The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Plus, anyone buying this when it comes out??

https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=8987

FRAKK YEAH!!!

Might actually get two; one for me, one for mum for Christmas (she's a Hitchcock fan, probably moreso than me).

[Foggy]

If anyone was interested, my exam went okay.

The first two questions I looked at where about world cinema: Power, Poverty and Conflict, and they were answered around City of God and La Haine, you got to choice between

A) "Stylistic Choices don't just stop at the way a film looks, but also it's meanings" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Explain how setting can take a key role within the films you have studied

Second set of questions where about Popular Films and Spectatorship, and where answered around Life is Beautiful, Schindler's List and Night and Fog

A) "Narrative is seen as a more important factor in manipulating the audiences emotions than style" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Can't remember now

The final one was Close Critical Analysis and I did it around Fight Club

A) How much did learning about the filmmaker as an auteur help in developing an understanding of your choosen film?

B) Talk about a critics response to your choosen film and how they reflect on the film then and now

C) (the specific question) Explain how a close critical study of Fight Club has made the film MORE or LESS complex?

Some of the other questions for the final section where like "How are Male Friendships/Relationships portraed in Talk to Her?", "Explain the choice to present The Battle of Algiers as a docu-drama?" And "Sweet Sweetback's Badasssss Song is not a film but a movement" Explain how Max Von Peeble's film is considered a movement instead of a film".

What do you guys think of this exam?

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Foggy

If anyone was interested, my exam went okay.

Good.

Originally Posted by Foggy

The first two questions I looked at where about world cinema: Power, Poverty and Conflict, and they were answered around City of God and La Haine, you got to choice between

A) "Stylistic Choices don't just stop at the way a film looks, but also it's meanings" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Explain how setting can take a key role within the films you have studied

If it was me, I probably would have picked B and went on to describe how scuzzy the settings of "CoG" and "La Haine" were.

Originally Posted by Foggy

Second set of questions where about Popular Films and Spectatorship, and where answered around Life is Beautiful, Schindler's List and Night and Fog

A) "Narrative is seen as a more important factor in manipulating the audiences emotions than style" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Can't remember now

Can definitely see how answering A could connect to "Schindler's List."

Originally Posted by Foggy

The final one was Close Critical Analysis and I did it around Fight Club

A) How much did learning about the filmmaker as an auteur help in developing an understanding of your choosen film?

B) Talk about a critics response to your choosen film and how they reflect on the film then and now

C) (the specific question) Explain how a close critical study of Fight Club has made the film MORE or LESS complex?

Umm, yeah, that's all you dude.

Originally Posted by Foggy

Some of the other questions for the final section where like "How are Male Friendships/Relationships portraed in Talk to Her?", "Explain the choice to present The Battle of Algiers as a docu-drama?" And "Sweet Sweetback's Badasssss Song is not a film but a movement" Explain how Max Von Peeble's film is considered a movement instead of a film".

What do you guys think of this exam?

Interesting stuff. Hope you did good on it.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Good.



If it was me, I probably would have picked B and went on to describe how scuzzy the settings of "CoG" and "La Haine" were.



Can definitely see how answering A could connect to "Schindler's List."



Umm, yeah, that's all you dude.



Interesting stuff. Hope you did good on it.

For the first one I went for A, but I didn't feel too strong on either, they were a bit crazy with what could of come up, went with A for the second section and with the final one I went for the specific one for Fight Club (because oddly enough it was the broadest out of the three), we weren't taught much to do with Auteur theory with Fight Club, mainly because the first two questions are situated with Analysis and Critics. And Sweet Sweetback's Badassss song is on my watch list, it sounds badassssss

[Al_The_Strange]

Before I forget, I went and watched "The Room" on youtube. Thanks to the Fogmeister for recommending it.

Regarding the film...I'm not sure if it's serious... If so, then it sucks! If not, then it's fairly successful at being an amusing self-conscious comedy.

The film definitely has a "so bad it's good charm," especially in regards to the dialogue. The writing is so choppy, so ridiculously plain, and so illogically-placed that most lines of dialogue are hilarious (especially with the actors' terrible delivery). Acting is very cheesy and bad all around. Throw in some gratuitous nudity (most of which is blocked on youtube ), and the film does hold a moderate amount of attention.

It's still a pretty shallow and flakey film. There's not much conflict; what little there is is strangely contrived (like everything else). The story overall is simple and contrived. Not only does the weakness in conflict take away from the story, but it also makes the film a lot less interesting.

For what it's worth, the film looks pretty enough with its bright and colorful...room...and stuff.

2.5/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Poor | Film: Poor)

Recommendation: Nope.

Here are some examples of how bad this movie's dialogue is (most of these cracked me up ):

[Show spoiler]"I'm glad you're listening to your mother! Nobody else listens to me!" "You're probably right about that mom."

"I'm going to do what I want to do and that's it. What do you think I should do?"

"I got the results of the test back. I definitely have breast cancer." "Don't worry about it, everything will be fine. They're curing lots of people every day."

"Hello! What are these characters doing here?"

"Where's my money?" "Yeah, it's coming. It'll be here in a few minutes." "What do you mean it's coming? Where's my money?!"

"Somebody had better do something around here!"

"Ah man, I just can't figure women out. Sometimes they're just too smart. Sometimes they're flat-out stupid. Other times they're just evil." "It seems to me that you're the expert, Mark!"

"Do you have some secrets? Tell me, come on."

"I have a girl. She's married. I mean, she's very attractive. She drives me crazy." "Why didn't you mention this before? Is it anyone I know?" "You don't know her." "Can I meet her?" "I don't think so. It's an awkward situation." "You mean she's too old, or you think I would take her away from you?"

"Hi!" "Bye!"

"What's going on here?! Why are you doing this?" "I love him." "I don't believe it!"

"You don't understand anything, man. Leave your stupid comments in your pocket!"

"Thank you Holly, this is a beautiful party. You invited all my friends: good thinking!"

"Hey everybody, I have an announcement to make. We're expecting!"

"When is the baby due?" "There is no baby?" "What? What are you talking about?" "I told him that to make it interesting." "We're probably going to have a baby eventually anyway. You're not going to tell Johnny, are you?"

"I feel like I'm sitting on an atomic bomb waiting for it to go off." "Me too!"

"Everyone betrayed me. I'm fed up with this world!"

"I gave you seven years of my life, and you betrayed me" (earlier in the film, it was only five years )

"Wake up Johnny, come on!" (Johnny's obviously dead...)

"Is he dead? My God Mark, is he dead?!" (Johnny's still obviously dead...)

"Yes he's dead!" (Johnny's been dead...)

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Prometheus (2012)
Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller, 124 minutes
Directed by Ridley Scott
Starring Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Logan Marshall-Green and Charlize Theron

[Show spoiler]I've had the pleasure of seeing Prometheus twice. The first occasion was my first exposure to IMAX/3D and it was easily the best presentation I have ever seen in a theater. That prompted me to share the experience with two UK friends who were in town for my 50th birthday. Yes, I'm old.

The most difficult thing to overcome when reviewing Prometheus is separating the incredible presentation from the story. Should I review the experience, or just the movie itself? I have chosen to comment on both elements.

The opening shots immediately draw you in and establish that you are about to witness something special in terms of presentation. As the camera pans over the surface of a moon, you are part of the experience. As with Avatar, you are transported to a different world. The first shot of the ship is also effective, with the roar of the engines. Kubrick would probably turn over in his grave at the technical error of portraying sound in space, but it does add something for the viewer.

Prometheus is quite ambitious. It does a good job of explaining some of the events that led up to the mission in Alien. We are shown some of the discoveries which prompted the Weyland Corporation to explore deep space. A crew is sent to search for an incredible secret, which I won't reveal here. Unlike other films in the Alien franchise, the presence of an android is explained from the beginning. David (Fassbender) is accepted for what he is without anything being hidden. The one thing that does remain consistent is that the android knows more than he admits. Where did he get that information?

There is more than one alien species present in Prometheus, plus the humans. The story explains the origin of the type of ship discovered in Alien and we experience a small thrill of recognition. Ridley Scott balances new information with previous events in an effective way. I came away feeling like I knew a lot more about this universe, but I didn't feel that the original film had been betrayed in any way.

It took me several viewings over a number of years to raise my rating for Alien to 4.5/5. Perhaps because I know that film so well, Prometheus had more of an immediate impact. However, there is one thing preventing me from rating the film as highly. The character of Fifield (Sean Harris) is a blatant flaw in the film. He's a British geologist with the personality of an idiotic criminal. He's clearly intended to provide comic relief, and I admit that the audience did laugh at his comments during both viewings, but his inclusion felt so out of place. Up until that point, the film had me fully engaged. The story seemed plausible and interesting. Fifield would never have passed any serious attempt at psychological screening by the Weyland Corporation and would never have become part of the crew in any realistic scenario. His inclusion pulled me right out of the movie as soon as he spoke his opening dialogue. His scenes with Millburn (Rafe Spall) were all ludicrous and I'm forced to deduct half a point just because of their presence.

Everything else worked.

I'm not against the idea of humor in a serious movie. Vickers (Theron) and Janek (Idris Elba) did have an amusing exchange which was handled in a far more intelligent manner. Theron played her part well and her icy personality was believable.

The highlight of the film for me was the unexpectedly wonderful performance from Noomi Rapace. I liked her portrayal of Lisbeth Salander in the original Dragon Tattoo trilogy and was pleasantly surprised to see her tackling a role in English. Like Alien, the movie ends with a fight for survival, and Shaw (Rapace) is the equivalent of Ripley. There's one sequence which made me laugh because it was so outlandish, but Rapace played it totally straight and still had me on the edge of my seat and rooting for her. This will upset some people, but I think she was a more effective character than Sigourney Weaver's Ripley. I like both tremendously, so I guess it doesn't matter.

Prometheus delivers in terms of story, action, and special effects, and most of the acting is good. The conclusion left the possibility of a sequel and I wouldn't be sorry to see that happen. It's always tricky when a franchise is continued after a long absence, but Scott really pulled it off. See it in IMAX/3D while you can and buy the Blu-ray when it is eventually released.

Overall score 4/5

Saw this last Saturday in 3D and loved it.

I'm kind of surprised that you were surprised by the performance of Noomi Rapace given that you have seen The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and the other two films.

I won't touch Shaw vs. Ripley.

I would actually love to go see Prometheus in 3D again in the theater before it's gone, but I doubt that will happen. The Blu-ray will have to do I guess.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by KilloWertz

Saw this last Saturday in 3D and loved it.

I'm kind of surprised that you were surprised by the performance of Noomi Rapace given that you have seen The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and the other two films.

I won't touch Shaw vs. Ripley.

I would actually love to go see Prometheus in 3D again in the theater before it's gone, but I doubt that will happen. The Blu-ray will have to do I guess.

I guess I didn't realize how well Rapace would act in English.

This is the first film I have seen twice in theaters since Inglourious Basterds.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Steve46

I guess I didn't realize how well Rapace would act in English.

This is the first film I have seen twice in theaters since Inglourious Basterds.

Fair enough, but given that I knew that she could speak English well (from the interview on the Blu-ray for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), I wasn't concerned really. It was nice to see her get the starring role in something like this.

If I had another free movie pass for it, I'd probably be more likely to go again.

Let's just say I liked Prometheus a lot better than Ingloruious Basterds, but outside of Kill Bill 1 and 2, I'm not a fan of his movies.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Before I forget, I went and watched "The Room" on youtube. Thanks to the Fogmeister for recommending it.

Regarding the film...I'm not sure if it's serious... If so, then it sucks! If not, then it's fairly successful at being an amusing self-conscious comedy.

The film definitely has a "so bad it's good charm," especially in regards to the dialogue. The writing is so choppy, so ridiculously plain, and so illogically-placed that most lines of dialogue are hilarious (especially with the actors' terrible delivery). Acting is very cheesy and bad all around. Throw in some gratuitous nudity (most of which is blocked on youtube ), and the film does hold a moderate amount of attention.

It's still a pretty shallow and flakey film. There's not much conflict; what little there is is strangely contrived (like everything else). The story overall is simple and contrived. Not only does the weakness in conflict take away from the story, but it also makes the film a lot less interesting.

For what it's worth, the film looks pretty enough with its bright and colorful...room...and stuff.

2.5/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Poor | Film: Poor)

Recommendation: Nope.

Here are some examples of how bad this movie's dialogue is (most of these cracked me up ):

[Show spoiler]"I'm glad you're listening to your mother! Nobody else listens to me!" "You're probably right about that mom."

"I'm going to do what I want to do and that's it. What do you think I should do?"

"I got the results of the test back. I definitely have breast cancer." "Don't worry about it, everything will be fine. They're curing lots of people every day."

"Hello! What are these characters doing here?"

"Where's my money?" "Yeah, it's coming. It'll be here in a few minutes." "What do you mean it's coming? Where's my money?!"

"Somebody had better do something around here!"

"Ah man, I just can't figure women out. Sometimes they're just too smart. Sometimes they're flat-out stupid. Other times they're just evil." "It seems to me that you're the expert, Mark!"

"Do you have some secrets? Tell me, come on."

"I have a girl. She's married. I mean, she's very attractive. She drives me crazy." "Why didn't you mention this before? Is it anyone I know?" "You don't know her." "Can I meet her?" "I don't think so. It's an awkward situation." "You mean she's too old, or you think I would take her away from you?"

"Hi!" "Bye!"

"What's going on here?! Why are you doing this?" "I love him." "I don't believe it!"

"You don't understand anything, man. Leave your stupid comments in your pocket!"

"Thank you Holly, this is a beautiful party. You invited all my friends: good thinking!"

"Hey everybody, I have an announcement to make. We're expecting!"

"When is the baby due?" "There is no baby?" "What? What are you talking about?" "I told him that to make it interesting." "We're probably going to have a baby eventually anyway. You're not going to tell Johnny, are you?"

"I feel like I'm sitting on an atomic bomb waiting for it to go off." "Me too!"

"Everyone betrayed me. I'm fed up with this world!"

"I gave you seven years of my life, and you betrayed me" (earlier in the film, it was only five years )

"Wake up Johnny, come on!" (Johnny's obviously dead...)

"Is he dead? My God Mark, is he dead?!" (Johnny's still obviously dead...)

"Yes he's dead!" (Johnny's been dead...)

"I didn't hit her, it's not true, it's bullshit, I did naaaauuwwwwwt...oh, hi Mark"

Battle Royale

Already reviewed, everyone knows I love it.

But this time I watched the special edition, which feature 100% more basketball, pedophilia and a good three warnings scattered across the opening 10 minutes that you shouldn't be letting 15 year olds be watching it

I think it also added so weak CGI blood, and so additional edits that show bodies as such, I don't think it's the better cut since the odd charm is decreased by it, and the film just doesn't flow as well, but it's still a damn good movie

I still love it balance of emotions with odd quirks of comedy, it's well distributed characters and the great tense scenes and action. It's not the best directed films of all time and it's certainly still has some editing issues, but I can really let it slide because the sheer strength the film has

10/10

The UK blu-ray is also quite a mixed bag, usually looks great, but they didn't seem to transfer the scenes with on screen titles, so every now and again you'll have a shot that runs for quite a number of seconds looking like absolute crap between the scenes looking great, mighty distracting.

[menaceuk]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Prometheus (2012)
Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller, 124 minutes
Directed by Ridley Scott
Starring Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Logan Marshall-Green and Charlize Theron

[Show spoiler]I've had the pleasure of seeing Prometheus twice. The first occasion was my first exposure to IMAX/3D and it was easily the best presentation I have ever seen in a theater. That prompted me to share the experience with two UK friends who were in town for my 50th birthday. Yes, I'm old.

The most difficult thing to overcome when reviewing Prometheus is separating the incredible presentation from the story. Should I review the experience, or just the movie itself? I have chosen to comment on both elements.

The opening shots immediately draw you in and establish that you are about to witness something special in terms of presentation. As the camera pans over the surface of a moon, you are part of the experience. As with Avatar, you are transported to a different world. The first shot of the ship is also effective, with the roar of the engines. Kubrick would probably turn over in his grave at the technical error of portraying sound in space, but it does add something for the viewer.

Prometheus is quite ambitious. It does a good job of explaining some of the events that led up to the mission in Alien. We are shown some of the discoveries which prompted the Weyland Corporation to explore deep space. A crew is sent to search for an incredible secret, which I won't reveal here. Unlike other films in the Alien franchise, the presence of an android is explained from the beginning. David (Fassbender) is accepted for what he is without anything being hidden. The one thing that does remain consistent is that the android knows more than he admits. Where did he get that information?

There is more than one alien species present in Prometheus, plus the humans. The story explains the origin of the type of ship discovered in Alien and we experience a small thrill of recognition. Ridley Scott balances new information with previous events in an effective way. I came away feeling like I knew a lot more about this universe, but I didn't feel that the original film had been betrayed in any way.

It took me several viewings over a number of years to raise my rating for Alien to 4.5/5. Perhaps because I know that film so well, Prometheus had more of an immediate impact. However, there is one thing preventing me from rating the film as highly. The character of Fifield (Sean Harris) is a blatant flaw in the film. He's a British geologist with the personality of an idiotic criminal. He's clearly intended to provide comic relief, and I admit that the audience did laugh at his comments during both viewings, but his inclusion felt so out of place. Up until that point, the film had me fully engaged. The story seemed plausible and interesting. Fifield would never have passed any serious attempt at psychological screening by the Weyland Corporation and would never have become part of the crew in any realistic scenario. His inclusion pulled me right out of the movie as soon as he spoke his opening dialogue. His scenes with Millburn (Rafe Spall) were all ludicrous and I'm forced to deduct half a point just because of their presence.

Everything else worked.

I'm not against the idea of humor in a serious movie. Vickers (Theron) and Janek (Idris Elba) did have an amusing exchange which was handled in a far more intelligent manner. Theron played her part well and her icy personality was believable.

The highlight of the film for me was the unexpectedly wonderful performance from Noomi Rapace. I liked her portrayal of Lisbeth Salander in the original Dragon Tattoo trilogy and was pleasantly surprised to see her tackling a role in English. Like Alien, the movie ends with a fight for survival, and Shaw (Rapace) is the equivalent of Ripley. There's one sequence which made me laugh because it was so outlandish, but Rapace played it totally straight and still had me on the edge of my seat and rooting for her. This will upset some people, but I think she was a more effective character than Sigourney Weaver's Ripley. I like both tremendously, so I guess it doesn't matter.

Prometheus delivers in terms of story, action, and special effects, and most of the acting is good. The conclusion left the possibility of a sequel and I wouldn't be sorry to see that happen. It's always tricky when a franchise is continued after a long absence, but Scott really pulled it off. See it in IMAX/3D while you can and buy the Blu-ray when it is eventually released.

Overall score 4/5

From a visual & Audio perspective this movie rocked. The atmosphere is great but seriously, the story and writing ruins it .

The Characters suck, except for David, who was pretty awesome and fassbender showing another great performance.

Shaw, who seems to be the Ripley character and a surviver just doesn't work, she always comes off as weak and desperately lucky.

Janek just wasn't used enough. I thought Idris Elba did great at making you remember the character.

Vickers, showed promise but Ultimately it doesn't go any where.


Have to say the ending actually sucked too. IMO they really should have lft the

[Show spoiler] xenomorph

out. Not only was it plainly obvious but it lacked any real drama and just seemed thrown in.

Honestly, this movie disappointed me but it still has some quality. 3.5/5 for me. maybe even a 3/5.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by menaceuk

From a visual & Audio perspective this movie rocked. The atmosphere is great but seriously, the story and writing ruins it .

The Characters suck, except for David, who was pretty awesome and fassbender showing another great performance.

Shaw, who seems to be the Ripley character and a surviver just doesn't work, she always comes off as weak and desperately lucky.

Janek just wasn't used enough. I thought Idris Elba did great at making you remember the character.

Vickers, showed promise but Ultimately it doesn't go any where.


Have to say the ending actually sucked too. IMO they really should have lft the

[Show spoiler] xenomorph

out. Not only was it plainly obvious but it lacked any real drama and just seemed thrown in.

Honestly, this movie disappointed me but it still has some quality. 3.5/5 for me. maybe even a 3/5.

It certainly had its weaknesses, but I guess I wasn't expecting much from it. It would great to write one of these blockbusters and put in the details that we hope for.

[menaceuk]

Originally Posted by Steve46

It certainly had its weaknesses, but I guess I wasn't expecting much from it. It would great to write one of these blockbusters and put in the details that we hope for.

Well it seems expectations are the difference here cause I had high expectations

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by Foggy

If anyone was interested, my exam went okay.

awesome, let us know when you receive the A!

The first two questions I looked at where about world cinema: Power, Poverty and Conflict, and they were answered around City of God and La Haine, you got to choice between

A) "Stylistic Choices don't just stop at the way a film looks, but also it's meanings" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Explain how setting can take a key role within the films you have studied

A) I wouldn't agree with that. Stylistic choice seems to be a choice by the director & one that all viewers agree on (color pallete, costumes, hair, etc). The meanings of a film? That's a choice by the viewer, and each viewer can disagree on.

B) Fargo & Shining come to mind. Fargo b/c its the cold, barren atmosphere which really was a character itself, and ended up having an effect on the characters. Shining is perhaps the best example and shows how external environment can have the biggest effect ever on one's internal environment.

Second set of questions where about Popular Films and Spectatorship, and where answered around Life is Beautiful, Schindler's List and Night and Fog

A) "Narrative is seen as a more important factor in manipulating the audiences emotions than style" How far would you agree with this statement?

or

B) Can't remember now

A) Depends on the film. If the narrator is telling the audience what to think, instead of letting the audience interpret the characters/themes for themselves, then yes. This is very bad! If the narrator is just giving the audience "up to speed" facts to get the audience familiar with the story, then no.

The final one was Close Critical Analysis and I did it around Fight Club

sounds like an oxymoron. haha just kidding. I know some people love the film. I just couldn't get into it.

A) How much did learning about the filmmaker as an auteur help in developing an understanding of your choosen film?

B) Talk about a critics response to your choosen film and how they reflect on the film then and now

C) (the specific question) Explain how a close critical study of Fight Club has made the film MORE or LESS complex?

A) You mean Fincher as an auter? I wouldn't know. I'm not familiar enough with his films. I'm not into his films that much.

B) I know there is tons of positive reviews for FIght Club. If they just excluded the

[Show spoiler]portions that over-explaiend the whole "I am Tyler Durden" and telling the audience stuff they can figure out on their own with more subtle cues, and without all the intellectual handholding

it would have been a much better film. I enjoy films that let me "flex my intellectual muscles" , instead of doing all the mindwork for me but then again, I do have some odd tastes

Some of the other questions for the final section where like "How are Male Friendships/Relationships portraed in Talk to Her?", "Explain the choice to present The Battle of Algiers as a docu-drama?" And "Sweet Sweetback's Badasssss Song is not a film but a movement" Explain how Max Von Peeble's film is considered a movement instead of a film".

What do you guys think of this exam?

nice exam! I love that class and I'm not even in it!

[Foggy]

Pretty good stuff in there

For the first question I went for the idea that a director can aim to portray certain issues and messages in a film, both City of God and La Haine where very politically motivated films, but City of God also used style to broaden it's appeal, while La Haine kept to it's anti-police roots with it's style.

Second one I talked about Life is Beautiful success if pivotal on narrative to get us to care for the character, while Schindler's List acts to recreate the holocaust, and works within the construction of the scene, while it features a very gripping narrative, most of it's most effective scenes leave very little bearing on the narrative as a whole.

And the final one was Fight Club, and using themes and theories to understand it, using Post-Modernism, Crisis of Masculinity and Psychoanalysis to get a brooder understanding, while also arguing that the film felt more complex with the theoriess added.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Pretty good stuff in there

For the first question I went for the idea that a director can aim to portray certain issues and messages in a film, both City of God and La Haine where very politically motivated films, but City of God also used style to broaden it's appeal, while La Haine kept to it's anti-police roots with it's style.

Second one I talked about Life is Beautiful success if pivotal on narrative to get us to care for the character, while Schindler's List acts to recreate the holocaust, and works within the construction of the scene, while it features a very gripping narrative, most of it's most effective scenes leave very little bearing on the narrative as a whole.

And the final one was Fight Club, and using themes and theories to understand it, using Post-Modernism, Crisis of Masculinity and Psychoanalysis to get a brooder understanding, while also arguing that the film felt more complex with the theoriess added.

A lot of this kinda went over my head at first. From what I can tell, they look like good answers, and I find them agreeable.

Makes me wonder how I'd do in a film school. I took a couple of classes and they were a blast (got As in them ). If things were different, I'd consider a career in film. As it is though, I found a good comfort zone with a stable, secure job.

If I was a filmmaker, I'd probably be somebody comparable to...ahem...Michael Bay...

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest random selection: "RoboCop."

For such a short film, "RoboCop" feels like it has everything, making for a very satisfying picture. To start with, it is quite entertaining, with its frequent action and shootouts, its cheesy yet memorable dialogue, its satirical commercial breaks, and its gritty post-modern style. It is a very pulpy work of sci-fi; the action is often punctuated with extremely gnarly, over-the-top violence. It may disturb the most squeamish of viewers, but for dudes like me, it makes for one wicked experience!

The story is inherently brilliant, carrying some strong fundamental themes of death and rebirth, and vengeance and redemption (the director even claims that it is a Jesus Christ allegory ). It's a pretty simple set-up, showing the genesis of the heroic main character, his confrontation against crime, and eventually his rogue campaign for justice against a corrupt system. Within this basic construct, the characters remain interesting and endearing, even if they don't show a whole lot of depth.

The film shows its age a little, especially since it uses a lot of modern (1980s modern, that is ) settings and props to try and give the film a futuristic look. It uses pretty basic yet very effective photography and editing; it is especially remarkable for its point-of-view shots during RoboCop's construction. The writing and acting tend to be very cheesy and over-the-top, serving to present the story in the most blunt fashion while keeping it light and entertaining. The actors do bring the characters to very vivid life; Peter Weller is impeccable as both Alex Murphy and RoboCop, Kurtwood Smith is awesome as the villain, and I liked Nancy Allen in her role. The film uses some rather utilitarian sets, props, and costumes. Music is quite catchy.

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

Recommendation: I'd buy it for a dollar!

This Blu-Ray is nowhere near as bad as I remember. In fact, I found its definition and cleanliness most worthwhile. It probably could be a grade sharper, and it does suffer from an excess of grain and noise, but it is pretty decent as it is. Sound quality is the same way; the dialogue still sounds very dated, but most music and sound effects are superb. I think we'd all love it if they'd re-release this movie with a higher bitrate video and all the extras intact, but as it is, I think I like this disc enough to keep it (even if a re-release does happen).

PQ: 3.5/5, AQ: 4/5

*score might have been different on Al's Top 100 Favorite Films list, which is coming soon to a thread near you!

[Foggy]

Predator

The epitome of masculinity placed on film!

(p.s. the Ultimate Hunter edition seems to have been brought to us from the same guys who made Wallace and Gromit)

9/10

Hamlet 2

Instead of killing himself at the end of the Shakespearean play, Hamlet decides to travel through time with Jesus to stop Gertrude and Ophelia from dying. Sounds like it could be a pretty unique and quirky spoof-comedy...

But instead we get the tale of a failed actor and drama teacher played by Steve Coogan (pulling a decent American accent) as he pulls together the play mentioned above to save the drama department, although the play is obviously met with criticism by many around the community.

The biggest problem with the film is that it's not invested within itself, clearly the filmmakers where more bothered about the idea of Hamlet 2, but couldn't physically piece it together, so they came up with the rather cliche story of "This one final show will save the department", and while the film races along, it sets up interesting ideas, and then drops them. It's a ton of half cooked ideas that could of elevated the film if they focused their attention away from "a sequel to Hamlet would be really funny".

The comedy is hit and miss, with odd dashes of misplaced slapstick amongst many racism jokes that feel a bit unnecessary. Characters are very underdeveloped, the big mishap being Coogan's character. You don't really get a wrap around his character because he keeps changing, some times he's an idiot, some times he's a genuine teacher and some times he's just weird, leading to most the jokes not being funny just because you're not clear on the norm around him. It doesn't help that Coogan over plays it due to it being his first major role.

Not only that, the tone of the film just doesn't hit, it's too indie for a mainstream audience yet it's too mainstream for the indie audience as well. Never really hitting any specific audience, and just leading to a load of "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" jokes.

There is no clear message being portrayed here, I think the film starts off taking digs at the fact that no one really respects art anymore, or that art is never given a chance in today's world. But it doesn't go with that, then it seems to go in a way that people take controversy too far to heart, yet it's never pushed far enough. Maybe it's the dumbing down of storytelling to mass audiences, but it seems to argue against that in some scenes also.

The film just has too many problems, but, when it gets to Hamlet 2 (the actual performance), it's pretty funny.

Sure, the rest of the film is pretty weak, sometimes painful, but the reason you'll want to watch it is to see how it comes out in the end, and it really does make you laugh, it's as suitable ridiculous as it sounds

So, if you want to watch Hamlet 2...go to Youtube and search for the final 20 minutes and you've just saved yourself an hour of time and a little bit of money

5/10

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Predator

The epitome of masculinity placed on film!

(p.s. the Ultimate Hunter edition seems to have been brought to us from the same guys who made Wallace and Gromit)

9/10

Glad I passed over the UHE.

Originally Posted by Foggy

Hamlet 2

[Show spoiler]
Instead of killing himself at the end of the Shakespearean play, Hamlet decides to travel through time with Jesus to stop Gertrude and Ophelia from dying. Sounds like it could be a pretty unique and quirky spoof-comedy...

But instead we get the tale of a failed actor and drama teacher played by Steve Coogan (pulling a decent American accent) as he pulls together the play mentioned above to save the drama department, although the play is obviously met with criticism by many around the community.

The biggest problem with the film is that it's not invested within itself, clearly the filmmakers where more bothered about the idea of Hamlet 2, but couldn't physically piece it together, so they came up with the rather cliche story of "This one final show will save the department", and while the film races along, it sets up interesting ideas, and then drops them. It's a ton of half cooked ideas that could of elevated the film if they focused their attention away from "a sequel to Hamlet would be really funny".

The comedy is hit and miss, with odd dashes of misplaced slapstick amongst many racism jokes that feel a bit unnecessary. Characters are very underdeveloped, the big mishap being Coogan's character. You don't really get a wrap around his character because he keeps changing, some times he's an idiot, some times he's a genuine teacher and some times he's just weird, leading to most the jokes not being funny just because you're not clear on the norm around him. It doesn't help that Coogan over plays it due to it being his first major role.

Not only that, the tone of the film just doesn't hit, it's too indie for a mainstream audience yet it's too mainstream for the indie audience as well. Never really hitting any specific audience, and just leading to a load of "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" jokes.

There is no clear message being portrayed here, I think the film starts off taking digs at the fact that no one really respects art anymore, or that art is never given a chance in today's world. But it doesn't go with that, then it seems to go in a way that people take controversy too far to heart, yet it's never pushed far enough. Maybe it's the dumbing down of storytelling to mass audiences, but it seems to argue against that in some scenes also.

The film just has too many problems, but, when it gets to Hamlet 2 (the actual performance), it's pretty funny.

Sure, the rest of the film is pretty weak, sometimes painful, but the reason you'll want to watch it is to see how it comes out in the end, and it really does make you laugh, it's as suitable ridiculous as it sounds

So, if you want to watch Hamlet 2...go to Youtube and search for the final 20 minutes and you've just saved yourself an hour of time and a little bit of money

5/10

It's been a while, but I blind-bought it on DVD cheaply and thought it was hilarious.

[Al_The_Strange]

“Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter”

Chances are that you’ve already made up your mind about this film when you read its title. You’ll either facepalm at the sacrilege of turning one of history’s greatest men into something base and tasteless, or you’ll laugh your behind off. Regardless of your reaction, the film may surprise you. Director Timur Bekmanbetov has proven himself to be a master of orchestrating scenes of absurdity and chaos, with beautiful and awe-inspiring action scenes, and with serious demeanor. He does the same here, orchestrating the absurdity with a straight face and plenty of style to satisfy.

After “Wanted,” a film so loaded with fantastic action sequences, I was hoping Bekmanbetov would deliver a plethora of inspiring new setpieces. Such scenes are few and far-between in “AL:VH;” there are plenty of short fights with lots of style and lots of gnarly bloody mayhem, all captured in flowing slow-motion photography. The biggest standouts will be the horse stampede scene, which somewhat resembles a crazy car-chase scene that swaps out the cars with horses and sends horses flying off in all directions (a very clever and inspiring scene, in my opinion, which is sadly marred by some camera shake and lots of dust on the screen), and the climactic train battle, which will likely be compared to the train scene in “Wanted,” but I feel it’s a solid stand-alone setpiece. In terms of action, the film delivers; it’s still the director’s tamest and sanest work, but what we get would be something comparable to an “Underworld” movie.

The story for this madness is generally sound, believe it or not. Regardless of how you accept the idea that Abe slays the undead in his off-hours, the film does a fine job of weaving historical accounts and personal history in with the vampire storyline. I’m no Lincoln expert, so I don’t really know how much of the film is accurate (I certainly don’t know how well it adapts the original novel). Accepting it as its own little universe, I felt it was generally successful. Half of it does a good job of setting up the vampire story and the other half does a good of playing out the period drama, all in an earnest manner.

If there is any problem with the story, it would be in its consistency; the opening scenes whiz by really fast, before settling into a steady and pleasing pace during Abe’s youth. The story then zips through entire years of the story, lightly covering the Civil War aspect and speeding it up to the climax. It’s very choppy, uneven pacing; I suspect that 30-60 more minutes of scenes would have allowed the story to breathe, allowing the pacing to flow naturally and make the film even more epic than it is. What we get feels like an abridged telling of the overall story.

The film definitely has style. The camera work can be a little shakey in some scenes, but there are also a lot of moments with slick slow-motion photography. There are quite a few unique editing effects. Acting is generally not bad; I grew to accept Benjamin Walker as the title character, for he looked and acted the part very well. Writing is not terribly strong, but it gets the job done. This production has decent-looking sets, props, and costumes. As one other reviewer pointed out, however, the makeup department failed to make certain characters age the way Lincoln does, and it can be distracting. Music for this movie has some really awesome parts.

There could have been more to the film: more crazy action, more to the Civil War scenes, more consistency to the plot, etc. Still, if you’re looking for stylish vampire-slaying action like I am, the film generally satisfies.

3.5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Average | Film: Pretty Good)

Recommendation: Probably not to anybody looking for perfect cinema, or anybody who can't accept the premise of the film's title. For everybody else, as a rental.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Predator

The epitome of masculinity placed on film!

(p.s. the Ultimate Hunter edition seems to have been brought to us from the same guys who made Wallace and Gromit)

9/10

comment of the year!