Oppenheimer wins 7 Oscars (Best Picture) (film & awards) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 12:58:56 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Off-topic Board (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, The Mikado, YE)
  Oppenheimer wins 7 Oscars (Best Picture) (film & awards) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Oppenheimer wins 7 Oscars (Best Picture) (film & awards)  (Read 23325 times)
morgankingsley
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,016
United States


« on: March 25, 2020, 06:01:00 PM »

I watched 'Doctor Sleep' last night and I loved it! I would put it up there as one of the best sequels ever made and definitely one of the best sequels made last decade alongside 'Blade Runner 2049.' Both movies, despite being made decades later, manage to enhance their predecessor and that's what makes a great sequel!

I do wonder if certain Kubrick purists will find this movie controversial though. I personally think that it makes 'The Shining' better by clarifying and extrapolating on aspects of Kubrick's classic. Not only that but it somehow manages to simultaneously be a sequel to both the book and movie at the same time which is a real accomplishment considering how much they differed and how much King detested Kubrick's adaptation. For one thing, this movie is actually about "the shining" and almost creates its own universe based on that aspect. We get to see a mythology and world being built here, and it's really fascinating. In that sense though this movie is mistitled and I feel bad because that might have been why this movie was a relative flop. It shares that issue with another recent Ewan McGregor film-'Birds of Prey'/'Halrey Quinn: Birds of Prey,' and like that movie should have had a title to establish more familiarity with it. Maybe 'The Shining 2: Doctor Sleep' could have worked. I mean, they only mention who/what "Doctor Sleep" is once. But even then, it's also possible that like with why 'Blade Runner 2049' flopped somewhat, 'The Shining' might just be too much of a niche franchise for the average moviegoer. I do feel that this movie won't be for everyone.
If you're a huge fan of 'The Shining' though, like me, you will get a lot out of this film. It might end up containing a few too many fan service/member berry moments for some, especially towards the end, but I don't feel like they ruined the film or anything. I was fine with them. There was one little easter egg that I guffawed at involving tea cups in particular which only the most obsessive and detailed fan of 'The Shining' would notice, and I wholly appreciate the filmmakers' inclusion of it as well as other painstaking details that make this movie as much of a homage to Kubrick's film as it is a sequel to it. It is not as scary as 'The Shining' though. This movie is actually less of a horror movie (though there are some scary moments, one of which is among the most disturbing things I have seen in a recent film) and more of a supernatural drama-thriller. So keep that in mind when managing your expectations for seeing it. It's also really long, about two-and-a-half hours.

I also want to mention that this film utilizes the novel concept of casting new actors in flashbacks. We don't see that too often anymore and I honestly prefer it to digital de-aging. Everybody they got, especially the new Halloran and Wendy, are great! They may not look 100% like the previous actors but they do feel like them. I do wonder if the casting agent for this film regretted not casting the kid from 'Marriage Story' as young Danny though. The kid in this film was perfectly fine, but the kid from 'Marriage Story' is a dead-ringer of the original Danny (who actually appears in a small cameo in this movie).

As for the few flaws I had, and there were very few, the concept of the shining, while integral to this movie and greatly expanded upon seemed to fall into the trap that the force does from 'Star Wars' (the prequels featuring McGregor also, coincidentally). It kind of becomes too inconsistent, ubiquitous, and vague. The new character Abra, who is great overall, actually might fall into that "Mary Sue" criticism for Rey to some. It didn't bother me, but I'm sure some have thought that. The only other thing about this film that bothered me was Rebecca Ferguson as the villain, Rose. She was actually fantastic in the role, but at times her accent seemed to drift in and out between being American and British. What's weird is that she is actually Swedish, so I don't know what that was about. It was a bit distracting. Otherwise I loved her.

So yeah, this has become another one of my favorite movies of last year. 

Well honestly Blade Runner 49 flopping was no shock because the original didn't do too well either and yes it is a cult classic but the overwhelming majority of people still never even heard of it beyond pop culture references, so it was sort of bond to only get newer fans of the original and the older fans of the original and some die hard Gosling fans
Logged
morgankingsley
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,016
United States


« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2023, 09:13:51 PM »

To be honest, this year seems to have a stronger list of films than some previous years, such as Pinnochio winning best animated, and the nominations of Maverick for best picture (which I doubt it will win, but I do respect the fact that it at least got nomianted). Also nice to see that Jamie Lee Curtis is able to get a get a solid career outside of being the lead in Halloween, as I didn't know her film existed until now.

Morgan Kingsley -

March 12 2023
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 11 queries.