The Sci-Fi Slob's Movie Reviews

Would I like Interstellar? Should I get it? I almost did, but I hesitated after reading the confusing plot synopsis on Wikipedia (I sometimes spoil the movie for myself just to see if it's really something I should get -- Interstellar's plot seemed iffy and didn't provoke me to buy the movie).

Wikipedia is about as accurate as the Bible.

That's not the answer I want to hear and you know it.

What I want to know is -- is Interstellar basically Dallas Buyers Club in space?

Errm ..not really.

Okay.

The thing for me is one of the best sci fi horrors ever made, the whole premise, the whole mood of the film, the setting, from the first minute when u see the helicopter chasing the dog, with that erie music, u feel it's an atmospheric film, absolute classic, i recommend it to everyone, no wonder it has an 8.2/10 rating on imdb, one of the best scifis ever made indeed, it hasn't aged also, which is even more tremendous.

Directed by Dan Gilroy

Featuring Jake Gyllenhall's best performance to date, Nightcrawler is a thrilling and thought-provoking critique of society's desensitisation and thirst for gore. Gyllenhall plays one of the creepiest characters ever - a cold-hearted little sociopath named Louis Bloom - a petty thief turned amateur cameraman..

Bloom witnesses a car accident one evening and sees some amateur cameramen capturing footage of the wreckage, Bloom thinks he can do better, and he stops at nothing to achieve that. He starts capturing his own footage and taking to a local new centre where he sells it. Which is when he meets TV news supervisor Nini Romina (Rene Russo) and develops a controlling relationship with her. Bloom will stop at nothing to capture the most disturbing and goriest footage possible and doesn't mind breaking the law in the process.

The scene where Bloom and Nini have dinner together is probably the finest portrayal of a true sociopath. The way Bloom gains leverage and eventual control over his boss is a thing of beauty -- he even attempts to blackmail her into sleeping with him. The controlling relationships and the way he treats people makes Hannibal Lector seem like a empathic, warm-hearted little soul. His black, dead eyes are really creepy, and at no point does he show the least bit of remorse for the mayhem he causes.

I was on the edge of my seat during the Diner scene and subsequent car chase, and also amazed at the lows that Bloom will stoop to to get the story he needs. Nightcrawler is more than just another story about a sociopath. It's a scathing commentary on a corrupt media where ratings override the basic principles of ethics and morals. "If it bleeds it leads" as the slogan says.

Per your review, I decided to get Interstellar, but I haven't watched it yet.

Saw Nightcrawler last month and gave it the same rating. I also agree about Jake's performance and character. Good one, Slob.

Directed by Ridley Scott

Having seen Blade Runner in its several different incarnations around forty times over the years, I may have been forgiven for getting a little tired of the film. However, after viewing The Final Cut of the film at the cinema last night, I found myself covered liberally in goosebumps and left in awe of the brilliance of what I was watching. The opening scene of a fast, fire-breathing industrial landscape combined with the haunting Vangelis score, had the same effect on me as it always has - amazement.

From the start I was seamlessly immersed in the intoxicating atmosphere of a rainswept, polluted, and over crowded dystopian Los Angeles. Very loosely adapted from the Philip K. Dick novel Do Androids dream of Electric Sheep the film maintains the basis of the books story and the questions it asks the reader. The question of life to put it simply - what is it, can man create it, should he - questions we will no doubt one day have to answer. Whilst the plot of the film is quite simple, the film is full of ambiguous overtones, both philosophical and ethical. There is one fundamental question asked by this dark dystopian story, where men have practically become gods with their mastery of genetic engineering: what makes us human?

Rutger Hauer’s performance is outstanding. As a replicant seeking to live longer, he ironically seems to be the most alive of all the characters in the film. In contrast with Deckard, who seems to be in a constant state of apathy. The "Tears in the Rain" ending of the film always has an effect on me, but in the cinema it was an altogether different experience - the greatest experience I've had to date.

The combination of dystopian sci-fi and film noir blend perfectly to create a dark, melancholy atmosphere. The city itself has it has a life of its own - probably the most effective vision of a dystopian city ever brought to the screen. In my opinion, Blade Runner is the greatest and most influential sci-fi ever made. It set the benchmark for all proceeding non-space based sci-fi, and remains a timeless masterpiece.

In a world where technology has taken over, we have destroyed the environment and most animals are extinct and corporations have become gods, one can only wonder if Ridley Scott has made an accurate predication of the future.

Glad to see you got to view it at the cinema. I noticed the BFI did a great job in rolling out a few Sci-Fi classics across the country (I managed to watch 2001: A Space Odyssey late last year). A classic film of course, and it's great to read your personalised review and to hear how much you enjoyed viewing it on the big screen.

__________________

The second World War is raging across Europe, millions are dead, and the allies find themselves at a tactical disadvantage, all thanks to the apparently unbreakable German Enigma code. In a concerted effort to break the German code, British intelligence hire the very best cryptographers and mathematicians on the planet.

Benedict Cumberbatch as Turing delivers one of the best performances of recent memory. A nearly two-hour runtime flies by thanks to the tight and masterful script from Graham Morton. The films cinematography has a classic, timeless look especially in the outdoor scenes shot on location in Bletchley Park.

Frequent flashbacks cut back to Turing’s time at a boarding school in which he befriends a boy by the name of Christopher (the name he later gives his code braking machine). As the flashbacks reveal more and more about Turing, he inches closer and closer to building a device that will help break the Enigma code. He faces opposition from his team. Keira Knightly plays Joan Clarke, Turing’s go to confidante for all information both professional and personal. The chemistry between the two is palpable at times.

Ultimately, his story is one that ended tragically, but the film chooses not to focus on that, but instead to celebrate his legacy.The Imitation Game is one of the best biopics I've seen in years. And if it hadn't faced such strong competition, I think it may have won a few Oscars.

Fresh, innovative, groundbreaking,unique are just a few of the words I could use to describe this film - it's a one-off. Birdman is the story of a washed-up middle aged actor who used to play a super hero character called 'Birdman'. Riggan (Michael Keaton), takes us on his roller coaster ride back to the top of the business and to make a amends with his estranged family.

The first thing that hits you right from the start is the cinematography - it's amazing! At first I just thought I was watching a single take long scene, a set-piece to set the film off, but then it just seamlessly continued, not only giving the film its uniques one-take feel, but also succeeding in doing something very few directors would have even attempted. In the entire two hours of the film, there must have been five transitions, tops.

The plot is very funny as Michael Keaton and Edward Norton clash throughout the film. Norton plays an ego maniac actor who is cast in Keaton's new play, and they can't stand each other. Keaton has to put up with Norton's antics because the play is his last chance to save his career. Emma Stone plays Keaton's troubled daughter who supports him along the way, but is at the same time a little embarrassed by him. You get an authentic feel of a fast paced and hectic backstage theater atmosphere, created by the one-shot filming. Not only that, but the sets are very well designed -- from the brightly colored neon lit stage sets and busy corridors, to the dingy dressing rooms -- everything has a fresh, vibrant, metropolitan feel.

The chaotic atmosphere in which he works matches Keaton's state of mind during most of the film. He's looks like he's on the verge of a nervous breakdown most of the time, and he every so often disappears into one of his little daydreams where he takes on the superpowers of his 'Birdman' character, and goes for a fly around New York. The scene when he is locked out of the theater and ends up walking around New York in his y-fronts, had me in stitches. Not only is Birdman a wacky comedy and a cinematic marvel, but it also has some complex and subtle undertones as well. A lot has also been said about the ending -- which I think was a very clever metaphorical and ambiguous scene -- which will have you asking the question: is he flying or is he dead?

The one standout highlight in this otherwise mediocre biopic/drama were the performances of Steve Carell, Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo. I never thought I'd ever be praising the talents of Channing Tatum, but he was actually pretty good in this, and his chemistry with Ruffalo was spot on as well. The narrative, however, was thin --very thin -- and stretched across the films two hour running time like boot cut jeans over a sumo wrestlers posterior.

The story of Foxcatcher concerns eccentric millionaire John du Pont; heir to the Du Pont family fortune. A life time wrestling enthusiast, Du Pont recruits the Olympic gold medal winning Schultz brothers, Dave and Mark in order to coach Mark to a gold medal at the upcoming Seoul Olympics, and to have the brothers coach young wrestlers at his state of the art training facility.

Du Pont was brilliantly portrayed by Carell; he came across as brooding little momma's boy, who, at every chance he could get, would intimidate his wrestling recruits by flexing his financial muscles. You'd think, though, that a film about an eccentric and unstable, wrestling obsessed millionaire who eventually went mad, would have a bit more action in it, but the film was just uninspiring and boring for the most part; it resembled a history channel documentary with Hollywood stars acting out the reconstructions. It's quite obvious that the film was just monstrously let down by its piss poor script.

In hindsight, I've thought less and less of Foxcatcher since seeing it about a month ago. Boy, did that movie drag.

I thought Birdman was great also.

The Imitation Game is that good, eh? Maybe I'll take your word for it and give it a shot.

Directed by Jennifer Kent

I understand now why this film has received such a warm response, it's a masterclass in subtle and complex storytelling, and is as much a character study on how grief can effect people, as it is an all-out horror film.

The plot is about a widow, Amelia, and her young son Samuel. The boy is misbehaving constantly and becomes obsessed by a pop-up children's book called Mr. Babadook. The book is really creepy with disturbing images, and when it depicts the death of Amelia and Sam, Amelia rips it up, only to find it on the doorstep the next day fully restored. The Babadook stands out from the most recent horror films in that it doesn't rely solely on jump scares, but instead, slowly creates dread and suspense and taps into the audience's emotions through the psychological instability of the main character. The film scares the audience in a more subtle and psychological way, and the closet thing I can compare it to is The Shining

As the main character, Amelia, starts to lose her mind the Babadook appears. The monster's appearances are few and far between but very effective and well timed. The directer has left it the audience the interpret exactly what the Babadook is and what it means. Why own interpretation is that it represents Amelia's inner demons - her depression over her husbands death taking over, which could ultimately lead to her taking her own life and her son's. Amelia's eventual descent into madness is terrifying and chilling, and the ending leaves at lot of unanswered questions.. The performances from the two actors were amazing. The style of the film set the perfect tone and the monster itself was extremely creepy and looked very impressive.The Babadook has cult film written all of it. An unorthodox and well made film which has breathed a breath of fresh air into the horror genre.

I liked it too, but my favorite thing was driving my wife crazy by just saying Babadook Babadook Babadook Babadook over and over again.

I repped this earlier.


So wanted to catch this after it slipped under the radar and I heard good things about it. I even asked in the Shoutbox a few weeks ago.


Might grab a DVD on Friday based on this review.


Good review bud!

__________________

Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson

Much like Joaquin Phoenix throughout the film, I think you would have to be as high as a kite to even write a synopsis for this film, let alone a review; as I imagine Paul Thomas Anderson must have been when he directed it. I tried my best but I just didn't get what the film was trying to do. Playing out at times more like a surreal comedy like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, rather than a noir detective story.

From about twenty minutes in, I didn't know or want to know, what the plot was about, I really didn't care. I also didn't detect any detective story in there; if there was one, then it must have dispersed among the many of Joaquin Phoenix's psychedelic drug binges. Don't get me wrong, the film is hilarious and both Joaquin Phoenix and Josh Brolin are excellent in it. The problem is, I didn't know where the comedy finished and crime drama began. Most of the film felt disjointed and lacked energy, and I almost fell asleep half way through the two and a half hours, which felt like an eternity. I think Inherent Vice is a bit of a misfire by Paul Thomas Anderson - a classic case of a novel not converting well into a film.

The few hilarious moments and great performances are this film's only saving grace. I just hope PTA will be back on form for his next film.

I still want to see it