Discussion in 'Movies, Music and TV shows' started by Celestin, Apr 14, 2016.
They had so little chemistry it was obvious from the trailers. A damn shame
You expected a good movie from Luc Besson?
Sadly I still do, "Besson" just means "the Fifth Element" to me, and my brain somehow glosses over everything since.
La Femme Nikita
The Fifth Element
Yes, given the budget, I expected an entertaining movie. Oscar-worthy? No. But definitely popcorn-worthy.
Some of his French Taxi movies were pretty great. I enjoyed them a lot.
I saw those listed when I went to pull up his IMDB info. Never heard anything about them, but saw he did three of them. And that he's doing "Lucy 2". :facepalm
Why Luc WHY!!!
In that list I only consider the first 2 as really good movie. I loath 5th Element with a passion even despite prime Bruce. From that negative impression I expect Valerian to be full of kooky characters with a stupid plot pissing over the SF genre.(I haven't seen it yet so let me embrace my internet rage here
Granted, Taken is highly entertaining but to me it's a Liam Neeson movie which could have been great if Liam would have only gotten rid of Luc Besson in the same fashion as his movie character. Transporter series, seriously?
The guy produces and writes Fast Food for more than 20 years which can be occasionally entertaining but most likely plain annoying.
Damn, now I feel good. Time to watch "From Paris with Love" to appreciate some quality meaningless violence.
You loathe Fifth Element?
Not liking the Fifth Element is like hating Christmas.
And from then forth the one they called Snapdragon became known as the Grinch.
I view Taken and Transporter about the same -- popcorn movie. Mindless fun that is specifically made to not be taken seriously.
As for Fifth Element...
I dont think there is anyone who can actually strike up any chemistry with DeLavigne considering how much of a shitty actress she is. Then again you can't call what she is an actress, can you?
Luc Besson is at his best when they don't let him direct. The best movies he worked on (as in, his most entertaining stuff) weren't directed by him.
Someone mentioned Taxi. Taxi 2 is the greatest and it's also just a damn entertaining action comedy. If you disagree, you're wrong. And there was never an American remake.
Taxi 2 was the best yes. And Transporters we're just so insanely fun. Except 2. 2 was trying to be something it wasn't. Unlike crank, which were all shit, Transporter hit the right noted for fun, action and tight enough you don't care about much. Plus, gorgeous women.
Everything Else: Crap.
I'm sorry but I've never been more bored in a movie. Nothing happened. Even the emotional moment of the civilian boats arriving was pathetic due to the pacing of the timeline.
This movie is little more than a disaster film...without any real intensity to the action aside from a bunch of people drowning.
It could have worked as a character piece but the characters were beyond bland and entirely uninteresting.
Easily Nolan's worst film.
I liked it more than Interstellar, which I found to be pedantic and too English major-y, but yeah, I agree. Movie could have been renamed "100 Ways to Die In and Around Boats." And while I think it showed the raw horror of WWII fairly effectively, I generally don't want to go to the movies just to see people get killed.
Gonna have to disagree with you there.
The subject had more in common with a natural disaster than what we typically think of when we picture a battle. When one Army has another fixed like the Germans had the British the sense of impending and inevitable doom is the drama itself. We saw no german faces throughout the course of the movie. They are the landslide, the tsunami, and the avalanche and there is no where to escape to.
I think it would have been a very poor choice if the focus of the action had been on the fighting itself. It had to dwell on the hopelessness of the British and French sitution on the beach, that's the entire reason the battle is remembered.
Also I liked choice to leave the majority of the characters without names. It helped convey to me the feeling that these handful of characters we followed were representative of the entire population. In that sense, they were a tiny bit flat as characters I suppose. But if anything it helped me imagine the same basic scenes playing out hundreds of different times over the course of the evacuations.
It also made it more personal in a way. Watching a movie about war we tend to sympathize more with the virtuous protagonists. We see the spectacle and horror of the D-Day invasion in Saving Private Ryan, but Tom Hanks makes it off the beach okay so we tend to feel like we maybe would have as well. When I don't know the name of the character (or the actor), I feel a little less attached to them but more attached to the group as a whole. It was actually uncomfortable in this case because I wasn't as easily able to seperate myself from the nameless masses getting unceremoniously slaughtered. I didn't instantly snap to the plot armoured protaganists during or after these scenes, so I wasn't able to convince myself that I would have been one of the guys who survived.
I don't know man, I thought the it was better than just "crap" in the non cinematography and score aspects.
Saw Atomic Blonde last night. It's nothing much to write home about in terms of plot or character work, but Theron kicks all the ass, stylishly and brutally, which is Al I really wanted. The seven minute long fight sequence that is apparently one single shot, going from the streets, into a building, upstairs, downstairs, into a room, and back out into the street again is genuinely incredible.
Not literally one single shot, but apparently very close to it.
Separate names with a comma.