CAROL
Cast: Cate Blanchett, Rooney Mara, Kyle Chandler, Sarah Paulson, Jake Lacy, John Magaro, Cory Michael Smith.
Dir: Todd Haynes.
I saw this on Christmas Day and it turned out to be the most perfect film to see on Christmas Day. It is technically a Christmas film and it's an absolute beauty of a film. In the 1950's when homosexuality is still very much a taboo,a housewife on the brink of divorce meets a younger woman behind the sales counter at a department store and begins a friendship and eventually an affair. I'd like to think of this as set in the same universe as Todd Haynes' previous film set in the 1950's, Far from Heaven. It's every bit as beautiful and as profound as that film, perhaps maybe even more so since this is less of a stylistic exercise of that film though Douglas Sirk's influence is still felt as well. Both Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara deliver beautiful performances. The cinematography by Ed Lachmann is stunning and the Carter Burwell is gorgeous. Yes, this is definitely one of my favorites of 2015.
Oscar Prospects: Totally deserving of Picture, Director, Actress (x2, Mara is a co-lead), Adapted Screenplay, Original Score, Cinematography, Production Design and Costume Design.
Grade: A.
The Official Review Thread of 2015
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
ROOM
Cast: Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay, Joan Allen, Sean Bridgers, William H. Macy, Tom McCamus.
Dir: Lenny Abrahamson.
To put it bluntly: I think this is one of the best films of the year. Both Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay give remarkable (some would say Oscar-worthy) performances as a mother and son held captive in a place simply called "Room". The subject matter is of course nothing that new and have been tackled in one way or another in Lifetime movie-of-the-weeks but the way the story is told, the way it was shot and the way it was acted, it makes for truly emotional ride that feels genuine, earned and authentic. The film manages to be sweet, life-affirming, hopeful, and moving without feeling treacly and phony. That's a remarkable achievement. I couldn't recommend this enough.
Oscar Prospects: Deserving of Picture, Director, LEAD Actor (Tremblay), Actress, Supporting Actress and Adapted Screenplay.
Grade: A.
Cast: Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay, Joan Allen, Sean Bridgers, William H. Macy, Tom McCamus.
Dir: Lenny Abrahamson.
To put it bluntly: I think this is one of the best films of the year. Both Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay give remarkable (some would say Oscar-worthy) performances as a mother and son held captive in a place simply called "Room". The subject matter is of course nothing that new and have been tackled in one way or another in Lifetime movie-of-the-weeks but the way the story is told, the way it was shot and the way it was acted, it makes for truly emotional ride that feels genuine, earned and authentic. The film manages to be sweet, life-affirming, hopeful, and moving without feeling treacly and phony. That's a remarkable achievement. I couldn't recommend this enough.
Oscar Prospects: Deserving of Picture, Director, LEAD Actor (Tremblay), Actress, Supporting Actress and Adapted Screenplay.
Grade: A.
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
I agree. I think Paulson would be a great "surprise" nominee. Not sure she has much of a chance, but it would really be nice for a true supporting actress, as you say, to be recognized in that category with a nomination. Also, it's utterly defiant against the category fraud narrative this season. And, you're right, Sabin, she absolutely accesses a more human side of Blanchett's character in the film and actually has interesting (and well acted without being showy) key scenes - alone - with each of the main characters (Carol, Therese, Harge).Sabin wrote:I'm working out my personal ballot right now and while Sarah Paulson is hovering at or slightly below no. 5, she would be such a welcome addition to the lineup. A true supporting actor in a field of leads (Mara, Vikander) and the routine of a dull routine of another Mirren nomination. Arguably Paulson does more to humanize and bring us into Blanchett's inner life than Mara.
It might be worth remembering that Blanchett has brought along surprise nominees to the party in the past (Sally Hawkins).
She's also been doing great work for years and I'd love to see her honored. I still think her sadistic schoolteacher character on "Deadwood" was one of her best roles.
I also wish that Isabella Rosselini were more in the conversation this year.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
It's funny you say that bc when I perished the Best Actor nominees of the past few years, the one that reminds me most of Cranston's nomination is Morgan Freeman for Invictus. It's simply a "triumph" of speaking like somebody else.
I'm working out my personal ballot right now and while Sarah Paulson is hovering at or slightly below no. 5, she would be such a welcome addition to the lineup. A true supporting actor in a field of leads (Mara, Vikander) and the routine of a dull routine of another Mirren nomination. Arguably Paulson does more to humanize and bring us into Blanchett's inner life than Mara.
I'm working out my personal ballot right now and while Sarah Paulson is hovering at or slightly below no. 5, she would be such a welcome addition to the lineup. A true supporting actor in a field of leads (Mara, Vikander) and the routine of a dull routine of another Mirren nomination. Arguably Paulson does more to humanize and bring us into Blanchett's inner life than Mara.
"How's the despair?"
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19377
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
Mirren was the best thing about Hitchcock, but her take on Hopper, at least in the trailer, is of an older Hopper than she would have been at the time of the blacklist. Still, I guess I'll have to see it to get a better idea of her characterization.
For anyone interested in checking out the real Hopper, just go to YouTube and search. She can be seen as late as 1963 on What's My Line.
For anyone interested in checking out the real Hopper, just go to YouTube and search. She can be seen as late as 1963 on What's My Line.
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
Not at all. I know it's kind of an unpopular opinion but I actually liked Mirren in Hitchcock and didn't so much mind her SAG mention that year (and wouldn't have terribly hated if she were nominated for an Oscar that year as well although I did, if un-enthusiastically, like the eventual line-up). Anthony Hopkins was hamming it up big time, but I admired Mirren's work. She plays a very empathetic and intelligent woman in the film and it's an intelligent performance. I haven't seen Trumbo yet, but she just seems to me like such a lazy choice this year -- in the vein of, say, Matt Damon in that Nelson Mandela movie I can't think of at the moment. I know conventional wisdom is that it's a "weak" year for Best Supporting Actress but, c'mon, there are better performances than that to cite.Sabin wrote:The good news is before seeing Trumbo, I was convinced it was a surefire nominee for Best Actor and Supporting Actress. After seeing it, I don't know. Helen Mirren is barely in the film and her character makes very little sense. She gives a big speech to Louis B. Mayer but we've seen her do this. I still haven't seen Hitchcock but I'm guessing it's the same exact thing.
I mean, even something like Sarah Paulson for Carol (maybe she can get the nomination that eluded Patricia Clarkson for Far From Heaven) I would support to not make Mirren happen this year.
SAG really does seem though to have a Helen Mirren thing.
Last edited by flipp525 on Sat Dec 19, 2015 1:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
I'm truly sorry, Magilla. Tee and BJ seem to love The Big Short. I'm truly astonished that the people who railed against The Wolf of Wall Street are staying silent on this one.
Trumbo is not a serious look at a serious subject, but I wouldn't call it a farce. The correct categorization is drama, I suppose, because there's nothing funny about Trumbo. I'd call it breezy if it wasn't so leaden. At one point Trumbo and Preminger discuss Exodus and Preminger demands more brilliant scenes in the movie (btw, people talk about "brilliance" and "genius" like adding salt into soup) and Trumbo says if you have all great scenes you have a boring movie, so Preminger replies "How about you make all the scenes great and I'll just even them out by directing averagely" or something to that effect. And then they grin. This movie is no great scenes, no good scenes, evened out by indifferent direction.
Life is too short for this kind of Oscar completism. I wrote Trumbo off when I saw the trailer but I got the screener so I gave it a shot. I don't know nearly enough about the history of the black list but the film definitely gives Preminger his due and I'd say he comes off looking a bit better than Kirk Douglas, but the film cares so little about contextualizing history that one should be more dramatically insulted than anything else. The thrust of the film is Trumbo has to write to make a living for his family so he uses fronts, his work wins Oscars he doesn't receive credit for, he helps get his friends work, he gets older, and by the combined efforts of breaking the silence and assistance from Otto Preminger and Kirk Douglas the film ends with him seeing his name on the big screen in possibly the hackiest shot of the year ("Written by Dalton Trumbo" mirrored on his glasses) and gives a big speech at the end. There is nothing politically challenging throughout the film. There are no insights into his writing. The setup for 'The Brave One' is a story about how when he and his wife were in Mexico they saw a boy with a bull, a friend says "Well, you'd better write it but make it good", a few minutes later (of writing off-screen if I recall) he hands it into Frank King with the disclaimer that unfortunately it's a good script, cut to him watching it win an Oscar while he's at home with his family. He really does watch the Oscars a lot, that Dalton Trumbo. The film has him talking about beating the black list by getting his fellow writers work but Louis C.K.'s character keeps saying variations on "Why are we intentionally writing crap for no money and no credit in an industry that doesn't care about us?" and I found myself agreeing with him.
It's people telling him again and again that he's a great writer. His actions take an emotional toll on his family, he drinks a little more, takes pills a little more, but he's never less than adorable. Bryan Cranston is...fine. If you've seen the trailer, that's the performance. It's hard to really fault him when the script gives him nothing to do and he's not really directed. Cranston is such an animated performer that it's kind of amazing that the same director who did Austin Powers couldn't at least have some fun with him. There's a scene between him and Louis C.K. gazing off into the distance, talking about politics (barely) and future plans (sort of), it ends with Cranston tossing off some eloquent wordplay, Louis C.K. saying something like "Fine, I'll do whatever you want if you just shut up and not talk like that agin", and Cranston not being able to promise that. Any other director would present that scene in any way other than two people looking off into the distance in close ups and intermittently back at each other. Maybe they're walking somewhere or doing something. Or maybe if you're running out of light for the day, maybe Trumbo puts his arm around Louie. They do nothing. They just stand there. There is no inflection to that or really any other scene in the movie. It's a parade of caricatured celeb goonery as well. The guy who plays Kirk Douglas at least sort of looks like him. Michael Stuhlbarg does Edward G. Robinson with zero attempt at the accent and almost no makeup until the end where he looks like an alien warlord. The guy who plays John Wayne looks more like Patrick Warburton.
The good news is before seeing Trumbo, I was convinced it was a surefire nominee for Best Actor and Supporting Actress. After seeing it, I don't know. Helen Mirren is barely in the film and her character makes very little sense. She gives a big speech to Louis B. Mayer but we've seen her do this. I still haven't seen Hitchcock but I'm guessing it's the same exact thing. Because we just have no idea if Alicia Vikander will go supporting for The Danish Girl or Rooney Mara for Carol, it's impossible to know if there will be room for Helen Mirren in this. Kate Winslet and Jennifer Jason Leigh are such stronger contenders for their work and beyond that, who knows? Alicia Vikander for Ex Machina? Rachel McAdams for Spotlight? Jane Fonda for Youth? I was hoping Elizabeth Banks, who isn't revelatory at all but merely career best, would get more notices for Love & Mercy but that doesn't seem to be happening. I'm guessing people will vote for Helen Mirren whether or not they see the movie...but ironically Bleecker Street has done such a good job of sending out this screener that it may be unavoidable. Bryan Cranston though is tricky. Unless there was some power struggle behind the scenes, nothing in the film is really his fault. He's not good in the film but I could see people enjoying him because his character is nothing if not consistent. Best Actor seems to be a bigger mishmash of movie star turns and dress up than usual. I haven't seen The Revenant or The Danish Girl so I can only imagine DiCaprio and Redmayne are both in, while if Fassbender doesn't survive the inexplicable Steve Jobs meltdown it will be embarrassing. Beyond that, it's Cranston and Depp playing dress-up and Damon and Carell trading on their personas (a scienced-up know-it-all and a blustery loud mouth). The best thing going for Cranston is his performance looks like the kind of thing they honor. If the film is nominated, I will change my Philomena quote.
Trumbo is not a serious look at a serious subject, but I wouldn't call it a farce. The correct categorization is drama, I suppose, because there's nothing funny about Trumbo. I'd call it breezy if it wasn't so leaden. At one point Trumbo and Preminger discuss Exodus and Preminger demands more brilliant scenes in the movie (btw, people talk about "brilliance" and "genius" like adding salt into soup) and Trumbo says if you have all great scenes you have a boring movie, so Preminger replies "How about you make all the scenes great and I'll just even them out by directing averagely" or something to that effect. And then they grin. This movie is no great scenes, no good scenes, evened out by indifferent direction.
Life is too short for this kind of Oscar completism. I wrote Trumbo off when I saw the trailer but I got the screener so I gave it a shot. I don't know nearly enough about the history of the black list but the film definitely gives Preminger his due and I'd say he comes off looking a bit better than Kirk Douglas, but the film cares so little about contextualizing history that one should be more dramatically insulted than anything else. The thrust of the film is Trumbo has to write to make a living for his family so he uses fronts, his work wins Oscars he doesn't receive credit for, he helps get his friends work, he gets older, and by the combined efforts of breaking the silence and assistance from Otto Preminger and Kirk Douglas the film ends with him seeing his name on the big screen in possibly the hackiest shot of the year ("Written by Dalton Trumbo" mirrored on his glasses) and gives a big speech at the end. There is nothing politically challenging throughout the film. There are no insights into his writing. The setup for 'The Brave One' is a story about how when he and his wife were in Mexico they saw a boy with a bull, a friend says "Well, you'd better write it but make it good", a few minutes later (of writing off-screen if I recall) he hands it into Frank King with the disclaimer that unfortunately it's a good script, cut to him watching it win an Oscar while he's at home with his family. He really does watch the Oscars a lot, that Dalton Trumbo. The film has him talking about beating the black list by getting his fellow writers work but Louis C.K.'s character keeps saying variations on "Why are we intentionally writing crap for no money and no credit in an industry that doesn't care about us?" and I found myself agreeing with him.
It's people telling him again and again that he's a great writer. His actions take an emotional toll on his family, he drinks a little more, takes pills a little more, but he's never less than adorable. Bryan Cranston is...fine. If you've seen the trailer, that's the performance. It's hard to really fault him when the script gives him nothing to do and he's not really directed. Cranston is such an animated performer that it's kind of amazing that the same director who did Austin Powers couldn't at least have some fun with him. There's a scene between him and Louis C.K. gazing off into the distance, talking about politics (barely) and future plans (sort of), it ends with Cranston tossing off some eloquent wordplay, Louis C.K. saying something like "Fine, I'll do whatever you want if you just shut up and not talk like that agin", and Cranston not being able to promise that. Any other director would present that scene in any way other than two people looking off into the distance in close ups and intermittently back at each other. Maybe they're walking somewhere or doing something. Or maybe if you're running out of light for the day, maybe Trumbo puts his arm around Louie. They do nothing. They just stand there. There is no inflection to that or really any other scene in the movie. It's a parade of caricatured celeb goonery as well. The guy who plays Kirk Douglas at least sort of looks like him. Michael Stuhlbarg does Edward G. Robinson with zero attempt at the accent and almost no makeup until the end where he looks like an alien warlord. The guy who plays John Wayne looks more like Patrick Warburton.
The good news is before seeing Trumbo, I was convinced it was a surefire nominee for Best Actor and Supporting Actress. After seeing it, I don't know. Helen Mirren is barely in the film and her character makes very little sense. She gives a big speech to Louis B. Mayer but we've seen her do this. I still haven't seen Hitchcock but I'm guessing it's the same exact thing. Because we just have no idea if Alicia Vikander will go supporting for The Danish Girl or Rooney Mara for Carol, it's impossible to know if there will be room for Helen Mirren in this. Kate Winslet and Jennifer Jason Leigh are such stronger contenders for their work and beyond that, who knows? Alicia Vikander for Ex Machina? Rachel McAdams for Spotlight? Jane Fonda for Youth? I was hoping Elizabeth Banks, who isn't revelatory at all but merely career best, would get more notices for Love & Mercy but that doesn't seem to be happening. I'm guessing people will vote for Helen Mirren whether or not they see the movie...but ironically Bleecker Street has done such a good job of sending out this screener that it may be unavoidable. Bryan Cranston though is tricky. Unless there was some power struggle behind the scenes, nothing in the film is really his fault. He's not good in the film but I could see people enjoying him because his character is nothing if not consistent. Best Actor seems to be a bigger mishmash of movie star turns and dress up than usual. I haven't seen The Revenant or The Danish Girl so I can only imagine DiCaprio and Redmayne are both in, while if Fassbender doesn't survive the inexplicable Steve Jobs meltdown it will be embarrassing. Beyond that, it's Cranston and Depp playing dress-up and Damon and Carell trading on their personas (a scienced-up know-it-all and a blustery loud mouth). The best thing going for Cranston is his performance looks like the kind of thing they honor. If the film is nominated, I will change my Philomena quote.
"How's the despair?"
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
THE END OF THE TOUR
Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Jason Segel, Anna Chlumsky, Joan Cusack, Mamie Gummer, Ron Livingston.
Dir: James Ponsoldt.
I actually have a still unread copy of Infinite Jest on my shelf just daring me to read it. And I will within the next year. That's my New Year's resolution. Anyway, this is about Rolling Stone magazine writer David Lipsky's interview with that book's author David Foster Wallace at the tail end of his tour promoting the aforementioned book which has been critically acclaimed. I have no idea how accurate this is to the events and to the character of David Foster Wallace but as a movie, it's still a pretty good once. Jason Segel is a real revelation in this. I've always thought he was a good comedic actor but here, as Wallace, he showed range I've never seen him do before. Jesse Eisenberg complements him well as Lipsky. It breaks no new ground or doesn't offer any new insights on what it means to be a writer, etc. but it is still a compelling character and dialogue driven piece.
Oscar Prospects: Jason Segel is a LEAD actor in this one. He's worthy to be mentioned. Maybe Adapted Screenplay? But I think the competition's too tough right now.
Grade: B+
Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Jason Segel, Anna Chlumsky, Joan Cusack, Mamie Gummer, Ron Livingston.
Dir: James Ponsoldt.
I actually have a still unread copy of Infinite Jest on my shelf just daring me to read it. And I will within the next year. That's my New Year's resolution. Anyway, this is about Rolling Stone magazine writer David Lipsky's interview with that book's author David Foster Wallace at the tail end of his tour promoting the aforementioned book which has been critically acclaimed. I have no idea how accurate this is to the events and to the character of David Foster Wallace but as a movie, it's still a pretty good once. Jason Segel is a real revelation in this. I've always thought he was a good comedic actor but here, as Wallace, he showed range I've never seen him do before. Jesse Eisenberg complements him well as Lipsky. It breaks no new ground or doesn't offer any new insights on what it means to be a writer, etc. but it is still a compelling character and dialogue driven piece.
Oscar Prospects: Jason Segel is a LEAD actor in this one. He's worthy to be mentioned. Maybe Adapted Screenplay? But I think the competition's too tough right now.
Grade: B+
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19377
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
Tell me more. You guys are now discussing three films I was hoping I wouldn't have to see, but being an Oscar completist I will probably have to.
I've avoided Trumbo because the trailer completely turned me off. It looks more like a farce than a serious film about a serious subject. It's also factually inaccurate. It perpetrates the myth that Kirk Douglas ended the blacklist. Trumbo himself said it was a lot of people doing a lot of things that ended it. His family gives more credit to Otto Preminger who was the one who risked his own career and reputation to go before the WGA and insist that Trumbo be given on-screen credit for Exodus. Because Spartacus was released a month before Exodus, Douglas gets to say that his was the first film released with Trumbo's name on it. Lee Grant gives the credit for her re-emergence to Fredric March who insisted on her casting as his daughter in 1959's Middle of the Night.
I'm putting off seeing The Big Short and 99 Homes because they hit too close to home. I was in the banking industry for forty years and saw up close what these investment bankers did to it. The guys at the top may be making tons of money but there were a lot of competent middle managers and their staffs who were squeezed out because of their antics. I was one of the few who actually retired on his own and was given a big retirement party as opposed to a pink slip. If I waited a few more years, I may not have been so lucky.
I was also indirectly the victim of the foreclosure process. Because there were so many foreclosures occurring all around me 4-5 years ago, and the misguided antics of my Home Owners Association board to sue the builder of our condos for spurious reasons, I was forced to sell my eight-year-old California home to an investor at a huge loss because lenders were scared and only all-cash sales were going through in my community at the time. Fortunately I had enough equity to be able to put a substantial down payment on my New Jersey home.
I've avoided Trumbo because the trailer completely turned me off. It looks more like a farce than a serious film about a serious subject. It's also factually inaccurate. It perpetrates the myth that Kirk Douglas ended the blacklist. Trumbo himself said it was a lot of people doing a lot of things that ended it. His family gives more credit to Otto Preminger who was the one who risked his own career and reputation to go before the WGA and insist that Trumbo be given on-screen credit for Exodus. Because Spartacus was released a month before Exodus, Douglas gets to say that his was the first film released with Trumbo's name on it. Lee Grant gives the credit for her re-emergence to Fredric March who insisted on her casting as his daughter in 1959's Middle of the Night.
I'm putting off seeing The Big Short and 99 Homes because they hit too close to home. I was in the banking industry for forty years and saw up close what these investment bankers did to it. The guys at the top may be making tons of money but there were a lot of competent middle managers and their staffs who were squeezed out because of their antics. I was one of the few who actually retired on his own and was given a big retirement party as opposed to a pink slip. If I waited a few more years, I may not have been so lucky.
I was also indirectly the victim of the foreclosure process. Because there were so many foreclosures occurring all around me 4-5 years ago, and the misguided antics of my Home Owners Association board to sue the builder of our condos for spurious reasons, I was forced to sell my eight-year-old California home to an investor at a huge loss because lenders were scared and only all-cash sales were going through in my community at the time. Fortunately I had enough equity to be able to put a substantial down payment on my New Jersey home.
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
It's a baffling picture. How is it not at least...average? The script isn't great by any means but it feels like it's directed by someone who can't remember if he left the stove on.
It's sole redeeming virtue was to make The Big Short look like a masterpiece. It's been a wildly underwhelming few days of moviegoing.
It's sole redeeming virtue was to make The Big Short look like a masterpiece. It's been a wildly underwhelming few days of moviegoing.
"How's the despair?"
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
Also Worst Collection of Performances From Actors Who Have Been Pretty Great Elsewhere.Sabin wrote:If there was an award for Worst Casting Director, it should go to Trumbo. Ever year. Forever.
Also Worst On-Screen Obsession With the Academy Awards.
Also, potentially, Worst Oscar-Nominated Film of 2015.
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
If there was an award for Worst Casting Director, it should go to Trumbo. Ever year. Forever.
"How's the despair?"
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
THE LOOK OF SILENCE
Cast: Adi Rukun.
Dir: Joshua Oppenheimer.
The Act of Killing was one of my favorite films from 2013. That documentary about Indonesian death squads who murdered around a million people during the '60s alleging them to be communists but who are currently considered heroes in the country, made my jaw drop and shook me to the core at its depiction of real-life monsters who are all-too human. That film focused on the perpetrators, and this sequel, or companion film whatever you wanna call it, focuses more on the victims, particularly from the point of view of an optometrist whose older brother was one of the million people who were murdered. He goes around to contact and talk the people who were directly or indirectly responsible for his brother's death. Though a more conventional film than The Act of Killing, it is no less powerful in its depiction of the worst aspects of human nature but with occasional bursts of light of the best of humanity as well which packs an emotional punch. You need not have seen the first film to appreciate this but you still should regardless. See both. It is one of the best films of the year.
Oscar Prospects: Definitely a strong contender for the Documentary Feature Oscar.
Grade: A.
Cast: Adi Rukun.
Dir: Joshua Oppenheimer.
The Act of Killing was one of my favorite films from 2013. That documentary about Indonesian death squads who murdered around a million people during the '60s alleging them to be communists but who are currently considered heroes in the country, made my jaw drop and shook me to the core at its depiction of real-life monsters who are all-too human. That film focused on the perpetrators, and this sequel, or companion film whatever you wanna call it, focuses more on the victims, particularly from the point of view of an optometrist whose older brother was one of the million people who were murdered. He goes around to contact and talk the people who were directly or indirectly responsible for his brother's death. Though a more conventional film than The Act of Killing, it is no less powerful in its depiction of the worst aspects of human nature but with occasional bursts of light of the best of humanity as well which packs an emotional punch. You need not have seen the first film to appreciate this but you still should regardless. See both. It is one of the best films of the year.
Oscar Prospects: Definitely a strong contender for the Documentary Feature Oscar.
Grade: A.
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
STAR WARS EPISODE VII: THE FORCE AWAKENS
Cast: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Max Von Sydow, Lupita Nyong'o, Domnhall Gleeson, Andy Serkis, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew, Iko Uwais.
Dir: J.J. Abrams.
Ah yes. The much hyped, highly anticipated, more than inevitable continuation of the Star Wars saga. This pretty much follows what Creed did with Rocky: It followed the original film's formula and narrative beats while giving fans what they want. As is the case with Creed, it's not a bad thing. For me, personally, I'm not a CRAZY fan of Star Wars. I like it just fine. I enjoy them a lot, even the prequels. I don't turn my nose up on it though some fans want to make me (LOL). Having said that, yes, this is a solid science fiction action movie, thankfully (mostly) free from George Lucas' over-the-top cheesy dialogue and actually contains some pretty human moments mostly coming from Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and Adam Driver. It won't win over the haters but fans, from casual ones like me to hardcore ones, will be happy and satisfied.
Oscar Prospects: No, not Best Picture. Actually Harrison Ford IS actually a longshot contender for Supporting Actor. It will get in Best Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing.
Grade: B+
Cast: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Max Von Sydow, Lupita Nyong'o, Domnhall Gleeson, Andy Serkis, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew, Iko Uwais.
Dir: J.J. Abrams.
Ah yes. The much hyped, highly anticipated, more than inevitable continuation of the Star Wars saga. This pretty much follows what Creed did with Rocky: It followed the original film's formula and narrative beats while giving fans what they want. As is the case with Creed, it's not a bad thing. For me, personally, I'm not a CRAZY fan of Star Wars. I like it just fine. I enjoy them a lot, even the prequels. I don't turn my nose up on it though some fans want to make me (LOL). Having said that, yes, this is a solid science fiction action movie, thankfully (mostly) free from George Lucas' over-the-top cheesy dialogue and actually contains some pretty human moments mostly coming from Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and Adam Driver. It won't win over the haters but fans, from casual ones like me to hardcore ones, will be happy and satisfied.
Oscar Prospects: No, not Best Picture. Actually Harrison Ford IS actually a longshot contender for Supporting Actor. It will get in Best Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing.
Grade: B+
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6398
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
Re: The Official Review Thread of 2015
CREED
Cast: Michael B. Jordan, Sylvester Stallone, Tessa Thompson, Phylicia Rashad, Tony Bellew, Wood Harris.
Dir: Ryan Coogler.
I'm not a fan of the original Rocky (I mean, it's okay but Best Picture? Please.) and I didn't bother seeing any of the sequels but the fact that Ryan Coogler is directing this (I'm an admirer of his first film, Fruitvale Station) and the good reviews overall compelled me to see this. It may be blasphemous to say in some quarters but I think this is a better film than the original. Yes, it does follow the formula of the first film but it infused it with better filmmaking and a better lead actor (Michael B. Jordan is a freakin' STAR). Sylvester Stallone, to be fair, does acquit himself very well here, humbly accepting his age and allowing the lead star to shine while managing to also have a moving arc. Ryan Coogler is definitely no one-trick pony. I can't wait for his next film.
Oscar Prospects: Many are saying Stallone should WIN. Personally, I think it's a nomination-worthy role but I think Michael B. Jordan deserves a nomination ahead of him. I think it should be also considered for Cinematography, Film Editing and Sound Mixing.
Grade: B+
Cast: Michael B. Jordan, Sylvester Stallone, Tessa Thompson, Phylicia Rashad, Tony Bellew, Wood Harris.
Dir: Ryan Coogler.
I'm not a fan of the original Rocky (I mean, it's okay but Best Picture? Please.) and I didn't bother seeing any of the sequels but the fact that Ryan Coogler is directing this (I'm an admirer of his first film, Fruitvale Station) and the good reviews overall compelled me to see this. It may be blasphemous to say in some quarters but I think this is a better film than the original. Yes, it does follow the formula of the first film but it infused it with better filmmaking and a better lead actor (Michael B. Jordan is a freakin' STAR). Sylvester Stallone, to be fair, does acquit himself very well here, humbly accepting his age and allowing the lead star to shine while managing to also have a moving arc. Ryan Coogler is definitely no one-trick pony. I can't wait for his next film.
Oscar Prospects: Many are saying Stallone should WIN. Personally, I think it's a nomination-worthy role but I think Michael B. Jordan deserves a nomination ahead of him. I think it should be also considered for Cinematography, Film Editing and Sound Mixing.
Grade: B+