What Movie Did You Just Watch? ...Rises

[ajmrowland]

yeah, in my other post, I was gonna suggest they got them off the plane but I dont even know if that was possible.

[TheSequelOfDisney]

La Vie en Rose - I've been waiting forever to see this (ever since Marion Cotillard won the Oscar); it was just as epic as I thought it would be. I knew absolutely nothing about what this was about--only that Cotillard would be in it. Likewise, I knew nothing about Édith Piaf or her music. It was quite enlightening to learn about her, and I absolutely fell in love with her music and voice (I had actually already bought La Vie en Rose and Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien before I saw this film). Marion Cotillard was amazing, to say the least, as were the other actors in the film. It's truly beautiful and I wish that there was a U.S. BD release of it; here's hoping that it'll come sooner rather than later (I know there's a pretty awesome French BD that's been released). Great, great, great film.

Orphée (Orpheus) - This one was really interesting. Since I already saw Cocteau's La Belle et la Bête, I thought I would give this one a try. Marais is in this film, too, though I like Beast more so than Orpheus. I knew nothing of this myth, and even though this is considered a modern "update," you could tell that it's still rooted in some type of text. It wasn't overly wonderful, though the specially effects were highly distinct, unusual and amazing, it's still a pretty good film. It's not my favorite of the two, but it's still good.

Being John Malkovich - Now this one was weird: good, but weird. I did like learning about puppets (since it's new to me how they work and such). The concept is super interesting, too (I would never come up with there being a random portal into someone's brain), but I wasn't overly taken by it. Still, there were some great performances by John Cusack, Cameron Diaz, Catherine Keener, and John Malkovich. Really interesting, but not really my cup of tea. It's definitely worth a watch, though.

All That Jazz - Ha, I knew nothing about this either except that the title references Chicago. I do like musicals, but this one was kind of weird (and there's definitely a connection to 8 1/2, which, also, is kind of weird in it's own way). The actors are great, though. The ending was really, really weird (it reminded me of The Wiz for some reason), though I guess it realistically pictured the craziness of Joe Gideon's life. Worth a watch, but maybe just once (at least for me).

Un Conte de Noël (A Christmas Tale) - Long movies can be great, but this one dragged on a bit for me. Right around Christmastime, a mother finds out she has cancer and she must ask her family (who joined her for the holiday) for some help, via a bone marrow operation. All of the performances were great, and it's nice to see all of the familial interactions, but it was a little bit too long for my tastes.

Ace in the Hole - Wilder's follow-up to Sunset Boulevard, Ace in the Hole is pretty wonderful (though not as good as SB). Kirk Douglas plays a wonderful character who decides to keep a man stranded in a mountain in order to earn lots of money. The supporting cast is just as good as Douglas, and this is a well-thought out film. Apparently this is based off of an actual story, too. Again, I like Sunset Boulevard better, but Ace in the Hole is just as riveting in the publication world as SB is to the film world. Definitely worth a watch!

Fantasia - I mean, really, what more could I possibly say? It's my favorite DAC: spectacular music accompanied by spectacular animation. Enough said.

Date Night - Hilarious! I don't understand why some people don't think this is funny. Maybe I'm just in love with Tina Fey (yeah, I guess I am, haha), but this is great. I've seen this maybe five or six times already and I still laugh out loud to pretty much everything. I'm so glad my mom bought this for me for Christmas because I doubt I'll ever get tired of watching this film. Oh, and, of course, Steve Carrell is brilliant as well.

Black Swan - I love this one, too. Natalie Portman is blood brilliant as Nina. I can't compare, as many critics did, this to The Red Shoes. Even though they tread similar themes, they really are quite different and I like both of them equally. I could watch this any time and still be completely mesmerized. I don't know that much about ballet, just what I've learned from these two films, but I'm glad that fine arts, like ballet, are making it to the big screen. This is definitely worth a watch, for Portman at least; plus Mila Kunis is great, too.

Grease - I grew up on Grease and know pretty much the whole thing. The songs are super-catchy and even if it might not be the best musical, it certainly may just be my favorite. Great cast all around, and I think it should be mandatory for everyone on the planet to see this (if they haven't already).

The Night of the Hunter - I bought this only a few months ago, but I've fallen absolutely in love with it; Robert Mitchum plays the wonderfully misguided Preacher who is so obsessed with money that he has to hunt down to kids to get it (though he never actually does); the supporting cast, including Shelley Winters and Lilian Gish, is excellent, as well. Criterion's BD is practically perfect, and I'm so so so glad that I've been able to see this film. It's definitely worth the watch.

Cinderella - I don't even know the last time I saw this (I feel like it's been years). It's great, of course, with beautiful animation and songs. This time around, though, I noticed that there are like 10,000 animals in the film. How can she keep all of them fed and what-not (haha)? This is seriously magical, and even though it's not at all my favorite of the Disney Animated Classics, it's certainly up there.

Alice in Wonderland - Besides Fantasia, this just may be my favorite of the films Walt Disney actually made. It's fanatical, and crazy, and magical, and wondrous. If you need a good laugh, this is definitely the film. Though it may be episodic, I think the cast of different characters helps this particular film (since the premise is a little out there to begin with). The Blu-ray's picture quality is gorgeous and I'm so happy it's in my collection.

The Emperor's New Groove - One of my favorite Disney films from the 2000's. It's hilarious and fun, with pretty good animation and a nice theme-song. Ha, I really don't know what else to say.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - This was my most anticipated film of last year, and it's still amazing. I shouldn't compare this to the Swedish film, but I do like this one better (though the ending still gets me). With fantastic performances by Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara and Joely Richardson. It's a brutally honest film that captures a lot in the 158 minute run-time. Though the subject material is rather dark, it's an excellent portrayal of something that could happen in the real world. It's a fantastic film with an equally fantastic Blu-ray release; I'm ecstatic to have this one

[Dr Frankenollie]

The Dark Knight Rises - My second viewing didn't change my opinion very much - I still like it and enjoy it, although there should have been more ambuigity in the ending, John Blake didn't seem to be a well-rounded, three-dimensional character like with Gordon and Alfred and Joseph Gordon-Levitt was mediocre acting-wise and we didn't see enough of the established characters from the previous films. However, virtually all of this is forgivable because of Bane: Tom Hardy's expressiveness and wonderfully weird voice make him quite menacing and very fun to watch.

Strangers on a Train - Maybe the last major, well-known Hitchcock picture for me to see for the first time, I don't think it's anything particularly great, but still rather good. It has the usual innocent, ordinary man accused of a crime he didn't commit plot device, yet even if it isn't fresh when it comes to Hitchcock, it's not tiresome. There are some very stylish and memorable shots: Bruno staring down at Guy from the University of Washington; the close-up of Bruno amongst the audience of the tennis match, showing he's the only person not moving his head and paying attention to the ball; and the opening scene, introducing us to the protagonist and antagonist by their shoes. Most of the cast is mediocre, but Robert Walker is marvellous as Bruno Anthony, the same kind of enigmatic, silky-voiced villain that James Mason plays in North by Northwest.

[ajmrowland]

The Dark Knight Rises - My second viewing didn't change my opinion very much - I still like it and enjoy it, although there should have been more ambuigity in the ending, John Blake didn't seem to be a well-rounded, three-dimensional character like with Gordon and Alfred and Joseph Gordon-Levitt was mediocre acting-wise and we didn't see enough of the established characters from the previous films. However, virtually all of this is forgivable because of Bane: Tom Hardy's expressiveness and wonderfully weird voice make him quite menacing and very fun to watch.

Mostly this. I did watch the movie, and found it entertaining with an unusually long time spent on certain portions but it really pays off. the ending isnt entirely satisfying, but the movie wraps up the trilogy quite nicely.

Next Stop for DC: Metropolis(again)

[Lazario]

Silver Bullet (1985 / directed by: Daniel Attias)



With October not much further away and this being a particularly hellish Election Year, I decided I'd better start brushing up on my haven't-seen or haven't-seen-in-a-long-time horror. I've been very anxious to rewatch this movie in particular since I have some pretty strong childhood memories of it being extremely brutal. Is it? No. Surprisingly, it can claim a slightly higher degree of tension in its' scenes of people talking about the monster's devastation than any of the death scenes. I wish it weren't, but it's trying very hard to play vigilante morality; ala- Fulci's City of the Living Dead. Though thankfully we may be spared any scenes of the people accusing each other, we are forced to watch bar assholes go on rants against the local cops. The cops are barely made into characters yet we can't help but feel their job is a little hard since the killer is a frickin' werewolf. This isn't really a good set-up for scenes of People Vs. the Cops. Shouldn't the police be blamed when what they're taking heat for really is their fault? We watch scene upon scene of crowd confrontation and... it adds up to nothing. When the movie's over, it's a story about the sister learning to love the brother again. And god is she a weak character. The actress earns a few points during the can-collecting scenes where the movie really works. She walks among all the very disheartened townspeople and they can barely muster up the care to say anything. Some of them look hollow. Some look suspicious and mistrusting. Some look like they kind of want to throw something at her. All without dialogue. She says a few words but the important thing is that she's pretending to be after the cans when she's really looking for a person with a missing eye and when she gets all this extreme "go away!" in return, she has to look as chipper as possible. The impression I got is that she succeeded. Whatever Gary Busey adds to any movie is gained here (he certainly keeps you awake). He definitely comes off better than Everett McGill as the film's killer. He's not scary at all, when he gets to say anything really dramatic- he goes over the top, and though he gets a pretty wacked dream sequence, he also has about zero character. The film looks great and the music adds quite a bit (scored by Jay Chattaway, by far and away the best thing about 1980's terrible Maniac). The dialogue is a mess and several scenes are cringe-inducing. The biggest problem there is the idea that the killer's victims were somehow breaking religious commandments. It's not followed up, he just mentions one woman who took sleeping pills before he killed her. Perhaps Stephen King's original book explained this better. I dunno. The worst scenes involve a prank with a snake, a little girl's father going a horrendously-acted rant against "cripples," and the one moment Corey Haim's character gets mad at his sister, for "wearing dresses to show off her tits"... even though we don't see any of this behavior whatsoever other than a throwaway 2-second shot of her talking flirtaciously with a couple boys weeks before this point in the story. However, overall, it is a lot better than what's passed for horror by and large in the last decade.




Deadly Blessing (1981 / directed by: Wes Craven)



I guess I can't really say the bottom dropped out of the religious-horror subgenre by 1981 if The Amityville Horror produced 3 or so sequels in the 80's. But, aside from the film's insane ending (which I'm almost tempted to say is worth sitting through the 100-minute movie to witness), this is not one of Craven's finest hours. The acting is quite solid (though Ernest Borgnine goes way over the top) but... and Netflix's ABYSMAL Watch-Instant print might have something to do with this, the movie is visually ugly. It never once rises above made-for-TV quality. And the music is awful. I wouldn't even call it good enough to be Omen leftovers but it rests somewhere between that and Children of the Corn. The deaths aren't unique or interesting. The story is awful. The dialogue is very poorly written. Craven's always been interested in religion as a device but there's nothing tense about the "differences" between the Amish wackos and the Charlie's Angels troup of "serpents" tempting all the menfolk away from an honest day's work. It's a little more than that kind of movie. It's also the kind of movie where apparently the father is a total puritanical freakshow given Godlike worship by the entire cult - none of whom can think for themselves - yet the sons are normal and have no trouble communicating with the infidel type people. Modern, even-tempered sons somehow raised by an entirely rigid, fundamentalist Old-World cult... how does that happen? A cult who beat their children for nothing more than losing their shoe or rolling around in hay. Apart from Sharon Stone's part in the movie (she gets all the best everything: the best lines, pre-Nightmare on Elm Street freaky dreams, the best nightgowns, and she lives), the movie has no style or scary ambience to speak of. Nothing that wasn't leftover from Omen or Amityville. Both of which are better.




Mom (1991 / directed by: Patrick Rand)



Damn are the early 90's an underrated time for horror! Anyway, this movie takes a break from the ultra-serious, more realistic approach of Silence of the Lambs, Misery, and Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer to deliver a very interesting (code word to some for dull) entry in the Mom/Grandma Becomes Cannibalistic, Demonic Flesh-Eater While Son/Daughter Covers Up for Her subgenre. It lasted a little less than 10 years with Troma's Rabid Grannies as the chicken, Peter Jackson's sublime Dead Alive (aka- Braindead) as the ripest egg it produced, and 1996's direct-to-cable/VHS feature The Granny as its' last call dinner bell (it was picked clean after that). This film has no hope of out-rageousing either Grannies or Braindead, so it has to go the opposite route and be more artistic. More subtle. And more emotional. Is it? Yes. Easily. Which makes it a perfectly accessible, easy to swallow gore film for people who don't like splatter. The sole problem of course is that, like the main character's wife Alice (played by - get this - one of the Waltons' daughters, Mary Beth McDonough = Erin), I think we have to agree this guy just spends too much time with his mother. Some of the "gags" of the movie come from him having to take all sorts of desperate measures to keep her locked up. None of these are funny. Some turn out to be surprisingly bloody, so I'm not complaining. But... this guy losing his job and getting kicked out of his own apartment ultimately come as a result of his obsession with his mother. That might not sound crazy when you see how out of control she is but... it becomes very uncomfortable watching him tie his mother to her bed. All 4 of her limbs. Anyone else getting the major heebies jeebies, from just reading that? It's even creepier to watch. This guy (Mark Thomas Miller, dead ringer for Bill Paxton, who's pretty hot so I'm not completely unhappy with him) just shouldn't be so heavily involved in a suppression-of-will war. Not with... this woman for a mother. She's just too nice (I'm not kidding- this woman is Mother of the Year material, apart from the killing people thing) and almost never manipulative. It makes you start to wonder, ya know- what his father was like and then... again: *shiver*. Apart from that, this film does most everything right. It's funny enough. The special effects are excellent. The tone, pacing, camerawork, etc(.) are ambitious and outstanding. The acting is quite good. The characters need a little work. But the driving force of the movie is its' cleverness and the ending made sure to check everything we might have been unsure of. You know: where's the dog, where's the detective, where's Alice, what's going on in the kitchen? All present and accounted for. You might recognize a couple of other people here. Brion James as the "head" flesh-eater previously was seen in one of my favorite Tales from the Crypt episodes, but of course he got his very own Shocker clone (aka- Nightmare on Elm Street rip-off): The Horror Show. And Stella Stevens (the shower screamer in Troma's Monster in the Closet and a ton of B-flicks) who played a victim here went on to star as the title monster in... that's right: The Granny.




Hellgate (1990 / directed by: William A. Levey)



Now, these 4 movies are part of the same day's viewing. And, no lie, I think this was the most fun. The acting is truly the only major flaw. That and the opening scene, pre-explosion of bloody violence, because it's not clear that this really took place in the whole jukebox 50's era (where I'm assuming the prologue was meant to occur since the present-time is the late 80's). And there's no way to follow a story set-up on a character who is like the rag-doll version of Jane from The Naked Gun for that one gag where Ricardo Montalbán drags her up to the balcony (and she's flying around like Olive Oyl from those absurd Popeye cartoons). Anyway, this is one of those rare Forget Everything movies. No logic. No emotional arcs. No reverence toward life or death. It's sort of a parody. But not a recognizable one. Are there cliches? Very few that I can pinpoint. For example: you know that old one where in the middle of a zombie attack upon a ghost town, one of the potential victims running for their lives goes into a bar and actually decides to sit and watch Parisian can-can dancers do an entire floorshow? Neither do I. The characters crack jokes even after they're besieged by a horde of western-town zombies (so there are 3 conflicting/bombarding time periods in the movie's tourist trap orgy of things- I guess that reveals the movie's allegorical value: it's about antique cultural artifacts that can kill, so throw away your paraphenalic history, y'all). Even after one of them is stabbed with a knife and bleeding heavily. Not the entire cast is wasted, they just make it hard to adjust to the anarchic style of the movie's humor. Without skilled performers, you're not going to laugh at something like Ron Palillo saying "can we talk?!" after a guy 3-times his size has been throwing him around the room for nearly a minute, breaking mirrors and windows and table tops with his fallen body in the process. But, after awhile, it starts working. Especially since there is some visual oomph to the movie, the music is eerie at times, the setting is very spooky and also very attractive as a kind of model of a cool old ghost town. The violence is all very amusing and clever, for a change. The death scenes are goofy but the variety of bizarre forms of bad happenings on display is impressive. For example- I may have mentioned the zombies, stabbings, and ghosts. But there are also talking severed heads in fridges, a laser-shooting crystal-wiedling cyborg John Astin lookalike, rubber bats on strings which are treated as real, a terrifying mutant fish (which explodes) (forget Piranha- this thing is "Land of Confusion" terrifying, this thing is "The Lonely Goatherd" terrifying!), jarring cutaways to an Arnold Schwarzenegger clone sharpening axes and machetes, a sex scene where the girl actually goes crosseyed in closeup, and several old dark house antics. Just what I needed after rewatching Tobe Hooper's truly boring The Funhouse last year.

[Lazario]

Asian horror day.



Pulse (2001 / directed by: Kiyoshi Kurosawa)



Not nearly the masterpiece many have been calling it. The problem mainly is that it's expecting you to see the entire world falling apart through the stories of a few people and that's okay. But when you really see what's troubling them so much (ghosts on a computer screen, and really trendy looking images of ghosts at that), that this is literally killing the entire world's population by making them depressed, scared, and lonely thereby reducing their will to live, the film loses all its' power. Again, because it rests on trendy CGI images of ghosts. Ghosts aren't scary, ever. Never have been, never will be. This movie tries to work its' way around that by saying they are a physical force around us and can only keep to themselves so long as their glasses aren't full. If you look at the vessel they inhabit, their body, as a glass. The film tries to convince us that the afterlife is a more dire version of living alone. So, when the ghosts get too depressed, scared, or lonely themselves- they have to pass this feeling on to the living. Well, apparently, one of the ghosts has leaked their overflow not into just any person but the internet itself. So, that spreads and anyone who uses certain programs get the too-sad-to-live virus which gets into other systems and it spreads until living people become living ghosts or kill themselves and become dead ghosts. Fast forward to: almost the entire world is gone. Only way to survive if you're not infected with too-sad? Don't use the internet. Much too trendy to me. However, you certainly can't fault the actors' commitment or the cinematography. They're stunning. And the film really does try to do something interesting with ghosts. The human part works okay. The ghost part doesn't.




A Tale of Two Sisters (2003 / directed by: Kim Ji-woon)



Who the hell was that woman who freaked out at the dinner table? What was the relation of the woman living with the girls' father to the girls'? If the "sick" sister killed the other sister, why did the woman living with the girls' father threaten her? Yes, the need-to-know information is: who is truly the bad person here? Who actually abused the other sister? And, of course, who were that other couple and what did they have to do with the woman living with the girls' father? I have to keep calling her that because the movie doesn't make it clear who the hell she is. The girls call her stepmother. But she was in the house before the mother died. So... what the hell is up with that? Did the mother commit suicide in the other sister's closet? Why? Was the mother's ghost the one attacking the stepmother? Oh, and... why is the movie not bothering to make anything clear or even the slightest bit real? I'd credit the movie on the strength of the performances but, isn't it kind of an insult to the actress playing the sick sister who is acting her heart out to portray a young girl tormented by family secrets - to the point where she frequently yells at her father for ruining his daughters' lives - if the movie turns around and tells us she was a murderer who probably killed her own sister? I do not appreciate this movie pulling a Frailty and insisting that people who feel for the main character's plight are gullible saps. It was the movie that went to all this trouble to tell the audience her story was so important. But, of course, this is only one possible outcome because the movie won't even tell us what is going on. So... not much reason to see it. Everything is a trick. It's a hollow mindfuck that cares about the characters, then doesn't care. What I will give it credit for is being extremely visually pleasing. And the music is pretty good. And even if the filmmakers don't care, the actors certainly do. I'm at a loss. I can't recommend it and I won't. But if you don't care about being manipulated, this movie is definitely worth seeing based on the merits money bought it. As for me, I need something more substantial.




The Host (2006 / directed by: Bong Joon-ho)



If I were to post this on a horror forum, I would surely get a lot of flack for saying it. But I am sick to death of the last decade's ultra-pretentious approach to survival horror. As a matter of fact, there really wasn't survival horror before the likes of Wrong Turn, Dead Snow, etc (ignoring Asian offerings such as Battle Royale for the time being). This wave of horror has come as a result of many different events around the world signalling the beginning of the end of the world. This is all fine and good, I even agree there's at the very least cause for concern that the world is ending. Deep down, I don't even mind the entire aesthetic change of horror and the absurd over-focusing on things like technology and crowds of people in peril. But... why exactly do movies need to treat characters like shit? If the movies care so much about the disintegration of society and government turning against us... why do they not only view the characters as worth nothing and entirely subject to death by ultra-trivial means (in this movie, being accidentally whipped by the monster's tail is both effortless on its' part and treated with no emotional or physical gravity) but also actively seek to make them so unlikable, aggressively hypocritical, stupid, nasty, guilt-mongering, etc(.)? The point of the wave of survival horror movies is supposed to be that we're all in this together. But nearly every goddamn movie is about splitting us apart. And every time, it isn't for a specific reason. There's nothing to actually learn from these movies about the world we live in. This movie, for example, deals with a family who love each other but when things are at their worst... they heartlessly mock, judge, shame, and demean each other. Do you believe your family would ever do that to you? Let alone in a time of crisis??

This movie is really on a mission to insult people. Under the guise of being a socio-political commentary. A group of protestors trying to keep the local population safe from toxic fume dumps are attacked by a swarm of police and when the camera shows one of the family members rushing to try and save his niece, he runs out of frame while the camera stays on a bum picking his nose in apathy at the situation. Is the point of this shot his apathy? No. It's the nose-picking. The military is about to unload poisonous gas over the area they suspect the monster is hiding which they themselves suspect will kill children if they breathe it in, police are endangering the lives of hundreds of people, and where's the camera? On a guy picking his nose.

This movie has a gift for that kind of thing. A group of media photographers unsubtly swoop in on the gathering grieving loved ones during a memorial after the monster's first mass killing spree and the family I mentioned before drop to the floor and start rolling around like worms. I really hope someone is reading this and if you are, I imagine you have an eyebrow raised. You might be wondering what the context is for this scene. Why are they rolling around? Well, two of the brothers are arguing but as soon as the photographers show up, they all manage to end up on the floor scorning them for exploiting their grief. But they're all still rolling around. On the floor. Like worms. I can't possibly emphasize this enough. The shot is clearly trying to milk some humor from this. But the fact that the last scene had the monster jump in a very small building with a bunch of people trapped against a pair of chained doors while streams of blood dripped over the edge of the elevated trailer-like structure... Not funny. The film thinks a lot of unfunny things are hilarious. After a news report shows an image of one of the monster's surviving victims having contracted a disease that makes his skin break out in boils and blisters, they report that there's a virus spreading and anyone who coughs might have it. Cut to a bunch of people on the street wearing gas masks. The second someone coughs, they all look suspicious (even though they're also all protected). The guy takes off his mask to spit in the street and the sounds the rest of the crowd makes are barely removed from the roar of a hysterical riot. ZAZ made this funny. Of course, in Airplane!, no one was being hurt or killed in a realistic context. It's not funny here. It's not even realistic. The guy was clearly a smoker. I know smokers. Not only do they breakout in heaving coughs daily but they produce a lot of phlegm and need to spit it out. Lots of people smoke. So, almost everyone knows someone like this guy.

At 2 full hours long, what can anyone say the movie accomplished? Nearly every single scene is about making the characters we're meant to care for unlikable and treating people dying, dealing with grief, and terrified for the safety of their loved ones with no respect whatsoever. The themes are serious, the people who praise the movie are serious, and the movie is a big joke. Add to that the fact that it's also a computer-generated monster which kills people by the dozen, tears a family apart... looks silly. The camera can't get enough of it as well. Which makes sense as it's not just shown to be huge and fast... it also backflips acrobatically like a dolphin. So, it's good to know that if this were really happening, while crowds of people were being picked off one by one you'd have the option to also sit on the grass, munch on some popcorn, and clap like you were at Sea World. Filmmakers, a little tip: if your movie is about the tragic waste of human life and the effect that has on society, maybe it's not so important that your savage monster can do cool tricks.




Shutter (2004 / directed by: Banjong Pisanthanakun and Parkpoom Wongpoom)



This one's pretty interesting. It's entirely soulless and also intent on playing tricks with the audience but not a single one they didn't anticipate before going in. It's yet another ghost story, more lame Ring girls with black hair popping into frame to scare the bunnies out of you, more depressed people, more desperate suicides. But this one is about how going to college sucks the life out of you. So... it's definitely about something. Trying to show us that college in Thailand is like high school in America. With a slight Grease twist- our lead character here is an Asian Johnny Depp version of John Travolta's Danny, his clique of friends think the girl he's dating is lame so he can never admit he's dating her, things go bad and eventually - after some backstory and traveling, ala: The Eye - you have yourself a ghost with an agenda. Furthermore, unlike The Eye, this movie's decision to go back into the past of the ghost actually puts some life into it. Before that (and a particularly excellent scene where the lead's new girlfriend decides to do some private photo taking; oh, yeah- this movie's about cameras and whether or not you can take pictures of ghosts but you probably remember that much from trailers of the American remake), this movie was dead-on-arrival. The writing doesn't give the characters any depth, the scares are non-existent and extremely cliched, the pacing couldn't be more off, and the majority of the first half of the movie is so boring- I almost turned it off. But I'm glad I didn't. The movie is still mostly bad. But the second half is much better than you'd expect. Leading to a shockingly clever, unpredictable, and inspired twist ending. The balance is tipped by how much you really like the main character, a guy who took a picture of his old girlfriend while she was being raped. Who didn't intervene due to peer pressure. Peer pressure we don't feel- the movie just tells us it's a thing. That's the kind of movie this is.

[PeterPanfan]

I've recently reviewed The Jacket, American Psycho, The Hole, and Detention.

http://thefilmrookie.blogspot.com/

[TheSequelOfDisney]

Apocalypse Now - This is the first film I saw for my Cinema Studies class, and I'm not entirely sure what to think about it. I've read Heart of Darkness (which the film borrows from), and I wasn't really too fond of it. I don't know what to say. I feel like I didn't actually care whether or not the characters lived or died (though I knew Kurtz would because he died in Heart of Darkness); I couldn't relate to any of the characters, and it just felt kind of blah to me. War films aren't my favorite (not nearly), so that could have some effect in how I felt about it. It was just okay, I guess; it wasn't anything special for me.

Next week's film is Silence of the Lambs (which I have seen before a few times; in fact, I saw it last semester with the same professor for my American Gothic class).

[TheValentineBros]

A Night at the Opera.

[Dr Frankenollie]

The Incredibles - http://onethousandandonemovienights.blo ... eview.html

@PeterPanFan: I'm enjoying your film blog.

[PeterPanfan]

@PeterPanFan: I'm enjoying your film blog.

Thank you! I've been so busy lately - hopefully I'll update it tonight or tomorrow.

[TheSequelOfDisney]

The Help - This is such a good film! I've read the novel a few times now and even though it is better than the film, I think this was a pretty faithful adaptation. I love pretty much all of the actors involved, and I'm so glad that Octavia Spencer won the Oscar. I'm sure I'll be watching this many more times (since I doubt I'll ever get tired of it).

Toy Story 3 - Hmmm, TS3 is just okay for me. I've never been that big of a fan of the series, and they hold no special place in my heart, but the films are good, including the this last one. I do think that they were trying to hard at the end with the incinerator and giving the toys to Bonnie, though; it was almost as if they were forcing you to feel sentimental and nostalgic. But other than that, it's a pretty decent film.

[KACENAID]

Ruby Sparks - This film was right up my alley as it's definitely my type of movie. It's a great "what if" film with humorous moments, and I really wasn't expecting it to have its share of powerful and moving moments. I'm glad I sought it out.

Beasts of the Southern Wild - The fact that this film won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance as well as other wins at Cannes made this movie big on my to see list. I can see where the acclaim came from. This film was very compelling in its artistic expression and it's also a very unique movie. You'll never find a film like this in mainstream cinema, that's for sure.

ParaNorman - At first while watching this movie, I thought to myself that I wasn't enjoying it as much as I enjoy Coraline. But as the film progressed and picked up steam, I found myself having more fun and came to the conclusion that the two films are apples and oranges films. I definitely like the humor in this film and some of the design choices.

[Dr Frankenollie]

Airplane! - Upon first viewing, this became my favourite comedy; the most recent viewing is something like the fifth, and it still makes me laugh hysterically. There are countless jokes, some blatant and some subtle, some that I only got on this viewing, with clever visual puns, parodies of cliches, double entendres and rather brilliant dialogue. There are a few weak moments, but I still love it.

Grave of the Fireflies - First viewing. The animation is mostly unspectacular, but the story and characterisation is certainly not. Reinforcing the fact that cartoons aren't just for kids, this is a very adult feature and does more than say 'War is Hell' with the blood-red, horrific backgrounds early on; it shows the sheer unfairness and madness of it all. Political feuds, greedy dictators and bitterness lead to the deaths of many, most of all the people who were least to blame for any country's bitterness, be it Germany or America. The protagonists are both extremely likable: Seita is hard-working and immensely caring, carrying the burden of looking after his infant sister when he's practically still a child himself and trying to be resolute after learning of his mother's death; and Setsuko, an adorable girl epitomising the innocence, hope and strength of young children, as well as representing all the children who suffered in times of war. It's a beautiful film in substance and the pain of the characters (particularly Seita's frustration with having to say goodbye to his sister when cremating her) is tangible. A surprising point of interest is that director Isao Takahata has denied several times that the film is anti-war; in that case, he did a rather poor job at conveying his true message.

[SillySymphony]

Ratings based on a 5 star method.
[Blue = 1st time rating and/or viewing]

Meet Me In St. Louis (1944) ✰✰✰✰
[^ It's a sweet film; the songs are good and the littlest sister's dark humor make this movie stand out for me. My sister's auditioning for a non-musical play version this Tuesday.]
The Dark Knight Rises (2012) ✰✰✰
[^ Didn't dazzle me. I was put off immediately by the opening sequence. I genuinely had no idea what was going on. I guess all I needed to know was that a plane was torn apart and that Bane's the bad guy.
I get that Bane is supposed to be scary. He didn't have to literally 'overkill' his performance every 5 minutes. His reverberator voice was just odd.
I felt really stupid for not seeing that twist coming, and yes, that death scene was plain terrible. Looking back there's so many plotholes and laughable moments. ]
The Rescuers (1977) ✰✰✰✰
[^ Got the new Blu-ray double feature for my birthday. I'm not an expert on colors so don't take my word for it when I say they were lovely. The last time I saw this was on vhs so the bright, high definition picture was practically a shock. When I was little I used to fast forward through the slow songs, but now I really enjoy them.]
The Rescuers Down Under (1990) ✰✰✰✰
[^ What I liked most about the first was the story, animation, villains and songs. The sequel's strong points for me are the backgrounds, instrumental music and the Marahute sequence. I always thought Jake the kangaroo mouse was cool character.]
Howl's Moving Castle (2004) ✰✰✰✰
[^ Not sure what I just watched tonight, but it was spectacular. I'm a sucker for Beauty & the Beast and/or Cupid & Psyche tales, especially unusual ones like this. The characters were so likeable. Even when I was confused about what was happening it was still enjoyable to look at. I watched the dubbed Disney version.]

[TheSequelOfDisney]

The Rescuers - It has been a very long time since I've seen this film, and I have to say that I really quite enjoyed it. Is it anything spectacular? No, but it's really heartwarming. You end up really caring for Bernard, Bianca and Penny, and you want them to get out of danger. There are some nice songs in here, too. The animation may not be the best, but the story, though relatively simple, is well done. I only watched it on DVD (I bought the Blu-ray, but I don't have a player at school), and I haven't gone through the bonus features, but this seems like it's a pretty okay release. I do wish there were more bonus features, though. I'll definitely have to re-watch this soon.

The Rescuers Down Under - Again, I hadn't seen this in I don't know when. It's very interesting that Disney made a sequel to The Rescuers, but I can see why with such a nice pairing of Bernard and Bianca. I actually loved Bernard more in this film than the original because you can definitely tell that even though he's super reluctant, he'll do as much as he can to help save Cody and Marahute (and her eggs). Wilbur's an okay addition, but I do kind of miss Orville. The rest of the characters are interesting, too; I'm not sure whether I prefer Medusa or McLeach because they're both pretty good villains. I may just like this better than the original, but I'd have to think about it (the one thing I did dislike was that there are so many supporting characters, ie talking animals, that didn't necessarily need to appear). Pretty good film, but I wish we got more than just a 10 minute making-of.

Pocahontas - For some reason, I just really love this film. It's probably because I love the songs and score so much and the animation is pretty astounding. Even though it is one of the more serious films in Disney's cannon, I feel like we needed a serious film somewhere, and I think Pocahontas definitely fits the bill. This time around, though, I had to watch the original cut; it's not bad, of course, but when I came to the part where I'm so used to seeing If I Never Knew You, I greatly missed it. It adds so much to the story and the characters that it's a shame that it wasn't included in this new Blu-ray/DVD release. It's definitely a missed opportunity. Thank God that I have my 10th Anniversary DVD set at home so I can watch the film with the inclusion of If I Never Knew You. This is definitely one of my favorites from the 90s.

[BelleGirl]

A couple of films I've seen this August:

On a vacation on The Ilse of Wight, Ryde, me and my friend saw two movies in the cinema in a single day. A first time for me . They were:

Brave
This newest release from Pixar may be deemed less original or surprising than its predecessors, I really enjoyed it: It was funny, well-animated, and exiting. I don't know if Merida should be regarded as the umpteenth Disney princess or the first Pixar princess, but either way she is the first princess under the Disney wing that has a truly interesting relationship with her mother. Mostly the mothers of Disney princesses were either dead - sometimes replaced by wicked stepmothers- or had a very modest part in the story and no personality at all. This is certainly not the case with Eleanore:a loving mother who means well and want the best for her daughter but clashes with her, both mother and daughter being equally strong-willed and stubborn. I think a lot of mothers and (teenage) daughter will recognize something of themselves in Merida and Eleanor.
Will definitely pick up this film and add this to my collection when it is released on DVD.

The Bourne Legacy
A bit hard to understand the story: something to do with a medicine that improved human capacities. Didn't matter, there was a lot of action and enough excitement to keep the movie interesting. Explosions, confrontation of the hero with a wolf in Alaska; a lot of shooting and killing and a spectacular chase and flight on a motorbike as finale.

On TV/dvd back home:

The Pink Panther (1964). First in the series, slow moving story with a few laughs and bumbling inspector Clouseau in a surprisingly minor role. He is too stupid to see that his wife cheats on him with the man who is also 'The phantom' (David Niven)

The Inspector General (1949) on a DVD I bought in Ryde
This Danny Kaye vehicle is much older than the Pink Panther bur far more quicker paced and much funnier in my opinion. I thought I knew the film by heart, but seeing it again after many years I was surprised to see several scenes I didn't remember. Kaye was a multi-talent who could act, sing and dance and was good at mimicking and imitating accents.
Isn't there a Danny Kaye collection box? There should be one.
[/b]

[PixarFan2006]

I watched some of True Grit (2010) last night.

[PixarFan2006]

Frenzy (1972)

I bought this yesterday for $5. It may be far from Hitchcock's best (I need to see more of his films), but it still did have it's moments. It's the usual story of a man being accused of a crime he did not commit (being in the wrong place at the wrong time). I thought it had some good camerawork though.

[JiminyCrick91]

Ok so I AM cheating on this one but I have been to Toronto International Film Festival this evening and thus what I did watch WAS film related.



Jason Reitman's Live Read of American Beauty as portrayed by Bryan Cranston, Christina Hendricks, Paul Scheer, Adam Driver, Mae Whitman,
George Stroumboulopoulos (a Canadian radio and TV host), Nick Kroll, and Sarah Gadon. This was an amazing experience. As an actor myself, between my unreleased indie film and school, I've been a part of and seen my fair share of table readings but this was simply astounding. So pro, so electric. I wish Reitman would record these things because the world at large deserves to see Bryan Cranston's take on Lester Burnham. He can do so much with just his voice and face that you forget that they are not doing all the actions that Jason Reitman is reading out. It feels so vivid you see it all WITHOUT seeing it. Wonderful, wonderful cast. There was a bit of a sigh of disappointment that the Chris Cooper role was to have been played by Woody Harrelson but that washed away right away. Spectacular is all I can really say right now.

-Skyler