Media itt: movie/film discussion - Beware Spoilers

Eagle4

Eagle4

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY

* * *

The reaction to Marvel’s next superhero flick has been more positive than even the optimistic main actor, Chris Pratt could have hoped for. Insanely risky, even for Marvel’s standards, Guardians of the Galaxy features a talking raccoon, a green Saldana and a talking tree. To top it all off, it’s directed by James Gunn, notorious writer of both Movie 43 and Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed. Despite all the potential for disaster (there’s plenty), the film has been hailed as an entertaining, feel-good Marvel caper that’s totally original. So then, why’s it more of the same?

There’s a prominent formula that Marvel are seemingly sticking to. An introduction of the main characters as they assemble, a good look at the central antagonist and his motives, and some partially-relevant high-action antics just before a final showdown where everything explodes and the heroes eventually prevail. The same applies to GotG, and even then it can’t clarify the villain’s motives (more on that later). It’s wrong to say that GotG is an original Marvel flick; it’s disappointingly unoriginal, glittered up with colourful aliens and a fantastic 1970s soundtrack.

The film takes place, as the title suggest, around a myriad of areas contained within the galaxy. Opening with Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) as a child stating farewell to his mother, he is quickly whisked away into space and the rest is history. The opening credits feature his attempt to steal an orb with an unknown power set to Redbone’s Come and get Your Love (fantastic), setting the scene for what I expected to be an awesome watch. After his travails, he’s swiftly captured and reluctantly teams up with the aforementioned set of characters, Rocket the Raccoon (Bradley Cooper), Gamora (Zoe Saldana), Groot (Vin Diesel) and Drax the Destroyer (Dave Batista). Of course, they’re rough with each other at first, but then grow to like their teammates and end up as an (admittedly odd) group of buddies.

Which leads to one of my major qualms of Guardians of the Galaxy – it’s incredibly clichéd and only has a facade of quirky characters to shield criticism from most reviewers. A good portion of the characters aren’t fleshed out, generic to the point where they become caricatures. The main antagonist – Ronan (Lee Pace) has incredibly unclear motives where it’s easy to assume that he seeks world domination simply because he’s assigned as the bad guy. His villainy is exaggerated tenfold, almost to the point where it’s ridiculous. The main protagonist, Chris Pratt’s Peter Quill has nothing interesting going for him. He’s arrogant and irritating, and sure, he develops to take responsibility and becomes a better person, but I still wasn’t invested in his character. Gamora, meant to be a strong female character, is identified fairly early on as Quill’s love interest and is set aside until the end for the predictable big kiss. The only other notable female character – Nebula (Karen Gillan) has barely five minutes of screentime (though I’m sure she’ll return for the second installment). Michael Rooker’s Yondu is incredibly irritating and stalls the film whenever he’s on screen. Similarly annoying is Rocket – intended to be portrayed as the badass of the group, this intention is laid on so thick that it’s hard to resonate with him. Instead, he comes across as obnoxious and only obnoxious.

Yet it’s not just the generic characters that Guardians of the Galaxy suffers from. Most of the film’s jokes fall flat – including nearly everything that Rocket says and a running ‘I am Groot’ joke that gets increasingly more boring every time it’s uttered. Sure, wit is present, and Drax’s moments where he takes everything literally is a great example of this. So why can’t there be more moments of this comedic ingenuity?

While it may seem that this is more of a rant towards the film than a 3-star review, I want to clarify – I didn’t dislike GotG at all. Despite my problems with the film, it has a great entertainment value with some incredible sequences (the prison-escape scene comes to mind) and the best soundtrack of any film released in 2014. It may not be as good a film as you’d expect after all the praise dished out towards it, but Guardians of the Galaxy is definitely worth watching if you’re looking for an enjoyable film with little substance but plenty of action.
 
Tomahawk

Tomahawk

is a Team Rater Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Eagle4 -- I agree with you that Guardians of the Galaxy had some very cliche moments, and while that was slightly disappointing it can't be too big of a criticism. It's kind of hard not to go with them for a movie like that, after all it is meant to be a blockbuster and it's also a super hero movie. Personally, this was my favourite Marvel movie so far. Mostly because of things like the sound track and the humor, but most importantly is that the movie itself was very entertaining. Like, there are some individual scenes that were just excellent and I think you can't call a movie great if there aren't some outstanding individual scenes. GotG wasn't lacking in these, like other Marvel movies. That is just my opinion though. The soundtrack is excellent as well.
 
TheValkyries

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
I have these feelings and I think it has to be because of the construction of the film because like, my feelings are ubiquitous and perfect all the time.

Also I cringe hardcore at "group of buddies" because MISSING THE POINT SO HARD. Also I liked the reference to a kiss scene that never existed. A+ review would read again.
 
Spacewizard

Spacewizard

"more of the same"
"disappointingly unoriginal"
"incredibly clichéd"
"facade of quirky characters to shield criticism"
"the characters aren’t fleshed out, generic to the point where they become caricatures"
"incredibly unclear motives"
"almost to the point where it’s ridiculous"
"The main protagonist has nothing interesting going for him"
"He’s arrogant and irritating"
"I still wasn’t invested in his character"
"set aside until the end for the predictable big kiss"
"is incredibly irritating and stalls the film whenever he’s on screen"
"laid on so thick that it’s hard to resonate with him"
"he comes across as obnoxious and only obnoxious"
"Most of the film’s jokes fall flat"
"increasingly more boring every time it’s uttered"

3/5 - "definitely worth watching"
 
alexwolf

alexwolf

lurks in the shadows
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
Just watched The Incredibles, one of the best animation movies i have seen. Great humor, animation, plot, action, characters, and super powers. Also, am i the only one that found Elastic Girl incredibly sexy?

(i know i am many years late, stfu)
 
Last edited:
Tomahawk

Tomahawk

is a Team Rater Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
alexwolf said:
Just watched The Incredibles, one of the best animation movies i have seen. Great humor, animation, plot, action, characters, and super powers. Also, am i the only one that found Elastic Girl incredibly sexy?

(i know i am many years late, stfu)
Click to expand...
The Incredibles is one of my favourite Pixar movies! Probably my favorite, now that I think about it. Samuel L Jackson is just awesome. Though, I do kinda wonder how you think the animation is great when it's kinda outdated compared to recent movies ?_?
 
alexwolf

alexwolf

lurks in the shadows
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
Tomahawk said:
The Incredibles is one of my favourite Pixar movies! Probably my favorite, now that I think about it. Samuel L Jackson is just awesome. Though, I do kinda wonder how you think the animation is great when it's kinda outdated compared to recent movies ?_?
Click to expand...
Idk, it just felt great tbh.
 
Eagle4

Eagle4

Went to see Riot Club (or 'Posh', for you Americans) today.

An unexpectedly funny film with decent acting, but lacked any meaning behind it.
 
SlottedPig

SlottedPig

sem feio
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Has anyone seen Snowpiercer? It's been out for a year or so -- I haven't even heard of it until this week, but it's getting an insane amount of praise from reviewers and critics.

It's not a very similar movie but I'm also interested in seeing The Lego Movie, does anyone have anything to say about it? I saw trailers for it when I saw Frozen and while it didn't seem very interesting, its cast is absolutely outstanding -- not sure how great they would be in a movie, but Elizabeth Banks / Will Arnett / Nick Offerman / Alison Brie were really great in every show they've been in. Tagging Eagle4 since you praised it a few pages back
 
Last edited:
vonFiedler

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Every animated movie since Up has been mediocre to shit and Lego Movie was like a self aware cold shower for the industry. Yes it is worth seeing.
 
Eagle4

Eagle4

Yup, Lego Movie was fantastic. Hilarious at times, doesn't take itself seriously, has a wild plot and manages to not come off as a feature-length lego advert.

Seen a lot of films since Guardians of the Galaxy

Boyhood -


When it comes to reviewing films, the phrase ‘There’s nothing like this’ or ‘It’s completely unique’ is often overused and misused. In Boyhood’s situation, that same phrase is perfectly applicable – there really is nothing quite like Boyhood and it’s concept.

Taking place from 2002 to the present day, the whole cast grow up – literally – before your very own eyes. While the theme of nostalgia is apparent, that’s not the film’s primary focus. Instead, the prominent theme is simply life as a boy growing up (you don’t say…). Its plot is made up of strands – moments in life that can appear mundane and ordinary but when placed together, hold vast amounts of importance. It’s simply amazing and nothing short of a masterpiece in how director Linklater goes about achieving such a moving film – a film that has the power to evoke emotion from the audience just from the concept alone.

The casting choices are superb. There is an obvious amount of risk in choosing a cast that will grow up together over 12 years. Yet every single member is fantastic in the role they play – subtle acts that increase the realism of the film tenfold. Patricia Arquette is incredible as Mason’s mother. Her understated performance where she balances looking after her children with her relationship issues is both contained and touching. The same goes for all of the actors, really – actions that could come across as annoying or illogical are completely natural and can cause certain members of the audience to reminisce with a tear in their eye.

If there are any criticisms that could be made of Boyhood, it’s that a few scenes feel superficial; crammed in to deliver an important message to the audience about life. A scene in a darkroom where Mason’s photography teacher graces him with lessons on life has a facade of importance – but really is all fluff. And while it is touching to watch the smaller moments of the boy’s life, some do come across as a little too mundane and insignificant to serve any fulfilling purpose in the film.

Yet despite its (very few) problems, Boyhood manages to become one of the best films of the year – a powerful character study that focuses not on a particular young boy, but the concept of a boy and his life in general.
Click to expand...
Noah -
- Eh, a surprising step down from Black Swan for director Darren Aronofsky, Noah was visually appealing for the most part but didn't carry enough emotional weight to be a truly worthwhile watch.

Riot Club -
- Bizarrely hilarious and downright disturbing at times, Riot Club was a very entertaining flick that featured some great performances - even if the subject matter's deeper implications were too subtly portrayed.

Nightcrawler -


“What if my problem wasn’t that I don’t understand people but that I don’t like them? What if I was the kind of person who was obliged to hurt you?”

Lou Bloom, a hungry, sociopathic freelance crime cameraman played by the magnificent Jake Gyllenhaal is deeply unsettling. He’s a man on a mission; hell-bent on growing his ‘company’, he takes to the LA streets and hires a lowly intern (Riz Ahmed) to assist him in Lou’s endeavours to make as much money as possible by capturing horrific incidents. Yet as the film continues, Lou’s progression into insanity and lust for power showcases himself as the true horror…

This is Jake Gyllenhaal’s best performance of his career to date. With a mixture of Bale’s Bateman (American Psycho), Damon’s Ripley (The Talented Mr. Ripley) and Robert De Niro’s Pupkin (The King of Comedy), Gyllenhaal is downright terrifying and virtually unrecognisable, playing his character with such menace that it’s easy to forget he’s acting. While Gyllenhaal faces stiff competition in this year’s Oscars race, he does more than enough to earn a nomination; whether the Academy recognise his performance is another matter entirely. Losing 13kg of weight for his role, Lou Bloom looks hungry both figuratively and literally; an unnerving presence on screen that imposes himself in every single shot. With the film focused on Gyllenhaal, it is easy to disregard the additionally stellar performances of Nightcrawler’s supporting cast; namely Riz Ahmed as Rick, whom Lou hires, and Rene Russo as Nina, a television news producer that befriends and inevitably gets out of her depth with Lou. Riz Ahmed is brilliantly hapless as Rick, where the final 30 minutes establishes himself as a sympathetic pushover that struggles to stand up for himself when Lou manipulates. Similarly, Rene Russo makes a welcome comeback as a hardened, occasionally-despicable character that bears many parallels with Lou (though at times this point is enforced rather too heavy-handedly).

Aesthetically, Nightcrawler is a beautiful film. With stunning scenery, dark, brooding cinematography and an impressive method of shooting each car chase from first-time director Dan Gilroy, the LA streets and landscape haven’t looked this impressive since Nicolas Winding-Refn’s Drive. And in terms of pacing, Nightcrawler ticks the boxes as it slowly descends from one act to an increasingly despicable other, crescendoing into a tense, fascinating, brilliantly-edited final 20 minutes that keep your eyes fixated on the screen. Nightcrawler is intense, disconcerting and progressively insane, but is not without its faults.

The main problem of Nightcrawler lies within the writing of Jake Gyllenhaal’s monstrosity of a character. It’s desperately difficult to conform to director Gilroy’s intentions and root for Gyllenhaal’s anti-hero when he does nothing to earn the audience’s sympathy. Without a backstory or reasoning behind the character’s actions, any empathy for him diminishes. Scenes early on in the film, such as when he’s disappointingly rejected a job, do nothing when the audience are aware beforehand of how evil a character Lou Bloom is by the film’s opening scene. Can we really support the character’s endeavours when he’s so detestable and unlikable? I found that a difficult concept to wrap my head around.

As a thriller, Nightcrawler works brilliantly. As a satire of media, it struggles; incredibly stubborn in the point it’s trying to make, Nightcrawler flounders due to the fact that the character that epitomises everything wrong with the media’s lust for news is so inhumane, detracting from the film’s argument.

Yet despite Nightcrawler’s failures, it hardly burdens a fantastically-crafted story with a terrific performance from Gyllenhaal and a gripping finale that serves as one of the year’s best scenes. It may enforce its points a little too strongly, but the film is nevertheless an exciting, enjoyable flick that gives great momentum to both Gyllenhaal’s and its director, Dan Gilroy’s careers.
Click to expand...
Locke -
- I tried to like this film. I really did. Turns out Tom Hardy in a horrible Welsh accent talking in a car for 90 minutes isn't my cup of tea.

Under the Skin -
- Unsettling and mesmerising, I confess that I hardly understood what was going on at times. For all the film's achievements, I didn't FEEL, remaining impartial, if intrigued, to what the third act would entail.

The Maze Runner -


YA (Young Adult) flicks are going through a rather turgid time currently; Divergent‘s mediocre reviews and the similar reaction to The Giver is earning the profitable genre a bad reputation. And, presently, that’s what the genre represents: an easy way to churn out bog-standard productions and earn dosh following the startling success of 2012’s The Hunger Games. The Maze Runner is just another run-of-the-mill adaptation from a mildly popular YA novel in order to generate plenty of cash, right? Er, no actually. I’d go as far as to say that The Maze Runner is the best YA film in recent years, shadowing the might of even The Hunger Games.

The quality of The Maze Runner lies within the fact that it chooses not to conform to the stereotypes of the YA genre. It’s incredibly refreshing to watch a YA flick without worrying about distracting love triangles, numerous extravagant settings and an easygoing tone that doesn’t quite fit with the material and messages it attempts to send. No, The Maze Runner sets itself apart from its competition – and it would no doubt be receiving much better review if it were not for the negative connotations that its genre has garnered over time.

The plot is deceivingly simple at first – a teenager (Dylan O’Brien) find himself dazedly placed in a maze where other teenagers like him reside, in the same situation. They are trapped in a box – known as The Glade, where an impressive and colossal maze surrounds them, preventing their escape unless they find a seemingly non-existent exit. Here, disputes occur and tension rises, toppling over as the only girl is introduced into the fray (Kaya Scodelairo). As the walls to the maze then refuse to close, the terrible inhabitants of the maze known as Grievers come out to play…

Basically, think a modern version of Lord of the Flies.

One of the film’s greatest strengths is the tone and mood it creates; there is an overbearing sense of urgency, which comes across fantastically to the audience. While many YA flicks don’t encapsulate the looming, dread-foreshadowing tone that may be more suited to their source material (instead resorting to cheap jokes or melodramatic romance), The Maze Runner captures this perfectly. Scenes such as the sprint to escape the closing walls of the maze, and the introduction to the hideous Grievers, are incredibly tense and increasingly stressful (and enjoyable) to watch. The Maze Runner takes itself very seriously, and while that approach has been misused in recent history (Man of Steel comes to mind immediately), it’s masterfully used here to squeeze the largest amount of intensity out of the film as it can muster. Yet while the film is gripping, it’s also contemplative and intriguing, where many loose strands that the plot begins with urges the audience to remain focused.

Another impressive aspect of The Maze Runner is the acting of the main characters. Dylan O’Brien plays both the confused and the increasingly-confident hero extremely well, where his understated performance contains exactly the right amount of both bravado and pretense at knowing how to deal with the situation he’s in. Will Poulter, hot off last year’s BAFTA Rising Star Award, plays fellow trapped teenager Gally with a bullish confidence, his antagonistic actions contradicted by his good intentions. While he may serve as the antithesis to O’Brien’s protagonist, his performance is both sympathetic and easy to relate to. Thomas Brodie-Sangster (He’s 24! 24!) plays second-in-command Newt with subtle kindness, acted out well enough but mainly used for expositional purposes. Similarly impressive is relative newcome Ki Long-Hee, who plays the main action figure of the film, Minho. His performance carries an air of competence and physicality, a facade that protects his feelings of helplessness towards the situation he finds himself in.

Less impressive is the supporting cast, where the line deliverance is robotic and devoid of any empathy. It’s a compliment to the main cast’s acting (or inversely, an insult to the supporting cast’s) that their performance is so prominent in how lifeless they are. And while the plot is simple, it unravels rather quickly into many loose strands, where only a small amount are tied up (of course, there is 2015’s sequel to look forward to). Finally, despite the stunning CGI, where the maze in particular looks epic both aesthetically and in scale, there are a few short moments where the effects are clear and obvious, though that shouldn’t detract from the film too much.

One of the film’s main criticisms stems from its ending, and how anti-climatic and nonsensical it seems. Of course, the fact that the film is merely the first of a trilogy is neglected, where critics are too hasty in their distaste of the amount of questions the film leaves open by the end of its running time. In terms of its underwhelming nature, it’s representative of its refusal to abide to the YA stereotypes, instead choosing to end on a sombre, intriguing note that will give the audience goosebumps. The Maze Runner is a refreshingly intense, gripping and unique movie experience that will have the audience salivating for more.
Click to expand...
A Field in England -
- Oh look, Eagle4 enjoyed an artsy interpretive film, what a surprise! A Field in England is intense, moving, frightening, and batshit crazy. And I love it for that.

Holy Motors -


I’m not even going to bother trying to explain the meaning of Holy Motors, a bizarre, wonderfully eccentric film featuring a crazed performance from Leos Carax regular, Denis Lavant. That’s not to say that Lavant is the only actor that steals the show during his generous screentime; Kylie Minogue (yes, really) and Eva Mendes both make odd, hilariously puzzling appearances in what can only be described as cameos.

The film has a deceivingly simple premise: Mr.Oscar (his first name is never mentioned) has been tasked with 9 appointments that he must fulfil during the course of the day. Then things take off; ranging from becoming a family member of a house full of chimpanzees, stabbing a replica of himself and participating in stop-motion shenanigans, Lavant uses all of his acting capabilities to put on a show for the audience (often literally).

The symbolism behind Holy Motors is alluded to plenty of times, but is never really explored enough to make it seem as if it’s the film’s focal point. It’s an idea that seems clever and inventive, but when stretched over the course of 1 hour and 40 minutes, it loses its intrigue fairly quickly. A good example of this would be a scene where Mr.Oscar puts on the disguise of an elderly gentleman on his death bed. It’s an odd scene that, while making a subtle point to the audience, kills off any momentum the film has.

Nevertheless, Holy Motors looks fantastic and has many scenes of real genius (but lack importance too). A scene where Mr.Oscar runs across a graveyard terrorising citizens and munching on bouquets of flowers is a joy to watch, while Kylie Minogue’s brief appearance where she belts out a solo is moving and fascinating in equal measures.

The best way to approach the oddities of Holy Motors is to throw logic and reasoning out the door. You must accept that the occurrences of the film make sense to someone, and live with that. If you achieve that, you can experience an oddball adventure with many stunning scenes. It’s ending may leave you flabbergasted, but you’ll be flabbergasted for days on end.
Click to expand...
Mr. Nobody -
- This flick's sentiments, ambition and editing are second to none. A warning for those who take it upon themselves to watch this - It'll definitely take multiple viewings to fully appreciate the near-masterpiece that is Mr. Nobody.

Also Top 10 films of the year for me so far (will fluctuate):

1. The Grand Budapest Hotel
2. Boyhood
3. The Double
4. The Lego Movie
5. Inside Llewyn Davis
6. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
7. Nightcrawler
8. The Maze Runner
9. Riot Club
10.Chef

Seeing Interstellar on Saturday in IMAX 70mm - SO HYPED OH MY GODDD
 
Texas Cloverleaf

Texas Cloverleaf

This user has a custom title
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
SlottedPig said:
Has anyone seen Snowpiercer? It's been out for a year or so -- I haven't even heard of it until this week, but it's getting an insane amount of praise from reviewers and critics.

It's not a very similar movie but I'm also interested in seeing The Lego Movie, does anyone have anything to say about it? I saw trailers for it when I saw Frozen and while it didn't seem very interesting, its cast is absolutely outstanding -- not sure how great they would be in a movie, but Elizabeth Banks / Will Arnett / Nick Offerman / Alison Brie were really great in every show they've been in. Tagging Eagle4 since you praised it a few pages back
Click to expand...
Watched Snowpiercer literally yesterday, great movie
 
Eagle4

Eagle4

Interstellar was magnificent. It was a masterpiece.

Granted, I'm a self-confessed Nolan fanboy. I'll have a write-up for it later on in the week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Top