What film did you watch last night?

A think both Sicario and No Country share a very common ground in ambiguity. It's very much up to the audience to decide upon the central themes and to some extent, what the characters motives where at the end of it all.

No Country especially. Whilst there are definitely good and bad characters, there arcs aren't exactly cut and dry. ESPECIALLY Moss and Chigurh.

I find it a fascinating style personally. Less typically filmic in nature and I think that really helps plant the story in reality. No Country has so little score throughout and it's shot incredibly intimately. Pulls you straight in.

Paul Thomas Anderson is another pioneer of this particular style.

...I'm ranting xD
 
Is Sicario the one with fake Brad Pitt and the utterly pointless female main character? I'll probably have to watch it again at some point, but I remember it being pretty boring.
 
G-MAN2004 said:
Is Sicario the one with fake Brad Pitt and the utterly pointless female main character? I'll probably have to watch it again at some point, but I remember it being pretty boring.
Click to expand...

Fake Bradd pitt? Josh Brolin perhaps? I'm not sure what you mean by that regardless xD

As to Emily Blunts role, contextually your right on the money. It's ENTIRELY pointless, up to a point of course.

Her character is quite literally a means to an end

More then that though, her cluelessness isn't an accident. It perfectly frames our viewpoint. We are essentially on the same journey she is through this world of utter depravity and absolute lawlessness.
 
smokedog said:
Sausage party 4/10
If you've seen the trailer, you pretty much seen the film. What starts off quite amusing becomes annoying quickly. The end scene is funny though.
Click to expand...

Really? I though it was poorly represented by it's trailer, most of what happens in the film is not even hinted at.

Sausage Party 6/10

It's rude, filled with racial stereotypes and knob jokes, and tries to be funny with shock value. Despite this there is enough genuinely clever humour, and the hysterically funny sex scenes of the finale, to carry it through. The trailer, although it contains about half of the funniest moments, fails to explain the movie itself which is some sort of weird anti-religious screed. I enjoyed it, but I don't think I'd watch it again.
 
DrToffnar said:
I think that's the point. The film plays with your expectations SOOOO well. The ending is like 'well, what did you expect? This isn't a Disney flick. This is what would ACTUALLY happen'.
Click to expand...

Yeah, kinda. It's about being unable to escape fate, so what happens is what has to happen.
 
darreny said:
While I love no Country for old men I do always feel cheated by what happened to him
Click to expand...

Well this I can see from a certain perspective ..... so I gotta say try looking it differently based on what I say next. The movie's focus is not really on Chigurh (the assassin) but its actually about Tommy Lee Jone's character, Sheriff Bell, which bookends the beginning and the end of the film. The assassin just represents "change" and how Sheriff Bell feels past his time understanding the chaos this change brings on .... hence the title "No Country For Old Men". ;)

Like the film Seven .... I initially hated the ending because it was such a downer. Once I thought about the movie on subsequent viewings, it finally clicked for me.
 
Last edited:
Kingsglaive: Final Fantasy XV 6/10

Since I know jack about FF lore I suppose I was at a bit of a disadvantage.

I had no clue why the Niflheim and Lucis were at odds with each other.

Why did the Niflheim use biological creatures as their primary weapon since they are a technological based race? would have made more sense to augment them but nope, plain old beasties.

Other than me not having a clue most of the time, animation is sublime and Sean Bean is one of the voice actors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom