Captain Philips
Everything was great but the cinematography. Close ups + shakycam + constant focus shifting = a bad time.
[B]Synecdoche, New York[/B]
Man. I've seen the last 30 or so minutes of this before, when my parents watched it. Maybe 2 years ago or something. I knew it was something, but I didn't know what. I figured today was the best time to watch the film. I'm not gonna go into details or anything, I just want to say that this film is perfect. I don't really know what this film was about completely, but I have feelings and ideas, but at the same time this film spoke to me on an unprecedented level. I'm running on a purely emotional level here. PSH gave perhaps the best performance of his career with this one. It's a role that goes beyond the common thoughts of when someone is just so damn good, of "Man, I can't imagine anyone else playing this role!". I think it wouldn't be [I]possible[/I] for anyone else to truly play this role. This is what PSH was born for, and what Kaufman has been aspiring to his whole career. PSH may be gone, but his legacy lives on in his films and this is probably his peak. Not to imply he went downhill, at all, but I'm just glad he at least made this movie. It's funny, sad, existential, post-modern meta-cinema and is perhaps as pretentious as it sounds but it is incredible.
I'm reminded of Ebert's review of this film. [I]"I think you have to see Charlie Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York" twice. I watched it the first time and knew it was a great film and that I had not mastered it. The second time because I needed to. The third time because I will want to... it's not that you have to return to understand it. It's that you have to return to realize how fine it really is. The surface may daunt you. The depths enfold you. The whole reveals itself, and then you may return to it like a talisman."[/I] I may have only seen this film once, but I understand completely what he means. This is a film that works on such a scale, with so many levels, and such emotional power that it cannot possibly be dissected in one viewing. The second viewing may help understand. The third may primarily be for enjoyment. But even come the fourth, fifth, sixth time, this is a film that you continue to unravel. I feel you could unravel this film infinitely. it's something that works off your emotions, your situation and your life. It's a film that will change depending on when and how you watch it. My interpretation of it now will not be the same as my interpretation in 5 years. Then again 5 years after that, and so on. It'll be a totally different film. That's something magical.
This is also the first film since I was a kid to legitimately make me cry. I mean, I've welled up at films before, but the end of this film... There were just little things that really struck a cord with me. Not even the bits I expected. For instance [sp]when his daughter dies- it wasn't her saying "No" to his ask of forgiveness that hurt me. It was him picking up the flower from her body that made me well up.[/sp] Another being -and I'm not even sure of the reason for this one- [sp]at his father's funeral, he says something like "there are 13 million people in this world, and not one of them are extras. Each one is the star of their own story."[/sp]And I just let it all out. Same goes for the funeral monologue near the very end. Not only is this the first film to properly make me cry, it made me cry several times throughout. Maybe it's something to do with Hoffman's passing, because honestly I have never been hit as hard about a celebrity death as I was with this one. I'm still horribly torn up about it and can't believe it. But I think the film would still have made me cry. It's a film I don't understand but I know it's special and I know I love it, I have to, like Ebert, watch it one more time to try and come to grips with it properly. Then I'll watch it again because I want to. Then, maybe after that, I'll wait a while, and I'll decide to watch it again. And it'll be a different film with a different meaning, because I'll be a different person. That's how you know you've discovered something special. It's a film like no other and a film better than most of the others, and a perfect testament to Philip Seymour Hoffman. In the future, this film will be regarded as one of the greatest of all time. I know it, because it is one of them already.
[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;43763864]Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides 2/10
"Captain Jack Sparrow: The Caricature: The Movie." It's like they were afraid to show a scene where he wasn't doing some cool shit or having a sword fight, and the improvised escapes from the other movies evolved to such a ridiculous height that the only way I can explain it is that Jack Sparrow is some sort of prescient god who knows every facet of the situation before his character should even know the information. Every other fucking scene was an action scene, the plot is disjointed, I still don't even know what the relationship between Jack and Angelica is, probably because it was the most convoluted and inconsistent thing ever.[/QUOTE]
During the first three movies you're never sure if Jack is crazy, lucky, or both. On Stranger Tides just threw that out the window by making him omnipresent and able to get out of any situation in a series of events that would even make Rube Goldberg say "nah that's stupid."
The scene where Jack escaped the dinner table is literally the death of anything that ever made that character interesting.
City of Ember. 5/10 - Spoilers ahead guys.
So much potential lost. Ruined the whole twist in the first 20 seconds, and the ending was so silly it hurts (nice hole right above the city, glad no one noticed that and nothing ever fell down in TWO HUNDRED YEARS). But mutant mole rats? Mutant moths? What? And what in God's name was with that 'escape' sequence... You put families on that, and it'll be a bloody gore fest before they ever get to the exit. That's completely ridiculous. Not to mention travelling DOWN for 5 minutes, walking up a small (compared to the book at least) flight of stairs and ending up MILES above the city. Come on.
Should have been a 3 or 4 hour TV mini-movie and spent more time showing the gradual failure of the reactor and the Mayor's attempts to hide it all from the people. I loved the visuals and the sets were beautiful, actors were good, just they tried to do too much too quickly, and didn't do it right at all.
Such a shame it bombed, I still want to see a sequel regardless.
[QUOTE=Killuah;43764171]The films should've stoped after the first one.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, the first Pirates movie was great. An absolute surprise with topnotch acting, cool characters and overall a great setting. It was even funny, then they decided to shit on the series.
[QUOTE=Sobek-;43767941]City of Ember. 5/10 - Spoilers ahead guys.
So much potential lost. Ruined the whole twist in the first 20 seconds, and the ending was so silly it hurts (nice hole right above the city, glad no one noticed that and nothing ever fell down in TWO HUNDRED YEARS). But mutant mole rats? Mutant moths? What? And what in God's name was with that 'escape' sequence... You put families on that, and it'll be a bloody gore fest before they ever get to the exit. That's completely ridiculous. Not to mention travelling DOWN for 5 minutes, walking up a small (compared to the book at least) flight of stairs and ending up MILES above the city. Come on.
Should have been a 3 or 4 hour TV mini-movie and spent more time showing the gradual failure of the reactor and the Mayor's attempts to hide it all from the people. I loved the visuals and the sets were beautiful, actors were good, just they tried to do too much too quickly, and didn't do it right at all.
Such a shame it bombed, I still want to see a sequel regardless.[/QUOTE]
You are overthinking this.
[QUOTE=junker154;43768382]Agreed, the first Pirates movie was great. An absolute surprise with topnotch acting, cool characters and overall a great setting. It was even funny, then they decided to shit on the series.[/QUOTE]
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;43762140]Philip Seymour Hoffman has been found dead in his apartment... Absolutely tragic, total surprise. To me, the best actor of the past 15 years. One of the best of all time. Just surreal.[/QUOTE]
What the hell I always thought he was Matt Damon.. except fatter build for some movie role.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43772473]What the hell I always thought he was Matt Damon.. except fatter build for some movie role.[/QUOTE]
Fatt Damon :v:
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;43765633][B]Synecdoche, New York[/B]
Man. I've seen the last 30 or so minutes of this before, when my parents watched it. Maybe 2 years ago or something. I knew it was something, but I didn't know what. I figured today was the best time to watch the film. I'm not gonna go into details or anything, I just want to say that this film is perfect. I don't really know what this film was about completely, but I have feelings and ideas, but at the same time this film spoke to me on an unprecedented level. I'm running on a purely emotional level here. PSH gave perhaps the best performance of his career with this one. It's a role that goes beyond the common thoughts of when someone is just so damn good, of "Man, I can't imagine anyone else playing this role!". I think it wouldn't be [I]possible[/I] for anyone else to truly play this role. This is what PSH was born for, and what Kaufman has been aspiring to his whole career. PSH may be gone, but his legacy lives on in his films and this is probably his peak. Not to imply he went downhill, at all, but I'm just glad he at least made this movie. It's funny, sad, existential, post-modern meta-cinema and is perhaps as pretentious as it sounds but it is incredible.
I'm reminded of Ebert's review of this film. [I]"I think you have to see Charlie Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York" twice. I watched it the first time and knew it was a great film and that I had not mastered it. The second time because I needed to. The third time because I will want to... it's not that you have to return to understand it. It's that you have to return to realize how fine it really is. The surface may daunt you. The depths enfold you. The whole reveals itself, and then you may return to it like a talisman."[/I] I may have only seen this film once, but I understand completely what he means. This is a film that works on such a scale, with so many levels, and such emotional power that it cannot possibly be dissected in one viewing. The second viewing may help understand. The third may primarily be for enjoyment. But even come the fourth, fifth, sixth time, this is a film that you continue to unravel. I feel you could unravel this film infinitely. it's something that works off your emotions, your situation and your life. It's a film that will change depending on when and how you watch it. My interpretation of it now will not be the same as my interpretation in 5 years. Then again 5 years after that, and so on. It'll be a totally different film. That's something magical.
This is also the first film since I was a kid to legitimately make me cry. I mean, I've welled up at films before, but the end of this film... There were just little things that really struck a cord with me. Not even the bits I expected. For instance [sp]when his daughter dies- it wasn't her saying "No" to his ask of forgiveness that hurt me. It was him picking up the flower from her body that made me well up.[/sp] Another being -and I'm not even sure of the reason for this one- [sp]at his father's funeral, he says something like "there are 13 million people in this world, and not one of them are extras. Each one is the star of their own story."[/sp]And I just let it all out. Same goes for the funeral monologue near the very end. Not only is this the first film to properly make me cry, it made me cry several times throughout. Maybe it's something to do with Hoffman's passing, because honestly I have never been hit as hard about a celebrity death as I was with this one. I'm still horribly torn up about it and can't believe it. But I think the film would still have made me cry. It's a film I don't understand but I know it's special and I know I love it, I have to, like Ebert, watch it one more time to try and come to grips with it properly. Then I'll watch it again because I want to. Then, maybe after that, I'll wait a while, and I'll decide to watch it again. And it'll be a different film with a different meaning, because I'll be a different person. That's how you know you've discovered something special. It's a film like no other and a film better than most of the others, and a perfect testament to Philip Seymour Hoffman. In the future, this film will be regarded as one of the greatest of all time. I know it, because it is one of them already.[/QUOTE]
I absolutely love this movie and I think this
[quote]It's a film I don't understand but I know it's special and I know I love it[/quote]
sums it up perfectly. Some people think it's pretentious but I don't have any trouble enjoying a movie I don't understand.
I've read speculation that [sp]Caden killed himself in the beginning of the movie and the rest is some sort of purgatory. Normally I [I]hate[/I] "he's-in-hell/heaven/purgatory/he-was-dead-the-whole-time explanations, but it's at least interesting food for thought if not 100% convincing. The explanation at least pointed out a lot of things I missed, like how time passes in the film. I got the obvious ones like Caden thinking Adele has been gone for a week, but Hazel says it's been a year. Give it a read, anyway:
http://italkyoubored.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/charlie-kaufmans-synecdoche-new-york/[/sp]
Ellen/Caden's monologue to Caden/Ellen in the earpiece at the end is probably one of my favorite scenes in any movie, and the soundtrack is wonderful:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA_ubhYgjAc[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXRI6Cx-S98[/media]
Also I read a review saying it was the worst movie ever, and in that review was, "The title, which is as pretentious as the rest of it, is a mispronunciation of the word 'Schenectady,'". Lol nice try good hustle please come again.
[b]Citizen Kane[/b]
· Amazing acting for a movie with a whole bunch of people new to cinema.
· Writing of the century. No, I mean it. So emotional I don't even
· Unbelievably great and unconventional use of lighting, and camera angles like, fuck. Everything was so meaningful. Editing so great I felt like looking at a gem from the silent era.
· long takes! in 1941!
It was my first time seeing this. Doesn't quite compare to anything I've ever seen. I now get the the 'Citizen Kane of x' analogy
[b]12/10[/b]
I have to watch this again.
[editline]3rd February 2014[/editline]
Knowing it was someone's first production ever also leaves me speechless. brb trading my soul for film making natural talent like O.W. did
shame CK was OW's magnum opus
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43772839]
Ellen/Caden's monologue to Caden/Ellen in the earpiece at the end is probably one of my favorite scenes in any movie, and the soundtrack is wonderful:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA_ubhYgjAc[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXRI6Cx-S98[/media][/QUOTE]
jon brion is a fucking genius and i wished he made more soundtracks. every single time it has been such a great experience, making you feel all kinds of emotions.
[B]Raging Bull- 5/10[/B]
Uhh okay. "One of the greatest films of all time"? "The best film of the 80's"? "Scorsese's best work"? What the hell. I can't wrap my head around that. This film was a slog. Very boring and dull, incredibly average. I will praise Scorsese's direction, the cinematography and the editing. Nothing else about this film was standout at all... I didn't like it. Robert Deniro was quite good but I don't see how this was the role that got him an Oscar. His performance was flat compared to his other early works. His character was crappy. Uninteresting and a shitty person, I have no reasons to sympathise and nothing to keep me interested in this film at all. The film's just a load of fluff. I actually expected to love this film, considering it's often praised as being Scorsese's best film and it seemed the film most like Taxi Driver which I love. But nope. It's actually his worst film. Even worse than The Departed. At least The Departed is fun.
Most films that are highly acclaimed that I don't agree with, I think "well, I didn't like it, but I can see how it's so acclaimed" nope. not at all with this one. It's just really, really mediocre.
It's definitely not a fun movie, were you expecting something like Rocky :v:
De Niro is more visceral and intense, imo it digs way deeper than any sports film.
i dunno ive not seen Rocky (sorry)
I didnt expect to have fun but I expected it to be a great film.. to me it wasn't.
just watched the conjuring..
peeing pants movie for the first hour, specially cause it's one of those based on a true story
i don't know, though.. i just can't dig a horror movie with an ending like that
its actually pretty annoying to me that I can't like Scorsese films that aren't Taxi Driver. Becuase goddamn that film is incredible. And it's not like he changed his style dramatically, in every film it's obviously Scorsese. The themes are similar etc. And Raging Bull was even written by Paul Schrader, who wrote Taxi Driver! I thought that was the case. I thought maybe I just didn't like Scorsese as a writer (I dont) but I dont even know what it is :(
Watched The Counselor and I was just bored which is a shame because I know that I really shouldn't.
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;43775952]i dunno ive not seen Rocky (sorry)
I didnt expect to have fun but I expected it to be a great film.. to me it wasn't.[/QUOTE]
since it's subjective to regard films as great, it's kinda tricky to discuss when you don't personally enjoy it.
I suppose I didn't think much of it at first but I saw it first when I was 15, but I knew then I was in the wrong state of mind to watch it, deffo the second watch a couple years later made me see the reality of it; actually moved me the second time around.
saw [B]Owning Mahowny[/B]
first Phil Hoffman movie I watched after his passing, I think I chose well.
It's about addiction and obsession. It's a good little flick that I reckon is pretty much forgotten about.
I've been after a casino film which is more about the character than the game and I was gifted with such. I liked "Hard Eight", but it wasn't wholeheartedly what I was after. The character here is empty, with his only life fulfilment being the act of gambling. It isn't even about the winning, this guy was genuinely mesmerised by gambling and he totally lost himself in it. The flow of just playing at a casino and getting the focus to just throw bet after bet. Even though it doesn't show, you can totally tell that he obsesses over the process of gambling and the flow of it is what he's comfortable with.
Hoffman here is so very what he did best, natural.. focused and real. His character here is wrecked with his obsession, and the preciseness of his performance makes it so relate-able to the watcher.
Aesthetically, it's brilliant, really smooth colouring and the soundtrack was great, really good jazz that I might check out. Played the film with a good screen/stereo and liked it a lot.
[editline]3rd February 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=mikeyt493;43775973]its actually pretty annoying to me that I can't like Scorsese films that aren't Taxi Driver. Becuase goddamn that film is incredible. And it's not like he changed his style dramatically, in every film it's obviously Scorsese. The themes are similar etc. And Raging Bull was even written by Paul Schrader, who wrote Taxi Driver! I thought that was the case. I thought maybe I just didn't like Scorsese as a writer (I dont) but I dont even know what it is :([/QUOTE]
Bringing Out The Dead is imho the only Scorsese film remotely similar to Taxi Driver. Loved that film.. might rewatch it tonight.
the constant gardener - 7/10
Miami Vice Director's Cut
3.5/5
I hate doing any reviews with a .5 attached, but in this case, it felt necessary. Overall, I thought the movie itself was pretty enjoyable most of the time, apart from a false start beginning, in my opinion, and some generally iffy direction. I'm not a big fan of Michael Mann's digital, hand held camera style that he's adopted recently. I found it fitting for Collateral, but here it just seems wrong. Same with Public Enemies.
[editline]4th February 2014[/editline]
Although, now I want to watch Collateral, so I'll probably do that tomorrow.
[B]Punisher: War Zone[/B] 4/10
Simply bad. The characters are all half assed, the punisher is dull and poorly developed, the villain is dumb and the story is poor. But at least it has some over the top b movie - 80s style action and extreme violence, and some stupidly funny dialogue that don't make it completely unwatchable.
Whoever made this must have used google translate for the italian lines, because they are so hilariously out of place and flat out wrong: eg. who the hell says (actual translation) "go fuck yourself!" when the power goes out? and "to eat" when telling your guests to sit down and begin dinner? I literally cried of laughter because they tried to make it seem serious.
O brother where art thou 9/10
That finale gives me goosebumps lasting minutes.
[editline]4th February 2014[/editline]
And now all my thoughts are in old time southern accent.
[QUOTE=KlaseR;43783973][B]Punisher: War Zone[/B] 4/10
Simply bad. The characters are all half assed, the punisher is dull and poorly developed, the villain is dumb and the story is poor. But at least it has some over the top b movie - 80s style action and extreme violence, and some stupidly funny dialogue that don't make it completely unwatchable.
Whoever made this must have used google translate for the italian lines, because they are so hilariously out of place and flat out wrong: eg. who the hell says (actual translation) "go fuck yourself!" when the power goes out? and "to eat" when telling your guests to sit down and begin dinner? I literally cried of laughter because they tried to make it seem serious.[/QUOTE]
At least it had Newman in it.
[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;43773716]shame CK was OW's magnum opus[/QUOTE]
It was his Magnum Opus, but other OW's productions weren't bad - they were actually ridiculously good, but there was nothing that could be compared with Citizen Kane. Macbeth, Othello, Touch of Evil, The Trial, The Stranger, The Lady from Shanghai and F for Fake.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;43784182]At least it had Newman in it.[/QUOTE]
yeah he was actually the only actor I recognized, and the only one who was good for that matter. everyone else was ridiculous.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
