2019 Movie Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by DaybreakerMC, Aug 26, 2019.

?

How many 2019 releases have you seen?

1-5 6 vote(s) 54.5%
6-10 1 vote(s) 9.1%
11-25 3 vote(s) 27.3%
25-49 0 vote(s) 0.0%
50+ 1 vote(s) 9.1%
  1. I think the redesign looks very nice. I'm also not really a big fan of Sonic (have nothing against it, just have no previous admiration for it), but I could tell the first design was horrendous. I'm extremely happy that the director chose to listen to the community in this, and that gives me hope for a new precedent of directors listening to the community more. Let's just hope Tom Hooper is doing a secret redesign of the Cats movie.
  2. To be frank, the Sonic Movie should have been 2D animated instead of 3D animation... (Think "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" or "Space Jam")

    2D animation is so underrated nowadays, bar none... Such a shame... -_-
    Nickblockmaster and benthebobjr like this.
  3. From my observations of the modern film world, a 2D animated movie is really hard to sell. The 3D animation looks much more modern, and a lot less cheap (even if it is cheaper). So it's safe not to expect 2D animation for any future wide release animated movies.
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  4. Such a shame that such a stigma exists...

    "Just because it's 3D means it's better!!!" (cough cough) look at all those 3D movies in the past 20 years that did not do too good (cough cough)
    Nickblockmaster and benthebobjr like this.
  5. Huh? Your last sentence seems to go against the rest of your post. :p Did you miss a negation?
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  6. Indeed I did miss a negation... sigh
    But at least you get what I was trying to say XD
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  7. I have a friend who is going to see the Sonic Movie when it comes out, mainly to see how bad it will be, haha~
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  8. Featured Review: Zombieland: Double Tap
    Grade: 6/10 - A fun, long-awaited sequel


    We're going to have to wait another ten years for the next Zombieland movie, aren't we? If so, bring on the wait. Zombieland: Double Tap takes place ten years after the first film (or so I think). Our main four are now living in the White House happily ever after. At least they were, until Little Rock runs off with a John Lennon wanna-be.

    This film is a fun reunion for the main four cast members, and you can feel their enthusiasm in their performances. Jesse Eisenberg is, well, Jesse Eisenberg. It can be distracting if your mind strays and tricks you into thinking Mark Zuckerberg is narrating the movie, but don't worry, it's just Jesse. Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin all give great performances as well. None of these four really disappear into their role. The actors all fit their characters, and that makes it easy to think it's a movie based around the actors in the zombie apocalypse.

    The best part of the movie, and there's no convincing me otherwise, is Zoey Deutch and her character of Madison (the stereotypical dumb blonde). Zombieland: Double Tap is a hilarious film, but Madison has all the funniest parts.

    Here's the problem with the movie. I'd like to believe that while being super unrealistic in concept, and super silly in purpose, Zombieland tried to be as grounded and realistic as possible. Double Tap seems to disregard any purpose of realism with very on the nose moments. For example, the doppelgangers that show up. They have their moments, but they take you out of the movie more than they add to the humour.

    Another problem with the movie is the pacing. A certain character has to leave other characters in order to get the plot moving, and because of the lack of setup, the decision for that character to leave feels unjustified. Then the movie skips forward a whole month. Later in the film, characters are diving to a location and one says something along the lines of "buckle up, it's gonna be a long ride". After an unusual cut, they're at their location. A final example of the problems with pacing exists near the end of the movie, when a character seems to be in a "race against time" with the zombies, but ends up having a convenient amount of time to spare.

    That previous example just adds to the problems with the final act. It becomes obnoxiously predictable and full of deus ex machinas. Yet despite these problems, Zombieland: Double Tap still manages to be one of the funniest films of the year and a very enjoyable watch. Although this wasn't perfect, I'd happily welcome a third installment in the future.

    Other recent 2019 watches:
    Fractured: (5/10)
    Kitbull: (9/10)
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  9. Featured Review: The Laundromat
    Grade: 5/10 - Now that's a mess


    I oddly enjoyed The Laundromat. Steven Soderbergh's attempt at an Adam McKay styled political satire does come off as messy but can be fun at times.

    The Laundromat is based off "Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global Elite" by Jake Bernstein. The film focuses on the 2016 Panama Papers and how they affected Ellen Martin (played by Meryl Streep) who loses her husband in a boating accident.

    What a mess. This film is extremely inconsistent with tone and purpose. One minute it's telling the story of Ellen Martin, the next it's giving us a lesson in offshore shell companies with Jürgen Mossack (Gary Oldman) and Ramón Fonseca (Antonio Banderas), the next we're with a completely different set of characters and learning how this whole thing affects them. When it all mixes to try to form a movie, it hardly does just that.

    The Laundromat is more of a political commercial bringing attention to the loopholes present in the current American legal system, rather than being a satirical film of its own. A lot of this comes with characters breaking the fourth wall and, at one point, even breaking character to give a speech about the modern-day problems.

    And yet, with all that, I still oddly enjoyed it. Perhaps it's the upbeat and fast-paced tone that makes it watchable. Or the predictably excellent performances by Meryl Streep, Gary Oldman, and Antonio Banderas. Or maybe it's the technical craft of the film, with smooth one-take shots and some nice production design. It's as if each scene or sequence on its own is perfectly watchable, but when combined with every other scene it just becomes an incohesive jumble of tones.

    The Laundromat is exposition-heavy and inconsistently focused, but it is surely watchable (especially with its 90-minute length). It contains some funny moments and some great performances. It just won't be for all audiences. Every person who watches this will have a different takeaway on what they thought of it, depending on the things they liked and didn't like. I guess The Laundromat won't be making much of a splash.

    Other recent 2019 watches:
    The Breaker Upperers: (6/10)
    Wine Country: (5/10)
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  10. Over the past few days I've watched Parasite, Jojo Rabbit, The Lighthouse, and Dolemite is my Name. I'd like to give all four of these featured reviews, so I shall do them daily and one at a time.

    Featured Review: Parasite (기생충)
    Grade: 10/10 - One of, if not, the best movies of the year!


    Parasite is a movie that tricks you into thinking there's a Google Chrome logo in the poster. It fits really, Google Chrome is a parasite on your computer's RAM after all. In all reality, Parasite is a South Korean film directed and written by the legendary Bong Joon Ho. It focuses on various elements of social classes as a poor family goes to work for a rich family.

    I went into this movie knowing only that and nothing else. That uncertainty as to what will happen, what this is about, what is going on, all makes for such a fantastic experience. As a result, that's all I'll mention plot-wise. Instead, let me tell you a story about what happened at my screening. There was a fly on the projector. It moved around and made a silhouette on the screen. For the entirety of the movie I thought it was a creative choice by Bong Joon Ho to further emphasis the symbolism of bugs, but no, it was just a fly.

    How should I some this up? Parasite is fantastic! Parasite is near perfect! Parasite is one of, if not, the best movies of the year! Go see Parasite! Do not be deterred by the foreign language. It is cast brilliantly, with every single person's performance getting a moment to shine! It is written brilliantly, allowing tension, emotion, and comedy to cross through subtitles and make the audience feel each thing. It is shot and scored brilliantly, with beautiful camera work complemented by an amazing score. They built the entire house and poor neighbourhood for this movie. Fantastic art design.

    There is so much more to talk about with this movie, but it all requires an in-depth spoiler analysis. Long story short, go see Parasite. If you're going to watch one foreign film in your entire life, make this it. If you're going to watch one movie in 2019, and you're not attached to pre-existing franchises like the MCU, make this it. Watch Parasite!
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  11. While the EMC community is undergoing an argument craze, who doesn't need a little escapism. What is escapism you may ask? A way for you to escape reality and immerse yourself in a fantasy, or at least that's how escapism is in relation to movies. So while everyone is arguing, here's a movie review!

    Featured Review: Jojo Rabbit
    Grade: 9/10 - Funny and heartwarming



    There I was, standing outside of Ryerson Theatre during the Toronto International Film Festival. Four hours in line for rush tickets. Ninth in a line of seemingly 100+ people. Showtime strikes and TIFF volunteers come to greet the rush line. Three people are let in, the rest of us are left sad. I go to Jack Astor's to eat. Jojo Rabbit wins the People's Choice Award at TIFF. I vow my return.

    Little over one month later I return to Toronto. I eat at that same Jack Astor's with my tickets in hand. Tickets in hand for Jojo Rabbit. A promise made, a promise fulfilled. So, was it worth the wait? Without a doubt.

    Taika Waititi's anti-hate satire is, for the most part, effective at its goal. It utilizes the satirical aspects very well, especially with the presence of imaginary Hitler (played by the director himself). Jojo Rabbit can also be very heartwarming at times and balances this with the comedy very well. That balance seems to be one of Waititi's strong suits.

    I can't help but feel that Jojo Rabbit played it too safe. No one expected it to be Schindler's List, but for a movie taking a risk with its subject matter, it could've taken more risks. That's not to say it shys away from the horrors of WWII by any means. It definitely doesn't.

    This is an ensemble movie, and that is another strong suit of the film. Scarlett Johannson is great as always, even if her character is more limited than hoped for. Sam Rockwell, Alfie Allen, and Rebel Wilson are all hilarious. Archie Yates is a scene-stealer as Jojo's witty friend. Then there are the two standouts. Roman Griffin Davis is already a legendary actor and this is his first role. He does so well, and it's only complemented by Thomasin Mackenzie who is outstanding.

    Jojo Rabbit will please everyone that isn't appalled by the touchy comedy. If you can understand that it is an anti-hate satire, you should have a great time!
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  12. Featured Review: The Lighthouse
    Grade: 8/10 - Aye, 'tis a good movie!


    Watched The Lighthouse I did. Curious of my thoughts are ye? Nay? Ye hurt me feelins. Aye? That be good I say, that be good!

    The Lighthouse focuses on two men as they slowly lose their minds overseeing a lighthouse. This psychological horror film is directed by Robert Eggers and stars Robert Pattinson and Willem Dafoe. This movie is weird. Really weird. It's great, but wow is it weird.

    The first thing that most people notice about The Lighthouse is the look of it. Yes, it is black and white; yes, it is in a smaller aspect ratio; yes, these two things are a creative choice; and yes, they add so much to the movie. I find it hard to believe The Lighthouse could still have the same effect it did if it had not used these two creative choices. Both the aspect ratio and the lack of colour make the movie feel like it was made in the time it's set (the 1890s). The lack of colour also gives the audience a feel of blandness, similar to how the characters would feel being on that rock for a good amount of time. The aspect ratio could also portray the feeling of being trapped, once again similar to how the characters would feel being on that rock.

    The Lighthouse is really carried by its performances. The plot is okay, but the two characters, their dialogue, and the outstanding performances are what carries the movie. Robert Pattinson is fantastic. Do not doubt his acting ability. Willem Dafoe, as we all already know, is one of the best actors in Hollywood, and this movie is no exception to his talent.

    In terms of technicals, this movie is near perfect. I've already mentioned the aspect ratio and the lack of colour, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Throughout the movie you are greeted with the presence of a great score mixed with superb sound editing. The cinematography throughout is beautiful. There is one scene where a character is leaning over something to grab a key. The camera movement is that scene is brilliant, and it is consistently brilliant throughout the film. To top it all off, The Lighthouse was filmed in Nova Scotia! #Canada!

    In a lot of ways, this movie reminds me of Ad Astra. The film is purposefully slow to immerse the audience in the character's surroundings. The plot is minimal, focusing more on deep and developed characters and their changes from start to finish. The technicals: score, cinematography, visual presentation, and sound work are all near perfect. Then, of course, the final similarity: people walked out of my theatre because these movies are for film enthusiasts and not for the average "I want explosions" moviegoer.

    Watch The Lighthouse. No matter what you take away from its ambiguity, it will be worth the experience.

    Other recent 2019 watches:
    Dolemite Is My Name: 7/10
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  13. Featured Review: The King
    Grade: 8/10 - A historical drama for its target audience


    The King is a historical epic based on Shakespeare's Henriads. It follows Henry V's rise to power as the King of England and the conflict he experiences with France.

    I must say, I really liked The King! It's one of those movies that I've grown a greater appreciation for it the longer I've thought about it. A decent amount happens in the first hour, but I was always left waiting for something to actually happen. Or at least that's how it felt. When I realized an hour had passed (due to a brief Netflix pause) I was genuinely surprised. While the movie feels slow, that hour felt a lot shorter than it should've.

    Everything after that first hour was fantastic! It's intriguing, it's got funny moments, it's got epic moments, and it solidifies itself as a worthwhile historical film. Timothée Chalamet is fantastic as Henry V. His role is more kept to himself, but in the moments he's given to shine, he shines. Joel Edgerton is fantastic as always, and I need to see him in more. Then there's Robert Pattinson. After seeing him in The Lighthouse I was convinced he was a great actor. After seeing him in The King I'm convinced he can play any role.

    There are so many great names in the cast that show up here and there for a small period of the film. It just all feels so nicely intertwined with my favourite part of the film: this does not try to be unrealistic. We're talking two people fight with big heavy armour, they lose their breath and fall to the ground, they start wrestling as they've lost their swords. Things like this that keep the movie from being some awesome yet unrealistic moment, and allow the movie to have real moments that do not lose the intrigue of the audience.

    How do you know if you won't like this movie though? Well, the target audience is people who enjoy historical dramas. If you don't like historical dramas, odds are this doesn't have anything for you. If you like historical dramas, feast yourself on a prize!

    Other recent 2019 watches:
    The Great Hack: 5/10
    Nickblockmaster, TuckerAmbr and 607 like this.
  14. I didn't understand this paragraph. What do you mean? And the scene you describe, is that in the film or is it not?
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  15. It is a poor description of a sequence that takes place early on. Sorry for the confusion XD
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.
  16. Has anyone seen JoJo Rabbit yet? I want to know if I should see it in theaters or save my money and rent it on dvd later.
    Nickblockmaster and benthebobjr like this.
  17. I saw it back in October. I really enjoyed it and thought it was very well made. It's definitely an audience oriented movie (taking home the People's Choice Award at TIFF). If you've seen "Thor: Ragnarok" it's from the same director/screenwriter and so it has similar humour. I guess the biggest question you have to ask yourself is whether or not you think the content matter (WWII/Nazis) should be joked about. Even if it's a satire directed and written by a Jewish man (who happens to also play Hitler). I would recommend it though. My review is in this thread.
    Nickblockmaster and AncientTower like this.
  18. I have been slacking on pushing out reviews. Alas I return with something chilly.

    Featured Review: Frozen II
    Grade: 6/10 - No-laugh Olaf


    The early reactions from the premiere definitely overstated this film. Not that Frozen II was bad, but it surely wasn't better than the original. All your favourite 2013 Disney characters go into a spooky forest. Now you have a sequel.

    Before I talk about the actual film, I must say the theatre experience was weak with this one. Not anything to do with the film itself, but the loud and obnoxious children that were screaming "LET IT GOOOOOO" every time Elsa moved into frame. So irritating. There are quiet moment in this film that became inaudible because of the children. "Oh but Mr. Daybreaker it's a movie for children what did you expect?" Shut up Jimmy, let me want to enjoy a movie theatre experience.

    Nonetheless, the actual film was okay. That's really the best I can say for it. The animation is absolutely beautiful. Some of Disney's best work. The voice acting is great as well, not much of a shocker given it's production team. For the most part the movie is also entertaining. For the most part.

    No-laugh Olaf. Let's be honest, he was funny in the first movie. Now he's just in everyone's way like an irritating brick wall on the plot. In all fairness I thought Olaf had one hilarious scene. That's it though. He's almost as annoying as Kristoff, who seems to have nothing to do in this movie. They had to put Kristoff in the film though given the importance of his character in the previous. Unfortunately, his appearance just feels tiring and lame.

    The first act struggles to engage the audience, or at least it did for me. I didn't mind it because of the characters and animation, but I was waiting and waiting for it to pull me in. Then the Queen and her sister go into a spooky forest alone with no guards, leaving their kingdom under the control of some talking rocks, and I lost it.

    I liked the musical numbers though. There are some great songs that will certainly be ruined my screaming children come the next few months. Not all of them hit the mark, and not all of them have smooth transitions, but overall they're well made. One of the songs is set up in a cheesy 80's-esque manner, with callbacks to music videos like Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody. It was either laughably bad or golden. You decide.

    Frozen II just wasn't all I expected, not that I expected a Best Picture level film in the first place. It does what it needs to do that. It's an entertaining film that the screaming children will enjoy. That's that.

    Other recent 2019 watches:
    Doctor Sleep: 7/10
    Earthquake Bird: 5/10
    Portrait of a Lady on Fire: 9/10 - Review coming to this thread soon
    Terminator: Dark Fate: 6/10
    Nickblockmaster likes this.
  19. Hm, it would be nice if maybe I could see Frozen in theater instead of Frozen II. :p
    Nickblockmaster and benthebobjr like this.
  20. Featured review: The Irishman
    Grade: 9/10 - Now this is cinema


    Now Mr. Scorsese, this is cinema. While I don't think The Irishman is perfect, do I ever think this is what films should be. Martin Scorsese had this movie perfectly timed with his comments on Marvel movies not being cinema. In synopsis:

    In the 1950s, truck driver Frank Sheeran gets involved with Russell Bufalino and his Pennsylvania crime family. As Sheeran climbs the ranks to become a top hitman, he also goes to work for Jimmy Hoffa -- a powerful Teamster tied to organized crime (Google).

    The Irishman is told through the perspective of Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) as he looks back on his life. To achieve the scale of Sheeran's life, Scorsese decided to go all-in for the 209-minute runtime. That makes for a long movie. Is it worth the three and a half hours it takes to watch it? Yes. Does the length take a toll on how good the film is? I think so.

    I love longer films. They allow the characters to be fully developed, the plot to be explored, the tension to be built up. If I'm honest, I would have loved to see an additional 30-minutes added to this film to extend the courtroom scenes and explore Anna Paquin's character more. When it comes to the length of The Irishman my criticism stands with something that probably couldn't be avoided. The movie feels like it lulled a bit in the middle, and due to the length, it feels as if it took a while to boot up.

    Even with the lull The Irishman still feels intriguing all throughout. It can be credited to a number of things, but I mainly credit Martin Scorsese's directing. Wow. There's a reason why Scorsese is considered one of the best. Don't be surprised if he wins Best Director at the upcoming 92nd Academy Awards. He's already got the odds.

    Credit where credit is due, the performances are top-notch. The entire cast is fantastic, but the main three are, well, the main focus. Joe Pesci returns to the industry with a bang as he plays Russell Bufalino, ruler of a Pennsylvanian crime family. Pesci is stellar! He is quiet, intimidating, and his presence is so felt whenever he's on-screen.

    On the other hand, Al Pacino snaps into the role of Jimmy Hoffa, a labour union leader who has ties with the Bufalino crime family. His performance is filled with anger, control, power, and just the feel of a wholesome guy who's not so wholesome at the same time. Between these two supporting characters, it's hard to say who steals the show. Each time one of them steps on-screen I change my mind as to who gave a better performance. Hopefully, this gets these two legends a double nomination in the Best Supporting Actor category this February.

    Then there's Robert De Niro. Must anything be said past his name? If I'm being quite honest I think he's the weakest of the three. He gives a fantastic performance that leads the film strongly, but I never felt he disappeared into the role. Perhaps it's just that Robert De Niro has played so many gangsters it's hard to tell which from which.

    Anna Paquin made lists of early Oscar predictions before this film premiered. It's no wonder she's not on any now. I counted a whole seven words spoken by her throughout the film. I know she could've given a fantastic performance, you could see it in her silence. I also know her character could've given an added depth to the story had it been explored more. She plays Frank's daughter and is clearly affected by his life choices. I really wish The Irishman explored that family aspect more than it did.

    Netflix spent a lot of money on this film. They invested a ton into Scorsese here. A lot of that went to the de-ageing of our main cast. I must say, those visual effects are seamless. Sure, there are a few moments where things might seem off, but for the most part it's impossible to tell there was any effects use. They just look younger, and at times they just look older. It works so well.

    The camera work and editing are just two more things boosting the excellence of the film. It really had to be great if the intention was to make the runtime bearable. The pans in the camera as characters move around or dialogue begins, mixed with the precise cuts and transitions, they blend together to create a wonderful movie in the technical aspect.

    There are so many small things The Irishman contains that add to the film. The real-world events happening at the time. Yes, this is practically a biopic about someone who had a hand with major players, but to see it from that perspective is enthralling. The inclusion of the Copacabana, or jokes about Italian names, just small things like this.

    There are also bigger themes within this film. It's an exploration of power, jealousy, masculinity, family, and age. Some subtle, some not. With the expansive runtime, The Irishman gets the chance to focus on all of these themes slightly. Most of them are effective, and some I wish were touched upon more, but overall it made the film that much more impactful.

    The Irishman may not be a perfect movie. It has flaws as almost every film does. However, it's one to be appreciated. It represents so much in modern-day cinema. The idea that Netflix was the only company willing to distribute this movie, a Martin Scorsese movie, says a lot about the current status of the industry. I like Marvel movies, superhero movies, and blockbuster films as a whole, but reflecting back on Scorsese's New York Times article I realize how important what he said was.

    We are in an age where movies are tailored and cut to appeal strictly to the audiences. Directorial creativity and the concept of risk are absent in almost all of the major films distributed. If it was this hard for a big name director like Martin Scorsese to get his film out there, imagine the struggle existing in independent filmmakers trying to start-up in the industry. God bless Netflix.

    I highly encourage reading Scorsese's article in the New York Times, and I highly encourage everyone to watch The Irishman. It is a long watch that requires the dedication of 209-minutes, but it is worth it. Keep cinema alive.
    Nickblockmaster and 607 like this.