What have you watched recently: Electric Boogaloo

youreadthat

Nightcrawler - 6/10

Interesting film and good acting but didn't work as a whole for me. It felt like it was going for the moral/ethical news element but over doing it for effect, and falling well short because in reality this was a film about a guy with severe autism or something running around LA at night. As such the first 2 acts are boring as you don't have anyone or anything to care about. The last act is good though because finally the consequences of his actions begin to hurt others severely and thus becomes quite tense, which is well done. One big disappointment was that you could see the thing with his partner happen a mile off.

Arkaron

Repo! The Genetic Opera
I had hold off on watching this for some reason as some people had recommended I should give it a try a few years ago. I can see why it could have a cult following, but man does this start dragging after the first 30 min... The premise is cool, but there is nothing is the direction that gives the film the opportunity to really become a classic of deviant or even unconventional cinema. Plus, most of the songs are extremely repetitive and uninspired. For rock musicals, stick to Metalocalypse. For modern psychedelic musicals, stick to Tokyo Tribe.

ButtersSuki

True Story with James Franco and Jonah Hill. I went to see this blind as it wasn't my choice and I hadn't heard anything about it, but I'm a little torn as to what I thought of it. It clocks in at 99mins, but it felt much shorter and I'm not sure if that's a positive or negative reflection on it, probably negative. It's kinda weird seeing the main protagonists together in anything other than a comedy and all the way through the serious dialogue scenes I was almost waiting for one of them to tell a dick joke or fart. The story is interesting, but for me to really make this work this should have been a 2 hour+ effort to allow the themes to develop. Hill is fine in his role but Franco I feel dials this in - he looks half asleep in all his scenes and but for a wink at the end he wears the same expression for the whole film. It's "grand", but had potential to be so much better. 5/10.

ScumLord

I watched Lucy the other night for the first time. I was with it right up until Morgan Freeman stood up and stated that the human brain only uses 10% of it's brain and I realised the whole film is based on a scientific myth. I know Luc knew this but it just ruined the entire film for me. As it went on I just couldn't go along with the nonsense presented to me. Being smart means you can do martial arts without any kind of training, being smart means you're stronger the film just went deeper and deeper into nonsense.

Fysh

ScumLord wrote: »

I watched Lucy the other night for the first time. I was with it right up until Morgan Freeman stood up and stated that the human brain only uses 10% of it's brain and I realised the whole film is based on a scientific myth. I know Luc knew this but it just ruined the entire film for me. As it went on I just couldn't go along with the nonsense presented to me. Being smart means you can do martial arts without any kind of training, being smart means you're stronger the film just went deeper and deeper into nonsense.

To be fair, I think you have to approach it as a knowingly ridiculous film. Bear in mind Freeman's pontificating what abilities might be unlocked as people start using more of their brains, which he freely admits is entirely speculative and based on no evidence whatsoever

adox

The Black Oil wrote: »

Runaway - enjoyed it a lot. Tom Selleck plays Jack, a sergeant in the robotics squad. He's partnered with a younger officer. They've a pretty good dynamic and crucially, don't sleep together. Pretty soon they're out chasing robots that have gone nuts. The first call involves them chasing one around a corn field. Not sure why the farmers couldn't take care of it. Later on, Jack has to wear an 'electromagnetic scatter suit' and there other bits of fun like, early versions of video voicemail, a floater, i.e. a drone, bullets that can go around corners and a police iPad, basically.

The bad guy isn't written all that well, though he is basically immoral and corrupt. There's a bit of character redemption going on for Selleck. He is a widow, is scared ****less of heights, has a young son and a domesticated robot - 'your pasta will be al dente in 2 minutes, 17 seconds.' A series 12 model, no less. Maybe like Tars from Interstellar?

Recommended. Seek it out. :cool:

That bad guy is Gene Simmons from Kiss, if I remember correctly.

ScumLord

Fysh wrote: »

To be fair, I think you have to approach it as a knowingly ridiculous film. Bear in mind Freeman's pontificating what abilities might be unlocked as people start using more of their brains, which he freely admits is entirely speculative and based on no evidence whatsoever

Meh, I don't like having to do the whole suspension of disbelieve with movies anymore. The writers need to put in the effort to make a realistic story not just pluck any old nonsense out of thin air. I find most films disappointing, I'm probably being unreasonable but I'm just completely bored with fantasy, I want realism. Or at least fantasy that makes an effort.

Fysh

ScumLord wrote: »

Meh, I don't like having to do the whole suspension of disbelieve with movies anymore. The writers need to put in the effort to make a realistic story not just pluck any old nonsense out of thin air. I find most films disappointing, I'm probably being unreasonable but I'm just completely bored with fantasy, I want realism. Or at least fantasy that makes an effort.

If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't work for you and there's not a lot more to it really. I hate being told to just "suspend my disbelief" or "leave my brain at the door" - if it gets to the point where I'm having to consciously think about it, the film-makers have failed. I'm with you there, 100%.

Having said that, for me at least, Lucy was in the same boat as Jupiter Ascending. I might have been lucky and caught them both in just the right mood, but something about the tone of both of them meant I was able to just sit back and enjoy them as a ludicrous blast of action silliness.

youreadthat

There are three good things about Lucy;

1) Looking at Scarlett Johansson.

2) It's not long.

3) At least you're not watching Sucker Punch or something by Adam Sandler.

e_e

youreadthat wrote: »

There are three good things about Lucy;

1) Looking at Scarlett Johansson.

2) It's not long.

3) At least you're not watching Sucker Punch or something by Adam Sandler.

It's also lovably wacky and one of the best edited and shot action movies of the past few years.

Makes me a little sad that a lot of people are so resistant to the film's sublime ridiculousness. A lot of people have the idea that it's a dumb film trying to be smart but it's the opposite if anything, very witty and self-deprecating about its own absurd ambition and the way it has the balls to invoke 2001: A Space Odyssey/The Tree of Life. :P

Harry Palmr

Good to see The Train getting more Electric Boogaloo thumbs up. Fascinating clip above there, alas that scene would now be done on an Apple Mac. Burt Lancaster performing his own stunts was always a joy to watch.

The New Centurions 1972 Dir Richard Fleisher.

Based on the novel by ex cop Joseph Wambaugh, the drama about an intake of cops from the academy is a pretty good look at the everyday travails of the job as they plug the gaps in the fabric of a failing society. George C Scott and Stacy Keach are both excellent as older officer and his prodigy on the mean street of East LA. The only bum note is the ending as, alas you could see coming a mile off.

johnny_ultimate

ScumLord wrote: »

Meh, I don't like having to do the whole suspension of disbelieve with movies anymore. The writers need to put in the effort to make a realistic story not just pluck any old nonsense out of thin air. I find most films disappointing, I'm probably being unreasonable but I'm just completely bored with fantasy, I want realism. Or at least fantasy that makes an effort.

Thing is, film by its very nature is a suspension of disbelief. For the language and form of cinema to work you have to give yourself over to what is, in essence, an artificial world, with its own rules and logic.

I think it's limiting to say writers need to adhere to a 'realistic story'. Some films work so well because they dive full in into their preposterous, bizarre internal logic and design - why should filmmakers be tied to boring old reality when they have the opportunity to indulge their imagination? That's one of the great opportunities of cinema after all! Sure, countless films work precisely because of their adherence to something more realistic, or scientific principles, or visual groundedness. Others work best when they do the exact opposite. Naturally, it's possible to go too far in one direction or the other - a film can become disappointingly dry when it sticks to 'realism', whereas others can disappear up their own silliness.

Basically: I think saying all or even most films need to adhere to one form or philosophy is indeed a shortcut to frequent disappointment. Filmmakers always will and should explore the wild and fantastical alongside the more realistic - they'd be wasting many of the opportunities inherent in the medium otherwise

fin12

Has anyone seen the Amy Winehouse documentary? Is it worth going seeing it in the cinema?

Mickeroo

fin12 wrote: »

Has anyone seen the Amy Winehouse documentary? Is it worth going seeing it in the cinema?

Thread on it here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057455536

Most people seemed to like it quite a bit.

NachoBusiness

ButtersSuki wrote: »

True Story with James Franco and Jonah Hill. I went to see this blind as it wasn't my choice and I hadn't heard anything about it, but I'm a little torn as to what I thought of it. It clocks in at 99mins, but it felt much shorter and I'm not sure if that's a positive or negative reflection on it, probably negative. It's kinda weird seeing the main protagonists together in anything other than a comedy and all the way through the serious dialogue scenes I was almost waiting for one of them to tell a dick joke or fart. The story is interesting, but for me to really make this work this should have been a 2 hour+ effort to allow the themes to develop. Hill is fine in his role but Franco I feel dials this in - he looks half asleep in all his scenes and but for a wink at the end he wears the same expression for the whole film. It's "grand", but had potential to be so much better. 5/10.

Seen it during the week and yeah, would agree with pretty much all you've said

It's well acted, directed, paced etc but you just feel unsatisfied, like you were told part of the story, rather the complete on. Maybe that's the way it had to be. Would have to read the book the film was based on and watch a docu on the killer to know if that is indeed the case.

Something tells me be as hard believing anything this journalist has to say, as it would be the killer. Just found a 48 Hours episode on Christian Longo, so I'll start there. That's one thing about the film, it makes you want to know more about what the hell went on here, with both of them.

ButtersSuki

Anyone seen any movies lately or is this now the CGI thread? :rolleyes:

fin12

Just watched taken 3 again, love the taken films. Liam Neeson is Class.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Anyone seen any movies lately or is this now the CGI thread? :rolleyes:

I watched a documentary about CGI.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I watched a documentary about CGI.

Actually, speaking of, saw Side by Side recently! Documentary examining the film/digital debate, goes into the CGI stuff a bit, has interviews with Lucas and Cameron and

they're fully in favour of it

:pac:

I enjoyed it, if you were well into your techie bizniss though it might be a bit boring/outdated maybe.

tricky D

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Good to see The Train getting more Electric Boogaloo thumbs up. Fascinating clip above there, alas that scene would now be done on an Apple Mac. Burt Lancaster performing his own stunts was always a joy to watch.

Just finished it and 10 thumbs up here too. Hits the spots just about perfectly. Some of the dynamite train wrecking scenes reminded me of Tora, Tora, Tora.

johnny_ultimate

Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters
The biopic is often one of the driest, most inherently limited forms around - and Paul Schrader's extraordinary take on the life of Yukio Mishima goes to show how exciting it can be when you add some ambition and imagination to the mix. It is an eccentric portrait of an eccentric man.

To really get under the skin of the artist, author and one-time filmmaker, Schrader adopts an inventive structure. An account of Mishima's almost surreal final day is the overall linking narrative. This is supplemented by two things: a series of flashbacks illuminating specific chapters in his life, and a trio of condensed adaptations of his books. It's a refreshingly dynamic setup, all three sections feeding into each without overstating the links. It encourages Schrader to experiment with form. The flashbacks are shot in monochrome, while the 'final hours' sequences are shot in a muted but fetching colour. It's the adaptations where Schrader goes really wild though. Shot on sound stages, all three adaptations embrace different colour palettes - hypnotically vibrant and endearingly garish colour schemes at that. The Temple of the Golden Pavilion, for example, is unsurprisingly presented with gorgeous autumnal yellows, oranges and reds, while Kyoko's House is dominated by neon pink. It's a setup that allows for lots of visually imaginative flourishes, and the theatrical stylings fit nicely with Mishima's own fondness for the stage (as memorably captured in his fascinating film Patriotism - the production of which is briefly recounted here).

While Schrader's film does cover a pretty broad timescale - Mishima's childhood to his death - he skillfully sidesteps the misguided attempts at condensing a life into 120 minutes that many, many other biopics fail at. Instead, he chooses to explore a handful of themes and personality traits. The author's political stance and his pretty much disturbed obsession with achieving a 'beautiful death' are probably the most prominent of these. Schrader understands there's a certain irrationality to Mishima, but he probes deep nonetheless. What's ultimately most remarkable about Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters is the way its themes are allowed germinate through the very form of the film - in exploring both the man and the art so directly, we're left with an uncommonly illuminating and complex portrait of a one-of-a-kind artist. An electrifying Phillip Glass soundtrack and a dominating lead performance from Ken Ogata (Imamura's great Vengeance is Mine and Ballad of Narayama collaborator) don't hurt either

pixelburp

This thread has become seriously derailed by CGI discussion; I'm sure it's fascinating but it's really clogging up the ability to see what people have recently watched :P

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I might just head over to the off topic/random chat thread to see if anyone's watched anything good lately.

Sad Professor

I've split the CGI discussion into its own thread.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057466220

TerrorFirmer

Watched the Long Riders (1980) last night. Good film, and remarkable for the fact that they used real-life siblings to portray the various brothers involved in the James-Younger gang - Keith and David Carradine, Stacey and James Keach, Randy and Dennis Quaid. Even the lesser roles of Robert and Charles Ford were acted out by brothers. Well worth a watch.

ForstalDave

Zardoz not the worst movie ever needed a much bigger clothing budget though

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Ex Machina.

Watched this last night. I don't watch that much Sci Fi so it's possible it's all been done before. Even with my limited knowledge I'm sure I've seen the "robot with feelings" story done once or twice, but still, I thought this was very well done. You kind of know for the start that Oscar Isaac's character isn't being straight with Domhnall Gleeson but it didn't actually end up going where I thought it would. It looked like they were going where I thought it was going for a minute but then it went somewhere else.

I'm a massive fan of Alicia Vikander, I think she's brilliant, and my opinion of her is unchanged after seeing this. Also, given the recent derailment of this thread by CGI chat, I loved how low key the effects were here. I watched the making of bits on the disc after and Garland mentions it's a relatively small budget film so they had to keep things simple and they did, but they did it so well. I'd actually loved to have seen more than the few very brief behind the scenes bits.

Glebee

This is 40(2012): Really enjoyed this comedy which really surprised me. Maybe a bit on the long side but a defo 8/10 and worth a look.


St Elmos Fire(1985): A classic in my book, why dont they make films like this anymore. Its a wonder they have not done a remake. Ok no real story but there is something nice about it. Maybe im being nostilgic. 8/10


When Worlds Collide(1951): Christ I used to love watching these scf fi films when I was a young lad on BBC2 of a Wednesday evening and when I saw this pop up on Netflix I could not resist. End of the world stuff but I love it.:D

All the above on Netflix.

fin12

Glebee wrote: »

This is 40(2012): Really enjoyed this comedy which really surprised me. Maybe a bit on the long side but a defo 8/10 and worth a look.


St Elmos Fire(1985): A classic in my book, why dont they make films like this anymore. Its a wonder they have not done a remake. Ok no real story but there is something nice about it. Maybe im being nostilgic. 8/10


When Worlds Collide(1951): Christ I used to love watching these scf fi films when I was a young lad on BBC2 of a Wednesday evening and when I saw this pop up on Netflix I could not resist. End of the world stuff but I love it.:D

All the above on Netflix.

Didn't like This is 40 but St Elmos Fire is a great film, Ya I love all those 80s films like pretty in pick.

Glebee

fin12 wrote: »

Didn't like This is 40 but St Elmos Fire is a great film, Ya I love all those 80s films like pretty in pink.

Thats next on my list:D