Dude, what the hell are you talking about? It's cool if you didn't enjoy the film, it was based heavily on Jewish symbolism, but calling it generic is just dumb.

Just watched Restoration with Robert Downey Jr. and David Thewlis (One of my fave actors). 8/10 interesting history piece with a unique sense of humour and a good story.

I've been meaning to watch Shindler's list for a while but it seems like 3 hours of intense black and white depression so I'm not super down.

What's wrong with intense black and white depression?

Different tastes I guess

On Coens:

Miller's Crossing: I agree with Expedience, it was rather forgettable. A remake of an older film noir flick, but with darker overtones (due to Hollywood sensibilities being what they were when the original was made) and doesn't really capture much of the feel of the original, or film noir. A romp without much of interest taking place. One of their poorer films, if not the poorest.

A Serious Man: I can't say I was too fond of the film either, but I sort of see where they were going with it and why it doesn't really have much of an appeal to anyone too familiar with the ethos and ideas of people of American Jewish descent. The film is take on Job (the unlucky dude from bible) and Jewism and its ideals as well as America in the 1960s. Yeah, everyone is pretty much a prick in the film and the film more or less knows it. It's a sort of a dark, quirky comedy like Coens have been making for a while, but this one goes for a rather niche crowd. I do like how they build up the rabbis. Three rabbis, supposedly wise in the matters of life and religion, yet all three pretty much don't have anything to say to the Job of the film. Or really anything to offer for anyone. It makes some interesting points, but as a movie it wasn't very enjoyable. Don't know if it works better for members of the target group.

No Country for Old Men: I can see why people wouldn't enjoy it, but I think the understated dialogue, explosive action and stoic approach to storytelling really captured the feel of Cormac McCarthy's writing. Just strong performances all around and much to my liking.



I used to watch movies and thinking "this isn't believable at all", fortunately no longer. I don't think it is necessary in art/storytelling/whatever - be it books, films, comics, games - for the storytelling to be realistic. Nor is it really desirable either, unless the story calls for it. As long as everything that happens serves some purpose in the story, storytelling, theme setting it's all good. A coherence within a piece of work is desirable, but even that can be waived in case it is necessary, for example completely forgetting some plot point to increase the atmosphere of dread in a horror movie.

Conan: The Barbarian (remake) - 7 out of 10.

I've gotta say, I was expecting some stuff from this movie. I was expecting a not so good acting and I got it (Ron Pearlman and Morgan Freeman both just didn't care through it). I was expecting a very generic revenge story and I got it. I was extpecting un-even storytelling and I got it. The one thing I didn't expect from this was to enjoy it.....and I did. The film knows what it is, dosn't try to do anything outside of what it is and decides to just be itself, and I just enjoyed it. There was an enjoyable ammount of blood for an Unrated film (Not sure if there's an unrated version out). The action was fun to watch. There was also some legit "Holy Shit" moments in it, like the opening scene with the baby in the womb and later on when Conan uses a decapitated head to get past security. I also actually enjoyed the witch daughter, I'm a sucker for female villians and she was fun one. So yeah, this surprised me, it wasn't anything great or even good, it was just a fun action/fantasy film and I can't complain about that.

Apollo 18 - 4.5/5

I'd been told this film was disappointing; non-scary, badly-shot and uninteresting. They, as I've often found, were wrong. Of all the "found footage" style films that have been in vogue since The Blair Witch Project, this is the scariest one I've ever seen. The feeling of claustrophobia and utter abandonment is almost enough to induce a panic attack, especially when the scares REALLY start coming.

I think it's because as a culture we've become used to the moon being accessible; we see the footage from the Apollo missions and think "been there, done that". We had forgotten how difficult every step of that journey was, and how utterly dangerous the positions of the men on each flight were; how close they were to never coming home. This film has reinforced that for me; the sense of loneliness and helplessness adds more than anything to the chill factor. In space, no-one can hear you scream.

I saw Pina last night in 3D. This was the first time I'd seen a 3D movie in a very long time, so that took some getting used to, but once I adjusted, I really enjoyed the film. I don't know much about modern dance (or dance in general), but the film was so beautifully shot that I got completely absorbed by the performances. Great score as well. The "narrative" is an interesting one as well. The way they interweave larger performances with short interview clips and solo dance pieces kept me engaged the entire time. I'm not sure if such a method would work in any other film however.

Underworld Awakening- saw it in a "fake imax", but still impressed. Very loud movie. It nearly felt like there was an earthquake during the action scenes.

Just watched The Grey, which I thought was very well done, and was really successful at creating an isolated atmosphere. Bonus points for Liam Neeson.

I have to say I think that Empyreal's taste in movies is extremely shitty. Which is surprising, since his taste in power metal is great. Or not so surprising I guess. Or maybe I just have completely opposite tastes when it comes to movies.

In the name of the Father (1993)
4/5

Powerful, thrilling, and critically acclaimed cinema following the story of Gerry Conlon and the rest of the Guildford Four - a wrongly convicted group blamed for the 1974 Guildford Pub bombings in London, during a period of heightened unrest between the IRA and British forces in the UK. Seemingly unanimously praised actor Daniel Day Lewis leads the cast of this evocative, moving film, as Conlon, and gives a brilliant performance as a small-time thief from Belfast, beaten and broken by the police, forced into admitting guilt for these heinous crimes, by an incompetent and corrupt British Police force under pressure to find the culprits. Aside from a stunning performance by DDL, in one of his most celebrated roles, Pete Postlethwaite does excellently as Giuseppe, and acclaimed actress Emma Thompson makes an appearance. If you like your films moving, powerful and with meaty subject matter, this based on a true story film should appeal to you, and it's pretty easy to see why it was so critically acclaimed. Apart from an apparent few historical/factual inaccuracies, it's pretty hard to fault this film really. The fairly contemporary nature of the the subject matter, at the time of the film, with a biography by the real-life Gerry, means that Daniel Day Lewis was here pretty confined in a role less fantastical, or open than his others, and he really explodes, doing a brilliant job of some challenging stuff. His breakdown for example is just an acting masterclass. I'd recommend this film.

I'm just restlessly waiting for Quentin Tarantino's next masterpiece.

Expendables 2 looks fun especially with Chuck Norris added.

I love Tarantino,and I'm sure Django Unchained will kick infinite ammounts of ass,but based on the details made available so far,I'm not super excited. Great cast though.

Yeah on paper, QT's film plots don't look like much but it's in the execution of those little awesome details(Tarantino-isms) that fuel the enjoyment and that is why he is the best filmmaker working today. I see there is now a release date. I'll be very much looking forward to Christmas Day just for that.

And maybe next time you could actually give a real argument or statement instead of saying stupid shit. I thought The Grey was good too so I guess you have shitty taste as well.

^ hahaha, what the fuck is this shit?

Conan the Barbarian (1982)
3/5

I just watched this for the first time in many years, and while flawed, mostly dude to the hammy acting, and campy dialogue, this well-regarded sword and sorcery epic wins out due to insanely good soundtrack, awesome gore and stunning sets and costumes. The film is a mixture of influences from the original pulp writings, and the later books by other authors, so many fans of those literary works are bound to have differing opinions on the film depending on where their allegiances lie. In my opinion, the film's considerable budget could have been better spent on casting, and perhaps a bit more (though i hear scripts were in the works for 10+ years) on script writing, as these are really the only weak areas of the film. As with the horror genre to which i'm partial, sword and sandal type flicks, though constantly attempted by many directors passionate of the subject matter and genre, often fall down due to lack of budget - but with its $20 million, one could be forgiven for perhaps thinking a better job could have done in the acting and dialogue departments. With cheap horror films for example - we expect these deficiencies, and they're part of the charm , but with a production of this scale they seem out of place. Anyways, an enjoyable film with an epic narrative of vengeance and quest, and plenty of brute force, and nude or partially fur-clothed babes including a seductive snake witch and sword-proficient scantily clad Valeria, who beheads guards while barely clothed in fur, along with Arnie as Conan and his sidekick Subotai. The strongest performances are by James Earl Jones as the villain Thulsa Doom, and Max von Sydow as King Osric.

And he's managed to piss a lot of people off with the rating..

Hahaha, his next film is really called Django Unchained? Be prepared for a flux of "Django" films in movie stores. Anyway, looking forward to it.

The Grey - 4/5

A very cold, isolated film about Liam Neeson and some of his co-workers getting stranded out in the arctic wastelands after a plane crash and having to fend against wolves and all sorts of other perils. Each of them has his own inner trouble and one of the main themes is the desperation and longing one feels for comfort in hard, harsh environments - we all have things to cling to. Neeson gives one of his best performances in a while and the other guys all do pretty well themselves. The main strength of the film is the huge, enveloping atmosphere of cold and desolation. I felt downright hopeless several times when watching this, right up to the bloody closing scene. If there's a failing to this, it's that the character development is just too basic and stunted and has all been seen before. It's not bad, but it does keep the movie as a whole from reaching a higher plane.

Haha what the hell, Chuck Norris forced them to rate The Expendables 2 PG-13? The whole appeal of the movie is supposed to be watching endless people get blown to pieces.

"It was reported that the change was requested by Norris before he would take part in the film, as he did not appreciate the swearing present in the script."

So he doesn't appreciate cuss words but he has no problem with excessive violence? What a fucking twat.

Please let this move by him obliterate Chuck Norris memes and quotes for good.

Chuck Norris doesn't go down on guys for pleasure, he does it to make their ears cave in.

Only Invasion USA is real. I'm surprised that film hasn't been bandied about given how much the internet seems to love talking about Chuck Norris.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089348/

It was my first time at the theater since at least over a year, my father and I went to see this instead of the awful SW episode 1. Yeah, Liam Neeson is very great in it, I feel it was an important movie for him, kind of biographical in some metaphoric ways (Neeson lost his wife in a ski accident in Québec ). His character has to deal with despair and separation from his wife. It's a tough and sad movie as it is a survival movie, not only against wolves and cold, but against his own troubles. It's a most watch if you like these kind of movies. Yes, it can be considered ''simple'' as Empy said, it's not a over the top action flick and doesn't have pretention to be one.
4,1/5 (only to be a bitch and to be different than Empyreal.)

It's hard to watch 1989's Batman again when I got The Dark Knight on the shelf.

It's very different, but I still think Batman Returns is the best of them. Yes, I'm a fan of Chris Nolan's vision of the bat, but I feel he removed all the fantasy from it. Opposed to Burton's movies. His two movies had the right amount of seriousness and fantasy opposed to the non flexible serious atmosphere of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. The joker always has been a twisted crazy and kind of funny character, no way to change that though. Can't wait for the final movie of the trilogy, but I prefer my Batman a bit more sillier (not like Clooney in Batman and Robin silly hahaha).

The 1989 Batman and The Dark Knight are about on par for me. Amazing movies, both. I hated Batman Returns though...fucking loathed that one.

Today I went to the movie rental store and got some movies.

Tonight I watched Bullitt with Steve McQueen. I really liked it for what it was, although I didn't quite understand the intricacies of the plot. I like when I can digest movies 100%. Anyway, it had a lot of class that I don't see in movies anymore. Although I think I was expecting a bit more of a proto-Dirty Harry Callahan type thing. I was waiting for things to show up, you know, the at-odds chief, stuff like that, didn't happen. I get how he was a bit of a cowboy cop, he did kind of go out on his own, and he did try and conceal a death from everyone, including his superiors. But how was the airport scene against protocol? The villain was trying to leave the country, he'd shot at the cop, then he went in the airport, shot a security guard, and then the cop shot and killed him. Thus meaning that the trial that was the whole reason for the movie, couldn't proceed. But how did he screw up? How exactly is that unjustified, if at all? Sounds to me like an imminent danger to ones self and others, in other words, self defense.

My dad liked the movie until the ending, which I think ruined it for him. It was kind of sudden. He said that it "made no sense."

The car chase scene proves to me that you don't need fancy computers and stuff to make excitement, just screaming engines and squealing tires. The sort of stuff Judas Priest used to write about.

I also watched That's What I Am. My dad picked it out. At first I was put off by the PG rating, thinking it would be some sort of kids movie, and questioning why he got it. But after about 10 or 15 minutes it picked up. It actually dealt with some more mature themes. It actually wasn't bad. On a related note, Ed Harris is an under-rated actor, by the way.

Both the Nolan batman movies are amongst my favourite movies. Dark Knight rises is my most anticipated movie right now. Please let it be the greatest thing ever.

Terry Crews on the PG-13 rating:
"It's PG-13. Do you really think only men 40 and over saw the first one? The kids bought tickets to "Eat Pray Love" and walked right into "The Expendables". In fact, they were YOUR kids."
Exactly, maybe he should be telling THAT to Chuck, not the people bitching about it.

Taxi Hunter
Taxi Hunter is a 90ies Hong Kong flick from the time making "Cat III" (HK's equivalent of restricted, but it has no "higher" rating) exploitation flicks was quite common there, the director Herman Yau having made the infamous Ebola Syndrome and The Untold Story subsequently. Although this one isn't a Category III and not quite exploitative, it still bears influences. My brother found Super to be the best comparison. I've seen only glimpses of it, but he seems to be right. It's kind of a comic book-y film with highly varying tones; sometimes it's quite dark, violent, but at others it's surprisingly light. Anyway, the film goes like this: a successful, mild-mannered assurance guy looses his wife to some very egocentric taxi driver. He realizes how lots of them rip off their clients and such, and he decides to clean the streets of them. The drivers are really shown as evil characters and the director really tries to make you root for the "anti-hero" even if what he's doing is quite wrong. At first I thought the film would take a more serious and bleak route, but it almost feel like the thing was lifted from a comic book. Although the police has one of the most ridiculous comic-relief cop, he kinda has his place when seeing the film differently. He's mostly annoying and way over the top (except for a scene or two where he's actually funny) but he doesn't really detract from the film. The lead actor, Anthony Wong (which is in the two aforementioned HK flicks) is quite good and believable, one of the best out there I'd say. He's really good with unconventional roles (any roles by the way) and seeing the shy guy starting to hate taxi drivers and kill them, even struggling to do so at first is awesome.

This, absolutely. I found the Nolan films sillier because of the way they were presented. It's a superhero movie, realism doesn't belong in Batman.

Vatel: Depardieu as Vatel, a master steward within the embroiling diplomatic intricacies of the Sun King's nobility in 17th century France. The whole thing takes place during the king's visit to Vatel's master's estate and Vatel is put in charge of entertainment, decoration, cooking and everything. Great sets, costumes and food even if the whole story is rather... naive. Which I suppose is kinda the point: Vatel being too honorable for the denigrating and irrational ways of the court. To showcase that the royalty and nobility of the time were really out of touch with the realities of life. Sort of what Marie-Antoinette was as well.

Our Man in Havana: Alec Guinness as a vacuum cleaner salesman-turned-agent in pre-revolution Cuba. Kind of a fun romp with the international intrigue served up for laughs. Sort of like Burn After Reading. A few good laughs here and there and some profound moments with the German Hasselback. Other than that it all feels a little too light and yet not fun enough.

The Haunted Palace: While the title is taken from Poe, most of the plot is actually from Lovecraft's The Case of Charles Dexter Ward even if some slight elements call forth the rather gothic ideas of lovers coming back from the grave - a theme Poe poked fun at even if he used it himself as well. The atmosphere is oppressive and Vincent Price is excellent as always. There are some meshes of The Dunwich Horror in the flick as well which are used and promptly forgotten.

Phantom Woman: A low-budget film noir about a man's wife getting murdered while he spent the evening with another woman (innocently enough) whose name he never learns. He gets the death sentence and so it is left to his secretary to find the truth. She starts digging and getting into dangerous situations and yet is miraculously saved from everything. She enlists the lead detective of the case as well as her and her boss's mutual friend to aid her cause. It all sort of comes together rather haphazardly even if the noirish cinematography and characters are pretty good. Well, except for the murderer.

Ride the High Country: Peckinpah western about an old lawman trying to get his self-respect back. He enlists the help of an old friend and his young apprentice on his job to escort gold from the mountains. On the way they get a girl hangaround, who is going to the gold mining camp to marry her boyfriend. Of course, this boyfriend turns out to be a scoundrel so they have to get her back to her father. It's all described (and soundtracked) to be rather comedic, even if things get rather raunchy, gritty and serious at times. The main theme falls on taking the high road, doing what's right, making up for the bad things. And how difficult it all is to do in the real world outside of high ideals. Randolph Scott and Joel McCrea bring wonderful performances as the two old friends.



If you didn't know, that scene is pretty much the first of its kind - a scene that set the example from which almost all of the car chase scenes that came afterwards took their cues.

It's such a gorgeous film. Its demented genius lies in the fact that it's brilliant in some departments (action direction, production design, James Earl Jones's performance) and utterly terrible in others (Arnie's acting, dialogue, basic story logic...). I'm not ashamed of loving it, and disliking the 2011 film because it's simply middle-of-the-road.

And the music, of course - Conan the Barbarian has one of the most rousing, epic scores in the history of cinema.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34x6m-ah ... AAAAAAAAAA

Oh hell yes, while I am noticing some diviations from the book, it still looks like a damn fun time.

I didn't like Repo either Emp,for pretty much the same reasons you outlined. Those songs were really unmemorable. I could barely remember anything about any one of them immediately after seeing it. Great blog by the way.

Yup, it's because they didn't have any actual choruses or hooks. They were just singing random bullshit.