What Movie Have You Seen Today?

General General Movie Discussion
609

It was pretty technically spectacular. Certainly should get an editing Oscar and cinematography for Deakins. While I didn’t notice any obvious seams, except for the blackout, I couldn’t help but wonder during the narrative how they traveled so far and went through so much in the first hour of the movie. It didn’t seem realistic even though my eyes had just seen it continuously happen.

Also, the story seemed very much like Saving Private Ryan crossed with Peter Jackson’s excellent trench warfare documentary They Shall Not Grow Old.

610

Would be an interesting win for a film mooted as being a ‘single shot’.

611

I’m now watching the old Dutch television show “Floris”, directed by Paul Verhoeven and starring a very young Rutger Hauer. It’s a Dutch “Ivanhoe” like show from 1969 and still great to watch. Only 12 episodes from half an hour, but full of adventure, sword fighting, filmed on real locations, like old castles and woods. Great fun!

1 Like
612

Lots of editing involved in making that possible - you’d be surprised what is an edit in that film and what isnt i suspect…

2 Likes
613

Granted there’s no doubt lots of cleverly seamless cuts. I can only talk of myself as an editor and fellow editors in telly (don’t know Lee Smith), but the art of ‘invisible editing’ is a bit of a myth created probably by directors who would prefer we forget editor’s play as key a role in telling their story as they do (Sam Mendes nod to Lee Smith last night proving he’s not one those egomaniacal nobs).

While great editing should never distract from story, nor make it crudely obvious the whole thing before the viewer is a construct, it’s not entirely invisible. The best editing makes a virtue of the mediums most significant short coming. Rather than hiding, it adds meaning by juxtaposition; think the bone-to-space station cut in 2001 - the most visible and among the greatest cuts in cinema. Or creating nuance with the good old fashioned long transitions of Apocalypse Now.

For me, editing to make a shot seamless is no doubt arduous and creatively demanding, but ultimately it’s not the art of editing at its best.

3 Likes
614

Yeah I mean it plays a role in the presentation of the story (for it to be a harrowing experience that he endures with no cutting away etc…) but mainly its sorta the camera travelling in the scene and the main characters go off screen and then the characters appear again where the edits are happening - so it is a mix of cgi and editing that is achieving the one shot presentation

Editing is I guess, like all good parts of the film chain - in service of the whole product, so editing or music or directing or writing etc that is self aggrandising is often not the best for the film as a whole.

1 Like
615

This “one shot” gimmick is what 1917 has going for it. Otherwise, it’s not a war movie that brings many new revelations. It’s Saving Private Ryan combined with They Shall Not Grow Old. It’s not as good as Dunkirk and doesn’t say anything specific about WWI the way Platoon did about VIetnam, or The Big Red One about WWII. And the German soldiers were really bad shots, like Stormtroopers, whereas the other films mentioned depicted the quick random cruel finality of war much better. Those things took me out of the movie a bit.

1 Like
616

Chugging right through Phase 3, up to Thor: Ragnarok. Ranking Phase 3 films is going to be difficult…they’re all so good.

617

In the last two weeks I’ve seen:

1917: A blistering, tense ride thanks to the one-shot gimmick (think I spotted 3 ghost-cuts) and beautifully shot by Roger Deakins. I thought Newman’s score was derivative of Skyfall/Spectre but all in all I loved every second of it 9/10.

Bad Boys for Life: Much, much better than I’d hoped! I’m a big fan of 1&2 and didn’t expect much from an unheard of Belgian duo directing team. But it was entertaining, emotional and very, very funny! Superior in a lot of ways for not being in Michael Bay’s hands for once 8/10

Marriage Story: A very ‘real’ watching experience. Almost like a documentary. Amazing performances from Johansson and Driver, a must-see if you’re married, i’d imagine. Some intense scenes 7/10.

The Disaster Artist : You can only watch this if you have seen the best worst film of all time beforehand (The Room). And it’s hilarious. James Franco is spot-on as that lunatic enigma Tommy Wiseau. He is well-supported by the long-suffering Greg Sestero (Dave Franco), as you discover what went into filming what is now a cult classic movie about ‘how not to make a film’ 10/10 .

Uncut Gems: I hate Adam Sandler but thought I’d give this a go. It’s the best I’ve ever seen him really. This is a loud, shouty film but very gripping. The musical score is very weird but somehow works with the madness that goes on in every scene. The film builds and builds and builds and by the end of it you’re just exhausted. 7/10

618

It was much more earnest than Dunkirk or most of those other films - while it was about the brutal journey Will and Tom take it was probably more about their personal journeys, being inspired by each other’s friendship and bravery to achieve the unachievable - I don’t think it was meant neccessarily to be a “war is hell” kinda war movie, it had a much gentler soul to it though I would agree it wasn’t particularly revelatory as a film

2 Likes
619

A Marriage Story

Some pretty amazing performances from Adam Driver and Scarlet Johansen here. Driver as husband Charlie was subtle, and I thought more deserving than Joaquin Phoenix’s over the top joker (he’ll undoubtedly win the Oscar instead.) Scarlet as wife Nicole did a good job of conveying both her care for the husband, but also the desire to assert her stamp on her own life choices. While Laura Dern’s performance has all the buzz and feminist cred right now, I found Alan Alda and Ray Liotta more fascinating as divorce lawyers. Dern and Liotta going toe-to-toe in court was perhaps the most tensely dramatic scene in the film.

The editing and production design underscored the characters’ feelings in the film. When Charlie and his lawyer visit her lawyer’s office, they’re in triangular rooms symbolizing Charlie feeling cornered and fenced in. There was also a lot of symmetry in the editing, which was way better than 1917’s (which wasn’t even nominated in the category though I had thought it would win.) But Marriage Story’s editing served the story and underscored the characters’ sentiments. Noah Baumbach’s script nicely foreshadowed events with meta story telling (Nicole holding a CGI baby in her pilot script as she tells the producers the audience won’t side with her later in the story if they think she’s a bad mother.) This nicely leads into Dern’s speech in her office on the modern expectations of mothers versus fathers. There is also some insightful humor on LA vs NY–trick or treating in Hollywood, reaching for parking garage tickets, and … “the space. Gotta love all the space!”

Still though, it was clear each character bore some guilt for their respective situations. Charlie made at least two decisions that drove Nicole away, and she escalated the divorce proceedings by hiring an aggressive attorney. In the long run, that cost them both a lot of money and was likely to damage their relationship with their son. My only other criticism would be that Hollywood writers typically have no idea of money issues families face and that both characters were in “the biz.” They love to make films about themselves. But this one was pretty well made and performed.

1 Like
620

The Intern (2015)

An interesting little tale about a 70 year old widower who becomes an intern at a tech company to relieve his boredom and loss of purpose. The movie actually manages to surprise by not relying on the lame old cliches and tropes one would usually expect from this type of movie. Robert De Niro is excellent as Ben Whittaker navigating a world that maybe hasn’t left him as behind as he thought. Anne Hathaway is brilliant as always in a roll that literally feels like the next step for her character from The Devil Wears Prada. She is one of my favorite actors. The rest of the cast each have their own mini-stories and arcs to make the characters and world feel that much more real.

2 Likes
622

The Gentlemen

This is a fun Guy Ritchie film, centered around the illicit marijuana drug underworld in England. Matthew McConaughy, Charlie Hunnam, Colin Farrell, and Hugh Grant in a career shifting role from former leading man to character actor that steals the show star. Its first 30 minutes are somewhat hard to follow but once you get used to the accents and it gets going, it’s highly entertaining. It’s in the vein of Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. The final 20 minutes is edited to give you insight into earlier scenes where you thought you knew what was happening, but there are wonderful twists. Hugh Grant plays Fletcher, a private investigator wannabe screenwriter (yes, you read that right), that makes a pitch/blackmail attempt to a drug kingpin’s #2. Accordingly there’s a bit of a what’s real what isn’t meta moment near the end, ala Robert Altman’s The Player as well as a wonderful nod to The Conversation and Gene Hackman. It also touches on how to run a criminal enterprise in the age of social media where everyone records everything on their phone, and how an old school mob would deal with that. An honorable mention also goes to Colin Farrell as the Coach, who plays a surprisingly admirable character against type. The dialog is R-rated witty, filled with misogynist four letter words without somehow being misogynist or racist. Sometimes a word is just an adjective when said in a London cockney accent. So many great lines to quote, but none permissible to print here. A few minor flaws, but all in all a brilliant film.

2 Likes
623

Downhill

This unfunny film is marketed as a comedy, but is a failed dramatic satire and remake of the 2014 Swedish film (googles it) " Force Majeure. Will Ferrell plays a doofus who gaslights his family rather than confront his cowardice upon bailing on them in the face of a controlled avalanche. Without comedic elements, he comes off as a selfish man child. That being said, Julia Louis Dreyfus is fabulous in the role and she needs to be in more movies that cater to her strength as a dramatic actress. She was funny, intelligent, a good mother to her children, and you felt for her being the wife to such an imbecile. That, beautiful shots of the Alps, and a blessedly short run time under 90 minutes almost salvage this film going experience. Worth a look on home video though.

1 Like
624

Force Majeure is possibly the funniest film of the past decade. Check it out, you won’t regret it.

625

Birds of Prey

One of the worst DCEU movies I’ve ever seen, and that’s after watching Suicide Squad right before this one. There’s a reason the box-office on this is horrible despite positive reviews (really?) and audience approval (no, really?) on Rotten Tomatoes. Ugh. I can only think reviewers were afraid to pan a movie that tries to be feminist and pro-women in the age of #metoo. I read one review that claimed this wasn’t a flop because its numbers were similar to Ford vs Ferrarri, a film made by men, and so the discourse must be sexist. But this is not Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, or The Last Jedi, all films featuring strong females and were box office successes.

Here are just a few of the things wrong with this rotten egg:

The title: “Honey, let’s go see Birds of Prey?” “No, I want to see the new Harley Quinn movie. When does that come out?” “I thought they were making Gotham City Sirens?” Nope. Birds of Prey: The Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn was changed online to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. You can’t even abbreviate it: BOPTFEOOHQ.

The R-rating: Needless F-words (lost count at 20) and needlessly violent. This for a film that is based on an animated character popular with girls and whose plot device centers around a young tween girl. “Let’s make a kids comic book movie that only those old enough to vote can see.” Its violent tone seemed out of place in the DCEU and more like a canceled Marvel Netflix show. Logan and Deadpool’s R ratings still fit in with the X-Verse, and are used to underscore seriousness in the former and satire in the latter. This violence had no purpose. It almost felt tacked on after the success of Joker.

The cast: Suicide Squad made up for some underwhelming characters by at least having solid actors in those roles–Will Smith, Cara Delevigne, Alfre Woodward. Other than Margot Robbie, the rest of the supporting cast has no draw, despite casting Ewan MacGregor as a villain (Disney+, can we please get Obi-Wan started?) Hey, seen the new Mary Elizabeth Winstead movie? Imagine the hosts of The View as a crime fighting vigilante group. Joy Behar and Megan McCain have better fight sequences.

Even the jokes are botched. Exhibit A: What should have been a hilarious solution to how to get back a swallowed diamond has its timing and visuals so botched that the viewer instead wonders, “why is that kid taped to a toilet?” Exhibit B: Among the grievances listed as to why the villain Roman Sionas hates Harley is that she “voted for Bernie.” In 2016. While she was in prison. Or as an ex-con broken out of jail. Gotham must have no voter suppression or registration laws whatsoever. And “Voted for Hillary” was right there for the taking too.

The editing: To set up the story, Margot Robbie has to narrate a flashback within a flashback to set up all the characters’ backstory and motives. It’s structurally confusing.

Sex appeal: At least Justice League had some visual eye candy, for both genders, in the forms of Jason Mamoa or Gal Gadot to keep one entertained between set pieces. Margot Robbie looks best during the Suicide Squad flashbacks. Now she sports a t-shirt that says “Harley” and “Quinn” on it? Did she pick that up at the Warner Bros. studio swag shop? They don’t even put her in the signature harlequin outfit.

The title card: The studio shows Wonder Woman, Superman, Batman, The Flash, Green Lantern (who has yet to appear in the DCEU)–none of whom are in this movie. But they found time to reference Captain Boomerang as its only in-universe joke. Does anyone work harder than Jai Courtney’s agent?

Somehow a studio that knows how to make a comic book movie for women (Wonder Woman), kids (Shazam!) and adults (Joker) took a property featuring all three and laid this rotten egg instead.

2 Likes
626

I present the entire problem. This is not a criticism of you, more a point of how Margot Robbie’s Birds Of Prey has a specific audience in mind - much like Joker, you are either love or hate depending on whether you are in on the joke or not.

Joker is viscous social satire
Birds of Prey is meta commentary on patriarchy

you can see why critics took to both. How much you, as an audience member, find enjoyment in it, is entirely dependant on your feelings of selling the underlined theme they have based it on.

I should say I loved both, but I’m a professional actor and writer, and I have advanced degrees in Drama and the English language, so the meta qualities of the two were very much preaching to the choir.

1 Like
627

I almost didn’t put that criticism in, as we’re well aware of what trolls say of feminist super hero movies. I just didn’t find Birds of Prey that well executed compared to say Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman. It’s not its message, but its faltering at executing it. I really did want to like this movie, and the intro animated sequence was a clever start. It just fell apart after that.

Not even its side characters were interesting. Yes, all the men were horrible d-bags. That’s okay. I found it kind of funny given that Steve Mnuchin and Brett Ratner used to produce DCEU films. And Heart’s Barracuda was a clever nod at that type of Hollywood insider joke (given it’s about their manager), but Marvel already did Heart, and better, in Captain Marvel. Likewise, Deadpool’s incorporation of Pat Benatar.

Then there’s the Bertenoulli daughter. “Do you know who I am?” she asks, then shoots the victim before answering. What? Later she says, “They call me Huntress”, albeit after being interrupted many times, and despite the fact that everyone calls her “Crossbow Killer.” Another botched misfire at humor?

Plus, it doesn’t seem like it was marketed correctly. The filmmakers might have had one target audience in mind, while the studio and marketing department had another. Hopefully, Marvel will do a much better job in this genre when Black Widow comes out.

628

Finally had a spare 3hrs to watch Doctor Sleep…

It’s a very accomplished film, not least because of the huge shadow cast by Kubrick’s masterful predecessor.

In terms of that predecessor i don’t think DS is good enough to join it on that highest podium, but it’s far from an embarrassment to it. Not so much a sequel, as an heir.

The performances are all very good, with Mcgregor and Ferguson carrying the drama with aplomb. In this movie’s case it helps that the Director is also the Editor (as well as the screenwriter), since the pacing is pretty much perfect (despite it’s length), feeling like Flanagan knew pretty much exactly how he wanted to cut it when he was shooting.

On reaching the Overview the slow pace and build up to this moment - Danny facing his fears - really pays off. However, when the villain arrives at the overview it never quite lives up to that promise. Saving this location until the finale is great, but it leaves little time to experience the place. That’s not really a fault, but a catch 22; the flip side being if the movie spends too much time there it risks over aping the original.

My one very big gripe with this movie is it’s child torture scene. That’s not a sentence that should ever need to be written, because there’s no justification whatsoever for having such a scene in any movie. It’s gratuitous and in a worst case scenario (which is not unlikely given so many people will watch this movie in one format or another) that some sick **** will be inspired by it.

There are no doubt lots of good arguments against my flaking out over this: “It’s a horror movie, so what’ya expect?” I don’t imagine that i remotely qualify as a snowflake, or a prude and generally distrust censorship in most forms, but there is a line and Flanagan’s gone down hugely in my estimation for having crossed it. It displays a real lack of imagination and writing chops, when the necessary jeopardy can’t be created without including this scene (moreover, the gratuitous detail of the scene). A shame, since it was an otherwise good movie.

629

The scene is in the book, and I think Flanagan handles it magnificently. It is not gratuitous yet horrifying. And I consider it necessary to convey that the True Knot will not stop at anything and also go for Abra, another child.

Horror is about crossing boundaries, for my taste, but Flanagan does not revel in its depiction at all. If someone feels inspired by this he will also feel inspired by Nicholson wielding an axe at his boy.

But I agree with the rest of your review! I only have seen the director‘s cut, however.

1 Like