MovieChat Forums > Ace_Spade > Replies
Ace_Spade's Replies
That explains how her magic can zappa Fantasia back to normal.
I think it's because it's a really good script. The dialogue and characters are all really good, and the plot keeps you guessing, entertained, and glues you to the film.
I haven't seen Infernal Affairs, so I can't compare endings. I liked the ending of The Departed a lot. It closed off the story and worked with the story Scorsese was presenting. I saw nothing cheap, or juvenile about it. Possibly nihilistic, but...I don't think so. But a case could be made.
I don't find the characters one-dimensional. I find the main cast quite nuanced. As for the psychiatrist character, I didn't know she used to be two people, and I don't recall finding her contradictory at all.
Again: exact comparison as to which one is better aren't something I can comment on because I haven't watched the Infernal Affairs films, but this film has a solid script, GREAT dialogue, and characters who are fascinating and, as far as I'm concerned, deep. The plot is thrilling.
Finally, the script doesn't have to beat Infernal Affairs to win the Oscar. It also doesn't have to be a faithful adaptation, or even be the *most* faithful adaptation out of the nominees, it just has to be (perceived as) the best script out of the nominees. Sandman81 points out that those were Borat, Children of Men, Little Children, and Notes on a Scandal. I might have gone for Children of Men over The Departed, but whether or not Infernal Affairs itself is better is, largely, irrelevant to The Departed's victory.
I thought the same thing, but that would only be if they lived a full lifespan with medical help. The autodoc might not have been terribly helpful, even with the override.
It's also possible they just got really, really sick at some point and died. If one of them was 85, got terminal cancer and the autodoc couldn't help, they're toast. A lot of long-term couples check out shortly after the other one, no real medical reason, they just go almost in tandem.
For me, the fundamental problem is taking a film noir and trying to make it work as a musical. I'm not saying it's impossible (Les Miserables, as a book, doesn't seem to lend itself well to being a musical, either), but it's a real uphill battle. I definitely agree with with your point about Nine and 8 1/2 and the idea of redoing a classic. A classic is a classic for every inch of its celluloid, so its another big challenge to attempt. Not that it never works (The Magnificent Seven - although I think Seven Samurai is better, TMS is still a great film), but it's really hard to do. For me, these two problems make the notion of a Sunset Blvd. musical a really foolish notion.
I found it pretty thrilling myself. I liked the action well enough, and the weather/environment was something I haven't seen really in most action films. The skiing and hiding from the blizzard, the horses being faster, but unable to pursue through the woods and deep drifts - there were a lot of new elements. Overall I liked it a lot, although I didn't think it was the best picture, it was certainly a top grade action movie.
As for understanding it, I'm not sure how you got lost. Plotters want the throne, the baby's the new king, so they want him dead.
It is for this reason that I think De Palma made a mistake with the ending. The final scene is a bloodbath, shot like a cool action sequence. It ends with the ironic shot (The World is Yours), but that is a weak message after showing how "cool" Tony is in his last minutes.
In my opinion (and what do I know, I'm no De Palma), the film should have ended with Tony's sister dying, then showing Tony as a blubbering, slobbering wreck - having lost all friends, family, and worthwhile aspects to his life - getting gunned down by the assassins. No blaze of glory. No cool shootout. Just a whimpering, pathetic mess with nothing gained for his foolish pursuit of selfish, base gain.
With the ending as it is, it allows Tony to look "cool" in his final moments and prevent the greater messages of the film from sinking in.
Yeah, I got that vibe as well, but I agree with your particular assessment that this only really applies to the first thirty minutes.
Agreed. It drives me to distraction when people criticise this movie for being too campy and over-the-top, usually in comparison to The Dark Knight. It bugs me because this movie is plenty dark (though TDK probably is "darker"), but also because the argument seems to be that "darker = better", and it doesn't.
Batman '89 is a terrific film, gothic, entertaining, really well put-together, dark, and psychologically complex.
This is my favourite work of Tarantino's. I feel like it actually has things to say. It's commenting on the justification of brutality and the reveling in that as entertainment (risky question to raise from Tarantino).
I know what people mean about his being "unchecked", but I'd highlight Django Unchained as being the epitome of his having no one left to say no moreso than Inglourious Basterds.
Each scene of IB plays like a short film, building to a climax in and of itself, while each short film contributes to the whole. It's almost like a miniseries. I did enjoy the first scene most, but that's an impossibly high standard. It's brilliant.
It's a really great film. One of my favourite superhero flicks. I love Burton's blend of comic book fantasy with the psychological truth of the outsiders and freaks. He does this so well in his Batman pictures.
My favourite scene is at the Christmas ball with Bruce and Selina dancing together and that big, hammerblow revelation comes along and knocks them both for a loop. Great scene, brilliant performances.
I agree that there's no hero, but I would argue that Abigail is the protagonist. We, as the audience, follow her story the most. She moves the plot.
It's very even in terms of screen time, power, dynamics, etc., but Abigail's storyline seems to me to be the focus. Sarah is usually the antagonist.
That's not to say that Abigail isn't villainous, Sarah isn't sympathetic, or that Anne never affects anything, but just that the story revolves around Abigail the most.
I think Isaacs' performance is fantastic, but the character isn't really great - it's too one-note. Again: Isaacs makes great use of what he's given, but it's just not that wonderful a character.
In the National Film Registry and anywhere else classic cinema is valued.
Star Trek or Wars? I only ask because you typed in Trek, but you're on a Star Wars forum.
If Trek:
I like the Motion Picture, most people think it's too slow.
Wrath of Khan is gangbusters (awesome)
Voyage Home is funny
Undiscovered Country is really good, too.
First Contact is a quasi-zombie picture in space - worth checking out - good action
I kinda liked Insurrection...most didn't.
Star Trek (JJ Abrams') is great fun.
If Wars:
Star Wars (Episode IV: A New Hope) is my favourite
Empire Strikes Back is most people's favourite (I love it, too!)
Return of the Jedi is good fun, gets a little silly at times, but has a pretty epic climax between Luke and Vader.
The Force Awakens is a killer action picture.
Mr. Gravedigger from his first album is a masterpiece.
We Are Hungry Men from the first album is also great, and an early sci-fi Bowie song.
Saviour Machine is another sci-fi great.
His cover of the Pixie's Cactus always grabbed me on Heathen
Everyone Says Hi, also off of Heathen, has always seemed so, so very sad to me. It's really touching.
For my money, the best ever is From Russia with Love. Goldfinger has always been a little overrated for me, although a lot of that has to do with how much hype it gets.
Too many to count! From top to bottom, I thought this was a wonderful film. I loved its innocence and charm, but I was surprised by how really, really funny it was.
Favourite gag that springs to mind is Mr. Brown on the phone with Curry: "It's Mr. Curry doing a silly voice!"
While I doubt he expected her death, Bond lives in a world filled with death and carnage. He's always prepared for the worst and uses assets, like Jill, to complete his missions. Not that he's completely unfeeling and uncaring, but he can be quite inured and cruel. It's likely he knew that harm or death were probabilities and took the chance anyway.
I'm a big fan of a bunch of Batman films already. I feel like Batman, Batman Returns, Mask of the Phantasm, Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight all accomplished what they set out to do. They're pretty top-notch. I can't think of anything that the filmmakers could have done which would have earned an R rating and that might have made the movies better.
Logan and Deadpool earned R ratings and were worth it. Would watching the Joker get much more sadistic be any better? I doubt it.
By Revenge of the Sith, I didn't care. The first two of the prequel trilogy were so uninteresting to me that I didn't bother going to see the third one in theatres.
Now it's deja vu, because I'm seriously weighing the pros and cons of seeing the ninth one when it comes out.