Skip to main content

16,100 replies

MOVIES: What are you watching?

winetarelliwinetarelliMember
Gravity

For the uninitiated, a perfunctory glance suggests this is the most well reviewed major English language film in over a decade. On Rottentomatoes, it is sitting at 98% Fresh amongst all critics and 100% Fresh amongst "top critics". Buzz includes comments such as those from James Cameron that this is "the greatest movie ever set in space" and "the movie [he] has been waiting [his] whole life to see." The movies is written, directed, and produced by Alfonso Cuarón who has made several extrodinary movies, amongst them Y Tú Mama Tambien and Children of Men.

First of all, I loved it. But secondly, this is a nearly impossible movie to review. Immediately, this is the most extraordinarily well filmed movie set in space of all time. And, frankly, space or no, it is flat out one of the most expertly and wonderfully filmed movies in the history of cinema.

What makes the movie so unlike any other movie, though, is for all the technical and photographic brilliance, the movie is essentially a play. Perhaps even a minimalist play. The entire never-bested production is to provide the backdrop for a very human and in some ways very small and quiet movie -- but a movie full of emotion and 88 minutes of thrill and excitement (The entire movie is 91 minutes long).

George Clooney is great, and Sandra Bullock gives the best performance of her career. And I felt feelings... even though I've never been in their position, it really resonated with me -- how would I handle it? How could I find the ability to go on? The movie is about the triumph of the human spirit and, perhaps because my mother just passed away a couple of weeks ago, I could not help but be reminded of the very human struggles my family has recently gone through as watching this.

All of this said, I was consistently taken out of being truly and fully immersed -- for the strangest of reasons. The scope and quality of the photography, staging, and production was so extraordinary that I was often aware of the juxtaposition of this production for what, as I said, is essentially a very human, small, play. Cuarón is such a brilliant director, everything on the screen is alive and moving -- thought has gone into the pen or paperclip in the upper right hand corner of the screen that any other director would have paid no attention to. But it is almost as if he is *too good* for this. It is almost like Schindler's List direction of Waiting for Godot.

This is a movie that absolutely MUST be seen in 3D on a huge screen. The flip side of what I've been saying is that in order to get the requisite thrill and impact of this movie, such production values were absolutely essential. It adds tremendously. Plus, just as a movie buff, this is going to be (already is being) called one of the greatest technical achievements in movie history -- and even if just for that (even though there is so much more to seeing it on a huge screen in 3D) -- it is a 'must see' in 3D on the largest screen in your area for any movie lover.

I'm coming in lower than the vast majority of critics on this and scoring it an enthusiastic: A-
Last edited by winetarelli
P parcivalMember
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
Gravity

For the uninitiated, a perfunctory glance suggests this is the most well reviewed major English language film in over a decade. On Rottentomatoes, it is sitting at 98% Fresh amongst all critics and 100% Fresh amongst "top critics". Buzz includes comments such as those from James Cameron that this is "the greatest movie ever set in space" and "the movie [he] has been waiting [his] whole life to see." The movies is written, directed, and produced by Afonso Cuarón who has made several extrodinary movies, amongst them Y Tú Mama Tambien and Children of Men.

First of all, I loved it. But secondly, this is a nearly impossible movie to review. Immediately, this is the most extraordinarily well filmed movie set in space of all time. And, frankly, space or no, it is flat out one of the most expertly and wonderfully filmed movies in the history of cinema.

What makes the movie so unlike any other movie, though, is for all the technical and photographic brilliance, the movie is essentially a play. Perhaps even a minimalist play. The entire never-bested production is to provide the backdrop for a very human and in some ways very small and quiet movie -- but a movie full of emotion and 88 minutes of thrill and excitement (The entire movie is 91 minutes long).

George Clooney is great, and Sandra Bullock gives the best performance of her career. And I felt feelings... even though I've never been in their position, it really resonated with me -- how would I handle it? How could I find the ability to go on? The movie is about the triumph of the human spirit and, perhaps because my mother just passed away a couple of weeks ago, I could not help but be reminded of the very human struggles my family has recently gone through as watching this.

All of this said, I was consistently taken out of being truly and fully immersed -- for the strangest of reasons. The scope and quality of the photography, staging, and production was so extraordinary that I was often aware of the juxtaposition of this production for what, as I said, is essentially a very human, small, play. Cuarón is such a brilliant director, everything on the screen is alive and moving -- thought has gone into the pen or paperclip in the upper right hand corner of the screen that any other director would have paid no attention to. But it is almost as if he is *too good* for this. It is almost like Schindler's List direction of Waiting for Godot.

This is a movie that absolutely MUST be seen in 3D on a huge screen. The flip side of what I've been saying is that in order to get the requisite thrill and impact of this movie, such production values were absolutely essential. It adds tremendously. Plus, just as a movie buff, this is going to be (already is being) called one of the greatest technical achievements in movie history -- and even if just for that (even though there is so much more to seeing it on a huge screen in 3D) -- it is a 'must see' in 3D on the largest screen in your area for any movie lover.

I'm coming in lower than the vast majority of critics on this and scoring it an enthusiastic: A-


Wow . . great review! Hoping to see this within the next week
D duckfaninmtMember
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
Gravity

For the uninitiated, a perfunctory glance suggests this is the most well reviewed major English language film in over a decade. On Rottentomatoes, it is sitting at 98% Fresh amongst all critics and 100% Fresh amongst "top critics". Buzz includes comments such as those from James Cameron that this is "the greatest movie ever set in space" and "the movie [he] has been waiting [his] whole life to see." The movies is written, directed, and produced by Afonso Cuarón who has made several extrodinary movies, amongst them Y Tú Mama Tambien and Children of Men.

First of all, I loved it. But secondly, this is a nearly impossible movie to review. Immediately, this is the most extraordinarily well filmed movie set in space of all time. And, frankly, space or no, it is flat out one of the most expertly and wonderfully filmed movies in the history of cinema.

What makes the movie so unlike any other movie, though, is for all the technical and photographic brilliance, the movie is essentially a play. Perhaps even a minimalist play. The entire never-bested production is to provide the backdrop for a very human and in some ways very small and quiet movie -- but a movie full of emotion and 88 minutes of thrill and excitement (The entire movie is 91 minutes long).

George Clooney is great, and Sandra Bullock gives the best performance of her career. And I felt feelings... even though I've never been in their position, it really resonated with me -- how would I handle it? How could I find the ability to go on? The movie is about the triumph of the human spirit and, perhaps because my mother just passed away a couple of weeks ago, I could not help but be reminded of the very human struggles my family has recently gone through as watching this.

All of this said, I was consistently taken out of being truly and fully immersed -- for the strangest of reasons. The scope and quality of the photography, staging, and production was so extraordinary that I was often aware of the juxtaposition of this production for what, as I said, is essentially a very human, small, play. Cuarón is such a brilliant director, everything on the screen is alive and moving -- thought has gone into the pen or paperclip in the upper right hand corner of the screen that any other director would have paid no attention to. But it is almost as if he is *too good* for this. It is almost like Schindler's List direction of Waiting for Godot.

This is a movie that absolutely MUST be seen in 3D on a huge screen. The flip side of what I've been saying is that in order to get the requisite thrill and impact of this movie, such production values were absolutely essential. It adds tremendously. Plus, just as a movie buff, this is going to be (already is being) called one of the greatest technical achievements in movie history -- and even if just for that (even though there is so much more to seeing it on a huge screen in 3D) -- it is a 'must see' in 3D on the largest screen in your area for any movie lover.

I'm coming in lower than the vast majority of critics on this and scoring it an enthusiastic: A-


Great review... thank you, winetarelli. I am very sorry to hear of your mother's passing, however... my thoughts & prayers are with you.
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
Amour, 20 minutes--click. I think there's just a lot of bad filmmaking here. I don't understand the too long static shot of the audience preparing to watch the piano concerto. I don't get the husband who, regardless of how old he is, does't get on the horn to the amubulence when his wife's obviously stroking out. And then we spend another 7 minutes before he finally says, "I should call the doctor." Followed with another poorly framed and weirdly static shot of him talking to his daughter ceaselessly.

PS, 16 minutes was all we could take of the aimless Side Effect. When we got to the Repulsion moment, that we all knew was coming, that was it. I guess it goes on to be clever, but I thought even the music was bad.
J juicyMember
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Old Man:
Amour, 20 minutes--click. I think there's just a lot of bad filmmaking here. I don't understand the too long static shot of the audience preparing to watch the piano concerto. I don't get the husband who, regardless of how old he is, does't get on the horn to the amubulence when his wife's obviously stroking out. And then we spend another 7 minutes before he finally says, "I should call the doctor." Followed with another poorly framed and weirdly static shot of him talking to his daughter ceaselessly.

The end of life is not perfect.
R RothkoMember
quote:
Originally posted by winetarelli:
Gravity

For the uninitiated, a perfunctory glance suggests this is the most well reviewed major English language film in over a decade. On Rottentomatoes, it is sitting at 98% Fresh amongst all critics and 100% Fresh amongst "top critics". Buzz includes comments such as those from James Cameron that this is "the greatest movie ever set in space" and "the movie [he] has been waiting [his] whole life to see." The movies is written, directed, and produced by Alfonso Cuarón who has made several extrodinary movies, amongst them Y Tú Mama Tambien and Children of Men.

First of all, I loved it. But secondly, this is a nearly impossible movie to review. Immediately, this is the most extraordinarily well filmed movie set in space of all time. And, frankly, space or no, it is flat out one of the most expertly and wonderfully filmed movies in the history of cinema.

What makes the movie so unlike any other movie, though, is for all the technical and photographic brilliance, the movie is essentially a play. Perhaps even a minimalist play. The entire never-bested production is to provide the backdrop for a very human and in some ways very small and quiet movie -- but a movie full of emotion and 88 minutes of thrill and excitement (The entire movie is 91 minutes long).

George Clooney is great, and Sandra Bullock gives the best performance of her career. And I felt feelings... even though I've never been in their position, it really resonated with me -- how would I handle it? How could I find the ability to go on? The movie is about the triumph of the human spirit and, perhaps because my mother just passed away a couple of weeks ago, I could not help but be reminded of the very human struggles my family has recently gone through as watching this.

All of this said, I was consistently taken out of being truly and fully immersed -- for the strangest of reasons. The scope and quality of the photography, staging, and production was so extraordinary that I was often aware of the juxtaposition of this production for what, as I said, is essentially a very human, small, play. Cuarón is such a brilliant director, everything on the screen is alive and moving -- thought has gone into the pen or paperclip in the upper right hand corner of the screen that any other director would have paid no attention to. But it is almost as if he is *too good* for this. It is almost like Schindler's List direction of Waiting for Godot.

This is a movie that absolutely MUST be seen in 3D on a huge screen. The flip side of what I've been saying is that in order to get the requisite thrill and impact of this movie, such production values were absolutely essential. It adds tremendously. Plus, just as a movie buff, this is going to be (already is being) called one of the greatest technical achievements in movie history -- and even if just for that (even though there is so much more to seeing it on a huge screen in 3D) -- it is a 'must see' in 3D on the largest screen in your area for any movie lover.

I'm coming in lower than the vast majority of critics on this and scoring it an enthusiastic: A-


I am sorry about your mother. Please accept my condolences.

Thank you for the review. I have heard nothing but praise for this movie, but I was wondering whether to see it on IMAX in 3D or not.

Now I have my answer.
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
quote:
Originally posted by Juicy:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Old Man:
Amour, 20 minutes--click. I think there's just a lot of bad filmmaking here. I don't understand the too long static shot of the audience preparing to watch the piano concerto. I don't get the husband who, regardless of how old he is, does't get on the horn to the amubulence when his wife's obviously stroking out. And then we spend another 7 minutes before he finally says, "I should call the doctor." Followed with another poorly framed and weirdly static shot of him talking to his daughter ceaselessly.

The end of life is not perfect.

Most of my critism had nothing to do with the end of life. It's unrealistic dislogue and unnecessary shots.
W wine+artMember
quote:
Originally posted by The Old Man:
Amour, 20 minutes--click. I think there's just a lot of bad filmmaking here. I don't understand the too long static shot of the audience preparing to watch the piano concerto. I don't get the husband who, regardless of how old he is, does't get on the horn to the amubulence when his wife's obviously stroking out. And then we spend another 7 minutes before he finally says, "I should call the doctor." Followed with another poorly framed and weirdly static shot of him talking to his daughter ceaselessly.



I'm not sure what my review would have been if I only watched for 20 minutes, but watching the entire movie I agree with the endless praise of this excellent movie. I also agree with this movie being one of the very finest of 2012.

On a side note, I thought Ebert's review was not only spot on, but thought his last paragraph on this movie was Ebert at his finest.

I will miss his reviews.
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
quote:
Originally posted by wine+art:I'm not sure what my review would have been if I only watched for 20 minutes, but watching the entire movie I agree with the endless praise of this excellent movie. I also agree with this movie being one of the very finest of 2012.

20 minutes is over 15% of the movie. There was so much bad filmmaking up to that point that I didn't see how it could improve. Could someone address the too long static shot in the auditorium or the purpose of the too long, and poorly framed, static shot of the scene with his daughter?
robsutherlandrobsutherlandMember
quote:
Originally posted by The Old Man:
quote:
Originally posted by Juicy:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Old Man:
Amour, 20 minutes--click. I think there's just a lot of bad filmmaking here. I don't understand the too long static shot of the audience preparing to watch the piano concerto. I don't get the husband who, regardless of how old he is, does't get on the horn to the amubulence when his wife's obviously stroking out. And then we spend another 7 minutes before he finally says, "I should call the doctor." Followed with another poorly framed and weirdly static shot of him talking to his daughter ceaselessly.

The end of life is not perfect.

Most of my critism had nothing to do with the end of life. It's unrealistic dislogue and unnecessary shots.


Personally I just have a hard time watching angst, hardship, heartbreak and sorrow for hours on end. Especially if it is well done.

Spending money and time to intentionally feel terrible is usually not high on my list no matter how beautiful the wallow may be.
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
quote:
Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Master and Commander was on IFC last night and I watched most of it again.

Has anyone read the books? Are they good?

The books are very difficult. They are full of colloquialisms and 19th century sailing terminology. There is a concordance available to help, but I only made it through the first three and a half books. However, they are extremely high rated and recommended to your mileage may vary.

I actually got a model of the HMS Surprise to help me immerse myself into the era. Available here:
Handcrafted Model Ships
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
quote:
Originally posted by Parcival:
Late night travel last night made easier with some old John Cusack classics:

Better off Dead
Grosse Pointe Blank


I think the only "classics" that he was in are The Grifters and Being John Malcavitch. I'd throw The Sure Thing in there for fun. The Grifters is also the only good movie Annette Benning was in.
thelostversethelostverseMember
quote:
Originally posted by The Old Man:
quote:
Originally posted by Parcival:
Late night travel last night made easier with some old John Cusack classics:

Better off Dead
Grosse Pointe Blank


I think the only "classics" that he was in are The Grifters and Being John Malcavitch. I'd throw The Sure Thing in there for fun.


I won't argue about Better off Dead, but Grosse Pointe Blank was an excellent movie and had one of my favorite soundtracks.
J jcocktostenMember
quote:
Originally posted by thelostverse:
quote:
Originally posted by The Old Man:
quote:
Originally posted by Parcival:
Late night travel last night made easier with some old John Cusack classics:

Better off Dead
Grosse Pointe Blank


I think the only "classics" that he was in are The Grifters and Being John Malcavitch. I'd throw The Sure Thing in there for fun.


I won't argue about Better off Dead, but Grosse Pointe Blank was an excellent movie and had one of my favorite soundtracks.


For shame, Better of Dead is remarkable and fantastic. I want my two dollars. Two dollars. As an aside, the actor who played the villain from Better Off Dead was an excellent waiter in Key West for a number of years.

Oh and Grosse Point Blank is awesome
PreviousNext

Add Reply

Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×