Search
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/e75/250f69d1-62c2-4c7d-ac60-2198e4b37e75.jpg?m=1612961912)
Jane Lynch recommended The Big Lebowski (1998) in Movies (curated)
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/71c/64b93487-1b18-47aa-8370-ff4c531d371c.jpg?m=1609707766)
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Mission: Impossible III (2006) in Movies
May 9, 2020
I didn't hate this film as much as I hated the first two but I am crediting that to Philip Seymour Hoffman. That man is as talented as they come and left this earth far too soon. I think this is the best of the first three. I love that they brought back Luther. I loved what he added to the second one and I hope he stays consistent in the next few films. My favorite character was Benji - I thought he was super funny and great to watch. I also liked the added layer of a love interest for Ethan. The first two films are what they are when it comes to romance, but this one felt authentic and enjoyable.
Not the worst, but not the best film ever. On to the next!
Not the worst, but not the best film ever. On to the next!
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/0e1/6ae3f7d1-7063-4f9c-b080-a1491c3f20e1.jpg?m=1533253929)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Synecdoche, New York (2008) in Movies
Aug 18, 2018
Strange and unique, just like its writer/director!
To say the films of Charlie Kaufman are not a one-of-a-kind experience would be a gross understatement. Anyone who has seen Adaptation or Being John Malkovich would agree.
This film follows its own path (or lack thereof) through the life of a troubled playwright, his relationships with women and his ultimate desire to leave a lasting impression on the world.
Not sure if I became fully immersed in this one or not. Having just finished it may need to sink in a little. I definitely love the strange and unusual and this one foots the bill for sure.
It was glorious, yet tragic to see another amazing Philip Seymour Hoffman performance knowing he won't give us any more of them.
Recommended for those who seek a challenge.
This film follows its own path (or lack thereof) through the life of a troubled playwright, his relationships with women and his ultimate desire to leave a lasting impression on the world.
Not sure if I became fully immersed in this one or not. Having just finished it may need to sink in a little. I definitely love the strange and unusual and this one foots the bill for sure.
It was glorious, yet tragic to see another amazing Philip Seymour Hoffman performance knowing he won't give us any more of them.
Recommended for those who seek a challenge.
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/28b/4c282c61-c0e0-44a5-8c87-2b60b832928b.jpg?m=1615546793)
Tony Hale recommended Punch-Drunk Love (2002) in Movies (curated)
![Twister (1996)](/uploads/profile_image/ad2/487a3b65-9474-47c1-a607-0bc56bb1fad2.jpg?m=1522336586)
Twister (1996)
Movie Watch
he house rips apart piece by piece. A bellowing cow spins through the air. Tractors fall like rain....
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/1a8/a351252c-2673-4cb5-8ae9-5910ecef81a8.jpg?m=1614599124)
Justin Long recommended Boogie Nights (1997) in Movies (curated)
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/66e/e47af90c-6998-4643-88e0-c7c125e1766e.jpg?m=1610396926)
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (2007) in Movies
Sep 19, 2020 (Updated Oct 12, 2020)
Completely fucked, 'from worse to even worse' filmmaking in vein of something like 𝘜𝘯𝘤𝘶𝘵 𝘎𝘦𝘮𝘴. I think this is a terrific - even in many instances traumatizing - thriller with even more gobsmackingly terrific performances (particularly from Philip Seymour Hoffman in a straight up *brutal* role). It's very nasty and gritty but also very sophisticated, and looks wonderful while doing so, too. That all being said, sacrilege as this may be, is it too much to ask for one Sidney Lumet film to actually have some momentum? Good God, at least from the ones I've seen - still good as they are - they're absolutely killed from prestige greatness because of the dire sag in pacing. Scenes here drone on well past the point of no return for really no reason, granted at least in this one it's mostly salvaged by the clever asynchronous way the stories are all edited together - but still, it'd be nice for this to be a little snappier at times. That aside, it's a testament to all these mammoth performances and emotionally gripping writing that it was able to come out as solid as it was - and it is something that Lumet, into his 80s here, was able to end his career with such a stimulating, grimy drama. Legitimately jaw-dropping ending, nearly gave me whiplash.
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/b26/4fceea14-87e1-4455-b98c-cda626154b26.jpg?m=1549634223)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The newest installment of The Hunger Games series brings us to District 13 after Katniss Everdeen has been rescued from the Games and whisked off to supposed safety.
The movie is huge and sweeping and grabs the viewer from the very start.
Unlike the first two films, it could conceivably stand alone, and the viewer would ‘get it’ without having read the books.
I read all 3 books back to back in 15 hours, back before the first movie was released. The Mockingjay – Part 1 makes me want to go re-read the books all over again.
All the main characters are back; Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen, Liam Hemsworth as Gail Hawthorne, Josh Hutcherson as Peeta Mellark, Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, Elizabeth Banks as Effie, Philip Seymour Hoffman as Plutarch,
and Donald Sutherland as President Snow. Mockingjay introduces Julianne Moore as President Coin.
A lot of the movie is based on Katniss watching screens to see what is going on in the capital, but there are enough outside action scenes throughout the film to ensure you don’t just feel like you’re watching a film of someone watching tv.
I didn’t, and don’t think anyone in the theatre had any teary eyed moments like I did in the first two films. This movie was less emotionally heart wrenching, and had much more of a ‘rally the troops’ feel, but that’s what the goal was. I certainly was rooting for Katniss in the action scenes and at several points in the film I jumped in my seat.
I didn’t really ‘like’ the ending scene, but understand why it was ended there. Mockingjay part 1 completely builds suspense for what will be Mockingjay 2, and again, drives me to want to re-read the books.
I would give this movie 4.75 out of 5 stars.
The movie is huge and sweeping and grabs the viewer from the very start.
Unlike the first two films, it could conceivably stand alone, and the viewer would ‘get it’ without having read the books.
I read all 3 books back to back in 15 hours, back before the first movie was released. The Mockingjay – Part 1 makes me want to go re-read the books all over again.
All the main characters are back; Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen, Liam Hemsworth as Gail Hawthorne, Josh Hutcherson as Peeta Mellark, Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, Elizabeth Banks as Effie, Philip Seymour Hoffman as Plutarch,
and Donald Sutherland as President Snow. Mockingjay introduces Julianne Moore as President Coin.
A lot of the movie is based on Katniss watching screens to see what is going on in the capital, but there are enough outside action scenes throughout the film to ensure you don’t just feel like you’re watching a film of someone watching tv.
I didn’t, and don’t think anyone in the theatre had any teary eyed moments like I did in the first two films. This movie was less emotionally heart wrenching, and had much more of a ‘rally the troops’ feel, but that’s what the goal was. I certainly was rooting for Katniss in the action scenes and at several points in the film I jumped in my seat.
I didn’t really ‘like’ the ending scene, but understand why it was ended there. Mockingjay part 1 completely builds suspense for what will be Mockingjay 2, and again, drives me to want to re-read the books.
I would give this movie 4.75 out of 5 stars.
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/81d/f6c08083-f1fc-4bb4-aff6-89007439481d.jpg?m=1611929006)
Bill Nighy recommended Punch-Drunk Love (2002) in Movies (curated)
![40x40](/uploads/profile_image/7b9/921f4b6c-268e-4342-a909-b8843f8557b9.jpg?m=1583101466)
JT (287 KP) rated Moneyball (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
If you like your baseball and statistics, if you know your ERA from your RBIs then this is surely going to be a film not to miss. Directed by Bennett Miller the film stars Brad Pitt as Billy Beane the general manager of the Oakland Athletics during the 2002 season in which the club went on a 20 game winning streak.
The theory and reason behind this success was using player stats and computer generated analysis to pick a team of relative nobodies, a practice that is now used by almost every baseball club in the National and American leagues today.
During this monumental season the club achieved 103 total wins doing so on a tiny budget, matching the mighty New York Yankees whose budget was well over $100m. To say that Beane’s method was out there was an understatement, and not everyone agreed, and in some cases they still don’t. The film however is living proof that it did work!
Beane’s sidekick in all of this and one of the only other people backing him was Peter Brand (Hill) the brains, whose ability to value and assess players on their potential to get to first plate and thus increase the likehood of runs was almost invaluable.
So how do you make a film about pure stats an exciting one, there is not enough live action to depend on, although the clubs pivotal game to reach twenty straight wins is pretty amazing when you see how they almost let an elven run lead slip through their fingers.
The acting is solid, Pitt and Hill gel extremely well and Philip Seymour Hoffman ads a gruff dimension as the clubs manager, seemingly having to succumb to Beane and Brand’s mathematical insanity.
You don’t need to be a fan of the game to enjoy this one, its an underdog story from the perspective of the back room and at the end when you see just how much Beane turned down to take the same post at the Boston Red Sox you can really get a feel for just how much it all meant to him.
The theory and reason behind this success was using player stats and computer generated analysis to pick a team of relative nobodies, a practice that is now used by almost every baseball club in the National and American leagues today.
During this monumental season the club achieved 103 total wins doing so on a tiny budget, matching the mighty New York Yankees whose budget was well over $100m. To say that Beane’s method was out there was an understatement, and not everyone agreed, and in some cases they still don’t. The film however is living proof that it did work!
Beane’s sidekick in all of this and one of the only other people backing him was Peter Brand (Hill) the brains, whose ability to value and assess players on their potential to get to first plate and thus increase the likehood of runs was almost invaluable.
So how do you make a film about pure stats an exciting one, there is not enough live action to depend on, although the clubs pivotal game to reach twenty straight wins is pretty amazing when you see how they almost let an elven run lead slip through their fingers.
The acting is solid, Pitt and Hill gel extremely well and Philip Seymour Hoffman ads a gruff dimension as the clubs manager, seemingly having to succumb to Beane and Brand’s mathematical insanity.
You don’t need to be a fan of the game to enjoy this one, its an underdog story from the perspective of the back room and at the end when you see just how much Beane turned down to take the same post at the Boston Red Sox you can really get a feel for just how much it all meant to him.