1039 replies to this topic

[S K Y F A L L]

I've been thinking we'll probably get alot of skin from Clarke, maybe a timetravel scene.

 

Arnold should hang dong in this one...

 

Could Dr Who be a liquid terminator?

[x007AceOfSpades]

I do like Jason Clarke, but I'm not sure if he can surpass Christian bale as John Connor. I'm part of the few that actually loves Terminator Salvation and Bale's performance in that film. I do like Emilia Clarke in the casting of Sarah Connor though, I think she'll do a fine job. On the other hand, I just can't get behind Jai Courney as Kyle Reese. I absolutely cannot stand him.

 

Could Dr Who be a liquid terminator?

as for Matt Smith

Spoiler

Seeing him dressed up as a resistence soldier for me proves that he is indeed Kyle Connor. I could be wrong though.

 

[Call Billy Bob]

I'm part of the few that actually loves Terminator Salvation and Bale's performance in that film.

 

I stand behind you on this one.

[tdalton]

SEEN:

Mitt - 3

In the Blood - 2.5
RoboCop - 2
Non-Stop - 3

300: Rise of an Empire - 1

3 Days to Kill - 2

The Sacrament - 3.5

Godzilla - 0.5

Draft Day - 3
 
LOOKING FORWARD TO:

The November Man

Gone Girl

The Equalizer

Tusk

Stephen King's A Good Marriage

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Edge of Tomorrow

Stage Fright

The Town that Dreaded Sundown

Camp X-Ray

[thecasinoroyale]

Like your thinking Ace...

[SecretAgentFan]

 

I'm part of the few that actually loves Terminator Salvation and Bale's performance in that film.

 

I stand behind you on this one.

 

 

Me, too!

[Call Billy Bob]

Salvation fans unite!

[thecasinoroyale]

http://www.comicbook.../news/?a=110257

 

Emilia Clarke is starting to really nail down the Sarah Connor look/vibe I think.

 

Matt Smith....well...god knows what he's doing here....!

 

And people wonder why 'Genisys' is getting slated already on Social Media? Come on - give us something PROPER.

[Call Billy Bob]

Any halfway good reasoning on the name, other than what I've seen - the "genesis" of Cyberdyne "Systems"?

[thecasinoroyale]

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Smith REALLY has the oddest face around.

 

Do we think Arnie cuts it still as the Terminator? I think he does look really...old here, more than any other recent film. I know you shouldn't judge from one shot but...hm...I'm not won over to be honest, sadly.

[Call Billy Bob]

Wow - I never knew how much I needed Emilia Clarke firing an assault rifle in my life until now!

[thecasinoroyale]

Sort of steals the show in those pics!

[Call Billy Bob]

And how!

[tdalton]

I think that if they were smart, they'd have Emilia Clarke and Schwarzenegger as the leads in terms of the film's marketing and leave it at that.  Clarke is really the only good thing about what we've seen so far.  She's nailed the Sarah Connor look and I don't doubt that she'll be very good in the part, a worthy successor to Linda Hamilton.  Schwarzenegger is Schwarzenegger, which is a big positive the film should have going for it.  The other three, however, couldn't look more anonymous standing behind Clarke.  I know that Jason Clarke is a good actor, but he and the other two standing behind Emilia really don't inspire any confidence.  They really should have brought back Christian Bale and then cast the net a bit wider in terms of casting the rest of the film's leads.

[Iceskater101]

I agree, Matt Smith has a really weird look to me and the fact that he is in this.. hmm. I mean I have never been a fan of the Terminator films but I agree with tdalton in the fact that Emilia Clarke really nails the look. She looks like a force to be reckoned with and the other ones (especially Matt Smith) do look really odd in these pictures.

[Call Billy Bob]

What's odd to me - The Doctor is holding a big gun! All kinds of wrong in that picture...

[x007AceOfSpades]

All of the pictures and the plot synopsis released by the producer and such has finally led me to this:

Spoiler

Terminator: Genisys is getting the Star Trek 2009 treatment. It's getting rebooted, but it's still acknowledging the previous timeline. With Star Trek the only thing linking the two timelines together was Nimoy's Spock (William Shatner is rumored to be in the third film as a returning Kirk) Here, Connor sends back Reese to ensure that HIS future is set, but it isn't. Sarah Connor isn't the same one from the first Cameron film. Now they're trying to make sure to get the future set and put everything back in place. I'm actually liking it a lot so far, I think if it's done right, it could be a promising lead in for the new trilogy.

 

 

I'm part of the few that actually loves Terminator Salvation and Bale's performance in that film.

 

I stand behind you on this one.

 

 

Me, too!

 

Salvation for me, is the true third installment in the franchise (pre Genisys). T3 Just threw some stuff together to try and make Judgement day. Salvation get's a lot of hate for being different than the first two films, but I loved how it was now showing the war, albeit the beginning before Connor took over as the leader of the resistance. Shame that Arnold actually didn't like it. It was much much better than T3.

 

Emilia Clarke is starting to really nail down the Sarah Connor look/vibe I think.

Sort of steals the show in those pics!

 

Wow - I never knew how much I needed Emilia Clarke firing an assault rifle in my life until now!

I agree tcr, I think she'll be a great successor to Linda Hamilton. She's really nailing the Terminator 2 look and she looks just outstanding.

 

Any halfway good reasoning on the name, other than what I've seen - the "genesis" of Cyberdyne "Systems"?

Spoiler

Genisys ---> Genisys Terminators. SkyNet's new Terminators.

 

Do we think Arnie cuts it still as the Terminator? I think he does look really...old here, more than any other recent film. I know you shouldn't judge from one shot but...hm...I'm not won over to be honest, sadly.

Remember what Kyle Reese said in the first film, it's a machine deep down underneath. All the hair, skin, tissue is living, it ages and grows to appear to be old looking, but the machine is still deadly. The power cell inside can run for a hundred years, so while the flesh ages, the machine doesn't. It just keeps going until the power cell runs out of energy and eventually self destructs.

[Call Billy Bob]

All of the pictures and the plot synopsis released by the producer and such has finally led me to this:

Spoiler

Terminator: Genisys is getting the Star Trek 2009 treatment. It's getting rebooted, but it's still acknowledging the previous timeline. With Star Trek the only thing linking the two timelines together was Nimoy's Spock (William Shatner is rumored to be in the third film as a returning Kirk) Here, Connor sends back Reese to ensure that HIS future is set, but it isn't. Sarah Connor isn't the same one from the first Cameron film. Now they're trying to make sure to get the future set and put everything back in place. I'm actually liking it a lot so far, I think if it's done right, it could be a promising lead in for the new trilogy.

 

 

I'm part of the few that actually loves Terminator Salvation and Bale's performance in that film.

 

I stand behind you on this one.

 

 

Me, too!

 

Salvation for me, is the true third installment in the franchise (pre Genisys). T3 Just threw some stuff together to try and make Judgement day. Salvation get's a lot of hate for being different than the first two films, but I loved how it was now showing the war, albeit the beginning before Connor took over as the leader of the resistance. Shame that Arnold actually didn't like it. It was much much better than T3.

 

Emilia Clarke is starting to really nail down the Sarah Connor look/vibe I think.

Sort of steals the show in those pics!

 

Wow - I never knew how much I needed Emilia Clarke firing an assault rifle in my life until now!

I agree tcr, I think she'll be a great successor to Linda Hamilton. She's really nailing the Terminator 2 look and she looks just outstanding.

 

Any halfway good reasoning on the name, other than what I've seen - the "genesis" of Cyberdyne "Systems"?

Spoiler

Genisys ---> Genisys Terminators. SkyNet's new Terminators.

 

Do we think Arnie cuts it still as the Terminator? I think he does look really...old here, more than any other recent film. I know you shouldn't judge from one shot but...hm...I'm not won over to be honest, sadly.

Remember what Kyle Reese said in the first film, it's a machine deep down underneath. All the hair, skin, tissue is living, it ages and grows to appear to be old looking, but the machine is still deadly. The power cell inside can run for a hundred years, so while the flesh ages, the machine doesn't. It just keeps going until the power cell runs out of energy and eventually self destructs.

I think that those of us who have been bantering about Genisys for the past couple of days are all generally getting more excited and filled with anticipation - heck, this could have been an entirely seperate thread!

[x007AceOfSpades]

Official trailer and poster for Michael Mann's upcoming crime drama, Blackhat. Looks visually stunning and very, very good. I really hope it get's a limited release at the end of this year. I've been waiting to see this since Mann started filming it some time ago. If not, January 16th, 2015, is just around the corner.

 

Also worth noting that I love the poster and the simplicity to it. Reminds me of the poster for The Insider

[S K Y F A L L]

Looks great.

[S K Y F A L L]

I think the only films left I want to see are

 

INTEINTERSTELLAR

GONE GIRL (didn't care for the book that much just want to see Batman hang dong)

DUMB AND DUMBER TOO

HORRIBLE BOSSES 2

EXODUS

THE HOBBIT

[x007AceOfSpades]

I'm only going to see Interstellar just for the sheer fact of Matthew McConaughey being in it (despite being underwhelmed by Dallas Buyers Club). Visually it looks great, and the reviews seem to be in the middle, so why not. Plus it's one of the last films to be shot on 70MM IMAX film stock and be distributed on film stock (Paramount went completely digital with film distribution last December).

 

As for Gone Girl, I too didn't like the book, but being that David Fincher is behind the director's chair, he actually takes an uninteresting, and dull book and makes it completely engrossing. I think you'll like it.

[thecasinoroyale]

To infinity, and beyond...in 2017!

 

'Toy Story 4' is happening.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/29947502

 

 

Good? Bad?

[x007AceOfSpades]

With all the billions Disney makes, it was bound to happen sooner or later. $$$$$$$

[Call Billy Bob]

I'll still pay $8 to see it.

 

And, I know, I'm part of the problem

[tdalton]

To infinity, and beyond...in 2017!

 

'Toy Story 4' is happening.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/29947502

 

 

Good? Bad?

 

I don't see any problem with it.  Toy Story has been a consistently excellent franchise, so I'm definitely up for another film.  If the creative team behind Toy Story thinks that there's another worthwhile story to tell, even though Toy Story 3 ended things very well, then I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt considering the high quality of the films to date.

[Call Billy Bob]

The big plus for me is the fact that John Lasseter will direct the film himself after sitting out Toy Story 3. He says he wouldn't make the film unless he felt it could be better than the previous three. His confidence in the project is a good sign.

[x007AceOfSpades]

His confidence in the project is a good sign.

Or his paycheck was really nice.

[x007AceOfSpades]

nterstellar - 2014 - 5/5 - Directed by Christopher Nolan - starring Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway

"Mankind was born on earth, it was never meant to die here."

 

After Christopher Nolan's previous film, The Dark Knight Rises left me more than disappointed, I was at first hesitant to shy away from Interstellar. It was the enthusiasm of being a fan of cinema, science and the buzz that had been surrounding, on top of Nolan's avocation for film stock which told me something. It told me that this was going to be an experience like never before, one that I would always remember, and the IMAX experience (granted it wasn't 70mm) for Interstellar was just awe-inspiring. It's the most ambitious science-fiction film to come around in quite some, and going in with modest expectations, I was blown away.

 

Set in the near future, Earth is no longer able to properly sustain humanity and our only main source of food happens to be corn, with crops being destroyed by blight and dust storms. We follow Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) who is a former NASA test pilot and an engineer lives with family and his father in law, Donald (John Lithgow) on their farm. Cooper's young daughter, Murphy (Mackenzie Foy) says that there's a ghost that's trying to communicate with her, which Cooper discovers it to be a form of intel communication;binary code via dust which leads them to a secret facility where NASA still remains active.

 

There, Cooper meets Professor Brand (Michael Caine) who tells him that a wormhole has been discovered in our solar system orbiting Saturn. Brand tells him that it's humanity's only chance to explore and look for a new habitable planet for all of mankind. Cooper reluctantly agrees, after being hesitant of leaving behind his family. Joining him is Amelia (Anne Hathaway), Brand's daughter, a physicist Rommily (David Gyasi), geographer Doyle (Wes Bentley), and two AI robots CASE and TARS (voiced by Josh Stewart and Bill Irwin, respectively) as they set out traverse the vastness of space and search for a new home.

 

To get it out of the way early, Interstellar is as ambitious and visually stunning as Stanley Kubrick's space masterpiece, 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it doesn't come close, but that's okay. There's traces or little parts in the film that may remind you of Kubrick's film, but in the end, the two are ultimately different. What Nolan has crafted is a essentially a family drama in the center of a space drama. It's the story of one man and his long journey who must leave behind his family in order to save the world entire. It sounds kinda corny, but it's actually not half bad. You feel the anger between a young Murphy watching her father leave and not knowing when he'll return and the guilt that Cooper shows of feeling as if he abandoned them, when in doubt, he's saving them.

 

Is this a masterpiece? For me, not entirely, but why am I rating it five-stars? The experience, the effects, the acting, everything. Hell maybe I love this film much more than I do. The script proposes interesting scientific theories that really put your brain to work if your a sci-fi guy or just a science guy in general. It's ambitious like I said, and probably the most ambitious film Nolan has made yet. Thanks in part to the extensive research with theorist Kip Thorn, Interstellar is a marvel. Even some scenes which feel a bit far fetched feel plausible. Sure the script has some of the previous problems in Nolan's films like constant exposition and not too great dialogue, but it should not take away from the experience that is Interstellar.

 

I also can't review this properly without talking about how gorgeous and visually aesthetic this film is. Combining visual effects and practical effects, as well as the jaw dropping cinematography from Hoyte Van Hoytema, this film will leave you breathless. The only way to truly see this film is in IMAX format. The space exploration scenes were so... it's hard to describe. Stunning? I can't describe how this film swept me off of my feet. From trekking throughout the vastness of space, to the dead silence of space, to going through wormholes and black holes, this feels and looks like a space film. A great one too. The tidal wave scene was absolutely frightening with the crashing sounds of the waves blarring in IMAX, and the gorgeous, yet haunting landscapes of Mann's planet. Oh and the sound was incredible as well, by far the best. Really love that and scenes shot outside the spacecraft had no sound other than Score.

 

The acting was great all around as well. Matthew McConaughey is still proving himself worthy as a great actor since his resurgence with The Lincoln Lawyer and proves that he can return to big budget films again (I'm part of the few that thinks Sahara is dumb fun!). Anne Hathaway was great in role, as was Jessica Chastain (who happened to favorite a tweet of mine!) who plays Cooper's daughter grown up on Earth, and Casey Affleck who plays Tom, Coopers eldest child. Michael Caine doesn't have much screen time but he's great, but the one that surprised me and everyone in the theater was Matt Damon. Damon plays Dr. Mann, an astronaut who sought out an icy planet and went into cryo stasis. I don't want to give out spoiler's on his character but it was absolutely great. A small role, yet a terrific one. Zimmer's score is also very pleasing to the ears. Hans Zimmer is a composer I often find myself on the fence with. I feel like he has ability to turn in consistent scores, but falters. I found the score for The Dark Knight Rises too be too loud and more of the same and not having the subtle touch that was James Newton Howard. I also found that he used drums, lots of drums for an even louder sound with Man Of Steel. While I enjoyed his score 12 Years A Slave, Interstellar is by far the best work he's turned in, in quite some time. I'd say it rivals that of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' score on Fincher's Gone Girl. Those are by far the two best scores of the year, without a doubt.

 

A lot of people have issues with the last thirty minutes or so of the film, and I can see why. I didn't have problems with it at all, if you understand Albert Einstein's theory of wormholes and that of time being relative to perspective, it all makes sense. Same thing goes for "they", which if you've seen the film, you'll understand what I'm talking about. It also deals with Paradox as well, much like Nolan's 2010 Sci-Fi/action film, Inception. Now before I end this, I must seriously talk about two films: Interstellar and Gravity. Both are somewhat similar, yet different. They both deal with space and such, but it's Interstellar that is the far superior film. I'm not talking about visuals either, I'm talking about overall being more interesting and better plotted than Alfonso Cuarón melodramatic space film. Yes, it may seem to be unfair to compare the two, but I honestly don't see what made Gravity get rave reviews, and for this film to get so-so. Was it because this film presents plausible, and interesting ideas and wasn't Sandra Bullock in a space/disaster film? Sure Gravity has the themes of rebirth and survival, but Interstellar is the better of the two. And I'm not even a massive Nolan fan either.

 

Well this is now going to be my eleventh paragraph of my review, and I'm already feeling like I've been rambling on a bit too much, which means it is now time to conclude the review. It's a brilliantly made science fiction film and visually enjoyable as it is plot wise. For being nearly three hours it was never boring, which is rare, as it almost feels as if Nolan has a problem with pacing. But all in all, Interstellar may not be Best Picture quality, but it certainly is one hell of a ride. It's an experience like never before, one that I will never forget. If I learned anything else, it's that I can't wait too see Hoyte Van Hoytema's work on Bond 24 next November!

 

PLEASE GO SEE INTERSTELLAR IN IMAX

 

"Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night... Rage, Rage Against The Dying Of The Light."

 

Nightcrawler - 2014 - 5/5 - Directed by Dan Gilroy - starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Rene Russo

"If you want to win the lottery, you have to make the money to buy a ticket."

 

The City Shines Brightest At Night. They call Los Angeles the City Of Angels, which is the exact opposite in Dan Gilroy's modern masterpiece, Nightcrawler. At night, all the bad men come out to play, and for one Lou Bloom, it's all in a night's work as a freelance crime journalist. It's a film I walking into the theater knowing it was going to be good, but left speechless. You will not forget Nightcrawler and you will not forget Lou Bloom. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Lou Bloom, an ambitious who is destined to make himself known. He falls into the world of freelance crime journalism in Los Angeles after stumbling upon a car accident and witnessing a nightcrawler, Joe Loder (Bill Paxton) recording the aftermath. Lou buys himself a police scanner and a cheap hand-held camera and sets out to capture the events in the night, all while securing footage and funds from a news station and acquiring himself a partner. With better equipment, a better car, and a partner, Lou's true side begins to unfold as we witness him for the man he truly is. For a lack of better words, Lou Bloom is a sociopath.

 

Ever since the 2011 film, Source Code, Jake Gyllenhaal has been delivering great performances left and right. End Of Watch, and the two films by Denis Villeneuve: Prisoners and Enemy have shown him to be shaping up into one of the finest actors of this generation. Then there's Nightcrawler which is on an entirely different level. Jake completely submerses himself in the role and becomes Lou Bloom, losing thirty pounds, and becoming a recluse. This a performance that will you with your jaw dropped. He carries the film so perfectly and Lou Bloom is destined to become a character we will all remember. From the moment we see Lou Bloom he just appears to he a young man driven towards success and willing to do anything and everything. He's charismatic and striving, yet always living and working on his own ethics. As the film progresses we realize he's no different then your average criminal. He's conniving, he's manipulative to those he works with, he will not stop until he is best. Even if it means lying to the police, threatening others, sabotaging rival nightcrawlers, and worse: death. Behind the ghoulish smile, the frail body, and the bug eyes, Lou Bloom is a bad, bad man. By the end of the film, you will not stand him, and quite possibly hate him. A much layered character.

 

The script by Dan Gilroy is absolutely terrific with a dark main character, and rich supporting characters the only boost the main up. It shows what a modern city is now, and how the media, particularly that of news, which will go above and beyond to get their story, which only fuels Lou Bloom. It's an eloquently written script that's part character study, part crime thriller, part satire, and part neo-noir. Dan Gilroy also directs the film, bringing to life the story of Bloom and keeping the viewer invested throughout and knowing when to turn up the intensity and when to focus on characters. He knows what film he's making, and he never sets out to make something lesser or something more. Not since Michael Mann's Collateral as a director really captured two sides of Los Angeles, but most importantly L.A. as a character. Gilroy brings in subtle moments of dark humor which doesn't break Nightcrawler's dark tone, but rather makes it all the more intriguing. He shows what a modern city and it's people are like and the cut-throat world of journalism. He also directs tense, action scenes perfectly, letting the scene just go and not trying to make it look flashy. I'm talking about the Chinese restaurant scene and the car chase that follows, which is by far the most intense, edge of your seat scenes in the film. That doesn't go without saying that cinematographer Robert Elswit captures everything so beautifully and shows a daunting Los Angeles. It's one of the most visually appealing films of the year, and it looks stunning on the big screen.

 

The City Shines Brightest At Night. I think I've said all I can possibly say in terms of praising how outstanding Nightcrawler is. It's one hell of a film with fantastic writing & direction, wonderful acting from Gyllenhaal, along with the supporting cast in Rene Russo, Riz Ahmed, and Bill Paxton, and masterful technically speaking. Nightcrawler is a modern masterpiece, and with several other films that I'm waiting to see for the remainder of the film, it is currently my number one film of the year. It was that great. It was just perfect on every level. I will now conclude my review with quote I began it with.

 

"If you want to win the lottery, you have to make the money to buy a ticket."

 

A Most Wanted Man - 2014 - 4.5/5 - Directed by Anton Corbijn - starring Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Willem Dafoe

"Have you ever seen blood on the street? "

 

The last espionage film I saw was Kenneth Branagh's Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, which is a seriously, weak and horribly made film and a massive disservice to the character created by the late, great, Tom Clancy. On the hand, John Le Carre's A Most Wanted happens to be one of the years best films. It's a classic espionage film that is smartly written and directed, and brilliantly acted. It's an espionage film that consists of heavy dialogue, but nonetheless, keeps you highly invested in the story, all the way to the shocking ending. Well maybe shocking isn't the word, but it's certainly a gut-punch.

 

The film takes place in a post-9/11 Hamburg, Germany and begins with Issa Karpov (Grigoriy Gronemeyer), a half Chechen, half-Russian, illegally enters Hamburg with supposed intentions on claiming his late father's fortune, which is said to be in the millions. This catches the eye of a secret intelligence agency in Hamburg, led by Gunther Bachmann (Phillip Seymour Hoffman). Bachmann finds Karpov too be interesting, but is more invested in one Dr. Abdullah (Homayoun Ershadi) whom he believes is funding terrorist organizations/activities. With Germany and the United States invested more in Karpov, he must find a way to use Karpov to bring him closer to Abdullah.

 

A Most Wanted Man is a slow burner of an espionage film. While to some it could come off as a slow paced films, it's actually paced quite well and reflects Bachmann's intentions on taking his time to carefully carry out a mission. The film puts everything out there for you and just requires your undivided attention. With major espionage films today being more in check on being blockbusters, it's rare to see an espionage film that feel's old school and just takes it's time to tell a worthy story. While I'm an absolute die-hard Bond fan, and I love seeing Daniel Craig kick ass as the classic character, it's wonderful to see a classic espionage thriller. There's no need for action pieces or sinister villains to make it interesting. The story alone is interesting and engaging for the viewer.

 

It would be wise for me to say that the acting of course is on full display here in Anton Corbijn's film. Despite some dodgy accents, everyone is quite well, as Rachel McAdams and Robin Wright deliver serviceable performances, Willem Dafoe's supporting role, while not having the most screen time, his acting is great, but the best of all is the man himself; Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Hoffman's Gunther Bachmann isn't a badass like Bond, or an overall intriguing man like George Smiley, but is a more reserved, calculative man. He's a man who is positive on what he seeks, but is caught in the middle of conflicting interests with other agencies and governments. Hoffman's acting is just brilliant, and worth a watch alone. He brings a level of intensity and class to the screen that isn't to be missed. It's definitely a shame that this is Hoffman's last film. I mean that in a positive manner, because there is always a great performance from him to behold in forthcoming films, and this is the last one of him, and is a great performance of him by far. His death has cast a large shadow over the industry as one of this generations' finest actors has passed on.

 

A Most Wanted Man will surely be long forgotten by the time awards season comes around, which is a shame, as it's certainly a damn fine film. The writing is crisp, the direction is top notch, and the acting is outstanding. It's a fine addition to the espionage genre and is highly recommended to fans of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, fans of Le Carre, and fans of espionage. Definitely one that isn't to be missed.

 

"To make the world a safer place. Isn't that enough?"

 

The Rover - 2014 - 4.5/5 - Directed by David Michod - starring Guy Pearce and Robert Pattinson

"You don't learn to fight, your death's going to come real soon."

 

The Rover is a film that may seem unclear and possibly bore you with it's narrative, but it's mood and atmosphere, done excellently by writer/director David Michod proves that this is one of the years more refreshing films and maybe even one of the best. It's just as barren and haunting as the film itself. It takes place in a post-apocalyptic Australia ten years after a massive global economic collapse and follows a man, Eric (Guy Pearce), a drifter who's car gets stolen by a group of men led by Henry (Scoot McNairy). Eric then sets to seek out the men and retrieve his car, coming across Rey (Robert Pattinson) who turns out to be Henry's brother.

 

When you hear post-apocalyptic, don't let this film fool you for what you mind will imagine "post-apocalyptic". It's not George Miller's Mad Max but instead, David Michod presents us a very plausible Australian Wasteland, that is jarring and haunting. There's not a whole lot of dialogue present, and the film really centers on it's two main characters led by Pearce and Pattinson. Pearce and Pattinson carry this film jointly together and do so with powerful ease. Sure the film can get slow at times, but my god, were they ever so brilliant to watch.

 

When you read the tagline "Fear the man with nothing left to lose" you think it's going to be another revenge thriller but it isn't. All it is, is a man who want's his car back (whose contents are revealed at the end and put a tear in my eye). Pearce plays Eric so beautifully, he's not hostile, but he's a man who really has nothing to lose and shows virtually no signs of fear throughout the film. He is joined by Robert Pattinson who turns in another great performance. I never thought I would praise Pattinson for his acting, especially after being in those atrocious teen-vampire films. I thought he was great in Cronenberg's Cosmopolis and he's even better here. It follows the two men who strangely develop a friendship as they push forward.

 

The Rover also strangely plays out like a western film too, following a man in a desolate area on a quest to seek out the one thing that belongs to him. It's strange for me to put into words, but you'll understand it when you see. It's packed with gorgeous and moody cinematography that showcases the film and it's atmosphere rather brilliantly. Not to mention the incredible score by Anthony Portos, which is some of the best I've heard this year. It's another great film by Michod which I think is easily on par with his previous effort Animal Kingdom. His two films are definitely must sees and he's becoming a director to definitely look out for.

While it is slow in spots, that isn't to take away from how great Michod's The Rover is. It's packed with great visuals, a nice score, great writing and directing, but most of all, powerful performances. Definitely a must see.

 

"You should never stop thinking about a life you've taken. That's the price you pay for taking it."

 

Fury - 2014 - 3.5/5 - Directed by David Ayer - starring Brad Pitt and Logan Lerman

"It will end, soon. But before it does, a lot more people have to die."

 

War is hell. We all knew that, since we've studied it enough in school, read enough books, seen enough movies, watched enough History Channel specials (before Pawn Stars and those American Pickers pricks took over) to know that yes, War is indeed hell. So what makes David Ayer's WWII tank drama different? Well, nothing actually. Am I saying that it's bad? No, i found it to be pretty good, and it's probably the best WWII film I've seen in quite some time, but it's not outstanding by any stretch, and that's coming from someone who likes Ayer and was greatly looking forward to Fury.

 

It's the last month of the European theater during World War II, April 1945. The Allies continue to push forward into Nazi Germany, despite being out-manned and outgunned and having tanks inferior to the Germans. The film follows one particular tank and it's crew, "Fury", led by hardened U.S. Sergeant, Don "Wardaddy" Collier, Boyd "Bible" Swan, Grady "Coon-Ass" Travis, and Trini "Gordo" Garcia (Brad Pitt, Shia LaBeouf, Jon Bernthal, and Michael Pena, respectively) Their original assistant and gunner has been killed in battle and has been replaced with Army typist, Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman). Norman has never experienced any sort of war, and gets off to a bad start with the crew which results in the destruction of a fellow tank. With few men and few weapons, "Wardaddy" takes Norman under his wing in attempts to strengthen him during the hardest times of battle, when they need all the soldiers they can get.

 

A lot of World War II movies usually follow a small group of soldiers on their mission and what not, but Fury is really the first one I can think of to solely follow a tank and it's five-man crew. It's not all two hours of tank action which you can try and expect being that David Ayer is writing and directing the film, but instead it actually has less fighting time, until the big climax. The battle scenes are among the best in the film. Their graphic, bloody, and their shot and edited extremely well, and the sound is top notch as well. The climax of the film is probably the highlight film, and it's worth the admission alone.

 

When the film doesn't focus on the fighting and instead reverts to being a drama, it's not entirely bad. The film only focus really on "Wardaddy" and Norman, which wouldn't have been a problem if they other three crew member weren't wasted and if the film didn't hang over your heads "War is hell" and "The innocence of war".

We've seen the "War Is Hell" film many times, particularly that of Steven Spielberg's WWII masterpieces Saving Private Ryan and the "Innocence of War" with Oliver Stone's Platoon. Yes, Norman is a young man, one who is not fit to withstand the horrors of war, but is it necessary to have him babied throughout the film?

That's the problem I had, and yes, I know we can't all be born tough sons of bitches. You learn in the beginning of the film that "Wardaddy" is a bit of a hard ass, and you see it more with him getting stern with Norman and eventually forcing Norman to kill a Nazi as a means of toughening him up. Eventually, "Wardaddy" warms up to him and he sees himself in him, and they form a bond. But the film seem so keen to just focus on those two in particular, but I guess that's what the film set out to focus on in the first place.

 

The acting is really good actually, with the best easily coming from Brad Pitt in a very good role delivering a serviceable performance and one that is much better than his previous "World War II" film (you know which one I'm talking about. The one with the Nazi scalps.) Logan Lerman is pretty decent and at times great and other, unconvincing. Jon Bernthal plays the asshole of the crew, albeit very well, and Michael Pena doesn't do much, and Shia LaBeouf was actually very, very good, which is surprising. The only thing is, Bernthal, Pena, and LaBeouf are just wasted and they don't really provide anything to move the film forward other that show color and diversity from within the tank. A shame really.

 

I give Ayer props for making a passable WWII film, but it'd be great to see him tackle some new themes, as well as "bonding" which has been in his past two films now. I wasn't disappointed with Fury to say the least, as it pretty much was what I was expecting it to be, I just thought maybe Ayer would've done some things a little differently. One thing is for sure, it's definitely a much better made and much better written and much better acted film than his earlier film this year, Sabotage.

 

"Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

 

The Salvation - 2014 - 2.5/5 - Directed by Kristian Levring - starring Mads Mikkelsen and Jeffrey Dean Morgan

"Your beloved brother killed my ten year old son. And then he raped my wife."

 

The western genre is pretty played out and tiresome now. So what makes The Salvation different? Besides it's short run time and a more revenge focused story, almost nothing, but Mads Mikkelsen delivers a good enough performance that warrants this otherwise, "okay" western a watch. Mikkelson plays Jon, a Danish settler in the 1870's who's family is killed by a man that was traveling with them on the stagecoach. Jon kills the man, which then sets off a hunt for him by the man's brother, Delarue (Jeffrey Dean Morgan).

 

It's a pretty basic western revenge/thriller with a good performance by Mikkelsen and Jeffrey Dead Morgan plays a passable villain. Eva Green is also in there with no dialogue being that her character had her tongue cut off, but her limited facial expressions really do show her range as an actress. I really can't say much other than it was pretty short and has some pretty nice shots throughout, but it's largely forgettable. Unless you're a fan of Mikkelsen, there's not much here. Standard western.

 

"May the lord have mercy on both of your souls"

 

Sex Tape - 2014 - 2/5 - Directed by Jake Kasdan - starring Jason Segal and Cameron Diaz

"I once sent Annie a picture of my d***. She was at a PTA meeting. It was horrible."

 

Well you're probably wondering why Sex Tape has two stars. It's not the worst comedy of the year (Kudos to you Neighbors you still hold the honor of being the worst comedy of the year, the worst film of the year, and the worst film I have ever seen!), it's a pretty funny concept, it's just not executed well enough nor is it entirely interesting enough. However there were two scenes that I found to be the best in the entire film, which I'll get to later.

 

Jay and Annie (Jason Segal and Cameron Diaz, respectively) used to have a great sex life, but with marriage, jobs, and kids it has become seemingly impossible for them to find the time to be intimate again. When they suddenly have a night entirely to themselves, they get drunk off of tequila and make a sex tape on Jay's new iPad using the "The Joy Of Sex" as their reference. When they wake up, Jay gets a mysterious text about his tape and he realizes that because he forgot to delete it, it synced to all of the iPad's he once had that now belong to others. Jay and Annie then set out to retrieve the iPad's and delete the sex tape before anyone else sees them.

 

The one thing to take from Sex Tape is that it is one giant, ninety-minute product placement advertisement for Apple products. iPad's, iPhone's, iMac's, and MacBook's, you name it, to the point where it feels like the iPad itself is a central character when in fact, it's just a damn electronic device. I'm not particularly a fan of Apple and I'm not the biggest lover of Steve Jobs. I'm a proud Windows Phone user, and I don't mind product placement, so long that it is done subtle and not in your face every chance it gets.

 

Now, the film for the most part isn't entirely funny. There's a few moments that will probably elicit a couple of chuckles from you, but that's about it. However the two scenes I laughed my ass off at were the best. The scene with Rob Lowe snorting cocaine and listening to Slayer was hysterical to me, and then Jack Black's cameo as the owner of YouPorn, who spews out rival porn sites was hilarious. The rest of the film is like a romantic comedy gone wrong instead of being a raunchy comedy. I'm also glad Judd Apatow wasn't involved in this film, as I didn't enjoy seeing Jason Segal's penis in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Jason Segal's penis. Three times. In your face. Forever etched in my mind. Thanks Judd Apatow.

 

Sex Tape minus the scenes with Rob Lowe and Jack Black, is another disappointing comedy film of the year. At least Cameron Diaz was naked. For the most part. Probably a body for non-closeups.

 

"Who has sex for three hours? That's the length of the movie Lincoln -- you did the full Lincoln."

 

The Equalizer - 2014 - 2/5 - Directed by Antoine Fuqua - starring Denzel Washington and Martin Csokas

"What do you see when you look at me?"

 

Do Denzel Washington and Liam Neeson have the same agent or something, because it seems like all they do is make the same (or similar style) revenge/action thrillers. I haven't seen complete seasons of the original CBS show The Equalizer starring Edward Woodward, but I've seen enough episodes to say that it's actually a pretty good eighties show. So the concept behind the show is about a man, Robert McCall, who happens to be a former government agent, goes out and seeks those with the odds against them, and finds a way to equal them out, thus being called The Equalizer.

 

Denzel Washington plays McCall in the film adaption, a widower living a solemn life, working an honest job in a department store, and just getting by. He befriends a young prostitute Teri (Chloe Grace Moretz) who gets mistreated by her pimp and eventually sent to the hospital. McCall approaches her pimp, working for the Russians, and offers them nearly ten grand in cash in exchange for her freedom, but they refuse his offer and are killed by McCall in the process. The Russian mob boss, Vladimir Pushkin (Vladimir Kulich) sends his enforcer, Teddy (Martin Csokas) to find McCall and kill him, while McCall wages a one man war against the mafia and the corruption in the city.

 

I applaud the fact that the film tried to show a human side to the character, up until they decided to practically make him go full Punisher. The Woodard character of McCall is a simple one. He's a good man who will help those in need and to help them in dangerous situations. Here we get two sides to McCall: A good, humble side which you see when he's interacting with fellow employees at his job and when he's talking to Teri. Then there's the other side where he basically turns into this Punisher-like character where the only motive that exists is "Kill". Now, The Punisher and The Equalizer may seem similar, but they are different. Robert McCall aims to help those that need help. Frank Castle kills those that manage to continue to do evil things, but Castle exacts his motives based on the death of his family. Two different people. One is a retired Spy, the other is basically the Terminator. So why make McCall here a killing machine?

 

Because it's Rated-R and we need violence? No. There's very few traits, if any, from the Edward Woodard character that carry over to Denzel Washington's incarnation. So instead, The title, the name, and somewhat motive carries over to your average revenge action thriller that we've all seen a dozen times now. Man lives decent life. Friend gets hurt. Man gets upset and exacts revenge on the bad guy. The end. While the film may show scenes of McCall doing various vigilantism acts, it feels very forced and doesn't compute with the film. One scene he helps someone by beating a perp up, the next he's killing someone. Groovy. How long has it been since Denzel Washington has really delivered a performance that left you speechless and really made you appreciate the man and his trade? For me it was his outstanding performance in Ridley Scott's American Gangster(terrific film by the way). Since then, it's been the Liam Neeson treatment. Sure his acting wasn't awful, but it would've been great if his character was written and portrayed to be this invincible superhero. There's absolutely no point in the film where he's forced to think about his next move or to be cautious. Sure he's a former black operative, but do we really need to see him outsmarting and outwitting his foes left and right? If EON Productions can now show Bond getting his ass kicked and taking a brutal beating, why can't Denzel? He's not superman...

 

The rest of the acting is pretty much a mixed bag, then again, revenge action thrillers aren't noted for their acting right? Chloe Grace Moretz has maybe twenty minutes of screen time and is pretty unconvincing as a prostitute. She's a fine young actress, but I don't think this was a role best suited for her. Then there's Martin Csokas who pretty much plays your by the books Russian villain. That's another thing, why does it always have to be a Russian that's bad? As part Russian (well, more Ukrainian actually), it's pretty annoying. But hey, at least the pirate himself, Tait Fletcher (Old school MMA fans will know him!) was in it. The action is also by the books at times too, though I did think the finale in the department store was pretty decent. The rest is a "seen one, seen 'em all" sort of thing. It gets over the top maybe as director Antoine Fuqua's way of trying to convey hyper realism or just trying to be as edgy as possible. It's all trying to be stylish and uses rather laughable, yet awful slow motion that just rolls your eyes. Explosions, gunfights, stealth kills, choppy editing during hand to hand combat scenes. you get the jist.

 

The best scene in the film is probably the dinner scene between Washington and Csokas, as I felt they played well off of each other. The rest of the film, for being two hours, dragged too much when it was too busy focusing on sub plots which were there as a means to try and develop McCall, or look into him, but ultimately slow the film down. It's pretty badly paced for a lack of better words. The rest of the film really has no sense of tension closing in on McCall as he's just too busy killing Russians in his Superman shirt. Though I did like Zack Hemsey's "Vengeance" in the finale, interesting choice, but I love that track. Oh and that Eminem suck in the ending credits was dreadful.

 

If you're a sucker for mindless action films you might find some kick out of this. If you actually like decent films or you're a fan of the show, you're not going to find anything here to write home about. It's extremely disappointing to see the outcome of this film since it's the returning collaboration between Washington and Fuqua, who haven't worked together since 2001's Training Day (personally think that film worked because of David Ayer's great script). The Equalizer is another action film, there's nothing remotely enjoyable about. Personally, I think Liam Neeson's A Walk Among The Tombstones was the better of the two films between the actors to come out in the same time.

 

"Your heart is beating three times the normal rate, because you're losing so much blood. In about thirty seconds your body is going to shut down and you will suffocate."

 

Oh and one more thing, why is it now that every action film has to get a damn IMAX release? What was so visually and aesthetically pleasing about this film to the heads at IMAX to give it an IMAX release? What happened to the days when IMAX was reserved to films with a large, broad scope? Films that were just visually striking and just a marvel to witness, they just left you in awe?

 

LOOKING FORWARD TO: (Most anticipated are highlighted in bold and red)

Inherent Vice

Exodus

The Hobbit: The Battle Of The Five Armies

American Sniper

Hercules

The Drop

The Judge

Horrible Bosses 2

HAVE SEEN:

RoboCop - 1/5

Need For Speed - 4/5

Sabotage - 1.5/5

Nymphomaniac - 4/5

300: Rise Of An Empire - 0/5

Takedown: The DNA Of GSP - 4/5

Captain America: The Winter Soldier - 3/5

Neighbors - 0/5

Godzilla - 2.5/5

X-Men: Days Of Future Past - 5/5

The Raid 2 - 0/5

22 Jump Street - 4/5

Deliver Us From Evil - 4/5

Under The Skin - 5/5

Edge Of Tomorrow - 4.5/5

Non-Stop - 3/5

The Monuments Men - 1/5

Locke - 4/5

Enemy - 4.5/5

The Purge: Anarchy - 3.5/5

The Expendables 3 - 2/5

Lucy - 3.5/5

Joe - 4.5/5

Snowpiercer - 4.5/5

Noah - 2.5/5

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit - 1.5/5

Guardians Of The Galaxy - 3.5/5

Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes - 3.5/5

Dom Hemingway - 3.5/5

Transcendence - 2.5/5

The Grand Budapest Hotel - 5/5

Chef - 4.5/5

The Signal - 3.5/5

3 Days To Kill - 1/5

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - 0/5

I, Frankenstein - 0/5

Boyhood - 5/5

Sin City: A Dame To Kill For - 2/5

Houdini - 3/5

Maleficent - 1/5

Brick Mansions - 2/5

Into The Storm - 0/5

Let's Be Cops - 3.5

Gone Girl - 5/5

Wolf Creek - 3.5/5

Stretch - 4.5/5

Open Windows - 3/5

Dracula Untold - 2/5

Annabelle - 0/5

The Town That Dreaded Sundown - 4/5

Interstellar - 5/5

Nightcrawler - 5/5

A Most Wanted Man - 4.5/5

The Rover - 4.5/5

Fury - 3.5/5

The Salvation - 2.5/5

Sex Tape - 2/5

The Equalizer - 2/5

[S K Y F A L L]

Mark Wahlberg is The Six Billion Dollar Man

http://www.flickerin...=zergnet_314131