The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

great analysis! I agree. Plus, this helps a lot because, as you point out, it makes Guy Pierce's character more meaningful, unlike Theron (haha ok she's a hottie, so I guess its ok). Question though:

[Show spoiler]are the engineers pissed because (a) we are like spoiled little brats and not grateful for what the engineers did for us (give us life), or (b) by being at engineers military base, we are messing up their "extermination" plan for us, so must kill those of us that are here, otherwise they won't be able to "exterminate" us. I think you mean (a), right?

. Another question:

[Show spoiler]why do they want to exterminate us? is it because of (a) also? Or because the engineers feel threatened by us? much different reason!

There is a deleted scene that expands on the

[Show spoiler]meeting between Weyland and the Enginneer. More dialogue is exchanged; the Engineer asks why these guys have come, David explains that Weyland wants immortality. Weyland explains that David was their perfect creation. Then the Engineer strokes David's head...and goes nuts. From this expanded exchange, I think it's safe to say that the Engineers were absolutely not comfortable with humans being on the same level as them (just as the gods in the Prometheus myth). So yeah, they were threatened; humans gained so much knowledge, they were on the threshold of creating life themselves in their image, and the Engineers wouldn't have wanted that.

Extras on the Blu-Ray are awesome, definitely worth looking at.

you know what I realized?? This

[Show spoiler]"aliens as gods"

was a theme heavy thing in 2001. Kubrick talked in interviews about how

[Show spoiler] (paraphrasing) "If Aliens were so advanced to us that we couldn't even comprehend how advanced they were - they would look to us like a God." Pretty much the same theme throughout Promestheus = Engineers made us = Engineer are our "God". And I LOVE how SCott threw in the obvious refute of this "well then who made them?". When I would watch 2001, sometimes I would look at it from the standpoint of "God" left all the monoliths behind, and sometimes I'd look at it from the standpoint of "Aliens" left all the monoliths behind, and other viewings were where they were the same entity, like in Promestheus

Whoa, I never thought of things that way for 2001: A Space Odyssey. I read about the

[Show spoiler]space zoo

theory, but so much of that movie continues to elude me.

yeah, that part I'm a bit fuzzy on. I read about Promestheus on Wikipedia and it said he

[Show spoiler]made man from dirt and gave them fire, which supposedly was only for gods. so what is the "fire" here in Promestheus? Space travel? Alien language?

help me out bro

[Show spoiler]In fact, now that you've mentioned the dirt and fire, it reminds me that the characters in Prometheus could create anything they wanted through robotics (David, representing the dirt), but couldn't fill anything with a soul.

Anyway, it's not just life or creation, but everlasting life that Weyland asks for, and causes the Engineer to flip out. The more I think about it, the more I think that's the "fire" of the thing: complete and total mastery of life and death, which the Engineers have, the humans want, and David mediates between the two.

holy crappola!! Awesome analysis!!! I don't know why I was locked into thinking

[Show spoiler]there was only one engineer. Duh! you're right! Still not sure how man would have known what the 5 -star sequence looked like, in order to write it on the wall, even if they did see Engineers coming back to earth? Maybe it was a symbol on their ship or something? Your point about man doing the drawings (not Engineers) makes much more sense, because the engineers wouldn't want man coming back to their land.

I think the writers were fairly skimpy on this part

[Show spoiler]regarding the star-reading. I think they were shooting for the same thing as Stargate, because the ancient Egyptians (and other ancient cultures) could plot out astronomy pretty well, and lined up their monuments with the stars accurately. They may not have described any of this in Prometheus, but if the ancients somehow knew that the Engineers came from a specific star and they could spot it in the sky, I figure they could jot down the constellations on the caves and hieroglyphs just from what they see and know. The specific cave painting Shaw finds makes it look like the Engineers preached to the ancients or something, and pointed out the five stars over their heads.

They could have just as easily derrived the star charts from Engineer markings too, who knows?

maybe this is a dumb question because its so simple:

[Show spoiler]why did the engineers make us? were they threatened by something at home, so needed to make an identical species in a similar-live sustaining planet? or were they merely spreading their DNA, in a selfish way to spread their influence? do we know?

That Detective Is The Right Question - YouTube

[Show spoiler]Seriously though, this is a question that the film itself brings up, but never answers. I don't think it can ever be answered. It's the deepest and most philosophical thing that we can all ask about the film, but it's the pursuit of the answer that keeps Shaw going (and us as well). It might get covered in a potential sequel, but we'll have to wait and see...or come up with our own reasoning.

Great analysis here again! I knew I could count on Al on this one

I actually much prefer a film that leaves more questions than a film that tries to give us too many answers. It results in us having these kind of discussions and throwing around these kind of theories.

lol, glad I could help.

what makes you think they want to

[Show spoiler] "destroy and recreate" life, as oppose to merely destroying it?

[Show spoiler]Judging from the opening scene, and all the freaky mutations that happen later, I figure it's in the nature of the black goo to destroy and recreate on a cellular level. In fact, the film makes it look like it randomly spawns weird life forms, as it spawns these weird snake things, and a weird worm appears in the one guy's eye, turns one of them into a zombie, and causes a squid to grow inside of Shaw.

yes, you're right, it was this film showing that. and yes, that did seem to provdie some clues as to what the fack was going on. but alas, I couldn't make much sense of it, other than to know

[Show spoiler]engineers were running from something, some engineers died, and that's about it

The dialogue in the deleted scenes had more speculation and parallels; I think they confirm that

[Show spoiler]it was indeed an outbreak of something, we just don't know what. We may not want to know what.

seems like a GREAT film for repeated viewings

Yes it is.

HECK YEAH!!! This is A+++ stuff right here!! Are you guys reading this??? Al is definietly SE

NO but seriously, I hadn't thought much of the LOA lines, but that makes TOTAL sense. Plus the "fire" stuff, I wasn't sure either. The

[Show spoiler] "not minding that it hurts" probably does refer to him KNOWING that he's going to be killed/facked up by teh engineers (other GODS like him = very smart, has abilities the other humans don't). Funny thing is though, would David really need to be reminded to "remember it doesn't hurt"? He's a robot, if anything he'd have to be reminded that it DOES hurt . LOL

Thanks bro!

Thank you, I'm glad I'm somewhat evolved to make sense of some of it.

There are still lots of unanswered questions about it, and it sounds like Scott and the writers made it that way on purpose. A sequel is in the works (and Lindelhof is NOT returning ), so hopefully it'll be a complete and thoughtful duology that ties things together really well.

Last I heard, the sequel is supposed to be called Paradise, and will

[Show spoiler]continue with Shaw's exploration of "where they came from."

It should be awesome.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Riddick Official Teaser (2013) Vin Diesel Movie HD - YouTube

And this is like the 100th movie I'm psyched for this year.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Argo

Enjoyed it quite abit. Very well made, on all fronts. It was fascinating since I didnt know about the whole

[Show spoiler] BS Canadian filmmaker portrayal

as the means to escape. Cool.

For a thriller though, it fell short for me with regards to tension and fear of consequence. Simply put, not stressfull or dark enough by any means for my tastes.

Going to Hollywood was necessary (and accurate) for the story, but it added a "pleasant" vibe that pulled the film away from its roots, a life and death/torture hostage situation.

I was too comfortable.

Had I paid full admission price to see this at a theater I would have left fully satisfied, no doubt, but Best Picture? Seems a bit lofty there IMO.

Film 4/5
PQ 4.5/5
AQ 5/5

Right on. I can kinda see what you mean about the glossiness of Hollywood contrasting with everything else. I thought the opening scenes were fairly intense, and they had me on the edge, wondering who would make it out and what would happen to everybody. You kinda know that

[Show spoiler]they'll all be okay in the end

.

Yeah, I'm also not sure if it's Best Picture worthy. Then again, I can't think of a better choice. I'm so NSE after all.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Too bad you didn't enjoy it quite as much as me, but I think your reasoning is definitely fair and I can see where you are coming from.

Also, this:
Riddick Official Teaser (2013) Vin Diesel Movie HD - YouTube

Saw the trailer in the Riddick thread.

[SquidPuppet]

Since we are into the short films lately, I thought I'd share this one. I have been watching it for a couple years now. Wheneve I feel down I take a peek and it cheers me up.

Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home"

Absolutely gorgeous locataions. Fablous cinematography. Beautiful music.

Watch all of it. The manuevers increase in mindboggling awesomeness as the film advances.

Edit: Watching linked through Blu-ray.com makes it look all herky-jerky. watch it AT youtube and it is High Def smooth and delicious.

A maniacal loonatic? Or, a precise acrobat of the highest order?

Danny MacAskill - "Way Back Home" - YouTube

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Saw the trailer in the Riddick thread.

Would have been more psyched about the teaser if it was longer than 22 seconds.

It's good to get any footage, but that also might be one of the shortest teasers in history.

[jhiggy23]

surf---you should check out the article on indiewire that has links to what they believe are the best prometheus analyses out there. The

[Show spoiler]space jesus

one is the one that I subscribe to, and has an abundance of pretty definitive support for it, as absolutely crazy as it is. It is also in tune with Lindelof's interests, as set forth in Lost.

[jhiggy23]

My Left Foot


3.5 (out of 4)


I gave the film an extra half star because of how good Daniel Day-Lewis was. I didn't find the film particularly entertaining, but the acting from Day-Lewis and Fricker really was great. I've been around people with cerebral palsy and to say that Day-Lewis nailed it is an understatement. You don't see him, you see Christy Brown. It's worth watching just for Day-Lewis' first Oscar win.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

My Left Foot


3.5 (out of 4)


I gave the film an extra half star because of how good Daniel Day-Lewis was. I didn't find the film particularly entertaining, but the acting from Day-Lewis and Fricker really was great. I've been around people with cerebral palsy and to say that Day-Lewis nailed it is an understatement. You don't see him, you see Christy Brown. It's worth watching just for Day-Lewis' first Oscar win.

Great film!

[Abdrewes]

I haven't seen the first three Paradise Lost films, but yesterday I saw West of Memphis. I'm not sure if I can fully reccomend it as its by no means tells the full story of the Memphis Three. Immediately afterwards I spent hours looking through the official documents online.

I guess the great Canadian director Atom Egoyan (The Sweet Hereafter) will be releasing a film based on The Devil's Knot. The subject matter alone has the potential to make it best film of the year.

[jvince]

Manhattan (1979)
dir. Woody Allen

The Good: Gorgeous black-and-white cinematography. Top-notch writing (arguably Woody Allen at his funniest); Most of the back-and-forths are priceless and delivered to perfection. Superb performances, especially from Allen, Diane Keaton, and Mariel Hemingway. The Gershwin soundtrack.

The Bad: The f*ck is wrong with that a**hole making that poor girl cry? *shakes fist at Isaac*

The Bottom Line: At some moments, Manhattan outdoes Allen's earlier and more revered film, Annie Hall (although as a whole, the latter is slightly superior). A must-see not just for romantics but for all movie lovers.

[U7ysses S Gr4nt]

Taken 2

Being a fan of the original and just the genre in general, I had to give it a shot. Liam keeps it moving relatively well, but it's an unncecessary sequel.

4/10

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by jvince

Manhattan (1979)
dir. Woody Allen

The Good: Gorgeous black-and-white cinematography. Top-notch writing (arguably Woody Allen at his funniest); Most of the back-and-forths are priceless and delivered to perfection. Superb performances, especially from Allen, Diane Keaton, and Mariel Hemingway. The Gershwin soundtrack.

The Bad: The f*ck is wrong with that a**hole making that poor girl cry? *shakes fist at Isaac*

The Bottom Line: At some moments, Manhattan outdoes Allen's earlier and more revered film, Annie Hall (although as a whole, the latter is slightly superior). A must-see not just for romantics but for all movie lovers.

What are you gonna endorse next? Breathing?

When Woody's at his best, his films are a total delight. At his worst they are insufferable.

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

When Woody's at his best, his films are a total delight. At his worst they are insufferable.

Basically every other film he makes follows that pattern

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

Basically every other film he makes follows that pattern

Probably since Deconstructing Harry.

By the way, did I make the right choice by not purchasing You Will meet a Tall Dark Stranger?

[Hawkguy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

By the way, did I make the right choice by not purchasing You Will meet a Tall Dark Stranger?

I'd say so.

I'm glad you agree. It's amazing how for his last 20 or so films, he grinds out one lesser film for every great one. So judging by the mess that was To Rome with Love, his next film will probably be very good.

[jhiggy23]

Cinema Paradiso:

Film: 4 stars (out of 4)


Just an incredible film. It won the Oscar for best foreign film in 1989, Empire magazine ranked it as the 27th greatest foreign film of all time, and it's widely considered by critics to be one of the best films ever at movies, with only 8 1/2 being clearly ahead of it.

I really just loved the film, from the performances, to the direction, to the writing, to the incredible score. And it's now easy to see why it's ending scene is so widely renowned--one of the best I've seen.

It's interesting that there are different versions of the film. There's a 155 minute version, a 125 minute version, and a 175 minute version. When the film was released in 1988, Harvey Weinstein and Miramax decided to release the 125 minute version. In 2002, the 175 minute version was released theatrically. What's interesting is that the additional 50 minutes almost all takes place just before the end of the film, expanding upon an important sub-plot and completely altering the meaning of the film and the nature of a main character. I saw the 125 minute version--I haven't seen the longer version, but I know what happens. I think Ebert's review on the matter seems spot on. The longer version is nice because the viewer gets to know what happens with a certain sub-plot, but it extends beyond the natural ending of the film.

I've been wanting to see the film for awhile, especially since there's an art house movie theater next to the courthouse I work at called Cinema Paradiso, which is modeled after the film.


__________________________________________________ ____________


In a Better World


Film: 3.5 (out of 4)


Winner of the Oscar for best foreign film in 2011. I thought the film was excellent. Maybe a little contrived, but it didn't affect my viewing at all. I thought the directing, writing, performances, and cinematography were very good. I also enjoyed the theme of the movie, which is completely universal. It's interesting that the director decided to make the film to show that Denmark, which has a very low crime rate, isn't as idyllic as it's made out to be and that they have the same issues that people everywhere have. This was a worthy winner, although I can't say if it was better than the other nominated films that year (note: I have Incendies, arguably its biggest competition, dvr'd on my tv).

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by CoopFilm

I'd say so.

I'm glad you agree. It's amazing how for his last 20 or so films, he grinds out one lesser film for every great one. So judging by the mess that was To Rome with Love, his next film will probably be very good.

Well, his next project has Cate Blanchett, so it has to be good. Well to be fair, she hasn't been in a great film for quite some time, so it's anybody's guess.

[Abdrewes]

Jhiggy23,
I almost really liked In a Better World but it was a way more than a little contrived. Also I feel it's guilty of cultural tourism.

[jvince]

The Cabin in the Woods (2012)
dir. Drew Goddard

The Good: Clever take on the horror genre. Fran Kranz, Richard Jenkins, and Bradley Whitford. Witty dialogue. Thermos bong. The purge. Merman.

The Bad: Could've been executed much better, especially the ending. Resorts to lazy contrivances at times. Terrible CGI.

The Bottom Line: The Cabin in the Woods is a unique and admirable stab at the genre that needs to be seen more than once in order to catch everything.