Movie Reviews Part the 12th: Does Gimli hate file conversions as well? Stay tuned!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I've only seen The New World once, but it's in my Netflix queue with Days Of Heaven.

I've just rented both of these. Looking forward to hitting them up by the end of the week.

I also got S2 of Mad Men, Last of the Mohicans, the full series of My So-Called Life, and Volumes One and Two of the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. Has anybody seen this Young Indiana Jones stuff? Is it any good?
 
Yeah, I DLed the whole series a few years back. The production value is out of this world; Lucas spent a lot of coin on that thing. They shot in more countries than any other series before or since.

And the crew is made up of people who went on to work on the SW prequels; a lot of talent involved.

The stories are all great blends of historical information with some fun thrills.

I think you'll like it.
 
Nice. I remember there was an extended trailer for the series on my old VHS copies of the original Indy trilogy, and I always thought it looked really cool.

You guys have discussed Malick countless times in here, so I'm sure this has come up. But now that I have Days of Heaven and The New World in my possession, would you say that either one of the two would be a better entry point? Or does it not really matter?
 
I'd argue that starting with Badlands and moving chronologically is a good way of moving forward. Days of Heaven sealed it for me, mostly in seeing the formal and narrative leap the dude made in 5 years.
 
Perhaps you missed the part where he already has Days of Heaven and The New World IN HIS POSSESSION.

I was just wondering what happened to you. Was afraid you went the way of Dalton, NSW, and Shouter.

Seen anything lately? Like Hugo? Think carefully before you answer.
 
He can torrent an HD copy of Badlands and then go on to those. IT IS POSSIBLE.

This semester's been pretty hectic as far as school and work have been concerned. Dalton and Shouter are MIA as well? That sucks.

Anyway, in the past two weeks I was able to see Hugo, Martha Marcy May Marlene and Miranda July's The Future.

Mx4 was a pretty perfectly calibrated, Polanski-esque paranoid drama. Easily one of the better experiences that I've had in a theater this year. Following it up the next day with Hugo restored my faith in humanity a bit. I think that may be my favorite Scorsese flick since Casino, at least in terms of it having an overall complete vision. I'd give Gangs the leg up in terms of sheer artistic ambition, however using a children's story to set up a greater exploration of the magic of early cinema while legitimizing 3D as a solid narrative tool is pretty nifty, I suppose. The Future approaches an emotionally straightforward idea about the fears of a progressing relationship in a delightfully bizarre and abstract way. It's not normally the type of film I respond to, considering July's indulgence in quirks, but it's presented in such an honest way that I found it endearing.

Curious to hear if any of you guys have seen Attack the Block or if I've missed that discussion. I know Powerhour would dig it and Deep would dismiss it, but I'd like to hear other takes.
 
Hugo restored my faith in humanity a bit. I think that may be my favorite Scorsese flick since Casino, at least in terms of it having an overall complete vision. I'd give Gangs the leg up in terms of sheer artistic ambition, however using a children's story to set up a greater exploration of the magic of early cinema while legitimizing 3D as a solid narrative tool is pretty nifty, I suppose.

Good...Good...

palpatine.jpg


I see your reasoning for that ranking; obviously many of us here are fans of Gangs (and I feel like I'm endlessly debating it in various places), and it's probably my "favorite" but it's by no means the closest to perfect. Could definitely have used another rewrite (or probably one less writer), and there will always be the question of the edit and what Scorsese was supposedly forced to cut by Harvey Weinstein.

Hugo moved me, that's for sure. And it was obviously a personal film for Marty. I'm not sure that his passion was perfectly fused with the story (many detractors feel that Hugo's story takes a backseat in the film's second half), but it worked well enough for me.

I have to say that overall I probably preferred Shutter Island, which I also found very moving. There, Scorsese was able to mix his classic homage (Fuller, Welles, Hitchcock, Tourneur) with what he's best at: penetrating a disturbed male psyche. Sure, there's a bit too much exposition at the end, but from a directorial standpoint I found it a lot more interesting and creative than Hugo, which to me is much more a sum of its parts in terms of great art direction, photography, and the effects (including the 3D). Marty should be commended for using the new technology in a fresh way, of course.

I'd also say that Kundun never gets enough credit. It's not something I revisit too often, but the imagery is very, very powerful, as is seeing him work about as far away from his milieu as he ever has. Plus, you have Roger Deakins and Phillip Glass adding their talents.
 
I'd probably agree with most the detractors in how the first half of the story acts more as a mechanism for the Melies-centric second half. Though I would say there is as much of an indulgence in influence in Hugo as one would find in Shutter Island, though the latter does have a greater synthesis. Hugo certainly uses its stylistic techniques (and faux technicolor aesthetic) to a greater capacity than The Aviator, which I still dig but the content is fairly surface-level biopic material.

I feel the same way toward Kundun. Another film of his that doesn't get enough credit is Bringing Out the Dead. It follows some of the thematic framework of Taxi Driver only with Nic Cage's Frank serving as an antithesis to DeNiro's Travis Bickle. Hell, it may be Cage's finest performance, though his character's struggle is better suited for a younger actor.
 
I like Bringing Out The Dead a lot, even if it's one of his weaker films for me. We're talking about a guy who hasn't made a bad one, unless you want to be super-critical of Boxcar Bertha. Even his most "sell-out" studio film, The Color of Money, has some interesting things to say, continues and deepens the character study begun in The Hustler, and is really entertaining to watch.

I'm wondering if I should check Hugo out in 2D for my second viewing. I'd like to be able to judge it without the gimmick, even if Scorsese has used it in a very un-gimmicky way.
 
I'm wondering if I should check Hugo out in 2D for my second viewing. I'd like to be able to judge it without the gimmick, even if Scorsese has used it in a very un-gimmicky way.

I am seriously thinking of going back for the 3D viewing.
Out of respect for Scorsese and because enough people have said it is the best use of 3D.

I do expect this to be a more meaningful experience in 3D.
 
Something was wrong with my rip of We Need to Talk About Kevin, so that viewing is indefinitely postponed. However, A Separation is truly one of the year's most amazing films.
 
Hugo. 8.5/10 Wow. Best use of 3D I've seen so far. The story was immersive though some in the audience we definitely sleeping. :giggle:. To me it was moving and well made.
 
Saw Hugo today. It was wonderful in every way.

But I'm still reeling from Melancholia on Saturday.
 
Got a free ticket to The Artist 9/10 - I just adore this movie. It's smart, funny, touching and you feel like you were played like a piano. Even the dog was a great actor. That's two good movies in a row including Hugo. :up:
 
the actor is getting all the attention and awards, he is very good

but, the lead actress is what really impressed me, she was a pure delight.

Berenice-Bejo.jpg


the film is quite good, loved the fact that they used real locations, did not just go with blue screen to get the past
 
Cave of Forgotten Dreams

Breathtaking. Can you imagine getting to see that cave in person? I'd probably spend the whole time crying. "It's so ..... *sob* ...... beautiful! *Sooooooooooooooooooob* "

The Killing Fields

Because nothing says Christmastime like Cambodian genocide!

I'd never seen it, but had wanted to for a long time. I found Sam Waterston's character (or maybe it was his acting) rather off-putting. It's hard to say a movie featuring such horrors was enjoyable, but I'm glad I finally saw it.
 
Hugo gets me excited about movies and movie-making. Can't pay a film a higher compliment than that.
 
Not seeing Hugo in 3D is pretty much going against everything that Hugo was about. I really had no idea what the movie was about, so when they started talking about Trip to the fucking Moon, I got pretty excited, and then I actually got to see ANY of it on a big screen...IN 3D. Holy shit.

I wasn't quite enamored with the first 30-45 minutes, not nearly as much as I was the rest of the movie. I can't decide if my favorite Scorsese film or if After Hours is, but we all know my Scorsese tastes are strange.
 
Senna. Brilliant film. Of course we all know the ending but the film is just put together so masterfully, I don't know how they managed to get all this incredible footage - like the close-ups of his face as he lined up for what would be his last race at San Marino - but it is incredibly interesting. It's also kind of hard to watch, because in spite of all the great moments there's this sense of impending dread. Highly recommended.
 
Senna was one of the better documentaries this year, that and Buck, about a horse trainer were both top notch.



I saw Mission Impossible 4 on the IMAX last night. Te best main stream action film of the year.

A Dangerous Method, also very good, not what I expected, I thought it would be more sensational, based on the previews.
Instead, it was very solid film making, with great performances.
 
I loved the fucking shit out of M:I 4. The whole stretch in Dubai is a 20 minute masterwork unto itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom