NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Well, he's from Cambridge, which doesn't really help you with that Southie accent.
Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate It | Part#: Some High Number +2
- Thread starter ProstheticConscience
- Start date
Well, he's from Cambridge, which doesn't really help you with that Southie accent.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
For sure. My point was just that there are still plenty of original films being made out there.
Spring in Fialta
A malign star kept him
Blade Runner 2049 (2017) - I goofed up by not watching this one in the theaters. A great visual achievement and I think Roger Deakins outdid himself on this film (he was also attached to a better director this time around). While I'd have to think about whether Blade Runner is a better film than 2049. By mostly sticking to the original Philip K. Dick material, I think the '82 version might have a generally more interesting/engaging story whereas the 2049 narrative doesn't really transcend general blockbuster fare (it's fairly shallow), although it is presented and executed with far more grace and emotional impact. Visually stunning and the color palette, texture, contrasts and settings are breathtaking. Ryan Gosling (who is one of the few Hollywood superstars where I can usually completely buy into what he's selling) gives a perfect performance as K/Joe, who, thankfully, stays the most interesting character and is impeccably written, as compared to Deckard (I can't stand Ford's delivery/how smarmy and smug he comes across) or Robin Wright whose performance is forced from beginning to end. But what a freaking cool film.
Last edited:
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
The visuals were spectacular but what also really resonated for me with the theater experience was the booming soundtrack and ambient noise.
A few of those scenes I can still picture: the endless landscape of solar collectors at the beginning, the massive shield wall along the ocean, the orange tint of Las Vegas.
I loved the melancholy beauty of this scene (1:13):
I think Villeneuve really succeeded in creating an homage to the "feel" of the film without outright copying everything about the Scott original.
Amerika said:
Agreed for the most part.
The scene where Joe loses control of his emotions when told his memories were real is such a poignant one - considering how mild and nuanced he is (by necessity - Constant K) for the majority of the film.
I thought Ford was decent but also felt like Wright was miscast.
Sylvia Hoeks did a fine job as Joe's mirror/foil, emblematic of Roy Batty in the original, as a fully formed human with childlike emotions - as replicants were.
Even though Dave Batista was only in it for a little bit, he pulled off a surprisingly subtle and sympathetic performance opposite Gosling in that opening scene as the replicant Sapper Morton.
Amerika said:
Yeah, the original had a very tight and personal story while this one ventured into Messianic territory which always risks adhering too much to film tropes and devaluing personal struggle and introspection.
The "twist" of sorts saved the film from that to some extent.
Last edited:
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
If you're interested, they did some prequel videos as well, which give Dave Batista and Jared Leto a little more screen time.
Sapper Morton:
Niander Wallace:
The other one is animated and not really reminiscent of the film.
Sapper Morton:
Niander Wallace:
The other one is animated and not really reminiscent of the film.
Parasite
3.50 out of 4stars
A very fun comedy thriller satire on class differences in South Korea. As great as it is, and it is very memorable and through provoking, I still am a bit indecisive on the last 5-10mins of the movie's decision making.
JoJo Rabbit
3.25 out of 4stars
Over the top absurdist look at war and hate through the eyes of a child in Nazi Germany. Another fun and funny satire, yet at times too on the nose and too easy(hitting the low hanging fruits of the debate) for me to consider this "a genius" look/interpretation on the subject. Albeit it's done very well and it's all around messages/insights are spot on and hopefully inspirational to anyone with a even a little bit of anger or hate in their heart.
Doctor Sleep
3.00 out of 4stars
Interesting supernatural sequel to the Shining, with a focus on the themes of trauma, death, and fear. Great storytelling and some good acting turns to go along with it's realistic themes of "true human horrors" inside this movie to go with it's supernatural fun.
3.50 out of 4stars
A very fun comedy thriller satire on class differences in South Korea. As great as it is, and it is very memorable and through provoking, I still am a bit indecisive on the last 5-10mins of the movie's decision making.
JoJo Rabbit
3.25 out of 4stars
Over the top absurdist look at war and hate through the eyes of a child in Nazi Germany. Another fun and funny satire, yet at times too on the nose and too easy(hitting the low hanging fruits of the debate) for me to consider this "a genius" look/interpretation on the subject. Albeit it's done very well and it's all around messages/insights are spot on and hopefully inspirational to anyone with a even a little bit of anger or hate in their heart.
Doctor Sleep
3.00 out of 4stars
Interesting supernatural sequel to the Shining, with a focus on the themes of trauma, death, and fear. Great storytelling and some good acting turns to go along with it's realistic themes of "true human horrors" inside this movie to go with it's supernatural fun.
Shareefruck
Registered User
Shinichiro Watanabe's name being associated with Blade Runner actually piques my curiosity much more than Denis Villineuve. Love that man's style.
I really liked the last bits. I thought it was a brilliant way to end the movie. I thought for a second the movie had offered up a halfway "happy" ending, and then in the last scene snatches it away--the previous three or four minutes being just another pipe dream that won't be realized)]
The absolute end I agree with, but I'm not sure getting there, before those scenes you mention, really do it for me. But then how do you get from A to C without them? You might be right.
I just kind of had a feeling when things started getting tense, that there were too many pawns and at least 1 was going to get seriously injured or killed, and they did. I almost wish that the original housekeeper didn't die to see how the law dynamics would have played into the whole panic room situation, say in a way where she can't mention her husband (say getting killed in the basement in this idea or a more fun/bizarre kidnapped and drugged or so by the poor family workers in the house currently) because her life would be threatened by loan sharks if they knew he was dead. But that ending might not have been as good or worked for getting the dad into the basement. I am underrating the ending as I ramble, I just wish there was more legality brought into the end situation (s) then what was brought up. Kind of wish, not sure for better or worse but say prior to the buying the house montage, they showed the Park family with a new maid or chef or etc with a 'twinkle' in his eye, or snorting something when they leave the room, or talking of robbing them, etc. Just to come full circle. Again, probably asking for too much. But I think you're right.
I just kind of had a feeling when things started getting tense, that there were too many pawns and at least 1 was going to get seriously injured or killed, and they did. I almost wish that the original housekeeper didn't die to see how the law dynamics would have played into the whole panic room situation, say in a way where she can't mention her husband (say getting killed in the basement in this idea or a more fun/bizarre kidnapped and drugged or so by the poor family workers in the house currently) because her life would be threatened by loan sharks if they knew he was dead. But that ending might not have been as good or worked for getting the dad into the basement. I am underrating the ending as I ramble, I just wish there was more legality brought into the end situation (s) then what was brought up. Kind of wish, not sure for better or worse but say prior to the buying the house montage, they showed the Park family with a new maid or chef or etc with a 'twinkle' in his eye, or snorting something when they leave the room, or talking of robbing them, etc. Just to come full circle. Again, probably asking for too much. But I think you're right.
An Elephant Sitting Still : 6.5/10 decent story but the lenght is ridiculous. To stretch what should have been an 1h45 movie to nearly 4 hours is pure Madness.
What will you cut though? If the film is any shorter, it will lose its impact, because there are no wasted motion. Every scene is important, and reveals more about the characters, and the contemporary lower class Chinese society they occupy.
Savi
Registered User
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,981
- 2,900
Riding the Bullet - lacks identity or purpose or intention, ineffective as a scary movie, badly written (with void allusions to Cujo, Christine, Misery... and NOTLD (?)) and badly acted (David Arquette really is a terrible actor). In short, a masterpiece - 1/10
Yeah, it brisked by for me too. I saw this one before Burning, and this one felt faster than Burning, despite being double in length.
Elephant Sitting Still is not perfect, but for a first feature, it is very impressive.
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,981
- 2,900
The Purge - For some reason, I thought this was a teen-horror flick with insufferable cool characters and, maybe because I work with teens who do think it is, that the purge was presented as something awesome... Not at all the movie I thought it was. Better? Lots. Good? Well, let's not get carried away. 4/10
Glass (2019) - 3/10 (Really disliked it)
I liked Unbreakable and thought that Split was OK, but this was a bore. There's hardly any story, just lots and lots of exposition and superhero meta to pass the time. The movie feels very aware of the superhero genre, as Shyamalan includes just about every superhero concept (weaknesses, hero/villain symmetry, troubled upbringing, origin stories, etc.) in a way that feels like fan service.
The majority of the film takes place at a mental institution where a psychiatrist tries to convince the men that they're not really superheroes. It's about as exciting as that sounds. For some reason, Anya Taylor-Joy's character, the girl who was kidnapped and tormented by McAvoy's character in the last movie, now cares about him and visits him regularly. Willis' and Jackson's characters have little to do and are upstaged by McAvoy's... not that the latter has much to do, either, but the film revels (perhaps a little too much) in McAvoy's impressive abilities to change personalities on a dime. I'm sure that Shyamalan was thinking, "Those parts of Split were praised, so let's do it even more this time." Finally, we expect a major showdown, but the ending amounts to little and feels like a pathetic conclusion for the characters.
I think that the script was rushed after the success of Split only two years earlier and exemplifies much of the half-baked writing that Shyamalan tends to take flak for. He's very hit or miss, and after appearing to return to form, he went right back to a miss, IMO. I imagine that superhero fans might be more tolerant, but I'm not one of those.
Edit: One more thought...
I liked Unbreakable because it was a thriller that you realized only at the end was a superhero movie. Similarly, Split was a horror movie that you realized only at the end was a villain movie. This movie presents itself as a superhero/villain movie from the beginning and in every scene, so it's very different and I think that that's part of why I found it less appealing... though not being my cup of tea doesn't negate my criticisms about it being written poorly and being boring.
I liked Unbreakable and thought that Split was OK, but this was a bore. There's hardly any story, just lots and lots of exposition and superhero meta to pass the time. The movie feels very aware of the superhero genre, as Shyamalan includes just about every superhero concept (weaknesses, hero/villain symmetry, troubled upbringing, origin stories, etc.) in a way that feels like fan service.
The majority of the film takes place at a mental institution where a psychiatrist tries to convince the men that they're not really superheroes. It's about as exciting as that sounds. For some reason, Anya Taylor-Joy's character, the girl who was kidnapped and tormented by McAvoy's character in the last movie, now cares about him and visits him regularly. Willis' and Jackson's characters have little to do and are upstaged by McAvoy's... not that the latter has much to do, either, but the film revels (perhaps a little too much) in McAvoy's impressive abilities to change personalities on a dime. I'm sure that Shyamalan was thinking, "Those parts of Split were praised, so let's do it even more this time." Finally, we expect a major showdown, but the ending amounts to little and feels like a pathetic conclusion for the characters.
I think that the script was rushed after the success of Split only two years earlier and exemplifies much of the half-baked writing that Shyamalan tends to take flak for. He's very hit or miss, and after appearing to return to form, he went right back to a miss, IMO. I imagine that superhero fans might be more tolerant, but I'm not one of those.
Edit: One more thought...
I liked Unbreakable because it was a thriller that you realized only at the end was a superhero movie. Similarly, Split was a horror movie that you realized only at the end was a villain movie. This movie presents itself as a superhero/villain movie from the beginning and in every scene, so it's very different and I think that that's part of why I found it less appealing... though not being my cup of tea doesn't negate my criticisms about it being written poorly and being boring.
Last edited:
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
I've held off from watching Glass because I didn't want it to taint Unbreakable and I guess I'm glad I did.
OhCaptainMyCaptain
Registered User
In all honestly, I'm curious why people think this. Why does another movie impact the quality of another one? Even if it's in a line of movies, the quality of one shouldn't hurt the quality of another. I've never totally understood that.
Someone should make it into a trilogy and call the resulting movie Unbreakable Glass.
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,981
- 2,900
That actually sounds awesome! Well, not in the hands of Shyamalan, but I like the idea a lot.
(Haven't seen Glass, probably will at some point when I'm bored)
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,769
- 3,807
I haven't see Glass yet either (maybe one of these days ...) but the set up seems a little odd considering he already made two movies showing these guys being superheroes/villains. I don't know if he really leans into a "maybe they're crazy/maybe its imaginary" angle but it seems like a weird and undramatic choice if he does.
Jojo rabbit: 8/10 my favorite movie of the year so far.
The Body: 7.8/10 good thriller.
Honeyland: 7/10 decent documentary.
The Body: 7.8/10 good thriller.
Honeyland: 7/10 decent documentary.
GlassesJacketShirt
Registered User
There's more to this angle, unfortunately it isn't worth going through the whole film for it. Although Shyamalan has some duds in his filmography, I consider Unbreakable to be pretty good and Split to be decent. This one's not in the same ballpark, not only in terms of story but also overall cinematic execution.
