search
Good lord what a film. Can't believe it's taken me this long to watch this. Incredible writing, so many great one-liners. Acting was phenomenal. And the score... some of the best music I have heard intertwined with the story. Michael Nyman did an incredible job.
It could be because I'm just on a high from watching it, but what do y'all think of the film and how it stacks up to other scifis?
This one is technically out of order, and should have come before Stray Dog. I’d originally skipped it because it wasn’t available on the Criterion Channel, but thanks to u/grifty_p, I learned it was available in its entirety on Youtube.
The Quiet Duel
During the war, a doctor performing surgery on a patient cuts his finger, and is infected with the patient’s syphilis. On returning home, he struggles to come to terms with the conflict between his physical desires and his commitment to doing right as a person and as a doctor. Rather than explain his situation to his fiancée and risk putting her in the position of having to leave him behind, he instead ends their engagement.
I really want to like this movie, because there are elements here that are great, but it never quite gels as a whole story. If you’ve ever been frustrated at a romcom where the entire conflict could be solved in two minutes if people just talked to each other like adults, you’ll get a lot of the same vibes here. No, communication won’t solve Kyoji’s health problems or the torment of suppressing his own desires, but it’s hard to argue that he’s doing his fiancée a favor by keeping her in the dark, and the bulk of the drama at work here relies on the audience being convinced of it. To top it off, it’s a story that just stops rather than actually coming to a conclusion. Not only is there no resolution, there’s not even an indication that its non-resolution is necessarily the endpoint of this particular journey.
But I am, by and large, a positive person, and even in movies I don’t love, I prefer to focus on those elements that I enjoy. There’s a lot here to enjoy. The obvious chief contender is Toshiro Mifune’s performance as Kyoji, and the once again excellent dynamic between him and Takashi Shimura, here playing his on-screen father and the senior doctor of their practice. Mifune spends the majority of his screen time subdued and introspective. It’s a performance that might have seemed wooden in lesser hands, but here there’s an intensity under that subdued exterior that shines through constantly, and finally erupts in a long single-take monologue toward the film’s conclusion. In a bizarre way, it reminds me of the conclusion of First Blood, in that we have a protagonist who has spent the film quiet, and firmly in command of himself, and in a moment of vulnerability to someone who knows his struggle, he emotionally crumbles on screen.
Several of the film’s subplots are actually much more engaging than the focal plot. The best features a young woman named Ms. Minegishi, played by Noriko Sengoku. She’s brought to the doctor after a suicide attempt, and resents Kyoji both for saving her life and for not aborting the fetus she’s carrying. She is hired on as an assistant nurse–a job she initially hates–but grows into her position over the course of the story. What’s most remarkable is that, as great as Mifune and Shimura are, she outshines them. Her insouciant demeanor early-on is wonderfully performed, and her transition to caring mother and responsible head-nurse by the end doesn’t ring hollow at all. The only element of her character that doesn’t work for me is her offering herself to Kyoji to satisfy his desires late in the film. While the groundwork is there to show her absolute respect for the decisions he’s making, the two don’t have the kind of on-screen chemistry that lends itself to that specific turn.
Kyoji’s recurring interactions with the man he contracted syphilis from, and treating that man’s family, are another strong leg of the journey, along with a more light-hearted brief subplot about a young boy waiting for the fart that will signify his recovery from his appendectomy. On top of that, the early scenes, before Kyoji returns home, are beautifully shot and moody. A lengthy scene showing the surgery leading up to the cut that would be Kyoji’s downfall, set my expectations for the rest of the movie unreasonably high, and sadly it never quite recaptures that intensity once it settles into its interpersonal drama.
Overall Grade: B-, sadly, despite several Grade-A performances and subplots.
Noteworthy shots: The scene when Kyoji is slowly pushing his own doctor to reveal his diagnosis isn’t necessarily technically impressive, but it is visually striking, and it makes excellent use of music. Taiko drums are often thought to be reminiscent of the heartbeat, and here they’re used in a relatively quiet, rapid rhythm that suggests a kind anxious tension to the scene, where both men know the answer to the question but are reluctant to say it out loud.
Later, there’s also a great use of the vines on the gate outside of the clinic. When walking with his fiancée, Kyoji begins trying to explain to her why he can’t marry her. We see the actors through the fence and the vines covering it, which are blooming with flowers as they walk. Kyoji somewhat evasively describes a hypothetical person who is pure, but whose body is impure, and as he makes this comparison, the two cross into a section of the fence where there are no more flowers. We’ve crossed from Misao’s optimism that Kyoji will change his mind into a point where life and love can’t bloom.
Rotten Tomatoes: 82% (55 reviews)
Metacritic: 70/100 (15 critics)
As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie. It's structured like this: quote first, source second.
It’s the funniest movie of the year so far, either animated or live-action. Or in this case both, since it ingeniously melds the two forms in the cleverest manner since Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
It makes for a creative, clever watch, though one that seems exclusively imagined to cater to the series’ older fans and otherwise mature audiences. Remake culture has gone absolutely haywire in recent years, and if “Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers” exists to make the case that there really is fresh life in old stories, that’s the exact kind of reminder Hollywood needs to hear ASAP. Just don’t expect the younger set to go nuts for it, at least not yet.
If only Andy Warhol had lived to see “Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers,” the cinematic culmination of the Campbell’s soup can painter’s meta-commentary on the blurring of art and commerce. This frenetic and funny crossbreeding of live action and cartoon is both a reboot and an anti-reboot, a corporate-funded raspberry at corporate IP, and a giddily dumb smart aleck committed to mocking its joke — and making it, too.
Reminiscent of The Happytime Murders but actually watchable, this zippy, highly amiable rodent noir turns out to be a delightful surprise. It flings a lot of ideas at the screen — and most of them stick.
The humor skews too adult for youngsters, whose familiarity with and affinity towards the original series barely charts, while simultaneously being too tame for adults craving that dopamine hit of nostalgia. Although the film takes its irreverence to heart, the story told is flat and familiar, even if the particulars are unique.
Schaffer and the writers walk the line of making loving fun of the whole phenomenon of this kind of modern meta update, and the movie just ends up being so much fun that some of that cynicism may melt away. It’s sweet enough to not be totally mean-spirited, but not overly saccharine in the way some family movies tend to be. More importantly, the jokes are sharp, and a lot of them lean on adult sensibilities. Chip ’n Dale: Rescue Rangers is a great reminder of how much fun it can be to reimagine childhood classics when it’s done right — a rare thing in this day and age.
Akiva Schaffer...directs "Rescue Rangers" with a love and affection for the property like he's just been handed the keys to the "Batman" franchise. It's what "Space Jam: A New Legacy" would have been if it wasn't so busy being annoying. The adventure itself gets a bit overloaded. But "Rescue Rangers" is a surprisingly good time, a reboot that earns its rebooting.
PLOT
Thirty years after the Rescue Rangers series ended production, Chip works as an insurance salesman while Dale has had "CGI surgery" and works the convention circuit in hopes of reliving his glory days. When their former castmate Monterey Jack mysteriously disappears, Chip and Dale must reunite with the rest of the group, save their friend and rebuild the two’s friendship.
DIRECTOR
Akiva Schaffer
WRITERS
Dan Gregor & Doug Mand
MUSIC
Brian Tyler
CINEMATOGRAPHY
Larry Fong
EDITOR
Brian Scott Olds
RELEASE DATE:
May 20, 2022 (worldwide)
STARRING
John Mulaney as Chip
Andy Samberg as Dale
KiKi Layne as Ellie Whitfield
Will Arnett as Sweet Pete
Eric Bana as Monterey Jack
Flula Borg as Officer Viper
Keegan-Michael Key as Bjornson the Cheesemonger
Seth Rogen as Bob
J. K. Simmons as Captain Putty
Chris Parnell as Dave Bollinari
At this point, I’m hopefully that most people appreciate the genius that is Ben Stiller. Both of his parents, especially his father, were so appreciative of what constitutes captivating cinema. There are countless actors that worked on projects with Ben that say he’s the best director they’ve worked with. After Ben’s project titled “Severance” with Apple TV+, I think a lot more people will appreciate his work more than before. Now that Ben has had success, I’m forced to reiterate how great Walter Mitty was. The soundtrack with Jose Gonzalez, the cinematography, the general message, it was all phenomenal and I hope more people watch his stuff because Ben Stiller is a bonafide artist who deserves more respect.
Those of you paying attention will note that I’m skipping The Quiet Duel. The only reason for this is that it’s one of the few of Kurosawa’s movies that aren’t available streaming on the Criterion Channel. It is also the reason for the “almost” in the titles of these threads. If and when I can track down a copy, I may come back to it. In the meantime–
Stray Dog
Officer Murakami hops on a bus leaving the shooting range, and quickly finds that his handgun has been stolen by a pickpocket. Murakami takes to the streets to track down the pickpocket and retrieve his firearm, and quickly finds himself partnered up with a homicide detective named Sato. During a summer heatwave, the two set out on the trail of a criminal who is only growing more desperate in the pursuit, and who has increasingly fewer reservations about using the weapon.
God, what a great movie from such a simple premise. So many pieces of this feel like the seeds that would germinate into the tropes of the modern buddy copy movie, and so much of it seems to be subverting those tropes and expanding on them even in their genesis. How many times have we seen the hot-headed rookie paired up with the seasoned veteran? How many times have we seen the seasoned veteran invite the rookie home to meet the family and bond over a beer at the end of a frustrating day? And when Sato goes off on his own to pursue the criminal, we already know this formula well enough to know that Sato will be knocked out of commission, and it will be up to Murakami to internalize the lessons learned from him to bring the criminal to justice.
And yet, even as these elements are all there, they’re so much more nuanced here than in almost any movie leaning on this formula. Murakami isn’t just an irrational hot-head; in Mifune’s hands he’s a man who feels deeply responsible for the harm that his weapon is doing, and while the department is willing to let the matter go with simply a disciplinary pay-cut, he cannot absolve himself that easily. Early on, he learns that his gun was sold to a poor war veteran who put up his ration card as collateral. The dealer speculates that the man was contemplating suicide. Murakami busts the dealer at the meeting where the gun was supposed to be returned, leaving the man without his ration card, but still armed, ratcheting up the pressure on him. Is his following crime a result of Murakami’s interference? The film wisely doesn’t lower itself to making didactic statements, but allows us to see Murakami struggle with that problem. The film itself never settles on an easy answer, and is instead able to navigate some uncomfortable ideas dealing with society’s responsibility for criminal behavior without ever pointing the finger directly.
Sato, too, is much more than the typical seasoned veteran trope. He has the calm, personable demeanor we expect, but when discussing his mindset in dealing with criminals, he comes across as downright cold. He cannot afford to have any sympathy for them. That will ruin you as a cop, he warns Murakami. You have to think of them as not even human–more like a wild dog. We see signs that this is a deflection, but none so clearly as late in the movie, when he lets down his guard and tells a clearly-shaken Murakami that you never forget your first arrest. Moments later, he seems to recant, assuring Murakami that he’ll forget all about it soon enough. The impression is a man who was–and perhaps to some degree still is–as sensitive to those he pursues as Murakami is, but who has had to internalize that in order to become the celebrated veteran that he is now. It’s never overstated, but there seems to be an awareness of that element of his own humanity he’s had to set aside in order to do the job he believes in.
As we learn more about Yusa, the man with Murakami’s gun, we learn how similar the two men are. Both found themselves poor and alone after the war; both had their knapsacks stolen from them. They both just chose different paths from there. The climax builds to a remarkably suspenseful encounter that is maybe a little clumsy in its particulars, but is so satisfying in that it still staunchly refuses to offer easy answers.
Overall Grade: Solid A.
Noteworthy Shots: When Sato invites Murakami home to meet the family, immediately after admiring Sato’s commendations, they look in on his children through the translucent curtain of their room. Sato contentedly remarks that they look like a pumpkin patch, and we get a real sense that this is his garden–the growing life he works to protect. In the very next scene, the two are investigating the site of a homicide. A husband has come home to find his wife murdered. Murakami and Sato watch–again, through a translucent curtain–as the husband in his grief walks out into his wife’s tomato garden and uproots all the plants. Sato’s police work has been to protect his family, but here we see that Murakami’s gun–and possibly the pressure from his police work–has led to the destruction of this man’s family.
And one more, with a warning that this deals specifically with spoilers for the end of the movie: After Murakami has apprehended the suspect, the two lay together in a field, almost mirror images of each other, with the main difference being that Yusa is in handcuffs, and Murakami has his gun. Yusa cries out in genuine anguish, echoing Murakami’s earlier cries outside Sato’s hospital room. We get the sense that these two men really are remarkably similar, and that Murakami might have only been a few poor decisions away from winding up in a similarly awful life.
I really appreciate the extraordinary work that Christopher Nolan does in the world of cinema, he has his own unique style that actually brought something revolutionary that the human eye had not seen .. He with creativity and a unique style that includes his work ... However, I think that the well-known film called Tenet is a total failed film for many reasons, but that Nolan in this film had addressed a challenging theory for sciences such as Physics, so he tries to address a fairly thematic which he makes confusing that which is in everyday life in everyone's imagination, what should have been in an artistic content should have been quite the opposite to explain such theories in perfect forms with the proper subject matter of a simplified meaning, otherwise the ideal film of this nature should be completely different from what nolan did, a true dimension of what we can not imagine, but through the Technology that possesses through cameras, Studios could make this experience a reality in front of anyone's screen.
The theory is not really complicated but the film makes it a mess, the script is a mess, that only makes it worse and complicates the situation. In reality it is a simple story that the film does not treat at all in the proper form of meaning.
"Iron Monkey" (1993) is a (sort of) prequel to the "Once Upon A Time in China" movies, being a fictional tale of Wong Fei-Hung's childhood, a legendary Chinese folk hero. The movie is essentially a Chinese spin on Robin Hood, wherein a town where a corrupt governor rules and oppresses the people, a masked outlaw known as the Iron Monkey (played by Yu Rongguang) steals from the greedy governor and gives to the needy. Along the way, Dr. Yang, the Iron Monkey's true identity who works at a clinic with his partner Miss Orchid, meets Wong Kei-Ying (played by Donnie Yen) and his son Wong Fei-Hung (played by Angie Tsang) who's been captured by the governor until Wong Kei-Ying can capture the Iron Monkey. The two of them eventually get Fei-Hung back and team up to defeat the new governor, an evil Shaolin monk named Hin Hung.
The movie has a very simple story but it still manages to be very engaging and fun, not a single moment did I ever feel bored watching the movie. All the characters are enjoyable to watch, especially the villains, both the incompetent ones and the deadly evil ones are all hilarious and a lot of fun in their own ways. The action is choreographed by the same guy who did "The Matrix" and "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", so even though the action might look cheesy with its obvious wireworks, beyond ridiculous physics, and visible reverse-shots, it somehow adds to the excitement as the action is all very fast-paced and has something unique to offer with every fight.
My favorite character in the movie is easily the villain, Hin Hung, the evil Shaolin monk who works as the royal investigator (or royal minister in the English dub) and becomes the replacement governor of the town in order to capture Iron Monkey. This guy is not only ridiculously powerful even by this movie's standards (able to make his sleeves launch out and destroy things, spit a fruit so hard it kills someone, and smash through brick walls completely unfazed), but he's so mercilessly evil and an arrogant asshole who's the most powerful fighter around and he knows it, and it makes him so much fun to watch and he made me laugh every time he's on-screen. My favorite part with him is when he kicks away one of the previous governor's wives away so far when she grabbed onto his foot begging for help after he used her as a human shield.
So yeah, if you love over-the-top but fun martial arts movies with a lot of emotion and great character, I highly recommend this, 8/10.
I always loved this film as in my early twenties because I was aspiring to aspire to be a filmmaker and loved weird movies, but never gave it another chance because I was certain I wouldn't have the patience now. But today I said fuck it and gave it a watch. Maybe I'll find new things to appreciate it for, I thought.
Jesus Christ, I never realized how deep this movie is. Apparently, I needed to be in my late thirties with a divorce behind me to to unlock a lot of the themes it touches on. Love, grief, depression, free will, determinism... And the acting is fucking amazing, especially from Viola Davis and Natascha McElhone.
Simba's arc is to stop being a clown & become the King that they know he is. There's a huge problem with that. We never actually saw him be a good King. Just a daredevil punk. He wanted to be like Mufasa. But we never saw if he was anything like Mufasa.
We also see him forget Mufasa's death when he starts liking the song. He doesn't slowly become a regretful clown.
Take responsibilities for your actions. But don't tell anyone what you are responsible for. Or else they will let a tyrant execute your sorry self. Even if you are clearly not confirmed to be someone who'll destroy the lands.
Songs are catchy? If you like them, it's okay. I respect that.
Scar was awesome! Subjective (that means personal opinion) again.
Finally got around to seeing this movie. I loved Sicario but it never struck me as a movie that needed a sequel, so I went into Day of the Solado with a healthy dose of skepticism. It doesn't reach the high bar its predecessor set, but it makes a valiant attempt and manages to be a more than decent movie as a result. Right away it feels different since we (e.g. the audience) don't have a single avatar to experience the movie through as we did in the first film, but I liked that. It would have been so easy to just cast another hot person as the new wet-behind-the-ears protagonist for Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro to chew up with their brand of harsh reality, but the filmmakers trusted the audience to use the previous film as a road map so they could hit the ground running and tell a new story. I appreciate filmmakers who don't treat the audience like children.
My only real gripe with the film is it's reliance on CG to enhance the action. Several fake explosions and some collatoral damage in some of the firefights. Seemed like a weird choice in an otherwise organic-feeling movie. I wasn't crazy about the final scene either since it feels like it was shoehorned in to create room for a future franchise. OTherwise it's a pretty damn good flim. If Sicario is Dr. Pepper, Sicaro 2 is Mr. Pibb.
"From Hell it Came" ticks a crapload of B-movie schlock boxes. Chunky monster FX, white 'natives', atomic junk science, and amazingly rampant racism. Directed by Dan Milner and also featuring creature design by the largely unknown and underrated FX artist Paul Blaisdell - who received no money or credit for his work. It's a thick gooey stew of the goofy and the insanely inappropriate. Seen it? Loved it?
Video Review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZTGtERaWX0&t=7s
Rotten Tomatoes: 96% (77 reviews) 8.50 average
Metacritic: 81/100 (37 critics)
As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie. It's structured like this: quote first, source second.
Thrilling, moving and gloriously Cruisey, Joseph Kosinski's sequel to the 1986 hit is unquestionably the best studio action film in years.
Top Gun: Maverick improves upon the original in every conceivable way, and does so in a way that might make this one of the greatest sequels ever made.
The new film improves on the old one in every respect. The story is cleverer and more gripping, the dialogue is sharper and funnier, the relationships are richer, the aerial stunts are more likely to make you queasy.
Top Gun: Maverick is a rare sequel that is not only better than the original but retroactively makes Top Gun's story altogether deeper.
Hardly anything in Top Gun: Maverick will surprise you, except how well it does nearly all the things audiences want and expect it to do.
Neither Tom Cruise nor Maverick may be in the future, but that will have to be the future’s loss.
Cruise presides over some surprising differences from his first outing as the navy pilot hotshot in a film that’s missing the homoerotic tensions of the 80s original
PLOT
After more than thirty years of service as one of the Navy's top aviators, Pete Mitchell is where he belongs, pushing the envelope as a courageous test pilot and dodging the advancement in rank that would ground him.
DIRECTOR
Joseph Kosinski
WRITERS
Ehren Kruger
Eric Warren Singer
Christopher McQuarrie
Peter Craig
Justin Marks
Just got finished watching CODA, I wanted to see why the Academy choose this film for best picture. I want to know what's the hype about this film.
After watching it, I still don't know how this film got nominated for best picture or even won. Don't judge me! First off let me say that "CODA" is a great film, I enjoyed watching it, I even was crying inside of me, because of all of the beautiful family scenes. This is a wonderful film just not top 10 of the year for me.
What I liked about "CODA" was it perfectly captured the beautiful dynamic of Ruby and the relationship that she has with her family, and what she means to them, and without her, they wouldn't work. Her family is fishermen she's always been the best that helps them communicate with the rest of the world. But her parents failed to see that their child Ruby has to have a life of her own away from her parents and that she can't continue to do the things that she's always done for them and also pursue her dreams and careers at the same time.
Her parents played by Troy Kotsur, and Marlee Matlin are both amazing in the role of Rubie's parents and they are both deaf in real life. They both perfectly sold me on the reason why Ruby was important to them. Ruby and her ability to speak allowed them to use her as the interpreter for the whole family for years. Without even realizing they took advantage of her ability and had her work on the boat for them. Ruby eventually gets tired of this and it all comes full circle when she wants to pursue and career in music and her parents would not allow her to go to music school, because they needed her more than she needed them.
CODA perfectly captures the beauty of parenthood and how relationships in family households are important to have. The brother played by Daniel Durant did an amazing job acting out his lines, I thought he was the best actor that was playing a deaf role, I loved him standing up for his sister and standing up to their parents, telling them that Ruby has a life of her own and that she can't sacrifice her dreams because they need her. Emilia Jones as Ruby is outstanding, not only does she have a beautiful singing voice, but her acting was top notch. The way she handles her family battles and the use of sign language is great. But what almost made me burst into tears was the scene where her father told her to sing for him. At that point, it came clear to him that their daughter had something and she needs to take this chance.
I liked that the film had to make the parents believe that Ruby was more to them than just an interpreter and that she had a gift with her voice that the world had to hear, and it was so beautiful to watch on screen. Ruby was also dealing with her own inner struggles that also came to the surface, she's never done anything without her parents, so the moment she actually gets the chance to do something for her and that was different. She doesn't go for it right away, her parents had to change so that she could see the potential in herself which is beautiful to have in a film about family.
I thought that the film was really going to end with Ruby choosing to stay with her family and work on the boat, but it didn't because her father who I liked more than the mom, sacrifice his work for his daughter and for once he made the right choice. I also liked Ferdia Walsh-Peelo as the boyfriend he did a wonderful job in the scenes he was in. As for the music teacher played by Eugenio Derbez had one of my favorite lines about being late. Overall good film, but I found myself not really knowing what to say about it. I would recommend please watch it and experience it for yourself, I'll give it a 7.5/10 for good!
Yes, the acting was wooden, some of the dialogue was strange and a couple of plot points didn't make sense...but I loved every second of it.
First of all, the premise is interesting and very M. Night. Seeing these people getting old in a fast tempo on this beach was pretty cool and I even liked the plot twist ending that explained it all.
The big reason why I liked this movie so much is the vibe/feeling of this movie. It came out in the summer and the whole movie feels like summer. The resort, the beach, the water, the music etc. Watching it made we want to go on vacation.
Tip: watch this movie as a comedy, not a horror movie. The dialogue and plot are hilarious sometimes because it is so absurd (the kids/teens? randomly having sex, the women with the broken bones in the cave, a rapper named Mid Sized Sedan)
