[procrj]

Originally Posted by ajmat

Sully is a pretty good movie. Explores the feeling and trauma one goes through.

Thanks for that. Will try and watch this weekend.

Captain Philips - 4.5/5 - Watched this again after a long time and Tom Hanks never ceases to amaze with range of emotions and characters that he can pull off. Very good movie about piracy on international waters.

Eye in the Sky - 4/5 - Story line focuses on drone strikes and collateral damage. Does drag a little at times but very well made movie that tries to cover moral, emotional & rational angle surrounding drone strikes & collateral damage.

[pratyush6]

Originally Posted by FuelInjector

+1 . I would add Memento to that list as well. Always felt he was a brilliant story teller and it gets better every time.
But like you said, each one to his own horse.

with some freetime, watched "Dont Breathe". A new story, good suspense sequences. Decent screenplay. Worth the time and money, i would say.

How the hell did I forget Memento? See, now I have 4 in the best of best list!

[Eddy]

Eagerly awaiting first hand reviews of "Robinson Crusoe". I am hoping it will be a good watch for my 5 year old.

[Fraz33r]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

... both very boring, non mind-blowing, with a long drawn out meaningless ending, although both those movies had terrible lead actors (yes I mean it).

I think there are two schools of thoughts here: One is the normal movie goer, who needs just plain assertive story teller;
This is your Hero, this is what happened and this is the conclusion. Good over Bad. Interstellar, Inception don't fit this bill IMO. I had a lady sitting next to me in Inception; and was literally annoyed as she wasn't able to keep track of what was going on.

Nolan, is different.why? He makes you think, he lets you draw your own interpretation of what you thought must have happened. After the movie ( when watched the first time) I am sure the friend sitting next to you, interpreted a Nolan movie differently than you did.

There is nothing wrong there, but some people love this and those are considered Nolan's fan to the extreme. Even Stanley Kubrick's 2001: Space odyssey has varied polarizing views. I am no way defending a Nolan movie, but Interstellar i believe did deliver.However, explaining the concepts of time warp, space travel to be known to every common man as simple as there is Candy in the Jar, go eat it, is very difficult, and hence varied views.

Originally Posted by pratyush6

Everyone has a right to their opinion but IMHO, I think Interstellar and Inception were his two best movies made along with TDK........ People love to hate Nolan - but imagine the kind of pressure it puts on him to deliver.

The above line pretty much sums it!

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by Fraz33r

Nolan, is different.why? He makes you think, he lets you draw your own interpretation of what you thought must have happened. After the movie ( when watched the first time) I am sure the friend sitting next to you, interpreted a Nolan movie differently than you did.

I don't quite understand how you, or anyone else understood that I dislike Nolan by picking and choosing lines, whereas I've strongly emphasised that I consider him above ultra-heavyweights like Spielberg or James Cameron. I've been a Nolan fan for a long, long time now, I bet none of you saw his first black-&-white movie project "The Following", if you didn't then that movie is short, very choppy yet its amongst his best work, it gets so confusing in the middle but by the time the ending is there the story wraps up neatly.. one of the best crime mysteries there is out there. Yes I will not put him over Stanley Kubrick, he's in a league of his own.

There is no stereotype Nolan fan either, I simply refuse to believe that one is a Nolan fan ONLY if he/she likes Inception and Interstellar.. I know my American cinema and I've seen movies that probably 99% Indians haven't.. while they are mostly above Bollywood level Nolan did take it to new heights and I'll always say that. One of the problems with Inception & Interstellar is that they were helmed by very weak actors.. one a Leonardo DiCaprio who apart from gazing/staring cannot work the camera for nuts and a Matthew McConaughey who is always known for pulling off Texan/Southerner accents and nothing more (yes I know Dallas Buyers Club, Sea of Trees & Lincoln Lawyer, he was great in them but not in Interstellar). Before anyone else has to repeat this I might as well say it.. its my opinion.

Also no Nolan fan talks of the Prestige in the same level as Interstellar, even with a titan helming it (Bale), Insomnia was a work of art as well. Nolan is clearly influenced by Kubrick and that's no secret.. his next movie is his tribute to Full Metal Jacket while Interstellar was an inferior tribute to 2001: A Space Odyssey.. the latter had a solid script and was truly open to interpretation.

Just a debate, please don't take my opinion personally just as I've never expressed my like or dislike of others choices here. Those 2 movies in my opinion shouldn't make the IMDB top 50 even.. way too many better movies than those. TDK though, should pole vault way above The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption, it is a perfect 10/10.

[Fraz33r]

No worries! and i wasn't dissecting your comments either, Just that nolan leaves a lot of scope to interpretation than an average director does was my point.

As far as acting goes, I thing it is subjective; what you feel is ho hum..might be great acting for others.

And yes prestige blew me out of the water!

And coming back to reviews:

I was going through the IMDB top 250 and i had to look upon " To Kill a Mocking Bird"

I have really started appreicating old movies, with the kind of content they had. The court scene and Gregory Peck, gives me goosebumps. If you get a chance to give it a shot with some patience. We are too used to fast paced cinema's nowadays, that I could not finish the movie in one go!

Sorry for that disrespect; harper lee and Mulligan.


Rating 5/5

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by Fraz33r

Just that nolan leaves a lot of scope to interpretation than an average director does was my point.

I do agree with that point, his movies are almost entirely interpretation but that was never my problem to begin with. I guess we're all just admirers of his work in different ways and there's a good thing in that too, some call people like us pseudo-intelligent cinema fans, some call us pretentious etc.. I guess that's their take on Nolan fans.

What Chris does also depends on the kind of people who're with him, in my view its his brother Jonathan who's fond of circuitous plots and loopholes since he wrote Memento Mori and Interstellar. Chris Nolan is more of a visual guy.. the effects in Inception, the natural action sequences in Batman trilogy, the effects of Interstellar.. those are his contributions. Cinematography requires a special kind of skill and I think he has it, one of the few ones. He also chooses only method-actors for his movies and it has worked perfectly as long as the story clicks.. Michael Caine, Chris Bale and Gary Oldman can deliver and how. Dunkirk has a largely unknown casting, except for Cilian Murphy and Tom Hardy.. I have a good feeling about this one so lets see.

[ninjatalli]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

One of the problems with Inception & Interstellar is that they were helmed by very weak actors

Brilliant point. Although I might not agree entirely calling Leonardo DiCaprio a weak actor, however I would refine your statement that these moves were helmed by actors doing a poor job or just an ok-ish job.

Both movies were tough to comprehend for the average guy. And while the movie logic and direction might be perfect, it takes a really great acting performance to get everyone to understand and feel with the actors. And that's where Leonardo DiCaprio and Matthew McConaughey failed. The later did more than the former, but still the point is valid

Originally Posted by dark.knight

TDK though, should pole vault way above The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption, it is a perfect 10/10.

And the reverse logic applied perfectly here. TDK was a 10/10 because Heath Ledger got the role perfect. Remove Heath Ledger out of the movie, and you get Dark Knight Rises.

P.s. Thanks for the 'Following' headsup. Got any more suggestions?

[RavenAvi]

Originally Posted by Fraz33r

I was going through the IMDB top 250 and i had to look upon " To Kill a Mocking Bird"

I have really started appreicating old movies, with the kind of content they had. The court scene and Gregory Peck, gives me goosebumps. If you get a chance to give it a shot with some patience. We are too used to fast paced cinema's nowadays, that I could not finish the movie in one go!

Fantastic film. Seen it a number of times but it still amazes me with each viewing. Quite possibly one of my top 10 favourite films of all time.

If you like courtroom dramas, there's 2 fantastic 50s films, though not as hard-hitting as Mockingbird - Witness for the Prosecution & 12 Angry Men.

A more contemporary one I really liked in this sub-genre was A Few Good Men.

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by ninjatalli

however I would refine your statement that these moves were helmed by actors doing a poor job or just an ok-ish job.

My opinion still stays, but I agree with the rest.. Matthew did try but he's not exactly A-Level to pull it off.

And the reverse logic applied perfectly here. TDK was a 10/10 because Heath Ledger got the role perfect. Remove Heath Ledger out of the movie, and you get Dark Knight Rises.

Hardly, the reason why TDK tore records for its time was actually due to several reasons, least of all - Heath Ledger, and that's saying something. The script was extremely strong, the story and narration was bullet-proof (as far as comic book live action goes). Aaron Eckhart (Thank You For Smoking, Towelhead & My All American) was never praised for his role as Harvey Dent though he portrayed his transition to 2-Face, with perfection.. the movie in incredibly accurate and yet dared to have its own variations. The court-scene where Dent was seen trying to put Sal Maroni away.. if tradition had to be followed Dent was to be attacked with acid in that moment thus becoming 2-Face, but Nolan didn't do that yet paid tribute to the original writers as well.

TDK stood out among the trilogy because the characters were symbolic of today's reality. Harvey Dent symbolized the legal force which is out to fight the system and actually help keep the law for a change but cannot due to the corruption within the legal system itself.. subjected to and wounded by such irrationality the greatest of men turn to evil as well. Bruce Wayne feels trapped and yet obligated to carry on doing what he set out to do.. knowing that the rabbit-hole he's gotten into is only going deeper and deeper. Joker represents the criminal whose main motive isn't money, but disruption.. its conquer by chaos theory and to understand such a person leave alone catch him is incredibly difficult. Nolan set so many gripping moments in the movie, he basically portrayed a picture of such a corrupt Gotham than every do-gooder was victimized in the end. I believe love played a deep role in the movie without it being even mentioned.. Bruce Wayne, James Gordon and Harvey Dent were all shattered by it, only that their reactions were different.

Then there are the scenes which give out hope - the ship bomb dilemma for example, or the way the accountant realises how the city can terrorise even a common, unknown person based on one criminal's blackmail and chooses not to reveal the true identity of Batman because he understood the importance. The conversations between Alfred and Bruce in their make-shift shipyard Batcave were all so true as well. Ledger was good, I'm definitely not saying he wasn't but according to me the story was 60% of the reason, 2-Face 10%, Bruce Wayne 10%, Commissioner Gordon 10%, and the Joker 10%, basically everyone pulled their weight. Add the gripping music by Hans Zimmer and you got perfection.

TDKR can never be a TDK, one was intense and showed Batman at his prime, the other was wrapping up the series and had to be slower, more irrational (due to less time) and had to condense a very famous storyline into less than 3 hours.. it was setup to be a failure because no ending is ever perfect (like Spiderman-3 of Tobey McGuire), but this one was still not too bad at all.

P.s. Thanks for the 'Following' headsup. Got any more suggestions?

I've a very limited choice.. I've almost entirely stopped watching mainstream cinema for now. Action, horror, comedy etc all stopped. I've just been watching intelligent, horizon-expanding cinema for the past couple of years now.. Locke is a good movie, Will Smiths iRobot will always be a favourite, Camp X-ray is a brilliant movie.. best movie made post 2010's I'll dare to say yet I'm willing to bet that less than 2% of the public would've heard of it, Moneyball was a good movie as was Rescue Dawn and The Machinist. Plenty of good cinema to be found.. just not the ones shown on Indian t.v.

[naveenroy]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

.... was utterly disappointed with Interstellar and Inception.. both very boring, non mind-blowing, with a long drawn out meaningless ending, although both those movies had terrible lead actors (yes I mean it).

No offense but hahah, this reminds me of the time when me and my guy friends decided to go for Interstellar. I'd already watched it once and wanted to see it again. But friends decided to bring along their wives (wasn't planned). And sometime in the movie, I remember a friends wife lean over, look at me and ask me - "Did YOU decide to bring us for this movie?".

I put Interstellar up there - the top of my list. Inception was amazing too - I have watched it so many times. I cannot wait for the next Nolan movie - he usually doesn't disappoint.

EDIT - I am not picking on you dark.knight - I see many replies to your post already.

[deathwalkr]

@Naveen: Did YOU pick the movie? :P

I'm simple enough to admit Inception went completely over my head and i didn't last for 30mins which is very surprising considering i usually watch movies till the end no matter how bad it is.

Interstellar, haven't even tried watching it.

Prestige...Amazing!

Btb never understand the big hungama about Nolan and his fans and antifans. It's like apple and android, dc and marvel. He makes good movies, why so much tension i dont know.

[Eddy]

For all who think Interstellar is confusing, please watch Mulholland Drive.

[heydj]

Roadhouse - featuring Patrick Swazye. All time favorite movie of mine with rating of 9/10.

Breakfast At Tiffany's - saw it recently, amazing movie - 8/10.

Btw not understanding a movie does not mean its bad - earlier comments about ''Interstellar & Inception having weak lead actors or endings'' are beyond me. When I went to see Inception a couple came about 5 minutes late for the show and all the time kept on saying not understanding and in end useless film.

Also out of curiosity who would you cast in lead role in these movies?

[knaveen]

Originally Posted by Eddy

For all who think Interstellar is confusing, please watch Mulholland Drive.

Try "Donnie Darko" as well. Have seen this movie multiple times over the years, still cant get it out of my head.