The classic "pleasant cinema experience." It actually was. Over two hours long, and it never drags. Sure, the third act feels a bit sluggish. But it’s not just a momentary dip; the entire final third loses steam. Or maybe the first two acts set it up poorly? I bring this up often regarding films—when one part doesn't mesh correctly with the rest. Helgeland clearly isn't a true director; he can't decide if this is a comedy about gangsters or a gangster flick with comedic elements. There's a distinction there. On one hand, you have the Kray brothers acting like cartoon villains, and on the other, they're heavy, intense psychopaths. I'm not saying those styles can't coexist, but there's a better way to execute it. One way that would have actually worked for me. Regardless, the movie is fine. Hardy is his usual reliable self. It's a blast watching him; you can tell he's having a field day with this dual role. Visually, Helgeland's direction is solid. He clearly studied the genre. The cinematography suggests his biggest influence is Scorsese during the Goodfellas era, though you can see traces of Guy Ritchie and even some early Coppola.
Aside from the mess under the big blue tent, Coachella is a total disaster—but it’s such a massive disaster that it’s actually entertaining. Since I’m a genius, I showed up for the second night wearing nothing but shorts and Chuck Taylors. Luckily, I grabbed a poncho, which was really just a heavy-duty trash bag, so at least my upper half stayed dry.
(Shout out to the psycho girl under the blue tent. Out of all the guys there—who were significantly better looking and more attractive than me—she chose me. For the first five minutes, it was a massive ego boost; for the next hour or two, it was just me wondering how the hell to escape this bizarre situation, because she’s a literal psycho.)
I made it about thirty minutes in before I turned it off. Maybe I'll revisit it when there’s nothing else on. (There’s always something else on.) Not worth the time.
You're the only one getting this wrong, treating a movie like it’s some tennis match or a football game. In art, nothing is ever crystal clear to everyone. Opinions are like trash—everyone’s got one. To you, that movie is a classic. To me? It's just a remake. You're throwing my words back at me, and I'm doing the same to you. Whatever.
Quote : shadow dancer
You can wait until Judgment Day, or you could just go back and actually read my posts with some common sense.
Quote : shadow dancer
I don't have anything better to do than just quote you back to yourself. You already know exactly what you wrote.
Quote : shadow dancer
Plagiarism is a sliding scale, isn't it? I’m not even a huge fan of Sergio Leone's work, but I respect the hustle—meaning me (not your imaginary 60,000 critics)—that he didn't just steal it; he made a legitimate remake. Still, he stepped all over Akira Kurosawa's rights and ended up in court, and honestly, he deserved it. Take it or leave it.
True Detective Red Riding, the trilogy from '74, '80, and '83.
I'm trying to figure out what it actually means when people say two episodes of The X-Files were "directed in a Rashomon style." What exactly is this Rashomon directing style? Is it more like a crawl or a butterfly, and if it's a crawl, can anyone point out the specific difference between those two styles?
Michael Lopez2 said:I think Star Wars is great and really charming. I haven't seen Star Wars yet (unbelievable, but some people exist 😬), so I want to see how it compares to The Walt Disney Company.
Regarding Japanese cinema, my top Criterion picks are:
House of Onibaba House of Onibaba Rashomon Rashomon Twenty-Four Eyes Gate of Hell Woman in the Dunes
Mr. Smith gets props. Joe does too. I watched the latter and it’s worth the time. John Wick is a must if you're into action—you won't find better choreographed fights, and the plot isn't total garbage. I have a feeling you might actually dig that Dolan movie. Personally, I find that whole gay-hipster-mommy-issues thing exhausting, but you probably won't mind. 😛
Supposedly, the movie was butchered in post-production. For a moment, I felt like there were missing minutes—maybe a minute or a minute and a half—before every single scene started. This had potential, but if you believe David Ayer, the producers or whoever they are completely ruined it.
Can I switch from Joshua Smith5 to either Lou [assuming it's taken] or Reeth [assuming it's free]? If you think either change is minor enough that people will still know who they're dealing with, let me know.
Go with Reeth since Lou is unavailable. Reach out to Nice.
I saw Dylan’s "divine" appearance at the end of the movie as the answer to all of Llewyn's problems. See, while he's a decent performer, Llewyn—much like his so-called friends—doesn't actually stand out in a sea of similar faces. Dylan, with his distinct vocal style and songwriting, elevates the entire folk scene in the eyes of the average person. He sits on a pedestal, sure, but he brings Joan Baez, Phil Ochs, and Judy Collins up there with him. So, if I read that ending correctly, Llewyn Davis is going to make it. After all, isn't his character based on Dave Van Ronk?
Props to Jared Padalecki. It’s refreshing to see a (semi) celebrity who isn't afraid to speak their mind. Hoffman was an incredible actor, but the fact—if it's actually true—that he had over a dozen bags of that golden-brown stuff in his apartment points to an intrinsic death wish. A stupid way to go... leaving behind three young kids.
That scene where Tom Cruise sits in a diner and slowly realizes that Jon Voight playing the villain carries more weight than the entire Bourne franchise.🙂
Dean Parisot, plus that solid vibe from the first movie about retired, badass assassins, is what got me into this one. No regrets. Yeah, you can tell the actors are just messing around and not giving it their all, but honestly? That’s exactly what I’m looking for. There are some decent lines scattered throughout, Malkovich has this incredibly creepy, sweet little smirk, but Lee Byung-hun is the standout, obviously. The first installment was better—definitely better—but this isn't bad either. It drags a bit, and some of the action sequences are poorly directed, but sitting in a packed theater where people are laughing and the jokes land... the atmosphere carries it. It's fine. Passable.
