ysbreker

Movie/TV recommendations

Recommended Posts

It's Pine-apple Express...but changed to Apple Express...I couldn't write out the correct word for the fruit in the real title without the stars replacing it as censorship for some reason. I can say fuck but I can't say pine-apple without a hyphen.

I suggest "ananas".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also... you didn't change the word "Express" :deranged:

I think it's still different enough to dodge copyright law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
********* is a banned word?? Lol! Do you win some sort of prize for discovering that?

Hahahaha it's been a while since anyone noticed that. It has been part of Thumbs for a very long time.

I think "Molyneux" was censored at one point as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is ***** still censored?

[edit]

I guess not.

[edit of my edit]

b a c o n is still censored!

Edited by ysbreker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a reprinted, restored version of The Godfather this morning. The UK distributors Park Circus are showing it at a few screens and I was completely [ign.com]-ed by it.

Considering I've seen the film a couple of times over the years, on DVD and so on, I was very surprised. I thought it was a good film, but not utterly god-damn wonderful. I thought it had flaws. Strangely, seeing it in the darkened cinema, where you can be completely enveloped by the experience, swept all of my concerns aside. The big, widescreen epic feel of it, the warmth and meticulousness of the cinematography and the production design. And hearing the Nino Rota score booming out. Just lovely. I suppose it was a viewing context I couldn't suitably construct in my living room.

Has anyone else had an experience like that, seeing a film on the big screen, or in a different context, and finding a new appreciation for it?

Conversely, it seems that Citizen Kane is also getting the go-around in the UK, and the screening for that was tonight, too. Wonder how that fares.

Oh, I also saw 9, but I'm embargoed until halfway through October for that one (despite it being out in America and, ironically, the site I'm reviewing it for already have already run a US-sourced review).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw a reprinted, restored version of The Godfather this morning. The UK distributors Park Circus are showing it at a few screens and I was completely [ign.com]-ed by it.

Considering I've seen the film a couple of times over the years, on DVD and so on, I was very surprised. I thought it was a good film, but not utterly god-damn wonderful. I thought it had flaws. Strangely, seeing it in the darkened cinema, where you can be completely enveloped by the experience, swept all of my concerns aside. The big, widescreen epic feel of it, the warmth and meticulousness of the cinematography and the production design. And hearing the Nino Rota score booming out. Just lovely. I suppose it was a viewing context I couldn't suitably construct in my living room.

Has anyone else had an experience like that, seeing a film on the big screen, or in a different context, and finding a new appreciation for it?

Conversely, it seems that Citizen Kane is also getting the go-around in the UK, and the screening for that was tonight, too. Wonder how that fares.

Oh, I also saw 9, but I'm embargoed until halfway through October for that one (despite it being out in America and, ironically, the site I'm reviewing it for already have already run a US-sourced review).

That is a stupidest embargo I have heard of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been too lazy to see anything for the past two months or so, but I did see:

- Watchmen: Pretty good film, adequate adaptation. They had to lose some of the depth for length's sake (so I'll need to look at the Director's Cut), but I enjoyed it nonetheless. I prefer the book, but it's well worth seeing.

- ********* Express: meh. It had some good lines, but the shit writing that goes into these things...you know, I've done my share of terrible writing, but if I'm putting my real name on the line then I'd try to make the whole thing halfway interesting, at the very least. I don't remember if it was just the end of the movie that ruined it for me, but either way I'm left feeling a little short-changed.

- F For Fake: I think that, outside of Citizen Kane, Orson Welles was one underrated mofo, and this movie shows why. He's constantly re-inventing himself, and for the most part the movie is engrossing and very interesting. I think my favorite part is how he's basically invented a new kind of film that mixes-up fiction with reality and somehow pulls it off without sounding too preachy. Welles called it "the film essay"; I'd say it's more of a "passive film essay". It doesn't preach, it isn't pretentious, but it's got a lot of substance beneath the style. I enjoyed it, if for making me think about its subject matter a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- F For Fake: I think that, outside of Citizen Kane, Orson Welles was one underrated mofo, and this movie shows why. He's constantly re-inventing himself, and for the most part the movie is engrossing and very interesting. I think my favorite part is how he's basically invented a new kind of film that mixes-up fiction with reality and somehow pulls it off without sounding too preachy. Welles called it "the film essay"; I'd say it's more of a "passive film essay". It doesn't preach, it isn't pretentious, but it's got a lot of substance beneath the style. I enjoyed it, if for making me think about its subject matter a bit.

F for Fake is an excellent movie, it simply oozes of old bearded Welles' charisma; and the subject is actually completely awesome - I don't remember the movie being obviously self conscious; the editing, mise en scène and scenaristic tricks, serve the movie theme very well, and are not just for show. So, yeah, agreed.

God, I must unwrap that copy of Orson Welles Mac Beth DVD and check it out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to use Satoshi Kon as an example in the argument with Chris that anime is kinda cool.

So, I just watched Paranoia agent, kon's 2005 series, and while it defied all of Chris's problems with anime, it was also about how Kon dislikes anime for the same reasons Chris does :deranged:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been reading a book about the assassination of General Patton, and it's reminded me of 'The Company'. I'm going to watch it again as it's rather fine.

There's nothing about Patton in there, just that the facts about espionage in the immediate post-war period in the book reminded me of this mini-series.

Plus it has Tom Hollander in it, who's ace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just watched Primer. It's pretty good, if a little confusing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_(film)

Great film. I'd heard it was really confusing but when I watched it I thought was pretty easy to follow ... until it got to the end and I realised I hadn't understood anything past the first 20 minutes.

I think I understand most of now though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Primer wasn't that difficult. It was quite good, I like these high quality low budget movies. Although Primer was really really low budget. But just like "The Man from Earth" it shows that seriously good/interesting movies don't need a multi million dollar budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a bunch of movies on the plan to and from New Zealand.

State of Play was meh, but it'd been a while since I had seen Robin Wright Penn act, and she remains gorgeous across the years, so that kept the movie interesting enough.

The International's ending and opening were neat but, god, Naomi Watts sure can't act and the rest of the scenario is a bit shallow for a political thriller. Also, we need Armin Mueller-Stahl in a lead role: he's been awesome in too many mediocre movies (Eastern Promises, the later X-Files and this one) to not get a shot at being center stage in a good one.

Terminator Salvation : pretty bad but extra point for the Plane Edition which makes the action sequences completely indecipherable and kind of hilarious.

I watched about 30 movies during my accumulated 55 hours of flight (including Night at the Museum 2 and Hannah Montana - got to keep in touch with the youth) but can't remember them really well.

I also stumbled upon a documentary about fear and suspens in Hitchcock's movies and it was awesome since it consisted mostly of him commenting on his own work directly. Made me want to watch movies from him I have yet to watch. I think I'll start with Frenzy.

On Wednesday, I watched District 9, which is one hell of a frustrating movie for letting go a brilliant first half to mundane hollywood cliches in the last 20 minutes.

I loved the first part, until they seek to retrieve the container in the lab .. at which point, the main character cease to be a complete dick, which take away most of the fun and interest away.When the small ship crashed, I thought the film was back on its feet and its unpredictable course again, but it went all hollywood ending. That and the meany sniper out of a WWE storyline were too much for me.

Then there was Redacted : which shows how horribly wrong fake documentaries can go. If you though bad writing, bad acting and bad music could plagued a movie, you need to witness those 'qualities' in a fake documentary; it makes everything look preposterous and make the filmmaker look like a dick not only for allowing bad acting but also for promoting it to complete authenticity without having his brain kill itself. Plus, the movie is beating a dead horse.

On the plus side, I've watched the first season of Mad Men which turned out to be completely different from what I imagined both in terms of content and aesthetics. The most amazing thing is the absence of referential nudge-nudge and how little nostalgia the writers have put in there. It's basically a ratpack movie except it's a period piece like I've seen about -the Victorian; so it's quite fresh.

The storylines are quite decent even tough, the brush is sometimes a little too heavy on the characters flaws, but otherwise, the sobriety is one to applaud. It was particularly awesome when they approached the Kennedy-Nixon campaign.

The only thing that seems weird to me is how futile most of the secondary female cast seem to be, sometimes corroborating the machismo comments from the male characters. Were all female secretaries that giggly, stupid and ready to get laid for promotion ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got around to seeing District 9 and wasn't disappointed.

I really liked the writing, the way all this high tech kit was just strewn - unwanted and unusable - across the ghetto, with the aliens themselves also devolved into squalid living and behaviour.

I like that a lot of key stuff just wasn't explained, or resolved, either, like where the aliens came from and why. In similar vein, I like that there was no real resolution to the story either (discounting Wikus' apparent fate). I also don't mind the ridiculousness of alien fuel being able to mysteriously rewrite human DNA on the fly and convert Us into Them in a short frame of time.

The approach to the alien tech - when it did finally start working - was excellent too. You could see (for example) that that mecha suit was incredibly advanced when on auto-pilot. Yet Wikus clearly had no idea what he was doing with it, even with his part-alien DNA, beyond the basic "fight or flight" instinct and the suit's translation of that at each given moment. Really well done and completely convincing to me.

I think there's a point with good sci-fi where you don't have to work everything out, and you don't need some grandiose resolution to Everything either. (I think this may have been a point Nick made on one of the not-too-distant podcasts actually.) I enjoyed District 9 most of all because of its confidence in this regard; everything about it just flowed really well for me, didn't run away with itself in scope, and didn't insult you with some patronising, ridiculous last-10-minutes crescendo.

Definitely a personal favourite of this year--just don't let there be a sequel! :frusty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The International's ending and opening were neat but, god, Naomi Watts sure can't act and the rest of the scenario is a bit shallow for a political thriller. Also, we need Armin Mueller-Stahl in a lead role: he's been awesome in too many mediocre movies (Eastern Promises, the later X-Files and this one) to not get a shot at being center stage in a good one.

I found this movie pretty shallow as well, along with boring and cheap looking.

I'm a Tom Tykwer fan, but it also seems like every other movie he does kind of sucks. I enjoyed Deadly Maria (Although I probably couldn't stomach watching it again, I found it way too disturbing), Run Lola Run, The Princess and the Warrior, and Perfume, but I found myself incredibly bored or disatisfied with Wintersleepers, Heaven, The International, and Das Leben ist eine Baustelle (Although he was just a co-writer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think there's a point with good sci-fi where you don't have to work everything out, and you don't need some grandiose resolution to Everything either.

Yeah, I hate completionist SF that tries to justify or explain everything with some bunk or other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Westle on this one. I loved District 9, but I didn't realize I was loving it the first time through. Right as it ended I realized how much I had enjoyed it, because it ends the same way it begins: Small. It looked like it was going to lead up to this epic climax, but besides the

mech chase and Christopher Johnson's escape

, which were heroic and epic, but on a relatively small scale, the narrative dodges the more cliched and unnecessarily explanatory paths it could have taken in favor of giving us what I felt was a very understated (albeit not very subtle) ending.

The sniper being such a cliche badass was kind of lame. That was my main gripe with the story, along with the father-in-law being a pretty obvious villain. The visuals and the intelligent use of CG more than made up for any narrative shortcomings in my mind: As simple as the story was, the direction made it feel like a fully realized and believable world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I hate completionist SF that tries to justify or explain everything with some bunk or other.

I think there's a balance. LOST (for example) better explain everything, dammit! But I also remember reading the names and backstories of all the colourful characters in the famous Star Wars cantina sequence and it just totally killed whatever wonder was left over from being a kid. Some things are much more interesting/powerful when they're not explained. (Guess that's something David Lynch figured out a long time ago! :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy fuck, why did you make yourself suffer through reading the bios of the entire Mos Eisley cantina? That's crazy!

For my part, it obviously depends on the sci-fi setting, both methods of storytelling have their merits. It's reactionary to denounce the one or the other, depending on which style is currently in vogue. Now personally, I like it to be able to delve deep into a universe if I so choose (Riddick, for instance), but then I also love seeing something like Solaris, where little is explained. Or sometimes a universe is so flimsy it wouldn't survive closer scrutiny (like the excellent Space Truckers), so it's a good thing there isn't too much exposition.

Edited by Rodi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like explanatory sci-fi is almost it's own genre. Lost, and to a lesser extent Battlestar, thrive on mysteries which are so enigmatic and immediately relevant that a lot of the thrill comes in seeing them answered. However, in situations where the mystery isn't the point of the show, it often serves the atmosphere to keep it mysterious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now