The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Al_The_Strange]

It's sad, but scams like this work because people really don't stop to think that a given phone call or e-mail is fake. I also wonder of people are generally becoming more and more nieve. I'm pretty paranoid by nature, thanks to my upbringing, my work, and stories of this nature, but there are still times when I see something in my e-mail or hear a phone message and wonder, wait, is this for real, or what? It's freaky to think about what could have happened if I really did give that one mystery caller my computer info. But the general rule I stick to, and I think more people MUST be aware of, is that companies and authorities don't call you on the phone, you have to go to them, or else they see you in person with credentials. Everything else is a lie!

And, Squiddy's scenario is great. I'd like to negotiate the rights to write the novelization of that for ya.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

Good news that these people populate the US and not the UK then

Not completely true. US filmmakers are just greedier than UK fimmakers and more willing to exploit our dummies for a dollar than you guys are.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

It's sad, but scams like this work because people really don't stop to think that a given phone call or e-mail is fake. I also wonder of people are generally becoming more and more nieve. I'm pretty paranoid by nature, thanks to my upbringing, my work, and stories of this nature, but there are still times when I see something in my e-mail or hear a phone message and wonder, wait, is this for real, or what? It's freaky to think about what could have happened if I really did give that one mystery caller my computer info. But the general rule I stick to, and I think more people MUST be aware of, is that companies and authorities don't call you on the phone, you have to go to them, or else they see you in person with credentials. Everything else is a lie!

And, Squiddy's scenario is great. I'd like to negotiate the rights to write the novelization of that for ya.

Have at it my friend, no royalties needed, since I am already a millionaire.

But send me a copy please.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Not completely true. US filmmakers are just greedier than UK fimmakers and more willing to exploit our dummies for a dollar than you guys are.

I guess that's our stiff upper lip and whatnot coming out

[legendarymatt92]

"You shouldn't have touched anything from that basement."

The Good Points: Excessively gory and gleefully violent. It's just so over-the-top and absurd that it's almost impossible not to like. Some truly terrifying moments, with an eerie, tense sustained atmosphere. Alvarez particular excels in his visual style, with wondrously kinetic cinematography and a downbeat hue to proceedings. The no-humour angle suited it, yet some of the violence -- especially the ending -- was done somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Nice little nods to Raimi's original.

The Bad Points: Almost every dialogue scene, most of which had terrible expositional problems and were executed badly. Some small plot inconsistencies, but nothing major. The ending felt a little rushed and the pay-off wasn't as satisfying as it could have been, given the circumstances.


Overall, Evil Dead is a suspenseful, frightening and extremely gory addition to the annals of horror cinema, but some of its excessive weaker elements do work to somewhat hinder the greater whole -- although not enough to overshadow the bombastically entertaining gore-fest that Alvarez has brilliantly crafted, fortunately.


7/10

[Steve46]

The five Antoine Doinel films air on TCM tonight, beginning with The 400 Blows in an hour.

[Foggy]

A Field in England



8.5/10

[Abdrewes]

My standard post-viewing procedure consists of jotting down brief observations which I will then keep on my person as I write my review. Regardless of the quality of the film, this has always been one of the more exciting aspects of the writing process. However, after my screening of The Lone Ranger, I was as thoroughly parched as a junior marathon runner after a 5K race. More than anything else, I wanted to nestle myself under layers of cool cotton bed sheets and extricate the memory of the last two and a half arduous hours of the evening.

Director Gore Verbinski's re-imagining of the Lone Ranger opens on a crane shot of a luminescent San Francisco carnival on a 1933 summer's eve (coincidentally the same year the character debuted on radio). A plucky elementary school kid, in full Lone Ranger attire (black mask too) wanders into a Wild West exhibition. Mouth agape and in unabashed awe, he ventures to a display on the right side of the monolithic hall and gazes upon the manakin of Tonto, the Comanche spirit warrior (Johnny Depp under layers of J. Edgar makeup). He then awakens and recounts to the little boy the origin story of the Lone Ranger. The existence of this Brechtian framing story, which is returned to several times, seems to be for no other reason but to remind us we are witnessing something constructed. However, this undercuts any possible tension the story had built up prior to the cross-cut and only adds to the bloated runtime.

Tonto's narration leads us to 1869, during the construction of the first railways to pass through Colby, Texas. John Reid—our soon to be hero played by Armie Hammer (best known for his dual role as the Winklevoss twins in The Social Network)—is promptly deputized by his Texas Ranger brother, Dan, whom is in hot pursuit of the nefarious Butch Cavendish. However in an obligatory Canyon shoot out, Butch and his gang of outlaws (one of the copious nods to other Westerns) assassinate John's older brother. He then has no choice but to align with the stone-faced, taxidermy crow headdress wearing Tonto (Johnny Depp for all intents and purposes channeling the spirit of Captain Jack Sparrow) and a white stallion named Silver. Their vengeful date with the most notorious outlaw of the Wild West awaits.

In a midsection which inadvertently gives Lawrence Kasdan's Wyatt Earp a run for its money in terms of un-involving bloat, we are subject to the most shopworn of gags—the nape of an unconscious John dragged through horse manure, cannibalistic computer generated hares, and a 12 gauge double barreled shotgun harbors in Helene Bonham Carter's prosthetic leg (wherever Depp is, Carter is destined to be also). Further, jokes levied at the reasoning for the Lone Ranger's black domino mask land with a stultifying thud. Instead of coming off as a loving lampoon of the Western genre (à la Blazing Saddles), it often resembles a directionless mass of farcical scenes. Sure, visually, it is pure Verbinski—detailed compositions with striking depth of field, expert use of rack-focus, and showman-like camera movement—but it has none of the wonder or ingratiating lunacy of Rango or the first two Pirates of the Caribbean films. Here, the layers of artifice only deepen the inert quality at the fore. Even a finale that cleverly appropriates imagery from Buster Keaton's The General couldn't neuter the spur aftertaste of the second act.

As Gore Verbinski's follow up to the liveliest animation of the past decade, Rango, The Lone Rander is disappointing. Though also a western littered with dozens of movie references, it nonetheless introduced us to a group of memorable characters while carving a unique identity for itself. Equally disappointing is the involvement if Jerry Bruckheimer, whom has produced some of the most notable American studio system action-thrillers of the last three decades (chief among them Michael Mann's debut, Thief, and the films if the late, great Tony Scott), has continued his slide into live-action Disney oblivion.

Nothing would have delighted me more than to deem The Lone Ranger this generation's Heaven's Gate—an occasionally unwieldy behemoth with an indulgent vibrancy all it's own—but sadly it is not. I will have seen dozens of inferior films by the end of this calendar year, but few that will have squandered its potential so thoroughly as The Lone Ranger. That's the unfortunate skinny, Kemosabe.

[Al_The_Strange]

How ironic. Here's my review of...

The Lone Ranger (2013)

I am not a fan of westerns, not by a long shot. What few I like are a very specific few, but most strike me as being long, dry, and boring. I certainly never gave a flying rip about the Lone Ranger. Sure, I recognize the references that have permeated in modern pop culture over the decades; we all know of the mask, the horse named Silver, the Indian dude, and the William Tell overture. For whatever reason, I never had an interest in the franchise, until now.

As it stands, 2013's The Lone Ranger is easily one of the most exciting and evenly-entertaining westerns I've seen. It has big action, often venturing into realms of big-scale absurdity that's become commonplace in modern blockbusters. It has comedy; the interplay between the Ranger and Tanto is often amusing, and fills up the spaces between the action really well. It's a long feature, but I was engrossed in it the whole time.

I was equally engrossed in the story. It gets a little wonky, given the unique narrative structure; this is one of those stories that's bookended by a character telling a story, with asides, flashbacks, and flashforwards at key moments. A few scenes are made a little sloppy this way, and a few pressing questions remain unanswered (how did Tanto get out of jail?). The film also gets predictable at times, and the standard western elements are dispensed liberally throughout. However, I still felt that this was a tight and well-built plot. I'm especially pleased with the characters; they are colorful and fun, but also show enough depth and emotion to make them memorable and relevant.

This film uses some fantastic photography. Editing is okay, but a few scenes seem to be slapped together lazily. Acting is good: I thoroughly enjoyed the performances of Armie Hammer (who really does embody the look and mannerisms of the title character), Johnny Depp (who channels the same deadpan lunacy that made Jack Sparrow so fun), and everybody else. Writing is pretty decent. This production has great-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is generally good, and toward the end, the William Tell overture is utilized liberally.

A lot of viewers and critics don't seem to like this film, but I really don't see that much wrong with it. I feel it does to westerns what Pirates of the Caribbean did to pirate movies; it's an exciting, refreshing piece of tall-tale escapism. For a western, it's darn good stuff.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: I don't see why not.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Foggy

A Field in England



8.5/10

Got my sig to work again, although it's only appearing on my newest posts

[Abdrewes]

"For a western it's dean good stuff"?

I live and breathe westerns: silent, noir-infused, CinemaScope, spaghetti, revisionist, etc. and this is no western. It tries to subvert western tropes, but I think it misses the mark substantially.

Verbinski likes the surface appeal of them, but ultimately i feel that he really doesn't know how they work. Again, this coming from a huge fan of Rango.

[jvince]

Neon Genesis Evangelion: The End of Evangelion (1997)
dir.Hideaki Anno, Kazuya Tsurumaki

The Good: Exceptional animation; probably one of the most stunning animes I've ever seen. Impeccably framed compositions form some incredibly arresting imagery. Sound mixing and editing is also excellent. Very intriguing. Very surreal. Loaded with allusions of all sorts, ranging from biblical to psychological. Fantastic musical score. English dub isn't bad.

The Bad: Doesn't work too well as a standalone film. Might be too weird and confusing for those expecting your typical mecha anime movie.

The Bottom Line: This movie is f*cking nuts. It's like something from the mind of a madman with many, many issues. I hated it at first (which is most likely because I haven't seen the series yet), but I immediately warmed up to it after thinking about it. The End of Evangelion is oddly captivating and brimming with imagination and depth unlike any other animated film out there. Worth a look.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

"For a western it's dean good stuff"?

I live and breathe westerns: silent, noir-infused, CinemaScope, spaghetti, revisionist, etc. and this is no western. It tries to subvert western tropes, but I think it misses the mark substantially.

You're probably right, but as a non-western-fan, this was more appealing to me personally. I actually removed that phrase in my finalized version of this review, when I saw how poorly the film is being received.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Verbinski likes the surface appeal of them, but ultimately i feel that he really doesn't know how they work. Again, this coming from a huge fan of Rango.

I think I've heard the same arguments for Sergio Leone.

Regardless, when I see Verbinski, I think less "westerns" or "pirates" and more of adventure all-around. I think he's good at adventure films, regardless of what genre they fall into (or, in the case of The Ring, mystery).

So I should say "for adventure, it's darn good stuff."

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by jvince

Neon Genesis Evangelion: The End of Evangelion (1997)
dir.Hideaki Anno, Kazuya Tsurumaki

The Good: Exceptional animation; probably one of the most stunning animes I've ever seen. Impeccably framed compositions form some incredibly arresting imagery. Sound mixing and editing is also excellent. Very intriguing. Very surreal. Loaded with allusions of all sorts, ranging from biblical to psychological. Fantastic musical score. English dub isn't bad.

The Bad: Doesn't work too well as a standalone film. Might be too weird and confusing for those expecting your typical mecha anime movie.

The Bottom Line: This movie is f*cking nuts. It's like something from the mind of a madman with many, many issues. I hated it at first (which is most likely because I haven't seen the series yet), but I immediately warmed up to it after thinking about it. The End of Evangelion is oddly captivating and brimming with imagination and depth unlike any other animated film out there. Worth a look.

Seeing the series first is definitely a requisite for this film. The last two episodes of the original series sucked pretty bad; it's way weirder and more convoluted than this film. The film is a masterpiece by comparison. Otherwise, you're correct on all accounts.

The thing I love best about it is that the imagery is so striking and the events are so big that I really believe this is the most accurate portrayal of what the end of the world could look like, at least from a theological standpoint.

Definitely check out the series though; it totally rocks.

[jvince]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Startin' small, workin' my way up to your league.

Lol, what league? The shit league? I'm like the worst at posting reviews here.

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Seeing the series first is definitely a requisite for this film. The last two episodes of the original series sucked pretty bad; it's way weirder and more convoluted than this film. The film is a masterpiece by comparison. Otherwise, you're correct on all accounts.

The thing I love best about it is that the imagery is so striking and the events are so big that I really believe this is the most accurate portrayal of what the end of the world could look like, at least from a theological standpoint.

Definitely check out the series though; it totally rocks.

Yeah, I'm gonna check the series out and then I'll revisit the film. I think I'll like it much more the second time around.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

You're probably right, but as a non-western-fan, this was more appealing to me personally. I actually removed that phrase in my finalized version of this review, when I saw how poorly the film is being received.



I think I've heard the same arguments for Sergio Leone.

Regardless, when I see Verbinski, I think less "westerns" or "pirates" and more of adventure all-around. I think he's good at adventure films, regardless of what genre they fall into (or, in the case of The Ring, mystery).

So I should say "for adventure, it's darn good stuff."

Good point on Leone.

I was surprised to see that the great critic Matt Zoller Seits is a big fan of the film. Still need to read his review.

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-lone-ranger-2013

I will try to give this another shot on home video.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

TheLoneRanger

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

How ironic. Here's my review of...

The Lone Ranger


4.5/5

Should I see this?.... He he he he....

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by jvince

Lol, what league? The shit league? I'm like the worst at posting reviews here.

The P.P.R.L.

[Show spoiler]Professional Profanity Review League

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I was surprised to see that the great critic Matt Zoller Seits is a big fan of the film. Still need to read his review.

That should tell you something. If you are paying attention.