Gravity by Alfonso Cuarón has been a much talked about and written on movie since it's release and after seeing it a few days ago, it seems all the attention for good reason. It's a remarkable film and two pieces I've since read about it's director and the movie struck me as excellent.
For the Sept 30th issue of New York Magazine, Dan P. Lee wrote "The Camera's Cusp: Alfonso Cuarón Takes Filmmaking to a New Extreme With Gravity" and it's a fascinating 6,000 word feature. Another solid piece of writing, and more on the movie itself, was the fairly short Esquire website post "Gravity Isn't Quite Accurate, and That's Okay" by Chris Jones.
In terms of my own views on the movie, the visuals were stunning in 3D (and perhaps more so in IMAX), but the big thing about the movie for me was the tension and drama. In fact, there was a portion of it where I found the emotional drama perhaps too much with the choice Cuarón made in having Sandra Bullock's character in Dr. Ryan Stone having experienced a particularly horrific moment in her past. Watching things unfold on screen as Stone in pretty much ceaseless peril and combining those with her past, it felt both that the tragic backstory might be excessive and given that backstory, logical that Stone might just say "no más" (guess I couldn't get enough of the accent in Cuarón's name) and stop trying to figure out a way to survive. Related to this, I was watching and thinking there no way NASA would have sent to space anyone in Stone's emotional state.
From that point of skepticism I had, though, I thought her past then well dealt with by Cuarón in the film, and as Jones wrote about, whether something would have actually occurred the way it was portrayed (whether a technical detail about space or selecting of science specialists for the mission) doesn't have to detract from the movie.
The other thing I loved about the piece by Jones was his mention of the attempt to make a movie out of his book Too Far From Home, the subject of the first real blog post I wrote five years ago. Not that my blog writing has been like performing life-saving surgeries, but this book kind of got me started with it.
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Friday, October 18, 2013
Thursday, May 24, 2012
The Avengers by Joss Whedon
It's been a while since my last blog post on a movie (posted on Inception in July 2010 and sort of posted on The Social Network in October of that year), but saw The Avengers last night and enjoyed it quite a bit.
The film was written and directed by Joss Whedon and while I haven't seen much of his prior work, he's got quite the following and I was interested to see The Avengers after reading recent pieces on him like "The Hero Whisperer" by Lev Grossman for Time Magazine.
The movie was entertaining and whipped through it's 2:20 run time and while the effects were good and all, the story was what struck me. I don't know modern movie-making well enough to know the directing process of a CGI-heavy movie like The Avengers, but the way Whedon's script had such rich mythology and character development as well as brought together the characters was impressive.
I'd be interested to read the movie script sometime and while watching the film, remembered a short July 2010 Esquire piece on Jon Favreau (who executive produced The Avengers). Quote that stood out from him was "I had a writing teacher who said, 'if you want to learn to write a screenplay, read "The African Queen" twice'."
The film was written and directed by Joss Whedon and while I haven't seen much of his prior work, he's got quite the following and I was interested to see The Avengers after reading recent pieces on him like "The Hero Whisperer" by Lev Grossman for Time Magazine.
The movie was entertaining and whipped through it's 2:20 run time and while the effects were good and all, the story was what struck me. I don't know modern movie-making well enough to know the directing process of a CGI-heavy movie like The Avengers, but the way Whedon's script had such rich mythology and character development as well as brought together the characters was impressive.
I'd be interested to read the movie script sometime and while watching the film, remembered a short July 2010 Esquire piece on Jon Favreau (who executive produced The Avengers). Quote that stood out from him was "I had a writing teacher who said, 'if you want to learn to write a screenplay, read "The African Queen" twice'."
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Doing Work You Care About: Inc. 500 List / TechCrunch / Facebook
Three different things I've come across lately that all lead to me ruminating further on the subject of work... and the goal of efforts put into said work.
Starting off on the topic was Inc. Magazine's annual Inc. 500/5,000 List of the fastest growing private companies in America.
The top 500 are in the magazine itself and then top 5,000 featured online. In reading some of the profiles of the companies and their founders, I really got a sense for how hard the whole thing has been for many of the people (yes, also with exceptions)... and also how many of them just were doing something they really liked and kept at it.
Very tied into this idea of just starting something you have a degree of passion for, "The Way I Work: Michael Arrington of TechCrunch" was featured in the October issue of Inc. The piece describes Arrington as a guy who likes to write, likes to break stories and has actually (perhaps by design, perhaps not) built a pretty large business out of it. This is a conjecture-based statement to be certain, but I got the sense that if TechCrunch hadn't hit it big, Arrington would still be plugging away writing missives about breaking news in tech... because that's something he really likes to do.
The quick, easy and obvious point to draw from all this... try to figure out what you like to do and then do it. If it's something that turns into a viable business, that's great. Heck, maybe it's not even something that would ever turn into an ownership-stake business, but even if you just build a viable career working somewhere you like for others, that's not so bad.
-----
Related to this subject of work and where it can go... went and saw The Social Network the other night.
Good movie, perhaps not as fantastic as I expected (based on reviews I've seen and that it was directed by David Fincher), but I definitely enjoyed it as a piece of entertainment (and it's acknowledged to be a fictionalized story for the purpose of greater entertaining).
Here's how the movie relates to the Inc. content and notion of working at something you care about... Zuckerberg did. He was a genius with a passion for the idea that would become Facebook and now a $25B business. Whether he thought it would get that big or not is almost besides the point that he was really really into what he was working on.
Zuckerberg has gotten rich from the idea and others who were there as early employees have also gotten wealthy, but I'm going to guess (or, perhaps just hope) that early on, they were putting in the long hours because they both liked what they were doing and saw the potential of it growing bigger. The fact that it did grow bigger than probably anyone would have imagined... a happy consequence of the idea and work to be sure, but definitely not one that was guaranteed. The actions towards that by people doing work they were into... that's something that's controllable (a different way of saying guaranteed).
-----
So, tying it all together... do work you care about. If you've got the idea and willingness to fail, try to make a company out of it. If you don't have the idea or aren't in a position to take on the risk of starting a company, still do work you care about.
Seems simple, but that goal can be just as vexing a proposition as starting a company if you're not there yet. Well, I guess this is where the old phrase comes in... if it were easy, everyone'd be doing it.
Starting off on the topic was Inc. Magazine's annual Inc. 500/5,000 List of the fastest growing private companies in America.
The top 500 are in the magazine itself and then top 5,000 featured online. In reading some of the profiles of the companies and their founders, I really got a sense for how hard the whole thing has been for many of the people (yes, also with exceptions)... and also how many of them just were doing something they really liked and kept at it.
Very tied into this idea of just starting something you have a degree of passion for, "The Way I Work: Michael Arrington of TechCrunch" was featured in the October issue of Inc. The piece describes Arrington as a guy who likes to write, likes to break stories and has actually (perhaps by design, perhaps not) built a pretty large business out of it. This is a conjecture-based statement to be certain, but I got the sense that if TechCrunch hadn't hit it big, Arrington would still be plugging away writing missives about breaking news in tech... because that's something he really likes to do.
The quick, easy and obvious point to draw from all this... try to figure out what you like to do and then do it. If it's something that turns into a viable business, that's great. Heck, maybe it's not even something that would ever turn into an ownership-stake business, but even if you just build a viable career working somewhere you like for others, that's not so bad.
-----
Related to this subject of work and where it can go... went and saw The Social Network the other night.
Good movie, perhaps not as fantastic as I expected (based on reviews I've seen and that it was directed by David Fincher), but I definitely enjoyed it as a piece of entertainment (and it's acknowledged to be a fictionalized story for the purpose of greater entertaining).
Here's how the movie relates to the Inc. content and notion of working at something you care about... Zuckerberg did. He was a genius with a passion for the idea that would become Facebook and now a $25B business. Whether he thought it would get that big or not is almost besides the point that he was really really into what he was working on.
Zuckerberg has gotten rich from the idea and others who were there as early employees have also gotten wealthy, but I'm going to guess (or, perhaps just hope) that early on, they were putting in the long hours because they both liked what they were doing and saw the potential of it growing bigger. The fact that it did grow bigger than probably anyone would have imagined... a happy consequence of the idea and work to be sure, but definitely not one that was guaranteed. The actions towards that by people doing work they were into... that's something that's controllable (a different way of saying guaranteed).
-----
So, tying it all together... do work you care about. If you've got the idea and willingness to fail, try to make a company out of it. If you don't have the idea or aren't in a position to take on the risk of starting a company, still do work you care about.
Seems simple, but that goal can be just as vexing a proposition as starting a company if you're not there yet. Well, I guess this is where the old phrase comes in... if it were easy, everyone'd be doing it.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Inception by Christopher Nolan
After hearing great pomp and circumstance about the movie Inception, I saw it today and found it to be fascinating, maybe great, maybe not great... but certainly fascinating on multiple levels.
Different vantage points that could be used to consider the movie begin with (a) director of the film (b) what he tried to do (c) how how well he did that and finally (d) what the response has been.
Director
I don't typically post on movies... with this being only the third after one on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and then a post on Avatar.
One thing Inception and these films share is the involvement of a Director whose work I find interesting, if not groundbreaking. To Whit...
1. Curious Case of Benjamin Button by David Fincher - prior work including: Zodiac, Fight Club and Seven.
2. Avatar by James Cameron - who previously did Titanic... which a few people might have heard of. Also, Avatar had the distinction of bringing in an entirely new wave of technology. When I say these, I mean actual 3D, not the upconverted 3D that multiple movies since Avatar have been released in.
3. Inception by Christopher Nolan - previously did: Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Insomnia, The Prestige and Memento.
Pretty heady stuff and these three guys along with M Night Shyamalan (yes, I am one of the people who liked Lady in the Water) are the directors whose new films I'm going to consider seeing based on filmmaker reputation alone.
Attempt made in the movie
If nothing else, Inception deserves huge credit for it's attempt. The movie is a visual tour de force ($160M can buy a lot of special effects), but where it differs from most other films is in it's layers of complexity. Stealing of dreams, dreams within dreams, 3rd level dreams within 1st and 2nd levels... lots and lots going on and me thinks Nolan as the Writer/Director should be commended for creating something truly original... especially in this era of the sequel as blockbuster movie.
Success at the Attempt
I found the action sequences (of which there were many) to be really solid and story arc of Leonardo DiCaprio's Dom Cobb character to be intriguing, but the aforementioned complexity made it harder for me to appreciate both the action and story. Just a lot of energy spent as the viewer trying to both figure out and validate that I knew what was going on. Additionally, I found myself wanting more back story about the dream infiltration concept in Inception... where it came from and why Ellen Page as a character introduced to it wasn't a bit more shocked by the idea. Was this a world where people knew all about the idea? If so, either I missed or mention could have been made of that.
Reaction to the movie
I hadn't heard about this prior to seeing the film, but there's been pretty interesting critical discussion of how good... or not good it was.
The long and short of it is some (seems to be many) critics really liked it and gave it huge credit for ambitious movie making and trying to accomplish something different. As the counterpoint to this, there's also been critics who thought it too muddled and perhaps overreached in it's attempt. Course, then the original positive camp critics criticized the negative camp critics... and on they go. Interesting stuff that's written about in the NPR piece "'Inception,' Art, Edelstein, And The Impossibility Of Accounting For Taste."
Perhaps the best way to go at this is for someone to say the movie tries something different and if it sounds of interest, to see that and then form an opinion... or simply see if you're entertained. Better this than to get worked up over whether someone else is of your same mind on the matter.
As Roger Ebert noted on his twitter page "Announcement: It is OKAY to dislike Inception"... which was in fact given four stars in Ebert's Chicago Sun-Time movie review.
Different vantage points that could be used to consider the movie begin with (a) director of the film (b) what he tried to do (c) how how well he did that and finally (d) what the response has been.
Director
I don't typically post on movies... with this being only the third after one on The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and then a post on Avatar.
One thing Inception and these films share is the involvement of a Director whose work I find interesting, if not groundbreaking. To Whit...
1. Curious Case of Benjamin Button by David Fincher - prior work including: Zodiac, Fight Club and Seven.
2. Avatar by James Cameron - who previously did Titanic... which a few people might have heard of. Also, Avatar had the distinction of bringing in an entirely new wave of technology. When I say these, I mean actual 3D, not the upconverted 3D that multiple movies since Avatar have been released in.
3. Inception by Christopher Nolan - previously did: Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Insomnia, The Prestige and Memento.
Pretty heady stuff and these three guys along with M Night Shyamalan (yes, I am one of the people who liked Lady in the Water) are the directors whose new films I'm going to consider seeing based on filmmaker reputation alone.
Attempt made in the movie
If nothing else, Inception deserves huge credit for it's attempt. The movie is a visual tour de force ($160M can buy a lot of special effects), but where it differs from most other films is in it's layers of complexity. Stealing of dreams, dreams within dreams, 3rd level dreams within 1st and 2nd levels... lots and lots going on and me thinks Nolan as the Writer/Director should be commended for creating something truly original... especially in this era of the sequel as blockbuster movie.
Success at the Attempt
I found the action sequences (of which there were many) to be really solid and story arc of Leonardo DiCaprio's Dom Cobb character to be intriguing, but the aforementioned complexity made it harder for me to appreciate both the action and story. Just a lot of energy spent as the viewer trying to both figure out and validate that I knew what was going on. Additionally, I found myself wanting more back story about the dream infiltration concept in Inception... where it came from and why Ellen Page as a character introduced to it wasn't a bit more shocked by the idea. Was this a world where people knew all about the idea? If so, either I missed or mention could have been made of that.
Reaction to the movie
I hadn't heard about this prior to seeing the film, but there's been pretty interesting critical discussion of how good... or not good it was.
The long and short of it is some (seems to be many) critics really liked it and gave it huge credit for ambitious movie making and trying to accomplish something different. As the counterpoint to this, there's also been critics who thought it too muddled and perhaps overreached in it's attempt. Course, then the original positive camp critics criticized the negative camp critics... and on they go. Interesting stuff that's written about in the NPR piece "'Inception,' Art, Edelstein, And The Impossibility Of Accounting For Taste."
Perhaps the best way to go at this is for someone to say the movie tries something different and if it sounds of interest, to see that and then form an opinion... or simply see if you're entertained. Better this than to get worked up over whether someone else is of your same mind on the matter.
As Roger Ebert noted on his twitter page "Announcement: It is OKAY to dislike Inception"... which was in fact given four stars in Ebert's Chicago Sun-Time movie review.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
"Avatar"
I've only posted once previously about a movie I've seen (that being this post about "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"), but "Avatar" was compelling enough to me to warrant mention.
What was so interesting to me was both the story and the technology... both of which brought to mind other great films.
From a story perspective, the same "epic tale of life" that I liked so much in "Titanic" (of course also directed by James Cameron) and the aforementioned "Benjamin Button" were both here, but really... "Dances with Wolves" is the movie I most thought of based on the plot.
On story alone I would have found it a solid movie, but what really took into into a higher category for me was the technology (and I highly recommend watching it in 3D). It was amazing on the screen... and also fascinating to view the movie in the context of it being likely the first in a long line of current 3D technology live-action films.
Based on this front of the curve usage of technology and coupled with the great story, the comparison film that probably most comes to mind for me is "Star Wars."
Quite a comparison, but "Avatar" to me was quite the movie.
-----------------
Postscript: Ok, after thinking about it further and being a few days removed from the amazing 3D effects, I feel now the story probably wasn't the greatest in the world (and certainly not up to "Star Wars" story territory), but the technology made this a great film to me.
To that point... interesting BusinessWeek cover story on James Cameron a few weeks ago.
Titled "King of the World (Again)" the piece details how even after the huge success of Titanic, the director had to win over sceptical studio executives when he expressed desire to make the most expensive movie ever filmed. In fact, he had to put his own money in to help develop the cameras used during shooting... which should pay off nicely for him with other directors interested in that technology for their own 3D films.
What was so interesting to me was both the story and the technology... both of which brought to mind other great films.
From a story perspective, the same "epic tale of life" that I liked so much in "Titanic" (of course also directed by James Cameron) and the aforementioned "Benjamin Button" were both here, but really... "Dances with Wolves" is the movie I most thought of based on the plot.
On story alone I would have found it a solid movie, but what really took into into a higher category for me was the technology (and I highly recommend watching it in 3D). It was amazing on the screen... and also fascinating to view the movie in the context of it being likely the first in a long line of current 3D technology live-action films.
Based on this front of the curve usage of technology and coupled with the great story, the comparison film that probably most comes to mind for me is "Star Wars."
Quite a comparison, but "Avatar" to me was quite the movie.
-----------------
Postscript: Ok, after thinking about it further and being a few days removed from the amazing 3D effects, I feel now the story probably wasn't the greatest in the world (and certainly not up to "Star Wars" story territory), but the technology made this a great film to me.
To that point... interesting BusinessWeek cover story on James Cameron a few weeks ago.
Titled "King of the World (Again)" the piece details how even after the huge success of Titanic, the director had to win over sceptical studio executives when he expressed desire to make the most expensive movie ever filmed. In fact, he had to put his own money in to help develop the cameras used during shooting... which should pay off nicely for him with other directors interested in that technology for their own 3D films.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
"The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
"The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" came as part of the Christmas Day wave of hopeful blockbusters and even for those with high expectations, it definitely didn't disappoint.
The movie stars Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett, but most intriguing to me prior to release, it was directed by David Fincher. His past directing credits (which can be found on Fincher's http://www.imdb.com/ page here) include "Zodiac", "Seven" and "Fight Club".
What I enjoyed most about the film was it's effectiveness at telling an "epic tale of life"... with the twist of it being lived in reverse by Brad Pitt's character... leading to the poignant scenes of relationships between characters aging in different directions.
To this whole "epic tale of life" concept... the movie reminded me of both "Titanic" and "Forest Gump". This connection makes sense given the fact that the screenwriter Eric Roth (whose imdb page is here) wrote "Forest Gump" as well. Another thing that helped give the film it's scope is the screenplay by Roth was adapted from an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story of the same name.
A very compelling movie and the trailer provides a good slice of what it's about...
The movie stars Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett, but most intriguing to me prior to release, it was directed by David Fincher. His past directing credits (which can be found on Fincher's http://www.imdb.com/ page here) include "Zodiac", "Seven" and "Fight Club".
What I enjoyed most about the film was it's effectiveness at telling an "epic tale of life"... with the twist of it being lived in reverse by Brad Pitt's character... leading to the poignant scenes of relationships between characters aging in different directions.
To this whole "epic tale of life" concept... the movie reminded me of both "Titanic" and "Forest Gump". This connection makes sense given the fact that the screenwriter Eric Roth (whose imdb page is here) wrote "Forest Gump" as well. Another thing that helped give the film it's scope is the screenplay by Roth was adapted from an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story of the same name.
A very compelling movie and the trailer provides a good slice of what it's about...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)