Da Couch Tomato

An attempt at a new layout, with horrible glitches, and very minimal knowledge of HTML.
Showing posts with label matt damon. Show all posts
The Economic Times

Da Couch Tomato Podcast, Episode 11, discussing Ford v Ferrari, the awesome sound design, and the importance of great story.

Background music used is the Ford v Ferrari musical score by Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders.

Hosts: Sting Lacson and Rachel

Not red enough, so this is probably Utah.

I expected this to be another heavy space drama. My only basis for that, of course, was the poster, showing Matt Damon in a spacesuit. The last time we saw him in that get-up was in Interstellar, as the stranded scientist-turned-douchebag Dr. Mann, and we all know how heavy that was.

Well, the premise was pretty heavy enough. After a Martian sandstorm ruins NASA's exploration team, the entire mission is told to evacuate. One man, of course, gets left behind. Everyone thought he died. But he didn't. Tough luck for Matt Damon, because he's actually still alive. So the "Martian" in the title is actually an Earthling that just happens to be stranded on Mars.

This isn't exactly a survival movie like Castaway; neither is it a film about the loneliness and isolation of man in the blackness of space. This is actually a feel-good movie, with humour as its main ingredient. And to make sure that the comedy takes center stage, the filmmakers made sure to cast popular comic faces like Kristen Wiig, Donald Glover, and Michael Peña.

That, in my opinion, is what makes this movie work. You have to counter-balance the heavy premise of being left alone to die on the Red Planet with the comedy of... being left alone to die on the Red Planet. Am I making sense? Probably not. But that's how Sir Ridley Scott was able to pull this off, making sure that despite having Jessica Chastain and Matt Damon as two of the film's lead stars, we viewers won't even think of it as a rip-off of the philosophically heavy drama of Interstellar.


P.S. Go read the book. It's way funnier.



The Martian. USA. 2015.



Original rating: 8.0 / 10
Jeff Daniels' character from The Newsroom being a perfect fit for NASA's director: + 0.1
Entire film not feeling like a Ridley Scott flick: + 0.1
Final rating: 8.2 / 10
Not to be outdone by Sandra Bullock, Anne Hathaway also gets in a spacesuit.

Ah, Interstellar. You beautiful piece of cinematic art. And because you were the only film of 2014 that I've been genuinely excited about since last year, I shall try and convince others to lose their stinginess and go spend on an IMAX ticket.

1. Christopher Nolan
Sorry, I lied. I've been genuinely excited about this film since two years ago, after The Dark Knight Rises. Why? Because it's Christopher Nolan at the helm. Other films get me excited about, well, the film itself. Like how the Pacific Rim sequel and Star Wars Episode VII excite me because the franchises excite me. But Nolan is one of the few directors whose films I'd watch in a heartbeat, even without knowing what his film is about. I'm not sure if it's his brilliantly-paced non-linear storytelling style that excites me, or the fact that he likes to tackle subject matter that no filmmaker before him has ever dared touch. Like the astronauts on board the Endurance, Nolan is an explorer, venturing into uncharted territories in visual storytelling.

Directed by Christopher Nolan? Here, take my money.

2. Original screenplay
Go watch Interstellar. Don't wait for the torrent to be available, you pirate. Go and spend for a movie ticket, because we want this film to make money at the box office. Not because we want to make the Nolan brothers Chris and Jonathan rich, but because we want Hollywood business analysts to see that investing in an original screenplay not adapted from any existing source material (and by "adapted", we don't mean "loosely based on academic papers published in reputable scientific journals") can also make big bucks at the box office. Hollywood has been struggling with a drought of stories written specifically for the cinematic medium, and it could kill its film industry like the crops in Kansas. Or Texas. Or wherever the hell Interstellar is set.

3. Minimal CGI
Like all of Nolan's previous works, this film uses computer-generated imagery very sparingly. He prefers actual sets or miniature models over CGI, and it's more than just his cinematic style–it actually creates a realism you can detect with your naked eye, and it draws out a better performance from the actors, knowing that they are not reacting to a green screen.

Also noteworthy is how long the end credits are–just around one-tenth the time of the usual Hollywood blockbuster. That's because fewer people are needed for physical effects as compared to the long list of names required for CGI special effects, with rendering requirements necessitating the need to outsource their labour.

4. Free physics lesson
If you've always been interested in space exploration and intergalactic travel but have never had the fortitude to stare at a mathematical equation for more than ten seconds without throwing up, then this film is for you. It takes the brilliant ideas of renowned theoretical and astrophysicist Kip Thorne (no relation to Rip Torn, though their names sound very much alike), and simplifies them without losing their scientific bases. The famous "twin paradox", which discusses the passage of time as seen by two observers travelling at different speeds, or the effects of gravity on an extraterrestrial scale, such as its relation to the tides and waves which we take for granted on our seas on Earth–these are touched on by the film and dumbed down for the average moviegoer to fathom. I don't think it's been dumbed down enough, though, because apparently a lot of people still exit the theatres muttering how their minds have been blown, and not in a good way.

5. Grand space opera
Who doesn't love space operas? The word "opera" here doesn't mean something where a fat lady sings, but something like a soap opera set in space. That means melodrama and cheesiness played out to extremes, with Oscar-winning actors Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway at the acting helm. And Michael Caine? Don't mind him, he's always in Christopher Nolan movies.

This black hole is more interesting than ten Michael Caines.

6. (Possibly) the last IMAX film
Although not entirely shot in IMAX, there are a lot of scenes that are, and these are the scenes that matter. The swirling dust storms of a dying Earth, the vastness of the stars, the complexity of a wormhole, and the immensity of a black hole's event horizon–these are all best viewed in the glory of 70 mm celluloid. For cinephiles who enjoy the grainy look of actual film stock, or for those who just want the bragging rights of having seen what could possibly be the last IMAX movie shown on an analog projector, see it at the SM Mall of Asia, not only because it has the largest IMAX screen dimensions, but because all the other IMAX theatres will be showing it in digital format.

7. The fifth dimension
The idea of a fifth dimension is very hard for a normal person to comprehend. Only a chosen few have ever had a glimpse of it; these are mostly the shamans and sorcerers, and those who have overdosed on psychedelic substances. The human race is only in its infancy in its understanding of the four dimensions, let alone five, so don't worry if you didn't get the film's premise and left the theatre scratching your heads. Five dimensions isn't going to go mainstream anytime soon, in the near future, or in your grandchildren's lifetime. The least you should've taken home with you is an understanding about love's ability to transcend dimensions, a newfound respect for mankind's indomitable spirit in the face of the unknown, and a mind-boggling fascination with everything about TARS the robot.

What is this? I don't even...



Interstellar. USA. 2014.



Original rating: 8.5 / 10
TARS the robot: + 0.3
Douchebaggery of Matt Damon's character: - 0.1
Seeing what a black hole and a wormhole could actually look like: + 0.2
Nolan non-linear storytelling: + 0.1
Nolan plot twists starting to feel more and more Shyamalan-y: - 0.05
Jessica Chastain: undecided
Final rating: 9.05 / 10





Follow Sting Lacson on Twitter. But follow Da Couch Tomato first.

Follow Da Couch Tomato on Google +.
YouTube

The film Elysium is an example of what is known as a "Jesus Christ Narrative". Now allow me to explain.

Jesus Christ, or Judas Iscariot?


I'm not sure if this film is made with a specific target audience in mind or if it totally wants to be like Pixar films in that it aims to hit both the young and adult audience with one stone. But in trying to do that though, I think we get more for a plot than we can handle.

First, it's reminiscent of the first film: Gloria (Pink) and Mumble's (Elijah Wood) son Erik (Ava Acres) is different. He may not have his father's rhythm or his mother's strong voice, so he thought maybe he could fly. Penguins fly? Not.

One happy family in the end, of course.

Consider also the friendship of the little furry penguins and the different family dynamics, aside from Mumble's family, we have dad Seymour and son Atticus (the chubby ones) and the British-accented mom and child. And there's also the small bit about the elephant seal and his kids' encounter with Mumble and the furry little kiddos—a really nice story though.

The former cult leader (right) and the new one (left) who didn't learn from him.

Then, there's also the new cult leader Sven (Hank Azaria) and his false hope of flight because he's really a bird, not a penguin (that beak should've given it away early on). And also Ramon's (Robin Williams) quest for love, which he found in Carmen (Sofia Vergara), you know, after a selfless act and some cheesy romantic stuff.

Second, the Penguin Nation is trapped by an ice berg gone rogue, so we have efforts to help them like giving them fish, the bit about Queen's "We are the Champions" and aliens trying to help, and tap-dancing penguins and elephant seals.

My favorites (even if they're such a distraction)

Plus, there are the krills Will (Brad Pitt) and Bill (Matt Damon), which is already a good short story by themselves. If they were trying to be kind of like Scrat in Ice Age, well, they've taken too much screen time that they take everyone's attention away from the main story. Oh, and don't forget the global warming stuff, too.

Those are a lot going on in a film, let alone a children's film. I wasn't surprised when my seven-year-old didn't pay attention to some parts and kind of wanted to stop watching even when it was so close to the end. It isn't entirely bad; there are lots of lessons to be learned. But it's just really... mumbled.


Happy Feet Two gets a five out of ten, for being a smorgasbord of a lot of stuff but not seamlessly fused together—a little too much for their real audience, the kids.



*screencaps courtesy of VLC

This is another one of those films which I watched without having any idea about it whatsoever. Any preliminary impressions I might have had came from the title alone.

This film was also produced by Image Nation, which is a company based in Abu Dhabi. So I believe we can expect Arab wealth to find its way into Hollywood in the near future.

So anyway, my first thought was, "Contagion? Sounds like some sort of virus. Maybe it's a zombie movie or something." Because that's typically how zombie movies start. There's some sort of killer virus in the beginning, then it begins to mutate and spread, then brat-tat-tat-tat, you get machine gun fire, then blood and gore, and before you know it, it's a full-blown zombie apocalypse.

But not this film.

Yes, this one's about a virus, and a killer virus at that. Except this one centers on the human drama. Well, not just centers, but more of focuses entirely on the human drama. What happens when a killer virus strikes? How does humanity react? And this chronicles humanity's reaction on all levels. The plot absolutely does not take a zombie apocalypse direction.

What makes this film work as a drama is the extremely talented ensemble. This is like a Dream Team for the acting department. Here are the starters (in alphabetical order), who all have Acadamy Award trophies which they can use to bash your head in.

Marion Cotillard
She is so beautiful, she looks great
in any hairstyle.

Matt Damon
(who by the way does not have an acting Oscar)
"I don't care."

Gwyneth Paltrow
"Asdajijcapemajapinc"

and
Kate Winslet
"Hmm?"


Next we have two reserves, who have no Oscar trophies, but who have been nominated at some point in their lives.

Laurence Fishburne
Morpheus can whoop your ass
while drinking coffee.

and
Jude Law
"I was nominted twice."

By the time the film ended, which was when everyone had the cure injected up their nasal cavity, I thought "Well, this is a pretty decent film. It's quite good, actually." And then the end credits flash.


Okay. That explains everything.

And on a final note: Jennifer Ehle has a very pretty face.

"I know, right?"


Contagion. USA/UAE. 2011.


Rating: Seven point nine out of ten.




*some info from IMDb
By herd commander
Sun, 23 Jan 2011, 12:07


I am just glad we watched both Superman and Batman and True Grit on DXM. Movies acquire a kind of "depth" and "meaning"... and that "felt experience", with DXM─"sacred-ness"; without which would have otherwise felt like just merely passing time.

But that does not mean these films won't stand out without the aid of such enhancers. The mark of a truly great film is that it cuts across boundaries, whether in normal or special types of awareness.

Movies exhibiting some grit, genuinely felt (lol):

In this film, we see how the Law of the Land may be executed by the parties concerned, and how it is met with force and resistance.

We can also see a filmic tradition that amounts to notable results (repeat partnerships) in the guise of actor Josh Brolin and directors the Coen brothers. Much like what we see with Michael Caine, Christian Bale, and director Christopher Nolan; or with Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and director Tim Burton; or Hugo Weaving and the Wachowskis; or Russel Crowe and Ridley Scott─all of which achieve archival notoriety.


More!


Lastly, we see a young actress in character and wearing the mantle of "true grit", placing the stereotypical alpha male suit(s) in the periphery as (merely?) guardians of fair justice.

If your sons, or daughters, are confused tweens, or budding, fashionable metrosexuals, or (caution: grit ON) fatherless emos, then this film might just set them, or you, right on track.


Rating:
9/10



This is how to force a review:

Invictus: from the Latin invictus, meaning "indomitable".
Also the title of a poem by William Ernest Henley.

The most famous lines of the poem are "I am the master of my fate:/I am the captain of my soul."

This poem was Nelson Mandela's favorite poem, and is what added to Mandela's indomitable spirit while in prison. This means that Mandela's steadfastness was due to his realization that he is the master of his own fate, and the captain of his own soul. Hence he shall not die, but will live on to become president of South Africa.

What this movie is really trying to say, though, is this: "I (Nelson Mandela) am the master of my fate, and I am the captain of the South African rugby team."

Wait, I thought Matt Damon was the captain of the Springboks? He even learned the Afrikaaner accent for an Oscar nomination.

Well of course Matt Damon is the captain of the Springboks. What this movie really wants to show is that Nelson Mandela (played superbly by Morgan Freeman) is higher up than Matt Damon. Mandela is the captain of the captain. So in essence, Nelson Mandela was actually the captain of the Springboks, winners of the 1995 Rugby World Cup.

And Clint Eastwood was able to seamlessly merge politics, nationalism, and sports, into one great story. Well, Clint Eastwood didn't write it. But he directed it. And you have to admit it, Clint Eastwood is a great director.


*some info from IMDb and Wikipedia
pic from NY Daily News


Invictus. USA. 2009.


Rating: Seven out of ten.

Is it just me, or does Matt Damon always get the action-suspense roles? Although he doesn't do any of his Jason-Bourne-secret-agent-bone-breaking-super moves, the overall feel of this movie is the same as his spy thrillers, despite being a war film. Must be the adrenaline.

But come to think of it, I don't think this is a war film. It's more of a conspiracy theory set in Iraq. None of that Band of Brothers camaraderie here. At least The Hurt Locker had a semblance of army life. This film just used the army as a backdrop. It's more of a detective whodunit flick. But I'm not saying it didn't work. It did. It was engrossing.

Matt Damon may be too pop, but he's a good actor.

Brendan Gleeson may be too common, but he's a good actor as well.

Greg Kinnear may be too comedic, but he's surprisingly dramatic here.

Director Paul Greengrass may be a relative unknown (at least to me), but he does a good job here. All the hand-held shots make it feel like a genuine documentary of a war zone.

By the way, don't let the title deceive you. There is nothing environmental about this movie. At all. The Green Zone refers to that part of Iraq under Coalition Provisional Authority. So don't expect any climate change topics, as this film was set in 2003.


*some info from IMDb and Wikipedia
pic from altfg.com


Green Zone. France/USA/Spain/UK. 2010.


Rating: Seven and a half out of ten.

In 2007, Director Martin Scorsese finally won an Oscar for Best Director for his cops and robbers drama, The Departed. The movie, a remake of an acclaimed 2002 Hong Kong film Mou Gaan Dou, more popularly known as Infernal Affairs, had an amazing cast with the likes of Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon, Leonardo DiCaprio in the lead as well as Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen and Mark Wahlberg playing secondary characters. On the other hand, the original also had heavyweights with the likes of Andy Lau (House of Flying Daggers), Tony Leung (Hero, Lust Caution), Anthony Wong (The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor) and Eric Tsang in the lead. While the names are not that familiar to some, they represent the cream of the crop in Hong Kong Cinema.


The cast comparisons, as far as the major roles are concerned, are as follows, and I’ll just use the US version’s character names as reference:

Leonardo DiCaprio and Tony Leung as Billy Costigan
Matt Damon and Andy Lau as Colin
Martin Sheen and Anthony Wong as Queenan
Jack Nicholson and Eric Tsang as Costello

William Monahan adapted the screenplay written by Siu Fai Mak for the American audience and used Boston and the local underground world as the backdrop for the events.

Even before it came out, comparisons between the two movies swirled. While remakes will always be compared to the original, especially in the case of American remakes, the level of awareness in this case is heightened by the fact that it was being done by no less than the great Martin Scorsese with his aforementioned killer cast. This isn’t Gore Verbinski remaking The Ring. This is Martin Scorsese, the master, the man.

So did Scorsese deliver? Is the Original better?

The story as we all know by now involves two moles, Billy and Colin, one for the police and one for the mob. A series of events leads them to realize that there is a mole in their respective group and they try to smoke each other out.

Acting-wise, the two movies are at a stalemate. I will always see this movie as the first part of Leonardo DiCaprio’s transformation into a man, the second part being Blood Diamond which came out later that year. While DiCaprio always plays the trapped, tortured soul extremely well even in his earlier films like The Basketball Diaries and Catch Me If You Can, in this film, it seems that he reached a whole level of repressed anger which could only be achieved through age. Tony Leung always seems to be in a serene state which makes his break down all the more effective. The role is actually perfect for him. Unlike DiCaprio whose undercover cop is a raging bad boy who will fight anybody, Leung goes the other way as he pretends to not to give a shit about the mob and its operations at all. Surprisingly, both are effective and both fit in with the role and the movie.

Andy Lau and Matt Damon on the other hand play the role practically the same way. Their image in the police force is that of a young achiever, on his way to the top. Both exude what can only be described as being a gentleman asshole who are at the top of their game both as a policeman and a mobster. Damon and Lau are at a point in their careers when they are so likeable that you forget that they are playing the role of the bad guy in the movie which ultimately makes you on the same level as the police force they are deceiving.

Sheen and Wong, veterans that they are, understand that their role is not very showy but equally important. Their role is as close to a father figure for Billy as he can get and in a society of faulted figureheads, this is important. The difference is actually not a way of acting but a person and that person is Dignam played by Mark Wahlberg. While DiCaprio’s character had two links to the force, Leung’s only had one. This subtle difference changes a lot of the dynamics in the story and essentially, at least for this writer, creates the difference between the two films.

In the beginning of Infernal Affairs, there was a short premise about the so-called Continuous Hell which was the worst of all hells because of the continuous suffering that one would experience in it. This is what their characters basically experience in IA. Leung never liked being an undercover and he’s been at it for more than nine years and he feels like he’s just about to lose it. He desperately wants to be a cop, an ordinary one, but for now the only police thing that he can do is to salute as a funeral car of a dead cop passes by. On the other hand, Lau’s Colin is a guy who does not really want to be a crook from the very beginning. He was thrust in this role as a young man and he cannot get out of it. Thus they live in their own personal continuous hell. They live a life that they do not want and they see no end to it.

In The Departed such struggle is not quite as clear-cut. Damon’s Colin does not seem to have a problem with being a mole. There is no moral struggle, at least visibly, in him and in a way, he seems to get worse and worse. DiCaprio’s Billy is more faithful to Leung’s however. Just like Leung, he wants to get out of the game although his desperation seems to stem more from his fear of getting caught by Costello than by being in the undercover business for a long time. There lies another difference between IA and TD. Leung has been undercover for ten years while DiCaprio could not have been more than three. The desperation is present in both but less palpable in The Departed.

Which brings us back to the celebrated role of Dignam. In IA, there is no Dignam but rather the role is spread out in different characters. The first “Dignam” who along with Inspector Wong knew about Leung’s undercover role was in the movie but was killed prior to the main events. This was seen in IA II. Other Dignam scenes were present as well but they were passed on to other roles such as the OCB head which in TD was played by Alec Baldwin. The importance of Dignam in changing the storyline can mostly be seen after Sheen’s character died. Billy Costigan was desperate but Dignam could be somewhere and he could meet up with him somehow. Leung's character on the other hand was totally fucked the moment Inspector Wong died. Logically speaking, Billy could still have things fixed up as soon as Dignam shows up and so he did not have to deal with Colin. Leung had nowhere to go and so his desperate fateful act was entirely logical.

In almost every story there is a battle between good and evil. As we all know, the Good almost always wins and in IA such holds true. While Lau’s character survives, good still won over evil because evil, Lau’s character, became good in the end as when he betrayed Sam and gave the appropriate recommendation for Leung's character. In TD, Colin only turned against Costello because he was afraid that Costello was going to turn him over to the FBI being that Costello was an informant of crooked FBI agents. It was not a triumph over evil. It was a necessity more than anything.

Infernal Affairs is an awesome film and Infernal Affairs II the prequel, only strengthened its power. The only problem with the franchise is that it was ruined by Infernal Affairs III and if one can stay away from this horrible sequel please do so.

The Departed won Best Picture despite the fact that it was not even in the Top Five of Scorsese’s movies. It won an award for Best Editing even though it was probably Schoonmaker’s worst work ever and is absolutely on the other end of the spectrum compared to GoodFellas. The lack of continuity in the shots is distracting at times because of the lack of smoothness in the transition. Some key points were also unbelievable like the scene where Billy’s message alert tone went off when only a minute ago he’s been receiving text messages on silent mode.

Finally, The Departed was indeed a good movie and could have been deserving of an Oscar for Best Picture and Best Director. Sadly, it seems more of a charity case for Scorsese for having lost so many times while deserving a win at the same time. Personally I feel uncomfortable when someone, especially a great one like Scorsese, wins an award for a remake. That’s like winning Best Vocal Performance for a cover version of a popular song. In the end, Scorsese should have won many times over and it is a tragedy that he has to win for this one.


Infernal Affairs: 9/10
The Departed: 9/10
At Gunpoint: Infernal Affairs

Premium Blogspot Templates
Copyright © 2012 Da Couch Tomato