| So this is the typical thread every movie related site must have. Talk about and discuss the last film you've seen. In my case, it's Kung Fu Panda, the Dreamworks Animation movie. It was an old pending account, and it surprised me on how such a simple and light movie could be so solid in its delivery. It is probably not as memorable in terms of its themes as your regular Pixar, but its execution is pretty great, its comedy works very well and all around is very entertaining. Too bad the final event feels too rushed and kind of cheap after the whole buildup. |
JodyqtOct 19, 2014 11:56 AM
| I'm not exactly sure since it's been awhile. I've been concentrating on expanding my knowledge with music, so film's been on the back burner. I think it was either Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas or Sin City. I watched those two in one sitting so I'm having a hard time remembering what I saw first. Fear and Loathing was more of an experience than a film. A great reproduction of Gonzo journalism, focusing more on the journey and the experience rather than the point. It's also a scary tale of drug induced belligerence and paranoia. Still, while being all of that, it can be quite quirky and humorous. Definitely not a film for everyone, but one I don't regret seeing. Sin City was a guilty pleasure of mine. Finally, a film with Jessica Alba that didn't make me want to turn off the television. And I have to admit that any film that can infuse style and mayhem like that is one I can dig. I watched a review about it stating that the movie wasn't really about the individual character arcs, but how those arcs reveal the dynamics of the city and the hope it has by the ending. Fun film. True to its comic. Me likes. |
| Well, I just finished watching the old classic Live-Action Lady Snowblood, part 1. The plot was stronger than most revenge films that I have seen, especially in the sub-category of a rape-revenge film. It wasn't a great film but it kept me entertained, very stylish violence and over the top deaths, I imagine if I had watched it in the 70s it would have been so hilariously gory that it would have been fairly difficult to take seriously. Some very noticable influences and comparisons to more recent cinema such as Quentin Tarantino's "Kill Bill" and possibly some influence for George Lucas' "Star Wars" though I maybe thinking too much into it with that. I did like many of the characters, and how we got a peak into the lives of those who were doomed to be killed in the revenge plot, it posed an interesting question of the everyday doing's of a regular individual. I did like it, but I can't see myself watching it again in the future. |
 |
| I watched Once recently, an Irish kind of romance film. It was really well done, I thought it felt very true to life. The dynamic between the two main characters was interesting enough to get me through it and keep me engaged throughout. I don't usually like the kind of music that this movie focuses on (folk music, I think), but the main theme was really quite good. This main song alone made me really like the film... I'd recommend Once for that alone. Other than that, I finally got around to watching The Holy Mountain too. All I can say is..... that I'll have to watch it again. I'd call it a very surreal experience at least. Ducat_Revel said: I'm not exactly sure since it's been awhile. I've been concentrating on expanding my knowledge with music, so film's been on the back burner. I'm a pretty big music guy myself... |
| получить деньги моего друга |
| I actually saw something quite awful on TV yesterday; Van Wilder 2. It was predictable to a tee and totally uninspired, the jokes had no life to them and were just strung together mechanically while just expecting the audience to laugh, the acting was crappy (Kal Penn has done much better, he seems uninterested and struggles pulling off the accent for long periods), the story's flow felt forced, and like the jokes, just strung together from one scene to the next like each scene was a tumor that had to be dealt with, the production values were pretty awful and lastly, it even was a little gross with one particular scene. If there was anything to get out of it, it was at least a change up from constantly seeing decent or good movies as of late. |
| My first comment here and it's a negative one. :P Yesterday, I watched Robocop (2014) and was soooo disappointed with it. The director could have looked out of the box and change parts of the film that wouldn't threaten the plot. Instead he just made a new generation copy-paste with a few twists & turns that was even worse that the original. Not to mention that the movie is extremely slow. I mean, what the hell? I was in the middle of it and the protagonist was just "transformed" into Robocop. Grrrr... I wanted to watch an action film not a "how to make a robot in 2 hours." |
| The last movie I watched was the current Godzilla movie, which I wasn't a big fan of for various reasons. Godzilla himself was awesome though, the few scenes he was actually in. It would be hard to explain why without slightly getting into spoilers. I guess what I can say is that I didn't entirely agree the changes they made to the premise of the original Godzilla. If you want a better explanation, and are OK with spoilers, there's this http://letterboxd.com/ghadius/film/godzilla-2014/ |
PopkaJun 3, 2014 5:21 PM
| Monsters University. I'm not going to deny that it is to some degree disappointing as a Pixar movie, but I guess the highly divisive reception it had helped on lowering my expectations and in the end I enjoyed it quite a lot. Sure, it lacks the elements of risk and originality that are in Pixar's most outstanding works, the storyline is very clichéd and predictable, however it is still solid quality entertainment with endearing characters. Specially, Wazowski and Sullivan, who are about as charismatic as they were in Monsters, Inc. The only issues I find here are some irregularity on visual jokes (that snail monster) and that, to a point, the photo-realistic animation doesn't mix well with a story that looks to me more cartoony and in fact takes benefit from having strambotic character designs. |
| Lately I've seen just few movies, compared to the amount I saw in the past. Last one is somewhat unknown, it's called : “The Truth About Emanuel”. It focuses mainly on the elaboration of the loss; on motherhood and how it can break away from a purely innate instinct; on guilt, and more. I found it quite interesting, although at the beginning I had chosen it as a cure for my insomnia. :P |
| Watched The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. I thought it was great, and unexpectedly very funny. I don't know if I would call it open-ended, but I will say that it makes excellent use of a not-entirely-resolved ending, maybe one of the best I've seen. |
| Louie Bluie. Terry Zwigoff's other documentary. It's not quite as entertaining as Crumb, but that's only because I find R. Crumb a more interesting subject than Howard Armstrong. If you like blues, sexual perversion and old guys chewing the fat, then this film should be up your alley. |
| Just watched the movie 'Take Shelter' by Jeff Nichols, it was quite a fascinating experience. The movie is a bit of a slow burn, it works as something of a character study of a near-middle-aged man having some strange visions and slowly succumbing to paranoia while becoming alienated to his friends and family. Shannon's character essentially starts to experience the Hedgehog's Dilemma at this later stage in his life, but in a way it is also something of an anti-thesis to that method of thinking (perhaps even ironic) because every time he tries to push someone away from him and try and keep them safe, the more it ends up hurting the very people he's trying to help as well as himself. The movie also has a very subtle power of love quality to it that attempts to remedy this, and it is sharply executed, never becoming corny or overly indulgent, but just redemptive and wholly satisfying...until that doozy of an ending. It's not necessarily a bad one, it's just...different and really quite thought-provoking; I'm trying to contemplate it at the moment myself, it may need a rewatch. All in all it was a great film and it seems a bit underrated even; Shannon's performance is absolutely incredible, the production values are pretty nice, the movie always seems to have a disturbing air of suspense and dread and the characterization was pretty great, definitely recommend it. On a side note, people seem mixed about the Lions Club supper scene perhaps because it briefly loses its composure--particularly around Curtis where it is all centered--but I feel it is essential to have those scenes where all the pressure is just unleashed and they expose their inner anxieties to the fullest (which is also what I liked about Punch Drunk Love) and Shannon just totally left me breathless with that outburst while delivering--what I found to be--the most powerful quote in the film. Loved that bit. |
| I just watched Wong Kar-Wai's In the Mood for Love. Gotta say, that was damn brilliant. I wasn't a big fan of The Grandmaster, the only other movie I've seen by him, but this one definitely got me. It's insightful and it has ridiculously good use of lighting in every scene. It's also got a pretty much perfect bittersweet ending on location at one of the coolest places in the world. |
Popka said: I just watched Wong Kar-Wai's In the Mood for Love. Gotta say, that was damn brilliant. I wasn't a big fan of The Grandmaster, the only other movie I've seen by him, but this one definitely got me. It's insightful and it has ridiculously good use of lighting in every scene. It's also got a pretty much perfect bittersweet ending on location at one of the coolest places in the world. Fantastic, I've been dying to see In the Mood for Love, glad to know it is so great. As for The Grandmaster, the Western release removed some content I hear, so I think you gotta find another cut of it, unless the full one is the one you saw. |
| I actually think I did see the full cut. It wasn't bad, but I thought there were too many characters and I felt that the significance of the war wasn't captured very well. At least, not as well as in Donnie Yen's Ip Man. In the Mood for Love has a fairly small cast, and only needed to focus on small-scale personal drama, which it did perfectly. The Grandmaster] also did that pretty well, for that matter. |
| Just watched Lost Highway from David Lynch, in a word DISAPPOINTED! I get the idea of the ghost and all but I was lost for what on earth the show was trying to tell me. Don't trust the stinky rich, don't trust the strangers because they may want to fuck you around? I did like the atmosphere but that wasn't enough for me. No social commentary? Not really fond of the characters, though I did find the situation that played out to be unusual and the transition between characters in the second half of the film to be interesting as well from a film-making perspective, but that is about all I can garner from the show. An exercise in style. Hmmm, I might have to rewatch it, or maybe I didn't grasp onto any of it, because I haven't slept in 3 days. |
JodyqtJun 3, 2014 4:52 PM
|
| I'm impressed you were able to stay awake through the movie with no sleep for 3 days. I occasionally nod off even during movies I like, and I don't think I've ever gone without sleep for quite that long. |
| Okay, guys, I need help. I'm currently watching Brazil. I had to pause it because it's making me really uncomfortable. I'm guessing that was the desired effect of the film, but damn the main dude's neurotic. Does the level of discomfort lessen? I'm in the scene after he hijacks the truck and rams through the blockade. :/ |
| yes, at that point i too became very aware of my discomfort. from memory this won't change. the ending is so great though, so i recommend you stick with it. brazil is a weird film for me - being a big 12 monkeys fan, i went into brazil expecting it to be a masterpiece. i loved it initially, but it wore me out. in the end i think it's great, but not for me in a lot of ways... |
Jody32 said: Just watched Lost Highway from David Lynch, in a word DISAPPOINTED! I get the idea of the ghost and all but I was lost for what on earth the show was trying to tell me. Don't trust the stinky rich, don't trust the strangers because they may want to fuck you around? I did like the atmosphere but that wasn't enough for me. No social commentary? Not really fond of the characters, though I did find the situation that played out to be unusual and the transition between characters in the second half of the film to be interesting as well from a film-making perspective, but that is about all I can garner from the show. An exercise in style. Hmmm, I might have to rewatch it, or maybe I didn't grasp onto any of it, because I haven't slept in 3 days. is that your first david lynch thing? |
BigSimo said: yes, at that point i too became very aware of my discomfort. from memory this won't change. the ending is so great though, so i recommend you stick with it. brazil is a weird film for me - being a big 12 monkeys fan, i went into brazil expecting it to be a masterpiece. i loved it initially, but it wore me out. in the end i think it's great, but not for me in a lot of ways... I was afraid of that. I think it's a terrific film. Heavy in an unconventional way. Not thematically, but there's just a lot of layers to peel back and I felt the film was shoving everything at me all at once with a lot of force. But it's the lack of real connection that's disturbing me. And I guess that's the point. To show a life so self-contained and a bureaucratic system so apathetic that real pain no longer registers to them. Basically, a carefree sense of inhumanity. I feel bad for the Mrs. Buttle and everyone in the film who was wronged... I'll finish it, but I think I'll need to put it off until I have the appropriate mindset. Maybe in an hour. |
BigSimo said: No, fortunately, I've seen Mulholland Drive, Eraserhead and a few others.Jody32 said: Just watched Lost Highway from David Lynch, in a word DISAPPOINTED! I get the idea of the ghost and all but I was lost for what on earth the show was trying to tell me. Don't trust the stinky rich, don't trust the strangers because they may want to fuck you around? I did like the atmosphere but that wasn't enough for me. No social commentary? Not really fond of the characters, though I did find the situation that played out to be unusual and the transition between characters in the second half of the film to be interesting as well from a film-making perspective, but that is about all I can garner from the show. An exercise in style. Hmmm, I might have to rewatch it, or maybe I didn't grasp onto any of it, because I haven't slept in 3 days. is that your first david lynch thing? |
JodyqtJun 4, 2014 6:39 AM
|
| I saw A Million Ways to Die in the West. Now, here's what I should have done. I should have watched something in between In the Mood for Love and A Million Ways to Die in the West, because when you watch a masterpiece and the next movie you watch is this, you get whiplash. Pretty much all the jokes went on too long, as did the movie. I have no idea what's supposed to be appealing about a story in which some guy ends up with Charlize Theron after his first girlfriend dumps him. Not only that, but Theron's character wouldn't shut up about how great this guy was. And I don't know what I was supposed to like about him other than that I guess he was supposed to be "smart," which just means that he was essentially a dude from 2014 randomly planted in the Old West. Why? I don't know. I guess technically that makes him more reasonable than all the outlaw gunslingers, but honestly if he actually did live in 2014 this guy seems like he would be kind of a dick. The movie also keeps running with this mustache joke that was maybe funny the first time just for how weird it was, but wore out its welcome long before the movie decided it was time to stop using it. I don't know. There was also some part involving crappy CG bipedal sheep that I blocked out of my memory. I'm not a fan of any of MacFarlane's TV shows, but I liked Ted. I guess the humor in Ted was based on reactions and not just the assumption that certain things are inherently funny. |
| Today I watched Crash. This is what I said on Letterboxd: Popka said: To be fair, I've literally only ever heard bad things about this film, so maybe I went into it biased. Still, if that's what happened, I don't think it was any great loss.I'd heard this movie was about racism, but I didn't know it would be about a bunch of people who will go right up to someone with differently colored skin and scream racial slurs right in their face. The weird thing about this is that not even Edward Norton's character from American History X would do something like that. That kind of behavior requires not only racism, but stupidity. This makes it kind of hard to buy any of the film's attempts to make me sympathize with any of the characters when it shows you their "human" side. Of course, even if I could, those attempts would still fall flat on another level. This is one of many films that try to show that people can behave unkindly toward others, but they also have their own personal problems that no one else knows about. But what this movie fails to realize is that if you don't want the transition between unkindness and humanity to be jarring, especially when the film's idea of being unkind is being a vicious racist monster, the personal problems the characters are dealing with has to have something to do with the way they express unkindness toward others. That is not the case in this movie, unless I'm missing how having a sick father is in any way related to having a hatred of black people deep enough to commit sexual assault. A couple of characters don't just to show their "humanity." They get redemption. The more egregious of these seems to have occurred by magic. The other might have been the only actual display of humanity in the film. At least, it showed that a certain racist character wasn't so racist he would let someone be blown sky-high in a pillar of fire. I guess that's something. But think about if it had occurred the other way around, chronologically: Say there was a film where a character saved another person's life, and the film took the position that that gave them license to abuse the person they saved. Sounds like a crappy movie if you ask me. The difference is that in Crash, the abuse and life-saving have even less to do with each other. I suppose that was my biggest problem: The characters' personal problems that are supposed to show their "humanity" have no connection to the racism depicted. In fact, I don't know if the word "racism" should even be used, since the film doesn't seem to care much about racism itself. Just about the only purpose of including racism in the film is to be the opposite of kindness. There's only one scene that even comes close to saying something about why racism in particular is bad over all the other ways people hurt each other, and that passes pretty quickly without ever becoming relevant again. You could probably replace every racial slur and prejudiced comment in this movie with a more generic insult and it would be about the same. In fact, I think you could do it without making any significant changes to the film at all. And it would still be bad because their acts of hate would still be so tenuously connected to their acts of kindness. But at least it would be less exploitative, and it would make slightly more sense. |
Popka said: Even though I agree with what you guys are saying. In all honesty I've met a handful of people who match the people's personalities in Crash, extremely open with their racism.Today I watched Crash. This is what I said on Letterboxd: Popka said: To be fair, I've literally only ever heard bad things about this film, so maybe I went into it biased. Still, if that's what happened, I don't think it was any great loss.I'd heard this movie was about racism, but I didn't know it would be about a bunch of people who will go right up to someone with differently colored skin and scream racial slurs right in their face. The weird thing about this is that not even Edward Norton's character from American History X would do something like that. That kind of behavior requires not only racism, but stupidity. This makes it kind of hard to buy any of the film's attempts to make me sympathize with any of the characters when it shows you their "human" side. Of course, even if I could, those attempts would still fall flat on another level. This is one of many films that try to show that people can behave unkindly toward others, but they also have their own personal problems that no one else knows about. But what this movie fails to realize is that if you don't want the transition between unkindness and humanity to be jarring, especially when the film's idea of being unkind is being a vicious racist monster, the personal problems the characters are dealing with has to have something to do with the way they express unkindness toward others. That is not the case in this movie, unless I'm missing how having a sick father is in any way related to having a hatred of black people deep enough to commit sexual assault. A couple of characters don't just to show their "humanity." They get redemption. The more egregious of these seems to have occurred by magic. The other might have been the only actual display of humanity in the film. At least, it showed that a certain racist character wasn't so racist he would let someone be blown sky-high in a pillar of fire. I guess that's something. But think about if it had occurred the other way around, chronologically: Say there was a film where a character saved another person's life, and the film took the position that that gave them license to abuse the person they saved. Sounds like a crappy movie if you ask me. The difference is that in Crash, the abuse and life-saving have even less to do with each other. I suppose that was my biggest problem: The characters' personal problems that are supposed to show their "humanity" have no connection to the racism depicted. In fact, I don't know if the word "racism" should even be used, since the film doesn't seem to care much about racism itself. Just about the only purpose of including racism in the film is to be the opposite of kindness. There's only one scene that even comes close to saying something about why racism in particular is bad over all the other ways people hurt each other, and that passes pretty quickly without ever becoming relevant again. You could probably replace every racial slur and prejudiced comment in this movie with a more generic insult and it would be about the same. In fact, I think you could do it without making any significant changes to the film at all. And it would still be bad because their acts of hate would still be so tenuously connected to their acts of kindness. But at least it would be less exploitative, and it would make slightly more sense. |
|
| Sorry to hear that. I'm sure people like that exist, I think my problem was mostly that the movie both acted like this was the attitude held by most of the population of LA. |
| So after curiosity had been getting the better of me for about a year after seeing such an enticing trailer and yet such divisive (rather poor even) reception, I got around to nabbing Only God Forgives as it was on sale and I was looking for a controversial underdog title to see if I'd wind up liking it (also got Cosmopolis too). And boy did I ever. In all honesty I understand why people won't like this movie, and I still expect people to hate the crap out of it, but it really hit me hard and pushed all the right buttons. The plotting is (somewhat) minimalist, the dialogue is spare and exacting and the pacing is languid, but those are not faults per se, but rather its innate style, and coupled with the outstanding cinematography showcasing some rich visuals, it forms a suave but haunting mood piece, and even has more to deliver with it. The characters at face value seem a bit alienating and blend well with that deep, dark, unorthodox style aforementioned, but have some very complicated motivations that give them broader personalities while also bringing them down to earth a little more in the end. All of it connects in a web of revenge slightly thematically similar to RuroKen: Trust and Betrayal (one of my fav animu) but with the tables turned and focusing more on the different ways of atonement, rejection of it and how it all gets weighed in the end. Refn capitalizes on that heavy precedence of show over tell to paint these characters as abstract entities on some lavish canvas and have them gradually blossom into very human characters that still give a great tragedian, fabled air about them by the end. There are lots of small visual allegories, cues and general subtext which slowly add layer upon layer to all the main characters and culminate into making quiet but nuanced and complex individuals. All the events that transpire (and some small details which end up lending a lot later) have an immense effect in the grander scheme of things with bits of bleak irony, uncompromising ruthlessness, soulful gravitas and more. The ending even somewhat conflicts on my views on revenge, but it made so much sense and was so staggering and lovely (as well as a bit fascinatingly ambiguous I find). I may have to edit this later as my mind is trying to weave together all the right words and important thoughts to get the satisfaction of giving all dues to this film. I loved it. On the other hand, I saw Drive a few years ago and found it too lackadaisical and disjointed for my tastes, and that's the Refn movie a lot of critics and reviewers love (despite still dividing a lot of people) but I may need to rewatch it. OGF is probably more polarizing and yet it clicked so well with me, and people tend to be all over the map on it, so I suggest people at least give it a shot for the experience. |
AngelsArcanumJun 25, 2014 6:32 PM
| Saw another few movies: Dumbo, Moonrise Kingdom and The Shining. Dumbo was quite nice. It was tender, sweet, subtle, rather well paced and just generally endearing. Everything flowed so deftly and with such passion and heart, I could really empathize with adorable little Dumbo, and that ending was just so liberating! The musical numbers were also pretty great too. Wasn't perfect, but it warmed me right up. As for the other 2...to be honest I can't say I cared much for them in all honesty. Moonrise was too quirky for its own good and the script and dialogue tried to be natural through being weird (unnatural) and idiosyncratic, but it felt too artificial and forced. In general a lot of the stuff that was happening didn't feel believable or entertaining, so it didn't work for me with either approach. I've forgotten most of the film at this point along with my complaints but it was just too off-kilter for me. Then there's the classic: The Shining...which I was mostly apathetic towards unfortunately. I couldn't really get invested behind all the stuff that happened and some of the characterization felt wonky, scattered and maybe even a bit contrived even. I felt there was a lot of either overacting or poor acting at times, especially on Nicholson's part. Normally I find Nicholson quite good, but hear he just kind of ticked me off, made me laugh awkwardly or made me roll my eyes. I just couldn't get any emotional investment from him, not in a totally empathetic way, but just like a solid, 3-dimensional establishment of him as a person and his descent into insanity and possession and whatnot. From the get-go he already sounded like a lunatic in his little quips with kind of sinister undertones to them, so I already felt like he was a nutcase. Coupled with all those pieces of grievances that would tamper with his mind, everything doesn't feel fully fleshed out and just kind of runs with it. Is he going mad from the alcohol withdrawal? The alienation from his wife? The writer's block? The ghostly possession? The combination of all these and more? It's all kind of just thrown in to the pot and left to its own devices, and since we don't see him having any truly tender moments with his family prior to going to the hotel (be it before or after he gave up alcohol, or even before he even started being aggressive with Danny-all that jazz) I didn't really have any attachment to him and his madness didn't feel gradual in the movie despite the slow pacing which I feel would lend itself more to fleshing out such things. Then the music also just kind of beats you over the head early on as well, having all these various moments that are at most-strange and the least-mundane and giving them these loud, horrific pieces to try to make them seem creepy I guess, but it's purely obnoxious I find and reminds me of Requiem's rather irksome score and its handling. I tried to do a little bit of reading on the film (wiki) to see if there was more to get out of it and see if I missed some things, but ultimately all the things people were praising with the narrative and the execution were to me like some people find the 5th Kara no Kyokai movie (which I didn't mind last time but should probably re-examine as well): sparse, esoteric and--dare I say--pseudo-deep (ho boy I'm going to get slammed for this). The movie didn't get me too intrigued, it didn't get me thrilled, it didn't get me uncomfortable, and it just didn't really affect me much at all. I will say though that for one thing, the mise en scene and cinematography are marvelous - visually stunning and imaginative. As much as I rag on this film, it's better than the sum of its parts and is ultimately a merely decent thriller in my book, but maybe I will find something more substantive if I dig into some more analysis and/or give it a re-watch and am probably making a hyperbole in my statements, but for now it just didn't feel like anything special. Now Rosemary's Baby on the other hand...THAT'S a winner in my book; that movie made me want to crawl out of my skin and I had this unnerving anxiousness and flustered warmth that just took me hostage AND IT'S OVER 40 YEARS OLD! -Feel free to disregard the next section if you wish- P.S. Maybe it's not relevant to the people in this club, and I don't know how integral people gauge this scene as part of the enjoyment, but the scene where Danny and Dick are talking about the Shining kind of threw me off because it got me thinking about how people complain about Kotoura-san having poor foundations for its mind-reading, but within seconds Dick is already defeating the whole purpose of the Shining to begin with by not knowing about Danny's alter ego and having to talk verbally if he just said him and his grandma could talk to each other through their minds alone, so why didn't he just do that with Danny? Does Kubrick want to not have internal dialogues? Or maybe that's all part of the limited multi-perspective narrative as well, hell idk (don't mean to sound presumptuous). With Kotoura, the most crucial and intensive plot point and element with the mind reading comes when I mean that scene in The Shining is hardly that pivotal (at least, the way I see it atm) but it seems like some really half-assed telepathy element (at least in this scene) for such a lauded film, but maybe I'm getting too bitter and personal about this. Forgive my ramblings, it's 5AM and I'm probably just grouchy. |
AngelsArcanumJun 26, 2014 2:08 AM
| I'll give you my reading of The Shining, for what it's worth. |
| Whether you yourself were able to piece together all the connections in Nicholson's anxieties as an interpretation or whether that was Kubrick's ultimate intention, it makes things more coherent and meaningful as such despite feeling a bit disjointed in the narrative and all the half-baked overplotting now feels more tangible with that explanation. The thing about the wife really neglecting that event entirely I don't think I picked up on and is flying over me still, but I kept note of the contrast with her smiling expression as she mentioned Nicholson accidentally hurting Danny and how it works in tandem with her immediately blaming him for Danny getting hurt a second time (but as I say that I'm seeing that it could be that it was a drastic thing she just let slide the first time and when it is a repeated offence, she feels more rectified in feeling completely upset). As far as the seeds of his madness things go, you added some more extensive details on the whole nature of his hidden and slowly expanding depravity, but I guess on a primal level for a thriller I would've wanted to see Nicholson prior to the compounding factors of his madness so myself as the viewer could feel a mounting unease and growing tension coming out of this conflicted character who starts to become almost a full fledged (but damaged) villain (again, not too literally). It's a little more subjective, but I guess I simply didn't feel the impact I probably should've, and it probably goes in tandem with--or simply largely in part of--the score being so drastic so early on too. That's an interesting bit about the perspective as well, for some reason I kept putting myself IN the current person's shoes between Nicholson, the wife and Danny when they were on their own exploring despite being behind the back view, and the readings on wiki surrounding that notion as well further cemented it into my subconscious and deluded me from that idea, but it is right in the framing and adds a bit more of a subtle meta effect on the events in the film and us bearing witness to them all and allowing them to unfold. I also happened to subconsciously click with that scene with Dick in his room watching TV but didn't really know what to make of it; the symmetry may have cued me in a little, and the placement of the erotic picture between the two lamps placed in a lower position seemed like it was hinting at something phallic or some darker part of Dick's character but I was still unsure. I'll give it the benefit of a doubt with an extra half point mostly due to the first bit, and if I get a genuinely more satisfying and meaningful viewing the second time with those other factors considered (or just coupled together and making things flow better) I may give it another extra half point because I'm getting vague sentiments in my mind of it delivering more next time with all this said. |
AngelsArcanumJun 27, 2014 10:36 PM
| It's true, the amount that one relates to Jack's character is subjective. It was risky business trying to make him seem sinister from the start and asking you to sympathize with him at the same time. For whatever reason I did sympathize with him when he was talking to Lloyd at the bar and when Wendy accused him of hurting Danny. Nicholson sold me on those scenes. It is possible that Wendy let it slide the first time and reacted more harshly when she thought Jack had hurt Danny again, but she was also unnaturally accepting of Jack's initial reaction to her intruding on his work, which I thought was a pretty bad case of crossing the line on his part. I do think it's interesting that there could be a phallic element to the way that scene was framed. It could just be one of Kubrick's quirks, because he has a weird thing for vaguely phallic imagery. He includes it whether it fits or not; its presence makes sense in, say Dr. Strangelove, but perhaps not as much so in 2001. It could also be related to how Jack eventually kills him because he sees him as a threat to his goals; Dick is clearly a more well-adjusted person than Jack, and probably more secure in himself. The social pressures Jack has issues with would probably involve the general perception of masculinity. If he takes the side of the ghosts at the end because he gives into his insecurity, establishing Dick as a more securely masculine character could drive home Jack's hypocrisy in the steps he takes to avoid the feeling of being judged and observed. He is, at the end of the day, the villain, as victimized as he is. The Shining is a movie where people's reactions will vary, because a lot of it is based on what Kubrick would have thought was scary, and his weird perfectionism doesn't apply very well in that context. I wouldn't know how to assess this movie qualitatively without referring to my own personal reactions to it. I don't think people will ever settle over whether Nicholson's performance is too extreme or if it fits the tone of the movie. Some people never liked it and never will. Some people, like Stephen King, find it grows on them. If the movie doesn't come across as empty in content, it comes across as extremely pessimistic. This and Blade Runner, I think, are both movies that hold a bit of an anomalous place among those films that fall into the more or less established canon of "great movies" or classics. Unlike a lot of other famous or generally loved movies, their methods are frustrating when they don't immediately win you over. But if they do they draw their audience in completely. |
| Well, Sunday was too quite for me so I decided to watch Noah (2014). What a mistake that was. 3 things made me have a negative review on that movie. 1) I know that they wanted to make the film attractive and create some differences as not to go side by side with the "original story," but this 24/7 mud-covered characters were worse than a SmackDown match. Not to mention that 80% of the movie was whispering and the other 20% just yelling. We definitely didn't have something in the middle. No, sir! Whispering to one another gives suspense and a feeling that the characters say something very important & smart at that time. 2) Though I was intrigued by the trailer, the first 15 minutes of the film were as if the catastrophe already happened. A post apocalyptic world where instead of zombies you have some stone-like Quasimodos. 3) That Emma Watson. Okay, she was good for that smarty Hermione character but... that when she was 8 or 9 years old. Now, she is a nice looking girl who (in my humble opinion) does not fit to be an actress. After all the money she got from the Harry Potter franchise she could be, more or less, whoever she wanted. Anyway, I'm about to watch Army of Darkness (1992) and reeeeeally hope to enjoy this one. :-) |
| Hmm, I've heard mixed things about the new Godzilla. There is nothing wrong with remakes, but I wished more people would check out the original 1950s one. The thematic concerns were a lot stronger in that. |
|
| So I finally got around to watching Reservoir Dogs and I have to say, I loved it. The acting was great, the characters were enjoyable for villain protagonists and it has a lot of re-watch value, too. Pulp Fiction is still my favorite Tarantino flick but this is up there with Django and Kill Bill for me. |
| Love me some Reservoir Dogs. |
| Reservoir Dogs is awesome. Rewatched that recently with one of my friends who loves Tarantino but hadn't seen it before. Even thought it pretty much amounts to a genre pic, it really is eminently memorable more than anything. I can't say the same for Cop Land, which I watched today because my dad recommended it. I like most of the movies he recommends to me, but this one seemed constructed largely of cliches and awkward lines. The acting was really underwhelming considering the cast includes Ray Liotta, Robert DeNiro, and Harvey Keitel, although Sylvester Stallone gave a good performance. The end sort of saved it from being an unenjoyable experience, but overall I wasn't impressed. Because of that I decided to rewatch WALL-E because it's one of my favorite movies of all time and I haven't seen it in a while. That was the first movie I vehemently loved that I actually got to see in the theater when it came out. It's still the most adorable movie I've ever seen, and I'm still as enamored with the first half as I am with any silent movie I've seen. I've read that the staff watched Chaplin movies during the production until they understood how to convey the whole spectrum of emotion through the face alone, but one thing I love is that WALL-E and EVE don't even have faces, they just have eyes. |
| I've never watched a Tarkovsky movie, so I watched The Mirror. It was great, if not a film I could fully grasp until close to the end. I'm not good at absorbing what a movie is trying to get across without rewatching it a bunch of times. But I wouldn't mind rewatching The Mirror, and I liked it better than all the other movies I've seen in a similar vein like Tree of Life, although of course that's different in its own way. |
| Breaking the Waves (Lars von Trier), Naked (Mike Leigh) and Enemy (Denis Villeneuve). I really enjoyed all three and was quite surprised with Enemy - it starts with a quote from Saramago's O Homem Duplicado: Chaos is order yet to be deciphered. And it develops this idea well and very subtly. |
| Watched Andrei Rublev, as per LayedBack's recommendation in another thread, and because I wanted to watch another Tarkovsky film. It's good. Really, really good. I loved it about as much as Seven Samurai, which is saying something. It had the scale of one of Kurosawa's epics with the surreal qualities of Night of the Hunter. I was averse to watching it at first because of its length, but I'm glad I did. |
| Because I'm lucky, Boyhood was released in theaters near where I live. I wrote something about it here: http://letterboxd.com/ghadius/film/boyhood/ But seriously, nothing I said about it would amount to more than if I just told you to go see it if you haven't already. |
| I saw The Godfather for the first time not that long ago. While it's not my favorite movie and you do need alot time devoted to it, I can certainly see why people love it so much and yeah, I'd recommend it. Only problems I had with it was I thought it ended kinda abruptly and I thought Al Pacino's character was pretty bland but other than that I have no real problems with it and before that I saw The Blues Brothers. That movie kicked ass. Best musical I've ever seen bar none. What other musical has car chases, nazies, Ray Charles, James Brown, crazy ex girlfriends, Dan Aykroyd and John Belushi in it. Oh and the music kicks all kinds of ass |
| Blues Brothers is awesome. Finally watched The Spirit of the Beehive. It's great. It has some elements of Pan's Labyrinth with a style somewhat reminiscent of Tarkovsky. I think it qualifies as magical realism. That's a bit of a hard term to define, but I would say it fits here. It's not something I see in a lot of movies but the ones I've seen that do have it were all very good in one way or another. Those would probably be Spirit of the Beehive, Magnolia, The Double Life of Veronique, The Birds, A Serious Man, and possibly Cloud Atlas (for the comet birthmark). I'm probably missing some I haven't seen. |
Popka said: Because I'm lucky, Boyhood was released in theaters near where I live. I wrote something about it here: http://letterboxd.com/ghadius/film/boyhood/ But seriously, nothing I said about it would amount to more than if I just told you to go see it if you haven't already. I wish I was that lucky. I guess I won't be seeing that one on the brig screen. :( |
| Casual guardians of the galaxy. Loved it so much I will probably watch it again in theatres. Didn't expect the comedy to be that good. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Alphabet Movie Game ( 1 2 3 4 )LuckyAlix - Dec 1, 2015 |
193 |
by ramenyst
»»
May 7, 2019 9:53 PM |
|
» Who's the best movie villain ever?LuckyAlix - Dec 1, 2015 |
16 |
by ramenyst
»»
May 7, 2019 9:50 PM |
|
Sticky: » New Members Introduce Yourselves! ( 1 2 )LuckyAlix - Nov 30, 2015 |
50 |
by ramenyst
»»
May 7, 2019 9:38 PM |
|
» Favorite Directors ThreadLayedBack - May 19, 2014 |
26 |
by FlagCrusherTaka
»»
Mar 21, 2019 11:39 AM |
|
» Your least favorite filmbmoore07 - Jan 18, 2016 |
43 |
by Wiziliz
»»
Feb 9, 2018 7:08 AM |