John's Reviews

The Fountain -

"Therefor, the Lord God banished Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden and placed a flaming sword to protect the tree of life." - Genesis 3:24

Words cannot express how much I adore The Fountain. Even so, my wish is to try and share my thoughts on this film because it truly is one of the most underrated films in cinema. It left theaters in the red and that is an atrocity. The cast poured their hearts and souls into this film, yet it's met with mundane reviews from simple minded viewers and poor box office numbers.

First off, I want to stress the importance of Jackman's performance in this film; it is nothing short of brilliant. It tops anything, and everything, he has done before it. I'm so impressed by it that if I ever meet the man, that is the only thing I will praise him on. This role deserves more recognition than anything else he's done, or will ever do. I cannot even begin to put this man's talent into words; it just needs to be seen.

The story follows three perspectives that weave together to form one tale -- acceptance. A 16th century conquistador, present day scientist, and future astronaut are all connected. However, the scientist is the part that drives the majority of the story. Tommy, the scientist, is fighting to find a cure for the love of his life -- Izzie. She's dying from brain cancer and Tommy's field of research is the reversal of brain tumors.

Rachel Weisz is an excellent choice for the vulnerable Izzie. This is one of her best performances, if not her best, but it is definitely overshadowed by Jackman. He manages to steal ever scene from her, but it doesn't take away from the film one bit. If you pay close attention to her acting you will easily see the brilliance I'm talking about. To be honest, I can't think of a single role of hers that doesn't top this one. It's raw, emotional, and powerful.

The visual effects are, hands down, out of this world; they are simply awe inspiring. However, the most stunning fact is the space scenes are not CGI; they're bacteria slides. This allows the film to hold up well in the years to come. They are some of the most beautiful and gripping space scenes -- ever. They will easily stand the test of time, and this film should be applauded for that fact.

Aronofsky has out done himself with this film. I don't know if it will ever be possible for him to top this piece of art, but I will definitely keep an eye out for his newer works. The Fountain will always be recognized as a stunning achievement by myself, and I will never pass up an opportunity to share it with others.

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

I agree with you 100%. I think the reason why it wasn't hot at the box office is because the critics were not smart enough to link the three tales together.

I think the best way to sum up why the critics didn't like it is because they couldn't sum it up in one sentence like, "Die Hard on a boat!!" or "Mobsters in space kicking alien arse!!"

Well, maybe some critics and objective viewers actually thought the sucka was boring and pretentious. Are you saying that that's impossible? I had already watched it once and was thoroughly unimpressed, but I knew, for a fact, that my Bro, a published writer, would love it for thematic and visual reasons. I was completely correct. As far as I'm concerned, I liked it a little bit better upon second viewing, but I still thought it was a Mess. I have to admit though, that I'm a Major Weirdo because I watch movies I don't even like multiple times, depending on how significant I find them. I find The Fountain significant but not good. Sorry!

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I really don't quite see how you could call it a "mess." If you're referring to the jumping of the story, then I would have to disagree. IMO, that only adds to story of a guy that just can't let go. His mind is jumping all over the place...."how do I save my wife? What if she dies? How do I live without her?" All this, and more, is represented by the constant shifting of the story/setting. I posted a length post in another thread about the entire film explaining how I saw it, and the above statement goes with my hypothesis on the film. It's all about one guy that just doesn't know how to let go...he's being torn apart by grief. I seriously can't find anything about this film I don't like and I find it even more brilliant the more I see it.

Trust me, I know what it's about. I also know what Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is about. If "what it is about" falls short of "what it's supposed to be about", then I find problems with a movie. My argument is that there is no reason why your interpretation of the film is better than mine. I can enjoy a movie I find severely flawed through its "underdeveloped overreaching" as much as anybody can love a "perfect movie", and there is certainly a possiblity that we can both be correct about the same movie and "seem" to be 180 degrees apart. Happy New Year, Bro! My wife's birthday is tomorrow!

Well, I still have to, respectfully, disagree on the grounds that you didn't write or direct the movie, so what do you know about "what it's supposed to be about?" Ever stopped to think that "what it is about" is the same thing as "what it's supposed to be about?" All the interviews I read from the director/writer and cast are what made me come up with my interpretation of the film. Anywho, it's a free world, mostly, so you can think anything ya want!

So you digested the idea that the film was supposed to have a 3-4 times larger budget than it did, and it was supposed to be far more complex, much longer and that the visuals had to be fudged due to lack of money? And it's perfect the way it is? "Ever stopped to think..."? Like I said, I have no problems with anybody loving anything.

Actually, just to set some things straight about The Fountain, I'm going to fill you in on some information.

To begin with, this film was originally approved to be shot with Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett at a tune of about $70 million dollars. Sets were built, storyboards were written, etc. However, Pitt had creativity differences and left the film for Troy back in 2004. When he left, Warner scrapped the project and sold all the sets. This original production was going to be using CGI, of course.

Now, Darren Aronofsky was *determined* to have this story told, so he teamed up with Kent Williams and released it as a graphic novel in 2005. I quote the director, "I knew it was a hard film to make and I said at least if Hollywood f***s me over at least I'll make a comic book out of it."

Mind you, he still wanted to shoot this flick, so he pitched the film to Warner again for the much smaller sum of $35 million dollars. First thing that had to go was the CGI, of course. Also, Aronofsky wanted the visuals to stand the test of time (much like 2001 and Star Wars). Highly detailed models, or in this case bacteria slides, will always age better than CGI. So this was an excellent move because it met the director's wish and bought the film in way under the original budget.

Now mind you, the graphic novel was the first script from the original production. I have a copy of it and it is just as brilliant as this film. Also, the second script/production is very close to the original one with only very minor details changed.

The visuals were not "fudged," they were improved (I would take these visuals over CGI everyday of the week). The story was not supposed to be more complex or longer because the only major differences in the two productions were the cast and visuals (read the graphic novel if you don't believe me). As you can see by the numbers I posted, the budget was only supposed to be twice the amount.

And in spite of all...no, because of these changes/obstacles the film ended up being perfect. I'm not expecting you, or asking you, to like the film. I am merely arguing that the film is exactly what it was supposed to be, and *that* is just one of the many reasons why I love this film.

Gross

That just made my night. Thank you.

And let's remember. The original film pitch with Brad Pitt was totally different. Aronofsky re-wrote it all for the second pitch.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Oh haha....damn keyboard!

Like I said, go out and read the graphic novel if you honestly believe that one because it was not the case.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine -

X-Men Origins: Wolverine is the first of many future spin-off films from the original X-Men trilogy. The success of the first three showed that there is an obvious market for future works. Of course, this success does not equate quality, and this film is sorely lacking in the latter.

Origins: Wolverine tells the back story of the acclaimed character Wolverine, which includes the discovery of his powers and his involvement in Weapon X, a government anti-mutant project. While it would make sense to assume this picture would be an analysis of the character in question, the resulting assumption will lead viewers to a quick and horrid let down. Although my knowledge of Wolverine’s true origins are confined to what I’ve read on the Internet, it is quickly obvious that the writer’s of this film were not concerned with giving depth and development to Wolverine’s past. Instead, they took the only other route and created an action packed blockbuster that explores Wolverine’s involvement in Weapon X.

The quality of this film can be summed up in one word; subpar. The script writing is nothing short of silly, and some of the lines will bring laughter at just how bad they are. Don’t be surprised if you find yourself rolling your eyes more than once during the film, as there are a few occasions where it’s warranted. However, this doesn’t mean the film is a total loss.

Action, which is quite plentiful, is the only thing holding Origins: Wolverine together. It’s both placed and paced well, but doesn’t border on the line of too jammed to the point of dulling its enjoyment. My biggest complaint was the sad excuses made by the script writers to give some sort of meaningful story to the film, as all the attempts fall flat on their face. Instead, the film’s action helps fit the bill for a mindless entertainment experience and it does deliver.

Cameo appearances are also abundant throughout the entirety of the film and this bodes well for fans of the comics and future works in the X-Men universe, but diehard fans will undoubtedly be left with a bad taste in their mouth. Origins: Wolverine is an excellent kickoff for the big summer ahead, and it fits the bill and definition of a typical blockbuster. The story might be lacking, but the stunts and special effects pick up the slack and delivers entertainment nonetheless. The best recommendation I can give for casual fans of comics, or the X-Men universe, is to expect a typical summer flick that relies on tightly shot and packed action. And for you diehard fans…expect to be disappointed.

Crap. Why can't the superhero's I love the most get the Ironman/TDK treatment. Great movies but not even in my top ten favorite hero's list. So far all of my beloved superhero's films have been pretty mediocre to downright terrible. *sigh*

Thanks McClane.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

I know exactly how you feel. Wolverine is one of my all-time favorite superhero's, tied for favorite with Batman. I was really disappointed to have the writers give such carelessness to Wolverine. Fun, but a huge letdown. I was not surprised at how mundane the film was, though.

My review pretty much has the same points as yours. The film is decent, but could have been so much more.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine is the first of many future spin-off films from the original X-Men trilogy.

Really? I thought they only did a Magneto one and that was it.

__________________
The Freedom Roads

Thanks John

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

The Road -

The Road is a grueling, post-apocalyptic story about a man and his son merely trying to survive. It’s bleak, daunting, and the most emotionally charged film of the year. Combine all of these traits together and you achieve one thing: brilliance.

After an unexplained cataclysmic event changes the face of the Earth, a man and his son embark on an epic journey towards the coast in hopes of survival. We never learn their names but it’s an unnecessary thing. This is unlike any other post-apocalyptic tale; there are no fiery action scenes of destruction, only character driven scenes about the need to continue the human spirit—to “carry the fire inside.”

I have not read the book by Cormac McCarthy that the film is based upon, so I cannot speak as to how the original material is handled (I’ve heard that it is faithful to the book). I can tell you, however, that this film is perfect in its own regard. The bleakness is overwhelming at times but the love between father and son is unmistakable and touching.

Viggo Mortensen has already proven more than once (A History of Violence, Eastern Promises) that his acting skills are outstanding. His performance in The Road as the father tops anything he’s done before and for good reason. Every twist in their journey brings about another scene where Mortensen’s talent pushes the limit, and he delivers every time.

Kodi Smit-McPhee plays opposite of Mortensen and the connection between the two rivals that of real life father and son relationships, thanks to Smit-McPhee’s acting and the chemistry between him and Mortensen. He is truly a hidden gem in this year’s new releases. Numerous scenes brought me to tears seeing the two struggle during their journey. Fear and love are constantly written all over their faces.

Numerous parts of this movie stand out above the rest. One of my favorite aspects is the innocence of Smit-McPhee’s character in a guilty world. Small things, such as his ignorance of Coke, only add more depth to his character and the atmosphere of the world. The way his character carries the constant belief in the goodness of people in a world gone mad is just one of several personalities the film contains, as a wide array of responses to the end of humanity are showcased in The Road.

The cinematography in The Road is also another favorite of mine. The future is shot in dismal dark and gray, while the film’s pre-apocalypse flash backs are bright and colorful. The decision to film this way shows how much the world has changed. It’s as if all the color has drained from the face of the world.

One thing is certain, this film is a worthy Oscar contender for both Best Actor and Best Picture. While I would very much like to see Mortensen take the award for best actor, I would be equally satisfied to see Smit-McPhee win. The work of both these actors easily tops that of everything else from this past year. I honestly think Mortensen’s Oscar has been long overdue and there is no doubt in my mind that this film is his finest work.

As I’ve said more than once, this film is bleak. It’s actually downright depressing, but that does nothing to take away from its brilliance. I only wish to make that fact clear for possible viewers. It’s not an action film, as the trailer would make it out to be, and the few scenes of violence are depicted true to life—quick and messy.

As disheartening as The Road may be, it’s the must see film of the year. Very rarely do we get to experience stories of this caliber or performances so fraught with emotions. With that in mind, do everything in your power to see this film, regardless of the toll it may take on you.