4815162342 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) It'd have been one thing if at the end he appears and she forgives him, that would have worked, but for them to live happily ever after in love for eternity just rubbed me the wrong way. The High Life Because The Low Life didn't score well with test audiences The High Life is listed in its genre as a Comedy first. Wait...what? I couldn't find any comedy in this at all really, maybe some light-hearted escapades when Karl enters the picture, but actual comedy? No way dude. So, minor genre flub out of the way, this is a film about an Immortal, a guy who since the early 16th Century or so has never aged and magically heals from all injuries. He's loved many women, had many adventures, experienced many events, and is downright bored with himself. Ryan Gosling stars as Christian (speaking of Gosling, he's another guy who EVERYONE cast in a film this year, seriously people, there are more actors out there than Gosling and Emily Blunt), the man who doesn't age and whose love experiences turn into sour regret, though frankly the odds of him not having a kid out there somewhere after all his time is remote, I don't recall the film ever saying he couldn't have his junk work. But that's me rambling. Gosling does a great job playing the cynical, world-weary Christian, who may finally have found the person who makes him lose the will to live. That woman is Michelle Monaghan' Rebecca and Monaghan plays Rebecca with the right amount of caring, sass, and biting wit. She's invested in Christian and in love with him, but also not blind and not willing to stick around as he goes through his self-deprecations and depressions and moaning. The film is a very moving and effective romantic drama, but the whole immortality explanation is kinda bunk. It's one thing to be ambiguous, it's another thing for a film to claim it is providing answers when really all it does is give some simplistic gobbledegook that makes little sense and the rest is left totally up in the air. The fact of the matter is giving no answer in a film is much better than giving a partial answer that amounts to a mess. So, very good film, very well executed, the whole immortality cure bit was handled poorly even if a solid thematic move. Edited February 5, 2013 by 4815162342 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Creator Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 My thoughts exactly on Society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiccup Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 My thoughts exactly on Society. I knew you were going to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Creator Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I knew you were going to say that. I actually really liked it...but I don't like the ending. From what I've read so far, it would be my number 1, granted I haven't read everything yet. But the ending just didn't fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) 451 It's an adaptation of Farenheit 451 Farenheit 451 is one of my favorite novels. If you don't fuck it up, you get a great movie. So let's take a look at this film: Alfonso Cuaron directs. Clive Owen stars. Gary Oldman plays Captain Beatty. The plot is mostly faithful but grows a bit with some unique styling and tone. Yeah, Ueka didn't fuck it up. Job well fucking done. Edited February 5, 2013 by 4815162342 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 Last Ditch Effort The One Where WETA Builds a Dam Peter Jackson loves to make things look epic and big. This film gives him the chance to build a huge dam and change the course of a river and sack an ancient city. He doesn't waste those chances as the film looks pretty damn (pun intended) good. The design of Babylon is exquisite, a masterpiece mixture of CGI, miniatures, scale models, art direction, and more. You feel like you are over 2,500 years ago in a time where civilization was made at the point of a sword. The setpieces in the film are well-designed and executed, with action and war and ancient things that go boom giving excitement and spectacle. The dream sequence where Babylon saves itselft if only during a prince's sleep is exhilarating. So on the technical aspects, job greatly done. But the characters are all rather dull and uninteresting. Cyrus is your standard "I want it all" emperor and the film portrays him as a militaristic despot even though ancient histories show he was more enlightened and tolerant than the Babylonians. Ed Harris is serviceable in his role, which is mostly a yes-man advisor who occasionally pushes back with words. Matt Dillon and JGL's characters aren't much better, with the the typical father-son friction of "WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IN ME!?" and not much else to define them other than Dillon being stoic and JGL being impetuous. The actual story outside of the battles and battle planing is quite thin too. So we have an exciting, entertaining film with spectacle and flair, but not much below the surface. Same flaws as Oro last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 Portal More Balm for Valve Fanboys Waiting for Half-Life 3 Portal is a fun, breezy, intelligent game with a wicked sense of humor. Blankments Productions made the right call when making the live-action adaptation to simply get out of the way of the setpieces and let them do all the talking for the film. Gina Carano provides an excellent physical actress to handle the demanding athletics of the role of Chell and GLaDOS is as darkly humorous on the big screen as she was on the computer screen. The film is pretty much what you get in the game with the addition of a short informative exposition video starring He Who May or May Not Be Khan. It slows the rapid pacing down, which is okay since the film needed to breathe a bit anyway. It's fun, funny, and zippy, good times at a theater. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 5, 2013 Author Share Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) L.A. Noire It's Better Than Gangster Squad L.A. Noire is an example of a strong, vibrant idea killed by lazy filmmaking. It's clear that the filmmakers lost interest and some point during production and just wanted to get it finished and out there to make money (in fact a studio producer for the film admitted this). The result is the foundation for a very good film that never quite gets executed on. The actors all do well enough in their roles, but the roles are underwritten and the plot moves forward in very general terms with little details on character depth, plot motivations, etc. I wish I could say more about the film but really, it's just there, an entertaining and involving enough ride for audiences to sit through and remember for a little bit. The production design and costume aspects were very well done. So though it's a disappointment, still better than Gangster Squad. Expedecade drops this evening Edited February 5, 2013 by 4815162342 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChD Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Great reviews as always, Numbers. One more movie and To The Moon comes then. Really curious to see what you're thinking about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Nice, positive Portal review. Hoping for $100M, which would be possible if it benefits from Avarice sellouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 6, 2013 Author Share Posted February 6, 2013 Expedcade Expialidocious I am going to come out and say it: Expedcade is the worst Bond film since A View to a Kill, possibly the worst since Moonraker. Here are the reasons why: 1) The film randomly takes place 10 years after Lord Madship. Why? Just because really, the film thought it'd be cool. My guess is that Christopher Nolan wanted to make this film like TDKR. This isn't the only way he tries to do that. 2) We're suddenly introduced to SPECTRE and Blofeld as mega-villains from the get-go. No buildup, no progression, no nothing. Just WHAM! They get flung at us in the pre-song opening as "THE BAD GUYS." Blofeld is Bond's most famous villain, you don't just hurl him in as a common megalomaniac. 3) Q is now a field agent? WHAT. THE. FUCK. 4) Blofeld randomly tells a guard not to flood the base because he can't swim. Well that clearly is not unsubtle foreshadowing. 5) Marion Cotillard plays a new MI6 agent whose past we know little about. Well even though this is a Nolan film I doubt it will amount to much. 6) Moneypenny is suddenly dating Q? We get a throwaway sentence of "oh this started a year ago." Another reason why a ten year jump doesn't work for something like Bond. 7) Yeah, let's have the random newbie agent sleep with Bond in a bed right next to ours and assume they won't have loud sex. 8) M is barely in the film then randomly falls ill from a fruitcake. M might as well not have been in the film at all. 9) Blofeld's motivation. "My name is Ernst Blofeld, you killed my cat, prepare to be arrested." 10) Moneypenny's family? Why bother? Doesn't contribute much at all and slows the pacing to a crawl in that section. 11) Q is still a field agent, does little technical work, gets himself captured, then executed by Blofeld. Q might as well have not been in the film at all since he's not Q at all. 12) Blofeld has sewn a canister of virus into Leiter's right leg, therefore we must chop off the leg. OR, here's a thought, you send him to a surgeon who can operate and remove the canister, right? Nah, that makes too much sense. 13) Secret reveal #1- Moneypenny says she is the secret commander of MI6 now that M is dead. Uh...ok? So why isn't Moneypenny actually commanding MI6 instead of running around on field ops she isn't qualified for? 14) Secret reveal #2- Nena is actually a secret villain intimately connected with the apparent main villain of the film, and she's played by Marion Cotillard. Yeah, we totally didn't see that coming Nolan. Another TDKR import that mangles the novelized version of the Nena character (in "For Special Services"). 15) Oh yeah, Tiffany Monts is in this film, we completely forgot about her after the opening sequence. Her character is treated disposably in this film, another casualty of the 10-year jump eliminating character development and the film simply throwing her aside for 3/4 of it. 16) Less than five minutes after Marion Cotillard reveals herself as a big bad, she dies an awkward, unceremonious death. Nolan, I am seriously getting annoyed with this TDKR parallels. Oh yeah, and most convenient timing of the year award goes to Moneypenny. 17) Blofeld gets thrown into a pool of sewage. While struggling, he screams he cannot swim and then gurgles underwater. Yep, foreshadowing. What a goddamn waste of the biggest Bond villain there is and of Christoph Waltz's talent. Blofeld is treated like the most common of cartoonish Bond villains and then gets killed off along with SPECTRE in a single film. WASTE OF TIME. 18) Monts tells Bond to sacrifice her to save London, because we need to continue to up the body count in the film. Bond cries manly tears even though we have no indication Monts meant anything to him after Lord Madship ended. 19) Moneypenny says that Bond will have to take the fall for M's death and that she and MI6 will have to hunt him down. Bond starts running, an innocent man accepting suspicion, losing people close to him, but still keeping to his work saving the world because it's the right thing to do, a loquacious guardian, a deadly protector, a British kni- YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!!!!!!! 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 That was oddly enjoyable to read, and although some of your complaints were other people's highlights, I understand your issues with the film. I'll answer one of them: Main reason for the ten year time jump was that I know Fassbender is a popular Bond choice, and when I'm done with Bond (which will be in Year 8), I wanted someone to have the option to continue with my cast, setting a Bond film in the ten year gap. Of course, going off your review, no one's going to want to touch Fassbender as Bond ever again, so I guess I'm screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) Well, that was an amazing review I laughed hard. Edited February 6, 2013 by CJohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 6, 2013 Author Share Posted February 6, 2013 That was oddly enjoyable to read, and although some of your complaints were other people's highlights, I understand your issues with the film. I'll answer one of them: Main reason for the ten year time jump was that I know Fassbender is a popular Bond choice, and when I'm done with Bond (which will be in Year 8), I wanted someone to have the option to continue with my cast, setting a Bond film in the ten year gap. Of course, going off your review, no one's going to want to touch Fassbender as Bond ever again, so I guess I'm screwed. I don't think anyone would want to make a Bond film with the same cast knowing that half of them are going to get killed off already. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 True, true. I guess emulating the director's style went too far for this film, as most TDKR references went unnoticed (except for Nena; I was tempted to recast Cotillard, but then I couldn't figure out anyone else). Based off the reactions by mostly everyone (except Riczhang), Bond Part 3 will be much more Lord Madship in style, even as a Duncan Jones film, and it will end the trilogy on a high note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark Alfred Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 I liked this better than Lord Madship. It was fun and Nolan worked for me. Has some flaws, but it's an entertaining ride. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Well, with that scathing review, and good-but-not-great response from everyone else (again, barring Riczhang), I'd say my Oscar chances this year are dead in the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Oh, and all I got to say about time jumps is just wait until The Last Six sequel. I'm going to abuse their immortality for a chance at possibly the biggest movie time jump ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted February 6, 2013 Author Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) To the Moon When in Doubt, Reach for the Stars Here are some snippets from other reviews of To the Moon: To the Moon has a wonderfully poignant story, and an early frontrunner for Best Animated Feature. The voice cast does a fine job, and the script is very strong, and emotionally resonating. Simply put, in my time on CAYOM, this is the best debut film I've ever read. One of the best movies I have read in CAYOM. I played the game and it is a fantastic adaptation. I hope the CAYOM Academy nominates it for Best Movie of the Year. Gorgeous animation, brilliant score, and amazing voice cast, To the Moon is an animated wonder. The direction and vision behind this film have payed off. I am in shock this was created by a first time studio.Best Animated Picture is in the bag. What else could I possibly add? Great job ChD. Edited February 6, 2013 by 4815162342 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChD Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 To the Moon When in Doubt, Reach for the Stars Here are some snippets from other reviews of To the Moon: What else could I possibly add? Great job ChD. Thank you very much ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
