 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Batman Begins 9/10
The Dark Knight 10/10
BATMAN BEGINS 8/10
I agree with BATMAN BEGINS and think this film is a great blend of grounded in reality and still fantastical action. I liked the ending with Batman killing in a clever way [I don't have to save you].
Then we get THE DARK KNIGHT which is GARBAGE.
THE DARK KNIGHT 0/10
For starters, the Joker isn't anywhere real or grounded in ANY reality but more then that, he is a TERRORIST and once he started killing police officers, people in office, and blowing up the hospital, it just seemed like UTTER BULLSHIT that Batman after flipping the truck over had a clear shot to WOUND or KILL the Joker but doesn't.
Then his whole escape from jail is beyond stupid.
I also hate the end when Fox gives Bruce shit about going "too far" when mind you they went to China to kidnap a Chinese national with Diplomatic Immunity from his own building using Mercenaries... yet using sonar to find the Joker as he toys with killing THOUSANDS of people as they speak is going to far?
As for Heath Ledger... sorry, I felt his performances was overrated for the sheer fact that NO ONE else in the film every tried to act like they had a pulse and felt that while he was clearly having fun, I don't think his ABSOLUTE belongs in a world populate by real people but then again, he has the mob looking for him, the entire police of Gotham, kills all his thugs and has no concept of money [even THE ANIMATED SERIES always had the Joker getting a score].
The film just fails for me.
Atleast the reviews for THE DARK KNIGHT RISES say BANE is a terrorist but this film ruined any interested I had in watching any more of this universe [and the trailer with Bane killing all those football players does nothing for me unless someone spoils it for me and tells me that Batman kills Bane].
For a film compared to THE UNTOUCHABLES or HEAT [another film I dislike], this one just doesn't have the "He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good thing you won't be seeing TDKR BJ. That way I won't have to read how absolutely implausible it was for you. I understand some of where you are coming from but you seem to take things to an extreme when it comes to believability and/or realism in films. Avengers was just as unrealistic but it was well presented and told the story well. I fail to see how the dark and gritty approach Nolan takes with these films makes them need to have any more realism than any other comic-book film.
THE AVENGERS and to same extent THE TRANSFORMERS TRILOGY showed a lot of destruction to buildings and places/cities but never really let it sink in that there are people in those towers or made it all feel really tragic.
They would be different films and darker ones.
THE DARK KNIGHT however for me takes too much of a turn when the Joker starts killing police offers and public officials yet isn't handled with any much of a punishment and even when Batman actually looses his temper [the once scene I actually enjoyed but of course ruined by the Joker who is super human and feels no pain] he is once again shown pull of an "exciting" escape the ends with the murder of a completely innocent character and one who isn't all avenged. The film is in love with the Joker the same way DEXTER is in love with its lead and it feels "wrong" for me to be rooting for someone like this if the film doesn't delivery in the end.
But make no mistake, I'm hung up on the "realism" of it all simply because the film present this what with Chen having to be chased because of bureaucratic laws and even the way he and the attack on the mob core [laundered money] and how it is all dealt with is presented in ways that add a reality to Gotham and to Dent [the most interesting character] and how he is willing to risk his life since he knows the mob will come after him.
I have no problem with the dark and gritty approach and as I said, I loved it in BATMAN BEGINS but even that final act had mayhem and not anarchy and terrorism by a murderer who essentially is a cartoon.
But to each his own and mind you, I know I'm in the minority with my dislike for this film along with HEAT, THE LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY, INCEPTION, and THE USUAL SUSPECTS.
Such is life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAT GIRL 5/10
SPOILERS
Saw this from the Criterion Collection so I had some rather high hopes but ultimately it left me very cold.
Anaïs is a heavy 12 year old while her older sister Elena is attractive and skinny. While on vacation with their parents, Anaïs tags along with Elena as she explores the seaside town and Elena meets Fernando, an Italian law student, who seduces her [never mind the fact that he is quite older] and all of it not too far from Anais' eyes.
Maybe because I'm a gay man or just a man but I couldn't really relate to the love/hate relationship of the two girls but I liked how raw it was even if unconformable and I'd be lying if I didn't admit at how I laughed at how lame Fernando's line to have sex with Elena were or that they worked [If we don't have sex, I'm just going to have to have sex with another girl...do you want that?].
Then of course Fernando eventually get Elena to performal oral, anal, and finally vaginal sex only to crush her while Anais watches and comments on the reality of things.
AND THEN THE LAST 5 MINUTES...
The girls and there mother are driving and Elena is sad and cries and cries and cries and Anais finally gives her some comfort when they pull over at a rest stop to sleep. Then the front windshield is broken, Elena gets hit in the head with an axe, the mother is strangled, and then the attacker takes Anais into the woods and rapes her.
In the morning when she is found, Anais says she wasn't raped because as she explained earlier in the film, sex the first time is suppose to be with a nobody and it is better to get it over with.
The end.
It really threw the whole movie into a whole other place and it has stayed with me for quite a few days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 17, 2012 - 2:19 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mastadge
(Member)
|
In Time (2011) dir. Andrew Niccol -- One of the most unintentionally hilarious movies in a long time. Just so absolutely unsubtle and on-the-nose at every turn. It's central conceit is the very simple time-is-money metaphor, and it tackles every single pun and cliche imaginable. Timberlake, Seyfried and Murphy are all fine, Craig Armstrong's score isn't bad, but this movie is so full of half-assed ideas and worldbuilding and stupid decisions it's almost painful. Actually a diverting enough movie, but not quite so bad-it's-good, and not guite almost-good enough to be a guilty pleasure. Oh well.
Perfect Sense (2011) dir. David Mackenzie -- A small character drama about the end of the world. There seem to have been a lot of those lately. Ewan McGregor's on a bit of a roll recently and Eva Green is a little better here than she often has the chance to be. Mackenzie's one of those directors whose movies seem to be all over the place in terms of genre but seem to have some thematic unity. Anyway. If you're looking for a thoughtful movie about the people instead of the special effects of an apocalyptic time, you could do worse than checking this one out. Nice score from Max Richter, too.
Colombiana (2011) dir. Olivier Megaton -- Horrible. This movie is all over the place, and it only lasts like twenty-seven hours. It starts with an embarrassingly overlong wire-fu-parkour chase involving a little girl, and doesn't improve much after that. From incongruous details (Xena wasn't around in 1992; to the best of my knowledge nowhere in the US (the film is mostly set in Chicago) is the trunk of a car referred to as the boot) to severe intellectual and emotional impoverishment to a bunch of scenes that are simply poorly edited, this movie is a chore to sit through. I was hoping for a decent lightweight thriller. I wasn't expecting to be bored. Ugh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Time (2011) dir. Andrew Niccol -- One of the most unintentionally hilarious movies in a long time. Just so absolutely unsubtle and on-the-nose at every turn. It's central conceit is the very simple time-is-money metaphor, and it tackles every single pun and cliche imaginable. Timberlake, Seyfried and Murphy are all fine, Craig Armstrong's score isn't bad, but this movie is so full of half-assed ideas and worldbuilding and stupid decisions it's almost painful. Actually a diverting enough movie, but not quite so bad-it's-good, and not guite almost-good enough to be a guilty pleasure. Oh well.
Dont know why but I really liked IN TIME, flaws and all.
I'd give it a 7/10 and yea, I feel alot of ideas aren't flesh out but part of me feels like it is a chapter in a universe already explained much like JUMPER which didn't bother too much with the set up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 19, 2012 - 8:41 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Michaelware
(Member)
|
Amazing Spider-Man 8/10 ****
I had no complaints. It dealt a solid compass in relating how all acts and intentions are individuals' responsibility, you own them or they own you in consequences. Also, whup ass on wayward reptilians is always cool.
Nice Horner score.
Savages 7/10 ***
Oliver Stone going crazy, stirring up the limbic obsessions that mark almost all current movies. Lots of chaos, the druggies open that path and the movie does a good job showing the total damnation of each progressive step in making worse choices. I'm sure Stone thinks the heroes are just acting out of love but to me it just looks like protecting the nest, and the girl is like property tossed about in a world without hope. The endings just show she mentally escapes to her happy place, like in Brazil? Lost people and chaos , great directing and acting by the side players, but it's missing the wisdom.
Get the Gringo 6/10 **.5
Gibson is still a superb actor, but the movies current norm of bloodlust and limbic obsessiveness, death, sadism, bloody sex, depresses me. You have to go under the layer of bloodlust to find what's worthwhile. In this case I think the direction is good, the acting is fine, and it's about a loathsome guy mourning his humanity and trying to keep a spark alive by saving the kid from the druglord.
I have no interest in Dark Knight whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 20, 2012 - 1:16 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Sirusjr
(Member)
|
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) - 8/10
Christopher Nolan took a bold approach to Batman when “Batman Begins” was released, providing powerful realistic back-story to a character many were familiar with but never saw portrayed as real. In “The Dark Knight” we saw the evolution of Batman as he rose to confront the Joker. The first two films provided a powerful introduction to the character of Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale). While “The Dark Knight Rises” is a solid ending to this evocative trilogy, it feels in many ways like it could have been better.
The film paints the picture of a city eight years after the events of the previous film in which Bruce Wayne thinks Gotham no longer needs Batman and many are starting to wonder if past tough-on-crime efforts that led to filling the prisons with criminals were worth it. It takes a visit from a cat burglar (Anne Hathaway) to wake Bruce Wayne from his doldrums and motivate him to live again. Soon the appearance of a strange masked-man named Bane (Tom Hardy) pushes Bruce Wayne to take on the persona of Batman once again in the protection of the city.
Batman is not the main star of the show, however, as Catwoman and young police officer John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are each given significant screen-time as they do their part to deal with the terror plaguing Gotham. Spreading the spotlight among three main heroes saves the film from further descent into mediocrity because Batman is so seldom seen. Hathaway and Gordon-Levitt are both fantastic and give their characters true screen presence.
The film falls short of perfection in a few ways. First, and most obvious, is the poor pacing. Though it is only 15 minutes longer than the previous film, it fails to find the sweet-spot that “The Dark Knight” and “Inception” did so well. Nolan could have cut a good 30 minutes from the film to give it a more cohesive flow but instead I felt my mind wander in many spots. Second, the plot strains the lines of believability even more than its predecessors. Bane’s antics are so over-the-top that I wondered how he could possibly have done as much damage as he did without anyone stopping him sooner. If you had issues with believability in “The Dark Knight” be prepared to shake your head.
Hans Zimmer (and company) provides another brooding mix of orchestra and synth for the soundtrack, borrowing heavily from his work for “The Dark Knight.” Though some may find this recycling of material to be lazy, I found it gave weight to many of the major scenes. The new musical ideas for Catwoman and Bane are fitting and work well throughout. The Moroccan tribal chanting that accompanies Bane is powerful and evocative.
Despite a few negatives, “The Dark Knight Rises” manages to provide a solid conclusion to Nolan’s Batman saga that is sure to please fans. It explores a few deep issues that are likely to linger with viewers long after the film. Though it fails to rise above the bar set by “The Dark Knight,” it delivers big-screen thrills of the sort expected for a summer Blockbuster and demands to be seen in theaters.
NOTE: I didn’t see the movie in IMAX but it is said that Nolan filmed many of the major scenes with an IMAX camera. Many IMAX theaters also sport more powerful speakers that may make it worth the extra cost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 22, 2012 - 1:48 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ny
(Member)
|
Came across an Alan J Pakula rom-com on Netflix, from 1979, called Starting Over, with Burt Reynolds, Candice Bergen, and Jill Clayburgh. It wasn't very funny, it was edited kind of strangely for some reason, and it amounted to an everywoman-gets-Burt-Reynolds fantasy, but it had it's moments, and was shot by Sven Nykvist, so that 70s film stock looked just gorgeous in Netflix's HD treatment. I'm not going to give it the low to middling score it deserved, I'll just say how nice it is to stumble across obscure and forgotten works by artists you admire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 24, 2012 - 7:03 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Francis
(Member)
|
Source Code (2011)
4/10
Promoted similarly as 'Inception', I had to check out 'Source Code'. The story is simple: Jake Gyllenhaal has to relive a bombing on a train through the body of a passenger over and over again in order to figure out who's responsible for the bombing.
There are a lot of problems with this movie; The train where the movie takes place for 70 % of the time looks like a movie set. I dare you to find a train where the top floor has an opening where the walking path would be, only so that the bottom floor can see the passengers on the top floor, making for a nice visual gag but doing this means you only get half as many seats on the top floor (!) I'm digressing here but really. Also, I dare you to find a train that clean. Really.
The movie barrows from "Twelve Monkeys" the most but it doesn't respect it's own set of sci-fi rules. It violates them so blatantly, especially during the ending which ends on a happy note, but in reality Jake Gyllenhaal just took over somebody's body and what happened to that guy? Is he dead? Lost forever in sci fi limbo? And is Jake running off with his girlfriend? Hello?
Social Network (2010)
5/10
I was excited to see how facebook got created and to Fincher's credit, he manages to make a barely entertaining movie out of the biggest non-even success story of the last decade. Really, watching pc nerds set up a social network in university because they want to get laid and be part of the sigma delta pi club gets tiresome real fast. Watching facebook get 10.000 members, and then 100.000 members and then a million... Boring.
The legal battles involved are not that entertaining and the inner goings of the facebook founders even less so... There is a whole plot involving the financer, Eduardo, getting sidestepped out of his venture which feels unresolved and the final confrontation feels like a scene from "Show girls". Timberlake does a good job as the Napster creator who takes the company to the next level, but again it all feels like I'm watching the nerd version of Casino or Scarface without the downfall at the end.
I think this movie is a missed opportunity in the sense that it had the chance to take on the subject of social networking, but instead it decided to focus entirely on Mark Zuckerberg, who in the end, is not 3 hour movie material. A 50 minutes documentary on discovery channel at most.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
