2015 Films thread

[Boopa1219]

The new Star Wars movie looks awesome.

 

Then they also released a teaser for the OTHER new Star Wars movie called "Rogue One", which is an anthology movie set between Episodes III and IV, and is about a band of rebel fighters who work to steal the plans of the Death Star. Apparently there will be no Jedis in the movie, because they want it as realistic a Star Wars movie as they can make. It's going to be a hardcore war movie in the vein of Saving Private Ryan, Blackhawk Down, etc. I think that's an interesting take that may bring in viewers who aren't big Star Wars fans, but do enjoy war movies.

 

Wouldn't say that they making it realistic but that the Jedi were basically extinct during that time frame so it makes sense not to have them in it.

[Boopa1219]

That is Sucker Punch with Superman and Batman. Snyder is about to Michael Bay the DC universe

 

1. That's kind of an ignorant comment but I will say that based on the 1 minute of footage that we were shown, that it more like a Zack Snyder film, he's embracing his auteur a little more here. (Look up auteur theory) Again we only saw not even a minute of footage and all of it was out of context. Never judge a movie by its trailer, especially its teaser trailer

 

2. There is nothing wrong with Micheal Bay the filmmaker.

[Brian]

1. That's kind of an ignorant comment but I will say that based on the 1 minute of footage that we were shown, that it more like a Zack Snyder film, he's embracing his auteur a little more here. (Look up auteur theory) Again we only saw not even a minute of footage and all of it was out of context. Never judge a movie by its trailer, especially its teaser trailer

 

2. There is nothing wrong with Micheal Bay the filmmaker.

 

You can judge Snyder by his other works including MoS, which looked like garbage and was. He is about as much of an auteur as Brett Ratner is.

None of the DC movies have been good nor memorable. If you think so, you're probably in the extreme minority.

 

Yeah, Michael Bay is a good filmmaker. Thats a first.

[Kyyle23]

1. That's kind of an ignorant comment but I will say that based on the 1 minute of footage that we were shown, that it more like a Zack Snyder film, he's embracing his auteur a little more here. (Look up auteur theory) Again we only saw not even a minute of footage and all of it was out of context. Never judge a movie by its trailer, especially its teaser trailer

 

2. There is nothing wrong with Micheal Bay the filmmaker.

 

Lmao, pot meet kettle. Bay and Snyder are garbage, all style no substance

[LDF]

 

i am a huge movie goer. i enjoy watching movies even some of the so called weak movies. now on the flip side, some of the great movies, i don't get into. saying that, all of the Zack Snyder films, i didn't like. i didn't get into it, the story line was, at least for me not strong. then again i wouldn't know what strong is.

 

now for Micheal Bay, most of his movies i enjoyed. i wouldn't know if any had substance, but it was a brain dead movie for entertainment value. his movies is right there for me with Michael Mann movies.

 

people will have opinions and i know my taste in movies is on a very broad spectrum.

 

here is a question, no one like the Transformer first movie??? why??

[caulfield12]

1. That's kind of an ignorant comment but I will say that based on the 1 minute of footage that we were shown, that it more like a Zack Snyder film, he's embracing his auteur a little more here. (Look up auteur theory) Again we only saw not even a minute of footage and all of it was out of context. Never judge a movie by its trailer, especially its teaser trailer

 

2. There is nothing wrong with Micheal Bay the filmmaker.

 

There is nothing wrong with Michael Bay, the profit center...but not to be confused with cinematic artist/auteur/groundbreaking or pretty much any complimentary phrase.

 

If you enjoy Bay so much, though...Furious 7 would be considered the greatest movie added to the cinematic canon, with Bad Boys 2 closely following it.

[LDF]

There is nothing wrong with Michael Bay, the profit center...but not to be confused with cinematic artist/auteur/groundbreaking or pretty much any complimentary phrase.

 

If you enjoy Bay so much, though...Furious 7 would be considered the greatest movie added to the cinematic canon, with Bad Boys 2 closely following it.

 

you know the discussion of movies earlier was very interesting and maybe i am not smart enuf to see movies as you guys do. both sides of this discussion i am talking about.

 

why can't movies be about enjoyment and remember everyone will have a different opinion on it.

[Boopa1219]

Lmao, pot meet kettle. Bay and Snyder are garbage, all style no substance

 

There is nothing wrong with Michael Bay, the profit center...but not to be confused with cinematic artist/auteur/groundbreaking or pretty much any complimentary phrase.

 

If you enjoy Bay so much, though...Furious 7 would be considered the greatest movie added to the cinematic canon, with Bad Boys 2 closely following it.

 

 

These two videos disprove that:

 

https://vimeo.com/109950825

 

You should look deeper into at before you write it off.

 

While he's not a big director to me personally, I would die to shoot like Michael Bay. His movies might not be Citizen Kane, but they are throughly entertaining. As a filmmaker from a technical standpoint, nobody does what Michael Bay does better than Michael Bay.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Joshua Strong

[Boopa1219]

You can judge Snyder by his other works including MoS, which looked like garbage and was. He is about as much of an auteur as Brett Ratner is.

None of the DC movies have been good nor memorable. If you think so, you're probably in the extreme minority.

 

Yeah, Michael Bay is a good filmmaker. Thats a first.

 

Thesis on Man of Steel https://vimeo.com/109950825

Michael Bay - What is Bayhem?:

 

And no DC movies had been good? I can name 5 ones that came out recently: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Watchmen, and Man of Steel (Watch the thesis). You're so right, everyone hated The Dark Knight Trilogy.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Joshua Strong

[Boopa1219]

i am a huge movie goer. i enjoy watching movies even some of the so called weak movies. now on the flip side, some of the great movies, i don't get into. saying that, all of the Zack Snyder films, i didn't like. i didn't get into it, the story line was, at least for me not strong. then again i wouldn't know what strong is.

 

now for Micheal Bay, most of his movies i enjoyed. i wouldn't know if any had substance, but it was a brain dead movie for entertainment value. his movies is right there for me with Michael Mann movies.

 

people will have opinions and i know my taste in movies is on a very broad spectrum.

 

here is a question, no one like the Transformer first movie??? why??

 

Michael Mann is a great filmmaker too in my opinion. I love that he doesn't use soundstages and shoots everything on location, when you watch a movie like Heat or Collateral, you can feel how visceral the action scenes are. Love the editing in his movies too.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Joshua Strong

[LDF]

Michael Mann is a great filmmaker too in my opinion. I love that he doesn't use soundstages and shoots everything on location, when you watch a movie like Heat or Collateral, you can feel how visceral the action scenes are. Love the editing in his movies too.

 

re the bolded, as i said before, i am really that smart as you guys are, esp in talking about movies as you were last night.

 

but i will truly recommend a movie called manhunter. it was the first Red Dragon and not with Anthony Hopkins. the main lead was a young Willam Peterson.

 

 

 

[Kyyle23]

These two videos disprove that:

 

https://vimeo.com/109950825

 

You should look deeper into at before you write it off.

 

While he's not a big director to me personally, I would die to shoot like Michael Bay. His movies might not be Citizen Kane, but they are throughly entertaining. As a filmmaker from a technical standpoint, nobody does what Michael Bay does better than Michael Bay.

 

Why do you keep saying "you should look deeper" "look into this thesis" and act like these directors are good at what they do? Just because someone wrote a thesis or broke down a movie doesnt make the movie good. Just because you think Snyder is an auteur doesnt make me think that his directing style is anything other that a dark lens and a lot of shaky camera for affect and long gloomy shots and booms.

 

I tried to like Man of Steel. The more i watch that movie the worse it gets(which is unfortunate because it is on cable a lot). Watchmen is terrible, he changed too many plots points and it was far too long and terribly acted.

 

Maybe you should stop reading thesis about movies and watch them.

 

[Brian]

Thesis on Man of Steel https://vimeo.com/109950825

Michael Bay - What is Bayhem?:

 

And no DC movies had been good? I can name 5 ones that came out recently: The Dark Knight Trilogy, Watchmen, and Man of Steel (Watch the thesis). You're so right, everyone hated The Dark Knight Trilogy.

 

You're the only one that would put Nolans trilogy into this DC universe.

 

As much as Snyder Fan maybe an accredited critic/theorist, I doubt his biased take would convince me.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Brian

[caulfield12]

Why do you keep saying "you should look deeper" "look into this thesis" and act like these directors are good at what they do? Just because someone wrote a thesis or broke down a movie doesnt make the movie good. Just because you think Snyder is an auteur doesnt make me think that his directing style is anything other that a dark lens and a lot of shaky camera for affect and long gloomy shots and booms.

 

I tried to like Man of Steel. The more i watch that movie the worse it gets(which is unfortunate because it is on cable a lot). Watchmen is terrible, he changed too many plots points and it was far too long and terribly acted.

 

Maybe you should stop reading thesis about movies and watch them.

 

 

Take the movie Drive for example....as an auteur movie that was overpraised for its style, minimalist dialogue and hip soundtrack. Better yet, look at Goslings even worse directorial debut. Auteur...maybe, but that doesnt make it not terrible regardless.

 

Sometimes you just need to tell a great story, like the Russian film Leviathan or a documentary like Searching for Sugarman. In the end, great stories and individual performances always trump CGI driven movies like Transformers (the first one at least had a decent albeit formulaic plot)...or Pans Labyrinth will always trump Pacific Rim.

[Brian]

Take the movie Drive for example....as an auteur movie that was overpraised for its style, minimalist dialogue and hip soundtrack. Better yet, look at Goslings even worse directorial debut. Auteur...maybe, but that doesnt make it not terrible regardless.

 

Sometimes you just need to tell a great story, like the Russian film Leviathan or a documentary like Searching for Sugarman. In the end, great stories and individual performances always trump CGI driven movies like Transformers (the first one at least had a decent albeit formulaic plot)...or Pans Labyrinth will always trump Pacific Rim.

 

I agree with all of this. Drive looked cool but as a movie and everything else, I was bored and saw very little good in it.

 

If Joshua enjoyed MoS, more power to him. Film is subjective. But to try and analyze that mess is a waste of time because it's nothing more than eye candy of a story we've seen 100 times.

 

 

[TaylorStSox]

i am a huge movie goer. i enjoy watching movies even some of the so called weak movies. now on the flip side, some of the great movies, i don't get into. saying that, all of the Zack Snyder films, i didn't like. i didn't get into it, the story line was, at least for me not strong. then again i wouldn't know what strong is.

 

now for Micheal Bay, most of his movies i enjoyed. i wouldn't know if any had substance, but it was a brain dead movie for entertainment value. his movies is right there for me with Michael Mann movies.

 

people will have opinions and i know my taste in movies is on a very broad spectrum.

 

here is a question, no one like the Transformer first movie??? why??

Michael Mann films are brain dead? Ok, I need to get out of this thread.

[LDF]

Michael Mann films are brain dead? Ok, I need to get out of this thread.

 

as someone said, films are subjective in the most part. i look at films differently than most, and maybe not as deep as others. if you needed to make a comment, then state it, don't go thru the big hoopla of your post. you wouldn't even needed to respond. it looked as you needed a stage to make your dramatic exit.

 

 

[Boopa1219]

Why do you keep saying "you should look deeper" "look into this thesis" and act like these directors are good at what they do? Just because someone wrote a thesis or broke down a movie doesnt make the movie good. Just because you think Snyder is an auteur doesnt make me think that his directing style is anything other that a dark lens and a lot of shaky camera for affect and long gloomy shots and booms.

 

I tried to like Man of Steel. The more i watch that movie the worse it gets(which is unfortunate because it is on cable a lot). Watchmen is terrible, he changed too many plots points and it was far too long and terribly acted.

 

Maybe you should stop reading thesis about movies and watch them.

 

First of all, I never said that Zack Snyder was an auteur level filmmaker, he's not Terrence Malick. I said that he was embracing his inner auteur as in 'auteur theory'. You probably don't know what that is, so here is the definition:

 

"Auteur Theory—as it was dubbed by the American film critic Andrew Sarris—was an outgrowth of the cinematic theories of André Bazin and Alexandre Astruc. A foundation stone of the French cinematic movement known as the nouvelle vague, or New Wave, the theory of director-as-author was principally advanced in Bazin’s periodical Cahiers du cinéma (founded in 1951). Two of its theoreticians—François Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard—later became major directors of the French New Wave. The auteur theory, which was derived largely from Astruc’s elucidation of the concept of caméra-stylo (“camera-pen”), holds that the director, who oversees all audio and visual elements of the motion picture, is more to be considered the “author” of the movie than is the writer of the screenplay. In other words, such fundamental visual elements as camera placement, blocking, lighting, and scene length, rather than plot line, convey the message of the film. Supporters of the auteur theory further contend that the most cinematically successful films will bear the unmistakable personal stamp of the director."

 

And they are good at they do. Someone said that Man of Steel was an empty movie, so I shared that link to thesis to show them otherwise. That movie is full of allegories and is wonderfully shot and it looks great. There's more to Zack Snyder movies you just have to look deeper into his movies and you'll find it. The same way people deep-read books and poems.

 

In regards to Watchmen, I wouldn't be so quick to say that he changed to many plot points. The film is almost a panel to panel adaptation of the comic. He did change some things, but he had to because it wouldn't have work in the context of a movie. Just because somethings works well in one medium (in this case a comic book) or dosen't mean that is going to work well in another. Alan More the creator of the Watchmen comic said, "There are things that we did with Watchmen that could only work in a comic, and were indeed designed to show off things that other media can't." While he had not seen the film, he did read the script and said that it is as close to humanly possible to the source material.

 

Again as I said before you may hate his movies but Michael Bay is one of the best technical directors in all of Hollywood. He's more influential than people give him credit for, directors such as Christopher Nolan and Refn are just a few to have said that Bay is a influence on them and how they shoot. Bay also shoots on 35mm and earns him a few extra points in my book. He also likes to keep CGI to a minimum and use practical effects as much as possible. Yes, he is behind the Transformer franchise, but with the exception of the robots, alot of the VFX are done in camera practically.

 

And I have probably seen more movie than you have. If you want to talk about movies from any era, and international films just message me anytime

Edited April 22, 2015 by Joshua Strong

[Kyyle23]

Oh, you have seen more movies than me. Man, i know i am wrong now. And ignorant

 

Look, you appreciate the medium. You obviously appreciate the filming much more than you do the films themselves, which is totally fine. But dont come in here and call me ignorant and show two fanboy youtube videos that you agree with and consider the matter disproven. What i said was not wrong about Snyder(or bay for that matter). These guys make aesthetically pleasing movies and almost completely forgo any actual coherent script in order to do so. You know what other movies were Jesus allegories? The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions, and both of those were also pretty garbage. And they both made a lot of money and have allowed the Wachowskis to continue to rip off big studios and make more terrible movies.

 

You can look back in the last 7 years of film threads and see that I actually was behind the Transformers movies for a while. But then it went beyond "well this is a kids cartoon and kind of ridiculous at that" and fell squarely into "Michael Bay just filmed an orgasm of explosions and inserted CGI robots and a Victorias Secret Model"

 

I understand that Bay has been pretty good with creating camera angles that are now popular. I can appreciate that. I also took a class that went over movies like that, i can appreciate Raising Arizona for creating multiple camera shots and angles that were never used prior. But Michael Bay has yet to make a movie as good as Raising Arizona

[Brian]

Oh, you have seen more movies than me. Man, i know i am wrong now. And ignorant

 

Ha. I did papers in college, breaking down scenes from Raging Bull, Apocalypse Now, and even American Psycho. I would never think any film student would take MoS and break it down like that and be accurate.

[LDF]

Ha. I did papers in college, breaking down scenes from Raging Bull, Apocalypse Now, and even American Psycho. I would never think any film student would take MoS and break it down like that and be accurate.

 

i really like movies and going to the theater to see them.

 

but what you did, i know i am OCD, but that is just crazy. even for me.

 

i got to give you and many credit for that. whew. ...

[fathom]

Ha. I did papers in college, breaking down scenes from Raging Bull, Apocalypse Now, and even American Psycho. I would never think any film student would take MoS and break it down like that and be accurate.

 

I wrote a paper in college based off of Amy Poehler's character in Deuce Bigalow! Good times quoting her character word for word.

Edited April 22, 2015 by fathom

[Brian]

i really like movies and going to the theater to see them.

 

but what you did, i know i am OCD, but that is just crazy. even for me.

 

i got to give you and many credit for that. whew. ...

 

Studying film in college ruined my viewing experiences for awhile but I got over it and can enjoy them for both art and entertainment. It's pretty easy to separate now.

[Brian]

I wrote a paper in college based off of Amy Poehler's character in Deuce Bigalow! Good times quoting her character word for word.

 

Send it to me. Sounds interesting.

[fathom]

Send it to me. Sounds interesting.

 

Ha, that was far too long ago to still have around. My wife wanted me to take a class with her during our senior year, so I took a course that focused on movies highlighting individuals with disabilities.