The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[IronWaffle]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

A miserable experience. On more than one occasion I found myself Studying the faces in the audience thinking, "Are they enjoying themselves?", "Does this classify as entertainment?"

Great write-up, but this particular point hit home. The first and most intense experience I had like this was at my only brush with Bay, Transformers, where I spent what feels like half the movie doing this. Since then I catch myself doing it at least once during blockbuster exposition dumps and once during mindless action scenes. Not on purpose, mind you; once I catch myself I force my eyes back on the screen as if telling myself to eat my veggies. Only veggies are healthy. More like forcing myself to eat the 64 oz. cup in my cupholder.

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

DjMethod, have you seen the original, Abre Los Ojos? It's far superior, even as I've come to like the sloppiness if Crowe's film.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

^^^^Wow! I think all four films are drastically different. Each pair of sequels are united in script, but on a formal level, the directors are doing vastly different things. David Fincher's visual strategy on GwtDT is more about collecting data, with little judgement, his eye is much more focused on process and detail than the Swedish version, which is well mounted, but without superb craftsmanship. Abre Los Ojos has a much harder and colder edge than the pretty and loud Vanilla Sky, in tone they are polar opposites. Where the original had me feeling absolutely sick and devastated, Crowe's film has a slick, overproduced and impersonal feel.

I've come to just submit to the artifice of Crowe's film and just appreciate each distinct overcranked element including performances and soundtrack.

I watched Abre Los Ojos after I wrote my review, though I could only get 3 quarters of the way through the film because I passed out. Like GWTDT, both films have the exact same script. I felt the primary difference was exactly how you put it--Amenabar's version felt more personal and frightening. Cesar is much more accessible than Cruise, though I liked both Penelope and Cameron Diaz much better in the second one. And like GWTDT, the Vanilla Sky remake is more polished. Crowe undeniably improved on some scenes and he basically filmed the exact same script but better. I do prefer some scenes in the original (like when Cesar argued with the panel of doctors, it felt more organic, while Crowe's scene was a bit stiff). However Vanilla Sky has the edge at the moment, but I won't decide until I finish Amenabar's film.

Vanilla Sky didn't seem messy to me. Mixing genres puts some people off and is ambitious but like I wrote my review, it really is about a straightforward concept and it portrayed that well to me, even without seeing the much simpler Abre Los Ojos.

On another note, Amenabar's The Sea Inside is excellent. On the edge of my Top 100.

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Looking at the older posts, I saw surfdude talking about Melancholia as a metaphor for any impending sense of doom a person may experience in a lifetime, and the characters represent our natural reactions. I'm kinda experiencing that now; got an upcoming business trip that feels like the coming of Melancholia. I'm trying my best to be like Justine and just let things go.

Give it another watch. Like jvince just said, it just made me go "damn."

[KingRad]

13 Assassins - 4.5/5

Great film. This movie has one of the most intense and entertaining battles I've ever witnessed in cinema. The film is beautifully shot, well directed, and Takashi Miike's admiration for Akira Kurosawa is very apparent in the film, which isn't a bad thing. My only complaint would be that some of the special effects were a bit off-putting, and anyone that has seen the film knows exactly what scene in particular I'm talking about.

[SquidPuppet]

Must. Stay. Out. Of. Melancholia. Discussion.....

Must.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Must. Stay. Out. Of. Melancholia. Discussion.....

Must.

you can share your love for it with the rest of us. we all agree it's awesome anyway

[Abdrewes]

Re: Vanilla Sky. I just think Crowe tried too hard, he trows everything at the wall and it was near insufferable when i first saw it. Amped up soundtrack, amped up visuals. I guess it's total lack of subtlety and manipulative nature is something I've been able to forgive more and more as time goes on.

There are too many moments (whether deserved or not) of potent cinematic bliss to dismiss outright: the bar scene, the empty New York scene, the Sigur Ros lucid dream climax (which is way overdone, but beautiful). I've returned to it since and it still delivers.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by IronWaffle

Great write-up, but this particular point hit home. The first and most intense experience I had like this was at my only brush with Bay, Transformers, where I spent what feels like half the movie doing this. Since then I catch myself doing it at least once during blockbuster exposition dumps and once during mindless action scenes. Not on purpose, mind you; once I catch myself I force my eyes back on the screen as if telling myself to eat my veggies. Only veggies are healthy. More like forcing myself to eat the 64 oz. cup in my cupholder.

They are by no means great write ups. They're pretty much 15 minutes of stream of consciousness writing followed by 5 minutes of puzzle piecing. As long as I get a few of my most immediate thoughts in, I'm good, and in this particular case, the faster I dump this turkey the better.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Must. Stay. Out. Of. Melancholia. Discussion.....

Must.

let me help you stay out of it:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=27284

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

Vanilla Sky[/CENTER]

Vanilla Sky is about a drug. It's a familiar drug that every man tries once in his life whether consciously or not. In the film, that drug is Sofia (Penelope Cruz). She embodies love—that intoxicating drug that gives David (Tom Cruise) a high that permanently shifts his normal. In other words, his mood will never be the same again without it.

great point about Sofia being the drug! I never picked up on that. Its true though. That scene with her and Cruise where he

[Show spoiler] offers her the drawing for "one kiss" and she bites her lip....

bro, I melted like a piece of choclate in my living room floor

David, a guy so perfect that a single gray hair is unacceptable, is seemingly forced towards humility after suffering a disfiguring accident shortly after meeting Sofia. However, it is not humility he achieves, but a curse that transcends any kind of physical deformity. David has to have that drug again, so he desperately seeks out his previous normal state, taking drastic measures to make it a reality.

Again, I love the "drug" interpretation here. It really reinforces his desperation and how he will go to ANY length to have the drug. Nice!!

I also love the pivotal scene of

[Show spoiler]him leaving Sofia's apartment and seeing Julie outside in the blue car (how freaky was her eyes matching the car)?? She asks him to go for a ride. He hesitates. Little does he know that this split second decision will alter the course of his life severely. He already knows Julie is a nut, yet he gets in the car with her. His poor decisions in the past (using her as friend-with-benefits) have already written the script for how each decision will end. Julie is pi$$ed at him. Its like that in life for us = our past decisions will often times determine the outcomes of our future decisions, so we better decide WELL, as our past decisions may have locked in negative outcomes if we don't choose well!

Both Cruise and Cruz play idealized characters. Cruise plays a meticulously perfect big shot, who is only likable because of his abundance of confidence and charm. Meanwhile, Cruz is the natural kind of perfect, and is as desirable as she is pure

[Show spoiler](she met Brian at a library! ).

It is no surprise that they were a pair in real life because their puppy love is authentic and palpable (an emotional stage on par with A Lot Like Love and Like Crazy). I could not help but smile. And Cameron Diaz is utterly frightening as the irrationally clingy stalker—every man's worst nightmare.

I agree! their chemistry was off the charts! In Cruise's apartment, remember when he first spots her and can't take his eyes off her? LOL. Everyone is like "uh, David?? Hello??"

how great was the Brian/Cruise dynamic around Sofia? I love the "sweet v. sour..." monlogue Another downside of being a Cruise: you only know sweet.

The film just exudes replay value. It is a cerebral ride along the lines of The Butterfly Effect, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Source Code, and The Fountain—all loose-reality films where a man obsesses over a woman. And all among my favorite films.

Vanilla Sky is pure ecstasy and an enthralling cinematic escape. It's a drug I want to take again and again.

yes!! A former #1 film of mine, but has fallen due to the fact that I haven't watched it in a while (no blu ). Thanks for the refresher . It'll get me off my butt to watch it again soon!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

let me help you stay out of it:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=27284

You seem to have forgotten the facts!

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Gee, all the other people at the wedding didnt seem to magically go mad. Justine must be special. Only the chosen ones get to connect spiritually with a planet. Special people connect with a world ending planet for what benefit????? Whats the purpose of that again????



Ok then, go have a seance with a medium to get the hard facts.



God you are clueless. Her Mom and Dad were nuts and her sister was unstable. Bauer asked "Is everyone in you family stark raving mad?" Justine even said to her husband "But you knew this was coming, didnt you?" She was wacked long before that night and well before the discovery of Melancholia.

Soggy napkin > x10 your theory



Only crackpot dudes, and the guy in the film was depicted as sane. Script failure number 87.



What on Earth are you babbling about? The vast majority of

[Show spoiler]suicides

have tons of (missed) warning signs. How many times do family members scold themselves for not seeing it coming when they should have. How many people are in therapy, or institutionalized, or on meds and frequently talk of doom before they do the deed?

Sutherlands character was UPBEAT and EXCITED to be living during an era where he would be privelaged to witness such a momentous event. He was pumped to share it with his kid. There is NO WAY he would have bailed and missed it.



Squid 10,037 vs Surf -32 You must feel like a Titanic passenger in this debate.



OK, lets say it was gas powered. Why did its standard 12v battery function properly and start the internal combustion engine despite the Melancholia interference, yet all the others failed? Are gas golf carts special like Justine? Do they have a connection too? What does it all mean? LMAO at the mega continuity BLUNDER

Oh, is that a tear of defeat I see running down your cheek?



Try to keep up. The cake was at 11.30 (lame) and the soup was at (approx) 1:00 am.



Realistic for whom? Personally, I would want to spend the last moments of my life in the arms of my loved ones. my WIFE and KIDS. I wouldnt think to myself "Heck, its the end of the world, I think I'll go bone some random stranger chick for comfort". If I were alone in the world, maybe I would seek the comfort of a stranger, but Justine had family nearby.



Thank you for defeating your own argument.



No. It was supposed to be a "What if" cerebral meditation flick. The filmmakers tried to deliver the story with a serious tone and they failed in their attempt. There was too much ridiculous silliness cluttering the screen and overriding the attempt to be taken seriously.



First of all, Triangle was a non linear time tweak psychological thriller, where Melancholia was a supposed to be a chronological character behavioral study. Second, Triangle had likeable characters that we could really care about. Third, there was no intuition for the character in Triangle. Everything was experienced by her, ONE STEP AT A TIME, and that served to both educate her about her path, and tell the story for us. Brilliant.

Shame on you for comparing Triangle to Melancholia. Low blow. Despicable You.



I have no idea because the filmmakers failed SO miserably at deciding for themselves, hence delivering a confused and muddled product. Dont mix fantasy/art with personal realism, it doesnt work. And if you are going to depict personal and family realism, for Gods sake, make it realistic.



So why show a failure if you are going after the "Happy ever after" metaphor for balance. I love nihilism in movies, but without the "Happy Wedding" as a mirror effect the whole doom thing loses its heft. If the film says "Everything is crap and there is nothing to lose", then there is NOTHING TO LOSE and the film has no value. If there is no sense of potential epic loss, then nihilism just becomes whining self pity.



I love your sense of humor. Almost as much as I love educating you about films.



Listen to the dialogue. Its horrible man. I think it may be caused by a translation issue from their native tongue. MANY of the sentences are nobody talks like that.

Also, why was Sutherland calling his son Sweatheart all the time? That is not a customary term of endearment for a male parent to use when addressing a young male in the US. Mom to son? Sure. Dad to son? No.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

You seem to have forgotten the facts!

[Show spoiler]

dang it!!! how did you find that??

seriously though, in looking over our discussion, it seems that many of your remarks that to do with "would X really occur?" (i.e., the realism of the facts in the film), but isn't it possible that the whole genre/context of the film is fantasy/surreal/etc, in which case those remarks are moot? kind of like asking how Jackman could realistically

[Show spoiler]float and munch on tree roots

in The Fountain? yes, that question was intentionally silly, but my inquiry is legit.

[Foggy]

#1 Skyfall
Directed by Sam Mendes
Written by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan
Starring Daniel Craig, Judi Dench and Javier Bardem
Synopsis: Bond's loyalty to M is tested as her past comes back to haunt her, bringing MI6 under attack.



My Thought:

[Show spoiler]Bond is one of the main reasons I love films, when I was a kid I used to watch them all when they were on TV, a few years ago I lost all interest in the James Bond films. Sure, I watched Casino and Quantum but the care wasn't there. Skyfall reminded me of why James Bond captivated me so much, while also catering towards what I like to see in films nowadays, playing with ideas about the need for intelligence agencies and struggling to keep up with the spinning world of technology, while delivering a classy action thriller fixed with great practical work, stunning cinematography by Roger Deakins and fantastic acting. Only downside are the few lousy moments of green screen and CGI work.

#2 The Master

Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson
Written by Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, Joaquin Phoenix and Amy Adams
Synopsis: A Naval veteran arrives home from war unsettled and uncertain of his future - until he is tantalized by The Cause and its charismatic leader.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]The Master, like its main characters alcoholic mixtures, is richly dense in mystery and enigma. While this might be annoying to some, I think The Master could be looked at in the future as a film in front of it's time. It's definitely a film that demands re-watching, and a film I'd be happy to revisit time after time as the film seems like it'll shape very differently every time I'll view it. The acting is superb, from the pitiful Phoenix and the charismatic Seymour Hoffman, both playing characters that are worlds apart yet connected by curiosity and loss. A truly hypnotic film

#3 The Cabin in the Woods
Directed by Drew Goddard
Written by Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard
Starring Kristen Connolly, Chris Hemsworth and Anna Hutchison
Synopsis: Five friends go for a break at a remote cabin in the woods, where they get more than they bargained for. Together, they must discover the truth behind the cabin in the woods.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]A hell of a good ride, I know all too many people who dislike this film because it's too weird, which is strange considering all the horror film-lore going around, the one that is poking fun at horror films is considered to be too much. I think a better word for Cabin in the Woods is unique and utterly fun, the most fun I've had at the multiplex all year in fact!

#4 Looper
Directed by Rian Johnson
Written by Rian Johnson
Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis and Emily Blunt
Synopsis: In 2074, when the mob wants to get rid of someone, the target is sent 30 years into the past, where a hired gun awaits. Someone like Joe, who one day learns the mob wants to 'close the loop' by transporting back Joe's future self.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Looper is a film that has a hurricane of great ideas, styles and themes spinning around, often unpredictable, fast paced and well written, Looper is a science-fiction classic waiting in the isles, if only its ending was strong enough.

#5 Amour
Directed by Michael Haneke
Written by Michael Haneke
Starring Jean-Louis Trintignant, Emmanuelle Riva, Isabelle Huppert
Synopsis: Georges and Anne are in their eighties. They are cultivated, retired music teachers. Their daughter, who is also a musician, lives abroad with her family. One day, Anne has an attack. The couple's bond of love is severely tested.



My Thought:

[Show spoiler]Slice of grim and crushing filmmaking. The opening shot of the film reflects a mirror image of a cinema auditorium homing in on the fact that this is an important film to you, you need to take notice. The acting is spot on, the direction is soothing and the film sweeps you up with ease without being over the top flashy. And it really allows you to make up your own opinions.

#6 Seven Psychopaths
Directed by Martin McDonagh
Written by Martin McDonagh
Starring Colin Farrell, Christopher Walken and Sam Rockwell
Synopsis: A struggling screenwriter inadvertently becomes entangled in the Los Angeles criminal underworld after his oddball friends kidnap a gangster's beloved Shih Tzu.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]My guiltiest pleasure of the year, not at all subtle, not really all that clever. It's really just a mismatch of imaginative ideas spun into an overly self-reflective script, but yet it all works and end up being really rather quite funny in the end. Never so stupid it's insulting but never so impactful it's considered art, Seven Psychopaths just gets a nice entertaining balance.

#7 Argo
Directed by Ben Affleck
Written by Chris Terrio
Starring Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston and John Goodman
Synopsis: A dramatization of the 1980 joint CIA-Canadian secret operation to extract six fugitive American diplomatic personnel out of revolutionary Iran.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Complete intense, almost so perfect it's too perfect film, hits every beat correctly, tells a phenomenal story along with having great writing and direction that completely sucks you in. Probably the big crowd pleasing film is the most likely to deserve the Best Picture in the end.

#8 Beasts of the Southern Wild
Directed by Benh Zeitlin
Written by Benh Zeitlin and Lucy Alibar
Starring Quvenzhané Wallis, Dwight Henry and Levy Easterly
Synopsis: Faced with both her hot-tempered father's fading health and melting ice-caps that flood her ramshackle bayou community and unleash ancient aurochs, six-year-old Hushpuppy must learn the ways of courage and love.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Such a wonderful film, I'm so gutted I'm unable to find it anywhere on blu-ray to watch. Quvenzhané Wallis is completely brilliant and conducts the screen so well, worked on my emotions like no other film has this year.

#9 Django Unchained
Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Written by Quentin Tarantio
Starring Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz and Leonardo DiCaprio
Synopsis: With the help of a German bounty hunter, a freed slave sets out to rescue his wife from a brutal Mississippi plantation owner.



My Opinion:

[Show spoiler]The obligatory Tarantino entry, like Inglorious Basterds before it, I left a little underwhelmed (although obviously really enjoying it in the end of course) but the more it lingered the more it wormed itself into my mind and now I find myself gagging for a rewatch. Many great scenes in this one and in some parts Tarantio's best work, but it's just too long and unfocused to reach the top of the list.

#10 Moonrise Kingdom
Directed by Wes Anderson
Written by Wes Anderson and Roman Coppola
Starring Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward and Bruce Willis
Synopsis: A pair of young lovers flee their New England town, which causes a local search party to fan out and find them.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Again, another film that left me underwhelmed on first watch, but unlike Django, I have gotten around to rewatching this one quite a few times now and it really does work completely on me now. Moonrise has such an whimsical atmosphere around it that it's too hard not to fall in love with its charm, it also helps that the film is funny as hell as well.

#11 Wreck It-Ralph
Directed by Rich Moore
Written by Rich Moore, Phil Johnston, Jim Reardon and Jennifer Lee
Starring John C. Reiley, Sarah Silverman and Jack McBrayer
Synopsis: A video game villain wants to be a hero and sets out to fulfill his dream, but his quest brings havoc to the whole arcade where he lives.



My Opinion:

[Show spoiler]Wreck-It Ralph was a film I was expecting to like, but not love. And it's a film that not original and takes a lot of ideas from other great animation classics. But I was shocked by all the right notes that Wreck-It was hitting, it made me laugh (a lot), it got me very attached to the characters and to the dilemmas they were stuck in and had a little bit of maturity lying underneath as well a a lot of sweetness. It simply just clicked.

#12 The Avengers
Directed by Joss Wedon
Written by Joss Wedon and Zak Penn
Starring Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans and Scarlett Johansson
Synopsis: Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. brings together a team of super humans to form The Avengers to help save the Earth from Loki and his army.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]The first big big Blockbuster on the list, some people hate it, a lot really love it, I just like it. It shows how escapist, mindless fun doesn't need to be nonsensical, and shows that work does need to be put into these sorts of film. The dynamic characters, the set pieces, the unpredictable gags. It's not a classic like many proclaim, but it is a rejuvination into the new era of production line special effect driven films with no soul.

#13 The Raid: Redemption
Directed by Gareth Evans
Written by Gareth Evans
Starring Iko Uwais, Ananda George and Ray Sahetapy
Synopsis: A SWAT team becomes trapped in a tenement run by a ruthless mobster and his army of killers and thugs.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Abosolutly brutally in every way. Simply put The Raid has to be seen to be believed.

#14 Zero Dark Thirty
Directed by Kathryn Bigelow
Written by Mark Boal
Starring Jessica Chastain, Joel Edgerton, Chris Pratt
Synopsis: A chronicle of the decade-long hunt for al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden after the September 2001 attacks, and his death at the hands of the Navy S.E.A.L. Team 6 in May 2011.



My Opinion:

[Show spoiler]When I walked into this film, I was thinking I was going to be bored by it really. But I was compelled beyond belief, what's real? what's fake? who cares, this is great filmmaking in note book form, efficient, gripping and all too relatable.

#15 Killing Them Softly
Directed by Andrew Dominik
Written by Andrew Dominik
Starring Brad Pitt, Ray Liotta and Richard Jenkins
Synopsis: Jackie Cogan is an enforcer hired to restore order after three dumb guys rob a Mob protected card game, causing the local criminal economy to collapse.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]You know, I'm shocked about the negativity going around this flick, ok it's not very subtle and not very focused, but the film is very gritty and often darkly satirical, and it usually works in a very unnerving fashion.

#16 The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Directed by Stephen Chbosky
Written by Stephen Chbosky
Starring Logan Lerman, Emma Watson and Ezra Miller
Synopsis: An introvert freshman is taken under the wings of two seniors who welcome him to the real world.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Another crowd pleaser, Perks of Being a Wallflower really connected to me, it's sweet, charming and quite emotionally charged, and again, another one I'm struggling to find on sale in stores on blu-ray.

#17 The Dark Knight Rises
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written by Christopher Nolan, Jonathan Nolan and David S. Goyer
Starring Christian Bale, Tom Hardy and Anne Hathaway
Synopsis: Eight years on, a new terrorist leader, Bane, overwhelms Gotham's finest, and the Dark Knight resurfaces to protect a city that has branded him an enemy.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Came out of The Dark Knight Rises (and my first IMAX experience) quite disappointed, you do have to admire the sense of scope and scale Nolan was going for in his final film in the trilogy but in the end the story struggles with the weight, but once you've gotten over those plot issues, the film works in such a thematical sense that the final Batman film really does work next to the previous two, despite it's initial flaws.

#18 Silver Linings Playbook
Directed by David O' Russell
Written by David O' Russell
Starring Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence and Robert De Niro
Synopsis: After a stint in a mental institution, former teacher Pat Solitano moves back in with his parents and tries to reconcile with his ex-wife. Things get more challenging when Pat meets Tiffany, a mysterious girl with problems of her own.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]David O Russell's play on the typical rom-com is an easy one to dismiss because of its conventional setting, but in the end, the film has a lot more going on than just that, it often has a slightly grizzlier sense of humour and has some darker tones to play, along with some great acting. Although I'm with a lot of others and don't see this as Best Picture material.

#19 Kill List
Directed by Ben Wheatley
Written by Ben Wheatley and Amy Jump
Starring Neil Maskell, MyAnna Buring and Harry Simpson
Synopsis: Nearly a year after a botched job, a hitman takes a new assignment with the promise of a big payoff for three killings. What starts off as an easy task soon unravels, sending the killer into the heart of darkness.



My Thoughts:

[Show spoiler]Probably the most underseen film on my list, Kill List is as grizzly as they come, twisting genre as its twisted nature implies, every second of Kill List builds your nerves up into a crescendo of shivers none stop until the final second, truly uncomfortable viewing.

#20 Chronicle
Directed by Josh Trank
Written by Max Landis and Josh Trank
Starring Dane DeHaan, Alex Russell, Michael B. Jordan
Synopsis: Whilst attending a party, three high school friends gain superpowers after making an incredible discovery underground. Soon, though, they find their lives spinning out of control and their bond tested as they embrace their darker sides.



My Opinion:

[Show spoiler]Finally, Chronicle is simply a very efficient blockbuster, both on budget and storytelling, keeping it quite low scale and never out staying its welcome. Chronicle sits you down for a lean mean 90 mins and leaving you completely satisfied and yet wanting more. If The Avengers is the way to do the big budget production line films, then Chronicle is the way we should do normal risky films.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

dang it!!! how did you find that??

seriously though, in looking over our discussion, it seems that many of your remarks that to do with "would X really occur?" (i.e., the realism of the facts in the film), but isn't it possible that the whole genre/context of the film is fantasy/surreal/etc, in which case those remarks are moot? kind of like asking how Jackman could realistically

[Show spoiler]float and munch on tree roots

in The Fountain? yes, that question was intentionally silly, but my inquiry is legit.

But, in The Fountain it is completely explained. When Tom is in the bubble, those are Tommy's thoughts as he is

[Show spoiler]finishing Izzi's novel. It's just his imagination.

In Melancholia the human behavior at the wedding is presented as real, actual events in the final days of their lives.

My actual beefs are really, simply, horrific dialogue and acting. And some character inconsistancy blunders that ripped me out of the film. And Justines boss following her around INSISTING that she deliver a slogan. WTF was up with that? And I dont ask that because the end of the world is coming, I ask because whay is he doing that at her wedding? Just too bizzarre and not connected to the story.

[legendarymatt92]

Has anybody seen the 1973 version of The Crazies, by Romero? I might watch it tonight as I've only ever seen the remake (and enjoyed it thoroughly.

It's either that or the Swiss film Cargo, but I've heard that's quite heavy for this time of night...

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

But, in The Fountain it is completely explained. When Tom is in the bubble, those are Tommy's thoughts as he is

[Show spoiler]finishing Izzi's novel. It's just his imagination.

In Melancholia the human behavior at the wedding is presented as real, actual events in the final days of their lives.

"presented as real, actual events" = thats what I'm wondering (just thinking out loud).

[Show spoiler]COuldn't Melancholia (the planet) symbolize death? And Earth symbolize US? It barely missed earth on the first pass = symbolizes how we may barely survive a car accident in life, but then what does Melancholia (death) do? It loops around and comes back to hit us later = we can't escape death = its inevitable so don't fight it = don't be like Tommy in The Fountain = accept death and enjoy your time on earth NOW

. See bro, Melachonlia = THe Fountain

My actual beefs are really, simply, horrific dialogue and acting. And some character inconsistancy blunders that ripped me out of the film. And Justines boss following her around INSISTING that she deliver a slogan. WTF was up with that? And I dont ask that because the end of the world is coming, I ask because whay is he doing that at her wedding? Just too bizzarre and not connected to the story.

I think her boss was at the wedding for the same reason her sister (Claire) was harassing her at the wedding. As above,

[Show spoiler]if Earth symbolizes each one of us, then what is the boss/sister? Annoying thoughts we might have, which might welcome suicidie (Justine said earth sucks and it would be good if Melancholia hit = suicide metaphor). The boss just reinforces her view of earth sucking = life sucks in this metaphor

. but like you said, it may not be metaphorical. that's just what worked for me

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

"presented as real, actual events" = thats what I'm wondering (just thinking out loud).

[Show spoiler]COuldn't Melancholia (the planet) symbolize death? And Earth symbolize US? It barely missed earth on the first pass = symbolizes how we may barely survive a car accident in life, but then what does Melancholia (death) do? It loops around and comes back to hit us later = we can't escape death = its inevitable so don't fight it = don't be like Tommy in The Fountain = accept death and enjoy your time on earth NOW

. See bro, Melachonlia = THe Fountain

That metaphor is fine with me. Let's just say for arguments sake that we agree that its all one big metaphor. OK? Then that still doesnt explain all the goofy behaviors.

I think her boss was at the wedding for the same reason her sister (Claire) was harassing her at the wedding. As above,

[Show spoiler]if Earth symbolizes each one of us, then what is the boss/sister? Annoying thoughts we might have, which might welcome suicidie (Justine said earth sucks and it would be good if Melancholia hit = suicide metaphor). The boss just reinforces her view of earth sucking = life sucks in this metaphor

. but like you said, it may not be metaphorical. that's just what worked for me

Well.....if you are going to take it THAT far. I can see why the ostrich decided to vote for TinkerBell instead of eating peanut butter at 4:17pm, based on the belief that the gravitational pull of Atlantis would cause the vacuum of cotton to reastablish the norms of the seventh group, since the fifth group had already alienated the Grand Ones womb prior to the event of couter-rotation, which would end the advancement of plant errosion based on hyper-mineral content.

See Surf? It CAN be taken TOO FAR.

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Re: Vanilla Sky. I just think Crowe tried too hard, he trows everything at the wall and it was near insufferable when i first saw it. Amped up soundtrack, amped up visuals. I guess it's total lack of subtlety and manipulative nature is something I've been able to forgive more and more as time goes on.

There are too many moments (whether deserved or not) of potent cinematic bliss to dismiss outright: the bar scene, the empty New York scene, the Sigur Ros lucid dream climax (which is way overdone, but beautiful). I've returned to it since and it still delivers.

"Total lack of subtlety". That's true, it doesn't have the ambiguity of Mulholland Dr. and everything is explained. I don't think Crowe is the type to take those artistic liberties since he focuses more on storytelling and editing, and does keep us guessing along the way, but I agree.

So having just finished Abre Los Ojos, it's a pretty even match. Here's my breakdown:

Vanilla Sky
+ #1 thing Vanilla Sky does better is the Cruise/Cruz chemistry. Off the charts. Which is why I compared it to my favorite young love films in my review.
+ Aames is way crazier about Sofia than Cesar is.
+ Penelope Cruz is better in her role.
+ Cameron Diaz is better in her role.
+ Crowe adds details like Aames pulling out that gray hair every morning, Sofia's mole, and the thawed-out dog news bits.
+ Aames is also bit more fleshed out than Cesar. Cesar really comes off as that rich kid that got his parents' inheritance, while Aames has the big shot attitude and more confident persona (yet is consequently more difficult to relate to)
+ Sweet/Sour dialogue
+ The flashback

[Show spoiler]while he's falling is a great climax.

- Crowe kind of holds our hand at the end

[Show spoiler]to the extent of even showing Aames's funeral reception.

- When Sofia awkwardly runs away after the club, it transiently pulled me out of the film. She has the same response in Abre Los Ojos but it's natural.

Abre Los Ojos
+ The last act is much better.
+ Haunting and atmospheric. Actually much more in tone with The Butterfly Effect than Vanilla Sky, though with a less winded obsession.
+ More of a grounded psychological drama than a genre mash. Blended much better.
+ The last frame of the film.

[Show spoiler](I like that it stays black)

+ Antonio > Kurt Russell
+ When he randomly

[Show spoiler]shoots that guy in the end. I lol'd (at the first shot).

- Characters are less developed, particularly Cesar and Nuria, but Sofia as well.
- Cesar draws an impossibly detailed caricature.

Ultimately, there is less to complain about in the original. I am surprised you found Vanilla Sky "insufferable" in your first viewing. I was so captivated that I overlooked any of its flaws. I am assuming it had a sort of Tony Scott flair to you? Or was it just the use of colors? It never felt over the top for me and works for the surreal and dreamlike qualities of Vanilla Sky. What particularly impresses me is how Crowe can take the exact same script and embrace a completely different tone. All I can say after seeing both is this stands as one of the best remakes I have ever seen.

[KingRad]

Robot & Frank - 3.5/5

Overall it was a good watch, but there was a certain amount of complexity I was looking for the whole time, and it just wasn't there. The themes presented in the film felt slightly underdeveloped. The film might have benefited from a longer run time. Frank Langella was definitely the highlight of the film, his performance was fantastic.




The Raid: Redemption - 3.5/5

When you look up non-stop action, this film should be right along the side of the definition. This has to be one of the most high-octane, in your face, adrenaline pumping action films to date. The only problem with that is, there's no time for plot. While the movie is entertaining as hell, the problem is you feel little to no emotion for the protagonists, nor the antagonists for that matter. You simply know that these are the good guys, and those are the bad guys. Attempts at plot developments are thrown at the audience in attempt to draw out an emotional attachment to a couple of the characters, but it doesn't work.

With that being said, the action is absolutely mind blowingly phenomenal. Everything from the camera work to the choreography is brilliant. This alone makes The Raid well worth watching.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

Has anybody seen the 1973 version of The Crazies, by Romero? I might watch it tonight as I've only ever seen the remake (and enjoyed it thoroughly.

It's either that or the Swiss film Cargo, but I've heard that's quite heavy for this time of night...

I saw the original The Crazies a while ago. I remember it being gaudy, and actually liked the remake better.

Next greatest rental: “The Crazies” 1973.

George A Romero made some solid zombie flicks with plenty of gnarly violence, action, and suspense, so one can expect more of the same out of this extremely low-budget film. Folks might give credit to “28 Days Later” for being the first to show zombies as frenetic monsters who actually run, instead of shuffling very slowly towards their victims. But it looks to me that the original “Crazies” has it beat; in this film, the zombies are genuinely crazy. The film’s all about people going nuts for no reason, mowing down everybody else in fairly gnarly ways. There is plenty of shooting, running, and peril in this film.

But, I feel it’s still a bit on the slow side, and the low production quality does the film little justice. Most of it feels a little too cheesy due to its cheapness; it rarely looks convincing, it lacks intensity, and some scenes are shot/edited in a cheap way. It’s not bad in the end, but I’ve come to realize just how better the remake actually is.

The story’s the same as the remake though; a bunch of people band together to escape the zombies and an over-zealous military quarantine, blah blah blah. There’s definitely a lot of conflict in the action and between the characters. But without any substantial character or story depth, it’s somewhat unremarkable.

The film has good photography, despite its low production value. Most sets, props, costumes, etc look okay and don’t really look too horridly cheap. Acting is okay, but with the DVD’s extremely bad AQ the dialogue was annoyingly shrill and weak. Music seems average.

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

Recommendation: Horror fans can rent it if at all interested, but I do think the 2010 remake is a grade better.

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

It loops around and comes back to hit us later = we can't escape death

I never thought twice about Melancholia's path being metaphorical. Very interesting point.

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

My actual beefs are really, simply, horrific dialogue and acting. And some character inconsistancy blunders that ripped me out of the film. And Justines boss following her around INSISTING that she deliver a slogan. WTF was up with that? And I dont ask that because the end of the world is coming, I ask because whay is he doing that at her wedding? Just too bizzarre and not connected to the story.

Where is the horrific acting?

As for the boss, Von Trier wrote him in to make the situation as stressful as possible. He was also the groom's best man.

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Well.....if you are going to take it THAT far. I can see why the ostrich decided to vote for TinkerBell instead of eating peanut butter at 4:17pm, based on the belief that the gravitational pull of Atlantis would cause the vacuum of cotton to reastablish the norms of the seventh group, since the fifth group had already alienated the Grand Ones womb prior to the event of couter-rotation, which would end the advancement of plant errosion based on hyper-mineral content.

Achievement for Best Original Screenplay

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Only the chosen ones get to connect spiritually with a planet. Special people connect with a world ending planet for what benefit????? Whats the purpose of that again????

I had beef with this too. It's in my review.

God you are clueless. Her Mom and Dad were nuts and her sister was unstable. Bauer asked "Is everyone in you family stark raving mad?" Justine even said to her husband "But you knew this was coming, didnt you?" She was wacked long before that night and well before the discovery of Melancholia.

See, even Kiefer is stressed. And for what? What will his money mean in a week?

Sutherlands character was UPBEAT and EXCITED to be living during an era where he would be privelaged to witness such a momentous event. He was pumped to share it with his kid. There is NO WAY he would have bailed and missed it.

Agreed. Also in my review.

Try to keep up. The cake was at 11.30 (lame) and the soup was at (approx) 1:00 am.

Not uncommon to have unreasonably late receptions. I've attended a few myself. Also, people who plan weddings always act like everything is the "end of the world."

Realistic for whom? Personally, I would want to spend the last moments of my life in the arms of my loved ones. my WIFE and KIDS. I wouldnt think to myself "Heck, its the end of the world, I think I'll go bone some random stranger chick for comfort". If I were alone in the world, maybe I would seek the comfort of a stranger, but Justine had family nearby.

Don't we know Lars Von Trier's position on sex?

[Show spoiler]No pun intended.

Dont mix fantasy/art with personal realism, it doesnt work. And if you are going to depict personal and family realism, for Gods sake, make it realistic.

Didn't you side positive on Antichrist?

So why show a failure if you are going after the "Happy ever after" metaphor for balance. I love nihilism in movies, but without the "Happy Wedding" as a mirror effect the whole doom thing loses its heft. If the film says "Everything is crap and there is nothing to lose", then there is NOTHING TO LOSE and the film has no value. If there is no sense of potential epic loss, then nihilism just becomes whining self pity.

Lars is building momentum snowballing the stress to make his point, and a wedding reception is the perfect backdrop to do so. So while he was using the "happy ever after" metaphor, he wasn't using the wedding to instill any positive emotion at all. There is no balance there, hence the "lopsidedness" of the film. He framed every scene of the film from his point of view of the world. Which is also why he

[Show spoiler]killed off the scientist.

I know why he did it, I just think it was a mistake.


P.S. I loved your back and forth bickering. Especially surfdude cleverly trying to equate it to The Fountain and Triangle.

(and sorry for chiming in when your points were directed to surf)