VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Following (1998)

Clint: 4/5 stars, 8/10.
Carolyn: 5/5 stars, 9/10.
Native: 3.4/5 stars, 7.6/10.
(Netflix’s guess for us was 3.7/5 stars, a bit low.)

Carolyn adds: “It wasn’t as good as Memento or Inception [or Batman Begins/The Dark Knight], but it was very detailed and I thought it told a good twisted story.”

I agree with Carolyn, but I felt that only the actual twist was worthy of a 5/5 star, 9/10 rating. The movie itself wasn’t. The movie WAS really good — but dry, with a stilted fight scene more awkward than that found in the original Star Trek Series, and a low-budget feel that definitely helped the noir feel, but ultimately left things seeming unpolished.

The story, however, was top notch, and I still really liked this.

Interesting how the main character never acted again, even though he was quite good: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0369918/board/nest/66469954

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0154506/

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Source Code (2011)

4/5 stars, 8/10 from both of us.
Native rating: 3.7/5 stars (Netflix’s guess for us=4.4!), 7.5/10.

From the director of Moon (which is better than this film), this movie is basically a “poor man’s 12 Monkeys”.

It was interesting.  Not much happened, but interest was held.

It was a unique way of looking at time travel.

But I just can’t help but think of it as being derivative of 12 Monkeys, which pulled it off much better. I don’t mind derivative works, but this just wasn’t as brilliant as 12 Monkeys.
Still as good as any blockbuster movie, though.

A lot of people have problems with the ending scenes (after the kiss).
I don’t.
They are hard to understand, and I had to read about them on the forums to fully grasp it myself, but everything actually makes sense, and the critics of the final scenes are largely divided between those who get angry when they don’t understand something right away, and film snobs who hate happy endings and assume they are tacked on by film executives mucking with the plot.
Reading the complaints of those people is frustrating!

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0945513/

VIDEO: REVIEW: MOVIE: Micmacs (2009)

Clint: 3.8/5 stars (which is the exact Netflix average AND it’s recommendation for us), 7.4/10 (a high 7–IMDB gives this 7.2/10).

Carolyn: 4/5 stars, 8/10.

I like Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amelie), but I definitely prefered him more back when he is collaborating with Marc Caro, who made his movies dark fairy tales (City Of Lost Children) or black comedies (Delicatessan) instead of whimsical comedies (Amelie).

He’s too whimsical now.

Jeunet has amazing directorial skills, yet I am starting to get tired of his Rube-Goldberg devices that he seems to want to use in every movie.

That being said… By virtue of receiving 4 stars, this movie is about 50th percentile for us.

We really liked it, but I liked it slightly less than most movies I really like.

It certainly LOOKS better than most movies, and is way more interesting than most movies.

We also found some similarities between this, and the new comedy Wanderlust (2012)

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1149361/

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Dune (1984)

We’d seen SOME of this movie in 1994 or so, but we didn’t watch this properly until 2012.

Carolyn: 3/5 stars, 7/10.
Clint: 3/5 stars, 6.6/10, and I think I’m being extremely charitable by rounding up to a 7 here. But I was also in the most foul mood of any movie I’ve watched all year, so it may not be as bad as I thought.

Netflix gussed 3.4/5 stars for us (though it’s average is 3.6/5 stars), and IMDB rates it 6.5/10, so it seems the general public likes this ever-so-slightly more than we do.

Less confusing than a typical David Lynch movie, due to it not being a David Lynch story. But overall, I thought the story was flawed with confusion. I couldn’t even name the two opposing factions, because there was so little exposition.

But then again, I was distracted by some unnecessary drama that walked into my home prior to watching this.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087182/

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Re-watched. Upgraded 9/10 to 10/10 (5/5 stars of course). Charlie Kaufman writes amazing movies.

“A couple undergo a procedure to erase each other from their memories when their relationship turns sour, but it is only through the process of loss that they discover what they had to begin with.”

Sounds like a romantic comedy, right? Definitely not. It’s a dramatic romance. It’s the 69th highest rating on IMDB, and it deserves it.

Any couple having problems or fighting with each other could actually get some therapeutic value from watching this, too! It teaches us something about ourselves, via watching the characters go through their travails.

As a bonus, you get to see Frodo as a total creeper, and Kirsten Dunst jumping around in her underwear and swooning over an older man.

Another amazing cerebral movie that we just had to watch again!

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0338013/

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Adaptation (2002)

Clint: 5/5 stars, 9/10.
Carolyn: 4.6/5 stars, 10/10.
(She tried to say 8/10, then saw that she previously rated it 10/10, but felt that she liked it better this time, so she embarassedly changed her 8/10 back to 10/10. Not sure how I feel about that rating process.).

Re-watched because Clint got too drunk when we watched it back in ~2003, remembering nothing but “green lines”.

Plus it’s Charlie Kauffman (Being John Malkovitch, Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind), who is possibly the most amazing writer in Hollywood.

And NIC CAGE!! Playing… Charlie Kauffman, who is writing the movie that we are watching, which is about adapting a book-within-the-movie into a movie-within-the-movie.

Yes: 4 levels here.

Our reality, our reality’s characters in the movie, the movie-within-the-movie, and the book that is based on.

And all 4 levels are tied to each other by causality.

They said a movie about flowers (rare orchids) couldn’t be interesting. They were wrong.

WITNESS THE SNORTING OF GREEN LINES.
See Nic Cage as IDENTICAL TWINS.

Good, good stuff. Very cerebral.  This movie is a brain-buzz.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0268126/

Twelve Monkeys (1995)

Not watched since college… but Terry Gilliam is both my favorite director, and the director of my favorite movie ever (Brazil).

We gave this another go, and it only caused us to upgrade from 9/10 to 10/10 (5/5 stars, natch).

Amazing movie.

I think this is some of Bruce Willis’s (and Brad Pitt’s) best work.

Trippy movie.
Surreal movie.
Time travel movie.
Apocalypse movie.
Mystery movie.
This has a lot going for it.

Recommend this as an opener for the best memory/confusion trilogy you could watch: 12 Monkeys, followed by Memento, followed by Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. (Warm up with said trilogy by watching Adaptation(2002).)

MIND-BLOW TIME: This movie is a 5th-dimensional snapshot. Truth.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114746/

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 896 other followers