[Andorion]

Does anyone here plan to watch Inferno?

[QuickTidal]

Andorion, on 17 October 2016 - 05:40 PM, said:

Does anyone here plan to watch Inferno?

I will...but I should note that while I enjoyed the DA VINCI CODE book and movie...ANGELS & DEMONS book and movie...for the popcorn fare they are...I stopped reading INFERNO at about the 100page mark due to how RIDICULOUS Brown made the plotholes. I'll watch the movie though because Ron Howard has seemingly been able to elevate the cheesy source material into decently taut thrillers that are enjoyable to watch and are visually stunning...but Brown's book left me less than cold.

EDIT: I found my posts about the INFERNO book which showcase mild spoilers for why I was so bothered by it....and why I eventually gave up.

QuickTidal, on 17 May 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

This one is about Dante's INFERNO.

I'm 100 pages in, and so far it's made two or three spectacular leaps in logic:

spoilers, even though the two instance are innocuous and not plot-concerning...

Spoiler

1. Langdon and his companion (this time it's a female British Doctor with a high IQ) call the American consulate in Florence, Italy (where the events take place) to find out what's going on, and then hide out across the street in the girls apartment (<----!!!!!!!?!) from the address they give to see if they can trust them...and then STAY in the building across the street (<----!?!?!?JFJVSJRGJS) till the baddies realize they must be in the vicinity....and Langdon uses the girls HOME COMPUTER to log into his Harvard Edu email...and they raid the building.

2. The baddies (just as stupid as Langdon apparently) arrive in the apartment and realize that the IP address is not registered to Langdon (Derrr)...and the lackey guy says it's registered under the initials "S.C."...and that "it shouldn't take too long to find out the persons whole name and proceeds to go about electronically finding it out...Me: Hey....Chauncy.....how's about you go to the fucking front door and find some mail? Huh? What do you think of that detective work chuckles?...Fuck. Like seriously.

....it's not remotely DAVINCI CODE of A&D quality story mind you (maybe Dante's Infero and the Medici's aren't that interesting a topic for me?)...

QuickTidal, on 17 May 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

Hound, on 17 May 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

I started reading Inferno too and I couldn't agree more about what you spoilered, seriously, the stupidity, oh my oh my..... And don't get me started about that stupid Mickey Mouse watch, GET OVER IT LANGDON!!!! argh! The story so far failed to grab me, I find the plot uninteresting, the characters stupidity jarring (it pulled me right out the story) and... I dunno, it's all so... dull? Bland? I really liked Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code, I even enjoyed the other books to some extent, but this one? Nah, I doubt I'll finish it.

Spoiler

Also, has Brown even SEEN Boticelli's MAP OF HELL? The thing is ancient, and cracked and blurry...that you could discern ANY added letters on the legs of the ppl in the ditches in the 8th circle (legs of which would arguably be less than a millimeter wide on the actual painting) even blown up is a HUGE leap in believability.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 17 October 2016 - 05:50 PM

[Andorion]

QuickTidal, on 17 October 2016 - 05:44 PM, said:

Andorion, on 17 October 2016 - 05:40 PM, said:

Does anyone here plan to watch Inferno?

I will...but I should note that while I enjoyed the DA VINCI CODE book and movie...ANGELS & DEMONS book and movie...for the popcorn fare they are...I stopped reading INFERNO at about the 50page mark due to how RIDICULOUS Brown made the plotholes. I'll watch the movie though because Ron Howard has seemingly been able to elevate the cheesy source material into decently taut thrillers that are enjoyable to watch and are visually stunning...but Brown's book left me less than cold.

I have read both the Lost Symbol and Inferno and I think his writing took a nosedive after Da Vince Code. Code wasn't great, but I have read worse. Angels and Demons was good. But after that.... to be perfectly honest it feels like he is running out of ideas. The Christian conspiracy angle is a bit played out now, and frankly Robert Langdon has lost all appeal to me.

If I do go to watch Inferno, which is by no means certain, then it will be a bit of a nostalgia watch for me and my friend in memory of our college days when Da Vinci Code was so hot.

Frankly I am far more interested in Fantastic Beasts next month.

[QuickTidal]

Oh, I almost forgot I also watched the Lonely Island flick, POPSTAR: NEVER STOP NEVER STOPPING. As a BIG fan of HOT ROD which also starred these folks and was Samberg's biggest starring vehicle since hitting it big on SNL and afterwards...I was hoping for more of the goods. Especially with the fact that Lonely Island consistently entertains with their songs...but a lot of the jokes land with a bit of a thud in this. Part of that is because the plot here is that Samberg's Conner4Real character was originally in a threesome with the other two Lonely Island boys called Style Boyz...where one wrote the song lyrics (Akiva's character), and one did the music (Jorma's character) while Conner sang the best...so we get a Mockumentary where the point is the old hackneyed idea of "the singer of a group being pulled out of the group to do a solo thing" and leaving most of the old band in true dust (or mistreating them in the new outfit, like Jorma's character). So the movie focuses down on the songs of Conner's new album that he did himself...which sucks and is completely offensive to most people. So while the beset thing about Lonely Island is the songs and how they are clever, topical, funny AND have a great beat and are super listenable...the Conner4Real tracks in the movie are awful (on purpose mind you) so while they may get a small chuckle for how bad or offensive they are...they also aren't very listenable, nor clever, nor interesting...so you just kind of have a reaction and then move on. The talking portions of the mockumentary read like ANY movie about this plot you've ever seen, and as a result are neither funny, groundbreaking, or all that interesting. Samberg, and his cohorts (and a criminally underused Tim Meadows!) manage to get some chuckles and have some funny bits scattered throughout, the whole exercise feels like a HUGE missed opportunity to help Lonely Island push further into the public eye. Like I thought it would be awesome to just have showcased a whole tour with them, new songs, and really funny tour antics....instead I got a movie about three friends who OBVIOUSLY have a purpose in their original band and only work well together...being split apart in the opining credits and not coming back together till the end. The middle is dry, and boring.

[Mezla PigDog]

How the jimmeny cricket are you finding the time/staying power to watch so many films QT? I've only just been able to move on to things that last 1 hour without being disturbed/falling asleep.

[QuickTidal]

Mezla PigDog, on 17 October 2016 - 07:12 PM, said:

How the jimmeny cricket are you finding the time/staying power to watch so many films QT? I've only just been able to move on to things that last 1 hour without being disturbed/falling asleep.

Actually, when the baby is sleeping on the weekends or in the weekday evenings, we put them on to watch...and my wife was a daily napper in her pre-mommy life, so the up-at-intervals-all-night has not affected her at the level it seems people expected it to as she can easily get into a deep sleep for power naps...and because I can't breastfeed, I do all the groceries and cleaning and laundry which frees the wife up to sleep too. So neither of us have been all that taxed in that department, knock on wood. We have lots of nights where we watch much less mind you...and movies are rarely uninterrupted.

[worry]

I'm gonna agree that Straight Outta Compton is a really good movie -- it stays interesting and engaging for nearly 3 hours -- but it is also definitely a hagiography. Also it kinda makes MC Ren an afterthought for most of the movie, like he's Eazy-E's sidekick. Though to the movie's credit I thought it actually made Jerry Heller a more nuanced character than I expected, given the bad blood and easily demonized take he could have gotten.

Re: Pop Star I kinda had the same middling response, but maybe for somewhat different reasons. I thought some of the of the weirder gags worked (e.g. the stuff with Seal), and I actually thought the songs were pretty clever (esp. "Equal Rights"). The plot was definitely cookie-cutter though, but worse than that, the movie suffered from an overall truth-is-stranger-than-fiction issue. Music aside, Justin Bieber is such a cartoony moron already that the parody just couldn't hit hard enough. Likewise, the boy band stuff in the real world is already so artificial and weird (R.I.P. Lou Pearlman) that the parody there wasn't strong enough either. I'm not sure it could have been, because hyperbole is nearly impossible (in contrast to, say, Zoolander -- the fashion industry is ridiculous too of course, but at the time people generally knew enough to get the jokes but still consider them exaggerations). I have a feeling 10 years ago this exact same movie would have hit harder, because the satire would have felt more like satire, the jokes would register as jokes, instead of "yup, that's actually how some of these people really are".

[QuickTidal]

Watched The LEGEND OF TARZAN over the weekend and was quite impressed overall. It's nice to finally see a film version of the latter stories of Tarzan (after he had returned from the jungle to England and then went back again), as studios are so fond of origin stories...this one wastes little time on that bit (there are some flashbacks, but overall they do not dwell in his origin story). Alexander Skarsgard is a solid Tarzan, if a tad stiff...and Margot Robbie makes a great Jane....but I really think that Sam Jackson walks away with this whole flick with his entertaining turn as real life character George Washington Williams (I think it was Amph or someone else who wondered at his inclusion in the story...but the events that the film deals with (That of King Leopold II's attempt to corner the Congo into Belgian hands for diamond wealth to shore up his debt-ridden monarchy...figures directly into the last years of Williams life, so it works in perfectly). Djimon Hansou and Christophe Waltz are both also great, but they are outshone by Jackson. The effects are wonderful and well done throughout with nary a misstep...the only factor being a few of the "vine swinging" shots appear to defy physics, but otherwise fine. The direction by Harry Potter-alum David Yates is great throughout, and only really stumbles non the fact that the two events that occur at the climax kind of both feel like they should be bigger and more important...like there is not one big climactic sequence and instead there are two much smaller ones, that feel more focused. And that's fine, but it gave me a disjointed feeling anyways...and that'd not on Yates but on how the writers structured the events.

Anyways, fun film, good action, and a great Tarzan story.

[amphibian]

The Tarzan movie was oddly good. Even confronted directly the specter of colonial looting and murder. I was very surprised at how clearly the filmmakers emphasized that Jane and Tarzan were natives who realized their advantages and still respected those around them.

I think my quibbles lie more in that the film seemed to present GWW/Jackson as the fulcrum of the Belgian withdrawal from the Congo, rather than the more peripheral figure he was.

Damn shame GWW died so soon after visiting the Central Africa region.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 24 October 2016 - 03:30 PM

[QuickTidal]

amphibian, on 24 October 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

The Tarzan movie was oddly good. Even confronted directly the specter of colonial looting and murder. I was very surprised at how clearly the filmmakers emphasized that Jane and Tarzan were natives who realized their advantages and still respected those around them.

Agreed. And they went a long way to making the African congo villages and tribes not only be realistic to how they would be, but more central to the events going on than they might have been in another film about the character.

It also makes the Belgians and any of the other colonials, even the Brits, the bad guys quite clearly with not room for argument. Even Williams is disgusted with them from the get-go. I feel that was important as a distinction to set the heroes of the piece apart.

And Djimon Hansou's character....

Spoiler

I loved that he's not bad. Not even remotely bad. He's just a bereft father. And I even like how they deal with that at the end of it all.

"He was my only son. He was only hunting and had no idea. What excuse do you have for killing him? Where was your honour?"....Tarzan: "I have none."

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 October 2016 - 03:33 PM

[amphibian]

He's not irredeemably evil, but the tribe does hunt apes and engage in abductions of people. The movie does presents this as a way of life rather than a conscious personal choice, which is closer to what reality of ape hunters is more like. Very interesting dynamic for sure.

[QuickTidal]

amphibian, on 24 October 2016 - 04:28 PM, said:

He's not irredeemably evil, but the tribe does hunt apes and engage in abductions of people. The movie does presents this as a way of life rather than a conscious personal choice, which is closer to what reality of ape hunters is more like. Very interesting dynamic for sure.

Fair point indeed.

I felt that Yates was nonetheless very fair in how he portrayed the entire thing.

[worry]

Sounds like you both got played for fools. Tarzan wasn't real. Turns out the movie is a complete fiction! That's Hollywood for ya.

[Kruppe of Darujhistan]

I've never been keen on Tarzan. I'm still waiting for the Bomba the Jungle Boy reboot.

[Mezla PigDog]

Overboard is on tv later. I'm recording it for next week. Don't ask me to choose between that, Bird On A Wire and Private Benjamin. Masterpieces one and all.

[worry]

[QuickTidal]

Sooo....xXX: Return of Xander Cage has a trailer...

Looks fun....and then I notice not only is Donnie fucking Yen in it, but Tony Jaa as well....and all of the sudden I'm in like flynn!

[Khellendros]

Watched Doctor Strange the other day. I left the cinema feeling underwhelmed. The whole thing was just a bit...meh, and most of the actors felt like they were going through the motions (except the awesome Tilda Swinton and the very underused Chiwetel Ejiofor). Once again, a Marvel film with an entirely forgettable villain (or villains, if you like) whose motivations amount to exposition in two lines of dialogue. Poor Mads Mikkelsen. He had it great compared to Rachel McAdams, though. Talk about paper cutout barely-love interest. The action scenes were complete CGI-fests which did less to show off the physics-bending than to make you lose track of anything that was going on (a bit like Transformers series action scenes).

Girlfriend predicted 4 out of 10 when she went in. Afterwards she said it was 7/10. So she was pleasantly surprised.
I predicted 6/10 and left thinking 5/10, complete by-the-numbers superhero action.

[polishgenius]

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

Sooo....xXX: Return of Xander Cage has a trailer...

Looks fun....and then I notice not only is Donnie fucking Yen in it, but Tony Jaa as well....and all of the sudden I'm in like flynn!

Did they just give away what seems to supposed to be a major twist right there?

Spoiler

I mean I was fairly sure Donnie Yen wouldn't accept being a bad guy anyway but you don't have to show us in the trailer!

[QuickTidal]

Khellendros, on 02 November 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Watched Doctor Strange the other day. I left the cinema feeling underwhelmed. The whole thing was just a bit...meh, and most of the actors felt like they were going through the motions (except the awesome Tilda Swinton and the very underused Chiwetel Ejiofor). Once again, a Marvel film with an entirely forgettable villain (or villains, if you like) whose motivations amount to exposition in two lines of dialogue. Poor Mads Mikkelsen. He had it great compared to Rachel McAdams, though. Talk about paper cutout barely-love interest. The action scenes were complete CGI-fests which did less to show off the physics-bending than to make you lose track of anything that was going on (a bit like Transformers series action scenes).

Girlfriend predicted 4 out of 10 when she went in. Afterwards she said it was 7/10. So she was pleasantly surprised.
I predicted 6/10 and left thinking 5/10, complete by-the-numbers superhero action.

While I've not seen it yet, the going reviews seem to be subtly indicating that the MCU Formula is starting to wear thin, and in singular character movies like this (as opposed to say CAP 3 which had so many characters, you cared less about it being a bog standard action flick with a forgettable villain) it stands out a lot more than it did in Phase 1.

I'm sure they'll keep making money, but I have a feeling they need to let their storytellers out of the box going forward, or those audience numbers may dip.