The reason Cid becomes the Rainmaker, even as said by the director is a "The Chicken and The Egg" scenario. For the movie so dependent on story and the time travel, I feel like the plotholes really come into play because there's no after-effect from the death. And how does that make Old Joe's future happen in the first place when the mother in that first timeline would still be alive? I had a lot of investment with Bruce Willis and JGL, but the shift in the 3rd Act really felt like poor writing, imo.
The reason Cid becomes the Rainmaker, even as said by the director is a "The Chicken and The Egg" scenario. For the movie so dependent on story and the time travel, I feel like the plotholes really come into play because there's no after-effect from the death. And how does that make Old Joe's future happen in the first place when the mother in that first timeline would still be alive? I had a lot of investment with Bruce Willis and JGL, but the shift in the 3rd Act really felt like poor writing, imo.
You were paying attention to the part of the movie that the movie told you not to pay attention to because it doesn't make sense.
1/3 of the way through a triple bill at a local horror film fest. First movie was a Spanish film called Game of Werewolves (Lobos de Arga). It was pretty good. Felt like it was trying to be the Shaun of the Dead of werewolf movies, and while it didn't reach SotD levels of funny, it definitely did not fail to entertain.
If nothing else, i's worth seeing for the practical werewolf effects alone. It's straight-up Wolfman-style "man in wolf suit" stuff for the monsters, and it's cheesy as all hell, but they fucking sell it. Awesome stuff. Definitely recommend a watch.
The next two films are The ABCs of Death and a 30th anniversary screening of Creepshow. Should be a fun night.
The ABCs of Death: some disturbing things, some disturbingly funny things, some pretentious things, mostly cool things. Pretty much what you'd expect from an anthology piece. The filmmakers came from all over the world, too, so it was neat to see such a great variety of international perspectives on the subject.
Perhaps not unexpectedly, the weirdest pieces came from Japan. One was about the fart apocalypse. And how one girl chooses to die via her hot teacher's magnificent gas instead of the bad gas around them. And then they both end up in fart nirvana.
To be fair, I think the same weird director dude made two of the three or four Japanese shorts.
Last film, Creepshow: eh, it was okay. It had awesomely 80's-tastic special effects, which I love, but seeing a much more intense anthology piece right before it probably lessened the impact of some of the segments for me. Favourite story was probably "Something to Tide You Over", which had the best mix of truly unsettling villain (RIP Leslie Nielsen) and cheesy monster make-up. Stephen King's bit in the second segment was endearingly tragic, too.
The Amazing Spiderman had an action scene on a bridge where he catches cars with innocent people in them with his webs. It was like these weren't even trying not to copy the previous Spiderman. The action scenes at the end, where all the people of New York decide to help Spiderman was waaaay too familiar.
Just watched The Iron Giant. That was a great animated film, but a couple of plot points were rather contrived, like the off-switch at the power station for example.
I have always felt like the movie was being exaggerated from Hogarth's POV (hence, Kent Mansley seems more evil and dangerous, there are silly things like the off-switch at the power station, etc.).
I have always felt like the movie was being exaggerated from Hogarth's POV (hence, Kent Mansley seems more evil and dangerous, there are silly things like the off-switch at the power station, etc.).
I like to think that it's a Calvin and Hobbes sort of thing. All the suspension of disbelief or failure thereof aspects are just in Hogarths head (its been years since I saw the film, though, so this might not hold up to criticism.)
I thought the giant off-switch in the Iron Giant was silly when I saw it, but I understood that they did it for the sake of brevity. I know that substations do not work like that at all, but I thought of it as screenplay shorthand to make the process of saving the robot last a few seconds. Also, that is one of my favorite animated movies.
telekinesis was completely unnecessary, and the movie would work better without it.
What? But the movie was... about.... what?
Well...
I agree, because the telekinesis is mostly shoe-horned in and doesn't really have any relevance until they focus on Cid where it's just like, Akira/Chronicle. I think there are SEVERAL flaws within that final act, not just with the time-travel issues but just with the writing and the character switch
Basically the movie comes down to suspension of disbelief. And I'd say there's 75% of people who still retain it throughout the entire movie and love Looper to death. The other 25% do belief it falls apart at the final act, but you really can't talk about it because it's an arc isn't even hinted or shown at all in the trailers.
I saw a couple movies in the past few days. Reposting my thoughts from my Tumblr.
The Master: definitely an interesting film, and very well-made! Not my favourite of the year, but only by virtue of the fact that it didn’t have enough explosions in it. :P
Seriously, my personal tastes out of it, it’s probably the most technically well-made and artistically well-done film I’ve seen that came out this year. I definitely didn’t catch everything to see and read into it on just one pass, which is always a good sign. I’m not sure if I’m interested enough to make that second pass anytime soon, but probably will if the curiosity builds up enough.
It seemed to have a lot of interesting things to say about human nature, psychology, impulse control, vices, intelligence, relationships (friendly, sexual, and otherwise), the need for meaning, and self-direction. And visually there were some interesting things going on with colours and motifs. For example, Frank wears a lot of blue throughout the film, particularly in the first half to 2/3’s, and is associated with a ton of nautical stuff in general, both navy-related and otherwise. In contrast, Dod is associated with a lot of reds and earth tones. I’m not sure yet what that entails, but my guess is that red is a stronger, more powerful colour, while blue in combination with the water motif suggests fluidity/drifting/inability to be tied down.
Anyway, yeah, definitely a good movie. I can see why some wouldn’t go for it so much, though. It’s pretty long, it can get a bit meandering, and the main characters can be hard to like or relate to at times. Go see it if you 1) are curious about cults and other fringe groups centred around a force of personality; 2) would be interested in delving into the psychology of a man with impulse control issues and sexual obsession; or 3) liked any of Paul Thomas Anderson’s past works like There Will Be Blood or Punch-Drunk Love. If none of those things sound particularly up your alley, you would be totally fine if you didn’t see it.
Cloud Atlas: I dug it. Like The Master, I don’t think it’ll be a contender for my favourite of the year, but it really grew on me and my moms as it went on, and it’s so damn ambitious, you practically have to respect it on that ground alone.
It has flaws to be sure, of which being a little too big for its britches is one, but man, you can fault so many movies for doing so many worse things than trying too hard. And for the most part, the film works at being engaging, exciting, (mostly) emotionally involving, and mentally stimulating. It has a little bit of everything that movies as a medium have to offer and then some.
Plus it’s awesome for being one of the more inclusive films made in recent times that I can think of. White, Asian, black, Latino, woman, man, gay, straight, young, old, heck, even a little bit of trans — it’s all represented in some form or another. True, some of the actors are made up to play races other than their own in several instances, but it’s definitely part of the whole “core cast of actors playing multiple roles stretching across time” thing and not a whitewashing thing. In addition to white actors playing Asian, there’s also Asian playing white, Asian playing Latino, and (I think) black playing Asian. So there’s still a healthy mix of diversity, even under the make-up.
And MAN that make-up. I mean, I knew that actors were going to be playing multiple roles, and certain characters you could definitely tell were actors in make-up… but then the credits play at the end and show who played which characters and you’re like “Wait, THAT was so-and-so? And THAT character was a person in make-up too? Whaaaaaaaat? Crazy! o_o” I sense that if nothing else, this film will get rewarded for its makeup, no doubt.
Anyway, it’s hard to describe much more about it in detail, or even more about how I felt in general. All I’ll say is that it’s definitely worth checking out. Even if you end up hating it or thinking that it’s the most pretentious thing you’ve ever seen, it’s an experience worth having, even if just to say you had it.
(Though TBH, if you think something like Cloud Atlas is pretentious, I only have two words: Cremaster Cycle.)
Saw Cloud Atlas last night and it blew my mind. Yes, like Eryn said, it had some flaws, but for whatever reason, the movie just resonated with me and was probably one of the best movies I've seen in the last 5-10 years. This is an incredibly bold, imaginative, and ambitious movie. It's movies like this that make people want to grow up to make more movies.
Saw Cloud Atlas last night and it blew my mind. Yes, like Eryn said, it had some flaws, but for whatever reason, the movie just resonated with me and was probably one of the best movies I've seen in the last 5-10 years. This is an incredibly bold, imaginative, and ambitious movie. It's movies like this that make people want to grow up to make more movies.
Would you say it is the 2001: A Space Odyssey of this generation then? I ask this because that movie made I and hundreds of others to want to make movies (James Cameron for starters) and this kind of movie sounds right up my alley.
Saw Cloud Atlas last night and it blew my mind. Yes, like Eryn said, it had some flaws, but for whatever reason, the movie just resonated with me and was probably one of the best movies I've seen in the last 5-10 years. This is an incredibly bold, imaginative, and ambitious movie. It's movies like this that make people want to grow up to make more movies.
Would you say it is the 2001: A Space Odyssey of this generation then? I ask this because that movie made I and hundreds of others to want to make movies (James Cameron for starters) and this kind of movie sounds right up my alley.
So by that standard Clerks is as good of a movie as 2001: A Space Odyssey?
Saw Cloud Atlas last night and it blew my mind. Yes, like Eryn said, it had some flaws, but for whatever reason, the movie just resonated with me and was probably one of the best movies I've seen in the last 5-10 years. This is an incredibly bold, imaginative, and ambitious movie. It's movies like this that make people want to grow up to make more movies.
Would you say it is the 2001: A Space Odyssey of this generation then? I ask this because that movie made I and hundreds of others to want to make movies (James Cameron for starters) and this kind of movie sounds right up my alley.
So by that standard Clerks is as good of a movie as 2001: A Space Odyssey?
Only by that standard and not through any other modicum of quality.
Saw Moonrise Kingdom last night. It was my first Wes Anderson film, and now I understand why Luke has complained about being ground down by Wes Anderson's style. It was a great movie, though.
I love the style, but if there's a director whose movies could be classed as style over story, it's Wes Anderson. Of the movies of his I've seen, Moonrise Kingdom was by far the best, but then again I've not seen his earlier movies.
I love the style, but if there's a director whose movies could be classed as style over story, it's Wes Anderson. Of the movies of his I've seen, Moonrise Kingdom was by far the best, but then again I've not seen his earlier movies.
Of his earlier movies, the ones you should definitely see are Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums (in that order). If you like dysfunctional families, you'll like Tenenbaums; if you like coming-of-age stories, you'll like Rushmore.
Comments
"No, they all share one."
If nothing else, i's worth seeing for the practical werewolf effects alone. It's straight-up Wolfman-style "man in wolf suit" stuff for the monsters, and it's cheesy as all hell, but they fucking sell it. Awesome stuff. Definitely recommend a watch.
The next two films are The ABCs of Death and a 30th anniversary screening of Creepshow. Should be a fun night.
Perhaps not unexpectedly, the weirdest pieces came from Japan. One was about the fart apocalypse. And how one girl chooses to die via her hot teacher's magnificent gas instead of the bad gas around them. And then they both end up in fart nirvana.
To be fair, I think the same weird director dude made two of the three or four Japanese shorts.
Also, that is one of my favorite animated movies.
Basically the movie comes down to suspension of disbelief. And I'd say there's 75% of people who still retain it throughout the entire movie and love Looper to death. The other 25% do belief it falls apart at the final act, but you really can't talk about it because it's an arc isn't even hinted or shown at all in the trailers.
The Master: definitely an interesting film, and very well-made! Not my favourite of the year, but only by virtue of the fact that it didn’t have enough explosions in it. :P
Seriously, my personal tastes out of it, it’s probably the most technically well-made and artistically well-done film I’ve seen that came out this year. I definitely didn’t catch everything to see and read into it on just one pass, which is always a good sign. I’m not sure if I’m interested enough to make that second pass anytime soon, but probably will if the curiosity builds up enough.
It seemed to have a lot of interesting things to say about human nature, psychology, impulse control, vices, intelligence, relationships (friendly, sexual, and otherwise), the need for meaning, and self-direction. And visually there were some interesting things going on with colours and motifs. For example, Frank wears a lot of blue throughout the film, particularly in the first half to 2/3’s, and is associated with a ton of nautical stuff in general, both navy-related and otherwise. In contrast, Dod is associated with a lot of reds and earth tones. I’m not sure yet what that entails, but my guess is that red is a stronger, more powerful colour, while blue in combination with the water motif suggests fluidity/drifting/inability to be tied down.
Anyway, yeah, definitely a good movie. I can see why some wouldn’t go for it so much, though. It’s pretty long, it can get a bit meandering, and the main characters can be hard to like or relate to at times. Go see it if you 1) are curious about cults and other fringe groups centred around a force of personality; 2) would be interested in delving into the psychology of a man with impulse control issues and sexual obsession; or 3) liked any of Paul Thomas Anderson’s past works like There Will Be Blood or Punch-Drunk Love. If none of those things sound particularly up your alley, you would be totally fine if you didn’t see it.
Cloud Atlas: I dug it. Like The Master, I don’t think it’ll be a contender for my favourite of the year, but it really grew on me and my moms as it went on, and it’s so damn ambitious, you practically have to respect it on that ground alone.
It has flaws to be sure, of which being a little too big for its britches is one, but man, you can fault so many movies for doing so many worse things than trying too hard. And for the most part, the film works at being engaging, exciting, (mostly) emotionally involving, and mentally stimulating. It has a little bit of everything that movies as a medium have to offer and then some.
Plus it’s awesome for being one of the more inclusive films made in recent times that I can think of. White, Asian, black, Latino, woman, man, gay, straight, young, old, heck, even a little bit of trans — it’s all represented in some form or another. True, some of the actors are made up to play races other than their own in several instances, but it’s definitely part of the whole “core cast of actors playing multiple roles stretching across time” thing and not a whitewashing thing. In addition to white actors playing Asian, there’s also Asian playing white, Asian playing Latino, and (I think) black playing Asian. So there’s still a healthy mix of diversity, even under the make-up.
And MAN that make-up. I mean, I knew that actors were going to be playing multiple roles, and certain characters you could definitely tell were actors in make-up… but then the credits play at the end and show who played which characters and you’re like “Wait, THAT was so-and-so? And THAT character was a person in make-up too? Whaaaaaaaat? Crazy! o_o” I sense that if nothing else, this film will get rewarded for its makeup, no doubt.
Anyway, it’s hard to describe much more about it in detail, or even more about how I felt in general. All I’ll say is that it’s definitely worth checking out. Even if you end up hating it or thinking that it’s the most pretentious thing you’ve ever seen, it’s an experience worth having, even if just to say you had it.
(Though TBH, if you think something like Cloud Atlas is pretentious, I only have two words: Cremaster Cycle.)