Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthorFlabyo
    • CommentTimeFeb 10th 2013
     (10949.61)
    Wreck-It Ralph is everything I hoped it was going to be.

    Lovely film.

    Even if we did have to wait months for it over here...
    • CommentAuthorStefanJ
    • CommentTimeFeb 10th 2013
     (10949.62)
    I find myself having, well, flashbacks from Cloud Atlas.

    This will be one of the very few movies I buy on Blu-Ray this year.
  1.  (10949.63)
    I saw Cloud Atlas last night and was pleasantly surprised.

    It's quite brave filmmaking, really - it sticks to the structure of the book, almost relies on the score of the film and your awareness of the actors playing different roles to carry you through. It had a great potential to fail utterly but it didn't, I think.

    It's not perfect, not by a long shot, but I'd like to see it again.

    I have the feeling that teenage audiences might understand it better than some older audiences: I've read the book and the philosophies surrounding it so I understand it but it also has a much more contemporary networked-culture underlying its other philosophies that younger audiences are more immersed in.

    Interesting if only to see Ben Wishaw as a woman.

    I really enjoyed Wishaw's performance as Frobisher and always felt Frobisher to be on of the more interesting characters in the book way back when I read it in 2000 and 2004.
    For anyone who has read the book, they do indeed cut large swathes out but rightfully so [no replacement fingers necessary in New Seoul, etc] and it makes it cinematic but cinematic in waves - some of my friends didn't get it and some didn't feel pulled along enough to go with it.

    I'd love to hear more thoughts on this and am looking forward to the critical reviews.
    •  
      CommentAuthorFoamhead
    • CommentTimeFeb 13th 2013
     (10949.64)
    @ Ben G: Watched Cloud Atlas a couple of nights ago and am still digesting it. Hadn't read the book beforehand (although it's now on The List) and, frankly, wasn't expecting much from the movie after catching one too many negative reviews.

    Not going to try and evaluate how well its interconnected stories did or didn't work just because I want to see it again before that. The sudden era-switching threw me at first but that's probably more down to me not paying close enough attention. As much as I really liked The Ghastly Ordeal of Timothy Cavendish narrative...plot...bits...I'm with you in that the Letters from Zedelghem/Frobisher arc is the one which seems to have stayed with me the most - and not only because I had to Wikipedia Ben Wilshaw to remind myself what I'd seen him in before.

    Nothing fell flat, became tedious or bewildered me; which is all the more surprising considering its near 3 hour run-time. Maybe its constantly shifting emphasis is the perfect way to appeal to the ADHD Generation? The action sequences felt a little out of place, to be honest. I don't know how or if these were translated from the book but they struck me as The Wachowskis giving an obligatory and gratuitous nod to their earlier films.

    The ending(s) mostly got a tad too schmaltzy for my tastes but, as innovative and experimental as it felt like it was trying to be, it's still a "big" Hollywood movie after all, so not really surprising.

    Performances: accents aside (because, overall, they never got too jarring), I'm usually not a fan of either Halle Berry or Hugh Grant but they both did really well...hell, everyone did but, along with Christoph Waltz, Hugo Weaving's one of those actors who'd make reading the yellow pages entertaining.

    Lastly and superficially, I don't remember a single scene which wasn't breathtakingly pretty to look at and each story was strong and intriguing enough to have made a good movie in its own right.

    Anyway, that's my two cents' worth.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJ.Brennan
    • CommentTimeFeb 14th 2013 edited
     (10949.65)
    So I saw A Good Day to Die Hard. And it was...as advertised. Bruce Willis + 'splosions + franchise nostalgia = what I expected and was entertained for my hour and a half. However.
    Before the movie there was THIS Watching the youtube version, I still got a thrill. But up on a giant IMAX screen, the second those strings kicked in I felt like I was 12 again, jaw dropped, wide-eyed and in awe. Normally I loathe 3D, but ...that film was made to be seen on massive screens.
  2.  (10949.66)
    @ foamhead - I agree with all your points, sir. Well put - especially that it was beautifully shot.

    I've heard word that there's a good version online so I may be watching that again sooner than I thought...[not that I'd ever do such a thing as to not question where a source comes from - of course, [of course, of course] - but a friend has already told me he's downloaded it.]
    •  
      CommentAuthorFoamhead
    • CommentTimeFeb 15th 2013
     (10949.67)
    Ben: All I've heard is that Cyrillic credits shouldn't put you off.

    Jurassic Park 3D: Jesus. I was a "grown up" (well, 24) when I first saw it and, 20 years later, that wide-angle "Welcome to Jurassic Park" reveal scene still gives me goosebumps.
  3.  (10949.68)
    Finally got around to seeing Les Mis and I can't believe how sloppy it is.

    Man - that is really, truly some awful filmmaking. I was really kinda shocked - my favourite critic [Mark Kermode] loved it and it's a stinking pile of pan-splattering shite.

    Four solid performances [from Anne Hathaway, Hugh Jackman, Samantha Barker, and Aaron Tveit] does not a good film make, Mr Hooper - sloppy work, sir. Very sloppy work.

    Poor show.
  4.  (10949.69)
    I caught the newest installment of Michael Apted's "Up" series, "56 Up," the other day. The documentary series follows the fortunes of 14 English people starting from childhood to the present day, but does so by checking in with them once every seven years. They range in background from lower to upper classes, though the upper class members had stayed away from the program for awhile.

    This installment proved a mixed bag. It was interesting seeing what's happened to an intelligent man who also seemed to suffer from mental illness, or another subject whose news of losing her job felt like a visceral punch to the gut. Thanks to the acceptance of reality shows, one or two of the subjects even came across as triying to turn their moment in the documentary into self-promotion vehicles. But I'm still glad I watched the whole thing, and wonder what will happen when the subjects reach 63.
    •  
      CommentAuthorcity creed
    • CommentTimeFeb 21st 2013
     (10949.70)
    Cyrillic titles are beautiful, all titles should be in Cyrillic.
    I loved Cloud Atlas for its insane bravura and utter guilelessness. It's a strange and wonderful beast. But...
    I get that no adaptation of a novel is going to be perfect but I do think they made some distinctly odd choices.
    The wrap-up of the Adam Ewing story in particular felt uncomfortably forced. Plus, although I got that little thrill of recognition at seeing many familiar Glasgow locations, I was non-plussed at best by the unexpectedly lazy stereotype of violent Scottish drunks. Oh, Hollywood. I'd stab you, but it's happy hour.
    •  
      CommentAuthorTF
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2013
     (10949.71)
    I got to see Joss Whedon's Much Ado About Nothing last night and really enjoyed it.

    The actors sell the Bard's jokes well and the there's loads of really well staged physical comedy (I laughed a lot)

    It has a great energy - Joss' songs and score are quite accomplished...

    It's just lovely!
  5.  (10949.72)
    Saw Stoker on Friday and i expected a good movie and witnessed a great one. Even if the directors love of Lynch and Hitchcock was on show, the latter more so.
    •  
      CommentAuthorOsmosis
    • CommentTimeFeb 26th 2013
     (10949.73)
    Here's an absolutely wonderful montage of fifty years of Cdr. J. Bond.



    (I saw it via Andy Diggle on Twitter, but it's doubtless doing the rounds elsewhere.)
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeFeb 26th 2013
     (10949.74)
    @ vandalhandle

    I plan to see that. Apparently it was written by Wentworth Miller from Prison Break.
    • CommentAuthormanglr
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2013
     (10949.75)
    @ vandalhandle

    Good news on Stoker - looking forward to that immensely. Park Chan-wook rarely has a misstep and even when he does, it's usually really interesting. Probably my favorite director working these days.
  6.  (10949.76)
    @johnjones it was and it's a bit weak in parts script-wise, but it's a great first effort from him, and i liked he used a pen name while it was floating around being rejected.

    @manglr probably the same here, i always check out what he and Kim Jee Woon do ( I'm gonna pretend 'The Last Stand' doesn't exist ), but Park Chan Wook is a master of composition every shot is beautiful.
    • CommentAuthormanglr
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2013
     (10949.77)
    That has been my bit of reticence with Stoker...I really have no desire to see Park Chan Wook get neutered by the Hollywood system. Hopefully, he'll have a better showing than Woon's 'Last Stand' did. And then I'll next be holding my breath for Joon Ho Bong's 'Snowpiercer'
  7.  (10949.78)
    @manglr Stoker is Park Chan Wook in charge and full flow, didn't feel like he was being directed at all
    •  
      CommentAuthorOsmosis
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2013 edited
     (10949.79)
    ** NEW STATHAM KLAXON **



    ETA: Nick Nolte? Michael Chiklis? TEXAS ACCENT?
  8.  (10949.80)
    ^^ Obligatory topless Statham shot in trailer guarantees audience, deserves STATHAM KLAXON. ;)