DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
Dr. Detroit
Diamond Member
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,401
- 826
- 126
The Platform - 6.5/10 (Netflix streaming) (Platform 2 arrives in October)
Really enjoyed the first 2/3rd's the film. It's shocking, gritty and dark. It's dystopian, its surreal. It's abrasive and loud.
SPOILERS:
And then it's all about how the children will save humanity, won't someone think of the children!
It's a film on trickle down economics and how the lowest suffer at the gluttony of those at the top.
BUT! If we just think of the children, humanity can be saved!
Really enjoyed the first 2/3rd's the film. It's shocking, gritty and dark. It's dystopian, its surreal. It's abrasive and loud.
SPOILERS:
And then it's all about how the children will save humanity, won't someone think of the children!
It's a film on trickle down economics and how the lowest suffer at the gluttony of those at the top.
BUT! If we just think of the children, humanity can be saved!
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
i watched a film called
The Game - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119174/reference/
and frankly i'm not sure what to make of it. This review will need spoilers, if you haven't watched this since 1997.
As a mystery, it's well done, but it greatly overstays its welcome. As a heist film, it's a bit better, but has no ending. As a whole, the ending is ridiculous to the point of being insulting.
I guess it may be a decent one-time theater experience, but i'd leave it at that. The Usual Suspects did this far better.
6/10
The Game - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119174/reference/
and frankly i'm not sure what to make of it. This review will need spoilers, if you haven't watched this since 1997.
Michael Douglas is Nick, rich asshole that does typical rich asshole stuff, but not really that much of an asshole; you get my drift.
Sean Penn is Conrad, his loser brother. We're not sure how much of a loser he is, he appears to still be pretty rich, but Nick considers him a failure.
Conrad persuades Nick to sign up with a shadowy organization that runs "The Game", a form of entertainment for rich people, and several other people tell him this is rally amazing, life changing. The film keeps it mysterious as to what exactly this game is, but the viewer is made to understand that it's gonna make rich assholes appreciate life by putting them into really dangerous situations - possibly fake, but who know.
By this point, the film plays as a straight thriller. And, it takes its sweet time.
Nick gets fucked around with by the The Game guys more and more, and things start to get out of hand. The first problem is how much tolerance for bullshit this multimillionaire has, instead of resorting to a private army of mercenaries at the first hint of actual danger.
Eventually the film - very slowly - escalates to houses being riddles with live bullets, Nick being nearly drowned, thrown off balconies, wounded, abducted and sequestered to another country, until the "love interest" tells him that it's just a rouse to keep him busy, while the The Game guys raid his accounts. By this point, the film is a crime/heist film.
And then, because fuck you, Nick kills Conrad - with clearly visible blood-gushing chest wound - and then himself by jumping off of a building.
AAaaand obviously it was all fake. Ah ha ha. Such lulz.
Because fake bullets make fake holes in fake wood, fake water only fake-drowns you unless you happen to find a switch that opens a door (and you can swim), and physical trauma doesn't exist. And of course literally the entire world is a part of the scheme, every room in existence is bugged, and it only takes five minutes to break&enter into a house and install complex electronics and visual effects that need to predict every random possible behaviour of the victim.
Sean Penn is Conrad, his loser brother. We're not sure how much of a loser he is, he appears to still be pretty rich, but Nick considers him a failure.
Conrad persuades Nick to sign up with a shadowy organization that runs "The Game", a form of entertainment for rich people, and several other people tell him this is rally amazing, life changing. The film keeps it mysterious as to what exactly this game is, but the viewer is made to understand that it's gonna make rich assholes appreciate life by putting them into really dangerous situations - possibly fake, but who know.
By this point, the film plays as a straight thriller. And, it takes its sweet time.
Nick gets fucked around with by the The Game guys more and more, and things start to get out of hand. The first problem is how much tolerance for bullshit this multimillionaire has, instead of resorting to a private army of mercenaries at the first hint of actual danger.
Eventually the film - very slowly - escalates to houses being riddles with live bullets, Nick being nearly drowned, thrown off balconies, wounded, abducted and sequestered to another country, until the "love interest" tells him that it's just a rouse to keep him busy, while the The Game guys raid his accounts. By this point, the film is a crime/heist film.
And then, because fuck you, Nick kills Conrad - with clearly visible blood-gushing chest wound - and then himself by jumping off of a building.
AAaaand obviously it was all fake. Ah ha ha. Such lulz.
Because fake bullets make fake holes in fake wood, fake water only fake-drowns you unless you happen to find a switch that opens a door (and you can swim), and physical trauma doesn't exist. And of course literally the entire world is a part of the scheme, every room in existence is bugged, and it only takes five minutes to break&enter into a house and install complex electronics and visual effects that need to predict every random possible behaviour of the victim.
As a mystery, it's well done, but it greatly overstays its welcome. As a heist film, it's a bit better, but has no ending. As a whole, the ending is ridiculous to the point of being insulting.
I guess it may be a decent one-time theater experience, but i'd leave it at that. The Usual Suspects did this far better.
6/10
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. - 7/10
Guy Ritchie spy film (2015) based on the 60's TV series. Nothing new here for this genre. Set at the time of the Cold War. Two spies at the top of their game, one US and one Russian, are coerced into saving the world. They enlist the help of the daughter of a former Nazi scientist being manipulated into building a nuclear bomb. The mission is similar to something James Bond might have to do.
I found it very entertaining for a Saturday night. I liked the style of the film; the swinging 60's with lots of action and a cool soundtrack.
Guy Ritchie spy film (2015) based on the 60's TV series. Nothing new here for this genre. Set at the time of the Cold War. Two spies at the top of their game, one US and one Russian, are coerced into saving the world. They enlist the help of the daughter of a former Nazi scientist being manipulated into building a nuclear bomb. The mission is similar to something James Bond might have to do.
I found it very entertaining for a Saturday night. I liked the style of the film; the swinging 60's with lots of action and a cool soundtrack.
I don't understand this guy, AT ALL. He makes some boring crap (rock n' rolla, few other gangster crap movies with weird british humor and accents) but then knocks it out the park with entertaining movies like Aladdin, King Arthur and this man from UNCLE. It's bad to the point that if I find out it's a Guy Ritchie movie, I will try to postpone it as much as possible because I don't want it being some crapfest like rock-effin'-rolla.
And yes, I know some of you will disagree VERY much with me on this and probably have some choice things to say about Aladdin and King Arthur. But those two and UNCLE are what goes for entertainment in my head.
/rant
sdifox
No Lifer
- Sep 30, 2005
- 98,969
- 17,389
- 126
You do know that people like different things yes?
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
you're a free spirit, Igor. don't ever change.
Yes but it annoys me how a person can go from wanting to direct great things to absolute crap. It's like some multiple personality disorder thing with Guy.
spacejamz
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 10,927
- 1,574
- 126
Deadpool/Wolverine was easily 10/10 for us...
I bought IMAX tickets the day they came out so we had seats right in the middle of the theater....the sound was dialed in and was cranked up pretty good...
All of the throwback references, one-liners, cameos and 80's/90's music were awesome...
Probably gonna go see it again which we have never done (usually one and done and wait for the blu ray to come out)...
Only thing that is getting old is all of this multiverse crap....hopefully that isn't considered a spoiler...
Definitely wait to the end of the credits if you watch it...
I bought IMAX tickets the day they came out so we had seats right in the middle of the theater....the sound was dialed in and was cranked up pretty good...
All of the throwback references, one-liners, cameos and 80's/90's music were awesome...
Probably gonna go see it again which we have never done (usually one and done and wait for the blu ray to come out)...
Only thing that is getting old is all of this multiverse crap....hopefully that isn't considered a spoiler...
Definitely wait to the end of the credits if you watch it...
The actor playing the senator was good. Everyone else was kinda ok including the British actors but the journalist was just plain annoying and looked out of place. Her scenes interrupted the nice flow of the narrative and it was not clear what the heck she was doing or how she was doing it. Weakest, most useless character ever.
6/10 (if you don't mind a movie that looks low budget and yet well done at the same time).
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
Dourif was born in Woodstock, New York, the daughter of actor Brad Dourif
The actor playing the senator was good. Everyone else was kinda ok including the British actors but the journalist was just plain annoying and looked out of place. Her scenes interrupted the nice flow of the narrative and it was not clear what the heck she was doing or how she was doing it. Weakest, most useless character ever.
6/10 (if you don't mind a movie that looks low budget and yet well done at the same time).
THE MENTAT FROM DUNE ! (the good Dune, not the shit one)
Good for you. She was miscast here. Must've needed the money badly. A more innocent looking, hard on her luck, type of actress would've suited this character better. Not someone whose eyes make her look like an escaped inmate.
Agree with your score. The movie seemed kinda pointless. Would've worked better as a series. Not sure how they are gonna get the other three sequels made if production costs are so high. Either the sequels get canned or they get REALLY creative with Part 2.
MrSquished
Lifer
- Jan 14, 2013
- 25,873
- 24,215
- 136
I watched fury road the other week in preparation to rent furiosa. But then the rental price was 9.99. no thanks. Now it's on sale for like $8 something. No thanks.
I ain't paying more than $5.99 to rent your goddamn new movie people.
I ain't paying more than $5.99 to rent your goddamn new movie people.
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
i watched an absolutely amazing film,
Fences - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2671706/reference/
Starring AND directed by Denzel Washington.
This won't be for everyone. It's not cinema, it's theatre. If you find stuff like Waiting For Godot boring, this ain't for you.
All it is, is Denzel playing a poor but hardworking father in 1950s America. There's few scenes (it's two hours long), just tons of long dialogue, subtle emotions, character building, and, well, that's it. If you watched Denzel's Macbeth, you will love this even more, with relatable dialogue that isn't 400 years old. The plot, if we can call it that, is just an excuse to have these phenomenal actors do their best. Also starring Viola Davis as the wife, and Stephen Henderson (the Dune 2 mentat guy) supporting.
It's a long, sometimes difficult film, but it's worth it.
8/10
Fences - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2671706/reference/
Starring AND directed by Denzel Washington.
This won't be for everyone. It's not cinema, it's theatre. If you find stuff like Waiting For Godot boring, this ain't for you.
All it is, is Denzel playing a poor but hardworking father in 1950s America. There's few scenes (it's two hours long), just tons of long dialogue, subtle emotions, character building, and, well, that's it. If you watched Denzel's Macbeth, you will love this even more, with relatable dialogue that isn't 400 years old. The plot, if we can call it that, is just an excuse to have these phenomenal actors do their best. Also starring Viola Davis as the wife, and Stephen Henderson (the Dune 2 mentat guy) supporting.
It's a long, sometimes difficult film, but it's worth it.
8/10
mikeymikec
Lifer
- May 19, 2011
- 20,019
- 14,362
- 136
You thought the remake of Aladdin was good? It struck me as a thoroughly unremarkable, strictly by-the-numbers Disney flick.
What you call "gangster crap movies with weird british humor and accents" is what brought him to fame and he has an IMDB top 250 entry, and he wouldn't have been let within a hundred miles of the directorship of a Disney film without that kind of résumé.
mikeymikec
Lifer
- May 19, 2011
- 20,019
- 14,362
- 136
Batwoman S01 E01
When stuff gets utterly panned by the Internet, sometimes I have to look
The first episode isn't anywhere as bad as IMDB's rating reckons it is (3.6)*, it's engaging enough for me to watch more of it. I definitely have one criticism of it so far, and it's an odd one - the flashback memories are badly done. Not to the point of "did an amateur with a camera run amok", not even Casablanca shimmer-effect bad, but uncreatively shot, a bland style that failed to evoke any kind of emotional reaction when it clearly should have done (it was a tragic origin story). In stark contrast to that is the quality of fight scenes which are quite believable.
In terms of acting skill I'm not sure who is/are meant to be doing the heavy lifting here. I could understand Ruby Rose being chosen as the 'straight man' (e.g. Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker) with better actors to support the main character, but I'm not sure who those better actors either.
* - there's an awful lot of dross on IMDB that gets rated between 4-7, and I wonder whether I would only be tempted to give 'Ahsoka' a rating of 3.6 simply relative to 'Andor' (if the latter was a 10), but relative to *everything* on IMDB, not even 'Ahsoka' deserves a rating as low as ~3.6.
When stuff gets utterly panned by the Internet, sometimes I have to look
The first episode isn't anywhere as bad as IMDB's rating reckons it is (3.6)*, it's engaging enough for me to watch more of it. I definitely have one criticism of it so far, and it's an odd one - the flashback memories are badly done. Not to the point of "did an amateur with a camera run amok", not even Casablanca shimmer-effect bad, but uncreatively shot, a bland style that failed to evoke any kind of emotional reaction when it clearly should have done (it was a tragic origin story). In stark contrast to that is the quality of fight scenes which are quite believable.
In terms of acting skill I'm not sure who is/are meant to be doing the heavy lifting here. I could understand Ruby Rose being chosen as the 'straight man' (e.g. Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker) with better actors to support the main character, but I'm not sure who those better actors either.
* - there's an awful lot of dross on IMDB that gets rated between 4-7, and I wonder whether I would only be tempted to give 'Ahsoka' a rating of 3.6 simply relative to 'Andor' (if the latter was a 10), but relative to *everything* on IMDB, not even 'Ahsoka' deserves a rating as low as ~3.6.
Well, I guess I should be grateful that he got to direct the kind of crap I enjoy thanks to crap that other people enjoy
JujuFish
Lifer
- Feb 3, 2005
- 11,363
- 1,012
- 136
The RDJ Sherlock Holmes is the only movie of his I've seen, and I found that fun.
Next up should be Ironman and Captain America Civil War and the Avengers movies.
And if you want something "boring" with more drama, "The Judge".
What sucks is that RDJ is BORN for being in a courtroom drama yet that movie does not exist. Yet.
JujuFish
Lifer
- Feb 3, 2005
- 11,363
- 1,012
- 136
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant was the only Guy Ritchie film I've seen. I've seen plenty of RDJ films.
Yeah. Both Sherlock Holmes movies are not typical Guy movies. Another great one is "Wrath of Man". Revolver might be good too but I can't really seem to remember at the moment if I've seen it.
DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,330
- 2,794
- 126
'aright, review time.
I watched
Shaft - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067741/reference/
the 1971 original.
I was surprised at how competent this film is. Obviously, this is an "old" film, so it's longer, simple takes, when two character talk they are conflicting more than just spouting nonsense joke lines, when there's action it's a lot more down to earth than your typical hollywood crap, and yet Shaft (the man) still manages to come across as a badass.
Joh Shaft is - *not* a policeman - a private investigator. He's got friends in the precinct where he used to work, and has street cred, but it's still him out for himself, with a major part of the film being the interactions with the police chief who loves Shaft for being the epitome of "don't take shit from criminals", but still can't get Shaft to act as his subordinate.
Then Shaft gets a visit by Bumpy "Jonas" (same character as the IRL Bumpy Johnson of American Gangster fame) whose daughter has been kidnapped by the mafia. Shaft is hired to rescue her, goes into investigator mode, gets into a couple of shootouts and fistfights, and eventually there's a "mission impossible" style incursion where they kill the bad guys and rescue the girl.
While the protagonist is certainly "badass", you won't get what .. well, what *I* was expecting to get - a vintage version of Black Dynamite. Instead the film plays it straight, with little or no comedy, Shaft isn't invincible, his "badass-ness" isn't comical, exaggerated or unrealistic, and also the film makes good use of the "dirt" of the shot-on-location sets to add grime to the mixture. More than "blaxploitation", it's PULP, like, classic pulp. Just .. with black people.
Obviously the production is not great, but still very passable. What i can complain about is that it's paced slowly, even at 1:40m it's a bit too long, but still very enjoyable on its own, and not just as a historical film.
My vote, all considered: 7/10
I also watched the 2000 and 2019 sequels with Samuel "Motherf*" Jackson but they are so mediocre and boring and talentless that i'm not gonna bother writing a review.
i wanted to also watch Shaft's Big Score (1972) and Shaft In Africa (1973) but they are very difficult to find.
I watched
Shaft - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067741/reference/
the 1971 original.
I was surprised at how competent this film is. Obviously, this is an "old" film, so it's longer, simple takes, when two character talk they are conflicting more than just spouting nonsense joke lines, when there's action it's a lot more down to earth than your typical hollywood crap, and yet Shaft (the man) still manages to come across as a badass.
Joh Shaft is - *not* a policeman - a private investigator. He's got friends in the precinct where he used to work, and has street cred, but it's still him out for himself, with a major part of the film being the interactions with the police chief who loves Shaft for being the epitome of "don't take shit from criminals", but still can't get Shaft to act as his subordinate.
Then Shaft gets a visit by Bumpy "Jonas" (same character as the IRL Bumpy Johnson of American Gangster fame) whose daughter has been kidnapped by the mafia. Shaft is hired to rescue her, goes into investigator mode, gets into a couple of shootouts and fistfights, and eventually there's a "mission impossible" style incursion where they kill the bad guys and rescue the girl.
While the protagonist is certainly "badass", you won't get what .. well, what *I* was expecting to get - a vintage version of Black Dynamite. Instead the film plays it straight, with little or no comedy, Shaft isn't invincible, his "badass-ness" isn't comical, exaggerated or unrealistic, and also the film makes good use of the "dirt" of the shot-on-location sets to add grime to the mixture. More than "blaxploitation", it's PULP, like, classic pulp. Just .. with black people.
Obviously the production is not great, but still very passable. What i can complain about is that it's paced slowly, even at 1:40m it's a bit too long, but still very enjoyable on its own, and not just as a historical film.
My vote, all considered: 7/10
I also watched the 2000 and 2019 sequels with Samuel "Motherf*" Jackson but they are so mediocre and boring and talentless that i'm not gonna bother writing a review.
i wanted to also watch Shaft's Big Score (1972) and Shaft In Africa (1973) but they are very difficult to find.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter