Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Movies

Finally saw Star Wars yesterday with my little dude. He enjoyed the heck out of it and I did too. I decided to just try to enjoy it even with the stupid plot points.
 
I think 2019 might go down as one of the best years for movies ever. Interestingly, I'd say it's the best year since 1999. Something about the anxiety of approaching the end of the decade? I mean, you've got:

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Parasite
The Irishman
Marriage Story
Uncut Gems
The Lighthouse
Joker
Little Women
Knives Out
1917

I could have named 10 more. You don't have to like all of them, but they all have their undeniable merits and the critical and audience scores generally reflect that.
 
Exposing your subconscious racism by leaving out both “The Farewell” and “Us.” @rome8180

Also, sexist Quentin Tarantino is doing some podcasts commenting on other directors’ movies:

 
It's funny that somebody called Tarantino sexist for whatever he did or didn't have the female persons do in Once Upon a Time In Hollywood but nobody called him racist for not having a single African American in the entire film. Like, I'm 99% certain there wasn't even a black person in the background of a scene.
 
Yeah, The Farewell looked so stupid I refused to put in on the list. The whole premise seemed flawed. Maybe they do things differently in China, but I don't know how a terminally ill person would be the only one not to know they were sick.

As for US, it seemed like the consensus was that it was a step down from Get Out.
 
deepdarkblue said:
It's funny that somebody called Tarantino sexist for whatever he did or didn't have the female persons do in Once Upon a Time In Hollywood but nobody called him racist for not having a single African American in the entire film. Like, I'm 99% certain there wasn't even a black person in the background of a scene.
Click to expand...

People were upset that the daughter in the Irishman had such few lines too. People will always complain
 
Quality review I just read about the film Dunkirk on Rotten Tomatoes.

"Oblivious at best and propaganda at worst, Dunkirk is admittedly a sensory feast but one that leaves me concerned about its palpable nostalgia for an era before women's liberation and civil rights movements. "
 
I saw 1917. I think it's technically and visually brilliant but I think the plot/storytelling is lacking significantly, particularly in the 2nd half of the film. It's a solid film that I probably would never rewatch because the best parts of the film is not knowing what's next, and the visual of it. Having seen it in theaters, and having completed the film, I don't have much interest to experience it again. Also, I am trying to properly assess it (in my own mind) while keeping in mind what the movie is intended to be, and keeping it within that context. However, at least for me, the 2nd half of the film does not represent World War I well (the first half did) and that personally was very disappointing. It was not gritty enough, and I have my reasons why which I will explain below.

IMO the peak of the movie was halfway through when Blake was killed off. The entire first half of the film is brilliant. Following both of them really captured the gritty, horrifying aspects of World War I. While it was a BOLD move to kill off Blake, and the scene is arguably the highlight of the film, surprising, and perfectly captured visually and by the actors, it also leaves the 2nd half of the film in a very difficult position since the tracking shots are now following just one character. This IMO took away all the suspense and edge from the film. Again IMO, I did not feel that Schofield was ever in danger of dying in the 2nd half of the film so he is the lone character left and we are just following him. There are 5 moments in the 2nd half where he just narrowly escapes death: The first is the sniper scene where he's walking on the beam across the river. 4-5 bullets narrowly miss him. The visuals of this is outstanding but I was sitting there totally fine never expecting him to die. The next is after he wakes from unconsciousness he walks into the town which was BEAUTIFULLY portrayed on screen with the flares lighting up the sky. He sees a German in the distance who charges him and hipfires at him narrowly missing him. Again, never thought for a second he was in danger of death.

He then enters the basement of I believe the church where he encounters the woman and the girl. I personally felt this to be out of place and unnecessary. I thought the scene was in place to humanize him and display that all those involved in war aren't bad, and in this case, he had no choice but to be there and was a good person. However, to me, this was just a break from everything going on and unneeded. There are multiple examples of him being a decent guy and rather innocent guy. It's displayed throughout the film when he initially questions the decision to deliver the message, to helping the German pilot that kills Blake, to not immediately killing the German soldier he encounters later in the film. I don't know, just felt it unnecessary and out of place.

After this he gets chased again, bunch of bullets missing him. He takes a full leap into a river which then conveniently perfectly carries him to exactly where he's supposed to be. He gets out, struggles to find where he's supposed to be, narrowly avoids being blown to shreds multiple times, delivers the message, and he saves the day. Then he finds Blake's brother in the middle of mayhem.

The 2nd half of the film was just too neat, too perfect. I saw a review where it felt structured like an adventure video game where you have a bunch of fun chase scenes, narrowly avoiding death, and then are the hero in the end overcoming a bunch of improbable odds. I agree with that. The 2nd half of the film to me really suffered from plot armor and at least from this one person in the audience (me) never believing he was actually in danger.

It was mentioned at one point in the film how Schofield should have witnesses when he delivers the message. I thought an ending which would have encompassed the atrocity and brutality of World War I and giving the film it's edge back, would've been for Schofield to have delivered the message and it was too late and they were all massacred, or the captain just defying orders and sending everyone to their death. Maybe I'm just a piece of shit but the 2nd half of the film was just too 'perfect' to me and my vocab isn't strong enough to explain it better than that.

So I view the film as an incredible technical/visual achievement but I think it falls very short of a recent war movie Dunkirk by Christopher Nolan which I felt was much better. Visually it was great, the multiple timlines occurring were perfectly woven into the film and it had more edge to it despite being just a PG-13 film, as well as better emotional payoffs throughout the film. Again, I understand 1917 was boxed in for some of this due to the way in which it was filmed limits the storytelling, but just my 2 cents.

In terms of war movies, it doesn't even sniff Saving Private Ryan in my eyes. They are very different films, but I think have to be compared since they're war movies. It doesn't sniff Dunkirk either. Another fairly recent war movie Fury I think has a much better story and plot overall. These are easy comparisons since they come from the similar timelines of World War I and World War II. Harder to compare it to American Sniper or a film like Black Hawk Down.
 
Also, for a few years I have been really trending towards television. I think a lot if it had to do with me feeling movies were beginning to drop in quality as studios were committing so much to the superhero/action movies, and thinking I could find better stories on TV. However, with how busy I am (generally speaking) now I am actually finding peacefulness in going to the movie theater. It's like a brief getaway from reality to just go there for a few hours and watch a film. There is this small independent theater near me which has shown films like The Irishman and Parasite. Typically I would have to trek into NYC to see these films in the past since the big theater companies wouldn't show them, which meant I would never go to NYC to watch them. The tickets are cheaper at this theater and they also show older films. It just re-opened a couple of months ago, but they're going to show Goodfellas this month and I think will continue with a classic film or 2 each month, which is cool for me since I've always wanted to see so many classic films on the big screen since I never had the opportunity to do so. I think viewing films in theater is a better experience.

Additionally, I also think I've been sucked back into movies because it feels like the slate of movies this year has been incredible. Knives Out, The Irishman, 1917, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Joker, Midsomnar, Parasite, The Lighthouse, Uncut Gems, and I'm sure a bunch of others I'm missing. Lots of good films this year. Marriage Story and The Two Popes too I'll check out eventually. Maybe next year if the movies suck ass I won't go see anything, but I really enjoyed the film selection from 2019.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Chat users

  • No one is chatting at the moment.

Chat rooms

  • General chit-chat 0

Forum statistics

Threads
1,068
Messages
425,315
Members
624
Latest member
Bluegrass Blue Devil
Back
Top Bottom