# Film Review Corner



## Guy Rowland (Jan 29, 2015)

Here it is - post your film reviews here, as and when you're in the mood. Current movies (given global release patterns), rather than, ya know, La Dolce Vita or anything. As spoiler free as possible seems a good guide, or at least clearly mark a spoiler.

*Whiplash*

Must confess, I really didn't like the trailer at all. Looked horribly overwrought - him out of Full Metal Jacket yelling at a drummer. Sheesh. But everyone - EVERYONE - said the film was electrifying, heart-pumping edge of your seat stuff, and J K Simmons is a lock for the Oscar, no-one else bother showing up so I thought "ok, gotta give it a try". Didnt like the Paddington trailer after all, and that turned out to be a gem.

Well, the trailer was in fact very representative.

*SPOILER PARAGRAPH* Question. Why are there so many drum solo jokes? Answer - because, clearly, they're an abomination. Musical masturbation of the worst kind. We all love drums - ya know, drums, they're great. Boom whack. They groove, they move, love 'em. But lordy, not a solo. That's like eating a plate of oregano. So, in Whiplash, we hear a moving speach about how some old Jazzer's solo was epoch-making, and I'm thinking "oh-boy, I don't like where this is going" (not that I'd particularly liked where it had been either). It's important too, cos that's the motivation for the ENTIRE MOVIE. If Lee Emery isn't a psychopathic bastard that pushes people to the point of suicide, he'll never push John Cusack into the brilliance of which he is capable - ie making a very loud plateful of oregano and force feeding it on us. So we get two dislikeable characters in the overwrought melodramatic search for something that no-one should ever be subjected to in the first place. He drums, he bleeds etc etc. Oh, and if the search for absolute perfection really is THAT important, why were at least a quarter of the very-core-of-the-movie-drumming-shots HOPELESSLY OUT OF TIME?!!!!*/SPOILER PARAGRAPH*

I guess the performances have to be that big and (have to say it) obvious, or else the film doesn't work. I mean, it was well acted all round, but shouty angst just isn't my thing.


----------



## choc0thrax (Jan 29, 2015)

I like the idea of this thread so long as it doesn't end up a sticky somehow. Stickied threads tend to die horrible deaths.

Don't have time to post a review of anything right now and I should probably be going to bed but I will say I very much disagree on Whiplash! I love the film but I do have a problem with it: the lead character's goal seems to be to play in such a rote fashion that I don't see how he thinks he could ever achieve what his heroes have. Maybe that was done on purpose though I dunno.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jan 29, 2015)

*Ex Machina*

Good. Very good. You need to suspend a little disbelief with the setup here and there (not at the AI angle though), but if you go with it it's thoughtful, intelligent and gripping. There's good sense of atmosphere and gently creeping menace, helped by the great electronic / guitar score from Geoff Barrow and Ben Salisbury - just a tad in-your-face in a couple of moments. but mostly perfect. Excellent performances all round.

Her was one of my favourites from last year (I think the year before that was in the US), again a really smart take on AI. Now, I really must watch AI itself, which to my shame I've still not seen.

EDIT - if you get a chance, watch the episode of the UK Twilight-Zoneesque Black Mirror called Be Right Back, which shares a little DNA with this, and also stars Domhnall Gleeson. That's one of the best one-off TV dramas I've seen.


----------



## AC986 (Jan 29, 2015)

I like the idea of this thread but I don't get to see the modern films for ages. Therefore, I will join this thread, but only if I can review what I've just seen.


----------



## snowleopard (Jan 29, 2015)

So, did you guys like *Whiplash*? I can't really tell! I haven't seen it, but saw both the trailer, which JK seemed way too cruel. And I saw a clip of a scene, which looked terrific, with JK more intense and direct, than just mean. 

I saw *American Sniper*, which I thought was a very well directed, very well acted work of fiction. I don't want to get into the politics of it other than that. 

I also saw *Selma*, which perhaps too factual, which took away a little from the drama. Still, I felt compelled by it, and loved the art direction and music, great selection of songs used very well in the film.

*Night at the Museum 3* was weak. A big step back from the first two. And somber seeing Robin Williams, knowing he was gone. 

Didn't like *Maze Runner* much at all. A few scenes okay, but the set-up turned into a muddled concept with a weak ending. Aimed at people half my age, so that's part of the problem. I liked Hunger Games, and thought Divergent was okay and both of those were for younger audiences, so I got talked into this. Wish I hadn't seen it. 

*Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies* was average, the series running on fumes in some ways. 
SPOILER ALERT!!!:  In the book, it ends with the killing of Smaug as he attacks the city. That part of the film was pretty good, and left over from Hobbit 2, which I think is the best film in the entire LOTR/Hobbit series. I felt no need for five armies. In theory, one could edit the Hobbit films together, trim a few minutes from the first film, include all of the second film, and just add the first 20 minutes of this third one. You'd have an outstanding 4 hour film!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jan 30, 2015)

snowleopard @ Thu Jan 29 said:


> In theory, one could edit the Hobbit films together, trim a few minutes from the first film, include all of the second film, and just add the first 20 minutes of this third one. You'd have an outstanding 4 hour film!



That's close to what I'd want. However, I want the running time max 89 minutes, and a rating of G or PG. Make it fast, fun and, ya know, for kids. Kick out everything extraneous from the original book. Loved LOTR, but I only ever saw the first Hobbit film which I really disliked, seemed incredibly indulgent for an adaptation of the kids book. Oh, and loathed high frame rate also.

My controversial thoughts on Whiplash are in the OP. I don't know anyone else who didn't like it, incidentally, I'm pretty much on my own on that one.

Adrian - well, how about making the guideline that its to review films that are new to you, regardless of their age? Just want to avoid a thread that endlessly debates the old classics, or films where our opinions are already well formed.


----------



## AC986 (Jan 30, 2015)

Yes exactly Guy. That's why I mentioned it so as not to do that. The last film I watched was Hud.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 7, 2015)

Watched Geoffrey Rush last night in a modern film called Deception, basically set in Rome.

Beautifully shot, good acting, great score from Ennio Morricone but the plot and outcome (more importantly) was predictable from way too early in the piece. Otherwise, very well put together ruined by the obvious.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 7, 2015)

I tried -to watch Scarlett Johansson's sort of Sci-Fi horror *Under The Skin* this week, but failed to make it to the end. I'm all for doing things differently, but I think Under The Skin proved I have my limits. A truly bizarre - yet astonishingly boring - combination of hyper realism (hidden camera filming Johansson's interactions with real people in Glasgow) and sat side by side with laborious artsy effects sequences metaphorically representing some sort of... oh I don't know, I just lost all patience with it. It's proved understandably divisive - either a 1/10 or 10/10 experience it seems. Critics overall like it far more than punters, according to Rotten Tomatoes. The scratchy sound designy score was just irritating to me, but that's because I was completely un-immersed, unlike some of the luckless characters in the movie.

Clearly I seek a middle ground between Michael Bay on the one hand and this on the other.


----------



## Soundhound (Feb 7, 2015)

I completely agree on Whiplash, and find myself in a tiny minority there as well. I think that director could wind up to be a big deal-I thought it was technically beautifully done. Shooting, pacing, framing, editing, all really elegant and powerful. But the story and characters I found ham fisted. I'm all for hyperbole, but it needs to be witty and insightful to be harrowing (see: Full Metal Jacket, Clockwork Orange etc). 

I also really liked Her. I thought it was that year's best movie, if I remember correctly. It took a preposterous premise and made it three dimensional, thoughtful and believable, really elegant. 

Just saw an Argentinian film called Wild Tales that was great, a collection of short stories on a common theme. Really smart and really funny.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 7, 2015)

I didn't know anything about Whiplash before I went, so I was delighted that it was based around a college big band. Brought me back to the old days, when I made my school's A band by a whsiper. Sadly, i left school 8 months later, but it was truly fun.

I thought the film was great. Harrowing, different- it was sort of a sports metaphor but I don't remember seeing this sort of competitiveness among musicians except for Drumline. I loved J.T. and wondered all the way through if he'd be redeemed. Whether he was or not was a topic of conversation between myself and some friends. Anyway- I really enjoyed it, and the Buddy Rich style solo? Yowsah.


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Feb 7, 2015)

I loved "Under The Skin"! Mica Levi's Death-Seduction score kept on reminding me of John Williams 1977 - SW's Attack of the Sand People Violin harmonics!


----------



## AC986 (Feb 7, 2015)

Tonight I sort of watched Butterfly on a Wheel.

No No No No No!


----------



## CharlesB (Feb 8, 2015)

I tried to watch http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt2724064 (this) when it was on tv last night. I failed.


----------



## lee (Feb 8, 2015)

CharlesB @ Sun Feb 08 said:


> I tried to watch http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt2724064 (this) when it was on tv last night. I failed.



3.3 on imdb :lol:


----------



## bbunker (Feb 8, 2015)

Went to see Inherent Vice a few weeks back at the Arclight - the first thing that I thought of, seeing it there, is how different the experience is watching an "art film" at an "art film" theatre, instead of at an "I'm here to be entertained, d*&# it!" theater. Anybody else notice something along those lines?

The film I thought was pretty fantastic as a piece. The conception, and the message, and the theme were all well tied together - it was definitely of one cloth. And I don't think I'm giving too much away if I say that ideas about discontinuity, and of plot having meaning and depth without clear, simple structural lines, well, it felt like they managed to capture some of the Pynchon magic without selling out on either the book or the film.

The acting was strangely poor - obviously the dialogue is dense and indirect, but most of the actors sound more like they're in an unstaged reading session than a feature film. Doesn't kill the film, just...well, it's Joaquin Phoenix, not Patrick Stewart. So, expectation management, I guess.

Josh Brolin is fantastic, though.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 8, 2015)

My wife and I saw Citizen Four this afternoon. It's Laura Poitras's documentary about the orchestrating of Edward Snowden's disclosures.

It was pretty electric, though longish. Poitras and Glen Greenwald were given the biggest story of either's career, and you could feel the tension and the weight of what they were doing in releasing those documents. Snowden came off as reasoned, determined and resigned to whatever fate he'd be dealt while simultaneously trying to set himself up for a life outside the U.S. There were fairly long interviews with him done by Greenwald, who was palpably excited.

What was surprising was the level to which it felt carefully planned and orchestrated. Snowden set it up with a LOT of thought. Bright guy and careful, considering the risks.

Worth seeing for the weight of the historical moment.


----------



## snowleopard (Feb 10, 2015)

I pretty much agree on Under The Skin. Scarlett Johansson is super hot, but while the film was stylish, it was too plodding. I do agree though that Mica Levi's score was superb. In an era where we hear too many canned scores imitating temp tracks, this was refreshing.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 10, 2015)

Larry - really want to see CitizenFour. It had only a limited release here, it was showing locally last weekend but only once - at a time I couldn't make. It'll probably be a home view. Seems a shame it hasn't had a bigger release, seems like it's pretty remarkable.

Snow - I reckon I'd have liked the score if I was into the movie, as it was I kinda hated it and found myself grumpily thinking I could knock off a soundalike in half an hour if pushed. I know that's not really the point, the point is really that it sounded like that at all. I guess it suited the movie - with all the good and bad that implies.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 10, 2015)

Saw A Most Violent Year. Oscar Isaac gave a compelling, Pacino-ish performance, and I have a thing for Jessica Chastain. However, I was surprised that critics seemed to like it so much- it was very stylized and beautifully shot, but for me it left you disappointed with no real resolutions to the tension it built and no real conclusion. Ultimately, a perfectly decent popcorn movie.

All of which adds up to- Guy? Run out and see this one! (as we disagree on practically every film) :wink:


----------



## AC986 (Feb 10, 2015)

Just watching Jennifer 8. Good scoring from Christopher Young. Not a bad thriller.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 11, 2015)

*The Theory Of Everything*

Very well performed of course by Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones. Gorgeous score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (not heard anything by him before), often featured front and centre. As a film I thought it was good, but not great - for me it suffered a little from a very linear structure and a lack of forward momentum - a tricky problem to solve when based all on real events. So inevitably I found myself comparing it with the Imitation Game, and the latter was a far superior film for me - a more ambitious structure and yet gripping, involving and ultimately moving in a way which somehow eluded TOE. Overall I'd describe TOE as solid more than inspired, but that's not to take anything away from the excellent performances or score.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 11, 2015)

Just watching Marathon Man. What a great score from Michael Small.

One of the greatest openings to any film.


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 11, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Sat Feb 07 said:


> I tried -to watch Scarlett Johansson's sort of Sci-Fi horror *Under The Skin* this week, but failed to make it to the end. I'm all for doing things differently, but I think Under The Skin proved I have my limits. A truly bizarre - yet astonishingly boring - combination of hyper realism (hidden camera filming Johansson's interactions with real people in Glasgow) and sat side by side with laborious artsy effects sequences metaphorically representing some sort of... oh I don't know, I just lost all patience with it. It's proved understandably divisive - either a 1/10 or 10/10 experience it seems. Critics overall like it far more than punters, according to Rotten Tomatoes. The scratchy sound designy score was just irritating to me, but that's because I was completely un-immersed, unlike some of the luckless characters in the movie.
> 
> Clearly I seek a middle ground between Michael Bay on the one hand and this on the other.



my god, that's the worst movie ever. unless you like seeing her naked :mrgreen:


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 11, 2015)

Birdman- I was surprised I like this movie. it was indeed a very well made and somewhat deep idea plus the concept of magical realism which is more normally associated with south American literature.

Budapest Hotel - also surprising I like a wes Anderson film. I guess the storyline was more defined and moved more than other of his films. 


Jupiter Ascending - I don't care what other people think but I really did like this movie. my wife can watch anything o nnetflix from any era but on Jupiter she walked out. so its such a rare thing that im guessing this will be a total bomb. 
I l ove sci fi and to me Jupiters torytelling and character development was like smashing together the 3 matrix movies into one but heavy on 3. way to many things of equal big and minor scale.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 12, 2015)

gsilbers @ Wed Feb 11 said:


> Jupiter Ascending - I don't care what other people think but I really did like this movie. my wife can watch anything o nnetflix from any era but on Jupiter she walked out. so its such a rare thing that im guessing this will be a total bomb.



I haven't seen Jupiter Ascending because I don't go out to the cinema so I guess I'll have to wait for it to be on tv.

But reading between the lines of how Mark Kermode described his recent experience, it's the biggest load of crap that ever fell out of anyone's ass. But visually interesting apparently, provided you're into an evening of CGI fest.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 18, 2015)

*Big Hero 6*

Lots of fun romp with a heart. Loved the way it dealt with loss in a non-patronising or overly-sentimental way. Never fully achieved greatness though - as it went on was a little saddened to realise it was starting to just tick superhero movie boxes. Nevertheless, another fine example of this golden era of animation.

Really enjoyed Henry Jackman's score - felt like it rumbled all over the place from pop to Thomas Newman to who knows where, but somehow it all fitted the jumbled up Sam Fransokyo thing.

- - - - - - -

UK folks - Larry mentioned *Citizen Four*, which is on Channel Four (how about that) next Wednesday evening.


----------



## MA-Simon (Feb 18, 2015)

*Pride*
Watched it recently. Such a great film.
Lots of fun and you will feel great after watching it.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3169706/

Don't watch the trailer. It will spoil everything and doesen't do the film any justice...


----------



## AC986 (Feb 19, 2015)

Watched some of Hard Eight last night.

Crap.


----------



## doctornine (Feb 19, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Sat Feb 07 said:


> I tried -to watch Scarlett Johansson's sort of Sci-Fi horror *Under The Skin* this week, but failed to make it to the end. I'm all for doing things differently, but I think Under The Skin proved I have my limits. A truly bizarre - yet astonishingly boring - combination of hyper realism (hidden camera filming Johansson's interactions with real people in Glasgow) and sat side by side with laborious artsy effects sequences metaphorically representing some sort of... oh I don't know, I just lost all patience with it. It's proved understandably divisive - either a 1/10 or 10/10 experience it seems. Critics overall like it far more than punters, according to Rotten Tomatoes. The scratchy sound designy score was just irritating to me, but that's because I was completely un-immersed, unlike some of the luckless characters in the movie.
> 
> Clearly I seek a middle ground between Michael Bay on the one hand and this on the other.



Cough, splutter etc etc…. this for me was hands down my film and soundtrack of year.

But then my taste in film leans more in the Jodorowsky direction 

Horses for courses etc etc etc


----------



## gsilbers (Feb 19, 2015)

really?! 
I kept thinking that something was going to happen. maybe when scarlett watched herself in the mirror for 3 minutes with no dialogue, or maybe when she was driving around and there was 10 too many stops around town on her van but at the end I left the movie theatre when she is in the beach and the scene there is a guy who walks up to her on the other side, in real time.... IN REAL TIME!!!! that's about 5 minutes of a guy walking on the beach... that's when I walked out the movie theatre.


----------



## choc0thrax (Feb 21, 2015)

*Interstellar*

*6.25/10*

Finally got around to seeing this thing a while back. I find it kind of hard to review because it seemed like a bunch of stuff cobbled together. I find this film had three things going for it: the robot was kinda funny/the music was decent/and the time stuff was interesting. I guess my main takeaway from this film was that it was cold and interesting. I'm happy that I now know what's inside a black hole: book shelves. I'd always assumed it would be an array of chaise lounges and paint swatches. So yeah the ending was laughably stupid. I was going to give it 6.5 but .25 was deducted for the inclusion of Topher Grace.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 21, 2015)

what rating did you give Gravity (special attention to the ending)?


----------



## AC986 (Feb 21, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> what rating did you give Gravity (special attention to the ending)?



Haven't seen Interstellar as yet. Rooting for Hans Z on the Oscar simply because he comes here and gives his time, which I happen to think (yes call me fucking patronising) is a worthwhile thing. However, it doesn't look like the it's the type of film to get anywhere with that. Who knows though.

Gravity I would give 5.5 out of 10.

Ironically (or coincidentally) I watched 2001: ASO. last night on BBC2 HD. Hadn't seen it for years. Ridiculously well put together especially for 1968. I remember going round to the Ritz cinema in Leicester Square in 1969 to see it _in stereo_ which was a big deal in those days. Went to see it with one of the apes haha! Should Kubrick have kept the original North score? Jury's still out on that one. Probably not.

8.5 out of 10.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 21, 2015)

adriancook @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> Ironically (or coincidentally) I watched 2001: ASO. last night on BBC2 HD. Hadn't seen it for years. Ridiculously well put together especially for 1968. I remember going round to the Ritz cinema in Leicester Square in 1969 to see it _in stereo_ which was a big deal in those days. Went to see it with one of the apes haha! Should Kubrick have kept the original North score? Jury's still out on that one. Probably not.
> 
> 8.5 out of 10.


Should Kubrick have told North that he wasn't keeping the score before the premiere, rather than lying to him about it? Um, yes....

D


----------



## AC986 (Feb 21, 2015)

Daryl @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> adriancook @ Sat Feb 21 said:
> 
> 
> > Ironically (or coincidentally) I watched 2001: ASO. last night on BBC2 HD. Hadn't seen it for years. Ridiculously well put together especially for 1968. I remember going round to the Ritz cinema in Leicester Square in 1969 to see it _in stereo_ which was a big deal in those days. Went to see it with one of the apes haha! Should Kubrick have kept the original North score? Jury's still out on that one. Probably not.
> ...



Oh for sure Daryl. But that was Kubrik wasn't it. I mean, when he wasn't making films, he was spending all his time in Rymans buying stuff for his filing cabinets. What can you say? :lol:


----------



## choc0thrax (Feb 21, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat Feb 21 said:


> what rating did you give Gravity (special attention to the ending)?



Can't remember if I gave it an exact rating but I do love that film.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 21, 2015)

I saw Rush and Gravity in the theater on back to back nights. (Note that of Ron Howard's films, he compares Rush most closely to Apollo 13.) What struck me was how differently motion was portrayed. In Gravity, everything is smooth and swirling. In Rush, it's all about violent vibrations.

I didn't care much for Gravity. It was done well, but I'm not big on lone protagonists in peril. I like films with the interaction of multiple strong agendas, so I'm not able to give it a good, objective review.

I really enjoyed Rush. I'd give it 8/10, which is really good for a racing film. This one had great rivals, rich history, and much more going on than the typical male-written romance story on an oval kind of thing.

Thinking back, my lasting experience watching Gravity is that "I'm claustrophobic, ready to puke and will probably die." Bitchen...

My lasting experience watching Rush is that "I'm driving a classic F1 car at it's freaking limit! It's shaking my eyeballs out and I might die, but I don't care." Bitchen!!!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 21, 2015)

Just to prove that for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction, I didn't like Rush at all. The driving stuff was done well but that script... Sheesh. It was like a Hallmark movie.

[tangent - dubbing a kids BBC film series at he moment, and Ron Howard turns up to help a bunch of 10 year olds shoot a space movie on a camcorder with papier-mâché models. Love him]

I think my views on Gravity are well known.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 21, 2015)

Ahh, but do you like any racing movie better than Rush? 

The classics are Grand Prix, which was epic for its historic F1 footage but the script was a drawn out gag. And then there's Le Mans, which used a novel documentaryesque style, but again, the film couldn't help itself but to become a bad romance novel.

And then there are comedy pieces like Stallone's Driven, which is laugh-out-loud terrible.

Yeah, Rush is flawed, but it's the best of its genre.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 21, 2015)

I like The Transporter! Jason Statham is so damn dark....


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 22, 2015)

JonFairhurst @ Sun Feb 22 said:


> Ahh, but do you like any racing movie better than Rush?
> 
> The classics are Grand Prix, which was epic for its historic F1 footage but the script was a drawn out gag. And then there's Le Mans, which used a novel documentaryesque style, but again, the film couldn't help itself but to become a bad romance novel.
> 
> ...



It might not be a fair comparison, but Senna was outstanding, Maybe Rush suffered because it never came close to feeling authentic in its wake, despite decent performances. I think it was possible though - it was mostly script issues imo, dialogue and structure.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 22, 2015)

YES! Senna was brilliant! And, yes, the comparison isn't fair as it was a true documentary based on source footage.

Regarding motion, they were quite similar. Both show that lightweight cars at the limit shake the crap out of the drivers. In Rush, the intensity was higher (more camera angles, better color, bigger sound...) In Senna, the feeling of risk was higher. There was one POV lap in the middle of the film where a car ahead slows out of nowhere and Senna doesn't lift for an instant. Put the slowing car a couple meters to the left and it's all over. It's on the knife's edge and it's 100% real.

Of course, no narrative film can match that. No matter how good the presentation, there's always that voice saying, "but it's not real."

We definitely have different tastes. For me, The Lego Film was like mainlining a stream of sugar-coated pop-cultural references with a chaser of amped up CGI action scenes. It gave lip service to deeper values while reveling in shallowness. It was as subversive as a two-story plastic couch. After reading glowing reviews here, it was probably the most disappointing film I've ever seen.

Then again, I'm aware that reviews typically say more about the viewer than the film. I'm fed up with shallow, pop action films, so I'm the last person who should review them. (Don't ask me to review Country pop music either.) 

The recent exception for me was Edge of Tomorrow. I found it to be brilliant. The protagonist wasn't just lucky or super-awesome and he didn't just believe really, really hard. He lived a situation, failed, and adapted - and the audience experienced that too. He'd change tactics up until a point, and then he'd fundamentally change his strategy. As a viewer, I was fully engaged, as compared to many films where I'm just passively watching a lucky, super-awesome, deep-believer get away with a string of implausible feats. Because the hero could practice over and over, the implausible became achievable - up until the next new situation.

I liked Interstellar as well - especially Act I. In Act II, Nolan couldn't help himself and showed the hero doing lucky, awesome stuff, but there were enough goals, stakes, and story to break up the fluff. Act III required immense levels of suspension of disbelief. If you can roll with it, it works. If you fight it, it's just silly. The resolution was fundamentally broken as the hero acts directly against the premise of the film. "You're dying and the whole extended family is here? Sure, I'll leave..." Still, it had enough going for it and explored the human condition well enough to keep me engaged.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 22, 2015)

Ah see we agree on some things - loved Edge Of Tomorrow (though in full disclosure it didn't repeat view quite as well as I'd hoped - is that ironic or not? I'll ask Alanis and decide the opposite).

Unlike Lego, which is the gift that keeps on giving. Strongly disagree its surface - for the anti-consumerism and anti-conformity alone as a family movie, it will always have a place in my heart ("what's your favourite restaurant?" / "ANY CHAIN RESTAURANT!!"). That, in a movie about toys, is genuinely subversive - the message is not to buy more, it's to be inventive with what you have. It's a hymn of praise to creativity, chaos and childhood and has more gags per minute than any other film I've seen since Airplane. Oh, and when the pop culture references are as well targeted as this (it renders the entire ghastly self-important Dark Knight series redundant with astonishing aplomb), I'll take it.

I'd do another 30 minutes on Lego, but I'll spare everyone...


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 27, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Mon Feb 09 said:


> My wife and I saw Citizen Four this afternoon. It's Laura Poitras's documentary about the orchestrating of Edward Snowden's disclosures.
> 
> It was pretty electric, though longish. Poitras and Glen Greenwald were given the biggest story of either's career, and you could feel the tension and the weight of what they were doing in releasing those documents. Snowden came off as reasoned, determined and resigned to whatever fate he'd be dealt while simultaneously trying to set himself up for a life outside the U.S. There were fairly long interviews with him done by Greenwald, who was palpably excited.
> 
> ...



Finally caught up with it (only on TV sadly) - yes, agreed on all that Larry. Doesn't overplay anything, just lets it play out. Definitely feels like history unfolding before us.


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 27, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Feb 27 said:


> NYC Composer @ Mon Feb 09 said:
> 
> 
> > My wife and I saw Citizen Four this afternoon. It's Laura Poitras's documentary about the orchestrating of Edward Snowden's disclosures.
> ...



Yay! It's a first! :wink:


----------



## Guy Rowland (Feb 27, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 27 said:


> Yay! It's a first! :wink:



I reckon we agree on a good 27% of movies, Larry. You liked Gravity, right?


----------



## NYC Composer (Feb 27, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Feb 27 said:


> NYC Composer @ Fri Feb 27 said:
> 
> 
> > Yay! It's a first! :wink:
> ...



And you liked Interstellar! :wink:


----------



## artsoundz (Mar 4, 2015)

Just saw "Whiplash" . Great movie.
Did you know the original working title was..
"Piet on a bad day"


----------



## Jaap (Mar 4, 2015)

I went to see Samba ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3399024/ ) last weekend and enjoyed the movie. It was from the same makers as Intouchables and they used a lot of same ingredients as that movie. Same main actor (Omar Shy) and same composer (Einaudi).
It was not as good as Intouchables, but nonetheless the whole movie was nice entertainment. Nicely shot, good combi of humor and also some serious stuff going on storywise and nice acting (not from everyone though). The music was not much to be honest, but also didn't distract, but didn't stand out as well.
All in all some nice entertainment, nothing groundbreaking, but good for a nice night out


----------



## JonFairhurst (Mar 4, 2015)

My wife and I watched Whiplash the other night. Loved it. 

The music was fantastic and really contributed to my post-film feelings. It's like a good Broadway musical where you leave singing the main chorus with an ear to ear grin. After Whiplash, my whole body was pulsing with "bap-bap-a-doo-dap" rhythms. 

Narrators voice: "This is your brain after an action movie" Image: Popcorn grease oozing onto the floor. "And this is your brain on double-time swing." Image: A popcorn machine with a machine gun fire of cascading, popping kernels.

I watched the film online. I now plan to buy the Blu-ray Disc for high-quality, long-term enjoyment.


----------



## snowleopard (Mar 4, 2015)

I saw *Birdman* the other night. It was indeed strange, but the acting so very strong, and the pacing and camera work superb. I like the music too, the misses hated it. Edward Norton was light's out terrific. If J.K. Simmons didn't have such a dominating (and rather large) part in Whiplash, Norton would have won an Oscar. I can't say I would have given it best picture though. Out of what was nominated, I did see Selma and liked it more. I haven't seen Grand Budhapest Hotel, as I'm iffy on Wes Anderson. And I didn't see Boyhood, as I cannot connect to Linkletter films. Endless, banal dialog. The only one I liked was Tape, which was based on a Stephen Belber play. 

I saw *Rush* when it came out, and liked it quite a bit. I've never been too big on Ron Howard because too many of his films have what I call "Opie" moments, where something barely related, but sentimental or heartwarming happens. That was absent in this film, entirely. 

A decent racing film not mentioned was *Bobby Deerfield*, with Al Pacino. The racing in it at times was authentic, because it was shot at actual F1 events. But it doesn't have the visceral involvement of Rush. It's also really a character study, and average at that. 

Didn't care for *Innerstellar*, nor dislike it. Impressive vision, but too cluttered and muddled, just like much of Nolan's Inception and Dark Night 3. I admired his adventurous approach though at experimenting. The score and sound a perfect example. I didn't like it, but loved what they tried. 

*Gravity* - I thought the first 12 minutes as absolutely astounding filmmaking of the highest order. The first half hour was almost that good. The middle it was still good. By the end, it seemed almost pat. Loved the Omnisphere score. Unlike Jon, I do like solo protagonists having to overcome (All Is Lost anyone?)


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 15, 2015)

*Frank*

Terrific, tonally unique I think. Frank is a singer always wears a fake head, and the film tracks the story of a naive young keyboard player who joins his band for one gig and ends up throwing his lot in with them as they attempt to record an experimental album together in rural Ireland.

You might think its a certain kind of film from the poster, but you're probably wrong. Yes it is funny, but the real surprises are how sweet natured and - especially - how genuinely moving it is. Beautifully acted, written and directed. I'll be thinking about this for a long time methinks.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 26, 2015)

*Ex Machina*

7.5/10. I found this one to be pretty good. Maybe I was too hyped up from the reviews that it sort of disappointed me a little. It has some interesting ideas and the robot's hot but I never really got that into it. It was more of an interesting 'huh' kinda thing. I couldn't shake the fact that that Oscar Isaac dude's voice sounded just like Adam Sandler.


*Mad Max: Fury Road*

11/10. Seeing it again tomorrow. That is all.


*Silicon Valley* (TV review!)

9/10. Not only the funniest show on TV but also very interesting. I never thought I'd see some half hour comedy dethrone Game of Thrones as my favourite current show but there it is.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 26, 2015)

choc0thrax @ Tue May 26 said:


> *Ex Machina*
> 
> 7.5/10. I found this one to be pretty good. Maybe I was too hyped up from the reviews that it sort of disappointed me a little. It has some interesting ideas and the robot's hot but I never really got that into it. It was more of an interesting 'huh' kinda thing. I couldn't shake the fact that that Oscar Isaac dude's voice sounded just like Adam Sandler.
> 
> ...



I like SV a lot. Loads o' fun.

Loved Ex Machina, but hadn't read any reviews previous to seeing it. Word to your mother.

I didn't give the original MM any more than a 7 out of 10. Lord Humongous was the star for me.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 26, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Tue May 26 said:


> choc0thrax @ Tue May 26 said:
> 
> 
> > *Ex Machina*
> ...



My average day involves me being bathed in film reviews via Twitter where I follow a lot of screenwriters/critics etc. It's been helpful in finding cool new movies and TV but the high praise certain things get sets me up to be disappointed a lot of the time. Apart from the reviews I also know the very second an earthquake or rain strikes LA.

Tangentially related to the thread: Has anyone seen the Point Break remake trailer released today? In it, a living, breathing human being utters the line *"I believe that like me, these people are extreme athletes, using their skills to disrupt the international financial markets."*


----------



## sleepy hollow (May 27, 2015)

choc0thrax @ Wed 27 May said:


> *Mad Max: Fury Road*
> 
> 11/10. Seeing it again tomorrow. That is all.


Is it really that good? I've seen a trailer and didn't know what to think of it. Impressive colors, (hopefully) very good cinematography, some VFX looked totally fake... hm...
So I was thinking it's probably just a fast-paced Mad Max 2 with bigger explosions.

Well, maybe I should just give it a try.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 27, 2015)

sleepy hollow @ Wed May 27 said:


> choc0thrax @ Wed 27 May said:
> 
> 
> > *Mad Max: Fury Road*
> ...



I was never into Mad Max first time around, so this hasn't really been on my radar. Did see the trailer and didn't pique my interest either, all looked pretty headache-inducing. But has to be said that pretty much everyone who's seen it raves about it - Mark Kermode is a more muted fan (he liked it well enough but says it gets too relentless and half an hour could come out, but his is a minority voice).

As to the VFX, I understand they're pretty much all practical / real. Sobering that folks can't tell the difference any more, if that's the case, but it did seem to have a hyper-real quality to it in the trailer.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 27, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Wed May 27 said:


> As to the VFX, I understand they're pretty much all practical / real. Sobering that folks can't tell the difference any more, if that's the case, but it did seem to have a hyper-real quality to it in the trailer.



There's more VFX than you think it's just that they're using it for stuff like this:

http://i.imgur.com/EWGeYl3.jpg

If the trailers somehow didn't do anything for you you should probably check your pulse just to see if everything's ok. 

Fury Road is such a refreshing movie. It's rare that we get a big budget film like this that doesn't feel like it was cooked up by years of studio notes. The bluray release is going to have a black and white version with no dialogue and the film will totally work just the same. You should always be able to understand the story just by the visuals and this one passes the test with flying, exploding colours.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 27, 2015)

choc0thrax @ Wed May 27 said:


> If the trailers somehow didn't do anything for you you should probably check your pulse just to see if everything's ok.



The weak pulse is just one symptom of my general ongoing decay.

I think the thing with me and action / blockbuster movies is that without exception all the ones I like don't have that much action in them. Die Hard, The Matrix, Terminators 1 and 2, Star Wars - they're all memorable for their action but in terms of proportion of screen time, they don't add up to much. Instead it's mostly yapping, but good yapping. Even something like Aliens - they're all about character, they're well paced. Action in and of itself is kinda boring to me, it only becomes exciting if I'm actually involved in the character and story. Then if the action is innovative in some way like most of the examples above, well bingo.

Fury Road has been described as a 2 hour chase movie right from the studio logo onwards, which sound like a spectacular turn off to me. I like the sound of its reported feminist eanings, but I dunno if it would be enough. Maybe it would... Just wary about sitting through two hours of aural and visual noise waiting for it all to stop.

[just watched the trailer again... It really does bore me. The original films' trailers did too, to be fair. Something about that world is just too cartoony for me I think - it all looks like a Kiss video or something.]


----------



## tack (May 27, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Jan 30 said:


> My controversial thoughts on Whiplash are in the OP. I don't know anyone else who didn't like it, incidentally, I'm pretty much on my own on that one.



I enjoyed the movie although I was able to suspend disbelief at the ridiculous behavior of the characters.

And then I listened to this excellent rant about Whiplash (by a musician/podcaster/skeptic called George Hrab) and somehow, after listening to him pointing out most of the things I noticed in the film but managed to ignore, I ended up a little embarrassed about enjoying it. 

https://soundcloud.com/george-hrab/whip ... -heres-why


----------



## NYC Composer (May 27, 2015)

tack @ Wed May 27 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Fri Jan 30 said:
> 
> 
> > My controversial thoughts on Whiplash are in the OP. I don't know anyone else who didn't like it, incidentally, I'm pretty much on my own on that one.
> ...



Oh, I've read scathing comments from various musicians about it. They probably read reviews before seeing it. I had NO idea what it was about, had NO illusions about its veracity whilst watching it (I was in my high school and college big bands) and l enjoyed the hell out of it.


----------



## John Walker (May 29, 2015)

I saw a good film the other day called Margin Call. Best film so far this year that I've seen.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 29, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Thu May 28 said:


> Oh, I've read scathing comments from various musicians about it. They probably read reviews before seeing it. I had NO idea what it was about, had NO illusions about its veracity whilst watching it (I was in my high school and college big bands) and l enjoyed the hell out of it.



The specifics about the musicianship aren't really important to me - happens all the time in film, this kind of incorrect detail. I can even forgive the copious wildly out of time shots of the drums, mostly cos it was shot in 18 days and done on a budget (and to be fair its a remarkable achievement on that score alone). The guy on that podcast is entertaining but wildly overstates his case - lord knows it's clearly not the worst film of the last decade. But from about 18 mins in, he makes a really valid point at the heart of the movie, that the central conceit is totally bogus. And [SPOILER ALERT] the notion that a 9 minute drum solo epitomises the very pinnacle of musical achievement is at best funny, and at worst misses THE ENTIRE POINT OF MUSIC. Perhaps the sequel will have an 18 minute blistering guitar solo at the end, because - ya know - that would be twice as good as a 9 minute drum solo, right?

Basically it's a war movie about a psychopathic drill sergeant who somehow got in charge of the band. Fine, but don't make his demented cause out to be heroic...


----------



## Daryl (May 29, 2015)

Most trailers put me off seeing the movie, especially when almost everything that might be good is given away. Sort of seems pointless to see the movie then.

Not sure if I'm going to see Mad Max. I'm a big Charlize fan but thought that the original movies were tedious.

D


----------



## sleepy hollow (May 29, 2015)

Daryl @ Fri 29 May said:


> Most trailers put me of seeing the movie, especially when almost everything that might be good is given away.


Those _Featurettes_ (if that is the correct term) are even worse. They show everything *and* explain everything. Totally lame.


----------



## Vin (May 29, 2015)

Tried to watch _Jupiter Ascending_. Stopped after half an hour.


----------



## Daryl (May 29, 2015)

sleepy hollow @ Fri May 29 said:


> Daryl @ Fri 29 May said:
> 
> 
> > Most trailers put me off seeing the movie, especially when almost everything that might be good is given away.
> ...


Agreed. However, to be totally fair I don't find watching on-screen explosions very interesting unless I know the reason for them.

D


----------



## Mike Connelly (May 29, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Wed May 27 said:


> Fury Road has been described as a 2 hour chase movie right from the studio logo onwards



It's not. Definitely lots of action but there's enough good dialogue/plot/character that it's not all action for the sake of action. I went into it a bit overhyped, but I'd definitely recommend seeing it in the theatre to anyone who likes action movies.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 29, 2015)

*Tomorrowland*

So much to like in this movie. Has a terrific hook - "remember when the future used to be great?" and practically falls over the sheer volume of its own ideas. In fact by the end that's pretty much what it does, when logic that's threatened to spiral out of control finally does. But there's a ton of fun to be had on the way, and an occasional dash of Speilberg sensibility (and a bit of solid JW impressioning from Giachinno) does no harm at all. The black-clad baddies are simply tremendous.

Its disappointment at the box office surely confirms the adage that Hollywood shouldn't release idea-packed original blockbusters with the word "Tomorrow" in the title. Sadly it makes the prospect of large scale non-comic book material ever less likely, and boo to that.


----------



## Lawson. (May 29, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri May 29 said:


> *Tomorrowland*
> 
> So much to like in this movie. Has a terrific hook - "remember when the future used to be great?" and practically falls over the sheer volume of its own ideas. In fact by the end that's pretty much what it does, when logic that's threatened to spiral out of control finally does. But there's a ton of fun to be had on the way, and an occasional dash of Speilberg sensibility (and a bit of solid JW impressioning from Giachinno) does no harm at all. The black-clad baddies are simply tremendous.
> 
> Its disappointment at the box office surely confirms the adage that Hollywood shouldn't release idea-packed original blockbusters with the word "Tomorrow" in the title. Sadly it makes the prospect of large scale non-comic book material ever less likely, and boo to that.



The music was great as well as the visuals and acting, but all the plot holes kind of ruined it for me. Like you put it, there were so many ideas that it couldn't hold itself up.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (May 29, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Fri May 29 said:


> *Tomorrowland*
> 
> So much to like in this movie. Has a terrific hook - "remember when the future used to be great?" and practically falls over the sheer volume of its own ideas. In fact by the end that's pretty much what it does, when logic that's threatened to spiral out of control finally does. But there's a ton of fun to be had on the way, and an occasional dash of Speilberg sensibility (and a bit of solid JW impressioning from Giachinno) does no harm at all. The black-clad baddies are simply tremendous.
> 
> Its disappointment at the box office surely confirms the adage that Hollywood shouldn't release idea-packed original blockbusters with the word "Tomorrow" in the title. Sadly it makes the prospect of large scale non-comic book material ever less likely, and boo to that.



I thought Tomorrowland was not that bad. I don't understand why its a box office disaster! 

Brad Bird tried a lot of new things but I have to say that the movie did not come together over all in a satisfying way. Still, lots of things to like and far from the failure the media is labeling it. 

The score however was very boring for me. It was trying too hard to be like John Williams (very noticeably). The themes were..meh..! 

Not sure whats happened to Giacchnio's music lately. I was not impressed with The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes either. I am probably the last person who should talk about serious orchestral music but I find that his music doesn't go anywhere a lot of times. A lot of times, its just stagnant. 

I really liked Ratatouille and Up....even though somehow a lot of people did not like the music for Up :?


Tanuj.


----------



## gsilbers (May 29, 2015)

tomorrowland was good I liked it and should be a movie all kids should go to see. very inspiring. 

although there are a couple of very uncomfortable seens with Clooney and the little 12 year old "robot". in context makes sense, but still felt very wrong.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 29, 2015)

gsilbers @ Fri May 29 said:


> tomorrowland was good I liked it and should be a movie all kids should go to see. very inspiring.
> 
> although there are a couple of very uncomfortable seens with Clooney and the little 12 year old "robot". in context makes sense, but still felt very wrong.



Actually that didn't bother me at all. On reflection, glad they didn't let those concerns put them off - IMO it was well handled.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 29, 2015)

*BOYHOOD*- 2 out of 10.

Good lord. The only points I gave it were for concept. Content-wise, totally boring and pointless. A slice of totally uninteresting lives. Did I mention it was endless?

You know you hate a coming of age film when you start screaming "Die, die, you whiney fck!!! Stop coming of age!!!!" at the screen.

2 hrs and 45 minutes of my life, irretrievably gone.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 30, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat May 30 said:


> *BOYHOOD*- 2 out of 10.
> 
> Good lord. The only points I gave it were for concept. Content-wise, totally boring and pointless. A slice of totally uninteresting lives. Did I mention it was endless?
> 
> ...



Ah, back to the old Larry / Guy polarity. Best Picture always felt a stretch for this, but I did find it astoundingly well acted and engaging (and whiney, Larry? Really? Did that kid even whine once?!). It's more European than American in its aesthetic, when all is said and done its simply a slice of ordinary life (people often reach for the 7up documentary series as a comparison - telling that real life is the frame of reference, not fiction), but that's something I do enjoy if done well, which this was. Despite the focus on the eponymous boy and his siblings, it was his mother I warmed to the most - maybe reflecting my own age? I did think Arquette's Oscar was thoroughly deserved.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 30, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Sat May 30 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sat May 30 said:
> 
> 
> > *BOYHOOD*- 2 out of 10.
> ...



Yes, Guy, he whined constantly during 2 hrs and 45 minutes of slices of lives no one cared about. Even the lovely Patricia got to whine a few times, most notably at the end. Oh, the existential angst. I started rooting for the returning vet to go alcoholic. I was hoping for a car crash, a few zombies, one insightful statement. ANYTHING EVENTFUL.

If you're going on about European sensibilities though, I swear, I will strap you to a chair and make you watch Woody Allen's "Interiors" 5 times in a row as your punishment.


----------



## chimuelo (May 30, 2015)

Thanks for saving me from watching it.
I can't believe I still fall for the hype of others and a few suck ass critics.
Musicians are the best Critics since we have learned patience the hard way.

FWIW My favorite Woody Allen Movie is "What's Up Tiger Lilly."

He isn't in it which makes it great.
Old Japanese spy movie where him and some stoned friends over dubbed the entire dialogue.

A scene as an example is where the Japanese gal comes out of the shower with a large towel wrapped around her, and in the original movie (pre dub) probably said something like, if you help me it would be appreciated....

Woody and his stoned buddies made it look like a sex quiz.....

She steps out, his eyes go wide like Buckwheat from the Rascals, then she says "Name 3 Presidesnts" like he has a shot for some trim, and goes batty trying to name 3 only ended getting 2 right, so no trim.

It's 90+ minutes of the funniest shit you can imagine.

The original music was left in the overdubbed movie too making it seem realistic.

Meanwhile Back at the Ranch...................


----------



## choc0thrax (May 30, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Sat May 30 said:


> *BOYHOOD*- 2 out of 10.
> 
> Good lord. The only points I gave it were for concept. Content-wise, totally boring and pointless. A slice of totally uninteresting lives. Did I mention it was endless?
> 
> ...



There was a point near the end of Boyhood where I felt more tortured than I ever have seeing any film. I kept thinking it was over... but on it went.


----------



## Guy Rowland (May 31, 2015)

chimuelo @ Sat May 30 said:


> Thanks for saving me from watching it.
> I can't believe I still fall for the hype of others and a few suck ass critics.
> Musicians are the best Critics since we have learned patience the hard way.



Oh for heavens' sakes. Three times oh for heavens' sakes.

Pick a dozen of your favourite films, and look them up on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes. Look at the public score and the critics score. Are your favourite films consistently critically panned because critics know shit?

There are films I love that critics don't, and vice versa. In general if something is well recevied by public and critics alike there's a greater chance I'll like it too, but that's by no means foolproof. The Dark Knight sits at #4 in the all time top 250 by public vote, and 94% from the critics, yet I have the audacity to think it's joyless, tedious and ridiculous in roughly equal measure. My own sueperhero movie of choice in the past decade is the low budget Aussie flick Griff The Invisible, which gets lowly 6.1 and 62% scores. I'd rather watch that every day for the rest of my life than any of the Dark Knight series again.

Boyhood gets critical but also strong public praise (8.1 score imdb). The idea that only critics like it is daft. Ditto Gravity, panned by several here despite high user and critics ratings - I thought it a terrific thrill ride, while the absurd and wildly over-indulged Interstellar left me cold. I know some people who's opinions I really rate who thought the stratospherically-rated Lego Movie was awful - I can't comprehend their response, its so obviously a work of imaginative comedic genius to me. Blue is the Warmest Colour was one of the most engaging and immersive films I've ever seen, despite a predictable plot you could write in a sentence. Others find the characters insufferable and the film endlessly tedious - if I'd have listened to them I'd have been deprived of an extraordinary experience. Yet both the hugely praised City Of God and Raging Bull I found so eye-wateringly boring I failed to finish either. Run Lola Run breaks another rule - well, it's a running movie not a chasing one, but that's (almost) all there is in the film, and I think it's a genuine masterpiece. There's no greater joy that being surprised by a movie you think it's going to hate - Moulin Rouge was another for me, I was determined to hate it and I spectacularly failed.

As for the notion that musicians make the best reviewers... well, going by my own taste in movies that also seems spectacularly wide of the mark. Now, if you've read a couple of dozen Larry reviews and think he nails it every time - well, fair play there's a good chance you won't like Boyhood either. But I don't buy for a second the idea that critics only garland emporer's new clothes pics, or that for some magical reason musicians make good critics.

But I love the debate. I love reading Larry's reviews - hey, we even agree on about 1 in 3. 2 in 3 for Chocco.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 31, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Sun May 31 said:


> chimuelo @ Sat May 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for saving me from watching it.
> ...



Vote for Larry's review! Vote for Larry's review! Who loves ya, baby?? Let Larry save you from this pasty, unbelievably tepid mess in which NOTHING HAPPENS. You'll be sitting there, watching, waiting, watching, waiting, until the very last undramatic moment, and you... will....be....left...eventless.

(I love this shit too, Guy!) :wink:


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (May 31, 2015)

Guy Rowland @ Sun May 31 said:


> chimuelo @ Sat May 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for saving me from watching it.
> ...




Guy,

I have to agree with you here. Critics don't always reflect the reality of a film. I mean, films are universal at times but they are also incredibly personal for so many different people. 

I do feel however that a lot of people get stuck into over-analysis and super intellectualizing so many films. There are so many brilliant films out there. In a few discussions I almost feel like people forgot about the movie and get into tangents which are very far away from the whole idea of a film. Of course, on occasion I do like to go off on a little side journey while discussing a film and its wonderful where it can take you. 

Critics have their own views and so do IMDB ratings which are very weird at times. Look at any Inaritu film and even the best ones only go up to 7.5 or something. Whereas so many other films get very highly rated. 

I don't know if any particular group of people like musicians would be the best critics. Perhaps, a good critic is someone who does a good over all evaluation of the film without bias and appreciates the various things that make films great cinema and enjoyable. This person could be anyone. 

For a film to be great, it does not need to be nominated for an Oscar obviously. Earlier, I was pulled into Oscar hype but the older I am getting, the more I understand about films and even working on films myself, I realise that a lot of it is not at all accurate. They get it wrong a lot of the time. 

Perhaps working on Indian films has given me another perspective. Most of the films so far discussed in this thread are very good. Some better, others not as good but still great. 

Like you, I too like to be surprised by films which may seem really bad in trailers or through the marketing. But, when you watch them it is completely different. 

For example, I had no interest in watching Edge of Tomorrow. But, I went with some friends and really enjoyed the film. Except that it was too loud and the music was not mixed to my taste. Too buried in the mix. I used to love Hollywood movie mixing but more and more they are so loud and heavy with SFX, the music is just a side gig. 

Avengers: Age of Ultron, the music takes a back seat most of the time. In a few places, I felt like why did they even bother scoring that scene. You could barely hear it. 

All of recent Hans Zimmer movies get great respect for music (some may be too loud). I watched Skyfall today and thought the music was really well mixed with the effects and dialogue. What a brilliant score from Thomas Newman. Really enjoyed the film and absolutely loved the score! 


Tanuj.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jun 1, 2015)

Back on the rant against Whiplash...

It was like someone hating on Harry Potter because "magic isn't real, and if it was they wouldn't teach it like that." And, "I couldn't disagree more with Voldamort's premise that one should rule the world through fear based on ruthless acts."


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 1, 2015)

Has anyone ever heard the tape of Buddy Rich ranting at his band on the tour bus? It was making the rounds back in the Stone Age. He was one bad hombre, and he was PISSED. Quite colorful.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 1, 2015)

Tanuj Tiku @ Mon Jun 01 said:


> Avengers: Age of Ultron, the music takes a back seat most of the time. In a few places, I felt like why did they even bother scoring that scene. You could barely hear it.


I'd go one step further. Why did they even bother making the movie. I was bored pretty much throughout.

D


----------



## lee (Jun 1, 2015)

Chappie

This was an awsome ride with a mix of robotic action packed mayhem and kinda cute and warm but artificial intelligence. Highly entertaining if you´re a sci/fi lover like myself.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Jun 1, 2015)

Daryl @ Mon Jun 01 said:


> Tanuj Tiku @ Mon Jun 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Avengers: Age of Ultron, the music takes a back seat most of the time. In a few places, I felt like why did they even bother scoring that scene. You could barely hear it.
> ...



I found it a bit boring too. Too much mindless action and there was never a threat for the Avengers really. Very weak villain! 


Tanuj.


----------



## chimuelo (Jun 1, 2015)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 01 said:


> Has anyone ever heard the tape of Buddy Rich ranting at his band on the tour bus? It was making the rounds back in the Stone Age. He was one bad hombre, and he was PISSED. Quite colorful.



He was the cockiest drummer ever. Loved his seminars. He'd bring us kids up and point to the 2 transparent bean sized circles where his tips struck with deadly accuracy.

Howard Cosell:
Buddy, do you accept the Challenge from Ginger Baker in Battle of the Drummers..?

Buddy Rich: No. I refuse the challenge because Baker is no challenge, but I'd be happy to beat up on him some mo'.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 8, 2015)

Tomorrowland-3/10. (Sorry, Guy)

1. This was almost a literal commercial for Disney-not only in product placement and golly-gee phraseology but in its effort to pull New Frontier Kennedy era oldsters like myself back into the old 60's Disney nostalgia where everything was light and bright and aspirational. This is a kid's movie pretending to have an adult sensibility. By all rights, it should probably have been animated, but they were trying to pull in the adults who DIDN'T have kids, I guess.

2. It's funny how, in contrast, Pixar's early work hit the ball out of the park every time with their Toy Story styled winks to the adult set. I s'pose that's because it was better written, had more heart and found the right balance of uplift and a little edge, none of which Tomorrowland managed to pull off for me. It was always trying too hard.

Side note- I really liked Syriana and Good Night and Good Luck- VERY much. I think Clooney has done some fine work-but he needs to cut down on the mascara, and he's not believable as an irascible curmudgeon.


----------



## dpasdernick (Jun 8, 2015)

Tomorrowland

I was actually pleasantly surprised. Not the greatest film but I did enjoy it. Maybe it was the IMAX screen...


Wild

I liked this one too. Reese did a great job and I loved how broken she was. My wife and I talked about walking the PCT ourselves. She said I would quit after the second mile. I said that would be because I'd be carrying her on my back after the first mile..

Jupiter Ass-Ending

Please make it stop... the mix was really bad... I fell asleep... Eddie Remayne's character was "WTF?" and no amount of digital spaceships was going to right this train wreck.


----------



## John Walker (Jun 9, 2015)

Saw a good one yesterday called The Station Agent.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 9, 2015)

I saw San Andreas the other day with my nephew (14). What a terrible film. We laughed pretty much all the way through. I don't know which script writer actually thought that an English guy would ever be able to say the words "Nob Hill" without laughing.

As for Alexandra Daddario's inappropriate apparel. My nephew leaned over (when she was swimming to escape the Tsunami) and remarked "nice flotation devices".

Having said that, it was a good evening out. If a film is going to be cr*p, then it had better be hilariously bad. The biggest laugh in the evening was reserved for the unfurling of the US flag. Hysterical. Unless you are American, I imagine. :wink: 

D


----------



## givemenoughrope (Jun 9, 2015)

Anyone see Mr. Turner? I've watched it twice and enjoyed the experience but I'm still not totally sure what to make of it which is s good sign I think. 
I asked a Brit friend the other day about the director and his 'kitchen sink reality' style and all he could say after too much wine was, "Mike Leigh is a c€£t," but he is without question a thoughtful and deliberate c€£t who can extend a shot, bend around the camera and leave just enough silence/extra-long beats that I felt drawn in from the first 20 seconds.
Excellent Oscar-nominated (gives me hope) score that is light years more imaginative than anything else I've heard from the indie neo-classical crowd. 

Again, I'm curious if anyone has actually seen it.


----------



## lee (Jun 10, 2015)

Watched Kingsman yesterday, we'll to be honest I didn't finish it! I'm usually very tolerant when it comes to gore/bloody violence in movies, but there was a scene that just disgusted me too much. Don't want to reveal to much, since the movie did have its qualities, and I'm sure many will like it and enjoy its praise of blood, but somehow this just felt sick and made me feel sick. Like turning violence into a dance. Not for me! And I'm the kind of person who can enjoy a gorefest like Braindead or Shaun of the dead. Weird huh?


----------



## choc0thrax (Jun 11, 2015)

*CHAPPiE*

5/10. CRAPPiE. [SPOILERS] Blomkamp seems to be remaking the same film over and over again but this time it's robots and not aliens. The angry two dimensional antagonist we're stuck with for this one is played by Hugh Jackman. He has a mini mullet and spends much of the movie skulking around in khaki shorts and muttering about those disgusting alie-- errm robots. He hates nerds and just wants funding for his own robot called ED209-- errmm I actually forget the name of his robot. By the end of the film Dev Patel fully becomes an alie-- errm a robot. 


*It Follows*

9/10. A great, simple horror film with a catchy concept and sweet score. Not much to say besides rent it when it hits VOD in July if you haven't seen it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymoh5SIqgtw


----------



## sleepy hollow (Jun 15, 2015)

Anyone seen Jurassic World? I've seen two trailers on TV, and now it feels like I've already seen the movie.

Man, when is that trailer madness going to stop?


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 15, 2015)

*Imitation Game-10/10*

OMG. How did a fascinating, intelligent, complex, historically informative, affecting, classy movie slip through the cracks and get made?? I couldn't possibly say enough about it, the acting, the production, the writing, the subject matter....

Brilliant. Simply brilliant. I'm only sorry I missed seeing it on the Big Screen.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Jul 2, 2015)

*Mad Max: Fury Road
*
Finally saw this. Nuts. Bonkers batshit crazy. Felt like an incredibly long trailer edited with that Kiss video I was afraid of. But not unenjoyable in places if you just go with it - when it slowed down enough to allow for just a glimpse of character and story things improved. It was never less than utterly absurd at every turn, almost cartoonish - you just have to switch your brain off really. Directed with remarkable energy for a 70 year old.

Mr XL's score - like the film - really was everything but the kitchen sink. In fact I'd be surprised if a kitchen sink didn't appear at some point as well (deep sampled... 24xRR appearing soon). It didn't feel like a classic movie which was disappointing, but it was a pure genre piece - so if you're a genre fan and the over-designed sensibility appeals, you'll have a blast.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jul 27, 2015)

I saw the film 'Ida' last night (free on Netflix). It's a 2014 Polish film, set in 1962 with post-WWII themes. It was shot in black and white on real film stock, and aside from the final scene and the in-car shots, I don't think the camera ever moves.

If you like big films with explosions, this is not for you.

If you like small films with pathos and fantastic photography, I highly recommend it. 

Musically, the film has some live club music (pop and jazz), some classical works, and very little underscore. You won't discover the next great composer here, but the music supports the film beautifully.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 4, 2015)

*Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation*

Fab. Really great fun, in a faith-restored-in-blockbusters way. I very much liked 3 and 4 in the series, and this keeps the standard way up. Actually this could be the best of the lot, with the glorious Ving Rhames back this time, and plenty of Pegg again. Felt like it was made by craftmen-and-women, not committee. Kudos to Joe Kraemer (of whom I'd not heard before) for a terrific old school score, liberally lifting and varying the original theme, and lovely light and shade (one key sequence is void of score completely).

*The Minions*

Very disappointing. Almost a laughter-desert in the kid-filled screening I went to - a fart joke in the first 15 mins was the single big laugh of the whole film, and c'mon. Just felt all over the place, and not in a good way... the joke wears awfully thin awfully quickly.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 4, 2015)

All Bond Movies and Bond Girls and Bond Music.
Total packages and yes while it's all overblown fantasy it makes me fantasize which is hard to do.
They were so good they made me watch each actor in other movies and love Sean Connery, Roger Moore, etc.
Still love using the line from Diamonds Are Forever where Jill St. John greets him as a blonde, goes and changes and comes back as a redhead. She says "what you don't like Redheads" Bond replies "Most certainly, provided the Cufflinks match"......


----------



## Guy Rowland (Aug 5, 2015)

(er... are you in the right thread, Chimuelo?!)


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 5, 2015)

*The Drop
*
I believe this was James Gandolfini's last movie, and it includes fellow protagonist Thomas Hardy. Both are brilliant. The film is an organized crime slash character study thingie, and I can see where some might find it slow, but for me the performances were well worth the price of admission. I've loved Gandolfini throughout, and Hardy is fabulous- he's getting more impressive with each film.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Aug 5, 2015)

*Ant-Man* - 7/10

Marvel's decided to push some of their less mainstream heroes into the blockbuster scene while they're still on their streak of good movies. Ant-Man doesn't break that streak. This was a great introduction to the hero. Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas... The entire cast was amazing, though the villain was pretty cliche and made no lasting impressions on me. The film was packed with humor, and pulls it off really well! The score was done by Christophe Beck. I really appreciate the uniqueness of the main theme when compared to the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and it worked incredibly well in one sequence in particular, but no other cues stood out to me.


----------



## dedersen (Aug 6, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> *The Drop
> *
> I believe this was James Gandolfini's last movie, and it includes fellow protagonist Thomas Hardy. Both are brilliant.


Absolutely agree. Great movie, that is not afraid of putting action on the back burner in favor of character development.


----------



## aaronnt1 (Aug 24, 2015)

Last year's Nightcrawler is a modern classic I think. Excellent performance from Jake Gyllanghaal and the story so tight and gripping and you know...says something worthwhile.... about society! Had something of early Scorcese about it, think King of Comedy and Taxi Driver.

Margin Call was also pretty terrific.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 5, 2015)

*Inside Out
*
Whoa. Never has a film classification so lulled an audience into a false sense of security. Cert U, it says in the UK, "Suitable for all. Contains very mild peril". Tell that that hordes of sobbing parents being dragged out at the end by their kids. Toy Story 3 is a walk in the park next to this.

Arguably, it's not even a movie for kids at all. Certainly I'd hesitate to reccommend it to 10s and under, it just won't mean anything to them I suspect and be a bit confusing. This is a very rare beast indeed, a studio "kids" film about psychology, neuroscience and the sheer pain, turmoil and horror of growing up. It plays its hand deftly, with deceptively simple narrative devices telling truths about the human condition with wit and intelligence, and displays great bravery in not plumping for soft easy answers. There are laughs, some really big ones, but typically these are not jokes the younger kids will get (indeed the occasional slapstick is about the only weak element of the film, and feels a little forced by the makers nervous of losing their traditional core audience).

I hear it's being talked of as an Oscar Best Picture contender, and it would be a delight if that is true. I doubt it, but you never know... just as William Goldman says that the only comedies that win Oscars are the ones that aren't funny, this is a kids movie about kids that isn't for kids. In that sense, it's falls behind the absolute best of the Pixar cannon, which manage to be genuinely suitable for all. But there's no use in arguing against the genius and skill at work here, and any recognition coming it's way will be richly deserved.


----------



## Killiard (Sep 5, 2015)

I almost took my three year old to see it when it came out but was advised against it due to the "mild peril". Probably made the right decision by the sound of it!


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 6, 2015)

Guy Rowland said:


> *Inside Out
> *
> Whoa. Never has a film classification so lulled an audience into a false sense of security. Cert U, it says in the UK, "Suitable for all. Contains very mild peril". Tell that that hordes of sobbing parents being dragged out at the end by their kids. Toy Story 3 is a walk in the park next to this.
> 
> ...



Again, sadly, we disagree my friend, although I do agree that it isn't really suitable for younger children. I felt I was lulled into going to see it by the promise of exactly what you say, "suitable for all." Instead, I found it a movie for tweens- 8-12 or so, with the bright and bubbly old school Disney esthetic that I don't enjoy but you apparently do, as I fel the same way about Tomorrowland which you enjoyed. 

I don't have a young child and I remember liking some movies for kids when I did, but this one wasn't Toy Story, not by a long shot, nor The Brave Little Toaster, one of the weirdest movies I've ever seen (and thoroughly enjoyed.) This one has the unshakeable protagonist that Disney loves so much, and anyone didn't know things would be ok in the end would have had to be VERY young.

It seems to be loved by all and it's admittedly quite creative, so yours is by far the popular opinion. I just didn't think it was very GOOD.

(Btw- the worst mistake I made with kids' movies was in taking my son and a friend to see A.I. While I think parts of that film were brilliant, it was VERY dark and totally unsuitable for 9 year old kids.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 7, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> with the bright and bubbly old school Disney esthetic that I don't enjoy but you apparently do



Really?!!! You thought that was "bright and bubbly?!!" Well next to A.I maybe...

I mean, yes it's a literally colourful world superficially, but that's kind of the point. I think the reason it's got the plaudits it has is because it head-on confronts the loss of childhood and innocence as full on trauma, touching on depression etc, doing so honestly and yet in a way that takes you with it on the journey. Watching that colour drain from Amy's world - internally and externally - as it collapses is strong stuff.

And I'm not sure on what criteria it might be judged not very good. If it's pure humour I can understand it - I know there's a body of opinion who wanted the film to be far more traditional and broad, seeing a lot more of the internal battles inside other characters' heads etc. That was obviously a fundamental - and very brave imo - decision taken right at the outset, to play less to the core young kids audience (incidentally, 8-12 still feels young to me... 12 is getting near the start age who could engage with this, but it's absolutely for anyone above that to 112. Love the letter last week on the Kermode and Mayo podcast from the 16 year old Slipknot fan who said it reduced him to a blubbering wreck). In terms of originally, script, visuals, pretty much anything I can think of - this was filmmaking par excellence (and hence the talk of Oscars I guess).


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 7, 2015)

Ah-let me clarify. I don't think it's a film for adults-or at least, not this adult. I suggested 8-12 because soon after that, kids are into things like Slipknot.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 7, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> Ah-let me clarify. I don't think it's a film for adults-or at least, not this adult. I suggested 8-12 because soon after that, kids are into things like Slipknot.



Ha! That's the thing though eh - it absolutely IS for 16 year old Slipknot fans. And definitely adults - parents in particular, but I think any adult potentially. I recognise though that not every adult can see what is ostensibly a kids movie and watch it at face value though, I have this argument all the time with my brother who isn't interested in any films marketed as kids films now his own kids are grown up. I'd say a good 50% of the films I've enjoyed most of the last decade or two are kids films - the quality level of script in particular seems higher, there seems more rigour has gone into the process. Also kids films have been the only genre to consistently keep that traditional blockbuster spirit alive throughout the dour and joyless tentpole films post-2000. And as my own kids head through their teenage years, I have no intention of denying myself access to much of the best cinema being made today.

Don't get me wrong - there are plenty of clunkers. Minions has just made a billion dollars - A BILLION DOLLARS - and I didn't laugh once (nor did the kids in the screening I want to either, mind, other than a fart gag about 10 minutes in which got a belly laugh but there we go). Just seemed all over the bloody place.

To mention Minions-loving BBC critic Mark Kermode again - it was interesting to me that he said he's already seen it three times, out of choice, and was a howling mess even at the end of the third time (and I'm 99% sure his own kids are well above the 12 year old threshold). A professional critic doesn't do this sort of thing out of sense of duty or out of faintly amused detachment - he's just responding to at as anyone might. The best kids films do that, I've always argued, they transcend the "kid" tag. In this case they actually replace it....


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 7, 2015)

You're a child at heart and a bright spirit, Guy. I'm an old cranky gasbag! 

Still, opinions is opinions. For me- Toy Story, yes. This one, nah.

What's really funny to me is I LOVED LOVED LOVED Moonrise Kingdom- and you didn't care for it. People are so interesting.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 7, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> What's really funny to me is I LOVED LOVED LOVED Moonrise Kingdom- and you didn't care for it. People are so interesting.



Ah no, I still haven't seen Moonrise Kingdom, you're thinking of some other fella with odd views 

Incidentally, on the subject of our clashing tastes, a rare film we both loved was *The Imitation Game*. Sadly I then decided I really ought to read the book because I felt so ignorant about the man and period, whereupon I discovered pretty much the entire movie had been made up. From his basic character (not Aspergers) to the basic plot (Enigma cracked in '32 by the Poles, it was just keeping on top of the changes; no codes reset at midnight; not ostracised by his team or management etc etc) there was almost nothing in the film which appears to be true, other than that there was clever chap called Alan Turing who worked at Bletchley Park. This has now rather dented my enjoyment of it. Of course I expected some dramatic license especially with characters and relationships, but this seems absurd. I've no idea, in fact, why it was an adaptation at all - if they were just going to make everything up, why base it on the book in the first place?


----------



## bbunker (Sep 7, 2015)

You stickler for detail, Guy! I loved Imitation Game as well, despite knowing in advance a bit about the history (my in-laws lived in Aylesbury in Bucks, so we visited the computing museum at Bletchley a few times!) and that most of the film's history was going to be rubbish. But isn't exaggeration what story-tellers have always done? It's rather hard to communicate exactly how important Bletchley's efforts were at an understandable level, for one thing, and I'd hate to watch a film where some tedious exposition-guy briefs the main characters on 'Well, the Poles have beat this thing for years, but the Germans' increasing of the rotors means that there's an exponential increase in possibilities, and we need to design a new Bombe that's programmed more cleanly, and we have the manpower to prepare the materials for the Bombes that the Poles don't have, especially now, with the war on. Oh, and the American version is going to completely replace most of our work in a few years. But this work is important!"

Detail is BORING. Impact is FUN. And ultimately, the average punter walks out of Imitation Game with an accurate sense of the relative importance of the Bletchley gang, that they were pretty darn important. As opposed to the 'exposition-guy' version, where the audience would walk out thinking Bletchley were just some number-crunching Calculus professors between two sets of pocket-protector professors. Which is true...but also not. You know what I mean?


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 7, 2015)

Good post bbunker, and fair points. It's a balance though of course, isn't it? I mean, we'd all have been very impressed and entertained if he'd also discovered penicillin on his days off and built a monorail to take everyone round Bletchley Park, but one would hope that the odd genuine event might creep in to these biopics.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 7, 2015)

Thanks Guy. You've totally ruined The Imitation Game for me with your truth telling.


----------



## chillbot (Sep 12, 2015)

Guy Rowland said:


> *Mad Max: Fury Road
> *
> Finally saw this. Nuts. Bonkers batshit crazy. Felt like an incredibly long trailer edited with that Kiss video I was afraid of. But not unenjoyable in places if you just go with it - when it slowed down enough to allow for just a glimpse of character and story things improved. It was never less than utterly absurd at every turn, almost cartoonish - you just have to switch your brain off really. Directed with remarkable energy for a 70 year old.
> 
> Mr XL's score - like the film - really was everything but the kitchen sink. In fact I'd be surprised if a kitchen sink didn't appear at some point as well (deep sampled... 24xRR appearing soon). It didn't feel like a classic movie which was disappointing, but it was a pure genre piece - so if you're a genre fan and the over-designed sensibility appeals, you'll have a blast.



And I finally saw this also... like some on here I had no interest in watching a "two-hour chase film" but I actually liked it, thought it was very well done. But the score was a huge disappointment to me. No? Just felt like 90% of it was cliché orchestral whereas it should have had a ton more badass in-your-face aggressive nasty synths and guitars mixed in. There was so much opportunity for bas-assedness but it almost sounded like they decided to go in a more classical morricone western direction... which would be a mistake in my opinion and wasted the reason behind hiring JXL in the first place....


----------



## chillbot (Sep 12, 2015)

NYC Composer said:


> *The Drop
> *
> I believe this was James Gandolfini's last movie, and it includes fellow protagonist Thomas Hardy. Both are brilliant. The film is an organized crime slash character study thingie, and I can see where some might find it slow, but for me the performances were well worth the price of admission. I've loved Gandolfini throughout, and Hardy is fabulous- he's getting more impressive with each film.



This is the best movie I've seen in ages (I don't see a ton) and the reason I finally decided to see Mad Max, above.


----------



## Dean (Sep 12, 2015)

Avengers Assemble 2; 
Out of curiosity I just watched Avengers Assemble 2,..WTF!!...I have no idea what the [email protected]%k it was about!?,..it was like the ravings of a madman,(like Transformers 4 ? POTC 3 & 4 / Alexander / Jupiter Ascending /Iron Man 3) ,..how the [email protected]%K does this happen?..All those a-list actors/production teams/so many talented people..who the hell is running the asylum?..the inmates!? This is not just a rant Im genuinely shocked considering how good the first one was? D


----------



## patrick76 (Sep 12, 2015)

Guy Rowland said:


> *Ex Machina*
> 
> Good. Very good. You need to suspend a little disbelief with the setup here and there (not at the AI angle though), but if you go with it it's thoughtful, intelligent and gripping. There's good sense of atmosphere and gently creeping menace, helped by the great electronic / guitar score from Geoff Barrow and Ben Salisbury - just a tad in-your-face in a couple of moments. but mostly perfect. Excellent performances all round.



Totally agree. It seems like almost everything I see lately is disappointing, but this was quite the opposite. I just kept waiting for something that would ruin the movie for me, but as you stated, if you suspend a little disbelief the movie is very effective and gripping. I think I will watch it again soon. Reminded me a little of Kubrick.


----------



## chillbot (Sep 12, 2015)

patrick76 said:


> Totally agree. It seems like almost everything I see lately is disappointing, but this was quite the opposite. I just kept waiting for something that would ruin the movie for me, but as you stated, if you suspend a little disbelief the movie is very effective and gripping. I think I will watch it again soon. Reminded me a little of Kubrick.



Just ordered it from amazon. You guys better be right or I'm coming back to... do something... I don't know... write a totally contrarian review. I have a home gym and I just realized a few weeks ago that my TV has a built in DVD player so now I've actually found some time to watch a few movies... it's not ideal lifting weights and watching movies but it's a shit ton better than lifting weights without watching a movie. The only thing I've found is I can't watch [actually funny] comedies because it's potentially really dangerous to snort or laugh with 60 or 70 lb dumbbells over your head...


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 19, 2015)

*Age of Ultron*

5/10

A mediocre mess. They look like a bunch of cosplayers sitting around expensive sets. Thor always seems horribly out of place. They have to save the human race but who cares? I don't think I've ever sat at the edge of my seat biting my fingernails hoping a villain doesn't wipe out billions of faceless people I have no connection to. Ultron was a pile of CG who talks like Joss Whedon. Actually they all do. Although I did like how Joss-- err Hawkeye started venting about how the story made no sense and how despite that he still had to do his job anyways. 

*
Inside Out*

8.5/10

Really good and creative. One of the more adult Pixar films. Quite well structured and Bing Bong's choice to jump off the wagon got me.

*
The Witch*

7/10

Well shot and acted and very atmospheric but judging from the rave reviews I'd heard I expected a lot more from it. It relied heavily on overly loud music and sound effects to try and startle you. Throw in some gross images and you're done. 

*
Room*

9/10

Easily one of the best films of the year. Everything about it incredibly well done and this thing is going to be an awards magnet. I was a bit disgruntled by the use of Mychael Danna's Moneyball score during a scene but I got over it.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 30, 2015)

*The Martian*

Well what an unexpected hoot. The Ridley Scott of Thelma and Louise, not Alien or - thankfully - Prometheus is behind the lens here. All character, wit and levity it turns out to be, giving me - oh yes - that old fashioned blockbuster I crave, like it's 1991 again. A compelling idea that takes itself just seriously enough to engage, but not too seriously so as we can't all have a lot of fun on the way. Terrific to hear adult laughter - frequently - in the screening of a film like this. Oh, and in this science space expedition, the scientists aren't all morons, which is a major step in the right direction after Prometheus. A bit long perhaps, but always enjoyable.

*Everest*

Fit the best! (For UK readers of a certain age). Solid film that places the viewer right on the mountain. And not just the eye-popping visuals, rather inside the psyche of the kind of fool who is drawn moth-like to it. I liked its lack of tidyness, the loose ends that never quite get resolved, making it less a blame game and more a study of chaos theory in the most inhospitable place on earth.


----------



## catsass (Sep 30, 2015)

Guy Rowland said:


> *The Martian*


I really enjoyed the book. I'm curious to see what Drew Goddard did with his adaptation. I am not a fan of what he did with World War Z.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Sep 30, 2015)

I haven't read the book, but thought it was a terrific screenplay. Avoids many (not all) the obvious character cliches in these things, doesn't over-milk every last potential tension moment on the way, and plenty of character-driven comedy. What was the book like, tonally? The comedy in the film was surprising to me, I wonder if it will be to book devotees?


----------



## catsass (Sep 30, 2015)

I have to say, your take on the film is rather encouraging in that it seems to align itself well with the spirit of the book. Humor was a key factor, and successfully kept the novel from drowning in a sea of science. For fear of crossing the "spoiler" line, I'll leave it there (and not mention the explicit, flying spaghetti-monster sex scene). Thanks for the review, Guy!


----------



## Vin (Sep 30, 2015)

Guy Rowland said:


> *The Martian*
> 
> Well what an unexpected hoot. The Ridley Scott of Thelma and Louise, not Alien or - thankfully - Prometheus is behind the lens here. All character, wit and levity it turns out to be, giving me - oh yes - that old fashioned blockbuster I crave, like it's 1991 again. A compelling idea that takes itself just seriously enough to engage, but not too seriously so as we can't all have a lot of fun on the way. Terrific to hear adult laughter - frequently - in the screening of a film like this. Oh, and in this science space expedition, the scientists aren't all morons, which is a major step in the right direction after Prometheus. A bit long perhaps, but always enjoyable.



Awesome, seeing it this weekend.

Review of a film I watched last night...

*Beyond the Black Rainbow*

What the f**k.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Oct 2, 2015)

Watched 8 1/2 on Sky Arts last night. Hadn't seen it for years. Great film.


----------



## synthpunk (Oct 6, 2015)

Anyone seen The Martian ? Harry G.W. score sounds interesting.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Oct 6, 2015)

aesthete said:


> Anyone seen The Martian ? Harry G.W. score sounds interesting.



Scroll up, scroll up


----------



## Kralc (Oct 6, 2015)

choc0thrax said:


> *Inside Out*
> 
> 8.5/10
> 
> Really good and creative. One of the more adult Pixar films. Quite well structured and _Bing Bong's choice to jump off the wagon got me._


No question there. Swear to god, I was on the verge of tears. Over an imaginary clown.

Everything about it seemed nicely contained and tight, there wasn't anything that was superfluous. And seeing as we're a score forum, I really liked Michael Giacchino's work.


----------



## cc64 (Oct 6, 2015)

I stumbled onto Grudge Match late last night, ultra-formulaic type of movie but i had a lot of good laughs. Made me nostalgic of the feel-good comedies of the 80's/'90s i guess. You guys might think i'm a moron but it was actually the 2nd time i saw that movie


----------



## sleepy hollow (Oct 13, 2015)

Quick reviews from the last few weeks:

*Argon
*
8/10 - Believe it or not, Ben Affleck seems to be interested in acting and directing. Who would've thought?

*The Iron Lady
*
4/10 - Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher. Fantastic! No idea what the movie was about, though.

*Interstellar
*
9/10 - Cool organ flick by Hans. I've always been interested in physics. Some parts were way over my head.

*Up In The Air
*
9/10 - Real in actors in a real film. No explosions. Very good.

*10.000 BC
*
lol

*All Is Lost
*
9/10 - Redford is killing it. You might get lost too, if you're watching closely.


----------



## synthpunk (Oct 19, 2015)

The Revenant Looks Intense


----------



## Baron Greuner (Oct 20, 2015)

Caught White Heat the other night. Very good.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Oct 20, 2015)

sleepy hollow said:


> *Up In The Air
> *
> 9/10 - Real in actors in a real film. No explosions. Very good.



Love that film. Repeat views very well too.


----------



## patrick76 (Oct 25, 2015)

*Crimson Peak*

If plot holes and cliches are what you are looking for in a film, well, then this one is for you! Everyone says that this film is visually stunning. IMO it looks fine, but not stunning. This movie is not Pan's Labyrinth or Hellboy, which I think are much bettor efforts on Guillermo del Toro's part. Disappointing. As for the professional film critics that gave this work a good review.... I guess plot doesn't really matter at all... One line from the film is "Beware the Crimson Peak". That is actually really good advice!


----------

