Jupiter Ascending (2015)

[RichWS]

There was so much exposition thrown around in the movie that I almost fell asleep. I literally didn't care about anything that happened in the movie after, like, 50 minutes in. I was just waiting for it to end.

 

People who complain about exposition in Nolan's films should be forced to watch this. 

[IndustriousAngel]

The exposition wouldn't be so bad if it were actually followed by some consequences, if the detailed background would be explored and so on. As it is, it's as pointless as the action scenes.

[TheMovieman]

Strip away all the nonsensical BS dialogue, the nifty (and expensive) visual effects and the cardboard cutout characters and this damn movie is about harvesting humans. Just plain bad all around but more than enough to make fun of especially in a group setting.

 

**/*****, (D, 3.8/10, 1.5/4)

Edited May 22, 2015 by The Movieman

[Goffe]

Script wise, there were always something saving Wachowski's ass, until JA that is. 

 

Bound worked because it wasn't trying to be complex.

Matrix worked because the villains were machines, so it was easier to overlook any (poor) commentary.

Speed Racer worked because it was kiddies film, so they had to tone down their politics. 

Cloud Atlas worked because it was based on a fantastic book.

 

On the bad side, JA is filled with one-dimensional characters, cringe-worthy dialogue and convoluted plots. Plus, the political dishonest and intellectual reach that exceeds its grasp is just the icing on the cake.

 

Even the action, the one fucking aspect that the directors are known for, one of the few things that no one can dispute that they are (or were) good at, was pretty bad and unimaginative in this film. I don't know who to blame, the bloody awful editing (mind-bogglingly fact: from the same guy who cut CA) or the directors themselves.

 

One thing that I really liked about it, that they dropped rather quickly (of course), was the idea that time was the most important commodity in the universe, certainly the most interesting and fresh concept of the script, it brought a much-needed humanization of the villains (even if super brief). Frankly, the film should have been based around that.

 

On the good side, Redmayne deliciously campy and Kunis decent enough performance, visuals, some isolated moments, and the masterful score pretty much saves this film from a total a catastrophe.

 

I'm not saying that their past scripts were flawless, they weren't, but their craft was enough for me to overlook those flaws, that weren't even that bad to begin with. Wachowski reached a point where their strength as writers dissipated completely, and their weaknesses were amplified to the max.  JA and the more recently Sense8 is a clear sign of that.

 

It's pretty much the worst blockbuster made by once good filmmakers

 

I still don't know why she wanted or needed a telescope. 35/100

And why the fuck did she need or want that telescope?

Edited June 29, 2015 by Goffe

[Ezen Baklattan]

"I CREATE LIFE!"

[Goffe]

I have been reading some reviews about this thing, the positive ones never focus on the film itself, but rather on the audience reception of it, always taking a shit on hotter, more well made franchises. Gotta to love when people given lol reasons why their loved films failed to capture everyone's attention, in this case, there's a relatively accepted conspiracy theory that people didn't embrace the film because "The Wachowskis steadfastly refuse to make stale violent power fantasies for teenage boys, which seems to piss everyone off" (actual sentence from the most liked Letterboxd review). Just out-of-this-world ludicrous.

 

Long story short, some are afraid of admitting to enjoy lowest-common-denominator spectacle, and are angry because people don't seem to get the brilliance of the YA genre. By being one of the few to get this unjustly misunderstood film, they want to feel special, like their parents raised them.

 

Quote from an actual Letterboxd review, liked almost 70 times.
"the fact that they were given the money to make this is nearly a miracle, and to take a Marvel or Batman or Harry Potter or Star Wars or Lord of the Rings etc franchise seriously but dismiss this seems, quite frankly, ultra shitty, rude and dumb. Think about the fact that you're discouraging people from giving money to a trans filmmaker, and discouraging young women from seeing a movie that they might identify with or making them feel stupid for enjoying it"

 

I know it's wrong to make generalizations, but I'm just stating a pattern that I saw in some reviews from critics and the most well liked Letterboxd reviews.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Goffe

[The Futurist]

Still amazing the second time on glorious Blu Ray 1080-p, DTS-HD sound.

 

"I Like Dogs"

[RobinHood26]

The girl at the video store claims this is here favorite movie of the past year. She should be fired

[Ethan Hunt]

The girl at the video store claims this is here favorite movie of the past year. She should be fired

Maybe its the only movie she's seen

[4815162342]

B-

[Squaremaster316]

The only good thing about this atrocity is that it's virtually guaranteed that the Wachowskis will never be allowed to be involved with another big budget film ever again.

 

Send these two nitwits to Direct-to-dvd hell!!!

[Webslinger]

There's a decent movie somewhere in Jupiter Ascending, but it's smothered by the abundance of nonsensical world-building and overly serious approach that the Wachowskis take. There are so many different plot threads competing for attention that the story rarely makes sense, and the Wachowskis are so interested in the serious development of their universe that the characters themselves aren't properly developed. Mila Kunis does plucky, likable work in the title role, and I wish that the film had focused more on her own perspective of her journey and shown a greater willingness to have fun with her fish-out-of-water story. Alas, she's shortchanged at virtually every turn. Surprisingly, she also has barely any chemistry to speak of with Channing Tatum, whose charisma is completely absent in a stoic role that - ironically and to the film's detriment - is impossible to take as seriously as the filmmakers intend (a half-dog hybrid? Seriously?!). Even the widely ballyhooed work of Eddie Redmayne - the only actor in the entire film who picks up the campiness inherent in the concept and sprints with it - doesn't get enough time to resonate in all its so-bad-it's-good territory. The film's worst sin, however, is that it's just boring. It would be much easier to forgive the film's over-abundance of story if it was enjoyable, but it's so dry for so many lengthy stretches that it constantly threatens to lose viewers' attention. I like the Wachowskis and I desperately wanted this film to be a silly but eminently enjoyable guilty pleasure (like Speed Racer), but it's a dud that collapses under its own weight.

 

C-

[Avatree]

better than interstellar

[Ethan Hunt]

7 hours ago, Salacious Tree Crumb said:

better than interstellar

 

 

Shit...

[misafeco]

The only positive thing about this movie is that it's not the worst movie in this year. The title goes to Minions. 

[MrFanaticGuy34]

I have to ask.....

 

Why do some sci-fi originals always have to end up being generic and bomb at the box-office due to overly high budgets? Not many of those movies can easily succeed at being good and very successful, you know.

 

JA is one example.

 

What's so hard & wrong about making sci-fi movies with smaller budgets and actually make the good?

Edited December 10, 2015 by MrFanaticGuy34

[Avatree]

5 hours ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

I have to ask.....

 

Why do some sci-fi originals always have to end up being generic and bomb at the box-office due to overly high budgets? Not many of those movies can easily succeed at being good and very successful, you know.

 

JA is one example.

 

What's so hard & wrong about making sci-fi movies with smaller budgets and actually make the good?

if you mean science fiction films with spectacle and effects and action, here are some recent successes:

 

DISTRICT 9 (30M / 211M)

LOOPER (30M / 177M)

SOURCE CODE (32M / 147M)

IN TIME (40M / 174M)

CLOVERFIELD (25M / 171M)

 

 

also,

THE HUNGER GAMES (78M / 694M)

GRAVITY (100M / 723M)

which had much smaller budgets than most major blockbusters.

[James]

This is still the best Sci-Fi movie of 2015. Balem is 

[filmlover]

Wrong. This movie is still garbage.

[Goffe]

thought it was okay first time I saw it. Didn't hold up very well on a second viewing.