Trainspotting is a strange movie. I would like to say that I enjoyed it, but that's not really how I felt watching it. It wasn't as depressing as Requiem for a Dream or as disturbing as some of the other movies I've seen, but it has a lot of dark humor and very off-putting scenes. Ewan McGregor turned in a great performance in this film, but it's still strange. I think I still need time to reflect on it though, haha.
I watch Trainspotting as a comedy more than anything, reading the book helps though it is all in Scottish vernacular which can be tough. I wouldn't say it is a case of the book being better than the movie because Irving Welsh isn't the best writer ever, but they help one another a great deal.
See the Google preview for what I mean by the Scottish vernacular. Filth was written the same way, which was adapted into a film that is on Netflix in the states now. Not as good as TS by any stretch but entertaining enough.
I dunno if you're an Irvine Welsh fan (I didn't know who he was until I saw Trainspotting), but he just did an AMA on Reddit here, if you're interested.
I thought Trainspotting worked best as a comedy with some darker aspects to it, but I still thought it was pretty dark. Not the darkest movie about drug addicts I've ever seen, but... + Show Spoiler +
the scene where Ewan McGregor is detoxing was pretty dark as well as the scene where they find Tommy. Basically any scene with the baby in it was depressing as hell also.
I have been leaning toward the theory that Anthony and Adam are in fact the same person. That Adam is Anthony after the car accident and possible separation from his wife. I love the theory that this movie is not in chronological order and goes something like this.
Anthony is cheating on his wife and after the car accident with his mistress he cant hide it anymore. (maybe where the scar comes from)
The accident was 6 months ago the same amount of time his wife has been pregnant.
This overload of commitment might of caused Anthony to develop a second personality.
Anthony had not been seen at his talent agency for 6 months. (possibly because he has been Adam working as a professor.)
Adam going to see his mother also leads me to believe they are the same person. His mother tell him she got blueberry's for him and Adam reply's he does not like them, (we know Anthony loved them). She is glad he gave up on his silly acting career, and comments on him being loose with women. When Adam is waiting for Anthony's wife at there apartment, his wife is startled thinking he was still at his mothers. Adams is confused by this because he was just at his own mothers house, (really Anthony's Mother).
The spiders might be symbolism to Anthony's fear of women controlling his freedoms. And why the spiders where shown either in place of a women or after a scene with one like his mother.
In one of the last scenes where Anthony's wife asks him to stay, it sounds like she knows its not him. I think in reality they have just been separated for awhile now and the scene of the car crash is really just Anthony's memory of the incident. He cry's in remorse and says sorry to his wife for all that he had put her though and she asks her husband/ex to stay with her.
The next scene he see's the new key and wants to go back to his old ways going back to the "club". This instantly reminds him he's not free when he see's his wife as a spider. once again "trapped" in commitment.
Its all just a theory of course and that's why I love films like this!
That's a pretty good explanation. I read an explanation very similar on Reddit, and I'm glad you liked my recommendation. It was a good movie in my opinion. After reflecting on it, I'd say that the movie is a solid 7 or 7.5/10.
Maybe I'm just dense, but I feel like the movie failed to make a huge statement about society as a whole. Instead, I feel like it was almost a character study. I feel like the movie could've explored deeper themes and the spider metaphor was quite clever, but I wish it had been implemented slightly differently. It was a clever movie though, and Jake Gyllenhaal put out a spectacular performance in my opinion. I think the part of the movie that makes it somewhat eerie is that you can't tell if Adam has a mental disease, lives out his fantasies, or if he's living in a strange place. I think that's part of what makes the movie so intriguing, but frustrating at the same time. I would like to rewatch the movie eventually and try to figure out what the actual timeline of events (if there is one) is.
About Enemy, it is (very loosely) based on a Saramago's book, The double. I absolutely loved the film. I like your interpretations guys, but i see it differently (and who cares, that's the point on movies like this one and that's why they are so great, they are made to toy with the viewer and leave an open puzzle for us to enjoy). Spoiler ahead from my own interpretation.
The movie plays with identity, two exact copies who lives on different context are different, so what makes them unique are their individual experiences, as that was the main theme of the book and is the main theme of the movie aswell, but the real beauty for me is the influence of Saramago's political views (which is where the homage to Saramago is in the movie, since he lived 48 years under a totalitarian regime and he believed that we were already living on "1984") to make the changes they did on the script. The spiders.
I have a hard time explaining on english so i will be short.
First we have a scene at the secret society, and short after Adam's does a speech about control, which perfectly describes the initial scene. The rulers offer hedonism involving spiders and sense of secrecy to control. You are in, or you are not. If you are not you don't have a clue of what is going on. If you are in, you are just under their control.
You can also see how Adam is on a routine, a grey life that repeats itself, pretty much like he describes what is life on a totalitarian regime. He feels trapped, he is unsatisfied and he certainly lacks any kind of thing to call him unique, and it's the critic to nowadays society and capitalism. The only thing he does have as an identity are that he is a history teacher (education), and that he is vocal about totalitarianism (requires to be silenced).
Then starts the speech about Hegel and Karl Marx, that every big event happens twice, first as a tragedy and second as farce.
They are different persons, since when the radio announces the accident, Adam's on Anthony's house and she is having a shower (and you can see the glass... web like marks ^^), we know it happens at that time because we hear the shower in the background while he turns down the volume of the radio.
Unsatisfied, he could had fought Anthony's proposal, but he didn't, because he desired to experience what his double had too, and that's why he went to Anthony's house. On the bed scene, you can see how Adam's girlfriend freaks out with the mark of the ring, meaning that they are not the same person and asks screaming in panic "who are you", and Anthony's girlfriend asks about how was his day at the university, and Adam says "what" truly confused. Later, she asks him to stay and he accepts, assuming what would be his new identity. Meanwhile Anthony dies on the car accident (the tragedy) and Adam becomes Anthony ( the farce), both as one are the big event to unveil the charade.
The spider at the end, is genuinely a spider. They are under a totalitarian regime, ruled by women-spiders, and he doesn't get it until it's too late. Even though there are trails all around the movie in the form of webs (like in the car accident, the curtains on the shower, the city architecture resembling a web) under which everyone on the city is trapped.
Anyways, Villaneuve said that he didn't really want the story to be about 1 man with 2 identities, or 2 different man, he wanted it to be open so the viewer would decide what to do with the movie's argument. So please, don't feel as i am trying to attack your interpretations. By the way, the book is pretty similar at the start (and quite slow, if you are not used to Saramago's work, but the ending is pretty awesome aswell and he touches way more the identity issues than Villaneauve could in the movie).
Saw Kingsmen tonight. I couldn;t place the director until I saw he also did Snatch, which was pretty entertaining too. As far as over the top action movies go, it was pretty good for entertainment value I'd have to say. Felt like a cross between something Tarantino and Zack Snyder would do, complete with suave British accents.
Back with another movie, and it's another time travel movie.
Primer -- I feel like I understood very little of this movie when I watched it. I had an idea of what was going on, but it was incredibly hard to follow. Reading the IMDb plot synopsis helps quite a bit (recommend you wait until afterwards to read it), but there are many events in the movie that are still unexplained. The characters are pretty much as boring as they get, and the writing is nothing to commend, but the plot is incredibly interesting. It was an interesting idea done on a very low budget, and for that I think it has to at least be recognized. It's not a fantastic movie, but it's certainly worth a watch since it's only 1 hour and 15 minutes long.
I'd give it probably a 6/10 because the plot's interesting. If you're not interested in a pretty unique sci-fi film, don't bother watching it. The acting is pretty awful, the sound mixing is terrible, the cinematography is not great, and it's not shot with particularly great cameras, so all of the dark scenes look like there's snow falling.
Probably already been mentioned but this is my top film of 2014. I'm not even into jazz or much of the subject material in general (music school) but it's acted and shot with such intensity it doesn't matter.
On February 14 2015 13:06 Ghost151 wrote: Saw Kingsmen tonight. I couldn;t place the director until I saw he also did Snatch, which was pretty entertaining too. As far as over the top action movies go, it was pretty good for entertainment value I'd have to say. Felt like a cross between something Tarantino and Zack Snyder would do, complete with suave British accents.
I was watching this with my mom and sister when the Swedish princess bit happened....Oy that was a facepalm moment. My sister was just laughing...
I just saw it tonight, and thought it was one of the best movies I've ever seen.
Up until the part where shit suddenly gets crazy it seemed like a pretty good movie, but not too different from your regular spy porn type of thing. As soon as the first wave of crazy hit, the movie launched itself into legendary status for me. It was amazing how well done the fight scenes were, and the movie was able to switch from taking itself seriously to going over the top very well. The second wave of crazy was amazing, and the music they picked suited it extremely well.
There were a few parts that let it down, I think. The movie got a bit too comfortable with some standard roles - i.e. the wife beater, the stuck up snob, the female asian assassin, etc. but it covered for that with unusual roles like Valentine and Eggsy himself. The post-credits were also a bit of a letdown to me. Eggsy seemed too similar to Harry Hart. There probably should have been differences between the way they fought or something.
Overall, incredibly good movie, well worth the admission. It's an extremely fun movie, and there's some action scenes that will blow you away. It's probably a good idea to see it on the big screen.
On February 15 2015 04:11 MtlGuitarist97 wrote: Back with another movie, and it's another time travel movie.
Primer -- I feel like I understood very little of this movie when I watched it. I had an idea of what was going on, but it was incredibly hard to follow. Reading the IMDb plot synopsis helps quite a bit (recommend you wait until afterwards to read it), but there are many events in the movie that are still unexplained. The characters are pretty much as boring as they get, and the writing is nothing to commend, but the plot is incredibly interesting. It was an interesting idea done on a very low budget, and for that I think it has to at least be recognized. It's not a fantastic movie, but it's certainly worth a watch since it's only 1 hour and 15 minutes long.
I'd give it probably a 6/10 because the plot's interesting. If you're not interested in a pretty unique sci-fi film, don't bother watching it. The acting is pretty awful, the sound mixing is terrible, the cinematography is not great, and it's not shot with particularly great cameras, so all of the dark scenes look like there's snow falling.
Oh man i disagree so hard with this. I really like: 1. The acting - OK so its not your standard movie acting. The reactions and emotinoal output is actually much more similar to real life. Its not 'acted' in the sense that everyone has learned the perfect Shakespearean acting technique, but its natural and nicely done IMO. 2. Personally i think the cinematography is great. 3. Everything in the movie makes perfect sense. If you feel like there are events that are unexplained, you haven't been able to work it out yet. This isn't an insult to your intelligence - I watched the movie 4-5 times before it all clicked into place. There is an absolutely perfect logical consistency, but its quite abstract and hard to follow.
I would give it 9/10 if i'm allowed to take marks off for the quality of the camera used. It was made for $6000 though, as you rightly say, and i think for this i would push it up to be one of only a few 10/10 movies i've ever seen.
Its all subjective i suppose. I think this movie was probably made by someone who sees the world the same way i do. I can see why its a very niche sort of film but i absolutely love it.
Its almost impossible to believe that its only 77 minutes long; its just so dense,
I would also recommend Upstream Color - Shane Carruth's latest - though its even more baffling than this one. The style is similar - although it was probably made on higher budget. It has the same deeply unsettling atmosphere about it - and the same psychological intensity.
On February 03 2015 05:14 obesechicken13 wrote: The Truman Show They don't make movies like this anymore. It's got the whole alternate universe feel as Groundhog day.
Jim Carrey plays a more serious perhaps hysterical world where his life is one big reality TV show. It's dismissive commentary of people who watch reality TV shows instead of doing stuff on their own. It implores you to take risks and do things rather than live a very safe but boring life.
It was a bit inhuman to keep someone in a TV show like that.
I'd say the movie was funny but I don't think I laughed during the entire movie.
That's because you shouldn't be laughing in this movie. Maybe in the beginning, before the understanding finally hits you and you see how sad and dramatic it actually is and you feel bad for laughing. Definitely the best Carrey movie to date.
On February 03 2015 05:14 obesechicken13 wrote: The Truman Show They don't make movies like this anymore. It's got the whole alternate universe feel as Groundhog day.
Jim Carrey plays a more serious perhaps hysterical world where his life is one big reality TV show. It's dismissive commentary of people who watch reality TV shows instead of doing stuff on their own. It implores you to take risks and do things rather than live a very safe but boring life.
It was a bit inhuman to keep someone in a TV show like that.
I'd say the movie was funny but I don't think I laughed during the entire movie.
That's because you shouldn't be laughing in this movie. Maybe in the beginning, before the understanding finally hits you and you see how sad and dramatic it actually is and you feel bad for laughing. Definitely the best Carrey movie to date.
This and Eternal Sunshine. Both movies have incredible amounts of feeling and show that Jim Carrey is actually a really really good actor. The soundtrack of the Truman Show is amazing. Philip Glass at his best:
Spriggan - One of those movies I have been wanting to watch in the back of my mind for awhile but just got around to it. A foreign military unit fights to control an ancient artifact and the Spriggan wants to stop it. Not bad, had some cool fight scenes but that's about it.
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Yeah I know people shat on this pretty hard but I was really bored one day and decided to watch it. Used to watch the old animated series that was made in the 80s when I was a kid. Grew up loving them. There is a lot in here that made me cringe though... + Show Spoiler +
The fucking Pizza Hut pizza that they show for like 30 seconds wtf?
However it was also loyal to the comics that started it all, so lots of people are saying. It's such an awesome universe TMNT is set in, I just want a really awesome movie one of these days based on it.
John Wick - Actually ended up hearing about this in a reddit thread that got me curious about it. Anyways, pretty good movie to me. I think what I found most interesting is the secret society these assassins have in it. I hear they actually want to make a franchise of movies out of John Wick.
Birdman - Honestly, after reading what it was about I thought it was going to be boring. They really make it compelling though and the acting in it was fantastic. Really well done movie.
Whiplash - Didn't know what to expect out of this at first, had heard very little about it beforehand. J.K. Simmons just fucking killed this movie, even as a whole though the movie is still great. Also got me wanting to get into Jazz again listening to the soundtrack of it which is also very good.
Moonrise Kingdom - Honestly, this was the first time I ever watched a Wes Anderson movie. Just never really felt compelled to watch his movies beforehand. Just watched this on a whim and ended up liking it quite a bit especially the way it was shot. Hated some of the characters but besides that I can't fault much about it.
The Grand Budapest Hotel - After watching Moonrise Kingdom, I decided to watch this next. Ended up liking this quite a bit more story-wise with the war setting and whatnot. It was definitely darker in tone which I enjoyed. I plan on watching Fantastic Mr. Fox soon too.
On February 15 2015 04:11 MtlGuitarist97 wrote: Back with another movie, and it's another time travel movie.
Primer -- I feel like I understood very little of this movie when I watched it. I had an idea of what was going on, but it was incredibly hard to follow. Reading the IMDb plot synopsis helps quite a bit (recommend you wait until afterwards to read it), but there are many events in the movie that are still unexplained. The characters are pretty much as boring as they get, and the writing is nothing to commend, but the plot is incredibly interesting. It was an interesting idea done on a very low budget, and for that I think it has to at least be recognized. It's not a fantastic movie, but it's certainly worth a watch since it's only 1 hour and 15 minutes long.
I'd give it probably a 6/10 because the plot's interesting. If you're not interested in a pretty unique sci-fi film, don't bother watching it. The acting is pretty awful, the sound mixing is terrible, the cinematography is not great, and it's not shot with particularly great cameras, so all of the dark scenes look like there's snow falling.
Oh man i disagree so hard with this. I really like: 1. The acting - OK so its not your standard movie acting. The reactions and emotinoal output is actually much more similar to real life. Its not 'acted' in the sense that everyone has learned the perfect Shakespearean acting technique, but its natural and nicely done IMO. 2. Personally i think the cinematography is great. 3. Everything in the movie makes perfect sense. If you feel like there are events that are unexplained, you haven't been able to work it out yet. This isn't an insult to your intelligence - I watched the movie 4-5 times before it all clicked into place. There is an absolutely perfect logical consistency, but its quite abstract and hard to follow.
I would give it 9/10 if i'm allowed to take marks off for the quality of the camera used. It was made for $6000 though, as you rightly say, and i think for this i would push it up to be one of only a few 10/10 movies i've ever seen.
Its all subjective i suppose. I think this movie was probably made by someone who sees the world the same way i do. I can see why its a very niche sort of film but i absolutely love it.
Its almost impossible to believe that its only 77 minutes long; its just so dense,
I would also recommend Upstream Color - Shane Carruth's latest - though its even more baffling than this one. The style is similar - although it was probably made on higher budget. It has the same deeply unsettling atmosphere about it - and the same psychological intensity.
I thought that Shane Carruth had a lot that he wanted to do. However, his budget limited his vision and scope completely. He actually says in this article that he is pretty embarrassed about how Primer came out in the final cut.
1.) Yes, I know it's supposed to be about "normal" guys. However, they have almost no personalities whatsoever and are, for the most part, interchangeable characters. One of them happens to have the family, the other doesn't. 2.) Shane Carruth said pretty specifically in the article that he thought it came out like an eighth grade film class. I'm not going to argue that this isn't subjective, but I don't think it's particularly great cinematography. He worked with what he had, but I'm not particularly impressed with how the sound editing or actual filming came out. 3.) Maybe I just need to watch it more. However, I'm pretty sure that even after reading explanations of it, there are still a few events that are unexplained.
First, what the hell was up with Thomas Granger appearing? They never really explained how or why that happened. From what I understand, he must've stumbled upon the machine and used it by accident, and ran into himself in the world, causing a paradox.
Second, what about time travel caused brain damage? This is just something that you're supposed to take at face value, but they never really seem to offer any explanation for it.
Third, how was Aaron able to leave himself (or anyone) a message on their phone without causing some kind of paradox?
My final question was when exactly did Abe build a fail-safe, and how did Aaron know about it? I feel like this must've been dealt with in the movie and if I watched it again I'd probably pick up on this, but I feel like the first three don't have explanations. I wasn't exactly sure about the timeline of events since it's not quite in order, but I felt like I had a good grasp of it.
Well, onto another movie that I watched.
Nightcrawler was really interesting. Jake Gyllenhaal's performance is pretty much spot-on in this, and he plays a character that you just want to hate desperately. He plays sociopath who will stop at nothing to be successful.
I wish there was slightly more to Nightcrawler. There's nothing particularly haunting about it, there is no psychological aspect to it, and (in my opinion) it's pretty easy to see what's going to happen once you get a little past the midway point. But it's still a fantastic film in my opinion, and definitely worth praise. Jake Gyllenhaal is probably one of the most underrated actors right now, and everyone in the film did a great job, especially Rene Russo and Riz Ahmed. I'd say it's definitely an 8/10 in my books. It's not a perfect movie, but it's really fun and has amazing acting. Definitely worth a watch.
Saw Kingsmen. Worth my money for sure. At first, I was a bit worried that things might get too gory (cuz of the rating), but it was surprisingly not too bad at all. Maybe the comedic element balanced things out. Snowpiercer, for example, was gorier than this imo.
Well, don, that one scene in particular was one of the more brutal scenes I've seen. There wasn't a whole ton of blood used, though, which probably toned down how disgusting it was.
Equalizer I liked it. I think it was a little better of an action movie than John Wick. Wick kills more people though and it had the whole revenge thing going on. + Show Spoiler +
It felt like he was toying with the bad guys by giving them outs and using makeshift weapons rather than bringing any.
So I just re-watched Darkman because I didn't realize Liam Neeson was in it, and I had forgotten most of it due to watching it as a small child.
First, never re-watch a movie you enjoyed as a small child. In fact, never watch anything you enjoyed as a small child. Not to say this movie is horrible or atrocious, but definitely not what I remembered.
As I watched the opening credits, I noticed Sam Raimi directed Darkman, so I was not surprised when it felt like I was watching the first three Spider-man movies all rolled together. Sam used the exact same techniques in both movies to tell the story, everything from camera angles and sound to captivate the audience.
Neeson's acting wasn't Schindler's List, or even great like Taken, but it was his first leading role. Mediocre at best, and overdramatic at worst.
If anyone is interested in studying Sam Raimi, I would suggest watching Darkman along with the first Spider-man. You can see him using the same techniques.
I also watched Equalizer and John Wick. While both are highly entertaining, I rather enjoyed John Wick a lot more than Equalizer. Not due to the actors, Denzel and Keanu both played their roles well, but because of the storyline. Very similar stories told from different sides of the law.
I like the retired *insert trained killer career* that must return to the role of grim reaper for various personal reasons. I guess that's why I liked the Taken franchise.
I watched About Time a little while ago. It's mostly a romantic comedy with a some drama thrown in. Basic premise is: Shortly after his 21st birthday Tim, the main characters, is told by his father than all the men in their family have the ability to travel back in time to earlier moments in their own lives. They go over different ways this power could be used and what other family members have done with it before Tim decides he will use it to find true love.
I generally avoid rom coms but watched this one on somebodies recommendation. I found myself really enjoying it. There are a number of things done very well. The time travel gimmick has some charming uses even as the mechanics of it are almost completely ignored. For example, there is a scene in Tim's wedding in which his best man gives an hilariously awful speech. We then get to see various other best man speeches that are given when Tim goes back in time to change his choice of best man; they are all terrible in their own way. Finally, the right choice is made, and we get a pretty emotional speech from Tim's father.
I felt that the movie got a little worse towards the last third or so. It becomes a little preachy in terms of life lessons it's trying to impart and over does it trying to reach for emotional triggers imo. After finishing the movie, on reflection, there were a few things that really bothered me. The fact that the time travel powers are kept secret from the women of the family despite the fact that it is explicitly shown that it can be used for their benefit as well seemed wrong. There's also something about how the movie is encouraging us all to live as the characters do even though the characters are actually rather privileged and suffer relatively few serious problems that annoys me.
In the end, the skill with which the movie is done trumps the flaws in content imo. Most of my complaints came about afterwards, but I found it engaging during the watching. Maybe a 7/10. Good enough that it made me think I should go back and look up good rom coms to see if I'd actually enjoy the best of the genre.
Like others here, I was worried it was going to be a fairly generic spy/action movie but they really decided to go off the rails, for the betterment of the film. The action/directing were fantastic (potentially more entertaining than John Wick's - less serious but the action was extremely well done.) The comedy was a bit dry until the end, but I think that's to be expected from a British film. The self awareness was also good.
EPT![[image loading]](http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/3/9/1236598258191/Vintage-Film-Posters-Chri-005.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.shockcinemamagazine.com/primer.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.michiganquarterlyreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Whiplash-Poster-slice.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://horrornews.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Spriggan-DVD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.cineworld.co.uk/assets/media/films/7110_poster_iphone.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.cineworld.co.uk/assets/media/films/7876_poster_iphone.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.impawards.com/2014/posters/john_wick_ver3.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Birdman_poster.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CtD86j_hwt8/U-2eBp2eqVI/AAAAAAAAADM/w8LKwHqrjtc/s1600/whiplash.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://static.splashnology.com/articles/Minimal_Movie_Posters_August_2012/Moonrise_Kingdom.jpg)
The self awareness was also good.
