Amph What was the last movie you saw?

Interstellar. Despite the wonky science, Matt Damon's character, and the weirdness of the tesseract sequence, not that bad at all. The visuals were spectacular and Hans Zimmer score was hauntingly beautiful. It definitely warrants a second viewing.

 

I can sympathize. Matt Damon's character wasn't written as well as the other characters. I loved the movie overall, however. Couldn't agree more, Darth I.

 

I rewatched it somewhat recently myself and felt that it has some really crippling problems. The love story is almost creepy. Peter Parker goes off as Norman Bate-ish

Anywho, I have a lot to catch up on...

'The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies',

As a regular movie watched for the enjoyment of rich narrative and complex characters 'BOTFA' is a total disaster. As an adaptation of Tolkien 'BOTFA' is a sin. For Peter Jackson battle scenes with his decapitation fetish brought ought to the extreme 'BOTFA' will leave a permanent grin on your face. I've already written a pretty in depth review. At best this is an entertaining bad movie with some glimpses of real characters and acting fighting through the muck and silliness.

'The Imitation Game' (Review from Imdb below)

I must admit that upon hearing of this film's existence and who was slated to play Alan Turing that a sort of heavy sigh came to me. I thought this was going to be no more than Oscar bait tripe that plagues the theaters every November. 'The Imitation Game' though really delivers as does it's star the controversial polarizing Benedict Cumberbatch. This movie is multi-faceted and greatly respects Alan Turing. It doesn't try to needlessly or condescendingly canonize him for the sake of cheap dramatic effect. This movie realizes that Turing was brilliant but also very human. How refreshing is that when films like 'The Theory of Everything' come out the same year? The movie isn't just about Turing the man however, it's about Alan Turing's work. This may be the most thrilling aspect of the film.

Benedict Cumberbatch has received both love and hate. It can be argued that he merely plays the same type of role, mirrors of his 'Sherlock'. On paper the genius Alan Turing may seem more of the same. He's not. This performance is essential in assessing Cumberbatch as an actor because I think it is so similar to the Cumberbatch 'type' and yet it's worlds away. Cumberbatch's Turing has all the intelligence of 'Sherlock' but none of the self- confidence, none of the edge. This is Cumberbatch portraying someone who is very vulnerable who has to try all the harder to get that edge out. Cumberbatch oozes charisma in his other projects and in his interviews and off screen persona. His Turing lacks all of that. It makes the triumphs and tragedies of this story all the more personal and painful. The story isn't only about Turing's homosexuality and the grave injustice done upon him. It serves as a central part of the character but it is not the only part. Cumberbatch and writer Graham Moore create a character that is so likable and real because he has such intelligence and power but is so alien and afraid.

Turing's work is the focus of this film and it's exploration is by far the best thing about it. I know that might sound odd but I admire this movie more as a first rate war thriller than as a biographical study of Alan Turing. Taking Alan Turing and his work in cryptanalysis and mathematics and translating them into a narrative is a tall order. What Director Morten Tyldum and Graham Moore do is add such incredible stakes to the whole thing. It is stressed how important everything is and the lives that are at stake. We feel as if everything is life or death and that this code breaking is just as important to the war effort as storming the beaches. Creating that sort of presence with a film that takes place largely in confined rooms is not easy. It takes great writing, directing and acting to do this. The film is tense and thrilling.

This film makes Alan Turing assessable and real to an audience. He isn't some super human or a label. He's an intelligent human being who used his intellect for good in war time. This approach respects Turing's memory and legacy and gives the audience a look at a fascinating historical figure in a way that is exciting. Highly recommended.

'The Phantom of the Opera'(1989)

This adaptation stars Robert Englund in the title role and embraces the horror of the story to the fullest. There's some brilliant stuff in this. Englund surprisingly plays up the romance of the part. He's a very good Phantom in the sense that I think he really understands the character. He has a danger to him and isn't just a giant misunderstood pussycat.

The movie's greatest achievement is that it does a really nice job mixing gothic horror with the kind of extreme special effects slasher horror of the 80's. I think this could have been one of the best 80's horror films if it didn't play it too close to what I imagine the target demographic wanted. The Phantom unmasked looks just like Freddy which is such a disappointment. There are also slashing scenes which are so boring. I wouldn't necessarily have minded them as much if they had done new things but alas it's pretty conventional in that regard.

It's a pretty decent horror film. Nothing spectacular but it has it's moments. At the very least it's a 'Phantom' that isn't afraid to be a horror film.

 

Hmmm, I never got that vibe. I definitely think Tobey makes Peter come across a bit more pathetic than sympathetic at times, and MJ's whirlwind romance with JJJ's son feels contrived and extremely thin, but otherwise I think the love story--which is the heart and soul of the movie--works pretty well, and I do think that Tobey and Kirsten have good chemistry. S-M:3 on the other hand...

My only really problem with S-M:2 is James Franco. Turning Harry into a big talking business mogul seems tailor made for him, but I found his performance to be a little off in this one. He's okay when he's doing dark and brooding, but when he's asked to go Trump, he goes thump instead IMO. But I was otherwise pleased by how well it held up for me.

The Avengers (2012) - (6th viewing) Not really much to say that hasn't already been said. It may not match Nolan's Batman saga "artistically", but for sheer entertainment I don't think any film outside of the original Star Wars trilogy or Raiders of the Lost Ark can touch it for me. Even after so many viewings I still laughed, got goose bumps and lumps in my throat and I was on the edge of my seat the whole time. I flat-out love this movie. - 10/10

 

John Wick

 

Howard the Duck. Still a cute film.

 

double post

 

My wife dragged me to Fifty Shades of Grey

 

I'm sorry, you have my condolences

 

I'm going to see it tomorrow. I got dragged to the last one and ended up thoroughly enjoying it. The reviews have been really strong this time. Definitely looking forward to it.

Interstellar (2014) - Wheeew! There's just no economical way to review this movie and do it justice. I could write paragraphs about what I loved, and just as many about what I didn't. The constant tug of war between these aspects kept me from enjoying the film, but I still believe it's worth watching, even re-watching. Tough to rate this one, but I'll settle for a... - 6/10

- I've seen Zimmer's score praised quite a bit around the web, but I found it an odd fit and kept waiting for Dracula, the Phantom of the Opera or, best case scenario, Morticia Addams to show up. The latter might've bumped my score up to a 7/10.

 

That's a really interesting movie. I rarely talk to anyone that's actually seen it. I think I agree with you pretty well across the board. It's interesting in the way it attempts to marry the moodier, gothic elements of the story with the eighties slasher aesthetics. I think it's an interesting chance for Englund to stretch a little and he's good in the movie, though, as you say, the movie doesn't let him stretch as far as you might initially think it's going to. It's basically what you said, I guess, a movie that had the chance to be more interesting than it is; but it's still interesting. I remember liking the music a lot. And the "unmasking" scene is a treat.

 

The 1927 one. It didn't blow me away either except for the fact that it is a big part of film history imo

 

but it's real pretty

 

There's something about traveling through a wormhole, plotwise, that induces psychosis in script writers. Dr. Bowman travels through a wormhole and ends up in somebody's badly decorated parlor. The USS Cygnus survivors pass through an absurdly kitschy hell and heaven. Matthew McConaughey gets lost in M.C. Escher's library. Just because Clarke and Kubrick could get away with it doesn't mean that everyone who makes a sci fi movie from now until the end of time should keep doing it over and over again like it was a law of physics that black holes are gateways to Someplace Stupid.

This movie functions as an awful prank on people who pay to see it, one of those "but the visuals are great!" experiences that makes me wonder whether it should have been distributed without any audio tracks. Movie makers who are "great at visuals" should have the balls to make silent movies. Nolan is the perfect man for the job of making modern silent cinema. I'd have liked Interstellar a whole lot more if I had no idea what anyone was saying. Talking, more than anything except the Escher library, ruined this movie.

"Murf! Murf! It's not about hugging trees. It's not about not hugging trees either, Murf! It's about finding that balance where going back in times helps yourself, but also helps more than yourself. Murf! Murf!"

 

Inception.

 

I liked Interstellar save for the bass farts and muddled ending. More like Interstoner.

 

It's one of those movies where you can tell everyone involved is trying very hard to make it a success, but it's just not happening.

 

One of the things I admire about Nolan is that he always seems to be reaching for the highest rung. In this case his grasp was just a bit tenuous.

Mission: Impossible III (2006) - This was the only one of the (so far) four M:I films that I hadn't seen. To be honest this franchise has never really moved the needle for me. The biggest problem is that Ethan Hunt hasn't been fleshed out. He doesn't have a specific personality or set of traits. No catchphrases or history. He's just very generic. Change the name and title these films could just be any Tom Cruise action flick. Now each film certainly has its own distinct style, thanks largely to landing a rather impressive list of auteur directors like Brian De Palma and John Woo. Here's it's JJ Abrams in his first feature as director. The action is fast and stylish, but despite the belabored attempts to give Hunt some dimension, it lacks the propulsive narrative to give any of it the necessary weight. - 6/10

- Phillip Seymour Hoffman's Owen Davian isn't given enough screen time or background to make him the threat he needed to be, which is a shame because Hoffman eschews hamming it up in favor of a genuine cold menace that could've been something special with better material.

- Maggie Q in that red dress. Mercy.

- I now feel compelled to revisit the other three M:I movies. I only recall liking the original, and that one only moderately.

 

Ferris Bueller's Day Off

 

Arabesque.

A fun, almost Bond type adventure/spy movie. Sometimes stupid, but fun.

Lots of nice cars, including a Phantom IV and some hot Mercedes driven by Sophia Loren.

I've never really had a crush on Sophia Loren, but after watching this, I can see why she has a lot of fans, there's a lot of fanservice.

 

ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST: Been about three years since I've watched it. Still a Masterpiece.

 

I had Once Upon a Time in the West in my queue for a while, but I'm slow to watch westerns.

I just watched The Other Womanand Sex Tape, adding them to my queue after watching B-roll footage of them on YouTube. I preferred the former but both weren't awesome. It's been a while since I've watched one of those bouncy silly slapstick comedies where everything is bright, the music is chipper, all the cars are new and shiny, the houses are perfect like right out of home improvement shows or Pinterest pins, the offices where they work have state-of-the-art technology and the walls are all glass, people are inexplicably wealthy, the clinical terms of private parts are mentioned in punchlines, there's a funny crazy animal, some kind of cameo by a veteran actor or someone not usually in films like this along with gimmick casting, and there's something being kept a secret until it gets revealed to someone and hilarity ensues.

 

The Imitation Game - Wow, phenomenal movie.

 

Womb (2010), which has some really beautiful, painting-like imagery. Found it odd that Matt Smith showed more skin than Eva Green, though.

 

I guess Kubrick's style kinda failed him in that final sequence of 2001 since must folks had no idea what the **** was going on. The companion novel did a better job explaining the purpose if the Stargate and Bowman's ultimate destination. But since both sequences have no dialogue that would otherwise provide much needed exposition, I guess the end result (utter confusion) would still have been the same.

That said, don't badmouth 2001 again, you heathen.

Granted, the similar sequence in The Black Hole was just awful and can't help but wonder if it somehow inspired the creators of Event Horizon.

As for Interstellar, I won't deny that the science was bad at times (ok, going through the wormhole that leads into another galaxy has no time dilation relativistic effects...but landing on planets near a black hole our surfing said black hole's event horizon does? Got it). But the tesseract sequence was definitely the weakest part as far as I'm concerned. Nolan needed his Stargate sequence and he gave us...the fifth dimensional interior of a bookcase meant to give Mr. Alright Alright Alright a way to phone home back in time and save humanity. Uh huh. So somehow, hundreds or thousands of years in the future, the highly evolved children of mankind created both a wormhole that lead to their new home and seeded a singularity with a device that world ensure the sequence of events that lead mankind to their new home? If they were so advanced and did indeed have the means to manipulate time, space and gravity in such a way...why go through all the trouble of making such a contrived -and perhaps even cruel - excuse of a temporal loop and simply provide a more efficient solution? Yeah, I know, it's a stupid piece of sf, but in the days since I watched it the stupidity of the sequence has grown exponentially.