Movie Tab II

Just to confirm yep, it's the Tartan release that I've got.

(And yep uc, i was saying what Adi said . Gave you kudos for seeing and digging it tho )

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

I sincerely hated JSA last time I saw it about two years back , I might have to give it another try although after going through Chan-Wook Park's entire filmography last time - Oldboy was the only one I really enjoyed.

Still , that guy knows how to make a gorgeous movie.

__________________

The Bridge On The River Kwai
David Lean, 1957

After watching Lawrence Of Arabia this weekend and being totally blown away, I thought it was about time to check out some more of Lean's movies. I know this is considered his best after Lawrence Of Arabia, so I immediately bumped it up on my Netflix queue. Something I've noticed about the two films of his that I've seen is that even though they're really long movies, they feel nowhere near that long. I mean this one was almost 3 hours long, but it barely felt like 2 hours. I guess I was just that into it. It's a very engaging story, so I can see why I was so sucked into the movie. One of the main things about this that really stuck out to me was the scenery, I mean it was beautiful. Especially that last shot as the camera is pulling away from the bridge right before the credits.

One of the most amazing things about this is how much of a great job William Holden did in this. I guess his character really helped him with that, because it seemed by the end of the movie he completely switched sides. I guess his character did have somewhat of a good reason for doing it, though. Even though I didn't quite love this as much as I loved Lawrence Of Arabia it's still a damn great movie and I'd recommend to anyone that hasn't seen it yet. It's definitely epic in every sense of the word.

Man Bites Dog (1992, Remy Belvaux/Andre Bonzel/Benoit Poelvoorde)
Not your typical serial killer movie.

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

TWILIGHT. (2008 - Catherine Hardwicke)



I don't think it's as horrific as everybody made it out to be, but it's certainly not 'like, the greatest movie evar!' either. I'll give the film three things-- the cinematography was nice, there were plently of LOL moments, and Robert Pattinson had one nice jacket on. On the other hand, however, the CGI was bad, the dialogue was cringe-worthy at times ("what a sad, masochistic lion", "your moodswings are kinda giving me whiplash"), the cast was unimpressive.. I don't really want to go on. 3.5/10

That gun looks just big enough for me to watch the movie

^^^



Meanwhile:

Star Trek III - The Search for Spock (Nimoy, 1984)



A definite step down from Wrath of Khan, but it continues/completes the storylines started in Khan, so it is sort of necessary. More dark and operatic than Khan, it still manages to be much less epic, and one can barely accept Lloyd as the Klingon Commander. His voice and mannerisms are just too unique, so he pulls you out of the story constantly. He does a good job, it's just hard not to see Chris Lloyd instead of Kruge. They finally got a decent Space Dock in this flick, though.

__________________

The Monster Squad (Dekker, 1987)

The much ornerier (but still tastefully funny) little brother to The Goonies, The Monster Squad is actually an impressive film, thanks in no small part to the authorship of Shane Black, who I don't think even knows how to write a bad film. The premise - a handful of nerds goes toe-to-toe with Dracula and his band of ferocious monsters - is as hilarious and fun as it is ridiculous. Many of the lines and adult innuendo in this film are pure gold, and although the monsters themselves (Dracula included) behave in sufficiently laughable ways, the costume and make-up work done by industry legend Stan Winston are amazing.




National Treasure (Turtletaub, 2004)

Okay, I'm a history buff, and I like this film. I don't think that makes me a hypocrite. Rather, I think it means I don't subscribe to the notion that historical accuracy is a prerequisite for a good film. That's usually the case, certainly, but I think National Treasure just wants to play in the historical sandbox. Now, I'm not going to say it's the best film I've ever seen. But I do think it, like its players, are enjoyable enough that all the many parts make a fun, dynamic whole. There are missteps aplenty, sure, but a brisk cat-and-mouse pace is maintained throughout, and there's just enough historical stone-skipping to put the film on par with the kinds of films that target "couch potato" history buffs (and I'd include the Indiana Jones films in this category, to some degree). I mean, what can I say? It's a fun, goofy story.




X-Men: The Last Stand (Ratner, 2006)

I know this is a pretty unpopular film, and believe me, it's certainly not ideal for me (as a fan of X-Men for many years). But I haven't been entirely pleased with the Singer films, either. Of course, they're easily more internally driven and competent, but much of the events in those first two films happen behind the scenes. To maintain a sense of realism and keep things grounded to personalities, a lot of the characters' mutant abilities are muted or merely suggestive. And I guess I appreciate this; nobody wants a film to degrade into an overblown light show. But after awhile, I really just want to see some cool $#!%.

I also feel like the first two films only skimmed the surface level of the mutant issue, representing it as merely a talking point issue rather than an actual ticking bomb. It's easy to connect the mutant struggle with racism and the 1960s Civil Rights movement, but until you see mutants rioting in the streets or marching for equal rights, the connection is really built on principle alone. In Ratner's film, the mutant issue is much more global, and more substantial events - like the development of the mutant cure - are happening.

And while the acting in any of these films is, in some cases, barely passable, I think Ratner's film hits a little closer to the mark. Sure, we need some true humanity (mutantity?) in the chief characters, but they're still comic characters. Part of the reason why Spider-Man worked so well is because it used largely the same language and character development as the comics. Sometimes, a comic film ought to feel like a comic.

That said, I was delightfully impressed with the depth of Ian McKellen's Magneto in this film moreso than in either Singer film. I've never liked this casting decision, and it was made worse by his depiction as someone who only considers the delivery of the mutant race by destroying humanity in one swift motion. But in Ratner's film, the character seems to understand more that it's an evolving issue, and that the war can't simply be won overnight. And he also seems to acknowledge and respect that his adversary, Professor Xavier, wholeheartedly works to achieve equality for mutants as well. To me, that's a rounded character.

*Faints*

Ok - What did you do with Sleezy?

I just can't agree, although I DO like X3 now and then. Singer juggled the ensemble cast of X2 perfectly, while nailing an atmosphere and tine that I was just completely over the moon about. X2 remains one of my favorite comic flicks ever. A couple of things don't work, but overall, it's a great film, and it's directly so well. I do love a few of the scenes in X3 though, especially the scene at the house with Charles and Phoenix...

Yeah, and don't get me wrong, I like aspects of Singer's films, too. The tone in the majority of the first film in particular is spot on. The isolation of the mutants is really felt pretty heavily through Rogue and Wolverine, which I think was crucial. But like I said, the Singer films (or their resolutions, I should say) are largely inconsequential, with most people in the world being completely oblivious that this war is even being waged. In that respect, I like that X3 brings more of that to the forefront.

During the development of X3, I remember groaning endlessly because I knew the Phoenix would be a major player of the film. In my opinion, she's the most transparent, useless character in all of Marvel Comics. But the film ultimately handled it well, changing the orientation of the entity to reflect a dormant side of her personality, and that worked much better.

I also like how Ratner's film wasn't afraid to take risks, like in the Charles/Phoenix scene you mentioned... or later in the film, with Magneto falling into some "bad luck," as it were. These are major events that have lasting effects (well, sort of), and neither of the Singer films really took that leap.

Further, regarding my desire to just see more cool action, I'll bet that if you polled a group of people who have seen X2, the majority will say their favorite part of the film was the opening sequence with Nightcrawler. Not only is it dynamic, exciting, and just plain cool, it's also downright X-Men through and through. And for me, those moments were too few and far between in Singer's films.

And while I'm not entirely crazy about some of the character additions in X3, I rather think I prefer to have them stick around as opposed to fleeting cameos. For example, Colossus was a missed opportunity, I think - his backstory is extremely heartfelt - but it was nice to see him for more than 30 seconds all the same. And as corny as he could have been, Beast was done EXTREMELY well.

I've read alternate versions of x-men screenplays and the introductions to the characters were much better in unproduced versions. I agree on the Nightcrawler point, that scene was badass.

filmmakers missed a chance to flesh out some really interesting characters, leaving Storm as a side note in the first film was a huge mistake. And Colossus was such an afterthought, a real shame. I thought all the characters had found their footing by the third film but then they were also flipped on their heads. Turns out Professor X has a potentially dark side. Wolverine is a big pu$$y. Jean Grey is actually a real psycho who is incredibly annoying. And as usual cyclops is useless.

Overall I really enjoyed all the films but the character development was awful.

__________________

Undercoverlovers 100 REDUX

Tell No One (Guillaume Canet, 2006)



Tense French movie-movie, which plays out as both a compelling mystery and an action-thriller, tells the story of Dr. Alexandre Beck (François Cluzet) whose wife is murdered. Although the doctor is a prime suspect, he's cleared and the death is attributed to a serial killer although things never really did add up. Eight years later, at just about the time that two bodies are found near the crime scene, Beck receives an e-mail which seems to be from his wife. Eventually, Beck is forced to take it on the lam, but he's aided by several unusual compatriots in trying to prove his innocence and find out if his wife is still alive.



What sets this flick apart from the usual paint-by-numbers thriller is that it has a strong plot and characters so that it's difficult to solve the mystery but it's easy to sympathize with the characters. Then, when you're totally drawn into the mystery, the film throws in one of the most-impressive chases by foot ever recorded (probably only topped by the one in Point Break) and adds a new level of characters to make everything even more complex and seemingly-unravellable (how's that for a word?). I thoroughly enjoyed the unusual characters and the way their fates played out. The only thing I'm worried about is that this is apparently going to be remade in English in 2011. The plot is so strong that if they cast it with character actors it could work. Unfortunately, I'm guessing they're going with big names.

The Green Pastures (William Keighley, 1936)



Simple, ultimately-moving tale, with an all-African American cast, which tells the Bible stories from the perspective of poor people living in the Deep South. A Sunday school teacher relates to his students what De Lawd God (Rex Ingram) might have done and why he did it while he explains all the major incidents from the early chapters of the Old Testament. Many of the stories are told humorously, and the characters all speak in what may seem as cliched "ethnic" dialogue, but the morals of all them come home loud and clear and nobody comes across as anything but a human being.



I realize that many people may find plenty of racism in the film since it was written and directed by whites, but once again, I find it much ado about nothing. To change the way the people speak would render the film pointless, and I understand that lots of misguided people want to burn The Birth of a Nation, Song of the South and Gone With the Wind, but this is a sweet, charming film which snuck up on me at the end and left me crying. Besides that, it has a wonderful cast and really allows Rex Ingram (the genie from The Thief of Bagdad (1940)) to shine in multiple roles.

Sleepy Hollow (Tim Burton, 1999)



Washington Irving's classic short story was reimagined and adapted for the screen by Andrew Kevin Walker (SE7EN), and the new story fits in well with Burton's preoccupations of the bizarre. In fact, Johnny Depp's Ichabod Crane now seems to be trying to solve a series of murders which somehow resemble those in the earlier Fincher film, but since this is Burton, it never quite reaches the darkness level of SE7EN. It is incredibly entertaining, exciting and beautiful though even if some of the whodunnits of the plot are obvious and jettisoned in favor of an honest-to-goodness horror fantasy with more lopped-off heads than any movie I can think of.



I'm not going into the new plot, but I will say that the cast is awesome. Christopher Lee plays the burgomaster who sends Depp from the NYC of 1799 to the "quaint" village of Sleepy Hollow to solve the murders. There he encounters the Town Council which consists of Michael Gambon (the second Dumbledore), Jeffrey Jones (Amadeus, Beetle Juice), Ian McDiarmid (The Emperor in Star Wars), Michael Gough (Tim Burton's Batman's Alfred), and Richard Griffiths (Harry Potter's Uncle Vernon). He also becomes attracted to Gambon's daughter Christina Ricci who practices spells to try to protect him and those she loves. Crane is immediately told the story of the Headless Horseman (Christopher Walken), and before he can pooh-pooh it, more murders occur and Crane witnesses the Horseman in action. These Horseman scenes are all top-of-the-line and really push the movie into the upper echelon of the Burton filmography. Besides containing Emmanuel Lubezki's expert cinematography, as well as awesome sound, editing, and F/X, Danny Elfman's menacingly-operatic musical score brings chills down the spine.



When she was growing up, this was Sarah's fave film. (I let her buy it; shame on me since it's rated R for blood and decapitations.) Yesterday I posted images from this flick in her Happy Birthday thread, so she picked it to watch last night, and that's why I'm writing this. She liked it a lot, but no word on changing her favorite movie list.

P.S. Sleepy Hollow is meant for huge screens and loud stereos, but if you've never watched it, see it in whatever format, except for edited and silent.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Funny, Sleepy Hollow was one of my favorite films growing up too! I just rewatched it again the other day and was surprised at the quality of it because my taste at the time that i loved it was just awful =\ but yeah it really is a beautiful movie! Some of the scenes are awesome i was thinking of actually painting the tree of the dead because that would make a kickass painting i think

I think you should do it. I mentioned earlier in my "review" of Barry Lyndon that Kubrick wanted the film to look like paintings from the 18th century. There were numerous times I thought I was looking at a painting during Sleepy Hollow too.

Yeah it definitely had tons of paint-worthy shots in it. I only really paint and draw and stuff in school because i don't have any of the supplies myself as they get really expensive and there's only a month of school left and i have to finish my 2001: A Space Odyssey series so i probably won't have time for another painting but i am planning on getting paints eventually!

Anyway, my thoughts on the X-men thing....X2 (IMO) is ten times better than the third one, X2 is in my top three comic book movies ever made i love it so much.

You should. Man Bites Dog is superb. Personally, I'd give it but that's because I love it. On merit, it's probably closer to

I agree with honeykid, Meat you may like it a lot, then again you may hate it. I could have given it a better rating, I'm still kind of thinking the film over. It has moments that are freaking hilarious, and then right after you're thinking, "should I be laughing at that?" That part with the old lady in the projects (you know the one HK), geez.

I certainly do, it's my favourite scene. That was the scene when I knew I'd like the film. Not sure what that says about me, but then again, I don't care, I was just pleased to see that someone in the world had the same sense of humour I did.

That scene sure did make me laugh too. Benoit Poelvoorde was excellent as the killer, his expressions and mannerisms made the character. Now that I've thought it over, I think I'm going to bump up my rating half a point.

Young People F*****g(Martin Gero 2007)-Awkwardly strange comedy that I haven't encountered before.I can't really say anything more



Diary of the Dead(George A. Romero 2007)-Ah Infected movies mmm how not to love them, you always know that there is no escape the inevitability of dead walking around.Even though they are slow and disoriented you forget that they are always more than us nd that what scares me,yes zombie movies are terrifying waking one day and see that the whole world is dead,it is scary.It's almost like Romero shows us the same movie over and over again but from different point of view and has always the same message: We are screwed!!!If the Infected don't kill us we will destroy ourselves,the last line was outstanding: "Are we worth Saving?You tell me."Again Romero pleased us with a great infected movie I know that this movie took some negativ reviews but you should give it a Second chance it was really good

__________________
I'm in movie heaven