Even More Movies You've Watched This Week

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
I would really love to see Darren Aronofsky remake Old Boy.[/quote]

That’s a brilliant idea, I rather stupidly forgot about Aronofsky, even a far better idea to have Aronofsky than my recommendations. I too imagine he’d be able to recreate the darkness and ominousness of Park’s ideal, especially considering how well he does it with Requiem and possibly even more so with Black Swan.

There are so many brilliant choices, I’m dumbfounded that they settled on Spike Lee in the end. At least if this whole thing does indeed go to shit, we have the original film to rely on for solace.[/quote]

Yeah totally agree. Hopefully, Spike Lee will do what The Departed did right and make a solid gritty film with the original film’s basic plot line instead of trying to bring out the dark karmic/ existential stuff.

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
I would really love to see Darren Aronofsky remake Old Boy.[/quote]

That’s a brilliant idea, I rather stupidly forgot about Aronofsky, even a far better idea to have Aronofsky than my recommendations. I too imagine he’d be able to recreate the darkness and ominousness of Park’s ideal, especially considering how well he does it with Requiem and possibly even more so with Black Swan.

There are so many brilliant choices, I’m dumbfounded that they settled on Spike Lee in the end. At least if this whole thing does indeed go to shit, we have the original film to rely on for solace.[/quote]

Yeah totally agree. Hopefully, Spike Lee will do what The Departed did right and make a solid gritty film with the original film’s basic plot line instead of trying to bring out the dark karmic/ existential stuff.

[/quote]

I hope it doesn’t bomb (artistically at least), but I would be lying if I didn’t hold some reasonable doubt. Sadly Lee’s already said he’s staying true to the manga, and of course as a manga the plot is substantially deeper than it was when summarised by Park in his film. Lee can sometimes get caught up in over-bearing plotlines and jumping from one subplot to the next in an effort to make his movies appear deeper than they need to be, hopefully he restrains himself here.

Some press representatives have seen a very early cut of the film, and apparently the response has been positive by the majority, but entirely how agreed they are upon that and how positive it really is, I cannot be sure.

I hope to be wrong in my predictions, but I shall have to wait until October to really find out.

The Dark Knight Returns P1 & 2

I’m way late on these, but they’re pretty good.

So Baz Luhrmann’s interpretation of “The Great Gatsby” was a somewhat substantial failure. I feel like this could be split both ways, that the less critical audience could be reeled in by the visuals, a gray area for those who haven’t read the book but at least have more of their wits about them, and a grand disappointment for people like me who both adore the novel and the cinema.

I might be too hard on Luhrmann, even though I loathe his work I shall admit it could have gone far, far worse than it did. Although, it also could have gone far better, and I blame Luhrmann’s dependency on visual awe and striking environments at the absence of any kind of substance or thought-provoking message for not allowing that to happen. It’s a reasonably long movie that has the time to say a lot, without really saying anything meaningful at all.

If anyone could adapt The Great Gatsby to the cinema admirably, and make no mistake that would certainly be a difficult task, it is not Baz Luhrmann. The subtlety and the principles held by Fitzgerald in the novel are taken aside and beaten into submission by Luhrmann, who proceeds to sprinkle them with glitter, roll them up into a ball, and splatter them across the screen in the hope that people will be tricked.

I will say that DiCaprio’s performance was commendable, and while the direction was sloppy, the script was bland, and the environment was crumbling around him, he continued to perform to the best of his intentions and stayed loyal to the task at hand. Very good show on his part, sadly it was not enough to stop the ship from sinking…

If anyone out there is a fan of the novel and would not like to see it’s reputation tarnished by this sorry excuse for theatrical drivel, I recommend staying as far away as you can, from Baz Luhrmann’s “The Great Gatsby”.

The Great Gatsby is a very good movie. It successfully delivers the themes and overall message of the book. It has stunning visuals. that make the audience feel the overwhelming superficiality and ostentation that the book portrays long island to have in the 1920s.
The characters are hollow and and all image, which is a theme of the book. The acting is outstandingly good. The main themes and motifs of the book are served to the audience on platter as in your face and upfront as the lavishness of Gatsbys parties.

I see lots of entertainment value, acting talent, symbolism and great production in this movie. I highly recommend this movie.

Sure it may not include all of the character detail of the book, but the overall messages are obviously present in the movie.

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
So Baz Luhrmann’s interpretation of “The Great Gatsby” was a somewhat substantial failure. I feel like this could be split both ways, that the less critical audience could be reeled in by the visuals, a gray area for those who haven’t read the book but at least have more of their wits about them, and a grand disappointment for people like me who both adore the novel and the cinema.

I might be too hard on Luhrmann, even though I loathe his work I shall admit it could have gone far, far worse than it did. Although, it also could have gone far better, and I blame Luhrmann’s dependency on visual awe and striking environments at the absence of any kind of substance or thought-provoking message for not allowing that to happen. It’s a reasonably long movie that has the time to say a lot, without really saying anything meaningful at all.

If anyone could adapt The Great Gatsby to the cinema admirably, and make no mistake that would certainly be a difficult task, it is not Baz Luhrmann. The subtlety and the principles held by Fitzgerald in the novel are taken aside and beaten into submission by Luhrmann, who proceeds to sprinkle them with glitter, roll them up into a ball, and splatter them across the screen in the hope that people will be tricked.

I will say that DiCaprio’s performance was commendable, and while the direction was sloppy, the script was bland, and the environment was crumbling around him, he continued to perform to the best of his intentions and stayed loyal to the task at hand. Very good show on his part, sadly it was not enough to stop the ship from sinking…

If anyone out there is a fan of the novel and would not like to see it’s reputation tarnished by this sorry excuse for theatrical drivel, I recommend staying as far away as you can, from Baz Luhrmann’s “The Great Gatsby”.[/quote]

X2

When I first heard they were remaking “The Great Gatsby” I was excited, I then got a look at the first preview and knew I would most likely be disappointed. To concerned with the visuals at the expense of the story.

[quote]CircaThursday wrote:
The Great Gatsby is a very good movie. It successfully delivers the themes and overall message of the book. It has stunning visuals. that make the audience feel the overwhelming superficiality and ostentation that the book portrays long island to have in the 1920s.
The characters are hollow and and all image, which is a theme of the book. The acting is outstandingly good. The main themes and motifs of the book are served to the audience on platter as in your face and upfront as the lavishness of Gatsbys parties.

I see lots of entertainment value, acting talent, symbolism and great production in this movie. I highly recommend this movie.

Sure it may not include all of the character detail of the book, but the overall messages are obviously present in the movie.[/quote]

It stays very true to the novel, but do you not feel that, that in and of itself, leads to a flaw in that we’re not subjected to a visual representation of the characters, but more a basal introduction to them through the means of literature as opposed to cinema? I can appreciate that DiCaprio’s performance as Gatsby was well played, but in someone like Nick Carraway, where the information he presents is more textual than emotional as it would be in a novel, do you not feel that it left out much of the potential to see the character’s external radiance in response to the whole debacle he’s faced with and the intricacies of his past? I felt it was almost like the novel was being thrown in my face, so Luhrmann wouldn’t have to take the time and effort for the character to represent himself in a deeper, more subtle manner.

I applaud all of the actors for their roles, but Maguire seemed largely unfulfilled as Carraway simply by virtue of the script being too blunt and confined within it’s own boundaries for him to really express himself and catch up to the others.

The characters are hollow, and Luhrmann takes the visuals and the glamour of the movie to represent that, but I almost feel like his approach was less of an intent to show the ugliness behind the mask sometimes, than it was just “Here, look at how shiny everything looks” without really expressing the darker modicums hidden beneath that. It was so visually intensive, that it almost served to take away from the expression of the insecurities and self-indulgent motives of the characters, in favour of just giving the audience a good time.

I wish Luhrmann had not been so tied in to the source material, and that is not something I would have ever expected myself to say, but given the circumstances he doesn’t allow everything to represent itself in theatre as opposed to in literature, I feel that he tries to match Fitzgerald so much that he comes up short in comparison, and then fills the movie with the generic Hollywood tropes in an effort to disguise that.

I may be holding bias here because I have a long history of disliking Baz Luhrmann’s work, but I can’t bring myself to really enjoy this, or feel it is anywhere near as endearing or eloquently presented as the novel.

[quote]CircaThursday wrote:
The Great Gatsby is a very good movie. It successfully delivers the themes and overall message of the book. It has stunning visuals. that make the audience feel the overwhelming superficiality and ostentation that the book portrays long island to have in the 1920s.
The characters are hollow and and all image, which is a theme of the book. The acting is outstandingly good. The main themes and motifs of the book are served to the audience on platter as in your face and upfront as the lavishness of Gatsbys parties.

I see lots of entertainment value, acting talent, symbolism and great production in this movie. I highly recommend this movie.

Sure it may not include all of the character detail of the book, but the overall messages are obviously present in the movie.[/quote]

Have you read the book? There is much more to it than lavish parties.

Tucker and Dale vs Evil

everyone was telling me to watch this movie… meh.

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Tucker and Dale vs Evil

everyone was telling me to watch this movie… meh. [/quote]

I’m quite a fan of it, even though I never expected myself to be given the premise. It’s a silly horror-comedy of course, but I like the way they played off the satire and cliches of past horror movies. It comes off with a rather stupid demeanour, and is not the greatest film of all time, but much like Cabin In The Woods (which I did think was better) I liked how clever it was in setting itself up for those horror tropes.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I can surely see why it might not seem so appealing, and the stupidity can get a little obnoxious at times, but overall I thought it handled itself pretty well.

Have you seen Shaun Of The Dead? As far as horror comedies go, it is easily my favourite. It might not translate itself too well outside of the dryness of British humour, but in the event that it does, I should recommend it. It’s quite a bit more witty and well planned than Tucker and Dale, and Cabin In The Woods for that matter, that might be the factor that tips you over the edge.

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]CircaThursday wrote:
The Great Gatsby is a very good movie. It successfully delivers the themes and overall message of the book. It has stunning visuals. that make the audience feel the overwhelming superficiality and ostentation that the book portrays long island to have in the 1920s.
The characters are hollow and and all image, which is a theme of the book. The acting is outstandingly good. The main themes and motifs of the book are served to the audience on platter as in your face and upfront as the lavishness of Gatsbys parties.

I see lots of entertainment value, acting talent, symbolism and great production in this movie. I highly recommend this movie.

Sure it may not include all of the character detail of the book, but the overall messages are obviously present in the movie.[/quote]

Have you read the book? There is much more to it than lavish parties.[/quote]
yea like I said the themes are there. just in a loud style. I look at the big picture, yeah some details re not in the movie.

Love And Death by Woody Allen

Having a recent affinity for Woody Allen films and deciding to take myself on an adventure through his most prized works in quick succession, I’ve been able to really compare each of his films and come to a more complete understanding of them as a collection of works. Love And Death is something I had not visited for quite a while, and returning to it after such a long time gave me a much grander sense of admiration as to it’s humour.

Essentially a parody and satire of the great 19th century russian novelists and their works, Allen takes it upon himself to create a grand spectacle of hilarity and wit, not only with his signature neurotic jewish humour, but also delving deeply into the intricacies of things such as War And Peace, moulding a comedy from their seriousness and philosophical ponderings as inspiration for his brilliantly creative mind’s work.

As it relates to romance Annie Hall may be my favourite Allen film, closely followed by Manhattan. But as a comedy, it is without doubt that Love And Death will remain my favourite Allen film of all time. More mature than his other great comedies such as Sleeper, Love And Death has a charming eloquence and very carefully planned expression of comedy, that I appreciate greatly. A “Monty Python And The Holy Grail” from across the pond, I adore this film and would recommend it to anyone with either an appreciation of classic russian literature or an affinity for polished, witty humour to see.

Saw the Star Trek film, mild SPOILER alert -its basically a remake a Wrath of Khan.
-Inferior to the original which is still the best of the bunch but a good effort and entertaining popcorn fare.

Benedict Cumberbatch is a strange choice for Khan but just about pulls it off, Simon Pegg was good, providing light relief and was nice to see Robocop’s Peter Weller.

The graphics/futuristic world are pretty impressive and must have required an absolute bucket load of computer engineers.

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Tucker and Dale vs Evil

everyone was telling me to watch this movie… meh. [/quote]

I’m quite a fan of it, even though I never expected myself to be given the premise. It’s a silly horror-comedy of course, but I like the way they played off the satire and cliches of past horror movies. It comes off with a rather stupid demeanour, and is not the greatest film of all time, but much like Cabin In The Woods (which I did think was better) I liked how clever it was in setting itself up for those horror tropes.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I can surely see why it might not seem so appealing, and the stupidity can get a little obnoxious at times, but overall I thought it handled itself pretty well.

Have you seen Shaun Of The Dead? As far as horror comedies go, it is easily my favourite. It might not translate itself too well outside of the dryness of British humour, but in the event that it does, I should recommend it. It’s quite a bit more witty and well planned than Tucker and Dale, and Cabin In The Woods for that matter, that might be the factor that tips you over the edge.[/quote]

Just saw Tucker and Dale. Appreciated the fact that they didn’t go dow to the level of slapstick. The part where the black guy gets set on fire had me laughing for a damn long time.

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Tucker and Dale vs Evil

everyone was telling me to watch this movie… meh. [/quote]

I’m quite a fan of it, even though I never expected myself to be given the premise. It’s a silly horror-comedy of course, but I like the way they played off the satire and cliches of past horror movies. It comes off with a rather stupid demeanour, and is not the greatest film of all time, but much like Cabin In The Woods (which I did think was better) I liked how clever it was in setting itself up for those horror tropes.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I can surely see why it might not seem so appealing, and the stupidity can get a little obnoxious at times, but overall I thought it handled itself pretty well.

Have you seen Shaun Of The Dead? As far as horror comedies go, it is easily my favourite. It might not translate itself too well outside of the dryness of British humour, but in the event that it does, I should recommend it. It’s quite a bit more witty and well planned than Tucker and Dale, and Cabin In The Woods for that matter, that might be the factor that tips you over the edge.[/quote]

Just saw Tucker and Dale. Appreciated the fact that they didn’t go dow to the level of slapstick. The part where the black guy gets set on fire had me laughing for a damn long time.

[/quote]

I thought Tucker and Dale was fucking hysterical. Great idea for a comedy/horror movie.

I just saw Silver Linings Playbook. Pretty good movie. I am not a film critic at all, I rely on my enjoyment during and after so I am useless for reviews.

I will say that they did a good job making the scenes where he is descending into the chaos of his own mind feel chaotic to the viewer.

[quote]bpick86 wrote:
I just saw Silver Linings Playbook. Pretty good movie. I am not a film critic at all, I rely on my enjoyment during and after so I am useless for reviews.[/quote]

That’s quite alright, I agree it was an incredibly good film, I loved De Niro’s character especially.

Life of Pi.

Definitely worth a watch.

Speaking of Ang Lee - I haven’t seen it in years, but, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon is also a film that’s worth the time.

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Life of Pi.

Definitely worth a watch.

Speaking of Ang Lee - I haven’t seen it in years, but, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon is also a film that’s worth the time.[/quote]

I loved Life Of Pi, only five people I’ve talked to out of film-oriented circles understood the idea behind the film, I can’t imagine how much less pronounced it must be to not think of the subtle religious and psychological aspects. Probably even enough to ruin the memory of it after a significant period of time.

Good show, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon is a masterpiece, one of my favourite martial arts films of the 21st century.

Damn Ang Lee is a great director, looking back I can’t think of a film of his I haven’t liked.