the live action remake of a remake of remakes. But that's typical pulp writing, really. I guess they are being very true to the source material on more than one level: brushing off increasingly convoluted story problems with contrived devices like time travel is tradition going far back in the print versions. Which is not to say that I didn't like the movie. I just think that realistically speaking the cinema is rather degenerating as an art form.

[Randall Flagg]

Viewed "Stuck in Love (http://stuckinlovemovie.com/)" Monday.
King related stuff in the movie.
Synopsis:

The directorial debut of John Boone, Stuck in Love stars Greg Kinnear as Bill Borgens, a highly respected and award-winning novelist who has been unable to write a word since his wife Erica (Jennifer Connelly) left him three years ago. While he pines for his ex, their oldest daughter Sam (Lily Collins) is about to publish her first novel, but is consumed with hatred towards her mother. Meanwhile, their younger son, Rusty (Nat Wolff), an obsessive Stephen King fan, falls in love with a fellow teenager who is dealing with an addiction to drugs. Stuck in Love screened at the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival under the title Writers

My thoughts:
An enjoyable drama, but it's hard to find sympathy or feel connected with a writer living in (I believe the Hamptons), whose child gets her first submission (to Scribner no less) accepted without help from the famous novelist, and whose son gets a cold call from Stephen King (imagine that), all the while spoiled 1% characters have the trials and tribulations of life.
The best parts were seeing the SK stuff in the background and hearing King's "walk on" phone call.
I give it 3/6 beers on the RFSRS. Should have been 2 beers but the King stuff kept me on the edge of my seat and the movie was mercifully cut to only ~96 minutes.

[Still Servant]

I need to do a review of X-Men, I fucking loved it.

Fucking loved it/10

I also loved X-Men: Days of Future Past. I'm not a comic book reader (at least when it comes to superhero stories) and I've never particularly loved the films. At least that was the case until I saw First Class, which I absolutely loved.

I will say that the "Time in a Bottle" scene was just fantastic. Easily one of my favorite scenes in a movie this year. Pretty much perfect in every way.

[Mattrick]

Seeing X-Men friday with a mickey of Jameson (don't judge that's just what I do friday mornings). Am hoping that Edge of Tomorrow will be worth seeing (like cruise but his action films are hit or miss...but Emily Blunt is a delight). Though the new price increase is a hit in the wallet for these morning showings...it went from 6 bucks to 7 bucks.

[Heather19]

Matt you should check your local theater. I know most of the ones around here (if not all) have a special day of the week where it's only $5 no matter what time you go. Of course it's usually like a tues or wed or something like that, but you can't beat that price.

[Mattrick]

I know on theatre kept doing that but those days are always crazy and sometimes the shows end up being sold out. I like my ten a.m. movies lol I think regular price is like 13 or something. Even the 3D prices are only I thik 10 bucks in the morning. Not seeing X-Men in 3D though since it was converted. Unless it's filmed in 3D I'm not biting.

[Ricky]

Just got back from an advanced screening of Deliver Us From Evil. A fun film, but nothing too spectacular (Sinister was much better). I'll try to get a full review up sometime tomorrow.

[fernandito]

I know it'll probably be a little closer to run of the mill than I'd like, but I really want to go see Edge of Tomorrow. I'm a sucker for anything sci-fi / time travel :blush:

[fernandito]

Just got back from an advanced screening of Deliver Us From Evil. A fun film, but nothing too spectacular (Sinister was much better). I'll try to get a full review up sometime tomorrow.
Fun fact : the little plush owl in the trailer is manufactured by my company. I made everyone watch the trailer and then I started messing with them, rolling the owl forward so it would hit their feet while I hid myself :lol:

[Ricky]

That owl is THE creepiest thing. :lol:

[Heather19]

Now I have to go watch the trailer. I don't think I've even heard of that film.

[Jean]

Just got back from an advanced screening of Deliver Us From Evil. A fun film, but nothing too spectacular (Sinister was much better). I'll try to get a full review up sometime tomorrow.
Fun fact : the little plush owl in the trailer is manufactured by my company. I made everyone watch the trailer and then I started messing with them, rolling the owl forward so it would hit their feet while I hid myself :lol:
you make plush owls???!!! how about plush bears?

[fernandito]

Unfortunately not... we have a bazillion bear related crib accessories tho lol.

[DoctorDodge]

I know it'll probably be a little closer to run of the mill than I'd like, but I really want to go see Edge of Tomorrow. I'm a sucker for anything sci-fi / time travel :blush:

Same here. I think this is a big reason why a lot of us loved Days of Future Past so much. Character-based time travel is something I'm especially a fan of - when someone either faces who they once were or who they will become - but while Edge of Tomorrow probably won't provide that so much, I'm still interested in seeing it. :)

[Still Servant]

I know on theatre kept doing that but those days are always crazy and sometimes the shows end up being sold out. I like my ten a.m. movies lol I think regular price is like 13 or something. Even the 3D prices are only I thik 10 bucks in the morning. Not seeing X-Men in 3D though since it was converted. Unless it's filmed in 3D I'm not biting.

I wish my theater had a 10 am showing. That would be amazing.

[Mattrick]

I know on theatre kept doing that but those days are always crazy and sometimes the shows end up being sold out. I like my ten a.m. movies lol I think regular price is like 13 or something. Even the 3D prices are only I thik 10 bucks in the morning. Not seeing X-Men in 3D though since it was converted. Unless it's filmed in 3D I'm not biting.

I wish my theater had a 10 am showing. That would be amazing.

I was surprised how busy the theatre actually was. Saw Godzilla the day of release at 11:30 am and there was about thirty people, at least 150 at X-Men a week after release.

[frik]

I always attend am showings: tickets are discounted, and usually there's only a handful of people in attendance.
As I always sit pretty close to the screen (say, 5th row), and everyone else is seated all the way in the back, there are no distractions whatsoever.

sk

[Ricky]

I always attend am showings: tickets are discounted, and usually there's only a handful of people in attendance.

That's what I like to do, too.

[Randall Flagg]

Viewed "A million ways to die in the west" yesterday. I think it should be titled "A million bad jokes in the wild west". Sophomoric potty humor that is quite funny on a 1 out of every 10 jokes is funnyjoke basis.
Seth Macfarlane should stay behind the camera. He has to, but cannot carry the movie. He was much better as "Ted".
Nonetheless quite humorous. Neal Patrick Harris and Sarah Silverman steal the show.
I give it 4/6 beers only because I had 2 beers before I saw it, and I think being a little lubed up helped.

[Ricky]

Deliver Us from Evil (2014)

Whenever a horror film boasts that its plot was “BASED ON (or INSPIRED BY) TRUE EVENTS”, it’s usually used as a device to entice prospective viewers and get butts into theater seats. While the connection between the supposed true events and the film’s content is usually quite loose, it doesn’t seem to matter much as long as its plot is satisfying. Unfortunately, the plot of the based-on-true-events crime thriller-horror hybrid, Deliver Us from Evil, isn’t.

In the film, Eric Bana plays real-life Bronx cop Ralph Sarchie who begins investigating a series of seemingly interconnected crimes. When confronted by a priest (Édgar Ramírez) who warns him that the crimes may be demonic in nature rather than mere human criminal activity, Bana’s skeptic cop and Ramírez’s open-minded priest team together to figure out what’s going on.

It’s here’s where the film hits its biggest problem: it never seems to know what it wants to be. Is it a cop-propelled crime thriller, or a horror with a goal to scare? It blends elements of both but the results are uneven at best. The film has a lot on its mind and throws it all at the audience—a decent family man haunted by his job (and past demons), a tale of possession, the unraveling of a mystery that may be more than it seems, commentary on religion, and various other plot threads—so that we’re never quite sure of its focus. For the most part, Deliver Us from Evil has a lot of good pieces, but when put together create more confusion than anything else.

The characters’ motives and actions are not as clear as they should be as you find yourself thinking things like: What are they doing now? or Hey, why are they at this abandoned building? As a result, you’re never quite sure where the plot’s going or what harrowing climax to look forward to later on. And when the film’s climax does come, you can’t help but feel unaffected by its significance.

Although Evil boasts an occasionally creepy atmosphere and a few shocks, there’s more jump scares utilized than anything else which is disappointing because there’s more than enough opportunities in its ample runtime to feature a slow build-up of genuine atmospheric scares. On that same note, the film is just too long. Clocking in just two minutes under two hours, having a large amount of content isn’t its problem; rather, it never seems to know what to do with it. It tries to sustain a sense of suspense and terror but ends up becoming unfocused instead, allowing itself to meander back and forth from plot point to plot point, unaware that the viewer may be getting lost along the way.

Deliver Us from Evil doesn’t offer anything incredibly new or groundbreaking to the genre. It has good ideas, but just doesn’t know what to do with them.

6/10

[DoctorZaius]

Rented America Hustle Friday night. Loved it. It was lighter that I expected, and yet it still had a Good Fellas kind of feel to it. Highly recommended.

[webstar1000]

Yep seen Xmen... WOW... well done. 9/10. Loved the Matrix feel it had to some scenes. I stayed after the credits too... anyone else see it? Dont wanna ruin it if you did not!!!

[fernandito]

Yep seen Xmen... WOW... well done. 9/10. Loved the Matrix feel it had to some scenes. I stayed after the credits too... anyone else see it? Dont wanna ruin it if you did not!!!

Yeap.

It's a young Apocalypse. Singer has stated that the next film will be a disaster film with Apocalypse as the cataclysmic force.

[DoctorDodge]

I am glad that Singer has been bringing in some of the more interesting key storylines of the comics to a fresh audience. It's a shame that The Last Stand already used the Dark Phoenix saga, as the problem with that film was that it crammed too much into one installment. It's clear that he does love the series, as there's an amazing amount of tying up continuity problems with First Class to the rest of the series (as amazing as that film was), and clearing up some of the rubbish from other films, and I don't often see that in comic book films, with the exception of the Dark Knight trilogy.

[Mattrick]

As I was walking out of the theatres after about 30 seconds of the credits of X-Men rolling, I looked up and saw about 75% of the audience wasn't moving so I yelled out "IT'S JUST APOCALYPSE TOOLS!!" I knew the next film was going to be about Apocalypse like two years ago...didn't everyone? What's the shock value? I dunno. The most shocking part to me is that people wait around for seven minutes for an advertisement...don't we usually skip those things when they pop up on a Youtube video?

[mae]

I always watch a movie to the end, including all credits, regardless of whether or not there's anything extra. I guess I'm just weird like that, but I've always done that. Whenever I go to the movies by myself, usually I'm all alone when leaving the theater, but if I'm with someone, they're usually pretty annoyed with me :unsure:

[Heather19]

I never rush out of the theater, but rarely will I stay till the very, very end of the credits unless I know there's going to be something.

[mae]

I enjoy the credits, but I can see how most people don't. I like listening to the score as it usually replays all the major themes, and it's fun actually reading who was involved in the making of the film I just watched. Can't read all the names, of course, but it is interesting.

[Ricky]

I like listening to the score as it usually replays all the major themes, and it's fun actually reading who was involved in the making of the film I just watched.

This! Plus I like to sit there and digest the movie for a little while everyone else is leaving.

[fernandito]

As I was walking out of the theatres after about 30 seconds of the credits of X-Men rolling, I looked up and saw about 75% of the audience wasn't moving so I yelled out "IT'S JUST APOCALYPSE TOOLS!!" I knew the next film was going to be about Apocalypse like two years ago...didn't everyone? What's the shock value? I dunno. The most shocking part to me is that people wait around for seven minutes for an advertisement...don't we usually skip those things when they pop up on a Youtube video?
It's part of the experience, relax lol.

[Mattrick]

All those reasonings are valid, but I know those people were sitting through them for none of those reasons lol and they're all mostly thinking JUST END ALREADY lol. I watched the clip YouTube outside smoking a bowl while they were still waiting inside.

[Still Servant]

As I was walking out of the theatres after about 30 seconds of the credits of X-Men rolling, I looked up and saw about 75% of the audience wasn't moving so I yelled out "IT'S JUST APOCALYPSE TOOLS!!" I knew the next film was going to be about Apocalypse like two years ago...didn't everyone? What's the shock value? I dunno. The most shocking part to me is that people wait around for seven minutes for an advertisement...don't we usually skip those things when they pop up on a Youtube video?

You're going to get your ass beat one of these days. I still don't know why the fuck you care whether or not people stay to watch the after credits stinger.

Also, not everybody knows what's going on in the X-Men universe. You shouting out that it was Apocalypse at the end would not have mattered to me anyway, because I have no fucking clue who Apocalypse even is. I had to Google it after watching the movie. Not everybody sits up at night sweating while pouring over every X-Men comic book.

[Still Servant]

I know it'll probably be a little closer to run of the mill than I'd like, but I really want to go see Edge of Tomorrow. I'm a sucker for anything sci-fi / time travel :blush:

Don't look now, but Edge of Tomorrow is getting solid early reviews.

Also, not that it matters, but I wish they didn't change the name. I think All You Need is Kill sounds a lot cooler.

[Mattrick]

As I was walking out of the theatres after about 30 seconds of the credits of X-Men rolling, I looked up and saw about 75% of the audience wasn't moving so I yelled out "IT'S JUST APOCALYPSE TOOLS!!" I knew the next film was going to be about Apocalypse like two years ago...didn't everyone? What's the shock value? I dunno. The most shocking part to me is that people wait around for seven minutes for an advertisement...don't we usually skip those things when they pop up on a Youtube video?

You're going to get your ass beat one of these days. I still don't know why the fuck you care whether or not people stay to watch the after credits stinger.

Also, not everybody knows what's going on in the X-Men universe. You shouting out that it was Apocalypse at the end would not have mattered to me anyway, because I have no fucking clue who Apocalypse even is. I had to Google it after watching the movie. Not everybody sits up at night sweating while pouring over every X-Men comic book.

I don't care that people watch them. It is just illogical to me that in a day and age when he skip, mute, ignore, change channels or walk away, do something else when advertisements come on that in this one instance people willingly choose to wait for one. If you're someone who watches the credits all the way through then it's normal for you, but most of the people I am sure are only staying for a teaser. It's not like it adds anything to the film you just paid to watch...it would be different if it was a few minutes and it both added to what was just watched and tease the next one.

I know not everyone sits up at night reading X-Men comics, I know that because I've never read an X-Men comic unless you include a Bishop comic I got for Christmas I gave away and not sure if I ever actually read it. If you know nothing about Apocalypse then that teaser does nothing for you anyways as you're not who these teasers are designed for; they are designed for those hardcore comic nerds to get on the internet and start the rumour mill spinning about Apocalypse and everything that could come with him i.e. build that hype before there's even a script for the next movie. (Like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1BbIcwZx-M) These teasers often do nothing for me because I do not read comics so when Iron Man runs into Sam Jackson and everyone had an orgasm, I was left confused, thinking perhaps since Travola died he need a new partner for the Pulp Fiction sequel or something...then someone told me about Nick Fury and The Avengers and I said "The Whos?" (I still don't know the names of all the avengers even though I watched the movie). Heck, even my memories of Apocalypse are faint from watching the cartoon when I was a kid.

If people want to watch them, whatever, I just do not understand the appeal or understand how they add to the experience. Just put it at the end of the damn movie like Nolan did with Batman Begins with Batman/Gordon and The Joker card.

[Still Servant]

As I was walking out of the theatres after about 30 seconds of the credits of X-Men rolling, I looked up and saw about 75% of the audience wasn't moving so I yelled out "IT'S JUST APOCALYPSE TOOLS!!" I knew the next film was going to be about Apocalypse like two years ago...didn't everyone? What's the shock value? I dunno. The most shocking part to me is that people wait around for seven minutes for an advertisement...don't we usually skip those things when they pop up on a Youtube video?

You're going to get your ass beat one of these days. I still don't know why the fuck you care whether or not people stay to watch the after credits stinger.

Also, not everybody knows what's going on in the X-Men universe. You shouting out that it was Apocalypse at the end would not have mattered to me anyway, because I have no fucking clue who Apocalypse even is. I had to Google it after watching the movie. Not everybody sits up at night sweating while pouring over every X-Men comic book.

If you know nothing about Apocalypse then that teaser does nothing for you anyways as you're not who these teasers are designed for

You don't care, yet you blurt out the end stinger for what? Just to be a dick?

I also disagree that the stinger isn't for people that don't know who Apocalypse is. I had no clue, but it got me even more interested in the next film. I thought it was so cool and I was really intrigued. It just helps build excitement for the next film. Sure, they could put the stinger earlier in the credits, most films do, although Avengers and some films like to put two. One towards the beginning and one at the end of the credits.

I just don't think it's cool to blurt it out in the theater while a bunch of people are waiting the end.

[pathoftheturtle]

People skip ads, but not ads for movies. They search for those. Various trailers are always top rated on YouTube + usually even on Google.
... It's a shame that The Last Stand already used the Dark Phoenix saga...The time travel erased it, tho. They could do it over.

Continuity issues between First Class and earlier films will probably be ignored. It's nuts they established the public didn't know about mutants then it turns out they've been in the news since the sixties.

Seems to me Singer has to bring back Rebecca Romin. The whole point of this film was young Mystique not being permitted to turn evil. So where is she? With Xavier?

[fernandito]

Continuity issues between First Class and earlier films will probably be ignored. It's nuts they established the public didn't know about mutants then it turns out they've been in the news since the sixties.
More than likely. They don't bother me tho, continuity errors are an intrinsic part of comic books, happens all the time. If they're cleaning the slate for the sake of a new, bolder direction I'm all for it.



Seems to me Singer has to bring back Rebecca Romin. The whole point of this film was young Mystique not being permitted to turn evil. So where is she? With Xavier?
Maybe she's operating solo like she was during most of DOFP... a little hard to tell at this point. The fact that she was impersonating Stryker at the end hints at something more... I personally don't think she'll be affiliated with anyone. I'm wondering how this will all fit in the grand scheme of things as Singer said the Apocalypse movie will be a disaster film.

[pathoftheturtle]

…continuity errors are an intrinsic part of comic books, happens all the time.
Poor excuse. Comic books are mass produced entertainment that were often put together quickly and cheaply by multiple writers. The best works, though, came about because certain creators decided the artform could be used better. Isn't that what we should expect from the films? Or do movies have to go down in quality to make comic fans feel better about the junk they usually read? I'm all for a new direction, too, but somebody could have explained what happened before they cleaned the slate.

[pathoftheturtle]

Oh well, at least none of it is as bad as what was done to Star Trek.

[fernandito]

Poor excuse. Comic books are mass produced entertainment that were often put together quickly and cheaply by multiple writers.
There was heavy improvisation on DOFP as well. Vaughn had a specific vision of where he wanted to go, then he dropped out and Singer came with his team and re worked several strands until we arrived at the finished product. It doesn't just happen with comic films, look at what happened with Prometheus. Rewrites occur all the time, it's just that we're more likely to see them in these kind of films because they attempt to maintain some semblance of continuity. It's not like the Bond films where you have a new arc with new characters every other film. Them tripping over themselves a bit is kind of expected, especially since they're juggling such a massive cast of characters.

[pathoftheturtle]

Yeah. And you're right on the spoiler couple posts ago. Sorry if I 's spillin too much plot.

[pathoftheturtle]

I, Frankenstein
4/10

I'm not sure who this movie is for - it purports to be a sequel to the classic novel, repeatedly making the assumption that the viewer has read it, but uses a standard structure of present day action-monster movies. I can't tell you to expect a provocative treatment of deep existential questions, because the presence of demons as antagonists seems to plainly confirm a certain religious moral order, but neither can I say it's just for fun and you don't have to worry about philosophical issues while watching the bad guys get buttkicked, because the angst of the borrowed main character does get stressed throughout the picture anyway. Takes the archetype of identity crises and it possibly was made just to show an answer that's a little too easy.

[DoctorDodge]

So I checked this one out today and really enjoyed it. The time loop scenario is a story that's been done a few times before, but it's still one that's told well in this film.

What really helps is the freshness angle it provides to the standard hollywood blockbuster, particularly the number of deaths Tom Cruise's character goes through the first time he tries something that in most blockbusters the main character would, understandably, get right perfectly, so when he gets clumsy and gets killed for it, it's surprisingly funny as hell.

I also liked how Cruise's character of Major Cage goes from being an inexperienced and not entirely sympathetic character (only gaining his rank through how good at PR he is) to how we gradually get used to seeing him grow more and more confidant in his new routine of dying over and over again. I also liked that as we see him grow more confidant and more experienced, the film relies less and less on actually showing us his experience of making particular mistakes and instead simply tells us what to expect and what he's learned, so that the action avoids being too repetitive and has a nice even flow.

Overall, while it's not the greatest blockbuster movie I've seen, it's a well-told, well made time loop story that really surprised me. If that's what you're looking for and aren't expecting too much depth (particularly regarding the alien race they're fighting the Mimics, although they did at least look cool), this is worth a look. 7/10

[Still Servant]

I've been looking forward to Edge of Tomorrow for a while. What didn't you like about it that made you go with a 7?

[Mattrick]

The Grand Budapest Hotel: Like every Wes Anderson film it's a complete delight. I'm not sure how he can craft such unique films from top to bottom and a lot of the charm comes with how straight faced and serious the actors play the roles as if everything they're surrounded by isn't the least bit strange. Willem Dafoe was hilariously evil and Adrian Brody seemed as if everytime just before he's on screen he did a big rail of coke his face is so intense at times. There's some fantastic over the top laughs and a little more blood in parts than we're used to seeing in a Wes Anderson films and even that is non-chalantly swept off Ralph Fiennes shoulder as if someone had merely stubbed their toe. Grand Budapest really follows the storybook forumla that worked well in Royal Tenenbaums and it's employed to even more use here as it's a movie about a someone reading a book and the author is telling the story that is being told by F. Murray Abraham to Jude Law. What I love about Anderson films is that they are all about relationships and how relating to people changes us; Tenenbaum's was about the decay a terrible, distant father can instill on his children, Life Aquatic was about an estranged father and son, Darjeeling was about very different yet similar brothers, Moonrise Kingdom is about youth discovering love and relationships and Grand Budapest is about the generational cycle of boss/entry level of boss and underling and the moulding of the next generation. Also, while I cannot recall the name of the fictional country the movie takes place in it is full of allusions to 1930's Germany, the rise of fascim and all the soldier uniforms are so obviously supposed to be German but just not German enough to actually be German....and the massive banners with the ZZ made me laugh my ass off. Oh, and just like American Hustle and Her the best laughs I got from this film involved a cat so it's been a strong year for cat humour!

5/5

[DoctorDodge]

I've been looking forward to Edge of Tomorrow for a while. What didn't you like about it that made you go with a 7?

Don't get me wrong, for a blockbuster movie, it's great. It's just that there's a couple of things regarding both the war and the alien race they're fighting that I would've liked to have explored in just a little more depth (including the main character, if I'm honest - outside of the loop and his job, you don't find out that much about him, one of the few things that makes his character stand out a little less), and while there's some originality there, it's still a story that I've kind of seen done many times before. Still a good film, though. Days of Future Past is still my favourite time travel movie this year, though. Kinda itching to see that again, if I'm honest.

[Still Servant]

Another original action film bombs at the box office. It's late, but I'd really like to talk about this and see if we can somehow figure out why this keeps happening.

[Mattrick]

Cruises's name carries more negative cache than positive I'm afraid...this is why films like Valkyrie and others didn't do very well. I'd be curious to see what his last starring role outside the Mission Impossible to make over 100 million was, probably War of the Worlds. He's a very underrated actor for some reason.

[frik]

Edge of Tomorrow is doing much better abroad: $111,000,000 opening weekend.

sk

[Mattrick]

That's because Asian's love Tom Cruise. Not a racist statement so much as fact...I've seen it.

[frik]

This hundred million is mainly from European and South American markets - just two million from Asia, where it has only opened in Hong Kong and Malaysia.
Guess Tom Cruise is liked world-wide, except for North America??

sk

[DoctorDodge]

Interestingly, the film has been successful internationally (according to this link, it raked in $82M: http://www.deadline.com/2014/06/intl-box-office-edge-of-tomorrow-no-1-with-82m-fault-in-our-stars-shines-in-brazil-mexico-oz-maleficent-adds-59-7m-x-men-crosses-100m-in-china-more/), and it was no. 1 in the UK. It's a shame it hasn't made as much in the US, though, as it is pretty much the key market. There might be more of a market for these kind of films internationally, perhaps - Dredd was number 1 at the UK box office during its opening weekend, but we all know how it fared US wise (although in that case, I still put a tiny portion of the blame on Rob Schneider).

[Mattrick]

This hundred million is mainly from European and South American markets - just two million from Asia, where it has only opened in Hong Kong and Malaysia.
Guess Tom Cruise is liked world-wide, except for North America??

sk

Japan loves him for sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhQjUiQYeak

[Heather19]

Cruises's name carries more negative cache than positive I'm afraid...this is why films like Valkyrie and others didn't do very well. I'd be curious to see what his last starring role outside the Mission Impossible to make over 100 million was, probably War of the Worlds. He's a very underrated actor for some reason.

You could be onto something. I can't stand Tom Cruise (never was a fan in the first place) but after that whole Scientology and Katie Holmes thing, I was especially turned off from him. I'm also not a fan of big blockbuster action films, which is what he normally stars in, but if he does a regular movie I wouldn't be thrilled to watch it if he was in it.

[thegunslinger41]

Recently watched 2 movies, both pretty emotionally heavy.


Labor Day
The Secret Life of Walter Smitty


Both great!


G

[Still Servant]

Cruises's name carries more negative cache than positive I'm afraid...this is why films like Valkyrie and others didn't do very well. I'd be curious to see what his last starring role outside the Mission Impossible to make over 100 million was, probably War of the Worlds. He's a very underrated actor for some reason.

I understand what you are saying about Cruise, but you also argued against yourself. Mission Impossible did over 200 million dollars at the US box office and that was released in December. This plays perfectly into what I wanted to talk about because Mission Impossible has name recognition. Jack Reacher doesn't have name recognition and it bombs.

A few of you also made good points about Edge of Tomorrow's international box office. It's very strong and it has nothing to do with Asian people liking Tom Cruise. The fact of the matter is that they are more open to new things. That and the fact that that market is currently blowing up over there.

Edge of Tomorrow is a PG-13 movie, with a strong trailer catering to video game style themes. There's no reason why it should do poorly. Add in the fact that it's getting good reviews and you would think you have a hit on your hands. Now, the reviews mean nothing because the people who go to the movies in droves don't care about reviews.

Somebody is going to have to figure out how to appeal to a mass audience without using Transformers or superheroes. I'm starting to lose hope with mainstream American moviegoers. They will give nothing a chance unless it's a sequel or reboot. The exception is horror films, which people seem to flock to the theater for regardless of its quality.

I haven't seen Edge of Tomorrow, but it doesn't deserve to be bombing the way it is, despite what people think about Tom Cruise. I firmly believe that if they had named Edge of Tomorrow Groundhog Day 2, they would be #1 at the box office.

[Mattrick]

That was my point with saying outside Mission Impossible as that series itself has a fanbase and name recognition. When you look abroad, Tom Cruise's appeal hasn't been tarnished as heavily when it comes to scientology, dirt sheets, personal life and stupid stuff like jumping on Oprah's couch...I don't know why American's couldn't get over him jumping on her couch. In many parts of the world Cruise is still beloved and is still the movie star he once was over here. His lack of drawing power over here has nothing to do with his acting abilities or his resume (which aside from a couple average films the past few years is still very strong), it's all opinion and perception. It's not as if you can point to any specific movie and say, 'that's what did it' with Tom Cruise. People just simply don't like him in the U.S and I'm sure those that don't have their reasons that has little if anything%

[Still Servant]

I don't want this to turn into a Tom Cruise problem. It extends far beyond his films. There are countless examples of films that have failed at the box office without Tom Cruise. Some of them also had star power. For example, Elysium last year. Pacific Rim is another one. I'm not saying Pacific Rim is great, but the differences between that film and Godzilla are really not many, yet Pacific Rim did a fraction of the box office.

I just don't want to focus solely on Cruise. I don't think this is just a Tom Cruise problem. This is an American problem. Notice I didn't say it was a Hollywood problem because Hollywood is more than happy to keep feeding us the same shit over and over again.

You're right about District 9. It's the one film that was the exception. I'm not quite sure how it broke the mold. As for the Hangover, I think comedies sometimes are immune. Especially ones that are geared for older audiences. I guess I'm mainly talking about action films or blockbusters.

[Mattrick]

Cloverfield managed to break through as well but that was because of it's marketting strategy...smaller films should look at what Bad Robot did bring people into the theatres, intrigue them with the trailers and make people invested before release. I'm sure that piracy definitely plays a role in that people will go out and see Godzilla or X-Men but a movie they are unsure of, that they aren't hyped due to a lack of history and fandom, and people are more likely to find a copy or wait for DVD/Blu-Ray release or to hear people's opinions before going to see it. You're right that the problem is beyond Cruise but I think when it comes to Cruise he's definitely more prejudiced against for various reasons than most A-list actors are. I am curious to see how Edge of Tomorrow would have fared without Cruise in the role, perhaps a relative unknown like Sharlto Copely was in District 9. I am curious to see if word of mouth helps get those in theatres who were cautious about seeing it. I don't think the strong chick flick opening same weekend helped it as I am sure many men who would rather of seen Edge of Tomorrow were dragged into a different theatre lol. I wouldn't be surprised to see it maintain a steady box office for the next two weeks though. I know I'm more willing to see it after hearing a lot of positive things.

[Still Servant]

I agree with you, Cruise is definitely more hated than any other A-list actor. I don't really understand it. I think he's one of the more dependable actors working today. A Few Good Men is still one of my favorite movies of all time.

I actually just got back from Edge of Tomorrow. I've been working so much, I decided to treat myself. Got off work at 9pm after working since 8am and decided to catch the 10pm showing. Even though I was tired, I was instantly rejuvenated by the film. I can't really go into at the moment, but I thought the story was pretty tight and it never felt like it lagged. Even though certain scenes were played multiple times, it still felt fresh.

Anyway, the big test is going to be Guardians of the Galaxy. It fits the superhero category, but it's not as well known. If people don't turn out for it, it will kind of tell an interesting story about mainstream audiences. Only time will tell. I personally think it will do pretty well.

[Mattrick]

Guardians of the Galaxy seems like it isn't going to take itself seriously in the least...I mean, a racoon is one of it's main characters, and I would rather see it than say Avengers 2.

[webstar1000]

Edge of Tomorrow... great movie but forgettable. A lot of fun in 3d though...

[fernandito]

Guardians of the Galaxy seems like it isn't going to take itself seriously in the least...I mean, a racoon is one of it's main characters, and I would rather see it than say Avengers 2.

Guardians of the Galaxy is the very essence of 'not taking yourself seriously'. There's a lot of slapstick, self deprecating humor in the comics. Check out a Vol. before the film is released, it'll give you a better idea of what to expect.

Also, Guardians and Avengers will end up crossing over at some point, it happens frequently in the comics.

[pathoftheturtle]

Open secret of Marvel Comics, actually: it started as pop art. Quite self-aware and essentially light-hearted. The Thing was at once the tragic character / tough guy of the Fantastic Four and the team's comic relief with off-the-wall dialogue & down-to-earth viewpoint directly in contrast to the, er… fantastic… superscience and bizarre threats. Then the most famous wisecracking superhero of all -- your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. This movie will be right within tradition. But there might be parts that are still just dumb. Some of the related films have already gone too far on occasion. I'm not real thrilled about the "infinity stones" revelation from the Thor 2 after credit sequence; the mega-crossover involving that concept in comics was to me a definitive example of indeed taking self too seriously.

[fernandito]

I read this really interesting article on how it's actually a good thing that Marvel does not have the film rights to X-Men and Spiderman because then projects like GotG would probably never have gotten off the ground. If I can find it I'll send it to you, Path.

[Still Servant]

Not to change the subject, but I can't help but think that a movie or series of movies featuring a combination of The Avengers, Spiderman and X-Men would be anything but lucrative for all parties involved. I know there is tons of red tape and legal mumbo jumbo, but it's in the best interest of all involved to work something out. The money everybody would make would be ridiculous. It would literally be like printing money.

I'm shocked they can't come to some kind of compromise. I'm sure there is also more to it than I am aware of.

[Mattrick]

I would think such a project would be too clogged to possibly be any good but that's just me. X-Men is it's own universe itself. I could see Spider-man teaming with someone but that's only because I've lost interest in that brand of films now.

[pathoftheturtle]

I don't know... the same people who go to every Marvel movie would probably be extra-excited about an ultra-big crossover film, but do you really think that would automatically equal extra-big profits?


I read this really interesting article on how it's actually a good thing that Marvel does not have the film rights to X-Men and Spiderman because then projects like GotG would probably never have gotten off the ground. If I can find it I'll send it to you, Path.Sure; that would be great. I don't know if it much bears on what I was just saying, but if you found it interesting, it certainly sounds like something I'd like to read. And that is what I was talking about on the av thread, isn't it? Ironically enough, if TCF hadn't gotten Singer for the first X-Men film, then there might never have been confidence and interest enough for Iron Man and all the rest to get off the ground anyhow.
:orely:

[DoctorDodge]

Godzilla

Well I must admit, I was rather disappointed by this one, mostly by the "human drama" part of the plot, as it seems to be the typical stock plot of "man seperated from his family while disaster happens" that I've seen in a lot of blockbusters. If any film screams "movie Jean would seriously fucking hate" (more so than a lot of blockbuster films I enjoy), this is it.

On the other hand, I found the actual monsters of the film rather impressive, especially Godzilla itself. I also liked the new backstory to the monster itself, and there were some cool epic scenes. But I can't help but feel the wrong story - human wise - was told here. At the very least, it wasn't told well enough. Instead of making me root for the characters, I couldn't help but feel I had seen it all before. Mattrick pointed out that Cloverfield was a much better monster movie, and I more than heartily agree. Compared to that and the seriously fun Pacific Rim, this is simply a disappointment, imo. 5/10

[Ricky]

A 5? Wow. But I do agree with a lot of your points. It could've been a lot better.

[Randall Flagg]

22 Jump Street.
Very funny. Exactly what I wanted and expected, but a bit more. So happy they didn't "kid it down" (make it PG-13). Raunchy, politically incorrect, but unfortunately little to no nakedness.
Love before/as the credits run they did the funny cuts on future sequels.
Funniest part was Capt. Dickson (Ice Cube) finding out that Schmidt (Jonah Hill) was banging his daughter. The ensuing mayhem was fantastic.
5/6 Beers on the RFSRS. Would have received 6 if there were at least 3 boobs shown.

[Merlin1958]

Edge of Tomorrow, an interesting Sci Fi concept, well done with loads of action. I really enjoyed it!!!

[Mattrick]

Dear Mr. Watterson is a must watch for any Calvin and Hobbes fan but I can't see it offering too much to people who don't love the comic strip.

Funny People is such an underappreciated film, even I wasn't a big fan of it the first time as it felt over long and even the stuff with Eric Bana felt overlong and tacked on but I didn't feel that way the second time through. It's a very well acted comedy and very well written and it shows what Apatow can do on the directorial end of filmmaking. Sandler is such a great actor who doesn't allow himself to be one for whatever reason. Rogen plays a very different character for him as well as he both isn't his old characters yet at the same time he still is, it's odd to describe.

[fernandito]

Has anyone here seen Snowpiercer (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706620/?ref_=nv_sr_1)? Mike, I seem to recall you mentioning it...

I've seen it mentioned more and more lately, often to polarizing reviews. IGN (which granted, isn't exactly the most prestigious film site) gave it a stunning 9.2/10 and I wanted to see if the hype was warranted. It certainly has my attention.

[webstar1000]

Has anyone here seen Snowpiercer (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706620/?ref_=nv_sr_1)? Mike, I seem to recall you mentioning it...

I've seen it mentioned more and more lately, often to polarizing reviews. IGN (which granted, isn't exactly the most prestigious film site) gave it a stunning 9.2/10 and I wanted to see if the hype was warranted. It certainly has my attention.

I did at a screening (I see a ton of movies before other people through a friend of mine who reviews them) and WOW... a must see. It is WELL DONE and a ride till the end for sure. See it...

[Still Servant]

Has anyone here seen Snowpiercer (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706620/?ref_=nv_sr_1)? Mike, I seem to recall you mentioning it...

I've seen it mentioned more and more lately, often to polarizing reviews. IGN (which granted, isn't exactly the most prestigious film site) gave it a stunning 9.2/10 and I wanted to see if the hype was warranted. It certainly has my attention.

I've been following Snowpiercer for about two years now. It made my 2013 most anticipated films of the year and then got pushed back because of the whole distribution debacle with Harvey Weinstein and Miramax. Weinstein wanted to cut 25 minutes and director Bong Joon-Ho wasn't having any of it. They finally came to an agreement and the film was given a firm US release date. I doubt it will get a wide release, but having Chris Evans as a name might help it. Either way, I will see it at some point. I'm still pissed I wasn't able to see The Raid 2. Only a few theaters had it around here. I'm drooling to see it.

[Ricky]

Isn't Snowpiercer going direct to VOD?

[Still Servant]

Isn't Snowpiercer going direct to VOD?

For the most part. I heard it will get a limited opening. I'm sure there are a few people that will be lucky enough to live near a theater that gets it. All the Indy theaters are gone over here.

[Merlin1958]

Anyone, "Hip" to the deal with "The Signal"?

[Randall Flagg]

Anyone, "Hip" to the deal with "The Signal"?
I viewed it yesterday. It's a beautifully done movie that is puzzling. It's almost 3 distinct "episodes". Imagine if Stanley Kubrick and David Lynch collaborated on a Twilight Zone movie.
Plot description is here, Three MIT students, professional hackers, start to pursue Nomad, a mysterious man who invaded MIT computers and exposed uncountable mistakes. The three go on a trip to the desert of Nevada to find him, just to wake up in a facility full of men with biohazard suits. In the search for answers, they find a conspiracy much larger than themselves.but I suggest you view it without reading about it or seeing the trailer. Have as open of a mind as possible.
I give it 3.5/6 beers on the RFSRS.

[Merlin1958]

Anyone, "Hip" to the deal with "The Signal"?
I viewed it yesterday. It's a beautifully done movie that is puzzling. It's almost 3 distinct "episodes". Imagine if Stanley Kubrick and David Lynch collaborated on a Twilight Zone movie.
Plot description is here, Three MIT students, professional hackers, start to pursue Nomad, a mysterious man who invaded MIT computers and exposed uncountable mistakes. The three go on a trip to the desert of Nevada to find him, just to wake up in a facility full of men with biohazard suits. In the search for answers, they find a conspiracy much larger than themselves.but I suggest you view it without reading about it or seeing the trailer. Have as open of a mind as possible.
I give it 3.5/6 beers on the RFSRS.

Cool thanks, Jerome. Problem i, I can't locate a theater in AZ (East Valley) showing the damn thing. I wanted to go see it yesterday. No luck.

[DoctorZaius]

Just got back from taking the kids to How to Train Your Dragon 2 - they loved it, I thought it was just Ok.

[WeDealInLead]

Odd Thomas - the movie nailed the tone of the book. Yeltsin is Odd Thomas. Dafoe was great as well. I read the reviews on rottentomatoes.com and this is one of the few time where I couldn't disagree more. One of the reviewer's reason for giving it a low mark was that the violence seemed too real. To me, that was what made it so good. Characters are quirky, but the setting is the real world and a mall shooting is still a mall shooting. My wife was bawling at the end and I have to admit I was real close too.

It's criminal that this movie received no promotion. 8/10.

[WeDealInLead]

Open call for movie reviews. I write reviews of comics and books but I'm useless when it comes to analyzing movies. I'm able to go a little deeper than "I like it because I like it" but I'm useless when it comes to analyzing photography, composition, lighting and what have you. I've read quite a few nice reviews in this thread. I can't pay you because no one pays me, you get the credit and a link to your website. If I could even use the ones already posted, that'd be great.

I waste time on writing these reviews because I genuinely believe what I've read was great art and more people should check it out. This is where your review would go: http://nottooterrible.wordpress.com

[Jean]

you can use any review bears have posted anywhere around here (if you like any, that is)

[Mattrick]

I've written some in this thread you can use...also in my top films of 2000

[Still Servant]

Open call for movie reviews. I write reviews of comics and books but I'm useless when it comes to analyzing movies. I'm able to go a little deeper than "I like it because I like it" but I'm useless when it comes to analyzing photography, composition, lighting and what have you. I've read quite a few nice reviews in this thread. I can't pay you because no one pays me, you get the credit and a link to your website. If I could even use the ones already posted, that'd be great.

I waste time on writing these reviews because I genuinely believe what I've read was great art and more people should check it out. This is where your review would go: http://nottooterrible.wordpress.com

You can use any of my reviews that I've posted here. I've been too busy to write anything recently. I usually start doing a lot of reviews as we get closer to Oscar season.

I want to create my own website that compiles my reviews as well as reviews from a bunch of the people here. Again, just too busy, plus my Fantasy Baseball Website takes up a ton of my time.

[fernandito]

You can use any of my reviews as well!

[WeDealInLead]

Thanks. I'll go through the last few pages and look for '13 and '14 movies.

[mae]

I can't write reviews but I watched Enemy a couple of days ago and I'm still thinking about it. A tremendous film, maybe even better than Prisoners, which was one of my very favorites of 2013. A couple of years ago I also saw Denis Villeneuve's Polytechnique, and that was another great film. I have his Incendies, which I'll watch as soon as possible now. He's now one of my favorite directors, if he can keep making movies like these.

[Mattrick]

I tried really hard to watch Incendies for the Oscars that year, couldn't find it :(

[webstar1000]

Transformers... not bad.. the best part..... Dinobots.

[DoctorZaius]

Took my daughters to see Maleficent yesterday. A surprisingly good feminist take on the tale.

[Randall Flagg]

Viewed "Begin Again" yesterday. Somewhat predictable RomCom, but with superior acting all around. I like and felt for the characters. Kiera Knightly captures your eye. Purportedly she did the singing herself.
Virtually zero violence, and minimal special effects. Several times the film had me guessing about outcomes, and one for sure made the movie. The final scene (pre-credits) was beautiful.
4.5/6 beers on the RFSRS.

[webstar1000]

Noah. Loved it!

[Still Servant]

The Purge: Anarchy - 7.5/10

I just got back from a free screening of The Purge: Anarchy and I can tell you that it's better than the first, which isn't that hard to do I suppose.

It seems like the filmmakers listened to the complaints about the first film and decided to do it right this time.

The first film had such an interesting premise with endless possibilities and it essentially turned into your average home invasion slasher flick.

A wasted opportunity indeed.

I would have called this film "The Purge: A Redo."

[DoctorZaius]

Took the daughters to see ECHO - we all loved it. A fine ET rip-off, if ever there was one, but was fun to introduce the kids to the live camera style of filmmaking. One of these days I am going to post a movie I saw without the kids!

[Mattrick]

The Purge: Anarchy - 7.5/10

I just got back from a free screening of The Purge: Anarchy and I can tell you that it's better than the first, which isn't that hard to do I suppose.

It seems like the filmmakers listened to the complaints about the first film and decided to do it right this time.

The first film had such an interesting premise with endless possibilities and it essentially turned into your average home invasion slasher flick.

A wasted opportunity indeed.

I would have called this film "The Purge: A Redo."

From the trailer I saw it looks like it will have most of the problems the first film had, it will just be outside. I still saw stupid 'creepy' masks and the focus being on a few people surviving The Purge instead of participating (though the films angle seemed to be they are driven to participate in The Purge through survival). The Purge is a great idea for a film but I can tell the sequel probably ratchets up the violence but not the social commentary as much as it should. It did look to be a marked improvement over the original (which as you said isn't too difficult to do) but I still found myself turned off by the trailer. As far as I am concerned there are only two ways to do this film: 1) Show the entire movie from the perspective of the government or some policing force as they hide away in their isolated fortress outside from The Purge and depict everything through security cameras etc and end the movie with an extended, silent clean up sequence in which ends with people going to work like nothing happened, 2) Focus on a married couple who go to work, go through a totally mundane day at work, establish that they are pleasant, wholesome people and watch them turn into savage beasts when The Purge begins and have them revert back to their wholesome selves the next day (they could almost use the same ending from Scorcese's After Hours). I'm not sure if Anarchy has this problem or corrected itself but the film should not concern itself with the violence because it should become emotionally detatched...if it was made right it wouldn't even show the violence centre frame, only in the distance or out of focus or at the side of the frame (like World War Z did with the zombies) only the faces of those on both sides of it because the violence should be secondary to where it's coming from. I just hate the fact these films are about people surviving The Purge instead of participating in it, it practically throws out all possibilities for commentary on the premise of the film: The Purge is meant to be cathardic...SHOW THAT FOR FUCK SAKES. As a writer poor execution and exploring of themes inherent in an idea is not only a waste, it's a piss off, because nothing is more frustrating to a writer than seeing good ideas get wasted by awful writing....this is why I disliked Under The Dome so much...so much potential for commentary on humanity and it was wasted.

[Still Servant]

First, let me say that the trailer certainly makes the film seem more like a horror film than it is. The guys with the masks are featured prominently in the trailer, but actually aren't in the film that much. As we all know, the point of a trailer is to get as many butts in the seats as possible. The Purge: Anarchy trailers are trying to seem more like a horror film and because of that are trying to appeal to its target demographic which is teens, young females and Latinos. Yes, you read that last part right. Latinos love horror films. I'm not making this up, studies shows that a large portion of a horror films audience is Latino. I can say that more than half of the theater last night was Latino.

I can also say that The Purge: Anarchy does dig into the social commentary of the whole concept of The Purge a lot more than the first film. There are characters conflicted on the morality of the whole thing. I think you would be surprised how much more of it there is. That being said, it certainly doesn't fill the film with. Very shortly, we are on to the next action scene.

The film you described above is very interesting and I'd love to see it, but let's be honest, mainstream America doesn't want to see people going to work and living their lives before they purge. They want to see chaos and mayhem. The film you described above would work perfectly as an Indy film, not a mainstream film.

I sometimes get carried away with trying to fix Hollywood and get to the bottom of what they are doing wrong. I often have to stop myself and realize the true reasoning behind almost every decision Hollywood makes and that is to make money. Let's be honest, these films aren't made for people like you and me and others in this forum. It's designed for people that just want to see some crazy shit go down and not have to think about it.

Having long scenes discussing the social and moral implications of The Purge is just not what most people want and it's not going to make money. I wish that wasn't the case but it is.

Don't get me wrong though, I like both kinds of films. I can turn my brain off just as well as the next person, but I often want a little bit more out of my cinematic experience too. The good news is there are multiple ways to get both experiences. As for The Purge: Anarchy, I think we are going to have to settle for a mainstream film heavy on action and light on thought provoking themes.

[Still Servant]

Snowpiercer - 9.5/10

For the fourth time in seven years, alien robots have descended on movie theaters across America, filling up three, sometimes four theaters at your local multiplex. The 200 million dollar behemoth is accompanied by an extravagant add campaign and numerous merchandise tie-ins.

As audiences flocked to the new Transformers movie, a much smaller, more unknown film rolled into theaters. Well, only a few theaters. In fact, you’d be lucky to find this Little Engine That Could of a film near you. That film is Snowpiercer. Its journey to American shores is as epic and filled with drama as the actual train in the film, but more on that later.

Snowpiercer tells the story of a near future Earth that has been ravaged by climate change. In an effort to counteract global warming, humans experiment with releasing various chemicals into the environment. The experiment backfires and a new ice age freezes the Earth, killing most of humanity. The few remaining survivors board a high-speed train where they endlessly circle the Earth. As we board the train at the start of the film, it has been circling the Earth continuously for the last 17 years.

The entire train is a small ecosystem of humanity. People of all nationalities and social standing co-exist together. It’s somewhat like a modern day Noah’s Ark. Like with our own society, there are the halves and the have nots. The people in the back of the train live in filth, cramped on top of one another. Their main food source are mysterious black gelatin bricks. All this while the people in the front of the train live the life of luxury. Eating gourmet meals and indulging in all the luxuries that a life on Earth would have to offer.

One can’t help but make the parallel to Rosa Parks and her struggle during the civil rights movement. In Snowpiercer, the passengers at the back of the train are treated like second class citizens and are essentially prisoners in their own home.

Soon we are introduced to Curtis, played by Chris Evans. That’s right, everybody’s favorite shield wielding Avenger, Captain America. Curtis is tired of eating black goo every day and he’s tired of his people being treated like rats who have stowed away. His objective? To get to the front of the train. A task that could prove quite difficult when confronted by ax-wielding ninjas and other various obstacles.

Snowpiercer is easily one of the most unique action films you will see (if you're lucky) all summer. The film is based on a French graphic novel, directed by a Korean director and comprised of a predominantly Western cast. The director is not just any director either, his name is Bong Joon-ho and he’s one of the best directors in South Korea. His films Memories of Murder, The Host, and Mother are some of the best films of the last decade.

If it wasn’t for Bong Joon-ho, Snowpiercer might not have even made it to American shores, at least not in the form that the director intended. Harvey Weinstein of The Weinstein Co., who was set to distribute the film, wanted the director to cut over 20 minutes from the film because he felt American audiences “wouldn’t understand it.” Bong Joon-ho was having none of it and the US release was delayed for almost a year.

Ultimately, the director and Weinstein came to a compromise. Weinstein wouldn’t force Bong Joon-ho to cut anything from the film, but instead of releasing it in 1,000 theaters across the country, it would only get distributed to about 100 art house cinemas and out-of-the-way multiplexes, all but assuring that Snowpiercer would go unseen by most of America.

The ironic thing about Snowpiercer is that it’s not some subtitled black and white French film or something. It’s a fast-paced action film led by Captain America himself. You would think Evans’ face alone would guarantee that audiences would come out to see the film. I guess Harvey Weinstein disagrees. The rest of the film is rounded out by two Oscar winners, Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton) and Octavia Spencer (The Help). As well as Oscar nominee John Hurt.

The fact that most people will never see Snowpiercer is a shame because it’s an amazing film, filled with interesting themes about freedom and class distinction. The film really makes you think about what it means to be truly free. The people aboard the train have the illusion of freedom and free will. In reality, The Snowpiercer is a prison and not just for the people struggling in the back, but for everybody that calls it home.

Snowpiercer also has great atmosphere and Bong Joon-ho fills every frame of the cramped confines with fine detail. The film also features a menacing soundtrack that amps up the excitement as the train comes barreling around curves.

As Curtis and his ragtag group of freedom fighters make their way towards the front of the train, each train car has its own unique feel. Some almost feel like the passengers are stepping into another world as they enter each car. They get weirder and wackier and more interesting as the journey continues.

I look at a film like Snowpiercer and I can’t help but think that it’s a poster child for everything that is wrong with Hollywood, but at the same time, everything that is right about filmmaking. Hollywood doesn’t want you to see movies like Snowpiercer. There are no superheroes, aliens or giant robots. It’s an original film, with interesting ideas. But Hollywood wants to banish it to the back of the train and keep feeding you gelatin bricks, hoping you will eat it up happily and not ask what it’s made of.

As Americans, we should be offended. Hollywood thinks we are stupid and unable to comprehend anything that has something different or important to say. There is inherently something wrong about that. The fact that a bunch of guys in suits are literally altering the taste of an entire country is downright sickening.

Snowpiercer is the kind of film that feels like you are watching something that will stand the test of time. I felt like I was watching an instant Sci-fi classic. It’s the same feeling I got while watching The Matrix for the first time. As the credits were rolling, I also got the feeling I was watching something that most other people might never get a chance to see and that’s too bad.

I hope one day things will change and films like Snowpiercer and Transformers can go toe-to-toe for your box office buck instead of fighting for scraps at the back of the theater. I’m not sure Snowpiercer will be the film to change what movies we are allowed to see at the theater. I guess the real question is can it change? Personally, I think it can…I think it can…I think it can. Until then, as the tagline for Snowpiercer states, we move forward.

[Randall Flagg]

Still Servant; that is a dead solid review. You said what I couldn't have; with such beautifully style.
I wanted to see it locally, but it was only playing 40 miles away in San Francisco.
I settled for ordering it via Directv VOD yesterday. Sat in my Captains chair, closed all blinds in the house, turned up the surround sound, and watched it in 1080P on my 70" HDTV.
Awesome movie with so many unique and quirky things in it.
Visually amazing. You'd think the tunnel affect of a trains layout would constrict scenes, but the film takes each cabin and goes over the top, again and again.
Aquarium, grade school classroom, Salon, Orgy, Night club, sushi bar, etc. Simply amazing.
The person at the head of the train was a shocker. Don't ask who, don't read any review that tell you. Just wait.
5.5/6 beers on the RFSPRS.
I plan on watching it again tomorrow.

[Still Servant]

Thank you so much, RF! That means a lot to me. I'm also so happy that somebody else besides me has seen the film.

I'm glad you mentioned VOD. That's something I wanted to touch upon in my review, but it was long enough as it is. VOD is somewhat a blessing and a curse. It's sometimes the only place where people can get to see films like Snowpiercer. The only problem is that VOD can sometimes be a death sentence for a films chances at the theater. VOD sometimes restricts certain theaters from even showing a film. Also, many theaters will not even carry a film and shun it because VOD takes away from their business. So my feelings about VOD are mixed.

It's also great that technology has reached the point where we can mimic the quality of a movie theater because that truly is the best way to watch films like Snowpiercer. My setup is similar to yours and it really is the next best thing to an actual cinema.

My hope is that a film like Snowpiercer slowly builds up an audience and finds life long after it was released in theaters.

Once again, thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it.

[fernandito]

Snowpiercer is at the very top of films I want to see.

[Heather19]

Well you have me intrigued as well. Do you think I'll like it? I'm not a fan of action films at all, and once I got to that point in your review I thought maybe it wasn't my kind of film. I'll go give the trailer a watch.

[Still Servant]

Well you have me intrigued as well. Do you think I'll like it? I'm not a fan of action films at all, and once I got to that point in your review I thought maybe it wasn't my kind of film. I'll go give the trailer a watch.

I think you might like it. It's certainly not wall-to-wall action like a film like The Raid or something. There are quite a few moments of dialogue where the world is allowed to breath. I know you like a lot of Sci-fi stuff, so I think you should give it a shot. Even if you don't end up liking, I guarantee you won't be totally disappointed that you saw it. There are enough original things in this film what make it worth a watch.

[Mattrick]

Does anyone else see a trailer/preview for a Musician Biopic and say..."yeah, I'm not watching that"? Can't really pinpoint why but they just don't interest me in the slightest, even if I hear they are well done.

[Ricky]

I'm with you, Matt. I don't know why either, but they just never seem to interest me in the way that a biopic about an actor or director would. I think in a lot of cases they use the biopic angle as an excuse to showcase the artist's music in the hope that it gets the audience on the film's side, since they're already familiar with it.

And great review, Mike. I never thought Snowpiercer looked like anything terrific when I saw the trailer, but now I'm curious to give it a watch. When I checked On Demand a few days ago, it wasn't listed (even though they said it was). I checked again last night and it's there, so I might bump it up on my to-watch list.

[mae]

Snowpiercer is also on Amazon Prime and Vudu.

[Still Servant]

I'm with you, Matt. I don't know why either, but they just never seem to interest me in the way that a biopic about an actor or director would. I think in a lot of cases they use the biopic angle as an excuse to showcase the artist's music in the hope that it gets the audience on the film's side, since they're already familiar with it.

And great review, Mike. I never thought Snowpiercer looked like anything terrific when I saw the trailer, but now I'm curious to give it a watch. When I checked On Demand a few days ago, it wasn't listed (even though they said it was). I checked again last night and it's there, so I might bump it up on my to-watch list.

Thanks, Ricky! I'll be interested in your thoughts. I hope that even if people don't like it, they will at least respect the film for being original.

I don't mind biopics about musicians. Both Ray and Walk the Line are fantastic films. You guys are doing yourself a disservice in skipping them.

[Heather19]

Well you have me intrigued as well. Do you think I'll like it? I'm not a fan of action films at all, and once I got to that point in your review I thought maybe it wasn't my kind of film. I'll go give the trailer a watch.

I think you might like it. It's certainly not wall-to-wall action like a film like The Raid or something. There are quite a few moments of dialogue where the world is allowed to breath. I know you like a lot of Sci-fi stuff, so I think you should give it a shot. Even if you don't end up liking, I guarantee you won't be totally disappointed that you saw it. There are enough original things in this film what make it worth a watch.

The trailer looked interesting. It's actually playing up in Amherst, so maybe I'll go check it out.

[Ricky]

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes review on my new movie blog:

Reviews From the Couch (http://reviewsfromthecouch.wordpress.com/)

I've been wanting to have all my reviews in one place, and have been working on getting everything set up. I'm still adding some pics. to older posts and messing with the header graphics, but all my reviews are posted. Hope you guys enjoy!

[DoctorZaius]

Finally a movie without the kids! Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - loved it! The reviewers are right on with this one. Andy Serkis deserves some kind of special recognition at Academy Awards time. He is amazing! For those who love the original series, this is a fine re-imaginging. Can't wait to see what they do in the next one.

[Merlin1958]

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes review on my new movie blog:

Reviews From the Couch (http://reviewsfromthecouch.wordpress.com/)

I've been wanting to have all my reviews in one place, and have been working on getting everything set up. I'm still adding some pics. to older posts and messing with the header graphics, but all my reviews are posted. Hope you guys enjoy!


:clap::clap::clap: Bravo on the site, Ricky my friend!! I read a few and even left you a comment. Keep at it and as, Arnold says "I'll be back"!!!

[mae]

Came back from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes underwhelmed...

[DoctorDodge]

Excellent review, Ricky. I loved Dawn, as well. I especially appreciated the fact that it began directly from their perspective with humans having become a thing of the past to them, it just made it that much easier to root for the apes in the film. (Not that I needed much more reason - like you said, the motion capture performances and special effects at bringing the apes to life are nothing short of fucking fantastic.) I'm also glad at the fact that the prequel films really are taking it slowly towards reaching the point (or a point nearish) that we recognise from the original film. Yes, it's more than likely partially due to the fact that more films = more money to milk, but still, the fact is the slow approach works, especially with how great both Rise and Dawn have been. I'd rather have a series of prequels that get better like this than a series of sequels that get worse any day. 9/10

[Ricky]

:clap::clap::clap: Bravo on the site, Ricky my friend!! I read a few and even left you a comment. Keep at it and as, Arnold says "I'll be back"!!!

Excellent review, Ricky. I loved Dawn, as well.

Thanks, guys! That means a lot.


I'm also glad at the fact that the prequel films really are taking it slowly towards reaching the point (or a point nearish) that we recognise from the original film.

I like this too, but I'm also wondering if jumping ahead 10 years from Rise was a smart decision story-wise. I keep going back and forth on this. On one hand, it gave the writers possibilities to explore the lives and increased intelligence of the apes over that time, but on the other hand I also kind of wish we'd have seen what was going on during those years. But I tend not to be a huge fan of time jumps in films in general, so it may just be me.


Came back from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes underwhelmed...

Maybe due to the lack of the humans' story? I feel like Rise and Dawn have already proved their storytelling abilities with the apes but without the humans having their own emotional journeys, the films seem like they won't be as "filling" since the human vs. apes conflict/dynamic is what makes the films so interesting.

[Still Servant]

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes review on my new movie blog:

Reviews From the Couch (http://reviewsfromthecouch.wordpress.com/)

I've been wanting to have all my reviews in one place, and have been working on getting everything set up. I'm still adding some pics. to older posts and messing with the header graphics, but all my reviews are posted. Hope you guys enjoy!

Awesome site, Ricky! You're ahead of me, I'm still working on the design and format. Great review also. Looking forward to visiting the site.

Love the prepositional phrases line.

[fernandito]

Cool site, Ricky! And great review of DotPotA. I'll try and get to your other reviews soon.

Mike, let me know if you get one set up.

[DoctorDodge]

I'm also glad at the fact that the prequel films really are taking it slowly towards reaching the point (or a point nearish) that we recognise from the original film.

I like this too, but I'm also wondering if jumping ahead 10 years from Rise was a smart decision story-wise. I keep going back and forth on this. On one hand, it gave the writers possibilities to explore the lives and increased intelligence of the apes over that time, but on the other hand I also kind of wish we'd have seen what was going on during those years. But I tend not to be a huge fan of time jumps in films in general, so it may just be me.

Well, if it helps, there's apparently 3 short films released online that do cover that gap. I haven't checked them out yet, but I'm definitely eager to. As for the time skip, I liked that the films are mainly focused on ape/human relationships and more importantly, that the 2nd film gave them the time and the space for them to develop their own civilization (while riding horses, because seriously, how fucking awesome do chimps riding horses still look?!). End of the last film, they had barely started their lives seperate from the humans and weren't exactly much of a threat, certainly not enough to take over the planet as we had seen in the original film. Ten years of building up their own civilization under Caeser's leadership plus the near extinction of the human race due to the classic scenario of man-made virus definitely puts the two races on an even level. I really can't wait to see where the story will go next.

[Ricky]

Well, if it helps, there's apparently 3 short films released online that do cover that gap. I haven't checked them out yet, but I'm definitely eager to.

I saw that, but I haven't watched them either. I keep meaning to though.


because seriously, how fucking awesome do chimps riding horses still look?!

Yes! That was really cool (and probably my favorite aspect of the film's marketing). Not only is it a cool image, but it's terrifying.

[Heather19]

Great site Ricky and excellent review! I haven't heard of the short films, will have to go look for them. Are they made by the same team? I was kinda wishing for a bit more info about that. And I do wish they focused a bit more on strengthening up the human storyline for the film. I did love the conflict between the good and bad chimps though. They should have made that better for the human side as well because I was pretty much just routing for the apes :lol: My one complaint was that I don't understand why power was that necessary for the humans. They couldn't wait longer than three days to try to form a friendship with the apes and coexist together? Instead it's like lets just go to war? They have their community, I'd be surprised that it would just demolish without power. Maybe they should have just explained this a bit better.

Pablo, I wonder if you were underwhelmed because to me this film almost felt like a filler film, to bridge the first and the third. Storyline wise it was a bit slow. I still didn't mind that too much though because sometimes you need that. Especially if they're planning out a trilogy.

[mae]

I think that's pretty much it. It felt like it didn't go anywhere, and just as it began and ended with the same shot, the balance of things ended up being the same, too.

[Ricky]

Great site Ricky and excellent review! I haven't heard of the short films, will have to go look for them.

Thanks Heather! And here's the link to the short films: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes Short Films (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/07/02/dawn-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-short-films/)


I did love the conflict between the good and bad chimps though. They should have made that better for the human side as well because I was pretty much just routing for the apes :lol:

I did too and am so glad that Caesar let Koba fall. I was worried he'd forgive him (AGAIN!) and help him up. I don't know if you stayed until the very end of the credits but there's a bunch of ape sounds and (according to other people) the sound of shifting rubble (which I don't think I heard), so the theory floating around online is that Koba lived through the fall. I'm really hoping that's not true though.


My one complaint was that I don't understand why power was that necessary for the humans. They couldn't wait longer than three days to try to form a friendship with the apes and coexist together? Instead it's like lets just go to war? They have their community, I'd be surprised that it would just demolish without power. Maybe they should have just explained this a bit better.

I don't think that it was necessary, just that it would make it easier for them to live and begin to take back the planet. I forget who said it, but there was a line like, "that's the advantage the apes have over us...they don't need power." But I'm with you, I think they should've done more with this too.


to me this film almost felt like a filler film, to bridge the first and the third. Storyline wise it was a bit slow.

I think that's pretty much it. It felt like it didn't go anywhere

I felt the same way. The ape side of the story I was fine with, but the lack of an interesting story with the humans definitely made it a bit slow. I almost feel like the 10-years-later setting would've been better for the third film rather than the second.

[Still Servant]

I think that's pretty much it. It felt like it didn't go anywhere, and just as it began and ended with the same shot, the balance of things ended up being the same, too.

I can see where you are coming from with that feeling, but when you really think about it, this film can almost literally be considered the tipping point for the entire Planet of the Apes franchise. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes might just have been the last chance for humans and apes to be at peace and both Caesar and Malcolm knew that. There's almost nothing that either one of them can do to stop what is coming. In a way, the end of the film is rather tragic. The exchange between Malcolm and Caesar is great. Two strong leaders from two separate species trying to keep their people/apes alive. They both realize that they gave it a shot and it wasn't enough.

Also, and I don't want to open up a can here, but the whole Planet of the Apes timeline is all screwed up. James mentioned that we are seeing the lead up to the first film, which is true in a way, but not really. Remember, they went back in time and changed things. This makes the timeline a little dicey. Also, from what I remember, the entire reasoning behind the Ape revolution is different in the last two films than they were in the original films.

Maybe this is a discussion for its own thread, I'm not sure if we have one.