Rate The Last Movie You Watched
Jun 5, 2016 at 11:31 PM Post #19,261 of 24,667



Psycho-Pass: The Movie - 7/10

Much easier to follow without having seen the preceding OVA series than GitS The New Movie, but then this is hardly an exercise in subtlety. It's more like a primer in how not to conduct international relations; colonialism is bad, intervening in the affairs of other countries is bad, engineering a coup and selling regime change as "self-determination" under the flag of democracy is bad. I don't know about the original series, but this film seemed far more concerned with terrestrial politics than with technology and the philosophical implications of AI. The Sibyl System is an ever-present and leads to questions about privacy, control and the limits of free will, but by and large, writer Urobuchi takes his cues more from Fanon and Foucault than Kurzweil.

It does owe a lot of its visual style to GitS though I think - the towering neon cityscapes recall those of GitS (which in turn riffs on Blade Runner's Neo Tokyo of course), as do some of the action scenes. If anything though, Psycho-Pass is more visceral, with quite a quantity of blood and guts exploding across the screen at regular intervals! It generally is more action-oriented, though doesn't skimp on story and characterization either. The one real gripe I have with it is that they appear to have used Japanese voice actors who clearly don't speak English to do voices in English for some of the non-Japanese characters, such as the mercenary crew.  It really grates hearing them read the words phonetically off a script with all the feeling of Babel Fish. Would it really have hurt the budget that much to hire a couple of native speakers for the English dialogue (of which there is a fair amount)? That gripe aside, it was enjoyable enough to make me want to dive into the original series.


Need to watch this.

Totally with Hutnicks on season 1. Skipped season two on the advice of others. Sounds like that was a good call.

[rule]

Been a busy bee with catching up on movies in my scant spare time. Am gonna try to drop some updates in batches. Starting with the rainy Sunday sci-fi double feature. Though these movies were long enough to call this a bifecta.


2001: A Space Odyssey 8.5/10

So I'm a bit late on this one, but better late than never...

Score is purely for every 5/6 shots being art gallery worthy and iconic. Kubrick's experience as a photographer is on full display here. It's almost inherently difficult to rate this film and the above score reflects personal preference more than objective viewpoint. This film's impact on not even generations of cinema, but cinema itself is without question. In that sense, it's literally impossible at this point to view this film in anything even reminiscent of a vacuum.

The artistic liberties taken are bold, inspiring, and even infuriating. Some of the things Kubrick did here I feel absolutely no director, regardless of venerability or status would dare even attempt in this day for a wide release.

The film holds up incredibly well and the transfer is really excellent. There were a few very obvious continuity issues which were clearly for artistic purposes and it's almost difficult to decide if I respect those choices or should lambast them. Which really brings me to my question.

I'm not sure if this is an absolute masterwork or the biggest masturbatory exercise I've ever witnessed. Like... should we bow down to it all Wayne and Garth style or turn it into a permanent installation at the MoMa. That's the question in my mind more than any sort of explanation or meaning for the contents of the film.


Moon 8.2/10

When this began, I had pretty high hopes, like I do with most films that start with a corporate advertisement. Which pretty much sets up the evil-inherent double-cross. Those films usually end up pretty good so let's keep that hit percentage up was my mood at that point.

Then this film goes in some interesting directions. Most of which I didn't expect, another plus. But then in a way, it let me down. Now I give this film more than an 8/10, which represents clearly a great film, and it is. It does a lot of things amazingly to deserve that. But I had higher hopes I guess.

It's hard to outline this without spoilers so...

Basically, the key faults to me were:

1) Sam Rockwell wasn't incredibly believable as an astronaut. And the issue here is that it's even questionable what defines an "atronaut"' in this kind of a scenario. I mean realistically, at this point, we're looking at the equivalent of extraterrestrial warehouse manager. And that fit better, but then they kind of made him out to be an atronaut-esque hero. Which really didn't align with the setup. A sort of congruence issue.

2) The dialogue between the two Sam's was a bit shaky. It's hard to really put my finger on it, but a couple of clones talking to each other after they'd all but accepted their clone-ness wasn't really what I would expect. There were definitely elements of denial and the situation being so beyond the realm of current human understanding that it's a bit difficult to fault this, but it just seemed off.

3) Not sure that the big plan would actually have worked one he touched down on earth. But it seemed a bit presumptuous. Though he likely did know a lot about their processes and procedures, it's a bit hard to believe that a company that would probably be hiding this clone thing would leave such a gaping hole in security.

4) There was also a bit too much hand holding here. You could have taken 20 minutes off the film's runtime with little to marginal negative impact.

But bonus points for nega-HAL.

Anywho, I liked the film, but felt almost robbed when it fell short of real greatness. Appreciated the unique setup though.
 
Jun 7, 2016 at 5:09 PM Post #19,262 of 24,667
Traveling Salesman.  (2012)   9/10
 
 
     OK so how did I miss this one?  Dialogue driven science based what if scenario that plays out in a single room. Cattlestar Glactipoop wobbly cam effect notwithstanding this one holds up with the building of intrigue. It posits the awesome question of what if P vs NP actually got solved and puts it in a quite believable scenario. It is a film that actually may have you raise your hand and try to ask a question or two during viewing, it had that absorptive effect on me, at least.
 
 That said I could have easily dropped it to an 8 or 7 just because the ending is trite and underthought compared to the rest of the film. The overall is so much to the positive that I have to give it a 9. If these guys had more budget I shudder to think of how good it could have been. One of the few films in my life that I actually wish went longer. If you have read any of my reviews you know how powerful a statement that is.
 
  Available in discount bins and for cheapsies online everywhere.
 
PS thank all the gods of Rome this was done BEFORE Trump was in the running for king of America.
 
Jun 7, 2016 at 11:13 PM Post #19,263 of 24,667
Hutnicks just watched this and it was incredibly engrossing. Worth a rewatch just for getting a second go at the dialogue. Agreed on the ending but am kinda curious as to what you think could have been significantly better with more money thrown at it. I actually feel like less is more worked pretty well here.

Traveling Salesman 8/10


[rule]

Lucy 6.5/10

This is just a pretty and fun ride. Not much more. Went by really quickly. Scarjo does well with these machine-like roles imo.

I don't really get why people are insulted by the "science" or the perceived pretense. Not once did I detect any intent by the film to impress false science or sensationalist claims. During the professor's lecture a student asks "has it been proven, scientifically?" to which he responds "for the moment, it's just a hypothesis. I confess, there's nothing scientific about it..." So what's the simplest plan, that the film is trying to use reverse psychology to recruit viewers into a cult of ignorance, or it's just an action flick that needed a setup that allows all the craziness. Personally, I see the latter.


Snowpiercer 5/10

This is pretty much Swiss cheese. Just wow. Waterworld on rails. I'm not sure how the ratings for this are as high as they are. The 5 is purely for entertainment. It's just so bad that I can't give it one more tenth. No hard feelings really and I don't feel like I wasted my life watching it. It's just laughably bad.
 
Jun 8, 2016 at 1:15 AM Post #19,264 of 24,667
i was thinking along the lines of more budget allowing them the time and latitude to rethink the end scenario and perhaps do a few more of the conscience sequences for the other members of the team. Then again, there is something to be said for constraints making a more efficient film.
 
I think you are being charitable with Lucy.
 
Dead on with Snowpiercer. I came out of that one feeling like a dullard A) because I don't understand the hype either and B) because the film actually lowers ones IQ while viewing it.
 
Edelweiss Pirates (2005)  8/10
 
 
   Film about a youth movement which sprang into life as an alternative to the Hitler Youth during the war. Interesting, well paced and diabolically realistic in it's portrayal of life in a bombed out Cologne during the closing days of the war. Unlike the more recent spate of films out of Germany aggrandizing any resistance to the Nazi regime, this film takes a more stoic approach by not making the participants into saint like resistors of the regime.  Well worth the watch to see how devastated and exhausted the civilian population gets when caught on the wrong side of a Total War.
 
Jun 8, 2016 at 6:08 AM Post #19,265 of 24,667
@vwinter I'm with you on Lucy. Couldn't understand the harsh criticism of it. It's just a popcorn flick; a fast-paced and engrossing actioner with a backdrop of scientific hokum. Yes, it's nonsense - especially the universe on a USB stick - but who cares? I don't think its aim was ever to be a thought-provoking sci-fi film, it was just supposed to be a fun ride. I have much more of an issue with films like Gravity, which ask to be taken seriously yet which despite presumably in-depth research, still contrive to play fast and loose with basic physics on several occasions.
 
Jun 8, 2016 at 9:32 AM Post #19,266 of 24,667
i was thinking along the lines of more budget allowing them the time and latitude to rethink the end scenario and perhaps do a few more of the conscience sequences for the other members of the team. Then again, there is something to be said for constraints making a more efficient film.

I think you are being charitable with Lucy.(1)


(1) I lol'ed, have a soft spot for Luc Besson.

I didn't even consider the script being in the equation like that. I would hope they would have used addition funding there.

What surprised me a bit given the movie's staging and topic matter was the score. You'd think you were watching a techno-thriller. It kind of worked but was an interesting choice either way.

In case anyone is interested in catching Traveling Salesman, it's currently on Amazon Prime Video.


@vwinter
 I'm with you on Lucy. Couldn't understand the harsh criticism of it. It's just a popcorn flick; a fast-paced and engrossing actioner with a backdrop of scientific hokum. Yes, it's nonsense - especially the universe on a USB stick - but who cares? I don't think its aim was ever to be a thought-provoking sci-fi film, it was just supposed to be a fun ride. I have much more of an issue with films like Gravity, which ask to be taken seriously yet which despite presumably in-depth research, still contrive to play fast and loose with basic physics on several occasions.


Page 2 of the Lucy script, certainly ambitious:




This was kind of why I would probably give Interstellar a nod. It's apparently reasonably rooted in at best scientific fact and at worst plausible possibility with our current understanding of the underlying science. Kip Thorne put out a book about his involvement in the film and science behind pretty much everything that happens. It was an interesting read, if clearly a bit over my head at certain points.
 
Jun 8, 2016 at 10:01 AM Post #19,267 of 24,667
I am a Besson fan myself. I think that was the problem. Sure begin with Leon, move into Nikita and end with Inception:wink:
 
As this one does not merit a new post.
 
WarCrap  (2016) 2/10
 
 
  OK, It wasnt my money spent on this one so I have not contributed to the outrageous runaway BO receipts this miserable film fiasco has garnered. Overly long, miserably acted, derivitive, plotted for the Dr. Suess reading crowd, this takes pre pubescent exploitation into realms never dreamed of by either Marvel or any of the HungerMazeDevaint franchises.  When you have an international online gamer community to draw from someone was at least clever enough to realize this was a "gimme" it'll spawn more sequels prequels sidequels, tv shows and perhaps even a broadway musical in the next decade and it will all be eaten up like soma.
 
  That does not excuse the fact that it is woefully under executed and looks more like a "Sanctuary" episode on steroided budget than anything else. The characterizations are nothing less than boneheaded at best so the whole war with orks thing takes place on an intellectual parity basis. It's the special olympics with swords and hammers here and the ever so touted CGI is nowhere near up to the standards of some "other" franchises.
 
  Is Nitwitsploitation a word?
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 9:28 AM Post #19,268 of 24,667
Blade runner(final cut)8.5/10
whats the other versions like gang?
i think i heard the voice over one many yrs ago.
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 9:33 AM Post #19,269 of 24,667
  Blade runner(final cut)8.5/10
whats the other versions like gang?
i think i heard the voice over one many yrs ago.

 
Final Cut Vs Director's Cut
 
Not much to choose between them really. Quality of Final Cut is better than Director's, but content much the same. As long as you don't go for the theatrical release (that's voice over, no unicorn + sucky ending IIRC), you're fine 
wink_face.gif
 
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 10:28 AM Post #19,270 of 24,667
   
Final Cut Vs Director's Cut
 
Not much to choose between them really. Quality of Final Cut is better than Director's, but content much the same. As long as you don't go for the theatrical release (that's voice over, no unicorn + sucky ending IIRC), you're fine 
wink_face.gif
 

no unicorn is bad bro-
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 12:25 PM Post #19,272 of 24,667
The Imitation Game 7/10

Felt overrated to me. After I finished it, I saw that this was nominated for so many Oscars and I was floored. Could not believe it was nominated for screenplay, adapted, directing, and editing. Those are areas i felt directly let the film down. The pacing of the movie was all over the place, with very little timeline shift warning or delineation. The script decided to take a very sad middle ground between something like Traveling Salesman, where they don't really go into any of the mechanics of the undoubtedly complex underlying issue, and something like recent Nolan where pretty much the entire film is exposition explaining the mechanics of what's happening and how it works. To put so much emphasis on the machine and then provide no explanation of even the fundamental concept behind how it works is a cardinal sin imo. Then there were the war sequences that just really felt tacked on, cheap and out of place. They provided no sense of immediacy or impending danger that the entire project was intending to avoid. It was all too high level and looked pretty low rent and awkwardly directed at that. Incongruent really.

The movie felt a little insulting actually, but I can't put my finger on why. The performances were mostly good. Without knowing what Turing was like, his depiction seemed a bit heavy handed. If anything it just made me want to see Cumberbatch do something else. In my opinion, the saving grace was the emotionally charged interactions between the characters.

To me, it wasn't a bad movie, so much as a wasted opportunity.
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 1:22 PM Post #19,273 of 24,667
The problem I had with Imitation game was the distillation of Turing into something he was not by perverting the actual history that occurred. A story that is actually interesting without having to add fictions becomes diluted to me when those fictions are inserted.
 
 Breaking the Code I think was a better effort at portraying Turing himself.
 
For the all time best misunderstood genius portrayed well. HBO's foolishly named Doomsday Gun set the bar for Langellas portrayal of Gerald Bull caught up in the internecine politics that wound up starting the first Iraq war and toppled Thatcher from government.
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 11:09 PM Post #19,274 of 24,667
   
WarCrap  (2016) 2/10
 
 
  OK, It wasnt my money spent on this one so I have not contributed to the outrageous runaway BO receipts this miserable film fiasco has garnered. Overly long, miserably acted, derivitive, plotted for the Dr. Suess reading crowd, this takes pre pubescent exploitation into realms never dreamed of by either Marvel or any of the HungerMazeDevaint franchises.  When you have an international online gamer community to draw from someone was at least clever enough to realize this was a "gimme" it'll spawn more sequels prequels sidequels, tv shows and perhaps even a broadway musical in the next decade and it will all be eaten up like soma.
 
  That does not excuse the fact that it is woefully under executed and looks more like a "Sanctuary" episode on steroided budget than anything else. The characterizations are nothing less than boneheaded at best so the whole war with orks thing takes place on an intellectual parity basis. It's the special olympics with swords and hammers here and the ever so touted CGI is nowhere near up to the standards of some "other" franchises.
 
  Is Nitwitsploitation a word?

I give this film 4/10. That's because I played Warcraft II since I was 10. It's watchable to me, but still very disappointing.
 
Jun 9, 2016 at 11:15 PM Post #19,275 of 24,667
Anomalisa - 6.5/10
 
What a disappointment! Loved it at first, but then it kept going downhill after he meets Lisa.
The sex scene also went on for an eternity for no real reason.
By the end I was just thinking to myself "That's it?". Felt totally pointless overall.
 
There's a few laugh out loud moments for me that would probably not be as funny for most.
I found the room service scene rather amusing.
 
I just wanted more from this movie. It had so much potential to be some sort of strange masterpiece.
 
 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top