The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

I have to agree with Kubrick too. Anything above our comprehension can only be explained spiritually, and aliens would be no different.

That sentence can be read a couple different ways. Because of that, I'm not certain what you mean.

[Baseballking888]

Rise of the Guardians: Great film. Some slightly weird pacing, but overall, thoroughly enjoyable and I really appreciated that sort of innocence to it that seems to be lacking in a lot of mainstream films these days. It was very sincere and not to mention gorgeously rendered.

It makes me sad though that it lost so much money. Not Dreamworks' best film, but a far cry from "we need to lay of 350 employees" bad.

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

That sentence can be read a couple different ways. Because of that, I'm not certain what you mean.

There are limits even to scientific theory. Limits to human comprehension.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

There are limits even to scientific theory. Limits to human comprehension.

Thanks

[Steve46]

Following (1998)
Crime, Drama, Mystery, 69 minutes
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Jeremy Theobald, Alex Haw and Lucy Russell

Are you a fan of Christopher Nolan? His impressive filmography includes Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, Inception, and The Dark Knight Rises. But his first feature was Following, and I imagine that there are plenty of Nolan fans who haven't got around to seeing it. My first viewing was just a few months ago, shortly after the Criterion Blu-ray release.

Why do I want to review it?

Well, one reason is that I wanted to talk about the first first film made by one of the best directors working today. Another incentive was the presence of actual ideas. Following is unpredictable, and does not use proven formulas. It works because it is genuinely interesting and compelling.

You have probably never heard of the actors involved. The two principals haven't had much of a career since, but I enjoyed their performances. The film is full of mysteries and revelations, so I am not going to talk about everything that happens. Instead, I'll limit most of my comments to things we learn in the opening 10 minutes.

The film grabbed my attention after two minutes during the opening narration by Bill (Jeremy Theobald), who is the main character. He tells us that he's unemployed, and frequently bored and lonely. In order to combat his boredom, he decides to start following people at random. In his own mind, he's an aspiring writer, although he probably views himself that way to justify his miserable existence. He's interested in people and what motivates them. When he's following someone, he has a certain set of rules, such as not pursuing women along dark alleys at night. He's a keen observer, but not a predator of any kind. He follows people of any gender, watches what they do, and then leaves.

Bill's problems begin when he breaks one of his biggest rules, and decides to follow the same person more than once. The man calls himself Cobb (Alex Haw), and after noticing that he's being followed, he confronts Bill and questions him. Cobb dresses, acts, and sounds like a successful man, which is in total contrast to Bill's scruffy appearance and less formal way of speaking.

Minor spoiler coming:

[Show spoiler]Cobb allows Bill to look inside the bag he's carrying, and Bill realizes that it's full of goods that are presumably stolen. The two form a kind of partnership, and start to do burglaries together.

I'm not going to reveal any more specific information, but I want to talk generally about the plot structure, and the overall feel of the film. The plot is fragmented, jumping around in time. If you have seen Memento, you'll recognize the style immediately. Bill's appearance changes, and is always a clue as to the timeline. As he's a writer, there's also a strong possibility that some of the events are things that he is imagining for a future story.

Another key element is the music. It reminds me a little of Angelo Badalementi's work, and it wouldn't be too out of place in a David Lynch film. The film was shot in black and white with an aspect ratio of 1.37:1, so be prepared for that. Following was originally shot using 16 mm film, giving the piece a raw feel which suits the story, but the Criterion presentation is superb. The Blu-ray also includes the option to use an updated 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio mix, as well as the original mono. Like the Memento DVD, the special features offer the chance to see events in chronological order.

After viewing the film a second time, I noticed that events had a different meaning because I was in full possession of the facts. Seemingly random encounters have more meaning because some of the people are recognizable. You'll probably ask yourself a lot of questions the first time you watch the events unfold. How does the character know that? Why is he doing that? Why is she acting that way? All of those questions will be answered by the end of the film, so trust that Nolan knows what he is doing and enjoy the ride. The revelations in the final 20 minutes will make you question everything you've seen up to that point, and then smile as you understand the logic.

Following cost around $6,000 to make, and grossed just $43,000, but Nolan hasn't made a weak film yet and this deserves to be seen. Although it runs for just 69 minutes, it feels as though it's crammed with ideas. The acting, story, dialogue and music blend together well, and Following is something that you'll probably want to see many times if you appreciate Nolan's style. Buy the Criterion and check it out for yourself.

Overall score 4.5/5

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Following (1998)

[Show spoiler]Crime, Drama, Mystery, 69 minutes
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Jeremy Theobald, Alex Haw and Lucy Russell

Are you a fan of Christopher Nolan? His impressive filmography includes Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, Inception, and The Dark Knight Rises. But his first feature was Following, and I imagine that there are plenty of Nolan fans who haven't got around to seeing it. My first viewing was just a few months ago, shortly after the Criterion Blu-ray release.

Why do I want to review it?

Well, one reason is that I wanted to talk about the first first film made by one of the best directors working today. Another incentive was the presence of actual ideas. Following is unpredictable, and does not use proven formulas. It works because it is genuinely interesting and compelling.

You have probably never heard of the actors involved. The two principals haven't had much of a career since, but I enjoyed their performances. The film is full of mysteries and revelations, so I am not going to talk about everything that happens. Instead, I'll limit most of my comments to things we learn in the opening 10 minutes.

The film grabbed my attention after two minutes during the opening narration by Bill (Jeremy Theobald), who is the main character. He tells us that he's unemployed, and frequently bored and lonely. In order to combat his boredom, he decides to start following people at random. In his own mind, he's an aspiring writer, although he probably views himself that way to justify his miserable existence. He's interested in people and what motivates them. When he's following someone, he has a certain set of rules, such as not pursuing women along dark alleys at night. He's a keen observer, but not a predator of any kind. He follows people of any gender, watches what they do, and then leaves.

Bill's problems begin when he breaks one of his biggest rules, and decides to follow the same person more than once. The man calls himself Cobb (Alex Haw), and after noticing that he's being followed, he confronts Bill and questions him. Cobb dresses, acts, and sounds like a successful man, which is in total contrast to Bill's scruffy appearance and less formal way of speaking.

Minor spoiler coming:

[Show spoiler]Cobb allows Bill to look inside the bag he's carrying, and Bill realizes that it's full of goods that are presumably stolen. The two form a kind of partnership, and start to do burglaries together.

I'm not going to reveal any more specific information, but I want to talk generally about the plot structure, and the overall feel of the film. The plot is fragmented, jumping around in time. If you have seen Memento, you'll recognize the style immediately. Bill's appearance changes, and is always a clue as to the timeline. As he's a writer, there's also a strong possibility that some of the events are things that he is imagining for a future story.

Another key element is the music. It reminds me a little of Angelo Badalementi's work, and it wouldn't be too out of place in a David Lynch film. The film was shot in black and white with an aspect ratio of 1.37:1, so be prepared for that. Following was originally shot using 16 mm film, giving the piece a raw feel which suits the story, but the Criterion presentation is superb. The Blu-ray also includes the option to use an updated 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio mix, as well as the original mono. Like the Memento DVD, the special features offer the chance to see events in chronological order.

After viewing the film a second time, I noticed that events had a different meaning because I was in full possession of the facts. Seemingly random encounters have more meaning because some of the people are recognizable. You'll probably ask yourself a lot of questions the first time you watch the events unfold. How does the character know that? Why is he doing that? Why is she acting that way? All of those questions will be answered by the end of the film, so trust that Nolan knows what he is doing and enjoy the ride. The revelations in the final 20 minutes will make you question everything you've seen up to that point, and then smile as you understand the logic.

Following cost around $6,000 to make, and grossed just $43,000, but Nolan hasn't made a weak film yet and this deserves to be seen. Although it runs for just 69 minutes, it feels as though it's crammed with ideas. The acting, story, dialogue and music blend together well, and Following is something that you'll probably want to see many times if you appreciate Nolan's style. Buy the Criterion and check it out for yourself.

Overall score 4.5/5

Hey, Steve is back.

I liked Following too.

[Foggy]

Not seen a lot from Al, so one can only guess he's become fully engrossed in Bioshock Infinite

If there was one word to describe that game, it would be something like...

[Show spoiler]Ican'teventrytowrapitupit'sjusttoobaffling

!

[jvince]

WALL·E (2008)
dir. Andrew Stanton

The Good: WALL·E. Absolutely stunning animation. Love the (mostly) silent first half. Very charming, funny, and endearing. High replay value.

The Bad: Slight dip in quality during the second half.

The Bottom Line: One of Pixar's finest offerings, this modern animated masterpiece is a must-see for all, regardless of age or preference.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Not seen a lot from Al, so one can only guess he's become fully engrossed in Bioshock Infinite

If there was one word to describe that game, it would be something like...

[Show spoiler]Ican'teventrytowrapitupit'sjusttoobaffling

!

Bioshock Infinite is indeed sucking up some of my time.

Also making preparations to move to a new tour of duty, so I might have to drop out for a while.

[Al_The_Strange]

Happy Easter everybody! Yesterday I watched yet again...

The Passion of the Christ

The birth and death of Jesus has been covered thoroughly across many biblical epics, but there has always been a gleaming Hollywood polish to them. If you look at films like Ben Hur or The Greatest Story Ever Told, there's surprisingly little passion in the Passion of the Christ; it's as if these films sugar-coat the events in favor of crafting a safe and fluffy audience-pleasing spectacle. That's not to say that these films lack merit; on the contrary, they are most valuable for bringing the events to life in a manner that all Christians can identify with, young or old. Their universal appeal makes them go-to classics, especially for Easter time.

In 2004, Mel Gibson dared to give us a portrayal of Jesus' death that is far more uncompromising, and arguably closer to what could have really happened. The Passion of the Christ is not a colorful or happy affair; it's a harrowing experience that lingers on the cruelty and violence, constantly underscoring the hideous nature of mankind. This is not an easy thing to watch; the camera tracks every blow Jesus takes, every cruel moment in which He is shamed and spit upon, every crack of the whip that breaks His flesh, and every hard step He takes toward Golgotha. The film goes on and on, purposefully placing the audience into His footsteps so that we ultimately feel His agony and face the ugliness of what happened. The film was highly controversial on its release, and remains so; many audiences can't stomach the brutality of the film, and would argue that such violence is unnecessary. Many others have harped on the director's personal sensibilities, temperament, and antisemitism, arguing that the film is too hateful and purposefully asserts an antisemitic agenda. Such criticisms have proven to be a source of heated debate, even to this day.

Regardless of how you regard this film, one thing is certain: it is a uniquely intense experience that brings the events to life in a way that no other film before it has. The Passion has a blunt but jarring and powerful cinematic experience that makes the characters and situations fresh and inspiring. Even if you're intimately familiar with the story, the film takes some striking artistic liberties that reinforce the themes and ideas of the film sublimely.

The storytelling for this film is impeccable. It follows the book of Luke practically word for word, but takes a few deviations to cover some important flashbacks that reinforce the characters and the messages of Jesus. It's hard to know how close to reality the film comes, but it comes very close, especially in regards to its look, style, and language (it's mostly the violence that borders on being ridiculously overdone). The film does a fantastic job of covering the passages of the Bible accurately, and emphasizing the importance of Jesus' sacrifice with tangible themes and messages. By the film's end, after seeing so much cruelty being poured into Jesus, I really did have a much better understanding of the importance of His sacrifice and suffering, and it made the experience of the film most worthwhile in the long run.

Despite its artistic liberties and emphasis on violence, the film has a very strong and vivid style, with incredible photography and editing techniques. Acting is decent; Jim Caviezel has limited dialogue to work with, but shows enough nuances in his physical performance to bring Jesus to life in a believable and distinctive manner. The supporting cast is really decent as well. Writing is effective, especially in the way it incorporates the Bible's words in with the drama. The film is most notable for using authentic Aramaic and Latin dialogue. This production uses some very detailed and real-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music has an authentic feel to it as well; it's quite haunting, but at times it maintains a subtle sense of divinity.

I personally value The Passion the most for its powerful, vivid presentation, and for helping me understand the significance of Jesus' sacrifice in a refreshingly bold context. For its brutal violence and arguable antisemitic overtones, this is not a film I would universally recommend to audiences; the best I can say is that if you think you can stomach the experience, you should at least give it a try. You may find this film rewarding.

5/5 (Experience: Perfect | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)

Recommendation: Yes, but only for those who can stomach it.

On Blu-Ray, this film looks and sounds great.

PQ: 5/5, AQ: 5/5

[Al_The_Strange]

Ben Hur (1959)

For more than 100 years, the tale of Ben Hur has staggered the imaginations of audiences worldwide, as indicated by its successful publication history, having at least three different film adaptations, and even a stage play adaptation. Of all the exposure this story has received, much of its acclaim may be attributed to its famous 1959 film adaptation, which remains a classic in epic cinema, and a standard Easter holiday favorite.

Whether you've heard of Ben Hur or not, chances are good that you've seen this film referenced or mentioned somewhere in pop culture. It stands as one of the biggest, most epic, most ambitious productions in cinema to date. It's most impressive in how it employed thousands of extras, over a million props, and some very expensive and lavish setpieces to bring this larger-than-life tale to life. Even if you aren't marveling at the sheer scope and scale of this film, the chariot race in the film's final act will have you at the edge of your seat. It's a long, uncompromising, real-looking sequence that's still thrilling and intense, and it should stand as one of the best racing scenes of all time. There is a really neat sea battle in the film's first half, which offers even more thrills and violence to behold. For the most part, however, this is a film more heavily built on drama and characterization. Parts of it remain enthralling, as we watch the title character suffer and fight his way through adversity. However, in between the major turning events and the action scenes, the film's momentum does suffer a massive slump. The pacing in certain scenes never agreed with me personally, and is really the only issue I take with this fine picture.

The story for this film is perfectly sound and well-built. Judah Ben Hur is a well-rounded character we can follow easily enough and relate to; his rivalry with Messala provides the conflict to drive the plot forward, and digs up some interesting themes of vengeance and hatred. What really propels the film above and beyond will be the story of Christ, running in tandem with Ben Hur's story; both storylines become entwined to reveal strong themes of redemption and salvation. I have no clue how closely this adapts Lew Wallace's original novel, but on its own merits, this film offers a decently insightful story.

Captured with a sweeping widescreen frame on a pristine 70mm film stock, this film looks every bit as big as it is. Just about every shot is carefully calculated to best present the imagery with incredible amounts of detail. It uses a lot of long shots, which never felt all that intimate or interesting to me personally, but it is definitely a big-scale picture with lots of impressive shots. Acting is pleasing; Charlton Heston plays Ben Hur with enough nuance and machismo to make the character cool and memorable. The rest of the cast do their best. Writing is not too bad either. This production spares no expense on its massive sets, props, costumes, and visual effects. Music is just as big and ambitious as the rest of the movie is.

For its sheer epicness and classic status, this film comes highly recommended.

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

Recommendation: Yep.

On Blu-Ray, this sucker looks and sounds darn near perfect!

PQ: 5/5, AQ: 4.5/5

[Abdrewes]

Thanks for the write up Al,

The Last Temptation of Christ is definitely not one of those slick, lifeless epics. Far from it, I find the way it deviates from the Bible to be ingenious. I was actually invested in the story, as I felt I was witnessing it for the first time

As for the Passion of The Christ, I've had a love/hate relationship with the film. Sure, his crucifixion was just as bloody, if not more. But I feel Mel Gibson didn't take any chances to humanize Jesus. Not for once am I able to step into his shoes. I'll never know what I feels like to be humiliated and beaten like that, but I do struggle with temptation, as all mankind does. That is why I prefer the Scorsese film. When Jesus finally says, "it is finished," I felt he really overcame something as I'm sure his emotional turmoil was much greater than the physical. Think about it: a man of close to 30 never falling into sin, that's a he'll of a struggle.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Bioshock Infinite is indeed sucking up some of my time.

Also making preparations to move to a new tour of duty, so I might have to drop out for a while.

You're going to have to give you thoughts on the ending when you get around to it:mindblown:

[Steve46]

Invictus (2009)
Biography, Drama, History, 134 minutes
Directed by Clint Eastwood
Starring Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon

I have very little time for politicians, I'm not a fan of rugby, and I know very little about South Africa. However, I do think that Clint Eastwood makes a lot of important films, and I enjoy the acting of Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon. That's why I decided to watch Invictus when it was released on Blu-ray four years ago.

Mandela was occasionally in the news during my childhood, but events happening on another continent meant very little to me as a young boy. As an adult, I have come to appreciate people who sacrificed much of their lives in an attempt to change the way people think. If you connected with Steven Spielberg's Lincoln, try to imagine a similar scenario in the modern world.

Mandela campaigned against apartheid, and was imprisoned for his actions in 1963. He spent 18 of his 27 years in prison on Robben Island, where he contracted tuberculosis. As I write this review, he's in hospital with pneumonia at the age of 94.

Invictus shows some of the challenges faced by Mandela when he became South Africa's first black president in 1994. He defied expectations at every turn. An early scene gives us a clue about the man as he calls together his staff. Some of them are white, and expecting to be fired, but Mandela urges them to stay and continue to serve their country. He wants to forgive those who imprisoned him, and those who hate black South Africans. He realized that he was in a position to lead by example, and that it wasn't the time to settle old scores. Freeman's portrayal provides insight into Mandela's character, and shows us why he was loved by the people with whom he interacted.

Racism is one of the most dangerous things in existence, and I believe that it will always be with us in some form. There is no logic in hating someone because of their color or origin, but we are still surrounded by people who do just that. I think it's incredibly ignorant to continue to hold such beliefs in modern society, but I won't turn this review into a debate about racism. I mention it because it's important to frame the story, and appreciate what Mandela was trying to do.

So why is rugby an integral part of the story?

When Mandela took office, South Africa had already been chosen to host the rugby world cup a year later. Mandela decided to use the occasion to help to unite South Africans in a common cause. Rugby had always been a game revered by white South Africans, while black South Africans preferred soccer. In fact, the black population frequently cheered for whichever team was playing their national team as a form of protest. Overcoming that level of hatred proved to be quite a challenge.

Matt Damon plays South African Springbok captain, Francois Pienaar. He leads a team that is suffering from lack of belief in its own ability. There's a definite parallel between Mandela's efforts to unite the country, and Pienaar's task of uniting his team, the fans, and the media. Mandela meets him to discuss the importance of performing well in the world cup, and the two talk about leadership techniques.

Invictus is an engaging story which appeals as a historical drama more than a movie about sports. You don't need to know anything about rugby in order to appreciate the story. Eastwood has constructed a film that deals with the weighty subject matter in a way that we can all understand. Freeman was deservedly nominated for his performance, and Damon is convincing as a rugby player.

Films like this may be considered too idealistic by many, but it works for me. I realize that uniting a country is more difficult than the events portrayed on the screen over the course of two hours. What Invictus does is encourage me to think beyond my immediate surroundings, and appreciate some of the things faced by people living in other countries. It's not the best film ever made about politics or sports, but it's definitely worth your time if you want to broaden your horizons.

Overall score 4/5

[jvince]

Snow White & the Huntsman (2012)
dir. Rupert Sanders

The Good: Charlize Theron. Imaginative, nice-looking imagery.

The Bad: Boring and lifeless. Zero chemistry between Stewart and Hemsworth. Lots of filler. Uneven pacing.

The Bottom Line: This Snow White iteration looks pretty but feels hollow. Pass.

[Romulus]

Happy Easter folks!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Bioshock Infinite is indeed sucking up some of my time.

Also making preparations to move to a new tour of duty, so I might have to drop out for a while.

Where might you be shipped to?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Happy Easter folks!

[Show spoiler]

That's just plain wrong.

[Show spoiler]Hilarious though.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Thanks for the write up Al,

The Last Temptation of Christ is definitely not one of those slick, lifeless epics. Far from it, I find the way it deviates from the Bible to be ingenious. I was actually invested in the story, as I felt I was witnessing it for the first time

As for the Passion of The Christ, I've had a love/hate relationship with the film. Sure, his crucifixion was just as bloody, if not more. But I feel Mel Gibson didn't take any chances to humanize Jesus. Not for once am I able to step into his shoes. I'll never know what I feels like to be humiliated and beaten like that, but I do struggle with temptation, as all mankind does. That is why I prefer the Scorsese film. When Jesus finally says, "it is finished," I felt he really overcame something as I'm sure his emotional turmoil was much greater than the physical. Think about it: a man of close to 30 never falling into sin, that's a he'll of a struggle.

I did enjoy The Last Temptation of Christ; a little slow, but I loved its photography, music, and ideas. Only in some recent reflections can I understand what it is that folks take issue with concerning the film's portrayal of Jesus, but I still don't see it as problematic as some folks claim.

I can understand the lack of humanity in The Passion; 90% or so of it is spent on Jesus' suffering more than anything. I do think the occasional flashbacks helped though, since they contrasted so heavily with the rest of the movie, and you can see the occasional glimpse of a more authentic and compelling Christ when he isn't soaked in blood.

Good points about temptation though; it's a struggle we all have to deal with, and Jesus is the ultimate example of how to deal with it, imo.

Originally Posted by Foggy

You're going to have to give you thoughts on the ending when you get around to it:mindblown:

Working on it little by little. The game definitely has some unexpected twists and turns, so this should be interesting...

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Where might you be shipped to?

In another twenty days or so, I'll be moving to Utah, to a site close to Salt Lake City. Same job as here (logistics, mail, cargo and shipping, asset tracking, and more), but it's a new place, and I'm told that there'll be a ton of work to do.

This will be the first time I've been to the States in ten years, and it'll be my first time living more than a mile away from my parents, so it's all rather exciting.

Also as good of a time as any to consider HT upgrades when I get a place.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

This will be the first time I've been to the States in ten years, and it'll be my first time living more than a mile away from my parents, so it's all rather exciting.

Also as good of a time as any to consider HT upgrades when I get a place.

From...



To...