Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 5:53 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16231 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 633, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639 ... 812  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 608
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Tropic Thunder (2008)
This was a movie that I quite enjoyed the first time I saw it in the theater, and while it is still funny, some of the luster has come off on repeat viewing. The screenplay from Ben Stiller, Justin Theroux and Etan Cohen takes a stab at skewering the process of making a Hollywood big budget action movie with tempermental actors, lax control from behind the camera, over the top bottom-line studio executives and smarmy talent agents.
Damien Cockburn (Steve Coogan) is trying to make a Vietnam war movie centering on the heroic experiences of army vet "Four Leaf" Tayback (Nick Nolte). His actors making up the platoon in the movie are marquee action star Tugg Speedman (Stiller), looking for his best option for his first oscar nomination, low brow comedy actor Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) and serious method actor Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr) who goes with blackface to play an African-American soldier. Rounding out the team are hip-hop star Alpa Chino (Brandon T. Jackson) and Kevin Sandusky (Jay Baruchel) the up-and coming actor who, because this is his first major role, is the only one taking the job seriously. The movie centers on the actors as circumstances find them stranded in the middle of Burma, but Tugg is firmly convinced that they are still being filmed using hidden cameras spread around the jungle.
Tropic Thunder is very funny in parts and a bit tedious in others. There's not a whole lot for Jack Black to do and Downey Jr. steals just about every scene he is in. There are some great parts by some other familiar faces in Hollywood. One thing Stiller tries to do is balance the semi-serious nature of parts of the movie (explosions and firefights with renegade drug lords) with broad comedy, which is a very difficult thing to do. I don't think director Stiller quite finds that right mix or balance. While the "Simple Jack" sub-plot yields many fine laughs and observations on Hollywood, if it was excised I think the tonal balance may have been a bit better. In 2008 I probably would have given 3 stars, but a repeat viewing yields 2.5 / 4.0

World War Z (2013)
Zombies are the new vampires and in this flick they are of the 28 Days Later speedy and agile variety rather than the slow plodding pursuers of the Romero pictures. Brad Pitt tries to save his family from the zombie apocalypse as Philadelphia is overrun by infecting hordes and then must work with what remains of the UN Command to figure out where the plague has come from and what can be done to stop it. These zombies are not out to consume victims or their brains, but simply to infect the uninfected and move on to the next victim, which in many cases is a whole lot scarier.
Some people have complained about the tonal shift of the movie about 40% of the way in, but I didn't mind it. The action is taut and presented with a great deal of suspense. There are some glaring plot holes that require some logic to be thrown out the window, but the overall strength of the characters and the situations does dampen the effects of the plot holes to a degree. A fun time at the movies overall. 3.0/4.0

Honor Flight (2012)
A re-watch of the documentary from last year detailing the efforts to fly the last of the World War II veterans in America to see the WWII memorial in Washington DC. The film focuses not only on the people behind the scenes of making this happen, but also on the verterans themselves as they take their journey which, for some of them, will be one of the final high points in their lives. The movie will manipulate you into caring about these people in a big way and I don't know how you could come away from this without feeling "something." Highly recommended viewing. Will re-iterate my 3.5/4.0 rating from a year ago.


Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:12 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 309
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
56 Up - 3.5 stars

Another solid entry from Michael Apted in his series exploring a remarkably wide cross-section of British society over 49 years now, with a new entry every 7 years. This series has now reached a point at which each entry feels like a reunion of sorts, although admittedly it's only been the last 2 entries that it's felt like that for me since I played catch-up via Netflix before 49 Up came out. I like some of the subjects more than others, but they all have something interesting to say. One nice touch this time around is that so many of them engage Apted, and in many ways these feel more like conversations than Q&A sessions, but that's to be expected as they mature. There's definitely a slice-of-life feel to the proceedings, as most of the subjects discuss the economy in one way or another, and politics comes up a few times. One thing that struck me was how similar the complaints about politics were to complaints one hears in the U.S. nowadays. Maybe we're more alike than we think!

One thing that struck me early on as being pretty remarkable was that
[Reveal] Spoiler:
despite several people having health issues, everyone is still alive! If you'd asked me before this film came out to pick a life event that would most likely occur to one of the subjects, death would have been it. They're getting up there, obviously.


This aren't any major surprises here, but that's just fine for a fan like me. If there's one issue I might raise, it's that some of the flashbacks are getting old and overly familiar, but then they're more like memories in that respect, so it's really not a big complaint.


Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:51 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:56 pm
Posts: 215
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
'Evil Dead' (Alvarez, 2013) *** out of ****
Dear god a horror movie with some balls? It sure has been a while and if you ask me it's a welcome sight, further bolstered by the fact that Fede Alvarez's remake of Raimi's horror classic is actually pretty damn good. Sure, it lacks any real semblance of a sense of humor and the characterizations are weak at best but Alvarez's approach to the film bleeds a true love for the material and the genre, consistently delivering the nastiness gore hounds like me appreciate (if it wasn't for gnarly horror movies I wouldn't have fell in love with cinema the way I have) while also playing and subverting some of the tried formulas this type of film have fallen into. It doesn't seem many of you sought this out, but if you ask me you all can keep Insidious or Mama and give me some stumpy limbs, raining blood and a motherfucking chainsaw in the motherfucking face; don't forget the tree rape.

_________________
Never take a forum signature too seriously, even this one.


Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:14 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3653
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JJoshay wrote:
'Evil Dead' (Alvarez, 2013) *** out of ****
Dear god a horror movie with some balls? It sure has been a while and if you ask me it's a welcome sight, further bolstered by the fact that Fede Alvarez's remake of Raimi's horror classic is actually pretty damn good. Sure, it lacks any real semblance of a sense of humor and the characterizations are weak at best but Alvarez's approach to the film bleeds a true love for the material and the genre, consistently delivering the nastiness gore hounds like me appreciate (if it wasn't for gnarly horror movies I wouldn't have fell in love with cinema the way I have) while also playing and subverting some of the tried formulas this type of film have fallen into. It doesn't seem many of you sought this out, but if you ask me you all can keep Insidious or Mama and give me some stumpy limbs, raining blood and a motherfucking chainsaw in the motherfucking face; don't forget the tree rape.

Looks like we finally see eye to eye on a film, I greatly enjoyed this film and well thought it was a very worthy remake. I'm also looking forward to the remake of Carrie.


Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:41 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 428
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Part 2 of "What I watched during my holidays":

A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)
John McLane (Bruce WIllis) travels to Moscow to reconnect with his estranged son, who is facing trial in the Russian capital. McLane junior turns out to be a CIA operative and soon father and son are involved in a generic action movie plot about radioactive material.
I never held the original 'Die Hard' in the same high esteem as most film enthusiasts. It's a good action movie, but, in my opinion, nothing outstanding. With the exception of the mostly comedic and quite entertaining Die Hard #3, the series got progressively worse - and it is hard to imagine that it could get much worse than this fifth instalment. The action is all demolition derbies and guys shooting guns at Eurotrash villains, which is loud and flashy, but actually not exciting at all. Bruce Willis looks way too old for an action movie here (strangely enough, because he fares better in other contemporary productions), and he seems to have forgotten his comedic timing when making quips, although the one liners don't get any better than "This is supposed to be my f***king vacation" anyway. The father-son bonding issue is truly cringeworthy as well. I'm glad I watched it on a plane rather than spending money on this crap. 3/10

G.I. Joe: Retaliation (2013)
Sequel to a movie based on militaristic, jingoistic action figures.
As far as in-flight entertainment goes, 'A Good Day to Die Hard' is still better than 'G.I. Joe Retaliation'. So is watching the screens which show the progress of your flight, indicate the ground speed or show the local time at your destination. Despite of its dubious origins (Hasbro toys), the first 'G.I. Joe' movie wasn't actually that bad. At least, it had some inventive action sequences. 'G.I. Joe: Retaliation' fails on every level, though. The best you could say about it is that Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson is a decent action star, who doesn't completely disgrace himself here - unlike the actress playing "Lady Jane", who can't even convincingly raise her arm and fist for the military signal to stop. I confess I didn't watch it until the end, but it is unlikely that I would have thought better of it than being a very bad movie: 2/10

Parker (2013)
Jason Statham action movie about an armed robber, who is shot and left for dead by his accomplices, but survives and goes after them to get his share back.
With Jason Statham movies, you know exactly what you are going to get. This is basically the same story as in the much superior "Point Blank" staring Lee Marvin and the Mel Gibson vehicle "Payback", but it is more conventional than either of them. "Parker" is an action thriller of limited ambition, but it accomplishes what it sets out to do. I have only one real complaint: Jennifer Lopez plays a totally unnecessary and highly annoying character, which eats up too much time. (Not her fault, she plays the terribly written character rather well.) Overall, a medicore film: 5/10

The Master (2012)
Traumatised alcoholic WWII veteran Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) has a series of breakdowns until he meets the self help guru Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), whose growing cult of self-improvement he joins.
The cult called "The Cause" bears a striking resemblance to early Scientology and Lancaster Dodd is evidently based on Scientology's founder L. Ron Hubbard. Paul Thomas Anderson's 'The Master' is neither an exposé on a Scientology-type organisation nor on a Hubbard-esque leader, though, and the focus is on the Freddie Quell character. In my opinion, this is not a wise decision, because there is little more to the Freddie Quell character than his mental problems and rampant alcoholism. There has been a lot of critical praise for this movie, which is indeed well-filmed and terrifically acted. However, I believe that most critics were all too willing to appreciate a movie by the maker of "Boogie Nights" and "There will be Blood" while missing the fact that the movie has only little tangible substance and that the filmmaker doesn't seem to be in control of his material. Don't get me wrong: It is a good movie, but it doesn't really seem to be about anything. 7/10

Get the Gringo (2012)
Mel Gibson (remember him?) plays an armed robber who crosses (rather crashes) into Mexican territory while being pursued by the police. The corrupt Mexican policemen find his considerable loot, declare their jurisdiction and put Gibson's character in prison, which is a sort of small town complete with women and children.
Like the above-mentioned 'Parker', this is an all right action thriller without any distinguishing features. It is a little bit more witty than other movies of its genre, but otherwise unremarkable. Gibson is quite good in these types of role, though. Mediocre 5/10

Warm Bodies (2013)
When the introspective R. meets Julee, he is immediately attracted to her and his heart starts to beat, which is remarkable because he is undead.
This is a staple romantic comedy with the twist that one of the lovers is a brain eating zombie. This is an absurdly funny premise, but it just couldn't work: Either zombies are truly dead and emotionless or, well, they aren't zombies, so anything in-between just muddles the rules for the specific zombie flick and 'Warm Bodies' in particular. Further, the horror elements are toned down a lot and the zombies aren't scary at all, even the skeletonised CGI ones, which look less convincing than Harryhausen's 1960ies stop motion skeletons in 'Jason and the Argonauts'. In short, it's a cute movie but not edgy and funny enough. 'Shawn ofthe Dead' or 'Braindead' it isn't. Below Average: 4/10

Inside Job (2010)
Documentary on the 2008 financial crisis.
Normally, documentaries about economical issues suffer from simplifying their subject matter too much (Michael Moore's 'Capitalism: A Love Story') or having trouble explaining what exactly is going on (the otherwise rather good 'Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room'). Personally, I think that film isn't the right medium for economical topics, because they are usually quite complicated and there is little that can be shown apart from graphs and talking head interviews. The Award-winning 'Inside Job' does this, too, but the interviews are actually well worth watching. Filmmaker Charles Ferguson aks his interviewees very clear questions, doesn't take bullshit for an answer and makes them squirm. Also, the movie manages to be brief and clarifying about the structural and individual reasons for the banking crisis, which is commendable. It is an angry movie and will make you angry and anybody with the slightest interest in the subject matter should watch it. A very good movie: 8/10


Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:45 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1480
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Quote:
Stewart Granger had a decent career in European swashbucklers and Westerns in the 60ies.


how is Scaramouche?


Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:24 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 2101
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Le Million: An artist is being chased by his creditors when he discovers he's won the lottery. The only trouble is that the ticket is his his jacket which his girlfriend (Annabella) has lent to a man wanted by the police. But then the jacket finds its way into the hands of an opera singer who wants to use it as part of a bohemian costume. The artist's best friend is also looking for the ticket in hopes of sharing the wealth, and enlists the artist's model (who the artist's girlfriend has caught the artist playing around. This all culminates at the opera with at least six people at least wanting possession of this jacket, some of them not even knowing. Oh, and it's a musical. A strange one.

I have a strong resistance to René Clair's French farces, but I must admit this one grew on me, and the scenes at the opera are very funny. This is apparently the first movie musical in which much (but not all) of the dialogue is fun. The highlight is a sweet scene in which a quarrelling young couple has to hide on stage while the singers are singing a love duet.

Annabella is really good (and really beautiful) in this film, well before she went to Hollywood and married Tyrone Power. René Lefèvre is the poor artist and Jean-Louis Allibert his sometime best friend and rival. Both had really long careers, with Lefèvre making it into Melville's Le Doulos.

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


Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:43 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 428
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
calvero wrote:
Quote:
Stewart Granger had a decent career in European swashbucklers and Westerns in the 60ies.


how is Scaramouche?


To be honest, I don't remember the movie at all with the exception that it featured a few decent fencing scenes.


Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:34 am
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7433
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Unke wrote:

The Master (2012)
Traumatised alcoholic WWII veteran Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) has a series of breakdowns until he meets the self help guru Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman), whose growing cult of self-improvement he joins.
The cult called "The Cause" bears a striking resemblance to early Scientology and Lancaster Dodd is evidently based on Scientology's founder L. Ron Hubbard. Paul Thomas Anderson's 'The Master' is neither an exposé on a Scientology-type organisation nor on a Hubbard-esque leader, though, and the focus is on the Freddie Quell character. In my opinion, this is not a wise decision, because there is little more to the Freddie Quell character than his mental problems and rampant alcoholism. There has been a lot of critical praise for this movie, which is indeed well-filmed and terrifically acted. However, I believe that most critics were all too willing to appreciate a movie by the maker of "Boogie Nights" and "There will be Blood" while missing the fact that the movie has only little tangible substance and that the filmmaker doesn't seem to be in control of his material. Don't get me wrong: It is a good movie, but it doesn't really seem to be about anything. 7/10


I think there's a bit more substance here than you think. Freddie isn't just mentally ill and alcoholic. He's also (I think) representative of many men post-WWII who found themselves without battles to fight, literally and figuratively. He's rudderless and scared, and cleaves to Phillip Seymour Hoffman because of the way the latter offers him direction and purpose. It's what defines their relationship and I found it to be quite dynamic and complex

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:47 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox

I liked this better when it was called City On The Edge Of Forever. [/nerd response]

Seriously, though, how many times have we drawn from this well? Hero(es) somehow stranded in a dark timeline, someone has to go back to set things right, stoke the viewers' taste for action porn with less scrupulous, more violent versions of their favorite characters, blah blah blah. And this version wasn't even particularly imaginative. The usual purpose for this kind of "What if?" storytelling is to gain some sort of insight into the original versions of the characters, but here, the changes are basically gratuitous and illogical (handwaved as the effects of a "time boom") and the only real consequence is that the characters' costumes get shittier.

I can't believe people are comparing this to the Dark Knight Returns--an alternative universe story that actually accomplishes something. Maybe we're still in the same situation that we were in during the early '90s, when the bosses' big takeaway from stories like Watchmen and Dark Knight was that violent stories with lunatic heroes would sell more copies.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:56 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:41 pm
Posts: 650
Location: The Desert
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Marketa Lazarová - František Vlacil's 1967 medieval epic has been widely dubbed "the greatest Czech film ever made," which, unless you're a big devotee to Czech cinema, is admittedly not a label that is going to mean all that much. I will admit that my previous experience with films from the region can probably be counted on one hand, so consequently Vlacil's film was never really on my radar before its announcement for the Criterion Collection. But after finally watching Marketa Lazarová, it's easy to see why it has left such a lasting impression. The film follows the escalating clashes between the members of a savage clan and the slightly more civilized and enlightened world around them. When the leader of a neighboring village refuses to get involved in any confrontations, members of the clan kidnap his daughter, setting up an eventual violent confrontation. It's a narrative that unfolds patiently, and one that requires some focus, with Vlacil devoting a good amount of time to building characters, of which there are quite a good number.

Helping matters somewhat is the film's structure, divided into a series of acts and chapters with a summary before the start of each one providing a little foreshadowing on the directions the narrative will take. It reminded me of the way some Cormac McCarthy novels have chapters begin with bullet points that hint of what's to come in the following pages, and it gives the film an almost-mythic quality. If some of the finer nuances of the film's narrative can be lost on a first viewing, it's only because Marketa Lazarová's visual and aural aesthetic completely commands the attention. Between the breathtaking visuals of blindingly-white, snowy landscapes (I'm struggling to think of another film that rivals the picture quality on the Criterion Bluray), the ominous rhythms of the soundtrack, and the more experimental flourishes of Vlacil's filmmaking approach, you can be forgiven for getting lost in the film's world. The film's harsher content and length might turn away some potential viewers, but for those interested in the best of the 1960s New Wave it is an easy one to recommend. 9/10.

Shoah - The defining image in Claude Lanzmann's 1985 Holocaust documentary is of trains moving along the European countryside. This is not just because of the train's primary use to transport Jews to concentration camps; it also serves as a sort of connecting symbol, tying together the material that comprises the film, personal recollections of survivors and quiet tours of where camps once stood and where so many lives were lost. Lanzmann's film doesn't concern itself much with offering a comprehensive history. As an interviewer, he asks smaller questions, and through both the words of his interviewees and the walks around all the significant places, he gradually fills in the details. This extends outward from the camp survivors as well, through interviews with former Nazi officials (who were recorded and videotaped without their knowledge) and locals in the communities that surrounded the camps. An argument can be made here that Lanzmann spends too much time focusing on these locals, and how they justified carrying out their normal lives while so much horror was occurring so close to them. Polish anti-Semitism is an important issue, but one that seems to consume a little too much of the film's first half.

Still, everything that is said in this film holds at least some significance. There are several faces and responses though that remain burned in the memory long after the film is over. There's the man who constantly blinks to force back the tears, the man who survived as a youth mainly due to his singing voice, and, most heartbreakingly, the two former "special detail" workers who both relate their traumatic experiences and keep their composure for so long before the weight of everything finally causes them to break down in front of the camera. Rightfully, there are no aesthetic choices that would threaten to sentimentalize the material. Over the course of 9 1/2 hours, Lanzmann tries to make sense of the insensible, but there is really just no way. What he ends up with is just as important though. Late in the film, one of the "special detail" survivors talks about a moment when he wanted to join all of the people entering the gas chambers. After realizing what he was trying to do, they turned him back, telling him he needed to survive to "bear witness" to everything that had happened. His purpose was to live for those who couldn't; Shoah's purpose is to keep the voices of the survivors alive long after they are all gone. 10/10.

_________________
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool."
Letterboxd Profile


Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:27 pm
Profile WWW
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:38 pm
Posts: 258
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Superman Returns

Each time I watch this I like it a little bit more. There are so many things that I really adore, from the small moments of humor (weren't there two of those? cracks me up every-time) to the rather significant addition to the mythology near the end. There is nothing I don't like about this film other than there is now never going to be a continuation.

_________________
My Blog: Queering the Closet


Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:33 pm
Profile WWW
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
I think Jaymizzle K. mentioned the possibility that his next franchise retrospective could be the Superman movies. If he does it, it'll be interesting to see what he thinks of Superman Returns seven years on. It's such a strange and strangely divisive movie.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:53 pm
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:34 pm
Posts: 73
Location: Chiddingfold, Surrey, UK
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
thered47 wrote:
Superman Returns

Each time I watch this I like it a little bit more. There are so many things that I really adore, from the small moments of humor (weren't there two of those? cracks me up every-time) to the rather significant addition to the mythology near the end. There is nothing I don't like about this film other than there is now never going to be a continuation.


I agree. I re-watched it recently to check if it was as much better than The Man of Steel as I thought. It is.

Everything is better. Lois Lane, the villain, the characters, the emotion, the music.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:59 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 428
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Alex wrote:
thered47 wrote:
Superman Returns

Each time I watch this I like it a little bit more. There are so many things that I really adore, from the small moments of humor (weren't there two of those? cracks me up every-time) to the rather significant addition to the mythology near the end. There is nothing I don't like about this film other than there is now never going to be a continuation.


I agree. I re-watched it recently to check if it was as much better than The Man of Steel as I thought. It is.

Everything is better. Lois Lane, the villain, the characters, the emotion, the music.


I'm very suprised at love for 'Superman Returns', which, in my opinon, is super-boring and fails to find the correct tone for a Superman film. Superman movies shouldn't be gloomy.

JamesKunz wrote:
Unke wrote:

The Master (2012)
...
The cult called "The Cause" bears a striking resemblance to early Scientology and Lancaster Dodd is evidently based on Scientology's founder L. Ron Hubbard. Paul Thomas Anderson's 'The Master' is neither an exposé on a Scientology-type organisation nor on a Hubbard-esque leader, though, and the focus is on the Freddie Quell character. In my opinion, this is not a wise decision, because there is little more to the Freddie Quell character than his mental problems and rampant alcoholism. There has been a lot of critical praise for this movie, which is indeed well-filmed and terrifically acted. However, I believe that most critics were all too willing to appreciate a movie by the maker of "Boogie Nights" and "There will be Blood" while missing the fact that the movie has only little tangible substance and that the filmmaker doesn't seem to be in control of his material. Don't get me wrong: It is a good movie, but it doesn't really seem to be about anything. 7/10


I think there's a bit more substance here than you think. Freddie isn't just mentally ill and alcoholic. He's also (I think) representative of many men post-WWII who found themselves without battles to fight, literally and figuratively. He's rudderless and scared, and cleaves to Phillip Seymour Hoffman because of the way the latter offers him direction and purpose. It's what defines their relationship and I found it to be quite dynamic and complex


You are probably right: The movie does have substance, but my problem is that I could never get a grip on it.

The movie strongly hints at the possibility that Freddie's condition is triggered or enhanced by his experiences in the war, that's true. However, it is never made clear and his family history also points in another direction, a well has his behaviour, which is symptomatic of schizophrenia. If Anderson would have wanted to make Freddie representative of a generation of former soldiers who are lacking a purpose in life after the war, Freddie's probable mental illness would merely obfuscate the issue. I also never quite understood what made the Lancaster Dodd character so interested in Freddie beyond having another follower. Just Freddie's booze? Does Dodd see something of himself in Freddie, and if so, what? Further, Dodd's wife seemed to play a very important role to the extent that, at one point, I thought that she was the brains behind Dodd. That was never explored further, though, and at other times she seemed to be a groupie. The statement by Dodds son, that Dodd "makes things up as he goes along" is also left dangling in the air with the exception of the heated argument in the prison cell. The son doesn't get another line. Then there are some sequences which are probably just imagined by Freddie (the nudity at the Cause's party), but that was also never clear to me.

I might just be too thick to get the movie or at least on a different wavelength, but I still think that Anderson didn't have control over his ideas. It's a good movie nevertheless.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:36 am
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 774
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Count me in as someone else who enjoyed Superman Returns. I can understand some of the criticisms, but I've never understood why people lashed at it so harshly.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:44 am
Profile WWW
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3653
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Thief12 wrote:
Count me in as someone else who enjoyed Superman Returns. I can understand some of the criticisms, but I've never understood why people lashed at it so harshly.

I think it was just trying to too hard to recapture the feel of the 1978 film and instead ended off coming as a pale imitation, I did like Kate Bosworth, Brandon Routh was OK, but his acting inexperience was obvious at times, and I just did not like Kevin Spacey's performance at all, he just came off as very wooden to me.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 12:47 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:18 pm
Posts: 217
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Count me in as someone else who enjoyed Superman Returns. I can understand some of the criticisms, but I've never understood why people lashed at it so harshly.

I think it was just trying to too hard to recapture the feel of the 1978 film and instead ended off coming as a pale imitation, I did like Kate Bosworth, Brandon Routh was OK, but his acting inexperience was obvious at times, and I just did not like Kevin Spacey's performance at all, he just came off as very wooden to me.


Those who have read my comments in the MOS thread know that I am very Pro-Superman Returns. I felt it came off as more of a love letter to the 1978 film, rather than an "imitation." But really, even if Bryan Singer did manage to reach that level, would people be able to put that original film off the high pedestal long enough to even recognize it? I think it's slightly overrated. Don't get me wrong. It's still the best Superman film to date!

Oh and I loved Kevin Spacey's performance. He bought so much menace and energy. It was better than Gene Hackman's rendition IMO. I could be in the minority on that.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:00 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3653
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Taleswapper wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Count me in as someone else who enjoyed Superman Returns. I can understand some of the criticisms, but I've never understood why people lashed at it so harshly.

I think it was just trying to too hard to recapture the feel of the 1978 film and instead ended off coming as a pale imitation, I did like Kate Bosworth, Brandon Routh was OK, but his acting inexperience was obvious at times, and I just did not like Kevin Spacey's performance at all, he just came off as very wooden to me.


Those who have read my comments in the MOS thread know that I am very Pro-Superman Returns. I felt it came off as more of a love letter to the 1978 film, rather than an "imitation." But really, even if Bryan Singer did manage to reach that level, would people be able to put that original film off the high pedestal long enough to even recognize it? I think it's slightly overrated. Don't get me wrong. It's still the best Superman film to date!

Oh and I loved Kevin Spacey's performance. He bought so much menace and energy. It was better than Gene Hackman's rendition IMO. I could be in the minority on that.

I didn't find him "menacing" at all, he just made me cringe everytime he opened his mouth, he didn't evne come close to Hackman IMO. For the record I don't think the 1978 film was an undisputed classic, but Superman Returns felt like it was trying way too hard to live up to it instead of doing it's own thing.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:02 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:18 pm
Posts: 217
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
I didn't find him "menacing" at all, he just made me cringe everytime he opened his mouth, he didn't evne come close to Hackman IMO..


Whattchu talkin' bout, Willis?? Watch all this great scenery chewing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnP8nfRB4g4

Oh well... to each their own. :) I do think the whole real estate motivation plot-device was getting a little tired, though. Meh.


Thu Jul 25, 2013 3:31 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16231 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 633, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639 ... 812  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests


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