Joel M
-
Posts
2,498 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by Joel M
-
-
The killer of this movie just got caught 20 years later.
Zodiac meanwhile still not arrested. How come, David Fincher?
-
2
-
-
For me it's a tie between Fincher, Tarantino and PTA.
And I think it's 100% because they were the ones breaking out when I started getting really into movies. Seven, Pulp Fiction and Boogie Nights are among the first non-conventional movies I ever saw in my life. There's for sure other filmmakers older and more current that I adore just as much, but they don't have the same "I was there when it all began" feel for me.
-
1
-
-
I don't see Mallick getting anywhere near BP/BD for a few reasons.
-2011 was so bad for mainstream oscar films that a silent french film and a scorsese boxoffice mega flop ended up the 2 biggest contenders of the season. This year might end up weak but not THAT weak.
-Mallick doesn't hold the same allure for the arthouse-loving part of the Academy that he did a decade ago. A big part of his legend up to Tree of Life was that he was a recluse genius that graced the world with a movie once every decade and hollywood stars were tripping over themselves to end up on his cutting room floor. Every new Mallick movie used to be the event of the decade for the arthouse crowd. That's not the case anymore, he's done as many movies the last decade as he did in the previous 40 years.
-Most important of all, Hidden Life didn't exactly set the world on fire at Cannes. It was completely overshadowed by Bong, Tarantino, Sciamma and even Almodovar. I doubt the Academy will embrace him more than Cannes did.
I'm not saying the movie will be a non entity like the last few Mallick movies. It will be a much bigger deal, but the most I can see is a few random below the line noms like cinematography or the stuff period pieces usually get nominated for.
-
2
-
-
After Joker got that surprising win at Venice it's Joaquin's to lose.
He is just so respected in the industry and would have already won if he hadn't gone off the rails with the mockumentary stuff and was in more mainstream movies during the last 15 years.
I also don't think genre bias will be much of an obstacle here. Academy and their precursors have been flirting with comic book movies for a few years now (Wonder Woman, Logan, Deadpool, BP) and all those movies were considered part of big franchises and released outside of oscar season. Joker is a mid-budget fall release with a big festival win, it's R rated, it survived the critics and is gonna be killing it at the box office around the time oscar talk kicks into high gear. Even if the movie ends up just a marginal BP nominee with no other above the line noms besides Actor like Bohemian Rapsody did, I think Joaquin is still winning.
The only think that doesn't work in his favour is that someone else already won for that role not too long ago.
-
1
-
-
On 9/3/2019 at 7:05 AM, BoxOfficeFangrl said:
Watched the trailer for Parasite, it's definitely not going to get the "nothing happened, I feel asleep it was so boring" complaints you saw about Roma in the Honest Oscar Ballots last year.
Completely agree with this. Haneke or Pawlikowski are not exactly right comparisons. Bong is and has always been a commercial filmmaker, the most common comparison/praise western critics have thrown his way is Spielberg. His movies have the same language/culture barrier that all foreign films have, but will go down a lot easier with oscar voters that groan at the thought of watching a movie with subtitles.
-
1
-
-
It is known that chill Brad is the best Brad and fun Leo is the best Leo, but I think both are really special here. Even if they are giving different kinds of performances, too me they both manage the perfect balance between cartoony comedy characters and real genuine people with a meanigful connection. And the metaness of them playing a bunch of hollywood failures is just a bonus. The movie doesn't even have to wink.
I really really enjoyed this movie from start to finish. It didn't bother me how much it lingered on scenes like Cliff preparing dinner for his dog or driving around LA, in fact most of them were absolutely essential to the general vibe of the film. Tarantino movies are too long or indulgent has been the most common complain I've heard for almost every Tarantino movie before or after Sally Menke's death, but in this case like in almost all of his movies for me it's not a bug, it's a feature.
I also found the movie deeply respective of Sharon Tate and imo it pays a beautiful tribute to her. Even if her primary function in the movie is to build tension just by her presence, she still manages to get some of her original shine back before she was a very famous murder victim. Margot Robbie is so wonderful in it despite her limited screentime.
Over the last month I really tried to avoid the discourse but still heard about the alternative history ending. Didn't felt spoiled at all in the end because how it plays out surprised me in the best way possible. I was amazed how many little things from the first 2 hours pay off in the final act, I really need to see it a second time.
Too soon to say where exactly it falls in my Tarantino list, but I'm pretty sure it's in the upper half.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BoxOfficeFangrl said:
Leo's not doing the del Toro movie, either, it's going to be Bradley Cooper (who is seemingly trying out some...interesting facial hair at the moment, ahead of filming). Ultimately DiCaprio turned down chances to work with PTA and GdT, not sure how much the order matters.
Is the PTA thing confirmed that he was offered and passed? I thought it's still in the rumour phase, nothing official.
-
9 hours ago, Charlie Jatinder said:
This number is definately false. All Greek sources have Titanic admissions between 1.850.000 to 2 mil. tickets before the 2012 re-release.
Here's a boxoffice list from July 98 which has Titanic at 868.000 adm. only in the capital city while it is still in theatres
SpoilerAnd here's another newspaper article from June 99 that says it reached 2 mil. admissions in the entire country
https://www.tovima.gr/2008/11/24/archive/o-polemos-twn-astronomikwn-eispraksewn/
What I guess happened is lumiere took the capital admissions for whole country admissions. I guess lumiere is a good source for more current movies but Box office reporting before the 00s was a bit haphazard, I wonder if there's errors in others countries also.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Barnack said:
It add paint on the screen, on very beautiful photography it is a bit of a shame, also it can make reveal timing hard (like you get the news before the character or after it) and by definition for a good part of the movie your eyes are not looking at the good place, there is at least 3 good reason for dubbing movies.
This goes both ways though. With dubbing:
1) You lose the original actors voice which is a big part of their performance.
2)The translation has to take liberties and change words and phrases because they have to match the actors mouth in a different language. You don't hear the exact dialogue the writer created but rather the general gist of it. This might not seem like a big deal for some movies, but imagine how much a script that has a very deliberate pace to it (like Sorkin or Tarantino) will lose in dubbing, or even a comedy that has puns and wordplay humour.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Taruseth said:
Your map already answer it. I think this has something to do with a "we have always done this kind of mentality," and maybe a little bit with laziness and a lot of older people can't speak english
I think it's 100% habit. Germany probably started dubbing everything since Hollywood movies/tv shows entered Europe and Germans have grown up with it being the norm. People not knowing english or being illiterate in general was the main reason when they started doing it in the 50s but I don't think it's a factor anymore.
It certainly isn't laziness, dubbing requires more time and money than subtitles but that's what the audience is used to. Here in Greece they used subtitles since forever and even people who don't know english wouldn't watch a live action movie dubbed.
-
4
-
-
Season 2 drops tomorrow
I've been rewatching season 1 the last couple of days and I think over the past two years it has become my favorite ongoing tv show.
Even if the interviews/research is the main thrust of the show's narrative, the small scale cases are what really makes the show great. It'm at episode 6 which concludes the Altoona murder and it's just amazing how they turned that really small case (next to the famous serial killers) into an epic arc with memorable characters, complex relationships while simultaneously being full of twist and turns.
From the trailer season 2 looks like it's gonna have one big ongoing investigation instead of 3-4 small ones. I really hope it is as compelling as the small time crimes of the first season.
-
5 minutes ago, tawasal said:
They are also directors well known for producing movies that make over 100m that don’t need big name stars.
The ones that fit this description are Cameron,Spielberg, Nolan and arguably Tarantino (he needs the stars for his movies to be truly big) and Leo worked only once with three of them. But a Scorsese, Inarritu even Lurman movie without Leo being a big commercial hit? yeah no.
-
So we went from "this is making 70m OW easy" to "is this gonna make 100m?" in a couple of months.
I also thought initially this would be a slightly bigger Django because of the cast but in the end it doesn't have the catchy hook/premise or even if it does the marketing can't really focus on it because it's spoiler stuff from the second half of the movie. At this point I hope it 'll end up somewhere between IB and Django at the boxoffice.
-
-
1.Fight Club
2.Toy Story 2
3.The Matrix
4.Magnolia
5.Being John Malkovich
6.The Iron Giant
7.The Blair Witch Project
8.American Beauty
9.Run Lola Run
10.Eyes Wide Shut
11.The 6th sense
12.Cruel Intentions
13.The Insider
14.Ghost Dog - The Way of the Samurai
15.Ravenous
16.The Talented Mr. Ripley
17.Election
18.Sleepy Hollow
19.All about my mother
20.Notting Hill
21.South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut
22.Limbo
23.Three Kings
24.10 Things I hate about you
25.The End of the Affair
Honorable mentions: Human Traffic, Man on the Moon, Stir of Echoes, The Road Home, The Limey, Tarzan, She's all that, Go, Office Space, The Mummy, Galaxy Quest omg, just scrolling through the year on letterboxd I got dizzy by how many good movies they were made in 1999.
-
6 minutes ago, filmlover said:
I mean isn't August basically the other time of year where movies can be allowed long legs? Crazy Rich Asians had insane holds its first few weeks, Mission: Impossible held great throughout the month, and The Meg ended up making more than 3x its big opening despite being tepidly-received last year. Plus August looks to be especially devoid of releases that will make waves this year besides Hobbs & Shaw that first weekend.
All these are true but 30m is still too low of a start. Even with a 4x multiplier which is far from easy, that OW barely gets it to Inglourious Basterds total. No one says it 'll be a flop but I don't believe Sony expectations for this is to do what IB did 10 years ago.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Barnack said:
Considering Tarantino recent non holidays release legs (tend to be about 3.2) and recent oversea multiplier (about 1.6), a 30M start could be pushed to 100m and make 260m, without China.
Would feel underwhelming if it play like that imo.
That's my feeling also. Yes 30m OW would be amazing numbers for any 2.5 hour R dramedy that doesn't have all of QT-Brad-Leo and a 90-100m budget. If 30m is all they can manage then everyone else should pack it up for Netflix already.
-
2
-
-
-
I'm hopeful because it gives a Brothers Bloom vibe which I liked but that trailer was not good. The CSI KFC line was pure cringe.
-
1 hour ago, Porthos said:
Who the hell knows what Aladdin would be doing if Disney had better managed the rollout. Maybe, perhaps even probably, Aladdin is clawing back 90% of what it 'could' have gotten if things had done better. I suppose we'll never know. At the same time the legs of Aladdin is currently having off a 3 day holiday weekend is showing that maybe a 130/400 or 140/380 wasn't impossible if the buzz had been better managed.
I think TLK being released 2 months later is what really put a cap on how high can Aladdin open. If those movies had their marketing roll out almost simultaneous it's understandable that TLK would always overshadow it because it's TLK. But if TLK was coming out the next year I think Aladdin could have opened high enough to pass 400m/1b with ease even with the continuous bad buzz the project had from the start.
-
1
-
-
And even if they beef up the very slight DTV stories to be more adventurous there's the problem of the soundtracks. The sequel songs were cheaply made silly tunes no one remembers. I really don't think a theatrical sequel is that possible even if Aladdin goes beyond the billion mark. Maybe cheaper Disney+ movies but that wuld be pretty much the same with the dtv sequels so I really don't care about that.
-
16 minutes ago, sfran43 said:
Guy Ritchie truly won!!!
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Alli said:
One of the few original adult movies this summer. that could be an advantage. leo is a draw, of course, but something about the movie doesn't seem appealing.
It doesn't seem to have a strong plot hook like Django and IB had, the movie is being sold as Brad and Leo hanging out in the 60s for the most part.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I didn't expect to like it that much, but I did. Easily the best of Disney's live action remakes even if it sounds like faint praise.
The original is the movie I've watched more times than any other in my life and by a wide margin. I love it from start to finish but the least interesting thing about it was Aladdin and Jasmine. They are the definition of stock lead couple that the main cool thing about them is their sidekicks (and THE song of course).
So I really like it that this remake gives Aladdin and Jasmine almost all the spotlight. The CGI sidekicks aren't as cute and loveable as the animated ones to have much screentime and Will Smith while great could never turn this into his own stand up show like Robin Williams, so that shift in focus might have been a necessity but it absolutely works. Both Naomi Scott and Mena Massoud are really good and the way the movie give them more time together makes their chemistry shine onscreen. Not to mention Will Smith playing Hitch in the rom com hijinks scenes is a joy even when he's blue.
Ofc the movie remakes shot for shot the animation classic just like BatB did, but where BatB felt like a rote ugly imitation this has a charm that's independent from the original. Maybe it's the young leads and the rom com angle or maybe it's Will Smith being fun onscreen after so many years of dour performances. Probably a bit of both.
B+.
-I don't think Jafar was that terrible, he was kinda just there. My biggest gripe is that boring old dude playing Sultan. Where was my fat jolly Sultan?
-The Jasmine new song was ok, nothing to write home about but the staging of that musical number was lol worthy.
Best Picture Predictions - 2019
in And The Winner Is...
Posted
ICON!