The Best Films of the Year - The 2015 Version

[Mladen]

I wanted to answer because of the film's pedigree and oscarbaity subject, but then I found out that the guy who wrote and directed this also wrote the screenplay for Amazing Spiderman 2  I think that tells us everything we need to know don't you  

True  I think that this movie had a chance. In this form, it would be perhaps the best TV movie (pull the Grace of Monaco card) or give the script to someone else. Sorkin perhaps, because he enjoys those long dialogues and the theme isn't far from his usual...

[Nictarion]

Taken in isolation, perhaps I would accept this, but the whole sidelining of the female graduate with that bullshit mission plus some other minor quibbles make me think it's much more than that. There is a bunch of stuff they plundered from the old Moore Bonds that should have been left burried. Those are rubbish films anyway.

Just quoting this for truth

Everyone in the Hateful Eight is likeable to me  eventhough they are all monsters and fiends  Tarantino magic  

 

I agree wrt the Moore Bond's  (except The Man With the Golden Gun), he's probably my least favorite 007.

I also find it humorous that you found everyone in H8 likeable, but you absolutely hated Rushmore because you found Max Fisher so unlikable. Veltigar logic.  

[GallowKnight]

I figured I might be worth mentioning here that George Miller's comments about not making more Mad Max movies was bullshit.

[Veltigar]

I agree wrt the Moore Bond's  (except The Man With the Golden Gun), he's probably my least favorite 007.

I think Christopher Lee is great in that one, but even he doesn't safe that one sadly

 

I also find it humorous that you found everyone in H8 likeable, but you absolutely hated Rushmore because you found Max Fisher so unlikable. Veltigar logic.  

I think your memory is selling my gripes with Rushmore short  Let's ignore the Tarantino magic present in the writing, directing, etc. which surely beats Wes Anderson's wizardry at the time of Rushmore and focus on what the films actually does with the repulsive human beings at their core.

In The Hateful Eight, pretty much everyone is a godawful human being. The Hateful Eight however, is self-aware enough to know that and then takes on the challenge of making us relish its characters nastiness. It never tells you that these guys are paragons of virtue, on the contrary, even people like me who loved it know that every single person in there was ultimately a nasty piece of work. 

In Rushmore however, we have this awful Nice Guy^TM at the core of the story and the movie isn't aware of that. On the contrary, Max is an unabashed hero and the movie expects us to root for this guy because he's so artistic and Wes Andersony. That's a humongous difference in outlook imo.

It's like the difference between Triumph des Willens and Inglorious Basterds. Both films feature a lot of Nazis, but where Triumph des Willens message is that "Hey, these Nazi guys are actually quite wonderful. Great personal hygiene, real crowdpleasers and they look good in those tight uniforms." inglorious Basterds message concering Hans Landa is that "He's a very clever guy, with some admirable qualities. However, he's also a monster who would sell his own mother to get ahead in life."

EDIT1: I know I'm breaking Godwin's law here, however this is just so you can now forever remember this argument  
EDIT2: The comparison between Triumph des Willens and Rushmore isn't totally satisfying of course. I mean you actually see Max do all these horrible stuff on screen in Rushmore and the movie still celebrates him. Triumph des Willens had the good sense to leave the Nazi attrocities out and just focus on celebrating an impressive rally. 

True I think that this movie had a chance. In this form, it would be perhaps the best TV movie (pull the Grace of Monaco card) or give the script to someone else. Sorkin perhaps, because he enjoys those long dialogues and the theme isn't far from his usual...

Another screenwriter would have done the trick I imagine. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Veltigar,

Could you tell me why you rated Chi-Raq so high? I haven't seen it yet, but all my friends that have hated it. I get that some of them didn't get the Greek Play connection and were frustrated with how the dialogue was used, but a lot of them knew that  going into it and still found a lot they disliked.

[red snow]

I wanted to answer because of the film's pedigree and oscarbaity subject, but then I found out that the guy who wrote and directed this also wrote the screenplay for Amazing Spiderman 2  I think that tells us everything we need to know don't you  

Was it so obsessed with setting up a multi-franchise shared universe it forgot to be a decent film? Did one of the characters appear in the actual film for the same amount of time as the trailer?

[Veltigar]

Was it so obsessed with setting up a multi-franchise shared universe it forgot to be a decent film? Did one of the characters appear in the actual film for the same amount of time as the trailer?

Never watched Amazing Spiderman 2  Just now that crap usually inspires crap  Like, why I know 13 hours is probably going to be terrible because Michael Bay is directing.

Veltigar,

Could you tell me why you rated Chi-Raq so high? I haven't seen it yet, but all my friends that have hated it. I get that some of them didn't get the Greek Play connection and were frustrated with how the dialogue was used, but a lot of them knew that  going into it and still found a lot they disliked.

In general, I think I really, really responded to the performances. Nick Cannon was strangely great, but the real star was Teyonah Parris. I feel like this film is a bit like her coming out party (like say Attack on the Block was for John Boyega), because she has A-list star written all over her. Plus, she's also maddingly sexy, which I could really appreciate  The film itself is really, quite erotic at times, which I think American cinema could use a little more off really. 

Another thing I really enjoyed about it was the music. I usually like hip-hop and rap though, so I was perhaps predisposed to loving the soundtrack. I also think this film made an important point, without going overboard with it (at least, most of the time. There are some scenes where he crosses a line and it becomes self-serving comedy instead of making a coherent political argument through satire). It's kind of hard to explain why I think this tale is more nuanced than people give it credit for, without actually going into spoiler territory. 

And finally, I loved how exuberant this piece of filmmaking was. Something about the colour, the dialogue, the staging, etc. I liked how Spike Lee pulled no punches and just went all the way. It fit with the genre I think. I feel like way to many people forgot that they were actually watching a satire first and foremost. I guess the controversial source material kind of clous peoples judgement 

[Mladen]

17/01/2016

 

1. Carol
2. The Revenant
3. Mad Max: Fury Road
4. Ex Machina
5. Bridge of Spies
6. 45 years
7. Creed
8. Steve Jobs
9. Inside Out
10. Kingsman: The Secret Service
11. Suffragette
12. The Martian
13. Burnt
14. Avengers: Age of Ultron
15. Cinderella
16. Ant-man

 

As someone called Suffragette a "failed Oscar bait", it is nothing more than that. Sad, though, because initial screenings were promising. The movie itself, although carries a weight, is a bit too simplistic and unlike (as Veltigar and I discussed regarding time) "Carol", it created several villains in male figures. Actually, the entire movie narrative was divided on gender basis.

As for "Burnt", I know it is not some great movie. but I adore movies about cooking, regardless how bad they can be

[Jack Bauer 24]

Finally saw The Martian and Creed last night. Loved them both. Watching Bridge of Spies now. Any feedback on that one? Also, has anyone seen Anthony Hopkins Solace?

[Mladen]

On 1/17/2016 at 1:33 AM, Jack Bauer 24 said:

Finally saw The Martian and Creed last night. Loved them both. Watching Bridge of Spies now. Any feedback on that one? Also, has anyone seen Anthony Hopkins Solace?

I loved BoS. Thought it had a bit Jacksonian problem of too many ends, but I liked it. 

 

21/01/2016

1. Carol
2. The Revenant
3. Mad Max: Fury Road
4. Ex Machina
5. Bridge of Spies
6. Legend
7. 45 years
8. Creed
9. Steve Jobs
10. Inside Out
11. Kingsman: The Secret Service
12. Suffragette
13. The Martian
14. Burnt
15. Avengers: Age of Ultron
16. Cinderella
17. Ant-man

How in God's name one awards Hardy for Mad Max when they have Legend? Exquisite, very, very nice. Entertaining as hell.

[Veltigar]

I just returned from a marvellous outing to the theatre. Creed has finally been released where I live and I really needed to see it. It was everything I wanted it to be and then some. I can only describe the experience as glorious,  no better it was fucking magnificent! Best film in the franchise by a landslide.

As a huge fan of the Rocky films, it just completely clicked together for me. It's like Ryan Coogler took everything great about the franchise and then somehow amplified those aspects, while adding in even more of his own particular brand of greatness. It's been a long time since I last had such a strong emotional response to a film. I was right there with Adonis in the ring, I threw every punch with him and I'm not going to lie, I even shed a tear near the film's end. 

The film had some really great performances in it. Sly deserves that academy award imo. He just lives Rocky, you feel that in every minute of screentime. I really hope he takes that award home. Tessa Thomspon and Phylicia Rashad were also remarkably complex, they really made the most of their limited amount of screentime. My highest praise though, I have to hand to Michael B. Jordan. I saw the Wire for the first time a couple of weeks ago and I immediately took to the character he played  (although I didn't know that was him at first). He showed great talent in The Wire and he definitely delivers on his promise right here, no doubt about it. In Creed, he gives such a layered, heartfelt (but also really physically impressive) performance, he was definitely robbed of an oscar nomination (not the first actor of colour this year and no I'm not talking about Will Smith). It just baffles me that Matt Damon was nominated for a far easier and less convinving roll in the Martian, while this great performance wasn't even mentioned.

Creed also has great directing and cinematography. The fights were just brutal, some of the best in the entire franchise (there is one that seems like it was shot in a single take). The humour was great, the music brilliant and the story was so emotional. I deeply emphasized with Adonis's plight. I can't praise this film enough really. I just absolutely adored it. 2015 really does feel like a year that saves the best for last  It's really hard to pin myself down on a definitive ranking a though. Imo, the first four in these list are all equally strong films, although Son of Saul is one that I didn't love per se (way to depressing for that, but it was a great piece of filmmaking). Their order can easily be changed around. 

 

1) Creed
2) The Hateful Eight
3) Son of Saul (aka Saul Fia)
4) Mad Max: Fury Road
5) Chi-raq
6) Ex Machina
7) Slow West
8) Le Tout Nouveau Testament
9) Inside Out
10) Carol
11) Anomalisa
12) MI: V Rogue Nation
13)  It Follows  
14)  The Assassin 
15) Star Wars: The Force Awakens
16) D'Ardennen
17) The Martian
18) An Inspector Calls
19) Avengers: Age of Ultron
20) Dheepan
21) Beasts of No Nation
22) Ant-man
23) Kingsman: The Secret Service 
24) The Wedding Ringer
25) Bone Tomahawk
26) Sicario
27) Spectre

 

 

[HexMachina]

Since I know some people were a bit miffed about the limited release of MacBeth, thought you may like to know it's due for DVD/Blu-Ray release 1st Feb in the UK, so you might get your hands on it soon to give it a watch 

[polishgenius]

17 hours ago, Veltigar said:

I just returned from a marvellous outing to the theatre. Creed has finally been released where I live and I really needed to see it. It was everything I wanted it to be and then some. I can only describe the experience as glorious,  no better it was fucking magnificent! Best film in the franchise by a landslide.

 

 

Personally, I'm just amused that a major Hollywood franchise film had a climactic, important scene set to Krept and Konan. 


But yeah, it was a really good film. 

[Red Tiger]

16 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

 

 

Personally, I'm just amused that a major Hollywood franchise film had a climactic, important scene set to Krept and Konan. 


But yeah, it was a really good film. 

GAWDAYUMN that entrance was badass.

[Veltigar]

I finally managed to knock two long anticipated films from my to watchlist. Yesterday, I saw Macbeth and today I went to The Revenant (in fact I just got back from that one).

Macbeth was great. The production looked immaculate and I really enjoyed some of the extra flourishes of the film. Mainly

Spoiler

Adding in the deceased son (or sons) of Macbeth in there. The grieving couple striving for power as a really, really bad way to get over the death of their child(ren) was an inspired deviation from the source material

I also really enjoyed Fassbender's take on Macbeth as someone who's essentially suffering from a horrible case of PTSD. Or as Michael Fassbender himself puts it in this interview:

Quote

You have a soldier who’s engaged in battle month-after-month, day-after-day. Killing with his hands. Pushing a sword through muscle and bone. And if that doesn’t work picking up a rock and using that”.

Marrion Cottilard was also outstanding. I haven't seen many of the famous Macbeth adaptations, but I thought she really did an excellent job veering away from the cliched Lady Macbeth type we all know. The whole

Spoiler

Oh-shit-what-have-I-unleashed thing she has going on in regards to her husbands decent into madness was great to behold. I thought this version emphasized that much more than the archetypical Lady Macbethlike characters you usually see depicted on screen.

Paddy Constantine, Sean Harris and all the other supporting actors were great as well. On the downside, I had a hard time getting into the story for the first thirty minutes or so. Part of it was the fact that I found it hard to follow the dialogue sometimes. Perhaps the sound was a bit off or so, but that bothered me a bit. I also thought it eventually became too stylized for its own good. The costumes, the sets (that throneroom!) and the cinematography are all great, but I think they went overboard with it in the final confrontation (one reviewer described the final battle as "Macbeth on Mars"). The director bit of more than he could chew imo, which detracted from the overall story.

Now that I have discussed Macbeth, I shall move on to The Revenant. I thought it was okay, really not very special and some of the best things about it are things that essentially turned me off  of the film as a whole. Firstly, the question whether Leo will finally bag himself an oscar can be answered with a resounding yes.

This is just the sort of flashy, over-the-top performance that would normally woo the Academy. Plus, it fits in the longstanding Academy tradition of awarding a statue to a deserving actor for a less than deserving performance. I think there wasn't a point in the movie were I saw "Hugo Glass", it was always just Dicaprio absolutely prostrating himself to finally, finally get his hand on that coveted statue (please Academy put the man out of his misery). I was reading this thread on IMDB called 100 things I learned from The Revenant and this just slayed me:

Quote

19. Leonardo DiCaprio's final scene was him asking the Academy, "You've just seen everything I just had to put myself through. Can I please have my Oscar now?"

Another thing people applaud the film for is its beauty and really, it's undoubtedly very beautiful. I think Lubetzki will probably take the award, but it felt like I was just watching cinematography for cinematographies sake. It was all distractingly flashy imo (a bit like the Macbeth on Mars sequence I mentioned above) and it came off as a bit gimmicky and shallow, which quite frankly reminded me of the tracking shot gimmick in Birdman. Both movies exist to serve their own very gimmicky end. You just feel that they aren't that committed to telling an actual story.

That brings me to my third major point, the story. It was very predictable and really rather dull. I was reading a bit about the differences between Hugo Glass' tale and this film and pretty much every deviation by Innaritu made the story more cliche

Spoiler

 (the gunpowder healing excepted). Like, the addition of his personal Friday (The director definitely has a thing for the noble savage archetype), the pedestrian revenge plot, visions of the dead wife, evil French Canadians being evil, magical healing processes etc. Some of the survivalist aspects of the story looked rather idiotic to me (like leave your wet clothes out into freezing temperatures, sure you'll be able to wear them without them being worse for wear).

I think that if I had been swept away by the film, I could probably have handwaved a lot of it, but the distractingly pretty cinematography didn't make that possible sadly. 

By far the best thing about The Revenant were the action sequences. They were at once kinetic, easy to follow, exciting and bloodily realistic. I think Innaritu did a good job depicting the violence of the frontier. I liked how he had eyes for the small acts of confusion in the mayhem, like in the first fight sequence when

Spoiler

one of the trappers, dazed by the indian attack walks up to their own horses and starts shooting them in the chaos

or in the final fight when

Spoiler

Leo gets his first swing in with the axe and cuts some of Hardy's fingers off

 

Anyway, I still put it rather high. The individual pieces of the puzzle might not add up to a coherent and engaging whole, but they are well done on their own. 

EDIT: oh and just one question I have to ask:

 

Spoiler

Was I the only one who thought that the bear looked fake as shit? Some shots of the dead horse looked off as well. I thought this was shot like GoT did, with an actual bear filmed seperatly and then put into the scene, but it looked very inauthentic to me. Like the CGI in that trailer for the new Tarzan film 

 

1) Creed
2) The Hateful Eight
3) Son of Saul (aka Saul Fia)
4) Mad Max: Fury Road
5) Chi-raq
6) Ex Machina
7) Slow West
8) Le Tout Nouveau Testament
9) Inside Out
10) Carol 
11) Macbeth
12) The Revenant
13) Anomalisa
14) MI: V Rogue Nation
15)  It Follows  
16)  The Assassin 
17) Star Wars: The Force Awakens
18) D'Ardennen
19) The Martian
20) An Inspector Calls
21) Avengers: Age of Ultron
22) Dheepan
23) Beasts of No Nation
24) Ant-man
25) Kingsman: The Secret Service 
26) The Wedding Ringer
27) Bone Tomahawk
28) Sicario
29) Spectre

 

[GallowKnight]

19 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

Spoiler

I finally managed to knock two long anticipated films from my to watchlist. Yesterday, I saw Macbeth and today I went to The Revenant (in fact I just got back from that one).

Macbeth was great. The production looked immaculate and I really enjoyed some of the extra flourishes of the film. Mainly

Hidden Content

 

I also really enjoyed Fassbender's take on Macbeth as someone who's essentially suffering from a horrible case of PTSD. Or as Michael Fassbender himself puts it in this interview:

Marrion Cottilard was also outstanding. I haven't seen many of the famous Macbeth adaptations, but I thought she really did an excellent job veering away from the cliched Lady Macbeth type we all know. The whole

Hidden Content

 

Paddy Constantine, Sean Harris and all the other supporting actors were great as well. On the downside, I had a hard time getting into the story for the first thirty minutes or so. Part of it was the fact that I found it hard to follow the dialogue sometimes. Perhaps the sound was a bit off or so, but that bothered me a bit. I also thought it eventually became too stylized for its own good. The costumes, the sets (that throneroom!) and the cinematography are all great, but I think they went overboard with it in the final confrontation (one reviewer described the final battle as "Macbeth on Mars"). The director bit of more than he could chew imo, which detracted from the overall story.

Now that I have discussed Macbeth, I shall move on to The Revenant. I thought it was okay, really not very special and some of the best things about it are things that essentially turned me off  of the film as a whole. Firstly, the question whether Leo will finally bag himself an oscar can be answered with a resounding yes.

This is just the sort of flashy, over-the-top performance that would normally woo the Academy. Plus, it fits in the longstanding Academy tradition of awarding a statue to a deserving actor for a less than deserving performance. I think there wasn't a point in the movie were I saw "Hugo Glass", it was always just Dicaprio absolutely prostrating himself to finally, finally gethis hand on that coveted statue (please Academy put the man out of his misery). I was reading this thread on IMDB called 100 things I learned from The Revenant and this just slayed me:

Another thing people applaud the film for is its beauty and really, it's undoubtedly very beautiful. I think Lubetzki will probably take the award, but it feltt like I was just watching cinematography for cinematographies sake. It was all distractingly flashy imo (a bit like the Macbeth on Mars sequence I mentioned above) and it came off as a bit gimmicky and shallow, which quite frankly reminded me of the tracking shot gimmick in Birdman. Both movies exist to serve this gimmicky end. You just feel that they aren't there that committed to telling an actual story.

That brings me to my third major point, the story. It was very predictable and really rather dull. I was reading a bit about the differences between Hugo Glass' tale and this film and pretty much every deviation by Innaritu made the story more cliche

Hidden Content

I think that if I had been swept away by the film, I could probably have handwaved a lot of it, but the distractingly pretty cinematography didn't make that possible sadly. 

By far the best thing about The Revenant were the action sequences. They were at once kinetic, easy to follow, exciting and bloodily realistic. I think Innaritu did a good job depicting the violence of the frontier. I liked how he had eyes for the small acts of confusion in the mayhem, like in the first fight sequence when

Hidden Content

or in the final fight when

Hidden Content

 

Anyway, I still put it rather high. The individual pieces of the puzzle might not add up to a coherent and engaging whole, but they are well done on their own. 

EDIT: oh and just one question I have to ask:

 

Hidden Content

 

I think you managed to sum up how I feel about both Macbeth and The Revenant.

[Veltigar]

8 minutes ago, The_Gallows_Knight said:

I think you managed to sum up how I feel about both Macbeth and The Revenant.

Say, since you also saw Macbeth, there is one question that keeps bugging me. Perhaps you could answer it:

So, the film starts with Macbeth and Lady Macbeth burrying their infant son. That much is clear, but do they actually have a second son? Macbeth paints stripes on one boy's face before battle and when that boy dies he seems especially sad. And Macbeth also places two stones on the boys eyes, just like he did with his infant son. That same boy also keeps returning in his haunted visions.

If that boy is their son, I think I would like it more. Since it makes Macbeth's descent into insanity even more understandable. At the same time, I don't really feel like the film does a good job establishing that teenage boy as his son, so it would imo also be a knock on the film's storytelling at the same time.        

[GallowKnight]

1 hour ago, Veltigar said:

Say, since you also saw Macbeth, there is one question that keeps bugging me. Perhaps you could answer it:

 

Hidden Content

 

Spoiler

Yeah, I assumed that the teenager that gets killed in combat and that Macbeth keeps seeing is their son. I don't really see how it could be anyway else. Especially since Macbeth seems kind of happy when he's seeing they boy in his hallucinations.

 

[Corvinus85]

2 hours ago, Veltigar said:

EDIT: oh and just one question I have to ask:

Hidden Content

 

I thought the same, too. Not a bad CGI model, but nothing special, imo. And they had an actor stand it and do all that. I would think this movie should not rob Star Wars of a visual effects award. If anything, Mad Max is the only serious challenger.

[Jack Bauer 24]

Going to watch Macbeth tomorrow. Looking forward to it.