Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

→ in
Tools    





I've got much to say on the last few entries, but one very minor and somewhat silly observation of ST VI: the Klingon blood being the color of bubble gum.

I can understand their blood is a different color, but for some reason the playful color didn't seem to have the same impact on screen. Guess I'm just human-centric. Some could say our red blood is a playful color as well. But the murder scene in the movie just didn't seem to have the same seriousness or impact with the blood looking like pink Good-&-Plenty's (an old candy) than if, say, the blood had been black. I guess I'm saying that the blood didn't come off as blood, but as Hollywood goop with some lavender food coloring. It was distracting, and since it was such a serious and important scene, it shouldn't have had such distractions.

I always remember reading how comic artists would say how they'd draw (or color) blood black because bright red blood ends up looking silly on the page while black blood looks more realistic.
Totally agree! When I watched the movie I thought the Pepto Bismo blood looked cartoonish and liked you said it ruined the scene.



Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is an excellent, excellent film.


I also enjoyed Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Didn't like any of the others, though.
Those 2 were my favorite of the first 5 ST films. I've been watching the original Star Trek TV series on DVD and just finished watching it. Now I'm starting to watch ST The Next Generation.



I have some unpopular issues with IV - I don't hate it or anything and the biggest problem is I've seen it too many times. Every time non-Trekkies wanted to watch a Trek movie it was this one!

One problem is the Enterprise is absent (except for a last minute cameo) - the Enterprise is literally a character of the original crew (to me anyway). Along with the Enterprise being absent there are many other typical Trek trappings that aren't there to much extent such as: outer space scenes, outer space battles, Kirk outsmarting an enemy, aliens, etc. The story didn't lend itself to a lot of typical sci-fi special effects (but of the effects there were, most were decent.)

Another problem is I don't really like time travel stories within a series (don't mind them if they're stand alone, but within a series they have the potential to effect continuity).

This isn't a terrible thing, but the movie came off as Nimoy's personal Save The Whales crusade (which indeed it was) - not a bad message, but it's quite obviously the message in the film (be a great theme for maybe a single TV episode, but to have a whole ST movie revolve around it? I have mixed feelings). The plot with the whale probe very much resembled the whole V-Ger fiasco from the much-panned ST-TMP, but re-used here as a way to fit an alien element around the Save The Whales story.

The aftermath of the Search for Spock seemed virtually abandoned - yes, it was touched upon at points, but the fact that Spock was now living in a new (cloned?) body, he had been killed, experienced death, he'd shared McCoy's body and mind, aged to adulthood in a matter of hours, had sexual relations in a teen form with an adult crew member, had a soul transplant, had suffered amnesia and was now starting all his relationships anew almost as a newborn - it all seemed a rather traumatic set of circumstances for a major character (something an entire movie could have spent delving into), yet it all seems to be treated as happenstance with a "well that was interesting, let's move on and make lots of jokes about time travel" attitude.

The good: the film resembled a longer type of TV episode (but refer back to my last point). I enjoyed the humor and the time travel did set up a lot of humorous situations. As Rules pointed out, I liked how various crew members had a chance to shine, each with their own subplot missions to help solve their problem. I liked the ending - that Kirk's punishment for all the stuff he pulled in ST-III was a demotion that would bump him back to rank of Captain and he'd have to command a newly built Enterprise.



Walter Koenig also got some "real air time" as Chekov in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, even though he wasn't in the original episode "Space Seed". Koenig said that he knew he wasn't in that episode when he got the script for ST2, but he didn't tell anyone because he didn't want to lose that juicy role. Even thought he wasn't in the original episode, he explained how Khan recognized him by explaining that Chekov wasn't a member of the bridge crew yet. He was just a lowly crew member who happened to be in the bathroom when Khan really really had to go very badly. When Chekov finally came out of the bathroom, Khan looked at him and said, "I will remember your face."





Here's a little known piece of trivia for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. Did you know that there's an error on the crew jackets for that movie?




What's the error?
Is it the Enterprise over the Golden Gate bridge (since the ship didn't appear in the film until a little cameo at the end)?



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
What's the error?
Is it the Enterprise over the Golden Gate bridge (since the ship didn't appear in the film until a little cameo at the end)?

Yes, that's the error. The Enterprise wasn't the ship that flew near the Golden Gate Bridge. It was the Klingon Bird of Prey.
__________________
.
If I answer a game thread correctly, just skip my turn and continue with the game.
OPEN FLOOR.



Yes, that's the error. The Enterprise wasn't the ship that flew near the Golden Gate Bridge. It was the Klingon Bird of Prey.
Thanks!
I also noticed there's a whale in the jacket photo but not appearing in close up photo! (Like one of those "what's the difference" cartoons!)



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
Thanks!
I also noticed there's a whale in the jacket photo but not appearing in close up photo! (Like one of those "what's the difference" cartoons!)

I pulled those pictures off the internet because my jacket is safely packed away in storage, but I'll have to check and see if the actual jacket has the whale. (I don't remember a whale on my jacket, but I'll check when I get a chance.)



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)

Director: William Shatner
Writers: William Shatner
Cast: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, George Takei, David Warner, Laurence Luckinbill
Genre: Sci Fi

Had it not been for bad luck ST V: The Final Frontier might have been the best of the original cast Star Trek movies. First time feature film director William Shatner had grand visions for his movie but a 'starship load' of misfortune followed him.

For starters there was a writer's strike that curtailed the planned big ending for the film, and the special effects budget was reduced so that the entire big finale was cut down to a mere whisper of it's planned opulence. If that was enough to thwart Shatner's grand film ideas the studio demanded his film be edited down by some 20 minutes from the original 2 hour movie he had shot. Despite the fact Shatner insisted all the material was necessary to the movie, the film was heavily edited. And that's why the 5th film in the original ST franchise is considered the weakest of the bunch.



The story premise is a good one: Spock's long estranged half brother Sybok reappears as a renegade Vulcan who's embraced emotions as a way of discovering a profound metaphysical truth. The most interesting aspect is the way Sybok delves into people's minds revealing their inner fears, so that they can conquer and be free of their inner pain, thus achieving a higher state of inner peace. Now that's a cool concept! Laurence Luckinbill as the messianic Sybok is both engaging and likable...that's important because he's a big part of the film and for the audience to accept him, as does most of the Enterprise crew, he has to seem both amicable and wise.

I wonder just how more fleshed out the film would have been with the missing 20 minutes restored to it. As it is some of the scenes seem abbreviated and don't fully achieve the emotional resonance that leaves the viewer in awe. There were several key scenes where I had an innate sense that an extra line was needed to bring the scene to it's emotional peak.



I hated this Star Wars bar room scene rip off. Actually I thought the same scene in Star Wars was kitschy stupid too, so no reason to copy it. It felt like it didn't belong and they had already done a similar scene in ST III The Search for Spock.



I liked David Warner's character as a Federation envoy. But whoever decided to make this human smoke cigarettes in the 23rd century doesn't understand Star Trek canon. Gene Rodenberry had resisted all attempts by commercial interest to have cast members smoke on the original TV series, as he felt no one in the 23rd century would be smoking. Not a deal breaker but disappointing for a ST fan. The actress who played the Romulan woman in the above photo, is pretty alright but made one of the worst Romulans I've seen.

Had the film's budget not been drastically cut, had there been no writer's strike, had the studio allowed Shatner's full 2 hour version of the movie...then The Final Frontier with it's unique themes might have gone down in ST history as one of the great films...but as it is I rate it a respectable:





I haven't seen it in a long time, but I thought Star Trek V was one of the worst Star Trek movies. The only good scenes were the "Row, row, row your boat" scenes, there was little of the fun character interactions that we've come to love, and there were very few memorable lines.

One of the reasons the movie was cut so badly was because the actress in the scenes with David Warner was so bad that most of her scenes were left on the cutting room floor. That's also the reason that David Warner was brought back for Star Trek VI.





Day for Night (1973)

La nuit américaine (original title)
Director: François Truffaut
Writers: François Truffaut (screenplay), Jean-Louis Richard (screenplay)
Cast: Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Léaud, François Truffaut
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance
Language: French


"A committed film director struggles to complete his movie while coping with a myriad of crises, personal and professional, among the cast and crew."

I enjoyed it! It's not often that I watch a film and get so into the story that I don't check how much time is left on the film. I was very intrigued for the entire 2 hours and loved the subject matter! It was great seeing a movie about a movie being made and what I liked was that it focused on the actual behind scenes business of getting a film made. I liked the entire cast.

François Truffaut was very likable on screen and I felt like I already knew him as I've seen him talk in detail in the documentary Hitchcock/Truffaut (2015). He seemed like a real cool guy and just seeing him work was a real treat.



Valentina Cortese the Italian actress was really great in this, she was full of exuberantated energy and reminded me of a cross between Greta Garbo and Gloria Swanson.

Jacqueline Bisset was OK in this, she didn't really do much. I remember when I was a kid she was the 'babe' that all the adults thought was hot, well at least the guys I actually liked Nathalie Baye as the script girl Joelle better.

I was pleasantly surprised by Day for Night! BTW in America that filming technique is called 'Hollywood Night'.





The Aviator (2004)

Director: Martin Scorsese
Writer: John Logan
Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, Kate Beckinsale
Genre: Biography, Drama, History

"A biopic depicting the early years of legendary Director and aviator Howard Hughes' career from the late 1920s to the mid 1940s."


DAMN IT! I just about bought a new TV set after watching the DVD of the The Aviator and thinking the color in my 10 year old plasma TV had went out making this gawd awful looking ugly cyan color. It really stressed me out and ruined the movie watching experience, as for the whole 3 hours of the movie I kept thinking, 'Damn! now I have to go buy a new TV set!'.... And I spent half the night messing around with the color settings on the TV, ugh!

Then...the next morning I pop The Aviator DVD into my computer and was very relieved to see the same yucky cyan color. So I knew, my TV was OK and it was just a cheap bootleg DVD that my library had, and I was going to tell them to throw it away!

...Then I read some other reviews of the movie and seen others had the same reaction to the strange color...OMG, so this was Scorsese's attempt at art, ugh! I'm NOT impressed. Scorsese was attempting to shoot the film in early 1930s Two Strip Technicolor. I loved the movie, but the look of it is yuck! and to me the visual appeal of a movie needs to match the quality of the story telling. And the story telling, the acting was all top notch but that cyan color was so distracting that it ruined the joy of watching the movie.

BTW I just watched a Two Strip Technicolor film Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) and the colors were much more pastel and pinkish, so I think Scorsese's addition of funky cyan color was not only distracting but inaccurate.



Leonardo DiCaprio nails the role of the eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes. Well I don't know for sure what the real Howard Hughes was like in person, as he was pretty reclusive, so what matters is that DiCaprio creates a well defined and sympathetic character that had me believing what I was watching was the real thing. Leo is excellent in this movie and so was all of the supporting cast, and it's a big cast that represents some of the most famous names in Hollywood during it's early days.



The Aviator creates the world of Hollywood during it's golden age (1930s-1950s), to near perfection.



Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	The Aviator 2004 (2).jpg
Views:	255
Size:	178.2 KB
ID:	50753   Click image for larger version

Name:	The Aviator 2004 (3).jpg
Views:	324
Size:	178.7 KB
ID:	50754  




Ghostwatch (1992)
Director: Lesley Manning
Writer: Stephen Volk
Cast: Michael Parkinson, Sarah Greene, Mike Smith
Genre: Horror, Mystery

A realistic spoof of a TV based news investigation by a BBC film crew of the most haunted house in Britain. CR

What an idea for a movie! Orson Welles would be proud...and it was originally shown on Halloween evening too, how cool is that! I would have loved to watch this on that night, I bet it would've been a very memorable viewing experience!

Ghostwatch originally aired on BBC in 1992 October 31st as a Halloween treat...or maybe as a Halloween prank on the viewers. It was a mockumentary presented as a live TV broadcast, where a team of investigate reporters spend the evening investigating paranormal activities at a reportedly haunted house.

I loved the way this was done, with the woman from Ghostwatch spending the night in the house along with a camera crew who are armed with spectral imaging equipment and the two little girls who had been terrorized by the poltergeist ghost nicknamed 'Pipes' are there. They're all stuck in that house, live on TV, as we watch mysterious noises and worse, happening right in front of our eyes.

Add to that the two anchor people back in the Ghostwatch studio, one a woman who's a true believer who too easily find reasons to believe the ghost is real. Then the older man who's the lead anchor of the show, he's more skeptical which throws the audience off balance and adds credibility that what we're watching is real. And then there's a reporter on the streets who's more of a light heartened comedian, which further clouds the real aim of the show...It's intentional misdirection, all well done.

I enjoyed it, just the spectacle of it and the way they pitted the shows team against each other so as to manipulate the feelings of the audience...I tell ya, this is just like Orson Welles' famous 1938 Halloween radio broadcast of The War of the Worlds. Of course the great Orson did it first, but Ghostwatch did a helluva job with it.


BTW, Did you guys spot Pipes in the movie? The producer confirmed that there are 13 times that Pipes shows up...In that photo I used, I hid Pipes, can you see him?





Incendies (2010)

Director: Denis Villeneuve
Writers: Denis Villeneuve (scenario), Wajdi Mouawad (play)
Cast: Lubna Azabal, Mélissa Désormeaux-Poulin, Maxim Gaudette
Genre: Drama, Mystery, War
Language
: Arabic, French


"Twins journey to the Middle East to discover their family history and fulfill their mother's last wishes."

I had not heard of this before. I kinda knew it was about something in the middle east, but that's all I knew. I haven't read any of the reviews so don't know what you guys thought of it. I image most will like it, as it's a well made film.

Wow! the opening sequence with the boys getting their heads shaved, that was powerfully artistic. Especially that intense stare into the camera by the boy...Damn that was impressive film making.

When we get to the next scene, the reading of the will, I kinda thought the film might be boring. But then we get into the story of the daughter and her search for her missing brother in the middle east and I was hooked! I was even more hooked when the film flashes back to the early 1970s and we see the mother, who's now a young pregnant woman caught in the middle of the Lebanese civil war. Her story was very engaging and I was riveted to the screen. Both actresses were fascinating to watch and really conveyed their emotions so well, I wish the entire film had been about them.

I'd rate the first hour of the film a solid 5/5 and at this point I thought Incendies might very well be a favorite of mine.

But then the second half started and I lost some interest. I didn't like the actor who played the son and thought his story wasn't all that interesting. Neither was the older man from Montreal that went along with him to Lebanon. This last hour took the film down a notch and I did feel like I was watching a movie as opposed to the first hour where I felt like I was watching real people in a real place.

I'm not fond of the ending. Just now, I did a little reading and seen this was based on a play that was based on real events. But I don't know how much of this really happened ?

Not sure how the ending makes me feel about the movie? If it's based on true events, then it belongs in the movie. However, if the ending was embellished, it's then way too much and takes away from the more heartfelt personal journey that we see in the first hour.






Day for Night (1973)

La nuit américaine (original title)
Director: François Truffaut
Writers: François Truffaut (screenplay), Jean-Louis Richard (screenplay)
Cast: Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Léaud, François Truffaut
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance
Language: French

You mentioned how much you enjoyed Valentine Cortese...I don't know if you know, but Cortese was nominated for an Oscar for this film.



The Aviator creates the world of Hollywood during it's golden age (1930s-1950s), to near perfection.


I too enjoyed the movie. Cate Blanchett delivered a very memorable and accurate impersonation of Katharine Hepburn.

The saga of Howard Hughes is my favorite fascinating story of the 20th Century. ~Doc



I won't dance. Don't ask me...
Speaking of The Aviator, I watched it in the cinema and I don't remeber something with colour bothered me, but your story with new TV set was (forgive me) pretty funny
The movie was very popular that time, but I barely remeber it. I recall great cast and that it was quite long.




Pixote (1981)
Pixote: A Lei do Mais Fraco (original title)

Director: Hector Babenco
Writers: Hector Babenco & Jorge Durán (story)
Cast: Fernando Ramos da Silva, Jorge Julião, Gilberto Moura
Genre: Crime, Drama
Language: Portuguese


A brutal story of the hard life of a street orphan in the streets of Sao Paulo, Brazil. The boy becomes involved with crimes, prostitution and drugs.

I should've been grossed out by that scene in the photo, but for some reason nothing in the film disturbed me. In fact I think it was a well made film and I did like aspects of it. I won't say I loved it, as it's not the kind of film one loves. But it was unique.

I liked the direct-documentary style with little music score and no fancy cinematography. The film is effective as it literally puts us in the shoes of these forlorn Brazilian street kids who end up in a state run orphanage. The orphanage is just another kind of hell for them. I've heard that in places like Rio or Mexico City that they have so much crime from the street kids that they have death squads that go around and shoot the kids down in cold blood on the streets. It's really a sad thing and it happens for real, so I believe what I seen was a true depiction.

I wasn't too involved in the movie for the first hour but once the group of boys left the orphanage the film got interesting for me. I liked how the four kids interacted and both supported each other and fought too. The scenes with the prostitute was my favorite.

There's a scene where the boy Pixote suckles at the breast of the prostitute. I actually found that scene to be the most emotional of the movie, as it wasn't sexual, but it was a pathetic bittersweet moment between two deeply wounded people. It was touching.

I kind of hate that the movie didn't end on that scene, because when the prostitute then freaks out and tells Pixote to stop and get the hell away from her...it broke the emotion of the previous scene.

+



Lean on Pete (2018)

Director
: Andrew Haigh
Writers
: Andrew Haigh, Willy Vlautin (novel)
Cast
: Charlie Plummer, Amy Seimetz, Travis Fimmel
Genre
: Adventure, Drama

"A teenager gets a summer job working for a horse trainer and befriends the fading racehorse, Lean on Pete."

I liked it, but didn't love it. I could have liked it a whole lot more with a few needed and simple tweaks. This felt like a Hallmark movie, and that's not a criticism. This felt like a Hallmark movie in that it was a very personal story of one determined teen boy Charley and his love for the race horse Pete. His journey to save Pete from the slaughter house and his quest to find his own place in the world as he traveled to find a long lost aunt, seemed like a subject matter of a PG rated Hallmark channel movie. I like those, when they're done well.



It could have had 20 minutes cut out as it felt too long for what was happening on the screen. By eliminating the scene of the two war veterans living in the middle of the desert the movie would've had better pacing. That scene added little to the overall movie, other than to hear the blonde girl get verbally hurt by her grandfather (what a jerk he was!). I guess the point was to say her only place to live wasn't all that great. Too much film footage for a 10 second pay off when she confides in Charley. It didn't need to be an R rating, as nothing R rated really ever happens that feels dishonest to me as it's a PG13 movie with a few swear words.

In short, I liked the movie's theme and the actors, and the settings were nice too.





RUSH (2013)

Director: Ron Howard
Writer: Peter Morgan
Cast: Daniel Brühl, Chris Hemsworth, Olivia Wilde
Genre: Action, Biography, Drama


"The merciless 1970s rivalry between Formula One rivals James Hunt and Niki Lauda."

Even though I never watch auto racing on TV, I do like movies about racing. I've seen a number of them too. But as much as I liked the subject matter and the personal stories of the two very different Formula 1 drivers, I didn't like what Ron Howard did to the movie. it felt like a 2 hour long movie trailer.

I'm sure some people like movies that seem like a trailer and by that I mean the scenes felt abbreviated, we seen many snippets of different events, but never does the film really delve deeply into it's subject matter. Everything seems to be glossed over and done on surface level. Maybe it gets more involved towards the end of the movie and that's when I liked it better...But mostly it felt like a quick edit, movie trailer that shows us sneak previews of the high-lights.



I especially disliked the scenes with rock/pop music playing over them, that gives a feeling of watching a TV commercial (or trailer) and made me feel like I wasn't in the actual moment. I'm sure that style of film making was what Ron Howard was trying for...A lot of entertainment movies are made like this.

I think that poster image says it all...you can often judge a film's demeanor by it's poster.