I think Pixar was a studio created by a pool of talented individuals with specific vision that serendipitously really worked. But over time, those staff grow old, retire and move on, or maybe just movies move on where they don't. New talent comes in and is less likely to have that factor X, and over time regression to the mean is always likely. Disney may as well accept this almost inevitable decline and switch to pumping out films to extract the remaining brand value.
Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Th3Ch33s3Cak3
- Start date
Absent
And twice is the only way to live.
- Jan 25, 2023
- 1,594
- 1,552
- 118
- Country
- Switzerland
- Gender
- The boring one
Re-watched (most of) starship troopers on tv. An amusing film. Can't help being, at times, as boring and dragging as the genre it satirizes. Maybe it's the rewatch effect, but, in contrast, I had enjoyed twin peak's cheesy soap opera aspect much more the second time. Starship troopers is more of an interesting objet than a real classic to rewatch. Like, I'm happy it exists, in its corner, with its weird and cool disproportion of production value. Doesn't require much interaction.
That being said, I was amazed by how prescient it is. Its plot is like a parody of 9/11 america, four or five years before it. That was eerie. I'm surprised it struck me only now. Maybe I had seen it before 2001 and had forgotten too much about it by then ?
That being said, I was amazed by how prescient it is. Its plot is like a parody of 9/11 america, four or five years before it. That was eerie. I'm surprised it struck me only now. Maybe I had seen it before 2001 and had forgotten too much about it by then ?
Everything Everywhere All At Once
The Little Mermaid (5/10)
I really didn't like this film. You'll get a sense of how much I didn't like it at the end via its DAC ranking, but be that as it may, I really didn't like it.
I might as well specify that this is the first time I've seen the film, despite having watched the cartoon back in the day (which, incidentally, I consider superior to the film it spun off from), and despite being familiar with the story. But having actually watched it? Yeesh.
Now to get a sense as to why, I'm going to go point by point. So on that note:
-I love how the first song is meant to be Sebastian's crowning glory, but in reality it's the weakest song in the film. It's exposition that isn't really needed, because everything we need to know about Ariel is shown minutes later. It's no "Look There She Goes," for instance. This actually reflects a problem with the film in general - some of the songs are entertaining, memorable even, but do little to progress plot and/or character, which is ideally what songs in a musical should do. "Under the Sea," for instance, is fine on its own, but you could remove it from the film and lose nothing in terms of story/character.
-I'll say it now, Flounder's barely a character in this film. You could remove Flounder from the film entirely, and nothing would change. Sebastian and Scuttle? Sure, they have roles to play in the story, but what's Flounder's role, exactly? At best, someone for Ariel to bounce off on during the sequence of exploring the shipwreck, but that's really it. Flounder just becomes dead weight through the entire film. And while that's not inherently bad (not every character needs to have a weighty role), for a character that's usually displayed prominently in Disney's Little Mermaid IP, it's striking just how much of a second flipper the dumb fish is.
-So Ariel travels to the surface and sees fireworks being set off on a boat (um, is that safe? Fireworks, wood, gunpowder...just saying...). Sees this guy for the first time, and falls head over heels, um, flipper. I'll give Eric some credit, he's at least established to be holding off for the right girl, and while bland, not offensively so. Grimby at least gets a chuckle or two. But the ship gets sunk by a storm (there's very few crew in the lifeboat - either this is a skeleton crew, or dozens of crewmen just burnt to death), and Ariel saves Eric's life, singing to him on the shore before leaving. That, as it turns out, is all Ariel needs to decide that she's found true wuv.
To be clear, this isn't bad writing per se, since it's established that Ariel is only 16. What IS bad writing is that the film actually runs with this - turns out that transforming into a human and leaving your family and world behind to seek someone who've you never actually talked to. This gets even worse with Ursula, as Ariel is so besotted, she's willing to sign a contract with someone she, and everyone else knows is evil (more on that later), to have three days to get Eric to fall in love with her, or else, she'll turn into a poppyp creature. I...what? You know how in Frozen Elsa berates Anna for wanting to marry Hans, a man she's onyl just met? Well, this is worse, because at least Anna and Hans had a conversation/song sequence before coming to that conclusion. Ariel doesn't even get that before risking her entire life to gamble on 'true wuv.'
-So, Ursula. This is a case where it feels like there's stuff missing that should have been present. There's vague reference (I think) to her once ruling the unnamed water kingdom (Atlantica? Or is that just in the cartoon) before apparently being deposed by King Triton, but it's never really explored. Similarly, Triton's antipathy towards humans is never really explored either bar vague references to them eating fish. I kept expecting there to be some revealed reason why he hates humans so much, but nup, he just hates humans. And while you might be saying "it's just a children's cartoon," I'd point you in the direction of Aladdin and Lion King, with Jaffar/Scar having more concrete reasons for rulership, and a strong sense of antipathy towards the sultan/Mufasa as a result. Here? Ursula is evil, Triton hates humans, don't ask any questions.
-So Ariel gets to the surface, and what plays out actually isn't too bad. We get needless slapstick with Sebastian in the kitchen, but aside from that, the sequence of events isn't too bad. Eric wants to find the girl that sung to him (despite Grimsby suggesting it was just a dream), so while he's curious about Ariel, she can't be the girl that sung since Ursula took her voice (people have suggested that Ariel write things down for him - I'd say that there's no reason to assume their writing systems are identical, but then, she can apparently understand the language, so...). Anyway, Ariel's clearly fascinated by the surface world, and while three days is too short a time for 'true wuv' to set in, but there's a sense of chemistry...sort of...maybe...enough for Ursula's servants to stop them kissing at the last moment.
-So Ursula steps in, with Ariel's voice, and casts a spell over Eric to make him 'wuv' her. Why she didn't do this from the start is something I'll leave to you. Again, it feels like there's stuff missing, because not once do Ariel and Ursula interact. She just sees Eric with this other girl and just gives up, there's no attempt made by her to win his affections at this point. Sure, it would be cliche, but it would at least be something.
-So Ursula is revealed and Ariel gets her voice back, but too late, time's up, Ariel belongs to Ursula, Triton trades his trident for her freedom, Ursula grows big, Eric kills her, yawn.
-So, Triton turns Ariel into a human (somehow), convinced that his 16 year old daughter really is in love with a man who she's known for only just a few days. Get married, and I guess Ariel isn't completely separated from her old world because mermaids/men turn up at the wedding, and God, I just don't care anymore. Apparently the moral of the story is that sixteen year old girls can make shady back-alley deals and get hitched with the 1%, provided that daddy only finds out after the fact.
So, yeah, I didn't think much of this movie. And look, maybe I'm being too harsh on it, but this is the film that people say kickstarted the Disney Renaissance. A film people call as "classic.' To be frank, I just can't see why. The songs are okay, but don't really work as a musical should. Ariel starts off as being naive, selfish, and short-sighted, and by the end, she's rewarded for her ignorance. All the other characters are bland at best, or in the case of Ursula, somewhat entertaining, but muddied by simple motives and vague backstory. So when I think of the upcoming live-action remake and all the nonsense fighting over it, I'm left to ask what in the original film made people so attached to it in the first place. Heck, if you DO remake it, make it truer to the original story. Y'know, where the titular mermaid dies in the end. That'll scare the kiddies.
DAC ranking is below:
I really didn't like this film. You'll get a sense of how much I didn't like it at the end via its DAC ranking, but be that as it may, I really didn't like it.
I might as well specify that this is the first time I've seen the film, despite having watched the cartoon back in the day (which, incidentally, I consider superior to the film it spun off from), and despite being familiar with the story. But having actually watched it? Yeesh.
Now to get a sense as to why, I'm going to go point by point. So on that note:
-I love how the first song is meant to be Sebastian's crowning glory, but in reality it's the weakest song in the film. It's exposition that isn't really needed, because everything we need to know about Ariel is shown minutes later. It's no "Look There She Goes," for instance. This actually reflects a problem with the film in general - some of the songs are entertaining, memorable even, but do little to progress plot and/or character, which is ideally what songs in a musical should do. "Under the Sea," for instance, is fine on its own, but you could remove it from the film and lose nothing in terms of story/character.
-I'll say it now, Flounder's barely a character in this film. You could remove Flounder from the film entirely, and nothing would change. Sebastian and Scuttle? Sure, they have roles to play in the story, but what's Flounder's role, exactly? At best, someone for Ariel to bounce off on during the sequence of exploring the shipwreck, but that's really it. Flounder just becomes dead weight through the entire film. And while that's not inherently bad (not every character needs to have a weighty role), for a character that's usually displayed prominently in Disney's Little Mermaid IP, it's striking just how much of a second flipper the dumb fish is.
-So Ariel travels to the surface and sees fireworks being set off on a boat (um, is that safe? Fireworks, wood, gunpowder...just saying...). Sees this guy for the first time, and falls head over heels, um, flipper. I'll give Eric some credit, he's at least established to be holding off for the right girl, and while bland, not offensively so. Grimby at least gets a chuckle or two. But the ship gets sunk by a storm (there's very few crew in the lifeboat - either this is a skeleton crew, or dozens of crewmen just burnt to death), and Ariel saves Eric's life, singing to him on the shore before leaving. That, as it turns out, is all Ariel needs to decide that she's found true wuv.
To be clear, this isn't bad writing per se, since it's established that Ariel is only 16. What IS bad writing is that the film actually runs with this - turns out that transforming into a human and leaving your family and world behind to seek someone who've you never actually talked to. This gets even worse with Ursula, as Ariel is so besotted, she's willing to sign a contract with someone she, and everyone else knows is evil (more on that later), to have three days to get Eric to fall in love with her, or else, she'll turn into a poppyp creature. I...what? You know how in Frozen Elsa berates Anna for wanting to marry Hans, a man she's onyl just met? Well, this is worse, because at least Anna and Hans had a conversation/song sequence before coming to that conclusion. Ariel doesn't even get that before risking her entire life to gamble on 'true wuv.'
-So, Ursula. This is a case where it feels like there's stuff missing that should have been present. There's vague reference (I think) to her once ruling the unnamed water kingdom (Atlantica? Or is that just in the cartoon) before apparently being deposed by King Triton, but it's never really explored. Similarly, Triton's antipathy towards humans is never really explored either bar vague references to them eating fish. I kept expecting there to be some revealed reason why he hates humans so much, but nup, he just hates humans. And while you might be saying "it's just a children's cartoon," I'd point you in the direction of Aladdin and Lion King, with Jaffar/Scar having more concrete reasons for rulership, and a strong sense of antipathy towards the sultan/Mufasa as a result. Here? Ursula is evil, Triton hates humans, don't ask any questions.
-So Ariel gets to the surface, and what plays out actually isn't too bad. We get needless slapstick with Sebastian in the kitchen, but aside from that, the sequence of events isn't too bad. Eric wants to find the girl that sung to him (despite Grimsby suggesting it was just a dream), so while he's curious about Ariel, she can't be the girl that sung since Ursula took her voice (people have suggested that Ariel write things down for him - I'd say that there's no reason to assume their writing systems are identical, but then, she can apparently understand the language, so...). Anyway, Ariel's clearly fascinated by the surface world, and while three days is too short a time for 'true wuv' to set in, but there's a sense of chemistry...sort of...maybe...enough for Ursula's servants to stop them kissing at the last moment.
-So Ursula steps in, with Ariel's voice, and casts a spell over Eric to make him 'wuv' her. Why she didn't do this from the start is something I'll leave to you. Again, it feels like there's stuff missing, because not once do Ariel and Ursula interact. She just sees Eric with this other girl and just gives up, there's no attempt made by her to win his affections at this point. Sure, it would be cliche, but it would at least be something.
-So Ursula is revealed and Ariel gets her voice back, but too late, time's up, Ariel belongs to Ursula, Triton trades his trident for her freedom, Ursula grows big, Eric kills her, yawn.
-So, Triton turns Ariel into a human (somehow), convinced that his 16 year old daughter really is in love with a man who she's known for only just a few days. Get married, and I guess Ariel isn't completely separated from her old world because mermaids/men turn up at the wedding, and God, I just don't care anymore. Apparently the moral of the story is that sixteen year old girls can make shady back-alley deals and get hitched with the 1%, provided that daddy only finds out after the fact.
So, yeah, I didn't think much of this movie. And look, maybe I'm being too harsh on it, but this is the film that people say kickstarted the Disney Renaissance. A film people call as "classic.' To be frank, I just can't see why. The songs are okay, but don't really work as a musical should. Ariel starts off as being naive, selfish, and short-sighted, and by the end, she's rewarded for her ignorance. All the other characters are bland at best, or in the case of Ursula, somewhat entertaining, but muddied by simple motives and vague backstory. So when I think of the upcoming live-action remake and all the nonsense fighting over it, I'm left to ask what in the original film made people so attached to it in the first place. Heck, if you DO remake it, make it truer to the original story. Y'know, where the titular mermaid dies in the end. That'll scare the kiddies.
DAC ranking is below:
32) The Black Cauldron
31) Dinosaur
30) Dumbo
29) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
28) Oliver & Company
27) The Little Mermaid
26) The Sword in the Stone
25) Pocahontas
24) Peter Pan
23) Bambi
22) Basil, the Great Mouse Detective
21) The Aristocats
20) Frozen II
19) Bolt
18) Tarzan
17) Wreck-it Ralph: Ralph Breaks the Internet
16) Fantasia 2000
15) 101 Dalmations
14) The Jungle Book
13) Alice in Wonderland
12) Hercules
11) The Emperor’s New Groove
10) The Hunchback of Notre Dame
9) Fantasia
8) Moana
7) Big Hero 6
6) Beauty and the Beast
5) Treasure Planet
4) Frozen
3) Aladdin
2) The Lion King
1) Zootopia
31) Dinosaur
30) Dumbo
29) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
28) Oliver & Company
27) The Little Mermaid
26) The Sword in the Stone
25) Pocahontas
24) Peter Pan
23) Bambi
22) Basil, the Great Mouse Detective
21) The Aristocats
20) Frozen II
19) Bolt
18) Tarzan
17) Wreck-it Ralph: Ralph Breaks the Internet
16) Fantasia 2000
15) 101 Dalmations
14) The Jungle Book
13) Alice in Wonderland
12) Hercules
11) The Emperor’s New Groove
10) The Hunchback of Notre Dame
9) Fantasia
8) Moana
7) Big Hero 6
6) Beauty and the Beast
5) Treasure Planet
4) Frozen
3) Aladdin
2) The Lion King
1) Zootopia
I mean, I sorta got it, but also Swiss Army Man was better, and weirder, and cooler. Everything Everywhere All At Once has a "cleaner" feel-good aspect to it, I guess.
The only good things about Little Mermaid are Sebastian, Flounder, "Poor, Unfortunate, Soul", and an awesome villain. Otherwise, watching this movie is having a pine cone shoved up my ass.
Not seen it this century, I think, but I remember not liking it when I did see it. Though maybe that was because it was cool and mainstream and I was an insufferable teen back then.
Which of course is sort of the point/joke behind that scene in Frozen. Disney - and many other story tellers to be fair - have been coasting on that Love at First Sight thing for years.
Of course, Ariel doesn't sign Ursula's (dodgy as hell) contract with a calm and cool head. She does just after her father has destroyed thousands of her personal belongings in a deranged loss of temper. Even if you don't want to read it sub textually as him beating the shit out of her, which its seems quite a few people do, she's highly emotionally vulnerable because she's angry. Most adults will make stupid decisions when they're angry. Sixteen year olds angry at their parents? Pretty sure that's the origin story of like 90% of tragedies. I mean she was concocting a plan to introduce herself before Sebastian's big musical number so even if she was pining after him the girls in my year at school did for Leonardo DiCaprio, Ursula wasn't even on her radar.
Kiss the Girl is an all time favorite cartoon song ever. I hope it doesn't get ruined in the "live, totally actually mostly CGI" remake.
Swiss Army Man could never get enough love as far as I'm concerned. A fantastic, wild ride. Better, IMHO, than "Being John Malkovich".
1917 - (Prime, purchase)
Been very late to this one, mostly cause I kept thinking this was Dunkirk and only remembering how each time I tried to watch that I lost interest like 5 minutes in for whatever reason. However this is not Dunkirk, it utilises the "one shot take" look throughout the whole film to impressive effect, aside from the odd obvious meddling with unconvincing CGI. Its a style that when done well it will grab you by the shoulders and not let go. Is a simple journey narrative too, almost like a WW1 themed rollercoaster, of one nervous boy's journey from one muddy field to some other distant muddy field. There's also some surprising audio-visual moments thrown in that really gives this film a classier feel than most war movies. Am not much one for war movies, but am glad to have chased this one down at last, great work!
Been very late to this one, mostly cause I kept thinking this was Dunkirk and only remembering how each time I tried to watch that I lost interest like 5 minutes in for whatever reason. However this is not Dunkirk, it utilises the "one shot take" look throughout the whole film to impressive effect, aside from the odd obvious meddling with unconvincing CGI. Its a style that when done well it will grab you by the shoulders and not let go. Is a simple journey narrative too, almost like a WW1 themed rollercoaster, of one nervous boy's journey from one muddy field to some other distant muddy field. There's also some surprising audio-visual moments thrown in that really gives this film a classier feel than most war movies. Am not much one for war movies, but am glad to have chased this one down at last, great work!
The same person did another film called The Lobster which has an equally dry, muted style of humour (and Colin Farrell cause why not). Though perhaps more heavily leaning on the humour side, if the difference can be observed to the initiated. Worth a check if not seen already.
Last edited:
Knock at the Cabin (2023)
This is kind of difficulty to review.
I don't think it's much of a spoiler, it may even be the trailers, but the premise is that Two dads and their daughter are enjoying a holiday at their cabin when 4 strange individuals take them hostage. The crux is that these individuals have no intention of hurting them, but instead they demand a sacrifice stating if one isn't given the world will end. The next 120 of the run time is spent with the situation rapidly escalating as the troop attempt to obtain the sacrifice willingly.
The movie is very well done. I say this specifically in reference to OLD which was just awful. Awful storytelling, awful dialog, awful acting. This film seems almost like it was done by an entirely different crew. the Cinematography is great. The dialog is very human and Dave Bautista gives an outstanding performance. We're the other acting flawed he carries the entire movie on his back. That said all the acting is pretty good excepting Rupert Grint. Nothing against the actor, but the made him a blue collar american oilhand as his character and his accent is hilarious as to almost pull you out of the film. Its like that Key & peel british accent sketch.
This film does a similar deal that MNS has done in the past, using flashbacks to develop the protagonists character. This largely done with flashbacks to the trials and tribulations the couple has gone through dealing with Homophobia and the joy of adopting their daughter. It's done exceedingly well and its a bit of a tear jerker. A lot of this plays into questioning whether the antagonists are targeting them and whether or not the world would even deserve their sacrifice.
In a lot of other movies this could be very drab, tired and boring, but smartly they do not sit around philosophizing and debating. The movie moves forward like a freight train and there's a running clock.
But is the movie good? Does it succeed? That's where this one gets kind of tricky. In this particular instance I was thankfully in a "cat watching TV" mode where I didn't go in with any expectations or pretense. I wasn't checking my phone. Just ready to absorb the events. I was thoroughly entertained. I'm gonna lick the edge of spoilers here though and say this movie "doesn't" have the classic MNS twist. I think the twist sort of comes in the second or third act so the film is less about that and more about stringing the audience along to see how it ends. That might positively or negatively affect each persons experience. If you were here for popcorn big dumb MKS "what a twist" silliness it's just not here this time.
For me it was around a 7/10. It was a cool watch. It didn't change my mind one way or another about MNS because it was largely atypical of his films. I think my reason for not giving it a better or worse score is kinda personal. I think it deserved an entertaining story and great acting, but I didn't find the end satisfying. Maybe I did want a big twist..idk. I'd still recommend it to anyone just enjoys good acting and moral dilemma thrillers.
This is kind of difficulty to review.
I don't think it's much of a spoiler, it may even be the trailers, but the premise is that Two dads and their daughter are enjoying a holiday at their cabin when 4 strange individuals take them hostage. The crux is that these individuals have no intention of hurting them, but instead they demand a sacrifice stating if one isn't given the world will end. The next 120 of the run time is spent with the situation rapidly escalating as the troop attempt to obtain the sacrifice willingly.
The movie is very well done. I say this specifically in reference to OLD which was just awful. Awful storytelling, awful dialog, awful acting. This film seems almost like it was done by an entirely different crew. the Cinematography is great. The dialog is very human and Dave Bautista gives an outstanding performance. We're the other acting flawed he carries the entire movie on his back. That said all the acting is pretty good excepting Rupert Grint. Nothing against the actor, but the made him a blue collar american oilhand as his character and his accent is hilarious as to almost pull you out of the film. Its like that Key & peel british accent sketch.
This film does a similar deal that MNS has done in the past, using flashbacks to develop the protagonists character. This largely done with flashbacks to the trials and tribulations the couple has gone through dealing with Homophobia and the joy of adopting their daughter. It's done exceedingly well and its a bit of a tear jerker. A lot of this plays into questioning whether the antagonists are targeting them and whether or not the world would even deserve their sacrifice.
In a lot of other movies this could be very drab, tired and boring, but smartly they do not sit around philosophizing and debating. The movie moves forward like a freight train and there's a running clock.
But is the movie good? Does it succeed? That's where this one gets kind of tricky. In this particular instance I was thankfully in a "cat watching TV" mode where I didn't go in with any expectations or pretense. I wasn't checking my phone. Just ready to absorb the events. I was thoroughly entertained. I'm gonna lick the edge of spoilers here though and say this movie "doesn't" have the classic MNS twist. I think the twist sort of comes in the second or third act so the film is less about that and more about stringing the audience along to see how it ends. That might positively or negatively affect each persons experience. If you were here for popcorn big dumb MKS "what a twist" silliness it's just not here this time.
For me it was around a 7/10. It was a cool watch. It didn't change my mind one way or another about MNS because it was largely atypical of his films. I think my reason for not giving it a better or worse score is kinda personal. I think it deserved an entertaining story and great acting, but I didn't find the end satisfying. Maybe I did want a big twist..idk. I'd still recommend it to anyone just enjoys good acting and moral dilemma thrillers.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 7,919
- 2,281
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
I finally managed to finish the last hour of Wakanda Forever.
Was not impressed.
Really hated the design of the new black panther costume, the flying battle suit looked like a low-rent Samus redesign (or if Mega-man had gotten a gritty American reboot in 2006). The entire battle between Shuri and Namor is boring as hell. Why the hell are Martin Freeman and Julia Louis-Dreyfus even in this movie?
Winston Duke continues to be awesome as M'Baku, and is criminally underused.
Was not impressed.
Really hated the design of the new black panther costume, the flying battle suit looked like a low-rent Samus redesign (or if Mega-man had gotten a gritty American reboot in 2006). The entire battle between Shuri and Namor is boring as hell. Why the hell are Martin Freeman and Julia Louis-Dreyfus even in this movie?
Winston Duke continues to be awesome as M'Baku, and is criminally underused.
Hopefully M'Baku being the new king of Wakanda will pay off later. I completely agree that Martin Freeman and Julia Louis-Dreyfus were basically pointless. All they did was confirm that Countess Valentina Allegro de Fontaine is, in fact, a bad guy, not merely morally grey.
All true, but part of my gripe is that this is never really acknowledged. As an emotional 16 year old, Ariel does something incredibly stupid that, even if it works out, means that she can never return to her world or her family. She does this, she never acknowledges the stupidity of her actions, and she's rewarded for her actions in the end. I don't really see evidence by the end that Ariel's matured as a person.
Also, this isn't really the film's fault, but if you factor in the cartoon, it seems like a step back, since Ariel was able to admit when her father was right (e.g. the Stormy episode), and could come to terms with not being able to get what she wanted (e.g. the wish starfish episode). Heck, I'd even say that ArielxUrchin is a better ship since they, y'know, talk before there's any conception of, um, y'know...
Not an unfair point but it’s still worth remembering Ariel’s original plan was simply to go and say hello; her grand design was to introduce herself. So it’s highly possible that the problem would have solved itself when Eric freaks out at the talking fish lady.
With all the streaming content I have, I very, very rarely buy any individual movie anymore. I bought this one on VUDU. I think it is spectacular. Not based on a specific true story but gleaned from stories the writer's grandfather told him. In a lesser work, the main character would have been a square jawed superman. Instead, this is a normal guy. Interesting that you have two Game of Thrones alumni in it. Due to where it was filmed? Great movie.
M3GAN - Saw the uncensored version on Peacock. Not a bad movie, and was about what I expected. I already know a sequel has been green lit, because of its success and Blum House .I have no idea how they're gonna make that work. The movie should have been a one-off. The title character is hilarious when going to the bitchy dark side, and great effects for a low budget sci-fi horror film.
Before Sunrise, 8/10
The first of Richard Linklater's Before trilogy, it follows an unlikely pair (played by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy) who meet on a train and decide to spend a single night in Vienna. That's basically it, because there's essentially no plot, you're basically just observing these two go on a very long date. I can't really find much fault with this movie: it's really well written, well acted, very sweet and romantic without feeling sappy, touching, funny and very grounded and relatable. So whatever criteria for my score are entirely down to how it affected me personally. And to be honest, I found it a bit exhausting. It's a movie that's essentially all dialogue, and not fluffy dialogue either: there's long screeds about relationships, dynamics between the sexes, identity, finding your place in the world and so on. And it just feels heavy despite the fairly lean runtime of 100 minutes. I feel like this would have been more digestible for me in 2 or 3 sittings, because you're not really losing anything by chopping it up. I also found it a bit hard to watch in places due to personal experiences, but that's not a knock on the film.
The first of Richard Linklater's Before trilogy, it follows an unlikely pair (played by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy) who meet on a train and decide to spend a single night in Vienna. That's basically it, because there's essentially no plot, you're basically just observing these two go on a very long date. I can't really find much fault with this movie: it's really well written, well acted, very sweet and romantic without feeling sappy, touching, funny and very grounded and relatable. So whatever criteria for my score are entirely down to how it affected me personally. And to be honest, I found it a bit exhausting. It's a movie that's essentially all dialogue, and not fluffy dialogue either: there's long screeds about relationships, dynamics between the sexes, identity, finding your place in the world and so on. And it just feels heavy despite the fairly lean runtime of 100 minutes. I feel like this would have been more digestible for me in 2 or 3 sittings, because you're not really losing anything by chopping it up. I also found it a bit hard to watch in places due to personal experiences, but that's not a knock on the film.
My DAC when it comes to Disney animated movies is:
Fantasia > Fantasia 2000 > Hunchback of Notre Dame > Everything else (Though there are things I like watching in "Everything else" like A Goofy Movie)
Speaking of which, where' s A Goofy Movie in your list?
Last edited:
Absent
And twice is the only way to live.
- Jan 25, 2023
- 1,594
- 1,552
- 118
- Country
- Switzerland
- Gender
- The boring one
If you're not already familiar with them, you should try to find movies scripted by Jean-Pierre Bacri and Agnès Jaoui.