GBGoodies 2015 Movie Logbook

The Theory of Everything (2014) - This is another movie that I watched because it is a 2015 Best Picture Oscar nominee. I liked Eddie Redmayne in Les Misérables, and I knew that a movie about Stephen Hawking had to be fascinating, so it sounded like a good choice.

This movie is about theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, (Eddie Redmayne), one of the greatest minds of our generation. It's about his struggle with learning that he had a degenerative disease while he was still a young man in college. It's about how he met his ex-wife Jane, (Felicity Jones), and how they dealt with his condition together. It's about how they stayed together, and then grew apart. And it's about how the world first learned about this incredibly intelligent man, and why he is so loved and respected.

This is a very good movie, but it is difficult to watch at times. The love story part of the movie is wonderful, showing how Jane would do anything she could to help Stephen, because she loved him so much. However watching his condition get worse and worse is heartbreaking. Overall, this movie is a great movie showing how Stephen Hawking defied the odds after being given only a few years to live.

+

Attachments

 

Birdman is one of those movies that's hard to talk about without spoilers. It's so open to interpretation that everyone wants to talk about what they thought was happening, and how they came to that conclusion. It's hard to do that for this movie without giving away some important spoilers.

I'd say you're right about that. I did find it really pretty overwrought and that was one of my main issues with it. In fact since watching it I've found my enthusiasm for it continuing to wane. Immediately after watching it I felt it was a solid but I think I kind of got caught up in the adrenaline of the conclusion which made me feel like that. I wrote my review and had it posted pretty much within 24 hours but already I felt that was a bit too positive so docked it to -. Since then however more things about it have bothered me to the point where I feel it should maybe be around a + now. While it is enthralling, well made and well acted I did find it overwrought, melodramatic, unrealistic and quite simplistic in terms of the story and characters


Anyway nice to see you going through the Oscar hopefuls GBG. I'm trying to do the same. Not seen The Theory of Everything yet but I'd pretty much agree with you on The Imitation Game and Birdman though obviously I wasn't as enamoured with Whiplash as you were

__________________

JayDee I'm glad I'm not the only one who has second thoughts on a review score. I haven't seen Whiplash though.

I feel the opposite about Whiplash. The more I think about it, the more I like it. The intensity of the movie was just amazing. As of right now, it's the movie that I'd like to see win Best Picture.

I'm hoping to watch Boyhood and The Grand Budapest Hotel tonight, but I don't have high hopes for either movie. Here's a little known secret: I've already seen both movies, so they're both re-watches for me, but I don't get what the big deal is about either movie.

I didn't find anything either interesting or funny about The Grand Budapest Hotel. Maybe it's just not my type of humor?

And I know that Boyhood took 12 years to make, and I can appreciate that, but I didn't find anything out of the ordinary about the story. If the same exact movie had been made the same way that most movies are made, with several actors portraying the characters at different ages, I don't think this movie would be getting all the praise that it's received.

In fairness, I'm going to give both of these movies another chance, but I don't have high expectations for either movie.

Boyhood (2014) - This is another movie that I watched because it's a 2015 Best Picture Oscar nominee. I saw this a while ago when everyone first started raving about it, but I didn't see what was so special about it. After re-watching it, I still don't see what's so special about this movie. I understand that it was filmed over 12 years, using the same actors throughout the production, but I don't see anything special in the actual storyline.

The film starts in 2002, and it follows the lives of 6 year old Mason Evans, Jr., (Ellar Coltrane), his older sister Samantha, (Lorelei Linklater), their single mother Olivia, (Patricia Arquette), and occasionally their father, Mason Sr., (Ethan Hawke). They go through moving, relationships, breakups, friendships, and more over the course of 12 years, until Mason goes away to college.

This is a good movie, but I just don't think it's as great as the hype that it's getting. The story has every cliché in the book, including divorced parents, an alcoholic, abusive stepfather, possibly the most annoying sibling ever, and every other standard teenage problem. If this exact same movie had been made as a normal movie using different actors at different ages, rather than filmed over 12 years using the same actors throughout, I doubt it would be as highly praised.

Attachments

 

The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) - This was another re-watch of a 2015 Best Picture Oscar nominee. Again, I didn't see what was so special about this movie the first time I watched it, and I still don't get why there is so much hype about this movie.

This movie recounts the story of how Zero Moustafa, (Tony Revolori), started as a lobby boy, became the trusted friend of the concierge, Monsieur Gustave H., (Ralph Fiennes), and became the owner of the Grand Budapest Hotel.

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand why everyone is raving so much about this movie. It's an interesting story, but it's just a bit too much on the strange side for me. It's not funny enough to be called a comedy, and it doesn't quite work as a drama either.

The cast is great, but the acting is just weird. The whole movie has almost a surreal feeling to it. I guess I just don't understand this type of humor.

Attachments

 

You're not the only one. I never bought into the whimsy and it wore me out eventually.

I'm glad to hear that I'm only one who just didn't get this movie.

I think Boyhood's about realism, allowing the viewer to relive and reminisce about childhood. The movie's allure is experiential.

I think a lot of people are getting too caught up in the whole 12 years thing. The movie itself is just an average movie. There is no real heavy drama to it, no laugh-out-loud comedy moments, no edge-of-your-seat scenes, etc. It's not an exciting movie, or an intense movie, or anything else that would make it stand out from the crowd. It's even a fairly predictable movie, with no "shocker" moments either. The only real thing that it has going for it to make it memorable is the "12 years in the making" thing.

Everything of what you just say is exactly what makes it stand out.

It's realism and as close to life as possible. The audience can relate, it's a life story on film. If you are looking for "forced drama" with people dying and what other "shockers" you might want, look elsewhere. I don't have a problem with mentioned dramas, but this is as honest and magical as it gets when it comes to life on screen. And the 12 years helps execute that story, yes.

Anyways, if you ever read my review I tried to describe what kind of film Boyhood is. But the film is not for everybody of course.

There's a reason that there aren't a lot of biographies made about normal people that everyone can relate to. It's because they're boring. When I go to the movies, I want to be entertained, and an average story just isn't very entertaining.

Not everyone loved Boyhood, but I think for those who did it wasn't as a movie but almost as a documentary of themselves. (At least for men because the film's about boyhood not girlhood.)

Don't get me wrong. I didn't dislike the movie. It's not a great movie, but it's not a bad movie either. It's a good movie with a somewhat interesting story, but it's just not as great as all the hype is making it out to be, and it pales in comparison to some of the other Best Picture nominees.

I'm taking my time on actually seeing Boyhood, it's not something I usually gravitate toward but with all the hype, I'm certainly interested. But then again, it seems like a film that relies on gimmick (like gbgoodies is saying).

The only thing that I can tell you is to watch the movie with an open mind, and make your own decision. I seem to be in the minority on this, so there's a good chance that you'll love the movie like most other people do.

I understand your point. What I'm trying to say is that the movie worked for many not as a movie but as a meaningful looking glass and that's what they're raving about.

I'll Take Sweden (1965) - I watched this movie for the upcoming 1965 movie list. Between Bob Hope, Tuesday Weld, and Frankie Avalon, I expected a light rom-com, which is basically what this movie is, but unfortunately, this is not one of the better rom-coms.

Bob Holcomb, (Bob Hope), is a single father of JoJo, (Tuesday Weld), his beautiful teenage daughter. He doesn't like her fiancé Kenny Klinger, (Frankie Avalon). because he is a college-dropout guitar player. To try to get her away from him, Holcomb takes a job in Sweden. When he gets there, he meets interior designer, Karin (Dina Merrill), and plans to take her away for a romantic weekend. Then he finds out that Sweden is much more liberal about sex, and they regularly have sex before marriage. When his daughter meets playboy Jeremy Slate, (Erik Carlson), and she plans to lose her virginity to him, Holcomb contacts Kenny and he comes to Sweden to stop her.

This is a fun movie, but it's nowhere near the quality of many other comedies. It has some funny moments, but nothing very memorable. There's not much chemistry between any of the couples in the movie. Unless you're a big fan of Bob Hope or any other star in this movie, it's not really good enough to recommend.

Attachments

 

Seems Like Old Times (1980) - This is a movie that I've probably seen over 100 times. It's one of my guilty pleasure movies that I watch when I'm just looking for something that's fun to watch. (Technically it's Mark F's fault that I watched it. He mentioned that he was going to watch it in the "Movie You're Watching Tonight" thread, and it made me want to watch it again.)

Nicholas Gardenia, (Chevy Chase), is a writer who is forced by two men to rob a bank. While robbing the bank, Nick looks up, directly into the security camera, leaving no question that he robbed the bank. Nick goes to his ex-wife Glenda Parks, (Goldie Hawn) for help. She is a lawyer who works as a public defender, and is known for giving odd jobs around her house to her clients. She is married to Ira Parks, (Charles Grodin), who is the District Attorney, and he is running for State Attorney General. When Ira's assistant Fred, (Robert Guillaume), recognizes the picture of Nick from the bank, he shows it to Ira. Glenda believes that Nick is innocent, and she wants to defend him, but Ira wants Nick in jail and out of their lives for good.

This movie is one of my all-time favorite comedies. It's one of those movies that I've seen so many times that I practically know it word-for-word, and it still makes me laugh every time I watch it. Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn are wonderful together. The entire cast is funny, including some great scenes with her chauffeur/butler Chester, (T. K. Carter), her maid/cook Aurora De La Hoya, (Yvonne Wilder), Judge John Channing, (Harold Gould), and an adorable group of dogs.

This movie is laugh-out-loud funny, especially the last few scenes, and I highly recommend it.

Attachments