Main Menu

Last movie watched...

Started by SmallBlueThing, 04 February, 2011, 12:40:44 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mardroid

Annihilation: A very interesting film which went to a very strange place. I enjoyed it.

Before that : Superman (The 1978 Christopher Reeve film)
Still holds up as a great film. Considering that lengthy bit at the start with the sentencing of Zod, Non and Ursa, were they already planning for the sequel, as that really feels tacked on otherwise? I suppose it gives an an indication of Kryptonian culture and justice. Ironic that in sentencing these villains to the Phantom Zone they effectively saved their lives.

Yes I like this film a lot. The time rewind stuff at the end makes little sense though. [spoiler] Even if we buy the idea that flying really fast around the planet and causing the Earth to revolve backwards will reverse time,* he does not move Lois from her location. Since he rewound time to before the aftershock quake hit her section of road, it's gonna happen, right? You don't see him fix that, or did he do it off screen?[/spoiler]

Possibly the best Superman film there is, although I might like Superman 2 a bit more.

*[spoiler]Or maybe it's just a illustrative way of depicting what's really going on. As it seems this version of Superman was crammed full of knowledge via capsule computer in his travel from Krypton to Earth maybe the key to time travel was explained to him off-screen. A bit odd as he is told not to interfere with Earth history...[/spoiler]

JOE SOAP

Quote from: Mardroid on 26 March, 2018, 09:13:12 AM
Considering that lengthy bit at the start with the sentencing of Zod, Non and Ursa, were they already planning for the sequel, as that really feels tacked on otherwise?

Donner was shooting both Superman I and II simultaneously.

https://www.popmatters.com/192936-superman-and-superman-ii-what-is-and-what-might-have-been-2495535795.html

Professor Bear

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 25 March, 2018, 11:57:55 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 March, 2018, 11:38:08 PM
Was writing illegal?  And reading?  How did people know what the tv schedules were if there were no magazines and no-one was allowed to read?

They read the opiate of the masses, comics.




Don't be silly, comics don't count as reading.

Keef Monkey

Quote from: JamesC on 25 March, 2018, 10:02:38 AM
Annihilation didn't convince at all in terms of the preparation or implementatin of the mission. No breathing apparatus, no one filming the mission, no plan to go beyong the Shimmer and return with samples before trying to go all the way to the lighthouse. 

It's possible I might be mish-mashing in my brain things that are explained in the book and not the film (and vice versa) but there have been many expeditions before this one (it's the 12th) and at this point they're just throwing different configurations of teams and equipment at it to see what happens. [spoiler]I think going in for samples and bringing them back has long been abandoned because in the movie nobody from the previous expeditions has ever returned (I'm sure Portman's husband is the first to come back?), so (in the film at least) the sole objective of the expeditions seems to be to keep throwing people at it in desperate attempts to see if someone can actually make it to the lighthouse and might be able to change something.

One thing I don't think the film ever covers is the technology thing - in the books they sent a camera with the first expedition and then decided never to do that again, partly because of the effect the footage had on people reviewing it and partly due to a theory that taking technology into the shimmer provokes it in some way so it's all notebooks from there on.[/spoiler]

So yeah, that stuff didn't bother me in the film (and even added to it) but it's hard to say how much the book prepped me for it.

JamesC

Quote from: Keef Monkey on 26 March, 2018, 12:22:54 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 25 March, 2018, 10:02:38 AM
Annihilation didn't convince at all in terms of the preparation or implementatin of the mission. No breathing apparatus, no one filming the mission, no plan to go beyong the Shimmer and return with samples before trying to go all the way to the lighthouse. 

It's possible I might be mish-mashing in my brain things that are explained in the book and not the film (and vice versa) but there have been many expeditions before this one (it's the 12th) and at this point they're just throwing different configurations of teams and equipment at it to see what happens. [spoiler]I think going in for samples and bringing them back has long been abandoned because in the movie nobody from the previous expeditions has ever returned (I'm sure Portman's husband is the first to come back?), so (in the film at least) the sole objective of the expeditions seems to be to keep throwing people at it in desperate attempts to see if someone can actually make it to the lighthouse and might be able to change something.

One thing I don't think the film ever covers is the technology thing - in the books they sent a camera with the first expedition and then decided never to do that again, partly because of the effect the footage had on people reviewing it and partly due to a theory that taking technology into the shimmer provokes it in some way so it's all notebooks from there on.[/spoiler]

So yeah, that stuff didn't bother me in the film (and even added to it) but it's hard to say how much the book prepped me for it.

I would like to think the book possibly covered it in more depth.
There could have been any number of reasons or people to not return. Surely it makes sense to be as prepared as possible. I mean it could have just been full of noxious gas.
Have you ever seen Village of the Damned? In that film they put a budgie cage on the end of a stick and use that to test the perimeter of the affected area. They also tie a rope around a guy's waist and send him in, reeling him back when he collapses. There's nothing in the film to suggest that either of these approaches wouldn't have been useful. That none of this stuff was covered just gave the impression that the whole operation was half arsed.
I don't think they even specified what the objective of the mission was. Was it to determine the cause and effects of the shimmer? Was it to destroy whatever was causing the shimmer? Was it simply to stop the shimmer from spreading?
I just found the whole thing completely unbelievable. I could happily have bought the more fantastical elements if the human characters reacted like real people instead of like stupid headless chickens.

Mattofthespurs

Going In Style

Knackered last night and couldn't be bothered to search for a film to put on I let SKY choose for me.

Wasn't actually half bad. Not going to stay in the memory for long but enjoyable hokum heist malarkey and Alan Arkin was very good.

Good one to switch your brain off too.

TordelBack

#12066
Quote from: JamesC on 25 March, 2018, 10:02:38 AMNo breathing apparatus, no one filming the mission...

Kane [spoiler]had apparently survived a year-or-so in the Shimmer, so whatever was going on in there breathing apparatus couldn't have seemed necessary by the time Lena went in - and who's to say earlier missions which didn't return at all hadn't gone in wearing full spacesuits[/spoiler].  Plus Kane's mission was filming itself.   

As to the relevance of Lena and Kane's relationship... [spoiler]well, as with pretty much everything and everyone else in the movie, it was being transformed/destroyed from within.  Note that Ventress has terminal cancer, Shepherd describes her old self as having been killed by her daughter's death,  the gorgeous Tessa Thomson's character (Radick?) is cutting herself etc[/spoiler].  The (a?) point is that the Shimmer [spoiler]is refracting/merging/duplicating/consuming... but that isn't just an alien introduction, these are things that are happening all the time[/spoiler].   

One of my big questions is the significance of the landing-site/centre being in a lighthouse.

And is there a pointed Alien reference in Kane's name? 



JamesC

Quote from: TordelBack on 26 March, 2018, 07:29:05 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 25 March, 2018, 10:02:38 AMNo breathing apparatus, no one filming the mission...

Kane [spoiler]had apparently survived a year-or-so in the Shimmer, so whatever was going on in there breathing apparatus couldn't have seemed necessary by the time Lena went in - and who's to say earlier missions which didn't return at all hadn't gone in wearing full spacesuits[/spoiler].  Plus Kane's mission was filming itself.   

As to the relevance of Lena and Kane's relationship... [spoiler]well, as with pretty much everything and everyone else in the movie, it was being transformed/destroyed from within.  Note that Ventress has terminal cancer, Shepherd describes her old self as having been killed by her daughter's death,  the gorgeous Tessa Thomson's character (Radick?) is cutting herself etc[/spoiler].  The (a?) point is that the Shimmer [spoiler]is refracting/merging/duplicating/consuming... but that isn't just an alien introduction, these are things that are happening all the time[/spoiler].   

One of my big questions is the significance of the landing-site/centre being in a lighthouse.

And is there a pointed Alien reference in Kane's name?

I'm pretty sure we could go around in circles for ages 'yeah-butting'...but -

One person has returned out of I don't know how many over the course of a dozen missions. He has organ failure for reasons unknown. If I were going in, I'd probably want a hazmat suit to be on the safe side. I certainly wouldn't take Kane's return as proof-positive that there are no contaminants.
I could go into more detail of what I would expect to see or how the mission preparation would make more logical sense but you get my drift.

I can see what you're saying about the thematic reasons behind the failed relationship and the other characters' reasons for accepting the mission. None of this made me care though. I thought Portman did a good job with what she had, Jason-Leigh was her usual magnetic self and the rest of the cast did what they could with characters so barely sketched that, for me, they were impossible to care about.

radiator

For me it worked because Annihilation was much more interested in the mood, the characters and the metaphysical side of things than the plot. I didn't mind so much about all the stuff that was kept vague or the slightly wonky logic and plausibility of whole setup.

I will often call out other genre/blockbuster films for weird logistical gaps that intefere with suspension of disbelief (for example there is a widely-ridiculed scene in Prometheus where the crew, after landing on a previously unknown planet, one by one remove their helmets and breathing gear on a whim*) but maybe that's because those films tend to be much more convoluted and plot-heavy than Annihilation, I don't know. For whatever reason this stuff didn't really distract me and I was able to enjoy Annihilation on it's own terms. In 'reality', sure, the team would probably be wearing hazmat suits, but they weren't because I'm guessing that no one wants to watch 90 minutes of actors trying to emote through a heavy layer of perspex, I guess you either go along with the conceit or you don't.

*perhaps it's widely ridiculed simply because the scene exists and therefore calls unnecessary attention to itself?

Professor Bear

Why didn't someone just stand on each side of the Shimmer and the one outside could just ask the one inside what it was like?  Also "and stay where I can see you."
The plot for Annihilation is a bit like the setup for Kamen Rider Build, only not as good because no-one in Annihilation has a laser sword or a talking motorbike and there's no kung fu or explosions.

abelardsnazz

Unsane. Steven Soderbergh's return to film after a self-imposed retirement is an entirely IPhone-shot, almost unbearable exercise in intensity. That it stays the right side of extremely watchable is testament to Soderbergh's directing skills and an incredible central performance from Claire Foy. Have I said it's intense yet? It is. Very.

TordelBack

#12071
Quote from: JamesC on 26 March, 2018, 07:56:34 PM
...the rest of the cast did what they could with characters so barely sketched that, for me, they were impossible to care about.

Obviously I can't make you care where the filmmakers have failed to do so,  but I really don't get this criticism. Are the other three really that much thinner than the supporting cast of any other SF film?  They all seemed believable and interesting enough that I was sorry when each departed. And the manner of their going was significant in each case too.

As to the technical believability of the mission, I think there's a meta-reason for that: other alien-contact movies have worn the hazmat/MALP path pretty intensively (Close Encounters,  ET,  Arrival,  2001 etc), not sure we as an audience needed to see it again: the more prosaic Southern Comfort-style hike into the woods was visually fresh,
and established that this is regular Earth, our familiar backyard that's being transformed,  rather than an expedition to another world; and then there's the in-universe reason,  that there have been many,  many previous missions,  and this one smacks of weary,  not to say suicidal, desperation.



Eric Plumrose

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 25 March, 2018, 11:57:55 PM
They read the opiate of the masses, comics.

Truffaut had it drawn in Greek to elicit a genuine reaction from Werner.
Not sure if pervert or cheesecake expert.

JOE SOAP

Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 26 March, 2018, 11:19:36 PMTruffaut had it drawn in Greek to elicit a genuine reaction from Werner.

Fabian always gave the best reactions.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM41nxK62Kg

Mardroid

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 March, 2018, 09:29:22 AM
Quote from: Mardroid on 26 March, 2018, 09:13:12 AM
Considering that lengthy bit at the start with the sentencing of Zod, Non and Ursa, were they already planning for the sequel, as that really feels tacked on otherwise?

Donner was shooting both Superman I and II simultaneously.

https://www.popmatters.com/192936-superman-and-superman-ii-what-is-and-what-might-have-been-2495535795.html

Okay, that makes things clearer. Thanks for posting that: an interesting read!

Last film watched: Superman 2.

Also a very good film. It's not perfect, but it's a lot of fun. Watching the 2 nearly back to back is interesting in that I noticed the lack of Brando in the second film including the slightly different version of the sentencing of the  supervillains. I put it down to the studio saving money by not reemploying such a large salaried actor, but I see from the article above that there was other things going on... though certainly relating to salary.