Reply With Quote
Better than both Gravity and Interstellar.
Easily better than Gravity. Almost as good as interstellar tbh.
Better than both Gravity and Interstellar.
Ridley Scott is ing back
Interstellar at IMAX is still GOAT though
Will see it soon. Saw Sicario this weekend. Del Toro...
Gravity sucked major ass. Aliens is still the greatest sci-fi movie. The Martian was average. I'll go see it again because I dosed off.
It shall go on my list.
Same, though I wasn't a fan of it. I read the book for the Martian and liked it a lot. Will have to get a chance to watch the movie.Will see it soon. Saw Sicario this weekend. Del Toro...
What did you overdose on?
Sicario is dope. beautifully directed, and top-notch work by Del Toro and Blunt. Watching Martian tomorrowWill see it soon. Saw Sicario this weekend. Del Toro...
Matt Damon is a
Really? I enjoyed it. The story was fairly basic a perhaps a bit cliche but Denis Villeneuve did a great job behind the camera...especially the scenes in Mexico.
Del Toro and Depp and neck and neck for bad guy of the year imho.
Last edited by benefactor; 10-05-2015 at 06:25 AM.
I thought it was formulaic, which ironic, because Villeneuve was clearly jerking himself off for his cinematography and screenplay. The acting was good, especially Blunt being able to convey her character's attempts to figure out her situation nonverbally and Del Toro's eyes. Some of those skies were gorgeous.
But the gestalt is that it was a pretty cookie-cutter attempt to not be a cookie-cutter movie. Probably my least favorite movie that I've seen this year.
But this is really what the movie was about though. The story itself regarding the cartels didn't matter. It was more about Blunt's inner struggle with the measures that had to be taken in order to be successful against they type of criminals they were fighting. This combined with Del Toro's icy ruthlessness and Brolin's borderline carefree approach towards his job as the leader of the hit squad/mop up crew made the movie more of a character study than an actual film with some sort of linear storyline.
I think you are looking a bit too deeply at something that just needs to be taken at face value for what it is...much like Black Mass.
I think it's the opposite. I am ignoring the deeper meaning of the story in my evaluation. When I was leaving the theatre yesterday, a friend did ask why Blunt was the focus and not Del Toro, and I explained to him that Blunt actually had a character arc while Del Toro didn't. I don't want to go too much more into it to avoid obvious spoilers. But yeah, I understood the character-study angle and would go farther and assert that Blunt was the proxy for audience in the movie. She did a great job conveying that, and the other actors did their jobs very well.
The issue to me was the actual construction of the film. The director really seemed to think he had a masterpiece going on, and he fellated himself constantly with the camera angles and his editing. It wasted time more than it created atmosphere. Too many three- to five-second scenes that didn't do anything. Too many half-whispered lines trying to hit the audience over the head with how profound everything was. And what was the message? Send a maniac to catch a maniac? Pretty sure Demolition Man conveyed the same thing without pretending to change the world.
So yeah, I just thought it was so confident in itself that it missed the mark, so keen to bring something new that it stuck to a formula. I don't think it was a horrible movie at all. It was just didn't sit well with me, despite having a potentially power message backed up by some power imagery. It's like thinking Guernica is an ugly painting while also understanding Picasso's intention.
I should check it out.
Huge Ridley Scott fan so I had to catch this one, just been busy and sick. Finally saw it a day ago and I think it's best since Black Hawk Down. tbh I am biased and I enjoyed his last few films that critics sharted on. The Counselor is easily the most underrated but The Martian is his most solid film in awhile.
Least favorite aspect was Donald Glover's scenes. Favorite part was the trek to the ship at the end, Damon's character appreciating the landscape for one last time, I thought Ridley really showed off his artistry on that. Great movie imo.
I think it was Ok. Different movie from Gravity, had more story but not as much action. Gravity was like a 2 hour 3D ride. You had too see Gravity in IMAX 3d to appreciate it. Interstellar was alright. A bit overrated because it's Nolan. Trailer for Revenant.That will be like Leo's nba 2013 game 6 in his career.
loved the movie. but i too was not a fan of donald glover's ahbed impression.
Siracio was dope. Enjoyed it, very great action scenes with moments of suspense. It was 99 degrees today in LA so I went to the movies again.
sicario was. martian suk tho... want my 2 hrs back tbh
Thought The Martian was a little boring. My friend even fell asleep through it. It felt like a boring Bill nye doing a remake of Cast Away, but Cast Away had more heart. I was getting a kick out of all the survival techniques for Damon but those quickly pass. Oh you have an oxygen and water machine ? And now you have food that manages itself? You can text earth too? Oh well then sounds like your set!
Sicario was a throwback to a Kubrick-style of film, where visual aesthetics and score tell you as much as plot and characters. The scenes of nothing were the director's soft, guiding hand over the landscape, with soft-spoken lines and creacendo'ing score punctuating the most intimate of moments. You aren't told something. You're shown something. You're not placed somewhere. You're led. What you do with it once there is up to you.
I loved everything about Sicario's plot, direction, and visual and audio aesthetic.
But then, I love Kubrick, so I immediately appreciated how scenes of washed out basins of alluvial landscapes are visual tentacles representing the reality that the reach of this story fans far more expansive than a standard view of the terrain allows.
When you allow yourself to be removed and allow for reality to set in, the truth of Sicario's is told by the landscapes shown twixt the narrative. The flood is unrelenting, it's reach greater than you can ever even see, and the notion that if you damn one flood means backwash and overflow in a new, less prepared area.
Yes Blunt was our naivety, and Del Toro was the desperate measures likely needed to do any thing of significance, and Brolin the calculated madness bridging the two, but the story isn't a character study. It's a condition study. And the film, it's visuals, it's score, it's narrative, all conclude we are drowning in the desert.
Lil' Kim style stomach pump for Naruto
It was ok at best.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
