Review the last movie you viewed (NO LISTS) IV

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 maintain that Moore is a more enjoyable Bond than Connery. Connery's Bond is a complete and utter douche-nozzle. Running around, raping women...just not cool. From Russia With Love just might be the very best Bond film though, regardless.

I've seen all the Brosnan films, and several Moore films, but I'm really looking forward to Timothy Dalton's pair, since I've never seen them.
 
Lancemc said:
I maintain that Moore is a more enjoyable Bond than Connery. Connery's Bond is a complete and utter douche-nozzle. Running around, raping women...just not cool. From Russia With Love just might be the very best Bond film though, regardless.

I've seen all the Brosnan films, and several Moore films, but I'm really looking forward to Timothy Dalton's pair, since I've never seen them.

I liked The Living Daylights a lot, which puts me in the minority. I thought, as I said a few pages ago, that the Moore films had gotten a little too cutesy, and it was nice to see a grittier Bond...but for some, he was TOO gritty, too dour. Dalton is a good actor, though, or so I think.

It's hard to argue with From Russia with Love being the best. I rate Casino Royale way up there as well.

I only liked one of the Brosnan films. It was frustrating, I'd see a Brosnan Bond film and think it was shit, but then he'd be in the Tailor of Panama or The Thomas Crowne Affair or even the Matador, and he'd be great, and the films were good too.

Eh.
 
My top 3 Bond films that I've seen currently rank

1. From Russia With Love
2. Casino Royale
3. Goldeneye

The first two are solid 9's, and Goldeneye is just such a part of my adolescence I can't help but love the hell out of it.
 
Lancemc said:
My top 3 Bond films that I've seen currently rank

1. From Russia With Love
2. Casino Royale
3. Goldeneye

The first two are solid 9's, and Goldeneye is just such a part of my adolescence I can't help but love the hell out of it.

I think that's why I like For Your Eyes Only so much. One of the first Bond films I actually went to see in the theater, and probably the last good Moore title. Whatever the consensus rating is for it, I likely score it higher due to that. Plus, fucking Topol is in it.

I like Goldeneye. Only Brosnan Bond film I liked at all.
 
Hopefully Quantum of Solace (I'm really digging that title btw) will break the ranks, and take the top prize here. I think Marc Foster is a fine director, though it will be interesting seeing how he handles material like this. And Casino Royale set the bar for modern Bond films incredibly high. I hope it succeeds though.
 
Now that the reinvention/origin story has occurred, it'll be interesting to see what happens next.

I read that they'll start to introduce some gadgetry, etc...not sure if there is a new "Q" or not.

It helps that Daniel Craig is the real fucking deal. I laughed when Bond fanatics went nuts when he was named. I like Clive Owen a lot and he'd have been an interesting Bond, perhaps, but I thought Craig was an excellent choice right away.

Having Mathieu Amalric in Quantum pleases me. He was the best thing going in Munich, and his work in Diving Bell speaks for itself.

Finding Neverland (I cried like a baby) and Monster's Ball are the only two Foster films I've seen.
 
Amalric is going to be fantastic. Best casting in the entire she-bang. And I new after the first 20 minutes of Casino Royale that Craig was going to be the best Bond of the bunch. I believe I may be correct. :up:
 
Well, he's off to a fantastic start.

I loved how rough around the edges his Bond is, and it'll be fun to, hopefully, watch his progression....the scene where he's looking in the mirror as he puts on the fitted Tux was great.

It'd be cool if Amalric becomes a repeated nemesis, and not just a one and done sort.
 
No spoken words said:
..the scene where he's looking in the mirror as he puts on the fitted Tux was great.

That's my favorite scene in the movie.

And if I'm completely honest, it's one of the few times watching a movie when I saw a man and was like "God damn, that he is so fucking sexy!". What a fantastic scene though. Comical, sensual, completely badass. Gave me chills.
 
I can't believe we actually have a consensus of preferring Moore to Connery. We are in a very small minority.

And I'm sad that I'm the only one who liked You Only Live Twice. Maybe because I saw it in the theatre a few years back?

My Top Ranking would look like:

1. The Spy Who Loved Me
2. From Russia With Love
3. Goldfinger
4. Live and Let Die
5. On Her Majesty's Secret Service

The Spy Who Loved Me just has too much awesome shit. Great opening song, probably the best pre-credit sequence, the white Lotus/submarine hybrid, Barbara Bach (quite possibly THE hottest Bond girl), the Egypt/pyramid locations, that cool underwater lair, and the funniest final line of any Bond film.

From Russia is the most solid and thrilling, but not as fun.

Lance, which Moores have you seen?
 
Lancemc said:
And if I'm completely honest, it's one of the few times watching a movie when I saw a man and was like "God damn, that he is so fucking sexy!".


Just a few? :hmm:


Like you don't think that every time you watch One Tree Hill.
 
Bond is supposed to be a gritty douche-nozzle, though. He's a complete misogynist jerk in the Fleming books.

That being said, it's been years since I had my Bond phase and rented all the movies. the only Moore one I remember liking was THe Spy Who Loved Me. I also really loved The Living Daylights and watched it multiple times.

I was, like, 15 though. I don't know if I'd think the same if I watched them all now. I remember the last time I caught Daylights on TV, I was pretty bored. And the lead actress was dull as a doorknob. I liked Dalton, though.
 
The Savages. I was really looking forward to this, loving Phillip Seymour Hoffman and reading all the great reviews. But while it seemed very realistic (and I've dealt with similar stuff with my sisters and mom and grandmother), it was kind of boring. Boring in a way that was painfully familiar, sitting in dreary nursing homes not knowing whether I was bored or just shut down because the situations were so depressing and painful that I didn't dare let myself feel anything so the boredom just masked deeper feelings. In that sense, the film has to be called a success I suppose since it was so realistic. Yet it wasn't touching in the way "Away from Her" was, for example. It was just plain depressing and sad, and drab. Left me feeling tired and empty, despite some resolution and glimmer of light at the end. Great performances, though.
 
lazarus said:
I can't believe we actually have a consensus of preferring Moore to Connery. We are in a very small minority.

And I'm sad that I'm the only one who liked You Only Live Twice. Maybe because I saw it in the theatre a few years back?

My Top Ranking would look like:

1. The Spy Who Loved Me
2. From Russia With Love
3. Goldfinger
4. Live and Let Die
5. On Her Majesty's Secret Service

The Spy Who Loved Me just has too much awesome shit. Great opening song, probably the best pre-credit sequence, the white Lotus/submarine hybrid, Barbara Bach (quite possibly THE hottest Bond girl), the Egypt/pyramid locations, that cool underwater lair, and the funniest final line of any Bond film.

From Russia is the most solid and thrilling, but not as fun.

Lance, which Moores have you seen?

I barely remember The Spy Who Loved Me, but, it's up next, so, I'll watch it tonight and see if it makes my Top 5. I'd have a hard time, Laz, ranking your 4 and 5 ahead of Casino Royale.
 
Casino Royale was a great reboot, but I think part of what made Bond so great was the tongue-in-cheek aspect of it. Now that was eventually taken too far, but I think trying to make such a serious film out of the franchise has taken away a bit of what made it great in the first place. The megalomaniacal villains, their henchmen, the gadgets, the puns...these became cliches, but no modern retelling is likely to charm the viewer in the way the first 10 or so did.
 
lazarus said:
Casino Royale was a great reboot, but I think part of what made Bond so great was the tongue-in-cheek aspect of it. Now that was eventually taken too far, but I think trying to make such a serious film out of the franchise has taken away a bit of what made it great in the first place. The megalomaniacal villains, their henchmen, the gadgets, the puns...these became cliches, but no modern retelling is likely to charm the viewer in the way the first 10 or so did.

I definitely enjoyed some modicum of the tongue-in-cheek element, but, I'm not married to it for the franchise. Casino Royale had a few lines that made me laugh, though. Also, scenes like Bond and Vesper riding on the train was a welcome thing. Just nice by-play, or so I thought.

I guess I do not find On Her Majesty's Secret Service as charming as you did, though, I definitely enjoyed it, especially the end. Fuck you Kojak.
 
No spoken words said:
Fuck you Kojak.

TVKO1.jpg




Who loves ya, babe?
 
Ratatouille

Very close to being a masterpiece. Could have been a bit funnier, but whatever. It's absolutely gorgeous, classy, and clever. I loved it.

9/10
 
Across The Universe

This will be a long review, and I'm sure a few here will not take kindly to it, but what the hell.

Coming into this film, I was not expecting much at all. It sounded like a movie with a thin plot (if any at all) propelled by music. And that's pretty much all it is, unfortunately. The worst part is that not even the music can hold up its end of the bargain at times.

So...the plot. Well, an hour in, I still had no fucking clue what I was watching. All I could guess was that it was a lame retread of the classic 60's tale (ZOMG VIETNAM SUCKS LET'S TAKE DRUGS), held together by a general, vague attempt at a love story that never really hits you at any point during the film. Thankfully, things calmed down a bit in the last 45 minutes, and there were some moments that were bearable amidst the pretentious tripe and painful cheesiness. The loose ends were mostly tied together OK, and it had a happy ending...if you like that sort of thing in films.

But it's still pretentious tripe. For every moment of genuine connection between the characters, there there are two scenes that are just used to show how "brilliant" Julie Taymor is at cramming as many colors and effects onto the screen as possible. Shots of people swimming nude in the water, weird scenes where the background disappears for no apparent reason, and color. Lots of color. They all say the same thing: absolutely nothing.

As for the dialogue, there isn't much to say. The plot was predictable and lazy, and so is the writing. There is little to no humor, and very little drama. And the drama that is there is embarrassing. You just sit there thinking to yourself, "damn, I could've written this on the can". And don't even bother getting your hopes up over actual character interaction; the characters are lazily-written cardboard cutouts that end up being 60's stereotypes and not much more. Some of them are just douchebags. Their names?

Jude (British douchebag)
Lucy (female douchebag)
Jojo (bad Jimi Hendrix rip-off)
Sadie (bad Janis Joplin rip-off)
Max (regular douchebag who gets sent to Vietnam)
Prudence (one of the most pointless characters of all time)

This leads me to another point: PUNS ARE BAD WRITING. This is basic, and you can learn it at any writers workshop. Puns are lazy, generally not that funny, and render this film nearly unwatchable for a Beatles fan. Example:

"Where did you come from?"

"She came in through the bathroom window."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLZOLOZZLZLOZO

I should have counted the facepalms and eyerolls I did during the course of the movie, but I think I would have broken my calculator.

So the effects that were originally supposed to anchor this film were disappointing and added little. What about the music? Well, it's the Beatles, sure, and that's all fine and dandy, but these are covers we're talking about, which means that a good chunk of them are awful. For every fantastic cover like Strawberry Fields Forever, there are embarrassing efforts like Sadie's sad attempt to rock out to Helter Skelter or a spoken word version of Mr. Kite that made me want to hurt somebody. And the timing of many of these covers are absolutely atrocious. It Won't Be Long being sung IN THE MIDDLE OF CLASS is a good example. The teacher doesn't even notice until she hits a really high note. It made me think:

"lalalalalala HEY! WTF, man? This is a classroom! You can sing loudly, but not THAT loudly!"

And why oh why must they lip-synch to everything? There are no places to breathe and just let the songs speak for themselves. No, they have to have the main characters act it out and ruin the pacing of the film. I dreaded every moment that I started to hear music, and I'm one of the biggest Beatles fans you could ever meet.

In conclusion...
  • Decent effects that merely pad the film
  • Weak plot
  • Mediocre acting
  • Uninspired dialogue
  • Music was a mixed bag
GFY, Across The Universe. I want those two hours of my life back.

3/10
 
LemonMelon said:
Across The Universe

This will be a long review, and I'm sure a few here will not take kindly to it, but what the hell.

Coming into this film, I was not expecting much at all. It sounded like a movie with a thin plot (if any at all) propelled by music. And that's pretty much all it is, unfortunately. The worst part is that not even the music can hold up its end of the bargain at times.

So...the plot. Well, an hour in, I still had no fucking clue what I was watching. All I could guess was that it was a lame retread of the classic 60's tale (ZOMG VIETNAM SUCKS LET'S TAKE DRUGS), held together by a general, vague attempt at a love story that never really hits you at any point during the film. Thankfully, things calmed down a bit in the last 45 minutes, and there were some moments that were bearable amidst the pretentious tripe and painful cheesiness. The loose ends were mostly tied together OK, and it had a happy ending...if you like that sort of thing in films.

But it's still pretentious tripe. For every moment of genuine connection between the characters, there there are two scenes that are just used to show how "brilliant" Julie Taymor is at cramming as many colors and effects onto the screen as possible. Shots of people swimming nude in the water, weird scenes where the background disappears for no apparent reason, and color. Lots of color. They all say the same thing: absolutely nothing.

As for the dialogue, there isn't much to say. The plot was predictable and lazy, and so is the writing. There is little to no humor, and very little drama. And the drama that is there is embarrassing. You just sit there thinking to yourself, "damn, I could've written this on the can". And don't even bother getting your hopes up over actual character interaction; the characters are lazily-written cardboard cutouts that end up being 60's stereotypes and not much more. Some of them are just douchebags. Their names?

Jude (British douchebag)
Lucy (female douchebag)
Jojo (bad Jimi Hendrix rip-off)
Sadie (bad Janis Joplin rip-off)
Max (regular douchebag who gets sent to Vietnam)
Prudence (one of the most pointless characters of all time)

This leads me to another point: PUNS ARE BAD WRITING. This is basic, and you can learn it at any writers workshop. Puns are lazy, generally not that funny, and render this film nearly unwatchable for a Beatles fan. Example:

"Where did you come from?"

"She came in through the bathroom window."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLZOLOZZLZLOZO

I should have counted the facepalms and eyerolls I did during the course of the movie, but I think I would have broken my calculator.

So the effects that were originally supposed to anchor this film were disappointing and added little. What about the music? Well, it's the Beatles, sure, and that's all fine and dandy, but these are covers we're talking about, which means that a good chunk of them are awful. For every fantastic cover like Strawberry Fields Forever, there are embarrassing efforts like Sadie's sad attempt to rock out to Helter Skelter or a spoken word version of Mr. Kite that made me want to hurt somebody. And the timing of many of these covers are absolutely atrocious. It Won't Be Long being sung IN THE MIDDLE OF CLASS is a good example. The teacher doesn't even notice until she hits a really high note. It made me think:

"lalalalalala HEY! WTF, man? This is a classroom! You can sing loudly, but not THAT loudly!"

And why oh why must they lip-synch to everything? There are no places to breathe and just let the songs speak for themselves. No, they have to have the main characters act it out and ruin the pacing of the film. I dreaded every moment that I started to hear music, and I'm one of the biggest Beatles fans you could ever meet.

In conclusion...
  • Decent effects that merely pad the film
  • Weak plot
  • Mediocre acting
  • Uninspired dialogue
  • Music was a mixed bag
GFY, Across The Universe. I want those two hours of my life back.

3/10

Do you know as much about Football as you do cinema, LemonMelon?
 
I really do want to see Across the Universe eventually. Hopefully for free on Encore or something.

It looks stupefyingly bad.
 
That's a pretty good way to describe it, but not as good as "clusterfuck."
 
I'd call it a lazily-written retread with a barrel full of pretentiousness on the side.
 
You mean you didn't like the symbolism in singing Dear Prudence to the lesbian Prudence in the closet???

God, I'm jealous of my friend who snuck into it now. At least she only wasted 2 hours of her time, I wasted that and 6 bucks.
 
Most Brutal Across the Universe Moments:

- Prudence singing "I Want to Hold Your Hand" on the football field.
- Prudence being sang to in the closet.
- Anything else involving Prudence.
- "She came in through the bathroom window." This wouldn't have been so bad if they hadn't stated it out loud.
- The horror that was Mr. Kite
- "It Won't Be Long"
- The bowling alley scene.
- Joe fucking Cocker.
- Oh! Darling... I can't listen to the song without thinking of the stupid exchanges between Jimi and Janis now.


I could probably flesh this out more, but that would only stem from me watching the movie again. That's not going to happen.
 
You know, I actually liked this a lot. I didn't think it was perfect by any means, and there were many scenes that didn't work for me, but I love Taymor's work, and I don't think this is a waste of her talents.

I saw an interview a while back where she tried to respond to some of the critiques about the film, in terms of the simplicity of the character archetypes and the plot itself. What I didn't realize is how personal much of the story was, in terms of what she brought to it from her own experience growing up through the turbulent 60's.

Personally, there's something really visionary about the I Want You (She's So Heavy) scene, and also what they did with Strawberry Fields Forever. Most films don't even have one sequence that's as artistically ambitious, and this one is full of them. Now that doesn't make it a great film, but I also don't think it deserves all the scorn that's coming its way.

I doubt many of you will be interested in hearing Taymor discuss her film, but David Poland, a film blogger and columnist who does really great interviews with filmmakers, got some insightful comments out of her that gave me more respect for what she did here.

For those who care:

http://www.iklipz.com/MovieDetail.aspx?MovieID=f5941277-02b2-401a-85ba-d9dc2ce61ef2


Sound is very low, so turn it up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom