|
The Movie Reviews Thread (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Essentially, it was a fun movie if you're able to kind of cast your mind back for 2 hours and get over the fact that the upper-echelons of the Persian empire are ubiquitously blonde-haired, blue-eyed, and have British accents; Because, ya know, Royalty always does. |
Haha, I wrote a thread about it. It puzzled me as well. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
And I'm sure he got paid more for his role than I've earned in my entire life thusfar. :mad: |
When you develop a widely acclaimed cannon of work and are willing to suffer through a fiasco parade as a supporting actor who, in some way for each appearance, suffers some form of 'money shot', I'll take this small grievance a little more seriously. :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Redd
It scored 2,7 on IMDB and is about a talking dog. I don't know man, doesn't that make it pretty ing obvious? :p |
I think I was hoping for a Cohen Brother's appraisal of the Son of Sam murders in New York City. Judging from the decisions behind the making and release of the film, I can take solace in the fact I'm not the only person capable of thinking in a cataclysmic series of non sequitur. :toothless |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Haha, I wrote a thread about it. It puzzled me as well. |
Chinese John Wayne is not impressed
 |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| haha, Chong Wang. |
|
|
| An_Alt |
Meat187's Review of Inception
First of all, Inception is good. I like it for being creative and original, for challenging the audience and not being your everyday shallow Hollywood . The general idea is nice and has a lot of potential. Inception really had the possibility to be a 9/10. The top score is out of reach, since that twat DiCaprio is in it. That’s -1 automatically, even if he’s not bad in this one. But unfortunately Inception fails and lands at quite a lower score. Here’s why:
1) The plot sucks
I won’t discuss the plot in detail, cause it’s so open to interpretation. That can be good or bad, a cheap way out when you can’t come up with a better ending or a way to let everyone make up their own mind and make it a personal experience for the viewer. It rather feels like the first I would say, but whatever. Most likely everything is Leo’s dream. If it weren’t, the plot would suck really hard. Why can’t his kids fly to France, why is the whole thing involving Saito so retarded, why is the whole “Oh , we can’t simply get out cause Leo didn’t tell us about the sedation and that we’ll end up in Limbo-dance world (where your brain neurons works at over light speed) if we die and therefore it’s serious business and the audience must now ing care, whoa!” so retarded, etc etc? Yeah, let’s say it’s a dream. Probably one that’s more an allegory on making movies and how they could work on audiences rather than exploring Leo’s mind and past. OK, why not? But still, the industry espionage storyline is crap. In that case the whole I want to see my kids storyline is rather silly, too. No matter what interpretation you pick, the plot sucks at one point or another. I can’t find a level where Inception works for me, the allegory on movies and their making is the one I like best, but then the plot really is weak.
2) The dream worlds fail hard
One of the reasons it had so much potential was the “pure creativity” (as one characters phrases it) you can realize in dreams. And here Nolan fails brutally. Really, the best thing the guy can come up with is folding Paris on top of itself? And that’s only done to showcase his cool CGI the possibilities. Yeah, show the audience how cool it can be and then just stick with some uncreative action scenes and a bit of zero gravity. Seriously, what is this whole action crap in there for? Too keep people entertained, I guess. How about using creativity and some more crazy ideas instead of we see in every other movie, Mr. Nolan? Take a look at Kaufman’s Eternal Sunshine to see how it’s done. Yeah, he had less CGI and action but a thousand times better ideas than you. You should have come up with some really insane dream instead of that crap you got now, what a waste of possibilities.
So yeah, the whole thing left me largely disappointed. It’s nowhere near as good as it could have been and only barely lands in the realm of good at all. Mostly because DiCaprio sucks as little as possible for him (read: quite decent) and it’s refreshingly different and original.
7/10… maybe only 6.5 |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| quote: | Originally posted by An_Alt
Meat187's Review of Inception
First of all, Inception is good. I like it for being creative and original, for challenging the audience and not being your everyday shallow Hollywood . The general idea is nice and has a lot of potential. Inception really had the possibility to be a 9/10. The top score is out of reach, since that twat DiCaprio is in it. That’s -1 automatically, even if he’s not bad in this one. But unfortunately Inception fails and lands at quite a lower score. Here’s why:
1) The plot sucks
I won’t discuss the plot in detail, cause it’s so open to interpretation. That can be good or bad, a cheap way out when you can’t come up with a better ending or a way to let everyone make up their own mind and make it a personal experience for the viewer. It rather feels like the first I would say, but whatever. Most likely everything is Leo’s dream. If it weren’t, the plot would suck really hard. Why can’t his kids fly to France, why is the whole thing involving Saito so retarded, why is the whole “Oh , we can’t simply get out cause Leo didn’t tell us about the sedation and that we’ll end up in Limbo-dance world (where your brain neurons works at over light speed) if we die and therefore it’s serious business and the audience must now ing care, whoa!” so retarded, etc etc? Yeah, let’s say it’s a dream. Probably one that’s more an allegory on making movies and how they could work on audiences rather than exploring Leo’s mind and past. OK, why not? But still, the industry espionage storyline is crap. In that case the whole I want to see my kids storyline is rather silly, too. No matter what interpretation you pick, the plot sucks at one point or another. I can’t find a level where Inception works for me, the allegory on movies and their making is the one I like best, but then the plot really is weak.
2) The dream worlds fail hard
One of the reasons it had so much potential was the “pure creativity” (as one characters phrases it) you can realize in dreams. And here Nolan fails brutally. Really, the best thing the guy can come up with is folding Paris on top of itself? And that’s only done to showcase his cool CGI the possibilities. Yeah, show the audience how cool it can be and then just stick with some uncreative action scenes and a bit of zero gravity. Seriously, what is this whole action crap in there for? Too keep people entertained, I guess. How about using creativity and some more crazy ideas instead of we see in every other movie, Mr. Nolan? Take a look at Kaufman’s Eternal Sunshine to see how it’s done. Yeah, he had less CGI and action but a thousand times better ideas than you. You should have come up with some really insane dream instead of that crap you got now, what a waste of possibilities.
So yeah, the whole thing left me largely disappointed. It’s nowhere near as good as it could have been and only barely lands in the realm of good at all. Mostly because DiCaprio sucks as little as possible for him (read: quite decent) and it’s refreshingly different and original.
7/10… maybe only 6.5 |
an alt? ban.
seriously though i see where you're coming from on the dream world failing hard in that it's open to the creator's imagination, yet everything was very realistic in terms of setting. they could've had more trippy, ed up happen (as it often does in dreams). so, in that respect, the film, which focuses on something inherently surreal (dreams), isn't surreal enough, imo. |
|
|
| Sushipunk |
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Meat187. DiCaprio isn't any kind of fantastic actor. At all.
He's ok, but that's pretty much the extent of it. He's been in quite a few good movies, but those movies weren't good because of his average acting, they were good due to having a great script that nobody could up.
IMO.
Edit: Redd deleted his post? |
|
|
| Redd |
yeah I don't feel like having an argument on something I don't really know enough about :p
I deleted it before yours was posted. |
|
|
| Sushipunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by Redd
I deleted it before yours was posted. |
I know, I was kinda replying to you :p Should have quoted you, never mind.
Off to bed, I think. |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
i dunno, i think he's alright, and at least he's gotten out of the shadow of his role in titanic. he's played in quite a few above average movies.
the more i think about it, though, what makes an actor "great"? believability? verbosity? emotional impact? i mean, you would have to agree that the majority of hollywood actors out there are at least decent at what they do; the roles they play are fair and believable for the most part. compare this to performances from local or school-based theatre, random attempts from people on youtube, local commercials, public broadcast, and other amateur forms of acting and one can obviously tell the difference between a professional and a fool.
all of you guys can claim "xxxxx actor sucks" (i often make that claim about michael cera, for example) but unless they are unbelievable as their character due to ty under-or-over-acting, i honestly can say there are few terrible actors out there who get booked regularly for film. conversely, i feel that there are even fewer great actors that leave an impression or impact in any way.
basically what i'm trying to say is, most actors that people say suck are actually just average and way above average by the everyday american's (amateur) standards, and i think that many people dislike actors solely due to personal distaste about something such as their looks/personality/behaviors off-screen/etc. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by An_Alt
2) The dream worlds fail hard
One of the reasons it had so much potential was the “pure creativity” (as one characters phrases it) you can realize in dreams. And here Nolan fails brutally. Really, the best thing the guy can come up with is folding Paris on top of itself? And that’s only done to showcase his cool CGI the possibilities. Yeah, show the audience how cool it can be and then just stick with some uncreative action scenes and a bit of zero gravity. Seriously, what is this whole action crap in there for? Too keep people entertained, I guess. How about using creativity and some more crazy ideas instead of we see in every other movie, Mr. Nolan? Take a look at Kaufman’s Eternal Sunshine to see how it’s done. Yeah, he had less CGI and action but a thousand times better ideas than you. You should have come up with some really insane dream instead of that crap you got now, what a waste of possibilities. |
Though I agree with you, I'm afraid that a much more creative "dream world" would've blown so many people away that the film wouldn't be amusing any more, but bewildering. I watched it with a couple of friends and I often had to keep them updated on what was going on, specially before the kicks when the 4 dreams were happening simultaneously.
Imagine if they had unicorns galloping on sparkling rainbows in the limbo and Mal became a tiger... can you imagine how confusing it would be!? |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Though I agree with you, I'm afraid that a much more creative "dream world" would've blown so many people away that the film wouldn't be amusing any more, but bewildering. I watched it with a couple of friends and I often had to keep them updated on what was going on, specially before the kicks when the 4 dreams were going on.
Imagine if they had unicorns galloping on sparkling rainbows in the limbo and Mal became a tiger... can you imagine how confusing it would be!? |
i mean, they had to keep the dreams semi-realistic because otherwise there would be a chance that the dreamer would realize it was a dream and wake up, thus ing up the inception process or whatever. i understand why they did it, just wished they could've integrated more creativity into the film. |
|
|
|
|
