Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 11:32:15 GMT
I'm finally gonna see this today. I had wanted to do a double feature last weekend with Disaster Artist, but it wasn't playing on Long Island. Then I wanted to do a double feature this weekend with Call Me By Your Name, but the closest theater showing that film is like a 30 minute drive from where I am. Anyway, I thought I'd start this thread in case anyone else has seen it. I'll post my thoughts later.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Dec 15, 2017 15:22:52 GMT
I'm finally gonna see this today. I had wanted to do a double feature last weekend with Disaster Artist, but it wasn't playing on Long Island. Then I wanted to do a double feature this weekend with Call Me By Your Name, but the closest theater showing that film is like a 30 minute drive from where I am. Anyway, I thought I'd start this thread in case anyone else has seen it. I'll post my thoughts later. Bub, the nearest theater of any sort is a 30 minute drive from where I am.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 15:51:24 GMT
I'm finally gonna see this today. I had wanted to do a double feature last weekend with Disaster Artist, but it wasn't playing on Long Island. Then I wanted to do a double feature this weekend with Call Me By Your Name, but the closest theater showing that film is like a 30 minute drive from where I am. Anyway, I thought I'd start this thread in case anyone else has seen it. I'll post my thoughts later. Bub, the nearest theater of any sort is a 30 minute drive from where I am. Yikes. The crappy one in my neighborhood is just a five minute walk away, and most others are roughly 20 minutes. I could go out to see CMBYN but I’m not familiar with the town it’s being shown in.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Dec 15, 2017 15:56:53 GMT
Bub, the nearest theater of any sort is a 30 minute drive from where I am. Yikes. The crappy one in my neighborhood is just a five minute walk away, and most others are roughly 20 minutes. I could go out to see CMBYN but I’m not familiar with the town it’s being shown in. The nearest theater showing arthouse films is... a long ways away. I went to see The Tale of the Princess Kaguya the one day it was playing and couldn't find the place in time. I know where it is now, but I haven't gone back because it takes around 70 minutes to get there. Yeah, I don't go to see the movies in the cinema at all, in part due to this handicap. When you throw gas in there, the price gets very high very quickly. And the time is inconvenient. I do go to see plays, but I usually have to set aside a whole day as I spend 4 hours round trip, 3 hours at the play, and somewhere in there I've gotta stop for food since I can't bring any on Metro. But live theater can't come to my home, so I make the time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 16:01:29 GMT
I'm finally gonna see this today. I had wanted to do a double feature last weekend with Disaster Artist, but it wasn't playing on Long Island. Then I wanted to do a double feature this weekend with Call Me By Your Name, but the closest theater showing that film is like a 30 minute drive from where I am. Anyway, I thought I'd start this thread in case anyone else has seen it. I'll post my thoughts later. Bub, the nearest theater of any sort is a 30 minute drive from where I am. Rip. The best theater in the city is a minute away from my house.
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Dec 15, 2017 20:02:35 GMT
Oh honey, I tried to see this last week but they didn't know who I am and wouldn't let me in. The woman at the ticket desk was quite rude to me, 'No, I don't know who you are... now fuck off!'
And people think Movie Stars have it easy...
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Dec 15, 2017 20:04:06 GMT
Oh honey, I tried to see this last week but they didn't know who I am and wouldn't let me in. The woman at the ticket desk was quite rude to me, 'No, I don't know who you are... now fuck off!' And people think Movie Stars have it easy... You played the fish, right?
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Dec 15, 2017 20:10:45 GMT
Oh honey, I tried to see this last week but they didn't know who I am and wouldn't let me in. The woman at the ticket desk was quite rude to me, 'No, I don't know who you are... now fuck off!' And people think Movie Stars have it easy... You played the fish, right? What fish?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 21:38:47 GMT
Okay I saw it. I. Fucking. Loved it. It's what a lot of people say - a weird, wonderful, enchanting fairy tale. This one can be seen as a great successor to Pan's Labyrinth (though I still consider that film superior...at least for now). The whole main cast is great, but Hawkins and Shannon are outstanding. There's one sequence in particular that I can't describe because it's sort of spoilery but it cemented my love for the film. It may be too soon for me to say, but it could surpass Baby Driver as my #1 film of the year.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Dec 16, 2017 0:07:43 GMT
It was.... fine. I might have liked this more if it weren't being touted as an awards contender and had my expectations not been as high as a result. The romance was woefully underdeveloped (she literally just gives him eggs and they're in love), too many narrative detours when it should have been more focused on actually exploring their relationship. The asset is supposed to be the leading man and I feel like I barely got to know him. Shannon is fine, but his character is completely one-dimensional and not at all interesting. The scenes with his family could have been cut completely and nothing would have been lost.
I mean I still liked it, but I would honestly much rather rewatch Crimson Peak than this. It's painted in such broad strokes, very heavy-handed at times, and follows the exact dramatic trajectory that you would expect it to based on the trailer. Hawkins and Jenkins are both delightful, it's beautifully shot, but I feel like critics were too easily won over by the classic cinema aesthetic. I don't know how or why this is getting recognition for its screenplay, which is frankly the worst thing about the film. It needed at least a couple more rewrites by a female writer...
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 16, 2017 0:32:47 GMT
Mutey and the Beast...
Resplendent technicals/design—the sets, the visuals. Great ensemble, notably the affecting, funny, hapless, heroic Richard Jenkins. There’s such terrific whimsy to the feel and pacing of the first half. Little classical odes and musical touches. While still entertaining, the second half settles too easily into hurried and predictable plot mechanics…. and an over the top romantic predilection in the denouement that didn’t to me feel earned. Sally Hawkins at the center of it all is fine but nothing special.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Dec 16, 2017 1:04:00 GMT
It was.... fine. I might have liked this more if it weren't being touted as an awards contender and had my expectations not been as high as a result. The romance was woefully underdeveloped ( she literally just gives him eggs and they're in love), too many narrative detours when it should have been more focused on actually exploring their relationship. The asset is supposed to be the leading man and I feel like I barely got to know him. Shannon is fine, but his character is completely one-dimensional and not at all interesting. The scenes with his family could have been cut completely and nothing would have been lost. I mean I still liked it, but I would honestly much rather rewatch Crimson Peak than this. It's painted in such broad strokes, very heavy-handed at times, and follows the exact dramatic trajectory that you would expect it to based on the trailer. Hawkins and Jenkins are both delightful, it's beautifully shot, but I feel like critics were too easily won over by the classic cinema aesthetic. I don't know how or why this is getting recognition for its screenplay, which is frankly the worst thing about the film. It needed at least a couple more rewrites by a female writer... Are you telling me there's a better way to fall in love? Because I can't think of any.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Dec 16, 2017 3:55:29 GMT
It was.... fine. I might have liked this more if it weren't being touted as an awards contender and had my expectations not been as high as a result. The romance was woefully underdeveloped ( she literally just gives him eggs and they're in love), too many narrative detours when it should have been more focused on actually exploring their relationship. The asset is supposed to be the leading man and I feel like I barely got to know him. Shannon is fine, but his character is completely one-dimensional and not at all interesting. The scenes with his family could have been cut completely and nothing would have been lost. I mean I still liked it, but I would honestly much rather rewatch Crimson Peak than this. It's painted in such broad strokes, very heavy-handed at times, and follows the exact dramatic trajectory that you would expect it to based on the trailer. Hawkins and Jenkins are both delightful, it's beautifully shot, but I feel like critics were too easily won over by the classic cinema aesthetic. I don't know how or why this is getting recognition for its screenplay, which is frankly the worst thing about the film. It needed at least a couple more rewrites by a female writer... Are you telling me there's a better way to fall in love? Because I can't think of any. I don't know about anyone else, but pizza is the way to my heart.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 23:16:00 GMT
It was.... fine. I might have liked this more if it weren't being touted as an awards contender and had my expectations not been as high as a result. The romance was woefully underdeveloped (she literally just gives him eggs and they're in love), too many narrative detours when it should have been more focused on actually exploring their relationship. The asset is supposed to be the leading man and I feel like I barely got to know him. Shannon is fine, but his character is completely one-dimensional and not at all interesting. The scenes with his family could have been cut completely and nothing would have been lost. I mean I still liked it, but I would honestly much rather rewatch Crimson Peak than this. It's painted in such broad strokes, very heavy-handed at times, and follows the exact dramatic trajectory that you would expect it to based on the trailer. Hawkins and Jenkins are both delightful, it's beautifully shot, but I feel like critics were too easily won over by the classic cinema aesthetic. I don't know how or why this is getting recognition for its screenplay, which is frankly the worst thing about the film. It needed at least a couple more rewrites by a female writer... Agree on the Shannon family scenes, but I think the love story was fine. Maybe we could have spent more time with The Asset but otherwise I think I understood the connection between him and Elisa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2017 15:17:32 GMT
Octavia Spencer was my favorite part.
|
|
|
Post by Sharbs on Dec 19, 2017 15:49:49 GMT
Octavia Spencer was my favorite part. uh oh... what did you think?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2017 17:12:04 GMT
Sharbs - Enjoyable, but riddled with clichés, heavy-handed arcs, and unnecessary violence. The musical sequences seemed pretty derivative, too - I couldn't help but think of La La Land. Hawkins, Jenkins, and Spencer all do fine ensemble work; Shannon is a little too "mustache-twirling" in his villainy, if you know what I mean. As I said before, Spencer was my favorite of the cast.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Dec 22, 2017 19:56:14 GMT
It was...quite good. I guess. Still not sure what to think, apart from the fact that I don't really buy the romance. There simply is nothing in the screenplay that supports the kind of connection the film wants them to have.
And Shannon was terrific. Watching him in this, I couldn't help but think of Tom Hardy's devilishly fun turn in The Revenant. Yes it's stereotypical and "thin" on paper, but both performances are forces of nature onscreen. Shannon was terrifying and over-the-top, and he clearly was having fun with the role. I loved how there was always something in Strickland's mouth. What a fantastic little touch. It's a shame most of the accolades are going to Jenkins, because he was rather boring.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Dec 23, 2017 0:39:44 GMT
Got to watch this today. Found it to be a wonderful and beautiful film. Especially loved Hawkins, Jenkins, and Spencer. Shannon was good but pretty standard fair for him. Would have liked to see the romance developed a little more before the breakout but still loved the film nonetheless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2017 3:03:49 GMT
The relationship between Hawkins and the creature was beautifully done, made even more emotionally powerful by Hawkins' incredible performance (better than McDormand tbh). Oh, and the music was great as well. But there were so many little details about the film as a whole that bothered me. A lot of them seem fairly insignificant, but they add up after a while. I also agree with @tylerferrerosorel about the clichés. They were too prevalent to overlook. I'd probably give it a 7/10, because the good stuff was truly magnificent.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Dec 27, 2017 6:26:26 GMT
Kinda loved this honestly, which I was not at all expecting. Wrote a little bit about it here.
|
|
forksforest
Junior Member
Quit your shit-spitting
Posts: 492
Likes: 212
|
Post by forksforest on Jan 1, 2018 21:11:52 GMT
I really wanted to like it a lot more than I actually did. Atmospherically, I wasn't feeling this (unlike Crimson Peak which I think 100% nailed its tone)--the romance, musical number, overture, and general throwback to an older time just didn't click to sell the ununusual romance. The monster wasn't developed enough for me to care or understand the draw, and throwing in the god-like element was unnecessary.
Hawkins, Shannon, and Spencer were great but I agree that the story was ridden with cliches and plot devices that I don't think added to the story. I also find the second half of it was a little rushed and didn't mesh well with the slower first half...the romance culminates a bit too suddenly.
Also not huge on the ending lol. Overall I gave it a 7/10 but as time passes, I feel a bit more negatively towards it than positive so the rating may change.
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jan 1, 2018 21:31:26 GMT
And Shannon was terrific. Watching him in this, I couldn't help but think of Tom Hardy's devilishly fun turn in The Revenant. Yes it's stereotypical and "thin" on paper, but both performances are forces of nature onscreen. Shannon was terrifying and over-the-top, and he clearly was having fun with the role. I loved how there was always something in Strickland's mouth. What a fantastic little touch. It's a shame most of the accolades are going to Jenkins, because he was rather boring. Preaach!!! Not every villain performance needs to break new ground. I think Shannon did a helluva lot with a character that was probably not-so-special on paper.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jan 4, 2018 20:51:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Jan 8, 2018 22:07:11 GMT
A beautiful and sensual masterpiece of Guillermo Del Toro. Its one of the most creative stories in years, that's for sure, even if the subtle storyline refers to the famous "Beauty and the Beast" theme. Its a brave film that works even due to fantastical elements mostly because of the great amount of emotions from what the film lives. Not only the story is creative, so are the characters, especially in the way the are connected. Another great choice was to have all lead characters with a burden. You have a mute lead the film, a gay loner being the second lead and a colored help being one of the greatest heroins. Sally Hawkins was fantastic. She really has a brilliant year with this and "Maudie". One more prove that she is such a versatile actress. The performance she delivered was so tender and soulful, that you must love that character. Michael Shannon was the villain, and while most of his actions were a bit stereotypical, the character was not. He got an interesting backstory and was very well developed. Shannon himself went beyond that and once again gives a very intense and memorable performance. Richard Jenkins had many great and memorable moments that really stick with you. He makes you care for his role from the first appearance on screen to his last. And you feel sorry for him all the time because of the very natural turn he did. Octavia Spencer is a true scene stealer. Her speciality to mix wit with seriousness works here just perfectly. Its a great role for Spencer and she possibly gives her best performance since "The Help". There is so much going on behind her eyes. You really miss her when she is not on screen. The score is beautiful the look is tremendous and Del Toro told the story like a novel. Sometimes he let it go a bit, especially towards the end but generally it is a very intense and focused direction. Surely a film that sticks with you and I am glad that Hollywood did not lose all its creativity.
Current nominations for:
Best Picture Best Director: Guillermo Del Toro Best Actress in a Leading Role: Sally Hawkins Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Michael Shannon Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Richard Jenkins Best Actress in a Supporting Role: Octavia Spencer Best Original Screenplay Best Editing Best Cinematography Best Production Design Best Make Up * Best Ensemble*
Rating: 9/10
|
|