|
Please title all your posts and rehost all images on Imgur |
![[image loading]](http://blog.buecher.de/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Star-Trek-Into-Darkness-202x300.jpg)
StarTrek into Darkness:
This movie is like the Pyronale. The Pyronale is a festival/competition for fireworks.
Usually we see fireworks once or twice a year, for fifteen minutes, and that is
special. The Pyronale is 8 hours, 3 days in a row fireworks from every country of
the world.
Now I would never watch the Pyronale because it makes me sleepy fast, this movie
kept me awake. It has not much of a story, there is no startrek "to bodly go where
no-one has ever gone before" moments, no genisis device that could spark great
ideas in the young minds of terraforming and a peaceful future.
This movie is great for people who enjoy the terminator series, and I certainly do,
even more, because they got interresting story twists about timetravels and scifi
elements. This movie instead has LAAZZERS.
It is a really cool Action flick, like the old Total Recall, but instead of some clever
story or great visual ideas of aliengirls ;d , we fill plotholes and in generall all holes
of the movie with EXPLOSIONS and LAZERS. This movie should be awesome for 0-6
year olds, for all the colors and shapes it has.
6/10, a great firework, no plot, would make Gene rotate in his grave
Question for trekkies that have seen the movie:
+ Show Spoiler +Why is Praxis already destroyed?
Super:
OMG. To think I almost watched that with my mother! This movie has tons of
hardcore gore in it, beware, not for the light hearted. It is about Frank, who
decides to take a wrench and mow down people who do bad things in his mind. If
you like ellen page, you will love ellen page after this movie. A lot of people
compare it to kick-Ass (which you should totally watch aswell), but I found it very
different. It's a more true, a real movie. If you can laugh about the splatter
effects, which are gross, do not mind the constant wink at the coalation between
religion and psychopaths, you probably gonna enjoy this very, very much.
Also, If you just ever dreamed about being raped by ellen page... well I not gonna
rate this movie, beware
.../10
![[image loading]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vwOU0Z3Y8eg/UXcKbCCqUgI/AAAAAAAAANw/crHVMACoEoo/s400/iron-man-3-imax.jpg)
Iron man 3:
Another Firework, meh, I was bored 90% of the time. For fans of the other movies
probably still worth it, everybody else, stay away, use these 2 hours of your life for
something useful.
4/10 mehhh
|
On April 26 2013 07:53 Jockmcplop wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Absolutely the funniest movie i have ever seen, with some real emotional (i hesitate to use this word cos its about terrorists) impact. 9.5/10
I love this movie as well. Great pick 
|
1584 Posts
|
On May 15 2013 01:15 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2013 00:34 ZapRoffo wrote:On May 14 2013 21:33 YoucriedWolf wrote:On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 14 2013 17:36 YoucriedWolf wrote:
Woa just saw "Persona" by Ingmar Bergman. Mindblowingly good, one of the best films I've ever seen. YES ! My second favorite movie  Watch Cries and Whispers, Summer with Monika, The Virgin Spring, Wild Strawberries and Scenes from a Marriage, Fanny and Alexander, if you haven't one of these. Saw Hannah Arendt a few days ago, not bad but I think the subject wasn't really good for a movie. Read Eichmann in Jerusalem instead... Did watch Wild Strawberries and Fanny and Alexander they are good. But I think I need to hold back on my Bergman for a while because he always delivers hard. Better to watch a few movies I might not like for a while, especially since I have amazing holes in my game. I've never even seen Renoir, Ozu, Kieslowski or Lang. What should I look for to truly appreciate [revolutionary] camerawork and such? I don't understand any of this. I would recommend some classic silent films also, like Man with a Movie Camera or The Fall of the House of Usher are visually memorable ones to me. And Dreyer, I haven't seen the Passion of Joan of Arc yet but Vampyr is brilliant. Solid advice, Passion of Joan Arc is very interesting een though it's not totally on purpose. And Sunrise, in my opinion it's almost as modern as Citizen Kane in terms of directing skills, plus it's an amazing story. Speaking movies hurt mise-en-scène a lot at the beginning.
Very true. I mean comparing sound films of the late 20s/early 30s to the last silent films like Sternberg's Docks of New York is pretty striking. A large exception being Fritz Lang's M. The mise-en-scène and camerawork is incredible for an early talkie. That would be a great starting point for Lang.
On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:
Nah. Such a hard title to give though. I'd go for Mankiewicz personnally.
Yeah, that was just me in the moment of seeing such a great little known film by him. I could go for Nicholas Ray, Samuel Fuller, Anthony Mann, Stanley Kubrick, John Cassavetes or hell even Frank Borzage over Welles given the day.
|
On May 15 2013 08:37 Chytilova wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2013 01:15 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 15 2013 00:34 ZapRoffo wrote:On May 14 2013 21:33 YoucriedWolf wrote:On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 14 2013 17:36 YoucriedWolf wrote:
Woa just saw "Persona" by Ingmar Bergman. Mindblowingly good, one of the best films I've ever seen. YES ! My second favorite movie Watch Cries and Whispers, Summer with Monika, The Virgin Spring, Wild Strawberries and Scenes from a Marriage, Fanny and Alexander, if you haven't one of these. Saw Hannah Arendt a few days ago, not bad but I think the subject wasn't really good for a movie. Read Eichmann in Jerusalem instead... Did watch Wild Strawberries and Fanny and Alexander they are good. But I think I need to hold back on my Bergman for a while because he always delivers hard. Better to watch a few movies I might not like for a while, especially since I have amazing holes in my game. I've never even seen Renoir, Ozu, Kieslowski or Lang. What should I look for to truly appreciate [revolutionary] camerawork and such? I don't understand any of this. I would recommend some classic silent films also, like Man with a Movie Camera or The Fall of the House of Usher are visually memorable ones to me. And Dreyer, I haven't seen the Passion of Joan of Arc yet but Vampyr is brilliant. Solid advice, Passion of Joan Arc is very interesting een though it's not totally on purpose. And Sunrise, in my opinion it's almost as modern as Citizen Kane in terms of directing skills, plus it's an amazing story. Speaking movies hurt mise-en-scène a lot at the beginning. Very true. I mean comparing sound films of the late 20s/early 30s to the last silent films like Sternberg's Docks of New York is pretty striking. A large exception being Fritz Lang's M. The mise-en-scène and camerawork is incredible for an early talkie. That would be a great starting point for Lang. Show nested quote +On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:
Nah. Such a hard title to give though. I'd go for Mankiewicz personnally.
Yeah, that was just me in the moment of seeing such a great little known film by him. I could go for Nicholas Ray, Samuel Fuller, Anthony Mann, Stanley Kubrick, John Cassavetes or hell even Frank Borzage over Welles given the day.
Another example could be comparing the last silent Hitchcock to his first talkie... No wonder some people thought talkies had no future^^
And yeah, I think tons of people could be name, American cinema is just so... overwhelming. Nice to see a fellow Cassavetes fan in any case
|
Just watched: you may not kiss the bride and was pretty cool.
Going to watch: to rome with love and ironman 3.
|
I cant believe I have just only watched Scott Pilgrim. Theres no need to review, analyze this movie and stuffs because it's simply the coolest ever made. You just gotta love it
10/10
|
On May 14 2013 22:09 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2013 21:33 YoucriedWolf wrote:On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 14 2013 17:36 YoucriedWolf wrote:
Woa just saw "Persona" by Ingmar Bergman. Mindblowingly good, one of the best films I've ever seen. YES ! My second favorite movie Watch Cries and Whispers, Summer with Monika, The Virgin Spring, Wild Strawberries and Scenes from a Marriage, Fanny and Alexander, if you haven't one of these. Saw Hannah Arendt a few days ago, not bad but I think the subject wasn't really good for a movie. Read Eichmann in Jerusalem instead... Did watch Wild Strawberries and Fanny and Alexander they are good. But I think I need to hold back on my Bergman for a while because he always delivers hard. Better to watch a few movies I might not like for a while, especially since I have amazing holes in my game. I've never even seen Renoir, Ozu, Kieslowski or Lang. What should I look for to truly appreciate [revolutionary] camerawork and such? I don't understand any of this. He has average movies too, his carrier was really prolific. Only Ozu movie I saw was a disAppointment (Tokyo Story). Kieswlowski is a cool guy, Dekalog 4-5-6 are among the very best things ever done for TV, and the Three Color Trilogy rules. Lang is a master, but I don't know him well, especially the American period. You should start with M I think. Renoir is a great guy, start with La Grande Illusion. Seen any Fellini/Tarkovski/Mankiewicz/Kurosawa ? That's a broad question, I think it's easier to notice with some specific director, Welles and Ophüls, as they have a very barroco style, with huge camera movements and very visible ideas. Tarr and his long shot maybe too, if you can deal with him. I have no theorical grounding in cinema, so my advice is to try to think about it while watching.
Yes, I read your unfavorable judgement on Tokyo Story, it was a shame because that was the movie I was planning on watching. I have very good knowledge of directors and which movies to watch because there is a great website (swedish unfortunately) that will let me make comprehensive lists of what to watch and it will predict my rating of a movie with great accuracy before I've seen it based on previous ratings I've made. I am just very slow in watching because watching film to me is more like homework and less like entertainment.
I have seen all of the ones you inquired about, all but Mankiewicz, I understand I must watch "All about Eve" asap.
And I wouldn't speak on Kurosawa because I was just a child when I saw "the seven samurai", it is nice that he has stayed so long in the business so I can watch something modern with him I guess it wouldn't be wrong to start with "Ran"? (right??)
Watching the camera technique of the same director through numerous works does seem like an intelligent thing to do. Maybe I will do it with Tarr, I have been anxious to see his movies but I did not know he had an indicative style of camerawork.
Yesterday I watched my second movie by Bresson ("Au hasard Balthazar" and now "Mouchette") I don't know why I keep doing this his movies are just terrible. Feeling so agitated I actually had to go on wikipedia to find out what the fuck was going on and I felt a lot better when I found out that he actually intended for his movies to be terrible. At least I am content knowing that he was happy doing whatever it is he was doing.
Thx for all advice made by other people too!
|
![[image loading]](http://s.cdon.com/media-dynamic/images/product/movie/dvd/image4/oslo_31_august_no-14619151-frntl.jpg)
9/10
|
On May 16 2013 03:50 YoucriedWolf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2013 22:09 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 14 2013 21:33 YoucriedWolf wrote:On May 14 2013 19:21 corumjhaelen wrote:On May 14 2013 17:36 YoucriedWolf wrote:
Woa just saw "Persona" by Ingmar Bergman. Mindblowingly good, one of the best films I've ever seen. YES ! My second favorite movie Watch Cries and Whispers, Summer with Monika, The Virgin Spring, Wild Strawberries and Scenes from a Marriage, Fanny and Alexander, if you haven't one of these. Saw Hannah Arendt a few days ago, not bad but I think the subject wasn't really good for a movie. Read Eichmann in Jerusalem instead... Did watch Wild Strawberries and Fanny and Alexander they are good. But I think I need to hold back on my Bergman for a while because he always delivers hard. Better to watch a few movies I might not like for a while, especially since I have amazing holes in my game. I've never even seen Renoir, Ozu, Kieslowski or Lang. What should I look for to truly appreciate [revolutionary] camerawork and such? I don't understand any of this. He has average movies too, his carrier was really prolific. Only Ozu movie I saw was a disAppointment (Tokyo Story). Kieswlowski is a cool guy, Dekalog 4-5-6 are among the very best things ever done for TV, and the Three Color Trilogy rules. Lang is a master, but I don't know him well, especially the American period. You should start with M I think. Renoir is a great guy, start with La Grande Illusion. Seen any Fellini/Tarkovski/Mankiewicz/Kurosawa ? That's a broad question, I think it's easier to notice with some specific director, Welles and Ophüls, as they have a very barroco style, with huge camera movements and very visible ideas. Tarr and his long shot maybe too, if you can deal with him. I have no theorical grounding in cinema, so my advice is to try to think about it while watching. Yes, I read your unfavorable judgement on Tokyo Story, it was a shame because that was the movie I was planning on watching. I have very good knowledge of directors and which movies to watch because there is a great website (swedish unfortunately) that will let me make comprehensive lists of what to watch and it will predict my rating of a movie with great accuracy before I've seen it based on previous ratings I've made. I am just very slow in watching because watching film to me is more like homework and less like entertainment. I have seen all of the ones you inquired about, all but Mankiewicz, I understand I must watch "All about Eve" asap. And I wouldn't speak on Kurosawa because I was just a child when I saw "the seven samurai", it is nice that he has stayed so long in the business so I can watch something modern with him I guess it wouldn't be wrong to start with "Ran"? (right??) Watching the camera technique of the same director through numerous works does seem like an intelligent thing to do. Maybe I will do it with Tarr, I have been anxious to see his movies but I did not know he had an indicative style of camerawork. Yesterday I watched my second movie by Bresson ("Au hasard Balthazar" and now "Mouchette") I don't know why I keep doing this his movies are just terrible. Feeling so agitated I actually had to go on wikipedia to find out what the fuck was going on and I felt a lot better when I found out that he actually intended for his movies to be terrible. At least I am content knowing that he was happy doing whatever it is he was doing. Thx for all advice made by other people too!
Stop watching those Bresson asap, you're hurting yourself^^ I was completely dumbfounded when I saw Au hasard Balthazar, though my opinion has changed a bit since. But A Man Escaped is an incredible movie for instance, and a lot easier to grasp in my opinion. Best prison movie just behind Le Trou (Becker), which I can't help but advise to anybody who love cinema. And it might be a bit harder, but Pickpocket is one of my favorite movie.
For Mankiewicz, Eve is excellent, but his carrier is incredibly varied and good. Letter to three wife is wonderful, Sleuth is an incredible and very unique movie, The Ghost and Mrs Muir is my favorite romance... He's just one of the best scenarist ever, and for me he is everything that is right about Hollywood.
Ran is a great movie, but it's not my favorite. Hard to advise anything, because almost everything is at least very good, and he has tried many genre. And also, I haven't seen everything by far. My favorite nowadays is Redbeard if that helps though.
|
To each his own, but seeing Bresson's L'Argent in a theater is still the most powerful and awe-inspiring screening I've ever been to. Dude's got talent.
On May 16 2013 03:50 YoucriedWolf wrote:
Yes, I read your unfavorable judgement on Tokyo Story, it was a shame because that was the movie I was planning on watching.
You can check out this! My short review on an Ozu film from 2 months ago (It was released on DVD recently):
On March 15 2013 10:09 Chytilova wrote:Show nested quote +Yasujiro Ozu's first sound film The Only Son (1936) ![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pTvIRwDJyBs/TO6hK9DKZSI/AAAAAAAAAMk/vNhkUewAqJI/s1600/vlcsnap-2010-11-24-22h00m47s1.png) It had been way too long since I saw an Ozu film. They are just as amazing as I remembered. The story of a single mother who works in a factory in a rural area of Japan and spends a great deal of her money to send her only son to a school in Tokyo. When he is grown up, married and has a young son she visits him to find out he quit a government job thinking he could find better work, but is now stuck in a low paying and unsatisfying teaching position. Like all his films the emotions are understated and poignant. His shots always hold onto the characters long enough to get the maximum emotional impact. His framing is especially beautiful in this one as well. No one makes better family dramas than Ozu and this is definitely one of his better ones.
|
![[image loading]](http://blog-imgs-53.fc2.com/h/x/m/hxm129/girl_with_the_dragon_tattoo_ver4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://xuongphimhd.net/sites/default/files/film_image/2013/02/24/img7KfAAy.jpg)
I watched both versions of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". It was very interesting to see two versions of hte same story made almost at the same time (2009,2011). It's hard to say which one i thought was "better" and it's probably impossible to decide since I obviously had to watch one before the other, and having to read the 2009 Swedish one dubbed changes things. I thought both were pretty good though, despite the 2011 "hollywood" version had clearly better craftsmanship and "style". I never read the book so I'm not sure which version really captured the sense better. What made them seem somewhat unique, besides being extremely similar in many ways, was that they had different takes on the main characters. In the 2009 swedish version the characters both seemed a bit more exposed and uncomfortable, whereas the 2011 version they were both seemed more confident and straightforward. I'd recommend both.
Oh and if you watch the Swedish version and are tempted to watch the 2 other movies in the series... don't. They are pretty crappy and completely different from the first part.
|
The depth of Skyfall's subtext shined brighter than it's circling plot, the new actors rise, old fall. The narrative isn't as tight as Casino Royale, but what is it's first time around?
Excellent color representation, and choice of locations, the film has a whimsy attitude with it's dialogue too, but which can be muted. The film fits well on it's own, and is certainly better than Quantum of Solace. SKYFALL is the end of a 007 era.
|
![[image loading]](http://data.whicdn.com/images/18005273/600full-dancer-in-the-dark-screenshot_thumb.jpg)
God damn you, Lars von Trier. (Dancer in the Dark)
|
The Great Gatsby
8/10. Very stylish.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 19 2013 08:44 Brainsurgeon wrote:God damn you, Lars von Trier. (Dancer in the Dark)
that movie is sad!
|
On May 19 2013 08:44 Brainsurgeon wrote:God damn you, Lars von Trier. (Dancer in the Dark)
I haven't seen that since I was a child.
|
United Kingdom10017 Posts
On May 19 2013 09:01 Velouria wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 19 2013 08:44 Brainsurgeon wrote:God damn you, Lars von Trier. (Dancer in the Dark) that movie is sad!
Maybe the saddest i have ever seen 
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TObi6u5.jpg)
4 Lions.
It's a movie about 5 muslim extremists who want to blow themselves up in London. Although they're not what the media portray them as.
The movie is a comedy.
It portrays the characters as not right in the head. It's done the way most British TV shows are made, with straight faces, subtle jokes, and loads of sarcasm.
Altogether it's pretty silly. And it shows how the media and government officials tend to get things wrong or make things up after a terrorist attack. The world isn't so black and white.
|
The Cat Returns
![[image loading]](http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/2775/thecatreturns.jpg)
An upbeat fairytale anime from Studio Ghibli, unfortunately one of the weaker film of the studio. The plot is generic with worse than Ghibli standard animation, unmemorable music. It's like some of the childhood day when you happened to turn on the TV, saw some anime and sit through it.
That said, some of the scenes are just plain funny to watch, the characters are charismatic too. Maybe Im too old for this shit xD
7.2/10 (IMDB got it right)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/super-movie-poster-405x600.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTczNDQxNzI0NF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDM0NzEwNA@@._V1_SY317_CR0,0,214,317_.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JuQm9T3.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eAcv9og.jpg)
