it definitely needs a second rewatch is what i strongly think and need to say;
since the first second this movie started, the sound design was out of this world, and its one of the main things i loved about this movie
i felt like i couldn't clearly understand half the stuff Robert Downey Jr's character kept saying, and i feel like i missed out on a big part of the movie because of it, that's why i strongly feel like i need a second rewatch of the movie, then i'll truly know if i ended up loving, or Loving loving my first ever Christopher Nolan movie on the big screen;
when that explosion finally went off, it literally gave me a scare, they did an incredible job with the movie's sound design
it had some g o r g e o u s shots as well, especially the last one, where it slowly zooms on Oppenheimer's face;
the anticipation & suspense as they're slowly completing the Project, (with the subtle nuclei reactions SFX that is happening in the background) showing it getting assembled piece by piece.. having the countdown... then it finally going off... it truly immerses you into the experience, and leaves you speechless afterwards, and that, that is only the beginning of it all, because the aftermath, and what follows, is the true horrifying stuff, as Oppenheimer slowly realizes what these events and discoveries are truly leading to;
& the way Nolan depicts Oppenheimer's regret, and all the other emotions he's going through, visually and through sound design, was perfect
The German nihilists, the feminist artist, the porn manager, the crazy phedophile, the crippled fake business tycoon, the Vietnam-war obsessed psycho and off course the Dude: a lazy deadbeat lowlife. The Big Lebowski sure has a lot of colourful personages which in my opinion is one of the reasons this movie is one of the best i have ever seen.
This is one of the many masterpieces from the Coen brothers, i wish i could congratulate them myself because they are geniuses. The music, the script and the cast are beyond fantastic. This is a masterpiece that only comes along in movies a few times in a decade. This is one of those movies that is and always will be a cult classic. I cannot say that this is the best movie that the Coen brothers ever made, but only because they made so many exceptional movies. But its definitely high up the list.
My favorite part is Gutterballs, when the Dude has some kind of hallucination. The music was just perfect together with the show Jeff Bridges and Julianne Moore put on. I can't tell you how often i saw that part, that was just awesome.
Anyone should see this movie at least once in his lifetime. But once you've seen it i can guarantee you that you want to see it again.
I loved this movie on so many levels. One of the things that I really enjoy about watching movies made in other countries is that there is such a different approach when it comes to how a story is told. For example, in this movie you aren't even necessarily sure what the main conflict is. It isn't assumed that the male lead and the female lead are going to be romantically linked. There isn't a music bed to tell us when something dramatic is happening. With this movie I just fell into a nice groove with it and let it take me away for three hours. I swear that the movie felt shorter than many of the ninety minute movies that I've seen recently.
Of course, this means that the movie isn't for everyone. The acting is fantastic but the pacing is.... deliberate? I laughed out loud when the opening credits started rolling forty minutes into the movie. It's been twenty four hours since I watched it and I am still pondering the central themes of the movie. I've seen some people say that they didn't like the movie because they believed the central theme to be grief. It may have been for some of the movie but clearly not for all of it. Also, the movie is beautiful to look at and it provides an excellent backdrop to ponder what is happening in the film.
Anyway, I would easily put this up with Licorice Pizza and Coda as the best movies of 2021.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHATEBadMovies
So we reach the end of Phase Three, and what an ending this is. Not as epic in scale as Endgame and not as good as it either. But, this to me, is better than Homecoming. Better arcs, a better realisation of character and overall an excellent way to represent story through visuals.
For some Mysterio has been poorly represented in recent media. But here, he is done so well and the abilities are Doctor Strange visuals of good. While still not copying anything we've seen yet. This allows for great tension and using trust against the characters that I don't think has been seen in the MCU since The Winter Soldier.
Tom Halland is Spider-Man. There's no denying it, he was born for this role as Robert Downey Jr was for Iron Man. Which makes this story sink so well into the narrative when it all comes down to loss and how to avoid falling into stress and anxiety's grip. Which makes this an important movie to follow Endgame. Wrapping everything up nicely and even starting some great elements for the future.
So yes, there are end credit scenes in this movie. Two of them. But instead of not caring about a bit of strapped on humour, stay. These scenes are vital for the future of this series of films. Plus, there is an added bonus for those who are fans of the original Sam Raimi trilogy.
So yes, it is a good movie. But there are flaws. For one, there is the whole convenient timing and placement of things. Which I thought they were going to explain but never did. The story does feel like a bit of rehash of Homecoming and how the motives of some are shown, and that was my biggest gripe.
This film is funny, has good action, pretty well-done CGI and amazing performances from all its cast. This movie deserves to follow Endgame and closes Phase Three fluently. Spider-Man: Far From Home is a great movie and has given me hope for the future of Marvel's plan.
8.6/10
Over 30 years since its release, this is still the high watermark of the series and, indeed pretty much any adventure film. Ford is the lynchpin of the series, and unlike James Bond, it is difficult to imagine anyone else taking on this role in the future. What makes Indiana Jones works so well as a character and instantly connect with an audience (apart from being Han Solo in disguise) is his world-weariness and that he does indeed seem to be "making it up as he goes along." He makes mistakes and gets himself into trouble more often than not. The sheer pace, the reliance on practical stunts and Ford's performance here sets this film apart from some of the more ridiculous elements that mar the sequels and Karen Allen is a great foil. Every film of course has a great score from Williams, but the theme created for the Ark of the Covenant elevates the music to another level. But it is Ford that embodies Indiana Jones - the looks of relief, panic and determination that cross his face, sometimes all in one shot, is often priceless and he is the key to making this character work so well.
Denis Villeneuve is the man!
There’s only one word that came into my mind after watching it: finally.
Finally, a blockbuster that isn’t afraid to be primarily driven by drama and tension, and doesn’t undercut its own tone by throwing in a joke every 30 seconds.
Finally, a blockbuster that puts actual effort in its cinematography, and doesn’t have a bland or calculated colour palette.
Finally, a blockbuster with a story that has actual substance and themes, and doesn’t rely on intertextual references or nostalgia to create a fake sheen of depth.
Finally, a blockbuster that doesn’t pander to China by having big, loud and overblown action sequences, but relies on practical and grounded spectacle instead (it has big sand worms, you really don’t need to throw anything at the screen besides that).
Finally, a blockbuster that actually feels big, because it isn’t primarily shot in close ups, or on a sound stage.
And of course: finally, a blockbuster that isn’t a fucking prequel, sequel, or connected to an already established IP somehow.
(Yeah, I know Tenet did those things as well, but I couldn’t get into that because the characters were so flat and uninteresting).
This just checks all the boxes. An engaging story with subtext, very well set up characters, great acting (like James Gunn, Villeneuve's great at accentuating the strengths of limited actors like Dave Bautista and Jason Momoa), spectecular visuals and art design (desaturated but not in an ugly washed out way), pacing (slow but it never drags), directing, one of Hans Zimmer’s best scores: it’s all here.
I only have one real criticism: there’s too much exposition, especially in the first half.
It can occasionally hold your hand by referencing things that have already been established previously, and some scenes of characters explaining stuff to each other could’ve been conveyed more visually.
Other than that, it’s easily one of the best films of the year.
I’ve seen some people critiquing it for being incomplete, which is true, but this isn’t just a set up for a future film.
It feels like a whole meal, there are pay offs in this, and the characters progress (even if, yes, their arcs are still incomplete).
8.5/10
[9.6/10] Oh man, what a treat this was. Such classic IASIP. There’s such great setups here, with pairings of Dennis and Mac, and Frank and Charlie, each bickering and dealing with the mutual dining situations like old married couples. And then you have Dee flying solo, in order to capitalize on a groupon, trying to maintain her dignity and be a part of any sort of pairing.
It’s hard to say what makes this one so great, since it’s just such an atmospheric thing. The dialogue is really good, with the exchanges at each table striking the right balance of feeling real in the sense of the kind of squabbles and awkward moments actual couples have, and the ridiculousness of having that filtered through Dennis and Mac having their “monthly dinner” and Charlie and Frank celebrating their “anniversary” of moving in together.
But the peak is when the two of them keep trying to one-up each other, particularly with the dominant parties, Dennis and Frank, each expecting the other to pay tribute, while Mac and Charlie are each just trying to have a nice time and let it go. And then you have Dee, sparring with her waiter and causing problem as usual.
It’s a beautiful example of escalation, as both the interactions among the “couples” get more heightened, at the same time the efforts of Frank and Dennis to show one another up get bigger and bigger too, while Dee’s mission to not be by herself at this fancy restaurant go to greater extremes at the same time.
And just when it feels like things are going to hit their peak, a waiter spills spaghetti all over himself, just as Mac predicted (or hoped) and suddenly all is forgiven and everyone is on the same page. It’s the icing on the cake that Dee tied his shoelaces together, just like she was trying to get him to do before. As much as The Gang gets at each other’s throats from time to time, it’s their common disdain, ridicule, and disregard for others that unites them and keeps them all on the same team.
This is peak IASIP. Nothing flashy, nothing outsized, just controlled insanity deployed in the midst of a nice restaurant. What an instant classic.
After the 2014 Godzilla film, people demanded a dumb monster movie.
The result is something that joins the ranks of Jurassic World 2, Pacific Rim 2 or Rampage.
Happy now?
Pro's:
- Creature design/VFX.
- The set up for the 3 main human characters (the idea that drives them).
Con's:
- Massively overblown (especially at the end).
- Too much exposition and way too plot driven. Emphasizing the plot is never a good idea when you make a film like this.
- The dialogue in this is awful, and does the actors no favours.
- The characters are hollow shells, and constantly act in unnatural ways. Especially what they did with Vera Farmiga's character felt lazy and not earned.
- It overuses the orange and teal look to a degree where Zack Snyder would be jealous of it.
- If you thought the final season of GoT had a lot of deus ex machina and 'plot armour' moments, just know that you've seen nothing yet.
- The action scenes in this are incoherent and underlit, and therefore hard to follow.
I find it funny that whenever we get one of these, the take away for most always seems to be: too much focus on the humans, not enough on the monsters!
Well, here's the thing: you can't really develop characters like Godzilla or King Kong, so watching them for 2 hours walk through buildings and punching things is going to get dull very fast.
Therefore, you need the human focus.
You know which director knows this? Steven Spielberg.
You know which movie knows this? Jurassic Park.
So instead of demanding more shallow elements for the next one, let's maybe ask for the filmmakers to develop the characters for once, and stop focussing on a plot we've seen hundreds of times at this point.
2.5/10
A true science fiction story or film is about ideas, not spaceship battles, futuristic gadgets, or weird creatures. "Blade Runner" fully qualifies as this in its examination of the impact of technology on human society, existence, and the very nature of humanity itself. These themes are set in a fairly basic detective story that moves slowly but gradually builds power as the viewer is immersed in a dystopian futuristic Los Angeles.
Harrison Ford fans accustomed to the normally dynamic roles that he plays may be dissatisfied with the seemingly lifeless lead character that he portrays here as the replicant-hunting detective known as a "blade runner". They should be, for this dissatisfaction is part of the film experience, part of the dehumanized existence in the story's setting. However, as the story unfolds, we see Ford's character, Rick Deckard, slowly come alive again and recover some humanity while pursing four escaped replicants.
The replicants, genetically-engineered human cyborgs, that Deckard must hunt down and kill are in many ways more alive than Deckard himself initially. Their escape from an off-world colony has an explicit self-directed purpose, whereas Deckard's life appears to have none other than his job, one that he has tried to give up. By some standards, Deckard and the replicants have thin character development. However, this is a deeply thematic and philosophical film, and as such the characters are the tools of the story's themes. Each character reflects some aspect of humanity or human existence, but they lack others, for each is broken in ways that reflect the broken society in which they live and were conceived/created.
There are several dramatic moments involving life-and-death struggles, but most of these are more subdued than in a normal detective story plot. The film's power is chiefly derived through its stunning visual imagery of a dark futuristic cityscape and its philosophical themes.
Among the themes explored are the following: - The dehumanization of people through a society shaped by technological and capitalistic excess. - The roles of creator and creation, their mutual enslavement, and their role reversal, i.e., the creation's triumph over its creator. - The nature of humanity itself: emotions, memory, purpose, desire, cruelty, technological mastery of environment and universe, mortality, death, and more. - Personal identity and self-awareness. - The meaning of existence.
Blade Runner is one of the more gaping holes in the list of films I haven’t seen (or at least, don’t remember well enough to talk about). Yesterday’s viewing of The Martian got me thinking about Ridley Scott’s past work so here I am.
I really should have done this sooner.
L.A. 2019, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) is a ‘Blade Runner’ - a policeman whose sole purpose is to hunt and kill replicants; machines almost indistinguishable from humans, yet banned from Earth. Four have been detected on the planet so he is called up to hunt and kill them.
Scott’s dystopian LA draws you in and holds you captive for 2 hours. This is a masterfully shot, timeless, beautiful piece of work. Every single frame is a work of art. The visual effects are not only highly effective, but incredibly creative and unique; never has anything like this been made before or since.
The plot is simple, one man chases another. However it’s driven almost entirely by its central themes; what is it to be human? Who deserves to live or die? Are we responsible for the things we create? What happens when our creations surpass us? All of these questions go unanswered, yet Scott somehow revels in the ambiguity.
Decker is a blank canvas of a character. The replicants he is chasing are complex, unique individuals. It’s no accident that Rutger Hauer plays the most human character in the film. His is the stand-out performance here, if only for the closing monologue.
Still fresh & still relevant, Blade Runner is indeed a modern masterpiece.
http://benoliver999.com/film/2015/10/31/bladerunner/
Who knew that 'misery' was a genre?
I wish this film hadn't been so well made. If it'd been less well made, I might not have taken it so hard.
Capernaum is a badly titled film about Zain, a 12-year-old Syrian immigrant growing up in the slums of Beirut. His parents love him... to bring home money and food but other then that they couldn't really care less for him or his indiscriminate number of brothers and sisters. Zain doesn't go to school, works full time at a convenience 'store' and his favourite sister is given away to be married at 11 years old. And then his life gets tough.
The film has its shortcomings. The ending feels like it was forgotten about until the money was nearly out and then they had to wrap everything up during their lunch hour. Or the court case which is used as a framing device and feels very gimmicky (and is fortunately not dwelt upon).
But what works, works too well. There is a devastating sense of realism that comes through thanks to the directing and to the cast, many of whom are amateurs plucked from the streets to play the roles of their lives. Zain (Zain Al Rafeea) was a Syrian immigrant, Kawsar Al Haddad (his mother in the film) was an illegal immigrant, the girl who played his sister (Haita 'Cedra' Izzam) was discovered selling chewing gum on the streets of Beirut, the real life parents of the baby (Boluwatife Treasure Bankole) with whom Zain bonds in the movie were illegals and were deported for a time during the filming...
There is enough reality here to choke you, or at least choke you up.
Capernaum is an experience so poignant it will pierce your heart, steal your breath, and wet your eyes with truth. It is a film you will probably love but certainly not like.
Everyone keeps suggesting there is a paradox concerning the 5D future humans and their ability to save humanity in the past. It's really not a paradox at all. Everyone assumes humanity survived to ascend to the 5th dimension but how could humanity exist in the future if not for the actions of Cooper.. who was guided by future humans (begin endless loop).
Did anyone ever consider the other important character in the movie? Amelia Brand carried on with the rest of her mission (thanks to Cooper). I postulate that Brand used the human seeds as intended and set up a colony. A colony that would thrive and eventually evolve beyond human. Thus Earth is of little importance, and may have indeed died. These colonists, and the generations that followed, would have been told the story of a great man (Cooper) who saved them from extinction. With the ability to manipulate space-time, they would pay homage to their hero "God" by helping him in the past so he may fulfill the mission most important to him, to once again see his daughter. Plan B worked beautifully. But the 5d humans, having the power to bend space-time, decided there's no reason why Plan A had to fail.
Léon is a film I've watched many times and it never fails to affect.
I could watch it a hundred times more just see to Léon's face as he watches Singing in the Rain; such unabashed joy. He turns around in a near empty theatre looking for someone else lost in a moment of bliss, but finds no one. Rarely has both joy and loneliness been captured so perfectly.
Jean Reno's naive and emotionally challenged Léon is 12 year old Mathilda’s knight in blood soaked armour. He immediately fills an emotional void and she clings to it, starting to play house; cleaning, shopping, washing. Léon and Mathilda need each other in a very basic human way; to love and be loved. The inevitable slide towards her sexual stirrings is uncomfortable and deftly handled by Natalie Portman. Her desire for revenge seems to slip away, lost to just being and working with him, until when pushed he denies any feelings of love for her. She takes incomprehensible action to exact her vengeance on Gary Oldman’s insane DEA agent, but with an unconscious belief that Léon will save her if it all goes wrong.
The “International Version” of Léon, the only I’ve watched, adds 25 minutes to the theatrical release, mostly depicting their growing relationship and brings the gravitas that makes their final scene together simply heart breaking.
This is considered one of the greatest films ever made for a reason. I honestly don't think I can add that much to the discussion, but here goes. I start watching it and always think I'm not going to like it as much as I remember. I'm not crazy about the opening due to the pace, but I feel like it is perfect once you progress further. Getting to know the different samurai and watching them interact is just really entertaining. Each is so distinct and relatable in a different way. Frankly, the story is wonderful and I love when they did it again in the American west.
Then there is the technical side of things. This does not feel like it belongs in the 50s at all to me. The film is shot so distinct and beautifully. I really love the way the rain battle looks in the end. The dark color of the water on the ground just looks so great to me, like a chalk drawing or something. And the theme music makes me think it is something I listen to in my car all the time, even though I hadn't heard it in a few years since my last watch. It immediately becomes a classic tune to me.
So yea, this is up there for a reason, and I say you should certainly see this before you die. Just remember to set aside a good 3 1/2 hours before you start.
My favorite film of all time. I have no idea how many times I have seen it, but it's many. Those three hours just flies by in seemingly no time at all. I just finished watching the restored "Mondo-version" and it's stellar. I imagine that this is what this film is supposed to look like. Sadly, I have never gotten the opportunity to watch it on a big screen...
Clint Eastwood is perfectly stoic and subtle, relying more on facial expressions than words. Eli Wallach is funny and uses his fantastic body language, along with some great one-liners. And Lee van Cleef with those eyes - I can see why Sergio wanted to work with him - since "his eyes pierce holes in the screen".
Sergios uses of long takes, wide shots and extreme close-ups are a thing of wonder. He is my favorite director ever and in my opinion never made a bad - or even mediocre film. Of course his films are so great much because of the work of Ennio Morricone. You only need to hum two notes from this movie and everybody knows which movie you are referring to. That is magic. Tragic that he never won an Oscar beacuse of that mix up after "Once Upon a Time in America". And it was a crime that Sergio Leone never even got a nomination in his lifetime.
