The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
VinylGuy wrote:
Yeah i dont know about that. The guy who directed has shown a lot of love for some classics. I get that you hate it because it has the A24 logo before, but damn if its not an impressive well crafted movie.
And Toni Colette.
It’s laughable, amateurish dogshit with a garbage script and ugly cinematography. Whenever Aster talks about it and his influences, he runs the gamut of condescending art horror cliches. I hate all these damn movies and directors.
Yeah i dont know about that. The guy who directed has shown a lot of love for some classics. I get that you hate it because it has the A24 logo before, but damn if its not an impressive well crafted movie.
And Toni Colette.
It’s laughable, amateurish dogshit with a garbage script and ugly cinematography. Whenever Aster talks about it and his influences, he runs the gamut of condescending art horror cliches. I hate all these damn movies and directors.
Yeah i dont know about that. The guy who directed has shown a lot of love for some classics. I get that you hate it because it has the A24 logo before, but damn if its not an impressive well crafted movie.
And Toni Colette.
It’s laughable, amateurish dogshit with a garbage script and ugly cinematography. Whenever Aster talks about it and his influences, he runs the gamut of condescending art horror cliches. I hate all these damn movies and directors.
amateurish? pretty much everything they do is so fucking hard to accomplish. The Cinematography is a beauty, looks like a Gregory Crewdson pic. Its fine if you dont like it, but there is nothing amateurish about this movie. Not one bit.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm Posts: 32355 Location: Buenos Aires
I fall somewhere in between VinylGuy's proclaiming it the movie of the year and LV's usual hyperbolic "this is AMATEURISH GARBAGE that is WORTHLESS DOGSHIT for FUCK PEASANTS", but probably a bit closer to the latter
It's such a slow, boring, seldom scary, barely ever interesting movie. LV is way off on his "amateurish" claim-- it is a very skillfully made film, and I really liked the look of it; the Gregory Crewdson allusions are pretty in-your-face but it works for the story. The cast is great, even though they're not always able to sell some of the more ludicrous story turns. There are a lot of unintentionally humorous moments, as well as a few powerful and disturbing ones. Overall, I spent a huge chunk of the movie wanting for it to be over.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Shitty horror flick, but the lead actress is stunning.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 9:08 pm Posts: 4738 Location: 5th floor, Bay 7, position 5740
Theory of Everything came up on the Netflix queue. I should probably really up date it. It was fine as far as bio pics go. I can see why Eddie Redmayne got the Oscar but it had that award bait feel the whole time.
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:03 pm Posts: 9359 Location: Washington State
Just finished Annihilation. Jesus. I had an easier time figuring out what was going on in the books!
That bear was pretty wild. Didn't care for the ending, thought it explained too much while not explaining enough, if that makes sense. Like I know he was a copy but why would the field dropping make him 'better'?
Actually not bad. Had a realism to it that many similar movies miss.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm Posts: 47209 Location: In the oatmeal aisle wearing a Shellac shirt
tragabigzanda wrote:
Last Flag Flying.
Like a lot of Linklater, the characters transcend the filmmaking technique. Steve Carrell has barely any lines, yet he owns the whole film. Despite being based on a book, it feels more like a play.
It's a road movie; a war movie (Vietnam and Iraq 2003); a film about men; about getting older and death; about regrets and looking forward; about religion; addiction... It's all of those things and none of those things, because it's really just four guys talking as they transport a body across the country.
Linklater gets a little schmaltzy at times, but then other scenes hit really hard. One scene in particular got me choked up -- Cicely Tyson outshines Carrell with about two minutes of screen time.
Unless you're a big Linklater fan; feeling particularly pensive; or maybe if you're a veteran (I'm just guessing), you can probably skip it. But I really enjoyed it, despite it being mostly a bummer.
Had an interaction yesterday that is making me reflect more on this movie...
So I met my new neighbor yesterday afternoon, outside on our adjacent patios. She is young, maybe 24, and has her first kid, a six-month old. She is also evidently a little "slow" (is there a better way to say this?); she sounds as though she is hard of hearing, but the lack of any apparent hearing device, and her easy ability to carry on conversation without needing to see my lips, makes me think it's some sort of minor mental disability...
I immediately start conjuring up these questions and assumptions about how it may have impacted her life, what it might mean for her child, etc, but then I caught myself and thought "Maybe not as much as I might assume."
In Last Flag Flying, there's a moment early on when Steve Carell reveals that his wife recently passed away; he also mentions that she was a little slow. His old war buddies try to prod him for more details on this, and he kind of brushes it aside, as if to say "It didn't have an impact on our day-to-day lives, nor my love for her." And then the topic is never revisited again in the movie.
This is what I love about Linklater. He uses the same device often, most notably in Boyhood: Events or elements that would become obvious plot points in most other movies are treated as just a part of life, nothing to be overly dramatized or fussed over. I think it's a big part of why I was able to catch myself going down a certain narrative path in my head with my neighbor yesterday. His characters breed empathy in my real world precisely because they are so real; and they are so real because the extraneous details of their lives are treated just as that: details that do not define who they are (or are not).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum