IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

529 Pages V  « < 522 523 524 525 526 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Cinemexperience: part deux., Some more filums you saw.
Julie
post Aug 22 2012, 09:30 PM
Post #7846


Hot Lips.
******

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 9,204
Joined: 6-February 05
From: Toronto
Member No.: 3,352



QUOTE (mcraigclark @ Aug 14 2012, 11:25 AM) *
It's my go-to comfort film. I love it.


I took Shack to the actual Goondocks last weekend, although I was much more impressed by the jail.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raven
post Aug 22 2012, 10:59 PM
Post #7847


Space Cowboy
******

Group: Blokes in Charge
Posts: 14,572
Joined: 1-October 04
From: Mercy
Member No.: 2,262



^ Did you go to the Lighthouse Lounge as well?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Aug 27 2012, 08:36 PM
Post #7848





Guests






This bank holiday I watched films. They were;

Rio Bravo

The Searchers

The Wizard of Oz

Bottle Rocket
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Aug 31 2012, 09:26 PM
Post #7849





Guests






Boyz N Da Hood

I hadn't seen this in years. It does seem a bit cliched now but that's mainly because it's been copied so much. The main question with it is where does accessibility turn into patronising, when does it stop being fable-ised vignettes of ghetto life and become simplistic melodrama, and most importantly does it matter when it's as affecting as this. Sure, John Singleton never made anything near as good as this, and even here the faults are clear, but despite all this it still manages to be a powerful and moving film after all these years.

Win Win

Entertaining enough but if it wasn't for a great cast, a decent script and some nifty direction this could easily have been a tv movie.

The Descendants

I didn't really know anything about this except that it was George Clooney with kids who didn't respect him and that it won Dean Pelton an Oscar. Alexander Payne confuses me, I love Election (I can't see Reese Withersppoon without thinking "her pussy gets so wet"), I thought About Schmidt was alright that one time I saw it on tv, and I just don't get Sideways (I've never made it more than halfway through), so I wasn't sure what to expect. I have to say, I liked it. It has a nice sense of melancholy without becoming maudlin or falling into sentimentality, it has some nice moments of humour and a pretty cool cast. It's not the greatest film ever made, it could have been a bit more subtle, a little less coffee table, I would have liked it to focus more on people meaning different things to different people, and I could have done without a subplot that felt like half-arsed Capra, but on the whole it's a pretty good film.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rebus
post Sep 9 2012, 10:20 PM
Post #7850


ЯR
*****

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 1,414
Joined: 7-August 06
From: The Tringlelimbohulehambala Express
Member No.: 5,395



The Dictator

Some very funny bits, some not so funny bits, overall it was exactly what I was expecting. Wish they could have used Adeel Akhtar more as he seemed a bit tacked on, but it was still worth a watch.

Cabin In The Woods

Excellent. Pure enjoyment from start to finish, loved every single minute of it, with Whedon regular Fran Kranz doing a great job but Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford as the office-weary doom-mongerers really stole the film for me. The final act was just a blisteringly violent joy to behold, a real pinnacle of shit-hitting-the-fan wonderment. The script, as expected, was fantastic, some real laugh-out-loud moments, and every teen horror movie trope was there, and the fact that they had to be there just made it all the more enjoyable to watch.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 14 2012, 08:41 AM
Post #7851





Guests






Solaris

The Soderbergh adaptation of the book, not remake of the film. Having never read the book I have no idea how similar this is but I do love the original film and whilst I don't think this comes close, it does have quite a bit going for it. Rather than the more existential questions the Russian film asks about man only experiencing the universe as an extension of the self, which seems to be a recurring theme with Tarkovsky, here this is boiled down to how we experience relationships, do we love the other person, do we even really know them or just the idea of them, etc. It's also such a melancholy film, as is the original, but this feels very much like somebody looking back on a past relationship and trying to process their grief, similar to The Fountain.

It's a much more technically accomplished film than the original, it probably helped that this had a hell of a lot more Hollywood money and thirty years of technological advancement. But where some modern sci fi films can feel like boys playing with their toys, getting lost in the physicalities of the universe they've created, Soderbergh never loses sight of the story at the heart of film. That said, it does feel like a bit of a love letter to 2001 at times.

The thing I love the most about this film though is the ambiance it creates. Whilst the storyline, the pacing and editing all play their part here, a lot of credit must go down to the soundtrack, not just the great musical score by Cliff Martinez but also the ambient sound running throughout the film, like the quiet humming of the space station or rain on a window. Even the sound of the dialogue, often little more than whispers, helps create a haunting, dreamlike feeling, especially whenever Natascha McElhone speaks, she is pretty awesome in this.

It's not one of the all time great sci fi films but it is better than quite a few with better reputations. I think it doesn't help that this is more emotional than cerebral, something nerds often have a problem with. I've said before that I think Soderbergh needs to make less films and spend more time on certain projects to really reach his full potential, and this is evident even here.

All in all, it's an emotionally engaging, romantic dose of melancholia that suited my mood at the time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 18 2012, 09:12 PM
Post #7852





Guests






Samsara

In 1992, after 13 months of filming in 24 countries, Ron Fricke's film of pure cinematography, with no dialogue or plot, Baraka was released. 20 years later and we get the best sequel since Empire Strikes Back. That said, it does feel like a sequel, it takes the things you loved in the original, makes things even bigger (this took 5 years to make with superior technology), but somehow doesn't quite capture what made the original so special. This really is nitpicking though, as this is almost as an astonishing experience as the first film, you know it's going to be visually spectacular when they have to widen the screen in the cinema to fit it all on. It's haunting, beautiful, incredible with an undercurrent of darkness, this feels like a bleaker film than Baraka, possibly with Fricke seeing things he highlighted 20 years ago being ignored and becoming worse.

Like the first film, there is a lot of beauty, it makes me want to travel, even to the loser countries I swore I'd never go to, it makes me want to not think about industrialised meat farming, it reaffirms any suspicion that East Asia is a wacky place, it makes me grateful to have been born in the first world, and it makes me appreciate life all the more.

If you get the chance to see this on the big screen (the bigger the better) you should take it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lazlo Woodbine
post Sep 19 2012, 07:44 AM
Post #7853


Infamous Wooden Spider
******

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 3,171
Joined: 1-October 04
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 2,273



QUOTE (logger @ Sep 18 2012, 09:12 PM) *
Samsara

In 1992, after 13 months of filming in 24 countries, Ron Fricke's film of pure cinematography, with no dialogue or plot, Baraka was released. 20 years later and we get the best sequel since Empire Strikes Back. That said, it does feel like a sequel, it takes the things you loved in the original, makes things even bigger (this took 5 years to make with superior technology), but somehow doesn't quite capture what made the original so special. This really is nitpicking though, as this is almost as an astonishing experience as the first film, you know it's going to be visually spectacular when they have to widen the screen in the cinema to fit it all on. It's haunting, beautiful, incredible with an undercurrent of darkness, this feels like a bleaker film than Baraka, possibly with Fricke seeing things he highlighted 20 years ago being ignored and becoming worse.

Like the first film, there is a lot of beauty, it makes me want to travel, even to the loser countries I swore I'd never go to, it makes me want to not think about industrialised meat farming, it reaffirms any suspicion that East Asia is a wacky place, it makes me grateful to have been born in the first world, and it makes me appreciate life all the more.

If you get the chance to see this on the big screen (the bigger the better) you should take it.

I'm really looking forward to seeing that but it's not out here until December. Hopefully one of the art-house cinemas in Wellington will show it. I'll have to hunt down a copy of Baraka in the meantime.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 19 2012, 02:43 PM
Post #7854





Guests






I was surprised they showed it here, three whole showings over the course of the day, which is kind of a pity as I'd like to see it again. I did have a screen to myself though.

I watched Baraka today, and like I said, Samsara is technically a better film but it just doesn't have that certain something that Baraka had.

I also watched Ocean's Thirteen, which I hadn't seen. Like the others I didn't know or care what was going on but it's nice to look at shiny things I'll never possess. You could put all three films on a loop and just have them as background noise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 22 2012, 10:24 AM
Post #7855





Guests






Magic Mike

More mixed fare from Mr Soderbergh. Whilst there isn't much new here about the commodification of masculinity, the thing I found interesting was the sexual objectification of men. This is a story that could very easily have been about women, the main difference being that as a straight man I find watching men strip to be very comical, one of the key scenes being when the romantic interest, the very pretty Cody Horn, first sees Channing Tatum strip, me finding it very silly, her finding it "interesting". To see so much of a film about this side of male sexuality outside of an Almodovar film is quite refreshing.

My main problem with the film, and it's a pretty big one, is the screenplay, or the lack of one. There really isn't enough there in the first place to carry the film, or at least not the film this should have been. This doesn't make this a bad film but it did leave me feeling disappointed. Other minor issues are things like everything being too shiny, everyone being a little too good looking and it looking a bit too much like a movie, running counter to the naturalistic feel the film has.

It is at least nice to see a film for people my age with a 30 year old male character who isn't out for revenge, or out to save the world or sell toys. As you'd expect from a Soderbergh film it looks great, the film has lots of great little moments, is very funny and Matthew McConaughey is back to his sleazy Dazed & Confused best as the owner of the strip club, alright, alright, alright. All in all, a good film, it's just it could have been better.

Moonrise Kingdom

Absolutely loved it. Wes Anderson's best film since The Life Aquatic, maybe even Rushmore, and so far it's duking it out with The Artist for best film of the year. Where was this film when I was a kid, all we had was stupid Goonies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lazlo Woodbine
post Sep 23 2012, 01:39 AM
Post #7856


Infamous Wooden Spider
******

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 3,171
Joined: 1-October 04
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 2,273



QUOTE (logger @ Sep 19 2012, 02:43 PM) *
I was surprised they showed it here, three whole showings over the course of the day, which is kind of a pity as I'd like to see it again. I did have a screen to myself though.

I watched Baraka today, and like I said, Samsara is technically a better film but it just doesn't have that certain something that Baraka had.


Looks like Baraka is available in down this way. Wish my TV screen was bigger to make the most out of it.


QUOTE (logger @ Sep 22 2012, 10:24 AM) *
Moonrise Kingdom

Absolutely loved it. Wes Anderson's best film since The Life Aquatic, maybe even Rushmore, and so far it's duking it out with The Artist for best film of the year. Where was this film when I was a kid, all we had was stupid Goonies.


Wes Anderson films always have a special something. I watched Darjeeling Limited with a little reservation after quite a few reviews saying it wasn't up to usual standard and it was just Wes Anderson doing the same thing, but I just loved it. Again, with Moonrise Kingdom I wondered if this would be the one where I thought I'd seen it before, but like usual sat in the cinema captivated from start to finish. His films may all have a lot of similarities but nobody else makes them like he does. They're all different enough in my mind to make them worthwhile, and I find it very difficult to pick a favourite.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcraigclark
post Sep 23 2012, 08:56 AM
Post #7857


I'm a poncey thrush.
******

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 6,604
Joined: 30-March 06
From: Undisclosed
Member No.: 5,057



I watched the red band trailer for Sinister last night. It looks genuinely terrifying.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 23 2012, 09:02 AM
Post #7858





Guests






QUOTE (Lazlo Woodbine @ Sep 23 2012, 02:39 AM) *
Looks like Baraka is available in down this way. Wish my TV screen was bigger to make the most out of it.

Just sit closer to the tv.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GundamGuy_UK
post Sep 23 2012, 01:05 PM
Post #7859


The Truth Who The Eyes Met Before!
******

Group: Senior Members
Posts: 6,453
Joined: 6-December 05
From: 1995
Member No.: 4,725



Total Recall (2012) - I've not seen the original, or read We Can Remember it for you Wholesale, so I can only judge it on its own merits. I enjoyed it. My main criticism is that once the action kicks off it never really stops, which is a bit of a shame because the first twenty minutes or so of introducing the world and characters is really excellent and looks amazing, reminding me of Blade Runner in many ways. Len Wiseman clearly subscribes to the JJ Abrams Star Trek school of directing, because there's lensflare everywhere. It was constant, but not as distracting as in Star Trek.

All-in-all, a decent sci-fi action movie with great music (I love Harry Gregson-Williams), nice effects (mostly physical too, another plus), and engaging throughout though suffering the usual problem with action movies nowadays in that there's a little too much action at times.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
logger
post Sep 25 2012, 06:18 PM
Post #7860





Guests






Killing Them Softly

For me, 2000's Chopper was that decade's Mean Streets or Reservoir Dogs and announced Andrew Dominik as a talent with a hell of a lot of potential. Then with The Assassination of Jesse James, if all the things I've heard about the problems he had with getting the film made (like rewriting it to feature more Brad Pitt to keep the money men happy) he still managed to make a very good film whose main flaw was that it didn't live up to its potential. And now with Killing Them Softly we have the best crime film since No Country For Old Men.

Centred around the robbery of an illegal card game and subsequent aftermath we return to the scummy criminal world of Chopper, although this now takes place in New Orleans during the 2008 presidential election. And boy does Dominik know how to create this world, harking back to the Scorsese we haven't seen for twenty years. Ben Afleck should take note. It's brutal, sleazy, cruel, funny and a little bit sad, no wonder there's a few people from The Sopranos showing up, (Johnny Sack got fat). There are some moments that almost seem a bit cheesey, and with a lesser film maker maybe they would be, but they're handled with an undercurrent of black humour and Dominik is just that good that the film gets away with it. It also feels a little heavy handed at times, the parallels between this small time underworld and the rest of America aren't too subtle for instance, and at times it feels maybe a bit safe but I'd put this down to Dominik's last film being one of the biggest flops of the previous decade, lesser men would have crumbled after that. These are less a criticism than an observation, slight details stopping it from being an all time classic, like No Country. It is one of the best films of the year, there's great performances throughout, the script is full of great scenes, the action is intense, this film contains one of the most brutal beatings I've seen in a film and once again we have more evidence of what a great film maker Dominik can be.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

529 Pages V  « < 522 523 524 525 526 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th April 2014 - 09:21 PM