Thomas II
Contributor
A Star is Born
-
Features
Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?
- Thread starter C_Mucius_Scaevola
- Start date
angelo
Deleted
Around 50% of movies that won a " Best Picture " category of the Academy Awards turned out be a disappointment. And I think the reason for that are the high expectations because of the high praise it receives at these awards. But then again, who am I to judge!
prideandfall
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,118
- Location
- a drawer of inappropriate starches
- Basic Beliefs
- highly anti-religious agnostic
the person watching the film, which is inherently an entirely subjective experience.
this whole pile of bullshit with oscars and awards and rotten tomatoes and such lately has been really driving home for me how utterly up its own ass the entire industry is about its importance and objective value.
it's a fucking movie. watch it, or don't. like it, or don't. and while it's fine to have awards for nebulous things like "best picture" everyone needs to recognize that this is "the best picture according to a select cabal of 90 year old industry insiders who pick based on metrics and nothing else" and not an accurate reflection of some kind of objective standard for reality.
angelo
Deleted
Couldn't agree more!
Opoponax
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,384
- Location
- California Central Coast
- Basic Beliefs
- Apathetic Atheist
Boyhood
I watched an actual good movie! I need to do more of this.
There's no traditional plot in this movie. It simply covers a mother, her two children, and the father over the course of 11 years. One remarkable thing is that the movie was shot over 11 years using all of the same actors, so we see the characters actually age before our eyes. Events transpire, while the characters grow, change, adapt, and progress, and the use of the same actors helps to document that stuff in a powerful way. It's a really different, but really charming movie.
See it.
8/10
I watched an actual good movie! I need to do more of this.
There's no traditional plot in this movie. It simply covers a mother, her two children, and the father over the course of 11 years. One remarkable thing is that the movie was shot over 11 years using all of the same actors, so we see the characters actually age before our eyes. Events transpire, while the characters grow, change, adapt, and progress, and the use of the same actors helps to document that stuff in a powerful way. It's a really different, but really charming movie.
See it.
8/10
Ford
Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,229
- Location
- Freedomland
- Basic Beliefs
- Just don't knock on my door on a Saturday Morning
The Clone Returns Home
Japanese film from 2008 that explores a possible future where cloning technology is just coming online. Kohei - an astronaut - volunteers to be cloned in case anything happens on his mission, but he appears to know that something will, and he'll be replaced by a copy. The film then goes into an extended flashback to his childhood, growing up with his mother and twin brother in a rural area. Then comes back to the titular arrival of his clone on the scene...but there's something not right.
It's a slow-moving film, and the camera lingers for very long shots but that actually drew me in because it was so different than what you'd expect from a "science fiction" movie. It also blurs the line between what's real, what's a flashback, and who is the "real" Kohei. This seems like a film that would bear more fruit on repeat viewings, but based on just one watch, it's a beautiful, fascinating movie.
7/10
Japanese film from 2008 that explores a possible future where cloning technology is just coming online. Kohei - an astronaut - volunteers to be cloned in case anything happens on his mission, but he appears to know that something will, and he'll be replaced by a copy. The film then goes into an extended flashback to his childhood, growing up with his mother and twin brother in a rural area. Then comes back to the titular arrival of his clone on the scene...but there's something not right.
It's a slow-moving film, and the camera lingers for very long shots but that actually drew me in because it was so different than what you'd expect from a "science fiction" movie. It also blurs the line between what's real, what's a flashback, and who is the "real" Kohei. This seems like a film that would bear more fruit on repeat viewings, but based on just one watch, it's a beautiful, fascinating movie.
7/10
angelo
Deleted
Top drama from the man who gave the world " Chicago."
8/10
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,243
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
A woman gave the world Chicago.
angelo
Deleted
Nightclub sensation Velma (Catherine Zeta-Jones) murders her philandering husband, and Chicago's slickest lawyer, Billy Flynn (Richard Gere), is set to defend her. But when Roxie (Renée Zellweger) also winds up in prison, Billy takes on her case as well -- turning her into a media circus of headline… MORE
Initial release: 10 December 2002 (Los Angeles)
Director: Rob Marshall
Awards: Academy Award for Best Picture, MORE
Producers: Neil Meron, Martin Richards
Where's the woman?
CJW
Member
A woman gave the world Chicago.
I'm, guessing:
From Wiki:
Maurine Dallas Watkins (July 27, 1896 – August 10, 1969) was an American journalist and playwright. In the 1920s she wrote the stage play Chicago (1926), about women accused of murder, the press, celebrity criminals, and the corruption of justice. Her play had a successful run on Broadway, during the roaring twenties — the play was then adapted twice for film. Watkins went on to write screen-plays in Hollywood, eventually retiring to Florida. After her death in 1969, Chicago was adapted in 1977 as a successful Broadway stage musical, which developed into an award winning 2002 film version.
I'm, guessing:
From Wiki:
Maurine Dallas Watkins (July 27, 1896 – August 10, 1969) was an American journalist and playwright. In the 1920s she wrote the stage play Chicago (1926), about women accused of murder, the press, celebrity criminals, and the corruption of justice. Her play had a successful run on Broadway, during the roaring twenties — the play was then adapted twice for film. Watkins went on to write screen-plays in Hollywood, eventually retiring to Florida. After her death in 1969, Chicago was adapted in 1977 as a successful Broadway stage musical, which developed into an award winning 2002 film version.
The Colourful Jester
Member
Captain Marvel
One of the few good origin movies Marvel has made. Not been told in chronological order was a good touch. I'm not fully familiar with the Skrull history so the story was a surprise in some ways. Annette Benning showed why she should be in more movies not bad for less than 10 minutes work. Jackson was a cuddly Fury in this - which cost him, I'm sure you can guess how.
A young Coulson is frankly a young Coulson and is unrecognisable from the character we see later. Larson is a damn good fit for Danvers. It'll be good to see her fit in with the Endgame team. Good action scenes of course. Goose rules. Nice 90s soundtrack.
Two credit scenes, the first is early and feels like a good link between Infinity War and Endgame. The last one appears at the end for comic purposes. The Marvel logo has been adapted with images of Stan Lee.
Of course, as a small dicked incel, this movies was pathetic. Who needs Thanos when she knocked down men (y'know 50% of the universe) repeatedly. Three indications of feminism, cleverly disguised by being blink and you'd miss them, were in the movie. Four if you count No Doubts Just A Girl song. It was also a mistake to watch in 3D as Larson actually reached through the screen and removed my balls. Granted I wasn't doing much useful with them. But the touch of a woman was quite unusual I must say.
One of the few good origin movies Marvel has made. Not been told in chronological order was a good touch. I'm not fully familiar with the Skrull history so the story was a surprise in some ways. Annette Benning showed why she should be in more movies not bad for less than 10 minutes work. Jackson was a cuddly Fury in this - which cost him, I'm sure you can guess how.
A young Coulson is frankly a young Coulson and is unrecognisable from the character we see later. Larson is a damn good fit for Danvers. It'll be good to see her fit in with the Endgame team. Good action scenes of course. Goose rules. Nice 90s soundtrack. Two credit scenes, the first is early and feels like a good link between Infinity War and Endgame. The last one appears at the end for comic purposes. The Marvel logo has been adapted with images of Stan Lee.
Of course, as a small dicked incel, this movies was pathetic. Who needs Thanos when she knocked down men (y'know 50% of the universe) repeatedly. Three indications of feminism, cleverly disguised by being blink and you'd miss them, were in the movie. Four if you count No Doubts Just A Girl song. It was also a mistake to watch in 3D as Larson actually reached through the screen and removed my balls. Granted I wasn't doing much useful with them. But the touch of a woman was quite unusual I must say.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,243
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Yeah, a quick search would have helped angelo with that, but we know he is allergic to facts. Watkins was a reporter in Chicago, and part of the machine that was involved in court cases that created ridiculous hype. She decided to embellish a little and create a play. Later on in life, she feared that she helped a guilty person get off on charges they were guilty of.
angelo
Deleted
I meant the producer and director. Not the author ! The actual people responsible in bringing the story to the screen.
Memoirs of a Geisha (film) - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_of_a_Geisha_(film)
Memoirs of a Geisha is a 2005 American epic drama film based on the novel of the same name by Arthur Golden, produced by Steven Spielberg's Amblin ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_of_a_Geisha
KeepTalking
Code Monkey
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2010
- Messages
- 4,641
- Location
- St. Louis Metro East
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
Your language was imprecise. You did not say "Top drama from the producer/director of " Chicago."", you said "Top drama from the man who gave the world " Chicago.""
That implies the story itself originated from a man, however, "Chicago" as a story very clearly originated from a woman.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,215
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
And the show and movie would both have flopped without the right women in the top roles. Why does everyone obsess over directors? They are important, but not the only important parts of a production. As an actor, I've been in shows with terrible directors that played perfectly well because the rest of the crew were on top form; I've been in shows that were well-directed and produced with good intent, but floundered because the script was weak or two of the leads didn't know how to play off each other. I was in a movie that sucked because the cameras did.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,243
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
It really is all about getting everything to work together well. I heard that in Bringing Up Baby, Hepburn initially had terrible delivery, but with a bit of coaching, everything worked out very well in the end. Saw Love Never Dies on stage, and that show proved great production, singing, and stage talent can't save an awful script!
And the show and movie would both have flopped without the right women in the top roles. Why does everyone obsess over directors? They are important, but not the only important parts of a production. As an actor, I've been in shows with terrible directors that played perfectly well because the rest of the crew were on top form; I've been in shows that were well-directed and produced with good intent, but floundered because the script was weak or two of the leads didn't know how to play off each other. I was in a movie that sucked because the cameras did.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,215
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
She said as much herself, actually in an interview about The African Queen; how it was so much easier to do that film than others previous. She'd never really been in a comedy before Briniging Up Baby, and they had to stop her from mawking at the camera vaudeville-style.It really is all about getting everything to work together well. I heard that in Bringing Up Baby, Hepburn initially had terrible delivery, but with a bit of coaching, everything worked out very well in the end. Saw Love Never Dies on stage, and that show proved great production, singing, and stage talent can't save an awful script!And the show and movie would both have flopped without the right women in the top roles. Why does everyone obsess over directors? They are important, but not the only important parts of a production. As an actor, I've been in shows with terrible directors that played perfectly well because the rest of the crew were on top form; I've been in shows that were well-directed and produced with good intent, but floundered because the script was weak or two of the leads didn't know how to play off each other. I was in a movie that sucked because the cameras did.
yuk yuk!
marc
Veteran Member
Pretty much agree with everything. It was an interesting way to give the backstory. I’m familiar with a lot of Marvel history, and they still kept it new and a few surprises.
The tribute to Stan was excellent, glad they did that.
I liked that Carol was not a stoic hero, or angry hero. She was sarcastic, playful, and took no shit. Also liked the little girl, and her advice to her mom.
It does raise a few questions, that can’t be asked without spoilers.
C_Mucius_Scaevola
Veteran Member
Ralph Breaks The Internet
Enjoyable, but true to the laws of diminishing returns, not quite as fun as the first movie, Wreck It Ralph. The chaos that is the internet was well portrayed, although I'd like to know where this fantastical video site is where "hearts" can be exchanged for real life money, so I can go make my fortune! Yes, I know, some things in movies are just made up ...
I liked the Disney princesses, although as a Scotsman, I was a bit disappointed in the stereotypical portrayal of Merida as unintelligible. I mean, come on, guys. That went out with "stupid Irishman" amd "lascivious Frenchman" jokes. Time for an update; it's the age of the internet, FFS.
One thing that bugged me: at the start of the movie, Ralph and Vanelope rush to enjoy the sunset that comes through the unused socket, which disappears when the internet is plugged in, but reappears when the plug is pulled on Sugar Rush. But at the end,
A minor continuity complaint, but it did bother me.
Enjoyable, but true to the laws of diminishing returns, not quite as fun as the first movie, Wreck It Ralph. The chaos that is the internet was well portrayed, although I'd like to know where this fantastical video site is where "hearts" can be exchanged for real life money, so I can go make my fortune! Yes, I know, some things in movies are just made up ...
I liked the Disney princesses, although as a Scotsman, I was a bit disappointed in the stereotypical portrayal of Merida as unintelligible. I mean, come on, guys. That went out with "stupid Irishman" amd "lascivious Frenchman" jokes. Time for an update; it's the age of the internet, FFS.
One thing that bugged me: at the start of the movie, Ralph and Vanelope rush to enjoy the sunset that comes through the unused socket, which disappears when the internet is plugged in, but reappears when the plug is pulled on Sugar Rush. But at the end,
A minor continuity complaint, but it did bother me.
