The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Pain & Gain

[Show spoiler]Michael Bay, perpetual purveyor of the chaotic, returns with his first film outside the Transformers franchise in nearly eight years, the last being 2005's The Island, which similarly is about "Big Ideas" (cloning). However, where that film only aimed to duplicate 70's sci-fi, Pain and Gain delivers a morally complex satire which only Michael Bay could deliver.

The film this most resembles in form is Neveldine & Taylor's Gamer. Both are extremely unsubtle socially relevant satires (well, Gamer is a bit less overt) that rely on garish frenzied imagery (sometimes hanheld) for effect. In the case of Gamer it was about the grotesquerie of our online identities and the ruthlessness of Reality Television and cable news. Pain and Gain is simply about The American Dream and how the subsequent desire for material wealth ("getting buff") corrodes our moral compass. To paraphrase Mark Wahlberg's opening narration, America got to be number one by getting more ripped than other nations. The levels to this film are so intricate: although it's built on top of a well treaded crime-narrative, it establishes a grimly fascinating portrait of The Pursuit of Happiness.

The story is no different than Rocky, Scarface or The Godfather, whom are all role models for the mentally unequipped Daniel Lugo (Mark Wahlberg),the key difference are the additional generations of decay. Paul Doyle (Dwayne Johnson) and Adrian Doorbal (Anthony Mackie) are lead by the Daniel Lugo, whom is striving for the American Dream only seen in gangster film and TV ads (Ken Jeung's supporting role as a Get-Rich-Quick-Guru is as juicy as they come).

Even more fascinating, if a bit tiresome, is what Bay's trademark bulldozer style accomplishes here. Buffoonery has been dimensionally trans-mutated into profundity, what was once blatant fetishization is now stinging social commentary. Michael Bay's gonzo abstract style finally purely marries form and function into what is his most aesthetically purposed film. His widescreen canvas casts a net on the constituents of materialization: nearly every frame highlights a logo whether Nike, Adidas or Windex. Bimbos, air-headed body builders and soulless businessmen populate the grimy, sleazy concrete jungle of Miami. His giant overbearing kinetic style paints a world just as heightened, fractured and repulsive as the one in Daniel Lugo's head. The half submerged shot of him in a pool, rendering his proportions mis-matched is telling. These aren't the heroes of Armageddon, The Rock, or Transformers; not do they exude any trace of altruism like Ewan McGregor's character in The Island. They are selfish, reckless and utterly detestable.

The timid satire of Spring Breakers is one upped in nearly every way. Compare Paul Doyle (Deayne Johnson) to Selena Gomez' Faith. He's larger than life buffoon, almost Bush Era pseudo-fascist: he totes along a Bible, wears an "I'm on Team Jesus" t-shirt, yet has no problem wielding a gun, or (later) snorting cocaine off of a curious object (a great nod to Paul Verhoeven's Robocob, also a satire, that I will not spoil here). Faith, in Spring Breakers,
however is painted in a much more fetishistic way (like the Michael Bay models of yore) with only the contrapuntal narration meshing with the satirical backdrop.

Michael Bay cynics, believe me I used to be one of them, will call this business as usual, but for those willing to dive into new images and pan for gold, you will find it. I hope he continues making films that have a socially reflective spirit, because who can better paint the warped American id than Michael "checks-and-balances" Bay. "That's the American Dream."

4/5

Thanks for the review, but Gamer is a terrible movie. That only makes me want to see it less...

[SpartanX]

Prometheus

[Show spoiler]This is my second viewing after my first viewing in the theater. And it was every singe bit as good. Another viewings has just cemented my opinion that this an awesome movie.

While it may not quite be on the level on Ridley Scott's masterpiece "Alien" and even James Cameron's "Aliens, I still loved this film. I love the way this film expanded and delved into the Alien mythology. Sure, there are some questions to be answered. Like what the hell is the black goo?

Performance wise- Michael Fassbender stole the show as the android "David". The way he emulated the performance of Peter O'Toole in the masterpiece "Lawrence of Arabia" was good, I think if they ever make a remake of Lawrence he would be the perfect casting choice.

Of course, I do have problems with it. I did not like the design of the precursor to the facehugger. It's a facehugger, not a freaking squid.

Overall, Prometheus is a thoughtful, ambitious and downright beautiful entry to the Alien franchise despite some plot holes and mistakes.

A

[Steve46]

Hitchcock (2012)
Biography, Drama, 98 minutes
Directed by Sacha Gervasi
Starring Anthony Hopkins, Helen Mirren, Scarlett Johansson, Danny Huston, Toni Collette and Jessica Biel

If you have read my post on favorite directors, you'll know that Alfred Hitchcock made the list. I don't know much about him, other than the movies he left us with. That's why I was so interested in seeing this biographical drama. When I found out that Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren were involved, I was tempted to see "Hitchcock" the week it opened in theaters. I missed that opportunity, and the remainder of its run had one evening showing per day, so I eventually decided to wait for the Blu-ray. Reviews have been disappointing, but, as always, I trusted my instincts and decided to make up my own mind.

Hopkins doesn't try to mimic Hitchcock's voice exactly, but he does employ the deliberate mode of speech that most of us are familiar with. The makeup isn't entirely convincing either, but it's good enough to get the job done. Hopkins plays the director quite seriously, and I felt that Hitchcock's playful nature was a little underused.

What the movie attempts to do is take us back to the making of Psycho, which was released in 1960. Paramount's bosses were seeking something similar to North by Northwest, which had been released in 1959, but Hitchcock wanted to try something new. We learn how the project was chosen, and the sacrifices that Hitchcock and wife Alma made to make it happen. It's an interesting look at a brief time in a career which spanned more than half a century.

The movie gets a lot of things right; It looks and feels like 1960, Scarlett Johansson and Jessica Biel manage to resemble film stars of that era, and the casting in general is excellent.

I've been thinking about why reviews were so negative, and I've come to the conclusion that it is a movie which will appeal to a very specific audience. It's not a gripping drama, and there isn't much excitement. This is a story intended for movie buffs or fans of Hitchcock. If you want to know more about his character, and how movies are made, this has something for you. Character studies are hard to get right, and the movie is far from perfect. But I was engrossed for 90 minutes, and enjoyed learning how some of the events came to pass. The marketing for Psycho was inventive, and contributed to its early success. Some of that story is shown here.

The biggest source of conflict in the movie is Hitchcock's relationship with Alma. We learn something about their home life, and ultimately how important she was to his success. There's an explosive scene, just over an hour into the movie, in which Mirren's performance is elevated from good to great. It reminded me somewhat of the scene in Doubt, where Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman finally confront each other.

Seeing "Hitchcock" makes me want to watch Psycho again, and I will do so in the near future. I've also been watching the excellent Bates Motel, starring Vera Farmiga and Freddie Highmore, and would recommend that as a good companion piece to Psycho if you're a fan.

"Hitchcock" works for its intended audience, but many people will find it lacking. It's a quiet movie, focusing on characters and details, rather than intensely dramatic scenes. I'm not sure what moviegoers were expecting. Perhaps they were hoping for a detailed look at Hitchcock's entire career? Lincoln fell flat for some viewers for similar reasons. If you enjoy seeing good acting, and have any interest in the man, "Hitchcock" is worth your time.

Overall score 4/5 (for it's intended audience)

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

Thanks for the review, but Gamer is a terrible movie. That only makes me want to see it less...

Why do you feel Gamer is terrible? Do you not see the satire?

[BJKH]

My review for The Expendables 2:

The Expendables 2 Review

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Why do you feel Gamer is terrible? Do you not see the satire?

While I've never seen it myself, I'm guessing a lot of people don't see the satire since it's gotten horrible reviews. Not saying that matters of course.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Why do you feel Gamer is terrible? Do you not see the satire?

I saw the satire, but I didn't find it very good. It was all a bit backwards and mean spirited (considering it's target audience are around the gaming audience).

[SquidPuppet]

I read your review Foggy. I am worried though. I loved the first one, and enjoyed number 2 enough to buy it when it was cheap. Number 3 is sitting at 93% at RT, so that looks great, but so was Spiderman 2 and I hated that.

This is what spooks me...

is just things blowing up, a great big endless boring noisy confusing nothingness given occasional zip by Gwyneth Paltrow in a temper

[jvince]

Babe (1995)
dir. Chris Noonan

The Good: Whimsical, charming, high-quality feel-good story. Excellent voice acting. Delightful animal characters; My favorites would have to be Ferdinand (the duck), the three singing mice, and of course, Babe himself; So darn adorable. Very impressive animatronics from Jim Henson's Creature Shop. High replay value.

The Bad: Nothing major.

The Bottom Line: I was pleasantly surprised to find how well this children's classic holds up. What I don't understand is why this is rated so low at movie sites such as IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes. Yeah, so it's overtly pro-vegetarian. Does that make it a bad film or are people just ashamed to admit they like it?

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I read your review Foggy. I am worried though. I loved the first one, and enjoyed number 2 enough to buy it when it was cheap. Number 3 is sitting at 93% at RT, so that looks great, but so was Spiderman 2 and I hated that.

This is what spooks me...

It's definitely not just things blowing up (although the climax does become a little tedious), there's a lot of heart, comedy and a few suprises in store. I can't remember much from Spider-Man 2 since it's been donkeys years since I watched it, so I can't really compare (other than I liked that film). I guess the only major concern you should have is with the portrayal of The Mandarin, if you're a big fan of the comics, you may have a few problems with what they do with him.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Okay guys, I really though Pain&Gain was a stinging satire. I've scribbled a bunch of notes to be glued together later. In short, I highly reccomend this film, especially to those of you who liked the type of satire in Gamer.

I feel like doing a double review of his two most recent Non Transformers films ('Pain' and The Island). So I hope to have those in sometime this weekend.

Originally Posted by DjMethod

Thanks for the review, but Gamer is a terrible movie. That only makes me want to see it less...

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Why do you feel Gamer is terrible? Do you not see the satire?

Originally Posted by KilloWertz

While I've never seen it myself, I'm guessing a lot of people don't see the satire since it's gotten horrible reviews. Not saying that matters of course.

Originally Posted by Foggy

I saw the satire, but I didn't find it very good. It was all a bit backwards and mean spirited (considering it's target audience are around the gaming audience).

I've only seen Gamer once. I did enjoy the satire and social comments of the movie, and have it on disc. I felt it had a lot of brilliant moments, in addition to some fun and exciting moments.

However, I have to agree that it's a pretty messy and gaudy film. I blame the style for the most part: the camera shakes WAY too much, and the editing is rapid-fire. I barely remember what else is wrong, but per the review I wrote ages ago, the plot was all over the place, characters underdeveloped, nutty writing, some parts were just plain confusing or unresolved.

I gave it a 3/5. Pain & Gain gets a 4/5 from me, but I don't find the two comparable that much, even with the satire. I'd gladly group Gamer together with things like The Running Man or the original Rollerball, and I'd rewatch it in the same sense that I'd rewatch Ultraviolet for its (very) few good points.

I'd describe P&G as Scarface without the shootings and with Bay's standard Bad Boys vibe attached to it.

[legendarymatt92]

It appears that Pain & Gain is the sleeper-hit amongst people on this forum at the moment. I'm quite surprised it's had anything positive said about it, let alone heaps and heaps of praise!

I may check it out now.

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

I'd rewatch it in the same sense that I'd rewatch Ultraviolet for its (very) few good points.

I know this is veering off, but since you mentioned it, one can only imagine what Ultraviolet might have been if Sony didn't take it out of Kurt Wimmer's hands and chop it up.

I still remember seeing the trailer for the first time before Underworld Evolution in the theater and thinking how bad-ass it looked.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by KilloWertz

I know this is veering off, but since you mentioned it, one can only imagine what Ultraviolet might have been if Sony didn't take it out of Kurt Wimmer's hands and chop it up.

I still remember seeing the trailer for the first time before Underworld Evolution in the theater and thinking how bad-ass it looked.

I agree completely. Stupid studios...

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Pain & Gain

Michael Bay, perpetual purveyor of the chaotic, returns with his first film outside the Transformers franchise in nearly eight years, the last being 2005's The Island, which similarly is about "Big Ideas" (cloning). However, where that film only aimed to duplicate 70's sci-fi, Pain and Gain delivers a morally complex satire which only Michael Bay could deliver.

The film this most resembles in form is Neveldine & Taylor's Gamer. Both are extremely unsubtle socially relevant satires (well, Gamer is a bit less overt) that rely on garish frenzied imagery (sometimes hanheld) for effect. In the case of Gamer it was about the grotesquerie of our online identities and the ruthlessness of Reality Television and cable news. Pain and Gain is simply about The American Dream and how the subsequent desire for material wealth ("getting buff") corrodes our moral compass. To paraphrase Mark Wahlberg's opening narration, America got to be number one by getting more ripped than other nations. The levels to this film are so intricate: although it's built on top of a well treaded crime-narrative, it establishes a grimly fascinating portrait of The Pursuit of Happiness.

The story is no different than Rocky, Scarface or The Godfather, whom are all role models for the mentally unequipped Daniel Lugo (Mark Wahlberg),the key difference are the additional generations of decay. Paul Doyle (Dwayne Johnson) and Adrian Doorbal (Anthony Mackie) are lead by the Daniel Lugo, whom is striving for the American Dream only seen in gangster film and TV ads (Ken Jeung's supporting role as a Get-Rich-Quick-Guru is as juicy as they come).

Even more fascinating, if a bit tiresome, is what Bay's trademark bulldozer style accomplishes here. Buffoonery has been dimensionally trans-mutated into profundity, what was once blatant fetishization is now stinging social commentary. Michael Bay's gonzo abstract style finally purely marries form and function into what is his most aesthetically purposed film. His widescreen canvas casts a net on the constituents of materialization: nearly every frame highlights a logo whether Nike, Adidas or Windex. Bimbos, air-headed body builders and soulless businessmen populate the grimy, sleazy concrete jungle of Miami. His giant overbearing kinetic style paints a world just as heightened, fractured and repulsive as the one in Daniel Lugo's head. The half submerged shot of him in a pool, rendering his proportions mis-matched is telling. These aren't the heroes of Armageddon, The Rock, or Transformers; not do they exude any trace of altruism like Ewan McGregor's character in The Island. They are selfish, reckless and utterly detestable.

The timid satire of Spring Breakers is one upped in nearly every way. Compare Paul Doyle (Deayne Johnson) to Selena Gomez' Faith. He's larger than life buffoon, almost Bush Era pseudo-fascist: he totes along a Bible, wears an "I'm on Team Jesus" t-shirt, yet has no problem wielding a gun, or (later) snorting cocaine off of a curious object (a great nod to Paul Verhoeven's Robocob, also a satire, that I will not spoil here). Faith, in Spring Breakers,
however is painted in a much more fetishistic way (like the Michael Bay models of yore) with only the contrapuntal narration meshing with the satirical backdrop.

Michael Bay cynics, believe me I used to be one of them, will call this business as usual, but for those willing to dive into new images and pan for gold, you will find it. I hope he continues making films that have a socially reflective spirit, because who can better paint the warped American id than Michael "checks-and-balances" Bay. "That's the American Dream."

4/5

Does it not bother you that the film attempts to humorously satirize the real-life exploits of Lugo, Doorbal, and company? Especially when it involves the kidnapping a month long torture of one individual, and then the kidnapping, killing, and dismemberment of another innocent couple, which resulted in both Lugo and Doorbal getting the death penalty (note: they're both still on death row). It seems shameful that Bay chose to make a satire of this horrible story, and almost make Lugo and Doorbal sympathetic anti-heroes.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by Foggy

I saw the satire, but I didn't find it very good. It was all a bit backwards and mean spirited (considering it's target audience are around the gaming audience).

I can see how soma may find it mean spirited, but I found it hilarious (I care nothing for video games, by the way) and all the more so when filtered through Neveldine/Taylor's juvenile lens. Everybody's a target, and its itreverently infectious. That said its equally about reality TV and our online personas.

I also feel like they got everything theu wanted out of the actors: Gerard Butler is two-dimensional, Kyra Sedgwick is an exaggerated Fox News persona, Mixhael C. Hall chews the scenery like none other, and my God, This was the Role Logan Lerman was born to play, and he nailed it: a grossly spoiled brat.......

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Does it not bother you that the film attempts to humorously satirize the real-life exploits of Lugo, Doorbal, and company? Especially when it involves the kidnapping a month long torture of one individual, and then the kidnapping, killing, and dismemberment of another innocent couple, which resulted in both Lugo and Doorbal getting the death penalty (note: they're both still on death row). It seems shameful that Bay chose to make a satire of this horrible story, and almost make Lugo and Doorbal sympathetic anti-heroes.

1)I find the humor mainly in the reappropriation of his style. Instead of his usual gross displays of jingoistic mayhem, the violence here is always felt.

2) I don't find them sympathetic anti-heroes at all!

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Why do you feel Gamer is terrible? Do you not see the satire?

There was nothing to "get" because the satire wasn't amusing, humorous, or clever in the least bit. Plus, it doesn't even matter when the template is aimless action fluff and a disastrous script. The film fails miserably imo, and I rarely say that.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

There was nothing to "get" because the satire wasn't amusing, humorous, or clever in the least bit. Plus, it doesn't even matter when the template is aimless action fluff and a disastrous script. The film fails miserably imo, and I rarely say that.

"Aimless action fluff," that's how I would describe some of your picks for the best comic book movies (300 and The Punisher especially). Yes, the script is terrible, but the way Neveldine/Taylor paint such a debased gleefully politically incorrect vision of America just makes me laugh. Sure, it's not The Fireman's Ball or Closely Watched Trains, but its more thought provoking (even in the ways thats it doesnt succeed) than 90% of American films today.

If you're down, you should check out this brief review:
http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/now-i...ine-taylor-usa

I think it's Healthy for any cineaste to like trash, to paraphrase Pauline Kael

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

"Aimless action fluff," that's how I would describe some of your picks for the best comic book movies (300 and The Punisher especially). Yes, the script is terrible, but the way Neveldine/Taylor paint such a debased gleefully politically incorrect vision of America just makes me laugh. Sure, it's not The Fireman's Ball or Closely Watched Trains, but its more thought provoking (even in the ways thats it doesnt succeed) than 90% of American films today.

That's fine, but I think it gets buried in the 90% of films today.

I never said The Punisher was all that good on its own, it's just a personal favorite of mine. Thomas Jane did a fantastic job and is the best Frank Castle. 300 pushed the aesthetic envelope in many ways, so that speaks for itself. Those that didn't like 300 usually fall into one of two sides: they disapprove of the comic's historical reimagining or the style didn't agree with them. Gamer didn't bring anything new to the table and could have delivered its message far more effectively with just a little inspiration anywhere from anyone in the entire cast and crew. It was like the camera crew didn't want to go to work, so they did a few lines of coke each morning before the jittery handheld shoots.