|Becoming closer to his dream of leading a normal life, a professional safecracker agrees to do a job for the mafia, who have other plans for him.|
Last Movie You've Seen
Posted 24 April 2013 - 11:25 PM
Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:33 PM
Killer Joe was an...ok movie I guess. Not bad but nothing to really right home about. It was the first movie I had ever seen to be rated NC-17. The movie was about a trailer park family who's son is in debt to drug dealers. The family practically despises their mother/ex-wife so they hire a cop who has a side gig as a contract killer to murder her so the daughter can receive the inheritance. Well to pay off the contract killer they let him have sex with the daughter (who acts very child-like). There's really not a lot of plot to the film, and a lot of the scenes seem to be in place for shock value. Overall I would give it a 6/10
Posted 29 April 2013 - 12:17 AM
Either way it really shows just how much he went through. Chadwick Boseman played a great Jackie Robinson and even looked like him at times. For those who don't know about this movie it's about the first
African American breaking the color barrier in Baseball, a significant point in segregation.
Posted 30 April 2013 - 04:14 PM
Posted 22 May 2013 - 08:16 AM
The Fast and the Furious 6
Let's be honest, I've never been, nor I am fan of the series. I am not wetting my pants when I see that next part is coming out. I prefer car movies from '70s and '80s. Movies like Vanishing Point, Gone in sixty seconds, Smokey and the Bandit, Cannonball, etc. where driver was pictured as the archetype of a cowboy riding his way and not caring about the world surrounding him. Movies in which car like a trusty steed was symbol of the freedom and the driver was smoking cigarettes and driving straight into the sunset. Unfortunately with the end of some era, movies like these dissapeared from the screens. Refn showed that it's still possible to make them by making Drive (which was a substitute of the things we've lost), but unfortuantely small number of directors got the guts big enough to follow his footsteps. Justin Lin isn't definitely one of them. He made sixth part of the series and he already announced seventh. By the way that movie could change its title to The Bold and the Beautiful, because it will soon become the movie with the highest number of parts (currently it's Planet of the Apes with 9 parts). The best thing is that Lin is trying to break the boundaries and the results are mediocre at best. Till this moment I thought that second part was the worst one, but sixth part showed that nothing remains the same, yet nothing changes. Lin served the next part, which is based on the very same ideas and is even worse than the last one.
The worst thing about this movie is fact that it has absolutely no substance to back up the special effects. Scenario is poor and which is even worse director and writer think that audience is full of idiots. Main plot is absolutely awful, showing us bunch of mercenaries lead by ex-SAS, who are supposedly very dangerous. Too bad we can't see that, because they look like bunch of guys scraped together to do absolutely nothing. Then we got super cop Hobbs, who wants to stop this bunch so he needs another bunch to help him. Of course DSS, which can travel around the world, waltz into Interpol buildings only to throw with some criminal around and are welcomed in the NATO bases doesn't have any skilled drivers nor hackers. There are scenes that contradict with everything that happened before, for example Letty's alive and she was working for Brian, but nobody knows about it, Riley works for Shaw from the beginning, but that doesn't mean she can't fight with Letty for live and death.
Another thing that ruin the experience is the humor, which is absolutely awful. One of the examples: After the crash in which Roman's car flipped, which resulted in crashed roof he's saying "That could be my forehead, man." Another guy answered "Nah, man your forehead ain't that big." Terrific joke and it wasn't the only one with that quality.
Another minus is total lack of love and respect for thing you're doing. If you somehow managed to aquire Jensen Interceptor, which is legendary, to your movie make sure it will be customized with mandatory Nitro. Same applies to Charger Daytona. Even worse things happen to cars like old Camaro, Mustang and Escort as they got 10 minutes of screen time, at best, combined. What was the point of buying them then?
Movie is filled with extremely cheesy dialogues, like "You've got 5 minutes" "I need 2"; "I knew you will say that" and similar ones. This with zero emotion from the characters makes each conversation in the movie extremely boring.
Movie is called Fast and Furious, but unfortunately there is no speed nor fury in every race and chase in the movie. They slow and almost static. They should use more zooms, dash or bumpers cameras and similar effects that take you closer to the car making this more intense, but instead almost every scene is filmed outside the car and with very stable camera.
Last chapter will be devoted to Gisele, whose death was easily the most terrible scene in the movie history. It was so washed up from the emotions, that it could be easily compared to infamous "I did not hit her" scene. They didn't even go looking for her or her body. They looked at Han and forgot about Gisele minute after when they were all cheery, because they won. Talking about family...
Don't get me wrong, it's not I like bashing this movie, but I absolutely couldn't find any positive there (F/X are nice and music fits the action), but the rest is below the line of mediocrity. The best parts were first and the fourth one and they were nice one time movies for free evening. Fast Five turned into bad copy of Ocean's eleven with cars and sixth part is even worse, not having any identity nor story.
One interesting fact: if you've seen the trailer then be prepared for a shock that all action scenes regarding cars were already shown. All the things people are going to cinema for were actually presented before the movie.
Fast and Furious 6 is the movie for die-hard fans of the series and if you aren't one of them you may easily skip it. 3/10 from me.
Edited by Tycek, 28 May 2013 - 08:09 PM.
Posted 22 May 2013 - 08:39 AM
Posted 22 May 2013 - 08:10 PM
Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:01 AM
I have to say, I thought that movie was pretty decent and interesting. The synopsis of the movie seemed intriguing; a man called V seeking freedom, later with the help of thousands, in futuristic Britain because of how the government is acting toward them. There were some mildly humorous parts, such as the Benny Hill segment. That scene managed to squeeze a chuckle out of me.
And the scene where V was shot had my mouth hanging open. I though he'd die after receiving multiple gun wounds. Instead, he killed all the guys who shot him. That's when he opens his cloak to show a piece of armour was being worn, but it was riddled with bullet holes. He sadly dies because the bullets actually did hit him. I have no idea how someone would be able to take all those bullets in like he did.
He was put on a train with bombs. He created a plan to blow up the Parliament earlier in the film, so that's how he set it up. The train rolled to the Parliament and it blew up. All of his followers were watching in astonishment.
One thing that's disappointing is that we never get to see his face. He wears the Guy Faux mask throughout the entire movie. I wanted to find out, yet at the same time not find out. It's kinda like how we want to know who Doctor Who's name is, but at the same time not really.
Posted 27 May 2013 - 09:38 PM
I finally saw Enter the Void on the big screen the other night. Ever since I watched it for the first time back in November I'd been determined that I'd never watch it again until I'd got a chance to see it blown up, so when it popped up in Tyneside Cinema's 75th Anniversary Celebration I dragged two friends along with me to go and see it... at 3am.
I must say, for me, it doesn't really hold up to a repeat viewing. The visual effects and general "look" of the movie are fantastic on the silver screen though. Drug enhanced Tokyo skylines, strip clubs and neon lights all bring induce a trippy and psychedelic feeling. It is beautiful. Especially so when you start it in the most unsociable hours. Where it falls down though, if you've seen it before, is the actual content. The relationship between Oscar and his sister feels way too heavy handed, and I realised just how much is done to try and intentionally shock you. Stuff like the (not so much) implied incest and the abortion scene are there because Gaspar Noe is trying a little too hard.
Plus, they played the shorter cut where the "resurrection" scene in the morgue was omitted, which annoyed me because I thought it was one of the best in the film.
But that said, my friends (both of whom had never seen it) said they really enjoyed it. There were a few things they weren't too fond of, one said she though it "took a turn for the worse in the last half hour, with all that incestuous ghosting", but were largely positive about it. So I reckon, if you ever plan on going to see Enter the Void, the biggest enjoyment will come from the visual spectacle of it all rather than the content so you're better off waiting until you can see it in a cinema rather than on the small screen.
I didn't enjoy the film anywhere near as much as the first time, but it's definitely more of an experience in the cinema so it wasn't a complete loss. Gotta say, the opening credits hitting you loud and fast right at the start in 30 foot high letters is f*cking fantastic.
And as an aside, if you're ever in Newcastle and plan on checking out a film, go to the Tyneside Cinema. It's a great little independent theatre and does stuff like these 75hr marathons quite often.
Posted 28 May 2013 - 03:30 AM
I think it was a really great movie! This one had The Rock in it. He played as the leader of a special force or something. and at the end when they had the two Dodge Chargers steal the vault was awesome! First time watching it and I'm not disappointed. I'm going to watch Fast and Furious 6 this week.
Posted 28 May 2013 - 08:16 PM
TF&TF tells a story about undercover cop who was sent to find out who is attacking the trucks transporting electronics and stealing the goods. Guys are well trained in car driving and they're using modified cars, so it's natural that protagonists has to join the ranks in one of the groups specialized in illegal racing.
As you may see the story is similar to Point Break, where FBI agent played by Keanu Reevees was infiltrating the group of adrenaline junkies, but the similarities aren't breaking the movie.
Things that are definitely on plus is the gangsta-buddy atmosphere and some kind of naturalism in the dialogues and scenes (i.g. improvised beat-up outside Toretto's bar). Sure this movie is loud, tacky and colorful, but it was without a doubt the best one in the series. It got really nice action scenes (attacking the trucks, racing, fights) and proper sense of speed. The story is also made well that even with the open ending it feels closed.
There are of course some mistakes, which could be easily corrected by someone who knows a bit about cars, but this errors don't ruin the rest of the picture.
TF&TF is good movie, especially if you're Midnight Club games fan (I got feeling that I need to play it immediately after seeing the movie) and even if you aren't one then it's good for free evening. 7/10.
The Fast & The Furious: Tokyo Drift
First movie in the series made by Justin Lin as a director and Chris Morgan as a
screenwriter and the best one made by the duo. It tells a story of Sean Boswell - rather troublemaking teenager who loves to race, which caused one mess too much. It's either prison or moving out for him again, so his mother tired of constant traveling decides to send him to Tokyo to his father. Being new in the city Sean stomped on few wrong feet and not seeing other choice he starts racing again.
The biggest minus is the Lucas Black himself. He acts properly, but unfortunately he looks way too old to play teenager. Other actors were chosen very well and special mentioning goes to Sung Kang playing Han Lue, Nathalie Kelley playing Neela and Brian Goodman playing Major Boswell. Their acting is proper and fits the scene of the movie.
Another annoyance is also connected to Sean, as he somehow managed to learn in japanese school while being born and raised in US. They could easily fix that by putting him into school for army brats as it is made in real life.
Tokyo Drift as a movie is quite good, it has elements of new adventure movie, nice action scenes, nice sense of speed and great Tokyo views. Story is simple, but characters (especially Han) are making this movie quite interesting.
Tokyo Drift is far from being perfect, but it can easily get strong 6/10.
+New adventure elements
-Lucas Black looks
Edited by Tycek, 04 July 2013 - 08:31 AM.
Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:12 PM
Derek Cianfrance pulled no punches in his début film Blue Valentine and he shows no signs of slowing down with The Place Beyond The Pines. But where Blue Valentine focussed tightly on the two central characters falling in and out of love, the sense of scale has been ramped up taking The Place Beyond The Pines into grander territory.
Focussing on the lives of two fathers, the central conflict comes from people who are neither wholly good or wholly bad but the beautifully murky grey area of just trying to do what's best for their families. In the first two acts, of this film which is very clearly divided into three parts, focus on the trials of Luke and Avery. Luke (Ryan Gosling) is a motorcycle stunt rider who, upon returning to a town with his annually touring show, finds he has a child that he fathered the previous year and sets out to provide for him in the only way he can. His less than lawful profession sets him on a collision course with the incorruptible cop in Avery (Bradley Cooper) and worlds collide as the two men and their families struggle to come to terms with the consequences over the next two decades.
TPBTP is a long film, and it feels long too, but if you can invest yourself in it it pays off in spades. There are no heroes here, only people ruled by their emotions and their efforts to do what is right. Mistakes, guilt and lies echo through generations as the sins of the father are imprinted on those who are doomed to also suffer for them. You may find yourself a little lost at the end of the first act and wondering why any of the progression we get of Avery in the second chunk matters, but it all comes to fruition in the understated and powerful final half hour.
It will be a film that polarises audiences. Many will criticise its awkward pacing and overly lengthy run time. But for those who love characters who are fundamentally broken, especially those who have major identity issues with their somewhat broken homes, this film will resonate to the core. Personally, I saw a lot of powerful emotions reflected back at me that I've dealt with myself. Never to the degree shown here, but I'd argue that anyone who has an issue with a parent would struggle to empathise here.
Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:57 PM
A great movie imo...
Posted 05 June 2013 - 06:13 PM
Killing them Softly
I had high hopes for this movie, great line up including Brad Pitt, Ray Liotta, James Gandolfini, the story is about 3 crooks ripping off the mob, Pitt and Gandolfini are hitmen who are hired in to sort out the situation and clean up. Sounds good?
Well it isn't. This has to be one of the worse movies I've ever seen, it's such over rated sh*t, it's unbelievable how this received so much praise. It's a wannabe Tarantino flick, without the style, it's full of political sh*t too. It ends abruptly too. I can't think of anything good about this movie at all.
Avoid this movie.
Posted 05 June 2013 - 08:07 PM
E: Eh, why not one more?
With a cold open of an apartment floor spattered with blood and deep red footprints, Side Effects starts with the air of mystery and intrigue it keeps throughout.
Without giving away too much, Side Effects revolves around a group of people, both patients and doctors, in the psychiatric world and the dangerous possibilities that foreseen or unforeseen side effects can bring about. This is a psychological thriller that deals in money, sex, lies and (pharmaceutical) drugs. Much like many police procedurals with which it shares its style, Side Effects hinges on that oh so ambiguous thing: the truth. When a course of anti-depressants leads to horrific consequences for Emily (Rooney Mara), her doctor (Jude Law) sets on to unravel the mystery of just what happened on a fateful night between her and her husband. More importantly, with his reputation and sense of justice on the line, he pursues why it happened.
The two leads (Mara and Law) elevate what could potentially have descended into one of those convoluted daytime TV movies. Jude Law gives his Dr Banks a pure heart and develops a truly compelling sense of righteousness that would leave only the most cynical not on his side, which makes some later developments for him all the more a difficult pill to swallow. On the flip side, Mara shows off her true range here. We've seen her as an everyday sort of girl in her bit part in The Social Network and the volatilely broken Lisbeth in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. In Side Effects she shows off a number of sides. From her all too believable state through the depression as a timid and injured soul to scenes where she is anything but (to say any more would give away too much), Mara is enthralling throughout.
Side Effects is quite a wild ride with twists and turns... once it gets going. For the first forty-ish minutes you're kind of left wondering where everything is going and although there are one or two interesting characters, they're not doing much, rather that things are just happening. Getting past that first act, something happens that makes you retro-actively appreciate everything that happened. It's a bit of a mis-step in that I would really have preferred to enjoy it as it was happening but being able to look back and think "Damn that was clever". As it stands, the first act is a lot more like looking at a sad painting instead of watching a film, which is great if you're into character studies like me, but it's not why a lot of people watch films. That said, do stick with it. If you like complicated mysteries that flip and flop and have people playing off each other in a vortex of angles, you'll love the last two thirds of Side Effects.
Gotta say though (ending spoilers) the ending is very much bittersweet... Actually no, it's just bitter. This character you've been rooting for pretty much the whole time pulls a massive dick move. I'm not saying it's not justified, but considering their motivations all the way through, the exact type of resolution seems particularly cruel.
Edited by I So Brink, 06 June 2013 - 01:10 AM.
Posted 08 June 2013 - 05:41 PM
I watched Love Story, the 1970 edition starring Ryan O'Neal and Allie McGraw, with my parents tonight. I've never been one to be emotionally drawn and pulled by romantic dramas, but I genuinely found the relationship between Oliver and Jenny to be gripping, easy to relate to my own personal relationships, and felt that it possessed enough depth for viewers to be captivated fully by the story. Without revealing too much about the plot and how it progresses (the general tone is set in the first minute I'd say, in the opening scene), it's a tragedy, and given my own current tribulations as a law student, my at-times edgy relationship with my father and my own romantic history, I couldn't help but relate to Oliver Barrett a lot throughout the film. Because of thi, I'd highly recommend it, however, there were times where the dialogue was executed so cheesily (especially earlier in the film) which made me nearly cringe and disappointed me given the general critical claim of the film, but, if you overlook it and focus primarily on the story and allow yourself to take the movie for what it is, you won't be disappointed. The shots of Boston and New York from the early '70s (which I had never seen personally from that time period) were rather interesting (for me at least, I mean, those images aren't exactly limited to the film).
Posted 08 June 2013 - 11:34 PM
When you've essentially got five teams working on five different short films, it's easy to get stuff done fast. Thanks to this V/H/S/2, the sequel to my favourite horror of the past few years (V/H/S), is here less than a year after the original and it hasn't suffered too abdly for it.
These films are taking us back to an old style you don't see too often any more: the horror anthology. V/H/S/2 follows pretty much exactly the same format as the first: there's a central story about some people being duped into going to a house and finding a bunch of random ass VHS tapes (despite being set right now). They pop the tapes in and we get a bunch of short films breaking up the central story.
Again, the framing story is the weakest of the lot. It doesn't really need to be strong at all though, seeing as it just functions as an excuse to play a bunch of short found-footage type films. I will say though, in the first we were given a reason to believe the guys in the central story deserved to be in this f*cked up situation, but in this one they just seem to be good people getting f*cked with for no real reason.
As for the feature shorts, there's a range of quality.
The first ("Phase I Clinical Trials") is pretty much your standard ghost story and easily the most disappointing of the bunch. It's pretty well made, and there's an interesting backstory that's alluded to but otherwise it's just pretty standard and has really predictable jumpscares. Not to mention the instance of completely out of the blue gratuitous nudity. I mean, I'm an insane Game of Thrones fan, so gratuitous nudity isn't a problem for me, but in this it's comes out of the blue and for no real reason other than tits.
With the start of the second film ("A Ride in the Park") my stomach sank and my eyes rolled. I won't spoil what it is, but it's a monster invasion that's been done to undeath so much these past few years. Luckily for me, it continues past the point where you'd expect the run-of-the-mill version to and actually becomes a fresh, fun take on something quite tired.
"Safe Haven" in slot three is the highlight of V/H/S/2. If the first film didn't have Amateur Night, Safe Haven would be the highlight of the series so far. Gareth Evans, director of the massively acclaimed action film The Raid: Redemption, throws a news crew into a commune of an apocalyptic death cult during the climax of their doomsday prophecy. Things get very crazy very, very quickly. It just keeps escalating and getting more and more intense until it gets so messed up even some of the victims can't help but just laugh at the sheer ridiculous brilliance.
Coming in last is the very efficiently titled "Slumber Party Alien Abduction". Yeah, it pretty much does exactly what it says on the tin. It's a very 90s styled throwback that knows what it is and just decides to have a bit of fun with it.
Overall, the film feels a lot less coherent than its predecessor. The first film was incredibly tight and despite having a handful of directors had very clear themes running throughout but the sequel just feels like a bunch of, seemingly random, short horror films from all over the genre. It's still a very good example of found-footage done right, but if you're left only able to see one for some bizarre reason, go for the first.
Posted 09 June 2013 - 01:42 PM
I thought Koyaanisqatsi could never be topped visually, but Powaqqatsi blows it out of the water. Godfrey Reggio was right to avoid using time-lapse photography as they wouldn't have worked that well here, but slow motion works wonders for the subject matter here. The music score, again by Philip Glass is haunting, thought-provoking and otherworldly. The message this film conveys is that third-world countries adapt to change, but at a terrible cost.
A true eye-opener of a movie, even more so than it's predecessor. I fully recommend it.
Edited by Valenta, 12 June 2013 - 09:16 PM.
Posted 10 June 2013 - 07:07 PM
Fast and Furious is the second movie from the series made by Lin as director and Morgan as screenwriter and it already went on the wrong track. First scene shows everything that is wrong about the ideas made by the duo - everything is overdone and made strictly to appeal the general population. Even if the group got at least ten different ways to steal the fuel from the road train, they took the worst one, using liquid nitrogenium, hammers, woman running on the driving truck and car driving under blowing trailer (!). From the very beginning director and screenwriter shows they got no idea for a movie nor a respect for the assets. In couple of minutes Han and Letty dissapear from the screen and movie turns from overdone chase movie into chessy flick with even cheesier revenge plot.
Story is completely not interesting, but movie is watchable to the first race. Then everything goes straight to hell. Movie called Fast and Furious has its best moments when main characters are not sitting in a car, which is quite ironic. First race and every one after it are extremely fake and boring. First looks like taken straight from Asphalt games made for mobiles with all these computer generated, silicon modified chicks and bright colors. Every car chase, especially those two made in tunnels are taken straight from Cartoon Network. There is one worth something, when Brian and Dom are escaping from Braga's goons, but only before Dom started using shotgun.
Acting is terrible and it doesn't surprise me why they decided to get rid of Michelle Rodriguez as her couple of minutes are simply bad. Rest isn't acting much better, like they made it only for the payment. That's the point of the job, but giving more life into your character wouldn't be bad.
And when I wrote about no respect for the assets, how come that you managed to get F-Bomb Camaro to your flick only to show it for maximum two minutes? What's the point of getting car like that? Normal '70 Camaro wouldn't be enough? Also if you decided to show Impreza rolling over, make sure you take whole exhaust system and part of rear running gear. Lack of the respect isn't that strange if you look closely at the story making absolutely no sense, with characters saying things that contradict themselves in the same dialogue. Braga is head of multi-billion dollar cartel, but he can't afford not coming for the deal worth 60 milions, which is obviously trap. Who wrote that crap? Power Rangers got more sense than this.
I wrote before that F&F6 is the worst part of the series, but F&F is just couple of seconds ahead. They should leave the series on the TD, but unfortunately someone decided to milk this cow in feral condition. 4/10 is the maximum I could give it.
Parade is another movie made by Srdjan Dragojevic, who is maker of one of the greatest movies I've ever seen: Lepa Sela, Lepo Gore. Around 16 years passed since the Yugoslavian wars, but countries located there are far from peace and understanding. Another conflict is in the air, but this time more local and the reason is sexuality. Small group of gays, including artsy director Mirko and his boyfriend - vet Radmilo are planning to organise gay parade in Belgrade. Problem is nobody wants to help them and even police doesn't want to get its hands dirty by protecting parade from the homophobic society. Only chance for them is Limun - ex-chetnik and criminal, who wants to get married and whose girlfriend gave him an ultimatum. Either he will protect the parade or there won't be the wedding.
The first great about this movie is the fact that Dragojevic is using stereotypes and insulting everybody at the same time. Mirko is crybaby dreaming of better Serbia, Radmilo is typical female type gay, who drives pink Mini Cooper, Limun is manly gangster and extremal homophobe with even more homophobic skinhead goon of a son and the only Albanian from Kosovo is drug dealer. Every character is the movie is overdrawn is stereotypical way, which turns this movie into more like theatrical play (which is in fact ironic, because Mirko was one of the theatrical plays director, who couldn't find a job, because of his sexual orientation, so he had to organise weddings instead).
Acting is great, but it's something you would expect from Dragojevic movies, especially if Nikola Kojo is playing Limun. Other actors are also great in their roles, and because of that movie feels very natural.
Dragojevic shows that not only he knows how to make unstereotypical movies about stereotypes, but also how to make witty references (Ben Hur, The Magnificent Seven and others).
Whole movie is more like a Dragojevic's dream about free country, where everybody would be proud to call it home and where friendship born from hate is stronger than hate born from fear.
But what's the most important Parade is great and rather unusual comedy really worth watching even if you're not into balkan cinematography. I had a great time watching it and because of that I give it 8/10.
-Not for everybody (LGBT)
Edited by Tycek, 10 June 2013 - 07:11 PM.
Posted 11 June 2013 - 01:39 PM
Posted 11 June 2013 - 04:03 PM
|QUOTE (ThePinkFloydSound @ Tuesday, Jun 11 2013, 13:39)|
|Was going to write something on Side Effects but I've been beaten to it. Enjoyable film and Rooney Mara is one of my favourite actresses now. She's so beautiful as well.|
It's always good to hear more opinions!
I'm in complete agreement about Rooney Mara. She's just fantastic. Between Side Effects and TGWTDT she's had two moments that elicited some real emotion in me and that doesn't happen all too often with films and me. In TGWTDT it was the sexual assault scenes, first with incredible discomfort and getting quite disturbed by the one where she is a victim and then a sense of justice in the second (which actually made me shocked at myself, that I could almost cheer on something like that happening to anyone). Then in Side Effects you'll probably be able to guess what it was. Not so much a specific moment, but when it's clear she was a liar all along I got genuinely pissed off. In the first part I was so sold on Emily being a really timid and broken woman I was really invested and felt so sorry and concerned for her. When it looked like she was going to jump in front of the subway train I was actually worried she was gonna do it. Sweeping that rug out from under me left me annoyed that I'd been played and impressed that it had been done so well.
As for how she looks, she's gorgeous. In SE I kept thinking she looked like Zooey Deschanel at points, simply because of the way she had her hair a lot of the time... even though they actually look quite different.
Posted 12 June 2013 - 12:32 PM
You say she reminded you of Deschanel at times and I can see that but I kept thinking it was Aleska Pallandino (Darmody, Boardwalk Empire). When I saw it was Rooney Mara, I just thought it was insane. The difference between TGWTDT and Side Effects is really amazing.
I've watched two films lately and one was Frenzy (Dir. Alfred Hitchcock, 1974) and the other Unbreakable (Dir. M. Night Shamayalan, 2000) I want to focus on Unbreakable.
I watched this film when it came out back in 2000. I was 15 at the time and I remember enjoying it but probably thought it was a little slow and it didn't really have the super happy ending.
Today, I watched it, 13 years older and wiser. I actually enjoyed it a lot more than I ever did. I would have seen parts of it on TV over the years but it's on YouTube now in HD.
The story is about a David Dunn (Bruce Willis) who finds a note on his car left by a man, comic book art dealer with brittle bone disease (Samuel. L. Jackson). The note read "How many days have you been sick?" Dunn starts to investigate this as he finds it quite profound given that he's just after surviving a fatal train crash where he was the sole survivor. You can start to see the pattern here... and I wont go further..
Unbreakable is shot every nicely. It moves at a nice and slow pace, keeping you in suspense and giving you time think about the characters feelings. Not to say it doesn't have it flaws. I've read some reviews that criticise Bruce Willis' acting is over done which personally, I didn't think so. Maybe I was too involved in the plot to see it and Jacksons delivery was apparently too serious with some of his monologues although I think that was his style. The deadpan, strong and stern afro-American monologues. Acting aside the production on the film, the cinematography is flawless.
Probably not for everyone but I'd certainly recommend it.
Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:12 AM
A trippy mix of religion, faith, paranoia and foreign lands. The patrons of new gods fight the embodiments of old, and the New World takes an opportunity to throw a few kicks in too.
I was prompted to see this after getting wildly excited over seeing the trailer for Nicolas Winding Refn's upcoming film Only God Forgives, his latest film since Drive, which I absolutely loved. I was told to check out both this and the Pusher Trilogy, something I'm sure I'll get around to eventually.
Anyway, Valhalla Rising. It's a much more esoteric movie than Drive and that's saying something. In the same way that if you went to see Drive expecting The Fast and the Furious with more Ryan Gosling, if you come to Valhalla Rising expecting a swashbuckling Viking hack-and-slash adventure you'll be sorely disappointed.
The plot, if you can call it that really, follows a mute warrior-slave known only as One Eye. He was at the mercy of a Celtic or possibly Nordic hill tribe who used him as a fighter in gambling and entertainment. Upon gaining his freedom he encounters a band of Christians setting off for Jerusalem to fight in one of the early crusades. Joining them, he sets off on journey to the Holy Lands that eventually leads them through Hell.
Valhalla Rising hints at many things and reveals few. Drawing on a wealth of cultures, particularly Celtic and Nordic mythology, certain things are alluded to. It's hard to ignore the similarities between this half sighted beastly warrior and the one-eyed battle god-king Odin from Viking mythology. Similarly it's hard to separate the visual stylings of the people the band encounters in wherever it is they end up from certain other "primitive" cultures; especially so if you believe the theories that the Vikings explored a lot more of the world than we thought.
The film leaves a lot open to interpretation, and it's going to come down to personal preference whether that's a good thing or not. Personally, I loved it. Lots of ambiguous storytelling techniques combined with some beautiful scenery (thank you, Scottish Highlands) create a powerful ethereal feeling, giving the entire film a dream like or illusion-like haze.
It's not a blockbuster. It's dreamy, unclear, hazy and features a lot of brutal violence. For once, as well, you get some sword-and-shield period fighting that doesn't involve a 10 minute sword fight just to resolve a dispute. The one thing that very much anchors Valhalla Rising in the real world is its portrayal of violence. Fights are over quickly. The injuries sustained are fatal and you know this for sure. It's not clean and it's not slick but it's impactful, you feel every hit, very much a metaphor for the film itself.
Posted 28 June 2013 - 09:09 AM
The movie is actually quite alright and fits perfectly into the current background of some bugging scandals (think: NSA)
At first I thought I was watching Watch Dogs - The Movie, but with the help of the omnipresent cluelessness of the protagonist(s) and the audience, the film manages to create a good portion of tension.
With an A.I. (ARIIA) turning against its creator as a result of the image of being threatened by him, the film forms a queue with movies like Odyssey in Space (HAL9000), Terminator (Skynet) or iRobot.
The special effects are a bit unclear, because they have been shot in narrow angles. This ads to the very claustrophobic atmosphere of the film.
It's quite impressive how the movie encourages you to think about how interlinked our highly engineered world already is, though many things are extremely exaggerated for cinematic reasons.
Posted 28 June 2013 - 03:51 PM
One of the best TV movies I've ever seen. From the beginning, it was clear Spielberg was a master at playing one's nerves like a banjo.
It entails a business man, David Mann travelling along a remote desert road in his Plymouth Valiant Signet on a cross-country business trip. He encounters a rusty and filthy Peterbilt 281 tanker along the way. He passes the truck, unwittingly setting off a tense high speed cat & mouse chase which will end with one of them getting killed. My favorite sequence has to be the diner scene, where David tries to figure out who could be trying to kill him and why, all the while battling his inner turmoil.
You can see that this film helped inspire the basic premise of Jaws as both films consist of 'two leviathans targeting everyman' as Spielberg later put it. It has it's flaws I admit, but nonetheless remains a tense well made thriller that's held up well these past 42 years.
FYI: That isn't a official poster. I just went for the most creative one I could find.
Edited by Valenta, 08 July 2013 - 07:44 PM.
Posted 02 July 2013 - 12:46 PM
Posted 08 July 2013 - 05:36 PM
Think of it like the holocaust. NEVER AGAIN!
^Snitch wasn't that great. Too much visual effects.
Posted 09 July 2013 - 09:16 AM
Rating: MA15+ in Australia
Comments: Great movie! Good story, amazing characters and the lack of music along give a really intense and suspenseful atmosphere. Through the movie I was wondering 'Oh sh*t, did he hear him? Where's he hiding? This guy's in for a surprise.' I recommend it if you like thrillers.
Posted 09 July 2013 - 10:44 AM
It's a heist movie starring Robert De Niro as a seasoned thief,Edward Norton and Marlon Brando.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users