Films Recently Watched

  On 5/5/2013 at 10:23 PM, zaphod said:

i honestly find michael bay a lot more tolerable. there's a definite self awareness to his films and their patriotic qualities.

Understandable justification, but yeah I don't think so. Bay is no Verhoeven. He's really just a dumb twat with an (overrated) gift for manipulating cameras and giant objects within a frame.

  On 5/5/2013 at 10:48 PM, zaphod said:

but that isn't true. if that's what she intended, why create a character that didn't exist around a causal chain of events that didn't happen in order to manipulate an audience into believing that there was some kind of righteous fire driving american operations to find bin laden? why create such a nebulous film that purports to be factual and even opens with an extremely distasteful recording from 9/11? i don't know why it's so difficult for you or anyone else to understand why that's deeply irresponsible and sort of abhorrent.

i don't think that the fact that it's not 100% factual prevents it from being seen as she intended, apart from some dramatization quirks it all seems very plausible, to me at least. i mean, wasn't there a real craze in regards to the hunt on bin laden ? didn't the us intelligence use torture to try to get him ? i thought the opening was very effective, it's the event that jump-started the whole ordeal after all. in the first sequence you get to hear all those voices and in the next you get to see the effect of that push for "war on terror".

regarding its irresponsibility, i dunno, i don't see how it's irresponsible. the fact that it leaves too much room for interpretation on the viewer ? shouldn't it be considered as serious and mature instead of irresponsible ?

The Master - 8.5/10. Held off watching this for a long time, probably because of the very luke warm reviews I saw around. I was very pleasantly surprised. I was very underwhelmed by There will be blood, especially because a protagonist with such an angry and bitter affect got tiring to watch for a whole movie. The Master feels like PTA's most accomplished movie so far. Almost Kubick level in some parts. Didn't find it boring in the least. I turned it on at 12am expecting to have to finish it the next day but instead watched it in a straight shot.

  On 5/5/2013 at 11:29 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

The Master - 8.5/10. Held off watching this for a long time, probably because of the very luke warm reviews I saw around. I was very pleasantly surprised. I was very underwhelmed by There will be blood, especially because a protagonist with such an angry and bitter affect got tiring to watch for a whole movie. The Master feels like PTA's most accomplished movie so far. Almost Kubick level in some parts. Didn't find it boring in the least. I turned it on at 12am expecting to have to finish it the next day but instead watched it in a straight shot.

 

Yes! It's a much better film than TWBB.

Forrest Gump: Film. 10/10

I hope Roger Ebert got a chance to see the Master before he passed, not only was it a really good movie on the surface it's also got plenty of stuff in it for hardcore film buffs. Was that interrogation scene all in one take? I can't remember, but that shit was pitch perfect. Also just random shots in the movie looked absolutely beautiful. Like when he's walking up to the boat, the way they focus back and forth and end up centering in on that party taking place. And several of those lighting/photography sets looked ridiculously good too. When they first showed that women getting her photo taken in the mall I thought for a few seconds I was actually looking at a still portrait photograph from the 1950s.

  On 5/5/2013 at 10:57 PM, Mirezzi said:

 

  On 5/5/2013 at 10:48 PM, zaphod said:

but that isn't true. if that's what she intended, why create a character that didn't exist around a causal chain of events that didn't happen in order to manipulate an audience into believing that there was some kind of righteous fire driving american operations to find bin laden? why create such a nebulous film that purports to be factual and even opens with an extremely distasteful recording from 9/11? i don't know why it's so difficult for you or anyone else to understand why that's deeply irresponsible and sort of abhorrent.

 

eugene seems like he's hit his head on something really hard, maybe concrete or something, so I'm just gonna move on for now and hope he recovers.

hold on just a bit, you posted this article a few months ago before watching the film which is very similar to my argument. i wonder what you think about it now.

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/29/the_zero_dark_thirty_debate_isnt_really_about_torture/

I haven't seen Zero Dark Thirty yet, but i just watched another 'controversial' political movie 'Fair Game' about the Valerie Plame affair. To an average movie goer who disliked Bush I suppose it would seem like a sweeping indictment about corruption in the US government, but knowing what I know about the case it was severely watered down to the point where it had almost no real weight whatsoever. I honestly think at this point to make a truly provocative movie that raises questions about american politics probably won't come out of a hollywood production.

this article makes me sort of want to see it though when the author says that it's a story of war crimes from the perspective of war criminals, and not questioning the morality of it.

edit: so I guess what I'm saying is, if Zero Dark Thirty is intentionally an indictment of the war on terror and the crimes on behalf of officials running it, the filmmakers even if they wanted to would have to 'hide' this narrative inside something easily confused for ra ra pro american propaganda. If it was an obvious critique of war criminals i don't think it would have been able to get made in the first place. Maybe an indie film, or like that absolutely terrible 'found footage' Iraq war movie by Brian depalma based on the Haditha rape/massacre by US soldiers

  On 5/5/2013 at 11:48 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

And several of those lighting/photography sets looked ridiculously good too. When they first showed that women getting her photo taken in the mall I thought for a few seconds I was actually looking at a still portrait photograph from the 1950s.

yes, this was incredible. it felt like he was actually showing off with this scene.

My favourite scene was near the start whenFreddy tried to strangle the last guy he was taking a photo of. That was scene of the year. The interogation scene was good. Both scenes sexualise Freddy's reaction to confinement and the need to get outta there. And boom some beaver.

it was undoubtedly gorgeous, i'm just not sure it hit the mark as a narrative. he's going back to his old dp for his next film. kind of a shame, the master was definitely his best looking movie.

  On 5/5/2013 at 11:59 PM, Schlitze said:

My favourite scene was near the start whenFreddy tried to strangle the last guy he was taking a photo of. That was scene of the year. The interogation scene was good. Both scenes sexualise Freddy's reaction to confinement and the need to get outta there. And boom some beaver.

yeah, totally. I loved how all the 'fight' scenes in the movie seemed like very sloppy realistic brawls. Almost as if PTA just told them to actually fight with no planned choreography. That scene with the lights made me highly uncomfortable.

I'd like to see some behind the scenes footage of the movie to understand if Phoenix is actually that fucked up acting while the camera isn't rolling. His acting was so convincing at times I just believed he was on a heroin binge during shooting or something.

His acting was unique, the scenes with him and Hoffman were a bizarre blend of bravado and potent paint thinner.

One thing that surprised me about it is how sympathetic they made the L Ron Hubbard-esque character. I expected them to show some of the more extreme parts of Scientology. For example it's widely believed that most of L Ron Hubbard's first books were high dose amphetamine rants by his children and wife while he sat on a typewriter transcribing their ramblings. There was one scene in the movie that sort of implied this happened, but I was expecting more Scientology weirdness.

  Quote

Hubbard's son, L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (otherwise known as "Nibs") and Hubbard senior's medical officer, Jim Dincalci, have both stated that the book was written under the influence of amphetamines:

LRH gave his son Nibs some amphetamines, and Nibs started talking, he said, started really going talking fast, from the speed. And he kept talking, he kept talking, and his dad kept giving him speed and all of a sudden he was talking about his history, when he was a clam and all these different situations in early Earth. And out of that came

History of Man

 

did I miss it or was the first part and the last part of this teaser not in the final cut?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iokPRd1fGhI

First part was not, last part was I believe.

finally watched Bloodfart last night

worst documentary I've ever seen

The twenty minutes of cut footage from The Master is mostly Scientology references.

It gives me the feeling that this was the only reason these scenes were cut from the film.

Scientology has got a tight grip on some shit it don't need to be all up on and it need to back the fuck off!

Don't fuck with my art L Ron!

Watch it Robbie/Mirezzi/Zaphod/all of you if you haven't yet.

It is all up on the blu-ray.

It also contains the John Houston documentary about soldiers with PTSD,

so sad.

The next film shall be the tits!

Samsara - beautiful and thought provoking. 8/10.

Julia`s Eyes - quality Spanish horror. 7/10.

The Elephant Man - good film, but not one of Lynch`s best, too ordinary. 7 or 8.

Branded - I liked this, far from perfect, but more interesting and memorable than your average lowest common denominator shitty film. 6 or 7/10.

Inland Empire - watched it again for the zillionth time, it`s a fascinating, atmospheric and mysterious masterpiece. 10/10.

iron man 3

made the mistake of watching this at the drive ins. takes place entirely at night, so couldn't see anything. should have seen that coming. got the gist and liked some parts. didnt really care tho tbh

holy motors

finally caught this. I didnt really enjoy it. I knew that it would be a guy in a limo acting out scenes but I thought they would be more interesting or funnier. only a couple of them really worked. Didnt like the kylie song either. Just didnt work for me on any level really. disappointed.

Monster's inc

still good. looking forward to monster's university.

finally watched : THE HOBBIT, and i really enjoyed it

So, I think Iron Man 3 was secretly written and directed by the Farrely brothers. I laughed at it, not with it and that made it a bearable experience. The plot was almost invisible, shrouded by goofy ass shit. Thanks for this one Marvel. Iron Man 3 meet Spider Man 3, it will be alright now that you have each other. Iron Man 3/10

8/10 for the amount of laughter in the parking lot afterwards, talking about/making fun of all of the strange, oddball, slapstick and awful narration in this vapid thing.

Think "I am walking into a Zucker brothers production of a Marvel film" and you will enjoy the crap out of it.

p.s. after you watch the extra scene after the credits, imagine it being Tony Stark eating schwarma by himself, telling the audience to go home you bunch of goddamn nerds!

you're acting like iron man 2 was some kind of masterpiece. it was basically just that film remade and stretched out. it's all the same crap.

hey I hate Iron Man 2 but this was so bad it was funny. So that makes it a bit better than part 2/10.

The Place Beyond the Pines - 8/10 great performances from everyone in it, even Gosling. i'm surprised when a director can still keep the audience in the dark for much of the film, even these days.

Iron Man 3 - 6/10 about as bad as part 2. ran 20 minutes too long, didn't know humans could stand in the middle of multiple explosions and walk away unscratched (not the Extremis ones either) what they did to the Mandarin was a joke.