The Walk (2015)

[Plain Old Tele]

Don't fall.

[4815162342]

It was fine. The walk itself is brilliant. Silvestri's music is pretty good.

 

But too much JGL monologue narration mugging and the characters outside of Phillippe were pretty thin. Could have gotten some trimming in Acts 1 and 2.

[The Panda]

I saw this in IMAX 3D and I'm mixed, I overall really enjoyed it and visually its well worth the price of admission. Great cinematography and excellent 3D, its some of the best use of 3D I've seen.

Narratively, its a mixed bag, my biggest problem being that you have JGL narrating in hard to adjust to French accent on the top of the Statue of Liberty the entire movie. It's distracting and lazy. It tells too much of a story that should be very visual in nature. So much of the narrative feels like a cheap way to speed through the development without any care, making the development ironically slow and boring in perception, to get to the thrilling coup act.

Whenever the movie quits telling you the story and shows you the story, it's brilliant and engaging. Sadly it tells about half the story and shows you the other half, making it half great and half mediocre.

The performances are a little hammy, and while they're not bad, there's nothing special. I think most of the fault of this is on the script for skipping development in favor of narration. Because of this the emotional pay off of the coup sequence isn't as strong as it should be.

I also find this laziness inexcusable as its Robert Zemeckis, the man has made some great films, and you can see greatness in this movie. Sadly that greatness is never fully realized because its coated in laziness. Laziness in execution, laziness in the score, and laziness in the script.

Not to say I disliked the movie, there's a lot to love, and there's nothing to hate. There's just a lot to be dissatisfied about because you know it could have easily been done better and you know Zemeckis knew that when he made the film.

This could have easily been an A/A+ film because there's so many fantastic moments. And when you're in the coup, you feel as if you're there, on the tower, on the wire. Sadly, it just couldn't completely deliver on the other moments, most notably an intrusive narration, so I'll give it a B/B+

[TStechnij]

Completely mixed. Some really great caper elements, but mostly it is a jumbled, lazy mess. Agree with The Panda a lot.

My full review: http://www.statepress.com/article/2015/10/joseph-gordon-levitt-stuns-by-somehow-being-even-more-punchable-than-previous-endeavors-in-039the-walk

I gave it a D on the poll. I wish I could retract that and give t a fair C/C-

Edited October 8, 2015 by TStechnij

[bapi]

So I was the only person in a theater with 240+ capacity... Yeah, wow, that was weird. Anyway the movie is quite weak and outside of very good 3D and Silvestri's music... I think it's the worst Robert Zemeckis movie ever! I like the guy but even something like Beowulf is better!

 

4/10

[TalismanRing]

Completely mixed. Some really great caper elements, but mostly it is a jumbled, lazy mess. Agree with The Panda a lot.

My full review: http://www.statepress.com/article/2015/10/joseph-gordon-levitt-stuns-by-somehow-being-even-more-punchable-than-previous-endeavors-in-039the-walk

I gave it a D on the poll. I wish I could retract that and give t a fair C/C-

 

Click "delete my vote" and vote again.

[The Panda]

I'm going to change my score to a B- after thinking some more. Too many flaws to warrant anything higher.

[Webslinger]

Even though The Walk marks just his second live action feature since Cast Away in 2000, The Walk feels very much like the animated films that Robert Zemeckis completed between 2004 and 2009: technologically remarkable, even if at the expense of the stories that each of the films told. Even though the film was shot with flesh-and-blood actors, The Walk is so remarkable in its composition and its visual effects that it feels like an animated film, which is an extraordinarily strong testament to Zemeckis's prowess as a visual director; he's so technologically adept behind the camera that the final product doesn't feel confined to the limitations of live action despite the presence of real performers. Nevertheless, I did feel compelled throughout the majority of the film's running time, and the investment that I felt in the first 90 minutes or thereabouts contributes to the effectiveness of the 17-minute setpiece to which the title refers. As seen in IMAX 3D, the walk of the title is truly a grand cinematic experience; while I did not experience the nausea that some viewers have reported, I watched with gasps in my breath despite knowing how the situation would result in advance. As such, Zemeckis's expert sleight-of-hand as a force behind the camera eclipses any shortcomings that the film itself might have, and it ultimately stands as evidence to the ingenuity of the human spirit, especially considering the tragic context that the structure at its center would come to assume in 2001.

 

B+

 

And, yes, if you can see it in IMAX 3D, definitely do so. While this film is not by any means perfect, it does demand to be seen on the biggest available screen.

[Blankments]

I thought it was fairly genius. I'm not a fan at all of the narration being literally talking to the camera, and the performances are serviceable, but this is a film for direction and 3D, and it works well. The entire walk I thought was overrated... until it ended and I realized I was holding my breath for the whole time. To be honest, I think the film works best in its last few minutes, after the titular walk. Talking about how the World Trade Center has a soul now and then Phillippe saying he has a pass to go on the observation deck "...forever" wistfully... I teared-up a little bit. This movie more than anything made me realize just how damn important those towers were, since 9/11 happened when I was in Kindergarten. Those bits don't feel shoehorned in at all.

 

Basically, yeah, the third act is easily the best part but it redeems every aspect of the previous parts of the film. A

[Kalo]

Should I see this film in theaters? It's playing at my theater now, but won't be playing at a time I can see it this weekend and will gone after that. I'm kind of high off of Martian and really am more excited for Bridge of Spies and Steve Jobs so if this is just okay I feel like it's not worth cramming so much in, in such a short time. 

[Jake Gittes]

I suspect Bridge of Spies and Steve Jobs will be just as effective at home, but I guarantee you that The Walk won't. It's a movie made for a big screen and 3D.

[Goffe]

To be honest, not even its set-piece impressed me, maybe because I was already checking my watch every 5 minutes when the walking finally started. I thought JGL was miscast as hell and the ending stretched for way too long, like at least 10 minutes beyond where it should have ended. Also, I'm not a fan of narrated movies, way to ruin the film's mood. I did like some of the music. 50/100

Edited October 14, 2015 by Goffe

[Kalo]

I suspect Bridge of Spies and Steve Jobs will be just as effective at home, but I guarantee you that The Walk won't. It's a movie made for a big screen and 3D.

 

It's not playing in 3D near by. 

[kaijukurt]

I found the overall plot to be decent enough to keep my attention. It did get slow at points though.

 

Visual FX and use of 3D were really great.

 

Plus, I liked JGL here; he just had this sort of appealing energy.

 

2.5/4

[BK007]

On October 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, The Panda said:

I saw this in IMAX 3D and I'm mixed, I overall really enjoyed it and visually its well worth the price of admission. Great cinematography and excellent 3D, its some of the best use of 3D I've seen.

 

Narratively, its a mixed bag, my biggest problem being that you have JGL narrating in hard to adjust to French accent on the top of the Statue of Liberty the entire movie. It's distracting and lazy. It tells too much of a story that should be very visual in nature. So much of the narrative feels like a cheap way to speed through the development without any care, making the development ironically slow and boring in perception, to get to the thrilling coup act.

 

Whenever the movie quits telling you the story and shows you the story, it's brilliant and engaging. Sadly it tells about half the story and shows you the other half, making it half great and half mediocre.

 

The performances are a little hammy, and while they're not bad, there's nothing special. I think most of the fault of this is on the script for skipping development in favor of narration. Because of this the emotional pay off of the coup sequence isn't as strong as it should be.

 

I also find this laziness inexcusable as its Robert Zemeckis, the man has made some great films, and you can see greatness in this movie. Sadly that greatness is never fully realized because its coated in laziness. Laziness in execution, laziness in the score, and laziness in the script.

 

Not to say I disliked the movie, there's a lot to love, and there's nothing to hate. There's just a lot to be dissatisfied about because you know it could have easily been done better and you know Zemeckis knew that when he made the film.

 

This could have easily been an A/A+ film because there's so many fantastic moments. And when you're in the coup, you feel as if you're there, on the tower, on the wire. Sadly, it just couldn't completely deliver on the other moments, most notably an intrusive narration, so I'll give it a B/B+

 

 

But Star Wars isn't lazy? Hahaha. Man, some people are hilarious! 

 

Fanboys, I tell you.

 

 

[The Panda]

3 minutes ago, BK007 said:

 

 

But Star Wars isn't lazy? Hahaha. Man, some people are hilarious! 

 

Fanboys, I tell you.

 

 

 

???

 

Youre quoting my movie review for a separate movie (that I reviewed before Star Wars) just to call me a fanboy?

 

I called the movie lazy because it does a very jarring narration the entire time instead of showing you a story that should have been visual by nature.  It was just lazy storytelling.  Star Wars re-treads a few things from the original, but they're different enough and it doesn't handhold you throughout the film.  Anyways, I don't think the point I was making for the Walk was comparable in anyway to Star Wars.

 

Also, somebody being a big fan of a franchise doesn't make them a fanboy, and I wish people would retire that terminology as a derogatory word towards others.  So what, I love Star Wars?  It doesn't make my perspective extremely jaded for everything I see because I love a set of movies (not even the whole set mind you, I can't stand 1 and 2).  I don't compare every movie I see too Star Wars, heck I don't see why Id compare any movie to it unless it's part of a conversation or there's some major reason to compare.

 

 

Anyways, you're obviously just trolling and trying to get a rise out of me.  But random comments like these belong in the deep corners of IMDb forums, or the YouTube comments section, not here.