Sad to hear what happened to Anton Yelchin. What a tragic waste. The stuff I saw him in, he always seemed pretty talented, but I never saw him get the chance to star in a big role.
If you've never seen it, you might check out 2005's Fierce People. It's an interesting little indie film that I was introduced to a few years ago.
The movie, set sometime during the 70s/80s, concerns a fairly normal teenager (played by Yelchin himself) who just-so happens to be the illegitimate son of a famous anthropologist, who he's never met but is open to meeting him. While he's considering spending the summer with his dad doing fieldwork in the Amazon, he instead ends up following his immature, coke-addicted mother (excellently played by Diane Lane more as an irresponsible older sister than a real mom) to her own work as a live-in nurse (or, possibly, "nurse") for an insanely wealthy WASP type (Donald Sutherland). Sutherland, himself a bit of a rogue and a misfit in his class, takes Yelchin under his wing, and introduces him to the strange and esoteric world of the East Coast Old-Money set. Yelchin decides to make the best of both worlds, approaching the upper-upper class as a tribe to be documented, writing letters to his dad as a kind of ethnographic document. There's also important supporting characters played by Kristin Stewart (bear with me, here) and a very young-looking Chris Evans.
It would be difficult to tell much more without spoiling the film, so I'll leave it at that for now. Suffice to say that the new circles he's moving in, despite their ultra-civilized exterior, prove to have their own kind of savagery lurking under all the navy blazers and cultivated accents. In its own way, I would go as far as to say that, at times, it's the most disturbing and upsetting movie that I've ever seen (consider this a trigger warning, I guess), depicting some things fully and realistically that other films would have discreetly cut away from. I've only seen it once, and I do not foresee that changing in the future.
But for all that - and an ending that feels like the other 5/6s of the movie deserved better, although I can't think of how I would have improved - it's definitely worth watching. There's some interesting stuff going on on a metatextual level, both in the epistolary thing that Yelchin and his (silent) dad have going on, and the way that the film blends its own fairly traditional dramatic storytelling with 60's-style voice-of-God anthropological documentaries (as in, an authoritative gentleman saying sentences like: "Horticultural farming among the Nuzumbi tribe is based around the cultivation of plaintains and coconuts using handmade tools..." and what have you; the older among us, I'm sure, are familiar with the type).
If nothing else, check it out for seeing Yelchin putting in a good performance very early in his career, surrounded both by old pros and people who would go on to bigger things. Such a damned shame.
EDIT: Looking at the film's entry on wikipedia, apparently the cool kids did not like this movie (it has a pretty bad RT rating). I am open to the possibility that I have poor taste, and it is admittedly flawed (especially, as mentioned, in the ending), but I don't think it's as bad as all that.
Man Anton Yelchin was really young. And really good - charismatic as all heck and I loved the wide eyed enthusiasm he brought to Star Trek and Charlie Bartlett.
Man Anton Yelchin was really young. And really good - charismatic as all heck and I loved the wide eyed enthusiasm he brought to Star Trek and Charlie Bartlett.
Man Anton Yelchin was really young. And really good - charismatic as all heck and I loved the wide eyed enthusiasm he brought to Star Trek and Charlie Bartlett.
He was killed by a Jeep Cherokee which apparently had recalled some of their jeeps for a rolling issue, I hope it wasn't his model and he wasn't up on getting that done, otherwise super tragic.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Has there been any discussion here on Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives? I watched it this weekend and liked it quite a bit for its blend of the mundane and the fantastic - I don't think I've seen it done in this particular way before - and for some of the scenes that could come across as willfully obscure but that nevertheless feel perfectly at home in the film. Does anyone know the director's other films? How do they compare?
Edit: Also, the last film I saw at the cinema was Green Room, in which Anton Yelchin was one of the leads. I don't think I've seen him in that much beyond this, Star Trek and that Terminator film, but he always came across as a sweet, likeable guy. What a shitty way to go.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Well I mean both of those are 70% right? sounds like they scored them fairly similarly.
If two critics disagree, and one of them is av club, I always side with the other one. I enjoy their reviews, and they sometimes have good points, but I often find their opinions pretty lolwhut.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I still think the AV Club has interesting things to bring to the table, but over the last year or so their reviews have sometimes focused on one aspect to the exclusion of anything else. They'd make for better essays along the lines of "Gender/race/xyz in Transformers 5" than reviews. (And, truth to tell, their essays on "xyz in abc" too often are big on ideas and concepts but lacking in actual arguments.)
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
+1
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
AV Club can't be trusted. Gave London Has Fallen an F, gave Transporter Refueled a B-, gave Lost River a C-, none of those reviews make sense.
Hmm, Rogerebert.com gave Central Intelligence three-and-a-half stars and said it was a buddy movie "in the tradition of Abbot and Costello" but AV Club gave it a C-.
I guess I should wait for more reviews.
I saw it Friday night. It was HILARIOUS. My only complaint is that some of the CGI at the beginning was atrocious.
The Rock walks the line between creepy and adorable and I think it works very well.
AVClub has a habit of giving truly excellent TV shows low ratings for not meeting their own highest standards even when they are beating the competition about the head and neck, its how you have new simpsons episodes that are higher rated than some rick and morty episodes
Or sometimes a reviewer clearly just doesn't "get" what they're watching, I'm glad their reviewer for the final season of Person of Interest was actually into the show
AVClub has a habit of giving truly excellent TV shows low ratings for not meeting their own highest standards even when they are beating the competition about the head and neck, its how you have new simpsons episodes that are higher rated than some rick and morty episodes
Or sometimes a reviewer clearly just doesn't "get" what they're watching, I'm glad their reviewer for the final season of Person of Interest was actually into the show
Yeah their tv reviewers would sometimes rate a show versus itself instead of just in general. Or worse, they'd rate a show based on what they personally would do.
Though I can't hate too much their crazy ex girlfriend review got me to watch that show.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
If you've never seen it, you might check out 2005's Fierce People. It's an interesting little indie film that I was introduced to a few years ago.
The movie, set sometime during the 70s/80s, concerns a fairly normal teenager (played by Yelchin himself) who just-so happens to be the illegitimate son of a famous anthropologist, who he's never met but is open to meeting him. While he's considering spending the summer with his dad doing fieldwork in the Amazon, he instead ends up following his immature, coke-addicted mother (excellently played by Diane Lane more as an irresponsible older sister than a real mom) to her own work as a live-in nurse (or, possibly, "nurse") for an insanely wealthy WASP type (Donald Sutherland). Sutherland, himself a bit of a rogue and a misfit in his class, takes Yelchin under his wing, and introduces him to the strange and esoteric world of the East Coast Old-Money set. Yelchin decides to make the best of both worlds, approaching the upper-upper class as a tribe to be documented, writing letters to his dad as a kind of ethnographic document. There's also important supporting characters played by Kristin Stewart (bear with me, here) and a very young-looking Chris Evans.
It would be difficult to tell much more without spoiling the film, so I'll leave it at that for now. Suffice to say that the new circles he's moving in, despite their ultra-civilized exterior, prove to have their own kind of savagery lurking under all the navy blazers and cultivated accents. In its own way, I would go as far as to say that, at times, it's the most disturbing and upsetting movie that I've ever seen (consider this a trigger warning, I guess), depicting some things fully and realistically that other films would have discreetly cut away from. I've only seen it once, and I do not foresee that changing in the future.
But for all that - and an ending that feels like the other 5/6s of the movie deserved better, although I can't think of how I would have improved - it's definitely worth watching. There's some interesting stuff going on on a metatextual level, both in the epistolary thing that Yelchin and his (silent) dad have going on, and the way that the film blends its own fairly traditional dramatic storytelling with 60's-style voice-of-God anthropological documentaries (as in, an authoritative gentleman saying sentences like: "Horticultural farming among the Nuzumbi tribe is based around the cultivation of plaintains and coconuts using handmade tools..." and what have you; the older among us, I'm sure, are familiar with the type).
If nothing else, check it out for seeing Yelchin putting in a good performance very early in his career, surrounded both by old pros and people who would go on to bigger things. Such a damned shame.
EDIT: Looking at the film's entry on wikipedia, apparently the cool kids did not like this movie (it has a pretty bad RT rating). I am open to the possibility that I have poor taste, and it is admittedly flawed (especially, as mentioned, in the ending), but I don't think it's as bad as all that.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
That's who he was?!
Fuck. I hope it was quick.
Dude... it was horrific.
It wasn't quick.
Shit.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Edit: Also, the last film I saw at the cinema was Green Room, in which Anton Yelchin was one of the leads. I don't think I've seen him in that much beyond this, Star Trek and that Terminator film, but he always came across as a sweet, likeable guy. What a shitty way to go.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
If two critics disagree, and one of them is av club, I always side with the other one. I enjoy their reviews, and they sometimes have good points, but I often find their opinions pretty lolwhut.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
They are Composite when the world needs HDMI
Now I"m curious why they gave LHW the worse marks. lol
The Rock walks the line between creepy and adorable and I think it works very well.
Or sometimes a reviewer clearly just doesn't "get" what they're watching, I'm glad their reviewer for the final season of Person of Interest was actually into the show
Yeah their tv reviewers would sometimes rate a show versus itself instead of just in general. Or worse, they'd rate a show based on what they personally would do.
Though I can't hate too much their crazy ex girlfriend review got me to watch that show.
pleasepaypreacher.net