Movies you just saw

[greyhammer90]

Oh I'm well aware of Tarantino's homages. I laugh when people say he ripped off reservoir dogs. His dialouge and style are what make him great though, no question.

And that continuous shot in Kill Bill vol. 1? Not goodfellas impressive, but pretty damn close. Showing the kitchen when he's going over the wall was another little moment of genius.

 

[ACamp1900]

only since but including kill bill. he has gone to a cartoony style of blood packs as a sort hyperrealism to negate fact you are in fact watching something ridiculously gratuitous and violent. but, the first three, dogs, pulp, and jackie are all based in a very life like and true form of blood levels and reaction.

going to see star trek in 30 min.

Funny, I loved his work up to and including Jackie Brown.... Since then he loses me more with each film... Though I admit I have not seen Django... I have friends that share my loathing of the Bill movies and especially Bastards that say he nailed Django... So we shall see

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Currently reading "John Dies at the End" and saw the movie is on Netflix. Trying to power through it, really excited to see the film.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Just watched Inception for the 2nd time. I am still WTF?

Inception is great and I consider it, visually speaking, one of the top three films ever made. Avatar, Inception, and The Hobbit are top three for me.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I saw a think on Reddit that showed how Tarantino is basically a walking encyclopedia of styles/shots/dialogue/themes from thousands of movies he's watched when he worked at a film rental place.

Tarantino is less "original," and more a brilliant rehash of films that directly influenced him. A lot of times it's shot-for-shot, too. I wouldn't be surprised if the cotton dealio happened in some short film from the 1950s Tarantino loved.

Tarantino's real genius is in his script. He writes a novel for each movie and just considers that his first draft. That's unreal.

Tarantino isn't unoriginal though, he did basically invent this creative and famous shot:

Check out Orson Wells. His low angle shot, was killer for the time and technoglogy, and wasn't he the father of POV?

 

[Junkhead]

I watched 1968 Tunnel Rats. (was free Movie Channel week). I love war movies, but dear God, that was horrible. Please, no one ever watch that. It was painful. I'd rather watch BioDome on look for 3 weeks.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

Inception is great and I consider it, visually speaking, one of the top three films ever made. Avatar, Inception, and The Hobbit are top three for me.

youre a very astute and knowledgable poster--what is leo's totem? and can you figure out what is a dream and what isnt, as far as his storyline is concerned?

 

[Cackalacky]

Inception is great and I consider it, visually speaking, one of the top three films ever made. Avatar, Inception, and The Hobbit are top three for me.

I agree on all 3 for visuals. Nolan did some masterful things with Inception. The themes, the execution, the psychology... amazing. My wife and I are still arguing over how it ended.

SPOILER*************************






She thinks he is still in the dream state based on all the stuff after Cobb disembarks. I hold that he made it out.

I read somethings saying the final scene was for all intents the point of the entire movie. That Cobb's perception of reality is where he wanted to be. In one scene he has a gun in his hand ready to off himself if the totem does not stop spinning. In the final scene he spins it, sees his kids and leaves the totem spinning not waiting for it to wobble. At the point he saw his kids, it did not matter if it was a dream or not to Cobb. I love the psychological stuff in movies.

 

[Cackalacky]

youre a very astute and knowledgable poster--what is leo's totem? and can you figure out what is a dream and what isnt, as far as his storyline is concerned?

Here is something I found last night after I watched it because I really wanted to understand this movie. After Saito and Cobb exit Limbo though, Nolan still leaves you questioning "reality" and what is it.

 

[GO IRISH!!!]

Watched "Man on Fire" this weekend. It was on cable and I refuse to watch movies like that edited for cable so I busted out the DVD. Great film and one of my favorite Denzel roles. He is such a good actor. Watching him in this movie made me want to watch him in "Glory" again.

 

[greyhammer90]

I thought it was pretty obvious (IMO) that the entire movie was a dream. Leo's wife was right to reject her kids after he performed Inception on her, as they weren't real and they were still dreaming. She didn't commit suicide. She actually saw that it was a dream state and woke up. Leo is still denying that it is a dream state.

There are several scenes in the "reality" portion of the movie that confirm this for me.

 

[Black Irish]

I read a theory that the top wasn't Leo's character's totem at all. It was his wedding ring.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

I read a theory that the top wasn't Leo's character's totem at all. It was his wedding ring.

this ^^

you have to follow the rules. and one of the main rules is that a totem cannot be used by anyone else, it's explicit to the holder and that person alone. so, although leo has the top, it's a keep sake and not the visual clue for him, in his dream state.

it is in fact his wedding ring. and when leo is dreaming his wedding ring is on, when he is awake, it is not.

again, this really only pertains to the scenes that are about leo's character and not so much the end sequence, as that is obviously, all a dream.

 

[Emcee77]

I saw a think on Reddit that showed how Tarantino is basically a walking encyclopedia of styles/shots/dialogue/themes from thousands of movies he's watched when he worked at a film rental place.

Tarantino is less "original," and more a brilliant rehash of films that directly influenced him. A lot of times it's shot-for-shot, too. I wouldn't be surprised if the cotton dealio happened in some short film from the 1950s Tarantino loved.

Tarantino's real genius is in his script. He writes a novel for each movie and just considers that his first draft. That's unreal.

Tarantino isn't unoriginal though, he did basically invent this creative and famous shot:

Right. People don't get this about Tarantino and it drives me crazy. I've read that when people ask Tarantino where he went to film school, he says, "I didn't. I went to films." He is fundamentally a film fan, especially a fan of genre movies and other B-movies, and all his movies are about other films in a major way. Jackie Brown is about blaxploitation movies, Kill Bill is about kung fu movies, Basterds is about WWII movies, Django is about spaghetti westerns. Now, he puts a creative spin on the stuff he pulls out of all these old genres, but other movies are his inspiration, his organizing principle -- they are almost a character in his movies. Like Buster says, the genius is not really in the content of his movies, other than the brilliant dialogue; it's in how he masters those old styles and blends them together to make his own style out of them.

 

[ndyeater]

Saw Star Trek into Darkness...Great movie and great sequel....saw it in 3d but didn't feel it was necessary to see it in

 

[Cackalacky]

Watched Lincoln last night.

1. Daniel Day Lewis is a great actor. I have a hard time even thinking of someone close.
2. Overall the movie was very well done. I particularly like they focused on the amendment and Lincoln's personality.
3. Did not like Robert's character at all and thought he was a nuisance in the movie. His character was not necessary,
4. The final scene with Lee and the assassination appeared to be thrown in there with no purpose. Not necessary at all. I would rather it have ended with his last speech and not even addressed those two topics. It would have been much more compelling.
5. Overall I thought it was good, not great. Tommy Lee Jones is still the man.

 

[Cackalacky]

Right. People don't get this about Tarantino and it drives me crazy. I've read that when people ask Tarantino where he went to film school, he says, "I didn't. I went to films." He is fundamentally a film fan, especially a fan of genre movies and other B-movies, and all his movies are about other films in a major way. Jackie Brown is about blaxploitation movies, Kill Bill is about kung fu movies, Basterds is about WWII movies, Django is about spaghetti westerns. Now, he puts a creative spin on the stuff he pulls out of all these old genres, but other movies are his inspiration, his organizing principle -- they are almost a character in his movies. Like Buster says, the genius is not really in the content of his movies, other than the brilliant dialogue; it's in how he masters those old styles and blends them together to make his own style out of them.

I agree with a lot of this. I think his music adds to the "character" you describe. The music hardly ever "suits" the actual situation going on in the movie but adds another dimension.

For example in Basterds when the Bear jew is in the tunnel. That music has no business in a WWII movie but definitely creates a dimensionality tot he shot that works.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Saw hangover 3 yesterday and was actually impressed. I kinda expected a similar story (blackout and figure out what happened) but they took it in a different way and i thought it was hilarious. Looks like theres a bunch of good movies coming out soon i cant wait to see, especially Man of Steel.

 

[grantphilly]

hey wha happan? i got a real red wagon! i cant do my werk! A Mighty Wind. must see (incoherent babble)

 

[ACamp1900]

this ^^

you have to follow the rules. and one of the main rules is that a totem cannot be used by anyone else, it's explicit to the holder and that person alone. so, although leo has the top, it's a keep sake and not the visual clue for him, in his dream state.

it is in fact his wedding ring. and when leo is dreaming his wedding ring is on, when he is awake, it is not.

again, this really only pertains to the scenes that are about leo's character and not so much the end sequence, as that is obviously, all a dream.

So was the whole storyline then actually some attempt to wake him??

 

[Black Irish]

I watched "Parker" last night. It was entertaining and didn't drag. But it felt more like an adaptation of an Elmore Leonard novel rather then one of Richard Stark's (aka Donald Westlake) Parker books. The fact that much of the action takes place in sunny south Florida probably contributes to that feel. I think "Payback" and "Point Blank" got the noirish feel of Stark's novels better. Jason Statham gives it a good go as Parker, but he doesn't quite have the dead-eyed toughness that Parker should have. Jennifer Lopez gives a really strong performance, the best of the movie. It's worth a watch.

 

[RuntheBall]

So I have had a lot of free time recently, so, naturally, I have watch a ton of movies. Here is the breakdown.

Life of Pi:
I was really excited to watch this as it got a lot of accolades, but feel like it didn't really live up the hype. There were some awesome visual effects though(which I think is what won the awards). It is an interesting story with an intriguing and thought provoking ending, but to me was a bit long it the middle (Think Old Man and the Sea). He literally was on this boat forever and the story kind of slows down too much in this part IMO.

Perks of Being a Wallflower:

This was probably my favorite of the bunch. Given I really like Emma Watson, and the movie takes place in Pittsburgh (two huge positives for me). Cinematically it probably wasn't the best (the director was the author of the book), but it really made up for it with a great story. It was kind of dark which I liked, but could be a turn off for some. It deals with a lot of heavy issues.
I loved the emphasis of music in the movie (David Bowie, The Smiths). The music seems to 1.) convey the emotions of the main character (whose head you are "in") and 2.) provide a type of mental escape for the main character (Charlie).


Black Swan:

Another dark movie about a New York City Ballerina. The movie stars Natalie Portman and also includes Mila Kunis (always a plus!). Without ruining it, it is a thrilling movie, and really was an entertaining watch even though I'm not a fan of ballet's. I really did enjoy the music though. Another thought provoking and thrilling movie, and definitely worth a watch. I thought Portman did a great job with her role.


Girl With the Dragon Tattoo:

Another darker movie starring Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara. It is hard to imagine Craig as anything other than Bond. It is a murder mystery type movie, and is a "thinking man's movie" as I thought it was fun to try to piece together the info in my mind. Warning, some part of this movie as really sexual in a dark cruel way. Its a bit tough to see, and maybe a bit unnecessary but provides a good way to establish the character's personalities. It is adapted from a Swedish book/ film, so I guess it comes from that (that is where the story takes place as well). The director also did The Social Network and Seven, and it is well put together. It is another thriller and definitely a recommended watch (but not with the kids).

Once:

An Irish movie about Glen Hansard's (an acoustic musicians) story. He starts off as a street performer in Dublin and writes his own stuff. He meets a woman immigrant from the Czech Republic, and the movie tells their story. It is a low budget movie (130,000 euroes), and both characters play themselves. That being said it is an interesting story, has great music IMO, and definitely a "cute" relationship.

The Pianist:

A big award winning movie about the Warsaw Ghetto during WW2. If your noticing a trend music played a role in this movie as well, though it kind of disappeared in the middle (besides the plot elements). It is kind of depressing (how can it not be?), but overall a great movie, I can definitely se why it won so many awards. Adrien Brody was the main actor (the Pianist) and does a great job. Definitely a recommended watch.

Taken 2:

I really enjoyed the first Taken, and all of the Bourne movies (which are kind of similar action-type movies). This one was good as well, but not as good. It seemed like a stretch a bit. It was more so entertaining than a good movie. I like Liam Neeson alot and he a good job again. Also Maggie Grace plays his daughter again, and she is fiiinnnee. Probably worth a watch if you enjoyed the first or like the escaping/ running away action type movies.

Momento:

Another movie that won a lot of awards. It is a "psychological thriller" and has a good/ thought provoking ending. The movie has an intriguing plot development (almost works backwards- but its kind of confusing). This is kind of cool and keeps the suspense until the end, but also allows part of the middle to become a bit repetitive and dry (though not too bad). Overall, I though it was a good movie, but probably not as good as I had heard (it is a Christopher Nolan film). Still definitely worth a watch though.

A Beautiful Mind:

Another "psychological thriller" type movie (though thriller might be a bit unfair;maybe mystery or unveiling would be better), this one starring Russel Crowe as John Nash. It tells his [Nash's] story, which is very interesting and definitely keeps you on the edge of your seat. I don't want to give too much away, but I really enjoyed it. Like many of these types of movie it is a bit depressing. I enjoyed the ending though.

Overall Thoughts:

You can probably notice a trend here. All of the movies (except maybe Girl w/ the Dragon Tattoo) were either psychological (differentiation between perception and reality, think Shutter Island, Inception, etc) or dealt with music (something I am really enjoying right now). I enjoyed all of them, though you may not (I'd recommend watching everything but Once and maybe Taken 2).

Here is my ranking (though it will vary from your's most likely):
1. Perk of Being a Wallflower
2. Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
3. A Beautiful Mind
4. Black Swan
5. The Pianist
[All of the five above are excellent; it is hard to separate them. You have to watch all of them]
6. Momento
7. Life of Pi
8. Taken 2
9. Once

While Taken 2 and once were entertaining and I enjoyed them, they aren't great movies. Overall I enjoyed all of the movies though. Don't regret watching any of them.

 

[UmphreakDomer]

went and saw "fast and furious 6" last night. its a very fun loud video game type movie. why its number one in the box office this week. completely ridiculous at certain points--a lot of points.
i.e. the end scene is a huge chase/fight sequence that has to do with a runway--this runway would have to be the length of texas for this all to occur!
i had only seen the 1st "F&F"-- and was never really "lost" because its all just so far fetched. fun time though.

 

[rikkitikki08]

Went to see the hangover 3, it was terrible. Thats really as far as my review goes. I will say this though

I CANT WAIT FOR MAN OF STEEL!

 

[UmphreakDomer]

saw "now you see me" two nights ago.

fun little movie that definitely has a cool factor to it. i'm not much of a jesse eisenberg fan as i believe he doesnt act. hes the same person in every role, himself. but i digress.

everyone else gave some pretty good performances and theres a couple subtle twists that you dont see coming.

not necessarily anything you need to see in the theatre. but, its a fun little movie.

 

[gkIrish]

Went to see the hangover 3, it was terrible. Thats really as far as my review goes. I will say this though

I CANT WAIT FOR MAN OF STEEL!

Yeah there was really no reason to see Hangover 3 in theaters. The funniest parts were already in the trailer. Also really excited about Man of Steel. Will probably see that at midnight opening night.

 

[Black Irish]

I watched "The Last Stand" and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. It got panned and didn't do much business in the theater so I didn't have high expectations. It was a funny, fast-paced, and the action choreography was great. Schwarzenegger has fun with his tough guy past his prime persona. And he gets great support from a solid supporting cast: Luis Guzman, Peter Stormare, Johnny Knoxville. I felt that Forrest Whittaker had a thankless, nothing role that didn't nearly use his talents. But overall, a really fun film. Grab some booze and popcorn and give it a watch.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I saw Lincoln, Zero Dark Thirty, and Moneyball.

There was an authenticity to each that I found masterful. I am used to sitting and watching movies and picking apart the inaccuracies, or at least debating them. There was none of that with these, just the kind of open-mouthed amazement that a kid full of wonder has on Christmas morning.

I think the question of Lincoln was what makes this man do something so colossally unpopular. Through our filter of history, post civil rights and all we don't have a feel for how oppressive public sentiment against the 13th amendment was. It no longer has a parallel in our society, it was so feared and distained. Showing everything in the movie, from the tremendous costs keeping the Union together had on his immediate family, the potential sacrifice of another son, and the final sacrifice, his assassination were all required. Lee surrendering and the vote of the House, were awesome in showing the resistance for his policy at home, and the unconditional surrender of a foe who had dictated the terms of the war for four and a half years.

Zero Dark was another great movie combining the realism of the Hurt Locker with the historical accuracy of a documentary. I was absolutely impressed by the way they could compress twelve or fourteen years down to a two hour movie. It was an awesome rendition, (pun intended). The Canary scene was as accurate as any I have seen portrayed, to the tactics and the weapon the sniper used.

But Moneyball. What a statement it made about experts and talking heads! This is now my trifavorite movie Brad Pitts has done, up there with Seven Years in Tibet and Legends of the Fall.

 

[Cackalacky]

I saw Lincoln, Zero Dark Thirty, and Moneyball.

I think the question of Lincoln was what makes this man do something so colossally unpopular. Through our filter of history, post civil rights and all we don't have a feel for how oppressive public sentiment against the 13th amendment was. It no longer has a parallel in our society, it was so feared and distained. Showing everything in the movie, from the tremendous costs keeping the Union together had on his immediate family, the potential sacrifice of another son, and the final sacrifice, his assassination were all required. Lee surrendering and the vote of the House, were awesome in showing the resistance for his policy at home, and the unconditional surrender of a foe who had dictated the terms of the war for four and a half years.

I guess what I think is that the movie was about the amendment and the unpopularity of it. Even though it was the "right" thing to do the timing was possibly not right politically or socially. Lincoln's dilemma laid out in the movie was to end the war through a peace agreement (which would never have materialized and Lincoln knew it and therefore was no real dilemma at all) and passing the amendment. He obviously chose the amendment. As far as Robert, Lincoln stated in the movie he put Robert with Grant and allowed him to serve with some dignity but far from any harm.... not much of a sacrifice unless the amendment failed and the war continued on (potential loss of Robert...yes.... but Lincoln did as much as he could to protect him). Anyway I just found that arc a nuisance.

As far as Lee goes, I was speaking cinematically, it just felt inserted and another unnecessary arc. We all know he surrendered unconditionally, and it was not part of the amendment or equality arcs. Lincoln's discussion with Grant on the porch was sufficient to end the "war" arc. They also discussed the end of the war drawing near (a couple of times) which was why Lincoln was in a rush to get the amendment passed in the first place, being if the war ended and the amendment not passed, no one would vote for it.

I can see your argument for the assassination, I just felt it was inserted too. He did sacrifice a lot ( obviously his life) and there was mention of other failed attempts at his wife and him as well. To me the movie was not so much about his personal sacrifices though as it was the amendment and what the amendment represents. I don't think the movie was wholly about Lincoln at all. Lincoln and the amendment were vehicles for the idea of equality and how hard fought unpopular ideas were (and still are) and how the ideas persist after we are gone. Hence the many references to equality (opening scene, Euclid, the amendment debates, and the final speech). Obviously Lincoln and the HOR were the ones who made it a reality and with personal sacrifices. I just don't think the Lee scene and assassination scene added anything to the movie.

One could easily take this movie and make it about human rights in general. Not just American rights granted by the processes we have set up for ourselves. The scene of Lincoln in the telegraph room with the two soldiers discussing Euclid is what stuck with me.

 

[Cackalacky]

I saw Iron Man 3 this weekend. If you want to know my opinion, PM me I don't want to spoil that for anyone just yet. I have some serious opinions on that movie.