Started By
Message

re: The Cabin in the Woods. TulaneLSU's 2011-12 movie review thread

Posted on 11/16/11 at 7:21 am to
Posted by TulaneLSU
Member since Aug 2003
Member since Dec 2007
13298 posts
Posted on 11/16/11 at 7:21 am to
Gulliver's Travels - it's official: Jack Black can only play one character and that character is not cool and not funny. This is a terrible movie, one of the worst of the years and there's zero redeeming about it. Acting, story, everything. Terrible. 0/10.

The Hangover II In continuation of the poo-poo-pee-pee-penis-vagina-drugs comedy of the late 90's and 2000's, the Hangover II has succeeded in making a movie of sheer debasement. The entire movie was uncreative, which at least you cannot say for the first one. The makers of this movie were content to do no writing and no significant directing because they knew the American public is stupid enough to pay to see this. I didn't laugh once. The only interesting thing was seeing Bangkok, but Jean Claude Van Damme movies do a better job with cinematography. 1/10

Harry Potter (2nd to last) Like Narnia I'd never seen any of its predecessors. Perhaps had I, I might have understood what was going on. I didn't. From start to finish I was confused and wondered who all these characters were. Fans of this movie obviously had an attachment to Harry before seeing this one because on its own, it is an utter failure. 4/10

Harry Potter (the last one) "'Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.'" So lives the entirety of the Harry Potter series, in my unread, unwatched opinion. All the books are one laywoman's descriptive sermon on Matthew 26. But the series' size and breadth is an elaborate misdirection. Only at the end do we realize what the series is about: the Garden of Gethsemane: coming to realize and face your fate, even if it means sacrificing everything.

In the one tear drops in the bowl scene, all is made known about Harry. I feel I needn't watch or read any of the books because all is peripheral to what is revealed in that bowl. All 20 hours of the film; all thousands of poorly written pages of words. All have been diverting our attention through cheeky wizardry and witchcraft from the heart of the story: Harry is his own foil. Jesus made a similar realization in the desert of temptation where sustenance, riches, and power are offered in exchange for disobedience of God and loyalty to himself (one might argue to Satan.) "It's the quality of one's convictions that determines success, not the number of followers" is how it's put elsewhere in the movie. This providential philosophy is how Jesus, the prophets, and all the great martyrs have lived. It's how the great posters on TD have lived and posted as well. For all the stupid spells, gadgets, brooms, and mutant creatures everywhere, Harry Potter is a morality tale about pursuing the good despite the cost.

I enjoyed this movie much more than the other two HP movies I saw. Despite its dark setting and CGI, the characters seemed to matter a little more and the story came together quite well. As the nerds in the theater next to me wept during much of the last thirty minutes of the film, I felt a surge of internal emotion. Not enough to elicit magical tears, but enough to give the movie a positive rating. 7/10
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 7:28 am
Posted by TulaneLSU
Member since Aug 2003
Member since Dec 2007
13298 posts
Posted on 11/16/11 at 7:21 am to
The Help Some movies lend themselves to being watched in specific theaters. The Sound of Music watched at the Salzburger Landestheater or Good Will Hunting at the Brattle Theater in Harvard Square come to mind. So when I learned of The Help's release, I knew I would need to watch it at The Prytania. It's not Jackson, MS, but the neighborhood in which The Prytania sits might as well be 1950s Jackson. Even this day, early in the mornings and around four in the afternoon, you will find black workers dressed in maid outfits going to and from work, although, now, many have been replaced by Hispanic workers, who are willing to work for much less.

It's interesting to see how a cinematic jeremiad is received by the crowd the film intends to condemn. And so I trudged off to that old theater. By the roar of laughter during scenes that mocked the ruling class, an objective observer concludes that few at The Prytania are willing to see their faults in movies. How quick people are to condemn those they see without recognizing their own hypocrisy and sin.

What is this movie about? I think it's that people a corrupt society categorizes as good and upstanding are usually neither. Corrupt societies, therefore, need to be rebuked, and the rebuke can only come from heroes, or in this case, heroines who are courageous. Their courage is founded in truth, and in their courageous pursuit of this truth, freedom from the shackles of corruption and brokenness is found. It is a modern retelling of Plato's Allegory of the Cave or Luke 14:26: "If anyone comes to me [Jesus the Truth] and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple." To step outside the mob's friendship is a dangerous, painful, and sacrificial move, almost always. It's a damn shame that this movie did not make more of the cost of discipleship, or cost of doing what is right. It's a bit fairy-tale-ish in its portrayal of justice fighters as triumphant. The reality is almost always that the children of these people receive the fruits of their labor while the fighters themselves are murdered or rejected. Those who have power never give up their power without violence.

Viola Davis and Emma Stone give the performances of their careers. Their characters are the only ones that break from pack-mob mentality, although the broken, blonde bimbo, Celia Leefolt, whose character I found pitiable but superfluous to the story, could, in a way, fit in this category (but remember, her exclusion is not by choice; if it were her choice, she would join the mob). The rest of the characters are rather pedestrian and used as comic relief or foils of evil.

Most viewers, like the ones with whom I watched this movie, will look at the film as an historical fiction. And they will judge the bad guys. In judging, people feel better about themselves and gain a sense of moral superiority. But as with any jeremiad, the author wants the listener or viewer to look at himself and his own situation. How are we today acting as the bad guys? How are we today treating others in a horrific, cruel, inhuman, yet culturally accepted way? 8/10

Horrible Bosses When your audience laughs hardest because one of its characters is named MFer, you know you've successfully filled the stomachs of the poo-poo-pee-pee-penis-vagina-drugs crowd. Sometimes I wonder if what passes as comedy today isn't written by 14 year old boys the studios recruit off message boards like the OT.

Jennifer Anniston is a pitiable, aging beauty whose acting career is dying, oh wait, was it ever alive? Jason Bateman is a talented actor, but until he realizes his potential, he'll be stuck scraping the bottom of the cheap seats for cheap minds. 3/10
This post was edited on 11/16/11 at 7:28 am
Posted by iwyLSUiwy
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
34488 posts
Posted on 12/13/11 at 12:54 pm to
quote:

Gulliver's Travels - it's official: Jack Black can only play one character and that character is not cool and not funny. This is a terrible movie, one of the worst of the years and there's zero redeeming about it. Acting, story, everything. Terrible. 0/10.

The Hangover II In continuation of the poo-poo-pee-pee-penis-vagina-drugs comedy of the late 90's and 2000's, the Hangover II has succeeded in making a movie of sheer debasement. The entire movie was uncreative, which at least you cannot say for the first one. The makers of this movie were content to do no writing and no significant directing because they knew the American public is stupid enough to pay to see this. I didn't laugh once. The only interesting thing was seeing Bangkok, but Jean Claude Van Damme movies do a better job with cinematography. 1/10

Harry Potter (2nd to last) Like Narnia I'd never seen any of its predecessors. Perhaps had I, I might have understood what was going on. I didn't. From start to finish I was confused and wondered who all these characters were. Fans of this movie obviously had an attachment to Harry before seeing this one because on its own, it is an utter failure. 4/10

Harry Potter (the last one) "'Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.'" So lives the entirety of the Harry Potter series, in my unread, unwatched opinion. All the books are one laywoman's descriptive sermon on Matthew 26. But the series' size and breadth is an elaborate misdirection. Only at the end do we realize what the series is about: the Garden of Gethsemane: coming to realize and face your fate, even if it means sacrificing everything.

In the one tear drops in the bowl scene, all is made known about Harry. I feel I needn't watch or read any of the books because all is peripheral to what is revealed in that bowl. All 20 hours of the film; all thousands of poorly written pages of words. All have been diverting our attention through cheeky wizardry and witchcraft from the heart of the story: Harry is his own foil. Jesus made a similar realization in the desert of temptation where sustenance, riches, and power are offered in exchange for disobedience of God and loyalty to himself (one might argue to Satan.) "It's the quality of one's convictions that determines success, not the number of followers" is how it's put elsewhere in the movie. This providential philosophy is how Jesus, the prophets, and all the great martyrs have lived. It's how the great posters on TD have lived and posted as well. For all the stupid spells, gadgets, brooms, and mutant creatures everywhere, Harry Potter is a morality tale about pursuing the good despite the cost.

I enjoyed this movie much more than the other two HP movies I saw. Despite its dark setting and CGI, the characters seemed to matter a little more and the story came together quite well. As the nerds in the theater next to me wept during much of the last thirty minutes of the film, I felt a surge of internal emotion. Not enough to elicit magical tears, but enough to give the movie a positive rating. 7/10
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram