Third Eye Film Society ~ View topic

Author

Message

< Third Eye Film Forums ~ Current Film Talk

gromit

Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:46 am

Joined: 31 Aug 2004 Posts: 9016 Location: Shanghai

Oh, Lord ...

_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number.

billyweeds

Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:11 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 20618 Location: New York City

Blue Is the Warmest Color, the Cannes Palme d'Or winner with the unsimulated Lesbian sex scenes, is far too long for its own good and really not much more than a well-acted soap opera. Well-acted it is, however, and intermittently galvanizing. The sex scenes are relatively meh, however. Can't say they're "been there, done that" meh, just "see ya, wouldn't wanna be ya" meh.

The sex scenes are graphic without being anything more. They aren't porn by a long shot, but neither are they infused with love, just orgasmic verisimilitude. This is not enough to make them dramatically valid IMO.

bartist

Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:28 am

Joined: 27 Apr 2010 Posts: 6967 Location: Black Hills

Unsimulated, eh? Sounds like it's not up to the standard set by Laura Harring and Naomi Watts in Mulholland Dr. Which may show the useful role of imagination in such matters.

I must be a geek, too. I got Jeremy's Kelvin scale humor, though some might find absolutely zero to laugh about. Also enjoyed the sci-fi thriller, "We Need to Talk about Kelvin."

The Casimir Effect is an interesting aspect of what's called the vacuum energy in quantum physics. In effect, the metal plates create a gap in which the vacuum energy is suppressed. Given that the normal vacuum energy adds up to zero (I think Richard Feynman explained this really well, but don't have a link), this means that there is a negative energy density between the plates. Now if we could just build a starship drive using the concept...

_________________
He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days.

knox

Posted: Sat Oct 12, 2013 11:25 am

Joined: 18 Mar 2010 Posts: 1246 Location: St. Louis

True geeks, or so I'm told, have to read Cryptonomicon to really belong to the club. I have yet to achieve that, so I'm not quite there.

The "OK" joke was great. Then there was the astronaut who kept climbing up the ladder in one of the spokes of the rotating space station. He was trying to lose weight.

Joe Vitus

Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 5:03 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 14498 Location: Houston

Loved most of Gravity, but the idea that it's the best science fiction film since 2001 is ridiculous because 1) duh, Blade Runner, but more importantly because 2) there is also a conspicuous lack of philosophy, which must be a major component of any movie attempting to take the baton from Kubrick's masterpiece and 3) most importantly, Gravity isn't a science fiction movie. It's an adventure film. Yes, it's set in space, but not a hypothesized future method of existing in space or utilizing hypothesized future space technology, but pretty much (perhaps exactly) the reality of missions and technology as they work now. If this is a science fiction movie, then every movie with technology once written about and dreamed of before it came to reality--i.e., any movie with television sets, cell phones or submarines--must be a science fiction movie.

None of this takes away from Sandra Bullock's superb performance, the best use of 3-D ever, or a for the most part very well constructed script. It's a terrific movie, one that reminds me of early blockbuster Spielberg (i.e., Spielberg at his best).

_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.

-Topher

jeremy

Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 5:15 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

I went to a late morning showing of Rush at the art deco Orpheum. I was surprised to see the place barely alive with people of an age that even I can call them people of a certain age. I assumed that I had arrived during some special concession period, but it later transpired that most had either come to see “Diana” or “The Best Offer”. There were just four of us for Screen 3.

I was prepared not to like Rush another Manichean biopic from Peter Morgan or in this case a binary bi-biopic. Having journeyman director, Ron Howard, at the helm didn’t increase my optimism. I’d even preformed my brief review: “Saw Rush; it wasn’t.” As expected, “Rush” was too obvious and too pat, but I couldn’t help myself from liking it anyway. I think its prime attributes were the strength of underlying story and the allure and glamour of the lead characters. Dramatically convenient though it may have been, James Hunt and Niki Lauda really were diametrically opposed individuals locked in a fierce competition for the 1976 world drivers’ championship and vindication of their very different philosophies of life. Hunt actually was the charismatic, risk-taking playboy that many men would like to be and most women want to bed or rather be taken to bed by, and, in requisite contrast, Niki Lauda was all cold, Teutonic efficiency. It was testament to the filmmaking team that not only was Lauda revealed to be at least as equally heroic as Hunt, but that the film credibly ended on a note of mutual respect forged out of fierce and tested rivalry. The racing scenes were Greengrass gripping and the splicing of contempory footing largeloy seemless, but sensibly, the film concentrated on the human drama.

In my wilder flights of fancy, I have occasionally thought, who would best suited to play in a biopic of my life. I’ve never satisfactorily answered that question, mainly, you’ll relieved to hear, because I don’t dwell on it that much, though I am currently leaning towards the unprepossessing James McAvoy or perhaps the more hapless Simon Pegg or Martin Freeman…I wonder if Benedict Cumberbatch is free . MIchael Fassbender would be wrong for all sorts of reasons. Anyway, and getting back on track, I think James Hunt would have been pleased by how he was painted by Aussie Chris Hemsworth, who is proving to be much more than a surfer dude with a pretty face and a hot bod. Daniel Brühl was equally good as the unsexy, unlovable, but ultimately sympathetic, anti-Hunt, Lauda.

As an aside, and by way of warning, the seventies styling and clothes, especially on the delectable Olivia Wilde, somehow seemed right. Surely we’re not due another seventies revival?

As for Ron Howard, I thought his film, which he partuially financed, was reasonably restrained, prudently edited and contained real flashes of cinematic flair. Further, in this case, his old school style and occasionally clichéd story-telling worked, providing the drama with power and momentum. Overall, I think I preferred it to the critically praised and technically brilliant, but somewhat slight and austere Gravity.

_________________
I am angry, I am ill, and I'm as ugly as sin.
My irritability keeps me alive and kicking.
I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit.
I know beauty and I know a good thing when I see it.

billyweeds

Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 5:26 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 20618 Location: New York City

Jeremy's comparison of Rush and Gravity makes a certain sense. Although most critics and civilians might easily agree that Gravity is by far the more spectacular achievement, there's little gainsaying the fact that Rush is more of an adrenaline...er...rush.

Meanwhile, the reaction to Ron Howard's direction of Rush and Sandra Bullock's performance in Gravity both prove that artists can go for years doing mediocre work or worse and suddenly come through with brilliant accomplishments that justify all the waiting. Bullock seems to be getting a lot of respect for her acting now, although it's obviously still a problem for Howard-detractors to embrace the fact that his direction is not just good, it's amazing. In any case, hosannas to both of them.

marantzo

Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 8:18 am

Guest

Joe, Jeremy and Billy; the comments are getting too damn good! Very Happy

jeremy

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:01 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

I see tha that "the performance of "Rush" at the US box office has been somehwat lacklustre, which should be enough to scupper any hope (if there was any) of it figuring come the awards season. Far be it for me to accuse American audiences of being insular, but "Rush" is doing much better worldwide. However, perhaps this shouldn't be a surprise given that just about everywhere else is where F1 and the main protagonists are known,

Marc

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:28 am

Joined: 19 May 2004 Posts: 8424

The philosophy in GRAVITY is in the visuals. I think it's a film about re-birth and evolution. Bullock's character learns to become human again. She descends from the heaven's. She emerges from the primordial depths and starts to crawl and then walk. I could go into my thoughts on the last scenes of the vessel breaking up and racing toward earth trailing long white sperm-like tails. The amniotic fluid of space. Umbilical cords everywhere. The space capsule as birth canal. Bullock assuming the fetal position inside the womb-like space capsule. I could go on and on and on....It is every bit as philosophical as 2001. It's just less self-important.

As for Blade Runner. Great set design, costumes and CGI. But not much else. I find it boring.

I do agree Cuaron is creating the kind of magic one used to expect from Spielberg.

jeremy

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 6:12 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

Interesting thoughts Marc. I'm not convinced what you saw is necessarily what Cuaron intended, but I would agree the implication that inviting interpretation is symptomatic of the best art.

Last edited by jeremy on Mon Oct 14, 2013 6:32 am; edited 1 time in total
_________________
I am angry, I am ill, and I'm as ugly as sin.
My irritability keeps me alive and kicking.
I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit.
I know beauty and I know a good thing when I see it.

jeremy

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 6:13 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

I still had more fun watching Chris Hemsworth going large as James Hunt though.

billyweeds

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 6:17 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 20618 Location: New York City

As much as I respect (and even agree with) Marc's assessment of Gravity, he runs the risk in his description of making it seem more self-important than it is. All of what he says is there to be interpreted that way, but what made the movie work for me was its very human story, told (almost incidentally) in outer space.

Bullock does become "human" again after a long, sad period of nothingness and despair. It's her spiritual journey that made the movie work for me, and the visuals were an essential part of it, but not the only part. One of the most memorable scenes in the film was apparently (by Cuaron's own description) suggested and even written by George Clooney. It's a scene unable to be described without giving something important away, but it defines the term "spiritual awakening," and it's Builock's "white light moment." It's basically non-visual, but just as important as any of the visuals in the movie.

marantzo

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:09 am

Guest

I will be seeing Gravity of course and most probably in IMAX. When I read the comments about it I have to stop reading sometimes because it seems to be going into a spoiler. Could the ones who have seen the movie please whiteout any of your comments that are spoilers so I can know when it is a spoiler. Thank you.

billyweeds

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:20 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 20618 Location: New York City

Gary--I always white out spoiler comments and take pains not to reveal anything of a real spoiler nature.

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

View next topic View previous topic Page 2927 of 3197 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 2926, 2927, 2928 ... 3195, 3196, 3197 Next Third Eye Film Society Forum Index ~ Third Eye Film Forums

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum