smibbo: (Default)
I love movie quote games. so I made a new one. The following are all from animated movies.

So she says, "Uh-uh, You don't have a challenge, you need a challenge." So now I'm challenged, all right- I'm challenged to HOLD ONTO MY LUNCH MONEY! because of all the big mooses who wanna pound me, 'cause they think I'm a shrimpy dork who thinks he's smarter than them! nut I don't think I'm smarter, I just do the stupid homework! If everyone else JUST DID THE STUPID HOMEWORK, they could move up a grade and get pounded, too! Is there any more coffee?

A: Head down!
B: Head down!
A: Arms in!
B: Arms in!
A: Knees apart!
B: Knees apart!.. wait, knees apart?

A: What's happening here?
B: We're both in barrels. That's the extent of my knowledge.

Ah, you're awake. I was hoping you'd cry out in your sleep, then I would have bitten your head off to silence you

Won't they be impressed, I am a ge-ni-us! See how I transform this old rat inTO a most deLIGHTful hat!

A: Well, you know, whatever kind of food comes out of a wazoo, I really don't think we're interested in eating.
B: I don't know. The guy's making a lot of sense to me. I think we should listen.
C: Yeah. I'm okay with wazoo food there.
A: No, you're not!

A: Nothing. Just... a little trouble with daddy
B: You mean Dad's in trouble, or Dad is the trouble?
A: I mean, either he's *in* trouble, or he's *going* to be.

There's nothing sadder than a puppet without a ghost, especially the kind with red blood running through them.

Nobody cares for you anymore. You're tarnished and you're filthy.

A: Shut up! Don't order me around!
B: We were just worried.
A: Why do you always have to try and save me? I could handle it on my own. Yeah, I admit I've gotten beaten before, but I won't always be on the receiving end, you hear that? You understand?

B: what did you say?
A: I said, NO. I'M. NOT! I hate that cold house on the hill! And how I was always hungry, AND HOW YOU BEAT ME!
B: He's lying!
C: Shut UP!
A: NO! not this time....

A: don't believe me?! You can ask the cat!
B: the... cat...? [gulps] Okaaaay I think I'm just gonna go
A: You're. Not. LISTENING!
B: Thats. Cuz. You're. CRAZY!

A: You are secretly funny.
B: Not a stick in the mud?
A: W-well I was...
B: Say it.
A: Co...
B: Say it.
A: All right... You're not exactly...
B: I can't hear you, I'm sorry. What?
A: ...a *complete* stick DEEP in the mud.

A:Ow! Excuse me, pardon me.
B: Excuse me, pardon me.
C: Look mommy. Another turkey.
smibbo: (Default)
This movie does not have a story. This movie is a character study. Except very little about the character is concrete. Most of what you know about Nina is pretty standard and fairly plain. Everything else is insinuation, allusion, implication and visual underlining.

I guess for some people, that counts as "subtlety" but it doesn't for me. "subtle" is when something is said lightly, barely or faintly. Its still stated, as a fact, but its not pushed in your face or explained in great detail. I like subtle. What I don't like is implying things (via outside sources) and then proceeding as if that's all you need to know. No,when I meet someone, I want to know who they are through THEIR experiences, words and deeds, not other people mentioning of their supposed characteristics. When I watch a character, in a human drama (as opposed to pure fantasy which has its own rules) then I expect to gather a certain amount of understanding via that character itself. Hearing other people gossip about that character doesn't work for me. My assumption is that gossip is gossip. Hearing STORIES about the character might work, as storytelling is often a psychological tool for presenting uncomfortable truths about someone in a context that allows me to draw proper conclusions as well as possible motivations and designs. Having people stand around gossiping? That just makes me wonder about the people gossiping.

Mostly, the problem I had with Black Swan was that it wasn't subtle at all. It was all there; visual metaphor, insinuated comments, emotional color-matching, Hitchcockian flash-frames, foreshadowing, "good/evil" light changes, even the use of handheld shakey camera work (which I hate) as well as some pretty decent CGI. There was nothing subtle about it. The reviews I've read rave about all this as ART and blah blah blah. I think that's because of the name ARONOFSKY!!!!

But without an actual story (and I don't mean he used a different timeline or went non-linear or anything so "edgy") it just seems... lacking. Natalie Portman is amazing as are all the actors, but without a definitive story behind them, it seems a lot of wasted talent.
smibbo: (Default)
Just watched Ink

Now, the story of the making of the movie is interesting; Indie group couldn't get financing through usual means (butt-kissing and bowing to investors whims) make movie digitally for $250K then try for professional distribution. Can't get it (major distributors claim movie is too "niche") so it only opens in 6 theatres across the nation. However, gets pirated and within a week or so becomes second most popular download. Amazon can't keep it in stock. Makers decide to go with the piracy, put donate button on movie site. Welcome the exposure.

So, we got a copy and watched it (in stages... *sigh*)

Okay review starts here:

The movie is amazing in some ways, a drag in some ways but fascinating in any case.

I don't want to give spoilers, and I think this kind of story is best approached with little fore-knowledge. The only thing you need to know is the setting is that there is the "good" dream people and the "bad" dream people. Ink has a little girl as his sacrifice. The "good" dream people are fighting the "bad" dream people.

Anyway... the effects were fun, cool and not overdone for the most part. The film rendering was in high contrast, high color saturation with glow effect on top, making it surreal without being annoying. Going into dreamtime is obvious by the lowering of the color saturation which oddly sharpens things while leeching the life out of it.
The story was odd in that the first half of it is almost entirely background stage setting which seems a bit disjointed and drags in places. The second half is where everything really moves along and the movie shines.
I found the first few fight scenes rather annoying as the camera shakes in order to hide lack of effects and bad choreography and they are entirely too long.
The script is fairly good although some of the lines were choppy and needed smoothing out; the actors were sometimes clearly struggling against unnaturalness. But overall the story is good; tightly paced, conversant and believable. THe acting was quite fine, except, obviously the parts where the script needed smoothing out but that was just a line or two here and there.
THe music was not very good for the first half of the movie, I was surprised when it very much improved during the second half.
The editing was PHENOMENAL. The movement was tight, the cuts were sharp and the action often seemed more lively than blocking would have made it. Lots of creativity in the editing; I was much impressed. When you see the movie, you'll understand why I stress how good the editing was. I always notice sub-par editing but good editing usually means I don't even think about it. This movie, however, relies heavily on a combination of good editing and lighting. It works beautifully.
The sound - thankfully - was fine. I hate watching cheap movies only because sound is nearly always sacrificed for money. This one wasn't. I didn't have to notice it at all. Thank gawd.

The world and theme of the movie was pretty nifty, it wasn't too complicated and it wasn't too silly. I think some people might find the titular character's costume/makeup to be overdone or something but I think it's workable in the confines of the story.
Mostly, the acting was just right, and it was awfully nice to see a movie with "real" looking people. Make no mistake, I don't think anyone was ugly or even plain. Just nice to see one person with a hawk nose, one person with pear-shaped body, one person with dreadlocks, a short person, a pudgy person etc. Only one person in the whole movie was "movie star" looks and it rather fit the character.

I think I'd be hesitant to urge just anyone to see it; the unevenness of the entire movie means some people will have too much difficulty suspending disbelief and other people will be annoyed with the minute problems. Both J and I were easily able to overlook what we thought were minor problems, especially in light of the more shining moments of the film; the last fight scene, the creepy-as-shit "bad" guys, the "rhythm of life" scene, the cut-aways to dreamtime. I think the fantasy element of the movie (the dreamtime world) was clearcut and easy to believe. They didn't get too fancy with it, although I do think they played with the effects more than was necessary in the first half to set the tone. The "light/dark" aspect was hammered home a little too much for my taste but that's just me.

Overall, its' an excellent movie for some people. If you like "Dark City" you'll probably like this a lot. Assuming you can be okay with minor obstacles. Hell if you like "Hellraiser" 1 or 2 you'll probably like this movie too.

Be warned, the bad guys are actually pretty damned creepy. I know some people might have nightmares about them. Because that's what they were.
smibbo: (Default)
It was good.

We saw it at the IMAX which I highly recommend. I was never a Superman fan (comics) but I loved the Reeves movies. This is an excellent homage to those. The acting, the acting was above and beyond the call of duty: everyone was absolutely amazing. Especially Brandon Roth. He was PERFECT.

It's a very touching tale too. Seriously.
smibbo: (Default)
Immortal (French but filmed in English)

This is one of the four movies that was made by "digital Back-lot" that is, live actors were filmed entirely in front of blue (or in this case green) screen and the backgrounds and additional characters were CGIed in.
There are actually only three live actors in the movie (that I saw anyway) the rest were ALL CGI.
Now, the one thing you need to understand going in is that the parity of live acting versus CGI characters is actually symbolic. There's a reason why some of the CGI characters look stunningly real and others look ridiculously fake. It's because in this future, people are becoming more and more "enhanced" so therefore there are a lot of "humans" running around who are to some degree or another cyborgs. Apparently there was another species as well - Daiyaks - who were on the planet, but not anymore. You see why later on in the film.

Our main characters are Jill (live actor, appears human but not human in film), Nikopol (live actor, completely human; no cyborg parts), Dr Turner (live actor, some cyborg) and Horus (CGI, definitely not human). There's some lesser characters - all CGI - but although their parts are important, they themselves aren't important at all, they merely further the sequence of events which would most likely have happened anyway.

Part of what I liked about this film was mentioned but not really doted on: the concept of predestination versus free will. All the characters except Jill believe themselves to be acting with free will however the events that unfold show there is really little free will unless the gods are not interested in messing with you. Therefore, an interesting mixture of predestination and free will is played out here. NO one, except Nikopol either notices nor cares really. Jill finds herself to be swept along events that hint at unravelling her identity yet she seems to accept this mostly because she has no memory of anything else. It is believed she is in fact not older than a few months. When you find out you are a fully functioning adult who's only been alive for 3 months, I suppose you would in fact accept your fate as given provided you are given answers along the way. Whereas many main characters with unknown or lost identities are usually portrayed as being confused, distraught and/or desperate, Jill is none. She is curious, open and yearning for answers but there is a solid core of self-security in her as well. She is swept along with events but she never seems to question too hard or become a screaming child, demanding answers with threats behind her. No, she asks "what's going on?" quite frequently but without tears anger or tantrums. Jill always seems to have a sense of purpose and grim commitment to see things through, whatever "things" might be.

Nikopol is a man who was a terrorist or rebel who was "imprisoned" in stasis and accidently(?) awakened early. He recites Baudelaire poetry in English which is jarring, yet lovely considering his circumstances. If anyone is freaking out over ignorance of events, it is definitely Nikopol. This is understandable, however, seeing as he is the one person least in control over what happens or even his own body. He confronts his situation over and over with the frustration of his powerlessness but he seems to know even as he is screaming and punching that his anger is pointless. It is his only free-will act though so he is a very sympathetic character. He is as honorable as he is allowed to be (which isn't much really) and he tries, but his actions are simply not allowed to be of any use to anyone throughout the story. Perhaps it is symbolic of traditional gender stereotypes that Jill accepts her lack of independance with grim determination but Nikopol does not, but it is done rather smoothly and almost poetically. Actually, that's rather a literal observation as it is Nikopol who seems to have the more emotional and poetical soul. Whereas Jill is nearly an observer in her own life, almost a detached participant, Nikopol is the emotional child, literally punching his frustrations out one minute then placidly being caught along the tide (literally) in a dreamy, poetic (literally) way. Jill seems to represent a kind of intelligent logical acceptance ("well if I can't affect what's happening, at least I can find out what is going to happen") always searching for answers but accepting whatever little satisfaction they bring whereas Nikopol is more the emotional passionate rebel, fighting against everything even while knowing how utterly futile his fight is. They are perfectly cast - him the not-forgotten hero of a failed revolution fighting events and her the barely born innocent vessel searching for understanding.

The story itself is pretty damned good. Nothing outrageous, just a bit of a mix of futurism and mythology. Nothing many other speculative fiction writers haven't tried before. It's well done, to the extent that I'd love to have the graphic novels trilogy that brought this about.

The artwork is SUPERB. If you see this movie for nothing else, watch it for the amazing artwork and beautful animations (not the CGI characters but the backgrounds and inanimate objects)

Unlike Casshern, where I felt somewhat overwhelmed and lost by the story yet completely moved by the beauty of the film itself, Immortal is just as beautiful with a good story too.
smibbo: (Default)

The review in the IMDB makes this sound like a fairly straight-forward psych-horror/thriller, but that is misleading. The film is extremely slow, and the translation, I think, is lacking in cohesion. Half the time I wasn't sure what the hell the man was talking about, because some of it sounded almost like poetry. Baph was able to illuminate for me.

The camera work was crappy. Lighting and sound were fine. No special effects that I noticed.

The characters were interesting but the story and plotline were weak as hell.

I would have liked a bit more about the tunnels below Tokyo especially when he made it to the mountains. The holes in the plot were too big and too ignored. There was no attempt to explain certain stupid mistakes. This violation of the suspension of disbelief was hard to overcome. The subplot of misdirection (Or reality, depending upon how you looked at it) was muddled and completely unexplored. He states some vague ramblings about how it could all be illusory but that is about it.

There ws also absolutely no explanation as to why he was such an idiot. I mean, yeah all the poetry about finding the cause of terror was interesting but it didn't absolve him from being a total moron about what was happening.

No explanation as to who all those other people were either.

Very murky on the reality factor, I guess. The connections were sloppily done too.

Overall, it was badly done. Could have been a nice flick, but it wasn't. It wasn't bad enough to be campy either. It was just rushed, sloppy and poorly executed. I wonder who is Shimizou's editor and producer? They really need to wake the hell up. As much as I liked Ju-On, he still just can't quite get the hang of proper editing and cinematic presence. Pace is everything in a psych-horror/thriller like this and Shimizou just doesn't quite pace right for my tastes.

Being as this was filmed in 8 days, you have to give him credit for a professionally done package overall. But frankly, I think it's pretty obvious it was filmed in 8 days. A reviewer likens him to Cronenberg and I can see the similarity, but Cronenberg wouldn't have sat still for that time-wasting bullshit, he understands the importance of editing and pacing and camera-work's effect on character development.

Overall, it's a Cronenberg wannabe flick that really isn't worth wasting time with. I went away with nothing of value.
smibbo: (Default)
"Sound of Thunder" - based on a Ray Bradbury story.
-totally miss this one, d00d. I usually don't give commands in my reviews but I have to say, if you are a fan of the story, this will not only disappoint, it will anger you. If you aren't a fan, don't know the story, you'll still hate this piece of crap. It just plain sucks.

"A History of Violence" - Cronenberg, Lite. Not bad but not what you want.

"Aeon Flux" - if you LOVED the 'toon, you won't like this. It's an antiseptic version really. Not bad, pretty good action flick in its own right but really, nothing like the original. Don't watch the extras; they're really just gushing about the damn movie and they aren't particularly erudite, just go on and on about how great the movie is and how it will change the way you look at life! Get a grip... it's a good movie, worth seeing but it's not like the cartoon and it's not about to change your life. Very pretty too.

"Saw II" - ehhh. Very gory. Extremely gory. No tension though. No real conflict or philosophical musing... just a lot of the usual - blood and gore and a bunch of assholes. The ending was okay... you could see it coming a mile away but it was badly executed.

"Jarhead" - another ehhh. It was okay but damn so badly edited. I was kind of amazed at some of the deletion choices. The relationship between the two main characters was barely touched and yet it should have been central. The problem is, I think it's supposed to be the story of a guy who's reality changed because of his experience in Desert Shield/Storm but it really didn't show it much. Instead you get a lot of slow footage of the terrain, which is mostly not pretty. It dragged a bit because of that. It just didn't have the impact I think it was going for. It did make me want to read the book. I think most Jarheads will feel a little cheated at this.

"Skins" - nice little independant flick. Somewhat amatuerish but that's forgiveable. The kid actors frankly sucked but I suspect he didn't have a lot of money and not a lot of choice. I would have liked a little more background on the relationship between the brothers BEFORE the downhill slide but I got the picture fairly well. The ending was cheesy as hell, but bearable. It was kind of a basic picture. Not bad, not great, certainly decent and worth watching.

"Tim Burton's Corpse Bride" -
Animation; awesome.
Story; not bad, but not great.
Characters; not very deeply known, too many of them and none cute (except maybe the bride herself) and only a few likeable.
Music; utterly forgettable. I don't know why they bothered having songs at all. Frankly, I think Danny's starting to coast.
smibbo: (Default)
Recently viewed:

In the Realms of the Unreal

Old Boy

In the Realms of the Unreal

This was a delightful film. It is a documentary about an "outsider" artist named Henry Darger. His massive body of work alone is impressive. His self-taught style is impressive. His skewed vision and fantastical storytelling is impressive. The story of Henry itself, however, is a little sad (you have been warned). I personally felt different from everyone else and found the "tragedy" of Henry to be inspiring and uplifting; living your dream on your own terms JUST for yourself, to me, is a wonderful accomplishment. I understand why everyone else felt saddened by it, but I just didn't. Henry was portrayed as being perfectly happy with how he did so why would I feel sad? Besides, his work lives on and we are all the richer for it.
That said, the film itself is lovely. Yu (the director) incorporates different techniques to highlight the different realities of the story with great effect. There is a narrator voice reading from Henry's diaries (It isn't Henry himself but the words are definitely all his) there is a narrator - a child - speaking for the overall view of Henry and his creations, and there are people who knew him to some extent or another who speak their minds. There is no confusion, ever, about what words are whose and the readings from Henry's own words are well-chosen; often underscoring the events in his life that inspired his writing and other times reflecting his fantasies and emotions. That Henry so unabashedly gave himself a starring role in his fiction is hardly concerning, seeing as how he journals himself as a saint oftentimes. Besides, his fiction was so fantastic, who could resist the opportunity to make themselves a knight gallant in such a world?
And therein is something unsaid but immediately recognizable by those of us in the know: Henry was a Game Master of the higest order. His world, his characters, his mythology and history... all were meticulously scribed and no pertinant details left out. The only sorrow I could have for Henry is that he was not blessed to live during a time of table-top gaming. He would have been the emporer of Game Designers. The film is wonderful and subsequent researched has shown me that Yu has not been amiss in her portrayal. Everything you could know about Henry is here and that is unfortunatly pitifully little. Everything you could know about Henry's art without actually seeing it in person is here...
Yu takes the liberty of taking some of Henry's art a step further and I can't see as even an art purist would object... it gives a whimsical air to the movie that keeps it from being too dry during the "talky" moments. Thankfully, there's only so much to say... nothing could begin to compare with just the looking at his work and the hearing of it read. I hope I can someday find a tome on Henry's work for my own.
Until then, what a wonderful introduction!

Old Boy

This was one of the most DISTURBING films I have ever seen. In fact, I think it may actually be THE most disturbing film I've ever seen. There's only a little gore, but it's wrenching. THere's not too much violence but it's upsetting. There's one sex scene and one nudity flash as well but.... well anyway.

One word of warning in particular: do not try to cuddle up with someone when you watch this. Best to watch with someone you care about, but do not get too close. It has the bizarre effect of making human contact seem mildly repulsive after watching it. Trust me on that.

By god, it was good though. The cinematography was excellent, the acting was top notch (although I did think the main jailer.... wasshisname.... was a bit melodramatic then again I think that was intentional) the lighting was SUPERB and the sets, costumes and everything else was perfect. I swear nothing seemed out of place in this film. I was impressed with the attention to detail by and large.
More than anything, such a simple plot, such a s unique story, such a complext series of events, and obviously not a humongous hollywood budget and I can't find anything subpar in the entire thing. Maybe I was too mesmerized by the characters and story. Believe me, the few things I thought was wrong with it turned out to be a joke on me.

Okay, yes, I had a feeling I knew the "surprise" and I wasn't far off in either case but the way it unfolded was still... harrowing. And even though I suspected, this time I wasn't sure, I hoped to hell that theory was wrong and I had other possibilities in mind too. I wasn't at all sure I knew what was up and that made a BIG difference to me. I suspected, but I was still horrified. Over and over.

The total emotional experience reminded me a bit of Saw and Se7en. Except this was much more intense. Really.


smibbo: (Default)

April 2017

23 4 5678


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 01:59 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios