Grudge Match - Pretty bad, seems like alot of the film was improvised with some really awkward ‘comedy’ moments … luckily Alan Arkin provided some laughs… and the fight at the end was well done
The Lego Movie: wholly delightful, very witty and clever at times that nicely subverts a lot of expected elements of “quest films”, while being far, far better than any movie about a branded children’s toy should be. Many genuine laughs are to be had here (a small, unexpected highlight is the Superman - Green Lantern relationship!).
The Wolf of Wall Street - Martin Scorsese 7/10
Nymph()maniac (part 1) - Lars von Trier 9/10
Le Passé (The Past) - Asghar Farhadi 9/10
Wolf Creek 2 - The cinematography of this film looks stunning, and its very different to the first one, more like a fun exploitation film this time round… good performances and some very impressive car stunts
The Monuments Men: about a unit in WWII comprised of art historians trying to recover art stolen by the Germans, who’re taking it back with them as they retreat across Europe over '44/45. Directed by George Clooney, it’s a fun, shapeless, ensemble drama which alternates between comedy, drama, war, art, the necessity of saving art during wartime; there are a handful of memorable vignettes and good performances: Clooney, Huge Bonneville, Bob Balaban, (an underused) Cate Blanchett. A good, old-fashioned orchestral score by Alexandre Desplat and attractive cinematography by Phedon Papamichael round things off pleasantly. It’s flawed mainly by its lack of focus or a strong enough narrative thread: a greater concentration on art would’ve helped, as it sometimes strays into “60s/70s all-star war film spectacular” territory. As a consequence, when it bumps up against the deportation of Jews, it doesn’t quite know how to come to terms with such a serious subject - the noble assertion that art is important enough to try and preserve even during war is as much as it can deal with. 3/5.
Re-watched Gravity. Still 9/10
3-D seemed to look less great now then remembered, so maybe the 2D version is equally impressive. Will check this one day with the Blu.
I’m going to watch the film again, this time with my brother, as I loved it so much after the first viewing that I’m bound to revisit the thing in the nearest future. I viewed it in 2D and I was very gratified - I conjecture my roaring subwoofer compensated for the lack of 3D visuals. 
Gravity was the first film which really worked in 3-D, the only one in which 3-D made really sense.
The Wolf of Wall Street: completely exuberant, fascinating, extraordinarily well-acted by everyone, hilarious and tragic, a flawless soundtrack, Marty directing a film about Wall Street as though they’re the new Mafia, and finally delivering a powerful catharsis. One of the best cinematic experiences I’ve ever had, simply put.
12 Years a Slave: not perfect from a narrative perspective or from characterisation, but undeniably incredibly powerful and directed with a great sense for verisimilitude by McQueen, not sparing any sensibilities for the audience, exposing in almost compendium fashion all of the horrors of the slavery.
Noah (Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Emma Watson, Anthony Hopkins).
As a movie, not too bad. Had almost a bit of a ‘Lord of the Rings’ feel to it at times.
The Lego Movie (Lord, Miller/14
“The Lego Movie”, directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, is a 3D animated film that exists in a world created out of Lego. This Danish company, 65 years old, is an iconic favourite and perennial feature of the children’s toy market. This might be a reason for cynicism, fears of a 100 minute advertisement perhaps well founded. However, instead, it is a clever, sly subversive comedy that keeps the innate charm of the toy, while having fun at mocking business and a consumerist society of uniformity. The animation style is slightly clunky, replicating with striking fidelity the limited articulation of the original figures and the almost stop-motion quality aesthetic of the world created. The computer generated imagery is extraordinary in mirroring the plastic blocks’ texture and helping make the Lego city a wonder of imagined production design.
This would all be without point though, if it were not for a very witty and humorous script, written by the directors, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. They gleefully send-up the corporate world and the Lego brand’s film tie-in ranges such as Star Wars and D.C. superheroes. They’re ably abetted by a talented vocal cast, featuring Chris Pratt, Will Ferrel, Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson and a whole host of guest voices, from Jonah Hill to Billy Dee Williams. The jokes range from popular culture to very specific references to past Lego ranges, slapstick to in-jokes, satire to one-liners, in a melange designed to appeal to all ages. Lord and Miller know well that the finest children’s movies are ones that attract adults as well, and here they achieve their goal with aplomb.
Still, the film never quite avoids a sentimental, good-intentioned moral which so many films of this genre are saddled with. Its plot twist, influenced by “The Matrix” (1999), whilst initially surprising and amusing does eventually lose some of its ingenuity. Some of the action scenes go on far too long, excessive demonstrations of versatility that are never as fun as just the pure moments of comedy. The script eventually has to resolve the conflicts it sets up, leading to a slightly weaker second half overall.
Yet this is never enough to sour “The Lego Movie”, which, on the contrary, is mainly a delight, always funny and far cleverer than any movie based on a children’s toy has any right to be.
A Lego movie…what will they come up with next.
The Monuments Men (Clooney/14)
“The Monuments Men” (2014), directed by George Clooney, his fifth film behind the camera, makes use of an irresistible premise: recover art works looted by the Nazis during the dying days of World War II. Not only is this a story never told before in the cinema (leading to an aura of uniqueness not often found with Hollywood studio pictures), but Clooney has assembled an enviable cast alongside himself with Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Bob Balaban and Cate Blancett.
Yet as a war film about art, it rarely seems too concerned about the specifics of the paintings and sculptures they’re trying to rescue. Jan Van Eyck’s Ghent Altarpiece and Michelangelo’s “Madonna and Child” are the main focus of the film, providing a narrative thread for the script (written by Clooney and Grant Heslov), but the thousands upon thousands of other pieces of art (emphasised by frequent shots of warehouses or mines stacked with canvases) are generalised into anonymous cultural property in the need of preservation. It’s frustrating, as are many parts of the film.
It lacks a strong narrative drive, being, until the last third, very episodic – some are fine, like Murray’s and Balaban’s encounter with a young German soldier at night, but others, such as discovering barrels of gold teeth taken from Jews exterminated by the Holocaust, show the film’s inadequacy dealing with the horrors of war. The pathos of members of the team dying and the mass destruction of art in impromptu bonfires lit by the German army are themes it finds hard enough to grasp and make the audience appreciate their impact. It keeps bumping into these big, important topics, the occupation of France and the role of collaborators say, pursuing them for a little while in subplots before backing away, unsure how to proceed, like over the use of child soldiers by the Germans, which is turned into almost an amusing anecdote.
This dichotomy between seriousness and a lighter, caper feel, reminiscent at times of late sixties and early seventies war films (think “Kelly’s Heroes” (1970) and their ilk, a feeling reinforced by Alexandre Desplat’s bass-heavy music score) leads to an uneasily balance not solved by Clooney’s at times uncertain and uneven direction. It always looks good thanks to cinematographer Phedon Papamichael’s eye for framing, but the characters’ speeches, justifying the importance of art even during wartime, sits awkwardly with the more cinematic moments, particularly the climactic race against time to liberate a huge storage of art.
It remains entertaining and well-acted throughout, but it’s clear that this is a film which could have been a more powerful exploration of its subject than it is. A missed opportunity then, enjoyable though, despite its failings.
The Raid 2.
I don’t want to overhype this movie, because I am often disappointed when others overhype movies. But in this case, I would say, ‘Believe the hype!’ The Raid: Redemption is an awesome film; I liked part 2 a LOT more. They really raised the stakes in this one. Very good acting, interesting story, outstanding action sequences. I guess I will leave it at that.
The only potential problem I can see is, how will they top this one? On the other hand, now I’m eagerly awaiting what the team of Gareth Evans/Iko Uwais and their stunt team can come up with next.
The Raid 2
It does take a while for the action to get going… up until the car chase I was wondering what the big deal was … but then its just non stop from then on, sort of becoming surreal in a way… I thought it was an amazing movie in the end
Greetings.
IMO, one of the great strengths of The Raid 2 is that the movie is character-driven, and I never found the non-fighting parts to be boring. There’s a lot going on beneath the surface of each of the main characters. And the pacing is superb; it seems to fly (for me) in spite of being a 2.5-hour movie.
Contrasting The Raid 2 with another action movie I recently watched, Ninja II: Shadow of a Tear, where, although stars Scott Adkins and Kane Kosugi and the rest display amazing fight action, the characters and acting are wooden. Plus, there is nothing in the story, characters, etc., that is unique…it’s so predictable, because it’s the exact same story and character types as countless other martial arts/action films written by, directed by, and starring primarily Westerners. In the West, the stereotypical martial arts/action film is: ‘blah, blah, yawn, blah…great fight!..blah, blah, yawn…great fight!..blah, blah’…etc. But in The Raid 2, I never found myself bored by the dramatic scenes. The principle actors never appear uncomfortable on camera when they aren’t fighting. The dramatic scenes make the action scenes all the more effective. Even the characters with little or no dialogue, like ‘the assassin’, ‘baseball bat boy’ and ‘hammer girl’ have a fascinating presence about them beyond just fighting, especially the assassin character (who specializes in double Karambit knives).
Gareth Evans is to be commended for breathing fresh air into not only the martial arts genre, but the entire action/crime genre as well.
Captain America 2: The Winter Soldier.
Cap 2 was less good than expected, even slightly boring despite a reasonable story. Even Scarlett Johansson was less cool than in Avengers and Iron Man, which is telling. 5/10
Her - Spike Jonze
A subtle and intelligent love story between an introverted guy (you feel sorry for him when you see his moustache) and a computer voice. Scarlett Johansson was great as the voice. 8,5/10
[size=12pt]Under the skin -2013- Johnathan Glazer[/size]
First I admit I haven’t read the novel in which the film is based, and read several reviews of the film, facing the fact that it was a clear case of love or leave it for the critics, for a long time that I haven’t seen such a case of clear different opinions and antagonism about a film, its 0 stars or 5 stars no in between,
Yes its a strange film, and yes Glazer is a fine director sexy beast was a very god film (in the best tradition of British thrillers), and the Birth was also a strong film. But here Glazer a clip video usual director is clearly on a different league, maybe the main problem is that wasn’t a league of its own, or was it I still don’t know.
Not a real plot, Scarlett Johansson (thanks Staton for writing it for me in the last thread), plays an alien send to earth (Scotland) on the service of other aliens disguised as bikers, with the mission of hunting men, luring them to a sort of liquid trap, using a lovely female human form (Scarlett), the mans she drags to the trap are normal man that we don’t expect to have any chance with such a beautiful women. But then after refusing to Kill on of the man (with a deformed face), she lured, the film takes a strange turn, the alien want’s to experience the new human feelings, but its an alien
To be real honest I’m still thinking if I liked the movie or not, not an easy work. The first half for me was the best part for me visually was stunning, the second half was not so good for me, but the film gets more violence with some strange scenes on the beach a rape, but liked the endig, with the Scarlett transforming in some sort of Predator without … well I’m giving it away no spoilers.
So very strange film, almost no plot very little dialog, odd and bizarre scenes, but with substance. I’ve read all type o comparisons a new Kubrick, Roeg (with the obvious reference from the David Bowie film), Russell and others, for me I saw a bit of Lynch paranoia (or lack of it), and most of all Tarkovsky, with some ideas common to Solaris. And that for me its main problem of the film the excess of references, or maybe the need for those references even if they don’t exist (the film is very far from Roeg work for instance in my view at least). It’s also hard to understand the message from the director, sometimes that is a good thing, space for your own interpretation of things, but here in such a complex film its more hard to accept.
But is it any good? It depends, if you don’t like slow paced art house type of films with little action, you won’t like this one, but if you liked something like Solaris you’re in the right track here. I have to watch it once again, but I real can understand why the divisions about Under the Skin are so strong, you got love it or leave it, the no other way. except we get to see Scarlett Johansson naked, and that is a good thing of course