A few more episodes in... I'm nearing the end of the first season and I haven't gotten bored yet; I'm still curious about what'll happen with the characters.
The show stumbles a bit in places with the pacing; at times it seems to drag and I think it probably could've been trimmed down to, say, 8 episodes as opposed to 10. Episode 8 is a backstory/flashback episode depicting the initial events from 10 years ago that led the characters to end up in their current situation. While I think it was useful to shed light on this backstory, I think it might've worked better had various bits been incorporated into at least some of the preceding episodes of the season, rather than putting it all in a single episode, nearly at the end of the season.
In episode 7 (I think? Maybe it was 6), there's a scene where Marty is riding a bike, which is somewhat reminiscent of Michael Bluth biking in Arrested Development. However, somehow in AD Michael actually looks sort of cool when he bikes, yet in Ozark, Marty looks kinda dorky while doing it. In AD, Michael rides an 80s Schwinn road bike. In Ozark, Marty rides a contemporary Specialized hybrid-esque looking bike. At least I think it said Specialized. In AD, Michael rides for transportation purposes; in Ozark, Marty rides seemingly for recreation.
Seeing this scene of another character of Jason Bateman's riding a bike made me wonder if there's something about him and bikes, so I had to look it up. I could only find one or two interviews that mentioned it briefly; apparently he's an avid cyclist. So I wonder if Michael biking in AD was his idea, or if the writers came up with it on their own. Seeing as he's a producer on Ozark, I'm guessing perhaps it was indeed his idea there to have a scene with Marty biking.
I can't believe there hasn't even been a short/portion of an interview of Jason Bateman specifically about biking...
We'll see how the rest of the show goes. At its best moments, it's pretty riveting, although at times it does feel a bit slow and/or slightly poorly thought-out. What's interesting about watching this after being very familiar with Jason Bateman's performance in AD is that he's capable of doing quite a bit of depth with a character, which you just don't really tend to get in a comedy.
ETA: Episode 9: definitely one of the better ones as the show builds up to what presumably will be the season's climax during the final episode. There was a cool song played over the end credits of this episode too. There was one scene that brought to mind "There's always money in the banana stand!" from Arrested Development... pacing/plotting still stumbles slightly in places; sometimes a particular plot point will skip an episode and then after that, the show comes back to it, which makes for a slightly disjointed/hampered viewing experience.
Friday, August 9, 2019
Tuesday, August 6, 2019
Movie review: Equilibrium
This movie happened to be on Netflix and the single-sentence summary (usually those manage to tell you nearly nothing about a given movie/show) seemed interesting. Plus it starred Christian Bale, who's an at least somewhat famous actor. So I thought I'd give it a shot.
It turned out to be a movie that I liked, even almost a little better than I expected. It didn't have a ton of depth, but it was interesting enough and slick-looking. Cool aesthetics. Visually, the aesthetic of the movie I would describe as "industrial minimalist semi-grunge, with slight neoclassical tones." That may be a description that only makes sense to me.
It's a dystopian/sci-fi movie. The settings/architecture were sort of a minimalist industrial look -- vaguely Brutalist in some ways/places, but not all of it was fully Brutalist. Visually it was an interesting-looking movie.
The premise, as described by Netflix: "In a dystopian future, a totalitarian regime maintains peace by subduing the population with a drug, and displays of emotion are punishable by death." This is actually one of the better/more descriptive Netflix descriptions and is basically accurate.
The movie seemed a bit like a mishmash of two classic dystopian/science fiction novels, Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. Also with a helping of Star Wars on the side. So it was a bit derivative, but it was a perfectly decent movie. There was even a touch of A Clockwork Orange (perhaps coincidental) with some music by lovely lovely Ludwig Van having a part in one scene.
I don't remember if I've seen anything else with Christian Bale in it. I think he's known for playing Batman? Or something like that. [American Psycho, The Machinist, both of which I should watch, The Prestige, also Batman like I suspected] In this movie he reminded me of an assortment of other actors, including Jake Gyllenhaal (think Nightcrawler), Jared Leto (Requiem for a Dream), and Benedict Cumberbatch (BBC Sherlock, etc), among others.
There were a number of artful fight scenes in this movie, consisting of an interesting theatrical combination of martial arts and gun battles. There was one scene involving something somewhat fencing-esque. I do wonder how much the actor(s) (namely Christian Bale) had to train/rehearse/practice the choreography for these fight scenes.
It wasn't a particularly mind-blowingly profound movie or anything, and most likely not Christian Bale's most acclaimed work, but again, it was perfectly decent, visually striking/interesting and the premise about living in a society where people are unable to have emotions was interesting enough.
It turned out to be a movie that I liked, even almost a little better than I expected. It didn't have a ton of depth, but it was interesting enough and slick-looking. Cool aesthetics. Visually, the aesthetic of the movie I would describe as "industrial minimalist semi-grunge, with slight neoclassical tones." That may be a description that only makes sense to me.
It's a dystopian/sci-fi movie. The settings/architecture were sort of a minimalist industrial look -- vaguely Brutalist in some ways/places, but not all of it was fully Brutalist. Visually it was an interesting-looking movie.
The premise, as described by Netflix: "In a dystopian future, a totalitarian regime maintains peace by subduing the population with a drug, and displays of emotion are punishable by death." This is actually one of the better/more descriptive Netflix descriptions and is basically accurate.
The movie seemed a bit like a mishmash of two classic dystopian/science fiction novels, Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. Also with a helping of Star Wars on the side. So it was a bit derivative, but it was a perfectly decent movie. There was even a touch of A Clockwork Orange (perhaps coincidental) with some music by lovely lovely Ludwig Van having a part in one scene.
I don't remember if I've seen anything else with Christian Bale in it. I think he's known for playing Batman? Or something like that. [American Psycho, The Machinist, both of which I should watch, The Prestige, also Batman like I suspected] In this movie he reminded me of an assortment of other actors, including Jake Gyllenhaal (think Nightcrawler), Jared Leto (Requiem for a Dream), and Benedict Cumberbatch (BBC Sherlock, etc), among others.
There were a number of artful fight scenes in this movie, consisting of an interesting theatrical combination of martial arts and gun battles. There was one scene involving something somewhat fencing-esque. I do wonder how much the actor(s) (namely Christian Bale) had to train/rehearse/practice the choreography for these fight scenes.
It wasn't a particularly mind-blowingly profound movie or anything, and most likely not Christian Bale's most acclaimed work, but again, it was perfectly decent, visually striking/interesting and the premise about living in a society where people are unable to have emotions was interesting enough.
Thursday, August 1, 2019
Review: Netflix assortment
Netflix has quite a number of original, Netflix-exclusive shows/movies, most of which I've refrained from watching since a) there are an absolute ton of them and I wouldn't have time and b) the majority of them don't seem to be interesting enough to be worthwhile watching.
Yet: I started watching a recently released animated anthology series, which has been... a mixed bag, but I've only seen a few episodes so far. I also started watching the show Ozark, because Jason Bateman, and by extension, Arrested Development, which I love.
Love, Death and Robots: an animated anthology series; each episode is pretty short and they're all done by different people, so they have wide-ranging plots and animation styles. Makes for nice bite-size watching material. More to say about this once I finish watching all the episodes, most likely.
Ozark: this show isn't that new, but I only started watching it now. I've only watched the first episode so far, which was decent enough that I think I'll continue watching it.
It stars Jason Bateman, otherwise known as Michael Bluth from Arrested Development. He's one of those actors that I have very much the impression of that particular role for him, so I thought it'd be kind of hard for me to watch a different thing where he's playing a different character; I'd just see him as Michael Bluth. Not that he's a bad actor, but some actors are just like that. I think I'd have a hard time watching something with Steve Carrell in it without seeing him as Michael Scott from The Office.
I did see him a bit as Michael Bluth; quite a lot of the delivery of his lines in Ozark was very reminiscent of Michael. Unsurprisingly, I suppose, since that's just how his voice is and there's not really anything he can do about that, since in this show he isn't supposed to have some kind of unusual accent.
The show itself reminded me of a variety of other things I've watched in various aspects. The cinematography was reminiscent of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; very cinematic for a tv show, I thought. It was also pretty blue, which I also remember TGWTDT being. The tone of the show reminded me a bit of NBC's Hannibal, and/or The Killing -- measured. Plot-wise, it was semi-similar to How to Get Away With Murder, perhaps. One of the characters in Ozark is played by the same actor that plays a semi-minor character in HTGAWM.
In a way, Ozark kind of made me think of an alternative universe Michael Bluth. (Jason Bateman's character in Ozark even has the same initials and name syllabilization as Michael Bluth) An alternative universe Michael who's darker, a bit more grim and more cynical. I guess maybe that impression is just due to the nature of the show; Ozark is supposed to be a crime drama whereas Arrested Development is an atypical comedy. Michael's character seems a bit more... noble. He at least tries/desires to be a good person at least some of the time, even if he's kind of sanctimonious (something you realize a bit into the show, though compared to his family members, he's the least crazy).
This cool song is used at the end of the first episode, which reminded me of House MD since I generally liked the music used in that show back when I watched it. Initially, I thought it was by some indie band, but then I looked it up and it turned out to be by Radiohead... in a way, it's sort of similar to the song Madness by Muse.
More thoughts on Ozark as I continue to watch it.
Velvet Buzzsaw: a movie, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, among others. It has to do with art; Jake plays an art critic. I think it was supposed to be sort of a satire, but it wasn't exactly the most effective satire. Jake Gyllenhaal was alright, but the movie itself was mediocre, which is about what I had expected. I watched it one day because I was bored and wanted to kill some time. I did wonder about the various artworks in the movie; if they were actual artworks that had been sourced to be in the movie, or if the props department conceived of and created all of them.
Ozark, a few more episodes in: Still can't shake the Michael Bluth impression, which isn't so terrible; Jason Bateman's character in Ozark is more or less an alternative universe version of Michael in a darker, non-comedy show. Michael minus the rest of his family, set in the Ozarks, involved with shady business with a drug cartel, instead of George Sr.'s antics.
Part of it is just the way that he talks, and his mannerisms/vocal mannerisms (which I guess falls under "the way that he talks"). It's sort of trippy though, to have AD so in-mind while watching Ozark. But it's also kind of impossible to have it out of mind, if you've rewatched AD as much as I have. Anyways, onward and upward...
Obviously his character dresses a bit differently in this show; it's set more currently so the early 2000s fashions would be out of date. He wears tighter-fitting shirts, as is the trend these days, not the billowing numbers of past decades (see also: Stephen Glass shirt)... He also wears darker colors, I've noticed.
Michael Bluth wore mostly whites and light blue shirts, unsurprisingly given his role as a businessman for his family's housing company. Martin in Ozark wears darker colors -- navy, burgundy, even a dark blueish plaid. Clothing that looks a bit more rumpled/disheveled, somewhat less polished. I assume the costume design was intentional.
Further reading: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/with-ozark-jason-bateman-mixes-michael-bluth-with-walter-white
I do maybe sort of wish the show were a bit shorter/faster-paced; as it is, it definitely seems like a slow burn, and I'm kind of impatient. Anyways, we'll see. Assuming the second season is also 10 episodes, that means ~20 hours of watching. Supposedly there's supposed to be a third season at some point, so hopefully the second season doesn't leave off on a crazy cliffhanger and then I have to wait some unknown amount of time for the next one..... another reason why I'm not so big on Netflix-exclusive shows. That means you, Mindhunter. Good show, but I thought there'd be a second season ages ago...
Yet: I started watching a recently released animated anthology series, which has been... a mixed bag, but I've only seen a few episodes so far. I also started watching the show Ozark, because Jason Bateman, and by extension, Arrested Development, which I love.
Love, Death and Robots: an animated anthology series; each episode is pretty short and they're all done by different people, so they have wide-ranging plots and animation styles. Makes for nice bite-size watching material. More to say about this once I finish watching all the episodes, most likely.
Ozark: this show isn't that new, but I only started watching it now. I've only watched the first episode so far, which was decent enough that I think I'll continue watching it.
It stars Jason Bateman, otherwise known as Michael Bluth from Arrested Development. He's one of those actors that I have very much the impression of that particular role for him, so I thought it'd be kind of hard for me to watch a different thing where he's playing a different character; I'd just see him as Michael Bluth. Not that he's a bad actor, but some actors are just like that. I think I'd have a hard time watching something with Steve Carrell in it without seeing him as Michael Scott from The Office.
I did see him a bit as Michael Bluth; quite a lot of the delivery of his lines in Ozark was very reminiscent of Michael. Unsurprisingly, I suppose, since that's just how his voice is and there's not really anything he can do about that, since in this show he isn't supposed to have some kind of unusual accent.
The show itself reminded me of a variety of other things I've watched in various aspects. The cinematography was reminiscent of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; very cinematic for a tv show, I thought. It was also pretty blue, which I also remember TGWTDT being. The tone of the show reminded me a bit of NBC's Hannibal, and/or The Killing -- measured. Plot-wise, it was semi-similar to How to Get Away With Murder, perhaps. One of the characters in Ozark is played by the same actor that plays a semi-minor character in HTGAWM.
In a way, Ozark kind of made me think of an alternative universe Michael Bluth. (Jason Bateman's character in Ozark even has the same initials and name syllabilization as Michael Bluth) An alternative universe Michael who's darker, a bit more grim and more cynical. I guess maybe that impression is just due to the nature of the show; Ozark is supposed to be a crime drama whereas Arrested Development is an atypical comedy. Michael's character seems a bit more... noble. He at least tries/desires to be a good person at least some of the time, even if he's kind of sanctimonious (something you realize a bit into the show, though compared to his family members, he's the least crazy).
This cool song is used at the end of the first episode, which reminded me of House MD since I generally liked the music used in that show back when I watched it. Initially, I thought it was by some indie band, but then I looked it up and it turned out to be by Radiohead... in a way, it's sort of similar to the song Madness by Muse.
More thoughts on Ozark as I continue to watch it.
Velvet Buzzsaw: a movie, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, among others. It has to do with art; Jake plays an art critic. I think it was supposed to be sort of a satire, but it wasn't exactly the most effective satire. Jake Gyllenhaal was alright, but the movie itself was mediocre, which is about what I had expected. I watched it one day because I was bored and wanted to kill some time. I did wonder about the various artworks in the movie; if they were actual artworks that had been sourced to be in the movie, or if the props department conceived of and created all of them.
Ozark, a few more episodes in: Still can't shake the Michael Bluth impression, which isn't so terrible; Jason Bateman's character in Ozark is more or less an alternative universe version of Michael in a darker, non-comedy show. Michael minus the rest of his family, set in the Ozarks, involved with shady business with a drug cartel, instead of George Sr.'s antics.
Part of it is just the way that he talks, and his mannerisms/vocal mannerisms (which I guess falls under "the way that he talks"). It's sort of trippy though, to have AD so in-mind while watching Ozark. But it's also kind of impossible to have it out of mind, if you've rewatched AD as much as I have. Anyways, onward and upward...
Obviously his character dresses a bit differently in this show; it's set more currently so the early 2000s fashions would be out of date. He wears tighter-fitting shirts, as is the trend these days, not the billowing numbers of past decades (see also: Stephen Glass shirt)... He also wears darker colors, I've noticed.
Michael Bluth wore mostly whites and light blue shirts, unsurprisingly given his role as a businessman for his family's housing company. Martin in Ozark wears darker colors -- navy, burgundy, even a dark blueish plaid. Clothing that looks a bit more rumpled/disheveled, somewhat less polished. I assume the costume design was intentional.
Further reading: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/with-ozark-jason-bateman-mixes-michael-bluth-with-walter-white
I do maybe sort of wish the show were a bit shorter/faster-paced; as it is, it definitely seems like a slow burn, and I'm kind of impatient. Anyways, we'll see. Assuming the second season is also 10 episodes, that means ~20 hours of watching. Supposedly there's supposed to be a third season at some point, so hopefully the second season doesn't leave off on a crazy cliffhanger and then I have to wait some unknown amount of time for the next one..... another reason why I'm not so big on Netflix-exclusive shows. That means you, Mindhunter. Good show, but I thought there'd be a second season ages ago...
Monday, July 1, 2019
Movie review: Platoon
This movie apparently was recently added to Netflix, I think. In any case, I hadn't seen it in the past and now I have. Save for The Deer Hunter and The Things They Carried, (I think there's a movie of that? I know there's a book) I think I've now seen all the major Vietnam War movies. My personal favorites of those have been We Were Soldiers and Full Metal Jacket. I've intentionally tried to forget Apocalypse Now; it was an awful movie and I hated it just as much as I hated the source material, Heart of Darkness.
Anyways. This one, Platoon, I'd been aware of for some time yet only now got around to watching. I wasn't entirely sure what exactly to expect, except that the movie was set during the Vietnam War. Initially, the movie didn't seem to have much of a plot, but the plot becomes clearer as the movie progresses. Perhaps you could say the plot is a little more abstract than in the other movies. It basically begins with a cold open as the central character arrives in Vietnam, minimal exposition in the traditional sense.
It stars Charlie Sheen, who vaguely resembles Tom Cruise, and also I think a mix of him and Jason Bateman. I think it was Charlie Sheen's father, Martin Sheen who was in Apocalypse Now, so I guess in the back of my mind, son resembled father (unsurprisingly).
It's interesting how each movie depicts a different slice of/take on the events of the Vietnam War. We Were Soldiers I'd describe as artful, almost, in a way, particularly due to the score/soundtrack for the battle scenes. Platoon was more raw, more brutal, in a way. No graceful/artful flourishes like in We Were Soldiers. Full Metal Jacket was different in a Kubrickian way (admittedly, the only other real reference for Kubrick's work I have is A Clockwork Orange, having also disliked and intentionally tried to forget The Shining), in that it definitely feels like a Kubrick film.
War is hell, as having watched all these various war movies has confirmed for me (I think "War is hell" is a quote from Full Metal Jacket somewhere). Platoon takes place entirely in Vietnam, unlike We Were Soldiers and Full Metal Jacket (and Born on the Fourth of July, the other Vietnam War movie I've seen yet haven't mentioned here yet).
Although this movie had a slightly abstract front end and I couldn't initially really tell where the plot was going, in the end. I did end up liking it. It depicts and focuses on the group dynamics within the group of soldiers portrayed, particularly conflicts amongst them as well as camaraderie (in some cases). It's perhaps a bit more character driven, in that the focus of the plot deals with the individual natures of the various characters and how they do or don't get along with each other while fighting the war.
I'm not sure if it was based off real events, and if so, to what extent [edit: yes, it was based off the director's experiences]. In the somewhat abstract beginning, the pacing seemed a bit slow, but when it came to what I assumed (correctly) was the climax, there was some brief falling action afterward as you'd expect to occur based on a traditional plot arc.
The focus on internal conflicts within the band of soldiers was interesting since none of the other war movies I've seen have had that be such an integral part of the plot. Full Metal Jacket perhaps touches on it a bit (particularly in the first act during the boot camp, where Joker becomes responsible for making sure Vincent's character improves) and I think there's also a scene or two in Jarhead regarding such things, but it's not the focus of those films.
There was a character named Elias in this movie, who had an interesting and important role, although so as not to spoil anything I won't say more about that, except that I think that's a nice name, although Ian is still my top favorite.
Although I've said in the past that I don't exactly like war movies, maybe I do like them after all?? (gasp) At least some of them. My main focus with regards to war movies would be: about the Vietnam War, very famous (even if they're about other wars, such as Saving Private Ryan) and/or starring an actor I like (such as Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead [maybe I should rewatch this... it's been awhile since I last saw it]).
At the moment, I think I'd rank my top favorite Vietnam War movies in this order:
We Were Soldiers (I thought it made a particularly unique impression due to the music/score/soundtrack)
Full Metal Jacket (the Kubrick factor)
Platoon
Wednesday, June 5, 2019
Birds needing a new home
Sometimes I peruse the local Craigslist listings when I'm bored, for light reading purposes. Occasionally I'll find one that's particularly interesting/nicely-written, such as this one for a pair of birds needing a new home:
"I need to find a permanent loving home for these bonded Sun Conures.
They should not be separated. She wouldn't know a life without him...and he would be totally distraught without her.
In a nutshell, I have other birds and the conures are becoming increasingly intolerant of them....attacking, dive bombing, etc. My wife also has grown intolerant of them...and it's causing issues for us, frankly. They also clearly hate their cage arrangement, but I cannot find a practical solution better than what they have. I think they just hate living near the others. When I take them out of town to my parents, they are fantastic! They are also great when boarded.
The female is only 2 years old. The male is 5 years old. The female is still a little bit fearful of hands, but she does step up and loves to snuggle on the couch. The male has a huge personality -- but he is very protective of her.
I've probably explained enough here. I love them dearly. I just know they will ultimately be happier in a different environment. Even though I spoil them somewhat, I feel like they're captive here anymore...they seem so unhappy. Time for a major change. I also believe they will end up breeding, which I'm not really encouraging here at my home.
Experience with birds will go a long way. I wouldn't recommend this pair if you've never had birds before. You will need to be patient at first, but they will quickly get adjusted and learn to trust you. I can give you lots of pointers to help the transition. Otherwise, I know they will be great pets...and possibly a breeder pair once she comes of age.
I'm asking a rehoming fee, but very reasonable. If you are serious, email me and we can discuss it. I do not have a cage to give you with them...because it's a double stack cage and I have other birds in it. Should be easy to come up with a good cage for them...and I can help guide you if needed."
"I need to find a permanent loving home for these bonded Sun Conures.
They should not be separated. She wouldn't know a life without him...and he would be totally distraught without her.
In a nutshell, I have other birds and the conures are becoming increasingly intolerant of them....attacking, dive bombing, etc. My wife also has grown intolerant of them...and it's causing issues for us, frankly. They also clearly hate their cage arrangement, but I cannot find a practical solution better than what they have. I think they just hate living near the others. When I take them out of town to my parents, they are fantastic! They are also great when boarded.
The female is only 2 years old. The male is 5 years old. The female is still a little bit fearful of hands, but she does step up and loves to snuggle on the couch. The male has a huge personality -- but he is very protective of her.
I've probably explained enough here. I love them dearly. I just know they will ultimately be happier in a different environment. Even though I spoil them somewhat, I feel like they're captive here anymore...they seem so unhappy. Time for a major change. I also believe they will end up breeding, which I'm not really encouraging here at my home.
Experience with birds will go a long way. I wouldn't recommend this pair if you've never had birds before. You will need to be patient at first, but they will quickly get adjusted and learn to trust you. I can give you lots of pointers to help the transition. Otherwise, I know they will be great pets...and possibly a breeder pair once she comes of age.
I'm asking a rehoming fee, but very reasonable. If you are serious, email me and we can discuss it. I do not have a cage to give you with them...because it's a double stack cage and I have other birds in it. Should be easy to come up with a good cage for them...and I can help guide you if needed."
Sunday, April 7, 2019
Movie review: We Were Soldiers
Whoa.
I watched this movie somewhat on a whim; I had seen the tail end of one movie that happened to be on television and was trying to find something else to watch since I didn't feel like watching Breaking Dawn, which was what had come on after the aforementioned movie. So I decided to look at what was on the DVR, and We Were Soldiers was one of the movies, so I decided I might as well watch it.
So I did. I really liked it, actually. It was quite something. It's a Vietnam War movie. I know I've claimed in the past that I'm not a particular fan of war movies, yet for some reason I still watch them. I've seen Saving Private Ryan (Tom Hanks and Matt Damon), Full Metal Jacket (Vincent D'Onofrio, somewhat briefly), Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July (Tom Cruise), Jarhead (Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal, among others) and maybe a couple others I'm forgetting. A small part of The Deer Hunter. Some of these I liked or disliked more than others (Apocalypse Now, for example, I thought was a colossal waste of time... three whole hours!!!). Saving Private Ryan lived up to its reputation of being a famous movie, Full Metal Jacket grew on me, somewhat surprisingly, Born on the Fourth of July was a bit of a different take on war movies, Jarhead was also good and I enjoyed the fact that Peter Sarsgaard was in it. But I digress.
Back to We Were Soldiers. For awhile I've felt that I should try to learn more about the Vietnam War, by various means. Some of that includes watching movies about/set during it. Within the last year, I also watched the PBS Vietnam War documentary series which I found to be highly informative, although I feel like I should've taken notes. One of the things that stuck with me from that documentary series was the shade of green of the American military uniforms -- I just thought it looked quite nice, so I wanted to get something in that same shade of green, ideally also in a similar style to the uniform shirts. Some time after watching the series, I happened to find a jacket matching those criteria at the thrift store! That was cool, even though it's not a Vietnam-era jacket. And it's comically large, but I've safety-pinned it to take in the back and have rolled the sleeve cuffs to somewhat mitigate that. The pockets are out of this world, especially for someone used to women's clothing. I wouldn't even really have to carry a purse if I wore that jacket! I haven't worn it much yet because it's not super warm and also doesn't have a hood (so no use for rain), but as spring proceeds hopefully I can get some use out of it. It'd be cool if I could get my hands on some replica 60s antiwar buttons to put on it. And a Bobby Kennedy for president button. That'd be cool.
That was a bit of a digression too. I really liked the movie; I think it's on the same level as Saving Private Ryan, and I think maybe it even edges out Saving Private Ryan slightly, as far as subject matter goes -- the Vietnam War interests me a bit more than World War II does. Both movies were pretty brutal/gruesome in parts, both definitely had me holding my breath and my heart racing during a number of the battle scenes.
I think the title of this movie is nicely poetic, which you don't always get with war movies -- "We Were Soldiers Once... and Young" being the full phrase/title of the book the movie was based on. It reminds me of some kind of poem. (maybe it actually is from a poem?)
This movie was actually a somewhat unique/different take on war movies due to some of the cinematic techniques utilized in it. I really liked the music/scoring/soundtrack -- it really enhanced the movie and it was done in a way that I think is sort of unconventional for war movies, or at least as far as the other ones I've seen go. The music/soundtrack/scoring was graceful and orchestral. In a number of scenes/parts of scenes, the score would be the prominent audio and the sounds of the battle were faint/in the background, which created an interesting dramatic effect; again, something that I don't think is that common in the genre of war movies. Sometimes the motion would be slowed down as well. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that the juxtaposition of the graceful, orchestral music and the chaos and violence of a battle was quite striking to me.
The movie has a beginning section set at a military base in the US as the soldiers prepare to be sent off to war. Then most of the rest of it is set during the course of a single battle -- Ia Drang in 1965. It was based on real events; some of the names I recognized from prior reading/documentary-watching. Maybe halfway through the movie, at some point in the middle, a journalist -- war correspondent -- shows up to cover the battle. I wasn't quite expecting that, but that was kind of a cool touch since I would like to become a journalist myself, although not necessarily a war correspondent. While it could be interesting to be a war correspondent in the present day (covering the Middle East, most likely -- like Arwa Damon, who is pretty badass and whose work I should pay more attention to) or could have been interesting to have been a war correspondent in the Vietnam War, I think it would be/have been interesting in a terrifying way. The whole aspect of being in the middle of a war and all. We Were Soldiers conveyed that pretty well. The journalist portrayed in this movie was Joe Galloway, whose name sounded familiar so I must've read about him in the past or saw him mentioned in the Vietnam War documentary series. More accurately, he was a photojournalist, and in the movie he's depicted as taking photos with a Nikon (!) camera, which was also sort of an interesting thing since I happen to have a Nikon camera. It really did make me wonder what it might've been like to actually be a Vietnam War correspondent. And also about media ethics in that context.
As an aside, I've also read about Vietnam War reenactments, which I think is an interesting concept because that's not the most common war to reenact. Yet there are some people who do indeed reenact it and there's actually a documentary about them ("In Country") that I should watch at some point. The people who were making said documentary had to dress up and act as period-appropriate war correspondents (although they were allowed to use their modern camera equiment) during the reenactment, which I thought was pretty cool -- perhaps someday I could participate in a reenactment like that.
I said/thought to myself "holy fuck" a number of times during the course of watching this movie, it was that intense. But it was quite a good movie, and honestly I'd be open to watching it again. I'm not quite sure I'd really want to watch Saving Private Ryan again; I think I mentioned that in my review of that movie right after I had watched it, which you can find on this blog somewhere. I've read that some people consider Requiem for a Dream to be a movie that they only want to watch once and never again, although that one I have rewatched a number of times and would rewatch it more in the future if the mood strikes me and I have the time for it.
In a way, I'd say the movie kind of felt like a mix of Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket (mostly setting-wise), and Requiem for a Dream -- it had a similar rawness like Requiem.
The cinematography differed a bit from the other Vietnam War movies I've seen. Perhaps this was at least in part because We Were Soldiers was a 2002 movie, and the others were made earlier in time -- Full Metal Jacket was 1987, Apocalyse Now was 1979. Those two movies, I remember the cinematography as being more saturated/vibrant, in terms of colors. We Were Soldiers had a color palette of mainly warmer greens, which was also sort of different, because I feel like the other two movies had slightly cooler greens. In a few scenes, you could see that blood had splashed onto the lens of the camera a little bit, which was sort of an interesting touch.
The end of it was well-done and I will admit that I cried a little bit. I usually do not cry about movies, although I can recall crying a bit towards the end of watching Titanic once.
Throughout the movie are interspersed scenes of the military wives back at home, and I thought their clothes were interesting -- mid-60s fashions for housewives, so not the more hippie-ish stuff that younger people, like college students would have worn during that era.
I've written nearly all of this fresh from watching the movie (I had to go look up the name of the specific battle this movie was based on), so now I'm going to go read a bit about the background of it and perhaps gain some additional context/knowledge about its production and that kind of thing. And find the name of that somewhat haunting song played over a few of the scenes.
[^^^ approximately 1600 words! ^^^]
I watched this movie somewhat on a whim; I had seen the tail end of one movie that happened to be on television and was trying to find something else to watch since I didn't feel like watching Breaking Dawn, which was what had come on after the aforementioned movie. So I decided to look at what was on the DVR, and We Were Soldiers was one of the movies, so I decided I might as well watch it.
So I did. I really liked it, actually. It was quite something. It's a Vietnam War movie. I know I've claimed in the past that I'm not a particular fan of war movies, yet for some reason I still watch them. I've seen Saving Private Ryan (Tom Hanks and Matt Damon), Full Metal Jacket (Vincent D'Onofrio, somewhat briefly), Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July (Tom Cruise), Jarhead (Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal, among others) and maybe a couple others I'm forgetting. A small part of The Deer Hunter. Some of these I liked or disliked more than others (Apocalypse Now, for example, I thought was a colossal waste of time... three whole hours!!!). Saving Private Ryan lived up to its reputation of being a famous movie, Full Metal Jacket grew on me, somewhat surprisingly, Born on the Fourth of July was a bit of a different take on war movies, Jarhead was also good and I enjoyed the fact that Peter Sarsgaard was in it. But I digress.
Back to We Were Soldiers. For awhile I've felt that I should try to learn more about the Vietnam War, by various means. Some of that includes watching movies about/set during it. Within the last year, I also watched the PBS Vietnam War documentary series which I found to be highly informative, although I feel like I should've taken notes. One of the things that stuck with me from that documentary series was the shade of green of the American military uniforms -- I just thought it looked quite nice, so I wanted to get something in that same shade of green, ideally also in a similar style to the uniform shirts. Some time after watching the series, I happened to find a jacket matching those criteria at the thrift store! That was cool, even though it's not a Vietnam-era jacket. And it's comically large, but I've safety-pinned it to take in the back and have rolled the sleeve cuffs to somewhat mitigate that. The pockets are out of this world, especially for someone used to women's clothing. I wouldn't even really have to carry a purse if I wore that jacket! I haven't worn it much yet because it's not super warm and also doesn't have a hood (so no use for rain), but as spring proceeds hopefully I can get some use out of it. It'd be cool if I could get my hands on some replica 60s antiwar buttons to put on it. And a Bobby Kennedy for president button. That'd be cool.
That was a bit of a digression too. I really liked the movie; I think it's on the same level as Saving Private Ryan, and I think maybe it even edges out Saving Private Ryan slightly, as far as subject matter goes -- the Vietnam War interests me a bit more than World War II does. Both movies were pretty brutal/gruesome in parts, both definitely had me holding my breath and my heart racing during a number of the battle scenes.
I think the title of this movie is nicely poetic, which you don't always get with war movies -- "We Were Soldiers Once... and Young" being the full phrase/title of the book the movie was based on. It reminds me of some kind of poem. (maybe it actually is from a poem?)
This movie was actually a somewhat unique/different take on war movies due to some of the cinematic techniques utilized in it. I really liked the music/scoring/soundtrack -- it really enhanced the movie and it was done in a way that I think is sort of unconventional for war movies, or at least as far as the other ones I've seen go. The music/soundtrack/scoring was graceful and orchestral. In a number of scenes/parts of scenes, the score would be the prominent audio and the sounds of the battle were faint/in the background, which created an interesting dramatic effect; again, something that I don't think is that common in the genre of war movies. Sometimes the motion would be slowed down as well. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that the juxtaposition of the graceful, orchestral music and the chaos and violence of a battle was quite striking to me.
The movie has a beginning section set at a military base in the US as the soldiers prepare to be sent off to war. Then most of the rest of it is set during the course of a single battle -- Ia Drang in 1965. It was based on real events; some of the names I recognized from prior reading/documentary-watching. Maybe halfway through the movie, at some point in the middle, a journalist -- war correspondent -- shows up to cover the battle. I wasn't quite expecting that, but that was kind of a cool touch since I would like to become a journalist myself, although not necessarily a war correspondent. While it could be interesting to be a war correspondent in the present day (covering the Middle East, most likely -- like Arwa Damon, who is pretty badass and whose work I should pay more attention to) or could have been interesting to have been a war correspondent in the Vietnam War, I think it would be/have been interesting in a terrifying way. The whole aspect of being in the middle of a war and all. We Were Soldiers conveyed that pretty well. The journalist portrayed in this movie was Joe Galloway, whose name sounded familiar so I must've read about him in the past or saw him mentioned in the Vietnam War documentary series. More accurately, he was a photojournalist, and in the movie he's depicted as taking photos with a Nikon (!) camera, which was also sort of an interesting thing since I happen to have a Nikon camera. It really did make me wonder what it might've been like to actually be a Vietnam War correspondent. And also about media ethics in that context.
As an aside, I've also read about Vietnam War reenactments, which I think is an interesting concept because that's not the most common war to reenact. Yet there are some people who do indeed reenact it and there's actually a documentary about them ("In Country") that I should watch at some point. The people who were making said documentary had to dress up and act as period-appropriate war correspondents (although they were allowed to use their modern camera equiment) during the reenactment, which I thought was pretty cool -- perhaps someday I could participate in a reenactment like that.
I said/thought to myself "holy fuck" a number of times during the course of watching this movie, it was that intense. But it was quite a good movie, and honestly I'd be open to watching it again. I'm not quite sure I'd really want to watch Saving Private Ryan again; I think I mentioned that in my review of that movie right after I had watched it, which you can find on this blog somewhere. I've read that some people consider Requiem for a Dream to be a movie that they only want to watch once and never again, although that one I have rewatched a number of times and would rewatch it more in the future if the mood strikes me and I have the time for it.
In a way, I'd say the movie kind of felt like a mix of Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket (mostly setting-wise), and Requiem for a Dream -- it had a similar rawness like Requiem.
The cinematography differed a bit from the other Vietnam War movies I've seen. Perhaps this was at least in part because We Were Soldiers was a 2002 movie, and the others were made earlier in time -- Full Metal Jacket was 1987, Apocalyse Now was 1979. Those two movies, I remember the cinematography as being more saturated/vibrant, in terms of colors. We Were Soldiers had a color palette of mainly warmer greens, which was also sort of different, because I feel like the other two movies had slightly cooler greens. In a few scenes, you could see that blood had splashed onto the lens of the camera a little bit, which was sort of an interesting touch.
The end of it was well-done and I will admit that I cried a little bit. I usually do not cry about movies, although I can recall crying a bit towards the end of watching Titanic once.
Throughout the movie are interspersed scenes of the military wives back at home, and I thought their clothes were interesting -- mid-60s fashions for housewives, so not the more hippie-ish stuff that younger people, like college students would have worn during that era.
I've written nearly all of this fresh from watching the movie (I had to go look up the name of the specific battle this movie was based on), so now I'm going to go read a bit about the background of it and perhaps gain some additional context/knowledge about its production and that kind of thing. And find the name of that somewhat haunting song played over a few of the scenes.
[^^^ approximately 1600 words! ^^^]
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Movie review: The Departed
I finally got around to watching this movie. I had been meaning/wanting to watch it for the longest time -- currently it conveniently happens to be on Netflix. Leonardo DiCaprio AND Matt Damon are in this movie during their prime (now they're kind of getting a little old...), which makes it doubly appealing.
Some other famous actors like Jack Nicholson are in the movie too, but I think he's weird looking so I don't go out of my way to watch movies he's in. The Shining was a weird movie, and dare I say, bad, even though it's famous and was directed by the famous director Stanley Kubrick. I watched it thinking it might be good because it's famous and I thought I should give more of Kubrick's work a look after watching Full Metal Jacket, but The Shining has disabused me of that notion. (well, I still might give A Clockwork Orange a try since it's also famous and maybe Eyes Wide Shut because Tom Cruise, but we'll see)
The Departed was directed by Martin Scorsese, also a famous director and who has done a number of movies with Leonardo DiCaprio, including Shutter Island which I thought was quite good and mind-fucky in a good way. Directors whose work I've enjoyed I do try to watch other movies they've done -- David Fincher (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), Martin Scorsese (Shutter Island), Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream), and I think maybe one other guy whose name I'm forgetting. I realize this set of directors has a diversity problem (as do famous directors in general), so if anyone wants to point me to dark thriller type movies directed by women and/or people of color, that'd be fun -- always worth it to expand one's horizons like such. I really should probably try to watch more movies directed by people other than (usually old) white men. I guess Boys Don't Cry is a start; that one was directed by a woman. Aside from that I can't really think of any others off the top of my head. Maybe I could become a movie director???
Back on topic, although the issue of diversity (really, in pretty much any field) is an important one. The Departed was a good movie, although it wasn't spectacularly mind-blowing in the way Shutter Island was and it didn't leave as much of an impression on me as Requiem for a Dream. Regardless, it was pretty solid and I wasn't disappointed -- I didn't think it was a waste of 2 and a half hours. This means it was better than, say, No Country for Old Men which I do think was a waste of time to watch and was a disappointment. While we're at it, Zodiac was also a disappointment (it could've been way better!!)
It was a pretty brutal/violent movie but I don't really mind that -- kind of comes with the territory/subject matter. It's actually at least the third movie set in Boston that I've watched which I thought was sort of interesting to note. The others have been Spotlight (about journalists) and Black Mass (based on a true story about mobsters with a brief Peter Sarsgaard appearance).
Matt Damon and Leo were good in their roles although I thought perhaps Leo's character could've been developed a little more -- the movie could've been a bit longer to include something like that. I also found the ending a little anticlimactic, actually -- I think I would've preferred a different ending, something that has a bit more panache. Although I can see why they decided to have it end the way it did.
It vaguely reminded me a bit of Heat, but I think I liked this movie better -- I feel like Heat kind of dragged a bit but The Departed kept up a nice suspenseful pace, lots of deceit/deception. It could've been a bit more suspenseful -- I suppose perhaps I wish it had more of a sense that the stakes were higher. Yes, it could've been more suspenseful.
Overall, perfectly decent movie, not a waste of time, Leo and Matt were good, although I think there was a little room for improvement. It wasn't mind-blowing, but I'm glad I watched it. I liked it better than Black Mass which was also focused on the subject of mobsters in Boston. 4/5
Oh, and there was a cool-looking Brutalist building featured briefly -- I think it might have been supposed to be the police headquarters or something.
I just looked it up -- I had been wondering if The Departed was based on a true story at all and if so, to what extent, and it turns out it was! It was based on the same people/characters featured in Black Mass, so that's kind of interesting... a fictionalized take on that scenario whereas Black Mass was explicitly based on actual people/events.
I still have not watched Inception, also starring Leo. Years ago (literally!) I got it on DVD but still I have not seen it. You'd think this one would be next on my list.
Also, as a rhetorical question, is Leonardo DiCaprio or Matt Damon a better actor/more famous? Perhaps one is the better actor as well as more famous, or maybe it's split, or maybe they're about equal.
Some other famous actors like Jack Nicholson are in the movie too, but I think he's weird looking so I don't go out of my way to watch movies he's in. The Shining was a weird movie, and dare I say, bad, even though it's famous and was directed by the famous director Stanley Kubrick. I watched it thinking it might be good because it's famous and I thought I should give more of Kubrick's work a look after watching Full Metal Jacket, but The Shining has disabused me of that notion. (well, I still might give A Clockwork Orange a try since it's also famous and maybe Eyes Wide Shut because Tom Cruise, but we'll see)
The Departed was directed by Martin Scorsese, also a famous director and who has done a number of movies with Leonardo DiCaprio, including Shutter Island which I thought was quite good and mind-fucky in a good way. Directors whose work I've enjoyed I do try to watch other movies they've done -- David Fincher (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), Martin Scorsese (Shutter Island), Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream), and I think maybe one other guy whose name I'm forgetting. I realize this set of directors has a diversity problem (as do famous directors in general), so if anyone wants to point me to dark thriller type movies directed by women and/or people of color, that'd be fun -- always worth it to expand one's horizons like such. I really should probably try to watch more movies directed by people other than (usually old) white men. I guess Boys Don't Cry is a start; that one was directed by a woman. Aside from that I can't really think of any others off the top of my head. Maybe I could become a movie director???
Back on topic, although the issue of diversity (really, in pretty much any field) is an important one. The Departed was a good movie, although it wasn't spectacularly mind-blowing in the way Shutter Island was and it didn't leave as much of an impression on me as Requiem for a Dream. Regardless, it was pretty solid and I wasn't disappointed -- I didn't think it was a waste of 2 and a half hours. This means it was better than, say, No Country for Old Men which I do think was a waste of time to watch and was a disappointment. While we're at it, Zodiac was also a disappointment (it could've been way better!!)
It was a pretty brutal/violent movie but I don't really mind that -- kind of comes with the territory/subject matter. It's actually at least the third movie set in Boston that I've watched which I thought was sort of interesting to note. The others have been Spotlight (about journalists) and Black Mass (based on a true story about mobsters with a brief Peter Sarsgaard appearance).
Matt Damon and Leo were good in their roles although I thought perhaps Leo's character could've been developed a little more -- the movie could've been a bit longer to include something like that. I also found the ending a little anticlimactic, actually -- I think I would've preferred a different ending, something that has a bit more panache. Although I can see why they decided to have it end the way it did.
It vaguely reminded me a bit of Heat, but I think I liked this movie better -- I feel like Heat kind of dragged a bit but The Departed kept up a nice suspenseful pace, lots of deceit/deception. It could've been a bit more suspenseful -- I suppose perhaps I wish it had more of a sense that the stakes were higher. Yes, it could've been more suspenseful.
Overall, perfectly decent movie, not a waste of time, Leo and Matt were good, although I think there was a little room for improvement. It wasn't mind-blowing, but I'm glad I watched it. I liked it better than Black Mass which was also focused on the subject of mobsters in Boston. 4/5
Oh, and there was a cool-looking Brutalist building featured briefly -- I think it might have been supposed to be the police headquarters or something.
I just looked it up -- I had been wondering if The Departed was based on a true story at all and if so, to what extent, and it turns out it was! It was based on the same people/characters featured in Black Mass, so that's kind of interesting... a fictionalized take on that scenario whereas Black Mass was explicitly based on actual people/events.
I still have not watched Inception, also starring Leo. Years ago (literally!) I got it on DVD but still I have not seen it. You'd think this one would be next on my list.
Also, as a rhetorical question, is Leonardo DiCaprio or Matt Damon a better actor/more famous? Perhaps one is the better actor as well as more famous, or maybe it's split, or maybe they're about equal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)