|
|
Post by Prometheus59650 on Jul 24, 2023 23:55:34 GMT
Had a big block of time so did Barbenheimer today.
Oppenheimer? Liked it, but wasn't blown away by it (no pun intended) Like a lot of Nolan's films, it seems quite firmly up its own ass. Sometimes I can get beyond that, but the sum of its parts wasn't quite enough that I could do that here.
RDJ is great and I say this even knowing that a lot of his wonderful work is in the back of the film, but half an hour of that film could have been chopped off for the better.
Barbie? Warm, surprisingly deep, some truly heartfelt bits and I am thoroughly in the "Give Gosling an Oscar" camp.
He's just 200% all in on Ken. Cheesy when meant to be, lonely and ignored when meant to be, and vapid himbo when meant to be, all without sacrificing the feeling that this guy has an actual personality. In his own way, he just wants to count and probably wants it more than even Barbie does.
Helen Mirren as narrator was (chef's kiss)
Didn't expect to say it, but Barbie was unquestionably the superior film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Garak Nephew on Jul 29, 2023 17:11:54 GMT
I watched Oppenheimer. I really like it. But it is also true that I am firmly on Nolan camp since the low-budget early days of "Following". I think that most of his movies are great, with the exceptions of "Interstellar" and the almost unwatchable "Tenet"; he is a gifted film maker with a peculiar and unique vision. He make movies of ideas but he likes to mess with your head with narrative structures and textures.
Mini SPOILERS
That said, I agree that the movie is a little too long and in some instances Nolan can't hold himself back with an "artsy" turn just for the sake of it and that, probably, the whole Strauss plotline is redundant and kind of distract your focus from more meaty issues. AND YET is on that line where you find the best supporting acting that I have seen in a long time. Downey is extraordinary as Strauss, biter and yet methodical; Strauss is portrayed as a little man that somehow manage to inflict a lot pain with the string of power that was granted to him; I got Walter White vibes from Downey performance but less malevolent, it is a character study, nuanced and measured. The acting direction is superb, the constant close-ups show that the story is carried by the characters; the movie belong to Murphy and Downey.
SPOILERS SPOILERS
For those of you who have watched the movie, do you think the ending suggest time travel?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus59650 on Jul 29, 2023 18:23:04 GMT
I watched Oppenheimer. I really like it. But it is also true that I am firmly on Nolan camp since the low-budget early days of "Following". I think that most of his movies are great, with the exceptions of "Interstellar" and the almost unwatchable "Tenet"; he is a gifted film maker with a peculiar and unique vision. He make movies of ideas but he likes to mess with your head with narrative structures and textures.
Mini SPOILERS
That said, I agree that the movie is a little too long and in some instances Nolan can't hold himself back with an "artsy" turn just for the sake of it and that, probably, the whole Strauss plotline is redundant and kind of distract your focus from more meaty issues. AND YET is on that line where you find the best supporting acting that I have seen in a long time. Downey is extraordinary as Strauss, biter and yet methodical; Strauss is portrayed as a little man that somehow manage to inflict a lot pain with the string of power that was granted to him; I got Walter White vibes from Downey performance but less malevolent, it is a character study, nuanced and measured. The acting direction is superb, the constant close-ups show that the story is carried by the characters; the movie belong to Murphy and Downey. SPOILERS SPOILERS For those of you who have watched the movie, do you think the ending suggest time travel?
Honestly, Tenet is unbearable and that's not counting the whole swaths of the third act that are almost inaudible. |
|
|
|
Post by Garak Nephew on Sept 3, 2023 3:21:16 GMT
I finally watched "Barbie" and I was stunned by how good this movie is. The movie keep flipping the script at every turn. It is so dense with meaning. My wife and I left the theater on a heated, invigorating discussion about the layers on this little jewel of a film. They check all the boxes for stereotypes and bimbo tropes but the angle and the comments flip them to make you see something else behind. It is a deep, feminist movie about the power of images and media on how visions of gender are constructed and what remains human at the core of these visions. Great stuff!
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus59650 on Sept 3, 2023 3:52:47 GMT
I finally watched "Barbie" and I was stunned by how good this movie is. The movie keep flipping the script at every turn. It is so dense with meaning. My wife and I left the theater on a heated, invigorating discussion about the layers on this little jewel of a film. They check all the boxes for stereotypes and bimbo tropes but the angle and the comments flip them to make you see something else behind. It is a deep, feminist movie about the power of images and media on how visions of gender are constructed and what remains human at the core of these visions. Great stuff! Minor disappointment with the film with a moment near the end that passes unaddressed... Dense with feminist ideas and flipping the script on and commenting on gender roles, but... S P O I L E R S At the end, Ken is having his distraught fit and Barbie eventually says to him, "Not every night had to be Barbie night?" Why not? It's BARBIELAND. It feels for all the world like she's just trying to placate him so he doesn't have a fit and cause more damage as so very many abused women in this world have to do. It feels odd to have this moment happen without further commentary. But...overall? great film. |
|
|
|
Post by Garak Nephew on Sept 5, 2023 21:41:58 GMT
Yes. It is an odd scene. Kind of condescending, condescending to Ken -yet he kind of had it coming-, but condescending to us since we kind of expected that Barbie was back in her game and taking manipulative bullshit from Ken was out of the question... Nevertheless, I think I see some rationale to it. Hear me out. Barbieland is contaminated. Since Barbie (and Ken) crossed the threshold between worlds, they brought (specially Barbie) with them a sort of stain from the human world. Barbieland can no longer be the same, it can no longer be... what?... pure? It is tainted, and yet it remains Barbieland. "New" Barbie knows that males are weak and must be guided so she choose to play an angle of her role that give Ken the semblance of an agency. Hence, New Barbieland remains the land of Barbie but, occasionally, Kens might congregate and performs the male rituals they deem adequate. It is complex because we must always keep in mind that all this game happens in the realms of stereotypes, (or, should I say, late stage capitalist archetypes), so this scene, in stereotypes sense, emphasizes Barbie's supremacy because she is giving Ken the authority to search, to be him. So, yes, she is placating him but only because part of the human virus she brought with her to Barbieland granted her a new vital information: there is a violence hidden on the human condition, a violence that must be dealt with performance. So, she concedes, "not every night had to be Barbie night", the world is vast, we can play together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Garak Nephew on Sept 5, 2023 21:54:15 GMT
On the subject of what movie is better, I think it is an unfair question because they are both great and very, very different. Yet, Barbie stays more focused and Oppenheimer give you more pathos, more sense of dread. The character studies on O are more expansive while B ask from you to peel away the layers of society. At times O appears reiterative and B sharp and provocative. I think Barbie have a more staying power.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sehlat Vie on Jan 13, 2024 5:50:30 GMT
I think I avoided this thread, because I hadn't seen "Oppenheimer" until this week; now that I have, I must say that Prometheus nailed it in his review.
|
|
I am so sorry...