Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sun Jul 13, 2014 2:10 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15599 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 ... 780  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 388
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The Frozen Ground (2013)
A young prostitute (Vanessa Hudgens) escapes the clutches of serial killer John Hansen (John Cusack) in Anchorage, Alaska. A state trooper (Nicolas Cage) tries to bring him down with her help.
This is a standard serial killer movie. It is inspired by true events, but the script forces a formulaic cat-and-mouse game upon the story. The Alaskan scenery and good performances by Cage, Cusack and Hudgens are wasted, because the movie is so badly assembled that it is barely comprehensible at times. Even worse, the film has a tendency to delight in the anatomical description of details of rape and torture. I really didn't like 'The Frozen Ground'. 3/10

Now You See Me (2013)
A mysterious figure assembles a team of illusionists (Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Isla Fisher). A year later, they are a spectacular Las Vegas magic show act and sponsored by a wealthy benefactor (Michael Caine). They amaze everybody by robbing a bank in the course of their act. An FBI agent and an Interpol agent (Mark Ruffalo, Mélanie Laurent) are trying to find out how their trick worked and so is a professional debunker (Morgan Freeman).
Structurally, 'Now You See me' is comedy caper movie with the twist that the heists are part of show acts and that the identity of the man or woman behind the scenes is a mystery. The movie uses typecasting to guide the audience through the plot, but the actors are all in good form. There is a certain problem with magic in movies in general, because movies are already illusions themselves, tricking the eye into seeing movement when there is only a succession of individual pictures. Therefore, a magic act in the movies is never as amazing as a live stage act, because it could have been achieved through the magic of the movies. 'Now You See Me' still works, though, by focussing on the characters trying to figure out how things are connected. Director Louis Leterrier, whose record isn't exactly stellar (Transporters 2, Clash of the Titans), keeps things moving at a good pace, so implausibilities aren't to bothersome. I was surprisingly well entertained. 7/10

Trance (2013)
Simon (James McAvoy) works as an art auctioneer and also as the inside man for a gang of robbers led by the violent Frank (Vincent Cassel). In the course of a heist, Simon hides the stolen painting, but gets a knock on the head. He suffers from amnesia and forgets about the location of the painting. When he can't reveal the painting's whereabouts under torture, Frank takes him tothe professional hypnotist Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson)
Definitely one of Danny Boyle's less successful movies. It is made in the style of his late 90ies movies like 'The Beach', but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that the movie becomes totally convoluted once it becomes unclear whether we're watching a hypnosis induced "dream", a memory or something happening in the movie's reality. As a result, the twist is somewhat arbitrary and to clever for its own good. Worth watching, but not really good. 6/10


Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:01 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7217
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Unke wrote:


Now You See Me (2013)
A mysterious figure assembles a team of illusionists (Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Isla Fisher). A year later, they are a spectacular Las Vegas magic show act and sponsored by a wealthy benefactor (Michael Caine). They amaze everybody by robbing a bank in the course of their act. An FBI agent and an Interpol agent (Mark Ruffalo, Mélanie Laurent) are trying to find out how their trick worked and so is a professional debunker (Morgan Freeman).
Structurally, 'Now You See me' is comedy caper movie with the twist that the heists are part of show acts and that the identity of the man or woman behind the scenes is a mystery. The movie uses typecasting to guide the audience through the plot, but the actors are all in good form. There is a certain problem with magic in movies in general, because movies are already illusions themselves, tricking the eye into seeing movement when there is only a succession of individual pictures. Therefore, a magic act in the movies is never as amazing as a live stage act, because it could have been achieved through the magic of the movies. 'Now You See Me' still works, though, by focussing on the characters trying to figure out how things are connected. Director Louis Leterrier, whose record isn't exactly stellar (Transporters 2, Clash of the Titans), keeps things moving at a good pace, so implausibilities aren't to bothersome. I was surprisingly well entertained. 7/10


Wow I'm surprised you liked this. This was one of the most over-directed movies of 2013, in my opinion, and the plot doesn't really make any sense at all. Plus it has one of those "endings that cheapen the rest of the movie" going on

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:47 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1656
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
All About Eve

Is this a cautionary tale, or a tale of a bitchy actress getting her comeuppance? I'm not quite sure. The plot in short: An aging star of the theater takes a young girl under her wing. But the girl has some plans of her own, and it involves stealing a bit of the spotlight. I suppose All About Eve was seen as cynical in its time, but I think that the years have dulled it somewhat, with cynicism being the stock in trade of many productions. However, the acting is superb, with Bette Davis stealing the film; she was rightfully nominated for an Oscar but lost in a packed field that included Judy Holliday and Gloria Swanson. With that said, All About Eve isn't a bad film, just a little dated.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Sun Dec 15, 2013 8:58 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 724
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
Unke wrote:


Now You See Me (2013)
A mysterious figure assembles a team of illusionists (Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Isla Fisher). A year later, they are a spectacular Las Vegas magic show act and sponsored by a wealthy benefactor (Michael Caine). They amaze everybody by robbing a bank in the course of their act. An FBI agent and an Interpol agent (Mark Ruffalo, Mélanie Laurent) are trying to find out how their trick worked and so is a professional debunker (Morgan Freeman).
Structurally, 'Now You See me' is comedy caper movie with the twist that the heists are part of show acts and that the identity of the man or woman behind the scenes is a mystery. The movie uses typecasting to guide the audience through the plot, but the actors are all in good form. There is a certain problem with magic in movies in general, because movies are already illusions themselves, tricking the eye into seeing movement when there is only a succession of individual pictures. Therefore, a magic act in the movies is never as amazing as a live stage act, because it could have been achieved through the magic of the movies. 'Now You See Me' still works, though, by focussing on the characters trying to figure out how things are connected. Director Louis Leterrier, whose record isn't exactly stellar (Transporters 2, Clash of the Titans), keeps things moving at a good pace, so implausibilities aren't to bothersome. I was surprisingly well entertained. 7/10


Wow I'm surprised you liked this. This was one of the most over-directed movies of 2013, in my opinion, and the plot doesn't really make any sense at all. Plus it has one of those "endings that cheapen the rest of the movie" going on


Agreed. I found it pretty gimmicky, but entertaining for most of it's running time, but the ending completely undermines everything that came before it. It's outrageously implausible and also doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when you sit down and think about it. There has to be a point where asking an audience to suspend their disbelief becomes egregious.


Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:38 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 626
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Two watches this weekend...

Blackmail Hitchcock's first "talkie" was an interesting watch, despite an odd pace. I mean, it takes almost 40 minutes to show us the lead character (Anny Ondra) going out with his detective boyfriend (John Longden) and then with his artist lover (Cyril Ritchard) who ends up trying to rape her. From there comes the actual blackmail, which only happens during the last 20-25 minutes. It just felt very weird in how things unfolded. But still, I thought Ondra was solid as the lead and so was Donald Calthrop as the blackmailer. If anything, the most interesting thing was seeing Hitchcock come up with more clever tricks on how to shoot scenes. But as far as the film goes, it was okay, but not that great. Grade: C+ or B-

Barry Lyndon I probably should let this one sink in. Like most of Kubrick's films, it takes a detached, cold approach to the story which makes it feel, well, emotionless. Still, Ryan O'Neal was pretty good as the lead, and the direction was impeccable. Every single shot on the film was beautifully done, as if Kubrick was painting a masterpiece. I think this one will probably deserve more thoughts later. As it is now, probably a B or B+

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:55 pm
Profile WWW
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3308
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
Unke wrote:


Now You See Me (2013)
A mysterious figure assembles a team of illusionists (Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Isla Fisher). A year later, they are a spectacular Las Vegas magic show act and sponsored by a wealthy benefactor (Michael Caine). They amaze everybody by robbing a bank in the course of their act. An FBI agent and an Interpol agent (Mark Ruffalo, Mélanie Laurent) are trying to find out how their trick worked and so is a professional debunker (Morgan Freeman).
Structurally, 'Now You See me' is comedy caper movie with the twist that the heists are part of show acts and that the identity of the man or woman behind the scenes is a mystery. The movie uses typecasting to guide the audience through the plot, but the actors are all in good form. There is a certain problem with magic in movies in general, because movies are already illusions themselves, tricking the eye into seeing movement when there is only a succession of individual pictures. Therefore, a magic act in the movies is never as amazing as a live stage act, because it could have been achieved through the magic of the movies. 'Now You See Me' still works, though, by focussing on the characters trying to figure out how things are connected. Director Louis Leterrier, whose record isn't exactly stellar (Transporters 2, Clash of the Titans), keeps things moving at a good pace, so implausibilities aren't to bothersome. I was surprisingly well entertained. 7/10


Wow I'm surprised you liked this. This was one of the most over-directed movies of 2013, in my opinion, and the plot doesn't really make any sense at all. Plus it has one of those "endings that cheapen the rest of the movie" going on


Agreed. I found it pretty gimmicky, but entertaining for most of it's running time, but the ending completely undermines everything that came before it. It's outrageously implausible and also doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when you sit down and think about it. There has to be a point where asking an audience to suspend their disbelief becomes egregious.

I really enjoyed that film and I actually thought the ending was pretty clever, usually I can predict these types of twists, but this one I truly did not see coming.


Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:36 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 2000
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug: not as negative as James. In fact, I liked the darker palette in this film. I don't recommend the 3D version, because it gets pretty hard to see sometimes, but 2-D should be okay.

Jackson clearly thinks of this trilogy as being a prequel of "Lord of the Rings" rather than a straightforward adaptation of "The Hobbit." Thus we get the superfluous scenes at Dol Guldur presaging the return of Sauron. On the other hand, I liked the addition of Tauriel (Elizabeth Lilly) and the expansion of the role of Bard, who give a soul to the movie. Smaug is more formidable in the movie than he was in the book.

I found it interesting that the corrupting One Ring was positively useful in this movie. Bilbo would have died pretty quickly without it.

The biggest problem with the adaptation is that it seems bloated. Part 2 is an improvement, but there's just not enough material for an eight to nine hour adaptation. So, maybe a 7 or 7.5 out if 10.

I was also watching A Century of Quilts: America in Cloth which was apparently a PBS production, but was pretty interesting, and is indeed 60 minutes long. Quilting is an art form which appeals to the mathematician in me, and ranges from the sublime ('Ray of Light' with all the compass roses. 'Solar Eclipse') to the godawful, despite this being a celebration of the top 100 quilts of the last century.

I maintain anybody who paints a quilt (as opposed to dyeing or doing creative piecework) is working in a different medium and should be disqualified.

Coincidentally, I was watching this, with the presentation of the the "Emporia Phenomenon," simultaneously with reading Doris Kearnes Goodwin's "The Bully Pulpit: Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and the Golden Age of Journalism" (her follow-up to "Team of Rivals" on which Lincoln is partially based.) One of the major figures in that 'Golden Age of Journalism' was William Allen White, the editor of the Emporia Gazette, who probably helped introduce the Emporia Quiltists to a cowering world. (8.5 of 10)

_________________
Evil does not wear a bonnet!--Mr. Tinkles


Last edited by Syd Henderson on Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:51 pm, edited 5 times in total.



Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:07 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7217
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:

I really enjoyed that film and I actually thought the ending was pretty clever, usually I can predict these types of twists, but this one I truly did not see coming.


Yes, and that's what's bad about it.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:25 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3308
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
Vexer wrote:

I really enjoyed that film and I actually thought the ending was pretty clever, usually I can predict these types of twists, but this one I truly did not see coming.


Yes, and that's what's bad about it.

Well normally I would agree, but in this instance I felt it was really well done.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:09 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:51 pm
Posts: 417
Location: Durham, NC
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Thief12 wrote:
Barry Lyndon I probably should let this one sink in. Like most of Kubrick's films, it takes a detached, cold approach to the story which makes it feel, well, emotionless. Still, Ryan O'Neal was pretty good as the lead, and the direction was impeccable. Every single shot on the film was beautifully done, as if Kubrick was painting a masterpiece. I think this one will probably deserve more thoughts later. As it is now, probably a B or B+


Thief, you just broke my heart with that grade.

This is by far my favorite Kubrick film, and arguably Kubrick's most overlooked work. I have to say that I find Lyndon to have more emotional resonance than many of his prior works-I always felt that the beauty of the film really contrasts itself against the narrative. Barry Lyndon is a grueling story once you get down to it--this is a guy whose transforms himself multiple times over the course of the story, and its all to reach a very vague place, but one that clearly means something substantial to him. With that said,I think we can all relate to that in some way, and in turn I think that does create somewhat of an emotional connection our protagonist. So yea I see a emotion here, again, more so than say The Shinning or 2001, and once you experience the ending, or the last 20-25 minutes, it becomes so arduous. But stepping away from the emotional aspect of the film, I find Barry Lyndon to be extremely extremely successful in displacing themes of our time (capitalism, class structures, etc.) into a vastly different, victorian setting. And it works so damn well. We get to see Lyndon scheme, connive, and work his way up the "ladder" so to speak, and its all so cleverly done (as you said, great example of impeccable direction).

The first time I watched the film, I was really struck by the scale (This is Kubrick's epic.Spartacus can kiss my ass). It's just kind of mind-blowing when you think about how everything is so well crafted--everything from the sets to the costumes to the atmosphere--it all builds upon this vast scale or "epic-ness," if you will. Going back to its setting in this victorian time--I still can't shake the feeling that a lot of Barry Lyndon is done in the vein of the gangster subgenre--perhaps this goes back to some of the themes that I addressed earlier or it may just be the tropes in the narrative. More specifically, it's hard not to see aspects of Barry Lyndon in Goodfellas, even though the former is less well known. Its just such an interesting film as a whole, and I will always contend that its one of Kubrick's greatest.

_________________
"I have now come to claim that satisfaction."


Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:59 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 747
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JackBurns wrote:
Thief, you just broke my heart with that grade.

Mine too. Barry Lyndon is Kubrick at his very best.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:56 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1292
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Like Father, Like Son (2013)

Considering how the general Thais have a strong gag reflex for anything resembling an "art-house movie" pacing, it's surprising how well-embraced Koreeda is. This is the first film I've seen from him, but Nobody Knows was relatively big in its release, and since then his films have been consistently given theatrical releases and well-received both critically and financially (as can be, given its limited release).

For Like Father, Like Son, I may not be as effusive as my country fellows, but I now can see the love and enthusiasm. The film has a certain unrelenting elegance to its tone, refusing ever to steep in over-the-top emotions or performances. As a result, the drama can get heightened by small gestures and glances without breaking the illusion that this can really happen in real life. Simple, lush cinematography exemplifies the superlative performances, especially from the younger generation. Koreeda has a very astute understanding of how children's minds work (which is more subtle than most directors think), and also able to bring out the exact performances needed in them.

A shame and minor flaw then, that he devotes too much of the time and focus on the adults and their very well-acted but eventually redundant problems. The emotional resonance of their story comes at the end, but until then the main father's semi coming-of-age story and a surprisingly trite statement on class division get repetitive at times. Still, the performances keep them at an enjoyable enough level, and this remains a sensitive and insightful drama not to be missed. 8.5/10


Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:47 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1553
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
HyperCube and Cube Zero

Three enjoyable movies, solid trilogy. Zero is a conclusion to the first movie and HyperCube seems like an outlier. A crazy tangent of the concept. 4.5 hours well-spent.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:40 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 626
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JackBurns wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Barry Lyndon I probably should let this one sink in. Like most of Kubrick's films, it takes a detached, cold approach to the story which makes it feel, well, emotionless. Still, Ryan O'Neal was pretty good as the lead, and the direction was impeccable. Every single shot on the film was beautifully done, as if Kubrick was painting a masterpiece. I think this one will probably deserve more thoughts later. As it is now, probably a B or B+


Thief, you just broke my heart with that grade.

This is by far my favorite Kubrick film, and arguably Kubrick's most overlooked work. I have to say that I find Lyndon to have more emotional resonance than many of his prior works-I always felt that the beauty of the film really contrasts itself against the narrative. Barry Lyndon is a grueling story once you get down to it--this is a guy whose transforms himself multiple times over the course of the story, and its all to reach a very vague place, but one that clearly means something substantial to him. With that said,I think we can all relate to that in some way, and in turn I think that does create somewhat of an emotional connection our protagonist. So yea I see a emotion here, again, more so than say The Shinning or 2001, and once you experience the ending, or the last 20-25 minutes, it becomes so arduous. But stepping away from the emotional aspect of the film, I find Barry Lyndon to be extremely extremely successful in displacing themes of our time (capitalism, class structures, etc.) into a vastly different, victorian setting. And it works so damn well. We get to see Lyndon scheme, connive, and work his way up the "ladder" so to speak, and its all so cleverly done (as you said, great example of impeccable direction).

The first time I watched the film, I was really struck by the scale (This is Kubrick's epic.Spartacus can kiss my ass). It's just kind of mind-blowing when you think about how everything is so well crafted--everything from the sets to the costumes to the atmosphere--it all builds upon this vast scale or "epic-ness," if you will. Going back to its setting in this victorian time--I still can't shake the feeling that a lot of Barry Lyndon is done in the vein of the gangster subgenre--perhaps this goes back to some of the themes that I addressed earlier or it may just be the tropes in the narrative. More specifically, it's hard not to see aspects of Barry Lyndon in Goodfellas, even though the former is less well known. Its just such an interesting film as a whole, and I will always contend that its one of Kubrick's greatest.


Well, I'm sorry I broke your heart, but like I said, it's a film that I feel has to sink in for me to appreciate it more perhaps. Plus, grades aren't meant to be definitive, and still, B or B+ is a good grade nonetheless. I remember having similar reactions to Dr. Strangelove and A Clockwork Orange at first, and came to appreciate both more with time. As it is now, it is probably #6 among the eight Kubrick films I've seen (above Spartacus and The Shining).

But anyway, you bring up a lot of good points, most of which I agree with. One of the things that impressed me more about the film was precisely Barry's transformation from a naive young man into the conniving man he ended up as. I thought it was interesting how Kubrick had me rooting for him in the beginning, only to feel sorry for him, or even dislike him, in the end. I also thought it was interesting to see Kubrick's perennial theme of dehumanization here, and I agree that the way it presents class structure in its fake facade is compelling. And I already praised the production values and directing. So I really liked the film. That shouldn't break your heart ;)

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:20 am
Profile WWW
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 388
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
Unke wrote:
Now You See Me (2013)
Structurally, 'Now You See me' is comedy caper movie with the twist that the heists are part of show acts and that the identity of the man or woman behind the scenes is a mystery. The movie uses typecasting to guide the audience through the plot, but the actors are all in good form. There is a certain problem with magic in movies in general, because movies are already illusions themselves, tricking the eye into seeing movement when there is only a succession of individual pictures. Therefore, a magic act in the movies is never as amazing as a live stage act, because it could have been achieved through the magic of the movies. 'Now You See Me' still works, though, by focussing on the characters trying to figure out how things are connected. Director Louis Leterrier, whose record isn't exactly stellar (Transporters 2, Clash of the Titans), keeps things moving at a good pace, so implausibilities aren't to bothersome. I was surprisingly well entertained. 7/10


Wow I'm surprised you liked this. This was one of the most over-directed movies of 2013, in my opinion, and the plot doesn't really make any sense at all. Plus it has one of those "endings that cheapen the rest of the movie" going on


Agreed. I found it pretty gimmicky, but entertaining for most of it's running time, but the ending completely undermines everything that came before it. It's outrageously implausible and also doesn't really make a whole lot of sense when you sit down and think about it. There has to be a point where asking an audience to suspend their disbelief becomes egregious.


I was surprised myself about how much I enjoyed the movie despite of its obvious shortcomings. Yet, I try to be truthful when I report on a movie and it would have been dishonest to say that I didn’t enjoy it as much as I did. I agree that there are numerous implausibilities and plot holes, but, as mentioned above, I thought the movie was deftly directed so they didn’t bother me too much while I was watching the film. As for the criticism of ‘Now You See Me’ being over-directed, I watched Danny Boyle’s ‘Trance’ shortly after ‘Now You See Me’ and I think it’s fair to compare their directorial styles, because they are both high concept heist movies with a preposterous plot and a twist ending. While the style of ‘Now You See Me’ certainly isn’t subdued, it is nowhere near as showy as the direction in ‘Trance’, which calls attention to itself. ‘Now You See Me’ doesn’t have this problem.
Concerning the ending, I assume that you are unsatisfied with the identity of the mysterious master mind behind the heists. I concede that the revelation does indeed seem a little bit arbitrary, but I think that’s not so much a problem of the ending per se, but a necessity of the whole mystery plot. Because we have a mystery figure and are supposed to be guessing his or her identity throughout the movie, actions must remain open to interpretation, none of the characters can clearly be defined as “good guys” or “bad guys” and their motives must remain uncertain. Consequently, the audience isn’t guided to the destination of the plot. On the other had, I thought that the inclusion of the mystery plot added to the movie rather than detracting from it.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Also, if you really think about it, none of the capers could have worked without the magicians having an inside man in the police force. So Mark Ruffalo’s character isn’t such a bad choice, although I think it would have made more sense for Mélanie Laurent’s character to have been “Ms. X”. Had more problems with Morgan Freeman’s character turning out to be the “villain” of the movie, when all he ever did was debunking magicians, which I don’t find objectionable at all.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:15 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3308
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Agreed Unke, I couldn't have said it better myself
[Reveal] Spoiler:
I thought for sure Morgan Freeman's character would be the mastermind, him making a living debunking magicians seemed like the perfect cover for him conducting the heists himself, so Dylan turning out to be the mastermind caught me completely off-guard in a good way


Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:04 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:22 am
Posts: 413
Location: Chennai, India
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Jagten (The Hunt) (2013) - 3.5 out of 4

Lucas (Mads Mikkelsen) is a loving and playful kindergarten teacher who lives a lonely life while battling his ex-wife for the custody of his son. Until a seemingly innocent lie from a seemingly innocent 6-year old girl in his school lands him in a world of pain. That this girl happens to be his best friend's daughter doesn't help in alleviating things. This was an extremely gripping drama from beginning to end. I was so often at the edge of my seat that I almost want to brand it as a part-thriller.

It asked a number of difficult questions without providing any real answers. As one of the characters in the film says, "It is always assumed that children tell the truth. Unfortunately, they often do." There's also the uncomfortable question of how quickly children's minds latch onto things they see, and how wildly their imagination can run free. The whole controversy begins when the young child in question is shown something she shouldn't have been. It also poses the difficult question of how as a society we are too quick to brand someone guilty in uncomfortable cases without due diligence and without even giving him the chance to defend himself.

Most of us might know Mads Mikkelsen as a weak James Bond villain, but his work here is pretty great. The ending can be considered as being slightly open-ended, though it did close a lot of the main plot threads that came before. For my money, this is one to watch out for in my year-end list.

Blue is the Warmest Color (2013) - 3.5 out of 4

First of all, let's get the controversy out of the way. Being a prudish country ourselves, there were a lot of quitters in the viewing of this film. I personally felt that there was one sex-scene too many in the film. As JB says in his wonderful review, there are three in total, and at least one could've been left at the cutting table without the film losing anything. They were definitely racy, but I wouldn't consider them exploitative. They served to portray the depth of the central romance more than anything else.

With that out of the way, I've seen BITWC mentioned as a coming-of-age tale, and while that is partly true, I would primarily consider it a beautiful romantic drama. When we meet Adele, she is in high school and coming to terms with her sexuality. She soon realizes boys are not for her, and that is when she meets Emma at a lesbian bar. And so begins one of the best romances I've seen in a long time.

I was reminded of the Before... movies in a lot of places, largely because of the conversational style of the film. Emma and Adele's conversations on philosophy, art, teaching, movies and other topics are some of the best committed to screen since Jesse and Celine's. As they talk on these topics, we can feel them growing closer together. They serve as windows into the lives of these characters. We get to know about how open Emma's parents are over dinner with them, while the dinner at Adele's house definitely feels a lot colder. We also get to know Emma's friends in the same manner. Besides the controversial sex scenes, this film is primarily about these conversations, and they are beautifully written, staged, acted and directed. Linklater, Hawke, and Delpy would be proud.

I also loved that the film doesn't trivialize their relationship. I've not seen that many films focusing on homosexual relationships, but besides an early spat between Adele and her school friends, this is a proper romance, and the fact that the couple is homosexual is irrelevant. What we observe is two people completely in love with each other. Adele moves in with Emma, and they start living like a regular couple. It is also ironic that despite the fact that Emma is the alpha in the relationship, it is Adele who makes a big mistake.

I agree with JamesB. The acting is out of this world fucking good. Like un-fucking-believably good. Adèle Exarchopoulos has lived the role of her namesake in BITWC. We see her grow from a naive, shy and uncomfortable high school girl to a woman in her early 20s making a living for herself. Adèle sells the transformation masterfully. This is a riveting performance; definitely the best one from an actress I've seen all year, and it would be a travesty if she didn't land an Oscar nomination at least. Léa Seydoux is relatively more well-known than Adele I would imagine. I placed her from Ghost Protocol myself. She doesn't undergo the same character changes as Adele, but is equally important in selling the romance, owning the role of Emma. It is a great performance no doubt, but I would probably classify her as the Supporting Actress myself, because this is primarily Adele's story.

As JB says in his review, the two important scenes are conversations between Adele and Emma, one right after the former's mistake and one several years later. Both are riveting scenes, with the actresses producing their best. The reconciliation scene in particular made me well-up in my eyes as it revealed the depth of their romance wonderfully. It is "the" scene in the film where everything came together, acting, writing, and direction.

This is the third time I will mention JB here, but I also agree with him in that this is the best kind of film, one where we lose ourselves in the world of these characters, one where we are fully invested in them, and it is not until the film is over that we finally come back to reality. I feel like I am doing a great disservice by not giving it full marks, but the slight open-endedness of the climax is probably the reason. It provides closure, but I guess I maybe wanted things to be closed out a little too cleanly in a happy ending which wasn't forthcoming. That is probably my fault though. Or maybe I was just pissed off that the film ended, and I didn't get to spend more time with Adele. For my money, this will be in Top 5, if not the outright top at the end of the year. It is just that fucking good. Go see it!

_________________
Balajithots - Last Updated 21-Jan - Frozen (2013)
This list... is an absolute good. The list is life. All around its margins lies the gulf.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:13 pm
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 971
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Word on BitWC, buddy. The way I see it is that Adele is addicted to the honeymoon phase of relationships. She wants the hot, passionate times to last forever, even though we know it can't. That's why her and Emma's relationship hits a snag. And like you, I'm thrilled the movie presented a same-sex relationship without going political on us.

Exarchopoulos gives the best Lead Actress performance of the year IMO, beating out Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine by a whisker. The movie is three hours long and she's in every scene; her character undergoes a complete arc.

This movie will be in my Top 10 as well. Can't get parts of it out of my head.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:43 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:22 am
Posts: 413
Location: Chennai, India
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
KWRoss wrote:
Word on BitWC, buddy. The way I see it is that Adele is addicted to the honeymoon phase of relationships. She wants the hot, passionate times to last forever, even though we know it can't. That's why her and Emma's relationship hits a snag.

Oh yeah, I agree on that part. She is really naive in that sense, and that's what leads her eventually to make mistakes. And that is where the coming-of-age part of the film comes in. But I still felt that the romance as portrayed in the film is honest, true and beautiful. Adele's mistakes results in her growing up, but she also does love Emma, and vice-versa. That is why the reconciliation scene is so crucial and so wonderful. Their words in that scene tell us everything we want to know about their characters.

Ultimately, it is just a beautiful film, one that I will rewatch in some time, that's for sure.

_________________
Balajithots - Last Updated 21-Jan - Frozen (2013)
This list... is an absolute good. The list is life. All around its margins lies the gulf.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:18 pm
Profile WWW
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1656
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Earth Vs. The Flying Saucers

It was time for a cheesy sci-fi film, and this fits the bill. This one's about an alien invasion, complete with cheesy effects, funny dialogue, cornball acting and aliens whose helmets look like penis heads. No, this isn't a good film in the way we usually think of a film as good, but it has a charm about it, considering they don't make them like this anymore. Plus, it's short; at under 90 minutes, Earth Vs. The Flying Saucers tells the same kind of story that Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich would take 2 1/2 hours to tell.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:11 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15599 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691 ... 780  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr