Bodyguards Bodyguard 5/10
A one-timer, sadly
Let me elucidate, then.
Cinematography revolves around the choices that need to be made concerning lighting, framing, and camera movements in order to fulfill the director's vision for the film. When handled well, one can use it to create and manipulate mood, atmosphere, and other psychological effects, which can help to immerse you in the film's universe. On the opposite end, overexposure/underexposure, bad lighting, focusing issues, bad handling of the camera, failure to use the medium properly may not only strip the film of its personality, but ruin any immersion one might have. The same applies to sound design, music, and so forth. Is this opinion to you?
Is it opinion if the plot is disjointed and lacks any semblance of coherence, if the characters aren't fleshed out in the slightest, lack the smallest trace of development, and behave and make choices that don't make any sense at all and for no reason whatsoever? Is it opinion if the script is shallow and contrived?
It's quite clear when something is done well, and when something is done poorly.
Last movie I saw was... The original Beauty and the Beast (Disney 1991), and I'd rate it 10/10.
Hariuha laþu laukar gakar alu ole lule laukar
It sounds like this thread needs some more Blueobelisk objectivity. My curiosity about Citizen Kane is piqued. I'm still a bit busy to watch movies but maybe just for you guys I can schedule some time this weekend...Horror month is over, and I've been meaning to move on to do one of @hellhamster's 90 recommended movies. (I thought I was going to watch Pacific Rim next but i guess Citizen Kane just skipped the line...)
- - - Updated - - -
(Wtf I just looked at my spreadsheet of recommendations and hellhamster says the movie is from 1941. I thought based on the name it was gonna be some like 90s "italian gangsters are cool right now" kinda movie. Jesus.)
Blade Runner 2049 10/10
I can't recall the last time that I was worried that I might forget a scene when I leave the theater. I might see it again.
Good Time 10/10 this movie was so god damn good. Robert Patterson is a pretty damn good actor. This movie is on par with Blade Runner and Dunkirk for me in terms od enjoyability for movies this year.
Thor: Ragnarok, 9/10. easily the best Thor movie to come out. Felt like they really tried to capture those old Jack Kirby comics full of colors and weirdness. Thought it leaned on the humor a bit much but the action and pacing is spot on.
It's normally always declared one of the greatest films of all time but it's a bit like saying your favorite painting is the Moana Lisa. Pretty safe call but very unoriginal and seems like something that people would let a review in the rolling stone top 50 list influence them rather than actually being thier favourite film
An American Werewolf in London 8/10
Couple 80's montages that dragged on for too long / Downer ending but all in all I was entertained and invested in the story.
An American Werewolf in Paris 1/10
Gave up 1 hour into the movie. Instead of a story or a haunting atmosphere like in the first movie we have rad American teenagers doing extreme 90's stuff like bungee jumping off the Eiffel Tower.
Cloud Atlas 2/10: It was just four or five trite stories mashed together with an over arching theme of "don't be a dick". It looked nice, but was otherwise a complete waste of time. I only finished it hoping that there would be a payoff for all the stories being in the same movie, there wasn't.
- - - Updated - - -
Don't bother with Citizen Kane. It's historically important as you're watching some experimental "depth of field as narrative" and "focal change as narrative", but it isn't particularly thrilling or well written. It's just the origin of many modern visual story telling techniques, not much else. Snot glasses will tell you otherwise, but trust me, they missed the point of watching that movie in their intro to film class.