The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by Realist01

No way. I see Amy Adams being more like Meryl Streep.

Ellen Page is in that nerd mode for every character she plays. I don't see a very long future with her IMO.

Page has shown the edge in Hard Candy and the likeable humor/nerd mode in Juno. She was good but seemed overmatched in Inception (granted she didn't have TOO much to do), among the likes of DiCaprio and Cotillard. I think she has the range to play edgy and also likeable, but to be on Streep's level you have to have consistency, an ability with languages and ethnicities, and the ability to act strongly and subtlely. Again, I only think Winslet has gotten to that level.

I like Page much more than Adams though.

[Al_The_Strange]

“Licence to Kill”

This Bond film might be one of the most significant in many ways. This is the one where Bond’s good buddy Felix Leiter gets to sleep with da fishies (well, his legs get bitten off by a shark ), and 007 forfeits his licence to kill in order to pursue a personal quest for vengeance! He takes on a powerful drug lord in the process, surrounded by henchmen, with a diabolical plot to take over the world! Well, as much of the world as a criminal can.

This original story is a solid platform for showcasing a good mount of solid action scenes. Yes, there are good fights, plenty of chases, lots of big explosions, loud shootouts, and everything! The ending sequences with the trucks is cooler than s**t! In between, the film maintains a surprising amount of edginess and brutality; aside from Felix’s misfortune, Sanchez whips a girl into submission, a henchman is shredded to death in a grinder, another henchman’s head explodes in a compression chamber, and one dude gets stabbed by a forklift! This is easily the bloodiest Bond movie yet, and combined with the drug-lord-themed story and Timothy Dalton’s intense acting, it comes off a little less like Bond and more like “Scarface”-lite. This is the one and only PG-13 movie in the original series…and it’s wicked!

As mentioned above, the story is unique, original, and quite brilliant all around. Bond’s character receives decent treatment (there’s even a nice reference to

[Show spoiler]his dead wife

, which effectively parallels this story). All the other characters are decent and collectively form a coherent plot structure. And it’s played pretty straight with very few absurd scenes or slappy comedy.

The film has good photography. Acting is great; Timothy Dalton is the man! Robert Davi is awesome as the main villain, Carey Lowell and Talisa Soto are decent as the main female leads, Anthony Zerbe is cool as Krest, and I was quite surprised and pleased to see a very young Benicio Del Toro playing a henchman (he was wicked! ). Wayne Newton was amusing. Production value is decent. Music is alright; the main theme song gets old after hearing it as many times as I have, but Michael Kamen’s score is cool (especially with a little Spanish guitar in the mix).

4/5 (entertainment: 4/5, story: 4.5/5, film: 4/5)

Recommendation: Yep!

The Blu-Ray looks darn near perfect, and sounds pretty good!

PQ: 4.5/5, AQ: 4/5

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Steve46

It's interesting watching some of the reactions when you see it for a second time with full knowledge of the reveal. Lots of little details make sense. It was well done.

I liked going through Shutter Islands the second time around much more.

[Al_The_Strange]

“The Living Daylights.”

From the start, this fine Bond adventure starts off fast and hardly lets up. We got decent shootouts, chases, fights, and everything! Bond’ car has some of the best gadgets ever in this one. Above all, I feel the film is loaded with memorable scenes, and there’s never a minute of drag. It remains one of the Bond movies that I find most entertaining.

The story’s a little screwy and confusing at first glance; I think because it builds on something that was originally a short story, and the writers tacked on a huge diabolical plot where the villains plan to take over the world! Well, no, but it’s something involving diamonds smuggling, arms dealing, the old “Smert Spionem” spy-killing plot, defections and anti-defections, a faked assassination, an uprising, and God knows what else. It’s all piled on thickly, one element on top of the other, and the connection between all of these can be a little flimsy (perhaps leaving it open to some plot holes). But, if you follow it, you won’t get lost, and the film is hardly dull. It’s big in scope and entails a whole lotta great stuff. It’s best just to sit back and enjoy!

The film is well-filmed with lots of quality shots and solid editing. Acting is great; Timothy Dalton is the man! I love Maryam d’Abo in this movie. Jeroen Krabbe is awesome as Koskov, John Rhys-Davies is awesome as Pushkin, Andreas Wisniewski makes a decent henchman, and Joe Don Baker is not bad as Whitaker (it’s interesting that he’s a villain here, but a good guy in two of the Brosnan movies). Production value is very high, featuring a lot of interesting locales, and quality sets, props, and costumes. Music is smashing.

4.5/5 (entertainment: 5/5, story: 4/5, film: 4/5)

Recommendation: Sure, why not?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Realist01

No way. I see Amy Adams being more like Meryl Streep.

Ellen Page is in that nerd mode for every character she plays. I don't see a very long future with her IMO.

Lets bet a Blu-ray.

[Al_The_Strange]

“On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.”

Now here’s an interesting Bond film. Coming after the first bunch of Sean Connery flicks, “OHMSS” is the one and only film featuring George Lazenby as Bond (for better or for worse). The movie pits him against more megalomaniac bad guys plotting to take over the world! Along the way…more fights, more pursuits, and more skiing.

It seems to me that the film tries its best to build up some kind of edge over all its predecessors. For one thing, the film is pretty crazily-edited, with some rather shakey camera moves and rapid editing. For a 60s movie, it’s extremely unusual (if not totally off-putting at first glance). Combined with some more extreme fight moves and some bigger-scale action setpieces (shootout at a mountaintop lair, car chase through a town, skiing chase through the mountains, and one avalanche scene (frankly though, I prefer the scene in “xXx” better )), the film definitely tries to throw the action in your face! The only Bond movie more hectic and intense than this is “Quantum of Solace.”

Story-wise, I never really found it that appealing. At the very least, it’s unique because

[Show spoiler]Bond takes a wife in this film, who is then gunned down at the end

. It’s quite the turning point for the character and the direction of the stories. Frankly though, I never found it that convincing (certainly not as convincing as what we see in “Casino Royale”). As for the rest of the plot; eh, it never really grabbed me that much. A plot to brainwash chicks with psychedelic colors and voices so they can go forth and unleash bioweapons? Uh huh…

I always found it iffy as a film as well. As mentioned above, some of the fight scenes have jittery editing and photography; it’s kinda cool, but also a little off-putting at first glance. Otherwise, I never found the photography that great; it’s especially annoying how most of the film looks excessively dark (including scenes that were shot in daytime but darkened to look like night…that is NOT convincing! ). Acting is…what it is. George Lazenby has the mannerisms and look, but I never found him that convincing. I never liked his voice, his looks, his acting…something about it never resonated well with me, and I probably like him the least of all Bond actors (in the official franchise anyway). I also dislike Telly Savalas as Blofeld; give me Donald Pleasense or Charles Gray any day! The only real standout is Diana Rigg, who’s hot and quite badass as Contessa. Production value is quite high, with plenty of quality sets, props, costumes, and locales. But, some of the special effects are horrendously fake, especially with all the skiing chases. Music is unique; I don’t care for Louis Armstrong’s theme song, but John Barry’s score is surprisingly downbeat and intense, bearing little semblance to any other Bond score.

Yep, there’s a lot of unique stuff here, but I still don’t care for most of it.

3.5/5 (entertainment: 3.5/5, story: 3.5/5, film: 3/5)

Recommendation: As a rental. Serious Bond fans need to see it at least once for the ending though.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

So.... I just finished Enter the Void...



Thoughts and review in a while after I gather myself!

Hope it's a positive one

[Riff Magnum]

Originally Posted by Q?

Assuming you're not rolling with my negative review and being sarcastic as well, to my... well.. this is getting convoluted. It didn't take me by a storm, I was eased into it and eventually very affected by it.

Not being sarcastic at all. I've been trumpeting the movie to everyone i know all year. It might be my favorite movie of the year. Black Swan affected me more at the time i was watching it, but Winters Bone stayed with me longer. I also thought, for such a low budget/indie film, that the technical aspects were quite good, as was the score, but i do have a few minor gripes about the way it was adapted from the book. Woodrell is one of my favorite writers and i wanna see him get the credit he deserves. Have you read the book?

[Hep]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Lets bet a Blu-ray.

Put me down for a tier one BD in favour of Page .

[Realist01]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Page has shown the edge in Hard Candy and the likeable humor/nerd mode in Juno. She was good but seemed overmatched in Inception (granted she didn't have TOO much to do), among the likes of DiCaprio and Cotillard. I think she has the range to play edgy and also likeable, but to be on Streep's level you have to have consistency, an ability with languages and ethnicities, and the ability to act strongly and subtlely. Again, I only think Winslet has gotten to that level.

I like Page much more than Adams though.

I saw that you have Deer Hunter on your wish list, why don't you just buy the region free studio canal release?

[PhiLeingFunkie]

Gamorrah
Rating: 3/5


Gomorrah depicts the octopus-like hold the Camorra have in Italy, though it’s a film about organized crime, it might just inspire you to put away your Tony Montana bobble head and take down your Don Corleone poster as it’s a searing and dreadful look into the effect of the mafia on life. Splintered into five separate stories, it’s a unique take on the genre. Director Matteo Garrone holds nothing back and the result is a gritty film with visceral violence and nefarious characters. Although Gomorrah ultimately gets the job done, the five plots serve to dampen the effectiveness of the overall product. Upon first viewing, viewers are likely to be disoriented and lost-perhaps this is the effect Garrone was going for- but it ends up being unsatisfactory, like scrambled eggs with too much salt in it.

Gomorrah is a film that you really have to see a second time, being so used to American Cinema; I kept rearranging each scene to see where it fit in with the overall picture only to find out all the pieces were to a different puzzle. The stories all reference organized crime in one way or another, but they don’t converge at any point, something I originally expected. It actually served to drive the point of the film home, but did leave me scratching my head when the credits rolled. The disparate plots kept the movie swift and interesting, but it does falter since none of the plots end up fully fleshed out. It’s like the first few episodes of Lost, where characters and situations happen out of nowhere, and we know absolutely nothing- only with Lost, we are assured flashbacks and exposition in future episodes.

I’ll admit it, I didn’t love the film, although its impact was like that of a bullet that Toto takes during his initiation. The documentary style- just a personal camera following and observing the action- and the acting are all superb. However, the lack of a true narrative story, and the rushed fragmented approach only diminished my enjoyment of it as a film. It’s a truly fascinating look into crime infested Italy, but- as the aspiring gangster duo in the film find out- it ain’t no Tony Montana.

[iam1bearcat]

Enter the Void

161 minutes

Year: 2010
Director: Gaspar Noe
Starring: Nathaniel Brown, Paz de la Huerta, and Olly Alexander

This may be the most difficult review I’ll ever write

Did I love Enter the Void? …No.

Did I enjoy it and am I glad I bought it? Hell yes!

Now, maybe in time with a few more viewings and letting it sink in I will like it more. Really, the only issue I have is that I’m not entirely sure what I just watched or what the message was, so it’s hard to say “I love this!” then have people ask, “what is it about or what do you think it means?” and then have me answer with a blank stare and an “I have no idea” that seems a bit hypocritical, so I will simply state that I thoroughly enjoyed the ride I was taken on, and I look forward future viewings

Now, I believe the film will divide viewers into either a love it or hate it group. If I had to choose, I would say “love it” light years ahead of “hate it”. My girlfriend however was not so much open to the film. As she so ‘kindly’ put it, “this is the worst 22 dollars you have ever spent” and numerous times throughout the film she would turn and glare at me in disgust, boredom and anger.

What is the film about? I won’t spoil anything so I’ll sum up the back cover: a brother and sister living in Tokyo. The brother (Oscar) is a drug dealer, and his sister (Linda) is a stripper. And both hate being in Tokyo and do what they do (their jobs) to “escape” being where they are. And after a tragedy befalls one of them, the film takes us on a journey of death, rebirth, and existential dilemmas. All in a massive 161 minutes…

1. The pacing / length
The film is incredibly long. At a tad over 2 and ½ hours the film definitely felt that length, and even longer to me. Sometimes not for the best. Some long films feel short and the length doesn’t detract you. But here, Enter the Void takes its damn time. This is the director’s cut, so it’s obvious anything he wanted was here because there were dozens of scenes I thought “this probably could be shorter, but I’m enjoying the experience” but this ain’t my film, this is his, so yeah. Now, because of this, some may hate the film. The first 30 minutes are a trippy, wild experience that some will be turned off by. Some hate films that deal with drug use. If so, turn away now, because you will be bored and rolling your eyes for quite a long time to come.

With that said, I enjoy films that take their time and don’t rush to plot points. This isn’t a film about an end goal (very ironic how much that statement is once you see the film) this is about the journey, and I enjoyed not being rushed and the film moving slowly.

also, i noted that the story doesn't really start until the 30 minute mark, at least. that opening act is quite odd and i was a bit put off by the lack of what i was supposed to connect to or follow.

2. The directing

Holy hullabalu! Can’t say I’ve seen directing like this before. When we follow Oscar it’s 90% first person, which may irritate some. Hell, we even get blinking! How cool is that!

The majority of the film is shown from a top down type directing style where we see the top of people’s heads instead of their faces and reactions, with a mix of wild snazzy colors and vivid effects and blurred imagery. It reminded me a lot of two very different things:

* Rez HD (Xbox 360 game) - for colors and music (look up a quick youtube video to see what i mean)
* Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - for structure and blurring of scenes and images

And watching this on blu is a real delight because of the colors and brightness, but also a good dose of grain to make the film feel real and not look or come off as Speed Racer.

3. What does it all mean?

Of course, only read the following if you’ve seen the film!

[Show spoiler]I loved the relationship dynamic between Oscar and Linda. And I loved seeing how close they were to each other in their lives and what they went through and survived. However, of course, there is an oddity here in that this relationship is TOO CLOSE for comfort and just wrong on a lot of levels. Did something make them this way? Or is this just how they came to be? No idea, but way too close of a relationship for a brother and sister. Creepy levels a constant 8, many times a 10.

Now, after Oscar dies, is he what is floating around in all the scenes? I assume so since that’s when the directing changes (when he dies). But, as the film ends, is she giving birth to him reincarnated? - remember the conversation with Victor as they walked to “The Void” about repeating life over and over again, and when the camera zooms in to her being impregnated. Very weird and creepy.

There are two very “what the F…” scenes in the film. One of which involves something that many may hate and turn the film off in disgust over, but nothing is actually SHOWN, but obviously there is no denying what is happening. And the other, at the end of the film, made me laugh out loud in exasperated delusion at the ridiculousness of such a scene needing to be included. But to each their own

So, with that said, Enter the Void is recommended, but I would suggest knowing what you’re getting into and reading up a bit on the film before renting it. It is incredibly well made, and Huerta’s performance is very good (Brown is average at best and luckily his performance doesn’t call for a lot of screen time / dialogue so he doesn’t bring down any scenes he’s in) and the directing and visuals are a real treat. But the pace and story will confuse, bore and cause some to give up and not see what many others will see.

I hope I haven’t been too confusing or cryptic with this review

PQ: 4.5/5
AQ: 5/5

First viewing score: 3.5/5

[iam1bearcat]

The Double Life of Veronique

year: 1991
director: Krzysztof Kieslowski
starring: Irene Jacob and Philippe Volter

another blind buy. another that left me scratching my head

i went in to The Double Life thinking that for this viewing i was just gonna sit back and watch the film. not try and dissect anything or put any pieces together. and that's what i accomplished for most of the film (although my mind did try from time to time to dissect it).

and even if i wanted to dissect and figure the film out, i wouldn't have been able to

so, covering just the film...

1. loved the color choices. very warm and cozy feeling
2. also the directing adds to the warm, cozy feel of the film. the film feels very personal while at the same time covering a vast time line and odd amount of space
3. Irene Jacob. a terrific performance. her portrayal here and character really add a depth to the film that other actresses may not have brought.

i wasn't however completely blown away by the film. for most of the puzzling moments the film has, it kind of left me cold.

i enjoyed the third act best, once Veronique receives the

[Show spoiler]shoelace

that's when the film really brings on the oddness and intrigue (at least for me).

i am looking forward to going back and watching it again and trying to figure out what the hell is going on, but for the time being, on the first viewing, The Double Life gets a

3.5/5

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

The Double Life of Veronique

year: 1991
director: Krzysztof Kieslowski
starring: Irene Jacob and Philippe Volter

another blind buy. another that left me scratching my head

i went in to The Double Life thinking that for this viewing i was just gonna sit back and watch the film. not try and dissect anything or put any pieces together. and that's what i accomplished for most of the film (although my mind did try from time to time to dissect it).

and even if i wanted to dissect and figure the film out, i wouldn't have been able to

so, covering just the film...

1. loved the color choices. very warm and cozy feeling
2. also the directing adds to the warm, cozy feel of the film. the film feels very personal while at the same time covering a vast time line and odd amount of space
3. Irene Jacob. a terrific performance. her portrayal here and character really add a depth to the film that other actresses may not have brought.

i wasn't however completely blown away by the film. for most of the puzzling moments the film has, it kind of left me cold.

i enjoyed the third act best, once Veronique receives the

[Show spoiler]shoelace

that's when the film really brings on the oddness and intrigue (at least for me).

i am looking forward to going back and watching it again and trying to figure out what the hell is going on, but for the time being, on the first viewing, The Double Life gets a

3.5/5

The first time I watched it, I liked it quite a bit. I gave it 4.5/5, knowing that it deserved such a high score. The second viewing made me see all that I had missed. The third viewing was like visiting a world I knew and loved and my score went to 5/5.

The reviewer from this site says that it changed his life. Here's his review:

[Show spoiler]
I saw Krzysztof Kieslowski's The Double Life of Veronique at a time when a lot in my life did not make sense. I was living on the other side of the Iron Curtain and had many questions that no one was willing to answer. I was incredibly frustrated and like Weronika, one of the two young women whose stories Kieslowski's film tells, the only thing that kept me sane was music.

My initial reactions to the film were mixed. I did not understand it, which is why I kept reading different articles from foreign critics that apparently explained everything that happens in it in detail. The more I read, however, the more things did not make sense to me. Eventually, I gave up on the film.

Everything came together much later on. I believe it was right around the same time when I saw the last installment in Kieslowski's Trois Couleurs. It was one of those strange moments when you suddenly realize that the answer to a mystery that you have been trying to solve for years had been right in front of you, yet you missed it, time after time. I suddenly saw my answer, the one that I should have had the very same night when I left the old Soviet-style movie theater where The Double Life of Veronique was screened, but did not because I was expecting to see the same film other people had - most of them living in a world that I knew very little about.

The Double Life of Veronique tells the stories of two young women, Weronika and Veronique, both played by French actress Irene Jacob. One lives in Poland, the other in France. Both are passionate about music, love and life. Both have weak hearts. They never meet in the film, though Weronika sees Veronique from afar during a street protest in Poland. At times, they feel each other's presence, but don't know how to react to the feeling.

Weronika is a terrific singer who has never been taught how to sing. She wins an important recital audition and in a short period of time her life completely changes. She begins dreaming beautiful dreams and falls in love. Then on the night of the recital, she collapses on the stage and dies.

Veronique is also a singer, but throughout the film we never see her singing. Her life is a lot more satisfying than that of Weronika. She also dreams and loves - but her world is brighter and warmer than that of Weronika. At the end of the film, Veronique's life also completely changes, but she lives.

Halfway through The Double Life of Veronique, there is an intriguing game of sorts where a skillful puppeteer captures Veronique's imagination, and consequently challenges her to find him. There are a number of clues that she gets in the mail about his location, but as is everything else in the film, they are simply clues to something a lot bigger.

But what?

Unlike what many people in the West believe, The Double Life of Veronique is not about a mystery, and it is not about the two women whose lives it follows closely. Rather, it is about the worlds they belong to - one full of hope and life, the other gloomy and cold. Kieslowski lived on both sides of the Iron Curtain and saw what many could not, or did not want to. This is why in his film Weronika dies and Veronique lives.

In 1991, The Double Life of Veronique won the Best Actress award (Irene Jacob), the FIPRESCI Prize, and the Prize of the Ecumenical Jury at the Cannes Film Festival. In 1992, the film won the Critics Award for Best Foreign Language Film granted by the French Syndicate of Cinema Critics.

I hope that it grows on you. You'll have no trouble selling the Criterion if you decide that's not happening.

Edit to add:

Look how Ebert's reviews change. The first shows his initial reaction and the second is the entry in his great movies section 17 years later.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

“On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.”

Now here’s an interesting Bond film. Coming after the first bunch of Sean Connery flicks, “OHMSS” is the one and only film featuring George Lazenby as Bond (for better or for worse). The movie pits him against more megalomaniac bad guys plotting to take over the world! Along the way…more fights, more pursuits, and more skiing.

It seems to me that the film tries its best to build up some kind of edge over all its predecessors. For one thing, the film is pretty crazily-edited, with some rather shakey camera moves and rapid editing. For a 60s movie, it’s extremely unusual (if not totally off-putting at first glance). Combined with some more extreme fight moves and some bigger-scale action setpieces (shootout at a mountaintop lair, car chase through a town, skiing chase through the mountains, and one avalanche scene (frankly though, I prefer the scene in “xXx” better )), the film definitely tries to throw the action in your face! The only Bond movie more hectic and intense than this is “Quantum of Solace.”

Story-wise, I never really found it that appealing. At the very least, it’s unique because

[Show spoiler]Bond takes a wife in this film, who is then gunned down at the end

. It’s quite the turning point for the character and the direction of the stories. Frankly though, I never found it that convincing (certainly not as convincing as what we see in “Casino Royale”). As for the rest of the plot; eh, it never really grabbed me that much. A plot to brainwash chicks with psychedelic colors and voices so they can go forth and unleash bioweapons? Uh huh…

I always found it iffy as a film as well. As mentioned above, some of the fight scenes have jittery editing and photography; it’s kinda cool, but also a little off-putting at first glance. Otherwise, I never found the photography that great; it’s especially annoying how most of the film looks excessively dark (including scenes that were shot in daytime but darkened to look like night…that is NOT convincing! ). Acting is…what it is. George Lazenby has the mannerisms and look, but I never found him that convincing. I never liked his voice, his looks, his acting…something about it never resonated well with me, and I probably like him the least of all Bond actors (in the official franchise anyway). I also dislike Telly Savalas as Blofeld; give me Donald Pleasense or Charles Gray any day! The only real standout is Diana Rigg, who’s hot and quite badass as Contessa. Production value is quite high, with plenty of quality sets, props, costumes, and locales. But, some of the special effects are horrendously fake, especially with all the skiing chases. Music is unique; I don’t care for Louis Armstrong’s theme song, but John Barry’s score is surprisingly downbeat and intense, bearing little semblance to any other Bond score.

Yep, there’s a lot of unique stuff here, but I still don’t care for most of it.

3.5/5 (entertainment: 3.5/5, story: 3.5/5, film: 3/5)

Recommendation: As a rental. Serious Bond fans need to see it at least once for the ending though.

Holy crap. Did you have a Bond marathon or what?

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Enter the Void

[Show spoiler]161 minutes

Year: 2010
Director: Gaspar Noe
Starring: Nathaniel Brown, Paz de la Huerta, and Olly Alexander

This may be the most difficult review I’ll ever write

Did I love Enter the Void? …No.

Did I enjoy it and am I glad I bought it? Hell yes!

Now, maybe in time with a few more viewings and letting it sink in I will like it more. Really, the only issue I have is that I’m not entirely sure what I just watched or what the message was, so it’s hard to say “I love this!” then have people ask, “what is it about or what do you think it means?” and then have me answer with a blank stare and an “I have no idea” that seems a bit hypocritical, so I will simply state that I thoroughly enjoyed the ride I was taken on, and I look forward future viewings

Now, I believe the film will divide viewers into either a love it or hate it group. If I had to choose, I would say “love it” light years ahead of “hate it”. My girlfriend however was not so much open to the film. As she so ‘kindly’ put it, “this is the worst 22 dollars you have ever spent” and numerous times throughout the film she would turn and glare at me in disgust, boredom and anger.

What is the film about? I won’t spoil anything so I’ll sum up the back cover: a brother and sister living in Tokyo. The brother (Oscar) is a drug dealer, and his sister (Linda) is a stripper. And both hate being in Tokyo and do what they do (their jobs) to “escape” being where they are. And after a tragedy befalls one of them, the film takes us on a journey of death, rebirth, and existential dilemmas. All in a massive 161 minutes…

1. The pacing / length
The film is incredibly long. At a tad over 2 and ½ hours the film definitely felt that length, and even longer to me. Sometimes not for the best. Some long films feel short and the length doesn’t detract you. But here, Enter the Void takes its damn time. This is the director’s cut, so it’s obvious anything he wanted was here because there were dozens of scenes I thought “this probably could be shorter, but I’m enjoying the experience” but this ain’t my film, this is his, so yeah. Now, because of this, some may hate the film. The first 30 minutes are a trippy, wild experience that some will be turned off by. Some hate films that deal with drug use. If so, turn away now, because you will be bored and rolling your eyes for quite a long time to come.

With that said, I enjoy films that take their time and don’t rush to plot points. This isn’t a film about an end goal (very ironic how much that statement is once you see the film) this is about the journey, and I enjoyed not being rushed and the film moving slowly.

also, i noted that the story doesn't really start until the 30 minute mark, at least. that opening act is quite odd and i was a bit put off by the lack of what i was supposed to connect to or follow.

2. The directing

Holy hullabalu! Can’t say I’ve seen directing like this before. When we follow Oscar it’s 90% first person, which may irritate some. Hell, we even get blinking! How cool is that!

The majority of the film is shown from a top down type directing style where we see the top of people’s heads instead of their faces and reactions, with a mix of wild snazzy colors and vivid effects and blurred imagery. It reminded me a lot of two very different things:

* Rez HD (Xbox 360 game) - for colors and music (look up a quick youtube video to see what i mean)
* Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - for structure and blurring of scenes and images

And watching this on blu is a real delight because of the colors and brightness, but also a good dose of grain to make the film feel real and not look or come off as Speed Racer.

3. What does it all mean?

Of course, only read the following if you’ve seen the film!

[Show spoiler]I loved the relationship dynamic between Oscar and Linda. And I loved seeing how close they were to each other in their lives and what they went through and survived. However, of course, there is an oddity here in that this relationship is TOO CLOSE for comfort and just wrong on a lot of levels. Did something make them this way? Or is this just how they came to be? No idea, but way too close of a relationship for a brother and sister. Creepy levels a constant 8, many times a 10.

Now, after Oscar dies, is he what is floating around in all the scenes? I assume so since that’s when the directing changes (when he dies). But, as the film ends, is she giving birth to him reincarnated? - remember the conversation with Victor as they walked to “The Void” about repeating life over and over again, and when the camera zooms in to her being impregnated. Very weird and creepy.

There are two very “what the F…” scenes in the film. One of which involves something that many may hate and turn the film off in disgust over, but nothing is actually SHOWN, but obviously there is no denying what is happening. And the other, at the end of the film, made me laugh out loud in exasperated delusion at the ridiculousness of such a scene needing to be included. But to each their own

So, with that said, Enter the Void is recommended, but I would suggest knowing what you’re getting into and reading up a bit on the film before renting it. It is incredibly well made, and Huerta’s performance is very good (Brown is average at best and luckily his performance doesn’t call for a lot of screen time / dialogue so he doesn’t bring down any scenes he’s in) and the directing and visuals are a real treat. But the pace and story will confuse, bore and cause some to give up and not see what many others will see.

I hope I haven’t been too confusing or cryptic with this review

PQ: 4.5/5
AQ: 5/5

First viewing score: 3.5/5

I'd see it just for the fact that the guy did Irreversible...definitely a talented director.

[Steve46]

I found some other essays and musings on The Double Life of Veronique. If you haven't seen the film, I strongly suggest ignoring these thoughts until you have as it would ruin the experience.

The fact that I have spent at least three hours this morning reading thoughts on the film says a lot.


What We Talk About When We Talk About Fate:
A quick thought on a darker reading of The Double Life of Veronique by Steven Carlson

The Double Life of Veronique – #359
from Jamie S. Rich’s Criterion Confessions

The Double Life of Veronique
Review by Independent Film Review critic Todd Conrad.

The Double Life of Veronique: Kieslowski and Pure Emotion
Kevin Pearson in Alternate Takes

The Double Life of Véronique
Jenny Dediny in Not Coming to Theater Near You

The Double Life of Veronique: Through the Looking Glass
By Jonathan Romney

Soul Sisters
post by Glenn A. Buttkus in blog Tacoma Film Club Annexe

Roger Ebert 1991 review

Roger Ebert 2009 Great Movies review

Blu-ray.com review

Kieslowski wrote, “I think that if you go to the cinema you want to give in to your emotions. But I am not saying that everybody has to like VERONIQUE. On the contrary I think it is a film for a very limited group of people. I don’t mean an age group, or a social group—but a group of people who are sensitive to the sort of emotions shown in the film. And such people can be found among the intelligentsia, among workers, among the unemployed, among students, and among old age pensioners. I do not think it is a film for the elite, by any means—unless we call sensitive people elite.”

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Holy crap. Did you have a Bond marathon or what?

Yep! I started it off after finishing the "007: Blood Stone" video game, and I've seen all but six movies now.

[CZAR]

Tales from the Crypt Presents: Demon Knight - I miss the Tales From the Crypt series and wished there couldve been more movies made. This was a fun film with a very entertaining performance from Billy Zane. He was perfect for the villain in this film and loved his sarcasm. Cordelia looked very sexy and of course Jada was very good as she usually is. Definite recommendation to all horror fans. Very fun film.

Film Rating - 4 stars (out of 5)



The Social Network - Finally got around to see what all the hype was about and if it was true. Well the film is definitely over hyped but so are most "best picture" nominations. I still thought it was a solid film but nuthin extraordinary and it definitely wasnt best picture material in my book. Jesse Eisenberg did deserve his nomination as he was damn good. Even thought Timberlake and Garfield were very good also. So the acting was top notch or atleast very good. The film at tomes dragged and got a bit sleepy but what else would u expect in a film about a lawsuit over a website. I did manage to get through the whole film and like I said I thought it was a solid film but nuthin I would watch again and to me the film has no replay value at all. All in all I would say atleast rent it as it should be seen by most.

Film Rating - 3 1/2 stars (out of 5)

Got Em!!

[iam1bearcat]

Adventureland

year: 2009
director: greg mottola
starring: jesse eisenberg, kristen stewart, and bill hader

come one, come all to what happens when you market a film for the completely wrong market!

this may sound harsh, but whomever marketed this film should be terminated. at least not in charge or allowed to market a film by themselves for about 15 years so they can learn how to actually do such a thing because whoever advertised and marketed Adventureland completely dropped the ball on this one.

let's point out some mistakes on the cover!

1. it says "from the director Superbad"

2. the caption on the bottom says "truly hilarious" by Ann Hornaday

3. the cover art itself is goofy and has Ryan Reynolds, Jesse Eisenberg and Bill Hader with a killer mustache on it, emphasizing big laughs and a raunchy comedy.



just because Mottola directed Superbad doesn't mean you should advertise that here. that's like saying if Nolan directs a slow burning romantic comedy the cover should say "from the director of THE DARK KNIGHT & INCEPTION!". yes, that may sell some copies, but it will piss people off because they will be expecting that.

of course, Adventureland wasn't a big release so they probably did put Mottola / Superbad line on the cover to catch attention and sell units, but still...

but that's not at all what Adventureland is about. and while i, and many others love the film for what it is - with it's terrific score by many great musical acts, 80's setting, moody atmosphere, slow burning story and melancholy characters - i can only imagine how many walked away pissed, confused and bored because this didn't turn out to be "Superbad 2.0" which is a real shame because this is a hell of a film!

almost impossible for me to explain how much i connected with Adventureland on my first viewing months ago, and now again tonight but i just did. i was born in 88 so i wasn't alive during this time. i never worked at an amusement park. and i never had a relationship with a girl that looked and acted like Kirsten Stewart (who really isn't a good actress, but i really like her character and performance here, which is odd, because this is essentially what all her performances are like). yet, i looooooove this film.

the dialogue is wonderful and real, the characters are flawed, honest and feel like genuine people, and the relationship between Eisenberg and Stewart's characters is great and has a real chemistry of a girl that seems to know what's going on and a guy who's new to and awkward with relationships.

there is humor, but most of it is not in the typical stupid "dirty" humor. of course, there is that one character that does all the cliched "dumb teenager" gag humor but it's actually pretty funny since it comes in waves and is not relentlessly annoying

first viewing i gave it a 4.5/5 although i had no real flaws with the film. same goes for this viewing, but i'm only gonna move it up a bit to 4.75/5 for the time being. although, in all likelihood this will become a 5/5 as it is already in my personal top 50. love it

highly recommended!

4.75/5