526

(6 replies, posted in Movie Stuff)

I'm not sure how I feel about Guillermo del Toro as a filmmaker, but I respect the fact he uses his success and clout to help other filmmakers get their feet in the door. In 2007, he got behind THE ORPHANAGE, a Spanish ghost story not entirely unlike his own DEVIL'S BACKBONE.

This time around, it's MAMA, based on a short film of the same name, a film which in its expansion to feature length has culled from quite a few more sources than del Toro's body of work -- the influence of THE RING and DARK WATER are readily apparent, with dashes of THE EXORCIST, POLTERGEIST, BLAIR WITCH, and even a few moments lifted from THE GRAVEDANCERS. Though MAMA, like ORPHANAGE, was made by Spanish filmmakers, unlike the earlier film it is in English.

The film starts out promisingly -- a stockbroker suffering sudden financial ruin has a psychotic breakdown, murders his estranged wife and kidnaps his two young daughters. One of them is a kindergartener, the other only a year or two old. He winds up driving his car off the road in the woods, and trudging deeper in they discover a cabin by a frozen lake. He's about to commit a murder-suicide before something in the shadows rips him away, leaving the two girls on their own. That night, sitting in the small pool of light cast by a tiny fire in the fireplace, a single cherry rolls to them -- the thing in the darkness has decided to look after them.

It's a creepy set-up, delightfully Lovecraftian. The older girl needs glasses, but they were damaged in the car crash, so she can't really see what it is that's adopted them. The toddler is exposed to the full brunt of the horror, but she's too young to have her sense of sanity shattered (and will, as a result, spend her childhood without one).

The film spends the next hour doing just about everything right. It sets up the adult protagonists to be tormented by Mama, and actually makes them likable, something so many films -- especially horror films -- fail to do. The brother of the man in the opening sequence -- the little girls' uncle -- has bankrupted himself searching for the girls, and when he finds them and chooses to take them in, his girlfriend decides she cares about him enough that she will stay and help him raise them. It really takes the time to make the story about the characters and not just the scares.

When creepy things do happen -- when it begins to become clear that the girls did not come out of the woods alone, and their guardian is jealously possessive -- they're suspenseful, sometimes masterfully so, with things happening uninflected within the frame. You, the viewer, are left to infer that Something Is Wrong from the context rather than the movie getting in your face with crazy camera work and orchestra stings.

Then, just past the midpoint, the movie begins to unravel. The plot begins to make less and less sense, the character motivations and behaviors become less coherent, and the sure-handed confidence of the creeping terror gives way to jump scares, shrieking violins, and showing a great deal of the entity Mama rather than implying her.* The tone starts to vary wildly as well -- sometimes creepy, sometimes silly, sometimes almost becoming an action movie. The final confrontation with Mama attempts to go for some emotional power, but the story has gotten so muddled and confused by this point it's hard to know what I'm supposed to feel.

If you like horror films, this is worth it for some of the really solid scares, and characters you actually care about; but don't let the first hour get your hopes up too high. It doesn't quite stick the landing.



*As a side note, the scene which I thought felt the most out of place in the movie was, I discovered afterward, essentially the original short film. In developing stories I find it's often the case that the concept which made me want to tell the story in the first place -- be it a scene, a character, a line of dialogue -- no longer belongs in the story once it's fleshed out. This is not unique to me -- it's what is meant by the writing adage "kill your darlings." Given that this story appears to be based in part on the legend of La Llorona, it's kind of ironic the filmmakers failed to do so.

527

(33 replies, posted in Episodes)

Jimmy B wrote:

Stop making me want to see Twilight!!!!!!!!

If you can't see it in a theater with the Twihards, it's probably not nearly as worth it.

528

(33 replies, posted in Episodes)

Allison wrote:

If Dorkman can list Dredd I can list Twilight.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/30396453.jpg
Nah, that one scene was totally worth it.

529

(449 replies, posted in Off Topic)

BigDamnArtist wrote:
doctorsubmarine wrote:

del Toro stated that the two pilots are neurally linked so they move in sync. One controls the right side of the robot, one controls the left.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n261/hotrazr/Gifs/whaaaaa.gif

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3eo9wj1jz1qbaywxo1_400.gif

EDIT: By the way, if anyone's curious, the music from the LOOPER trailer is "Fight for Freedom" by Position Music. Track 05. Good stuff on that site for fans of trailer music, and you may recognize some other tracks too. (For example, the modern-style trailer for 2001 used "Tactical Dominance," track 02.)

530

(25 replies, posted in Episodes)

http://i.imgur.com/d9Wx4.jpg
"There's always a bigger nerd."

531

(473 replies, posted in Episodes)

Probably not a damn thing as long as people are riding it the way it is.

Scumbag FilmCritHulk: Writes insightful article on how affected style choices can undermine the intended message.

In all caps.

533

(25 replies, posted in Episodes)

Yeah, but then they changed it from 10 nominees to "minimum of 5, maximum of 10" and then altered the way BP nominees are selected (they have to get a minimum percentage of the vote, IIRC). TDKR, not really surprisingly, just didn't get the votes.

534

(25 replies, posted in Episodes)

So we got 3/5 and two of our "meh" choices made it.

We considered last year's winner, HUGO, a "meh" too. So if the pattern holds it'll go to AVENGERS (biggest box office), but we'll wait to see what the VFX Predictinator has to say.

535

(59 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Tomahawk wrote:

but your specs are pretty good though. judging by the price, the gfx card isn't up to par with a quadro., is it?

Depends on the application, of course, but in CS6 benchmarks, my GTX680 smokes the Quadros.

536

(60 replies, posted in Off Topic)

iJim wrote:

Is this a a documented phenomena? Like the Tarantino/Kubrick/Film Snob phase?

It is, actually. In the process of becoming a more sophisticated film viewer, in my experience and observation you pass through the "everything is bullshit" phase.

537

(91 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Eh, to use a food metaphor as I often do, I'd rather eat a bean and cheese burrito that just fucking nails it than a complex experimental dish where the flavors don't work together and I'm left unsatisfied with an unpleasant aftertaste.

Which is not to say I don't want people to experiment and go for the complex stuff, because the best of both worlds would be the complex dish that fucking nails it. And sure, I'll credit the attempt as admirable. But given the two existing options, if someone asks me what I enjoyed more and what they should get for dinner, I'm backing the burrito.

538

(91 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

Well, it doesn't make it smart, either.

Granted. But the fact that the stakes continued to be raised and continued to be clear without ever having to resort to blatantly stupid tricks, and that no loose ends were left untied -- I count that as smart writing. It's harder than it looks. From a pure plot and storytelling standpoint, it's a masterclass in how to tell an action story.

LOOPER, for my money, is primarily instructive in terms of what not to do. Second magic bean, passive protagonist, inconsistent/unclear rules, going to the mansion, etc.

539

(91 replies, posted in Off Topic)

DREDD is no more or less dumb than DIE HARD. It's a straightforward actioner with no pretensions to philosophical depth, yes. It is a perfect actioner with no pretensions to philosophical depth. Nobody has to act like an idiot to make the plot work. No strange contrivances have to be invented halfway through to keep the plot rolling along, no rules have to be violated or fudged. It's a simple story with clear stakes and constantly rising tension. Just because it doesn't require an infographic to sort out the plot doesn't mean it's dumb.

540

(91 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:
iJim wrote:

This was the dumbest movie I've seen in years. Comically bad. So overwheliming bad that I don't know how to approach it. Like. Look at it. It should be self evident.

EDIT: 94% on Rotten Tomatoes!? Wow. I'd have guessed 60-65%.

And yet you thought Dredd was "perfect."

That's because Dredd IS perfect.

EDIT: For the record, I have the same opinion of LOOPER as of INCEPTION. I'd be happy if it were the baseline for turn your brain off movies. But it is definitely a "turn your brain off" movie, not a "smart and bold" one.

541

(91 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Zarban wrote:

More important, how dumb is it that a looper who survives into the future gets kidnapped and sent back via time machine to keep him from blabbing about... the fact that the mob disposes of people by sending them back via time machine? The looper has apparently not spilled the beans for 30 years DESPITE KNOWING YOU'RE GOING TO EVENTUALLY MURDER HIM THAT WAY.

YES. THANK you.

542

(59 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Fair enough to say -- I've only been running it two months now. Let's check in come summer or Thanksgiving and see how I feel about it then.

543

(8 replies, posted in Creations)

The big issue is the background -- it's not a problem it's blown out to white (the sky is white in the 16mm frame too), it's that it's too sharp. If you add a subtle "bloom" to the highlights it will soften the image and make it feel less "digital."

In addition, the shadows in the 16mm have a blue tint to them. The saturation is higher, the contrast is harsher, and the leaves are very green whereas in the digital frame they're almost yellow.

544

(59 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Or do what I did and build a Hackintosh. I've got an 8-core i7 at a stable overclock of 4.6GHz, 32GB RAM, dual-booting Mountain Lion and Windows 7 from SSDs, and all in cost me about $2500, not including monitor upgrades and such.

545

(255 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Listened to Steve Martin's Born Standing Up thanks to the recommendations ep, really enjoyed it. It's a short book, I listened to the whole thing during a day's work.

Started listening to Patton Oswalt's Zombie Spaceship Wasteland, and I officially do not find Patton Oswalt funny. I mean I've known this for a while, but I decided to give him one last chance with this book. After taking me all day to get through the first hour of a 3.5 hour recording, I gave up.

Moving on now to Craig Ferguson's American on Purpose.

This is a trick that everyone knew back in the day but it's possible they don't anymore, since dvGarage is no longer much of a thing.

When you're putting together a composite and you need to color correct one layer to match another -- say matching a greenscreen foreground to a sunset background plate -- color correct each channel (R, G, B) separately while looking only at that channel. That way you're matching black, white, and grey points on greyscale images, and your eye is much better at distinguishing differences in luminance than chrominance. Get each channel to the point that it looks like the foreground and background belong together in greyscale, and nine times out of ten the full RGB image will be nailed.

TIL that gif was actually animated.

548

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Don't knock it til you try it.

549

(14 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Spork wrote:

I have a few other vague thoughts that are tough for me to really explain in text form, but I think my biggest issue with Les Mis was the "romance" between Cosette and Marius. They see each other across the street and simultaneously decide they need to spend the rest of their lives together? ...What? Cosette singing a song about how her life has completely changed... Because she saw a boy she thinks is cute? I... What?

Eh, I let this slide because that's how romance worked in fiction for a long, long time. I mean, look at any Disney fairy tale. Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Little Mermaid -- it's all love at first sight. It's stupid but you can't really fault the film for an element of the story dating back to the novel.

550

(255 replies, posted in Off Topic)

You'll actually learn a LOT by the way King's whole thing changed after his accident, so that's fair.

The extended Stand is in fact better because it was actually the novel he wanted to publish in the first place. The revised Gunslinger is worse because it's him coming back 17 years later, having come to an entirely different idea as to what the Dark Tower books were about, in such a different place he was practically rewriting someone else's book.