Superb Scenes With Seanc

→ in
Tools    







2013 Director: Don Scardino

Full disclosure, I'm a Carell fan-boy, otherwise I wouldn't have gone anywhere near this movie. I should have stayed away. This is the type of comedy that has no appeal to my funny bone whatsoever. This film is trying desperately to be Anchorman but falls flat in every way. The first 20 minutes gives us a glimpse into the two main stars childhood. Presumably to give us some insight into the characters motivation, and to help us connect with them. Strike 1 and strike 2. Why would you spend 20 minutes of a comedy setting up your hero to be sympathetic to the audience if in the very next scene you plan on making him an unsympathetic egomaniac, inexplicable. Every single character in this movie except for Olivia Wilde's is played completely over the top. Correct that. Apparently they were told to play the character over the top, and then crank it up another notch.

Of course all of this is forgiveable in a comedy if it does the one thing that everyone expects, make us laugh. As you can probably already tell Wonderstone fails here as well. Two jokes landed for me in an hour and a half. When the name of Carrey's characters television show is revealed and the scene after the credits start rolling. Except for those not even a chuckle. It's the same way as I feel about The Office post Carell (in case your wondering why I'm a fan-boy).
I, too am a big Steve Carell fan but haven't heard anything good about this film and your review seems to back up everything I've heard thus far...I'm still going to try and see it at some point.



I enjoy reading your reviews! Your pretty good at it. I am a little disappointed to see Broken City got such a low rating. Not because I have seen it, but because I want to. I will still watch it of course, I just don't expect as much as I did. Also I loved City of God I thought it was amazing!
I'm really enjoying your reviews too...love the way you write.





2009 Director: Duncan Jones

Sam (Rockwell) works for the company that is responsible for producing most of the world's energy. Sounds like a great gig but there is a catch. He work on the moon, what's worse is he is stationed there for the duration of a three year contract with no interaction except for GERTY (Spacey) the computer that aids him in his work. Sam knows three years is too long, he desperately misses his wife and daughter. He has begun to have delusions, he tells GERTY he is worried because he has begun talking to himself. Things turn real bad when he takes a trip on a rover to fix a piece of machinery that has broken down. Sam crashes the rover and it is at this point that things start to become fuzzy not only for Sam but for the viewer.

Everything Moon is it owes to Rockwell. He is always a more than capable actor but outdoes himself in this role. The character he is playing goes through many extreme emotional states during the course of this film. Rockwell not only displays these emotions effectively but he keeps what could be an extreme character grounded enough that we continue to identify with him throughout the entire film. Spacey has a unique voice, one that doesn't always work to his advantage. It works perfectly here, the emoticons on GERTY are quite effective as well. Non-human characters are not an easy thing to pull off in film, but GERTY not only works it adds to the emotion of the film. If Moon has an issue it is in visuals. This was probably a low budget movie so I won't harp on it. I will say that everything inside the station is fine, everything outside the station less than fine.

Moon is a very effective character study. Grounded sci-fi is rare and Moon is better than most that have tried. Even the twists feel less jarring than they do in most movies. A must watch for any film fan.
Loved your review of this film and can't wait to see it, HUGE Sam Rockwell fan.





Director: Billy Wilder

Double Indemnity is a skillfully written, engaging film-noir. The film follows insurance salesman Walter Neff who falls for a clients wife when meeting her for the first time. They soon develop a scheme to write an accidental death policy on the husband and stage his murder as an accident. All appears to be going smoothly until the claims manager, Barton Keyes, grows suspicious.

Keyes is played by Edward G. Robinson who in my estimation takes this film from another ho-hum noir to a completely engrossing film. Keyes and Neff's scenes together are by far the best thing in Double Indemnity, leaps and bounds ahead of Neff's scenes with Stanwyck's femme fatale. MacMurray is also doing good work as Neff. He particularly excels in the scenes where he is feeling the pressure of his scheme unraveling. The weak link in my opinion is Stanwyck. She feels like someone who is sleep walking through their role, never allowing us to feel the emotion of her character.

Double Indemnity has made me excited to see more of Wilder's work. It is a very straight forward story elevated by Wilder's touches. His dialogue is brilliant. The twists are smart but well thought out. Allowing us to enjoy the story arc as it fleshes out rather than simply trying to fool us as so many thrillers do. The visual touches in the film bring a coolness as well. I was particularly fond of the way Neff lights his matches with his fingertips. Not only was this a cool touch, but Wilder uses it to convey character's emotions visually rather than verbally on a couple of occasions. Double Indemnity is a true classic.
I love Double Indemnity too, but I totally disagree regarding Barbara Stanwyck...I think it's her best performance and that she was robbed of the Best Actress Oscar that year.





Director: Jeff Nichols

Mud is the story of two best friends who happen upon a boat on an island that somehow became stuck in a tree. They plan to attempt to get the boat down and make it their own but discover that someone else already has the same plan. That someone is Mud (McConaughey) who tells the boys he is holding up on the island until he meets his girlfriend. Ellis, our protagonist, is immediately intrigued by Mud's personality and his situation and begins to do favors for him. Every favor leads to another favor and soon Ellis is learning more about Mud and his life than he should. He is also becoming more and more entwined in whatever conflicts Mud is involved in. Ellis's best friend Neckbone is leery of helping Mud from the beginning but is more than willing to support his friend in his decisions.

Ellis (Tye Sheridan) is the heart of this film and carries nearly every scene. Ellis is a complex character. He loves without reservation, he fearlessly confronts any perceived wrongs, and he is 100% committed to those in his life that he connects with. He sees something in Mud that he wants for himself and though Mud is flawed he commits to his cause as if it was his own. Ellis learns many life lessons over the course of the film. We can begin to see his faith in humanity shaken. That the film does not end with us having a concrete feeling of how this character will endue is a testament to Nichols script.


Some may read Mud as a cautionary tale for Ellis. I found him to be a picture of unconditional love. Mud is certainly flawed and would probably find his lot in life improved by cutting certain ties. Ultimately though his life would be hollow without the passion and love he has developed.


Nichols has created a nearly perfect film. There are a couple of characters and one five minute scene that in my opinion keep this from being a perfect film. Other than that the film is flawless. As in Take Shelter Nichols creates an amazing sense of place. We are gladly immersed in the world of the characters. The characters are rich and ambiguous. We feel like we know even the secondary characters who are given limited time. Shannon is particularly memorable as Neckbone's uncle. No scene is wasted, Nichols gives us emotion and context every step of the way. I can't wait to experience Mud again.
Another film I have never even heard of, but your review made me want to see it.



I'm really enjoying your reviews too...love the way you write.
Thanks Gideon. I have slowed way down with full reviews because I just felt myself getting too repetitive. I do enjoy doing a few a year though. Thanks for reading through.
__________________
Letterboxd






Big dumb fun. Just a little too much emphasis on the dumb for my taste. Not terrible, looks good and has a distinct style. I am just never going to think about it again. I was not a big fan of Cavill either, that didn't help matters.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Seen a variety of reviews regarding this movie and being a Guy Ritchie fan I'll still be checking it out at some point and the "big dumb fun" has been consistent and simply reminds me to turn the brain off while viewing.
Thanks sean

Seen several reviews for Mr. Holmes and have it on request at my library -- can't wait to see that one






There was no way that I was going to come out of this movie with an unbiased opinion. When you well up at the text crawl the director has to do little more then tell a proper story to make you love their film. That is not hyperbole or a way to overstate my fandom. I literally welled up at the text crawl and at a couple of other moments in The Force Awakens. It should be said from the start that if anyone complains that this movie has too much fan service it is impossible to argue with them. The main reason that it is going to be nearly impossible for fans of this world to come away unsatisfied is fan service. The thing is after waiting twenty years for a sequel to the greatest trilogy ever created, fan service can not only carry a film it was really needed. The way that I reacted to this film emotionally and the way that my crowd reacted audibly are proof that fans were not ready to say goodbye to the characters and world that Lucas created.

Maybe a lot of directors could have taken over this franchise. There has certainly been enough talk about everything the prequels got wrong in comparison to the beloved originals. Abrams deserves credit however, because he listened to that talk and delivered the goods from a visual stand point in The Force Awakens. I am not always the best eye when it comes to CGI versus practical effects. It is easy for even me to see that this film feels stripped down when compared to the flashy sterile feel of the prequels. Abrams knows there is nothing wrong with a little dirt and grime in this universe. We are supposed to be thrust into a galaxy at war. Where the uniforms are worn by combatants and the vehicles have been used. Abrams understands this and rightly traded in the glossy showroom look of Episode I-III for the lived in world of IV-VI. The other noticeable difference is the script. Don't get me wrong this isn't Tarantino dialogue. It is more than serviceable though, especially when compared to the clunky eye-rolling scripts of the prequels. It is not perfect. There are a couple of scenes that would have been on the cutting room floor if I had my way. However, I was constantly engaged with both the old characters and the new. There is plenty of humor and I think it all lands. Again, Abrams really understands what the fans responded to the first time around and gives us more of what we have been craving.

I really think the new characters are well done and will propel this franchise forward. There is a lot to talk about when it comes to the new characters but I am very content to let that talk happen over the next couple of months. This movie definitely needs to be experienced spoiler free especially for fans of the franchise and I would not do anything to put that in jeopardy for anyone who may be reading this. Abrams has done a great job of instilling the characteristics into his new characters that made the old ones so great while also keeping certain information at arms length so we are completely invested in the story as it unfolds both here and in future chapters to come.

The hype is real folks. I have not sat with a crowd that was so into a film since seeing The Avengers. I have not been this excited to make a return visit to the theater for a movie since, well, maybe never. I am certain to go see this at least one more time and probably two. I have never seen my children so engaged on an initial viewing of a film. During the final scene my oldest was repeating a phrase to me over and over again in anticipation of the inevitable. I want to talk about this film with fans who have seen it. So get out and go watch this thing. Star Wars is back and aims to please.






This is my second Alex Ross Perry film. He is a director I feel like I should love but so far I am having a lukewarm response to his movies. His dialogue is right up my alley, very sharp and biting. He gets great performances from his actors. Moss's here is probably my favorite female performance of the year at this point. His films have a very pleasing aesthetic, especially here. I love the lake setting and the look of the house. I also like his muted color palette which is very similar here and in Listen Up Phillip. Speaking of aesthetics. I absolutely love the look of the title cards and credits here. It is a small thing, but they are quite unique and really stood out to me. However, something continues to keep me from falling in love with these films. Despite the dialogue being so good the interactions are pretty unrealistic. Everyone says exactly what they are feeling at all times. The responses of others to these interactions are problematic for me as well. Maybe these are the things that are keeping me from totally embracing Alex Ross Perry. It could be the opaque nature of his narratives as well. I like the themes but it is tough to totally grasp everything that is transpiring and that is not always a good thing for me. I am certainly leaning to the positive side with his films but can't help wanting more.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
I've seen three of his flms. The two you saw i give
. In fact, I just finished this one an hour ago. Moss' scene where she cussed out her friend's lover was the best in the movie. His cinematographer and editor are getting better with each movie - I especially liked the slow dissolves and transitions here. The music was like something from a psychological horror film, and in a way it was, but he's still too cutesy in what he's trying to accomplish. He's trying to delineate depression and schizophrenia and show that it can go hand in hand with artistry (the beautiful drawing) but even at 90 minutes, it still feels too underdeveloped.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



I've seen three of his flms. The two you saw i give
. In fact, I just finished this one an hour ago. Moss' scene where she cussed out her friend's lover was the best in the movie. His cinematographer and editor are getting better with each movie - I especially liked the slow dissolves and transitions here. The music was like something from a psychological horror film, and in a way it was, but he's still too cutesy in what he's trying to accomplish. He's trying to delineate depression and schizophrenia and show that it can go hand in hand with artistry (the beautiful drawing) but even at 90 minutes, it still feels too underdeveloped.
I like that scene as well but my favorite was the opening. I really thought I was going to love the movie after that scene. I almost wished they hadn't showed the boyfriend at all in that scene. In fact the more I think about it the more I wish there were no men at all. I don't think I liked any of the stuff with the men. I forgot to mention the score, I don't know if you are saying you liked it, but I did.



No men? Almost like Perry's version of Persona?
I heard it compared to that a couple of times but I wasn't even thinking about that actually. I really didn't like the men though. Especially the neighbor. A couple of those scenes really grated on me. The canoe scene was the worst. I did like the dinner scene, but really I liked her speech which ended up not being about him at all.






Definitely in the second half of Russell's filmography for me but not nearly as bad as everyone is saying. The writing, music. humor, and performances are all there. Something feels uneven about it though. It has moments where I thought it was going to propel itself into the Russell movies I love but never quite makes that step.






Oh my! Tarantino is always divisive but this one is really going to split the crowd up I think. It really feels like this is everything Tarantino does dialed up, which is saying something for a guy who is never subtle. The first two hours of the film is just spending time with his dialogue and getting to know the characters. Setting you up to knock you down. Exposition in its most glorious form. This movie was a perfect five for me through the first two hours. Tarantino even uses score in this film and it sounds great. He throws in a couple of great songs as well. Through the last 45 minutes we get violent, blood thirsty, shock them silent Tarantino. Admittedly he loses me a bit here but there is still enough great to keep me in the story. Endings of films usually weigh very heavy for me but Tarantino has enough goodwill with me both as a storyteller and in this film to only knock off a tick on the rating. Tarantino fans are going to love this, sit back and enjoy.






I have heard so much good buzz on this film. I thought we were supposed to be breaking down stereotypes in 2015. Not funny at all and certainly not emotionally engaging. Easily one of my least favorites of the year.