March Movie Madness

Comments

The Illusionist was stunningly good. I was hesitant to watch it because the previews really didn't capture my attention in any special way, but I should have known better. Edward Norton commands every role he takes on. He's like a chameleon-- Norton can go from bad (Primal Fear) to good (The Illusionist) to a character that appears both bad and good within the same film (American History X). Now that's what I call talent.
Could have you been also been hesitant because of possibly confusion with The Prestige? The wife and I could never get the plot lines of those two movies straight so we ended up renting them at the same time. We still haven't found time to watch The Prestige. Ed Norton in American History X is amazing but I could never watch that movie again. That was a brutal movie. Fight Club, however, I could watch everyday. I just love is role in that movie. So well done.

He really did rock his role in Fight Club. Anyone that can pull off a duo personality pretty much gets an A+ in my book.

Yeah, when The Prestige previews were first released, I became really excited. Because I saw The Illusionist previews after the The Prestige ones, I didn't really think much of it. For a while, I even mixed the commercials up. What are the chances of two movies that deal with the same concept being released at almost the exact same time? Yeesh. I was able to discern the two after a while, but I was disappointed to hear that The Prestige wasn't as good as The Illusionist. I was planning for it to be the other way around.

That was a good idea to rent the two on the same night. I should have just waited 'til both of them were released. That would make a good comparison.

Thanks to you, I am going to add The Departed to my queue. The Illusionist is already there. I've almost run out of movies to see.

p.s. I thought Syriana was a horrible movie.
If I do a better job about writing after I watch the movies, I may help you keep that queue populated. If you haven't already, check out Tsotsi and Born Into Brothels. Maybe I need to search my Vox and post up all my old movie reviews.
I personally thought The Prestige > The Illusionist, but that's because I liked the casting a smidge better. They both had great plots and twists.

Casino Royale = swoon. I likey me some Daniel Craig. We saw this Bond in the theater, but I'm definitely going to watch it again soon.
Thanks for reminding me, that was another rule that was broken. There is hardly any "implied" female nudity in Casino Royale (boooo) where there is plenty of "implied" male nudity. Sure its a torture scene, but come one, the ladies got plenty of Daniel exiting the water in his swim trunks. Nothing for the fellas. Boooo.
I quite enjoyed Syriana. The message is, to a degree, as you claim. Oil and the people who control it. However, underneath is the ever-running sub-plot of international politics and the corruption which forms the ideologies of it. What was Clooney doing in the end? His job. He was a pawn. An unknowing, unwitting pawn and in the end, the game rolled right over the top of him and uncaringly moved on.

Casino Royale? Without doubt the very best Bond flick yet, surpassing even the original Goldfinger and Doctor No. To my mind, Daniel Craig portrayed Bond as Fleming wrote him. Cold, calculating and thorough. A killer who knows why he does what he does and has no qualms about it. Fleming portrayed Bond as a womaniser, but Craig's portrayal in CR doesn't reflect that, which I found refreshing. I look forward to more of the serious spy drama of this Bond version, with the tongue-in-cheek, suave pick=up lines left a long way behind.
The only problem I had with CR was the mushy love crap in the middle. It started off very action backed and you were lead to believe that Bond was a total bad ass then all of a sudden Bond is ready to quit his job because he has fallen for some chick. I had a hard time with that because you never saw that in older Bond flicks.
The 'mushy' stuff in CR comes directly from Flemings 1961 book, "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". Bond married Draco's daughter in the book, but lost her to an assassins bullet if I'm not mistaken. There's quite a bit of poetic licence in the films, especially now that the major stories have all been told at least once, some twice and at least one that I'm aware of, three times. I think it's 'Thunderball' /'The World Is Not Enough'/'Goldeneye' but there's so much cross-pollination of plot lines and so much poetic license in the last 6 or 8 films I could well be wrong.
I saw the point of the love/mushy stuff as the catalyst for his womanizing ways in the future. He needed something in his past to make him the way he is. After losing the "love of his life", or allowing himself to even have one and then losing her, made him uninterested in doing it again. So from here on out he focused on his work with a little fun on the side. I liked that part of the storyline. Of course I have never read any 007 books or even seen all the movies, but that was how I interpreted it.
Thanks Raf, now I have a good excuse for a movie weekend. Haven't seen any of th movies you've mentioned, though I made a mental note to see at least three of them when they were released.

Post a comment

Already a Vox member? Sign in

raf

About Me

raf
United States
shame on us. for all we've done. and all we ever were. just zeroes and ones -- NIN

Neighborhood

Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.

Archives