A few collected stats about my movie-watching this January:
Total films watched: 42
Films I'd never seen before: 15
Number of foreign (non-English) films: 4 (seems very low?)
Number of Canadian films: 3
Themes:
Some participants will select movies based on a particular theme, I didn't have an all-encompassing one, but there were a handful of mini-themes and themed movie marathons.
-X-Men series was inspired by a movie marathon that I could not attend, so I watched them on my own
-Douglas Coupland double bill - Everything's Gone Green and Souvenir of Canada
-Love & Infidelity trio - Last Night, Closer, Conversations With Other Women
-Star Wars Original Trilogy Marathon - thanks to the boys for coming over to geek out
-Silent Film Sunday - Steamboat Bill Jr. and Nosferatu
-Vampire Movie Marathon hosted by Mike, which also partially inspired me to watch Nosferatu
A number of my other selections were a direct result of other participants posting reviews and piquing my curiosity or reminding me of a classic or certain directors. I also downloaded some of the films people reviewed, and got asked to borrow 2 of the films I'd rated.
I must reiterate, it was so much fun! Now I've got insane amounts of TV shows to catch up on :P
Recap of my Reviews:
My 2nd time seeing the final HP movie. I feel Yates does better with each one, or maybe it's because this time I finally read the books. It should be noted that Deathly Hallows Part 1 is much more enjoyable when you're immediately able to follow up with Part 2, otherwise the characters seems plucked out of their natural environment (eg. Hogwarts) for an entire movie. It's amazing how much Yates did with 2 hours of almost exclusively murky grey imagery and in my opinion he faithfully adapted the story. My favourite HP movie of them all.
Mild spoiler: My favourite shot is still when they soar over London on the dragon, now that's how I want to see the city some day!
4/5
Bit of Hollywood fluff staring Sandra Dee's and Bobby Darrin's pretty faces about love, well-meaning deceit, and a case of mistaken identity. It's pretty cute and has a certain charm, not sure if that's because it was made 45 years ago. If it were a contemporary film perhaps I'd be trying to blow my brains out? Either way, if it ever airs on TCM again, it's worth a peek.
3/5
First of the X-Men series that saw the arrival of Wolverine and Rogue at Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters (did I get that right?), it served to set up and introduce the key figures out of the Mutants and establish the premise and reasons for homo sapiens and Mutants being on the brink of war. Again, this is a movie that's best watched with all the others, having grown up surrounded by boy chatter about the X-Men but never picked up one of the comics myself, I needed the intro and cliff notes but found the movie average overall (enjoyable, but average).
3/5
Scientist William Striker has a complicated agenda that creates a catalyst for anti-mutant measures from the Government, has him attacking Professor X's school, and attempting to replicate Cerebro (a machine housed in the basement of the school) for purposes of mind control. All this in 2 hours and 15 mins, which is either not enough time, or too much depending how you look at it. Striker's is not the only story in here either, there are many sub-plots amongst the Mutants and after a while it's just too much. My brain starts to get tired and then the movie won't even end despite my inability to take in any more plot points. When you stop to lay out the entire story, it's actually not a bad tale, but the packaging fails somehow. I'd rather they did this over 2 movies (I would actually gladly watch this over 4 hours in order to get more detail), or simplified it somehow.
2.5/5
Young love a la Cameron Crowe... Lloyd is smitten with Diane, who is clearly out of his league. But his kind heart and genuine affection win her over anyway, and Diane turns out to be truly lovely (if not weirdly close with her father) but with some complications in her life -- including said father who's at the same time a fraud, and thinks she can do better than Lloyd. The story is simple but engaging, and rings true in many aspects (if not a little overblown, but then again, aren't high school love stories -- onscreen and off -- a little overblown?)
3/5
Oh, the colourful splendor that is Baz Luhrmann! Especially set in the world of competitive ballroom dancing! And especially set in Baz Luhrmann's over the top world of competitive ballroom dancing!! Scott Hastings is poised to win the Pan Pacific Grand Prix but he just wants to dance his own showy steps. His defiant ways cause him to lose his partner, but in the process a beginner dancer from the studio named Fran encourages him to follow his dream and dance his own steps with her instead in the competition. Lies, deceit, meddling from crazy family members ensue, but in the end will Scott believe in himself and will love triumph??? Ha ha, it's not my first time seeing Strictly Ballroom but it still got some chuckles out of me. Plus who can resist that art direction? Tho I wonder how many bottles of platinum blond hair dye they went through during production of this film?
2.5/5 (It's something I have to be in the mood to watch, I'm sure I'd give it a 3 on another day)
A "cure" is found for the Mutant gene causing controversy amongst Mutants. Magneto rallies "the brotherhood" along with Jean Grey returned as The Phoenix to declare war on those who created the cure and those who would use it as a weapon to disarm Mutants. I say this time and again, I liked X3, better than the first 2. It's far from perfect, but the story is just complex enough without losing me, and the moral complexities are well exemplified. I gotta ask tho, is it just a product of the movies, or is Rogue really such a ninny? I never really noticed before but her character and abilities were so cool in the first movie, but by X3 she's become quite pathetic. Also after staring at The Phoenix for so long, I need to get me that hair colour stat!
3/5 (I'm tempted to give it 3.5...the effects were really quite good when it first came out...)
This Hitchcock thriller stars Cary Grant as a former jewel thief who is getting blamed for a recent rash of robberies in the French Riviera. Grace Kelly is the rich American heiress who is both intrigued and suspicious of him. The movie kicks off with some beautiful aerial shots in a not-so-suspenseful chase scene, and unfortunately that is one of the problems that persists in the film...it's really not that suspenseful. There's an abundance of witty lines and character-revealing conversations but overall I never got the sense that Grant was ever in much danger or peril despite being pursued by the police. That said, I still enjoyed the way their relationship played out and I did want to find out 'what happens next?' Good but not my favourite Htichcock film (and definitely not as good as I remembered it).
2.5/5
There's something to be said for a good opening credit sequence, and you can usually count on Fincher for that. Also, who the heck thought I'd start becoming a Trent Reznor fan? haha This movie is based on the book of the same name by Stieg Larsson, about a journalist investigating the disappearance of a girl in the 60's with the help of a troubled but fierce young computer hacker, which leads them to uncover more corruption and wrongdoing than they could ever imagine. There's much to say about this movie, the Swedish original, the story etc. I've had multiple discussions already. Fincher's version is gritty and intense as expected, Rooney Mara does an amazing job, and there is a lot of story to digest and many a moment that will make you flinch. I've never read the books but I've seen the Swedish trilogy of movies. Despite the good job Fincher has done on the English version, I would have to say I still prefer the Swedish version of Dragon Tattoo by Niels Arden Oplev better. There was a greater reliance on detailed storytelling there rather than editing tricks (both picture and sound), there's an art to the latter too, but in this case I prefer getting to the meaty part of the story. Also I prefer the way Mikael and Lisbeth's relationship is depicted in the Swedish version, where the emphasis was on friendship. Either way, this film is worth seeing and sure to generate much discussion.
4/5
If someone had told me I would one day find myself scouring all the HMV/Best Buy/Future Shops in downtown Toronto for an X-Men movie, I would've laughed at you. But I think First Class was worth the effort, despite falling into the popular (and increasingly criticized) "series re-boot" category. Here we go back to how everything got started, before everyone had their bad-ass nicknames and the general public were aware of the existence of Mutants. In this one Professor X and Magneto's common enemy is Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), who is hell bent on igniting the Cold War between the US and Russia. I am so in love with the Cold War/swinging 60's setting. Add in good character development, a straightforward story that leaves room to explore the blurred lines of loyalty and morality, and a strong cast, and you have the formula for my favourite X-Men movie of them all.
4/5
Paul Rudd is the lovable & gullible well-meaning hippie brother than manages to destroy his three sisters lives with his naivety and idealism. This is your classic indie gem with easily digestible characters and predictably enjoyable plot. I'll even forgive the cheesey cliche ending. I really enjoyed the cast, which stars Zooey Deschanel (blessedly acting less "New Girl"-ish, thus not making me want to vomit), Emily Mortimer, and Elizabeth Banks (with a hair do that makes her look kind of like a young Parker Posey) as the victimized sisters.
3/5
Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway star as a pharmaceutical rep/player and an independent young woman with stage 1 Parkinsons who, despite some initial resistance to commit, find themselves in a relationship facing some serious challenges. As far as Rom Com/Dramas go, this one isn't bad. The story isn't completely shallow, you get to see Jake Gyllenhaal's ass (and Anne Hathaway's boobs), and the mid-90's backdrop is an endless delight to me. If I had the choice between owning the soundtrack or the DVD, I'd still pick the soundtrack, but I would still recommend this movie.
3/5
This is the Candian indie featured penned by Douglas Coupland (aka the man who made the term "Generation X" famous) and at the centre of it is the character he writes best: Paul, a gen X slacker, a bit disenchanted with his world and his inability to get ahead in it. That is, until he becomes part of a lottery scam orchestrated by Bryce, the money-hungry ex of Ming, the girl Paul is interested in. I saw this back when it was at TIFF and forgotten most of it. I'd forgotten how Canadian it is, with its Vancouver backdrop and CBC (chinese-born-Canadian) female love interest. I'd also forgotten about the rather impressive cinematography and interestingly designed shots, not sure if it's a purposeful nod to the author's photography/orchestrated by Coupland himself. It's not the best thing Coupland's ever written, but it is funny and I can very much relate. Paulo Costanzo is also really cute.
3.5/5 (the 0.5 was for it's relate-ability)
A great family film with dazzling visuals, about an orphan living in a train station who stumbles upon a mystery involving an automaton, the girl who holds the key to activate it, and an unlikely link to a forgotten filmmaker. It’s based on the book "The Invention of Hugo Cabret" by Brian Selznick, giving us an unexpected lesson about Georges Melies (we didn’t know it was based on a true story). I’m not sure what it says about me (who has studied film history at a university level), but I’m sheepish to admit the only reason I recognized Melies’ “Trip to the Moon” was because The Smashing Pumpkins’ “Tonight, Tonight” video was inspired by it. Either way this movie is a delight, though a bit predictable at times. There is a wonderful subplot about a romance between two wiener dogs that had me tearing up more than I did for Edward and Bella did in three Twilight movies. Ok, ok fine, it wasn’t a subplot, but it was practically the greatest part of the movie. The 3D work was good (tho I’m still not a fan), but I felt it was unnecessary in one particular scene (very mild spoiler: when they showcase Melies’ films I don’t know why they decided to make them 3D, they’re supposed to be from the dawn of filmmaking, I really would’ve preferred to see them in their original form). Overall, it’s magical and feel-good, and if it weren’t for those damn 3D glasses, I would’ve been a kid in awe at the cinema all over again (kinda like the way I felt after watching Super 8).
4.5/5
Somehow I missed this one at TIFF 2005, luckily I happened upon this copy sandwiched amidst dusty, cigarette-smoke-coated discount movies at a 2nd hand shop in South Etobicoke. To say it's a documentary based on Douglas Coupland and his book of the same title is both accurate and a little simplistic at the same time. There are photographs from his books, and the font is familiar. If the book were to get up and start speaking to you, it would probably tell you some of the same stories. But there's more to it than that, it also looks at Doug's Canada House art project and includes his boyhood memories delving into relationship with his father, brothers, etc. I'm sure being a Coupland fan helps, but I think most Canadians will stumble upon one or two childhood memories while watching this.
3/5
Blood is thicker than water, but when 2 money-stricken brothers do their rich uncle a "favour", the moral implications make everything spiral out of control. Turns out Woody Allen does a good Hitchcock, because this is what Cassandra's Dream feels like. It's more dark Hitchcockian drama/suspense instead of your usual self-deprecating Woody Allen humour. I never really understood why everyone loves Matchpoint but no one knows about Cassandra's Dream. And even if you don't like the movie, staring at Colin Farrell and Ewan McGregor will get you through. They both give great performances.
4/5
In the 70's, acclaimed filmmaker Michelangelo Antonioni was invited to communist China to film a documentary about "New China". However Chairman Mao hated the documentary so much that Antonioni was charged with being anti-Chinese and counter-revolutionary. What I saw in this 3.5 hr documentary was largely observational with minimal narration and lingering shots. There are 3 parts, focusing on life in Beijing, Henan, and Shanghai. It's a rare glimpse into China during the 70's as it was forbidden by the communist party, even so, there were heavy restrictions placed on what could be filmed. Therefore some of the footage is taken with a hidden camera, these scenes contrast with their visit to a village in Henan where villagers are confronted by the camera without warning and folks come out of their homes to peer curiously at the "white men". The overall sense I got wasn't anti anything, it just showed a society of modest folk, people very accepting of their fate, and taught not to question much. This is echoed in the inscriptions of a village wall that frankly frightened me: "oppose individualism, criticize revisionism". It was an interesting watch, just long. Very long. Even after I forwarded through the operating room footage of the c-section where the woman is aestheticised by acupuncture (talk about something I NEVER needed to see)
2.5/5
Ok, have I filled my quota of pretentious films after this one? Godard has never been one of my favourites. Having spent much with his devotees (ie. in film school) I've been trained to read into every shot/word/light source/speck of dirt for greater meaning and after a while it's taxing and unenjoyable. What we have here in Une Femme Mariee is a cold, unaffected young French woman who has to decide between her husband and lover. The story (if you can really call it that) plays out over a handful of scenes over a short period of time, laden by themes of commercial/media influence (ie. a number of bra ads), fragmented thoughts, and largely pointless philosophizing. It was beautifully shot in stunning black & white, and I enjoyed the similar screen composition in her intimate moments with both men. Overall terrific cinematography, but don't expect to have any love towards the characters.
2/5
This was one of my favourite films of 2011 taking place in 1979 about a group of teenage amateur filmmakers who witness a mysterious train crash that is carrying a top secret alien species and aircraft. It's got the greatest dialogue amongst kids since Stand By Me, both in terms of humour and genuineness. For those who hail from the west end of Toronto, it's the type of movie you would've gone to the Westwood during the summer holidays with your friends to see. It brings you back to a time of wonder and awe, when you fancied yourself sophisticated while still young and innocent.
5/5
Decided to watch 3 favourite romantic dramas back to back that explore themes of love and infidelity (and how often one has nothing to do with the other, contrary to popular belief). Last Night is about a couple who spend a night apart; he finds himself on a business trip with an attractive new coworker, she runs into an old flame. Through the movie we see their struggle and the clashes between desire, love, fidelity, guilt, and obligation. I won't deny it's very much a chick flick, however I think it's unfair these types of movies get lumped in with your mediocre rom-coms when they are so much more. Anyone with an interest in morality, defining love, and right and wrong within a relationship would enjoy seeing this film. I think it's almost needless to say the dialogue and performances are great. (On a personal note, there is a line in there where a friend describes Alex as being more whole/complete when he is alone. I feel it's such an astute and concise line, perhaps because I often feel that way about myself)
4.5/5
Based on a play about four people and their tangled relationships with each other. There's a whole psychological element in this story that really takes a few viewings to sink it (granted it's at least my 4th time seeing Closer so I think I got the message). For general viewing purposes it's got thought-provoking dialogue, an alluring young Natalie Portman, handsome Jude Law (before his hairline started to recede), drama, desire and deception. I loved this movie so much that the last time I was in London I sought out one of the key filming locations (Postman's Park) to find the plaque from which Natalie Portman's character's name comes from.
5/5
This is one of the finest achievements in contemporary cinema when it comes to crafting a fine dialogue-driven story. Helena Bonham Carter and Aaron Eckhart are seemingly two strangers who meet a wedding, but as their conversation progresses you find out there's much, much more. The entire film is also artistically shot in splitscreen, utilized not for the character's point-of-views so much as a device for showing separation, facilitating flashbacks, and inward vs outward emotion. Though shrouded with words and years of separation, you can still pick up on the youthful spirit of their love (alive and suppressed all at the same time). The performances given by both are brilliant.
5/5
The IMDB description of this movie is: "American-born Gogol, the son of Indian immigrants, wants to fit in among his fellow New Yorkers, despite his family's unwillingness to let go of their traditional ways." which is also what I thought this adaptation starring Kal Penn was about too. From the trailers I thought it focused on his relationship with his father, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. The story is actually about a family, with much focus on the mother, from her youth in India, to being transplanted to New York and the trials and joys she faces as they raise their kids. The filmmaker captures the beauty but also the stark contrast of life in India vs the US, and shows the difference of cultures effectively even within North America. I wouldn't say it was emotionally charged as it could have been, but the story wasn't riddled with plot cliches (I think it can be hard to escape the cultural cliches - ie his white gf being a rich blond girl) which I appreciated (The Joy Luck Club could learn from this). The movie is worth a watch, however I still prefer Kal Penn doing comedy.
3/5
On blu-ray for the first time (don't worry, I didn't buy the saga, just the trilogy) the adventures of young Luke Skywalker learning of his Jedi lineage, battling the evil Imperial Empire... ok ok, I'm not going to summarize this... Any review about Star Wars was written long ago, to which I have nothing to add. The only thing folks can really comment on nowadays are what ridiculous changes the latest release brings. To this I will say -- I've never been so distracted during the Mos Eisley scene. And now that we're all focused on finding the changes, every time something's not quite right we'll stop and go "was that always there?" *sigh*
(I don't think I'm going to rate these, I don't know which version to rate them on)
It was around this movie during our "Star Wars Day" that I developed this theory about the light sabres getting brighter with every new release. This is still my favourite of the trilogy.
Where we discover the horrid number added to the scene in Jabba's palace is actually entitled "Jedi Rocks", and see Ewoks blink for the first time (SO wrong). Though I like Empire better for story, this one still is the flashiest and exciting in its own way.
Buster Keaton's comedic tale about star-crossed lovers whose fathers are rival steamboat captains is a silent film classic, one of the last films he made independently before signing with MGM. My preference for Keaton over Chaplin is his devotion to pure physical comedy with agenda, it's visual entertainment without a highbrow theme that we are require to raise our intellect to understand. In the dawn of the moving picture era that's my preferred focus.
3.5/5
The vampire movie that started it all was based on Bram Stroker's Dracula, depicting for the first time that sunlight was fatal for vampires. Count Orlok didn't sparkle, and didn't run around the woods in the daytime with sniveling chicks named Bella. I did a bit of reading about the film online afterward as I had some questions about the version I watched, there are various versions since the original prints were destroyed. Because of copyright restrictions, the characters names were originally changed (ie. Count Orlok instead of Count Dracula) but in my version with English subtitles (the film is German) *some* of the names have been changed back. Also my version did not include the blue tinting for nighttime scenes (which was a popular practice at the time due to technological restrictions to filming in night time). The music was 2nd rate (often 3rd rate) which took away from the overall creepiness of the film, I was conflicted whether to hit mute because the sound captured the pops and crackles of the film projection which I loved, a shame I could not separate that from the music. Max Schreck really is as creepy as they made him out to be in Shadow of the Vampire (a great companion movie to this I'd say).
3.5/5
Well...uhm...Naked Lunch was still more comprehensible than anything by David Lynch. It's loosely based on the 50's William S. Burroughs novel of the same name, I know nothing about the book, and even after watching it, I'm not entirely sure I know much about the film either. Bill Lee, while high on bug powder, accidentally shoots and kills his wife but his typewriter assures him she wasn't human anyway, together they delve into a mysterious plot that takes them to an Islamic port, and soon nothing and nobody is who/what they seem. I gotta ask, what was Cronenberg's obsession with bugs and fleshy drippy gross organisms in those years? I don't always have the stomach for it, Existenz was alright, but I can't stand to watch more of The Fly than I've already seen. Set decor's great and props to the props master and special FX, clearly a lot of imagination went into the movie. But overall, it just made me develop an irrational fear of typewriters.
2/5
A woman with rapidly deteriorating eyesight investigates the suspicious death of her sister who suffered from the same eye condition. I missed seeing this at a past TIFF and glad I finally caught it. It is finely crafted suspense. Though the story is a bit predictable at times there are a few good twists and always enough happening at all times to keep you engrossed. Speaking of gross, the films is not high up there in the gore scale, but there was one shot...which I now refer to as the "Buñuel tribute"...that made me cover my eyes and nearly go running out of the room. Something that doesn't happen often. There was also moments where it distinctly reminded me of Wait Until Dark (the 60's thriller starring Audrey Hepburn by Terence Young)
3.5/5
Aaaand that's 30 films in 17 days, likely my personal best! (Also indication that I really have no life.) I'm not going to stop here tho, many a bonus round to come!
BONUS ROUND:
Prior to watching this I'd see all of one trailer at Lightbox (probably preceding Incendies). It's about a woman who flees with her son from her oppressive husband in Istanbul. She returns to her family in Germany, who feel pressured by their traditional Muslim (?) values to shun her and try to take her son from her to return to her husband. She flees from them, at the same time hoping (stupidly) for reconciliation. I found the mix of cultures interesting, the religious and cultural values in which women find themselves oppressed, where violence against them is open and accepted, played out with Germany in the backdrop (not North America, but still very representative of the western world). It's a very engrossing and moving film, though grueling to watch emotionally. However, I can, in no way, relate to it. Even as the main character Umay struggled to reestablish a relationship with her family I sat there and thought "Jesus, who would want back in to a family like that?" and of course the mother-son bond is meaningless to me. It's still a very good film, completely overlooked in my opinion.
4/5 (I'm sure someone with a heart would've rated it even higher)
Another movie where religion is an important theme, however from a whole other angle! Mary and her best friend Hilary Faye are the paradigms of "Good Christina Girls". They attend Christian school, spread the word of JC, and are saving themselves for marriage -- that is until Mary tries to "cure" her boyfriend who realizes he's gay. Finding herself pregnant, she begins to evaluate her life, beliefs, friendships, etc. Mocking fanatical Christians is awesome, and Mandy Moore actually does a decent job of being the righteous and annoying Hilary Faye, who genuinely believes her every obnoxious action is a direct dispatch from God. The dialogue is hit and miss, from wickedly satirical to flat cliche satanic references (delivered by Eva Amurri aka Susan Sarandon's daughter, her performance is fine, even the character's good, it's just the lines they wrote for her) but overall an easy watch and some good laughs.
3/5
Gonzo receives a message from his alien family through his cereal, but an evil government agency gets wind of this and kidnaps him. Kermit and the gang must save the day! This movies was hot on the heels of Muppets Tonight, so it featured some of the new muppets that I'm less fond of (Pepe is actually better in this one than he is on Muppets Tonight). There was still tons of good stuff though, including a great opening sequence of the Muppets' morning routine, talking food, celebrity cameos, and the latest inventions from Muppet Labs.
3/5
Starring Bela Lugosi, this is the iconic Dracula (that most of us know better through The Count on Sesame Street). Between watching Nosferatu earlier in the week and my memory of Francis Ford Coppola's version of Dracula, I was mostly making story comparisons in my head (I have to get around to reading the book some day). It's impressive how polished this looked compared to the 1922 Nosferatu. There was still no use of non-diegetic sound (ie musical score) but in a way I liked it because I could hear the sound of the film (which they left intact for the transfer).
3/5
Based on the first book of Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles. This is Louis' story of being born into darkness and what followed. I wrote a short paper on one of the scenes in this movie back in university, so needless to say I'm quite familiar with it. From the Neil Jordan films I've seen, he seems to have a knack of keeping stories moving, though it's not all action, fire, and blood (though there is plenty of that too) I've never felt a single lull in the 2hr running time. I probably like on screen Louis than I like him in the books (I'm team Lestat!) I still wonder what it would've been like if River Phoenix had lived long enough to play Daniel Malloy, better yet if he could've reprised the role for the 3rd book, and Queen of the Damned wasn't a piece of shit...
4/5
This movie opens with Bette Davis shooting a man in what she claims to be self defense, but then a letter surfaces to indicate differently. Despite a plot that makes you want to find out what happens, I wouldn't say this was one of Bette Davis' better movies. For some reason it didn't particularly grip me, though through no fault of Bette Davis', she's great as usual. There's lots of emotional remorse, but some of it doesn't lead to much, I guess when you open with a murder I expect there to be more physical retribution. The ending is good but then I learned it was tacked on to satisfy the Hollywood Code in effect at the time. I guess as a emotionally-charged stage play it works, if I'd known that in advance maybe I would've seen it differently.
3/5
Cary Grant is the esteemed Dr. Praetorius with a mysterious past who falls for a pregnant un-wed medical student. It's got all the Cary Grant movie staples that I love, snappy one-liners, quick wit, quick talking, in a world where the right words will get you where and what you want.
3/5
Thank you Best Buy Trade & Save! This was one of my top 10 movies of 2010. Yep, the movie about Facebook that managed to top all the critics' lists and mine. From that point on I was convinced David Fincher is some kind of genius. Now that everyone knows who Rooney Mara is, it's cool to go back and watch an earlier performance. As mentioned I'm a fan of quick dialogue and double entendre, so that opening scene was awesome. I'm CEO, Bitch.
4/5
Also from my Top 10 list of 2010 that got mixed reviews from critics. I remembered liking it as a 2 hr movie with some small misgivings, but even I had my doubts that it would hold up in the extended 2.5 hr cut... turns out it was every bit as good, the extras didn't dilute my enjoyment of the film. I still have the same issues with the ending being too tidy but overall Ben Affleck does a decent job of writing and directing himself in a convincing performance. Sure, I have a soft spot for smart but reluctant criminals, but I'm still able to identify meticulous writing, a rich backdrop, and well-orchestrated heists.
4/5 (same rating as Social Network tho I liked that one better... this rating system is flawed :P)
I was a little surprised to find this a little less moving than I did watching it growing up in the 90's. Robin Williams as the teacher with unorthodox ways, inspires a group of young boys to think for themselves, but with some dire results in the conformist society from which they come. Perhaps it had something to do with driving the same point home one too many times, it's still a great tale of friendship and coming of age.
3.5/5
Recent offerings like Hanna is dribble compared Besson's masterpiece about an assassin (or "cleaner") who reluctantly takes in a 12 year old girl (Natalie Portman in the role that made her famous) whose family has been killed. It's been too many years since I last saw this movie, I need to treat myself to these great performances, gritty characters, and morally ambiguous but utterly engaging plot more often.
4.5/5
I had to go out on a guaranteed high note. Every time I finish watching Basterds, I feel like I can go back to the beginning and start watching it all over again despite it's 2.5 hr length. It is one of the most satisfying films ever made. Christoph Waltz is mesmerizing, Colonel Hans Landa of the SS is one of the greatest characters ever written. There are lots of QT staples as usual, almost each scene is a dialogue-driven slow boil with splashes of extreme violence in between, he even adapts the "trunk shot" (twice!)
5/5
