Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Triumph of meanness
  • 257 Replies sorted by
  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev - Thanks for the last post on MP. Especially the link to the (sick) New Yorker article.

    Wow! Author, Caitlin Flanagan really laid it out for us and perhaps the producers of the above pic.

  • Dom Hemingway

  • Her

    Just pass this up, save your time.

  • Wow to this thread.

    A few personal opinions I want to share, though nobody will care about: Snow-piercer was a good concept in some ways, had some pretty reasonable acting... and it started off strong. I watched. I was engaged. But somewhere along the way (around the time the piano playing teacher whips out a skorpian) it just fell flat on its arse. I watched to the end, because I felt compelled to. When Ed Harris shows up (someone I consider to be a high caliber actor, when he sinks his teeth into the right role) and gave this shameful performance... I lost all fascination with the film. If you have to watch it... watch it as an example of how to start off a great idea, and how to kill it within 20 minutes. How to make half a decent film, and half a shitty cliche ridden pile of awful.

    Saving Mr. Banks was a good film, I enjoyed it (even teared up in some parts)... but I was well aware (even not knowing the film's characters backgrounds) that they embellished on those characters a bit. Disney was not that passionate about story, I can garan-damn-tee it. He saw the dollarsigns in Mary Poppin's eyes the moment he read the book... and chased it down. That being said, Mary Poppins was a great film... even without her creator's involvement in the final film... but it made everybody rich... which was it's intention.

    Anything Soderbergh makes (there are exceptions)... these are movies I cannot get into. I've read reviews and threads galore telling me how awesome "The Limey" was... and in my second and third viewings (I have a lot of time to waste apparently) I still fail to see it's "awesomeness". The editing must have been done either by Soderbergh himself while he was jerking off... or it was given to a 10 year old. Intercutting completely useless footage that has nothing to do with the scene/story being told... it threw me right out of the movie. Moving on to some of his good films though: The Ocean's trilogy... which was a fun ride. I'll be honest... I cared none about any of the characters involved, I just wanted to see how they fooled the next guy. It was great. Che PT1 and PT2 are very very good films, a fine mix of story and cinematography. Soderbergh attempts to throw his choppy-editing hat in the ring here but it manages not to screw with the viewing. It's a very good insight into Che, and they cast the actor playing him very well. There isn't much else I've watched from Soderbergh that I quite enjoyed as much as these films.

    The whole discussion here about films needing heroes is bullshit. In the modern day, people are tired of seeing heroes. We get bored of it. There are some movies that throw us a hero or two, but for the most part we cop an anti-hero.

    And Vitaly, throw this film on your list:

    Standard Nick Cage fare, complete with over the top screaming and acting. A score that makes you laugh at times, and some cliche-riddled dialog. But, it's one of those films with a character that deserves to die...

  • Now about certain future meaningless stuff

    Many fans expected that this would happen, and today, it has. Lucasfilm has announced that the future of Star Wars canon will not be dictated by the Expanded Universe of the past thirty-six years. As of today, the official, canonical story of Star Wars consists of "the six Star Wars episodes, and the many hours of content [George Lucas] developed and produced in Star Wars: The Clone Wars." (This includes the upcoming Darth Maul comic adapted from TCW material.)

    This means that, while elements from the EU will be maintained -- including the Imperial Security Bureau and Sienar Fleet Systems in Star Wars Rebels -- Disney is taking the franchise in a direction that requires more artistic flexibility.

    In order to give maximum creative freedom to the filmmakers and also preserve an element of surprise and discovery for the audience, Star Wars Episodes VII-IX will not tell the same story told in the post-Return of the Jedi Expanded Universe

    What can I say? Idiots and money always can make shit from anything.

    If you want to read about "artistic flexibility" of Disney just read things two posts above.

  • Robocop Remake

    It is just bad - bad script, bad directing and mostly bad acting.

    Yet it has some fun parts.

    Like Chinese factory scene :-)

    And Michael Keaton who actually portrayed Steve Jobs better than anyone did it before on screen :-)

    P.S. Small tip. If you want to read reviews on IMDB on any big budget movies, do it after week or so as it is in cinema and start with 3-5th pages. Of course you must understand that if studios spend huge money they have some to pay special firms to make proper reviews and push them to the top, aren't you?

  • Transcendence

    It all just compilation of stupidity in slow-mo.

    We'll plant the virus (c) Hollywood.

  • This year have all chances to set absolute record

  • I finally saw GRAVITY. I was expecting flimsy weak characters and red hot tension and suspense. I ended up with decent characters, reasonably developed that I sorta cared about, and luke warm suspense. Two stars. Barely worth watching.

  • I ended up with decent characters, reasonably developed that I sorta cared about, and luke warm suspense.

    We clearly saw two different versions :-)

  • Well as a former astronaut, I can vouch for the authenticity. Okay, I'm actually not a former astronaut -- though some of the stuff I smoked in college might qualify me. But here's what a real astronaut said about GRAVITY and Hollywood science.

  • @brianl

    Seems like product of film advertisement machine :-) Really - whole film is full unrealistic crap.

  • Maleficent - good film if you like computer generated effects, all else is mostly trash

  • I thought Maleficent was under appreciated by critics. The story has complexity as did the characters. Excellent VFX and alternate world.

  • The story has complexity as did the characters. Excellent VFX and alternate world.

    Film lack any story at all, at least one that you can follow. VFX was nice, but always in place.

  • The story is very good. A woman betrayed, folded into a B story of raising a child that isn't hers. There were other B stories too that I thought dovetailed with the main plot. There's conflict and universal theme. However, if you and others weren't able to easily follow the story points, then IMO that's an argument that the script wasn't good -- but I don't think you could say for lack of complexity.

  • A woman betrayed, folded into a B story of raising a child that isn't hers.

    Many users think that whole plot was wrote by some feminist or lesbian (seems to be close to reality). As no positive man figures exist :-) Also under story I mean something that has logic and progress. And some match to the character history.

  • Huh, almost nothing to say. If remove all the fancy things we have bad scenery producing mix of bad version of Groundhog Day with very bad version of Independence Day.

  • "Many users think that whole plot was wrote by some feminist or lesbian"

    This was definitely a female-centric movie. Men were not portrayed in a flattering way. That's okay though, 98% of movies are about some version of Superman. Gotta throw the chicks a bone once in a while. Besides, it's Angelina.

  • Transformers: Age of Extinction

    Someone by error ordered to make very long trailer. Script was lost during transfer, so it was all new "fresh" ideas made on the go.