Timewaster's Guide Archive

Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers on January 27, 2006, 03:15:17 PM

Title: review: The New World
Post by: The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers on January 27, 2006, 03:15:17 PM
reference: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1242
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Fellfrosch on January 27, 2006, 03:28:48 PM
Absolutely hilarious throughout, though this was my favorite line: "Amazingly, he is able to teach her English without the help of a magical tree."

I say that from now on we only get reviews of bad movies, because they're way more fun to read.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Tage on January 27, 2006, 05:41:40 PM
I won't be watching this movie, but I wouldn't miss the review for the world. Four stars!
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Shrain on January 27, 2006, 06:30:47 PM
haha. Yeah, I had a feeling this movie wouldn't be anything to smile about unless you were making fun of it. But I have to say I nearly had a heart attack when I read "the kind that the late Harrison Ford used to play." I thought, What? Noooo! Harrison Ford's not dead, right? They just mean "late" like the part of his career or something. Phew. I'm glad "late" didn't mean pushing up daisies in this case.

What cracked me up the most was this sarcastic gem: "leaving instruction that Pocahontas be told that he drowned, which apparently is the thing to do when you get a good job offer and have to leave behind your prepubescent girlfriend." LOL. Genuis.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Paul_Gibbs on January 28, 2006, 03:04:35 AM
Growing up, Harrison Ford was my acting idol. After seeing "Hollywood Homicide" and some of the other career choices he's made lately, it's easier to think of him as dead.  We will continue to refer to him as "the late Harrison Ford" until he cinematically rises from his celluloid grave.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Shrain on January 28, 2006, 12:32:49 PM
Ah, yes, I -do- agree with you on his cinematic decline. I opted out of seeing HH because I'd pretty much figured it was more of the same "new" Harrison that I don't care for. :( *sigh*
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Peter Ahlstrom on January 28, 2006, 10:41:50 PM
When's the Firewall review?
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Patrick_Gibbs on January 29, 2006, 02:11:05 AM
Quote
When's the Firewall review?


We were kind of thinking it would be sometime after we have seen the film, roughly.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Peter Ahlstrom on January 29, 2006, 02:27:47 AM
I assure you that I did in no way expect you to review said film at any time prior to its appearance before your optic organs.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Mad Dr Jeffe on January 29, 2006, 02:18:26 PM
Im interested in seeing this, but not because of the plot, I love Maliks Cinimatograhy which is usually stunning. Im thinking that this may be good for a rental though now after the review.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Patrick_Gibbs on January 29, 2006, 04:28:01 PM
Quote
Im interested in seeing this, but not because of the plot, I love Maliks Cinimatograhy which is usually stunning. Im thinking that this may be good for a rental though now after the review.


Hard to say. If you want to see it for the cinematography, the theater is the best place to truly appreciate that, and I grant you that is very good, though personally I thought the cinematography in "Memoirs of a Gesiha" completely buried it in terms of visual splendor.

In the end, If you are a big fan of Malick's impressive visual style, it might be worth you're time - just don't expect much.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Paul_Gibbs on January 29, 2006, 08:49:29 PM
I agree, if you want to appreciate Malick's cinematography, the big screen is the best way. And there is no denying that "The New World" includes moments of superb visual poetry - it's simply prententious and lacks narrative cohesion.

This is really what we meant we called Malick more of a film school professor than a director. If you want to study the visual techniques of filmmaking, Malick's among the best. He can paint with all the colors of the wind: he just can't tell a story.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Mad Dr Jeffe on January 30, 2006, 09:05:36 AM
I was interested in the fact that he used a handheld camera and 360  degree shooting with actors given huge freedom of movement (which is never ever done). Also who did the score and is it any good? Thin Red Line was blessed with a great score.

Malick has plusses and minuses, and I accept that, he managed to take and confuse the plot of Thin Red Line beyond comprehension, dropping and adding characters at will and rearranging scenes to fit his vision. Visually though the movie was stunning, with vibrent greens and blues, sharp contrasts and experiments with light,.

I particularly like his use of the natural world in scenes in a realistic way, and almost as a participant instead of scenery or backdrop.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Paul_Gibbs on January 30, 2006, 11:54:51 AM
Malick uses all of those techniques you mentioned to strong visual effect. The score is by James Horner, one of my personal favorites. It's pretty good, but some of it just seems to be his "Braveheart" score slightly paraphrased.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Entsuropi on January 30, 2006, 01:13:20 PM
Tangent: I always loved the fact that in Braveheart, the battle of Stirling bridge didn't have a bridge.
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Mad Dr Jeffe on January 30, 2006, 01:42:54 PM
details, details.
I always loved that Edward Longshanks was the Prisoner.

I am not a number, I am the King of England!
Title: Re: review: The New World
Post by: Oldie Black Witch on January 31, 2006, 12:50:44 AM
And Number Two wants to speak with you.