Zotis' Film Watching Diary

The biggest problem with Pandorum for me is that it's lit so darkly you can barely make out proceedings for the first thirty minutes or so. Deliberate or not it just doesn't work because I want to be completely engaged at the beginning of a movie, not pushed away by relative darkness. Not long after that the ghouls show up and we're back in derivative zombie-like territory. Shame because I really like some of the ideas on show, such as the crew being awakened in lengthy stages to counteract an emergency. I also think the end reveal is still quite strong even if the film has already stooped to generic horror conventions. It could have used better direction and a little more faith in the seemingly mundane procedural ideas that (if handled right) would have made for a more intriguing, suspenseful movie.

__________________
100 Favourites From The Future: REWIRED

I found Annie Hall and Manhattan to be funnier. I think I'd say Love and Death is my third favorite/funniest Woody Allen movie so far.




That's kind of funny because I was actually thinking that the movie was too brightly lit in scenes that should have been darker, especially at the beginning. In interviews the director, actors, and other people working on the movie made comments about how "scary" it was and made reference to "horror" themes. But I didn't find it remotely scary. At best it was a little creepy. This was actually my second time watching it. I remember feeling the creepiness of the monsters the first time, but the second time around not so much. I definitely wouldn't call it a horror movie, or even close. It's more like an action movie, but technically I think it's a thriller. Giving thrills is not the same as giving scares though.

Emma Donoghue wrote the book which was published in 2010, and she wrote the screenplay for the movie too. Joan Allen and William H. Macey play the roles of Brie Larson's character's parents. I'm not familiar with Sean Bridgers, who played the antagonist, or Tom McCamus, the step father, but their roles in the film were also pivotal. The synopsis is that Larson, the mom, and Tremblay, her 5-year-old son, have been living in a small room for years. Larson had told her son an elaborate lie about the world, that the room was the entire world. But soon the time to reveal the truth will come.

I don't really want to say more than that about the plot because I feel that a significant portion of the film's power comes from the way it delivers it's plot's twists and hooks. You can probably deduce a lot, but if you knew exactly what would happen it would probably take away from the experience. Besides it's intricate plot structure the film also has brilliant acting, especially from Larson, Tremblay, and Allen. The cinematography is like a seamless train of Polaroid beauty. I felt like I could take any screenshot at any moment and use it as a poster. And I don't even know how they got such a tremendous performance from Tremblay at his age. I think this is the fourth of Brie Larson's films I've seen, and this girl has an incredible gift for conveying emotion. When everything in the film came together and the plot reached it's apex I felt overwhelmed. I would say that was around the mid point, but the movie continued to impress me with it's emotional delivery and meaningful content through and through from start to finish. It definitely deserved all the awards it had been showered with.

Brie Larson is an interesting actress. She actually did some pretty spectacular research and preparation for her role; a truly dedicated professional. She is a beautiful and sexy woman who often downplays her beauty to fit specific scenes. I don't know how much of that is her, and how much of that is the director, but I think it's probably a combination of both. Just looking at google pictures of her there are a lot of non-film snaps of her casually dressed with very little make-up on. She even went so far as to embrace pimples and that unsavory un-showered look. She also has made great movie choices for her career and the art of film. I wish I could say the same for Jennifer Lawrence. But I get the confident feeling that I won't see Larson in an action movie blockbuster, and that, I think, is a good thing. I'll be keeping my eye on Larson's career in the following years to come.

I really want to see this movie.

__________________

You better act fast while it's still in theaters, Vicky.

A truly excellent, but intense and emotional movie...not "lite" viewing at all. By the time it was over, I almost believed that i'd been there.

In the following review, if you have not seen The Force Awakens and want to go into the movie knowing absolutely nothing about it then to be perfectly honest you shouldn't read the slightest review no matter what anyone says. If you're still interested in the review but don't want spoilers I'd suggest you only read the first section. The second section doesn't contain spoilers, but I still wouldn't recommend it if you haven't seen the movie. If you don't care because you're not even planning on watching the movie, then I hope maybe reading my review will change your mind. If you didn't like the original Star Wars trilogy then you definitely won't like The Force Awakened so who cares (although even if you did like the original some people have set their expectations so high they still won't like it, which makes no sense because nothing J. J. Abrams has done in his career could possibly lead anyone to believe that he could pull off that kind of a masterpiece). I was going to do a third section and go into more specific critiques containing spoilers, but this turned out longer already than I expected so I think I'll wait until I've seen it again.


When I had first caught wind of the news that Lucas sold the rights to Disney I wasn't too pleased. I figured they'd do a really lame job with a money-grabbing corporate mentality. I remained quite skeptical up until a month or two before the release. I'd seen a few trailers, and they didn't really look like anything special. My aunts and uncle said they wanted to do a family outing to see it in theaters together, and I said I would see something else instead. I had no interest in even watching the movie at all. My skepticism changed suddenly when I stumbled across a trailer that actually showed some pretty decent acting on Daisy Ridley's part. And then I saw a video of Kevin Smith talking very excitedly about seeing the first half of the movie before it was finished. He was so enthusiastic that it really gave me hope. I still kept my expectations very low, and didn't let my hopes get much higher.

So a couple of days ago I was sitting at home playing Gran Theft Auto V. I had just finished watching Fargo, and I was feeling really good. I had a 12 hour shift coming up that evening, and had just finished a 12 hour shift the previous night. But I didn't really want to go to bed. I was planning on seeing Star Wars eventually, maybe when theater turnouts toned down a bit, but then I remembered that over the holidays my family was going to go see it. So to be honest, since I was planning to actually see it now, I didn't really want my first time to be with all my extended family. I looked at my clock and said to myself, "You know what, I could get an hour and a half REM cycle in, go to the matinee, and then rough it at work with a power drink." So that's what I did on impulse. I still got a lousy seat at an awkward angle, and accidentally went to the 3D showing (and I hate watching movies in 3D). So those things made the experience a little uncomfortable. All I'll say about the movie in this section is that it vastly exceeded my expectations. It was more than entertaining. I was actually emotionally invested. It surpassed my hopes and turned out to be a half-decent movie.


So there I was, sitting pretty far to the right in row A (the first row above the front isle). At least I didn't have to sit in the really lousy seats at the front that make you strain your neck. I did that once and vowed never to do it again. I was prepared to wait another day if that would have been the case. I reluctantly put on my 3D glasses and considered asking for my money back and putting it off another day. Well, I decided to just go through with it. The children's pop-up book of layered 2D images trying to be passed off as 3D would have to do for now. I didn't really want my first experience to be like this, but then again the movie probably wasn't going to turn out very well anyway...

I don't want to go into too much depth just yet, so I'll refrain from commenting on the opening scene. I'll just say that some of the acting was utterly horrible. I mean it was so wooden that some high-schools wouldn't give you the part. Twice in the movie a blaster caused someone to bleed. Aren't those highly compressed particle gas blasts supposed to cauterise wounds? And isn't that only if they get hit in the flesh, not in their storm trooper armor? I mean usually you just see that black scorch mark on their armor and they die anyway to so much as a shot in the foot (unless they're a main character, then it just stings a little) rendering their armor completely pointless in the first place (unless they're a main character, then their skin counts as twice as much armor). Oh man it was actually very hard at first for me to suspend my critical urges to over analyse everything. Gradually I started to get more comfortable with the movie, and then something magical happened. Daisy Ridley's acting was the first saving grace for the movie, at least for me. I found myself occasionally snickering at a number of absurdities, but I also noticed from time to time that I was actually captivated by the movie. Every now and then the shoddy 3D would pull me out of my immersion, but I didn't have too much trouble getting back in. The next saving grace was Adam Driver's character, Kylo Ren. I'm telling you, that was one hell of a well designed antagonist. His acting was decent enough to make the character believable, but it was really how they designed and wrote his character that made his role powerful.

My biggest fear going into the movie was Abrams. The best I have ever felt about anything he has done was "okay." Super 8 was okay, Alcatraz was okay, some episodes of Fringe were okay, Mission Impossible III was okay. I hated Lost, and I hated the Star Trek movies. When The Force Awakens was finished I felt like it was the best thing he's ever made so far. Which isn't saying very much, but it's something at least. It wasn't really the directing that saved this movie for me though.

I can understand and appreciate them not wanting to maintain the Expanded Universe (EU) as canon. It's a lot of material to go through for people who don't do any research before they make $200,000,000 films (And to think Jodorowsky couldn't get another $20,000,000 to make Dune). I still got the impression that some things were borrowed from the EU, but they were vague enough to be merely logical deductions of what would have happened considering the end of Return of the Jedi. Well at least the movie turned out better than it would have if Lucas had made it himself.


Besides Daisy Ridley there was really no other acting performance that stood out as above average. There were moments where Driver and Boyega shone, and other than that no one else even had so much as a great moment, not even Ford. But honestly Ridley's acting was so good that she carried the movie. Without great acting I simply can not get emotionally invested in a movie at all.

Other than acting the movie actually had a surprisingly good story. The basic overall plot structure wasn't bad, but the plot had no depth and that was a bit disappointing. Over the years I've come to differentiate story from plot in this way: The story is what happens, and the plot is how it happens. If someone were to retell what happened in The Force Awakens, I think people would have a response like, "It was better the way you told it." A movie's story to me is almost like something in the background and atmosphere that is implied by the events transpiring, but the plot is what is actually transpiring right in front of you. It's hard to describe, but I feel it. I felt like I could get lost in the world of Star Wars, even in this "new canon" version. But a lot of what actually happened was boring the way it happened. The idea of a great battle between the Republic and the Empire is pretty cool the way that they told it in the movie (sorry I can't be more specific without a spoiler), but when I saw it in the movie I thought to myself, "Year right, like it would have happened that way. I guess J. J. Abrams has never watched a WWII documentary, and has no clue what an actual battle looks like." The plot had so many plausibility issues that it fell into the realm of a 16-year-old's fan fiction. I think one reason why Lucas did such a good job with things like the Death Star trench run was because he actually based it off WWII documentary footage.

The special effects were surprisingly good though. I never felt like there was too much CGI or green screen. Those elements were blended in so well that I could rarely even tell where the boundaries were between what was real and what wasn't.


Well, I think I'll wrap it up here for now. There are a lot of things I want to go into more detail about, but I think I've come about as close to spoiler content as I dare. I may have actually said a little too much as it is. Overall I enjoyed the movie. I do have a lot of criticisms. It was a very flawed movie. But the good actually outweighed the bad. I'm looking forward to watching it again. I'm looking forward to the next movie. And I think I'll take a look at what else Daisy Ridley has done, because she really did blow me away. I actually went home feeling very inspired about life in general. If a better director had made this movie, and a corporation wasn't looming overhead with it's greedy puppeteer strings tugging at everything, this could have been a truly great movie. All things considered though, it turned out surprisingly well. Despite the lousy plot and mostly mediocre acting it was actually a pretty decent movie with some intense emotional scenes, some exciting action, some great characters and visuals, a good story, and a very strong lead.

It's been years since I saw Brick by the same director. I remember it being pretty good, and since I heard that Rian Johnson was going to be directing the next Star Wars movie I wanted to get a feel for him as a director. Well, Looper didn't instill confidence in me for Johnson's directing abilities. It was a pretty average movie that aimed more for entertainment value than quality. Gordon-Levitt's make-up was atrocious. The acting was mediocre. The explanations for what's going on were like side notes that no one cared about or had time for. It was one of those movies that you basically have to turn your brain off for in order to even enjoy. If you think about anything at all you'll realise that nothing in the movie makes any sense. I think Emily Blunt probably did the best job in terms of acting.



Circle (2015) Thriller

A fairly boring movie about a bunch of people in a room playing some lethal version of the game Mafia. Slowly they get killed off one by one while arguing about what's going on and voting each other off.

Before you saw it, did you really look at Looper as a whole and think quality over entertainment?

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

I didn't think about it in that way. I just had a reason to watch it, and in the end I was a bit dissapointed.

I watched Looper, mildly enjoyed it, and then completely forgot about it.

The ending made my heart cry, the movie was okay for standard action fare until they get to the farm, then I just shook my head. At that point, l agree with Zotus that this movie doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. It's nice to watch, but damn I felt sleighted.

__________________

Wow AboveTheClouds, I think I know exactly how you felt. I think the farm is where I felt something of a turning point too, from being entertained to feeling sleighted.

Gattica

I thought it was going to be a rip off of THX 1138, but it was surprisingly original. I'd still rank it average in terms of quality. I didn't find it particularly interesting.




Cymbeline

The Shakespearian language was more of a distraction than anything else. I almost turned it off. It wasn't a bad movie, but it was a chore to get through.

This movie dealt with some pretty intense subject matter. Thanks to a very strong lead (Hudgens), and overall great acting from the rest of the cast, the subject matter was delivered with the force needed to really get it's messages across. Based on a true story movies can sometimes make me forget to think about character motivations because that was the way that it actually happened. I noticed that wasn't the case with Gimme Shelter. I felt like I understood almost everything going on, and the motivations behind the scenes. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, and it made me excited about my own life. Now I just want to strive to enrich my own life experience to it's fullest, and help people who are suffering like the characters in Gimme Shelter.

Vanessa Hudgens gained weight, made herself as ugly as possible by doing things like cutting her hair, and transformed into the character so much that many people have said they didn't even realise she was in the movie until after it was over. They didn't even recognize her. When I first saw the trailer I had no idea it was her. But when I recognized the name, as one of the girls from Spring Breakers, I looked her up and was pretty surprised. She's got that supermodel body and seems very "girly," such an extremely different person from her character. I was really marveled by her dedication to her role for this movie. I never thought of her as that caliber of an actress before. When she talked about her passion for acting from an early age and how she started her film career it makes me wonder why there aren't more movies of Gimme Shelter's quality on her filmography. Hers was not the only performance of this caliber in the film. Rosario Dawson also undertook an intense transformation as the abusive drug addicted mother. She talked about how after just a few hours of filming she wore a grimace on her face for 24 hours without even realising it. Brendan Fraser's was probably the only performance that noticeably should have been improved. It seemed like he wasn't quite as into his role as the other actors and actresses. I still liked him for the role, and his performance wasn't bad, but it reminded me of myself when I have to say a line that I'm not comfortable with. This feeling that it just didn't look right sits with me.


Ron Krauss wrote, directed, and produced the movie. His filmography is fairly short having worked on about 10 films in 17 years. I haven't seen anything else of his, but he does seem like a very dedicated director/producer who both directs and produces most of his movies. He hasn't completed anything since Gimme Shelter, but is apparently working on two projects at the moment. It's really hard for me to actually gauge the quality of directing in general, but particularly in this movie. I usually look for things like the quality of the acting of the extras, attention to detail, what they get out of their stars compared to what those stars have previously done, but I don't really know anything that went on during the actual film making process. I can only see the finished result. With some directors I think it's a little easier to notice subtle things that are marks of good directing, like Bergman. But this time I don't really feel confident in my assessment of the directing. So much of the movie's strength came from it's actors transforming themselves, and I think Krauss probably played a role in that. The acting from the extras was good. The movie had a realistic feel to it and had great atmosphere. I definitely found myself lost, fully immersed in the movie. I didn't really notice the cinematography or music. I was too focused on the characters and story to even think about cinematography and music. I did get the impression from things that people said in interviews that Krauss was a hard working and thorough film maker. I wouldn't go so far as to call Gimme Shelter a masterpiece, but I would call it a truly excellent film and highly recommend it.

This was actually a hard movie for me to watch. I found it very boring. I tried to focus on appreciating the artistry in the cinematography more than anything else. There were incredible shots, really interestingly composed scenes, and great lighting that flourished in the black and white film. But that wasn't really enough for me to enjoy the experience. I got the feeling that I couldn't appreciate the intense art. I noticed how it seemed very rough around the edges, but I also wondered how deliberate that was. That vibe reminded me of Tarkovsky. I'm very interested to watch another Bela Tarr film, and I think I'll try revisiting Werckmeister Harmonies some years down the road.

I liked that WH because its so arid, minimalistic and visceral/intuitive: nothing that happens there has a clearly defined reason to happen. Its very unique experience and so I decided to add it to my top 50 favorites.

What's your favorite Bela Tarr movie?




I also rewatched Kick Ass 2 the other day. I generally enjoy them, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they're great films. The Kick Ass movies are my idea of "entertainment" as apposed to stuff like Avengers which is just boring and lame. I have the graphic novels too, and well there are elements in the plot/story that I think are better in the comics, there are also elements to the comics that are not very good. Especially the Kick Ass 2 graphic novel, it's artwork is considerably worse than the first one. Overall I'd rate Kick Ass 2 .


I rewatched Gimme Shelter again, and I grew in fondness of it. I still feel a little weird about Brendan Fraser's character, but I don't really think it's his acting that's the problem. Maybe the character just needed to be written a little bit, tweeked slightly to feel as real and genuine as the others.

I watched this for the b-movie hall of fame. I made a deal with Cricket. He watched my rec, High Kick Girl, so I watched his nomination. I had fun.

The Baader Meinhof Complex

A movie about the IRA RAF in Germany fighting against Capitalism through terrorism. A very well made movie. I especially liked the way characters would argue and loose their temper. There were a lot of really cool scenes of gunfights and assassinations. I never knew about the RAF before. Well, I still don't know much, but I have a vague idea now.





Marebito

A man obsessed with capturing fear on camera goes deep underground and finds a naked woman chained up in a rocky alcove. But she isn't human. The movie had a very low budget feel, with pretty rubbish cinematography. I didn't feel like it managed to capture the gritty feeling it was trying to very well. But occassionally it would capture it perfectly. It's like they had a brilliant idea, but couldn't really flesh out an entire movie. The script was pretty weak. The one thing that really captivated my imagination was the image of that naked woman chained by her ancle in a cave-like alcove. It was so creepy. It felt sadistic but at the same time so vulnerable and compelling. I really can't describe it. Normally I wouldn't advocate nudity in movies. I would prefer that sex scenes fade to black and dialogue is captured before or after, and generally that nudity is implied rather than shown. This was possibly the first time I'd make an exception. It really is so potent, and I don't think that image could have been as potent without it. I really wish the movie had turned out just a little better overall.