Justin's Review Thread

→ in
Tools    





Valhalla Rising (Nicolas Winding Refn,2009)




Not a bad effort at all, but it's ultimately only interesting on a thematic and visual level. Refn successfully brings the "feel" of the viking age to life with gritty reality mixed with surrealism. Though Refn's visual style is striking, it does become a little overwhelming and distracting. Valhalla Rising also suffers from poor acting, aside from the protagonist. There are many interesting themes in the film about culture and identity -- and they are certainly subtle -- but the film never quite takes those themes far enough.



Toy Story 3 (Lee Unkrich,2010)




A very sentimental, enjoyable film, but with some flaws here and there. One of the biggest problems is the script, or, to be specific, the villain and how hurried the 3rd act is. Much of the film seems to be rehashed from the 2nd film, which is pretty unfortunate considering the amount of talent and originality that Pixar has. I think it would be hard for anyone who's a fan of the franchise to say they didn't enjoy it, and I think the consensus is that it's great, but regardless, the script needed more room to breathe and some fresh new ideas. It's still absolutely worth seeing, especially in 3-D and IMAX.



The Killer Inside Me (Michael Winterbottom,2010)




Difficult, but ultimately very rewarding. It's much more than the negative press that the film received, which was, to me, unfair and cheap. But nevertheless, this is a disturbing portrayal of a sick mind. Winterbottom's narrative will likely be off-putting to most people, since it is told in a semi-fragmented way. The film's narrator (Lou Ford/Casey Affleck) is unreliable and his insanity slowly increases, which causes the film to spiral into a maddeningly confusing conclusion.



I really want to see this. I've read nothing about it, except for a brief synopsis, so I couldn't tell you how I feel about what's been said about it. Glad to see you post some thoughts on it, Justin.



Justin has his own review thread now, cool. I'll be sure to check it out periodically. Too bad about them Penguins, though.
__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."



Sorry for the delay. I've been pretty busy.

Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)




It's definitely a good film with a strong concept that's compelling and fast-paced. Though it's talky, it's never boring, and Nolan utilizes these moments to set the rules for his world -- which might have been necessary. And even some of the most interesting visuals come from these scenes. Inception isn't flawless, however. What Nolan misses is the emotional content, which is lost in the concept. Nevertheless, his direction is solid, and thoroughly entertaining.

Get Low (Aaron Schneider,2010)




Despite the presence of Bill Murray, Sissy Spacek, and Robert Duvall, the film falls short. Schneider seems unsure of himself, so a lot of the weight falls on these actors -- who are excellent, no question. But the tone is off, and the film loses momentum particularly towards the end of the second act, where it plods along to the conclusion.

Mother (Joon-ho Bong, 2010)




Bong's directing is top-notch with terrific cinematography and storytelling. Good acting, with a nice, slow-burning pace that never stalls. It ultimately leads to a very satisfying ending. Not to mention, Hye-ja Kim is superb.

The Kids Are All Right (Lisa Cholodenko,2010)




Good, but pretty forgettable. Cholodenko's directing is solid and moves the film along nicely, but it is missing something more -- it fails to make an impression. Though the film isn't memorable, the acting is great, though; Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo are definitely the strong points of the film. But that isn't to say that Annette Bening doesn't shine, as well. It's unfortunate that there are so many good things about the film, and yet it doesn't quite make it there.



Farewell (Christian Carion,2010)




With Polanski-esque suspense and strong performances, it's undoubtedly my favorite film of 2010 so far. Much of the actual espionage is kept off-screen, so we only see the meetings between the two protagonists. Thanks to Carion's directing, we learn a lot about them, and who they are outside of their jobs -- they never come off as one-dimensional. This is definitely a must-see.



Haven't heard of that until now, I'll have to check it out. Also meant to post that I caught the new Winterbottom film, The Killer Inside Me a few weeks ago. I rate it a little lower than you but definitely worth seeing.



planet news's Avatar
Registered User
A lot of these newer films I have never heard about apart from actually seen. I've been dying to see Mother but it's not "available" yet if yall know what I mean.

Anti-Christ
is one of the best films of the last 5-10 years, I would say. Absolutely a 10/10 for me.

I could never give Celebration a 10, because it's just shot so horribly. Intentional--I know--and I really sort of respect Dogme, but I don't see how this film is better by being Dogme. Honestly, the writing and performances are so strong that they really "deserved" a kinder visual treatment. Even if the quality of the film was improved a little. The graininess is a noticable bother. I'm not sure there's added intimacy here either. In fact, I'd even go as far as to call it a purposeful distanciation. The film works extremely well undoubtedly so I'm not sure if my "what-if" criticisms are even accurate, but this film--not so much The Idiots--"should not" have been Dogme shot IMO. I wouldn't shave off more than half a point, but film as art, as a poetic medium... NEEDS visuals IMO.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
I could never give Celebration a 10, because it's just shot so horribly. Intentional--I know--and I really sort of respect Dogme, but I don't see how this film is better by being Dogme. Honestly, the writing and performances are so strong that they really "deserved" a kinder visual treatment. Even if the quality of the film was improved a little. The graininess is a noticable bother. I'm not sure there's added intimacy here either. In fact, I'd even go as far as to call it a purposeful distanciation. The film works extremely well undoubtedly so I'm not sure if my "what-if" criticisms are even accurate, but this film--not so much The Idiots--"should not" have been Dogme shot IMO. I wouldn't shave off more than half a point, but film as art, as a poetic medium... NEEDS visuals IMO.
I certainly don't give it a 10/10 either, but I do think it's the European version of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?. I don't get why you think the visuals suck so much. It's probably the best-looking Dogme film I've ever seen, and it looks about 100 times better than Inland Empire and Public Enemies.



planet news's Avatar
Registered User
That's a good comparison. Both last all night and have you and the characters utterly drained emotionally by the end. Best visuals out of Dogme is not saying much. I haven't seen the film in a while, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't any better than Von Trier's Idiots... I might be projecting here a little though. I haven't seen Public Enemies, but I can't see how The Celebration looks better than Inland Empire. Even in the handheld bits of IE, everything was lit fairly well. Plus it was tripoded a good percentage of the time and compositions definitely matter to Lynch. I'm just not too big on that sort of camera work. It's basically skilless IMO. I'd compare the occasional beauty that comes out of it more to the products of surrealist automatism than "realism". I think it might just be the grain and bad lighting that bothers me, because Von Trier was at his shaky-cam peak in Anti-Christ, and I considered a lot of the shaky-cam work in that film to be really striking; his form as a whole was very varied in that film though.

Shaky-cam man... is this not the cinematic cliche of the 21st Century or what?

And yes, thanks for the recs, Justin.



Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (Edgar Wright,2010)




It's certainly very enjoyable and playful, but it unfortunately falls into repetition with the fights; it gets a little tiresome after awhile. Wright's visual direction is solid, but the flimsiest part of the film is Ramona and Scott's relationship, which never feels fleshed out or dynamic. But, anyway, like I said, the film is a lot of fun and pretty refreshing. It's worth seeing.

Iron Man 2 (Jon Favreau,2010)




This was nearly a disaster of a film, if not for a few good action sequences (I'm not saying the first was a masterpiece, but it was enjoyable). It's clear that Favreau wants to stay far away from serious subjects such as Tony's alcoholism, but that's exactly what would have helped such an empty film. Tony Stark could potentially be an interesting character, instead he's as flat as they come. You have a good actor, so let him act.



ah i tried to get my gf to see scott pilgrim last weekend but she was having none of that. oh well. stayed in and watched gremlins/fast, cheap & out of control instead though.

i can't say i disagree with your words too much on iron man 2 but i did think what you said about scott pilgrim, ie - "the film is a lot of fun and pretty refreshing." applied just as well there. i thought downey and rockwell were both very funny in that and liked the action scenes too.