@ the MOVIES!

[melburn21]

WARHORSE
a good film. after seeing the broadway play in New York, my expectations were high. possibly too high as i was left disappointed. The movie is beautifully shot with some outstanding use of lighting and colour. The period setting is puled off as a genuine feel of authenticity as you would expect from Spielberg. The problem with the film is that it keeps the cheesy/over emotional dialogue from the stage production. this works well for theatre, but comes across and a little cringeworthy in the cinema. Luckily, the appealing visuals and VERY strong storyline make up for the films shortcomings
7/10

HUGO 3D
I really liked this film. The cinematography is excellent and the visual effects are subtly outstanding. The story is charming and very enjoyable although it suffers from a grindingly slow first half. all actors are excellent, especially Ben Kingsley who plays Georges Méliès. Personally i found Sacha Baron Coen hard to watch, although to his credit, he does a good job. If you are interested in early cinema, you will enjoy this film even more. But if you don't, this might leave you feeling a little underwhelmed.
8/10

THE ARTIST
Excellent film. Not to be compared to the silent films of old. The Artist doesn't try to be an authentic silent film. It pays a homage to the old art form, while mixing in some of the conventions of modern film to help emphasise its message.
the movie is brilliantly cast and superbly written and directed. Fantastic cinematography combined with a believable and honest love story makes for one of the best films i have seen all year. It reminds me of why i love cinema so much.
10/10

BOY
A 2010 New Zealand film by Taika Waititi that i just had the privilege of seeing. A unique, zany and at times heartbreakingly film about a boy and his relationship with his transient father. This is one of those films that appears so realistic that you wonder how anyone could conceive or write the dialogue. Waititi produces his best work to date as both director and lead actor in the film.
Boy is hilarious in places, unnerving in others but ultimately incredibly uplifting. The story can seem at times ordinary, but then this is a story about an ordinary life, as seen through the eyes of a small boy. A must see, especially if you're a Michael Jackson fan!
9.5/10

[Dimethyltryptamine]

Chronicle - meh

[Urbicus]

That's disappointing to hear, it looked like a pretty interesting film.

One of those movies where the best bits are in the trailer?

[Solopop]

The Artist - 10/10

I've never been so charmed.

[Aussie Bhoy]

J Edgar - 7/10

Interesting story, power corrupts, etc. And also a look at his early home life that may have moulded the man. I did find that the story jumped to and fro in time a bit too much though.

[Dimethyltryptamine]

Originally Posted by Urbicus

That's disappointing to hear, it looked like a pretty interesting film.

One of those movies where the best bits are in the trailer?

Pretty much, yep. The movie is really predictable and sort of frustrating. If you watch it, you'll see why. Not bad for 15mil budget, but nothing special.

[Solopop]

Also, if you can you MUST see the Artist in the cinemas.

It is an amazing experience.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by melburn21

The Artist doesn't try to be an authentic silent film. It pays a homage to the old art form, while mixing in some of the conventions of modern film to help emphasise its message.

sure, it also 'borrows' liberally from talkies too, and that is my problem with it. It's just a playful little throwback that uses many of the same techniques with a 'modern twist'. The modern elements didn't work to me, and the silent stuff was lame i thought, so for me it was a complete waste of time. If the Coens directed it, it could have been more interesting perhaps

I love silent film, and i love film as an artform--which means i watch films from all over the world, not just the occasional foreign movie in between Hollywood junk--but i did not like The Artist. I didn't even think it was all that great to look at either. As far as B+W cinematography in modern film goes, The Artist is nowhere near the best.

Each to their own of course, but for me it just didn't cut it.

[Solopop]

Originally Posted by Built_To_Last

sure, it also 'borrows' liberally from talkies too, and that is my problem with it. It's just a playful little throwback that uses many of the same techniques with a 'modern twist'. The modern elements didn't work to me, and the silent stuff was lame i thought, so for me it was a complete waste of time. If the Coens directed it, it could have been more interesitng perhaps.

I love silent film, and i love film as an artform--which means i watch films from all over the world, not just the occasional foreign movie in between Hollywood junk--but i did not like The Artist. I didn't even think it was all that great to look at either.

I'm willing to bet The Artist is going to be one of those hyped academy movies that is quickly forgotten.

I don't understand how it didn't work? Everything just fitted.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by Solopop

I don't understand how it didn't work? Everything just fitted.

well that is an individual judgement call isn't it? I thought the whole thing came off too gimmicky and contrived, but for most others that seemed to work brilliantly.

I agree with you guys/girls that Hugo was a good movie though.

[Solopop]

Originally Posted by Built_To_Last

well that is an individual judgement call isn't it? I thought the whole thing came off too gimmicky and contrived, but for most others that seemed to work brilliantly.

I agree with you guys/girls that Hugo was a good movie though.

Contrived, how was it contrived? And how was it gimmicky? You can't just say that without reasoning.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by Solopop

Contrived, how was it contrived? And how was it gimmicky? You can't just say that without reasoning.

By gimmicky i mean it relies too much on referencing other films. e.g singing in the rain, a star is born, and loads of silent movie references. This woulidn't be a problem ordinarily but it relied too much on this referential gimmick in my opinion. It was a thin idea stretched to breaking point.

it was a typical and cliched romantic storyline that we see in Hollywood today only repackaged as a silent black and white movie.

To me it was just empty and boring. I understand i'm in a minority on this though, and i'm perfectly comfortable with that.

Kind of strange use of the Vertigo score. Wasn't expecting that! hehe

[Solopop]

Originally Posted by Built_To_Last

in many ways it's essentially a nonmusical version of Singin In The Rain. Only a lot of its attempts to be artistic come off as cheeky references. It rubs its referential tone in your face. It was a thin idea stretched to breaking point, and uses its b+w that is what i mean by gimmick.

It felt much more like a short film, particular a student-made short film; rather empty and largely technical and only speaking a superficial cinema l

It was nothing like Singing with the Rain, the characters and plot were so different I mean I think the only similarities was the idea of switching from Silent - Talkies. I don't understand how it was a thin idea? I mean the George character was so well developed and the romance was just beautiful. (That's my opinion) And countless films us B+W what makes this different?

And the production values were amazing, the costumes and sets were to die for. The dancing was sensational and it just oozed charm. I really don't understand your dislike.

But it is all personal opinions.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by Solopop

It was nothing like Singing with the Rain, the characters and plot were so different I mean I think the only similarities was the idea of switching from Silent - Talkies. I don't understand how it was a thin idea? I mean the George character was so well developed and the romance was just beautiful. (That's my opinion) And countless films us B+W what makes this different?

And the production values were amazing, the costumes and sets were to die for. The dancing was sensational and it just oozed charm. I really don't understand your dislike.

But it is all personal opinions.

I changed my post above while you were responding to this message. then i changed it again. The first change was made before you posted this response, just letting you know.

As for the use of B+W, it just didn't impress me all that much. The only way to explain this further is to start posting stills of various films, which i'm not about to do. From memory it lacked the interesting/creative use of deep focus that i like in old films, and i don't remember there being anything special about the use of framing in particular.

Great use of B+W in modern films: The White Ribbon(which is also quite 'classic' in its use of B+W in many ways), Tetro(both old and modern techniques utilized), The Turin Horse etc etc.

Of course all these films have different aims and objectives, but we are talking about aesthetic preferences here.

[Solopop]

Originally Posted by Built_To_Last

By gimmicky i mean it relies too much on referencing other films. e.g singing in the rain, a star is born, and loads of silent movie references. This woulidn't be a problem ordinarily but it relied too much on this referential gimmick in my opinion. It was a thin idea stretched to breaking point.

it was a typical and cliched romantic storyline that we see in Hollywood today only repackaged as a silent black and white movie.

To me it was just empty and boring. I understand i'm in a minority on this though, and i'm perfectly comfortable with that.

Kind of strange use of the Vertigo score. Wasn't expecting that! hehe

It didn't reference any of those films - it was a tribute to those and the silent films. It was an homage.

I understand how you could say it was clichéd but it was still made fresh and exciting.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by Solopop

It didn't reference any of those films - it was a tribute to those and the silent films. It was an homage.

I thought it was closer to pastiche honestly, and pastiche relies on intertextual referencing.

Anyway, regardless of one's definitions, to me personally this kind of approach only works when it's in the hands of really clever directors(like the Coens, for example. e.g Miller's Crossing etc), or when it's subverting the genre it's theoretically meant to be conforming or paying tribute to. e.g Pennies From Heaven(1981).

I guess i'm not fond of cinematic love letters ;-)

Originally Posted by Solopop

I understand how you could say it was clichéd but it was still made fresh and exciting.

Fair enough.

So what films are you looking forward to in 2012?

[Solopop]

I'm looking forward to -

Les Mis, Great Gatsby, Anna Karenina, Rust and Bone, Low Life, Dark Knight Rises, Lincoln, The Hobbit, Django Unchained, The Master, Hyde Park on Hudson, Imogene, The Surrogate, World War Z.

Quote a lot.

[Built_To_Last]

Originally Posted by Solopop

Anna Karenina

I was looking forward to that until Keira Knightley was announced for the lead

Luhrmann kills the appeal for Gatsby too!!! hehe.

Not looking forward to many Hollywood films this year i must admit. I'm kind of curious to see Prometheus, but i haven't seen a film by Ridley Scott that i liked in well over 10 years.

[Solopop]

I love Keira and she has proved in the past she works well with Joe Wright. And Saorise Ronan is in it.

I'm pumped for it.

[melburn21]

RE: the artist - i can understand all points raised. My main praise for the film is the fact that in a world of special effects, CGI, 3D, fast paced editing, etc.... i witnessed an audience completely captivated by a silent film. that, to me, is nothing short of genius.

MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE
i was eager to see this one as it had numerous favourable reviews. overall, i was underwhelmed. I hate this phrase but the film "had so much potential"...
Often the line between indy and amateur film-making is a little fuzzy... and this was one of those films that just didn't quite cut it for me. granted there were moments of undisputed brilliance (especially the end) and genuine tension... but the horrible pacing issues and script that felt like it never made it past the first draft (structure wise, not dialogue) were almost too much to bare.
5/10