Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[noodles_leone]

Boyhood - 9 or 10/10
It's more or less perfect, and almost a masterpiece of subtly. The two alcoholic stepfathers goes a bit too far in the realm of cliche, as does the "hipster being a photographer" aspect (though it works well with the whole "moment in time" message). Other than that it manages to make the '12 year filming' thing actually effective without feeling like a gimmick at all. It comes ever-so-close to the "coming of age film" cliches for 3 hours straight and for the most part strays away from submitting to them all at the perfect time. It's one of those long movies that I could have still tolerated for at least another hour. Essentially everything you'd expect from this type of story is toned down and made realistic instead of into sentimental Hollywood mish-mosh. I'd especially like to comment on the scenes of Mason and his father - they're perfect. The final respective scenes of Mason and his dad / Mason and his mom couldn't have wrapped up the film any better. A potential masterpiece on a repeat viewing, and for once, a movie that truly deserves it's overwhelming praise (unlike Gravity, which is just a decent, pretty-looking survival movie: sorry noodlesleone).

DJ, do you concur? (Except for the Gravity bit, that is pure blasphemy)
If the 12 year filming is the point of the movie, I'll not see it. If it would be good even without it, I'll see it.

[PowerRR]

DJ, do you concur? (Except for the Gravity bit, that is pure blasphemy)
If the 12 year filming is the point of the movie, I'll not see it. If it would be good even without it, I'll see it.

The 12 year filming is 'cool', definitely a noteworthy point, and I would say even subtly enhances the movie. Never does it once feel like a gimmick, and the movie is no way built around its own technique. Many would argue the exact opposite considering how low-key and standard the plot itself seems, but I feel the lack of grandiosity or heavy conflict is where the movie is truly great.

Guardians of the Galaxy - 7/10
Fun.

[dave jenkins]

DJ, do you concur? (Except for the Gravity bit, that is pure blasphemy)
If the 12 year filming is the point of the movie, I'll not see it. If it would be good even without it, I'll see it.

RR's comments are pretty close to the truth. There are a lot of melodramatic situations that are not presented melodramatically: they are more naturalistic. The kid isn't bad and demonstrates that what he's doing is more than a stunt. The director's daughter is even better in her role. There are a number of actors who have a single scene or sometimes two who really shine. There's a great bit where the kid's photography instructor gives him the big speech and it really works (as a scene, that is; I don't think it has any effect on the character). There's another funny bit where the manager of the restaurant where he works chimes in that made me laugh a lot. One of the best scenes is played by Patricia Arquette as the mom; it's her last scene in the film and it is absolutely right for the character.

The film is really good.

[noodles_leone]

Thanks guys. Sounds good.

[cigar joe]

The Driver (1978) Director: Walter Hill, Stars: Ryan O'Neal, Bruce Dern, Isabelle Adjani, obviously a car case film from the get go, story feels tacked on, stick with the top of the line  Bullitt & The Seven Ups  meh 5/10

[noodles_leone]

Zombieland - 7/10

5th viewing? Jesse Eisenberg is, by far, the best actor of his generation. Woody Harrelson is one of the most underrated actors around. Like many great child actors, Abigail Breslin is losing what made her great when younger (although in here she still has her moments). Anyway, as long as she keeps her childish "Little Miss Sunshine" smile, you can count me in:



Emma Stone is as hot as Emma Stone but her make up is terrible here. No spoiler, but the guy doing the cameo is disappointing (even if his scenes are well written).

Apart from that, the movie has its ups and downs but as a whole it is funny as hell. Also, it supports multiple viewings.

From what I heard, do not try to watch the Netflix show they adapted from the movie: everyone says it's terrible.

[PowerRR]

Zombieland - 7/10

Jesse Eisenberg is, by far, the best actor of his generation.

What

[Groggy]

The Giver - 6/10 - Never read or else don't remember the book. The movie's a pretty typical YA adaptation with action, dystopian government and Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep lending gravitas. The leads are pretty bland; Taylor Swift surprisingly decent. Not a bad waste of two hours.

[noodles_leone]

What

What what? You're a Shia Labeouf or a Mickael Cera fan?

[cigar joe]

Get on Up (2014) enjoyed this 7/10

[PowerRR]

What what? You're a Shia Labeouf or a Mickael Cera fan?

I don't know...Ryan Gosling? Joseph Gordon-Levitt? Off the top of my head those are both far superior to Jesse Eisenberg, who I consider probably the most irritating actor of his generation. I mean, Social Network is great and all, but other than that he hasn't yet left his awkward, mumbling, hipster teenager schtick yet, where his characters in Adventureland, Zombieland, 30 Minutes or Less, and every movie trailer I've seen him in are clearly...you know... the same.

[noodles_leone]

I never licked JGL: no charisma, no interesting face and "ok" skills. Gosling is good but doesn't bring anything new on the table. Although I like his presence, he's like young DiCaprio meets young Clooney. He can age well, like these two. Eisenberg started his career as a smart Michael Cera in these coming of age movies, that's true. He did however bring real charisma and his personal touch to characters that would have been far more generic if played by almost anyone else. He was amazing in the Social Network and it was a revelation for me (and pretty much anyone else I guess). But I strongly believe in him, just wait for his thriller parts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OTNhcO-56E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu8FVn-8I1E

I don't think those two are great movies (haven't seen them) but I'm ready to bet he's great in them. I cannot wait for him to star in good serious movies.



SKYFALL - 6.5/10

I missed it in theaters and couldn't find a way to rent it since then. So f*ck it, I bought it on iTunes yesterday.
As I feared, Sam Mendes is NOT an action director. Every single action scene is slow and already old. It always takes me out of a movie when I'm screaming at my TV "JAMES!!!! SHOOT HIM DON'T SLOWLY TURNS AROUND TO WATCH THE TRAIN YOU WILL EASILY DODGE". What I didn't know is that he's not a comedy director either. Every classic Bond punchline is made dull and NOT funny by the directing and the editing. In 2013, you don't have the right to cut to a smile of James Bond 2 seconds after someone in the room made a joke. If you want his smile, put it during the joke, not after. That's just comedy 101.

Anyway, lots of good and bad stuff in this one. Like most people, I liked the way they slowly recreate the Bond mythology (with reboots twists) while adding backgroung to the character. The quality of the movie itself apart, this Bond film elevates the franchise. It became exciting again (as a franchise, it had not been exciting for decades). Now, the script looks like a first draft, with tens of good ideas and thousands of awkwardly unprofessional mistakes.

Judith Dench is a great actress but she's beyond terrible with anything physical: shooting, running and suffering.

I have to say the main thing that made me buy this film is that I wanted to see how DP Deakins was doing with his first digital film. He did great with many night sequences, including the climax that has some incredible shots in it. He was less at ease with daylight exteriors, struggling hard with the highlights in some scenes. Night or days, his close up were disappointing (he's always been better at wide shots anyway). The scene in the glass building was also disappointing (good idea but it's far from brilliant stuff like Lady From Shanghai) but I guess it's more of a directing problem rather than a flawed cinematography.

Now, I have a question. When hiding at night from 10 bad guys with weapons, WHO THE HELL DOES USE A TORCH LIGHT?

[stanton]

Now, I have a question. When hiding at night from 10 bad guys with weapons, WHO THE HELL DOES USE A TORCH LIGHT?

Skyfall is full of such stuff you better not think much about. What is that for a trap Bond sets at the end when he is waiting alone for Silva and his gang? With M at his side instead of hiding here somewhere in safety. Actually it is only Bond's fault that M dies. But the film does not realise this.

I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt very much. He has a face and he has charisma. Gosling also.

[noodles_leone]

Skyfall is full of such stuff you better not think much about. What is that for a trap Bond sets at the end when he is waiting alone for Silva and his gang? With M at his side instead of hiding here somewhere in safety. Actually it is only Bond's fault that M dies. But the film does not realise this.

I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt very much. He has a face and he has charisma. Gosling also.

SPOILERS ALERT

Yeah, most "plans" in this film have this little problem: they're not plans. What exactly is the bad guy trying to do? Being caught just to... be... in London? What is James Bond expecting when he goes to the island? Why does he insist on killing baddies only 2 seconds after they kill innocent people? That's the kind of stuff that make the script look like a first draft: the flaws are easy to spot when reading the script and only need like a day of work to address everything before the shooting.

[PowerRR]

I never licked JGL: no charisma, no interesting face and "ok" skills. Gosling is good but doesn't bring anything new on the table. Although I like his presence, he's like young DiCaprio meets young Clooney. He can age well, like these two. Eisenberg started his career as a smart Michael Cera in these coming of age movies, that's true. He did however bring real charisma and his personal touch to characters that would have been far more generic if played by almost anyone else. He was amazing in the Social Network and it was a revelation for me (and pretty much anyone else I guess). But I strongly believe in him, just wait for his thriller parts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OTNhcO-56E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu8FVn-8I1E

I don't think those two are great movies (haven't seen them) but I'm ready to bet he's great in them. I cannot wait for him to star in good serious movies.

I don't think JGL and Gosling are amazing actors either, but I'd definitely put them above Eisenberg for their generation. As far as those two trailers go, I do see more potential and development. But as of now... I'll give him The Social Network, and that's it (in terms of 'best actor of generation' type stuff, it's not like he's necessarily a bad actor in his 'Land' movies and 30 Minutes or Less... just an average one).