Last movie you watched (Page 83 of 87)

Yiddish for the win.

The subtitle to every Mel Brooks film.

"Pirates of the Carribean: Deadmen Tell No Tales AKA Salazar's Revenge."

I haven't seen the 4th one. When my brother asked me after we saw this movie if I understood all the references made, I explained them pretty simply, so apparently the fourth one wasn't required watching.

I need to do a full review of this, because there was so much about this movie to enjoy. I'll start off with the fact that this movie is pure fun with some great drama thrown in. It does something that I think very few films are willing to do now in their storytelling and this explore the consequences of what happens to the characters. In fact, I would say that Jack Sparrow is the poster child for contemporary film characters, as someone who actively tries to avoid consequences. And, in this instance, an act that he did when he was younger comes back to haunt him.

The story is a bit contrived, in that it tries to draw several characters and interconnect them in a way, but it flows very well once the characters are set up, and the plot points of getting the characters together are quickly moved past as the characters establish their relationships, and each person discovers some depth to the other that isn't expected, like Henry's reaction to Jack, Corina's reaction to Henry, and so on.

The film is very grand in scope and end goal, and it doesn't disappoint. It ties up plot points from the 3rd and 4th film in a way that was incredibly satisfying, and in ways I didn't expect. The main characters are all fairly well defined, and the film only drags because it has such a large supporting cast, and a subplot that doesn't go anywhere. But, other than that, this movie is an adventure, feels big and grand, and ends in the most satisfying way.

Highly recommend.

I honestly went in to it expecting it to be more of the same, very predictable story.

But, it actually creates a very large,epic feeling tale. It's editing could be a little tighter, but the story is so enjoyable that I only noticed a couple of parts that really took me out but then I was right back in.

It has the same fun and fantastical feel as the first, but a more epic feel, like it has a larger impact on the world its building.

Also, as established, I am a sucker for father-son scenes, and this has two...what, I didn't cry. I went to an old theater.

I actually wasn't aware it had come out yet, but according to RottenTomatoes, it's been out for months.

So, yeah, I'm keepin' up with everything.

Mother! reminded me of Cabin in the Woods.
From his own oeuvre, there were elements of Requiem for a Dream and Black Swan (i.e. relentless, painful, descent into chaos and madness).
Yeah, it was alright. Once you work out the 'decoder wheel' to match the allegorical elements with the characters and narrative, I wonder how much re-watchability it has. The second half is like being beaten over the head for an hour.

So I picked up a Samsung Gear VR headset a few weeks ago for fifteen bucks, and have been dropping a dollar here and there for, mostly, movies. This one stuck with me the most, reminding me of Writhyn's Hyacinth project. This being a VR movie, as these are still in their infancy, I'll try to split up the review into first the technical side, then the movie itself.

Technical

The movie does a great job of using the VR environment. The meat of it plays out in real-time, as you're seated behind the screens of your exploratory vessel deep within the asteroid. The ship moves but you have a stationary reference point of all of your stuff. However, there's a sequence that montages from outside the asteroid to more than 800m into it (if I recall correctly, there was a distance-to-beacon on a screen that I noticed). This is done with a slowly moving camera as the vessel passes beneath you, floats past pillars in the distance, or comes up right alongside you. Each shot, by necessity I think, fades to black in between - not just keeping you from getting disorieted with a hard cut but also effectively using the language of film to denote the passage of time.

The Film

You're inspecting an asteroid, it's not super well-lit, shadows abound, and there's creepy music. If you think that something spooky is going to happen, you'd be right. It's just a seven minute film and while it's gorgeous and the sound design is great, it doesn't get inventive with what to do with its premise. If I were watching it on a screen, I'd probably enjoy it but wouldn't really think about it too much afterward.

It's immersive by way of being a VR movie, and what it does it does quite well. It just could have done more.

There's a similar discussion on the Noah DiF about watering (heh) down bible stories for children, which I agree with.

I've heard Christian comedians make similar points. Always interesting to me.

I watched this shit so that you don't have to.

The DiF commentary for the first one mentions a Shakespeare quote: "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". The Last Knight isn't even a tale, it's incoherent rambling.

The plot is an unfocused mess that makes Dark Of The Moon look like Shawshank.

Even Stanley Tucci and John Turturro aren't very fun to watch this time. Anthony Hopkins does the best he can, but the script gives him no help (I hope that at least he got paid well for this). The robot characters don't fare any better (John Goodman's talents are totally wasted) and the few transformation sequences we get seem less impressive than the ones made a decade ago.

To add insult to injury, the aspect ratio changes at almost every shot transition. It must be an IMAX thing, but I can't figure out why was it carried over to home video releases; it can be very distracting. Some movies (like Scott Pilgrim) use this gimmick for a reason; here it makes no sense whatsoever.

There's a silver lining to all this, however: box office suggests that many moviegoers don't fall for this crap anymore (even China generated significantly less profit this time).

Easily the worst one yet.