[Xochaedo]

Umm...the only movie I have watched recently was:

Gedo Senki - Tales from Earthsea

It's an anime from Studio Ghibli - the people behind Hayao Miyazaki's beautiful works (Spirited Away, Princess Mononoke, Howl's Moving Castle, etc.). The difference here is that Miyazaki's son directed this one.

Over all, I liked the movie. It's actually based off of a couple of the novels by Ursula K. Leguinn, although having read the books a few years ago, the only things that seemed familiar were some of the character names. I guess I would give it:

7/10

There was nothing inherently wrong with it, it just wasn't all that amazing.

[Tarantism]

Anybody hear about J.J. Abrams' new top-secret project, codenamed Cloverfield but currently being marketed as 01-18-08?

Here's the poster:



And the teaser trailer: (Warning: mild, frantic profanity at the very end of the teaser)

http://www.apple.com...aramount/11808/

Looks pretty sweet to me. As far as monster/destruction features go, seems quite a bit more intriguing than Transformers was.

Anyway, movie reviews, yes. I have a few, but they'll have to wait.

[boyward]

Tarantism, that's an unusual trailer for a Hollywood monster/disaster movie. It doesn't even have that deep voiced guy who usually introduces the trailers by saying, "In a world..."

Movies I liked renting from Netflix:

Nacho Libre
Rocketman
The Prestige
The Pursuit of Happyness
Kronk's New Groove

This post has been edited by boyward: 26 July 2007 - 10:14 PM

[Gatorjd]

I rented Zodiac this week. It was good, really interesting. 8/10

[Xochaedo]

Tarantism, on Jul 26 2007, 02:26 PM, said:

Anybody hear about J.J. Abrams' new top-secret project, codenamed Cloverfield but currently being marketed as 01-18-08?

Here's the poster:



And the teaser trailer: (Warning: mild, frantic profanity at the very end of the teaser)

http://www.apple.com...aramount/11808/

Looks pretty sweet to me. As far as monster/destruction features go, seems quite a bit more intriguing than Transformers was.

Anyway, movie reviews, yes. I have a few, but they'll have to wait.

Wow. That looks really interesting. I'll have to find some people from school and go to it when it comes out.

[Evili]

I will be seeing the Simpsons movie tomorrow, err, today (*checks clock* Yeah its after midnight). Yay me~

[Fremen_Warrior66]

I forgot to mention that I saw the host recently. Probably one of the best monster movies I've ever seen. It sure blows the Godzilla remake out of the water. King Kong was a pretty good one, but the nature of the monster in that film is different.

The portrayal of Americans made me burst out laughing and really sad at the same time. All of the Americans in here are a.) willing and have a good heart but really stupid or b.) evil idiots who don't think about their actions and force Koreans to do really stupid stuff too. I really hope that's not how they see Korean/US relations.

Anyways, the rest of the movie is really awesome, so go check it out!

[boyward]

More good movies I rented from Netflix:

Breach (a thriller that thrills without resorting to violence!)
Cinderella Man (wonderful story, but there's SO much use of Jesus' name in vain)

[Evili]

evileye, on Jul 27 2007, 04:00 AM, said:

I will be seeing the Simpsons movie tomorrow, err, today (*checks clock* Yeah its after midnight). Yay me~

Ok, so like we went to the place, and we had bought out tickets about three days in advanced. We got there, and they had sold out seats to someone else, and it was booked the entire day. We got a refund. <_<

[Crazy Diamond]

evileye, on Jul 27 2007, 05:10 PM, said:

Ok, so like we went to the place, and we had bought out tickets about three days in advanced. We got there, and they had sold out seats to someone else, and it was booked the entire day. We got a refund. <_<

It's okay, I just got back from that movie, so I'll write your review for you.

The Simpsons Movie

Overall, it was like an extended episode. They were able to get away with a couple of things they wouldn't have on television, like Marge screaming "g--d---" (this is the only cursing I remember) and full frontal nudity from Bart (which was actually one of the funniest gags in the movie). It was entertaining, and if you like the Simpsons you'll like this. Not as funny as some of the better episodes from back in the glory days, but still pretty entertaining. I'd give it a 7/10.

[DS-181-5]

Very short teaser trailer for The Dark Knight

Note: I would have linked the actual website that has it, but there is some stuff that some may consider disturbing...

[Colonel Link]

Crazy Diamond, on Jul 28 2007, 04:18 AM, said:

It's okay, I just got back from that movie, so I'll write your review for you.

The Simpsons Movie

Overall, it was like an extended episode. They were able to get away with a couple of things they wouldn't have on television, like Marge screaming "g--d---" (this is the only cursing I remember) and full frontal nudity from Bart (which was actually one of the funniest gags in the movie). It was entertaining, and if you like the Simpsons you'll like this. Not as funny as some of the better episodes from back in the glory days, but still pretty entertaining. I'd give it a 7/10.

What about the Gay kissing scene? That's what turned me off.

[Evili]

Well, I ended up seeing the Simpsons Movie yesterday anyways, so here is my impression:

Really funny. There was not 10 minutes that went by that I did not laugh. Just hillarious. Kinda crude. The Bart nude scene (though hillarious) was kinda crude. Marge screamed "g--d---", which was not needed.

The animation was great, especially him riding his motorcycle around the dome to win a free truck *wink*.

All in all, a easy watch, great, and I reccomend it for older teens only, or just if you are a big fan of the simpsons.

8.25/10

[Fremen_Warrior66]

His Girl Friday

I had no idea what I was missing out on when I didn't take the time to see this. Everything in this film is just top notch. It's a black and white 40's film and the film looked a little grainy on the dvd I got, however it does fit the whole feel of the film.

It's a story about a newspaper editor, played by Kerry Grant, who's trying to keep his ex-wife from marrying and leaving town in hopes that he can get back together with her. Through a lot of shady underhanded tricks he puts her fiance in some prickly situations and convinces her to help him cover the story of a convicted murderer. The final scenes in this film are frantic and full of physically comedic. At times 3 or 4 people are all talking at the same time. The dialogue is tight, funny, and intelligent, which is pretty unusual for a romantic comedy, especially in today's day and age.

Go pick up this little gem now.

Edit: This movie is in the public domain, so you can watch it free here http://www.archive.o...his_girl_friday

This post has been edited by Fremen_Warrior66: 30 July 2007 - 04:09 PM

[DS-181-5]

Finished watching Memento.

Wow. That was amazing. I'll post my full thoughts later.

[Tarantism]

The Fountain

I should preface this with how I got my hands on a copy. Since I'm what my brother calls a "book snob," he routinely gives me movies he dislikes or doesn't understand. (We kind of have that Paul Giamatti/Tom Church relationship from Sideways) When he told me he'd bought The Fountain, I was a little surprised--not because I'd seen it, but because I knew Darren Aronofsky's other films and had a hard time imagining my brother getting down with Pi or Requiem for a Dream. But I bit my tongue, and sure enough, four or five days later I got a text: "This movie is awful. Do u want it?" Score.

Not that his distaste is puzzling; this is one ambiguous movie. It would spoil a particularly important "plot" point to give my interpretation of what Aronofsky was trying to accomplish, so I'll put that part of the review in spoiler tags. I won't be able to fully explain the film--that would require a lengthy essay--but I'll do my best to give a decent overview

SPOILER

The film opens in the jungles of New Spain, c.1500. Tomas (Hugh Jackman), a conquistador of Queen Isabella (Rachel Weisz), is searching for something that will grant him the ability to "live forever," though the audience knows not what at first. (It is later revealed to be the Tree of Life, which Isabella points out was not destroyed, only "hidden" when Adam and Eve disobeyed God. More on that later.) This narrative transitions into another, c.2500, in which a bald, nameless monk (also Jackman) floats through space on a small patch of earth encased in an oxygen bubble, also home to a large tree which he speaks to as if it is a person. He seems to have hallucinations of a woman in a white shawl (also Weisz), telling him to "finish it." Both of these narratives are intercut with a third, which takes place in the present and concerns a doctor (Jackman again) named Tommy and his terminally ill wife Izzy (Weisz again).

Tommy (whose last name is "Creo," the Latin for "I create") is obsessed with finding a cure for his wife's cancer, so much so that the first time we see him (as Tommy, that is) he turns down a walk in the first snow with his wife to test a surgical procedure on a monkey. This is, actually, the narrative the film spends the most time on and so should be taken as the main thread. We learn that Izzy is writing a book, titled The Fountain, about a conquistador's search for the Tree of Life to save Queen Isabella from certain death at the hands of the Inquisitors. The opening sequence, then, and each ensuing trip the film takes to that period, comes out of her book as Tommy reads it to understand why his wife is so calm about her impending death and, one assumes, because he loves her so. As she becomes weaker, he becomes more obsessed with preventing her death, trying an untested compound from a tree in South America on his test subjects. The compound gets results but not the ones Tommy wants, and so he sinks further into despair.

I won't do a full plot summary--that'd be boring to read, anyway. But the film makes more sense if one writes it out, and the transitions between threads become more appropriate. Aronofsky did an interview on AICN in which he called the film "a love poem to death," which it indeed is. As she nears her death, Izzy becomes less afraid and more at peace, while Tommy is enraged at the stark reality of the loss of his wife. One is immensely glad that the original version of this film, an action-adventure flick starring Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett, was never made; Aronofsky rewrote the script after a hiking trip in Asia to reflect his own philosophical/theological musings. The resolution of the three threads is not what one would expect, although it doesn't cheat. Many critics have said that the film becomes ridiculous and over-the-top in the final minutes, ruining what had previously been "a work of art." I see the conclusion rather as one of stunning symbolism that forces the audience to accept the self-destruction that is the search for eternal life outside of death. And the peace that can come from accepting what remains of loved ones gone away: memory, and a tree.

END SPOILER

That said, the film is undeniably gorgeous. Working with longtime cinematographic collaborator Matthew Libatique, Aronofsky utilizes a bare minimum of CG effects to achieve the look he wanted. (According to IMDB, the nebula which Jackman hurtles toward with his tree in the year 2500 is nothing more than microphotographic captures of a chemical reaction in a petri dish.) The film's score, performed by Mogwai and The Kronos Quartet, leaves one breathless at its simplicity and power.

Being a re-edit from an R rating (one of the many battles Aronofsky fought with Warner Bros., who was furious with him for making a film that was impossible to market and unlikely to make much at the box office), the film's violence is realistic and bloody. A particular scene of close combat is revisited several times, and the lead inquisitor is shown in a long shot of self-flagellation. Language is light save one strong profanity (another product of the re-edit), and a prelude to sex is all that remains of the longer scene Aronofsky originally filmed. It's unlikely that kids would even want to see this film, however, or if they did, would make it past the halfway point (it's only 96 minutes long). Many Christians balked at what they saw as "New Age" or "Far Eastern" religious themes, but I didn't see anything incompatible with Christianity. It does deal unconventionally with death, but in a way I found profound and rather sublime. To each his own, I guess. If anyone sees it, or has seen it, I'd love to discuss it with you.

Oh, and that passage from Genesis regarding the Tree of Life? "He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life" (Gen. 3: 24, ESV). But that's for another topic.

The trailer, if you're interested, can be found here:
http://www.apple.com...er1/medium.html

This post has been edited by Tarantism: 04 August 2007 - 01:19 AM

[Gatorjd]

I've watched Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz in the last 2 days. I love them both, but probably Shaun of the Dead a little more.

Shaun of the Dead - 9/10
Hot Fuzz - 8/10

Oh and I watched 300. Awesome movie as well.

[Fremen_Warrior66]

Gatorjd, on Aug 1 2007, 03:11 AM, said:

I've watched Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz in the last 2 days. I love them both, but probably Shaun of the Dead a little more.

Shaun of the Dead - 9/10
Hot Fuzz - 8/10

Oh and I watched 300. Awesome movie as well.

Pshh...Shaun of the dead collapsed from the weight of its own source material. It started out hilarious and then just kind of fell flat. Hot Fuzz kind of undulated between interesting and absolutely hilarious. The horror-esque assasinations were both gruesome and fascinating. Hot Fuzz had a good comedic cadence and a interesting enough plot that it stayed fresh while Shaun had a stale taste towards the end.

[boyward]

I saw "The In-Laws" (1979) starring Peter Falk and Alan Arkin. It was a hilarious and ridiculous story about two dads whose kids are getting married. One of them is a dentist, and the is a CIA agent, and the CIA agent "borrows" his panicking future in-law for a bizarre undercover op in a foreign country, getting him into a lot of trouble. I would have enjoyed this movie a lot more if Jesus' name wasn't used in vain so much. That kind of spoiled it for me. But if you can get an edited copy, there would be nothing else to stand in the way of having a great time with this movie.

[boyward]

My wife and I watched National Treasure again tonight, and when it was over, my wife said, "Is there a sequel to that?" Sure enough, here are the trailers to National Treasure: Book of Secrets.

Rotten Tomatoes.
IMDB.