The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

I actually hope I'm not hyping it up too much for you or anyone else. Reviews seem to be pretty mixed; lots of viewers found it disappointing.

Meh I dig this sci-fi stuff, especially D9 and the anime's you mentioned.

Plus Wagner Moura and Alice Braga!!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Well, I thought it was rather odd to see people hanging off of the walls by their heads,

You are darn tootin' it's odd. Creeptacular.

even though I find the aesthetics of that brief trailer appealing, I was thoroughly weirded out.

You are supposed to be weirded out. It's a horror show after all.

You have me very confused here Al.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

Do you recommend the series? I've never watched any of them.

Season one was excellent IMO. Not so scary, but creeeeepy and evil as heck. Trippy photography and editing. Sounds and images that give you chills.

I have not seen season two but heard it missed the mark of season one.

The cast for upcoming season 3 is jawdropping.

Emma Roberts
Jessica Lange
Kathy Bates
Angela Bassett
Patti Lupone
Taissa Farmiga
Gabourey Sidibe
Sarah Paulson
Lily Rabe
Frances Conroy
Alexandra Breckenridge
Denis O'Hare

Kathy Bates vs Jessica Lang in a horror show.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

The real brilliance appears to be more and more in TV, these days. I'll have to check 'em out then.

All the cable channels are finding the right recipe to drive huge viewership.

Hollywood is forcefully moulding everything into a PG rating package in order to get the biggest audience to maximize profit. Moviegoers grumble and complain about the lack of authenticity in adult themed movies, frustrated by the watered down themes, language, violence, and nudity. The cable channels heard those complaints and have been ratcheting up their programing for a decade now, HBO leading the charge. They are delivering gobs of high budget, well written, well acted, beautifully shot, serialised adult (R-to-hard R) shows with very controversial themes. The cable channels are finding large audiences, who (like me) want adult drama to feel real, naughty words and neked bodies and all. No sissy stuff. Look at the success of The Walking Dead. 12+ million viewers.

A lot of big screen talent is migrating to the little screen for these exact reasons. They are tired of being artistically stifled. Kevin Spacey teamed up with Netflix to make House of Cards becasue he was tired of having projects rejected or being told to "Tone it down."

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Might have to watch Lost again too, since I never did watch season 6.

[SquidPuppet]

Sophie's Choice Blu-ray

Blu-ray + DVD

Shout Factory | 1982 | 150 min | Rated R | Nov 19, 2013 (3 Months)

been waiting for this one.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Sophie's Choice Blu-ray

Blu-ray + DVD

Shout Factory | 1982 | 150 min | Rated R | Nov 19, 2013 (3 Months)

been waiting for this one.

(Avoids lame joke about deciding whether or not to pick this up)

I'm really excited too. I hope it still holds up as it has been about four years since I last saw it.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

All the cable channels are finding the right recipe to drive huge viewership.

Hollywood is forcefully moulding everything into a PG rating package in order to get the biggest audience to maximize profit. Moviegoers grumble and complain about the lack of authenticity in adult themed movies, frustrated by the watered down themes, language, violence, and nudity. The cable channels heard those complaints and have been ratcheting up their programing for a decade now, HBO leading the charge. They are delivering gobs of high budget, well written, well acted, beautifully shot, serialised adult (R-to-hard R) shows with very controversial themes. The cable channels are finding large audiences, who (like me) want adult drama to feel real, naughty words and neked bodies and all. No sissy stuff. Look at the success of The Walking Dead. 12+ million viewers.

A lot of big screen talent is migrating to the little screen for these exact reasons. They are tired of being artistically stifled. Kevin Spacey teamed up with Netflix to make House of Cards becasue he was tired of having projects rejected or being told to "Tone it down."

Man, that was some explanation. I'm no expert on the matter, but it sounds like you've hit the nail on the head.

The thing with a miniseries, as well as your succinctly put findings, are that the creative department are given much more time and space to flesh out characters, storyline arcs or whatever they feel requires maximum focus. Movies, despite their absolute brilliance, can often lack that.

[jvince]

R´ha - YouTube

R'ha (2013)
dir. Kaleb Lechowski

The Good: Visually impressive. So, you're telling me all of this was made by just one person -- and a student, no less? This film? Damn...

The Bad: Conventional sci-fi plot.

The Bottom Line: The short caught the attention of Star Wars producer Rick McCallum and is now set to be adapted into a feature-length film penned by Life on Mars creator Matthew Graham. It would be interesting to see how they expand on the premise. Worth a look.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

You are supposed to be weirded out. It's a horror show after all.

You have me very confused here Al.

Good.

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

All the cable channels are finding the right recipe to drive huge viewership.

Hollywood is forcefully moulding everything into a PG rating package in order to get the biggest audience to maximize profit. Moviegoers grumble and complain about the lack of authenticity in adult themed movies, frustrated by the watered down themes, language, violence, and nudity. The cable channels heard those complaints and have been ratcheting up their programing for a decade now, HBO leading the charge. They are delivering gobs of high budget, well written, well acted, beautifully shot, serialised adult (R-to-hard R) shows with very controversial themes. The cable channels are finding large audiences, who (like me) want adult drama to feel real, naughty words and neked bodies and all. No sissy stuff. Look at the success of The Walking Dead. 12+ million viewers.

A lot of big screen talent is migrating to the little screen for these exact reasons. They are tired of being artistically stifled. Kevin Spacey teamed up with Netflix to make House of Cards becasue he was tired of having projects rejected or being told to "Tone it down."

I also concur with your assessment; it sounds very spot-on.

[jvince]

Jackass: The Movie (2002)
dir. Jeff Tremaine

The Good: The intro. Golf cart antics. The big cone. Ass kicked by girl. Night pandas. April's alligator. Bam's dad on the toilet. BMX tug-of-war. Golf course air horn. Butt x-ray.

The Bad: More misses than hits. The grossest and most juvenile of the three films.

The Bottom Line: The sequels are better than this. It's just amazing how after 25 episodes, three movies, and countless insane stunts, none of them died during filming.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by jvince

Jackass: The Movie (2002)
dir. Jeff Tremaine

The Good: The intro. Golf cart antics. The big cone. Ass kicked by girl. Night pandas. April's alligator. Bam's dad on the toilet. BMX tug-of-war. Golf course air horn. Butt x-ray.

The Bad: More misses than hits. The grossest and most juvenile of the three films.

The Bottom Line: The sequels are better than this. It's just amazing how after 25 episodes, three movies, and countless insane stunts, none of them died during filming.

Gearing up for that Bad Grandpa movie?

It actually does look funny.

[Foggy]

Ah well, Kick-Ass 2 next week Abdrewes...oh wait you didn't like the first one...

[Al_The_Strange]

[quote=Abdrewes;7970097]Frustratingly though, this is more in the vein of In Time and not Children of Men as what ensues is underdeveloped from a conceptual standpoint and brazenly illogical.[/spoiler]
Maybe true, although I personally liked In Time as well. I seriously enjoyed that film's concept, and I didn't see that much wrong with it the way other viewers did.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

To facilitate this, Neill Blomkamp (also screenwriter) has him stumble into a locking compartment at one of Androdyne's Los Angeles surveillance drone factories where he will be exposed to a lethal dose of radiation (talk about lazy plotting).

That scene reminded me so much of the way Wickus got sprayed by the alien goo in District 9. Both films really kick off when the characters go through some crazy accident, and I thought they were both neat that way.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Let us stop to consider the notion of keeping the med pods, certainly the most desired technology ever devised, under tight wraps. If the last two centuries have taught us anything it is that technology has a tendency to migrate freely—when there is capital to be gained, it will not, for any circumstances, remain safely tucked away for only the privileged elite to benefit from. Taking in to account that illegal transit between Earth and Elysium is improbably easy, there is nothing stopping a modest entrepreneur from making a bundle by bridging the med pods to the needy populace. Suffice it to say, Neill Blomkamp's sophomore effort has fundamental script problems. When you tack on the riotously dumb denouement, Elysium is as air headed as big budget films come. It's as if Blomkamp, in a desperate plea for anonymity, decided to defy high expectation by delivering a clunker of a science fiction parable.

This is something I had considered as well: why is it that all the great cure-all medical devices are ONLY available on Elysium? Especially since

[Show spoiler]at the film's end, it looked like an easy manner to dispatch ships and robots to cure everybody on Earth

. In the context of the story, the elitist nature of the Elysium citizens, and the social commentary, I felt it was a minor point: the Elysium people were jerks throughout the picture, wanting to hog their wealth and leave everybody else to die in the dirt. I also figure that the medical equipment must be so expensive that only the super-rich could afford them. I suppose, overall, it's a case where the social allegories override plotting, but it's not something that really bothered me personally.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

Okay, the script is a bonafide catastrophe, but the futuristic designs are terrific, nay, absolutely wondrous. From the sleek design of the military droids to the compact jet-powered spacecrafts (including a crimson variation of the Bugatti Veyron), the team of talented visual artists really know how to sell all the futuristic gadgetry with panache. The design of the Elysium space station—part Discovery One from 2001: A Space Odyssey, part leafy gardens from Silent Running—is one of the most awe inspiring works of art design seen in theaters this year, maybe the most. Riding along each sweeping pan into the inhabitable areas of the space station left me breathless; each towering tree and detailed digital Malibu-style abode had a tactile hyper-real quality. During these shots I felt the same type of rush audiences in 1977 felt watching Luke Skywalker navigate the trenches of the Death Star. In fact, everything but Jodie Foster making orders in a control room that takes place on Elysium captured my imagination unlike anything I have seen this year, so it is a shame the film is the definition of a mixed-bag.

Totally agree...except for the script, which didn't bother me much.

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

There are traces of genius in the way it integrates gritty reality into such an antiseptic environment as Elysium, but largely, the affair cannot be salvaged. Maybe as a cultural document, a time machine into cultural concerns of today and a key example of what was wrong with blockbusters from the 2010's it will find value in the future, but as of right now, it is nothing less than a disappointment. I had anticipated this to be the one summer release to look forward to. Boy, was I wrong.

Well, sorry it didn't work for you (along with numerous other viewers; I seem to be the film's only diehard fan ). Still a fair rating and a fair review.

If there's anything I'd argue about, I just think a lot of the film's flaws (characters, writing, action-intensive, shakey cam, etc) are the same as District 9.

[Abdrewes]

Sorry guys...I just reread my review which as always had some major grammar issues. Fixed it

Elysium:

[Show spoiler]It is the year 2154 and comfortable existence on planet Earth is firmly a thing of the past. In an opening ten minutes which contain the most viscerally moving blockbuster imagery of the year, Trent Opaloch's aerial photography captures a digitally rendered world of cluttered disposable housing and endless consumer waste. Mankind is policed and serviced by Armadyne droids whose mode of operation is distinctly out of line with humanities' best interests. Unlike the rest of the film, these scenes are charged with a mild satirical bent. Max Da Costa, the bald-headed ex-convict in Matt Damon, has a few comically charged encounters that poke fun at the ridiculous notion that such basic machines could possibly wrangle us in as a species. The first of these being a violent street street altercation with two police-bots, which leads to a broken forearm for Max, the next a monotone mimicking routine aimed at his parole officer. Both scenes are definitely broadly pitched, but effective. Sadly, that is all in the way of wit or effective commentary this film has to offer.

So Max, along with the rest of the denizens of his grungy hometown slum, dream of reaching the space station utopia of Elysium, which is only inhabited by the entitled one percent (maybe even only the fortunate one-tenth of a percent). Populated by hispanic people and resembling the look of the worn-down Chihuahua border cities ghettos, Max's surroundings instantly draw a parallel to modern social and political concerns, namely illegal immigration. This has all the makings for the type of science fiction story I admire: one which channels modern fears and concerns to speculate about about the future. Frustratingly though, this is more in the vein of In Time and not Children of Men as what ensues is underdeveloped from a conceptual standpoint and brazenly illogical. The world building here is just as poor as June's After Earth, but at least M. Night Shyamalan's film had the redeeming facet of filtering the adventure through an earnest coming of age allegory. Elysium, on the other hand, parades its hollow ideas with numbing action movie showmanship.

By simple deduction, we know Max will bull his way into Elysium. To facilitate this quicker, Neill Blomkamp (also screenwriter) has him stumble into a locking compartment at one of Androdyne's Los Angeles surveillance drone factories where he will be exposed to a lethal dose of radiation (talk about lazy plotting). His sole hope for survival lies in reaching one of the medical pods on Elysium which have the power to cure disease. En route, he will have to partner with a smuggler and steal corporate secrets from the mind of Androdyne CEO John Carlisle (William Fichtner) via a robotic exoskeleton and neural transmitter. The film eventually wants us to admire Max's pure altruism as he plans to open Elysium to the commoners, but the film has too many script issues for this to prove effective.

Let us stop to consider the notion of keeping the med pods, the most desired technology ever devised, under tight wraps on Elysium. If the last two centuries have taught us anything it is that technology has a tendency to migrate freely, from country to country—where there is capital to be gained, it will not, under any circumstances, remain safely tucked away for only the privileged elite to benefit from. Taking in to account that illegal transit between Earth and Elysium is improbably easy, there is nothing stopping a modest entrepreneur from making a bundle by bridging the med pods to the needy populace. Suffice it to say, Neill Blomkamp's sophomore effort has fundamental script problems. When you tack on the riotously dumb denouement, Elysium is as air headed as big budget multiplex fare come. It's as if Blomkamp, in a desperate plea for anonymity, decided to defy high expectation by delivering a clunker of a science fiction parable.

Okay, the script is a bonafide catastrophe, but the futuristic designs are terrific, nay, absolutely wondrous. From the sleek design of the military droids to the compact jet-powered spacecrafts (including a crimson variation of the Bugatti Veyron), the team of talented visual artists really know how to sell all the futuristic gadgetry with panache. The design of the Elysium space station—part Discovery One from 2001: A Space Odyssey, part leafy gardens from Silent Running—is one of the most awe inspiring works of art design seen in theaters this year, maybe the most. Riding along each sweeping pan into the inhabitable areas of the space station left me breathless; each towering tree and detailed digital Malibu-style abode had a tactile hyper-real quality. During these shots I felt the same type of rush audiences in 1977 felt watching Luke Skywalker navigate the trenches of the Death Star. In fact, everything but Jodie Foster making orders in a control room that takes place on Elysium captured my imagination unlike anything I have seen this year, so it is a shame the rest of the film can be defined as a mixed-bag. There are traces of genius in the way it integrates gritty reality into such an antiseptic environment as Elysium, but largely, the film as a whole cannot be salvaged. Maybe as a cultural document, a time machine into concerns of today and a key example of what was wrong with blockbusters from the 2010's, it will find value in the future, but as of right now, it is nothing less than a disappointment. I had anticipated this to be the one summer release to look forward to. Boy, was I wrong.

[Abdrewes]

Al, I'm sure one day I'll forgive some of the issues I had with the plotting for I really f**ing dug Elysium's designs.

And I'm kinda glad you got something out of the allegoical nature of it. Lord knows that I have forgiven plot points that were much more stupid (Prometheus).

I'm still excited to see what Neill will do next because he really has a unique vision when it comes to highlighting futuristic tech. Down, but not out in my opinion.

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Ah well, Kick-Ass 2 next week Abdrewes...oh wait you didn't like the first one...

I enjoyed the first one well enough...i was eventually worn down by its ironic distance to the material

[CoolRanch]

Barton Fink

My Two Cents
The Coen Bros. never cease to amaze me with their genre-defying film about a screenwriter with writer's block, Barton Fink. What could be one of the best scripts I have ever had the pleasure of experiencing, Barton Fink manages to be charming, humorous, and even disturbing all in the same film! My one concern is that I'm not too sure the movie stuck the landing.

[Show spoiler]I'm all for symbolism and allowing the audience to interpret the film for themselves, but the ending of Barton Fink just seems meaningless I even researched it online and not even the Coens, who wrote the script, were able to interpret its meaning. Maybe it's just me, but it just seems like symbolism for symbolism's sake (symbolism without meaning if that makes any sense)

Regardless of its shaky end, Barton Fink contains Oscar-deserving performances from each of its cast members, especially to John Turturro who gives a tour-de-force performance as the titular character. Amazingly, the only other movie that I've seen this guy in is Transformers Why is an actor with such ability acting in movies like Transformers and You Don't Mess with the Zohan when he could be doing so much more? But I digress. Barton Fink is another masterpiece in the Coens' repertoire, and as an aspiring screenwriter, it has a special meaning to me. It will find a home in my collection as soon as it is available. 9/10

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I enjoyed the first one well enough...i was eventually worn down by its ironic distance to the material

Ironic distancing?

I always through it was only different to the comic because they were written both at the same time as being produced (and some of the stuff in the comic really sucks tonally)

[jvince]

The Thing (1982)
dir. John Carpenter

The Good: Carpenter's masterful direction, Rob Bottin and Stan Winston's astounding special effects, Dean Cundey's stunning cinematography, Morricone's unnerving score, Kurt Russell, the cast, the story, the dialogue, the atmosphere, the pacing, the suspense, the gore, the opening, the kennel scene, the spider-head sequence, the blood test, the ending, the infinite replay value... Everything.

The Bad: Nothing.

The Bottom Line: Critics back then must have had shit for brains for panning this creature feature masterpiece. Sci-fi horror doesn't get any better than this. Essential viewing.