|
Posted by Shambler on 2003/05/11 15:08:47 |
I thought a trio of themed threads about other entertainment media might be good. If you're not interested, please just ignore the thread and pick some threads that interest you from here: http://celephais.net/board/view_all_threads.php
Anyway, discuss films... |
|
 |
#1741 posted by nitin on 2007/01/01 00:06:32
Simpsons season 8 - The last of the good seasons IMHO, sure there were good episodes after this, but not good seasons on the whole.
This one was actually better than 7 and had some great episodes and event he lesser ones were very consistent.
8/10
#1742 posted by nitin on 2007/01/01 23:00:07
Paths of Glory (1957) - Stanley Kubrick's later work might have been bloated and overly ponderous but his early career is littered with great films. This is arguably his tightest film, an amazing achievement considering how tightly wound his fabulous film noir The Killing was.
Quite possibly being the second greatest war film, it is staggeringly well made with one of those great endings that only appear in a handful of movies. Its impeccably shot, I believe Spielberg when he said he was basing the war scenes in Saving Private Ryan partially on what Kubrick did here. It might not have the effects but the intensity is still captured in some great camerawork. And it's not only great cinematography during the war scenes, every scene is shot not just as an exercise in style but as supportive of the content.
Kirk Douglas was a limited actor but this is his best role. And the script about 3 men who are tried as scapegoats during a military failure is very well written, never bowing to cheap sentimentality, but still remaining very powerful.
The only minor flaw is that some of the supporting cast could have been slightly better.
9/10
The Thin Man (1934) - Above average comedy-thriller with some sharp dialgoue between its two leads, one a retired private detctive and the other his affluent wife. The script is better than the plot allowing its main characters some great dilaogue. Unfortunately the plot manages to retain too much focus, something that works against the film given its tongue in cheek tone.
6.5/10
#1743 posted by nitin on 2007/01/06 17:46:41
Frida - another middle of the road biopic.
It's nicely scored and, although it only looks stylistically beautiful without the cinematography serving any real functional purpoe, its well shot.
Salma Hayek tries hard and is ok in the title role but the script suffers from the same problem as the majority of biopic scripts, trying to cram the whole life of its subject into the running time, rather than picking on a period or certain events to highlight what the character was all about.
5.5/10
#1744 posted by nitin on 2007/01/07 03:09:06
Carnivale Season 2- ok, I have 3 main problems with this season so I'll get those out of the way first. None of them are related with the show being canceled and not finishing as it should have (although that is another negative but one that cant be helped).
Anyway :
- The pacing this season is very schizophrenic. Some of the episodes are very chaotic (especially the first 4) and seem completely at odds with the pacing of season 1 and also the majority of the second half of this season. It does settle down after the first 4 but there's still few in the scond half that display the same chaoticness.
- The manner in which some of the questions raised during the entire first season are answered is clumsily handled. This is quite a pity as it is really apparent that the majority of the major plotline was worked out well in advance and was not being made up as the show went along (eg Lost). This is also the reason most of it links together and fits reasonably well but if the execution of the exposition was better, the show would have been even greater.
- It plays the weird card far too often and for no real purpose. Season 1 had the balance right, this season felt as if it was trying to be weirdjust for weirdness' sake.
Right, with all that out of the way, this show is extremely well put together and even with all those problems, this is still great television. It might not be as close to perfection as season 1 was, but there's lots to admire and like. And at least it provided some answers, unlike certain other shows which just like to keep piling on the questions.
8/10
 Permanent Midnight
#1745 posted by bambuz on 2007/01/07 14:25:20
I've seen this in an on and off bits and pieces -fashion, but being a snapshotty story, it didn't bother me that muhc... I just now watched the last part.
I find a lot of it strangely... sobering? Stiller is a pretty strong character here and feels natural in the lead role.
One of those films that stand out a bit for me.. I guess it's the unordinary but still somehow reality-connected life that is so fascinating.
It's not a perfect family life shattered by a mass murderer, but instead just some guy trying to get by and stumbling a lot on the way. Explained in a sort of inadequate way.
Oh and twin peaks is re-running again... I never really watched it before.
The pilot and the first episode at least mostly make sense but from what I remember it goes downhill with time. :/
 Pan's Labyrinth
#1746 posted by metlslime on 2007/01/08 13:55:59
Saw this over the weekend. A simple, well-crafted dark fairy tale. Recommended.
 Seeing It Over The Next Week Or Two
#1747 posted by nitin on 2007/01/08 23:46:18
looking forward to it.
#1748 posted by nitin on 2007/01/12 17:22:38
Scoop - well Match Point was a change in direction and a return to form somewhat, but this is basically the same type of Woody Allen film we've been getting for the last 15 years or so, a tired attempt at trying to recapture the wit and freshness of his earlier years.
This extremely slight comedy/murder mystery runs briskily but that's about all it has going for it. Scarlett Johannson is way out of her league in trying to put in a comic perfromance, Allen is annoying, and Hugh Jackman doesnt havemuch to do. The script is less than half baked and the whole thing is quite uninspired.
5/10
#1749 posted by nitin on 2007/01/13 16:43:55
Bringing Up Baby (1938) - not sure why I didnt really like it the first time around but upon a rewatch I was quite impressed by the zaniness of the whole thing. It still drops in the second half but to keep up this amount of wackiness for a whole movie should not really be expected anyway.
I'm also unsure what I thought about the performances last time around, but Katherine Hepburn really worked for me here. This is an inspired performance, which is much more than I can say for some of her later (and more celebrated) efforts. Cary Grant does well playing off her too.
7/10
Manhunter (1986) - Michael Mann's pre-Silence of the Lambs version of Red Dragon is, as usual, moody, well shot and well directed. However, it is also clusmily scripted, not very well acted and hampered by a very dodgy 80's soundtrack.
Brian Cox is actually pretty good as Hannibal Lecter but Lecter's character is not given as much screen time here as he was in the remake. But it's William "CSI" Petersen who is really unconvincing in the main role that later was played by Edward Norton. Petersen singlehandedly manages to undo all of Mann's good work with a fake performance that doesnt ring true in any way.
5.5/10
#1750 posted by nitin on 2007/01/20 02:19:51
Ringu (1997) - rewatch, and I still think this is one case where the american remake is far superior. For one thing, Naomi Watts is much better in the central role of the journalist investigating the mysterious video tape deaths. Also, gore verbinski's version had some nice memorable imagery which the low key japanese version is lacking and there was also a more well created sense of weirdness and dread in the remake. The original has a slightly better plot, with the remake adding in some unnecessary and silly scenes, but given that the whole setup was fairly preposterous anyway, that didn�t bother me. I liked the ending on the remake, but I do think the ending on this version is superior (although it wouldn�t really have fitted in with the remake).
5.5/10
Red Dragon - Michael Mann's Manhunter was fairly average but this version of the novel is even weaker. Edward Norton is slightly more watchable than William Petersen in the role of Will Graham but only just, its still a fairly lacklustre performance. And although the dodgy 80's soudntrack from Mann's film is not present, the replacement by a generic thriller score isnt all that much better. Obviously, Hannibal Lecter's role is expanded, but this time Anthony Hopkins phones in his perfromance from Camp Cheese. And even though both movies had virtually the same plot and an identical screenplay, this version had the addition of an extremely dumb and silly hollywood ending. Mann's film was better directed, better shot and also much more moodier (despite still being very average).
5/10
A Scanner Darkly - Richard Linklater's lucid and trippy film is perhaps the best realised version of the essence of Phillip K Dick's work. Total Recall was a decent film, but its only the expansion of one of his short stories. Blade Runner is a great film, but it deviated significantly from the source material. And Minority Report is only above average.
The animation style adopted (basically real footage superimposed with animation) suits the material very well, and renders a drug induced world quite nicely. The first 2/3 is short on substance, but is surprisingly very funny, with Robert Downey Jnr and Woody Harrelson providing plenty of laughs.
But the movie takes a different turn in the last 1/3 and if you can withstand a meandering and sometimes aimless screenplay till then, you get a pretty good payoff as all the lightheartedness gives way to a rather haunting little sequence of events.
The final end credits, replicated straight from the book, make sure that feeling stays with you for a little while.
7/10
Thank You For Smoking - hmm, it's perfectly watchable but it definitely feels stuck in middle ground, where it's thankfully not as soppy as a feel good redemption tale, but is also not as biting and cynical as it could have been.
It's arguable that going further in either direction would have resulted in a lesser film, but as it is I found it to be a nice enough distraction but not really engaging.
6.5/10
#1751 posted by nitin on 2007/01/20 10:05:56
The Bad Sleep Well (1960) - Akira Kurosawa's loose adaptation of Hamlet mixed with equal parts film noir, procedural thriller and corporate corruption expose is a great film let down slightly by a few missteps in the last act.
The opening twenty five minutes is devoted entirely to a wedding sequence and is a sheer masterclass as Kurosawa flawlessly sets up all the characters and slowly reveals all the information that will be necessary for the next two hours. Francis Ford Coppola must have been taking notes as his vitrual rehash of the scene to open The Godfather is as perfect.
What follows is a brilliantly shot, paced and acted movie that has a lot going on, and its only the anticlimax right at the end that doesnt quite deliver after the tremendous buildup.
8/10
#1752 posted by nitin on 2007/01/21 02:50:50
Futurama Season 3 - Nowhere near as consistent as seasons 1-2, and there's no real great episodes either, although there's a handful of very good ones. The second half's probably the strongest so I hope that continues on to season 4.
6.5/10
The Black Dahlia - I really dont get all the negative criticism this has been garnering. Sure, it's a flawed movie that feels a bit empty and flat, is awkwardly paced and is miscast, but its also quite evident that its made by a real filmmaker.
Brian de Palma's skills have almost always been compromised by shoddy material (which he sometimes writes himself) and it's arguable that he blew a chance to make a great film here given the quality of the source material, and it does feel like the movie's missing several crucial scenes, but what is there is quite well made. He and the scriptwriters just needed to let it breathe more.
6.5/10
#1753 posted by Lunaran on 2007/01/21 08:50:51
The Lady in the Water - M. Night Shyamalan's stories become increasingly childish and pie-eyed as this one revisits his theme of opening with a bedtime story he made up and then dwelling on characters that play parts in that story except he never told them. They spend two hours coming to terms with their 'purpose', having magically skipped over the part where they might actually question why their superintendent is telling them they have to protect a naked chick he found in the pool from a red-eyed dog made of grass so that the sky eagle can take her away. It might have been nice to throw that kind of bone to the audience first, because we're not buying it either, but instead Shyamalan almost acknowledges that he had no idea how to solve the problem of using his characters to elicit suspension of disbelief from his audience by ignoring the fact that he needed to in the first place and hoping we wouldn't notice. In one shot, frumpy stuttering protagonist learns that one of his tenants fits an archetype in this sea nymph myth the director made up, and then in the next that tenant has now miraculously been fully convinced of the reality of this myth by the frumpy stuttering protagonist and is totally cool with the whole thing.
Cinematography was the directorial equivalent of speaking in a monotone - nearly every shot is a long static cut from an utterly neutral angle, with editing that completely ignores all action and emotion his characters attempt to convey. It's like Stephen Wright was reading me the words to a lullaby he didn't care about. That's apparently Shyamalan's style, but I don't see how it adds a thing to his storytelling.
 Havent Seen It
#1754 posted by nitin on 2007/01/21 10:10:34
but usually christopher doyle is pretty impressive behind the camera. But I guess you can only shoot in the way you are told to :)
 300
#1755 posted by JPL on 2007/01/21 13:50:00
I saw the trailer yesterday evening, and it seems the movie will be interesting. The story comes from a legend of ancien Greece. the action takes place in Spartes. 300 Spartes warriors have to fight against hundreds Persians to save their city. It is as dark as Hell, the battles seems to be epic as "The Lord of the Ring" battles, and bloody as far as possible ! Everything I like in a movie...
 Oops
#1756 posted by JPL on 2007/01/21 13:51:53
fight against hundreds Persians
should have writen fight against thousands Persians .. otherwize the movie would not have any interest... :P
 Come On JPL,
#1757 posted by HeadThump on 2007/01/22 00:16:51
 Altered
#1758 posted by Tronyn on 2007/01/22 01:11:57
From some of the folks behind Blair Witch Project comes this well-written, well-acted and paranoid as fuck tale of alien abduction. While it is similar to Blair Witch in some ways (a small, tight cast, simple sets), it has a higher budget and for the most part doesn't take place in the woods or use shakycam. I can't really praise this movie enough, it's the best horror I've seen in a long time, and I watch a fair amount of horror films. The script is so well done, the way things are implied or slowly revealed really works to keep one engrossed, intrigued and increasingly worried and disturbed. The actors were all convincing and were all given a chance to let their characters come across as real over time.
 HT
#1759 posted by JPL on 2007/01/22 08:50:38
You know, I'm not a specialist of ancien Greece story... and it makes almost 25 years I for sure saw that at school... (remember I'm 37 this year... *sight*...)
 300
#1760 posted by nitin on 2007/01/22 09:24:20
yes, trailer looks interesting but this could be either really good or really bad.
 Also
#1761 posted by nitin on 2007/01/22 09:25:27
The Beat My Heart Skipped (2005) - Three reasons I wanted to see this, it was Jacques Audiard's followup to the fantastic Read My Lips, it was almost universally well received, and it has a plotline about a street level thug/debt collector whose interest in being a pianist is revived after spotting an ex-teacher. From then on, he is a conflicted soul who is torn between his art, his loyalty to his father, and his work. I wanted to see how you could make a good film with a storyline like that.
Well it's pretty easy to see why. Jacques Audiard is on fire behind the camera and Romain Duris is on fire in front of it. Audiard decides to basically just keep the camera as close to Duris as possible, which is not a bad move when your lead actor puts in such a magentic performance. He comea across as a mixture of pacino and deniro from their earlier 70's roles. The movie also has a terrific support cast and a good script for what the plot is. Ultimately its not a great film because there are only so many things that could be done given the general plot, but its sure is a very good one.
7.5/10
 JPL
#1762 posted by HeadThump on 2007/01/22 09:42:30
That came across as harsh, I'm sorry and didn't intend anything more than a rasberry.
When I think of schoolboys, I get a picture of Angus Young in my head. Angus Young whistling 'you are only young but you are going to die' as he wacks Xerxe's Immortals with his six string axe.
 HT
#1763 posted by JPL on 2007/01/22 10:33:49
Don't be sorry, I was not hurted at all... It is just a fact that I'm getting older and older each days... and it is nobody's fault ;)
However, I agree that I could have take time to find more infos/references about the movie story... sorry for this... ;P
 300 Movie Trailer
#1764 posted by JPL on 2007/01/22 10:49:54
 300
#1765 posted by lazy_bum on 2007/01/22 21:33:27
This trailer looks just like Frank Millers comic book. I think it will be next SinCity (in the comic book > large screen way).
|
 |
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
|
Website copyright © 2002-2025 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.
|
|