rate the last movie you saw
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I enjoyed Les Miz more than you did, Andy. I'd give it a 7.5/10. I'm not necessarily a fan of the musical although I like most of the songs. The story is the main attraction for me, with its themes of law, grace and forgiveness, and I thought the actors did a fine job. The second half slows down a bit and the story doesn't work as well. I don't know if this is how it is in the stage version (not having seen it) or if maybe it's just because they had to cut a huge chunk of the plot out of a gigantic novel.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
John, I am not a fan of the show, though most of my issues with the fiilm was in how it was filmed. If I liked the score, I know I would've liked it more than I did -- I'm just not a huge aficionado of this particular score (and I do like musicals in general). Didn't work for me, but I know it's sort of a polarizing picture and tried to stress that in my review (or will when it runs next week lol).jkholm wrote:I enjoyed Les Miz more than you did, Andy. I'd give it a 7.5/10. I'm not necessarily a fan of the musical although I like most of the songs. The story is the main attraction for me, with its themes of law, grace and forgiveness, and I thought the actors did a fine job. The second half slows down a bit and the story doesn't work as well. I don't know if this is how it is in the stage version (not having seen it) or if maybe it's just because they had to cut a huge chunk of the plot out of a gigantic novel.
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I also enjoyed ZERO DARK THIRTY and LES MIZ more than you did, my friend. And you give a 7/10 rating to ZDT yet your review reads like a 4 or 4.5/10-I got almost to the end of your review and was beginning to wonder what you LIKED about the film enough to give it that high a number. I guess the raid section must have been the only saving grace about it since it seems that nothing else was worth it.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Yes, you definitely did enjoy them more than me 
Well the ZDT "inbalance" is definitely my fault, but at this point, I didn't review it before so my reaction is based more on what I've read from everyone else. I think everyone knows what the film is...I will balance it out before I run it next week. But yeah, I actually could've lived without the first 90 minutes. Nearly 30-40 minutes could've been trimmed IMO or presented in a more concise, or effectively edited, manner -- it's not as if time was spent developing the characters' backstories. The last hour was well worth watching, but I did find it overrated as a film, on balance, and that extended to Chastain's performance (because of how the part was written). Not one of 2012's best IMO, but then again, I felt the same way about THE HURT LOCKER. Lot of fuss made about Bigelow on that movie also...didn't live up to its rep for me.
Well the ZDT "inbalance" is definitely my fault, but at this point, I didn't review it before so my reaction is based more on what I've read from everyone else. I think everyone knows what the film is...I will balance it out before I run it next week. But yeah, I actually could've lived without the first 90 minutes. Nearly 30-40 minutes could've been trimmed IMO or presented in a more concise, or effectively edited, manner -- it's not as if time was spent developing the characters' backstories. The last hour was well worth watching, but I did find it overrated as a film, on balance, and that extended to Chastain's performance (because of how the part was written). Not one of 2012's best IMO, but then again, I felt the same way about THE HURT LOCKER. Lot of fuss made about Bigelow on that movie also...didn't live up to its rep for me.
-
Eric Paddon
- Posts: 9037
- Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm
Re: rate the last movie you saw
The Shoes Of The Fisherman (1968) 7 of 10
=I was determined to watch this due to the timeliness of events happening now. This time the film comes off better than it did in previous viewings for me. The prescience in foreshadowing a non-Italian pope from the communist world playing a major role in world affairs is what makes the film fascinating from today's perspective, in that it shows the changing nature of the Papacy and its struggle to remain viable amidst the turbulence of today's world. And watching the scene dramatized of the papal electoral process is fascinating to see and should give us a reminder of the magnitidue taking place now.
North's score is terrific.
=I was determined to watch this due to the timeliness of events happening now. This time the film comes off better than it did in previous viewings for me. The prescience in foreshadowing a non-Italian pope from the communist world playing a major role in world affairs is what makes the film fascinating from today's perspective, in that it shows the changing nature of the Papacy and its struggle to remain viable amidst the turbulence of today's world. And watching the scene dramatized of the papal electoral process is fascinating to see and should give us a reminder of the magnitidue taking place now.
North's score is terrific.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
LIFE OF PI
7.5/10
For its technical accomplishments alone, Ang Lee’s LIFE OF PI is a must-view, and there’s no doubt from an artistic standpoint, its visuals were unmatched by any other film last year.
An adaptation of Yann Martel’s seemingly impenetrable rumination on the triumph of the human spirit, man’s place in the universe, and the role of religion in an individual’s spiritual journey, “Life of Pi” is, first and foremost, a film for the senses. Working from a script by David Magee, director Lee’s film follows “Pi” Patel (Suraj Sharma), a young man who learns of different religions growing up in the Puducherry region of what was once French India. His inquisitive nature, at once encouraged by his mother (Tabu) and discouraged by a father (Adil Hussain) who operates a zoo in their town, is scuttled as he grows older and his family is eventually forced to immigrate to Canada. En route, the Japanese freighter carrying them, as well as their zoo animals, is wrecked in a storm, with only Pi escaping – alongside a zebra, orangutan, hyena, and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker, who journeys with Pi on an ocean teeming with both peril and wonder, with florescent jellyfish lighting up the world beneath them and humpback whales catapulting through the air.
“Life of Pi” is so staggeringly, jaw-droppingly beautiful that Lee and cinematographer Claudia Miranda’s effective use of the 3-D format is evident from the movie’s first frames. Long before Pi and Richard Parker set out on a lifeboat of individual discovery, “Life of Pi” has already captivated the viewer with its fascinating portrait of young Pi’s life in French India, with gorgeous landscapes, colors and animals filling each and every frame. Most of the movies we see using 3-D employ it merely as a gimmick to goose grosses, but much like Martin Scorsese’s “Hugo,” Lee here frames so many sequences with depth-of-field dimension that its inclusion ranks as an absolute necessity to appreciating the spellbinding images that Lee and Miranda – both of whom were deservedly honored with Oscars, alongside composer Mychael Danna and the visual effects team at Rhythm & Hues – generated here.
The film’s story is another matter; one can easily see why readers of Martel’s book were drawn to the material, for its mostly ambiguous, take-out-what-you-put-in take on world religion and faith, in general, functions mostly as a byproduct of the individual reader. On-screen, Lee is able to invest the material with a similar cloudiness, though that ambiguity is harder to achieve in a medium like film. There’s no outright sermonizing in the picture, but its ending is more forcefully tilted in one direction than the more hazy conclusion Martel originally wrote. Still, however obvious (or not) the film’s metaphorical messages and spiritual philosophizing happen to be, there’s no question “Life of Pi” is a film that’s impossible to forget and easy to appreciate on a sheer artistic level. Whether or not you find it to be as enriching an emotional journey will be – much like its source material – up to the individual viewer.
Fox’s 3-D Blu-Ray presentation of “Life of Pi” is unquestionably a must-view for any 3-D home theaterphile. The images, composition and clarity of the 3-D are spectacular throughout, and as I wrote before, few films have demanded viewing in the 3-D format more than “Life of Pi.” The 3-D Blu-Ray also includes nearly 15 minutes of exclusive deleted scenes, plus the trailer in 3D and visual effects progressions (these exclusive extras can also be played in a standard BD player). Other supplements on the standard Blu (which features a dazzling 1080p AVC encoded transfer in its own right) boast several featurettes, an art gallery and storyboards, while a DVD and digital copy round out the disc. The DTS MA 7.1 audio is impressively mounted as well, highlighting another fine score written by Danna for his long-time cinematic collaborator.
One final note on “Life of Pi”: while not the fault of the film, it’s inconceivable to me that this picture generated a PG rating from the MPAA. With its marketing campaign that was driven by images of Pi and the tiger together in the lifeboat, I have no doubt there were parents who took children to this film, only to be horrified by the animal violence that occurs in it – even if it’s off-camera and isn’t gratuitous, this isn’t a film for children, and should’ve absolutely received a PG-13 for that and the generally intense tone of the picture. Of course, this isn’t the first sign our ratings system is dysfunctional – merely the latest evidence of it.
7.5/10
For its technical accomplishments alone, Ang Lee’s LIFE OF PI is a must-view, and there’s no doubt from an artistic standpoint, its visuals were unmatched by any other film last year.
An adaptation of Yann Martel’s seemingly impenetrable rumination on the triumph of the human spirit, man’s place in the universe, and the role of religion in an individual’s spiritual journey, “Life of Pi” is, first and foremost, a film for the senses. Working from a script by David Magee, director Lee’s film follows “Pi” Patel (Suraj Sharma), a young man who learns of different religions growing up in the Puducherry region of what was once French India. His inquisitive nature, at once encouraged by his mother (Tabu) and discouraged by a father (Adil Hussain) who operates a zoo in their town, is scuttled as he grows older and his family is eventually forced to immigrate to Canada. En route, the Japanese freighter carrying them, as well as their zoo animals, is wrecked in a storm, with only Pi escaping – alongside a zebra, orangutan, hyena, and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker, who journeys with Pi on an ocean teeming with both peril and wonder, with florescent jellyfish lighting up the world beneath them and humpback whales catapulting through the air.
“Life of Pi” is so staggeringly, jaw-droppingly beautiful that Lee and cinematographer Claudia Miranda’s effective use of the 3-D format is evident from the movie’s first frames. Long before Pi and Richard Parker set out on a lifeboat of individual discovery, “Life of Pi” has already captivated the viewer with its fascinating portrait of young Pi’s life in French India, with gorgeous landscapes, colors and animals filling each and every frame. Most of the movies we see using 3-D employ it merely as a gimmick to goose grosses, but much like Martin Scorsese’s “Hugo,” Lee here frames so many sequences with depth-of-field dimension that its inclusion ranks as an absolute necessity to appreciating the spellbinding images that Lee and Miranda – both of whom were deservedly honored with Oscars, alongside composer Mychael Danna and the visual effects team at Rhythm & Hues – generated here.
The film’s story is another matter; one can easily see why readers of Martel’s book were drawn to the material, for its mostly ambiguous, take-out-what-you-put-in take on world religion and faith, in general, functions mostly as a byproduct of the individual reader. On-screen, Lee is able to invest the material with a similar cloudiness, though that ambiguity is harder to achieve in a medium like film. There’s no outright sermonizing in the picture, but its ending is more forcefully tilted in one direction than the more hazy conclusion Martel originally wrote. Still, however obvious (or not) the film’s metaphorical messages and spiritual philosophizing happen to be, there’s no question “Life of Pi” is a film that’s impossible to forget and easy to appreciate on a sheer artistic level. Whether or not you find it to be as enriching an emotional journey will be – much like its source material – up to the individual viewer.
Fox’s 3-D Blu-Ray presentation of “Life of Pi” is unquestionably a must-view for any 3-D home theaterphile. The images, composition and clarity of the 3-D are spectacular throughout, and as I wrote before, few films have demanded viewing in the 3-D format more than “Life of Pi.” The 3-D Blu-Ray also includes nearly 15 minutes of exclusive deleted scenes, plus the trailer in 3D and visual effects progressions (these exclusive extras can also be played in a standard BD player). Other supplements on the standard Blu (which features a dazzling 1080p AVC encoded transfer in its own right) boast several featurettes, an art gallery and storyboards, while a DVD and digital copy round out the disc. The DTS MA 7.1 audio is impressively mounted as well, highlighting another fine score written by Danna for his long-time cinematic collaborator.
One final note on “Life of Pi”: while not the fault of the film, it’s inconceivable to me that this picture generated a PG rating from the MPAA. With its marketing campaign that was driven by images of Pi and the tiger together in the lifeboat, I have no doubt there were parents who took children to this film, only to be horrified by the animal violence that occurs in it – even if it’s off-camera and isn’t gratuitous, this isn’t a film for children, and should’ve absolutely received a PG-13 for that and the generally intense tone of the picture. Of course, this isn’t the first sign our ratings system is dysfunctional – merely the latest evidence of it.
-
Paul MacLean
- Posts: 7538
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:26 pm
- Location: New York
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I've been interested in seeing Life of Pi, but I utterly loathe 3D. Do you think the overall experience would be lost in 2-D?
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Paul, I certainly think you can still get a group grasp of the cinematography, and I don't think the overall impact would be negated entirely, so I'd still check it out. I just think this is one of the few times I've seen where 3D very much adds to the experience. Every shot has some kind of 3D framing and the effect is impressive.
Wasn't as crazy about the story, like I said, but it will resonate more with some viewers than others.
Wasn't as crazy about the story, like I said, but it will resonate more with some viewers than others.
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Andy, I appreciate the mention of your concern over the PG rating for LIFE OF PI. My kids are starting to figure out that movies and TV shows have ratings and are asking me what PG means. I'm starting to pre-screen more movies these days since I don't completely trust the ratings board.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Thanks John, we don't have kids yet but I always have an eye out when I see something like that. I would absolutely NOT recommend the film for young children. Some of the material is upsetting if you like animals, even if it's off-camera.jkholm wrote:Andy, I appreciate the mention of your concern over the PG rating for LIFE OF PI. My kids are starting to figure out that movies and TV shows have ratings and are asking me what PG means. I'm starting to pre-screen more movies these days since I don't completely trust the ratings board.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
LINCOLN
7/10
Steven Spielberg’s chronicle of President Abraham Lincoln’s crusade to pass through the 13th amendment, and abolish slavery, makes for a dense film that’s easier to respect than embrace.
At least Daniel Day-Lewis’ Oscar-winning performance (his third for Best Actor) is simple to appreciate: speaking Tony Kushner’s long, flowing monologues, Day-Lewis’ Lincoln is a fully formed portrait of a humble man with a wit and sense of humor who nevertheless became a bulldog when the situation arose. In this case, Lincoln’s battles both from within his own Republican party, as well as with lame-duck Democrats tussling over the amendment’s passage – which Lincoln sought to push through prior to the end of the Civil War and the Confederate states’ return to the union – necessitates the use of “favors” in order to pass into law. Kushner’s script, adapted in part from Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals,” is mostly a behind-the-scenes look into the backroom machinations that lead to a milestone moment in American history, with the bottom line that politics was, as it is today, often a dirty business indeed.
The supporting performances are all superb – whether it’s Tommy Lee Jones as abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens, Sally Field as Mary Todd Lincoln, David Strathairn as Secretary of State William Seward, or James Spader as Republican “operative” William Bilbo, “Lincoln” is filled with familiar faces who all give authentic performances. The atmosphere of the time, the attire and hairstyles, all come across in Spielberg’s picture, and whenever Day-Lewis is on-screen, you’re aware that a master is at work. Few actors can hold the screen so magnetically as Day-Lewis does, and yet he truly does slip into the role, making Lincoln come alive without an excessive theatricality. The film itself, on balance, though, is heavy on political maneuvering – in fact the film is essentially driven by an ideological dissection of policy – and for that reason, isn’t a particularly inspiring film or one that’s especially “user friendly” for anyone other than history buffs. The few times the movie extends beyond its drawing room dealings – such as Lincoln’s relationship with his wife or his eldest son Robert(Joseph Gordon-Levitt) – generate a fleeting emotional component, yet ultimately these sequences feel isolated in the midst of a heavy-going political saga, as well performed as it may be.
Touchstone’s Blu-Ray of “Lincoln” features a nicely detailed 1080p AVC encoded transfer with 5.1 DTS MA audio. Janusz Kaminski’s cinematography isn’t as overtly stylized as some of his prior efforts with Spielberg, and John Williams’ score mostly stays out of the way, injecting warmth whenever it can (which isn't often). Extra features are offered on a second bonus disc (included only in the 4-disc combo pack along with a DVD and digital copy), highlighted by a typical Laurent Bozuereau documentary that examines each step of the production from concept to screen, including a section on Williams’ underscoring.
7/10
Steven Spielberg’s chronicle of President Abraham Lincoln’s crusade to pass through the 13th amendment, and abolish slavery, makes for a dense film that’s easier to respect than embrace.
At least Daniel Day-Lewis’ Oscar-winning performance (his third for Best Actor) is simple to appreciate: speaking Tony Kushner’s long, flowing monologues, Day-Lewis’ Lincoln is a fully formed portrait of a humble man with a wit and sense of humor who nevertheless became a bulldog when the situation arose. In this case, Lincoln’s battles both from within his own Republican party, as well as with lame-duck Democrats tussling over the amendment’s passage – which Lincoln sought to push through prior to the end of the Civil War and the Confederate states’ return to the union – necessitates the use of “favors” in order to pass into law. Kushner’s script, adapted in part from Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals,” is mostly a behind-the-scenes look into the backroom machinations that lead to a milestone moment in American history, with the bottom line that politics was, as it is today, often a dirty business indeed.
The supporting performances are all superb – whether it’s Tommy Lee Jones as abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens, Sally Field as Mary Todd Lincoln, David Strathairn as Secretary of State William Seward, or James Spader as Republican “operative” William Bilbo, “Lincoln” is filled with familiar faces who all give authentic performances. The atmosphere of the time, the attire and hairstyles, all come across in Spielberg’s picture, and whenever Day-Lewis is on-screen, you’re aware that a master is at work. Few actors can hold the screen so magnetically as Day-Lewis does, and yet he truly does slip into the role, making Lincoln come alive without an excessive theatricality. The film itself, on balance, though, is heavy on political maneuvering – in fact the film is essentially driven by an ideological dissection of policy – and for that reason, isn’t a particularly inspiring film or one that’s especially “user friendly” for anyone other than history buffs. The few times the movie extends beyond its drawing room dealings – such as Lincoln’s relationship with his wife or his eldest son Robert(Joseph Gordon-Levitt) – generate a fleeting emotional component, yet ultimately these sequences feel isolated in the midst of a heavy-going political saga, as well performed as it may be.
Touchstone’s Blu-Ray of “Lincoln” features a nicely detailed 1080p AVC encoded transfer with 5.1 DTS MA audio. Janusz Kaminski’s cinematography isn’t as overtly stylized as some of his prior efforts with Spielberg, and John Williams’ score mostly stays out of the way, injecting warmth whenever it can (which isn't often). Extra features are offered on a second bonus disc (included only in the 4-disc combo pack along with a DVD and digital copy), highlighted by a typical Laurent Bozuereau documentary that examines each step of the production from concept to screen, including a section on Williams’ underscoring.
-
Paul MacLean
- Posts: 7538
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:26 pm
- Location: New York
Re: rate the last movie you saw
"If she was a president, she'd be Babraham Lincoln."
Re: rate the last movie you saw
THE LAST HURRAH 7/10
While it was St. Patrick's Day, I thought I would watch a John Ford film that is NOT THE QUIET MAN (watched that last evening-if you have not seen or purchased the new Blu-Ray from Olive Films, do so: absolutely gorgeous and you will throw away your old Artisan DVD). Not having seen this film in its entirety in years, I thought I would watch this valentine to old school politics and an examination of us vs. them (Irish vs. Yankees) and how not much has changed in either one over the years.
You probably all know the story: Spencer Tracy-great as always-plays a old-style pol who is mayor of a major US city (it is modeled on Curley of Boston) and who runs for re-election in the face of opposition from the old-money fogeys of his city and the ever approaching demise of his style of politics. Jeffrey Hunter is his nephew who is more of a son than his real one, and who decides to observe this dinosaur slog through the machinations of running for office just one more time. Along with Tracy, there are other golden age Hollywood character actors: Pat O'Brien, Jimmy Gleason, Donald Crisp, Basil Rathbone, John Carradine, Edward Brophy, Ricardo Cortez, Jane Darwell, Anna Lee and others. The film just misses the mark of being a truly great film and ends up being a very good one for a number of reasons: aside from Tracy, there is no other actor to really hold one's attention for a long period of time. Granted, he is the main character, but in scenes where Tracy is with Hunter for example, you never really notice Hunter, either physically or with a voice, and that is one of the film's biggest flaws-that role cried out for an actor who could give it some gravitas, like a Paul Newman or Charlton Heston or even Jack Lemmon, who would have at least given Tracy some competition. As it is, the actor who makes the second biggest impression is Brophy, and he is mainly the comic relief!
There are a couple of sublime moments: after defeat, Tracy walks home alone, almost totally forgotten through the park while in the background the victory parade for the man who defeated him rolls down the street; with his last breath, Tracy tells a man who detested him and feels that if he had to do it again he would have done it differently, "The hell I would!" Also, it would be nice for either Sony or some archive to do major restoration on the film-there are moments where the film looks in very rough shape, mostly towards the end of reel one.
Second tier Ford? Most definitely, but I will take a lesser film from him than the best of some other directors any day.
While it was St. Patrick's Day, I thought I would watch a John Ford film that is NOT THE QUIET MAN (watched that last evening-if you have not seen or purchased the new Blu-Ray from Olive Films, do so: absolutely gorgeous and you will throw away your old Artisan DVD). Not having seen this film in its entirety in years, I thought I would watch this valentine to old school politics and an examination of us vs. them (Irish vs. Yankees) and how not much has changed in either one over the years.
You probably all know the story: Spencer Tracy-great as always-plays a old-style pol who is mayor of a major US city (it is modeled on Curley of Boston) and who runs for re-election in the face of opposition from the old-money fogeys of his city and the ever approaching demise of his style of politics. Jeffrey Hunter is his nephew who is more of a son than his real one, and who decides to observe this dinosaur slog through the machinations of running for office just one more time. Along with Tracy, there are other golden age Hollywood character actors: Pat O'Brien, Jimmy Gleason, Donald Crisp, Basil Rathbone, John Carradine, Edward Brophy, Ricardo Cortez, Jane Darwell, Anna Lee and others. The film just misses the mark of being a truly great film and ends up being a very good one for a number of reasons: aside from Tracy, there is no other actor to really hold one's attention for a long period of time. Granted, he is the main character, but in scenes where Tracy is with Hunter for example, you never really notice Hunter, either physically or with a voice, and that is one of the film's biggest flaws-that role cried out for an actor who could give it some gravitas, like a Paul Newman or Charlton Heston or even Jack Lemmon, who would have at least given Tracy some competition. As it is, the actor who makes the second biggest impression is Brophy, and he is mainly the comic relief!
There are a couple of sublime moments: after defeat, Tracy walks home alone, almost totally forgotten through the park while in the background the victory parade for the man who defeated him rolls down the street; with his last breath, Tracy tells a man who detested him and feels that if he had to do it again he would have done it differently, "The hell I would!" Also, it would be nice for either Sony or some archive to do major restoration on the film-there are moments where the film looks in very rough shape, mostly towards the end of reel one.
Second tier Ford? Most definitely, but I will take a lesser film from him than the best of some other directors any day.
Re: rate the last movie you saw
LOTR: THE RETURN OF THE KING - I have two weeks off from school so I thought I would go through and get caught up on several Blu-Rays that have been sitting on the shelf which need watched. In honor of THE HOBBIT release this week (I'll be waiting for the massive box set - passing on buying those separately) I thought I would finally watch this film again. I will say that I did feel it dragged a bit, especially with the Mount Doom sequence (just climb the damn mountain! Lol...), but I still really enjoy it as a whole and the 4 hours doesn't seem like 4 hours to me. Still love the music.
BLADE RUNNER - THE FINAL CUT - Aside from the goofy hockey mask dancers, it's hard for me not to like this film. I think perhaps my two favorite sequences are Roy metting Tyrell (gorgeous set...all those candles give it a religious quality) and Deckard and Roy's final moments. That Tears In Rain speech always makes my eyes water. I always find something new to reflect on when I watch BR - this time it was Zhora's death - I don't know why but it was incedibly moving in a way that it never was, from the moment Deckard engages her at the club to his standing over the dead body. Rutger's performance is much more nuanced and deep than I noticed before too. And I am in the camp of those who am glad that there is no narration - never liked it. Beautiful film.
DANGEROUS DAYS: THE MAKING OF BLADE RUNNER - Outstanding documentary (and quite comprehensive) that they really went all out for. Loved the extra footage...had no idea they cut out a steamy topless scene of Sean Young ("Oh my!" in Takei voice). Very informative and worth watching several times - found it fascinating what didn't make it into the movie. And what happened to Sean Young? I guess she was a pain to work with (or so I've heard), but she was so gorgeous. Her look shad a noir-ish quality to them but I can see where the chemistry between her and Ford was not quite what it could have been. But maybe that was because she was a Replicant...lol...I am glad this film gets the positive recognition that it does. That Hampton dude (writer) is a bit of a whacko! Lol...
ST:TNG Season 2 - still going through the season. Still a great show.
BLADE RUNNER - THE FINAL CUT - Aside from the goofy hockey mask dancers, it's hard for me not to like this film. I think perhaps my two favorite sequences are Roy metting Tyrell (gorgeous set...all those candles give it a religious quality) and Deckard and Roy's final moments. That Tears In Rain speech always makes my eyes water. I always find something new to reflect on when I watch BR - this time it was Zhora's death - I don't know why but it was incedibly moving in a way that it never was, from the moment Deckard engages her at the club to his standing over the dead body. Rutger's performance is much more nuanced and deep than I noticed before too. And I am in the camp of those who am glad that there is no narration - never liked it. Beautiful film.
DANGEROUS DAYS: THE MAKING OF BLADE RUNNER - Outstanding documentary (and quite comprehensive) that they really went all out for. Loved the extra footage...had no idea they cut out a steamy topless scene of Sean Young ("Oh my!" in Takei voice). Very informative and worth watching several times - found it fascinating what didn't make it into the movie. And what happened to Sean Young? I guess she was a pain to work with (or so I've heard), but she was so gorgeous. Her look shad a noir-ish quality to them but I can see where the chemistry between her and Ford was not quite what it could have been. But maybe that was because she was a Replicant...lol...I am glad this film gets the positive recognition that it does. That Hampton dude (writer) is a bit of a whacko! Lol...
ST:TNG Season 2 - still going through the season. Still a great show.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
The narration is something that I think absolutely helps the film for first-time viewers; as you watch it repeatedly, it's less necessary, though I think it was supposed to give the movie a '40s noir type feel (it just wasn't done very well lol). My problem with any other version of the film outside the theatrical version is that I cannot accept Deckard being a replicant, which renders the dramatic point of the story moot.And I am in the camp of those who am glad that there is no narration - never liked it. Beautiful film.
THAT said -- no matter what version you enjoy, it's a classic movie. Even the workprint is fascinating.