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

[Quintus 5,399]

The Martian. What a giant piece of turd. Nothing works in this thing. Fuck you, Ridley Scott.

Sorry about the language but I really hated it. Like, from start to finish.

Karol

Must see.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

The Martian. What a giant piece of turd. Nothing works in this thing. Fuck you, Ridley Scott.

Sorry about the language but I really hated it. Like, from start to finish.

Karol

Want to elaborate a bit? I wasn't terribly fond of it but I didn't exactly hate it.

OK few things then:

It's basically a 1990's cheesy action cinema. The type of thing Michael Bay would make back in the day.

Writing is horrendously bad. Characters describing exactly what we can see on screen. Literally everything spelled out. It's unbearable. Besides, every single line from the great book of movie cliches is present.

Not a single character is bothered about Matt Damon. Not even Matt Damon. Which means no tension whatsoever.

There are two dozens of characters I don't care about. Why? Because I don't get to know them, other than because of a few lines of dialogue or some random slapstick comedy.

Tone of this thing just feels all over the place.

It's way too long. I had an actual bumache. But that could be from hemorrhoids...

I could treat it as a parody of a blockbuster from a different era of filmmaking. But that doesn't really say much...

Given that I had the same type of reaction to Prometheus (even though it's a different type of film), I might be allergic to Ridley Scott.

Karol

I don't disagree with any of this.

[nightscape94 965]

Yes, it's a bit long, and the one boardroom scene with astrodynamicist Rich Purnell is out of place (the one with the stapler nonsense), but I completely disagree with the Michael Bay comment. You're not even close to making a logical point with that one.

[Hurmm 91]

It's a very by-the-numbers production though, nothing that indicates its the work of a director of note. Apollo 13 is far, FAR better in pretty much every way. And they both are quite similar movies.

Half the characters here have nothing to do. What was the point of Kristen Wiig's character? Matt Damon was just himself - not bad but nothing too good either. Only Jeff Bridges and Ejiofor come out of this looking good.

But the movie overall was inoffensive. The tone at times was light to the point that the whole thing seemed insignificant. There was hardly a moment where you felt actual danger for Damon. It's also overlong but I didn't find it excruciating to sit through. No interest in watching it again though. If I do I'll just pop in Apollo 13.

[A24 4,331]

Sicario is coming out on Friday. Might try that.

Be careful, it's not Nolan.

Apollo 13 is far, FAR better in pretty much every way.

Really? Then I'm afraid I'm going to pass. I didn't like that typical Hanks vehicle.

[publicist 4,643]

Wasn't THE MARTIAN based on a book? Whatever is the case, i got in on a free press screening and it was kind of OK for that (3D sucked ass, though), but dramatically speaking it's not making any sense. It's really only there for people who like NASA equipment or watching scientists watching huge screens with lots of numbers.

Though unlike croc i didn't mind it at all. The songs were terribly obvious and yearning for the subtleness of i. e. the Coens.

[A24 4,331]

I heard very little of the book has made it into the movie.

[crocodile 8,006]

Yes, it's a bit long, and the one boardroom scene with astrodynamicist Rich Purnell is out of place (the one with the stapler nonsense), but I completely disagree with the Michael Bay comment. You're not even close to making a logical point with that one.

Felt to me like Armageddon. In overall cheesy tone.

Karol

[KK 3,307]

Sicario

Fantastic. Much like Prisoners, this is a film that gets under your skin. Films like this can run the risk of coming off as either too clinical or too sentimental, but under Villeneuve's precise, moody direction, he avoids such pitfalls. I think what I really appreciate about Villeneuve is how he doesn't aim to get his audience by slamming them arresting visuals (though there are plenty of them here), flashy plots or convoluted characters. Instead he focuses his intent on building this oppressive, nihilistic world through the film's one piece of innocence (Emily Blunt's character) as a vessel for the audience. The third act brilliantly brings this to light, especially through the magnificent terror that is Benicio Del Toro. Alongside a fantastic cast, that's carried by Blunt, Del Toro and Brolin the film also shows how well Villeneuve can stage tension. From the first entry into Mexico, to Blunt's final confrontation scene, you're often brought to the edge of your seat.

Probably my favourite of Villeneuve's right now. Though I've only seen Prisoners. I'm looking forward to the next film he has lined up, which I believe is a sci-fi project.

[crocodile 8,006]

I'm going to watch that this week. It just came out on Friday around these parts. Need to cleanse the palate after that awful The Martian with something that actually looks like proper cinema. Hope that Roger Deakins doesn't disappoint.

Karol

[KK 3,307]

I'm going to check out The Martian tomorrow night I believe. I'm not expecting anything more or less than an entertaining couple of hours. We'll see.

And Deakins is in top form as usual. It's a very handsome looking film.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

How fucking intense is that border scene, KK? I agree with your points but I disagree that he doesn't use arresting visuals. The way he stages the whole film is almost disturbingly entrancing.

[KK 3,307]

Oh no, I agree! I love how he stages his shots! Some scenes that come to mind are the opening scene, or the interrogation scene. I was just saying, that ultimately the visuals weren't obviously flashy as you might expect from a film shot by Lubezki's hand. He handles the camera with very nuanced subtlety so that it's more the tense world he builds that gets to me, than the beautiful looking shots.

And yes!! I love how the whole affair happens with relatively no casualties, but the sequence as a whole was draining in its intensity!

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Oh no, I agree! I love how he stages his shots! Some scenes that come to mind are the opening scene, or the interrogation scene. I was just saying, that ultimately the visuals weren't obviously flashy as you might expect from a film shot by Lubezki's hand. He handles the camera with very nuanced subtlety so that it's more the tense world he builds that gets to me, than the beautiful looking shots.

And yes!! I love how the whole affair happens with relatively no casualties, but the sequence as a whole was draining in its intensity!

Agreed. I love how the interrogation scene plays out against expectation. The absence of gore makes it more unnerving. That building tension without resorting to visual excess is wonderfully fresh.

Did you mean Deakins? The cinematography is nicely subtle too. It doesn't look like your standard Deakins, in my opinion. It's more dry and muted with the contrast, giving it a very bleak but crisp look. The thermal and night vision scenes are outstanding.

Thoughts on the score?

[KK 3,307]

Did you mean Deakins? The cinematography is nicely subtle too. It doesn't look like your standard Deakins, in my opinion. It's more dry and muted with the contrast, giving it a very bleak but crisp look. The thermal and night vision scenes are outstanding.

Exactly this! And I only mentioned Lubezki because this film differed from visually extravagant films like Birdman, or in Deakins' case, Skyfall. But there's a certain stillness to all those vast aerial shots that adds to the film's unsettling nature.

The tracking shot into the sewer drainage at the end of the interrogation scene is a good example of how subtly the film creeps up on your senses.

And I found the final scene with Del Toro and Blunt especially chilling.

Part of me was expecting Blunt to actually give her life to her moral code. But her defeat made it all the more crushing, I think. Funny how a deceptively simple closure scene really hit the bullet in the chest.

Thoughts on the score?

As I expected, it was very effective in film. In fact, I wish there was more of it.

More thoughts below. It's actually a pretty sophisticated work on album I think, though it meanders more than I'd like.

Sicario by Johann Johannsson

Now that's more like it! From the man that brought you the bland, predictable but "pretty" Theory of Everything comes something much darker, raw and challenging. Borrowing a page from Williams' Munich, much of the score is based on a tense electronic loop rhythm layered with, electronic thumping, dense clusters, churning basses and Goldenthal-lite aleatoric brass wailing in the climactic action sequences. The score only allows for some brief moments of "levity"; one being "Desert Music" which takes a dry sounding cello solo and builds it into a surprisingly evocative elegy with delicious shifting harmonics and wind colours. Rather beautiful actually. This is followed by "Melancholia", which is more disappointingly, just a guitar strumming on a bland guitar progression. And the score ends on a somewhat moving passage of distorted vocals.

Don't let my colourful descriptions ignite your imaginations too much though. All of this is actually very subdued in the score, and probably by necessity. The album could definitely be shorter, as it borderlines on the aimless at times. And there's a nagging voice in the back of my head that makes me wonder how much more surreal and crazy this score might have been in the hands of someone like Howard Shore. But this is a very admirable effort, one that makes me look forward to his future output.

Definitely not a JWFan score though.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Did you mean Deakins? The cinematography is nicely subtle too. It doesn't look like your standard Deakins, in my opinion. It's more dry and muted with the contrast, giving it a very bleak but crisp look. The thermal and night vision scenes are outstanding.

Exactly this! And I only mentioned Lubezki because this film differed from visually extravagant films like Birdman, or in Deakins' case, Skyfall. But there's a certain stillness to all those vast aerial shots that adds to the film's unsettling nature.

The tracking shot into the sewer drainage at the end of the interrogation scene is a good example of how subtly the film creeps up on your senses.

And I found the final scene with Del Toro and Blunt especially chilling.

Part of me was expecting Blunt to actually give her life to her moral code. But her defeat made it all the more crushing, I think. Funny how a deceptively simple closure scene really hit the bullet in the chest.

Yeah I felt the same. I was never able to guess what would happen next. Throughout, I thought the vignettes of the corrupt police official and his son were irrelevant and didn't factor into the plot enough to warrant their inclusion, but then it's tied beautifully together with the final scene, opening it up to the greater themes and morals of the film.

[Jay 37,352]

The Walk

A very delightful film! Almost all the reviews I read could be boiled down to "The walk at the end is cool, but there's an hour and a half of filler before that!" - well, I couldn't disagree more! The actual walk was great and all - a very well done sequence, but I liked everything building up to it more. JGL training with Ben Kingsley, his early life in Paris, his failed lake walk, his successful Notre Dame walk, and just seeing his drive, the artist inside him that needs to come out were all when done aspects of the film. But the best part is the actual coup, the entire infiltration of the buildings and them setting up everythign to get the walk done in time - sneaking in, hiding from guards, things that go wrong, etc. It was like an expertly done heist film. Good stuff. I enjoyed the whole film from beginning to end!

I saw it in IMAX3D and quite frankly, it was the absolute best 3D experience I've ever had, hands down. They didn't overuse it, and when they did use it, it was to great effect. I actually flinched a few times when things came flying at me.

The score by Silvestri was good, too! It was lacking a memorable theme to tie it together, sure, but what WAS there was good stuff. In fact, the entire film makes great use of music - not only the score, but lots of source songs too. Sometimes the source and score blended together nicely. I immediately wanted to listen to the score again when the movie was over.

So yea, I liked the film alot, and will probably check out the documentary version now. And this is worth a trip to the theater to see on the (hopefully really, really) big screen!

[A24 4,331]

It doesn't look like your standard Deakins, in my opinion. It's more dry and muted with the contrast, giving it a very bleak but crisp look. The thermal and night vision scenes are outstanding.

From what I saw, it reminded me of Enemy. The 'stages' are quite empty and there's lots of yellow and green tones.

A typical Enemy shot.

[KK 3,307]

The Martian

It's exactly what I expected. A nice way to spend 2 hours. Don't think it warrants some of the hatred I've read here, nor the effusive praise. It has some odd tonal shifts that raises the occasional eyebrow (ex. not sure why the music for the scene where Matt Damon staples the puncture sounds like it came straight out of a horror film...). There are a lot of unnecessary characters spewing out one-liners. But it's fun to watch for the situational scenarios, and the handsome Ridley shots. And it's all tied together by a charismatic Matt Damon, who helps keep afloat what could have been a dull "talkie" screenplay.

In the end, it's a feel-good survival movie, nothing more, nothing less.

[A24 4,331]

I think I will give it a 7. Sounds about right, right?

[KK 3,307]

That's probably what I'd give it.

Don't expect much substance to it, though the climactic scene does make you want to scream "YEAH! AMERICA!".

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Then 5 for Cremers.

"The movie is not as smart as it seems to think it is, but at least it's not worse than Prometheus.

5/10"

[KK 3,307]

I think he'd give it a 6. 7, if he's feeling a bit generous.

[A24 4,331]

I gave Ex-Machina a 7, so why not this one?

[KK 3,307]

Ex Machina is the superior film.

[A24 4,331]

Oops ... A 6/10 it is then!

[crocodile 8,006]

Sicario. Well made, shot, acted. Everything is right. It's just... that I don't really think I've learned anything valuable from watching it.Not about the eerie myth of USA/Mexico borders, not about the internal machinations of the intelligence services. I felt like all of that has been said before, and better. And for a dark film like this, it felt awfully tame. Feels almost like PG-13 movie in that respect, give or take some shots from the very first sequence. Also, I can't say it's Roger Deakins' finest hours. It has more of that Christopher Nolan look for the most part. Is it good or bad, I don't know.

Overall, I had a better experience listening to the soundtrack album the other day. It's ok. But not quite enough.

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

Must every film be a valuable lesson for you, Croc? It seems that way.

[crocodile 8,006]

It must involve and engage me on some level.

Karol

[BloodBoal 7,538]

If I wanted to learn a lesson, I'd go to school!

[Quintus 5,399]

It must involve and engage me on some level.

Karol

I remember going through this phase. Good times.

[crocodile 8,006]

It must involve and engage me on some level.

Karol

I remember going through this phase. Good times.

Let me put it this way. For something that's meant to say something about it's subject, it's too sketchy. For a thriller, it's too tame.

Karol

[A24 4,331]

Maybe it did say something but not in a modern (spelled out) fashion.

[KK 3,307]

Sicario. Well made, shot, acted. Everything is right. It's just... that I don't really think I've learned anything valuable from watching it.Not about the eerie myth of USA/Mexico borders, not about the internal machinations of the intelligence services. I felt like all of that has been said before, and better. And for a dark film like this, it felt awfully tame. Feels almost like PG-13 movie in that respect, give or take some shots from the very first sequence. Also, I can't say it's Roger Deakins' finest hours. It has more of that Christopher Nolan look for the most part. Is it good or bad, I don't know.

But see, I don't think that was Villeneuve's intent or focus at all. All that is in the background, portrayed with subtlety, but the film focuses primarily on the kind of characters we're dealing with. That's why I can't see Sicario being labelled as your typical "drug war film" or "government intelligence" film. It works on a more psychological level than that.

And I appreciate that it doesn't resort to excessive gore or visual extravagance. It's subtlety is a big part of its effectiveness.

[crocodile 8,006]

You see, it all just wasn't interesting enough to me. Neither as a cinematic experience nor in the execution of subject. It's probably a good enough award season film, I guess. Why do I think that? Because of the "subtlety" thing you bring up. That is the one thing this particular subject matter doesn't need. But you can't have A-list actors in a film that goes all the way. It's too much for them, I guess.

Are his other films any better?

Karol

[Jay 37,352]

Prisoners is a great film.

Enemy is terrible.

[KK 3,307]

You see, it all just wasn't interesting enough to me. Neither as a cinematic experience nor in the execution of subject. It's probably a good enough award season film, I guess. Why do I think that? Because of the "subtlety" thing you bring up. That is the one thing this particular subject matter doesn't need. But you can't have A-list actors in a film that goes all the way. It's too much for them, I guess.

Are his other films any better?

Karol

Fair enough. I'll just say that we've already seen our fair share of gory Cartel films. I think the muted horror that underlines every gripping scene in Sicario makes it a beast of its own, all leading up to a more muted psychological climax, which I consider to be the final conversation between Blunt and Del Toro. But to each his own I guess.

Prisoners is great, and embraces the darkness more. But I think Sicario is cleaner in execution. I've also heard great things about Incendies.

His next film is a sci-fi picture with Amy Adams. I read somewhere that he plans to move away from her darker approach for this one. I'm looking forward to it.

[publicist 4,643]

Enemy is terrible.

It isn't. Just over your head.

[Jay 37,352]

Ok.

[A24 4,331]

Prisoners is a great film.

Enemy is terrible.

One of the things I like about the former is that once it grabs you (which was pretty early on, in my case), it never lets you go again. The anxiety was almost exhausting.

I wonder if Villeneuve does the same with Sicario.

Alex

[KK 3,307]

The anxiety was almost exhausting.

I wonder if Villeneuve does the same with Sicario.

Alex

I believe he definitely did, or at least that's my experience with the film.

[Jay 37,352]

Prisoners is a great film.

Enemy is terrible.

One of the things I like about the former is that once it grabs you (which was pretty early on, in my case), it never lets you go again. The anxiety was almost exhausting.

Agreed! Prisoners has a great effect on the viewer, you just have to see what happens next.

[crocodile 8,006]

One of the things I like about the former is that once it grabs you (which was pretty early on, in my case), it never lets you go again. The anxiety was almost exhausting.

I wonder if Villeneuve does the same with Sicario.

Alex

He didn't really grab me at any point.

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,251]

The anxiety was almost exhausting.

I wonder if Villeneuve does the same with Sicario.

Alex

I believe he definitely did, or at least that's my experience with the film.

Same here.

[Hurmm 91]

Yeah I don't get croc's reaction to it. Sicario is primal, with swathes of moral greyness around it. Unless the crime or thriller genre isn't your thing, it's hard to imagine not being gripped by it at some point in the film.

On the other end of the spectrum is Nolan.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I saw it earlier. Well-made, but not really much more to it for me.

[A24 4,331]

What was missing?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Soul? Something engrossing, a sense that I should care about what was happening. I never really felt the good feeling of being transported at the movies, but was consistently aware that I was just watching something that someone put together. It was like some empty episode of a CBS crime show, but without even the investment you might get from long-standing familiarity with characters. It was just very bland.

[A24 4,331]

That sounds like a terrible movie.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

It's a tough genre for me anyway so I understand why many others were ok with it.

I sort of wonder if, thanks to the deluge of prequels and sequels and franchises we now have, many directors have forgotten how to make one-off films well. And now I see a sequel for this is planned....