Movies Seen in 2012

[Saul]

First Movie at the cinema this year. Went to see the premiere of "The Great Magician".

[nvek86]

1. Eastern Promises

The film is already a few years old, but since the genre doesn't really interest me, I've never watched it until now. But it was on TV yesterday, there was nothing else that interested me, so I stuck with it.
I'm glad I did, because I liked the film quite a lot. Mortensen was great (especially liked his interactions with Cassel's character) and there was one twist I did not expect.

[PKTrekGirl]

1. The Kids Are Alright (B-)
2. Priest (B-)
Watched this totally predictable movie last night.Sort of like The Searchers meets The Matrix meets the current vampire craze, only without being anywhere near as good as either of the films mentioned. I'd give it a C- for story and a B+ for CGI/special effects...so it ends with a B-. Carl Urban also gives it a bit of a bump, just for being present.

[zakkrusz]

Updates in Bold:

Bad Boys (8)
Legend of the Millennium Dragon (7)

[Harvey]

1. Holy Rollers (B-)
2. The Kids Are All Right (B)

People have complained about the ending, but it all seemed a perfectly logical development to me. A wonderful cast was assembled for this movie -- Annette Bening and Julianne Moore have been singled out, but everyone else has a great scene or two -- and the script is sharply funny. Stylistically, it's more or less just there, but it gets the job done (the exception is the wonderful sound design that plays out during the sequence when Bening finds out a painful secret). I'm not sure how it will work as a TV series (they've ordered a pilot adapted from the movie), but the movie is surely satisfying.

Theatres: 0
Home Video: 1 (+1)
Computer: 1

[ElimParra]

1. Marie Antoinette (2006) - 2.5/5.

Found it rather slow and boring early on. But adored Kirsten Dunst. She was a delight.

[TrekNut87]

1. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (B-)

Enjoyable, but I liked the first one better. I really liked that Downey/Law got to play with a little more humor this time around, though I thought the ramp-up in action was a little unnecessary. As for the new supports of Jared Harris and Noomi Rapace, both were very good. I enjoyed Jared Harris a lot more than I thought I would.

[stj]

Harvey wrote:

---

The writer was Scott Z. Burns, who also wrote the criminally underrated The Informant! for Soderbergh.

The film closely resembles Soderbergh's Traffic, something pointed out by countless film critics when the film was released. Of course, whether or not the film resembles any previous ones he's made has little to do with Soderbergh's importance as the director (it's worth noting that, like most films he's made, Soderbergh is also the credited cinematographer on the movie). In this particular case, the director was quite important, since the film was re-structured several times during editing (resulting in the reduction of Marion Cotillard's role, among many other changes).

Previous movies directed by Soderbergh that I remembered were Sex, Lies and Videotape; The Underneath; Che, and Ocean's Eleven. I never bothered with the Ocean's Sequels. How anything in that sample strongly resembles Contagion really needs explanation. If it's cinematography, then Soderbergh's role as cinematographer is obviously just as important as I thought it was.

I have seen Traffic, but, having seen Traffik on its original US broadcast, was never impressed with the movie. I found the Academy attention inexplicable. Since I think that movie was not very good at all, when I am told that it strongly resembles Soderbergh's Contagion, I don't think that it's because of the importance of Soderbergh's directorial contribution. If Soderbergh's directorial work were so creatively important, then Traffic would have been a genuinely good movie. I think the difference is because the script for Contagion was much better, which is not the director's work.

The directors who like Soderbergh act in other, more creative capacities such as cinematographer, editor and writer do have much more creative input than the director as director. And I have to add that even the director has a major influence on execution, if not in a directly creative capacity. (And to be complete, the director really is the primary creator of the unscripted portions, if any parts of a movie are left improvisation anymore.)

As to the specific issue of the editing in Contagion, how do you separate Soderbergh's contributions as director and editor? The director as director has the least creative importance. The more he or she assumes other, more creative roles, the more important she or he is creatively, most of all when the director is also the writer. But then, it's a matter of the writer getting a chance to execute the script properly instead of having a director bungle it. I criticized the movie specifically for a tendency to melodramatize the dark impulses of the unwashed masses, and the Cotillard subplot was the single worst instance of that. Soderbergh may have reduced the time but he didn't reduce the problem. In fact, I suspect the cut scenes showed the unwashed masses not to be so darkly impulsed, which would mean that Soderbergh made the movie a little worse than it had to be! In other words, the director as auteur was just the guy who fucked up something. This is creativity?

If the question is the issue of who is in fact more "important," i.e., powerful, in the completion of the final product, the tendency nowadays is obviously to award the director the power. Giving the most power to the person who has the least creative contribution I think explains one of the fundamental problems with Hollywood's creative process. And yes, I do think there's a creatively flawed process at work.

The funny thing is, the real issue may be the belief that Contagion is a bad movie, and Traffic is a good one.

[Saul]

'Alien Vs Predator' Unrated. Why did I put myself through that...

[nvek86]

2. Strings

That was a great film. The plot is well known (intrigue and murder after a king dies - although there are a few nice twists), but what makes the film special is that it's all done with puppets. And it's actually an important part of the story, e.g. they can't be in any place with a roof, because their strings go straight up in the sky and passing under a bridge is impossible for them for the same reason. It also has a wonderful soundtrack.
I'd heard about this film for quite some time (always praise and recommendations) and it did not disappoint.

[LitmusDragon]

2. Where The Wild Things Are - C. I appreciate the look of it, and I love that James Gandolfini voiced Carol, but I just didn't care for this movie that much.

[CaptainCanada]

stj wrote:

---

The director as director has the least creative importance. The more he or she assumes other, more creative roles, the more important she or he is creatively, most of all when the director is also the writer.

The director is the most important creative person, generally (there are some movies that are more producer- or writer-driven, of course, but director-driven is the rule). Their whole purpose is to direct the creative course of the entire project. The director decides what the movie is going to be. Everybody else works under their supervision and conforms to their vision.

But then, it's a matter of the writer getting a chance to execute the script properly instead of having a director bungle it. I criticized the movie specifically for a tendency to melodramatize the dark impulses of the unwashed masses, and the Cotillard subplot was the single worst instance of that. Soderbergh may have reduced the time but he didn't reduce the problem. In fact, I suspect the cut scenes showed the unwashed masses not to be so darkly impulsed, which would mean that Soderbergh made the movie a little worse than it had to be! In other words, the director as auteur was just the guy who fucked up something. This is creativity?

That assumption has no basis whatsoever.

[Goliath]

1. War Horse (B-)

A movie about a boy and his horse, and how war is bad. Reasonably entertaining, but bland, sentimental, and not very moving.

The historical content was a curious mishmash of the accurate and the inaccurate. I haven't seen the play on which it was based, so I can't compare the two.

I recommend it to people who like stories about horses, or children's books like The Incredible Journey. If you're looking for a movie set in the Great War with an anti-war message, see Paths of Glory instead.

Theatres: 1 (+1)
Home Video: 0
Computer: 0

[RandyS]

Today I watched Superman Returns, capping my Superman Re-watch. This is the first time I've pulled that DVD out of the 2006 mega set in some time.

Ugh.

I remembered this film was a bad attempt at a homage to the Chris Reeve/Richard Donner films, but I forgot just how embrarassingly bad it is.

Let's hope next year's film is better.

[PKTrekGirl]

1. The Kids Are Alright (B-)
2. Priest (B-)
3. An Invisible Sign (B)
This quirky movie starring Jessica Alba was about...well, a girl who really loved math. She has a lot of personal and family issues..but while the ending is pretty predictable, at least it's good. Jessica Alba does a good job.