The Movies thread!

[njskaguy33]

New Movie Review

Crazy Heart

For me, January is one of the best months for movies. While many fans yearn for the thrills of summer blockbusters, I always like getting a chance to see as many prestige movies as I can before the Oscars. The problem with this is that many films get over-hyped as the Oscar buzz gets louder and louder. One of my favorite films from last year, Slumdog Millionaire fell to victim to this

[Atterr]

Oh boy, am I missing a lot of movies lately. Finally got a chance yesterday to go to the theatre again. A lot of people probably already saw Sherlock Holmes and Up in the Air, so just some quick thoughts:

Sherlock Holmes: Guy Ritchie has been pretty sh!t lately and the trailer for this one didn't get me too excited either, even though it starred Robert Downey Jr., who will probably one day get an award for "Greatest Performance in a Leading Role of all Time". But I was really surprised that it was actually quite a fun buddy movie. Sure, it is nowhere original, but the dynamic between good-but-not-Golden Globe-good Downey Jr. and Jude Law makes it an enjoyable ride. Visually, it is great. I really liked 18th century London (especially since I just moved there) and the action sequences were decent enough, although I could really do without all those damn slow-mo's in the inevitable sequel.

Up in the Air: Simply a great movie. Loved every minute of it. Great acting all around. Great script. Great dialogue. Great... oh whatever you get the point.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Atterr

[njskaguy33]

Sherlock Holmes: Guy Ritchie has been pretty sh!t lately and the trailer for this one didn't get me too excited either, even though it starred Robert Downey Jr., who will probably one day get an award for "Greatest Performance in a Leading Role of all Time". But I was really surprised that it was actually quite a fun buddy movie. Sure, it is nowhere original, but the dynamic between good-but-not-Golden Globe-good Downey Jr. and Jude Law makes it an enjoyable ride. Visually, it is great. I really liked 18th century London (especially since I just moved there) and the action sequences were decent enough, although I could really do without all those damn slow-mo's in the inevitable sequel.

Up in the Air: Simply a great movie. Loved every minute of it. Great acting all around. Great script. Great dialogue. Great... oh whatever you get the point.

Yeah, I really don't know why he won a Golden Globe for this movie. Like you said, he was good but not really award good, especially considering he's played that character before. My vote went to Matt Damon for The Informant! which I thought was a much more challenging role. Again, what do I know!

As for Up In The Air, I'm really hoping Reitman gets himself a Best Director Oscar for it but I think James Cameron has a lock on the award. Still, the Academy sometimes goes with the more independent film so I'm hope this is the case this year.

[njskaguy33]

Note : In the interest of post length and personal time savings, I

[njskaguy33]

Oscar Nominations

The Oscar nominations were announced last night, so without further ado, here are the nominees.

Best Picture

Avatar

The Blind Side

District 9

An Education

The Hurt Locker

Inglourious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up

Up In The Air

My Prediction : Firstly, let me just say how annoying it is to have 10 Best Picture nominees. Yes, it

[Atterr]

Not many surprises there, or maybe it's the lack of nominations for Star Trek. At least, there is some recognition for District 9.

I still don't understand why there are 10 Best Picture nominees now. Sure, it is 'more exciting' now. Problem is, they still nominate only 5 directors, which makes those 5 pictures the only true contenders.

My predictions are very similar to Bulletproof's, only I think that Sandra Bullock will win Best Actress. Meryl Streep has enough Oscars already.

Avatar is definitely going to be the big winner on Oscar night. But as much as I loved the movie, it's not Best Picture worthy. So, I'm rooting for Inglorious Basterds and Tarantino.

[njskaguy33]

Not many surprises there, or maybe it's the lack of nominations for Star Trek. At least, there is some recognition for District 9.

I still don't understand why there are 10 Best Picture nominees now. Sure, it is 'more exciting' now. Problem is, they still nominate only 5 directors, which makes those 5 pictures the only true contenders.

My predictions are very similar to Bulletproof's, only I think that Sandra Bullock will win Best Actress. Meryl Streep has enough Oscars already.

Avatar is definitely going to be the big winner on Oscar night. But as much as I loved the movie, it's not Best Picture worthy. So, I'm rooting for Inglorious Basterds and Tarantino.

Ehhhhh, don't be so sure of that, Atterr. Despite being nominated 12 times in her career, she has only won the Oscar for Best Actress once, in 1982 for Sophie's Choice. Since then she has been nominated 11 times, all snubs.

As a matter of fact, Streep has been nominated for 16 Oscars and has only won 2! Now, I agree that's a better record than Sandra Bullock's 0 for 0, but I was shocked to learn that she hadn't won more.

[Devils731]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-chris-nolan-hell-mentor-superman-3-0-while-preparing-3rd-batman/

Chris Nolan is going to be the brains behind the Superman reboot, with Jonah Nolan and David Goyer writing the script. I think that sounds good on the surface, hopefully we'll get a more conflicted Superman who struggles with his powers and who he is on a meaningful level rather than a high school level.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Very interesting ....

[CRASHER]

Oh goodie... this means more Marvel/DC's on You Tube about this... damn I love that stuff!!!!

[Atterr]

Yeah, another Superman reboot!!!

And I thought it was too soon for a new Spider-Man series...

Ehhhhh, don't be so sure of that, Atterr. Despite being nominated 12 times in her career, she has only won the Oscar for Best Actress once, in 1982 for Sophie's Choice. Since then she has been nominated 11 times, all snubs.

As a matter of fact, Streep has been nominated for 16 Oscars and has only won 2! Now, I agree that's a better record than Sandra Bullock's 0 for 0, but I was shocked to learn that she hadn't won more.

Wow, really? Only two? Maybe it's all those nominations, but it sure feels like more than two. Thanks for pointing that out, though I still think Bullock will win it. In fact, the actress from Precious probably has a greater chance of winning than Streep. Don't know really why, but I just feel that Streep is too easy a choice for the Academy.

[CRASHER]

Yeah, another Superman reboot!!!

And I thought it was too soon for a new Spider-Man series...

How do you think Spidey Feels???

http://www.youtube.com/user/ItsJustSomeRandomGuy#p/u/0/lg6v1dgTcxw

Edited February 9, 2010 by CRASHER

[eaglejelly]

I still don't understand why there are 10 Best Picture nominees now. Sure, it is 'more exciting' now. Problem is, they still nominate only 5 directors, which makes those 5 pictures the only true contenders.

Oscar Nominations

[njskaguy33]

It's funny, but when I saw the first mention of the Superman reboot by 731, I had totally forgotten that Superman was just rebooted a couple of years ago. That is the first sign a film franchise needs a reboot...

To Atterr, you're probably right about Bullock winning the Oscar. Just thought it was amazing that Meryl Streep hadn't won more.

Oh, and eagle, while I appreciate the idea behind the clip you posted, it's still proof positive that SNL just isn't funny anymore.

By the way, I'm posting my movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes now. Last night I threw some old ones up, just to fill my page a bit so if you could give the page a click to boost my stats a bit, that would be lovely!

My RT Page

[njskaguy33]

Opening This Week

[Atterr]

Short movie review:

Moon

A great return to old school sci-fi movies such as 2001, Blade Runner and Silent Running, which were more about ideas than explosions. In fact, some of the elements in Moon might seem familiar to anyone who has seen those movies, but it's all to the credit of screenwriter and director Duncan Jones, son of David Bowie, that the final product is still something original. The script about an isolated astronaut working on the moon is cleverly written and will keep viewers guessing, while the camerawork and score by Clint Mansell add to the loneliness. As Sam Rockwell is practically the only actor in the movie, he carries its success on his shoulders, but he does a fantastic job, and one has to wonder why he is overlooked by the Academy. But the same goes for the whole movie. In a year where 10 films are nominated, it is very strange that Moon is not one of them.

[Devils731]

It's funny, but when I saw the first mention of the Superman reboot by 731, I had totally forgotten that Superman was just rebooted a couple of years ago. That is the first sign a film franchise needs a reboot...

Superman wasn't really rebooted since it continued from an existing storyline of the prior movies, it just needed new actors since the old cast obviously couldn't do it. A reboot is really ignoring all prior history and starting over.

Casino Royale reboots James Bond as it starts a new mythos from scratch, switching to a new Bond while continuing the old story line does not, as an example, IMO.

Short movie review:

Moon

A great return to old school sci-fi movies such as 2001, Blade Runner and Silent Running, which were more about ideas than explosions. In fact, some of the elements in Moon might seem familiar to anyone who has seen those movies, but it's all to the credit of screenwriter and director Duncan Jones, son of David Bowie, that the final product is still something original. The script about an isolated astronaut working on the moon is cleverly written and will keep viewers guessing, while the camerawork and score by Clint Mansell add to the loneliness. As Sam Rockwell is practically the only actor in the movie, he carries its success on his shoulders, but he does a fantastic job, and one has to wonder why he is overlooked by the Academy. But the same goes for the whole movie. In a year where 10 films are nominated, it is very strange that Moon is not one of them.

I enjoyed Moon, definitely worth watching as a different type of movie. I'll be interested in seeing the Ryan Reynolds movie "Buried" for the same reason, it got positive, although not glowing, reviews from the people who have seen it.

Wolfman – Filled with star power, raging action and fur, Wolfman finally hits the big screen this weekend. Benicio Del Toro, Emily Blunt and Anthony Hopkins head a cast that screams talent yet the reviews, thus far, have been pretty brutal. Many reviewers have been saying for a film that features a classic horror character, there is a surprising lack of genuine thrills to be had here. Shame too, as the cast looks to be really top notch.

I can't believe the number of people I know who are excited to see this movie. All the previews look awful to me. The 33% rating on RT doesn't really do the poor reviews justice as it's also 4.7/10, which is really poor. Although glancing through the RT reviews most of the "positive" ones have negativity in them, explaining how they achieved such a low "out of 10" rating.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Devils731

[njskaguy33]

Superman wasn't really rebooted since it continued from an existing storyline of the prior movies, it just needed new actors since the old cast obviously couldn't do it. A reboot is really ignoring all prior history and starting over.

Casino Royale reboots James Bond as it starts a new mythos from scratch, switching to a new Bond while continuing the old story line does not, as an example, IMO.

Fair point. To be honest, I'm not much of a comic book fan, so I didn't even realize the newer Superman just continued the story. To me, that seemed like a reboot but given your explanation, I see that it really wasn't. Still, it is pretty soon to be giving the whole thing a jumpstart, but with Nolan and Goyer behind the scenes, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

I enjoyed Moon, definitely worth watching as a different type of movie. I'll be interested in seeing the Ryan Reynolds movie "Buried" for the same reason, it got positive, although not glowing, reviews from the people who have seen it.

Haven't had a chance to see it myself, but I'm glad anytime Sam Rockwell gets a leading role or some kind of recognition. I'll definately have to bump Moon up on my Netflix queue. Also, great review Atterr...really makes me want to see this film sooner than later.

I can't believe the number of people I know who are excited to see this movie. All the previews look awful to me. The 33% rating on RT doesn't really do the poor reviews justice as it's also 4.7/10, which is really poor. Although glancing through the RT reviews most of the "positive" ones have negativity in them, explaining how they achieved such a low "out of 10" rating.

Yeah, the trailer just did not look good at all to me either. While I respect how the filmmakers didn't get all PG-13 with it and created a brutal Wolfman character, it doesn't seem to have any life to it. Just grand spectacle that may be interesting to look at but not have anything behind it. Wont be running out to see this one.

[DaneykoIsGod]

Speaking of Sam Rockwell, did anyone else see Choke? I really liked the book, but the movie left me feeling somewhat meh. Not sure if it's because the movie should have been better or if the story really doesn't translate well to the screen.

[njskaguy33]

I haven't seen it myself, but I've read the book and loved it. My brother saw it actually and, knowing I'm a pretty big Phallanuck fan, sent me a whole mini review of the film. Rather than paraphrase, I'll just post what he wrote...he wont mind, I'm sure! Mind you, he's never read the book, so his perception is a touch different than ours would be.

Choke, just from watching the movie, is a fascinating book! There is crazy character depth, and so many themes! The second coming of Jesus...giving people hope and meaning, the whole nihilism of the main character that basically goes from believing in nothing, into eventually something! After doing a little research, the book is 300 pages long...the movie is barely 90 minutes. If you can tell, we're already heading into a problem.

I guess you could say...the movie was kind of like an introduction to the book? All the themes were there, and I think Sam Rockwell did a pretty good job playing Victor. It's just that the film really has a hard time finding a voice or a tone, and while trying to find the tone, the movie just kinda drifts along. They advertise it as a dark comedy, but I just found it more fascinating than funny. I think I laughed two or three times. The best parts of the film were Victor's voice over--which might be because we're listening to the voice of the author, not really the movie. I've never watched a movie that has made me want to read the book, even while watching it. It feels to me that the director assumed the source material was so strong, that no matter how they make the film, it would still hold up. It didn't.

I read about the director's process in trying to put together the screenplay, he had to do it six separate times before he came up with an adaptation he was satisfied with. If your trying to get your first movie together and you have to do six passes of the screenplay to make an adaptation...pick an easier book! It wasn't a terrible movie, but judging by the quality of the writing, this could have been a great film! Instead, it was kinda just thrown together. I think you should watch it because you actually read the book...but I'm pretty sure you're gonna dislike it. There were some good directorial choices that made me think it was on it's way to being something better, maybe actually finding that voice, but it wasn't enough. For example, the "sex" scenes were often in similar locations, very dirty and ugly with fluorescent lighting--kind of making the act rather ugly and nothing, as apposed to something special and meaningful. But at the same time of doing that, the movie was trying to get a laugh with plucky music...eh? Also, he would see his encounters naked with quick editing while talking to them, which I thought was kind of a nice touch. But again, that was early in the film, and then never really explored. If the book has this kind of multiple tone writing, then the movie needs to adapt the same way. Maybe some books cannot be filmed? Now there's a thread of discussion that can take all night.

If you can't tell at this point, I was pretty disappointed with the film. But I already had my reservations, so my hopes were pretty low to begin with. It's basically really great material, in the hands of inexperienced people. If you don't mind, I would like to borrow the book from you some day. If you want to discuss it some more give me a ring. I would like to know what the book had that the movie didn't, in terms of plot, and, I don't know...everything.

[njskaguy33]

New Movie Review

The Last Station

Typically, I

[DaneykoIsGod]

Wow, sounds like your brother agrees with me on Choke. Thanks for posting that. Makes me feel slightly less crazy.

[Cachorro Louco]

Does anyone watched Mr.Nobody yet??? IF so it is anygood???

[njskaguy33]

Opening This Week – Nationwide

Shutter Island – Unless you’ve been in exile or something, you have most certainly heard some buzz on Shutter Island, the latest film from acclaimed director Martin Scorsese. I’ve been seeing this trailer for what seems like a year now and every time I wonder, “How in the heck is a Scorsese thriller going to be good?”. At first glance, it has all the elements: interesting imagery, mysterious island with long faced crazies, Leo DeCaprio, etc, etc…but something just didn’t seem right about it. Personally, I thought the film was going to get smashed critically, but early reviews have all been stating that it’s visually excellent but thin on story with some borderline overacting thrown into the mix. Not bad for a film that, to me, had letdown written all over it. Based solely on reviews, this may be worth a watch for the visual aspect alone…and hey, it’s Scorsese, how bad could it be?

Opening This Week – Limited

Blood Done Sign My Name – This film is a drama depicting the real life story of a white father and son who was acquitted for a murder of a black man, in full public view, in 1970’s North Carolina. While the premise seems to be interesting, reviews have been lackluster with many reviewers saying that the film comes off as bland and by the numbers. Might be worth seeing if the subject matter is of interest.

Celine: Through The Eyes of The World – A limited engagement concert film of…hmmm…let me guess…Celine Dion. Meh, this could’ve gone straight to DVD.

Ghost Writer – Directed by Roman Polanski and starring Ewan McGregor, Pierce Brosnan and Kim Cattrall in what may reviwers are calling one of Polanski’s tautest and most intense films. The story is a complex political thriller that involves ghost writing a Prime Minister’s memoirs, hidden CIA secrets in manuscripts and dead political aides. The trailer looks to be very interesting so this is worth a viewing if you’re a fan of thrillers…and don’t mind Polanski is a creep, there, I had to say it.

The Good Guy – Bland looking rom com about love, sexy Wall Street professionals, what makes the wrong kind of guy and blah, blah, blah, blah. Reviewers are urinating all over this on, so stay awaaay.

Happy Tears – Parker Posey and Demi Morore star in this quirky indie comedy about a two sisters who come home to care for their ailing father and learn to deal with the current situation as well as old childhood memories. Not much has been said about this film but early reviews have been pretty terrible, with reviewers saying it’s a holy mess.

Opening This Week – Worth Waiting For

Lourdes – Man, it took an act of God to find a freaking synopsis for this movie…critics are saying it’s amazing but I for the life of me can’t figure out what it’s about. The most I’ve been able to get is that it’s about a wheelchair-bound woman who takes a life changing journey to Lourdes, an iconic site pilgrimage in the Pyrenees mountains. Most reviewers are saying it’s haunting and brilliantly acted but there are a few who saying it’s a flat out snooze fest. Movie geeks will probably soil their shorts over this one, myself included, but the rest of us can just give this one a pass.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Bulletproof

[btexperience]

Yay! My comments on Choke made it to the discussion! Who knew my ramblings would amount to anything! Okay, moving on.

Happy Tears – Parker Posey and Demi Morore star in this quirky indie comedy about a two sisters who come home to care for their ailing father and learn to deal with the current situation as well as old childhood memories. Not much has been said about this film but early reviews have been pretty terrible, with reviewers saying it’s a holy mess.

I Just watched the trailer this morning. I had such a mixed reaction to it. On one hand, the whole movie looked promising, but at the same time, the whole thing looked "off". I don't know, it almost looks like it wants to be The Savages but at the same time...no. So weird.

On another note, I don't know if any of you are familiar with The Angry Video Game Nerd, but he also does other videos, too. In fact, he's originally a movie buff. Here's his video--The Top Ten Worst Movie Cliches.

Top Ten Worst Movie Cliches CLICK HERE