Movies

Ok because this blog has only received advertisers as viewers I will try to bring it back to life with a quick summary of movies I've watched since hac has been over

Midnight in Paris: probably one of the best movies I've watched this year. I don't want to ruin any plot details for those who have never heard of it before but I will say that the historical figures are cast particularly well and always manage to bring a smile to the face. Ernest Hemingway just has a way with words. Until he becomes drunk.

Transformers 3: this movie is almost three hours long and in total there was about one minute of footage I actually enjoyed which was mostly just panning shots of the city. I will admit some of the cinematography and visuals are really good but some of it almost unwatchable. And a commendation must go to Michael bay for making what could have been an hour and a half movie this long by making sam seem like an absolute douche and also inventing methods to get robots to fight other robots which don't even contribute to the plot

Kung Fu panda 2: although I haven't seen cars 2 yet, looking at the rt ratings it seems that pixar won't get an Oscar this year. This movie will probably win it and it deserves all of it. Better than the first one and having an opening fight sequence which is equal to or better than Kung Fu hustle.

That is all.

Harry Potter

I saw Harry Potter today, which I liked. Seeing how I really love the books though, it's hard to imagine a Harry Potter movie I wouldn't like unless it was really god-awful. So having said that, there were several things about the movie that I didn't particularly care for.

At times the film seemed to struggle with deciding how seriously to take itself. There were several one-liners and comic relief moments that fitted very awkwardly in the broody atmosphere of the film.

The precise events of the ending in the novel were changed to make the ending in the movie more subdued. This was quite a sensible choice since Harry Potter should always be about Harry Potter and so by applying some restraint, Yates prevented Harry's personal journey from being overshadowed by the spectacle and chaos of everything that happens in the Battle of Hogwarts. However, this came at the cost of the huge emotional payoff at the end of the novel. When Harry defeats Voldemort the feeling of triumph is notably missing and there's just a feeling of relief. There's more reflection than celebration at the end of the movie which I didn't like because there's not much to reflect on unless you're really familiar with the series.

But there were a lot of great moments that surprised me too. The spectacle of Hogwarts preparing for battle was quite impressive. Helen Bonham Carter was really good when she acted as Hermione in Bellatrix's body. Several moments involving Snape like his duel with McGonagall were tragic and touching. Alan Rickman does a good job of making Snape look like he's constantly in pain. I should probably say that I might not have noticed a lot of this stuff if I hadn't randomly browsed through all the Harry Potter-related pictures and posts on Lozi/Janet's Tumblr a few weeks ago.

Adaptation

Continuing on from the other blog, this is another more obscure movie that I watched recently (well before trials)

Adaptation is about how Charlie Kaufmann who is affected by writer's block and is unable to come up with a new screenplay because the book that he is adapting has no plot. Meanwhile his brother, Donald, is having great success as a new screenwriter even though Charlie thinks all he writes is cliched crap. And if you've noticed, it actually is the same Charlie Kauffman who wrote Being John Malkovich. Like actually, the character and the real life person here are meant to be the same. The movie was also written by Charlie Kauffman and also directed by Spike Jonze who directed Being John.

I guess the first hour or so of this movie is really pretentious. There's first person voice over narration, self references (there is actually a scene where Charlie is at the set of Being John Malkovich) and also all the sort of stuff you associate with a film trying to be arty. If you get through this first hour, you will realize that the actual point was to make that hour as pretentious as possible. Then the movie gets more conventional I guess until the conclusion which is so cleverly done you probably have to sit there thinking about it for like 10 mins to realize the implications of it.

I think this film is a little harder to follow than Being John and a little harder to get into, but if you stick with it, I'm pretty sure it's worth it.

Sunshine, Transformers, Shutter, Potter

Early in the holidays I watched Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (I'll use ES from now on), but felt that it was a bit difficult to review so I've left it for a bit. It's not that the movie was too confusing, it's that it has a very unique way of telling the story, through 'flashbacks'. Without giving too much away, it explores the concept of removing specific pieces of memory regarding a single person. So for example if you wanted to forget your deceased grandfather, you could have your memories of him removed, thus taking away your grief. Overall, ES is a very thoughtful and somewhat murky film, but I would still have to say there are bits of romance and comedy in it. At first there is confusion as with most great sci-fi films, however as the plot develops, you catch up quite quickly and get enthralled in the story. I think it was made even better by having subplots, which helps the main plot seem faster in my mind. Ultimately it was very enjoyable and made me feel 'happy' despite some of the darker themes explored in the film; the ending was logical and felt perfectly timed. 9/10

Out of stupidity I then watched Transformers: Dark of the Moon. If you've watched either of the first two films, then you've seen this one. Lots of explosions and big robots like the past two films with less comedy. The plot is: good guys have to beat bad guys in robot fights. 3/10

Shutter Island, directed by the great Martin Scorsese, is a dark mystery thriller, revolving around a mental institution. The amazing thing about this movie is that despite the fact I watched a version that looked like it was recorded on a calculator, Scorsese still managed to create a sense of suspense and fear. The lighting, music and acting were all very well done, with Mark Ruffalo playing a very nice support character. However the major downfall of the film is its ridiculous plot. Set up very nicely, it just seems so random and almost unedited at points. The ending seems quite illogical and feels as if the audience is back at the start of the film. Again without giving too much away, there is a lot of confusion throughout the film and little of it is resolved by the ending. 6/10

Lastly I watched Harry Potter 7 Part 2 with relatives (free tickets and free food woot!). Not to be a party pooper but I only watched the first 4 or 5 movies and finished the books so many years ago I forgot the whole thing. Therefore I had to Wiki the plot the night before to catch up. This led to the highlight being the free popcorn. The graphics were awesome as always (in a theater), the plot seems interesting (but hard to follow if you don't know what's happened in the last 3 years), but that was about it. I guess for followers, fans and young children the movie was amazing, but not for a random film-goer like me. The thing that irks me so much is the wasted talent in the film. So many great British actors just stood there saying the dumbest lines. Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman (Voldemort and Snape) were the only ones who had much input and did quite well (however Hans Gruber will always remain my favourite Rickman role). But for actors/actresses like Gary Oldman, Emma Thompson, Maggie Smith, Jim Broadbent, Julie Walters and even Helena Bonham Carter (Sirius Black, Trelawney, McGonagall, Slughorn, Molly Weasley, Bellatrix Lestrange) all seemed wasted in their roles. Looking at the list, the only input came from the bad characters. If you've watched all the others then this should be a good film for you. 7/10

I know it seems like I had lot of time in the holidays but one movie every two days doesn't take long. Reviews to come: Clockwork Orange, Goodfellas, Memento.

Tarantino

I read Bob's post on Tarantino and thought I'd write about him too seeing as he's also one of my favourite directors. The first Tarantino movie I saw was Pulp Fiction. When it ended I thought I'd never see something so brilliant again for the rest of my life. Never before had I seen a movie so exciting, so full of surprises and so utterly unconventional. It certainly piqued my initial interest in film.

I can't really remember in which order I watched Tarantino's other films so I'll just guess.

Inglourious Basterds was the only one of his films I saw in a theatre. To be honest, I didn't like it that much when I watched it. The dialogue didn't seem as brilliant as the dialogue in Pulp Fiction and I couldn't help but compare the two movies and feel that Basterds was a letdown. I also didn't understand why people thought the Christophe Waltz character was so amazing. Anyway, this can likely be explained by the fact I saw this movie over two years ago. My tastes have changes a lot since then so I intend to see this movie again soon.

I think the next one I saw was Jackie Brown, which is probably lesser-known among his films. I didn't get this one either. People say that this was his 'mature film' where he developed strong, full-bodied characters. But I just found it really boring. I guess that I could blame this again on how I was two years younger when I saw this and couldn't understand a lot of stuff I can understand now. But my feeling is that I wouldn't like this movie that much even if I saw it again now.

Sometime after I saw Reservoir Dogs, which I more or less enjoyed. The story on this one is a bit harder to grapple on first viewing because the narrative keeps switching to different characters and to flashbacks. I'm really bad at watching gangster or crime films, especially when the plot gets really complicated and I can't tell what's happening and why. I really think though, that when this happens it's the filmmaker's fault that they let their movie get tied down in exposition.

The last set of Tarantino movies I saw was the Kill Bill series, which I loved. I think these are the first movies where Tarantino got to employ lots of great cinematography and create great images. Certainly, they are the most visual of all his films. The first film is a bit of an all-out action film that pays homage to a lot of old Asian movies full of martial arts and stuff. You're presented with this mysterious 'Bride' who is out to seek revenge on 'Bill' and his team of assassins. Not much explanation is given to anything, really. The second movie is a lot more calm and develops the story a lot. I can't entirely understand why Tarantino directed the movies to be so different but they still work together to form a satisfying whole.

So these have been my experiences watching Quentin Tarantino films. As of now I've seen all his films except for 'Deathproof' which I've been avoiding because of the bad reviews. I always like to advocate forming your own opinion instead of checking RT or something but I guess sometimes you just can't be bothered.

If there's anything you take from reading this, let it be to watch Pulp Fiction if you haven't already done so. It really is even better than I made it sound.

12 Monkeys

Hey there reader, this is my first time doing this, so please bear with me as i try to get this down.

Here, I would like to share with you my movie experiences, or recommend movies that I think are really worth watching, and they'll generally be movies that aren't well known, or are old etc- i.e. not mainstream movies like Transformers or Clash of the Titans.

So, you know how everyone says Inception is mind fuck or what not. Well, i think this movie will probably fuck with your head even more. I dont know about you, but the poster already looks cool... yeah, the tagline is a bit....

Anyways, to put it in a nutshell, the movie is about time travelling, BUT before you stop reading because it is about time travelling, let me tell you that it deals with more than just that. In fact, the less I tell you about it, the better, because the plot is crucial. Of course, if you dont get the story, you can still enjoy it. The director Terry Giliam or something, came from Monty Python, and he really conveys the crazinesss which drives the movie along perfectly.

It's also important to note that the film stars Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt, but in roles you've never seen before- yes, bruce willis does act as a tough guy again, but theres a BIT more, and i think its enough to really enjoy. So if you want to see Brad Pritt become a retard, you should definitely watch this.

Basically, to anyone who wants to watch a movie after the trials, or even during the trials if you're a boss, go watch Twelve Monkeys, especially if you like something different from the usual stuff. Tell me what you think about it =]

Basterds, Dogs and Fiction

Quentin Tarantino is one of those directors who just make movies fun to watch. About a month ago, I watched Inglourious Basterds, which is about the plot to assassinate Hitler. Although the themes are relatively serious and mature, there is still room for some black comedy. Christoph Waltz's performance really did deserve the Oscar he won, with the line "That's a bingo!" sure to be one of the classics. For those who are confused as to the concept of remaking Hitler's assassination, it is set in a parallel dimension where many events which occurred in real life didn't in the film and vice versa, which sets up the finale really well. Out in 2009, this film shows a big change in Tarantino's narrative style, but maintains his humour and love for violence and gun fights. Worth a watch if you want something interesting to do, but maybe not a 'must watch'. 8/10

During the holidays I watched Reservoir Dogs, a 1992 gangster film also directed by Tarantino. It will most definitely remain as one of the classics, with the final scenes eternally memorable. However it is the 'ear cutting' scene that gained the most controversy and fame during the film's debut. Told in classic Tarantino style, the scenes are out of order chronologically, and we slowly work out what has happened as the film progresses through flashbacks and continuing the current time line. A simple plot revolving around the theft of some diamonds, leads to a dark, violent and angry story of betrayal and madness. But true to his style, Tarantino has managed to squeeze in a few funny scenes and jokes. Overall though, the film wasn't anything special, it's just the atmosphere and tension prevalent throughout the film that gives its magic. 8/10

Finally I wanted to talk about Pulp Fiction, probably the greatest plotless film ever. Made in 1994, the story revolves around a suitcase which is filled with orange light. In a later interview, Tarantino said that he originally had diamonds, but that seemed repetitive, so he used a MacGuffin, a plot device so that the movie makes sense. The scenes are all out of order, and there is seemingly no goal for half the characters, but the movie is just great. Samuel L. Jackson's famous scene in the apartment including the quote "Does he look like a bitch?", and Christopher Walken's 'watch up the ass' scene are pure hilarity. This film is great in almost every way, however the aimlessness of it all made it feel sort of empty in the end. The lack of general direction left me waiting for more, it felt more like a conglomeration for 4 or 5 short films, squished together, with the characters' lives intertwining. But I've watched it three times now, and will remain as one of my most loved films. 9/10

I'll wrap it out there for the first post of this blog, will have more movie reviews coming out soon.