Nothing on IMDB about a Mad Max in the near future, but that doesn't mean someone won't come up with it...
The Paved Straight Road, Won't Always Get You Farther Than The Winding Dirt Road...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...
Law Abiding Citizen
This turned out to be really good, a well paced thriller that made sense out it's violence. It's about a man who goes apeshit on everyone involved with the justice system surrounding a court case that couldn't properly prosecute the man that killed his wife and daughter. What holds the movie together is the fact that even as he's killing violently it's easy to sympathize with his loss and possibly wonder how far you would go in his place.
Watching the movie, I couldn't help but think of another killer who rationalizes his violence with an argument that claims benevolence, that being Jigsaw of Saw. In the first Saw we learn that his motive, his purpose of laying out these traps is to make people appreciate life. As Saw proceeds from 1-6 it becomes less about the appreciation of life and more about the appreciation of what suffering a person must incur upon themselves to be allowed to live. In theory the motive is still floating around.
At the same time there's Clyde over in Law Abiding Citizen. His motive is tearing apart a justice system that allows killers to walk free. At the beginning of the movie, his lawyer tells him that a deal was made. That one killer will get a reduced sentence by testifying against the other, the guy who actually killed no one and was merely there. The deal is made because neither killer will confess and there is no evidence the judge will accept.
Is this a real scenario? Maybe. Just look at the O.J. Simpson case. Everyone knew, and knows, that the man was guilty and sin. But he walked. The justice system is something that demands absolute perfection from everyone from the law enforcement to the presentation of the witness, to the cataloging of the evidence. And yet, every so often, I see on the cover of the newspaper that someone's been freed from prison after ten to twenty years now that new evidence, better DNA testing, etc. has proven that this person actually is completely innocent of the crime they were committed for.
So what do we get out of Law Abiding Citizen in the end? That there is a thin line between what is right and what is properly enforced in court? That deals should not be made with murderers? The court system isn't perfect, and anybody who's gone to pay for a parking ticket can attest to that, but the answer isn't burning it all down.
P.S.
Didn't V of V For Vendetta consider burning it all down a viable solution as well?
This turned out to be really good, a well paced thriller that made sense out it's violence. It's about a man who goes apeshit on everyone involved with the justice system surrounding a court case that couldn't properly prosecute the man that killed his wife and daughter. What holds the movie together is the fact that even as he's killing violently it's easy to sympathize with his loss and possibly wonder how far you would go in his place.
Watching the movie, I couldn't help but think of another killer who rationalizes his violence with an argument that claims benevolence, that being Jigsaw of Saw. In the first Saw we learn that his motive, his purpose of laying out these traps is to make people appreciate life. As Saw proceeds from 1-6 it becomes less about the appreciation of life and more about the appreciation of what suffering a person must incur upon themselves to be allowed to live. In theory the motive is still floating around.
At the same time there's Clyde over in Law Abiding Citizen. His motive is tearing apart a justice system that allows killers to walk free. At the beginning of the movie, his lawyer tells him that a deal was made. That one killer will get a reduced sentence by testifying against the other, the guy who actually killed no one and was merely there. The deal is made because neither killer will confess and there is no evidence the judge will accept.
Is this a real scenario? Maybe. Just look at the O.J. Simpson case. Everyone knew, and knows, that the man was guilty and sin. But he walked. The justice system is something that demands absolute perfection from everyone from the law enforcement to the presentation of the witness, to the cataloging of the evidence. And yet, every so often, I see on the cover of the newspaper that someone's been freed from prison after ten to twenty years now that new evidence, better DNA testing, etc. has proven that this person actually is completely innocent of the crime they were committed for.
So what do we get out of Law Abiding Citizen in the end? That there is a thin line between what is right and what is properly enforced in court? That deals should not be made with murderers? The court system isn't perfect, and anybody who's gone to pay for a parking ticket can attest to that, but the answer isn't burning it all down.
P.S.
Didn't V of V For Vendetta consider burning it all down a viable solution as well?
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
The Taking of Pelham 123
I really don't like Tony Scott's style that he's decided to adopt and use in every single film he makes. It's this blurry camera shaking that he's used in Domino, Man on Fire, Deja Vu, and I'm glad it's unique to him, unlike the shaky camera of the Bourne series. What's interesting about him, though, is that the man is seventy six years old and he's directing these action films. He was seventy one when he directed Domino. It's also interesting to note that of the four movies I mentioned in this post, Denzel Washington is in three of them.
The Pelham 123 thing I thought was okay. It doesn't stand out as a great action film or suspense film, however you want to define the genre, but it wasn't bad. The story made sense, the plot was evenly paced and I was left wondering as the movie went along how it would all turn out.
There was one thing that bothered me about Pelham that bothers me in lots of action movies. Batman Begins did it. The Rock did it. And Pelham does it. What I'm talking about is...
Secondary commentary explaining away the danger that is currently occurring in the film!
Or in other words, here's an example. In The Rock, there's this big chase scene at the beginning of the movie. Sean Connery is driving this supped up SUV and is crashing into a shitload of stuff, knocking things over to mess up the driving of the cops behind him. It's then that one of the supporting actors shouts into the police radio, while the camera zooms in and out and shakes all around him, "He's crashing into everything in sight trying to block us!" Duh! Of course he is! We as an audience can see that and we don't need any supporting actor who won't even show up past the thirty minute mark to tell us this.
Or, another example. In Batman Begins Ra's Al Gul is crashing a train into the tram central station in the center of Gotham City. There's Batman and he's fighting and it's all awesome and then it cuts to some old guy sitting in some control room and he's shouting about how the tram is going to crash! Of course we know the tram is going to crash! Batman hasn't saved the day yet and we've already received the plot point that told us Ra's ultimate plan.
In Pelham, we are led to believe that a train, hurtling down the subway at ridiculous speeds, may crash or derail or something. We can see it flying along. As an audience, we can see the people inside shitting their pants. And then some guy goes, "The brakes will turn on when we pass through a red light!" And then some kid goes, "But they're all green lights!"
And then there's you, the viewer, who the producers and the writer assume are on the edge of your seat. You're on the edge of your seat because it's a tense situation, and because you just shat yourself and you don't want to mash the $#it against your ass as you bite your nails and pray for the climax of the film to show up so that you can breathe, shower and change.
At least, that's what I assume they think. Because I doubt I'll be busy remembering little details the story might have mentioned or what the characters are trying to do when I'm occupied with shitting my pants.
I really don't like Tony Scott's style that he's decided to adopt and use in every single film he makes. It's this blurry camera shaking that he's used in Domino, Man on Fire, Deja Vu, and I'm glad it's unique to him, unlike the shaky camera of the Bourne series. What's interesting about him, though, is that the man is seventy six years old and he's directing these action films. He was seventy one when he directed Domino. It's also interesting to note that of the four movies I mentioned in this post, Denzel Washington is in three of them.
The Pelham 123 thing I thought was okay. It doesn't stand out as a great action film or suspense film, however you want to define the genre, but it wasn't bad. The story made sense, the plot was evenly paced and I was left wondering as the movie went along how it would all turn out.
There was one thing that bothered me about Pelham that bothers me in lots of action movies. Batman Begins did it. The Rock did it. And Pelham does it. What I'm talking about is...
Secondary commentary explaining away the danger that is currently occurring in the film!
Or in other words, here's an example. In The Rock, there's this big chase scene at the beginning of the movie. Sean Connery is driving this supped up SUV and is crashing into a shitload of stuff, knocking things over to mess up the driving of the cops behind him. It's then that one of the supporting actors shouts into the police radio, while the camera zooms in and out and shakes all around him, "He's crashing into everything in sight trying to block us!" Duh! Of course he is! We as an audience can see that and we don't need any supporting actor who won't even show up past the thirty minute mark to tell us this.
Or, another example. In Batman Begins Ra's Al Gul is crashing a train into the tram central station in the center of Gotham City. There's Batman and he's fighting and it's all awesome and then it cuts to some old guy sitting in some control room and he's shouting about how the tram is going to crash! Of course we know the tram is going to crash! Batman hasn't saved the day yet and we've already received the plot point that told us Ra's ultimate plan.
In Pelham, we are led to believe that a train, hurtling down the subway at ridiculous speeds, may crash or derail or something. We can see it flying along. As an audience, we can see the people inside shitting their pants. And then some guy goes, "The brakes will turn on when we pass through a red light!" And then some kid goes, "But they're all green lights!"
And then there's you, the viewer, who the producers and the writer assume are on the edge of your seat. You're on the edge of your seat because it's a tense situation, and because you just shat yourself and you don't want to mash the $#it against your ass as you bite your nails and pray for the climax of the film to show up so that you can breathe, shower and change.
At least, that's what I assume they think. Because I doubt I'll be busy remembering little details the story might have mentioned or what the characters are trying to do when I'm occupied with shitting my pants.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
Have you tried watching films that were not made to order for the sub-standard specimens of our esteemed species, buddy?
Much less bang in your buck. And by 'buck' I mean 'pants'. And by 'bang' I mean 'fecal matter'.
I think I'd rather watch The Good, the Bad and the Ugly one more time instead.
-Fred
Much less bang in your buck. And by 'buck' I mean 'pants'. And by 'bang' I mean 'fecal matter'.
I think I'd rather watch The Good, the Bad and the Ugly one more time instead.
-Fred
Pirates, vampires, zombies, ninjas, ghouls, aliens, goblins, monsters, robots, sorcerers, undead, werewolves, demons, mutated dinosaur-cyborgs and those pesky phone salesmen! The shotgun is a one-size-fits-all solution!
It is a classic, Fred, and one day I'll watch it again. In the meantime...
Surrogates
On a rating for abysmal to awesome this movie is...MEDIOCRE!
This movie was directed by the same guy that directed the third Terminator flick and written by two of the three writers that wrote the screenplay for the Catwoman movie, so how could this possibly go wrong?
Well, first let's look at the story. It's in a world where people live their lives through their robotic counterparts who don't necessarily look like them, or have the same gender. There are those that rebel against this sudden rise of surrogacy, something that somehow happened within the span of a decade, calling the robots lies. That's all interesting, but that's where the conceptual science fiction stops. The science fiction aspect of the story never grows from it's concept, turning the robots into a plot device that more closely resembles the face copies of Mission Impossible movies.
Also, during the very same month that Surrogates came out there was the movie Gamer. Gamer took the idea of living your life through something else and pushed it farther, where people were living through other people. It also added on various problems that Surrogates doesn't think of.
One of these problems is ping time. In Gamer, there is a slight delay between the user and the puppet. In Surrogates, billions of people have these robot doubles and yet they get perfect connection at all times. Somehow with the development of robotics they also managed to secure better wi-fi.
Another problem in Surrogates lies in the action. There just isn't that much of it. The movie is only 90 minutes long and it tries to be clever science fiction film, a hard hitting action film and a detective story all in one, yet the movie doesn't even run for long enough to provide the time to aspire to such greatness.
Oh, and would you like to be a cinematographer, but you're crippled by your lack of talent and skill? Well, have no fear! Merely slant the camera during every single still shot and suddenly you'll rise from talentless hack to pretentious artist!*
*Oscar not included
The slanted camera angles started getting annoying because quite literally every single still shot was at some degree off horizontal. Every one. The thing with camera tricks is that they should be used sparsely, that way when they show up it actually has an effect on the audience.
Imagine you were watching 300, and the entire movie was filled with the camera techniques they used in the combat scenes. Two characters are walking along and talking, and as they're talking the camera is constantly zooming out and zooming in, and then suddenly King Leonidas snaps his fingers in slow motion and goes, "Heeeyyyy!" It would get tiresome.
One example of good use of camera slanting would be the movie Sherlock Holmes. In one scene Holmes is walking along grabbing things as he goes to make a quick disguise and he grabs a hat and slants it, and as he does the camera tilts to match the hat.
Or in Mission Impossible Ethan Hunt has a meeting in a restaurant, and as he's becoming more and more agitated the camera is becoming more slanted. There's purpose to it!
Surrogates
On a rating for abysmal to awesome this movie is...MEDIOCRE!
This movie was directed by the same guy that directed the third Terminator flick and written by two of the three writers that wrote the screenplay for the Catwoman movie, so how could this possibly go wrong?
Well, first let's look at the story. It's in a world where people live their lives through their robotic counterparts who don't necessarily look like them, or have the same gender. There are those that rebel against this sudden rise of surrogacy, something that somehow happened within the span of a decade, calling the robots lies. That's all interesting, but that's where the conceptual science fiction stops. The science fiction aspect of the story never grows from it's concept, turning the robots into a plot device that more closely resembles the face copies of Mission Impossible movies.
Also, during the very same month that Surrogates came out there was the movie Gamer. Gamer took the idea of living your life through something else and pushed it farther, where people were living through other people. It also added on various problems that Surrogates doesn't think of.
One of these problems is ping time. In Gamer, there is a slight delay between the user and the puppet. In Surrogates, billions of people have these robot doubles and yet they get perfect connection at all times. Somehow with the development of robotics they also managed to secure better wi-fi.
Another problem in Surrogates lies in the action. There just isn't that much of it. The movie is only 90 minutes long and it tries to be clever science fiction film, a hard hitting action film and a detective story all in one, yet the movie doesn't even run for long enough to provide the time to aspire to such greatness.
Oh, and would you like to be a cinematographer, but you're crippled by your lack of talent and skill? Well, have no fear! Merely slant the camera during every single still shot and suddenly you'll rise from talentless hack to pretentious artist!*
*Oscar not included
The slanted camera angles started getting annoying because quite literally every single still shot was at some degree off horizontal. Every one. The thing with camera tricks is that they should be used sparsely, that way when they show up it actually has an effect on the audience.
Imagine you were watching 300, and the entire movie was filled with the camera techniques they used in the combat scenes. Two characters are walking along and talking, and as they're talking the camera is constantly zooming out and zooming in, and then suddenly King Leonidas snaps his fingers in slow motion and goes, "Heeeyyyy!" It would get tiresome.
One example of good use of camera slanting would be the movie Sherlock Holmes. In one scene Holmes is walking along grabbing things as he goes to make a quick disguise and he grabs a hat and slants it, and as he does the camera tilts to match the hat.
Or in Mission Impossible Ethan Hunt has a meeting in a restaurant, and as he's becoming more and more agitated the camera is becoming more slanted. There's purpose to it!
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
Saw The A-Team yesterday. It's been a long time since someone made a workable action-comedy that just throws action and laughter at you like that, and you're not annoyed by little things. After all, it's The A-Team. They're allowed to be over the top! I sure didn't get any smarter watching this, but damn, did I get entertained.
And some times, just some times... That's enough.
-Fred
And some times, just some times... That's enough.
-Fred
Pirates, vampires, zombies, ninjas, ghouls, aliens, goblins, monsters, robots, sorcerers, undead, werewolves, demons, mutated dinosaur-cyborgs and those pesky phone salesmen! The shotgun is a one-size-fits-all solution!
Jim the old guy wrote:Does anybody on this board have a job?
Hey!
I just got a copy of Harvey with Jimmy Stewart. That was an interesting movie. I was curious to see it after I just saw the play version recently. It was a nice story for a lazy weekend.Samantha
Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
Jim, I have a job. It's part time. I'm attempting to get a full time job but the job market seems to be more like a whorehouse filled with prudes. No openings available.
Up
On a rating from abysmal to awesome, this movie is awesome!
If Disney's Magical Kingdom had a source for it's magic, it would have to be Pixar. No matter how many times I pass on a computer animated film, let alone a kids film, for the sake of it being animated, I always fall in love with a Pixar movie. Most companies that make movies for kids seem to follow formula's, while Pixar almost seems to make movies that happen to be acceptable for kids, crafting their stories in a manner that's fun and exciting and emotionally attached at the same time.
The most magical part of the movie, for me, was the backstory. Before the main story of Up actually begins there is the tale of the old man when he was young and in love. And in the span of only a few minutes, with no dialogue at all, they go through this couple's life. It's not that it's new ground for Pixar, considering they managed to make a story about a little robot who travels the world in search of junk to box up entertaining, even when he's by himself, even when all he can really say is his own name.
What it made me think of was Star Wars:Episode 2, and the criticism I read about it. One of the things someone said about the movie was that the viewer knew that Anakin was in love with Queen Amidala was because he said so. If he didn't say he loved her, no one would know because it just doesn't show.
It makes Up more striking because of how it manages to show love without words. It becomes an idealized symbiotic relationship that's drawn into the real world by financial obligations and unfulfilled dreams. Some people wish they could travel to exotic lands, whether they be Asia, Africa or Paradise Falls, and life sometimes refuses to offer the time or the money.
There are a couple other interesting things brought up in this film, and one of them is a failed pregnancy. The other is blood. This is the first animated kids movie I remember seeing that shows blood, and it's not like kids have never seen blood. Hell, when I was a kid I'd be riding my bike and fall down so hard and skin my knees bloody. In Up, blood shows up in one scene, towards the beginning, and it is used very well to make a dramatic scene even more dramatic. It adds authority, makes it believable that the men and women in the dark suits would be able to evict the old man.
Up
On a rating from abysmal to awesome, this movie is awesome!
If Disney's Magical Kingdom had a source for it's magic, it would have to be Pixar. No matter how many times I pass on a computer animated film, let alone a kids film, for the sake of it being animated, I always fall in love with a Pixar movie. Most companies that make movies for kids seem to follow formula's, while Pixar almost seems to make movies that happen to be acceptable for kids, crafting their stories in a manner that's fun and exciting and emotionally attached at the same time.
The most magical part of the movie, for me, was the backstory. Before the main story of Up actually begins there is the tale of the old man when he was young and in love. And in the span of only a few minutes, with no dialogue at all, they go through this couple's life. It's not that it's new ground for Pixar, considering they managed to make a story about a little robot who travels the world in search of junk to box up entertaining, even when he's by himself, even when all he can really say is his own name.
What it made me think of was Star Wars:Episode 2, and the criticism I read about it. One of the things someone said about the movie was that the viewer knew that Anakin was in love with Queen Amidala was because he said so. If he didn't say he loved her, no one would know because it just doesn't show.
It makes Up more striking because of how it manages to show love without words. It becomes an idealized symbiotic relationship that's drawn into the real world by financial obligations and unfulfilled dreams. Some people wish they could travel to exotic lands, whether they be Asia, Africa or Paradise Falls, and life sometimes refuses to offer the time or the money.
There are a couple other interesting things brought up in this film, and one of them is a failed pregnancy. The other is blood. This is the first animated kids movie I remember seeing that shows blood, and it's not like kids have never seen blood. Hell, when I was a kid I'd be riding my bike and fall down so hard and skin my knees bloody. In Up, blood shows up in one scene, towards the beginning, and it is used very well to make a dramatic scene even more dramatic. It adds authority, makes it believable that the men and women in the dark suits would be able to evict the old man.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
I loved Up. I must have cried buckets. I loved their beautiful backstory. I was surprised they covered the couple's inability to have children. That seemed a very adult topic for a kids movie. They are very skillful story tellers at Pixar.
I just saw Toy Story 3 and once again was blown away by these guys. Great characters in an interesting new story. It's better acting and drama then I've seen in some live action movies.
Pixar knows how to get to your heart and hold on tight. They tell such wonderful, moving stories with so much depth.
I just saw Toy Story 3 and once again was blown away by these guys. Great characters in an interesting new story. It's better acting and drama then I've seen in some live action movies.
Pixar knows how to get to your heart and hold on tight. They tell such wonderful, moving stories with so much depth.
Samantha
Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.
Last edited by DrPaul on July 04, 2010 • 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Movies I saw the last couple weeks (in alphabetical order):
The Blues Brothers (played at the midnight show last week) -classic
The A-Team (I love it when a plan comes together)
Get Him to the Greek (silly but fun)
Harry Brown (kind of a downer)
Jonah Hex (steam punk, comic book, stylish and fun)
Killers - Katherine Heigl - What's not to like?
Knight and Day - Slightly over the top action/semi-comedy, very fun
Ondine - Irish movie with Colin Farrell - fisherman catches a mermaid(?)
Toy Story 3 - Quite possibley the best of the series. Fantastic!
The Big Lebowski (showing tonight at the midnight show.) Coen Brothers classic
The Blues Brothers (played at the midnight show last week) -classic
The A-Team (I love it when a plan comes together)
Get Him to the Greek (silly but fun)
Harry Brown (kind of a downer)
Jonah Hex (steam punk, comic book, stylish and fun)
Killers - Katherine Heigl - What's not to like?
Knight and Day - Slightly over the top action/semi-comedy, very fun
Ondine - Irish movie with Colin Farrell - fisherman catches a mermaid(?)
Toy Story 3 - Quite possibley the best of the series. Fantastic!
The Big Lebowski (showing tonight at the midnight show.) Coen Brothers classic
I just watched The Invention Of Lying last night... Gawd what a Boring movie... Unless you are a huge fan of the English guy Mark Bellison, don't waste the 2 hours it takes to watch this movie...
I fell asleep 3 separate times watching this...
I fell asleep 3 separate times watching this...
The Paved Straight Road, Won't Always Get You Farther Than The Winding Dirt Road...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...
Can You Run Your Game??? Click Here And Find Out...
*Note, Not All Games Have Been Tested & Therefore May Not Be Listed...