Wow, The Caller ended up being hugely disappointing. So many ways to fuck up a person's life
by messing with his or her past, but all that happens are a few simple deaths and the main character getting some burn scars.
I think the writer must've had a hard time figuring out how to get jump scares out of a story where the protagonist and antagonist never meet face to face, which is why it devolves into a slasher at the end.
I like how they wrapped up the subplot about the abusive ex, though.
Since I decided paying $18.50 for a movie wasnt a travesty and saw the first 9 minutes of Star Trek, I think so far it looks good but some of the fan nods are kinda...eh. Im still probably going to see it in IMAX 3D though so.
And to make this post slightly less irrelevant: I watched Life of Pi yesterday. Can't say I'm a big fan of the film as a whole, but at the same time I would blame the original novel for all the film's faults. Ang Lee's adaptation is probably the best you can make of the novel - and visually, it's quite stunning. There was one scene where the CGI felt entirely off, pretty much at the end where the tiger's walking down the beach, but other than that it's a great-looking film.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I just have no idea what the appeal of Film Hulk is on these forums, the dude's giving out pretty basic analysis about things that better writers have already written - without the annoying-as-fuck writing style. Every article of his that I've seen linked are fairly broad, shallow critiques of complex topics, where he's free to unload on various folks' lack of skills from safely behind his anonymous persona and armed with a few semesters of film school. There's such better stuff out there.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I just have no idea what the appeal of Film Hulk is on these forums, the dude's giving out pretty basic analysis about things that better writers have already written - without the annoying-as-fuck writing style. Every article of his that I've seen linked are fairly broad, shallow critiques of complex topics, where he's free to unload on various folks' lack of skills from safely behind his anonymous persona and armed with a few semesters of film school. There's such better stuff out there.
Link it, please! Seriously. There's a dearth of passing around real, interesting criticism in these threads.
Edit: Also, I unload on various folks' lack of skills, have an anonymous persona, and finished film school. What does that make me?
Chigurh often mirrors his victims before he kills them. They face him and they face their own mortality, eye-to-eye. He often violates their space before he violates their flesh, and it's deeply disturbing: the handcuffs around the neck, the tube to the head of the motorist, his shadow darkening the hall space under Llewelyn's door, feet on the bed in the hotel room of his nemesis Carson Wells (Woody Harrelson). Wells is dead as soon as Chigurh looks away from him, at the ringing phone, where the man he's really stalking is on the other end of the line.
The sense of intimate incursion is especially unsettling when he enters the trailer of Llewelyn and Carla Jean. We've been here before, the night Llewelyn comes home from his hunt, seen him take a beer out of the refrigerator and plop down on the couch (shot head-on) next to Carla Jean. It's a funny, "Raising Arizona" kind of domestic image. But when Chigurh enters this mobile home in the daylight, after they've fled, we watch him take a bottle of milk from the fridge and sit down in the center of the couch from nearly the same camera angles. He's insinuating himself into their head-space. He drinks their milk, and it's obscene. He may as well be drinking their blood. (Later, a cat drinking a puddle of spilled milk will provide all the visual information we need to know that there's a corpse in a pool of blood behind a hotel counter. And it's more upsetting than seeing the gory details.) Moments after Chigurh has disappeared, Sheriff Bell and Deputy Wendell arrive to inspect the scene, but this time the angles are different. We're just seeing what they see, and nothing more.
David Bordwell, writer of movie textbooks, has his own blog, with lots of good articles. Especially check out the list of "Readers Favorite Entries" on the right sidebar:
There's Clothes on Film, which is, well, about clothes on film. Quality and type of articles varies pretty widely, but it's very informative.
Carefully selected attire is an essential part of the world of Inception. Costume designer Jeffery Kurland (for he designed all the suits in the film) has utilised fabrics of varying weight and colour, plus a blending of classic and modernistic styles to establish setting and differentiate protagonists in slight but distinguishable ways.
Note Michael Caine’s outfit of tweed jacket and Nehru collar shirt with popper buttons. As Miles, a university professor who may be vital, Caine’s costume subtly informs proceedings with a merging of old and new (likewise echoing his and Cobb’s relationship). It is not implicitly stated that Inception is set in the future, however Miles’ clothing is not quite ‘now’, although, paradoxically, it could be. In other words there is a suggestion that the story could take place in the near future, or even that Miles’ appearance is actually part of Cobb’s amalgamated dream state. Or more radically Miles could just be an older gentlemen who dresses a little kookily. Point being, there are no absolutes in Inception. And with this in mind don’t neglect to register what Cobb’s children are wearing either…
And there's Soundworks, which has lots of cool little featurettes about sound design
EDIT: Also if you want forums, there's Roger Deakins homepage's forum, or cinematography.com, both of which have a fair share of professionals posting and answering questions.
Kana on
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
@Kana: I'm not a big fan of Jim Emerson (yet), mainly because nothing that I've read of it grabs me. What I like a lot about Film Crit Hulk is that the guy so obviously loves film, and he loves having an emotional reaction to film. The articles I've read by Emerson all felt rather anodyne; I have no problem with more academic criticism (hey, I spent several years studying and then teaching literary criticism, so I must get *something* out of it), but I've always found that the sort of criticism most engaging that also communicates excitement and passion for a medium.
Based on the Film Crit Hulk posts that I've enjoyed most, I definitely don't get your "broad, shallow critiques of complex topics". I'd agree that his topics aren't necessarily deep, but that in itself doesn't yet make his writing shallow. I'd say that Hulk's critique of Hooper's use of the camera is spot-on, addressing the issue engagingly and intelligently. Same for his thoughts on plot holes. I definitely agree that his shtik can be annoying, though.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Paul Verhoeven is one of those directors that doesn't do anything for me. Admittedly, I haven't seen all that many of his films, but Total Recall, Starship Troopers, Basic Instinct... I came away from all of them thinking that they were cheesy, B-movie trash. With more wit and subtext than your usual B-movie cheese, but also less clever than Verhoeven's defenders seem to think. Then again, perhaps I'm too much of a bourgeois prude.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Especially Starship Troopers does, and Basic Instinct was treated (at least by some critics) as something beyond the trashy sex thriller it was. Something more transgressive and meaningful.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Did Disney at least email Paul Verhoeven to see if he wanted a piece of the Star Wars pie?
I don't think ultra violence and tits are really what Star Wars needs.
Would have helped the prequels.
No it wouldn't have
Verhoeven made Robocop, Starship Troopers, and Showgirls. Excellence, Great, and the mother of all horrible guilty pleasures that don't require an internet connection.
Give the man a shot. Let him at least direct one of the TV episodes.
There are several directors I'd rather take on anything star wars before I'd want Verhoven. That's such a random choice. Hell I'd take Fincher over him and Star Wars is so outside of Finchers wheelhouse he would probably be awful with it.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Verhoeven is probably not nearly so awesome as his more vocal supporters might claim, but the dude can make a fun movie. Starship Troopers and Total Recall were both cheesy premises with campy production values, but they both had an energy and a self-awareness that made them a joy to watch. Nobody in those movies thinks they're making high art, but you can tell they're all having fun with it, and the films contain some fun action pieces and characters that you can comfortably root for.
Robocop was just a plain ol great movie, which may have been a single spark of brilliance or just dumb luck, but whatever.
Showgirls was awful and had no redeeming qualities unless you just really needed to fill in that space on your Naked Saved By the Bell Alumni Bingo card.
ElJeffe on
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.
She was also ugly naked, something about her body just didn't look good when the clothes came off. Might have been the pool sex with Kyle Mclaughlan, I don't know, I'm not a sexpert.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
...the films contain ... characters that you can comfortably root for.
That may be part of why I haven't really enjoyed any Verhoeven films - I didn't care one bit about any of the characters. There's something to their campiness that means I don't buy into any of the characters, and for me that kills most films dead.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
A local theater showed the Rifftrax of "Manos: Hands of Fate" last night.
Let's all take a moment to think that in this era of really flashy terrible movies, there were once movies that were incredibly awful while looking absolutely awful as well.
GNU Terry Pratchett
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
I never get the point of showing rifttrax in a theater. I mean who would want to pay those prices to be around the kind of people that want to watch rifttrax in a theater!
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Verhoeven is under-rated. Movies like Robocop and Starship Troopers are fantastic.
Ehh, having watched Starship Troopers again recently (after an extended discussion in this thread), it really isn't that fantastic.
It's about 15 minutes of social commentary, mixed with 30 minutes of a CW drama, and 60 minutes of senseless violence.
You forgot nudity.
I should really rewatch Starship Troopers, I haven't seen it in years. I did see the third one though and not even seeing the boobs of that lady from NipTuck could save it. It was beyond terrible.
Watched the movie equivalent of Majora's Mask. No not Groundhog Day, the other one. Melancholia. It's good!
The movie is divided into two parts, the second part is about an imminent planetary collision and that part is beautiful and nightmarish. The first part is about a wedding gone horribly wrong, and I dunno, it seemed a little over the top? I mean weddings are extra special occasions where people try to be on their best behavior, so even a little drizzle of dysfunction would have a big impact, but then this wedding features a torrential downpour and it felt like too much. The mother of the bride stands up to give this long nasty speech and I'm like, wouldn't it be better if instead the mother was mostly polite but said one subtly nasty thing? The part where the bride lets the groom know that she doesn't want to have sex right now has this nice amount of impact, but then Lars Von Trier turns the dysfunction knob up another twenty-seven notches and
has the bride go and have sex with someone else on the lawn and...I dunno.
I'll have I watch the movie again though I'm sure things went over my head.
I like the part where the rich brother-in-law who has paid for everything confronts the bride about her behavior and he's like "do you know how much this wedding cost?" and then later the bride sees some abstract art books on display in the library and she's like grr stupid rich person art and she replaces the books with books on representational art.
I also like the observation that sometimes, paradoxically, some things are easier for people who struggle with mental illness. As someone with anxiety problems this lines up with my experience. To Justine, the bride, the end of the world is no big deal because she has depression and it's felt like the end of the world for a long time.
Just got back from Hansel and Gretl it was like a mid-evil version of supernatural just replace sam with a hot chick and dean with Jeremy Renner. So improvements in both areas.
Much like Last Stand last week, what you see is what you get here and what you get is awesome if thats what you want.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I rented Taken 2 tonight. Boy was that a mistake. It was bad. Very very bad. And I'm a big fan of the first Taken.
Liam Neeson, bless his heart, does the best he can with what's here. He tries very hard to make something out of nothing with this incredibly bland script. Everyone else in the film, such as the ex-wife, the daughter who's supposedly like 16 but is very obviously thirty, and the forgettable villain, suck. Things happen in this movie just because. There are incredible leaps in logic on occasion. Lens flares abound for some reason. And the fight scenes, which I remember being pretty good in the first film, are absolutely terrible. The jump-cutting is ridiculous. The whole film reeks of pointlessness. I would avoid it at all costs.
Saw MIB3. It was uhh better than 2. Which is not saying much, 2 was just horrible. It makes me sad that the movie makers clearly don't understand their own franchise at all. Just basic points, like K and J were set up to have completely different working styles in the first movie. So of course the natural course of things would be to make J just a younger copy of K over time...
The movie started filming without having the full script and it SHOWS. Like really badly. Things that you think are surely going to be meaningful aren't at all (O) and the big secret is dumb and hurts the series over all.
The obvious guess from the start is that J will die saving K in the past. This is why K is sad, he knows that this will happen, but can't tell J not to come because then the Earth is fucked. He hasn't told anyone else this either, he made up some story when they asked. However, with some clever use of time travel, J subverts this outcome and things slightly change in the future to accommodate this new and better outcome (BttF in other words).
This is what a competent script would have done. In this movie, K is sad because J's miraculously BLACK COLONEL DAD in charge of the moon launch in the 1960s (LOL) died randomly and then K had to take care of J, except he didn't he just abandoned him instantly so who cares.
Other huge wasted opportunities or just points of confusion:
-Why set up the jetpack in order to just skip to the next scene? Shouldn't you have a joke there, movie? And no, I refuse to count the 5th dimensional guy's hypothetical joke, that's stupid.
-Shouldn't the time travel supplying guy have had a call back at the end?
-The villain was just pointless and completely two dimensional. He was bad because he just was? At least Edgar the Bug's berserker button was something interesting, this guy's was just dumb. Where did the girl come from and why was she there and how did she have his weapon monster? If the prison "was built specifically for him", then why did it seem so ill prepared to handle his obvious escape plan of WALKING OUT?
-Why set up MIB '60s racism against aliens (except for K) in exactly one scene, and then ignore it? And why do that at all when it runs counter to the backstory from the first movie?
-Have the writers ever heard of Chekov's gun? You don't set up how backwards the MIB '60s tech is unless it's going to factor into the plot somehow. In fact, it worked just as well as current day tech, in several cases even being a better alternative. What the what? (Yes it's a comedy and it was a joke, but why time travel if the entire thing could play it the EXACT SAME WAY in the present day? What a huge waste.)
-Why was K's behavior so nonsensical in the present day arc?
In the end, we find out he was sad remembering what happens to J's dad
but this runs completely counter to the way he was acting. First resigned, then frightened, then defeated. If he KNEW that the problem would involve time travel, then why did he bother drawing a gun on his door as if the guy was going to come for him? And
the dude died very easily from being shot, so the whole idea of his massive threat was just stupid also.
-How can Earth ban things in an intergalactic fashion? It is NOWHERE NEAR that powerful in this setting. All the good tech is directly borrowed from aliens and MIB is just a fancier version of customs + the diplomatic corps. This would be akin to the humans pre-Mass Effect 1 trying to pass an intergalactic law, except even more laughable.
-The whole scene with the rotating motorcycle things broke MIB's "operate in secret" thing wide open. TOTALLY idiotic. What, did clean up go and neuralize every single driver from rush hour that day?
-Remember how in the first movie "famous or strange person was an alien" was clever? Yeah, this movie did not remember that. Lawl, every model is an alien. Also umm Mick Jagger. Okay, good ones, that's a wrap people. We'll do the 'totally racist Asian bashing except it's not racist because he's an alien except it kinda still is' scene tomorrow.
I caught like 75% of The Beach today and it was just as bad and way better than I remember. That movie is like the 90s personified. And jesus did Leonardo DiCaprio look young in it despite being 26. Dude looked like a 14 year old.
Posts
I think the writer must've had a hard time figuring out how to get jump scares out of a story where the protagonist and antagonist never meet face to face, which is why it devolves into a slasher at the end.
I like how they wrapped up the subplot about the abusive ex, though.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
I'm optomistic for the new Star Trek. I hope to be able to like it without reservations.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
And to make this post slightly less irrelevant: I watched Life of Pi yesterday. Can't say I'm a big fan of the film as a whole, but at the same time I would blame the original novel for all the film's faults. Ang Lee's adaptation is probably the best you can make of the novel - and visually, it's quite stunning. There was one scene where the CGI felt entirely off, pretty much at the end where the tiger's walking down the beach, but other than that it's a great-looking film.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Link it, please! Seriously. There's a dearth of passing around real, interesting criticism in these threads.
Edit: Also, I unload on various folks' lack of skills, have an anonymous persona, and finished film school. What does that make me?
David Bordwell, writer of movie textbooks, has his own blog, with lots of good articles. Especially check out the list of "Readers Favorite Entries" on the right sidebar:
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2012/08/19/nolan-vs-nolan/
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2011/02/14/watching-you-watch-there-will-be-blood/
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2010/09/15/bond-vs-chan-jackie-shows-how-its-done/
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2011/01/30/the-social-network-faces-behind-facebook/
There's Clothes on Film, which is, well, about clothes on film. Quality and type of articles varies pretty widely, but it's very informative.
And there's Soundworks, which has lots of cool little featurettes about sound design
http://soundworkscollection.com/videos/garyhecker
EDIT: Also if you want forums, there's Roger Deakins homepage's forum, or cinematography.com, both of which have a fair share of professionals posting and answering questions.
Based on the Film Crit Hulk posts that I've enjoyed most, I definitely don't get your "broad, shallow critiques of complex topics". I'd agree that his topics aren't necessarily deep, but that in itself doesn't yet make his writing shallow. I'd say that Hulk's critique of Hooper's use of the camera is spot-on, addressing the issue engagingly and intelligently. Same for his thoughts on plot holes. I definitely agree that his shtik can be annoying, though.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Tobe Hooper's Les Miserables would have been something decidedly different than what we got, I reckon.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
I don't think ultra violence and tits are really what Star Wars needs.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Enjolras and the ABC would have faired far better at the barricades had they all been armed with chainsaws.
It's science.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
pleasepaypreacher.net
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Would have helped the prequels.
Verhoeven made Robocop, Starship Troopers, and Showgirls. Excellence, Great, and the mother of all horrible guilty pleasures that don't require an internet connection.
Give the man a shot. Let him at least direct one of the TV episodes.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
pleasepaypreacher.net
pleasepaypreacher.net
Robocop was just a plain ol great movie, which may have been a single spark of brilliance or just dumb luck, but whatever.
Showgirls was awful and had no redeeming qualities unless you just really needed to fill in that space on your Naked Saved By the Bell Alumni Bingo card.
pleasepaypreacher.net
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Ehh, having watched Starship Troopers again recently (after an extended discussion in this thread), it really isn't that fantastic.
It's about 15 minutes of social commentary, mixed with 30 minutes of a CW drama, and 60 minutes of senseless violence.
Let's all take a moment to think that in this era of really flashy terrible movies, there were once movies that were incredibly awful while looking absolutely awful as well.
PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
pleasepaypreacher.net
You forgot nudity.
I should really rewatch Starship Troopers, I haven't seen it in years. I did see the third one though and not even seeing the boobs of that lady from NipTuck could save it. It was beyond terrible.
The movie is divided into two parts, the second part is about an imminent planetary collision and that part is beautiful and nightmarish. The first part is about a wedding gone horribly wrong, and I dunno, it seemed a little over the top? I mean weddings are extra special occasions where people try to be on their best behavior, so even a little drizzle of dysfunction would have a big impact, but then this wedding features a torrential downpour and it felt like too much. The mother of the bride stands up to give this long nasty speech and I'm like, wouldn't it be better if instead the mother was mostly polite but said one subtly nasty thing? The part where the bride lets the groom know that she doesn't want to have sex right now has this nice amount of impact, but then Lars Von Trier turns the dysfunction knob up another twenty-seven notches and
I like the part where the rich brother-in-law who has paid for everything confronts the bride about her behavior and he's like "do you know how much this wedding cost?" and then later the bride sees some abstract art books on display in the library and she's like grr stupid rich person art and she replaces the books with books on representational art.
I also like the observation that sometimes, paradoxically, some things are easier for people who struggle with mental illness. As someone with anxiety problems this lines up with my experience. To Justine, the bride, the end of the world is no big deal because she has depression and it's felt like the end of the world for a long time.
Much like Last Stand last week, what you see is what you get here and what you get is awesome if thats what you want.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Liam Neeson, bless his heart, does the best he can with what's here. He tries very hard to make something out of nothing with this incredibly bland script. Everyone else in the film, such as the ex-wife, the daughter who's supposedly like 16 but is very obviously thirty, and the forgettable villain, suck. Things happen in this movie just because. There are incredible leaps in logic on occasion. Lens flares abound for some reason. And the fight scenes, which I remember being pretty good in the first film, are absolutely terrible. The jump-cutting is ridiculous. The whole film reeks of pointlessness. I would avoid it at all costs.
pleasepaypreacher.net
The movie started filming without having the full script and it SHOWS. Like really badly. Things that you think are surely going to be meaningful aren't at all (O) and the big secret is dumb and hurts the series over all.
This is what a competent script would have done. In this movie, K is sad because J's miraculously BLACK COLONEL DAD in charge of the moon launch in the 1960s (LOL) died randomly and then K had to take care of J, except he didn't he just abandoned him instantly so who cares.
Other huge wasted opportunities or just points of confusion:
-Why set up the jetpack in order to just skip to the next scene? Shouldn't you have a joke there, movie? And no, I refuse to count the 5th dimensional guy's hypothetical joke, that's stupid.
-Shouldn't the time travel supplying guy have had a call back at the end?
-The villain was just pointless and completely two dimensional. He was bad because he just was? At least Edgar the Bug's berserker button was something interesting, this guy's was just dumb. Where did the girl come from and why was she there and how did she have his weapon monster? If the prison "was built specifically for him", then why did it seem so ill prepared to handle his obvious escape plan of WALKING OUT?
-Why set up MIB '60s racism against aliens (except for K) in exactly one scene, and then ignore it? And why do that at all when it runs counter to the backstory from the first movie?
-Have the writers ever heard of Chekov's gun? You don't set up how backwards the MIB '60s tech is unless it's going to factor into the plot somehow. In fact, it worked just as well as current day tech, in several cases even being a better alternative. What the what? (Yes it's a comedy and it was a joke, but why time travel if the entire thing could play it the EXACT SAME WAY in the present day? What a huge waste.)
-Why was K's behavior so nonsensical in the present day arc?
-The whole scene with the rotating motorcycle things broke MIB's "operate in secret" thing wide open. TOTALLY idiotic. What, did clean up go and neuralize every single driver from rush hour that day?
-Remember how in the first movie "famous or strange person was an alien" was clever? Yeah, this movie did not remember that. Lawl, every model is an alien. Also umm Mick Jagger. Okay, good ones, that's a wrap people. We'll do the 'totally racist Asian bashing except it's not racist because he's an alien except it kinda still is' scene tomorrow.
My actual favorite part of The Beach is the beginning, because you could have spun a good story out of the first third or so, but then they didn't.