| Author |
Message |
|
| gromit |
 Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 1:42 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
But it's also true that most people have a good side and do good things in some contexts*. Which is why the mass murderer always seemed like such a nice guy that the neighbors are shocked. So most people just build their core self-image around the good stuff and justify/rationalize the bad.
* Hell, Hitler was a vegetarian, a painter, liked dogs ... |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| inlareviewer |
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:40 pm |
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
| Saw Spotlight. Will be editing the Year-End List for inclusion accordingly. Exceptional, wholly deserving of the plaudits and then some. |
_________________
"And take extra care with strangers/Even flowers have their dangers/And though scary is exciting/Nice is different than good." --Stephen Sondheim |
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:06 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
I thought Trumbo was pretty cheesy.
A lot of scenes seemed to exist solely to get in a witty line.
Everything rather black-and-white about good guys and bad guys (and gal). I did like the HH hats, and there were some good lines.
For a film about a scriptwriter, this seemed to have a rather weak script.
Overall this felt rather movie of the week to me. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:06 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
gromit wrote: I thought Trumbo was pretty cheesy.
A lot of scenes seemed to exist solely to get in a witty line.
Everything rather black-and-white about good guys and bad guys (and gal). I did like the HH hats, and there were some good lines.
For a film about a scriptwriter, this seemed to have a rather weak script.
Overall this felt rather movie of the week to me.
All sorta true, but I thought the movie was entertaining anyway. The black-and-white characterizations? Totally right on. What gray area is there in that story? And it's not like Trumbo was painted as a saint. He was kind of an asshole in many ways. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
I thought Trumbo was depicted as a great guy in the first half of the film -- a talented writer, good family man, principled and ethical, and willing to help others in the same situation. His communism is just presented as merely caring about others. It's only after he goes to jail and has his livelihood threatened and previous friends/acquaintances treat him as a pariah that he starts to act rather dickish, primarily towards his family, in his quest to provide for them and continue his career and undermine the black list. His bad behavior is presented as how the red scare / black list affected him. Part of how it victimized everybody as his final speech puts it.
Otherwise, I kept having to remind myself that the one character was supposed to be Edward G. Robinson. And the John Goodman cameo is rather cartoonish. Would an exec really trash his own office to intimidate/threaten a minion of the morality police? It was as though they saw such a Goodman cameo in a Coen Bros. film and adapted it. I could have written a line or two making that more plausible. And indeed I found myself tidying up and improving the screenplay while watching it.
There were some good lines and moments, such as Trumbo deflating John Wayne. Just so many of the scenes were clunky while getting to the good lines. |
Last edited by gromit on Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:34 am; edited 1 time in total
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:38 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
As for grey area -- they do bring up the case of Edward G. who like a number of lefties at the time reluctantly cooperated but only named the names the gov't committee already had. Sure it's knuckling under and not the greatest thing to rat on your friends even if they have already been exposed, but it's also not helping the gov't and not giving them any information. And as Edward G says in the film, Trumbo can keep working by borrowing another name, but Edward G can't keep acting by borrowing another face.
That was rather brief in the film, but also rather interesting. Though the film basically trashes Edward G by first having Trumbo hear Edward G's testimony while in prison. And then in case you don't get the point, the large Negro prisoner says that a snitch like that would get killed quickly in prison. And Edward G's sacrifice -- a year without any work or offers -- is scoffed at as only having to sell one painting from his wall of fortune.
I just thought they stacked the deck that this group of people = unpleasant assholes who are also anti-semites, strike breakers, ugly capitalists, and hacks, while the other side consists of heroic principled folks who support the common man and are talented and good family men to boot, at least until the stress gets to them.
Also, you don't get the feeling that anyone in Hollywood actually thinks there is a threat or subversion, but rather they're seem to be just vindictive power-hungry tools who want to settle scores or boost their image. As much as we think it's ridiculous, people on the other side politically often really do believe that Obama is ruining the country or that Medicare and The Affordable Care Act and such really are encroachments of communism and the downfall of what made America great. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:12 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
I was pretty impressed with the Steve Jobs film. Especially since I really don't and never had much interest in Jobs or Apple. There are a lot of personalities and egos flitting around and clashing. Jobs is a prety arrogant, ruthless asshole for much of the time, decidedly lacking in empathy. I never really got the appeal of Apple or Jobs, beyond the products. And after the film I still have no idea how, say Bob Dylan, fits in with the company ethos.
But the relationships and clashes are quite riveting. Terrific casting and acting. A lot of good snappy dialogue. The family and father-daughter drama is so much better integrated and smooth than that found in Trumbo. I really liked this film.
It started to seem a little odd, over-the-top that all of these clashes happen right before big product launches. But it certainly adds a dramatic urgency to the proceedings. And when it gets to the third go-around, even Jobs ponders why it seems all his friends/colleagues/adversaries seem to get drunk and come to speak truth to him during the countdown to stagetime.
I'll have to mull it over some more.
But it's interesting how disinterested I was in the film Trumbo about a man and era I find interesting; while I was very interested in the film Steve Jobs about a man and industry/era I am/was not interested in. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| inlareviewer |
| Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:33 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
| From billyweeds' recommendation and our own innate fondness for La Silverman, caught I Smile Back. Although its narrative contours and essential construction are Basic Indie Film 101: Self-Destructive Surburban Ennui, and one wishes Josh Charles' husband character was written and given screen weight equal to the degree his talent merits, it matters not one whit. If ever an actress carried a picture by her and its exposed nerve endings in a sheer display of unaffected existential and emotional truth, it's Our Girl Sarah, whose stark yet subtle, incapable-of-a-false-note turn surpasses any Leading Lady we've seen of late who isn't Brie Larson or Saoirse Ronan, yea, even La Blanchett's Truthful ferocity or Caroling understatement. Pitched somewhere to the right of Charlotte Gainsbourg and the left of Gena Rowlands, this is the sort of screen acting one wishes was the norm, and of which Ingmar Bergman might have been extremely eager to explore. Had the film itself met the potential in, say, Silverman's primary scene with the wonderful Terry Kinney as the character's rehab counselor, or her interaction with the (also underused) kids, I Smile Back might have been the best of kind since A Woman Under the Influence, if not Diary of a Mad Housewife. As it is, its fearless, transparent star is Something Else Again, and more than ample reason to see it. |
_________________
"And take extra care with strangers/Even flowers have their dangers/And though scary is exciting/Nice is different than good." --Stephen Sondheim |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 7:30 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| A few years ago there was a George Clooney movie about the Mideast oil situation called Syriana which for me was like watching a foreign movie without subtitles. The dialogue was one long dissertation for the already-knowledgeable. The same kind of thing applies to The Big Short, the current dramedy about the housing bubble of 2008. The movie is directed by Adam McKay with a lot of verve and pizazz, and Steve Carell, Brad Pitt, Ryan Gosling, Jeremy Strong, and a very mannered and actory but effective Christian Bale do a good job with the acting side. But the story and the terminology left me in the dust from almost Scene One. Once in a while they stop the action to explain stuff, but no. Still unintelligible. The movie is intermittently entertaining, but it made my head spin and almost explode. CDOs and subprime mortgages are just the tip of the iceberg. If you're into the stock market, be my guest. Otherwise, be warned. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 7:34 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
I think that's going on right after I grab a shower.
I probably am invested enough in that jargon -- we'll see ... |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:25 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
Has anyone seen The Diary of a Teenage Girl?
Normally this wouldn't be on my radar, but I was surprised to see that all three NYT reviewers included it somewhere in their Top 15 (or so) films of '15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/movies/best-movies-2015.html
Also an Israeli film, The Kindergarten Teacher made it on to two fo their lists and sounds interesting. Though I didn't click through for the full review, and not sure if such a film will turn up here. The (pirate) dvd market ain't what it used to be ... |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:21 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
I think I reviewed it a couple of weeks ago, at least I meant to. Absolutely blah indie, cliche-ridden and overrated. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
inla--Just saw your review of I Smile Back, and agree with almost everything you said, except that I'm no fan of Cassavetes and not crazy about Frank Perry's oeuvre either, so AWUTI and DOAMH are not my tortured-woman prototypes of choice. However, the underuse of Josh Charles was indeed a shame. he is a really talented dude, and his big (well, "bigger") scene (the remembrance of how they met) was beautiful. He also managed to be very likable and something of an asshole at the same time, which impressed me.
As for Sarah, unbelievable. I am literally (well, no, but figuratively) torn apart in the SAG voting trying to decide between her and Brie. (Haven''t yet seen Brooklyn.)
Speaking of whom (Larson, that is) I saw her in Trainwreck the other day, and that is quite a movie. Amy Schumer is all she's cracked up to be laff-wise, and Bill Hader, Colin Quinn, and BL are all wonderful too. My favorite out-and-out comedy since Bridesmaids, and though Schumer isn't Wiig, she's fine fine fine. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| bartist |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:33 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6963
Location: Black Hills
|
| Interesting, there was a lot of computer jargon in "Steve Jobs" and no one had a problem, but the technical stuff in The Big Short made many heads, like Weeds's, spin. Guess that says something about the pervasiveness of computer culture v. the more esoteric aspects of big finance. I thought both films were among the year's best. The casino analogies, in TBS, seemed spot on - a lot of those guys were essentially gambling. I liked the scene where Brad Pitt turns to the two young guys who are dancing around after a big score and sternly reminds them that they are screwing with people's lives to make their money and says something like, "It's nothing to dance about." |
_________________
He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 12:29 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
bartist wrote: I liked the scene where Brad Pitt turns to the two young guys who are dancing around after a big score and sternly reminds them that they are screwing with people's lives to make their money and says something like, "It's nothing to dance about."
So did I. That was one of the few moments that resonated on a human level about something that a layman could understand. Pitt was pretty powerful in that scene. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
