Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by theshining on Dec 30, 2012 12:30:30 GMT -5
Bishop posed the question a week or so ago in the general film discussion thread but I think we were all a few holiday season films away from making judgement. Safe to say, days removed from 2013, that we are in good shape to start this thread.
Here are my top 10 (no specific order)...
Cloud Atlas The Master Amour Headhunters Django Unchained Argo Flight The Queen of Versailles Beyond the Black Rainbow Looper
Honorable Mentions: Killing Them Softly, Savages (am I the only one who liked this?), Shut Up and Play the Hits, Life of Pi, How To Survive A Plague, Being Flynn.
Let Downs: Dark Knight Rises, Moonrise Kingdom, Prometheus
Didn't See (Possible top 10 types): Monsieur Lazhar, West of Memphis, Zero Dark Thirty, Les Miz, Central Park Five, Deep Blue Sea, The Sessions, Holy Motors
The, "I don't quite understand all the praise" nominees: Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook, Moonrise Kingdom, Cabin in the Woods, Take This Waltz, Beasts of the Southern Wild.
Django Unchained Moonrise Kingdom Lincoln Argo The Dark Knight Rises Cloud Atlas Life of Pi Safety Not Guaranteed Flight The Perks of Being a Wildflower
Didn't see many films this year but I'll make this now and edit in a few weeks:
1) Lincoln 2) Argo 3) Moonrise Kingdom 4) Skyfall 5) End of Watch 6) Looper 7) The Cabin in the Woods 8) The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 9) The Dark Knight Rises 10) Les Miserables
This will definitely be altered in the coming weeks once I see Life of Pi, The Master, Silver Linings Playbook, Cloud Atlas, and Django (hopefully I can find a torrent before March). Also still need to see Zero Dark Thirty. All the Oscar pundits say its between Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty this year.
Favorites, here... there are some selections in my list that are here out of niche enjoyment.
1. The Master 2. Django Unchained 3. Moonrise Kingdom 4. Cabin In The Woods 5. Fake It So Real 6. The Avengers 7. Looper 8. Les Miserables 9. The Comedy 10. Iron Sky
Disappointment of the Year: The Dark Knight Rises
Surprises of the Year: The Avengers Ted The Comedy
I still have yet to see Argo, Lincoln, Life Of Pi, Zero Dark Thirty, Flight, Cloud Atlas, Skyfall.
I would really like to include The Raid: Redemption, but I don't know if simply a 2012 US release qualifies.
I've seen some stuff to change up my list a tad (Oscars are still to come, so I think this thing is still relevant):
1. The Master 2. Zero Dark Thirty 3. Django Unchained 4. Moonrise Kingdom 5. Argo 6. Cabin In The Woods 7. Fake It So Real 8. Looper 9. Les Miserables 10. Flight
Wost movie I saw from 2012: Paranormal Activity 4 (by far)
Django Unchained Moonrise Kingdom Lincoln Argo The Dark Knight Rises Cloud Atlas Life of Pi Safety Not Guaranteed Flight The Perks of Being a Wildflower
Finally got around to seeing Les Mis and it was great. Throw it in my top 10 and take Perks out.
edit: Forgot about Silver Linings.
Revised List 1. Django Unchained 2.Lincoln 3. Moonrise Kingdom 4. Silver Linings Playbook 5. Argo 6. Cloud Atlas 7. Les Miserables 8. Safety Not Guaranteed 9. Life of Pi 10. Flight
Last Edit: Feb 1, 2013 0:48:58 GMT -5 by CPK - Back to Top
Aug 2 - Beyoncé and Jay-Z
Aug 23-24 - FYF Fest
Sept 17 - The Breeders
Sept 22 - Lykke Li
Oct 6 - Ought
1. Silver Linings Playbook 2. The Master 3. Lincoln 4. Moonrise Kingdom 5. The Grey 6. Beasts of the Southern Wild 7. Zero Dark Thirty 8. Django Unchained 9. Argo 10. The Kid With A Bike
Note: I've yet to see Amour, Skyfall, or Looper, but I plan on seeing them soon (especially Amour). I hated Life of Pi, but that's only because the story is infuriatingly absurd; not Ang Lee's fault, he's a good director. I also still need to see Les Mis.
Didn't see many films this year but I'll make this now and edit in a few weeks:
1) Lincoln 2) Argo 3) Moonrise Kingdom 4) Skyfall 5) End of Watch 6) Looper 7) The Cabin in the Woods 8) The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 9) The Dark Knight Rises 10) Les Miserables
This will definitely be altered in the coming weeks once I see Life of Pi, The Master, Silver Linings Playbook, Cloud Atlas, and Django (hopefully I can find a torrent before March). Also still need to see Zero Dark Thirty. All the Oscar pundits say its between Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty this year.
My list reedited btw:
Beasts of the Southern Wild Lincoln Life of Pi Argo Moonrise Kingdom Zero Dark Thirty Skyfall Django Unchained Cabin in the Woods Looper
HM: Hobbit, End of Watch, Killing Them Softly, Les Mis
I'm all for surreal plots (see: my placement of Beasts of the Southern Wild), but I just think the source material for LOP paints in very broad strokes regarding religion. The whole "first I was a Hindu, then I was a Christian, then I was a Muslim" structure in the middle of the movie strikes me as a lazy way to deal with a fascinating concept (pantheism). Not to mention these phases go by much, much, much too quickly.
The ending, to me, is deceptively pessimistic. It seems to suggest that the only reason to believe in the miraculous is because believing in human savagery is much worse and almost impossible for any sane person.
It's not so much that I dislike the fantastical nature of the "lost at sea" portion of the story; it's that I see this story as a deeply flawed, paradoxical narrative that repeatedly turned me off and that doesn't do justice to some of the fascinating concepts it only scratches the surface of. So, again, in a nutshell, I just feel like it paints in pretty broad strokes. I'm not saying I'm right, it was just how I felt about it. I know plenty of friends who liked it just fine.
I'm all for surreal plots (see: my placement of Beasts of the Southern Wild), but I just think the source material for LOP paints in very broad strokes regarding religion. The whole "first I was a Hindu, then I was a Christian, then I was a Muslim" structure in the middle of the movie strikes me as a lazy way to deal with a fascinating concept (pantheism). Not to mention these phases go by much, much, much too quickly.
The ending, to me, is deceptively pessimistic. It seems to suggest that the only reason to believe in the miraculous is because believing in human savagery is much worse and almost impossible for any sane person.
It's not so much that I dislike the fantastical nature of the "lost at sea" portion of the story; it's that I see this story as a deeply flawed, paradoxical narrative that repeatedly turned me off and that doesn't do justice to some of the fascinating concepts it only scratches the surface of. So, again, in a nutshell, I just feel like it paints in pretty broad strokes. I'm not saying I'm right, it was just how I felt about it. I know plenty of friends who liked it just fine.
I just saw it as a "it doesn't matter what religion you believe in, just have faith and you will be saved" type message. I think it was just meant to be a fun, unique survival story. That's why there are 'two versions' of the story at the end. The fun one with the tiger and the animals. And the brutal one with murder and cannablism. The audience wants the incredible, fun story because its entertaining and easier to swallow. For me it can be as broad and simple as it wants, but Richard Parker deserves that Oscar more than Tommy Lee Jones or Christoph Waltz, dammit.
I'm all for surreal plots (see: my placement of Beasts of the Southern Wild), but I just think the source material for LOP paints in very broad strokes regarding religion. The whole "first I was a Hindu, then I was a Christian, then I was a Muslim" structure in the middle of the movie strikes me as a lazy way to deal with a fascinating concept (pantheism). Not to mention these phases go by much, much, much too quickly.
The ending, to me, is deceptively pessimistic. It seems to suggest that the only reason to believe in the miraculous is because believing in human savagery is much worse and almost impossible for any sane person.
It's not so much that I dislike the fantastical nature of the "lost at sea" portion of the story; it's that I see this story as a deeply flawed, paradoxical narrative that repeatedly turned me off and that doesn't do justice to some of the fascinating concepts it only scratches the surface of. So, again, in a nutshell, I just feel like it paints in pretty broad strokes. I'm not saying I'm right, it was just how I felt about it. I know plenty of friends who liked it just fine.
I just saw it as a "it doesn't matter what religion you believe in, just have faith and you will be saved" type message. I think it was just meant to be a fun, unique survival story. That's why there are 'two versions' of the story at the end. The fun one with the tiger and the animals. And the brutal one with murder and cannablism. The audience wants the incredible, fun story because its entertaining and easier to swallow. For me it can be as broad and simple as it wants, but Richard Parker deserves that Oscar more than Tommy Lee Jones or Christoph Waltz, dammit.
Agreed. Pi is little more then a child when the story starts. I think his interest in religion and his understanding of the world should be viewed in that context. Which makes it that much more interesting to me.
Last Edit: Feb 1, 2013 4:38:00 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
I'm all for surreal plots (see: my placement of Beasts of the Southern Wild), but I just think the source material for LOP paints in very broad strokes regarding religion. The whole "first I was a Hindu, then I was a Christian, then I was a Muslim" structure in the middle of the movie strikes me as a lazy way to deal with a fascinating concept (pantheism). Not to mention these phases go by much, much, much too quickly.
The ending, to me, is deceptively pessimistic. It seems to suggest that the only reason to believe in the miraculous is because believing in human savagery is much worse and almost impossible for any sane person.
It's not so much that I dislike the fantastical nature of the "lost at sea" portion of the story; it's that I see this story as a deeply flawed, paradoxical narrative that repeatedly turned me off and that doesn't do justice to some of the fascinating concepts it only scratches the surface of. So, again, in a nutshell, I just feel like it paints in pretty broad strokes. I'm not saying I'm right, it was just how I felt about it. I know plenty of friends who liked it just fine.
I just saw it as a "it doesn't matter what religion you believe in, just have faith and you will be saved" type message. I think it was just meant to be a fun, unique survival story. That's why there are 'two versions' of the story at the end. The fun one with the tiger and the animals. And the brutal one with murder and cannablism. The audience wants the incredible, fun story because its entertaining and easier to swallow. For me it can be as broad and simple as it wants, but Richard Parker deserves that Oscar more than Tommy Lee Jones or Christoph Waltz, dammit.
You had me until that last sentence. TLJ was BRILLIANT in Lincoln. May've been a better character than Lincoln himself (although not quite as brilliant of an acting job as DDL).
I thought Christoph was fantastic in Django, too. I'd be really proud to see either of those guys win the Supporting Oscar.
Christoph absolutely deserves Best Supporting. As a matter of fact just give everything to Django. But I could be a little biased as it's the only 'big' movie I saw this year.
Perks of Being A Wallflower was actually pretty awesome. If you like the book you'll really enjoy the movie.
V/H/S was a pretty decent horror film.
Shutup and Play the Hits was absolutely brilliant.
Dark Knight Rises kind of sucked.
Those are the only new movies I got to see in 2012. Still have Lincoln, Argo, and Silver Lining's on my "Must Watch" list.
Last Edit: Feb 1, 2013 11:41:29 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
As usual, I'm pulling for Philip Seymour Hoffman... I haven't seen any of the other nominees aside from Arkin (who was good, but not award caliber if you ask me) and Waltz (understandably the favorite, here). I just think that Hoffman really helped make The Master something special, probably the best individual thing about that movie if I had to pick one thing.
1. Silver Linings Playbook 2. The Master 3. Lincoln 4. Moonrise Kingdom 5. The Grey 6. Beasts of the Southern Wild 7. Zero Dark Thirty 8. Django Unchained 9. Argo 10. The Kid With A Bike
Note: I've yet to see Amour, Skyfall, or Looper, but I plan on seeing them soon (especially Amour). I hated Life of Pi, but that's only because the story is infuriatingly absurd; not Ang Lee's fault, he's a good director. I also still need to see Les Mis.
Really enjoyed Kid with a Bike too, love the Dardenne Bros on the whole, though it was not up to L'enfant as far a their films go though.
Have you ever seen Revanche by Götz Spielmann? Fantastic film that plays very similar to what the Dardenne Bros and Michael Haneke usually deliver
1. Silver Linings Playbook 2. The Master 3. Lincoln 4. Moonrise Kingdom 5. The Grey 6. Beasts of the Southern Wild 7. Zero Dark Thirty 8. Django Unchained 9. Argo 10. The Kid With A Bike
Note: I've yet to see Amour, Skyfall, or Looper, but I plan on seeing them soon (especially Amour). I hated Life of Pi, but that's only because the story is infuriatingly absurd; not Ang Lee's fault, he's a good director. I also still need to see Les Mis.
Really enjoyed Kid with a Bike too, love the Dardenne Bros on the whole, though it was not up to L'enfant as far a their films go though.
Have you ever seen Revanche by Götz Spielmann? Fantastic film that plays very similar to what the Dardenne Bros and Michael Haneke usually deliver
No, but I will look into it now!
Bishop, I'm pulling for Tommy Lee Jones for Best Supporting. I love me some Phil Seymour Hoffman, but I just loved Jones so much in Lincoln.
Post by problem dog on Feb 4, 2013 22:47:09 GMT -5
1. Moonrise Kingdom 2. that historical drama 3. the well-acted biopic 4. Dredd 5. that recent historical drama 6. something foreign and austere 7. Silver Linings Playbook 8. the visually flat indie with that one good performance 9. did the Coens release one this year? 10. Take This Waltz
Seriously, though, I could come up with a top 10, but it wouldn't feel right since I still haven't seen Zero Dark Thirty, The Master, Holy Motors, Killer Joe, Perks of Being a Wallflower, Seven Psychopaths, Amour, Oslo, Turin Horse, and several others. I'm way behind.
I would disagree. I just watched it for the first time the other night and I feel like if anything it was very underrated, because most of the buzz on the film (outside of inforoo) was that it was a letdown or that people didn't get it. I think most of these people went into it thinking it was going to be another There Will Be Blood. I think The Master was the most stand-alone, different film that Anderson has made, which is one of the many reasons I loved it so much. Joaquin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman were beyond stellar, playing some of the most interesting characters in a film this year, and now that I've seen this I feel Phoenix deserves the oscar more than Day-Lewis this year. Just my opinion. So many great scenes as well, the processing scene, the desert bike scene.
I'm curious as to why you didn't feel it was all that.
Post by steveternal on Feb 5, 2013 10:10:19 GMT -5
I've seen precious few this year, and what I did I mostly liked (Moonrise Kingdom, Avengers, Dark Knight Rises, Les Miserables). A couple smaller films that stick in my mind are "Jiro Dreams of Sushi" and "Sound of Noise". Those would both be in my top 10, but, to be fair, I haven't even seen 10 new films this year.
Jiro Dreams of Sushi is one I heard a lot about middle/late last year but never looked into it. Sort of forgot about it, but last I checked it's on Netflix... may check it out.
Post by steveternal on Feb 5, 2013 14:09:52 GMT -5
^^^That's where I watched it, and ditto for "Sound of Noise" which is a great Swedish surreal comedy about six drummers who engage in sonic terrorism and the music-hating detective tracking them.
To everyone who disliked The Dark Knight Rises, I suggest you give it a second viewing without all your expectations from The Dark Knight. I was in your same boat. I left the theater feeling like it was good, but a disappointment from what I was hoping for. It seemed like it was trying to fit 5 hours of movie into 2 hours and 45 minutes.
I gave it another try last week and it was pretty damn awesome. The dialogue and twists and action sequences were all very interesting and exciting and deep. Without having that expectation hovering over me, I was able to truly enjoy the movie, similar to relistening to an album for that second or third time. You can then enjoy it for what it is, not what you were thinking it would be or what it needed to live up to.
Just to verify that I was not forgetting how awesome The Dark Knight is, I rewatched it a few days later. It is still as fresh and intriguing as ever, and I feel like The Dark Knight Rises is on par honestly. The biggest thing I held against DKR is that I loved Heath's Joker far more than Bane. In fact, I'm still not a big Bane fan. But I like Bruce Wayne far more in DKR than DK. Anyway, it's better than I originally thought.
Post by problem dog on Feb 5, 2013 20:14:37 GMT -5
I rewatched Dark Knight Rises on DVD and had the opposite experience. I saw it in theaters about two weeks after it came out, so I'd heard all the complaints and went in with lowered expectations. It was much better than I was expecting. There were some alleged "plotholes" that I would call intentional ambiguities, but I generally liked it enough that I was able to overlook the goofier parts.
I was much harder on it the second time around. Watching the first half when you know what's coming really invites your brain to pick it apart. The stuff that was bad the first time around just got worse, particularly Joseph Gordon Levitt's orphanage speech and everything related to that plot line. There are a ton of ways those same pieces could have been more elegantly up together, and I wish a better writer had taken a pass at that screenplay.