Go Back   Electric Mole Forums > Other > Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media)
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media) Post about movies, TV shows, video games, and other media.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 2011.11.09, 07:43 PM   #261
deadgrandma
Senior Member
 
deadgrandma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,798
deadgrandma knows what you did last summerdeadgrandma knows what you did last summerdeadgrandma knows what you did last summer
Default

I always enjoyed In the Mood For Love/2046 more
__________________
Disco! Life is dead
deadgrandma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.10, 03:05 AM   #262
zombiestrip
Member
 
zombiestrip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 57
zombiestrip pleased at least somebody
Default

Originally Posted by deadgrandma View Post
I always enjoyed In the Mood For Love/2046 more
In the Mood for Love is my favourite film out of all of Wong's films. If there was ever such a thing as a perfect movie - that would be it in my opinion. I just love that film to bits...

Originally Posted by karateexplosion View Post
Really been meaning to check that out. Though I have virtually zero foreknowledge as to what it's all about. Haven't even seen the trailer for it.


I'd like to take a moment to bitch about one of the defining franchises of our modern cinematic landscape. I am, of course, talking about the Saw series.
I'd advise you NOT watch the trailer because it practically gives away the entire film's story. But in a way it might not be a bad thing to see it cause, in my opinion, Drive isn't all about the film's story but about its characters (especially Gosling's). That's how I read it anyway. Don't make the mistake of thinking it's like Fast and Furious though, lol.

I agree with everything you said also about Saw. I love the first one and even though people ruined the ending for me, I was still enamoured by just how crafty the film was. I think for me, Saw, kickstarted my interest in films in a lot ways. The sequels are completely ridiculous although I do like the second and third since they, at least in my opinion, are the only films that SHOULD follow the original. I don't think the producers care whether the Saw films are actually good or not because good in their opinion is of course the profit they make on the opening weekend. The Saw franchise being that they are horror films scaled on a minuscule budget make for easy return come opening weekend which is exactly why they keep getting made year in year out (think Paranormal Activity, I suppose).

I almost hate the fact that each trap gets more elaborate with each film. I loved the fact that the first film's traps were not only basic in design and concept but the fact that they looked like something that anyone could've made. I think that's the truly terrifying part about it and why it's just brilliant. Oh well.
zombiestrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.10, 04:13 AM   #263
karateexplosion
Senior Member
 
karateexplosion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 373
karateexplosion is an asset to this community
Default

Originally Posted by zombiestrip View Post
I'd advise you NOT watch the trailer because it practically gives away the entire film's story. But in a way it might not be a bad thing to see it cause, in my opinion, Drive isn't all about the film's story but about its characters (especially Gosling's). That's how I read it anyway. Don't make the mistake of thinking it's like Fast and Furious though, lol.
That's good to hear. I like a good character-driven (oh puns) film. I literally know only two things about Drive; that the general consensus is it's pretty good, and Ryan Gosling has some cool, white jacket with a scorpion on it that may or may not be important (I think). Oh, and it's possible that there will be cars involved as well.

Originally Posted by zombiestrip View Post
I agree with everything you said also about Saw. I love the first one and even though people ruined the ending for me, I was still enamoured by just how crafty the film was. I think for me, Saw, kickstarted my interest in films in a lot ways. The sequels are completely ridiculous although I do like the second and third since they, at least in my opinion, are the only films that SHOULD follow the original. I don't think the producers care whether the Saw films are actually good or not because good in their opinion is of course the profit they make on the opening weekend. The Saw franchise being that they are horror films scaled on a minuscule budget make for easy return come opening weekend which is exactly why they keep getting made year in year out (think Paranormal Activity, I suppose).

I almost hate the fact that each trap gets more elaborate with each film. I loved the fact that the first film's traps were not only basic in design and concept but the fact that they looked like something that anyone could've made. I think that's the truly terrifying part about it and why it's just brilliant. Oh well.
And the first Saw is actually the second-lowest grossing film in the franchise, imagine that.

Also, correction - there're apparently only seven films in the series. I could have sworn they slipped another one in there when I wasn't looking.
karateexplosion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.10, 04:21 AM   #264
zombiestrip
Member
 
zombiestrip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 57
zombiestrip pleased at least somebody
Default

^ At this point, who's counting really? =\
zombiestrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.10, 05:50 PM   #265
Andikki
Senior Member
 
Andikki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Siberia
Posts: 100
Andikki is an asset to this community
Default

Originally Posted by zombiestrip View Post
I'd advise you NOT watch the trailer because it practically gives away the entire film's story.
The trailer for My Bluberry Nights that they showed here (not sure if it was an international trailer, or just the one our local craftsmen cut together) was criminal! It showed the last scene which the whole film was supposed to lead to. Thank god I do not watch TV, but my mom was the victim.
Andikki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.10, 06:05 PM   #266
deadgrandma
Senior Member
 
deadgrandma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,798
deadgrandma knows what you did last summerdeadgrandma knows what you did last summerdeadgrandma knows what you did last summer
Default

You managed it to the end?
__________________
Disco! Life is dead
deadgrandma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.11, 06:19 AM   #267
karateexplosion
Senior Member
 
karateexplosion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 373
karateexplosion is an asset to this community
Default

So I downloaded and watched Drive last night, or as I like to call it, "Waiting for something to happen and pensive facial expressions: The Movie". Really not feeling the love here. Painfully one-dimensional characters, completely lackluster plot and pretty much the absolute minimal amount of dialogue and action they could get away with, only to replaced by a torrent of scenes in which the characters do nothing but stare at each other and/or look pensive. From the opening sequence, I went in expecting a more serious and down-to-earth, smarter version of The Transporter and ended up with Garden State, complete with an obviously hipster-fodder soundtrack but only half the charm (and I kinda really hate Garden State). I mean, I get that this wasn't really meant to be any sort of action movie or anything like that. But how can you have a character-driven film with no progression or real emotion of any kind? I feel like I can't fault Gosling here, for anything other than accepting this, at least. I expect he's playing the role exactly as written. What boggles me is what exactly the fuck the writer or director is trying to accomplish with his character. You get all these infinitesimally subtle hints as to the emotions Gosling may or may not be experiencing underneath his stoic, dead-eyed stare, but nothing that ever gives you any real connection with the character or tells the audience what he's all about. And maybe this is Gosling's fault, but instead of being this steadfast bad-ass with a heart of gold I expect he's supposed to be, he just comes off as kinda slow. Of the Forest Gump variety. I mean, for fuck's sake, throw the guy a bone. He probably has no more than 150 words in the entire duration of the film. Instead, it's just blank stares and long shots of him driving through the city at night. Laborious is the only way I can describe it. Every shot lingers, every awkward pause drawn-out, every syllable forced. And that's every character and scene in the movie. I doesn't surprise me at all that this is based on a book. The book is probably great - filled with plenty of lurid descriptors of what these characters are feeling. Unfortunately the film fails completely in trying to convey anything of substance.

Shit, I hated this movie. Like, more than anything I've seen in years. Seriously, the last time I can recall being this overwhelmed with dissatisfaction after watching a film was probably when I saw Garden State. Holy shit.
karateexplosion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.11, 07:13 AM   #268
zombiestrip
Member
 
zombiestrip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 57
zombiestrip pleased at least somebody
Default

^ Oooh, how awkward. At least you we're able to say why you didn't like it as opposed to just completely writing the film off for no reason!

I personally loved Gosling's character and he played it really well, in my opinion. There's a sense that there's something not all that right about this guy - there's clearly something... dysfunctional with him. I liken his character a lot to Travis Bickle (even James Stewarts' character in Vertigo) and it's hard NOT to compare Drive to Taxi Driver since both are pretty much character studies of lonely and dangerous men. I'm pretty sure Gosling's lack of dialogue was intentional and that this bad ass bravado that he brought on with him was pretty much reminiscent of most Clint Eastwood-type characters (particularly the Man with no Name). So for that, I actually liked the stoic characteristic he brought to the character. I will agree that a lot of the shots lingered a bit too much but I never felt that they were as pretentious as the gratuitous amount of slow motion used in something like Sucker Punch (that to me was an awful film). And I liked that I kinda had no idea where the film was going despite the rather barebones plot once the movie gets rolling. It starts off as a kinda romance story with small tidbits of violence inserted here and there and then culminates in the second half with just a crescendo of violence - which of course kinda mirrors the whole mentality of Gosling's character. And the supporting cast, Albert Brooks especially, are great save for Christina Hendricks who was pretty much a pointless character. I liked Carey Mulligan but felt that she didn't really have much to work with (or maybe it was completely intentional, I mean she WAS supposed to just this naive single mother). Perlman kinda just played up his usual shtick but Bryan Cranston can do no wrong - he's a chameleon of an actor, like Gary Oldman or Daniel Day-Lewis.

Although you and I do share the same opinion here - I also didn't like Garden State. I just didn't get it, and I normally CAN get into coming-of-age films.
zombiestrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.11, 08:56 AM   #269
karateexplosion
Senior Member
 
karateexplosion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 373
karateexplosion is an asset to this community
Default

I feel like Drive had a lot of promise, but, at least in my viewing experience, floundered in the execution. I agree that there are plenty of parallels to be drawn in Gosling's role from some of the characters you mentioned, ESPECIALLY Clint Eastwood parts in Leone's films. That was the one that seemed to be a pretty blatant comparison the director attempted to make. Hell, I almost make the connection myself in my first post but decided to leave it out, haha. After reading your post and some other reviews of the film, I can see how Gosling was meant to come across as a little unhinged, but I gotta say, it didn't seem that apparent in his performance. Maybe chalk it up to his acting or perhaps the cinematic direction, but I didn't get as much of that vibe as was probably intended. It's odd though, since it's well known what wonders the long hold on an actor's face can do for hinting at the underlying mental state of their character (A Clockwork Orange comes to mind), so maybe just the fact that it was used so goddamn much in this film made it kinda passe and not carry a lot of weight for me. Like I said, for me he just came off as not the sharpest tool in the shed, which was another aspect that bothered me since it directly conflicted with what his character was supposed to be and had done. Albert Brooks was pretty satisfying, I will say though. It was a bit of a different take on the sympathetic villain, so I did enjoy that.

I actually give Sucker Punch credit, haha. It's still a terrible movie, but I went into it totally expecting nothing but schlocky, video-game action and titillation, so the fact that it had somewhat of an interesting premise was a pleasant surprise. I left the theater fairly satisfied simply because I did expect it to be complete shit. Honestly, I think had it cut out all the gratuitous Comic-Con garbage and not been in the hands of Zack Snyder, it could have been a decent flick.

As much love as I have for Bryan Cranston, I wouldn't say he's anywhere near the level of Oldman or DDL. Maybe Oldman, but both of them are so much more method that it's like comparing apples and oranges. If I had to compare him to anyone, it would probably have to be Philip Seymour Hoffman, in that both actors, instead of molding themselves into the role like DDL or say, Jack Nicholson, perfectly tailor the role to themselves. Which is likely just as rare in actors and makes them just as badass as ones that do go the method route.
karateexplosion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011.11.11, 05:13 PM   #270
zombiestrip
Member
 
zombiestrip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 57
zombiestrip pleased at least somebody
Default

Originally Posted by karateexplosion View Post
I actually give Sucker Punch credit, haha. It's still a terrible movie, but I went into it totally expecting nothing but schlocky, video-game action and titillation, so the fact that it had somewhat of an interesting premise was a pleasant surprise. I left the theater fairly satisfied simply because I did expect it to be complete shit. Honestly, I think had it cut out all the gratuitous Comic-Con garbage and not been in the hands of Zack Snyder, it could have been a decent flick.
Oh man, I just hated Sucker Punch overall. I mean I legit wanted to like it and I honestly don't mind Zack Snyder at all - I can understand why people don't like him, sure, but I think he really does have a good sense of direction when it comes to doing these big action films. The thing is though, he's been helped along by pretty good scripts of adapted material (I still think Watchmen is a misunderstood milestone as far as comic book films are concerned - for me, it's on almost on par with The Dark Knight in terms of transcending the genre itself much like the original comic) and Sucker Punch was something entirely original which he wrote and directed himself. And ALL of the things that people hate about Snyder were pretty much on display right there in SP, except it's even more gratuitous and very self indulgent. Oh well, here's hoping Snyder bounces back with Superman, lol.


Originally Posted by karateexplosion View Post
If I had to compare him to anyone, it would probably have to be Philip Seymour Hoffman, in that both actors, instead of molding themselves into the role like DDL or say, Jack Nicholson, perfectly tailor the role to themselves. Which is likely just as rare in actors and makes them just as badass as ones that do go the method route.
Oh my god. I never even thought of it like that before - you're pretty much on the money about that. I guess my point was that Cranston was able to become the character so well that it completely separates his character in Drive from say Walter White in Breaking Bad - hence adapting and becoming like a chameleon in that regard. But you're right about him being like PSH for seeing the qualities of a character and embedding them into his own real self as opposed to someone like who DDL who does everything he can to get rid any trace of himself and see the character as the character.
zombiestrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Movie Trailers Thread Inaudible-Whisper Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media) 44 2010.03.22 07:08 AM
BombayTV - Subtitle a movie clip Inaudible-Whisper Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media) 10 2009.04.17 12:13 PM
Movie villains, need your help Tokyo Jihad Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media) 6 2009.01.07 05:06 AM
100 year anniversary of animated film Tokyo Jihad Off-Topic (Movies, TV & Other Media) 1 2008.08.18 02:14 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:40 PM.