She is good in Continuum and in season 6 of Criminal Minds so I assume it must be the material.

Last edited by Jimmy B (2014-05-08 19:29:37)

Last night, I finally watched The Core. And I knew this film has such a ridiculous reputation, that I flipped a switch in my brain and said "ignore the bad science". And I ended up enjoying it quite a bit.

You know how a black hole forms under gravitational collapse, but until that point is balanced by the internal pressure? Well, a movie's bullshit is its gravitational mass, and the goodwill that it buys, is the balancing pressure. If you ignore the bad science, there's enough goodwill bought (Eckhart, Lindo and Tucci are all clearly in on the joke, and the humour works really well) that it doesn't go bollocks-supernova.

Though I do still wonder why some big silly films with multiple magic beans are so much more easily accepted than other ones.

edit: i'm quite liking this analogy. i think i'm gonna make "this movie just passed the Chandrasekhar limit" be my new "jump the shark"/"going to the mansion"

Last edited by Herc (2014-05-08 20:31:23)

Disclaimer: if you dislike the tone of a post I make, re-read it in a North/East London accent until it sounds sufficiently playful

That's a good way to put it. I really don't think it's as po-faced as people make it out to be. It's really just a low-key Armageddon.

edit: Avengers 3: Loki Armageddon

Last edited by Herc (2014-05-08 22:29:21)

Disclaimer: if you dislike the tone of a post I make, re-read it in a North/East London accent until it sounds sufficiently playful

You like my fireworks?

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013) - 7/10 (7.4)

Very enjoyable film by Ben Stiller about a gentle and quiet man who sets out on a journey. A simple story with a hard-to-resist combination of comedy and drama, and an overall very positive and uplifting tone that makes you feel good at the end of it. Good song selection and some very excellent photography from some exotic locations.
Very simple and in a sense very clichéd script that you can probably guess the outcome of from scene 1, but generally each scene is directed with a very steady hand and a great sense for comedic timing and genuine-feeling interactions between characters.
It held my interest and made me feel for the characters despite not necessarily having alot on the page to work with. Well done Mr Stiller.

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014) - 6/10 (6.3)

My brother compared this to "The Bourne Legacy" in terms of how it seems quite forgettable (and how I can't help thinking of Jason Bourne in general, though it's not quite the same type of focus story-wise). It's a decently interesting story about tensions between Russia and America and a terrorist plot, and Chris Pine is fine as an injured soldier recruited by the CIA and sent to Moscow to uncover said plot. But the movie doesn't have the same level of intricacy of your Mission:Impossibles, the sought-after Mcguffin device is an "algorithm" (yawn...), and it's not really smart enough to engage you in any deeper political intrigue. Overall every plot device has been done many times before, and it feels like the filmmakers didn't add the necessary flair and finesse to make it stand out. There's very little texture overall at display.

You're Next (2011) - 4/10 (6.5)

Slasher film. Family gathering turns bloody after unknown assailants attack their home. I felt this was below par, and the movies claims of being a dark comedy went straight past me, once or twice I chuckled but the movie doesn't cohesively move you in that direction, and the characters just ended up being really weird and off-putting since their sometimes weird antics or reactions clash with the more dead serious score and camerawork and your common-denominator scare tactics.
It's got a generally good reception for a slasher film overall, but I don't see it myself. I mean, the killers take the time to write "You're Next" with blood on the wall. That's the type of film it is, just replace your standard horror film teenagers with adults, but keep the rest as-is. If you've seen any horror film before, you know exactly what to expect. Either watch something aimed squarely at horror like the French home invasion movie "Ils" ("Them") from 2006, or just go for "Tucker and Dale vs Evil" or "Cabin in The Woods" if you want a genuinely clever blend of horror and comedy in various ratios.

The French Connection (1971 )- 7/10 (7.8)

Convincingly gritty and down-to-earth, almost documentary-feeling film about some cops investigating a smuggling case. Lots of street surveillance, tailing, and stake-outs.
Worth seeing if you're fairly young like me as a time-capsule of early 70s New York. Relaxed and airy atmosphere.

In Bruges (2008) - 8/10 (8.0)

Very original story and structure, hard to predict and very well-acted by Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes, among others. Overall very enjoyable and with a surprising depth of character for a stylish crime drama, somewhat in the style of "Snatch" or "Lock, Stock..." but with other layers over.
Director Martin McDonagh also recently did "Seven Psychopaths" which I even enjoyed slightly more, also an intriguing structure and plot to that one.

Last edited by TechNoir (2014-05-11 18:07:05)

Yes... But he punches a camel.

Tai Chi Zero

This was not nearly as bad as I was expecting. Haven't seen the sequel yet, but probably will since it's also on Netflix. Clearly aimed at the dozens in the steampunk/wushu crossover demographic.

The good first: the performances here are for the most part solid, and in some instances very good. Garfield and Stone's real-life chemistry is a huge help to their relationship onscreen, Foxx is endearingly pathetic is pre-Electro Max, Sally Field is perfect as Aunt May, and DeHaan's performance as Harry is mustache-twirling but for the most part works (more on that later).

That said, this thing is a mess. It's not even its having more than one villain that's the problem. The tone whiplashes between serious and lighthearted, especially toward the end, when Paul Giamatti's Rhino chews the scenery horribly—I can't fault Giamatti for having fun, but the moment itself does not belong. Character motivations fail to make sense in crucial places, particularly in the case of Harry, who goes from reserved but relatively normal and a seemingly nice guy to a raving, bitter lunatic within one scene. The reason provided for this turn, his dying of the disease that claimed his father, makes no sense—the senior Osborn managed to survive for decades with his disease, while Harry is apparently dying of it within weeks of its emergence.

Others have pointed out the massive problem that innocent bystanders cause to the film—there are crowds of them standing just feet from absolute carnage and watching calmly, which drains a huge amount of tension away from each scene that a crowd is present in. In addition to this, Spidey's constant wisecracking in the midst of destruction and innocent people presumably dying in car wreck upon car wreck makes him come off as a bit of a dick immune to what's happening around him.

Finally, as was discussed in the WAYDMs for Raimi's trilogy, I'm sick and tired of scientists who are trying to do good being consistently painted as amoral if not sociopathic bad guys who are directly responsible for the villains of this kind of film. It's not a problem unique to Spider-Man, but it's extremely irritating nevertheless.

Oddly enough, I managed to mildly enjoy the film in the act of watching it; I really want to see a non-superhero movie with Garfield and Stone as a couple, because they're great together, and the spectacle of the VFX was mildly diverting if cartoony and over the top. Still, I can't say it's a good film, though it's better than any of Raimi's installments in the franchise.

Last edited by Abbie (2014-05-19 02:19:47)

Conspiracy certainly makes for sobering viewing and is utterly riveting. It's set up rather like a play, with much of the action taking place in the same room with some superb actors just bouncing off each other.

I saw Lone Survivor recently:

It's a shame that the title gives so much away. Later I found it was based on a book of the same name and that it was based on a real op (Operation Red Wings), but I wonder whether they could retained some sense of surprise with a different name. Anyway, I'm a fan of Peter Berg (even like Battleship to a degree) so was keen to see this. It doesn't disappoint but I struggle to find much to say about it. It's perfectly competent and adequately entertaining, but never quite blossoms (I guess?) into anything of substance or memory - especially when compared to The Kingdom, which I love and hits on several layers.

Regarding the tone:

Hopefully I explain this well enough to not come across as an arrogant jerk. That is not my point, but this is my read on the film. The tone seems to follow Peter's journey and his internal confliction over being a superhero and being a normal teenager. There is a  lot of emotional baggage that comes with him, and I think the film tracks that, and so, appears to vacillate in tone. It struck me that the tone didn't change as much as Peter's attitude was changing. Whether or not that is good film making, or if I'm just making stuff up, I'm not really qualified to say

Regarding Spidey's wise cracks:

This has (and Eddie can correct me if I am wrong) been a fairly stable trait for Spiderman, and is one of the attractions of the character for me. Spidey is set up as a flawed person who happens to have super powers. I remember him being billed as a "super hero with problems" which is a bit antithetical to the super hero and comic world at the time, since superheros are supposed to be, well, super. Comes with the territory.

Spidey is different in that he isn't a brooding antihero or propaganda poster boy. He is an everyman, and sarcasm is one way that humans deal with tragedy. I don't think Spidey is making light of the destruction, so much as he is trying to shield himself from what would otherwise be an overwhelming situation. Then, in the aftermath, do we see him wrestle with the emotions of the consequences. For me, it is more relatable as a character. It was one of the draws of Spiderman when I watched the cartoon was his wise cracking and jokes in the face of danger. However, in other instances, there would be agonizing cries over the pain he is dealing with. I thought 2 did a good job in the balance of making Peter look like a young adult who is still trying to balance out his life.

Regarding Harry:

Harry, in my opinion, is a tough aspect of the movie. One the one hand, he is played masterfully and the chemistry between him and Peter is very realistic and enjoyable. There is a relationship there that was enjoyable to watch and understandable.

However, I agree that the pacing was too fast and it could have been played out very differently.

Spoilers, just as a precaution:

While I can agree that the film has its problems, I wouldn't call it mess, as the characters are solid and well presented. I think that the film tries to do too much with too much material and overwhelms itself.

Just finished watching these... Great films, I love Historical Dramas. 
However, Conspiracy has force me in to an existential crisis, by realizing that Nazi's and me are the same species. Now my brain hurts...    This happens to me often when watching films about this topic (or Politics in general) it'll pass and I'll be ok by morning. 

"Life is about movies; anything else is a bonus!"- Me   

What a great tagline for the poster.