The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I saw them Live two nights ago!!

Their stuff is so evocative and building. It's almost like classical music in that regard.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Their stuff is so evocative and building. It's almost like classical music in that regard.

Just as good live as they are on record. The crowd seemed bored as all hell, though. Every other person was on Facebook or Twitter.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Just as good live as they are on record. The crowd seemed bored as all hell, though. Every other person was on Facebook or Twitter.

So, just like at the theater then?

[jvince]

Oldboy (2003)
dir. Park Chan-wook

The Good: Revenge-plotting, live octopus-eating, tooth-pulling, hammer-bashing, tongue-cutting, incest-laden, sick, twisted fun.

The Bad: Like majority of Park Chan-wook's films, Oldboy favors style over substance.

The Bottom Line: In my best J. Walter Weatherman impression] "And that's why you never spread rumors."

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

That fight was epic. The way that Spinosaurous snapped the T-Rex's neck...

Agreed on everything else though. My biggest complaint about JP3, however, is that it's just more island stuff, wheras I was hoping they'd have a more world-wide conflict or something. I'm hoping Jurassic World will be something epic.

Me too.

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Those guys make killer tunes. So moody.

I actually haven't heard of them before. I'm gonna check out their other stuff.

[Abdrewes]

About Time ranks among the most charming films you will see this year, even during the array of ham-fisted "Butterfly Effect" interludes that litter the screenplay. What drove romantic comedy savant, Richard Curtis, to employ a time travel gimmick is beyond me. It reeks of that "quirky inventive" marketing pitch that executives drool over without considering if it works. It is possible to make the conceit function, but it is used simply as a portal to jump from one melodramatic causality quagmire to the next. Aren't the struggles of a rather awkward six-foot redhead enough? If Richard Curtis could go back in time, I suspect he would go back to the writing room and discard the dubious day-tripping.

The cat's out of the bag early: upon turning 21, Tim Lake is told by his father (played by the wiry and ever winsome Bill Nighy) that all the men in the family can travel back in time, to any moment experienced. Nighy's words of fatherly advice are that those who travel back in time with the intention of amassing personal wealth find themselves in ruin. He continues with instruction on the mechanics of transport. All Tim has to do is enter a dark place, close his eyes, visualize a precise moment, and he will find himself there. If it is that uncomplicated, wouldn't he have stumbled upon this magical ability years earlier? This is only one of the copious instances where the film plays fast-and-loose with logic. Viewers who often find themselves picking apart plots will have a field day with this film.

After a summer of fruitless advances on the blond bombshell of a friend his sister invited to stay at their upper class manor, Tim moves to London for law school. Residing firmly within the commercialized, divorced from reality notions of collegiate life, little is shown of Tim studying or even attending class. He is seemingly a bachelor blessed with an infinite amount of time to pursue women and mope around with the flailing playwright he is boarding under when things do not go well. After months of this, he has a meet cute with a girl named Mary at a Dans le Noir restaurant. Without the aid of redoing the moment over and over, he instantly hits it off with this woman. Conversation during their (literally) blind date flows like a torrent.

However, on the same night, Harry's play goes disastrously bad. Upon discovering this after his successful date, Tim decides to intervene by going back in time to cajole the actors to remember their lines. But by fixing Henry's timeline, he alters his own and loses all but the memory of Mary, which tragically includes her phone number. Forcing lightning to strike in the same place twice now becomes the most urgent matter on his to-do list. Though edited at a buoyant clip and scored with dollops of dainty piano, as he enacts his scheme to steal her heart again, I couldn't help but notice a queasy undercurrent. We see Tim's flaws—the fits of foot-in-moth, the displays of uncoordinated blunders, the awkward advances—but Mary does not. Her experiences with Tim are limited to his triumphs as he goes back to rewrite all failed encounters with her. He sweeps her off her feet by using knowledge he attained about her from disingenuous means. He's not interested in the the workings of Kate Moss' style, but he says he does during a do-over, lifting Mary's own description of the fashion icon in another timeline verbatim, just to get back with her.

Though the mechanics of the story are questionable, the amiable cast manages to stride above them. Domhnall Gleeson's path from graceless underdog to knight in shining armor is sure to win over even the most love-spurned curmudgeon. The stretches where he courts Rachel McAdam's' Mary glisten with cease-the-day beauty without ever falling victim to syrupy schmaltz. The sweat that clings to his hands as he makes his oafish initial advancements, the tremors of his heart as he asks her for her hand in marriage, the tingles of balmy bliss when nestled in the arms of his perfect lover are emotions that will reverberate with anyone who has been young and in love. There's no doubt that the anchor of an able cast gave the pair the aplomb to sell such spirits. The reason About Time is bound to become a Valentine's Day favorite is the electricity between the cast and less the mechanics of the story. Sentiment is valued over smarts.

Damn the frustration that arises when you fall madly in love with a film whose framework is ill-conceived, despite the best intentions of the creator. The poignant late moment when Tim decides to live each day as if he was going back in time just to relive it proves the heart of those behind the scenes is in the right place. It's impossible not to fall under the film's life affirming spell no matter how vivid one's conscious stirs. Had Richard Curtis trusted the audience enough to appreciate a down-to-earth story about the trials an immensely likeable pair hurdle while getting to know one another, About Time would be every bit the classic that his breakthrough Four Weddings and a Funeral is. As it is, it's a mixed bag that you will internalize much more than most of the "great" films you will see this season.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest blind-buy: The Moment of Truth

Bullfighting never was a sport I had an interest in, but I figured it would make for a compelling drama. If nothing else, this film is as real as it gets. There are a bunch of major sequences that pits the main character against raging beasts. These scenes aren't staged or faked with trick photography of any kind; the players seriously put their lives on the line to confront real bulls on screen. They come dangerously close to getting mauled and gored, as they gracefully maneuver and evade the animals. Perhaps most shocking of all is that the bulls themselves are hurt on-screen, often soaked in blood, and the camera lingers on their agony.

There is a basic narrative at work; it's generally the same formula that goes into movies like Gladiator or Rollerball, for these are all movies where some dude gets involved with a deadly sport and proves to be so good at it that he's pushed to the top. The Moment of Truth is a more original feature though, with characters that look and act quite realistic. The film boasts some intriguing parallels to the politics of the time, but even on its own, the plot is not bad. My only complaint is that it's pretty dry in between the more exciting scenes.

The film has a look and style that's at least halfway like a documentary. Photography tends to be rather pedestrian-looking, and there are a lot of distant shots. It looks quite gritty and real this way, but I think it also distances the viewer a bit, and I think the film could have been more effective if the camera could be closer to the action. Editing is pretty rough for this film as well. Acting and writing tends to be understated, and appears authentic that way. This production uses some very real-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales. There is no music score.

This film reveals a lot: it shows the valor, courage, and skill of bullfighters, but also the bloody brutality and mortal danger of it all.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: If you have the stomach for it, it is worth seeing at least once.

On Blu-Ray, this rare film boasts PQ that's pretty sharp, but prone to a lot of grain, noise, softness, and some print damage here and there. Sound quality is okay but not great.

PQ: 3.5/5, AQ: 3/5

[Abdrewes]

^^^
I still need to revisit that film with my grandpa. He's a bullfighting aficionado!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Next greatest blind-buy: The Moment of Truth
This film reveals a lot: it shows the valor, courage, and skill of bullfighters, but also the bloody brutality and mortal danger of it all.

My opinion would be much different. It shows some humans for what they are. Sick, sadistic, and arrogant villains.

Publicly tormenting and slowly torturing a majestic creature, ultimately to it's death for the sake of "entertainment" is as twisted as it gets. Calling it a sport is pathetic.

The animal has the capacity to suffer. Those who deliberately cause that are criminals. Sick, evil criminals.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

My opinion would be much different. It shows some humans for what they are. Sick, sadistic, and arrogant villains.

Publicly tormenting and slowly torturing a majestic creature, ultimately to it's death for the sake of "entertainment" is as twisted as it gets. Calling it a sport is pathetic.

The animal has the capacity to suffer. Those who deliberately cause that are criminals. Sick, evil criminals.

Agreed 100% And even I love Moment of Truth (the way I read the film is that our "hero" is no different than the bull at the end of the day).

[jvince]

Oldboy (2013)
dir. Spike Lee

The Good: This is not a remake. This is a reimagining. Spike Lee and writer Mark Protosevich (The Cell, Thor) get plus points for not copying Park Chan-wook's cult classic shot for shot like most American adaptations. They did their own thing. Not all of their changes work (I'll get into that later) but what they tried to do is admirable without being disrespectful to the original. The one thing I liked the most about this version is the development of the main character, Joe (played by Josh Brolin). His imprisonment is handled much better here than in Park's film in that it is meatier and more detailed with some dark humor tossed in for good measure. Another strong point is the lead actor himself. Brolin really brings his A-game to the table, delivering a performance on par with Choi Min-sik's without mimicking his Oh Dae-su character. Joe Doucett isn't Oh Dae-su. Joe Doucett is Joe Doucett. He makes it his own. Elizabeth Olsen does a fine job and Samuel L. Jackson is Samuel L. Jackson (i.e., his usual mother****ing awesome self). Oh, and the tooth-pulling scene may not be in this version, but it is replaced with an even more squirm-inducing torture sequence that I don't want to spoil. All I'll say is you won't feel like eating salt after seeing that scene. Ouch.

The Bad: As someone who has seen the original several times, it's hard to top all those memorable scenes and shocking twists. For instance, let's take the hallway scene. Everyone loves the hallway scene. Lee takes it up a notch (or two) by adding two floors, so that's three(!) levels of hallway hammer bashing shot in one long take. Sadly, the studio cut the last floor—one of the many cuts made as Lee revealed a total of 36 minutes of footage were left out—so what you'll be seeing in the theaters is only two floors of epic fighting. What's even more disappointing is that due to budgetary constraints, they ditched their original plan which was to shoot the fight sequence on a spiral staircase spanning three floors. Imagine the hammer fight in a spiral staircase.*****. That sounds really awesome. It's too bad we'll never get to see it. Lee also went with a different approach, getting rid of the surreal feel as well as the hypotism stuff and opting for a more grounded style. The idea of making the story more realistic is great, but in doing so, they made it nearly devoid of that crazy, otherworldly energy of Park Chan-wook's original. As for the cinematography, I expected better from Sean Bobbitt. You wouldn't be able to tell this was shot by the same guy who did 12 Years a Slave. Now, Sharlto Copley. I didn't like him. He nearly ruined the film for me. Because of the grounded feel that they went with, Copley sticks out like a sore thumb; like he belongs in one of those cheesy, direct-to-video B-movies. And lastly, the twists and the ending. I could see Protosevich's changes being a deal-breaker for most fans of the original film. He completely altered the first twist, took out the tongue cutting scene as well as the elevator scene (which is my favorite part in the original), and as a result, the ending kind of misses the point. It's just not quite as tragic nor poetic.

The Bottom Line: Spike Lee's take is one of those films that are entertaining at the moment, but once you start contemplating about it, it's not quite as good. Those who haven't seen the original might enjoy this, but as for the fans of Park Chan-wook's cult classic, it's a toss-up. Still, it's worth a look.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

^^^
I still need to revisit that film with my grandpa. He's a bullfighting aficionado!

Neat!

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

My opinion would be much different. It shows some humans for what they are. Sick, sadistic, and arrogant villains.

Publicly tormenting and slowly torturing a majestic creature, ultimately to it's death for the sake of "entertainment" is as twisted as it gets. Calling it a sport is pathetic.

The animal has the capacity to suffer. Those who deliberately cause that are criminals. Sick, evil criminals.

That is definitely true, and I may not have emphasized that enough in my review (it was late last night). I was certainly feeling uneasy and stunned by the animal cruelty.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Agreed 100% And even I love Moment of Truth (the way I read the film is that our "hero" is no different than the bull at the end of the day).

That is probably the best interpretation; pretty interesting to think about.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by jvince

Oldboy (2013)
dir. Spike Lee

Originally Posted by jvince

The Good: This is not a remake. This is a reimagining. Spike Lee and writer Mark Protosevich (The Cell, Thor) get plus points for not copying Park Chan-wook's cult classic shot for shot like most American adaptations. They did their own thing. Not all of their changes work (I'll get into that later) but what they tried to do is admirable without being disrespectful to the original. The one thing I liked the most about this version is the development of the main character, Joe (played by Josh Brolin). His imprisonment is handled much better here than in Park's film in that it is meatier and more detailed with some dark humor tossed in for good measure. Another strong point is the lead actor himself. Brolin really brings his A-game to the table, delivering a performance on par with Choi Min-sik's without mimicking his Oh Dae-su character. Joe Doucett isn't Oh Dae-su. Joe Doucett is Joe Doucett. He makes it his own. Elizabeth Olsen does a fine job and Samuel L. Jackson is Samuel L. Jackson (i.e., his usual mother****ing awesome self). Oh, and the tooth-pulling scene may not be in this version, but it is replaced with an even more squirm-inducing torture sequence that I don't want to spoil. All I'll say is you won't feel like eating salt after seeing that scene. Ouch.

The Bad: As someone who has seen the original several times, it's hard to top all those memorable scenes and shocking twists. For instance, let's take the hallway scene. Everyone loves the hallway scene. Lee takes it up a notch (or two) by adding two floors, so that's three(!) levels of hallway hammer bashing shot in one long take. Sadly, the studio cut the last floor—one of the many cuts made as Lee revealed a total of 36 minutes of footage were left out—so what you'll be seeing in the theaters is only two floors of epic fighting. What's even more disappointing is that due to budgetary constraints, they ditched their original plan which was to shoot the fight sequence on a spiral staircase spanning three floors. Imagine the hammer fight in a spiral staircase.*****. That sounds really awesome. It's too bad we'll never get to see it. Lee also went with a different approach, getting rid of the surreal feel as well as the hypotism stuff and opting for a more grounded style. The idea of making the story more realistic is great, but in doing so, they made it nearly devoid of that crazy, otherworldly energy of Park Chan-wook's original. As for the cinematography, I expected better from Sean Bobbitt. You wouldn't be able to tell this was shot by the same guy who did 12 Years a Slave. Now, Sharlto Copley. I didn't like him. He nearly ruined the film for me. Because of the grounded feel that they went with, Copley sticks out like a sore thumb; like he belongs in one of those cheesy, direct-to-video B-movies. And lastly, the twists and the ending. I could see Protosevich's changes being a deal-breaker for most fans of the original film. He completely altered the first twist, took out the tongue cutting scene as well as the elevator scene (which is my favorite part in the original), and as a result, the ending kind of misses the point. It's just not quite as tragic nor poetic.

The Bottom Line: Spike Lee's take is one of those films that are entertaining at the moment, but once you start contemplating about it, it's not quite as good. Those who haven't seen the original might enjoy this, but as for the fans of Park Chan-wook's cult classic, it's a toss-up. Still, it's worth a look.

Sounds interesting to me...

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

[CENTER]

Sounds interesting to me...

[/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]

I'm interested in seeing the director's cut. They cut out a lot of stuff.

And that spiral staircase scene. Oh man, imagine what could have been.

[Spirit Zero]

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

Well shiver my timbers...this here be damn complicated!. The third and final part of the pirates trilogy (or so we thought). I've never until now have not understood the plot of a Disney film. Yep its long long long, overdrawn, CGI filled complicated mess with so many sub plots and double crosses I forgot what the film was about. This film is also, apparently, the most expensive film ever made ever! how fitting that its the worst in the trilogy.

In short you have to know the back story for the last two films relatively well to keep up. The plot is even more convoluted than the second film and unfortunately it no longer has the wow factor, originality or nice fantasy element either. To be honest whilst watching I got a distinct sensation that I was watching deleted scenes merely pieced together to create another film. The film really does have that slightly disjointed vibe about it.

I think one of the things that got me was the fact the characters just didn't matter anymore. In the second film 'Davy Jones' was the terror of the seas with his firesome appearance, monstrous crew and pet Kraken (unadventurous end for that beastie), now in this film he is reduced to lingering in the background whilst people talk. A great character reduced to an extra virtually. 'Barbossa' of course was the terror of the first film and he has now been slowly reduced to 'Sparrow's' sidekick of sorts, then we have new character 'Sao Feng' who really doesn't matter. He looks good and its a nice touch to see the Orient in the film but the whole setup is wasted!. Again merely background fodder whilst we must watch Depp do his now overdone thing and the quite uninteresting love conflict between 'Turner' and 'Swann'.

I might add that Knightly has been completely covered in makeup for this last entry, absolutely smothered on her face. She looks like an orange with thick eyebrows! its pretty bad and pretty obvious if you ask me, looks unintentionally amusing.

Yet the sequences showing Sparrow's descent into madness whilst in Davy Jones locker I quite liked even though many didn't. I actually thought those scenes were quite original and well thought out giving us something fresh which is quite hard really, especially with the content you're trying to visualise here. The little moments of quirky insanity with Sparrow felt a bit Raimi-esque if you ask me, reminded me of 'Army of Darkness' and 'Ash' going nuts whilst splitting in two. A bit of a stump in the films fluidity sure but it showed some ingenuity, giving some more uniqueness in-between the other bland action bits.

Of course this being a modern day sequel the films gotta be BIG, REAL BIG!, you want overblown CGI enhanced action set pieces then voila!. I can't deny it all looks terrific and perfectly piratey but blimey gov! how overboard must they go...no pun intended. The perfect example? how about Turner and Swann in a blazing cutlass battle with hordes of bad guys in the midst of a booming sea storm. During this pitch battle to the death they shout out to Barbossa to marry them...he too is in the midst of a fight to the death.

So that he does, we have n utterly ludicrous action sequence with all three exterminating every bad guy with ease whilst they get married. Now I realise this film is purely for fun and all ages, to a degree, but come on, did we have to go there? its sequences like this that totally remove you from the film. Sure you gotta have some suspension of disbelief and that's why its OK to have some slightly fantastical elements but at least give us some small note of emotion, a small drop of actual realistic danger for the characters. No point loading up a brand new video game only to slap on the invincibility cheat and play through.

It takes us awhile but when we do eventually get to the pirate convention in Shipwreck Cove the film does perk up a bit momentarily. The introduction of the pirate city council as it were...was a nice touch, some great looking characters there. I liked how they show us pirates from various different countries, different backgrounds and cultures, they are all well crafted if a little bit cliched too just for fun. But all this leads me to another problem, why couldn't we see more of these guys and less of the rest? the finale sea battle builds up as if we will see every pirate and his crew fight...what happened there?!. We see Sparrow's Pearl go up against the Dutchman but what about the masses of other ships? all the other pirate ships? I thought they wanted to fight, instead they all watch?. I think Verbinski finally realised it was all getting out of hand and too big, I'll just conveniently let the other vessels disappear for the last bit.

In all honesty I had to do some internet/wiki research after watching this film to actually understand what happened here and there, get to grips with the plot. The whole 'Calypso' thing had me floundered for some time I can't deny, had to pinpoint exactly what the hell was going on with that. The piratey dialog while sounding cool, didn't help with trying to follow various sub plots.

There are lots of nice fun little touches throughout the film which remind you what the film was previously...before it became too big. We all know the film is just too flippin busy, too much going on, I think they could of left a lot out or at least leave some characters out, have them tied up and done in the second film or early on. The whole franchise is terribly bloated when it didn't have to be. Its still a solid set of films with a good story, but the first film is the only one which is looked upon favourably, shame really as these last two films could/should so easily have been classics too.

5/10

[jvince]

PRADA presents "CASTELLO CAVALCANTI" by Wes Anderson - YouTube

Castello Cavalcanti (2013)
dir. Wes Anderson

The Good: Symmetrical framing? Check. Wide angle lens? Check. Tracking shots? Check. Panning shots? Check. Storybook world? Check. Deadpan delivery? Check. Jason Schwartzman? Check. New Wes Anderson film? ****, yeah.

The Bad: Where's Bill Murray? No Bill Murray?! I need more Bill Murray!

The Bottom Line: Sometimes, we go too fast that we forget to enjoy the view, and sometimes, it takes a fall to make us stop and appreciate the simpler things in life. Castello Cavalcanti is worth a look.

[Scottie]

Please note that this review contains spoilers.

French-Arabic director, Abdellatif Kechiche, masterfully blends substance with style in his 2013 Palme d'Or-winning film, Blue is the Warmest Color (La vie d'Adèle – Chapitres 1 & 2). The film, an adaptation of the graphic novel Blue Angel (Le bleu est une couleur chaude) by Julie Maroh, follows a young high school student as she embarks on a journey of maturation, self-discovery, and sexual awakening after a chance encounter in passing with a mysterious blue-haired girl.

Adèle (Adèle Exarchopoulos) is a fifteen-year-old high school student who, unlike other individuals her age, is concerned about her future. She has always aspired to be an elementary school teacher, as she feels that the school institution is very important for growth and development. On her way home from school one day, Adèle exchanges glances with a mysterious blue-haired girl named Emma (Léa Seydoux). This arbitrary occurrence with Emma, an art student at the local college, will change Adèle's life forever. Slowly but surely, her life begins to spiral out of control as she starts to see the world from a newer, more refreshing perspective. Even though she has always been taught that girls date boys, not girls, Adèle cannot help but want more than just empty, emotionless, and unrewarding relationships with male counterparts. She needs more. She needs Emma.

Adèle's journey for self-discovery leads her to another run-in with Emma one night at a local gay bar. As the two meet for the first time, they quickly realize that there is something more - something special - to the other person's character. They end up exchanging some personal information and go their separate ways. As the days turn to weeks, and the weeks turn to months, Adèle and Emma find themselves growing closer together, almost inseparable. The life that Adèle once knew has significantly changed for the better. She finally feels happy and confident with who and where she is.

As their relationship continues to grow on both a deeper and more mature level, Adèle and Emma begin to notice an unpleasant strain and unhappiness growing between them. The raw emotion that they once felt for one another is, unfortunately, no longer as strong or as obvious as it once was at the start of their relationship. After having a big fight with one another that threatens to destroy their relationship forever, Adèle and Emma once again find themselves going their own, separate ways. Is this the end of their relationship or does something more rewarding lie within in the near future for these two lost souls?

There is no denying that the brilliant, award-worthy performances by Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux make Blue is the Warmest Color the masterpiece that it truly is. Director Abdellatif Kechiche, however, plays as large of a role, if not a larger one, for the whole of the film. Much like his 2007 film, The Secret of the Grain (La graine et le mulet), Abdellatif Kechiche uses a variety of close-up shots and handheld camera shots to create a documentary-esque romantic drama. By employing such a unique style of filmmaking, Kechiche is able to offer up a profoundly realistic portrayal of life, allowing the viewer to experience the hardships and tribulations that such individuals face on a day-to-day basis. The several editors involved on this project help to maintain the realistic nature of the film, as well, through their thought-provoking editing styles. Clips edited in quick succession with one another, for example, help to convey the often lost, hectic, and out-of-control mood that races throughout each character's mind. Being that the film is largely a character study, Kechiche's employment of motifs, especially that of hair, helps delve into the psychology of each character. While the most obvious example in the film is that of Emma's blue hair, the trigger for Adèle's sexual desires, the most important usage of hair is with Adèle's own. Adèle is as unhappy and as confused with her own life as she is with her hair. The viewer constantly sees her taking her hair down from a messy bun and trying to change it. It just does not work to her liking. It is not until after she meets Emma that she accepts her hair for what it is. At the end of the film when Adèle changes her hair from that of a younger style to that of a more more mature one, she asserts herself as a more mature being, as equally lost and as equally confused, but accepting of the life that she now leads.

Blue is the Warmest Color is far more than just a romantic film; it is a philosophical discussion on life and love. In a culture where individuals are constantly told to be somebody that they may or may not be, Blue challenges these notions and then some, asserting that there is absolutely nothing wrong with individuality and being different. While it can be a very scary and frightening thing, being true to oneself is the most important thing for a person, no matter how difficult it may be. The world is constantly changing and what was once seen as taboo many years ago is now seen as a lifestyle that demands acceptance. Just as two men or two women can fall in love and begin a relationship with one another, blue too can be a warm color.

/

[KilloWertz]

Jvince will be happy to know that I watched my copy of Trick 'r Treat today.

I'd give it about a 4/5. It will probably increase with another viewing. While I didn't care for the ending to the story with the young kids, I thought the story with Brian Cox was pretty much brilliantly done.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest rental: Godzilla: Final Wars

Godzilla might be the one character on film with the longest history. It's just like James Bond: it never really dies or ends, it just keeps coming back decade after decade in some new hip style.

After twenty-plus Godzilla films, Final Wars presents the last foray into the crazy world of rampaging monsters toppling cities (in the same fashion as Die Another Day was the last Bond film that went crazy with the gadgets and evil megalomaniacs and such). If nothing else, Final Wars goes all-out in shoving in as much epic action, as many monsters, and as much glorious cheese as it can! And it does so with flash and style!

Really, the film is utterly stupid and laughable. The acting is very cheesy (especially when watching it with English dubbing), the action is very over-the-top, the monsters still look fake as hell, and the production overall is as cheap as they come. The film also has a ton of scenes where they tried their best to be modern and cool; you can expect to meet a squad of dudes who twirl around with guns, as if they came from Equilibrium. And, there are car chases and fight scenes galore. Of course, the main highlight is the mass carnage caused by the monsters, and the film doesn't disappoint on that level: in addition to Godzilla, there are also flying bugs, rampaging lizards, and aliens destroying practically every city in the world. Oh yeah, it doesn't get much bigger than this!

The story's pretty silly, the characters are pretty flat, but what really matters it that it's basically the end-all-be-all war of monsters. The first half of the film sets things up fine and dandy, before all heck breaks lose in the last half. Nothing terribly deep, but it's cool all the same.

This film is quite cheesy. It does have fine and dandy photography. Editing can be pretty hectic and erratic (especially during the opening credits scene, which includes some cool clips from the last 20-something movies). Acting and writing are pretty bad. This production has some very cheap-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is pretty cool.

This is the type of kaiju film I find myself enjoying more and more: it's the type that doesn't take itself seriously, and knows how to have a good time. The film moves fast, has loads of action, and has a pretty generous helping of cheese. If you don't mind that kind of thing, then this movie should be a must-see!

4/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Average | Film: Average)

Recommendation: It is a cinematic masterpiece. Everybody should drop everything they're doing right now and behold its glory!

Got a ton more Godzilla films on my rent list. I plan on seeing as many of them as I can.

[Spirit Zero]

Prince of Darkness (1987)

Another minor horror flick from Carpenter that has gained cult status over the years. This is actually the first time seeing this film for me and like other Carpenter horrors I found it familiar, not really scary, but nicely creepy with something to think about after.

I was surprised how similar the plot is to his other films, a group of people stuck inside a building, trapped, fighting against an evil force. A few of Carpenters films follow these sorts of themes, always fighting an evil supernatural force or gangs of zombie-like bad guys. You can tell its Carpenter a mile away although that's not a bad thing, its always pretty comforting to see his recognisable visual style from way back.

I'm sure you all know what I mean, the filming in widescreen/anamorphic, stark lighting contrasts, his now legendary synthesized musical scores, handheld cam/steadicam, the fact you never really see the evil the good guys are fighting that much, plots with hidden meaning, strong individual lone characters, opened ended finales on occasions etc...Everything is present and correct in this horror tale and its enjoyable to see.

Alongside all of that the cast are mostly recognisable too, hot off the heels of 'Big Trouble' Dennis Dun and Victor Wong are cast again, Pleasence is back as another lone force of good to try and stop the force of evil and character actor Peter Jason pops up again here with a meatier role.

To be honest I would say that is the one problem with the film, its too familiar from Carpenter. The plot is bordering on his other works, he uses many of the same actors again when they don't really fit the bill (Dun and Wong here) and it kinda looks and sounds the same as his other works too. The score could easily be from any of his films frankly, its good and atmospheric but you could stick it anywhere, any one of his films. In all honesty this film is virtually 'Assault on Precinct 13' but with possessed people instead of criminals.

The devil is never mentioned I believe, but I'm assuming the 'father' was suppose to be the devil? and the dreams of the future are showing this evil force to have taken over the world?? hence the warning in the dream I think. Not too sure how this evil became trapped within the cylinder, or how it was placed into the basement of this church, or where the evil actually comes from originally and its goal etc...but lets just overlook that a bit shall we.

That said I did enjoy the film and I thought the finale was a good thinker, a bit creepy, dark, wraps up quick and open ended, nice. Makeup and special effects are decent and created with thought, the film has a nice spooky pending doom vibe about it and the story is interesting if a little bland. Not quite as good as other Carpenter tales but still solid.

6/10