MovieMeditation's "One, Two, Three" Reviews!

Gonna hafta think about this one, and yes, Hitman's Bodyguard should have been better than it was and yes, it did seemed held back or going through a basic 101 plot check list for hit movies for idiots. Saying that, I did ENJOY the movie all the same.


Also, Ghost Protocol was a very positive revive for the MI series and it's my favorite with the first coming in by a very close second. Simply because it had the "feel" of the old tv show with intrigue playing front and center with the action being an additional flavor to the stew, as it were.
Can't say I have a specific style for action. As long as it's done well, I'm for it. Fighting, shooting, car chases, insane scenarios. . . though the last is a bit of a razor's edge that can cause more pain than pleasure depending.

We can't be friends anymore, Edar. I will not have you sully my favourite murder couple of all time. Mofo!

I am heartbroken TRULY
but, to quote Horton the Elephant: I said what I meant, and I meant what I said.
And it includes both this AND what I said in my post in Last Movie Seen thread about how hot it was hearing Salma swearing in both English and Spanish. Loved her since Desperado and always will.
And for as much as I've enjoyed HB (seen it three times now) I do see MM's points.

Yes, and Deadpool.

__________________
Letterboxd

I am bereft at your heartbreak my friend. Come hither and I shall soothe it by singing that ridiculous nuns/ drinking song. I learnt the lyrics to sing a message on my brothers phone. He said it was the best rendition he had ever heard.

OMG Salma. A true pocket rocket goddess, and she rubbed her delicious boobage on my brother while declaring undying love. I'm turned on.

nuns drinking song?
I have GOT to hear this!!

Samuel is singing with the nuns while Ryan looks like his ears are bleeding. Will post shortly for your entertainment

My god that man is beautiful, and he just keeps getting more and more handsome with age.

ONE MORE!

never thought of that as a drinking song.

I misunderstood and thought you knew a nun drinking song. Ya know, like the Drunken Sailor Song that answers it's own question: What do you do with a drunken sailor?

Bevilo tutto!

Thanks for the comments, @edarsenal and @Dani8 - and yeah, Selma is always sexy, But I didn't find her forced foul mouthed attitude to be that great, unfortunately. Glad you like M:I-4 too, ed.

Haha, yeah, for best or for worse, that is probably the most forced film ever made.

__________________
/watching movies for mark f/
MovieMeditation's Cinema Reviews // Film Diary 2015 // Letterboxd Profile // MovieMeditation's Top 50 Horror

I have to disagree with you on Patriot's Day. The only issue I have with it is the composite character played by Marky Mark, but I understand why they did it and otherwise everything is very accurate. It's also a respectful movie towards the victims and survivors. Any real life person who did not want to be portrayed, wasn't. There is some corny dialogue like "if we don't get these guys they're going to do it to someone else", but of course this is how people talk. I also thought Lone Survivor was pretty awesome. Some of your words tell me you may have a bias against patriotic American movies, but at least in the case of Patriot's Day, that's how the actual event went down. I would think any movie from any country about an attack against them would contain patriotism. I don't understand why that's an American thing, yet you're not the only person I've heard this general view from.

I'm looking forward to Mother. I just heard of it for the first time a couple of days ago.

It may be accurate in terms of which actual parts of the events they portray, but it's more how they portray them that annoys me. Even for the inserted hand-held camera scenes, Berg still fails to make what is happening believable to me. He takes things on too simple, too surfaced or too cinematic, failing to make me buy into this film as something deeper than a Hollywood cash-grab or "pat on the back" picture.

So they respected who they included in the film, but though they might have gone for a respectful portroyal of the characters, it didn't work for me. The Chinese guy was pretty good, but the rest of the characters were so bland and didn't leave much impact at all. They felt like they were "there" because they were in real life, but not because they actually did much for the story. It felt too forced to have check-list characters like that - the couple who got split up and had to reunite; the boy and father who got split up and had to reunite; the death of a young boy so the impact feels greater and so on...

I wouldn't say I necessarily have a "bias" towards such movies, but sure I do find them missing the mark most of the times. Whatever movie, the event always seem so dramatized and "set up" and you can always devide the movie into HEROES and ENEMIES (yes in capitals) and it always seem to be more a product made to please the inner patriotism and hail the heroes of the day in such a glorified way that it almost because disrespectful sometimes, because of the overly dramatic way it is done.

You keep saying "that's how it actually went down". Sure, I know the basic story and such, but a movie isn't good just because it follows the real-life story that it is actually based on. That's kind of a given and what you expect from it really... It's more the approach and stylistic choices of a true story movie that sets it apart.

Greengrass' United 93 is a great example of such movie done excellently. The movie seems to be about ordinary people and it doesn't glorify one side or the other. The terrorists are not portrayed much differently than the heroes and the heroic acts come off as natural because of Greengrass' unbiased documenting approach. There is no real "hero moment" with an American flag in the backround or some patriotic remarks. The heroes are hailed as individual human beings and not as superhumans or action heroes, like it can often be the case.

I remember you saying something about you living in Boston/knowing Boston or whatever it was, so doesn't that mean you could have some bias yourself towards the event? The movie is almost made for you then, because you were actually there or know more about the event first hand than I do? In the same way you could say I'm not an expert on the topic and therefore my criticism can be faulty. But really I'm just judging the movie, not the event. And I don't like the movie or how Berg makes movies. So if anything, it's more a bias against Berg than patriotic movies.

Whether you agree or not, I did say "turning the otherwise goodhearted patriotic picture into a pitiful mocking of those who got injured" - so I actually think the starting point is fine and patriotic movies in its concept doesn't annoy more; though most of the times the execution just don't suit me.

I guess it is in the nature of being an American to be very proud and have big arm moments about being an American. FREEDOM! and all that. I'm not saying all Americans are that way or that being an American is so simple in its nature, but more than others especially their movies seem to scream out a certain proudness of who they are and where they come from. In movies, that often comes off as cheesy or embarrassing to me.

So yeah, patriotism is not an American thing, but it has kind of become associated with America a lot because of the way it is viewed from outside the country itself. So I guess you could also say because I'm not an American, I don't understand the way you guys go about talking and being proud of who you are. Nations are different, countries are different, I might just not understand how you go about it.

You should. You could very well end up liking it. At least some parts seem right up your alley!

I dont mind patriotism in American movies because for me it actually does rep[resent a huge part of the big culture over there, but this movie left me a little flat. I didnt dislike it but wont be rushing back for a rewatch any time soon. I agree that is was respectful to the victims, though, but I didnt connect with any of the characters. Not sure how else it could have been done, though. I like the doco feel of it.

With an 'F' Cinema Score, you're the first extremely positive review I've seen for mother!.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

What is this Cinema Score I keep seeing? Yet another nonsensical mass measurement of a movie's quality?

But if we go about that then a 68% fresh score on rotten tomatoes and a 74/100 on metacritic doesn't sound bad to me.

Anyways, mother is a very subjective, edgy art film... it's bound to split audiences - especially since it got Javier Bardem and Jennifer Lawrence in it... I don't think the target audience for those actors is the same as those for Aronofsky and a lot of people will probably be disappointed based on that group alone.

Personally I've seen a lot of positive feedback for the movie all over. But yeah, it's a diversive movie.

Yeah i'm not sure why this would be a good indicator of quality:

It's not exactly extensive either:

I haven't seen it yet but if i understand it right it's not a conventional film so it should be no surprise that a small sample of general audiences aren't responding well.

Here's a four star review. I haven't read it because i haven't seen the film but it has gotten some great reviews as well as some mixed and bad, exactly what you'd expect for that type of film.

It's just another case of critics opinions vs audience opinions. Again, look at RT, the audience score is 42%.

I found it interesting that this film is only one of 12 to get an F rating. It joins I Know Who Killed Me, The Wicker Man, Alone in the Dark, The Devil Inside and oddly Killing Them Softly, among others. That's why I was bringing it up.

In any event, any review of a film is a nonsensical measurement of a movie's quality. Your review included.


Again, simply to show the disconnect between audiences and critics.

People are complaining that mother! was marketed as something it isn't. Much like It Comes At Night another film liked by critics and hated by audiences. Maybe the problem lies within the marketing of such movies.

@TheUsualSuspect Sure, my review is too, but I'd rather trust someone with interest in film - the people on this forum for example - than a random collection of casual movie goers. That's the same people who wreck good films when a studio brings in a test audience to respond to specific cuts of films... that usually ends up with them wanting more of what the universally likable movie is. So therefore, a Cinema Score for mother! seems not to be of much use imo.

I've seen a few trailers for mother! after watching it and I don't think it's marketed wrong. It seems like a vague marketing of a complex film, but what can you do... The film is tough to market on the premise alone and without spoiling anything it's even harder.

Anyways, with artsy films like this I never listen to audience scores. Critics are better to look at in this case. You could say audience scores are never really a good indicator but you know... art films it's just an even worse indicator.

I don't think reactions like that can be completely ignored though. At least look at all aspects of the reaction spectrum before writing it off as unimportant.