Jump to content

What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Newer Films)


King Mark
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That sounds great, Koray ... cinemas selling noise-making food is hugely counter-intuitive. Rustling and crunching during The Imitation Game (I posted a review, but the thread 'ate' it ... I agree with what Bilbo said, though) at times was distracting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

INTERSTELLAR

It's stellar. I was expecting thought-provoking sci-fi and that's what I got. I prefer Nolan in this mode than his Batman films. Inception is still his best IMO, this one isn't far behind.

Really fascinating ideas, execution and wonderful visual style (of course who would expect different from Nolan).

But I would've liked some explanation as to why earth ended up how it did and it what time in the future it's supposed to be in.

Some of the design concepts are a bit bizarre (the robots) and how the end ties up with the story's beginning may not be to everybody's taste, but I thought it worked.

As with Inception, another strong score by Zimmer. Obviously inspired by Glass' Koyaanisqatsi, but not in a glaring copycat way, it helps the film's atmosphere and emotional impact.

8/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I would've liked some explanation as to why earth ended up how it did and it what time in the future it's supposed to be in.

Why? It would just slow the film down to have all that kind of exposition and wouldn't change anything else in the film for having it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Edge of Tomorrow aka Live, Die, Repeat

Awesome, very cool actioner. Of course we've seen Tom Cruise do this kind of role before many times, but what was refreshing is that he starts out as anything but a hero, more a coward so that was kind of new. The pace and editing of the film was very Bourne-like, and the special effects are totally convincing. So what we have is a Groundhog Day-clone but with the comedy / small town aspect replaced by brutal sci-fi action. And what tremendous action! The score by Christophe Beck was as generic as they come, but then we shouldn't expect anything else in an action film nowadays, should we? Luckily the sound mix is excellent, so it's a good time to have with a good audio installation. Also a bit of a missed opportunity to not have Bill Paxton utter his famous line: You're on an express elevator to hell... Going Down ! The way the scene was set up was clearly a nod to Aliens. Only this time he wasn't the grunt. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what we have is a Groundhog Day-clone but with the comedy / small town aspect replaced by gritty sci-fi action.

What? It had a lot of humor! It didn't feel gritty to me (that's actually what I liked about it!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally watched Gravity because I feel like I'm just-not-with-it-man if I don't see this movie.

I got so restless and wanted to do something else, I was relieved at the part where Sandra was about to kill herself so then the movie would be over. But then imaginary George Clooky barges in and motivates her to use the landing thing and I was like "oh no this has more to go?"

Judging by her terrible luck all throughout the movie, I wouldn't be surprised if she landed in some arab country and she's forced to wear a burka.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As awards season is fast-approaching, thought I'd start checking out some of this year's Oscar bait films.

56532.jpg

The Theory of Everything

Ooh, this one screams Oscar-bait! It plays much like a lesser cousin of A Beautiful Mind, but without the nice cinematography of Howard's solid direction. It's an oversimplified take on one of the world's greatest physicist, skimming over all the theory, and trying to gloss over the emotions, usually only portraying the good over the bad, and all that usual "triumph of the human spirit" jazz. To its credit, Eddie Redmayne and the more underrated Felicity Jones, deliver wonderful performances here, but even that won't inspire you to watch this again. And something about the cinematography of this film makes it look like some kind of TV movie, or one the worse looking episodes of Downton Abbey in parts. The score is rather pleasant though, with some rather nice minimalistic moments.

Overall, a substandard film spearheaded by two strong leads, but ultimately has nothing interesting to say about such an intriguing subject matter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which one? I didn't like how they glossed over the hardships of heir first marriage, seemed cheap to me. And the way Hawking's decision to leave was portrayed was far too sentimental and kind on the man (probably to avoid less hate or anything like that). But no, the second divorce was not mentioned,

still-alice1.jpg?w=446&h=299&crop=1

Still Alice

Much better than ToE. A well crafted drama revolving around an intellectual's slow journey through the experience of early onset Alzheimer's. One of Julianne Moore's finest performances. It's a very understated film, and it won't make enough of an impression to last in your memory past the year, but it is undeniably moving. In some ways, in terms of content matter, it's a bit like Amour, but without Haneke's cold and clinical direction and not nearly as bleak.

The film has a great cast too, though I guess that depends on your ability to buy Alec Baldwin playing a high-profile research scientist. Kristen Stewart shows surprising depth here though. This is the kind of role that really suits her (though again, it isn't exactly easy to believe seeing her as a "theatre actor".

It's a poignant look at life really. This will definitely get Moore a nomination, and a well deserved one too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's a bit like Amour, but without Haneke's cold and clinical direction and not nearly as bleak.

Haneke doesn't want to instruct the audience what it should be feeling. Cold and clinical, maybe, but it felt very realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree. Amour is a very good film and it's the better one in comparison to this. I'm just saying it won't leave you as depressed at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised you thought it was so exposition heavy, BB. I think Inception is his very exposition-heavy film. One thing I liked about Interstellar was that it really moved, without a lot of exposition at all. Curious we'd have such differing opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE TERMINAL (2004)

Most people regard this as a Spielberg fluff film. If you take out the Diego Luna/Zoe Saldana love story, which is totally ridiculous and underdeveloped, then this film is brilliant, in my opinion. There's plenty of great humor (Tom Hanks' mispronounciation of words in a thick European accent) and I think the drama between Viktor and Amelia is romantic and incredibly realistic. The best aspect of the film is the main character NOT getting the girl, especially with two A-list actors in these roles. It worked well, and isn't something you'd expect to find in a feel-good Spielberg film. I also think the film says a lot about US immigration policy and how we treat people from other countries, which makes it relevant today, more than when it was produced (2-3 years after 9/11). Furthermore, there is the great cinematography by Kaminski and a terrific score by John Williams.

This is one of my top Spielberg films, ranking right below CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, DUEL and JAWS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like that one too. I still feel this and Catch Me If You Can proved that Spielberg CAN stage effective comedy well and sustain it over an entire feature, not just in tandem with action set pieces like Indiana Jones. He's not necessarily a great comedy director as far as executing "jokes" (the broader slapstick in Terminal is hit-and-miss) but in terms of behavioral comedy like the "He cheat/Eat shit" scene and simple sight gags (the security cameras, Viktor's dinner with Amelia, Viktor running into the women's bathroom), a lot of that really lands for me and feels quite effortless. Plus Hanks knows how to sell the hell out of that stuff.

I agree on the cinematography too. I might even say it's Kaminski's best work with Spielberg after Schindler's List. Top five, definitely. That terminal is an awe-inspiring bit of production design too.

Surprised you thought it was so exposition heavy, BB. I think Inception is his very exposition-heavy film. One thing I liked about Interstellar was that it really moved, without a lot of exposition at all. Curious we'd have such differing opinions.

Yeah, I didn't have a problem with the exposition. Maybe a little bit with the bookcases but I still think it worked well enough. My main problems with both Interstellar and Inception were with characterization plus the way the story developed in Interstellar's second half, but as far as exposition goes I thought it was pretty much warranted in both cases. I can't really think of a way to write those films without those kinds of explanations. They probably could have been less dryly written/performed, especially in Inception, but neither film would make much sense without that stuff in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to know there's people out there who love The Terminal, too. For me there's something irresistible about the movie; every time it's on, I get hooked. Maybe it's because I loved airports as a kid, but still, I enjoy the hell out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised you thought it was so exposition heavy, BB. I think Inception is his very exposition-heavy film. One thing I liked about Interstellar was that it really moved, without a lot of exposition at all.

Well, there were many moments where, to me, it felt like the characters were just dumping information for the audience instead of having a natural conversation (for example, when they first reached the wormhole and Romilly was explaining Cooper how wormhole works, or when they were talking about whether they should go on Miller's planet or not). The problem is not so much that a lot of information was delivered (because the information was necessary), rather the way it was delivered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is not so much that a lot of information was delivered (because the information was necessary), rather the way it was delivered.

I agree. I sometimes felt the same way with how he was trying to deliver the theme of the film. For instance, I didn't like Hathaway's random spiel about love that I felt came out of nowhere. It felt like Nolan wrote that in just to remind us that "love is the key to everything!". Plot-wise, I didn't feel the exposition was too bad, but when everything was being dumped on us in the third act, it did begin to feel rather talky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you guys who complain about "love is the key to everything" solutions in movies ever been in love? Like, real, deep love?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.