Jump to content

The Movies thread!


CRASHER

Recommended Posts

When I first heard that the Batman reboot was gonna be based on Year One, I was pumped. After that rumor came out, my buddy loaned the graphic novel to me and I tore through it. Such a great story, so well done in so many ways. I remember actually being thoroughly disappointed after first seeing the movie since the story, however influenced by the novel it may have been, was completely different.

No, Batman Begins is indeed not a literal adaptation of Year One (I should have said loosely based). So when you put it like that, I can understand your disappointment and why you think it's completely different. But the influence of Miller's comic book is all over Nolan's movie in terms of style and tone, as well as some minor story lines.

Edited by Atterr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No, Batman Begins is indeed not a literal adaptation of Year One (I should have said loosely based). So when you put it like that, I can understand your disappointment and why you think it's completely different. But the influence of Miller's comic book is all over Nolan's movie in terms of style and tone, as well as some minor story lines.

Yep. Spot on. Sorry if I came off as argumentative, wasn't the intent. It's definitely loosely based on B:YO. It was the original rumors that BB would be based on it (read: literal adaptation) that built up my expectations. But, alas, that's what you get for placing stock in rumors.

Is there any graphic novel equivalent that a new Spiderman could draw inspiration from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link! Interesting to read your take on it, and although your make some fair points, I personally do not think that a movie has to be completely understood or explained to be fully appreciated. David Lynch's Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire are two modern masterpieces, although most of the time I don't know what the hell is going on (indeed even beyond the point of frustration). In the case of SNY, I can appreciate how the whole plot is basically just a means for the humanity on show.

You have a valid point, Atterr, and it's always a tough thing to bring up with "film people" when it comes to appreciating a challenging movie. In the case of SNY, I appreciate the artistry of it, the risk it took to make and how briliant the ideas in the film were. For me, though, alot of a film's appeal is the overal impression and while I really liked the ideas, I felt the presentation was rudderless. As I mentioned in my old review, if a more accomplished director had taken the helm, the film might have had a bit more focus. Instead, I felt Kaufman got caught falling in love with this own ideas, which can be film suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came back from Avatar... WOW

Almost 13 years after Titanic, the self-proclaimed King of the World is back, and what a return it is! Although I was sceptic at first about his new technology developed specifically for this movie, James Cameron has completely won me over. Avatar really is a feast for the eyes. The nature, people and creatures of Pandora are a thing of beauty. There is so much detail in every shot that the world really comes alive. I really wanted to spend more time on this planet. It is almost a shame that in the last 45 minutes Cameron lets loose the marines on Pandora. I say almost because, despite his long absence, it is immediately clear that Cameron is still one of the best action directors around.

Now I have to admit that Avatar has a very simple and somewhat cliche storyline (basically Pocahontas on a distant planet), but honestly I think that this is not really a bad thing. For this kind of movie a more complicated plot would probably only distract the audience from the visual experience. The movie also has some nice reflections on the current world and the ecological message (reminiscent of Miyazaki) fortunately isn't too preachy.

The movie has some other flaws, however. I still don't think Sam Worthington has enough charisma to be a leading man, and his relationship with Neytiri could have been developed better. Also, the song playing over the end credits has to be one of the worst in recent years. But when I complain about the song, I realise how much I liked the movie as there was little else to complain about. Welcome back James Cameron, but please don't let it take so long for your next film.

(I have seen Avatar in IMAX by the way - which I recommend to anyone - and it undoubtedly affects my judgment. Therefore I really wonder how this movie will hold up when I see it on dvd or blu-ray on a small screen.)

Finally saw Avatar last night, and I pretty much agree with everything in Atterr's review. Whlle there is ton you could nitpick about...the hammy dialouge, the generic story, Worthington as an actor, etc...my feeling is, when a film strikes such a pleasing chord with you, why bother. I'm sure mnay reviews have said the samre thing, but it really feels like Titanic. Titanic was a very flawed movie, but in the end, who cares, it hit the right emotions at the right times. Here are some random thoughts about the film.

- Techincally, this film is perfect. Like Atterr said, you really feel as though this is a living breathing world and it's such a visual treat, it masks alot of the films obvious flaws.

- Cameron knows how to direct an action sequence better than anybody in Hollywood right now. The action in this film was exhirating and served the story wonderfully.

- Due to the IMAX being sold out last night and my group of friends all ready to see it, we comprimised and saw in regulat 2D. While I'd love to see in IMAX for comparisons sake, and still may, the film still blew me away. As a matter of fact, my eyes don't play well with 3D and I'm almost afraid I'd get a headache after 2 and a half hours of my eyes crossing. That being said, I may see this again in IMAX just to get the "full effect". Be aware though, that the film is no less impressive in standard 2D.

- Sam Worthington was decent enough but Atterr has a very good point. I don't see him as a leading man in anything requiring real acting chops or real charisma.

- The film was almost too long as I started to feel the time midway through the second act but it definately picked up in the final 45 minutes.

- Can't say enough about the imagination and thought that went into designing the world of Pandora. Everything from the creatures, to the landscape was top notch. George Lucas, eat your heart out.

- As Atterr also mentioned, the story was predictable and generic, but in a way, it totally worked. The subtexts of being one with nature and being connected to all living things, for me, really drove the narrative. The basic framework was very Star Wars but that's a classic theme that always resonates when handled properly. In short, I've seen it before but I didn't care...it still held an emotional weight that was palpable and very enjoyable.

In short, Avatar is an epic spectacle that deserves all the accolades it has been receiving. The more cynical among us will probably scoff at the some of the film's shortcomings in script and acting, but that's all moot. While you wont be disappointed if you can't make it to an IMAX theater, this film is worthy of being seen on the largest screen you can find. Damn fun film!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(did I say this in here yet??)

I liked Avatar...a lot... I thought it was real good... very pretty and I liked the concept (very Matrix-ish which always gets me)

HOWEVER:

I thought they went wayyyyyyyy too overboard on the CORPORATE BAD... NATURE GOOD thing

(I did love the natives being able to plug into the planet though, that was coolsh!t)

Also... if you didn't see it... Sherlock Holmes... much fun too!! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if any of the people who love the nature theme had a problem with the natives enslaving the animals for their own will and purpose. :lol:

The 3D is stereoscopic so if you haven't done 3D with that yet it's supposed to be much easier on the eyes then the old colored glasses.

I saw it in IMAX 3D and my friend said he's been hearing the IMAX 3D was more effective than the regular screen 3D. I don't know if that's true but it could be. The digital film that IMAX requires is much crisper than regular film so could make the 3D much more consistent and good looking.

Edited by Devils731
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(did I say this in here yet??)

I liked Avatar...a lot... I thought it was real good... very pretty and I liked the concept (very Matrix-ish which always gets me)

HOWEVER:

I thought they went wayyyyyyyy too overboard on the CORPORATE BAD... NATURE GOOD thing

(I did love the natives being able to plug into the planet though, that was coolsh!t)

Also... if you didn't see it... Sherlock Holmes... much fun too!! :thumbsup:

It's funny how you mentioned the Matrix because I had the same thought whike watching it. I kept trying to remember when the Matrix was released and when Cameron started writing this (supposedly 10 years ago) looking to see if I could see a connection.

As for the Business vs Nature angle, it was verrry polarizing and a touch obnoxious, but the films needed that "big bad character" to go against the "ultra-good" Na'vi. Again, it's all part of the theme the movie as constructed around. That aspect was very Empire vs Rebelion where nobody, while watching the movie, falls in love with the Empire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if any of the people who love the nature theme had a problem with the natives enslaving the animals for their own will and purpose. :lol:

Naaah...you see, the Na'vi apologize profusely to the animal before stabbing it the heart or riding it off the edge of a cliff. It's all good so long as you say you're sorry!

The 3D is stereoscopic so if you haven't done 3D with that yet it's supposed to be much easier on the eyes then the old colored glasses.

I saw it in IMAX 3D and my friend said he's been hearing the IMAX 3D was more effective than the regular screen 3D. I don't know if that's true but it could be. The digital film that IMAX requires is much crisper than regular film so could make the 3D much more consistent and good looking.

Again, I think I may go see agian in IMAX 3D, just for the spectacle of it but I'm almost glad I saw it in regular 2D. That way, I could appreciate the movie for what it was without getting distracted by the immersive visuals. Then again, I did plan on IMAX 3D when I went to ge tthe tickets, so I may just be blowing hot air. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what made the 3D work for Avatar is that it wasn't made to only work in 3D. Nothing is flying out of the screen at you or silly gimmicks like that. It's mostly during indoor scene, I imagine the panoramics look distorted when presented with a uniform color like that.

But inside scenes you get this great sense of depth, like the screen you're looking at goes 30 feet deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally saw Avatar.

Went all the way to the IMAX in Hamilton. Got there at 2:40 on Saturday hoping to see the 3:40. It was sold out, along with the 7:15. Ended up getting tickets to the 10:45 and having to kill time (ended up wandering around Franklin Mills and getting some killer burgers at Rossi's ... good day).

Anyway, the movie is a pure visual spectacle. Unbelievable. The thought and creativity that went into imagining that world are just mind-blowing. The 3-D was never tacky like old 3-D movies used to be (where something seemed to "jump" at you every few minutes), instead it was a perfect compliment, allowing you to feel like you were in this other world rather than just looking at pictures of it. I did find myself chuckling at the way the ground lit up as the Na'vi walked on it at night (I just kept thinking it was a new "Billie Jean" video).

The plot was just a 162-minute-long hippie hard-on. They managed to sneak in a few subtle and not-so-subtle shots at George W. Bush in the midst of the orgy of environmentalism, but Cameron managed to get his message across without coming off as being too preachy. The plot was cliche, it was predictable, it stole heavily from the story of Pocahontas and at times it was kinda lame. But this is not a movie you watch for the plot.

All that said, is it wrong that my favorite character was the bad guy? The Head of Security Marine guy, whatever his name was, was one of the most badass movie characters I've seen in recent flicks. The dude would take a drag of oxygen before jumping into the alien atmosphere to fvck some sh!t up. His motives clearly made him the bad guy and there's something about his face that I couldn't stand (my first guess is that it's because he looks to me like an older Ryan Seacrest on steroids), but the dude was undeniably badass. Character aside, the best acting came from the CGI Na'vi. Take it for what it is ... a knock on the actual humans acting or a testament to the progress made in CGI? Whatever. The CGI Na'vi version of Sigourney Weaver was a better actor than the actual Sigourney Weaver. Yeah.

It's a must-watch, no doubt about it. I've heard it's still impressive in regular 2-D, but I'm really glad I went the distance for IMAX 3-D. If I had to grade it, I'd give it an A. Despite the weak plot, weak characters and weak acting, the visual spectacle of it all trumps everything. If one of those other areas was better, it'd be an A+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Avatar, guess who just won Best Picture at the Golden Globes....well, in case you were curious, here are the winners!

Best Picture - Drama

Avatar- I guess I shouldn't have been suprised when I heard this announced as I thought Precious was going to win, but this pretty paves the way for Avatar to win Best Picture at the Oscars. Thinking back on it, it almose makes sense given all the Titanic links one can make between the two films. Again, I think both Precious and Up In The Air were better films, but Avatar was such a revolutionary visual specatcle, I can't get too mad at it winning.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture - Drama

Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side - Critics have been raving about Bullock's performance in the Blind Side, so this shouldn't have been too much of a surprise either. Still, I don't think she gets an Oscar, but, jeez, I'm 0 for 2 so far, so what do I know!

Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Drama

Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart - With all the buzz Bridges has been getting leading up to the awards, this is no surprise. I plan on seeing it this week, so look for a review when I do!

Best Motion Picture - Comedy Or Musical

The Hangover - SWEET! Very glad I was wrong on this one, as I was hoping it would win but didn't think it would. Easily the best film of the nominees, with the exception of my pick, (500) Days Of Summer, but still nothing made me laugh harder this summer than The Hangover. Very glad it won!

Best Performance by an Actress in a Motion Picture - Comedy Or Musical

Meryl Streep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that said, is it wrong that my favorite character was the bad guy? The Head of Security Marine guy, whatever his name was, was one of the most badass movie characters I've seen in recent flicks. The dude would take a drag of oxygen before jumping into the alien atmosphere to fvck some sh!t up. His motives clearly made him the bad guy and there's something about his face that I couldn't stand (my first guess is that it's because he looks to me like an older Ryan Seacrest on steroids), but the dude was undeniably badass.

I agree, he was awesome. I was rooting for him by the end of the movie.

If you have any interest in it at all, I'd see it in 3d IMAX, since I imagine it doesn't translate to the small screen. Basically the only reason to see it is the CGI and it translates really well to 3d. Also if you're a pothead I'd recommend smoking up before going. The story is easy enough to follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, he was awesome. I was rooting for him by the end of the movie.

Good, I'm glad I wasn't the only one. That dude was the tits.

Something I forgot to give credit for was the concept of humans being the invading aliens. I'm not much of a movie buff so, off the top of my head, I can't think of another film where this is going on (though I feel like I'm missing one that should be obvious :noclue: ). I really liked District-9 for taking a new approach to the alien movie, and the same should be said for Avatar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good, I'm glad I wasn't the only one. That dude was the tits.

Something I forgot to give credit for was the concept of humans being the invading aliens. I'm not much of a movie buff so, off the top of my head, I can't think of another film where this is going on (though I feel like I'm missing one that should be obvious :noclue: ). I really liked District-9 for taking a new approach to the alien movie, and the same should be said for Avatar.

It's not space alien humans but white man humans invade with their technology robbing the peaceful, nature loving Indians in Pocahontas. At a lot of it's core Avatar is Pocahontas in space.

Extremely interesting read:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/43440

A guy with a seriously impressive resume critiques Avatar's science. Make sure to also read his follow-up at the bottom.

Not movie related but I love that the space elevator concept was first brought up by science fiction authors decades ago and now there are multiple big investing groups working to build one for real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opening This Week – Nationwide

Extraordinary Measures – I hope my brother reads this, because he called this a month ago. When a film is financed and produced by “CBS Films”, a newly created off shoot of the TV corporation, doesn’t that just scream made for TV? Evidently, the quality of made for TV films rubbed on this true life story starring Harrison Ford and...shudder...Brendan Fraser. The story is about a working class man on his way up in the world when his children fall stricken to a terminal illness and Ford plays the unconventional scientist looking for a cure. While I’m sure the real story is truly inspiring, critics have been down on this film from the beginning. RT has it at a 22% rating and it doesn’t look to improve anytime soon.

Legion – Paul Bettany stars in this film about God losing faith in mankind and sending a legion of angels to bring the Apocalypse and our only hope is the archangel Michael, played by Mr. Bettany. The premise looks to be ridiculous and the action looks like something out of a bad video game from 5 years ago, with lots of face stretching and crawling demons and blah, blah, blah. Bettany is a good actor that deserves better than this

Edited by Bulletproof
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember my impression of Legion deteriorating through my first time watching the trailer. It went from "cool premise" to "the old lady crawling in the ceiling seems a bit off" to "we have warfare between angels and they're using ... machine guns?" Ugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember my impression of Legion deteriorating through my first time watching the trailer. It went from "cool premise" to "the old lady crawling in the ceiling seems a bit off" to "we have warfare between angels and they're using ... machine guns?" Ugh.

Yeah, that trailer is really terrible. What bugs me the most about it is how bad the CGI is in it. It's like a 4th grader got his hands on AfterEffects or something and went hog wild. It just looks to be a mishmash of dumb ideas that just doesn't seem to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.