Movies reviews by yourself

Is anybody else here excited for awards season?! I am! The Academy Awards and all of those other shows are like my Superbowl! Any bets as to who the big winners will be on the big night? Isn't it interesting that this years' Academy Awards have both the youngest and the oldest Best Actress nominees in history? I live for stuff like this!

I just want Anne Hathaway to get her Oscar!

Me too! She broke my heart in "Les Miserables" and made me cry. Poor Fantine. She lost everything. Her lover walked out on her and left her with a child, she lost her child (sort of) to an awful couple because she couldn't take care of her anymore, she lost her job, she lost her hair and teeth, she lost her dignity as a postitute, she lost her mind as her health started to fail, and she eventually lost her life. Such a tragic character.

As a side note, Samantha Barks plays the most beautiful street urchin I've ever seen in my life.

I saw Les Miserables last night, and Anne Hathaway certainly deserves an oscar for her Fantine. Her acting was stellar, and although her voice is not as trained as it could be, it is strong enough and she used it as a perfect instrument to convey the despair of Fantine. It was almost painful (in a good way) to watch her 'I Dreamed a Dream': never before did the lyrics of that song hit the mark for me.

Other actors that impressed me were Hugh Jackman and Samantha Barks. Samantha's Eponine was powerful, and I wished the singing in the musical overall was more on par with hers. I love Hugh Jackman's voice, and admired his (acting/singing) craft as Jean Valjean, but I think that was not the right role for him: he would have made a much better Javert. His 'Bring Him Home' gave me conflicting feelings: I loved his singing as it was very skillful and emotive, but I didn't like that he sang that particular song the way he did: it really needed some falsetto parts and more vulnerability.

- Russel Crowe was good in just his acting scenes, but I found him terrible in his singing. His singing was flat and bland, almost devoid of emotion. It was almost as if he was too busy and concerned of his singing abilities to pay attention to the emotions in his singing, and his acting through song suffered from that.
- Didn't like Amanda Seyfried little trembling voice as Cosette either, nor Eddie Redmayne as Marius: he 'pinched' his voice a lot and it lost all strength in the higher notes (although I liked his 'Empty Chairs at Empty Tables').
- Enjoras and the other students had great voices, and so did the captain of the charging soldiers. The lesser characters (who only had a few lines) overall had better voices than most of the lead characters, imo.
- Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter were good as the innkeeper and his wife, but I found their scenes (in scenery and e.g. clothing) over the top and not fitting in the atmosphere/coloring of the rest of the movie.
- I cried when I saw Colm Wilkinson as the Bishop, that was great, and I liked how they gave him Eponine's lines in the last song, welcoming Valjean in Heaven.

As movie I really loved Les Miserables. The scenery and staging was great (especially the opening scene), and the story was told very well. I choked up a couple of times.
I liked how they stayed true to most of the (staged) musical, but added more from the book of Victor Hugo: it gave the story even more impact and depth. The way they integrated more story in the musical (they changed a lot of lyrics and added new lyrics by using familiar melodies of songs to tell more of the story) was good, it was done almost unnoticable and didn't 'annoy' me as someone who knows every single line of the musical as it is on stage.
But I would never buy the audio of this version of Les Miserables. The singing was lacking and secondary to the acting and staging. It really worked in the movie (except for Russel Crowe who managed to pull me out of the story several times, but maybe that's because I worship Philip Quast who was Javert at the 10th Anniversary concert), but I don't think I would enjoy listening to the songs without the visuals.
So, today I'm going to listen to the 10th Anniversary concert cd, while thinking of the acting and visuals of the movie. That'll work for me.

i still haven't seen Les Mis. i downloaded it , but haven't had the time to watch it (one good thing about oscar season is that all the contenders show up online with dvd screener quality videos in a matter of days ). i always found the soundtrack rather heavy and boring. have never been able to finish it, but i will now, hopefully. funny thing about "i dreamed a dream", it's people's favorite ballad and all that, but the lyrics are so depressing and the song always leaves me not only in tears but with such sense of desperation and total hopelessness. i don't think i could ever be able to sing it without braking into a sob. I mean : "I wish my life would be so different from this hell I'm living" and "My life has killed the dream I dreamed." Those two kill me every time.

I saw Hitchcock - I was disappointed to be honest. I thought it was going to be the story behind my all time favorite movie - Psycho, but instead Psycho was more or less an afterthough - it was all about Hitch and his wife's marriage, his unhealthy obsessions with his blond and cold leading ladies and his wife's adulatory with some writer guy. I wasn't bad, but I expected more.

One film that I thought was overlooked horribly during last year's award season was "50/50". It is NOT a Seth Rogan fratboy comedy type, which I was thrilled about (I do not like Seth Rogan). It's a smart comedy-drama film about a young, 27 year old man who finds out that he has a rare type of mass in his spine, and that he only has a 50 percent chance of making it. It is a semi-autobiographical film that the screenwriter Will Reiser based off of his own scary brush with a spinal tumor that, he too, had a 50 percent chance of surviving when he was 25 years old. As an interesting point at how life imitates art, Seth Rogan was his best friend in real life and really did stick by him during this awful time, so Seth basically plays himself in the movie (an obnoxious, supportive best friend) to Will's semi self insert character, Adam (played by Joseph Gordon Levitt). The thing that makes this so heatbreaking is that Adam is a somewhat timid, everyday young man. He takes care of himself, he jogs everyday. He doesn't even drive a car because he considers it a dangerous activity. He says so himself, in a hilarious and heartbreaking peice from the script, "I have a tumor? ME? But that doesn't make sense. I don't smoke, I don't drink....I recycle." The film is, quiet literally, 50 percent comedy and 50 percent drama, leaning heavily toward the drama genre in the most heartbreaking way toward the end of the film. I don't want to spoil anything, but it's a great film. Even Seth is tolerable in it, and the film would have been alot more depressing without him...he provides much of the comedy. This is a touching, moving film that will make you think about your own life, and thank your lucky stars that you are not in the same situation that young Adam is. It is lovely.

Also, a friend of mine dragged me to see "Mama" on Friday. I'm scared of the horror genre in my old age (I used to love horror films when I was a kid and teen, now I lean more towards tearjerkers and quiet domestic dramas). I don't want to spoil anything, but I really enjoyed it. It's very stylish and original. A very well made, well acted film and very, very creepy.

^ I watched this movie too recently, mainly because of my Joseph-Gordon Levitt obsession after seeing him in TDKR.

His other movies are worth watching too:
-Inception (about corporate espionage conducted through dream infiltration)
-Looper (time travel movie where JGL is a younger Bruce Willis)
- Brick (there are no words I can find to describe this movie properly, but it's mainly about a young man trying to find out who killed his ex-girlfriend. The way he went about it is unusual. The dialogues and all the characters in the movie are unusual)
- 500 days of Summer (a story about love that's not a love story; told in scenes out of chronological order)
- Premium rush (okay, I'm shallow and just want to watch JGL in biker shorts. Sue me )

Another movie I'd add to the list is "Manic"...it slightly reminds me of a teen version of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" (but not nearly as good). JGL works with Zooey Deschanel for the first time (this was made in 2001, way before 500 Days of Summer). He reminds me of how Edward Norton acted in "American History X"...crazy eyes, filled with a manic, hateful and violent energy. Other JGL movies that I want to see are "Hesher" and "Mysterious Skin". As a side note, what did you think of "50/50"? Wasn't the score for that film just fabulous?! Did you bawl as much as I did?? It was my favorite film of 2011. I thought this film was robbed of so many Oscar nominations...

Oh, and JGL is also in Lincoln! He plays the oldest son!

I saw "The Impossible" yesterday. It is based off of the harrowing, true story of one American family and their struggle to survive and to find each other again among the devestation caused by 2004 tsunami in Thailand. The vacation from hell. It is an amazing film. Nightmare inducing, for sure...so hard to watch at parts. Very, very scary...but bittersweet and uplifting by the end. Everybody in the theater, myself included, just sat there quietly through the credits. Also, there were several people crying as well. Naomi Watts (Oscar nominated for Best Actress for this film), Ewan McGregor, and Tom Holland all give standout performances as the wife/mother, husband/father and oldest son. The two youngest boys are adorable and bring the cuteness factor (and believe me, after such horror, it's nice to look at a little cuteness). I wonder what the real life family thought of this film? I thought it was brilliant. The sound editing was so eerie. The sound really and truly made me feel as though I was drowning in some scenes.

I find that although 50/50 is a reasonably good dramedy with decent acting all around, the threat of death hanging over the protagonist and its depressing undertones makes it difficult for me to enjoy it (Heh, although this really shouldn't be the case for someone who enjoyed watching SBL). I'm tickled by the thought that Seth Rogen was playing himself in the movie; because his ways of supporting his friend with cancer is so horrific that it's humorous. Thanks for the details about the inspiration behind the film. I watched the film mainly to see JGL flex his acting muscles, so I wasn't aware of it being semi-autobiographical and such. I'm usually ignorant of music scores in movies (unless the music itself plays a major part in the movie, such as 'August Rush' or 'The Piano') To be honest, 50/50 wasn't very memorable to me, because it doesn't have those big 'Oscar' acting moments in it. I suppose a big reason for this is the personality of the protagonist-- who's so mild-mannered that he barely showed any emotional reaction to his situation until close to the end of the movie (his angry outburst in the car made me think, 'you've only just reached the anger phase of grief now?')

I've tried to watch Manic, but I had to give up five minutes into the movie because the shaky camerawork was giving me motion sickness .

I've watched Hesher, and I find JGL's character to be very... unique. Lewd. Sociopathic. Unpredictable. Borderline Criminal. Some of the stuff that he said and did were so shockingly inappropriate that it made me gape at times.

As for Mysterious Skin, I've watched this movie many years ago, so I can barely remember the plot of the movie. But what did stick in my mind is this one scene where JGL's character had a, um, bad encounter. It was really intense, and I remember feeling really uncomfortable watching it.

Say, I've also heard that JGL had written his first movie recently (which he also directed as well as starred in) titled 'Don Jon Addiction'. After reading about what the movie is about, I kind of admire him for being daring enough to write such material, and portray such a character.

See, it felt very real to me. This young screenwriter took what had to be one of the most awful times in his life and created a dark, sad, humorous screenplay that comes straight from the heart. It didn't feel at all "Hollywood" or melodramatic to me. It's a real story about facing down death while still trying desperatley to cling onto life and it just struck a chord with me. It felt authentic. It blends comedy and drama so well, IMO (like SBL) When Will Reiser won Best First Screenplay at the Indepedant Spirit Awards last year, he thanked his cancer! I really thought the score gave the film a modern, indie feel...you know? Radiohead's "High and Dry" felt sad, but also hopeful when Adam first got the diagnosis, "To Love Somebody" was perfect in the oddly hilarious/morbid scene when Adam is walking around the hospital and high for the first time after getting his first chemo treatment, "Crying" was funny in the scene it was used in (the painting burning scene), "Yellow Ledbetter" was a great song to close with, and "The Other Side of Mt. Heart Attack" by The Liars used during the surgery scene made me bawl like a baby. So, so sad! It fit that scene and Adam's mounting fear perfectly!

I loved the fact that Adam was so mild mannered. He doesn't smoke pot or drink or screw around before this cancer diagnosis. He doesn't drive because it's "dangerous". He's just....a very timid, kind young man. He's a neatfreak and he jogs everyday. It's like...he didn't do anything to deserve this and in fact goes out of his way to avoid trouble, you know? Had this happened to some jerk you wouldn't feel as bad. But the fact that this careful guy has a 50 percent chance of dying not because of anything that he did? It feels heartbreaking and unfair.

I love that he accepted his diagnoisis with a relative grace, strength and bravery. He's comforting his girlfriend, his mom, his best friend and assuring them that he will be okay. He's in a sense of denial. And then, towards the end, when it's revealed that those awful chemo treatments are not working and he has to go in for an emergency surgery, and then one of his chemo buddies dies? Then it all comes crashing down around him and it all becomes too real. The sense of how grave things actually are hits him like a ton of bricks. And the night before the surgery, his last hope, he finally, FINALLY allows himself to break down and to actually feel...even if it's almost too late. That scream/breakdown in the car gave me chills. The frustration, the anger, the sadness, the fear....I've never heard anyone scream like that before. He sounded like a wounded animal. It startled the hell out of me in the theater and got me teary eyed. That scene, and the surgery scene. He's about to go in for his operation and it's a grave situation. He knows that it might not work, and that there is nothing more they can do if that happens. Even worse, he knows that the operation itself is dangerous, and that he might not even wake up. Right as they start to give him the sedative, he panics because he knows it could all be over...right here, right now at 27 years old. He hasn't even lived most of his life yet, especially since he's been an overly careful young man. That scene when he cried and hugged his mom and refused to let go? And she's trying her best to comfort him, but even she thinks he might not make it? HEARTBREAKING!!!! I'm getting teary eyed just thinking about it. This is a groundbreaking scene for mother and son, because the two of them had a strained relationship prior. It's nice to see them bond in a way, even if it is almost too late. I am so glad that JGL was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Comedy (yes, comedy...weird, huh?)/Musical for this performance last year. He was still robbed of an Oscar nod at least.

Btw, there were little cracks in his mild mannered "I'm going to be okay" philosophy during the therapy sessions with Anna Kendrick's character. During the entire movie, you could see little moments of anger and fear peeping through, becoming stonger towards the end as he gets more and more cynical about his possible death sentence. His final therapy session with her (the one where he walks out in anger) also is a great scene of acting. He doesn't care about being polite anymore...he's scared and pissed off. And rightfully so.

JGL is a great young actor, huh?? He reminds me of Edward Norton or Heath Ledger in a way. Btw, he was also in "Lincoln" this year! I love masterful actors/actresses like that. Lillian Gish, Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Natalie Portman, Daniel Day Lewis...brilliant, yet down to earth and not full of oneself. I admire the truly talented ones and the ones who care about the work/craft and who want to be taken seriously. Not the famewhores.

I looked up the film you were talking about, and I cannot tell you how excited I am for this!! Ahhh! I love moguls in the film industry. Channing Tatum/Megan Fox types do nothing for me. True artists like Orson Welles, Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, DW Griffith, Chris Colfer, JGL, Zoe Kazan...they are amazing!! I admire talented actors/actresses who also do BTS work for the love of the craft and who do it well. Actor/Writer/Director/Producer (ect) hybrids are just...magical to me. So proud of JGL for stepping behind the camera and for being intent on creating the best picture he can create! More Hollywood people need to do this!! I am sick of Kardashian/Hilton idiots! I also love that he doesn't shy away from edgy material. Not everything has to be so whitewashed and mainstream-friendly. Art has to sometimes be edgy, not just entertaining. It makes you think and feel.

Another film that I loved is nominated this year at the Independant Spirit Awards (the "Oscars" for indies) for Best First Screenplay, the same category that Will Reiser won for his "50/50" screenplay last year. It's called "Ruby Sparks". The trailers made it look like some kind of romantic comedy, but it it NOT a stupid romcom at all! The young lady (Zoe Kazan) who stars in it also wrote the screenplay. She wrote herself a hell of a role too, and had to be able to change her character at the drop of the hat...sometimes several times in one scene. She plays, literally, the creation and the figment of someone elses' imagination. The screenplay is magical and fantastically creative. It's about a writer who creates his "dream woman" and wills her into existence, basically. Zoe wrote the script herself, so any writer at heart (including Chris) can appreciate it. The film is actually quite serious, and it is all about writer appreciation, the writer's POV, the writing and creative process, and finally asks a very important question about the ethical and moral pros and cons about playing God. It reminded me a bit of "Stranger Than Fiction", but I liked "Ruby Sparks" far more. Good for her, and for anyone, for creating a fantastic vehicle for themselves. I think it is brilliant.

What does everybody here think of the fantasy genre? Maybe it's because I have a lack of an imagination, but I prefer realism over escapism when it comes to literature/film. I would not have bought/liked TLOS if Chris had not written it, but SBL: The Carson Phillips Journal is right up my alley. I don't really buy into fantasy or fairy tales for the most part. Films like "Stardust", "Ever After", "The Princess Bride" are all too sugary for me, as are Disney films. (I am very cynical). And the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings films are not relatable to me at all. I do remember enjoying "FairyTale: A True Story" back in 1997 when I saw it in the theater and I also loved "A Troll in Central Park", as well as the Disney princess movies (Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid were my favorites) and "Hook". But now as an adult? I just can't get into the fantasy genre. I like domestic dramas, slice-of-life films, comedy-dramas, psychological dramas, psychological thrillers, character studies/dramas, social commentaries, and non-romantic tear jerkers. I did enjoy "Ruby Sparks" and "Stranger Than Fiction" and "The Truman Show" very much, and I guess those are fantasy films in a way.

I like fantasy when it is explored from the perspective of being the delusions of a mentally ill person ("Phoebe in Wonderland", "A Beautiful Mind", "Donnie Darko") or when it is revealed for what it really is: a psychological defense mechanism against an intolerable real life situation ("Tideland", "Pan's Labyrinth"). I like it darker, and not so sugary. I also enjoyed "Brother's Grimm", as it felt like a behind the scenes, darker "real life" glance into the old tales that we all knew growing up. Fairy tales with a twist.

MoviesAreLife wrote:What does everybody here think of the fantasy genre? Maybe it's because I have a lack of an imagination, but I prefer realism over escapism when it comes to literature/film. I would not have bought/liked TLOS if Chris had not written it, but SBL: The Carson Phillips Journal is right up my alley. I don't really buy into fantasy or fairy tales for the most part. Films like "Stardust", "Ever After", "The Princess Bride" are all too sugary for me, as are Disney films. (I am very cynical). And the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings films are not relatable to me at all. I do remember enjoying "FairyTale: A True Story" back in 1997 when I saw it in the theater and I also loved "A Troll in Central Park", as well as the Disney princess movies (Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid were my favorites) and "Hook". But now as an adult? I just can't get into the fantasy genre. I like domestic dramas, comedy-dramas, psychological dramas, psychological thrillers, character studies/dramas, social commentaries, and non-romantic tear jerkers. I did enjoy "Ruby Sparks" and "Stranger Than Fiction" and "The Truman Show" very much, and I guess those are fantasy films in a way.

I like fantasy when it is explored from the perspective of being the delusions of a mentally ill person ("Phoebe in Wonderland", "A Beautiful Mind") or when it is revealed for what it really is: a psychological defense mechanism against an intolerable real life situation ("Tideland", "Pan's Labyrinth"). I like it darker, and not so sugary. I also enjoyed "Brother's Grimm", as it felt like a behind the scenes, darker "real life" glance into the old tales that we all knew growing up. Fairy tales with a twist.

I personally love the fantasy genre and always have. I've always been a quiet, shy person so fantasy was an escapism for me, both in writing and reading, so that's the original reason I latched onto it. I'm 21 now, but still am very fond of the genre, although I enjoy pretty much every genre EXCEPT for straight horror. Can't handle that. But stuff like Breaking Bad and Mad Men, I eagerly watch them just as much as I look forward to Once Upon a Time and Smash each week.

I agree some fantasy stories are very fluffy/sugary and have little substance. But I think the fantasy genre is a wonderful way to explore certain literary themes in a fresh skin, in ways more vivid than can sometimes be told in more realistic fiction, although I enjoy both. For example, the His Dark Materials trilogy - one of my favorites - is an interesting take on themes of free will vs. subjugation, innocence vs. maturity, sin vs. purity, and even more. It's dressed in fantastical colors and characters and concepts, but deals with deeper messages and ideas if you're willing to look for them (or, at times, they're clear as day). Can one imagine our souls traveling outside of our bodies, talking and walking alongside us, and what that would mean for interacting with others? If one could purge sin from ourselves through physical means, would you do it, even if it had dire consequences? Are people free to choose their own destinies, or are they trapped in God's design? HDM raises and delves into all these questions, and I find it really fascinating. You can use certain types of symbolism and metaphor in fantasy stories that sometimes you just can't in realistic fiction. In this way, fantasy transcends escapism and brings us back to reality by exploring real-world issues, but reflected in magical ways. Harry Potter deals with themes as well, one of its central ideas being "muggles" vs. wizards, those who are special and those who aren't, "lesser people" vs. "superior people". You can see it in how wizards treat pretty much every other race; and this echoes the real-life issues of classism (purebloods vs. mudbloods) and racism (wizards vs. non-wizards). Most of the books deal with that theme, as well as others. They're an entertaining, magical journey but they have meaning too.

Then you have Lord of the Rings, which also has deep messages about the horrors of temptation and human evil; but also how the seemingly ordinary, the small, the weak, can be the strongest of all of us. How to not give up no matter how devastating the obstacle in front of you; how being a hero isn't just defeating hordes of enemies and protecting a city like Aragorn, but facing the darkness of your own heart and choosing to love, to try, instead of run (Sam and Frodo). Then we have the hyperrealistic fantasy stories like A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones series). These books have more echoes of Shakespeare, like King Richard the Third, than your typical fantasy - they've even been referred to as "historical fantasy" at times. They paint a surprisingly realistic take on what a world of fantasy could be like, with all the nightmares and virtues of human nature ringing true within it. So, dark realistic fantasy definitely exists too if that's more your cup of tea.

.....I just realized this thread is supposed to be about movies but I was mainly talking about literature. Fantasy films have a somewhat disadvantage in the cinema world because there isn't a lot of it; they cost so much to film, and have unique hardships and complications in production that rom-coms, for example, would never have. They're also risky investments so only the most popular fantasy books get made into films, while less popular but high quality stories are passed up. But I think the animation houses are keeping up a rich world of fantasy in cinema, as are the efforts of HBO and the like for television, and I'm glad of that.

As I said, it's probably because I have no imagination! I am a fanfiction writer, not an original writer, after all (just call me Malerie!)

It's true that fantasy/sci-fi literature/films are rarely ever just for fun. There is almost always more than meets the eye, and there are theories that "Alice in Wonderland" is a thinly veiled political satire, and that "The Wizard of Oz" is really just a trip into the mind of a mentally ill girl! (I LOVE "The Wizard of Oz", btw. It's the first film I ever remember seeing and the first one I fell in love with!) It takes a brilliant mind to pull off a good fantasy peice, and I do see what you mean about the "Muggle Blood" issue in Harry Potter being about racism or any other form of discrimination, or the theme of the LOTR telling us that we can do anything if we set our mind to it, despite the obstacles and doubt in our way. Chris was right when he said that fairy tales were just modern morals/issues dressed up in a fancy package, and that they really are relatable to us in the real world. I prefer my messages a little more straightforward though.

If you think about it, musicals are a form of fantasy, for sure. And I've been warming to them for years now, thanks to RENT and Glee. It's just that trolls and goblins and fairies feel a little...Halloween to me? I don't know how to describe it. I LOVE mermaids though...

I think "The Black Swan" has some dark fantasy elements to it, but they were the delusions of a psychologically disturbed girl. It's more of a psychological thriller.

An interesting use of fantasy sequences in a non-fantasy film happens in "Precious". I won't go into detail, but this poor girl has one of the worst lives you can possibly imagine. Anyway, whenever truly AWFUL things happen to her (and they happen a lot), she goes away into her head and she imagines a different senerio: singing with a church choir and being their star, her hot boyfriend picking her up in order to take her on a ride on his motercycle. It just makes the reality of the situation that much more heartbreaking.

MoviesAreLife wrote:See, it felt very real to me. This young screenwriter took what had to be one of the most awful times in his life and created a dark, sad, humorous screenplay that comes straight from the heart. It didn't feel at all "Hollywood" or melodramatic to me. It's a real story about facing down death while still trying desperatley to cling onto life and it just struck a chord with me. It felt authentic.

I agree with you, that the movie felt 'real', and that is actually one of its strengths. It's not your typical Hollywood movie where every action or facial expression is exaggerated ten times for comedic or dramatic purposes (e.g. fainting in shock).

MoviesAreLife wrote:
Btw, there were little cracks in his mild mannered "I'm going to be okay" philosophy during the therapy sessions with Anna Kendrick's character. During the entire movie, you could see little moments of anger and fear peeping through, becoming stonger towards the end as he gets more and more cynical about his possible death sentence. His final therapy session with her (the one where he walks out in anger) also is a great scene of acting. He doesn't care about being polite anymore...he's scared and pissed off. And rightfully so.

I agree with you in this as well. You can see that his ability to cope is slowly getting worn down by his circumstances and by the other people in his life who were meant to provide him support but fell short or only added to his stress.

MoviesAreLife wrote:
JGL is a great young actor, huh?? He reminds me of Edward Norton or Heath Ledger in a way. Btw, he was also in "Lincoln" this year! I love masterful actors/actresses like that. Lillian Gish, Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Natalie Portman, Daniel Day Lewis...brilliant, yet down to earth and not full of oneself. I admire the truly talented ones and the ones who care about the work/craft and who want to be taken seriously. Not the famewhores.

I looked up the film you were talking about, and I cannot tell you how excited I am for this!! Ahhh! I love moguls in the film industry. Channing Tatum/Megan Fox types do nothing for me. True artists like Orson Welles, Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, DW Griffith, Chris Colfer, JGL, Zoe Kazan...they are amazing!! I admire talented actors/actresses who also do BTS work for the love of the craft and who do it well. Actor/Writer/Director/Producer (ect) hybrids are just...magical to me. So proud of JGL for stepping behind the camera and for being intent on creating the best picture he can create! More Hollywood people need to do this!! I am sick of Kardashian/Hilton idiots! I also love that he doesn't shy away from edgy material. Not everything has to be so whitewashed and mainstream-friendly. Art has to sometimes be edgy, not just entertaining. It makes you think and feel.

You've voiced my feelings better than I ever could

Yes, I do love JGL's acting too and think that he has remarkable talent in this area. Strangely enough, the first time I actually noticed JGL's acting was when I saw him in an episode of Numb3rs (Season 1 episode 11 'Sacrifice'). It may be his slightly Asian features that drew my attention initially, but I remember thinking, after watching the episode, that this actor was too good for television shows and should really be in movies. I was intrigued but never took the next step to look him up further (until TDKR).

Like you, trashy reality TV like 'The Kardashians' and 'The simple life' hold no appeal to me. They know how to market themselves, but there really isn't any real skill or artistic merit to the things they've created. They basically make a spectacle of themselves or their private lives and let the public lap them up for entertainment. I applaud their entrepreneur skills though.

I'm really curious and would like to watch Don Jon's Addiction once it's available. The steps that JGL seem to be taking are a bit similar to Chris's (e.g. delving into screenplay writing), though he's currently a more accomplished and in-demand movie actor.

I sometimes fear for Chris and his future as an actor, because so far, Hollywood seems to want to box him into Kurt-Hummel-like roles. He's had to write his own movies to free himself from those stereotyped roles.

MoviesAreLife wrote:
Another film that I loved is nominated this year at the Independant Spirit Awards (the "Oscars" for indies) for Best First Screenplay, the same category that Will Reiser won for his "50/50" screenplay last year. It's called "Ruby Sparks".

I haven't watched this movie but the way you've described it has piqued my interest. I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for this one.

ColferGirl wrote:
.....I just realized this thread is supposed to be about movies but I was mainly talking about literature.

Actually, all the fantasy works you've mentioned have been made either into movies (The Golden Compass) or TV series (Game of Thrones), so your discussions are definitely not out of place in this thread

I've never looked so deeply into the modern-day themes or issues that are explored in the fantasy works you've mentioned. I read fantasy as a form of escapism. I love reading about adventure, colourful characters, tales of valour and romance. To me, they're straight forward entertainment and that's what I'm after.

I read fantasy and science fiction growing up. One movie I'm looking forward to this year is 'Ender's Game'. Orson Scott Card used to be one of my favourite authors.

Delight wrote:I've watched Hesher, and I find JGL's character to be very... unique. Lewd. Sociopathic. Unpredictable. Borderline Criminal. Some of the stuff that he said and did were so shockingly inappropriate that it made me gape at times.

As for Mysterious Skin, I've watched this movie many years ago, so I can barely remember the plot of the movie. But what did stick in my mind is this one scene where JGL's character had a, um, bad encounter. It was really intense, and I remember feeling really uncomfortable watching it.

As a fan of JGL I do find Mysterious Skin one of his best performances but I find the movie it self very, very hard to watch and not only because of that one insanely rough scene but because the general theme of the movie. I was just thinking about watching it again few days ago but decided not to, since it would probably make me feel ill. (I don't know if creating that feeling for a viewer is ever good for a movie, but it tells about its effectiveness though.)

Hesher on the other hand I found hilariously zany, I don't know if that was the purpose of the makers, but that's how my humor took it. I mean I know Hesher as a character is probably insane and prone to violence but what he did for the father and son was uncannily therapeutic.

I find it that JGL movies have mostly been good and interesting, he's my go-to-guy when choosing a film. Looper was excellent and me and my friend, and she and I have pretty much different taste on everything, agreed on this one little detail that JGL makes almost any movie better.

I think you need to distinguish 2 types of fantasy - that made for children that deal with the realization that we must all grow up one day and leave the child behind (books like Peter Pan or Chronicles of Narnia and even Harry Potter in it's earlier parts) and fantasy that is clearly made for older more nuanced audience that can understand deeper meaning and psychology of character and situations not to mention gory subjects (Song of Ice and Fire aka. The Game of Thrones probably the prime example).

Personally, I love fantasy. It's primary purpose is to tell you a deeper truth without the need of it being spelled out. Why are fairy tales such a huge part of every child's growing up. Because they are in essence cautionary tales of what happens when you don't do the right thing. Also, people require a certain dose of escapism. Reality can at times be TOO real.

As an adult you can now watch Alice in Wonderland and wonder what kind of trip was she on or that maybe she suffered from schizophrenia, or even wonder about Lewis Carroll's obvious unhealthy obsession with preteen girls (particularly the Alice who inspired it all) and what that might have meant ! The same could be said and observed about J. M. Barrie and his familiarity with the Davies family boys. Not to mention all the not so subtle hidden messages in all the Disney cartoons.

The true value of a novel is that it has meaning for you both as an adult and as child. As a kid I loved the fantasy of Peter Pan - a flying boy, mermaids, pirates and ticking crocodile, but as an adult I love the fact that it's a story about passage of time and growing up and that we all have a Peter Pan in us no matter how old we get and that you should never allow him to disapper because you life will be poorer without it.

Oh, you reminded me of something I almost forgot to mention, Delight! Adding to the realism factor, I loved, loved, LOVED how they portrayed Adam's shock upon first hearing of his diagnosis! Perfect acting (how he numbly, blindly goes to the window and asks if he's going to be okay), excellent cinematography (the focus shifts from the doctor to Adam as the words slowly dawn on him, the deep focus on him as everything else becomes blurry), and especially the sound editing! The ringing in his ears as soon as he hears the word "cancer", the echo....everything was just perfect. No hysterics, no fainting. Btw, thank you so much for telling me about this new movie! I knew he was directing something, but I didn't know what it was about or called, and I didn't know he wrote/starred in it too. Bonus! And I'm not worried about Chris at all. He will continue to create his own stuff, to break out of that Kurt Hummel shell on his own, until others in Hollywood notice and take a chance on him. He's lucky he's so talented. If he was strictly an actor in a role like this, and didn't have the writing talent to make his own stuff, and didn't have the acting talent to do other things, I'd be worried...but this is not the case with him. And remember that JGL started out as a TV actor too on "3rd Rock from the Sun" and even as a child actor, yet he still managed to make an adult career for himself. I know that Chris can too, because he's talented. And please do check out Ruby Sparks. Any creative person (especially a writer) should just love it!

Valkeakuulas, sometimes the aim of a movie like that is to make someone want to throw up. If a film doesn't move you somehow...make you think, feel, cry, afraid, inspired, happy, throw up, cringe (anything that it genre specific)...then it is not doing its job. The Exorcist made people faint and cry and scream/run out of the theaters back in 1973 (it was even rumored to drive some people insane), but that didn't stop it from being one of the most honored horror films at the Oscars, and also one of the most popular horror films, of all time. I agree with you about JGL...he is a daring actor. You know something is going to be good if it has him in it. He doesn't do popcorn flicks and (typical) romcoms. He's edgy and off the wall. And any blockbusters that he does take part in are sure to have meaning. He's not going to be in crap like "Valentine's Day", "New Year's Eve" and "Movie 43".

Tanita_mors, I agree that there are fantasy works that appeal to children, and then fantasy films/literature that appeal to adults. I, too, look back on things like "Peter Pan" with a certain sense of...longing? I don't know. Let's just say, I still identify with the terror of growing up, even to this day. I still sometimes dream I can fly. I do get it. It's fun to look back on these things with an adult perspective and to see things you didn't even noticed as a child. Is Alice crazy?? Why do these Disney movies have this subliminal messages in them?! Who is crazier...Dorothy or Alice? And so on.

Escapism and realism both have their value. Realism makes you reflect, escapism allows you to, well, escape for a while. I like my escapism/fantasy in the form of Shirley Temple movies. They are Depression era (1930's) musical, family friendly and sugary sweet movies. They are not magical, whimsical or set in another realm (the most "magical" film she ever made was "The Blue Bird" at the end of her childhood career)...they are set in the real world. But that's as far as a comparison to real life as I can make. The heroine is a singing, winking, grinning, overly intelligent, tap dancing child who fixes the lives of those around her. She is cheerful, no matter what kind of situation she finds herself in...and the films always, always have happy endings that end with her happy, dimpled grin staring into the camera. Corny? Of course! But there is a reason Depression-era audiences of all ages loved her. Her characters represented hope. If a child can muddle her way through life's hardships with a smile, then there is hope for the rest of us. Her movies are perfect for when I want to tune out and just smile, as adorably corny and sugary as they are.

valkeakuulas wrote:
As a fan of JGL I do find Mysterious Skin one of his best performances but I find the movie it self very, very hard to watch and not only because of that one insanely rough scene but because the general theme of the movie. I was just thinking about watching it again few days ago but decided not to, since it would probably make me feel ill. (I don't know if creating that feeling for a viewer is ever good for a movie, but it tells about its effectiveness though.)

I've checked out wiki, so I now have a better understanding of what the movie is about. The subject matter itself is enough to make many viewers squeamish, but it is accurate

Spoiler:

Speaking of movies that make viewers feel ill, those of the horror genre (such as SAW) generally aim to do just that. I'm a wuss, however, so I tend to avoid these types of movies.

valkeakuulas wrote:Hesher on the other hand I found hilariously zany, I don't know if that was the purpose of the makers, but that's how my humor took it. I mean I know Hesher as a character is probably insane and prone to violence but what he did for the father and son was uncannily therapeutic.

Hesher does have a lot of dark humour in it, and there are times that I laughed watching it, mainly when Hesher (the character) does or say something horrifyingly inappropriate. One thing Hesher is not is predictable, so it's quite entertaining to watch him. My only gripe about the movie is that the child actor playing the protagonist isn't very good. Granted, it's almost inevitable that his acting would be found wanting when he has to act opposite co-stars like JGL and Natalie Portman.

valkeakuulas wrote:I find it that JGL movies have mostly been good and interesting, he's my go-to-guy when choosing a film. Looper was excellent and me and my friend, and she and I have pretty much different taste on everything, agreed on this one little detail that JGL makes almost any movie better.

I agree with you that most of JGL's films are interesting to watch. He's quite the daring actor, as Heather had said, and doesn't shy away from edgy films. I'm happy for him that he's managed to make himself better known by starring in supporting actor roles in several successful blockbuster movies.

I would like Chris to be able to achieve something similar one day (i.e. to shine and impress the audience in his role in a big budget Hollywood movie, even if his role is merely supporting).

MoviesAreLife wrote:Adding to the realism factor, I loved, loved, LOVED how they portrayed Adam's shock upon first hearing of his diagnosis! Perfect acting (how he numbly, blindly goes to the window and asks if he's going to be okay), excellent cinematography (the focus shifts from the doctor to Adam as the words slowly dawn on him, the deep focus on him as everything else becomes blurry), and especially the sound editing! The ringing in his ears as soon as he hears the word "cancer", the echo....everything was just perfect.

Yes, that scene is nicely done. In real life, as soon as a patient gets told he or she has life-threatening cancer, they usually aren't able to process or take in further information in that consult. That's why it's always a good idea to get the patient to have a support person with them when such bad news are given.

MoviesAreLife wrote:And I'm not worried about Chris at all. He will continue to create his own stuff, to break out of that Kurt Hummel shell on his own, until others in Hollywood notice and take a chance on him. He's lucky he's so talented. If he was strictly an actor in a role like this, and didn't have the writing talent to make his own stuff, and didn't have the acting talent to do other things, I'd be worried...but this is not the case with him.

I hope you're right. I just wish that, in the future, Chris doesn't have to fully rely on movies he's written himself to get a role in a movie (like what M.Night Shyamalan does with his cameo appearances in various movies he's written and directed).

MoviesAreLife wrote:And remember that JGL started out as a TV actor too on "3rd Rock from the Sun" and even as a child actor, yet he still managed to make an adult career for himself. I know that Chris can too, because he's talented.

I believe that there was a period of time, after '3rd rock from the sun' came to an end, when JGL had a hard time finding work as an actor. His lucky break came many years later.

For all of Glee's faults, I have to say that I'm grateful for the steady paychecks that it grants Chris. Show biz is very fickle. Sometimes, it just takes a few poor film choices (or poorly chosen words in interviews) to ruin your career. Thank goodness that Chris is talented and has other avenues to fall back on (such as Broadway, producing an album, writing novels or screenplays) should he find difficulty to succeed as a movie actor.

You know, that's one of a pet peeves of mine. If you are casting a film with a great cast, then PLEASE cast child actors who can keep up with them! There are some very talented child actors out there. I hate it when there are child actors who drag down every scene they are in...like in "The Shining" remake (the boy in the original "The Shining" was excellent!)

Oh, and let's not forget someone else who broke the typecasting curse: Anne Hathaway! She went from those sugary, goofy little Princess Diary movies to picking more serious and complex films and roles for herself...and look how that's paid off! Chris already removed himself from Kurt a little bit with Carson, and he will farther remove himself from that role with this new asylum movie. It's only a matter of time before someone picks up on it! All he needs it one good chance, something to launch himself as a "serious, adult actor". We know he will choose what he does with care. This is Chris we're talking about. He's not going to let himself get gyped and typcasted...or worse...cast in a really awful film. He's smarter than that.

We can already tell that Chris is just dying to play something darker...perhaps a bit more sexual or violent. He already wants to distance himself away from Kurt's shadow.

MoviesAreLife wrote:You know, that's one of a pet peeves of mine. If you are casting a film with a great cast, then PLEASE cast child actors who can keep up with them! There are some very talented child actors out there. I hate it when there are child actors who drag down every scene they are in...like in "The Shining" remake (the boy in the original "The Shining" was excellent!)

I have a soft spot for talented child actors (such as Haley Joel Osment in the Sixth Sense, or the actor who played Christian in the Danish film 'In a better world'). I agree that average child actors in iconic roles drags down the whole movie (I really think that Anakin Skywalker was miscast in The Phantom Menace). However, because they're really young, they get more leeway from me in terms of judgment of their acting.

MoviesAreLife wrote:Oh, and let's not forget someone else who broke the typecasting curse: Anne Hathaway!

True. Her portrayal of catwoman in TDKR is really impressive; and from what I've heard, she's also getting much praise for her role in the Les Miz movie.

MoviesAreLife wrote:We can already tell that Chris is just dying to play something darker...perhaps a bit more sexual or violent. He already wants to distance himself away from Kurt's shadow.

I don't think Hollywood is ready yet for a sexual Chris, but we can always dream, right?

Okay, since this is a movie thread, I'd like to introduce a movie I've watched recently titled 'Pitch Perfect':



It's a movie about a cappella choir competitions, and quite a number of the reviews for the movie went like this:

Pitch Perfect (2012, USA) is a fusion of Glee, Mean Girls, and everything nice.

Glee for college folk. Good music and cast.

It's like a superior, wittier double-episode of Glee.

There is also low-level dancing, medium-strength plotting, and highly-strung stereotypes as far as the eye can see. Sounds like just another episode of Glee, doesn't it?

I am charmed by this movie, even if the oddballs that make up the 'underdog' group that you're rooting for in the movie can be so odd that our ragtag bunch in the original New Directions seem sane and well-adjusted in comparison. There are mash-ups aplenty in the movie, and the way they did the competition song performances is quite creative (Watching them, I kind of wish that Glee would do something like that, so that there's none of that obvious transition from one song to the next, and it's not just a Rachel solo, followed up by a Troubletones mash-up or a heterosexual couple duet followed by a group number where everyone else gets a line if they're lucky). Rebel is quite delightful to watch and has no shortage of funny lines, such as:

‘You call yourself Fat Amy?’ gasps one of the thin girls.

‘Yeah,’ comes the reply, ‘so twig bitches like you don’t do it behind my back.’

However, the most WTF line in the movie would be the one coming from this Asian girl whose eyes reminds me of Emma Pillsbury (she has that staring look all the time):

"I ate my twin in the womb."

All in all, it's a movie that entertained me, and I'm reminded that the Glee concept can be successful without becoming trite or offensive. Better writing is the key.

Pitch Perfect was fun and adorable! While I love (don't kill me, Glee haters! )the comedy-drama style of Glee (it's one of my favorite genres), Pitch Perfect was like the Glee with all of the fun concentrated, and none of the drama. It's good to get a break once in a while, you know? It never takes itself too serious. This film makes me miss being in my college choir so much! I enjoyed that the film was self-aware enough to have the film buff/film score fanatic character attempt to convince the cynical female lead that, no, not all movies have predictable endings. The adorable, sweet, and very multi talented Anna Kendrick has me hooked with "Up In The Air" (Oscar nominated), "50/50" and this cute, little film "Pitch Perfect". Here's to hoping this girl continue to pick projects that show her talents and...who knows? Maybe she'll end up onstage again with a voice like that! Perhaps nominated for another Tony award? Rebel Wilson's deadpan, dry humor is hysterical! "Bridesmaids", "SBL" and now this! I think we all wish we had a "Fat Amy" in our lives, no? I love her spirited, non technical style of singing. My favorite line of hers is when that prick who lead the male acapella group insulted her, and then said he wanted to kiss her: "I sometimes think I that I should do crystal meth...but then I think: better not." Classic Rebel humor.

That girl who never speaks above a whisper (I can't remember her name) is oddly hilarious. "Nothing. I can't hear a thing you are saying!" LMAO! What about the "I set fires to feel joy" line? And then that guy took a beat, and then was like "That's adorable..." LOL!

Brittany Snow made a beautfiul redhead. Her voice was gorgeous and one of the best in the film, along with Anna's. Her character was just so...perky. She reminded me of a camp counselor. She was cheerful and sunny. Her personality was a great foil for that of the uptight, anal, control freak lead of The Bellas...what was her name...Aubry?

Haha... although Glee is not my favourite TV show at the moment (gross understatement here), I did love that original comedy-drama style it used to have back in season 1. Once the show took itself too seriously and fan-pandering went overboard, that's when Glee started to lose its ability to entertain and give joy.

When I watched Pitch Perfect, I'm reminded of what Glee used to be like-- Quirky characters united by the beautiful music that they can create together. It felt strange to be able to watch something like that without a low degree of bitter rage simmering in my veins as I do so (as is the case when I watch Glee nowadays).

Haha, oh yes, Rebel's 'crystal meth' line is hilarious! So is the "I set fires to feel joy" line by the shy/quiet/psychotic Asian girl. I was wondering why the actress Anna Kendrick look so familiar. So, she was in 50/50. Yes, her singing is pretty good (but she is no Lea Michele).

Yes, Brittany Snow does have a lovely voice (I wonder if she really sang those bass notes though), and the personality of her character is surprisingly very warm and likeable (I was expecting the typical bitchy, mean girl stereotype and was pleasantly disappointed). In terms of singing, I find that the voice of the anal, control freak leader Aubrey to be the most 'crystal clear'.

Well, in season one, is was more of a satire, dark comedy type. Now it's more like a teen, soap opera-ish comedy-drama. While I don't like the "teen soap opera" part, I love the blend of comedy and drama, which is very hard to pull off (and I'll admit that the writers sometimes fail in pulling it off successfully.)

My favorite number was when the Bellas did the Bruno Mars song "Just The Way You Are". SO beautiful! Nothing more beautiful than a 10 part harmony of singers!

One of my friends teased me and said that I was like that Asian girl! Not because of the weirdness, but because of the whisper-speaking she does! I wanted to smack her! LOL! And Rebel is a surpisingly good singer...not great, but I loved her on the "Turn The Beat Around" number. And true...Anna is no Lea, but she is good.

I thought that too, looking at the trailer. I'm so glad she wasn't a "mean girl" type (I am so sick of those!) I agree that Aubry had one of the best voices also. Haha! No way did Brittany actually sing those bass notes! LMAO! Those were computerized!

MoviesAreLife wrote:
One of my friends teased me and said that I was like that Asian girl! Not because of the weirdness, but because of the whisper-speaking she does! I wanted to smack her! LOL!

I did that whisper-speaking thing too, during a phase in secondary school. It took a while for my parents to work out that it's because my ears were blocked by wax. In that state, I thought I was speaking loudly but in actual fact, I was speaking very softly. People couldn't make out what I'm talking about half the time (and vice versa), and I think I've ruined a few friendships that way because they get too exasperated trying to talk to me.

Haha! No way did Brittany actually sing those bass notes! LMAO! Those were computerized!

Oh. It's still possible, no? I mean, Chris managed those insanely low notes in the opening lines of 'Give up the Funk'...

I've come across a review of another JGL movie which I thought voiced my opinions nicely, so I'm going to post it here.

The movie is titled 'The Lookout', and it's about a man with acquired brain injury who has terrible short-term memory (Think of Dory in Finding Nemo, but more tragic and less funny). Now imagine a group of unsavory people trying to take advantage of his handicap by manipulating him into committing a crime.

The Lookout (2007)

Content written by Tony Macklin. Originally published on April 5, 2007 in Fayetteville Free Weekly.

The best young actor in movies today may well be Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

A few people may remember him from his five-year stint (1996-2001) as adolescent Tommy Solomon on the television situation comedy Third Rock from the Sun.

A few others may know him from two recent movies -- Mysterious Skin (2004) and Brick (2005). He was extraordinary in Mysterious Skin, but his performance and the film were too raw to reach a broad audience. I thought Mysterious Skin was in the top five movies of 2004, and Gordon-Levitt blew me away.

Gordon-Levitt was also effective in Brick, although he was better than the movie.

One wonders if Joseph Gordon-Levitt ever will reach a wide audience and get the appreciation he deserves. He's 26, went to Columbia University for a short time, and hates celebrity. He has a great appreciation of language and seeks literate roles. He may be unwilling to make the compromises that seem necessary for stardom. But Gordon-Levitt sure picks interesting, challenging roles.

Currently Gordon-Levitt is in a movie that has a chance to be more commercial than his past efforts. It is The Lookout.

In The Lookout Gordon-Levitt plays Chris Pratt, a former high school hockey star, who had serious brain damage in a car crash for which he was responsible. Two passengers were killed; Chris and a girl survived.

Four years after the horrendous car accident, Chris is still both physically and psychologically wounded. He has to write down his everyday routines, so he will remember what they are. He is trying to order a disordered mind.

Chris lives with Lewis (Jeff Daniels), an older, witty, amiable friend and mentor. Lewis is blind, but "sees" more than Chris does. Chris studies to try to regain some equilibrium. At night he is janitor at a bank. But Chris gets lured into participating in a heist. The outcome has violent and ironic results.

The Lookout was written and directed by Scott Frank, who did the screenplays of Elmore Leonard's novels Get Shorty and Out of Sight. The Lookout is the first film Frank has directed.

Frank uses the conventions of buddy movies and heist films, but he takes them into fresh regions.

Set in rural Kansas, The Lookout seems to owe some of its qualities to the Coen Brothers and Quentin Tarantino. It's erratic and sly. It's a tale of manipulation, guilt, and determination.

It is a formidable directorial debut. Frank is aided by a gifted cast. Gordon-Levitt is excellent as the sometimes addled but determined Chris. He gives the character affecting dimension.

Jeff Daniels is impressive as the blind but very perceptive Lewis. Daniels is another actor who often is better than the films he is in, like The Squid and the Whale. In The Lookout, Daniels has a role he can sink his eyeteeth into.

Matthew Goode is ominous as the villainous Gary Spargo, whose creed is, "Those who have the money have the power." Isla Fisher is alluring as the provocative Luvlee Lemons who captivates Chris.

Although not as good as Mysterious Skin, The Lookout seems worthy of Gordon-Levitt's talents.

In a world of celebrity-actors and fool's gold, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is the real thing. May he prosper.

True! But there is no one alive with the range that Chris has! And I'm sorry that happened to you!

That movie sounds interesting! The plot reminds me a little bit of this movie called "Memento" (also plays around with the idea of short term memory loss). The reviewer was right on the money about JGL, though. I hope Chris gets reviews like that someday soon.