The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by KilloWertz

No worries. I never read the actual reviews people type unless I've already seen the movie. Well, I stop and skip right to the score once the movie starts being discussed.

I don't read reviews either if I am already sure I will see the movie

[P@t_Mtl]

Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade (1989)

After five long years, Indy was back (for what was at the time, his last adventure). In a stroke a genius, Spielberg pick James Bond to be Indiana's father. While the story is about the grail it's also about Indy and his dad, finding each other again. Very likely any son and dad who watched this movie sort of understadood how they felt. Both different but more alike than both would like to admit. At the time no one expected a new movie and even if some did, I doubt anyone figured it would take another 20 years for it to happen? By the mid 90's most everyone believe we would never see Indy back for another adventure. Still we had three great movies, books and comics to reminded us that adventure did have a name and that was Indiana Jones.

[jvince]

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (2011)
dir. Stephen Daldry

The Good: Max von Sydow and Sandra Bullock.

The Bad: Thomas Horn is terrible. His character is terrible. His voice-over, really terrible. Film is often heavy-handed. Botched execution.

The Bottom Line: In terms of quality, I don't think there's any other recent film that's more frustratingly bipolar than Extremely Loud. It has an interesting premise and some really great moments, but it also has its fair share of cringe-worthy misfires as well.

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Foggy

And I've not seen Jesse James, but I have a hunch that film is better. But I guess it just depends on what sort of film you want, that film is quite long and dramatic I think, while Killing Them Softly is briefer and more pulpy.

I really liked Jesse James, so I hope Killing is as good as or better than Jesse James. Looks like Andrew Dominik is going 2 for 2.

Originally Posted by DjMethod

What I like so much about Bergman's films is that they are always built around character depth and reflection. I think Persona does this best. You should watch Smiles of a Summer Night next. It's unorthodox Bergman but like a lighter, funnier Rules of the Game and brings together all of his finest actors.

Cool. I'll try to check out Smiles of a Summer Night. I also haven't seen Rules of the Game yet; that one's been on my watch list for quite a while now.

[iam1bearcat]

never thought my "re-start" would kick off with three straight horror films...

The Last Exorcism (2010) - 3.5/5

As many of you may know, I'm a big fan of documentary type films (The Blair Witch Project, [REC], Cloverfield). But for as entertaining as many of these films can be, there are also a plethora of bad ones that have been made in recent years.

The Last Exorcism appealed to me because it was 1) about exorcisms and 2) documentary style.

The film succeeds better than I anticipated. It was engaging, created a very creepy atmosphere (and a great setting ), and had some solid acting, including the main female lead who has very, very, very creepy eyes which works wonders in many scenes.

The opening set up makes the film feel very much like a real documentary and not a film passing as a documentary.

Sadly, the film takes a weird left turn in the last five minutes which almost destroys the entire 80+ minutes before it. The ending is odd, very goofy and pretty ridiculous. Most baffling is, the film doesn't explain how the footage was found since

[Show spoiler]the camera guy getting iced and dropped the camera

. At least Blair Witch explains this! The Last Exorcism forgets this.

Worth watching and the setting and atmosphere are pretty great. A few tweaks here or there and a better, more realistic ending would have made this a film I'd feel better about.

---

Paranormal Activity 2 (2010) - 2.5/5

Blah.

In a lot of ways this could have been an enjoyable film. And I can admit, it made me jump a few times and a lot of times I was wincing at what would happen next (I'm a sucker for screaming and noises in the dark more than a guy with a knife / weapon ).

But the film just... feels so choppy and bland. And the acting, especially from the dad, is not very good at all. The young girl and the mom (step mom?) do an okay job.

I was surprised to the connection to the first film and the ending made sense and was actually pretty good (although a bit humorous in the deaths) but it just couldn't make up for the plethora of that came before it (and I was a pretty big fan of the first film!).

[KilloWertz]

At least your first film in your re-start worked out well.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest random selection: Altered States

This film basically plays out like one extended science experiment. As such, it looks pretty dry and "boring" at first glance, but the actual subject of the experiment is something of fascination that prompts further study. Altered States presents the idea that powerful drugs can create a conduit for a person to touch the inner self (...which could also mean touching God?! ), allowing one access to six billion years of genetic memories stored in the human body. As the main character continuously dabbles with the forbidden fruit of mind-altering substances, he comes closer and closer to inhabiting the body of the world's first primordeal human being, complete with raw primal instincts and unbridled physical power.

The gist of it is: science dude takes drugs, freaks out repeatedly, turns into a

[Show spoiler]caveman and gets the munchies

.

The concept is really high-level stuff, provoking lots of introspect into the human spirit, human evolution, and humanity's relationship with spirituality and religion. Above all, the film is most memorable for being visually insane. There are several sequences where the film bombards you with rapid-fire freak-out imagery. I've yet to see any other film where the screen flashes weird goat heads, bloody knives, hellish scenes of crucifixions and boiling hot magma, giant snakes, sex, the universe, and lord knows what else all at once (not even 2001: A Space Odyssey went this far ). Scenes like this make the film very pungent, and it stands out as one of the trippiest experiences on film.

In between the occasional freak-outs, the film slows down quite a bit. The film goes on to follow these scientist characters, who form some profound relationships and rivalries, but most of these scenes come off as rather plain and dry, especially when compared to the film's most vivid imagery. I couldn't tell you if such contrast is intentional or not. Regardless, it is an intruiging story with a cast of halfway decent characters.

The film has its share of extremely hard-hitting imagery and extremely plain photography. Editing can be pretty erratic during the freak-out scenes, but for intentional effect; the film is very successful at beating its trippiness over your head. Acting is decent: William Hurt is the man (and looks so damn young here. Holy crap, he has hair! ). Writing is quite sophisticated, but could potentially go over some viewers' heads. This production has okay-looking sets, props, and costumes, and the special effects are impressive for its time. Music is alright.

Overall, this is a movie for the intellectual side of the brain (I forget if that's considered the right side of the brain or what). If that interests you, then the film is certainly recommended. Otherwise, you might still want to see it for some of the trippiest (and possibly scariest) images ever comitted to celluloid (David Lynch can eat his heart out ).

4/5 (Entertainment: Average | Story: Very Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: As a rental: see last paragraph.

This Blu-Ray looks good, sharp, and clean. Colors and contrast look a little dull in places, possibly as an artistic effect or source limitation. There are times when I wondered if any DNR was applied, since the film looks like it has a certain shean to it, but if there is any it's not that much of a distraction. Sound quality is alright; dialogue can be a little low or muffly, but everything else is good.

PQ: 4/5, AQ: 4/5

[jvince]

One Week (1920)
dir. Edward F. Cline, Buster Keaton

The Good: Buster Keaton and Sybil Seely must now be one my favorite on-screen couples ever; their comedic timing is impeccable. Slapstick surrealism; it's like a live-action, old-school cartoon. Highlights are the piano scene, the bathtub scene, the unforgettable spinning house sequence, and the railroad sequence -- basically the entire film.

The Bad: Nada.

The Bottom Line: One Week is like a best-of compilation of Keaton's sheer cinematic awesomeness compressed into 19 minutes. Highly recommended for Keaton/silent film neophytes, fans of romantic comedies and Looney Tunes and the like, and really just about everybody else. There's no discernible way one wouldn't at least crack a smile while watching this.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest rental: Kiki's Delivery Service.

Awwww...as expected, this movie is cute! Thankfully not childishly-cute like Totoro or Ponyo, but borderlines on being girly-cute. Thank goodness, it's not on the Sabrina the Teenage Witch level.

KDS is pretty fun and unique. I did enjoy watching the little girl flying around delivering stuff. There are occasional moments of peril, especially during the big disaster scene toward the end.

As it is with some of the other Miyazaki films, I find the story's pretty light and the plot structure is not all that strong. KDS has no real conflict per se, it's just episodic. Fortunately, the characters are endearing, and the overall concept is sound (but never in-depth like other pictures).

Animation quality looks good. No complaints about the voice-acting or production designs or anything.

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

Recommendation: Sure, why not?

[Al_The_Strange]

I just noticed how the Miyazaki cinematic universe works.

Kiki's Delivery Serivce could be a prequel to all the other films, since it shows the invention of the first airship (a bicycle with a propeller) and the advent of magic. It has a fairly ominous ending, with the big blimp disaster (possibly echoing the events that will happen in Castle in the Sky and Nausicaa). In this film, however, magic prevails and is allowed to grow in the next films.

I suppose Porco Rosso could be a spin-off of sorts here, which shows the continuing rise of airpower and magic. In this case, magic has a bit of a negative connotation, since it turned a man into a pig. It could be a foreshadow to the evil of magic and its contribution to the demise of the world...

My Neighbor Totoro could be a precursor to Princess Mononoke, in the sense that it introduces the concept of forest spirits. Their benevolent presence saves the day in both films; perhaps Totoro is an ancestor of the great walking spirit thing in Mononoke. There's definitely an evolutionary resemblance between the little furry spirit things and the little tree spirit things.

Then comes Spirited Away, which chronicles the rise of evil witches hiding in an alternate reality; more magic ensues. Unchecked, the witch in this film could have presented a potential danger to the world, but was ultimately defeated by a little girl. Such is the first major turning point in the major magic/airship war that follows.

Then comes Howl's Moving Castle, which chronicles the clash of witches and an outbreak of fighting among these different nations with massive airships.

Then there's Castle in the Sky, where the witches have given way to sky pirates, and a military build-up of airships results in a type of arms race (leading everybody to search for the lost city of Laputa and its secret technology).

Presumably, there would then be a massive outbreak of war that destroys the entire world!

In the aftermath, it's possible that Princess Mononoke could take place around this time, when technology has been knocked down to something no different than feudal-age Japan, but forest spirits (as introduced in Totoro) and magic are still abundant.

After so many years of evolution, there would be Nausicaa. By this point, the last remaining nations still cling to air superiority, but still struggle to find the ultimate superweapon (hey, could the stuff in this film be a direct evolution of what's in Laputa?), while simultaneously confronting the threat of giant mutant bugs.

Still not sure how Ponyo, Castle of Cagliostro, or the others I missed fit into this continuity, but I'm telling you, it's all one continuous storyline! And it was made in a completely random order, starting with the last film first, then going back to fill in all the gaps. It's brilliant how they created this universe and tacked on random elements of magic, technology, and myth in such a loose manner.

And you thought they were all stand-alone films, didn't ya?

[Foggy]

I have a choice of many blu rays in my room, many of which my roommates haven't watched, including the Alien films, The Raid, The Thing. But the choice came down between High School Musical 2 and...

Saw 3D: The Final Chapter

Don't know much about the story, but the acting was pretty hilarious and the deaths were funny as hell.

5/10

[bluearth]

The Artist (2011)

I've had no real interest in watching this movie for the longest, but in one such certain dry spell I went ahead and picked it up.

Popped it in and got to watching. It didnt take me long to realize how much better this movie would have been if filmed conventionally, in color and with sound, but at the same time retaining the 1920s charm. Instead we have a charming, innocent movie held back by the silence gimmick which adds nothing to the movie at all, but takes away so much.

It surprised me greatly how little faith the film makers had in this films ability to stand on its own. What convinced them to use the silent route as a crutch? The movie didn't need it. And as I already stated it would have been better off without it. Robert Redford's great Gatsby is a film set in the 1920s, and a great example of how great the era can look on the big screen. In the artist the filmmakers feel the need to trap and mute everything we like about the 20s behind silence and black and white. Sigh.

The first part of the movie quickly sinks into standard film procedure which of course means boredom and predictability. At this point I let the film continue to run and made lunch. 20 minutes later I returned and likely I missed nothing. More and more of the same, with moments of the film expecting us to feel for the rich and arrogant lead. Sorry, not happening.

No, I didnt like it. Its obvious why this movie was so well received, not many can think above and around well played gimmicks, so no real surprise this snoozer won an academy award for being "different" in the age of Michael Bay and IMAX theaters. How about awarding true creativity instead of those who go way out into left field just to be different? Oh well, I dont suspect many will understand, or rather, want to understand.

2/5

[Foggy]

^^^

Don't want to sound mean or anything, but you're not very good at this reviewing thing

[jvince]

The Navigator (1924)
dir. Donald Crisp, Buster Keaton

The Good: Best thing about the film is its delightful score. The climax (where Buster and the girl attempt to fend off the cannibals from boarding their ship with the help of roman candles) and the final scene in the submarine are pretty cool.

The Bad: Plot is thin and not well thought out. Not enough stunts. Lacks the spark you'd typically expect from a Buster Keaton film.

The Bottom Line: The Navigator lacks in laughs and inventiveness, and it probably would have been more effective as a short. Still worth checking out once you've seen Keaton's more original offerings.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

I just noticed how the Miyazaki cinematic universe works.

Kiki's Delivery Serivce could be a prequel to all the other films, since it shows the invention of the first airship (a bicycle with a propeller) and the advent of magic. It has a fairly ominous ending, with the big blimp disaster (possibly echoing the events that will happen in Castle in the Sky and Nausicaa). In this film, however, magic prevails and is allowed to grow in the next films.

I suppose Porco Rosso could be a spin-off of sorts here, which shows the continuing rise of airpower and magic. In this case, magic has a bit of a negative connotation, since it turned a man into a pig. It could be a foreshadow to the evil of magic and its contribution to the demise of the world...

My Neighbor Totoro could be a precursor to Princess Mononoke, in the sense that it introduces the concept of forest spirits. Their benevolent presence saves the day in both films; perhaps Totoro is an ancestor of the great walking spirit thing in Mononoke. There's definitely an evolutionary resemblance between the little furry spirit things and the little tree spirit things.

Then comes Spirited Away, which chronicles the rise of evil witches hiding in an alternate reality; more magic ensues. Unchecked, the witch in this film could have presented a potential danger to the world, but was ultimately defeated by a little girl. Such is the first major turning point in the major magic/airship war that follows.

Then comes Howl's Moving Castle, which chronicles the clash of witches and an outbreak of fighting among these different nations with massive airships.

Then there's Castle in the Sky, where the witches have given way to sky pirates, and a military build-up of airships results in a type of arms race (leading everybody to search for the lost city of Laputa and its secret technology).

Presumably, there would then be a massive outbreak of war that destroys the entire world!

In the aftermath, it's possible that Princess Mononoke could take place around this time, when technology has been knocked down to something no different than feudal-age Japan, but forest spirits (as introduced in Totoro) and magic are still abundant.

After so many years of evolution, there would be Nausicaa. By this point, the last remaining nations still cling to air superiority, but still struggle to find the ultimate superweapon (hey, could the stuff in this film be a direct evolution of what's in Laputa?), while simultaneously confronting the threat of giant mutant bugs.

Still not sure how Ponyo, Castle of Cagliostro, or the others I missed fit into this continuity, but I'm telling you, it's all one continuous storyline! And it was made in a completely random order, starting with the last film first, then going back to fill in all the gaps. It's brilliant how they created this universe and tacked on random elements of magic, technology, and myth in such a loose manner.

And you thought they were all stand-alone films, didn't ya?

Oh my!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by bluearth

The Artist (2011)

I've had no real interest in watching this movie for the longest, but in one such certain dry spell I went ahead and picked it up.

Popped it in and got to watching. It didnt take me long to realize how much better this movie would have been if filmed conventionally, in color and with sound, but at the same time retaining the 1920s charm. Instead we have a charming, innocent movie held back by the silence gimmick which adds nothing to the movie at all, but takes away so much.

It surprised me greatly how little faith the film makers had in this films ability to stand on its own. What convinced them to use the silent route as a crutch? The movie didn't need it. And as I already stated it would have been better off without it. Robert Redford's great Gatsby is a film set in the 1920s, and a great example of how great the era can look on the big screen. In the artist the filmmakers feel the need to trap and mute everything we like about the 20s behind silence and black and white. Sigh.

The first part of the movie quickly sinks into standard film procedure which of course means boredom and predictability. At this point I let the film continue to run and made lunch. 20 minutes later I returned and likely I missed nothing. More and more of the same, with moments of the film expecting us to feel for the rich and arrogant lead. Sorry, not happening.

No, I didnt like it. Its obvious why this movie was so well received, not many can think above and around well played gimmicks, so no real surprise this snoozer won an academy award for being "different" in the age of Michael Bay and IMAX theaters. How about awarding true creativity instead of those who go way out into left field just to be different? Oh well, I dont suspect many will understand, or rather, want to understand.

2/5

I found the gimmick to be magical and charming. But then, I do tend to be easily duped.

[P@t_Mtl]

The People vs. George Lucas (2010)

This movie along with the two Treekies movies made a decade ago explain very clearly why I no longer really attend conventions or associate much with fans of scifi and fantasy. In the 80's and 90's I use to attend tons of conventions every year and had quite many friends from all over, geeks to the core of Star Wars and Star Trek along with other things. The main trouble is that these "so call hard core fans" (I call them so call because in my view they are in need of medical help) turn me off attending conventions and piss me off so much that I really no longer speak with them. This incredible rage that one's life is ruined because of things that are so silly, lame and stupid, I just could not waste my time with it or with them. It's one of the reason I avoid certain threads and try to not post that much in this forum as well. In short this documentary explain just how sad some of these people lives really are that they define their entire existence over certain movies or books or whatever. An extremist is an extremist, whatever it may be that he is extremist about and for me I rather not waste my time with. I was recommended this movie but frankly I should I just skip it, I sort of expended what it was going to be about.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by bluearth

The Tree of Life (2011)
like the hipster movement with it's crappy style thats seen cool now because its "different"...Its amazing the amount of critics who overlook it's gigantic flaws because it's "artsy" and "different."

Originally Posted by bluearth

The Artist (2011)
not many can think above and around well played gimmicks, so no real surprise this snoozer won an academy award for being "different" in the age of Michael Bay and IMAX theaters. How about awarding true creativity instead of those who go way out into left field just to be different? 2/5

I like me some "different" movies

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by Foggy

^^^

Don't want to sound mean or anything, but you're not very good at this reviewing thing

Won't be reading those any more.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I found the gimmick to be magical and charming. But then, I do tend to be easily duped.