Reply to topic  [ 281 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 19  Next
Mini Reviews that leave Large Exit Wounds 
Author Message
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:01 pm
Posts: 5190
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
My efforts to catch up with Hollywood on my vacation continue with:

Captain America: Civil War (2016) - So, first of all, I knew it wasn't going to happen, but I lament that Helmut Zemo never donned a hot pink outfit with animal fur-lined shoulders like he did in the comics. The fight scenes were choreographed nicely, with a few CGI/wire-enhanced jump kicks and what not for good measure that never felt forced. I was surprised that so much of the story revolved around Bucky/Winter Soldier. In other words, after "Thunderbolt" Ross introduces the Superhero Registration Act thingie, I thought we'd get more ideological/verbal wars than we did, but instead, lots of long set pieces revolving around making sure that Bucky doesn't die. Now, the whole thing about the lady blaming Stark for her son's death in the beginning (and another character later on). I'm assuming she wasn't privy to the details on Ultron's creation, so when you have a battle for the human race itself, why place blame for not saving a handful of lives when a million were saved immediately and six billion more in the long run? I can understand Stark accepting the blame, but...whatever. One thing that the film didn't really mention at the end: Team Cap may have been busted from the joint, but I'm going to assume that Hawkeye's family relations will have been irreparably damaged, as he probably won't be able to go back home (at least not immediately).

Mockingjay, Part 2 (2015) - As visual shorthand for the novel, it does a good job. Unfortunately, a lot of the deaths are diluted to keep the rating a PG-13 (so the melting beam becomes a disintegration beam, and the purple "bleed-from-all-orifices" ray is simply not present), and we don't even get to know the team that well , so it's hard to have any emotional reaction when everybody starts dying. My reaction was: Who died? Aw, I'm too lazy to rewind and see who it was.

Red Riding Hood (2011) - I'm not huge for blondes, but there's something about Amanda Seyfried that just captivates me. Can't describe what it is. She has the same willowy-yet-strong seductiveness to her that Chinese actress Zhou Xun has. There's some very nice atmosphere and music in this movie, especially during the celebration of the "successful" wolf hunt. But the film on the whole is rather "meh". I'm glad that director Catherine Hardwicke brought in former Jackie Chan stunt team member Andy Cheng (who worked with her in Twilight) to help out with the second-unit directing. That was pretty neat to see his name in the credits.

Beautiful Creatures (2013) - A post-Twilight movie about a boy in a Southern Bible Belt town who falls for the new girl, who happens to be a witch...I mean "caster." According to the story's rules for witches, at age 16, a witch will either be claimed to the Light or the Dark, sort of like the Harry Potter Sorting Hat by way of the force. If you have any fear or trace amounts of negative emotions, there's a good chance you'll be drafted to the dark, even if you don't want to. Or so the movie says. I think I liked this more than Red Riding Hood, and I liked that the two leads looked more like your average person than your typical pretty boy/girl teen protagonists. The cast is good and it's great to see Emmy Rossum vamping it up and giving a good performance, especially after being introduced to her via the tragedy that was Dragon Ball: Evolution. The problem is that the film is simultaneously too long for what it accomplished and too short for what it should've done. A lot of the mythology regarding the casters isn't explained enough, so much of the dialog and the final conflict sort passed over my head. I also found the depiction of Southern Christians as intolerant, Bible-thumping a**holes to be irritating, but then I just paused and pondered on that for a moment before just letting it go.

Suicide Squad (2016) - Uhhh...That was a thing. The movie is structured in a weird way and the script on the whole is rather uninvolving. I mean, I didn't even realize that a major character had died until after the movie when I looked up the movie on the Wikipedia to see if I missed something in the plot. That means that the characters had so little emotional impact that I didn't even notice one of them missing at the end. And what was the point of putting Katana in the movie? Just to have an analog to Psylocke, considering that this movie had a very similar plot and theme to X-Men: Apocalypse.

Maniac (2012) - A remake of the 1980 classic, brought to you by Alejandre Aja (he wrote and produced), the same fellow who gave us remakes to Piranha and The Hills Have Eyes. The gimmick here is that our title maniac, mannequin restorer Frank Zitto, is played by Elijah Wood and the film is shot almost entirely in first person perspective. The numerous scalpings are not for the squeamish and the final 15 minutes alternate between super creepy, ultra gory and outright bizarre. The film is a bit slow at times, but the stalking sequences are well done and strangely enough, I often found myself saying to Frank, "Be careful! You'll give yourself aw---oh right, you probably should do that if we want to see innocent people not get killed in violent ways."

_________________
I wrote a book!


Tue Jan 31, 2017 7:12 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 9:12 pm
Posts: 3800
Location: Minnesota
Hman wrote:
Suicide Squad (2016) - Uhhh...That was a thing. The movie is structured in a weird way and the script on the whole is rather uninvolving. I mean, I didn't even realize that a major character had died until after the movie when I looked up the movie on the Wikipedia to see if I missed something in the plot. That means that the characters had so little emotional impact that I didn't even notice one of them missing at the end. And what was the point of putting Katana in the movie? Just to have an analog to Psylocke, considering that this movie had a very similar plot and theme to X-Men: Apocalypse.


Apparently they actually hired a company that specializes in editing trailers to edit this movie.

_________________
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised." - Brian Warner

"Marlowe's overreacting, Marlowe's taking it wrong, Marlowe's lighting kittens on fire again..." - Marlowe, on how the rest of the board sees him

"What we have here is one hellaciously well-built monument." - Bergerjacques, on the Lincoln Memorial

"Folks, we need a way to get Uwe Boll to inadvertantly touch Tony Jaa's elephant." - Beggar So's Hat speaks truth


Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:09 pm
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 6:41 pm
Posts: 9443
Location: Carlisle, Kentucky
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 - After listening to audiobooks of the entire series, I figured I might as well watch the movie cycle. In general, I was pretty damned disappointed in the entire 8-movie lot - with the slight exception of Prisoner of Azkaban. Alfonso Cuaron brought visual style, beautiful use of the whomping tree to indicate the passage of the seasons (acts), and a respect for the theme of that book instead of just hitting on the plot points like Cliff's Notes. No other director ever did as well - outside of unfairly derided Chris Columbus-directed ones. Outside of Azkaban, I much prefer Columbus' too faithful adaptations of the first two novels to any other treatment. But nothing hits quite as rock bottom as David Yates' direction of the final book.
Rowling's book has its definite low points, with a bloated middle so overloaded with petulant whining that I would have given up on the printed version and cast the pages to a well-deserved fire. The only book worse overall than The Deathly Hallows is Chamber of Secrets. But unlike the shallowness of the second book, The Deathly Hallows at least deals with two rather important themes: the deconstruction of Dumbledore (disillusion) as well as in the old tale of the Deathly Hallows (death). (I rather think the Lovegoods - Luna and her father - were utterly mistreated as characters throughout the series. Even though they are the source of reliable information about the Deathly Hallows, they are still basically exposition.)
Whether by design or sheer lack of insight, the screenplay by Steve Kloves and direction by Yates misses the most important points entirely. And they gave themselves well over 4 hours in which to utterly fail. There are no less than four or five narrative threads in the Deathly Hallows - some of which were worth telling - and Kloves/Yates chose the worst possible one. And even in carrying out that one thread, they mishandled that one bad enough by denying side characters the respect they deserved. Neville, above all, deserved a much greater heroic moment than a cameo. And the high noon climactic moment without an audience between Voldemort and Potter was equally bad. I guess there was no sense in actually trying to do anything more than make a money grab out of it because the movies practically had a guaranteed box office. But man, I wish they had tried a little more.

The Boxtrolls - On the other side of the spectrum, thanks to a wise decision to buy the DVD collection of Laika animation (ParaNorman, Coraline, The Boxtrolls, and Kubo and the Two Strings), I have been impressed enough to consider the animation studio well on par with anything Disney/Pixar, Studio Ghibli, or Aardman has produced. And my opinion is based almost solely on my reaction to The Boxtrolls which I think counts as having played quite a bit under the radar of the other animation houses. The Boxtrolls breaks rules in almost the same way that Rock n Roll High School did back in 1979-80. The heroic characters are villains, the main villain is likeable and sympathetic (and actually wins in the end), it's characters are not pretty in any conventional sense, and the people of the village of Cheesebridge, particularly the snotty upper crust, richly deserve their comeuppance by the villain. The central pair, Eggs and Winnie, are great together - particularly Winnie who is so intrigued and excited about the tales of the murderous, man-eating Boxtrolls that she is quite disappointed when they turn out to be nice. The stop motion animation is exceptional. Some folks have reacted negatively to it, so mileages vary. But given the general tastes of the BMMB neighborhood, I think you'll find Boxtrolls worth a rent at least.

_________________
Oh yeah, down here, I am considered the apotheosis of cool - Sewer Urchin

This is an appalling film. And for some of you, well worth your time - SSM

I like the way this board thinks


Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:35 pm
Profile WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 9:12 pm
Posts: 3800
Location: Minnesota
Bergerjacques wrote:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 - After listening to audiobooks of the entire series, I figured I might as well watch the movie cycle. In general, I was pretty damned disappointed in the entire 8-movie lot - with the slight exception of Prisoner of Azkaban. Alfonso Cuaron brought visual style, beautiful use of the whomping tree to indicate the passage of the seasons (acts), and a respect for the theme of that book instead of just hitting on the plot points like Cliff's Notes. No other director ever did as well - outside of unfairly derided Chris Columbus-directed ones. Outside of Azkaban, I much prefer Columbus' too faithful adaptations of the first two novels to any other treatment. But nothing hits quite as rock bottom as David Yates' direction of the final book.
Rowling's book has its definite low points, with a bloated middle so overloaded with petulant whining that I would have given up on the printed version and cast the pages to a well-deserved fire. The only book worse overall than The Deathly Hallows is Chamber of Secrets. But unlike the shallowness of the second book, The Deathly Hallows at least deals with two rather important themes: the deconstruction of Dumbledore (disillusion) as well as in the old tale of the Deathly Hallows (death). (I rather think the Lovegoods - Luna and her father - were utterly mistreated as characters throughout the series.)
Whether by design or sheer lack of insight, the screenplay by Steve Kloves and direction by Yates misses the most important points entirely. And they gave themselves well over 4 hours in which to utterly fail. There are no less than four or five narrative threads in the Deathly Hallows - some of which were worth telling - and Kloves/Yates chose the worst possible one. And even in carrying out that one thread, they mishandled that one bad enough by denying side characters the respect they deserved. Neville, above all, deserved a much greater heroic moment than a cameo. And the high noon climactic moment without an audience between Voldemort and Potter was equally bad. I guess there was no sense in actually trying to do anything more than make a money grab out of it because the movies practically had a guaranteed box office. But man, I wish they had tried a little more.


That book was the point at which I stopped considering myself a fan of anything Potter-related. Rowling's desperate meddling in her universe after the story was over just made the decision firmer.

People talk about Neville being awesome, but so much of it happens off-page (or off-camera, as it may be) that I can't possibly agree with it.

The ads made it look like the film would TRY to give the story an actual conclusion instead of "Harry talks a lot, Voldemort casts a spell, it bounces off and kills him mid-paragraph so Harry's hands stay clean". Does it actually?

_________________
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised." - Brian Warner

"Marlowe's overreacting, Marlowe's taking it wrong, Marlowe's lighting kittens on fire again..." - Marlowe, on how the rest of the board sees him

"What we have here is one hellaciously well-built monument." - Bergerjacques, on the Lincoln Memorial

"Folks, we need a way to get Uwe Boll to inadvertantly touch Tony Jaa's elephant." - Beggar So's Hat speaks truth


Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:21 pm
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 6:41 pm
Posts: 9443
Location: Carlisle, Kentucky
Mr. Paradox wrote:
Bergerjacques wrote:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 - After listening to audiobooks of the entire series, I figured I might as well watch the movie cycle. In general, I was pretty damned disappointed in the entire 8-movie lot - with the slight exception of Prisoner of Azkaban. Alfonso Cuaron brought visual style, beautiful use of the whomping tree to indicate the passage of the seasons (acts), and a respect for the theme of that book instead of just hitting on the plot points like Cliff's Notes. No other director ever did as well - outside of unfairly derided Chris Columbus-directed ones. Outside of Azkaban, I much prefer Columbus' too faithful adaptations of the first two novels to any other treatment. But nothing hits quite as rock bottom as David Yates' direction of the final book.
Rowling's book has its definite low points, with a bloated middle so overloaded with petulant whining that I would have given up on the printed version and cast the pages to a well-deserved fire. The only book worse overall than The Deathly Hallows is Chamber of Secrets. But unlike the shallowness of the second book, The Deathly Hallows at least deals with two rather important themes: the deconstruction of Dumbledore (disillusion) as well as in the old tale of the Deathly Hallows (death). (I rather think the Lovegoods - Luna and her father - were utterly mistreated as characters throughout the series. Even though they are the source of reliable information about the Hallows, they are still basically exposition.)
Whether by design or sheer lack of insight, the screenplay by Steve Kloves and direction by Yates misses the most important points entirely. And they gave themselves well over 4 hours in which to utterly fail. There are no less than four or five narrative threads in the Deathly Hallows - some of which were worth telling - and Kloves/Yates chose the worst possible one. And even in carrying out that one thread, they mishandled that one bad enough by denying side characters the respect they deserved. Neville, above all, deserved a much greater heroic moment than a cameo. And the high noon climactic moment without an audience between Voldemort and Potter was equally bad. I guess there was no sense in actually trying to do anything more than make a money grab out of it because the movies practically had a guaranteed box office. But man, I wish they had tried a little more.


That book was the point at which I stopped considering myself a fan of anything Potter-related. Rowling's desperate meddling in her universe after the story was over just made the decision firmer.

People talk about Neville being awesome, but so much of it happens off-page (or off-camera, as it may be) that I can't possibly agree with it.

The ads made it look like the film would TRY to give the story an actual conclusion instead of "Harry talks a lot, Voldemort casts a spell, it bounces off and kills him mid-paragraph so Harry's hands stay clean". Does it actually?


You don't know what the flock happens. During the final battle, Harry and Vold have two separate wand-to-wand stand offs. In the last one, Harry gets the super wand and somehow, Voldemort just flakes away like human psoriasis. I prefer the non-climax in front of everyone in the book, where at least Voldemort acknowledges affection for Bellatrix Lestrange and we get some insight into Tom Riddle. Harry wins with an audience watching.

By the way - which are the most wasted opportunities in the Wizarding World franchise so far? The movies - Helena Bonham Carter giving these wonderful unhinged cameos as Bellatrix Lestrange and no filmmaker ever writing extended scenes just to let her run with it. Or, the books - The House Elves - clearly more powerful than wizards and witches. Rowling made some attempts in the second and third novel to have them do something against their oppression with Hermione figuring out their unique culture, then that whole thread was just dropped after Goblet of Fire.

_________________
Oh yeah, down here, I am considered the apotheosis of cool - Sewer Urchin

This is an appalling film. And for some of you, well worth your time - SSM

I like the way this board thinks


Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:53 pm
Profile WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 9:12 pm
Posts: 3800
Location: Minnesota
Bergerjacques wrote:
You don't know what the flock happens. During the final battle, Harry and Vold have two separate wand-to-wand stand offs. In the last one, Harry gets the super wand and somehow, Voldemort just flakes away like human psoriasis. I prefer the non-climax in front of everyone in the book, where at least Voldemort acknowledges affection for Bellatrix Lestrange and we get some insight into Tom Riddle. Harry wins with an audience watching.


Honestly, I'd still prefer any sort of actual battle to JK Rowling promising us a final battle for seven f***ing books and then killing the villain mid-f***ing-paragraph. Also, I kind of like the idea of the two facing off all alone. Voldemort killed Harry's parents with no one watching, he dies with no one watching.

Quote:
By the way - which are the most wasted opportunities in the Wizarding World franchise so far? The movies - Helena Bonham Carter giving these wonderful unhinged cameos as Bellatrix Lestrange and no filmmaker ever writing extended scenes just to let her run with it. Or, the books - The House Elves - clearly more powerful than wizards and witches. Rowling made some attempts in the second and third novel to have them do something against their oppression with Hermione figuring out their unique culture, then that whole thread was just dropped after Goblet of Fire.


What gets me about the House Elves is that they're a race of happy slaves, and the one person trying to help them is told "But they LIKE being slaves!" and gives up. (If you believe Rowling's chatter, Hermione actually does improve their lot after the books end, but that's more of her meddling with the series after it's over.)

Biggest waste of opportunity? I'm spoiled for choice in the books, but for the films - remember how, in the film version of Half-Blood Prince, they burn down the Burrow? If only the filmmakers hadn't pussied the f*** out and slammed the Reset Button on it.

EDIT: I just got a book one. Snape starts out as a dick, and then we discover he's using it as a front for the incredibly dangerous game of double-agenting against Voldemort. That's cool. Then Rowling reveals he's doing it all because he never got over his high school crush. That's bulls***. Rips his spine right out. People can never bitch about Anakin again.

_________________
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised." - Brian Warner

"Marlowe's overreacting, Marlowe's taking it wrong, Marlowe's lighting kittens on fire again..." - Marlowe, on how the rest of the board sees him

"What we have here is one hellaciously well-built monument." - Bergerjacques, on the Lincoln Memorial

"Folks, we need a way to get Uwe Boll to inadvertantly touch Tony Jaa's elephant." - Beggar So's Hat speaks truth


Wed Feb 01, 2017 3:05 am
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:01 pm
Posts: 5190
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
My thoughts on Harry Potter:

I liked the books just fine and don't have many major complaints as to how Rowling handled the story, although I can sympathize with anyone who complained about the middle section of the final book. It was weird that the bulk of the last book wasn't set at Hogwarts, but okay. I can dig it.

I liked the first four movies a lot. I'm disappointed that the fourth movie didn't give us any blast-tailed screwts, but I liked everything else. And then David Yates stepped into the picture. A lot of people have praised his work, God only knows why. I hated his version of the climax to ...Order of the Phoenix, as the book gave us crawling brains and all sorts of bizarre rooms inside the Ministry of Magic, while the film gave us a few spells, Ginny casting a spell to break some glass, and that's about it. And the big kiss between Harry and Cho didn't even feel all that big (Yates would make the same mistake in the next film when the big kiss between Harry and Ginny happens). The final book was full of great cinematic moments of romance, heroism and whatnot, but Yates used none of it. Much like Order of the Phoenix, the finale is botched because Yates insists on doing a series of intimate mini-climaxes instead of something big with everybody present. It blows hard, as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, one more movie I forgot to review:

10 Cloverfield Lane - The spiritual sequel to Cloverfield has manic pixie girl Mary Elizabeth Winstead getting in a car accident as the Plot Point News Bulletin on her car radio mentions some weird stuff happening on the East Coast (she's presumably somewhere in Texas or Louisiana). She wakes up in a bunker built by John Goodman, who also shares the place with a local hick. Goodman says that there's been an attack on American soil and that the air has been contaminated, so she can't go out (although she certainly does try a few times). She eventually gets used to life in the bunker, until one day she discovers something while fixing the air filtration system...

I found it to be very suspenseful and entertaining. I knew about the last minute "twist" that I agree with others is out of step tonally with everything that came before it, but in the end I can accept it. It's still pretty creepy and leaves a lot to the imagination. I'm now excited about the third film in the series, God Particle, which is set to come out this year.

_________________
I wrote a book!


Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:29 am
Profile YIM WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:01 pm
Posts: 5190
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Mr. Paradox wrote:
Hman wrote:
Suicide Squad (2016) - Uhhh...That was a thing. The movie is structured in a weird way and the script on the whole is rather uninvolving. I mean, I didn't even realize that a major character had died until after the movie when I looked up the movie on the Wikipedia to see if I missed something in the plot. That means that the characters had so little emotional impact that I didn't even notice one of them missing at the end. And what was the point of putting Katana in the movie? Just to have an analog to Psylocke, considering that this movie had a very similar plot and theme to X-Men: Apocalypse.


Apparently they actually hired a company that specializes in editing trailers to edit this movie.


That was related to them trying to make the movie funnier a la Guardians of the Galaxy and Deadpool, right?

_________________
I wrote a book!


Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:33 am
Profile YIM WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2001 2:24 am
Posts: 6579
Location: Tyrannia (NOTE: This is a lie.)
Hman wrote:
Mr. Paradox wrote:
Hman wrote:
Suicide Squad (2016) - Uhhh...That was a thing. The movie is structured in a weird way and the script on the whole is rather uninvolving. I mean, I didn't even realize that a major character had died until after the movie when I looked up the movie on the Wikipedia to see if I missed something in the plot. That means that the characters had so little emotional impact that I didn't even notice one of them missing at the end. And what was the point of putting Katana in the movie? Just to have an analog to Psylocke, considering that this movie had a very similar plot and theme to X-Men: Apocalypse.


Apparently they actually hired a company that specializes in editing trailers to edit this movie.


That was related to them trying to make the movie funnier a la Guardians of the Galaxy and Deadpool, right?


The sequence more or less went like this: Make grimdark movie to fit in with Zack Synder's vision, watch two other Snyder-helmed movies blow up on the launch pad, take movie that was already shot and edited and cram in pop songs to be more like Guardians of the Galaxy and jokes to be more like Deadpool while remaining a PG-13 action film. But it was doomed from the start, because four people with guns, a guy who throws a stick, and Hot Topic Mallet Clown aren't actually going to be able to do anything against Superman in a fight and that was their putative reason for existing as a super team.

Zack Snyder is the worst possible choice to set up a superhero universe because he doesn't understand any of the things he's adapted going back to the Dawn of the Dead remake and because he appears to hate characters that need to be rescued, which is kind of a big thing when you're in a Superman movie. Additionally, his preferred superhero universe color palate of dark blue, dark grey and dark blue-grey means the movies aren't particularly interesting to look at while you're watching them (contrast that with Dr. Strange or Guardians of the Galaxy, both of which feature bright colors in the background and on the characters' skins and clothing).

_________________
Checkpoint Telstar enters the ring for the RussellMania review roundtable, taking a look at Ken Russell's 1971 masterpiece The Devils.

The Fiasco Brothers Watch a Movie watch Vampyr and talk about dream logic in a silent German film about a vampyr.


Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:58 am
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 2:17 pm
Posts: 2778
Location: Baltimore, MD
Snyder needs to be told exactly what to do. If you give him a well-defined narrative and visual structure, he can direct within that structure. See Dawn and 300 and Watchmen.

But if you give him a blank sheet of paper, sheet is what you'll get. He is the second coming of Ridley Scott, without the keen visual aesthetic.

_________________
Charnelhouse


Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:10 pm
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 6:41 pm
Posts: 9443
Location: Carlisle, Kentucky
Charnelhouse wrote:
Snyder needs to be told exactly what to do. If you give him a well-defined narrative and visual structure, he can direct within that structure. See Dawn and 300 and Watchmen.

But if you give him a blank sheet of paper, sheet is what you'll get. He is the second coming of Ridley Scott, without the keen visual aesthetic.


Like him or hate him, Snyder has a unique and recognizable style. Whether that style translates into quality is debatable, but he is definitely not generic.

_________________
Oh yeah, down here, I am considered the apotheosis of cool - Sewer Urchin

This is an appalling film. And for some of you, well worth your time - SSM

I like the way this board thinks


Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:09 pm
Profile WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 2:17 pm
Posts: 2778
Location: Baltimore, MD
Bergerjacques wrote:
Charnelhouse wrote:
Snyder needs to be told exactly what to do. If you give him a well-defined narrative and visual structure, he can direct within that structure. See Dawn and 300 and Watchmen.

But if you give him a blank sheet of paper, sheet is what you'll get. He is the second coming of Ridley Scott, without the keen visual aesthetic.


Like him or hate him, Snyder has a unique and recognizable style. Whether that style translates into quality is debatable, but he is definitely not generic.


See, I'm not sure if I agree. When I look at 300, I feel I'm seeing the style of the graphic novel. Same with Watchmen. And it's because he slavishly adheres to the original structure. Neither is his take on the source - it IS the source.

Then you have Dawn, in which I think the main credit has to go to James Gunn's script, which IS an original take on the source. I feel his recent works have been largely rudderless, mostly because no one is creating the structure for him.

_________________
Charnelhouse


Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:45 pm
Profile
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:44 pm
Posts: 6705
Location: London, Ontario
Resident Evil: The Final Chapter may not be a "good" movie but you almost have to admire the filmmakers for their seemingly complete lack of care for continuity or logic, as long as it looks cool it must be cool. You can tell Milla Jovovich loves playing Alice and Iain Glen is clearly relishing his turn as a villain while taking a break from filming Game of Thrones. Not a good movie but I had fun.

You can read my full review here: Resident Evil: The Final Chapter

_________________
End of Line

Read my reviews at Mana Pop.


Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:54 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:54 am
Posts: 6598
Location: California's #2 tourist destination
Charnelhouse wrote:
See, I'm not sure if I agree. When I look at 300, I feel I'm seeing the style of the graphic novel. Same with Watchmen. And it's because he slavishly adheres to the original structure. Neither is his take on the source - it IS the source.

Hey, Snyder did have a contribution to make to Watchmen -- it was his brilliant idea to mold fake muscles into Ozy's costume, as a commentary (or something) on other superhero movies.

_________________
"This is a Star Trek that pretends to have balls, but continues to prove that those balls are actually rubber prophylactics pretending to be balls." -- Bj

b l e s s e d    a r e    t h e    c h e e s e m a k e r s


Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:36 pm
Profile WWW
Burning Godzilla
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:09 pm
Posts: 4448
RINGS - 2002's The Ring had a supremely silly premise about a cursed videotape that was somehow tied to the tragic death of an evil little girl, who now roams the earth as vengeful spirit that kills anyone who watched the tape. The story didn't make a lot of sense, and probably made less sense the closer you looked at it. Still, the film managed to be successful, thanks to a tense and atmospheric style by director Gore Verbinski, and a strong lead performance by Naomi Watts. Over time, the effectiveness of that film (and the original Japanese movie that inspired it) was diluted by the inferior sequel we got in 2005, as well as a string of low rent knock offs, all remakes of other Asian horror films, such as The Grudge, One Missed Call, Pulse and Dark Water. Rings is an attempt to reboot the franchise and bring it back to the forefront where it once stood, but all it does is ram home the fact that the image of the ghoulish girl with the long, greasy black hair covering its face is just not scary anymore.

Just like other early year releases like The Bye Bye Man and Monster Trucks, Rings has taken a longer than expected trip to the big screen. Originally filmed and set to be released back in 2015, the original cut scored poorly with test audiences, and so the movie went under a series of major reshoots in an attempt to save it. During that time, the movie was pushed around a large variety of release dates for the past two years, until it is finally just now hitting theaters. Say what you will about the earlier Ring films, at least they seemed to be targeting an adult audience, and gave us an interesting lead heroine with Naomi Watt's Rachel, as she tried to uncover the truth behind the mystery haunting her. Rings, on the other hand, is strictly teen horror fluff. The direction by F. Javier Gutierrez (a Spanish filmmaker making his Hollywood debut) is bland and shows no distinction, the characters are your typical teenage idiots who walk blindly into one dangerous situation after another, and any suspense the earlier films may have built has been replaced with lame, overblown horror sequences, such as the one that opens the film, where the evil ghost Samara somehow is able to take down an entire airliner by crawling out of the monitor in the cockpit. Yes.

The only people I can see this movie appealing to are the small handful who are truly interested in learning more about Samara's pitiful backstory, and how she became the vengeful little ghoul that she is today. Rings is truly recycled in every sense of the word. From its images, to its ideas, right down to its scares, it's constantly reminding you of better movies that came before it. It doesn't want to thrill, or create a sense of tension or even fun in its audience. It simply wanders down the same path the first movie died, only with an occasional detour or two that just doesn't work. Instead of reviving the franchise, this reboot is likely to bury it further in the ground. At least it's nice to think so.

Full review on Reel Opinions.

_________________
Visit my movie review site - Reel Opinions at keiichisreelopinions.blogspot.com
Recently added reviews: Logan Lucky, The Hitman's Bodyguard

"By Milk Kitchen (is no dead)" - The last thing one sees while watching "Sawai Miyuu's You".

"Home is definitely where the heart is. Along with some spleen. And a little chunk of liver in the hall." Tagline for Silent Hill 4: The Room


Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:16 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 281 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 19  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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

Jump to:  

Forum hosting by ProphpBB | Software by phpBB | Report Abuse | Privacy