The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[P@t_Mtl]

Doc Savage: The Man of Bronze

USA 1975
Directed by Michael Anderson
With Ron Ely, Paul Wexler, Pamela Hensley
Format: DVD

It's been a good while since I pulled out the DVD and watched this. It's so hard to explain but this movie seem so less cheesie and corny 35 years ago when I was 8 years old . This 1975 production from George Pal was based on the very first Lester Dent pulp serial from 1933. They change a few things around but mostly it's the same story. Ron Ely was Doc Savage and looking back, he did have the built for it. The movie itself was turn more into a sort of Batman TV series type then the more serious tone of the pulp magazine story. The role Major Thomas J. "Long Tom" Roberts was played by Paul Gleason who is better known as Principal Richard Vernon from The Breakfast Club. Alot of the actors had good careers in the 60's and the 70's but are mostly forgotten now. It's campy, it's cheesie and yet I still like this movie, it's fun mostly as nostalgia, recalling that little boy I once was who watched these movies and found them so cool.

Note this is only available on DVD from the WB Archives on their web site but you can also find it on Amazon.

[iam1bearcat]

The Seventh Seal

97 minutes

Year: 1957 / 1958 (U.S.)
Director: Ingmar Bergman
Starring: Max Von Sydow, Gunnar Bjornstrand, Nils Poppe, Bibi Andersson, Bengt Ekerot

i was very intrigued by The Seventh Seal once i learned a few months ago that the story was essentially, a knight playing a game of chess with Death on a beach after the Crusades.

i was surprised though by how much more is involved in The Seventh Seal a lot more characters, some very great writing (i think the writing is the best strength of the film), some great performances, and some quirky, wild, unexpected humor. i was expecting a very serious slow film, but this film has a lot of funny, well written moments and the 97 minutes fly by.

while i'm sure i didn't understand it completely, The Seventh Seal is pure genius. cannot wait to watch it again and connect the dots in ways that i missed or just didn't get it on this first viewing.

very glad i decided to pick this up during amazon's random Criterion Collection sale. a very welcome addition to my collection

EDIT: film reminded me a bit of LOST -

[Show spoiler]Man in Black and Jacob talking on the beach, which was like Antonius talking to Death on the beach

, Rome -

[Show spoiler]Titus Pullo and Lucius Vorenus' relationship was a bit like Antonius and Jons' relationship here

and hell, even Star Wars! -

[Show spoiler]a certain shot in The Seventh Seal seems like Lucas ripped it right from here for some shots of the Emperor in the SW franchise

thought that was very neat

4/5

[Walts Ghost]

Marvel's Thor:

I had a chance to see an early screening of Thor today, and I have to say, I'm very impressed. Thor is a character that could have been very hard to translate onto screen, and I know some people worry how it they could make it connect to Marvel's Universe of Iron Man and Hulk seemlessly.The short answer: They did it. But there will be more on that later. This movie was a lot of fun, and is nothing like you've seen before. Although the trailer suggests that most of the movie takes place on Earth, but the better portion of it actually takes place in Thor's home of Asgard. A bold move, but something that makes this movie stand apart from all the other comicbook based films, and in my opinion, elevates it. Along with its fantastic cast and great direction, Thor looks to be one of the biggest hits of the summer, and it deserves to be. Marvel once again proves why they are the best at making movies based off of comics: they stick to the source material and make it real. They don't take the comics for granted, and it works wonders in their favor. Other studios could learn from their example.

When Thor (Hemsworth), son of Odin (Hopkins), breaks a treaty with a race known as the Frost Giants, he foolishly begins a war with his world of Asgard. Angered by his son's arrogance, Odin declares Thor unworthy of being the next in line for the throne and banishes him out of Asgard without his powers, exiling him to a realm known as Earth. As Thor is cast out, he is found by a group of scientists, led by Jane Foster (Portman) and taken in by them. As the war at home in Asgard continues to escalate, all is not what it seems and Thor must find a way back, but learn from his mistakes to once again become worthy to once again become the powerful God he was born to be.

The hardest sell for the movie to it's audience is selling a movie that doesn't fully take place on Earth. But the movie would not be nearly as cool if it did. Asgard is a beautifully constructed world that looks like nothing I've ever seen in a movie before. It's part futuristic, with a very Norse and Medieval feel. Asgard is a character in and of itself and not just a setting. What Branagh and his team have created is striking and rich. Everything from the Rainbow Bridge to the Great Hall of Odin's Palace, it's just amazing to look at. It all feels very real, and I hope that audiences can accept it and embrace it, because it really makes this movie stand apart from other movies. But if you're like me, you'll find yourself with your jaw dropped at just how spectacular Asgard is.

Which leads me to Kenneth Branagh, the director of the film. Many of you will recognize his name as the director and actor of many great adaptions of Shakespeare's plays. While others will recognize the name as the man who played Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. No matter what Branagh does, he's always been great at it. And nothing shows that better than Thor. He has a great eye of working with actors and makes these characters feel very real and less like a stiff caricature that they could have become. He really just knows how to get the best out of everyone, and there is even a bit of Shakespearing tone to the film while in Asgard that I felt fit it very well. But one thing that really surprised me was that Branagh could shoot action, and well. The movie has some very cool and epic fight scenes, and Branagh handles them very well. I've never seen him do anything quite like it, and I loved how it turned out. They have a very epic feel to them, especially during the battle with some of the Frost Giants at the beginning of the movie. It's one of the movies highlights, and it is really cool to look at it. If the movie hadn't been so well handled, it could have been a disaster, but Branagh has proven to be exactly what the material called for and Marvel made a great choice choosing him helm the movie.

Of course, the movie would be nothing without its cast. First and foremost, Chris Hemsworth IS Thor. Not only does he look the part, but he just oozes the cocky and arrogant attitude that Thor was known for. He excels at it even. But when Thor starts to feel compassion and human, Hemsworth is just as good there as well. He really owns this role, and they couldn't have picked a better actor for him. Honestly, he gives a performance close to Robert Downey Jr's level in Iron Man. He was that good. Some of the movie hinges on Hemsworth's comedic timing, and he's great at it. He's going to have a long career ahead of him, and I look forward to seeing more with him. But the standout in this movie for me was Tom Hiddleston as Loki, Thor's brother and the God of Mischief. I've never seen Hiddleston before, but he just completely steals every scene he's in as Loki. He is kinda and caring, but there is something underneath it all, and you can tell. He is the master of deceit, and when Loki gets angry and learns a shocking truth, he becomes scary. I was just blown away by Hiddleston, and I found my self just hypnotized by him everytime he was on screen. It was just a very good performance, and I look forward to seeing his character in The Avengers.

The supporting cast is good as well. Natlie Portman is good, but terrribly underused as Jane Foster. She's not given terribly much to work with, but what she is given, she does very well. She's my favorite the three leading Marvel ladies so far, out of Gwynth Paltrow's Pepper Potts and Liv Tyler's Betty Ross. Anthony Hopkins is also good as Odin, and although he doesn't have much screen time, he really has a great presence when he is. Kat Denning's is good as Jane's student Darcy, who serves more as comic relief then anything. I know many people were worried about her being annoying in the movie, but she's really not. She's quite good in it, and her character is very likable. Stellan Skarsgård is very good, but underused as Erik Selvig, a scienetist helping Jane Foster with her research. Criminally underused though were Sif and the Warriors Three, some of Thor's companions from Asgard. They aren't given much to do really, which is something I hope to see improved upon in other movies. And of course, Clark Gregg returns as Agent Coulson from Iron Man and Iron Man 2 and is fantastic as always. Brings a lot of fun and humor to the movie, and he really seems to be part of the glue bringing this whole Marvel universe together.

The movie is full of great dialogue, fun action and special effects, and great music. I really found it very well written. There is a bit of cheesy dialogue, but that's to be expected. But I really felt that this may be the best written of the movies. It just felt like the comics and really understood the characters and their motivations. It's also chock full of references from the Marvel universe that comic fans and movie goers are going to love. Some as small as the name Donald Blake for Thor fans, to other mentions of Bruce Banner and Tony Stark. Also, keep an eye out for an appearance of a very popular Marvel character and future Avenger. They never call him by his hero's name, but they do call him by real name and he is shown doing what he does best. It was a great moment for me, and many of the comic fans cheered when they saw him. I look forwards to seeing his character returning in The Avengers. Also, stay until the end credits. There is a big plot point revealed for The Avengers, so don't miss it.

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. It was a lot of fun to watch and Marvel has a big hit on their hands. I can't express enough how much I enjoyed it. Marvel really is on a streak, batting four perfect for films for me. It's just very well acted and directed, is beautiful to look at, and a lot of fun to watch. In relation to where it stands, I'd say it's right up for the first Iron Man for me. It just worked that well for me. I hope you all go out and check it out next weekend when it opens up, because you're in for a very special treat.

4.5/5

On a side, if you can, skip the movie in 3D. This movie was post converted and the 3D really doesn't add anything to the proceedings. In fact, it's a bit distracting becaues the glasses make the screen darker and at points it was hard to tell exactly what was happening. Just my two cents, but 3D is not neccessary in the slightest and should be avoided if you can.

[Diesel]

Here we go:

Fast Five


Spoiler warning here, just in case I forgot to tag something.

I have to say, reading the reviews over the last few days, I did become a little apprehensive about the film. All the comments about how it was the "dumbest" and most ridiculous one made me worried that we were heading for another 2 Fast 2 Furious...which isn't a bad thing completely, as I do enjoy 2 Fast 2 Furious, but that's not the kind of movie I'm looking for. Thankfully that was not the case. Yes, the entire final chase is just absolutely ridiculous, the

[Show spoiler]cliff jump

is severely inducing and the

[Show spoiler]break out of the prison bus

is beyond ridiculous, but the other stuff is par for the course for the series so it doesn't take extra suspension of disbelief. And in addition, it's not a movie that takes itself too seriously, so it's easy to just flow with most of it and accept it (like last year's A-Team).


The story was good enough: Need "one last job", bad guy tries to hit them so Dom decides to hit back. What they told us in the trailer is pretty much the general outline of what we got. No misrepresentation there. Everyone was used very well (besides Gadot who didn't seem to have too much to do) and they did a good job of making sure all these characters meshed with each other...especially Rom and Dom. Though I would have liked a little more interaction with them in the beginning since they are so different
The big bad wasn't really used that much...but he also wasn't needed that much. No issues for me there with him only being around a little since the entire movie focuses on trying to take him down.
Also, I gotta say that I was shocked when

[Show spoiler]they killed off Vince. Did not see that coming at all.

What impressed me the most was the tone of the film. This series has some serious distance between the extremes of 2 Fast 2 Furious and Fast & Furious. With this one Lin and the writer successfully found the perfect middle ground. The dialog scenes are at times serious and dramatic when they need to be, other times it's bust your gut hilarious. The action scenes are all thrilling and exciting to watch. It's well rounded and always enjoyable.

The humor was BY FAR the best of the series. The audience in my theater was dying laughing at almost every bit of comedy in the film.

As for the action, the majority of the time it is well filmed so that we can see what is going on and not incredibly zoomed in so you are sitting there wondering what the hell you are watching. The one time I was disappointed in the filming was the fight between Diesel and Johnson. That was where the close up/too quickly cut section came in. Small portions of it were easily visible, but the majority of the fight was quite disappointingly filmed...which is a real shame because from what we can actually see clearly, it was a hell of a fight. They said they filmed for a long time for that scene and practiced a lot...well then show it to us

I must also say that I would have liked to see one additional race in the film somewhere. It felt really short on that. I highly enjoyed what I got, but that would have made it better. Probably when Dom

[Show spoiler]goes to win that first car to beat the cameras.

Show us that race and I'm happier.


The acting is what you would expect. Nothing here is winning an award (unless maybe from MTV), but it shouldn't be expected to.
Walker, Brewster, Diesel and Kang have done this 3 or 4 times by now and are completely settled into their characters. Tyrese and Ludacris did better this time...but their characters were written better than 2 Fast of course. Rom had a lot less Bruhs and Homies...but they were still there when needed as to not change his character much. I enjoyed Dwayne Johnson in the film quite a bit as expected. You could really tell he was having a blast making this movie.


I do have to say though, that I wish they had found a better way to

[Show spoiler]get the money than by pulling the entire freaking vault out and around the city for several miles...

It was a blast to watch, but the sheer amount of implausibility made it wear on me. Stuff like the

[Show spoiler]cliff dive

and the

[Show spoiler]bus

that are instant, "No way" moments are over quickly...we spend much more time with

[Show spoiler]the vault being drug around

and it becomes more and more ridiculous. I would have enjoyed it more if they had maybe gotten the money into their cars and had to each get away while being chased down.
In the end though, it was fun to watch like I said, and that is the point of this movie, so I'm not taking much credit off for that. Plus when

[Show spoiler]Hobbs opens the decoy that smile on his face is priceless

I'm game for a 6th film of course, but the way they wrapped this one up, I would be perfectly fine if they had decided to stop with this one. The ending really felt like a series wrap up to me.

I'm going to say (tentatively) that this one is my favorite of the series. I was going to say it was definitely my favorite, but I've said that for more than one series before and had to go back and change my stance on repeat viewings. So after this hits blu and I watch it again I'll make that final call.


Rating - 4.5/5

Next Day Edit:

I can NOT believe I forgot this:

Attachment 32771

[volcomsocal]

Originally Posted by Steve46

And best of all it has a Totoro.

No idea what you're talking about.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by volcomsocal

No idea what you're talking about.

My Neighbour Totoro is a Hayao Miyazaki film, the character cameos in the film because Pixar are huge fans of Miyazaki films

[jvince]

Originally Posted by Steve46

And best of all it has a Totoro.

Yeah, I felt like I was the only one who geeked out when Totoro appeared. I really wished he would growl in Toy Story 3, but he was quiet the whole time.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by jvince

Yeah, I felt like I was the only one who geeked out when Totoro appeared. I really wished he would growl in Toy Story 3, but he was quiet the whole time.

I'm importing Castle in the Sky from the UK soon. May 9 release, region B.

[iam1bearcat]

Blow Out

105 minutes

Year: 1981
Director: Brian De Palma
Starring: John Travolta, Nancy Allen and John Lithgow

before three weeks ago i had never heard of this film and after reading about how this has strong similarities to The Conversation, i was very intrigued. add in people had high remarks for Travolta's performance and when amazon lowered this to $18.99, i had to bite.

and i'm glad i did

the story, that comes off as a simple assassination cover up, follows Jack Terry (Travolta) a sound man who is out recording random noises one night when he "witnesses" (err... 'hears') a car accident, with what appears to be a gun shot before the car crash. and who's in the car? a very, very important man.

all within twenty minutes, we learn who Jack Terry is, who the person in crash was, who was with him, and why that is a problem for a lot of people. i like when films do that subtly and quickly and don't bog down the film with slowly telling you what's happening, like the audience is a five year old.

Travolta gives a great performance, and it's amazing to see the talent he (i think) used to have. he's really kind of dropped off the map within the last ten years (if not more) and that sucks because he really had a talent when put in the right role. Nancy Allen also gives a strong performance as Sally, who... comes off as a hooker, but may be something else entirely. her quirky, ditsy personality meshes well with Terry's more uptight, closed in personality.

and then there is John Lithgow. it's amazing how young he looks here! and i found it riveting how he'd pretty much go on decades later to reprise his role here in

[Show spoiler]Dexter: season 4, as the Trinity Killer

, and honestly, do a much better job there.

while he's good here, he just seems too young to be taken seriously as the character he plays here. just a minor quirk i had with that.

overall a very good film. don't know what my impression will be on future viewings, but i really enjoyed it and am glad i own it. may not be one of the best of the 80's (or maybe it is, i haven't seen that many from the 80's) but a very solid film that should be a rental, at least, for all

3.75/5

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Blow Out

105 minutes

Year: 1981
Director: Brian De Palma
Starring: John Travolta, Nancy Allen and John Lithgow

[Show spoiler]before three weeks ago i had never heard of this film and after reading about how this has strong similarities to The Conversation, i was very intrigued. add in people had high remarks for Travolta's performance and when amazon lowered this to $18.99, i had to bite.

and i'm glad i did

the story, that comes off as a simple assassination cover up, follows Jack Terry (Travolta) a sound man who is out recording random noises one night when he "witnesses" (err... 'hears') a car accident, with what appears to be a gun shot before the car crash. and who's in the car? a very, very important man.

all within twenty minutes, we learn who Jack Terry is, who the person in crash was, who was with him, and why that is a problem for a lot of people. i like when films do that subtly and quickly and don't bog down the film with slowly telling you what's happening, like the audience is a five year old.

Travolta gives a great performance, and it's amazing to see the talent he (i think) used to have. he's really kind of dropped off the map within the last ten years (if not more) and that sucks because he really had a talent when put in the right role. Nancy Allen also gives a strong performance as Sally, who... comes off as a hooker, but may be something else entirely. her quirky, ditsy personality meshes well with Terry's more uptight, closed in personality.

and then there is John Lithgow. it's amazing how young he looks here! and i found it riveting how he'd pretty much go on decades later to reprise his role here in

[Show spoiler]Dexter: season 4, as the Trinity Killer

, and honestly, do a much better job there.

while he's good here, he just seems too young to be taken seriously as the character he plays here. just a minor quirk i had with that.

overall a very good film. don't know what my impression will be on future viewings, but i really enjoyed it and am glad i own it. may not be one of the best of the 80's (or maybe it is, i haven't seen that many from the 80's) but a very solid film that should be a rental, at least, for all

3.75/5

My copy is on the way from Amazon so I'll avoid your review until then. I wish your score was a little higher though.

[iam1bearcat]

The Rules of Attraction

107 minutes

Year: 2002
Director: Roger Avary
Starring: James Van Der Beek, Shannyn Sossamon, Jessica Biel, Ian Somerhalder, Kate Bosworth, Clifton Collins Jr., and Kip Pardue

there is a very good chance that The Rules of Attraction will be labeled very shortly as my favorite film. i have loved The Rules of Attraction since i first saw it way back in 2002 and my young mind was blown by how dark, depressing, cruelly funny and cynical it was. i was baffled by how much i enjoyed the characters, while you really cannot like any of them since they are all greedy, self centered and essentially do bad things without a single care. and then there is the cast! i love every single performance in the film. wouldn't change a single one. everyone is great, everyone i enjoy seeing on screen, and their performances and the story being told never gets old. this, for me, is the perfect film

other films that have been my favorite film at some point in time...

[Show spoiler]Fight Club
(500) Days of Summer
Garden State
Blow
Donnie Darko
Big Daddy

but i know it's not perfect, and i know many would watch ten minutes and be baffled as to how someone could like this, or at the very least love it, but i do. The Rules of Attraction is the type of film i can turn on at any time, in any mood, and watch in its entirety with no complaints, no getting bored, no nothing. pure, cinema bliss

for me, there are dozens of memorable scenes that litter the film, and they've always stayed with me (even with the terrible memory i have ) and made me appreciate more and more over time.

5/5

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Steve46

My copy is on the way from Amazon so I'll avoid your review until then. I wish your score was a little higher though.

i think you'll really enjoy it
what i'm trying to do is hold down my scores on first viewings. looking back on older reviews i think i tended to review something as soon as it ended, and not really think back on it and just throw a score at it as soon as my mind thought of a number. so i look back and go "wow, i gave The Illusionist a 4/5? even though it had no memorable moments, felt too long, no characters i connected to, a generic, cliched story and had a pretty ridiculous ending? that's not 4/5 material, that's 2.5/5 material, at best!"

and probably what i shouldn't have done was what i did here and think back on The Seventh Seal. i said to myself, "well, overall i think i like The Seventh Seal more, and i gave that a 4/5, so Blow Out has to be a bit less" when i shouldn't be comparing the two.

i didn't have any major complaints with Blow Out, i just find myself giving films higher scores if i find an emotional connection with it, and while Blow Out is a very good movie, it's not a movie i found myself connecting with all that much on a personal / psychological level. if that makes sense

[Steve46]

I just posted a new review on my blog, so here it is:

Mulholland Dr.
Cast: Naomi Watts, Laura Harring, Justin Theroux
Director: David Lynch

Optimum Home Entertainment | 2001 | 147m | Rated R | Sep 13, 2010

Video:
MPEG-4 AVC | 1080p | 1.85:1

Audio:
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
French: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
Italian: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1

Subtitles:
French, Dutch, Italian

Discs:
Single 50GB Blu-ray digibook, Region B (UK import)

Mulholland Dr. is a wild ride and it's best to experience it without knowing anything the first time you see it. The plot is non-linear and the ending isn't typical Hollywood fare. Most of my friends hated it and thought it was a waste of their time. But for those who like it, the experience is up there with the best that film has to offer. If you are analytical and curious enough to watch the film two or three times in quick succession, you're the type of person who may end up loving this film. If you haven't seen it and think you fit that description, I hope you will give it a try.

Mulholland Dr. is my favorite film of all time. The prospect of seeing the Blu-ray both excited and scared me as I wondered whether the presentation would be worthy of the film.

It elevated it to a different level.

The story is full of mystery and unfolds like a detective story for the first two-thirds of the film. Betty (Naomi Watts), an aspiring actress, wins a jitterbug contest and uses it as an opportunity to fly to Los Angeles to seek out an acting career. Immediately after, we see a car crash in which Rita (Laura Harring) suffers amnesia and seeks refuge in Betty’s empty home. The two soon meet and Betty tries to help Rita remember who she is.

The film was intended to be a television series and the first two acts were formed by the aborted pilot. Eventually, new funding allowed Lynch to finish the film and it evolved into an entirely different story. The plot isn’t linear, and the distinction between dream and reality becomes increasingly blurred.

This is a complex puzzle that is very hard to take in on the first viewing and is therefore not for everyone. If you like fast-paced action and straightforward stories wrapped up neatly by the end of the movie, you probably won’t appreciate the film. If you enjoy mysteries and being confused and unsettled, it may interest you.

It changed the way I watch movies.

This is the kind of film that possesses you. The best way to view it is to let it carry you along and wash over you. Save your analysis for repeat viewings. And if you have an inquisitive mind, there will be many repeat viewings.

I first saw this film without understanding all of it, but I found myself going over it in my mind and watching it again the next day. Then I wanted to tell all my friends about it. Over time, it has surpassed everything I have ever seen. It’s full of intrigue and makes me feel so many different emotions. It’s quite brilliant and Lynch’s best work, although all of his projects are valuable and important.

Watching one of Lynch’s films takes you on a journey into a different world. There’s something not quite right with the world, but it’s hard to identify exactly what it is. But it adds to the feeling of unease. In Mulholland Dr., he uses interesting camera angles to show you a glimpse of what is ahead. As a result, you become part of the story and see it unfold as the main characters do.

There’s a lot going on in this strange world. We are shown several different characters, initially unconnected, with no explanation of their overall role in the story. This probably happened because the threads were meant to be expanded on in the television series. You will meet film directors, detectives, a hit man, and a whole host of minor characters.

The film is punctuated by moments of bizarre humor. Some of the comedic scenes make me laugh out loud, and that’s not an easy thing to achieve. There are also moments of violence and mystery and ultimately true desolation.

The final act turns everything on its head.

[Show spoiler]Betty and Rita become Diane and Camilla.

It’s initially confusing, but everything becomes clear when you think about what you have seen and felt.

It’s full of symbols and metaphors and has an underlying theme which examines the Hollywood industry as a whole.

Lynch creates a mood better than any director I have ever seen. The colors, settings and actions of the characters all enhance the atmospheric presentation, and Angelo Badalamenti’s haunting score completes the experience. Mulholland Dr. has many of the elements that made Twin Peaks my favorite television show of all time. If you like one, you will almost certainly like the other.

I’m not going to expand any further on the plot, such as it is, because it may put you off seeing the film. It’s complex, but it’s very rewarding when you examine the experience after the fact. It’s the kind of film that encourages people to develop their own theories. Lynch refuses to explain it, preferring that you develop your own idea about what it represents.

The film can be viewed as a series of interesting scenes. In fact, that’s probably a good way to view it for the first time. The final act isn’t a predictable occurrence. If you’re someone that finds that refreshing, like me, then you should check out Mulholland Dr. if you haven’t already done so. Several film magazines voted it the best film of the last decade. It’s certainly something that can be appreciated even if you have other favorites.

Video Quality 4/5
The disc opens with trailer in SD, highlighting other StudioCanal titles, but don’t let that worry you. We see Rita in a car crash early in the film and the scene is shot in the dark and looks soft, as are several other scenes in the film. The film is supposed to look that way. But the majority has good detail and better lighting. I didn’t see any dirt or print damage and the overall presentation was extremely clean and pleasing. I didn’t expect the video quality to be great, but I was pleasantly surprised. The opening shots deserve 3.5 due to the lighting and softness, but other scenes reach 4.5. Overall I’ll give it a 4.

Audio Quality 5/5
The opening jitterbug scene gives you an idea of how Mulholland Dr. is going to sound; in a word, wonderful. The ensuing car crash is loud and full of detail. Lynch is obsessive about choosing exactly the right sounds to match the scene, and getting the volume exactly right. The sounds of gravel, doors opening and dialogue are all perfect. When it comes to louder scenes, such as Rebekah Del Rio singing, or the rumbling undercurrent during aerial shots, it’s also handled perfectly. I don’t think I have ever heard a better presentation in terms of sound quality. I imagine it’s exactly as Lynch intended.

Special Features 3.5/5
An Introduction to the film by Thierry Jousse (9:54 HD)
In the Blue Box (27:33 HD)
On the Road to Mulholland Dr. (23:40 SD)
Interviews with Mary Sweeney (SD) and Angelo Badalamenti (SD and audio only)
Back to Mulholland Dr. (23:52 in SD)
20-page booklet

Some of the features are excellent and include interviews with Lynch and members of the cast. The most enlightening feature for the first-time viewer is Back to Mulholland Dr., which includes a simplified interpretation of the film. Please don’t watch it until you have seen the film or it will alter the experience.

Similar Movies
The closest thing to Mulholland Dr. is Lynch’s other work such as Lost Highway and Inland Empire. Ingmar Bergman’s Persona also includes similar themes as does Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo.

Verdict
Firstly, be aware that the Optimum BD is locked to Region B, so only buy it if you can play it. I’m not going to tell you to buy this before you’ve seen it, despite my glowing praise. As I have already mentioned, it’s not for everyone. If you are a fan of the film and can play Region B material, buy it without hesitation. If this is the first time you have heard of it, rent the DVD or catch it on cable. Try to watch it on the biggest screen you can, without pausing, and with no other distractions. Watts and Lynch deserved Oscars for their work, but I guess there weren’t enough explosions, dumb jokes, or people getting hit in the groin.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

i think you'll really enjoy it
what i'm trying to do is hold down my scores on first viewings. looking back on older reviews i think i tended to review something as soon as it ended, and not really think back on it and just throw a score at it as soon as my mind thought of a number. so i look back and go "wow, i gave The Illusionist a 4/5? even though it had no memorable moments, felt too long, no characters i connected to, a generic, cliched story and had a pretty ridiculous ending? that's not 4/5 material, that's 2.5/5 material, at best!"

and probably what i shouldn't have done was what i did here and think back on The Seventh Seal. i said to myself, "well, overall i think i like The Seventh Seal more, and i gave that a 4/5, so Blow Out has to be a bit less" when i shouldn't be comparing the two.

i didn't have any major complaints with Blow Out, i just find myself giving films higher scores if i find an emotional connection with it, and while Blow Out is a very good movie, it's not a movie i found myself connecting with all that much on a personal / psychological level. if that makes sense

That makes perfect sense.

I often leave a concert thinking it's the best experience I have had. With over 500, that's obviously not the case. It's just as good as it could have been at that time.

It's extremely rare for me to give anything lower than 3/5 because I choose to see things for a reason. Whether it's the genre, director, actors or something I have heard about the movie. The few lower scores are usually things other people made me see at their house like Little Man or Zohan. I can't stand that sort of nonsense, I feel my IQ bleeding away every second.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

Marvel's Thor:

[Show spoiler]I had a chance to see an early screening of Thor today, and I have to say, I'm very impressed. Thor is a character that could have been very hard to translate onto screen, and I know some people worry how it they could make it connect to Marvel's Universe of Iron Man and Hulk seemlessly.The short answer: They did it. But there will be more on that later. This movie was a lot of fun, and is nothing like you've seen before. Although the trailer suggests that most of the movie takes place on Earth, but the better portion of it actually takes place in Thor's home of Asgard. A bold move, but something that makes this movie stand apart from all the other comicbook based films, and in my opinion, elevates it. Along with its fantastic cast and great direction, Thor looks to be one of the biggest hits of the summer, and it deserves to be. Marvel once again proves why they are the best at making movies based off of comics: they stick to the source material and make it real. They don't take the comics for granted, and it works wonders in their favor. Other studios could learn from their example.

When Thor (Hemsworth), son of Odin (Hopkins), breaks a treaty with a race known as the Frost Giants, he foolishly begins a war with his world of Asgard. Angered by his son's arrogance, Odin declares Thor unworthy of being the next in line for the throne and banishes him out of Asgard without his powers, exiling him to a realm known as Earth. As Thor is cast out, he is found by a group of scientists, led by Jane Foster (Portman) and taken in by them. As the war at home in Asgard continues to escalate, all is not what it seems and Thor must find a way back, but learn from his mistakes to once again become worthy to once again become the powerful God he was born to be.

The hardest sell for the movie to it's audience is selling a movie that doesn't fully take place on Earth. But the movie would not be nearly as cool if it did. Asgard is a beautifully constructed world that looks like nothing I've ever seen in a movie before. It's part futuristic, with a very Norse and Medieval feel. Asgard is a character in and of itself and not just a setting. What Branagh and his team have created is striking and rich. Everything from the Rainbow Bridge to the Great Hall of Odin's Palace, it's just amazing to look at. It all feels very real, and I hope that audiences can accept it and embrace it, because it really makes this movie stand apart from other movies. But if you're like me, you'll find yourself with your jaw dropped at just how spectacular Asgard is.

Which leads me to Kenneth Branagh, the director of the film. Many of you will recognize his name as the director and actor of many great adaptions of Shakespeare's plays. While others will recognize the name as the man who played Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. No matter what Branagh does, he's always been great at it. And nothing shows that better than Thor. He has a great eye of working with actors and makes these characters feel very real and less like a stiff caricature that they could have become. He really just knows how to get the best out of everyone, and there is even a bit of Shakespearing tone to the film while in Asgard that I felt fit it very well. But one thing that really surprised me was that Branagh could shoot action, and well. The movie has some very cool and epic fight scenes, and Branagh handles them very well. I've never seen him do anything quite like it, and I loved how it turned out. They have a very epic feel to them, especially during the battle with some of the Frost Giants at the beginning of the movie. It's one of the movies highlights, and it is really cool to look at it. If the movie hadn't been so well handled, it could have been a disaster, but Branagh has proven to be exactly what the material called for and Marvel made a great choice choosing him helm the movie.

Of course, the movie would be nothing without its cast. First and foremost, Chris Hemsworth IS Thor. Not only does he look the part, but he just oozes the cocky and arrogant attitude that Thor was known for. He excels at it even. But when Thor starts to feel compassion and human, Hemsworth is just as good there as well. He really owns this role, and they couldn't have picked a better actor for him. Honestly, he gives a performance close to Robert Downey Jr's level in Iron Man. He was that good. Some of the movie hinges on Hemsworth's comedic timing, and he's great at it. He's going to have a long career ahead of him, and I look forward to seeing more with him. But the standout in this movie for me was Tom Hiddleston as Loki, Thor's brother and the God of Mischief. I've never seen Hiddleston before, but he just completely steals every scene he's in as Loki. He is kinda and caring, but there is something underneath it all, and you can tell. He is the master of deceit, and when Loki gets angry and learns a shocking truth, he becomes scary. I was just blown away by Hiddleston, and I found my self just hypnotized by him everytime he was on screen. It was just a very good performance, and I look forward to seeing his character in The Avengers.

The supporting cast is good as well. Natlie Portman is good, but terrribly underused as Jane Foster. She's not given terribly much to work with, but what she is given, she does very well. She's my favorite the three leading Marvel ladies so far, out of Gwynth Paltrow's Pepper Potts and Liv Tyler's Betty Ross. Anthony Hopkins is also good as Odin, and although he doesn't have much screen time, he really has a great presence when he is. Kat Denning's is good as Jane's student Darcy, who serves more as comic relief then anything. I know many people were worried about her being annoying in the movie, but she's really not. She's quite good in it, and her character is very likable. Stellan Skarsgård is very good, but underused as Erik Selvig, a scienetist helping Jane Foster with her research. Criminally underused though were Sif and the Warriors Three, some of Thor's companions from Asgard. They aren't given much to do really, which is something I hope to see improved upon in other movies. And of course, Clark Gregg returns as Agent Coulson from Iron Man and Iron Man 2 and is fantastic as always. Brings a lot of fun and humor to the movie, and he really seems to be part of the glue bringing this whole Marvel universe together.

The movie is full of great dialogue, fun action and special effects, and great music. I really found it very well written. There is a bit of cheesy dialogue, but that's to be expected. But I really felt that this may be the best written of the movies. It just felt like the comics and really understood the characters and their motivations. It's also chock full of references from the Marvel universe that comic fans and movie goers are going to love. Some as small as the name Donald Blake for Thor fans, to other mentions of Bruce Banner and Tony Stark. Also, keep an eye out for an appearance of a very popular Marvel character and future Avenger. They never call him by his hero's name, but they do call him by real name and he is shown doing what he does best. It was a great moment for me, and many of the comic fans cheered when they saw him. I look forwards to seeing his character returning in The Avengers. Also, stay until the end credits. There is a big plot point revealed for The Avengers, so don't miss it.

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. It was a lot of fun to watch and Marvel has a big hit on their hands. I can't express enough how much I enjoyed it. Marvel really is on a streak, batting four perfect for films for me. It's just very well acted and directed, is beautiful to look at, and a lot of fun to watch. In relation to where it stands, I'd say it's right up for the first Iron Man for me. It just worked that well for me. I hope you all go out and check it out next weekend when it opens up, because you're in for a very special treat.

4.5/5

[Show spoiler]On a side, if you can, skip the movie in 3D. This movie was post converted and the 3D really doesn't add anything to the proceedings. In fact, it's a bit distracting becaues the glasses make the screen darker and at points it was hard to tell exactly what was happening. Just my two cents, but 3D is not neccessary in the slightest and should be avoided if you can

.

Will definitely check this out along with fast five and Sucker Punch and Rango.
God, I have missed on so many movies recently I need to catch up.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

Will definitely check this out along with fast five and Sucker Punch and Rango.
God, I have missed on so many movies recently I need to catch up.

Definitely check it out man! It's great.

[Al_The_Strange]

“DOA: Dead or Alive”

This film plays out pretty similar to “Mortal Kombat,” after it’s been stripped away of all the gothic-fantasy aesthetics and replaced with a group of hot ladies chillin’ at a lovely beach resort. It’s a bright and vibrant film, jazzed up with style and flair, and imbued with plenty of fighting and sex appeal. …on second thought, forget “MK,” it’s a little closer to “Charlie’s Angels.”

It’s not a film that takes itself seriously; perhaps even on a deeper level than “MK.” The fights are frequent and can be pretty absurd. But they are all a blast; whether bouncing on bamboo trees, running up the steps of a temple, trying to maintain footing on floating rafts…the setpieces are brilliant throughout, and make for a solid collection of memorable scenes. The choreography is fast and intense, and can be beautiful to behold. Combined with occasional lighthearted comedy, it’s nothing but fun on a bun!

The story suffers though; once again, it revolves around fighters coming to some tournament to duke it out for whatever reason. As it goes on, it goes off in some ridiculous directions, for better or for worse. But without any substantial depth to the plot or characters, it comes off as a pretty dumb movie in the end.

But it’s a very good looking film, with strong photography and gorgeous locations. Cameramanship is especially impressive during the fight scenes, for it is still and shows decent composition. Acting is not bad for this film, but it can be a little hammy. Production value is high, and I especially love some of the sets and costumes the film uses. Special effects are slick and hardly distracting. Music is cooler than s**t!

3.5/5 (entertainment: 4.5/5, story: 2/5, film: 4/5) Increased from 3/5

Recommendation: Action and martial arts fans can rent it for the fight scenes. Otherwise...not really.

This Blu-Ray looks great. It’s sharp, clean, and very colorful. There is some grain and noise, but it’s very fine and hardly distracting. Sound quality is not bad, but the music tends to dip in volume (possibly an intentional effect in the mixing process), and it ultimately doesn’t have that much of an impact.

PQ: 4.5/5, AQ: 4/5

[Foggy]

Let Me In

Well it's hard for it not to be crap it follows the original so closely.

First of all, this definitely isn't a shot-for-shot remake, like Quarantine, but it hit almost every note as it's original. The only thing that has changed is its opening (which I like) and less of the neighbours (which I don't like, but understand). They also change the nosey neighbour from the original into a proper detective, which I like because it make his

[Show spoiler]brutal death

near the end of the film have far more of an impact on Owen (in this version) and shows the major life-changing choice he makes.

One thing I hated in this, that didn't bother me as much in Let the Right One In were the bullies. The first scene they have involves the dreaded wedgie, leading on to the little boy pissing himself, all to dramatic music. Seriously, dramatic, menacing music to some scrawny little boy pee-ing himself due to an atomic wedgie, it's one of the silliest things in this film. I wouldn't mind, but the bullies are not intimidating, they fire of swear words aplenty and have nothing to back it up. It's all explained why of course, but I found them as intimidating as this...



also, although the crappy CGI cats are gone ( and faces are both in order) they were replaced by crappy CGI girl ( and faces are in order) they look terrible and completely take you out of the scene!

I found acting good, Hit Girl was pretty good, and so was that kid from The Road. However, best actor in it was Richard Jenkins, that guy can do no wrong, even in Step Brothers and starts acting like a dinosaur, he still got some credibility.

Pacing is incredibly consistent (and by that I mean constantly slow, although it works to the films advantage). Most shots linger for 10 seconds if not them all, creating a very distancing effect, like the characters are being dragged away from humanity by this manipulative little girl.

And the hermaphrodite thing being pulled out of the film, I think it works better as this film felt like it didn't need it, but if you going with the "I'm not a girl" thing, go the whole way, that stuff sounds silly without the context.

I gave the original 9/10, and I don't think I liked Let me In as much as the original, if only by a whisker. The fact that this really is a copy and paste job also takes away from the film, whether you seen it before or after seeing the original, you have to admit the film loses credit due to it's lack of difference, since there are scenes lifted directly from the original and re-shot for here

Still I recommend it!

8/10

Note: this is the UK Blu-Ray, done by royal f**k ups Icon, who ruined the Buried BD which I still want to pick up, but will refuse to pay anything higher the £5.

PQ - 6/10 - Not very impressive, nothing special to the look of the film on this blu-ray. Pretty dull transfer

AQ - 5/10 - Very quiet during dialogue and overly loud when the s**t hits the fan, never gets it even really

Overall - 6.5/10

[P@t_Mtl]

The Accidental Spy

China 2001
Directed by Teddy Chan
With Jackie Chan, Eric Tsang, Vivian Hsu
Format: Blu-ray

Nothing better then a Jackie Chan movie to spend an afternoon. Over the top action, great fight scenes, comedic moments and some cute Asian girls, what more can one ask for? In this one he get's mix up in some sort of spy game and the search for a virus. The CIA want's it, the bad guys want it and Jackie is stuck in the middle. Most of the movie take's place outside of Hong Kong, mostly in Seoul and Istanbul. It's a basic Jackie Chan movie but if you like them there is no reason to dislike this one.

The Blu-ray is from Asia, not the greatest transfer but it's not bad. I can say it's far superior to my old DVD copy of the same movie.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Let Me In

[Show spoiler]
Well it's hard for it not to be crap it follows the original so closely.

First of all, this definitely isn't a shot-for-shot remake, like Quarantine, but it hit almost every note as it's original. The only thing that has changed is its opening (which I like) and less of the neighbours (which I don't like, but understand). They also change the nosey neighbour from the original into a proper detective, which I like because it make his

[Show spoiler]brutal death

near the end of the film have far more of an impact on Owen (in this version) and shows the major life-changing choice he makes.

One thing I hated in this, that didn't bother me as much in Let the Right One In were the bullies. The first scene they have involves the dreaded wedgie, leading on to the little boy pissing himself, all to dramatic music. Seriously, dramatic, menacing music to some scrawny little boy pee-ing himself due to an atomic wedgie, it's one of the silliest things in this film. I wouldn't mind, but the bullies are not intimidating, they fire of swear words aplenty and have nothing to back it up. It's all explained why of course, but I found them as intimidating as this...



also, although the crappy CGI cats are gone ( and faces are both in order) they were replaced by crappy CGI girl ( and faces are in order) they look terrible and completely take you out of the scene!

I found acting good, Hit Girl was pretty good, and so was that kid from The Road. However, best actor in it was Richard Jenkins, that guy can do no wrong, even in Step Brothers and starts acting like a dinosaur, he still got some credibility.

Pacing is incredibly consistent (and by that I mean constantly slow, although it works to the films advantage). Most shots linger for 10 seconds if not them all, creating a very distancing effect, like the characters are being dragged away from humanity by this manipulative little girl.

And the hermaphrodite thing being pulled out of the film, I think it works better as this film felt like it didn't need it, but if you going with the "I'm not a girl" thing, go the whole way, that stuff sounds silly without the context.

I gave the original 9/10, and I don't think I liked Let me In as much as the original, if only by a whisker. The fact that this really is a copy and paste job also takes away from the film, whether you seen it before or after seeing the original, you have to admit the film loses credit due to it's lack of difference, since there are scenes lifted directly from the original and re-shot for here

Still I recommend it!

8/10

Note: this is the UK Blu-Ray, done by royal f**k ups Icon, who ruined the Buried BD which I still want to pick up, but will refuse to pay anything higher the £5.

PQ - 6/10 - Not very impressive, nothing special to the look of the film on this blu-ray. Pretty dull transfer

AQ - 5/10 - Very quiet during dialogue and overly loud when the s**t hits the fan, never gets it even really

Overall - 6.5/10

That's a shame that the UK Blu-ray isn't better since the one released here by Anchor Bay is a pretty good one.