Comments or questions are welcome.
Powered by Fast Secure Contact Form
No Comments
Trackbacks / Pings
-
Jerry
-
Synonym
Who and what we’re following
RT@LISTENtoSIN @RevoltTV it's all about HAVING FUN. If you forget to have fun while performing then they'll forget to enjoy your performance
26 minutes ago from UberSocial for BlackBerry
Sources: @AP reporters engaging in anal sex, NPR's @arishapiro fisting FOX's @edhenryTV at Obama press conference http://t.co/yD2Nh4TBMp
27 minutes ago from web
Now with a link that works http://t.co/JWpjjrVkam RT Joel: Since we're showing Ke$ha drinking her urine on @TheSoup 2nite watch...
32 minutes ago from Echofon
Seems to be a pseudo art film crossed with typical Hollywood liberal jackhammer-subtle metaphors.
And of course… the trailer tells the whole flippin story before it’s even released.
Film looks terrible already. And this review certainly isn’t helping its cause.
There are some great bits and pieces in this film, but ultimately it felt like riding a bus with a bunch of teenagers for two hours. Huge credit for being authentic, but several million demerits for being incredibly irritating.
I have learned to expect nothing from Gondry, but what is most surprising about this is how goddamn BORING it sounds. Luckily his next film seems to be a welcome return to insanity.
Movie sounds great and very visually stunning. Will definitely keep an eye out for this one. Hopefully it hits my theater. Despite your review I’m a sucker for stuff like this.
I am writing this strictly from crap I’ve read and not from seeing the movie, which I intend to see, and perhaps then it will change my mind.
However, there were multiple Oz books written by L. Frank Baum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Frank_Baum#Oz_works I bet white men have sat in an office wringing their hands since the original and only now is it economically feasible with CGI and chroma key. If they are harkening back, then I imagine that is where your obvious sexism and racism comes from, although they DIDN’T have to go that route. Considering who is in the film, I can’t imagine it being considered an art piece making commentary though. However, I could see it being an excuse to artistic license.
Have you ever seen Return to Oz? It’s based crappily on a few books from the same author just to produce what they wanted. I own it just because it is psychotic. It isn’t very good, and awful for children.
Oz has its own place in fairy tale history and I don’t find the first movie to be particularly pleasant at all. Essentially a child knocked out from a natural disaster has a dream that ostracized plenty of little people, in a world that placed beauty with the good and shit looks with the bad (only in women), has a full musical piece attributed to “even dyeing eyes to match a gown”, and both notate the Oz as a swindler.
And when you think about it, weren’t both movies swindlers? I can’t place this one above or below the other (yet) simply based on the sexism, racism (there is NO race other than white in the original), and crap farm life vs. city life references in the first.
However, it does make me want to challenge someone alive now to make a lively, visually entertaining, grand scale film with the same style used for the original. Only extras for crowds. Build the sets.
Um, wow. Funny because I saw this over the weekend and really enjoyed it for what it is, a cheesy movie with not much to think about. But after reading your review, I have to admit, my mind is changed and kind of blown. I didn’t even put any of this together. I can’t say I was explicitly affected by any sort of sexism here, but now I totally see it and get it. What an unfortunate movie, but what a stellar write-up.
I think the biggest part of Mariah’s difficulty lies in the fact that they no longer alternate who speaks first. By the time they get to her, everything’s already been said.
Agree w your top four tho i might slightly change the order (Candice was def the best tho). Also thought the judges over praised Curtis and under praised Devin, tho the latter did look poor in comparison to the ladies. I am worried he may go but I hope it’s Curtis or Paul, who was boring. I liked Lazaro more than the judges did.
Do not agree with your praise of Paul at all. He sounded okay, but he’s soooo boring. He’s just so average and ordinary. He sounded nice, yes. But come on, compared to the girls he’s irrelevant. I’d still rank Burnell over him. One mediocre performance doesn’t put him out of the competition.
Candi made a believer of me tonight. She was incredible and was on the top of the heap followed by Kree, Angie and Amber. If they continue this way, that is our top 4.
The bottom of the heap was Curtis and he really should be the one going home.
Not understanding the Burnell hate. He really wasn’t bad at all. Paul is so meh. But I’m enjoying your recaps.
Well, the rating looks promising.
Sadly it doesn’t look as great as Oldboy and Thirst, which is disappointing.
What is with your love of Jimmy Iovine? The guy is a total hack and disliked among the Idol community. On every blog I read, every website I read, people unanimously hate him. I despise him. Don’t even get my started on his attire. He offers nothing to anyone and is the worst thing about this show. Seriously.
Ah man, I’m so glad this is apparently good. Park Chan-wook is awesome but first English-language movies don’t always turn out so well.
I was really disappointed with this; lovely to look at and all but otherwise a deathly dull and mannered Hitchcock rip, completely lacking the Shakespearean sweep of Park Chan-wook’s earlier work.
I already stated my reasons: he gives the contestants an unsentimental assessment of how they fit into the broader context of the music industry. He knows what he’s talking about and he’s not swayed by emotions or feelings, unlike some, apparently.
The guy is a clown and his advice is unfounded. Telling Kree to not oversing? Huh? Since when has she ever oversung? Telling Angie to be less pageantry. I never got a pageant vibe from her ever. Unsentimental advice would be great, if that advice were actually accurate. And don’t be snarky with me, I still enjoy reading your recaps. I just don’t like Jimmy.
If I wasn’t snarky, you wouldn’t read me.
The finale weirdly gives me no reason to come back for Season 3. I mean, I will, but there’s no hanging loose ends for me to be dying to see what happens next. Two couples are brought back together, one couple is no more, and absolutely no word from Jessa means she’s happy with her dad. Tt was too happy of an ending and felt more like a series finale than a season finale. That said, I like your proposed direction for season three. I would like to add that Shoshanna is now going through things the other characters have already gone through, just an observation. I would like to see Hannah realize how pathetic and desperate she is.
So Kiarostami has made yet another movie where characters pretend to be other characters and neither character (let alone anyone in the audience) has a clue as to the actual identities of the characters onscreen??? oy. well i’ll say this for the man–he knows what he likes in his screenplays. Close-Up is a really good movie tho. Certified Copy was pretty good but really really really overrated when it came out. i’ll hopefully see this at some point but i kinda miss the sweet simplicity of A Taste Of Cherry.
I think the reason Mariah was more coherent this week is because they switched up the judging order after every performance. Up until this week, she was always last, every judge said whatever needed to be said, by the time it got to Mariah she probably didn’t feel the need to just be repetitive. When Mariah went first or second this week, she gave some very useful feedback. Let’s hope they keep up the switch.
Also, Lazaro is only there because of sympathy and because we had been following him from the beginning. In my opinion, it’s a matter of editing. We hadn’t seen Amber before the top 20 (or top 40 I guess), but we were following Lazaro since his audition. I despise him, but he’s getting that sympathy vote.
I get it, he’s had it rough. Sorry, but everyone lugs a sack of shit around and everyone thinks theirs is the biggest and smelliest.
Ha.
This movie was simply outstanding. STFU. If for no other reason, Ryan Gosling in tattoos is worth it alone.
Am I the only one who saw this movie and loved it? So much to dissect in how it was shot now that I think about it. I’m seeing it again tomorrow..
You hit the nail on the head with this remark – “which is supposedly based on a true story, clearly creative liberties are taken in abundance.” What annoys me about this movie is that it is fooling people into believing this is a true story. And I believe that is why the critics have been so kind to what is basically a pretty ordinary film. While the information about how aboriginals were treated is accurate, the story of The Sapphires themselves is little more than a fairytale. Two women travelled to Vietnam to perform backing vocals for a band. That’s basically what happened. This is a shortened version of the true story, which is now on the film’s wikipedia page. All validated with references.
“The Sapphires is inspired by the story of Tony Briggs’ mother Laurel Robinson, and aunt, Lois Peeler, who travelled to Vietnam to sing for war troops. There were three members in the original group, Robinson, Beverly Briggs and Naomi Mayers. They performed at hotels, pubs, cabarets, clubs, parties, army barracks and universities around Melbourne. They were invited to go to Vietnam to sing backing vocals for a New Zealand Maori band they had performed with in Melbourne. Briggs and Mayers declined as they were protesting the war, so Robinson enlisted her sister Peeler to join her. Robinson said it was this Maori band who introduced them to soul music, not Dave Lovelace, the character portrayed in the film by Chris O’Dowd. The director Wayne Blair said there was no such character as Lovelace in real life, adding “That’s where we went a bit Argo’”. Tony Briggs said in an interview in The Age in 2004 “he found it liberating as a writer to expand the number of characters” as it made the dynamics of the story richer.
Added to that, none of the four women were part of the stolen generation. That happened to some of Laurel and Lois’s aunts. Why did Blair choose to change the story so much? I would say it was because the true story would not have made much of a play or a film. And the true story shows the reason these women were obscure in Australia until the play was written. There was no fame for them back then, in Vietnam or Australia. Fair enough to make a film with information about the dreadful way the aboriginal people have been treated, but to write an almost completely fictional story, and then to portray it as a true story is not something I respect. The film Rabbit Proof Fence was a beautiful film, which also told the story of the Stolen Generation. A far more genuine film, and far more deserving of critic’s praise than this one.
Finally, a review that gets this movie.
That last bit in the review gives me pause: I’m kind of not interested in this movie if there are any sort of moral repercussions in the film, explicit or otherwise. I’d be much more game for a Bad Boys with chicks level of stupidity.
I would love to know what is going on behind the scenes that makes Hollywood keep trying to push Labeef. Is it a wager of some sort? A joke? Blackmail? The fact that you right it’s “his movie” makes me wanna run screaming in the opposite direction.
In the great footrace of life, who is the more turgid, joyless and lifeless actor:
Robert Redford or Harrison Ford?
At least Ford seemed to have charisma once, although I’m starting to wonder if that was all just a mirage brought on by a couple of engaging characters which elevated that stiff beyond his usual one-dimensional performances. I’m not sure that Redford ever had anything but his generic good looks.
It’s a shame this sounds like such a slog, because I find the 60’s counterculture (the SDS, Weathermen, Nixon stuff, not the idealized babyboomer daydream) very interesting. It’s pretty amazing how radicalized young people in the United States (albeit a relatively small segment) became in the late-60’s and early 70’s and how many of them were willing to resort to, basically, domestic terrorism to make a point. Now, I’m a pretty staunch leftist, even identified as a straight-up Marxist for a long time, and I would agree that the reactionaries were just as bad (and probably worse) than the new left. The segregationists and the Chicago PD were nothin’ to fuck with.
I often wonder if youth today would ever become so radicalized and idealistic? What would be the catalyst? A draft? I don’t know that even that would stir college kids today to action.
I didn’t hate it, but unlike the reviewer I agree that I wouldn’t have minded a bit more explanation. I mean before the show ever came out I think I read an explanation for it, but I’d rather not have to use Wikipedia too much for a TV show. Plus this setting is rather unusual in some respects (I’m not a gamer. Earth becoming a multi-species semi-terraformed planet is rather new to me. I’m not even sure I’ve seen it in print stories) so some explanation might have been nice.
I’m looking forward to more of this. No interest in the computer game, but it would be nice to have another good science fiction show.
Best movie I’ve seen this year.
I was not so impressed by this. I think it’s telling that the review focuses so much on the aesthetics of the show (which are indisputably good, and miles ahead of other so-called “sci-fi” shows). BUT that all comes to nothing without a compelling story, and this . . . isn’t compelling. I groaned when they made Nolan the sheriff (sorry, lawkeeper) and at the obvious, stupid Romeo and Juliet plot. The whole thing somehow managed to be heavy handed and also drawn out interminably — two hours was way, way too long for this episode. I started dozing off by the time we got to the big battle scene. It’s possible they could make something of this show, but they will probably need to fire all of the writers to accomplish that.
I thought it was pretty good as well. I am playing the game (it’s online Borderlands, not terrible, not amazing). Finished this week’s “Episode Missions” and was interested in seeing how they tied it together. I know that the pedigree is there (they even got the Dothraki language guy!) but wasn’t expecting much. Overall, it was a solid pilot, good pacing, some uneven acting,
I’m surprised this was at all decent.
Nice review Justin. Not Boyle’s best movie, but definitely the most fun he seems to have had with a movie in awhile. That’s definitely saying something, too.
I usually agree with your recaps, but your assessment of Candice’s Straight Up is so inaccurate. Listen to it again. She changed that song into something soulful. Yes, it’s a throwaway song when Paula does it, but please, listen to Paula’s version then listen to what Candice does with it. It’s actually kind of brilliant. The frills and riffs and things she does with her voice. When she takes things up and down when Paula leaves them flat. For me, this shows how creative Candice is. I could totally see her singing a song like this.
Candice is like Harry Dean Stanton or Tommy Lee Jones. Stick them in the sorriest turkey of a movie, they’ll still be worth watching. Nothing you say is wrong. On the other hand, neither do you contradict my point: compare her two performances of the evening and you decide which one she’d choose to represent her talents.
Have to agree with Sarah here, “Straight Up” proved to be yet another masterful interpretation of an unexpected number from Candice: In her hands, Paula Abdul’s earworm throwaway became a swaying jazz ditty, muscled up with upright bass and bongo drums for good measure. As Keith noted, Candice’s expertly placed runs were like slow winks from across the bar, and her “buh-buh bye-byes” were so saucy and expressive, I let out an involuntary whoop of delight in response. I literally threw my hands up in admiration when she sang this. Her vocals may have been showcased more on When You Believe, but we already know she can sing. Now it’s about being creative, which is exactly what Straight Up was.
You kind of make my point for me. If she wants to sing a swaying jazz ditty, there are plenty of numbers to choose from that are already in that category, that provide the necessary structure to support a voice like hers. She does the same thing in Top 4 week, dressing up a wisp of a Drake song, trying to turn it into something it was never intended to be. All you’re left with is the decorations, impressive, but by no means a song in themselves.
I’m a big Candice fan. She’s a big singer with a big voice. She needs big songs.
I wonder what convinced McConaughey to stop wasting his obvious talents on every Kate Hudson movie they offered him, and actually do some fucking work? Because he’s been great for the last couple of years, and I’m real glad to see it. Maybe he changed the brand he smokes, I dunno. I do know that, after seeing ‘Killer Joe’, my first thought was that somebody, somewhere, needed to write a sequel where Woody Harrelson plays his longtime nemesis ‘who just go back into town’.
Honeslty this basically is a sequel to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, just with Iron Man figurines. Basically if you like the general concept of an Iron Man film and you liked Kiss Kiss, you will enjoy this film very much.
This review got me major pumped to see this. I’ve read some negative reviews but I usually trust your opinion.
Ugh, shame. I really liked Kill List and was looking forward to this.
Surprised to read such a negative review of this. I watched it when it came out last year in the U.K and thought it was genuinely funny throughout, a real dark and twisted comedy set in the banal world of dull English tourists haunts.
Loved this movie. Maybe you missed the point? I can see how it could become a little redundant, but I enjoyed it and actually thought it was funny. Guess I’m kind of insane.