Author Topic: Respond to the last movie you watched (Jan 2011 - Nov 2013)  (Read 2532744 times)

Lobby

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2762
    • The Velvet Café
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8430 on: October 30, 2011, 03:39:01 PM »
Headhunters (Hodejegerne, Morten Tyldum, NO, 2011)

It barely ever happens that I write about a movie without having any idea at all about what other people have thought about it. There are always footprints all over the place, people have stomped around in the film nerd forum where I hang out, on the blogs that I follow and in the podcasts I listen to.

Some film bloggers and podcasters claim they manage to shut their ears and stay away from all reviews until they've watched the movie and made their own opinion about it. I have no idea of how they manage to do that. They must have some kind of delay mechanism attached to all their media consumption, keeping them from taking part of anything newer than six months old.

I want to listen to the latest shows and read the newest blog posts. And because of this I rarely get to see the movie completely fresh, as fresh as a field of snow early in the morning after a blizzard, before anyone has put their feet to the ground.

I usually don't get to see movies before everyone else since I don't get invitations for press screenings (apart from a PR company that for some reason has started to spam me about a one-man show in New York. Unfortunately they didn't think of offering me an airplane ticket at the same time.)

But since I go to the movies as much as I do, I've got the highest level in the loyal customer program at my theatre. And because of this I sometimes get to go to pre-screenings for free.

This happened to me the other week as I watched the Norwegian thriller, Headhunters, which won't come up in the theatres until later this week.

I know nothing about this movie; I have no idea about what any of my favorite film critics will think about it. I'm diving into the snow on my own this time, making an angel before the footprints have taken over. And gosh, it feels great!

Good craftsmanship
So what shall I say? Well first of all: standard thriller isn't my number one among film genres. I'm usually more into drama, science fiction and occasionally comedies. I probably wouldn't have watched this one in a theatre if I hadn't gotten the tickets for free. And this is a shame, because it was surprisingly good.

Basically it's a story about Roger, who works as a headhunter at day, but does some shady business at night to support his extravagant lifestyle. One day he thinks he's going to make a Really Big Crime, making him financially independent once for all. But all of a sudden something goes wrong and he finds himself running for his life from the guy he tried to trick.

 It doesn't sound too involving, doesn't it? Especially not since Roger from the beginning is pictured as a quite unsympathetic man who is cheating on his wife and generally doesn't think about anyone but himself. Why would I care about him?

However - there is something that the film maker must be doing right - I can't pinpoint it, but I suppose it's what they call good craftsmanship. All I know is that within five minutes I found myself absolutely absorbed into the plot. It held my attention in a tight grip all way through, and little by little the main character even managed to win me over.

This is a bit surprising since it's quite a violent movie, with a great deal of blood and splatter and gore and well... go figure. This normally doesn't work well with me, but it did, perhaps thanks to the dark humor it was sprinkled with. I can't go into details about it without giving away spoilers, but there are some scenes including a fight with a dog and an unusual place to hide on which I won't forget anytime soon.

This said - I suppose this film is kind of forgettable, the way that action thrillers usually are. It's meant to entertain as long as the screening lasts. Which actually isn't a bad thing.

Oh, and I wouldn't be surprised if Headhunters will pop up as a makeover on the other side of the Atlantic in a near future. Considering how successful The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was I bet they might like this one too.

And now my snow angel is finished. It's not particularly pretty -  but at least it's mine.

My rating: 4/5
« Last Edit: October 30, 2011, 03:42:44 PM by Lobby »
http://thevelvetcafe.wordpress.com/  - where I think aloud about movies

keith71_98

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 290
    • Keith & the Movies
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8431 on: October 30, 2011, 09:46:46 PM »
Loved your review Keith, i'll have to check it out once it arrives in the UK.


I appreciate that. I hope you get a chance to see it soon. It's well worth it.
Visit my Keith & the Movies site -
http://keithandthemovies.com/

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8432 on: October 30, 2011, 11:24:19 PM »
10 Reasons to Appreciate Blade Runner

1.   There isn’t a single character that is more powerful than the Los Angeles of 2019. A couple times Ridley Scott’s vision of the future is noticeably wrong.  Glass seems to break quite easily in 2019.  Ford’s copy of a photo is in a polaroid shape, which has gone the way of all trends.  But all of these errors of the past are fleeting and we end up being enveloped by the brilliantly created world. 

2.   The eyes—light directly into the iris, showing the reflection of a disk.  It is completely natural, but Scott makes it look artificial.

3.   Gives us a sense of how soon humans and manufactured humans will be inseparable.


4.   Vangelis’ music.  Yes, it is 80’s but Vangelis has always been other worldly, and thus timeless.

5.   The feel of future LA.  It is completely integrated, many people speaking an Asian language, racially segregated but completely interdependent.   We are allowed to gaze over crowded rooms, filled streets and it is all real.

6.   The speeches.  No Shakespearean monologues here.  Each speech is only a few sentences.  But they are packed like poetry.

7.   The action is also in short bursts, but the danger is real and powerful.

8.   Unique style.  Neon noir.  It is dark, rainy, yet filled with neon and video billboards. Bits of Scott’s vision of the future is wrong, but it is surprising how much Scott’s LA feels like modern Tokyo.

9.   Harrison Ford is upstaged by Rutgar Hauer in the climatic scene and that is no mean feat.

10.   How the death of an android causes us to reflect on our own death, the fact that all our lives are painfully short, and all of our experiences are quickly gone “like tears in the rain”.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

StudentOFilm

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3778
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8433 on: October 31, 2011, 11:10:25 AM »
Copied and pasted from my blog...

The Rum Diary



Having Johnny Depp as Paul Kemp is really a no-brainer. Depp had become friends with Hunter S. Thompson, the author of The Rum Diary and of whom Kemp is based on in an autobiographical sense. Depp had previously played Raoul Duke (another autobiographical character) in Terry Gilliam's adaptation of Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and even narrated Alex Gibney's documentary Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. If what I've heard about Thompson's speech patterns and behavior is to be believed, Depp has arguably inbued a little bit of Thompson in many of his roles. Don't get me wrong, Depp has an unbelievable range that can be seen in his ever-expanding list of accomplishments starting for me with What's Eating Gilbert Grape? and perhaps most recently witnessed in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

In The Rum Diary, Kemp is a bad boy agitator who can still appear suave as to mix with the high-society types, but he is still just as natural at hanging out with his blue-collar co-workers and knocking back shot after shot of a variety of liquors. Kemp is a journalist who has begun working for the San Juan Star in Puerto Rico and he uncovers a land-buying conspiracy involving a private island that is being overseen by a shady businessman (Aaron Eckhart). We witness Kemp/Thompson go from being inexperienced to an experienced man in terms of the passion for his craft. Still, that one notable arc doesn't prevent the film from being dull, boring, and feeling like it went on for thirty to sixty minutes too long.

Depp plays the character very one-sided and it feels weird that a character so confident has to sit around and act second-fiddle to everyone from businessmen to even his own editor (Richard Jenkins). Maybe this is because I can't help but think of Depp as this superstar actor/celebrity, but remembering my affinity for his work in films like Finding Neverland, I think I would be able to deal with having to watch Depp go from visiting private beaches to slumming with alchololism. Without a focused character, you have a wandering story. The other actors (the ones I've mentioned as well as Michael Rispoli and Giovanni Ribisi) play some interesting characters, but the characters that matter such as Kemp and Chenault, played by Amber Heard, are just to plain and simple. At least Heard was sensual in her portrayal, that helped keep my attention.

Writer-director Bruce Robinson had previously directed the phenomenal Withnail and I where he showcased the "high-end of social" drinking (as Kemp puts it) and managed to create a multi-dimensionality that really made the piece feel coherent. That is completely lacking in The Rum Diary and for all of Depp's passion for his late friend, Hunter S. Thompson, the film just feels like an exercise in digging oneself into a ditch.
"Be yourself, unless you suck."- Joss Whedon

My Switchboard

StudentOFilm

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3778
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8434 on: October 31, 2011, 11:32:18 AM »
Two other quick reviews...

Pi- Re-watch. Fun "losing-my-mind" kind of movie. The more I watch lower budgeted films, the more my filmmaking sensibilities actually feel like there is hope for what I'm going to try to be accomplising in five to ten years time.

Two-Lane Blacktop- With all of these articles/books I've been reading/skimming for my New Hollywood Renaissance class, you can find tons of quotes from everyone from Lucas to Coppola to Spielberg to Scorsese to Friedkin to Bogdanovich to Benton talking about how the goal of a lot of those American filmmakers of the 70s was to replicate the French New Wave across the Atlantic. Arguably, Monte Hellman's Two-Lane Blacktop is one of the closest in being a European Art Film with New Hollywood sensibilities (this is both my opinion, and what a lot of analysises seem to indicate). The problem was that "arthouse-films" can be hit-and-miss for me. I absolutely adore some and others I just don't get. Two-Lane is kind of in the middle. I really enjoy closest thing to a God that has walked the Earth actor Warren Oates and find myself mostly wanting to relate to him as he seems the most natural of a character compared to the emotionally distant driver/mechanic/girl. I sometimes don't understand certain motivations and decisions for the characters, but the unsettling mood that is created by Hellman and his crew really helps to compensate for my interest. Fascinating, but not as entertaining as what I think I wrongfully expected.
"Be yourself, unless you suck."- Joss Whedon

My Switchboard

AAAutin

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4186
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8435 on: October 31, 2011, 03:19:25 PM »
The Rum Diary

Felt very '90s "indie" to me: low-energy meanderer with quirky characters and hints of intriguing subplots that never really go anywhere. (None of this is necessarily bad.)

Two-Lane Blacktop

You should listen to the TWO-LANE BLACKTOP episode of DOUBLE FEATURE; the analysis is spot-on.

StudentOFilm

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3778
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8436 on: October 31, 2011, 05:10:49 PM »
The Rum Diary

Felt very '90s "indie" to me: low-energy meanderer with quirky characters and hints of intriguing subplots that never really go anywhere. (None of this is necessarily bad.)

I agree that it isn't necessarily bad and I can think of numerous films along those lines that I enjoy, I just felt like The Rum Diary's story and characters didn't really benefit from the style and approach that Robinson chose.
"Be yourself, unless you suck."- Joss Whedon

My Switchboard

AAAutin

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4186
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8437 on: October 31, 2011, 05:52:59 PM »
story and characters didn't really benefit from the style and approach that Robinson chose.

It's subtle, to be sure...almost to the point of being somnambulant. But I think that's a byproduct of both erring on the side of caution vis-á-vis creating a faithful adaptation and the rust/mellow of a retired director.

Lobby

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2762
    • The Velvet Café
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8438 on: October 31, 2011, 06:06:31 PM »
10 Reasons to Appreciate Blade Runner

What a lovely list! It totally made me want to rewatch it. And I have a good reason to! Even if it's high up on my 100 list of movies, I've never watched any of those special-director-extra-mumbo-jumbo versions that are out there. I probably should.

charming post Oldkid!
http://thevelvetcafe.wordpress.com/  - where I think aloud about movies

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #8439 on: October 31, 2011, 08:05:03 PM »
Comedian (rewatch) - It's weird that I have a copy of this when I only rated it a 7 the first time, but I've resolved to watch everything I own that I haven't seen for a while, so here goes.  I won't be keeping this one, but it was kinda fun to watch Jerry again.  I'd love to see his show, but he doesn't come to Portland that much.  And how about that Orny Adams?  Wow, that guy is a tool.  I remember them saying on the DVD commentary that they didn't intend to make him look bad, but he sure ends up looking bad.  It sort of sucks that the movie drops his storyline in the last half hour without any sense of where he's heading, but Jerry's the real show here.  Rating: Good


Zelig (rewatch) - Incredibly inventive idea for a film, and the technical achievement is quite impressive.  The footage matches perfectly, there are very few instances where the illusion falters.  Not as wall-to-wall funny as Allen's other comedies, but there are some howlingly good jokes in it.  And the film touches on issues like conformity and the cult of personality in clever ways.  At times, however, it just feels like an excuse for Allen to try on different disguises.  I don't have quite the same fondness for it as I do for Love and Death or Sleeper or a number of other Allen movies, but I enjoyed revisiting it, more than I expected to.  Rating: Very Good


Take the Money and Run (rewatch) - This was my favorite Woody when I was a young fella.  I guess the rapid succession of quick little gags appealed to me.  Now I'm less amused by it (perhaps partly due to overexposure) but there are some great bits.  The whole "gub" thing is really inspired, and the chain gang scene, and some of the small throwaway jokes like the "disguises" Virgil's parents wear.  Others fall kinda flat, but there's nothing truly awful in the entire movie.  Although not one of the greats, it's generally a fun time.  Rating: Good


Deconstructing Harry (rewatch) - Allen's homage to (and send-up of) Wild Strawberries has its pluses and minuses.  It's interesting, and in a way refreshing, to see him being so blatantly crass.  It's one of his darkest movies, and maybe his most cynical comedy.  Some of it is riotously funny, like the confrontation with Kirstie Alley in the middle of a patient's therapy session, or his version of Hell (with Billy Crystal in one of his most enjoyable roles).  But with all the little sub-stories going on, it comes off like a clearinghouse for unfinished ideas.  Also, the fragmented, jerky editing (because he's being "deconstructed," get it?) is an annoying quirk that adds little.  Still, there's a lots of laughs to be had and it's an interesting bit of self-deprecation combined with self-admiration.  Rating: Good

 

love