rom com about time travel is the tag line for it. it had a weird pace. there wasnt really any central plot, like one thing running through the whole movie. it was almost like a biopic, just telling a very factual story. the last 30 mins were pretty great though, a little sappy, but i really liked it.
I usually only write about stuff that I see in the theatres, but I watched Safety Not Guaranteed the other night on Netflix and enjoyed it quite a bit. It's obviously quircky, and not for everyone, but for that type of what was really a romantic comedy, I thought it was excellent.
I'm not a huge fan of the Mark Duplass as an actor. But I know he writes and produces and directs and all sorts of other stuff, and he is consistently involved in interesting stuff, even if I don't care for him on screen all the time. I'm all in on Aubrey Plaza. And I like that they let the traditional storyline, with the guy chasing the old flame, not work, and let it lie there like that. Personally, I enjoyed the ending as well, which I'm sure bothered a lot of people. It's not groundbreaking or anything, but I'd give it a mid to high 70s, and recommend to anyone who enjoys a little surrealism mixed in with their romantic comedy.
Some of the absolute best camera work I've ever seen. The visuals are stunning. I'd love to see a behind the scenes making of documentary of this. Just some of the things they were able to pull off, I've never seen in film before. I think this will win a ton of gold statues, especially on the technical/effects side. This is definitely something you watch on a big screen in 3-D. I kind of want to see it again in IMAX.
Last edited by DonDadda59 : 10-05-2013 at 08:05 PM.
Got incredible reviews on RT so I checked it out. Two hours of the most unimaginative, plodding, shallow, distant account of a ship's crew being held hostage and a guy negotiating for their release. This is literally how the movie goes:
1) Ship commandeered.
2) Terrorists want 15 mill, company offers 250,000.
3) Terrorists go down to 12 mill, company offers 900,000.
4) Company CEO consoles families in the most disconnected, unemotional way possible.
5) Terrorists want 9 mill, company offers 2.8.
6) Terrorists accept 3.3 and leave ship.
7) End of movie.
Keep in mind the entire negotiation process is cordial and professional, and every single negotiation is a guy in a boardroom talking into a phone with a guy on the ship. Totally flat, unsympathetic characters, zero plot to speak of (seriously this was probably written in 15 minutes)...just hot garbage. I can't say enough bad things about this movie, it didn't have a single redeeming quality. I kept watching assuming one of the top-reviewed movies in 2013 MUST have a payoff, but the only possibly "payoff" you could describe is brought on by a character's inexplicable idiocy and callousness totally in contrast with what they'd tried to develop the previous 1.5 hours. Do not watch, avoid at all costs, this was terrible.
I saw three movies this weekend that I wanted to talk about.
First is Room 237, which is a doc about Kubrick's The Shining, that I wanted to see when it came out, but never got around to. I was reminded of it after reading an article about Steven King on Grantland.
What a nice find over Chinese food on a lazy Friday Night with early morning work looming Saturday. It's basically a jumbled editing of five seperate conversations with various people who have some wild theories on the film's subtext.
The content varies from mind blowingly insightful, to comically insane, to sadly hoping these people are getting professional help, often within the same sentence.
If you're into these types of film subtext sort of discussions, you have to see this movie. It's like you're passing a bong around with a bunch of film study majors in a dorm somewhere.
I really enjoyed some of the theries. The Indian Holocust symbolism was a good one. The moon landing stuff was cool. The lady who made the hotel maps was entertaining. There are also moments that make no sense whatsoever. There's a guy who makes all these imagery claims, who say's Kubrick's face appears in the the clouds in the credits. The film makers go through it frame by frame while he explains it. Only for the filmmakers to leave the image up showing almost nothing. My only regret is that I wasn't chilling stoned with my buddy who's totally into these sort of things. A fn watch that I'd give a low 80s to, but if you're into that type of thing, you'll love.
^ Yeah Thorpe I watched that back in like February or March. I think a lot of the stuff in it could hold water... But that hidden image one just didn't make sense. You couldn't see dick in those clouds, and the hotel man talking to Jack when it looks like he got a boner is just pure happenstance.
The Indian stuff, impossible window, and moon stuff was all amazing though. Kubrick was smart enough to film that way.
I got a few people to watch this as well, and so far all reviews have been positive. I wish there was more weird deconstruction stuff around.
The second thing I saw was a Saturday afternoon post work showing of Gravity. Like DonDadda said. This is one of the most impressive visual displays of filmmaking I can recall seeing. I felt similarl about Life of Pi last year. This is way more stunning. I did see it in Imax 3/D, and I would suggest doing the same. The seamless long run shots, while occasionally looking a little "digital", were still breathtaking. I really felt like I was seeing something I'd never seen before. Small things like water and fire in zero g sometimes fetl a litte gimicky, but were too incredible for it to matter. It had some bigger things in it themetically than I think some people will recognize on the surface. I heard a few people say it was boring on the way out, which I found crazy. It worked to me strictly as a suspense movie. I wasn't as blown away by the larger themes as I think the filmmakers would have liked me to have been. There's some sort of obvious throw backs to 2001 in it. And in the end, there's pretty much all of three characters in the whole thing. There's little in the way narrative. And I can understand the instinct to maybe wish they had done more with this visual achievement. But I'm more than happy with it. I give it easily a low 90s, and fully expect it to win any number of technical awards at the Oscars. And like the story, or lac thereof, and getting the larger themetic stuff o not, for the visual aspects alone, this movie is a must see in theatres, if you care about movies.