What I Watched Last Night In HD/UHD etc (Review).

Status
Not open for further replies.
‘Logan’s Run’ (1976)

Logans Run.jpg


I first saw ‘Logan’s Run’ at the time of its original cinema release and despite being starved of big screen science fiction in those days, I recall that I remained thoroughly unimpressed and felt that I’d flushed my money down the bog. Flash forward to this week and a Blu Ray at the bargain price of £4 tempted me to give this film a second viewing and possibly re-evaluate my original impression.

Oh dear.

To say this was a total ****ing mess from start to finish and one of the worst examples of big screen science fiction I’ve ever had the misfortune to waste two hours on, would be to undersell my feelings regarding this monumental turkey.

The central theme of the film, one pregnant with potential, is woefully under-explored. No, make that completely under-explored or even adequately explained, by one of the worst screenplays I have ever encountered. Ah yes, the screenplay!

This is one sorry, meandering mess of half baked ideas, thoroughly lame and unexciting action set pieces and characters almost totally lacking in any intelligent motivation whatsoever. To say that the characters are thinly drawn would be a gross understatement, as characterisation and motivation along with logic and common-sense are totally eschewed in this mess of a screenplay. A screenplay that is also replete with some of the most banal and stilted dialogue you’re ever likely to hear in a major motion picture.

The performances from all involved are simply atrocious. We know that the likes of Michael York, Jenny Agutter and Richard Jordan are more than capable performers, but even they cannot rise above the appalling shite the screenplay asks them to deliver. The result is excruciatingly awful, ham-fisted dialogue almost every time someone opens their gob to speak.

The film features a pre-fame Farrah Fawcett and it speaks volumes to the level of performances in this turgid flick, that even one so challenged as she in the thesping stakes, delivers a performance that is pretty much on a par with everyone else in the film.

Then, just as you think you’ve seen the worst, in the third act along comes Peter Ustinov, who serves up a performance accompanied by several thick slices of ham and a highly dubious American accent.

As I said, this was only my second viewing of the film in its entirety since its original cinema release, but I recall sometime in the early ‘80s wandering into a screening room at a science fiction convention and catching a glimpse of ‘Logan’s Run’, which was a perennial convention favourite at the time. This was only a few years after its cinema release, but I remember thinking at the time that the brief snippet I saw looked incredibly dated, even then. As you can imagine several decades later, things have not improved.

This is a film that is appallingly dated in almost every conceivable area; conceptualisation, scripting, performances, dialogue, set design, costumes and some highly risible future tech. I am never one to criticise SFX in older films for having dated somewhat, as many productions employed what was the state of the art at the time and should not be criticised in the light of today’s more sophisticated technologies. However...

I must make special mention of the robot in the ice cave, which must be a contender for the worst ever automaton ever seen in any SF film. Some might say ‘Robot Monster’ has it beat, but that was a zero budget, poverty row production, whereas ‘Logan’s Run’ was a multi million dollar production from a major studio and they managed to deliver something that looked like a build-it-from-Fairy Liquid-bottles ‘Blue Peter’ project. I say this not in the light of today’s more sophisticated screen FX, as back in 1976, I recall that I almost pissed myself when I saw this.

To sum up, this is a film that was badly in need of a decent concept, a decent screenplay and a decent director, not to mention the services of a decent script doctor to spark up some of the worst dialogue I’ve ever encountered in any major motion picture. And several of the performers in this train-wreck really should have known better. But, money talks and credibility walks, I suppose.

The film also features what is probably the worst musical score in the illustrious career of the otherwise marvellous Jerry Goldsmith. But let's face it, he was hardly given inspirational material to work with, was he?

I’ve lost count of the number of times over the years that I’ve heard this disaster referred to as a classic SF film. I can only assume this is from people who’ve never actually seen it, perchance, or those that think “old” and “classic” mean the same thing. Have no doubts, ‘Logan’s Run’ is the poster child for bad science fiction cinema and only a “classic” in the eyes of those that regard the likes of ‘Space 1999’ and ‘Blake’s 7’ as “classic” SF.

Easily one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. However I should easily get a fiver for this in the car boot sale tomorrow and thus turn a tidy £1 profit! :D
 
Last edited:
Brightburn (2019) Blu-ray

1581203537819.png


Anybody who's already aware of this, is probably au fait with it's intriging premise - a reverse Superman tale. It's certainly an interesting idea, that whilst so many comic stories and characters are being mined within an inch of their lives, director David Yaroresky has chosen to take one of the best known mythologies and turn it on it's head.
As it begins, wannabe parents Elizabeth Banks (the recent Charlie's Angels and Modern Family) and David Denman (best known to me from the US Office), find something strange has fallen from the sky and left a serious mess in their backyard. So far, so Kal-El shaped, but as we fast forward a decade or so, the boy now adopted by the couple, is showing signs of both superpowers, and some seriously nasty growing pains...
It's certainly pretty dark stuff as the antihero, Brandon Breyer (newcomer Jackson A Dunn) , flirts with a darker path than an upbringing with his wholesome earth parents would suggest. More than a 'superhero' film, I found the whole tone more reminiscent of The Omen. Maybe a touch of Josh Trank's Chronicle too. Director Yaroresky deserves some bonus points as he ratchets up the tension factor and brings a real sense of dread to the proceedings.
There's some interesting, but underused themes here as young Brandon is pulled between a nature v nurture scenario, with his earth upbringing, and his alien roots.
Considering the premise, it's all put together on a very modest budget. It's never an issue, and even manages one or two decent moneyshots towards the finale. Some of the more minimal cg work works extremely well, and proves that if the characters are well written, and story beats decent, it doesn't always need big flashy elements. It never outstays it's welcome either, with a very lean 90 minute or so running time.
I wasn't the biggest fan of the ending, aside from a fun cameo. There were however, some nice tacked on scenes that suggest a potential sequel could take things in interesting directions...
I'll just sign off by eating some humble pie, and go on record as saying Elizabeth Banks, an actress I don't normally rate, is the backbone of this, and her character genuinely elicits a whole lot of empathy as her cosy family life implodes. Well worth catching, but more of a rental than a purchase.

7/10

Despite the film's very dark nature, I found the ending a little overly bleak. It would have been nice to see one of Brandon's parents survive to fight another day. Reading up further though, it seems the director was always going to kill Bank's character off, it was just a case of how...
 
Last edited:
‘Logan’s Run’ (1976)

View attachment 1255705

I first saw ‘Logan’s Run’ at the time of its original cinema release and despite being starved of big screen science fiction in those days, I recall that I remained thoroughly unimpressed and felt that I’d flushed my money down the bog. Flash forward to this week and a Blu Ray at the bargain price of £4 tempted me to give this film a second viewing and possibly re-evaluate my original impression.

Oh dear.

To say this was a total ****ing mess from start to finish and one of the worst examples of big screen science fiction I’ve ever had the misfortune to waste two hours on, would be to undersell my feelings regarding this monumental turkey.

The central theme of the film, one pregnant with potential, is woefully under-explored. No, make that completely under-explored or even adequately explained, by one of the worst screenplays I have ever encountered. Ah yes, the screenplay!

This is one sorry, meandering mess of half baked ideas, thoroughly lame and unexciting action set pieces and characters almost totally lacking in any intelligent motivation whatsoever. To say that the characters are thinly drawn would be a gross understatement, as characterisation and motivation along with logic and common-sense are totally eschewed in this mess of a screenplay. A screenplay that is also replete with some of the most banal and stilted dialogue you’re ever likely to hear in a major motion picture.

The performances from all involved are simply atrocious. We know that the likes of Michael York, Jenny Agutter and Richard Jordan are more than capable performers, but even they cannot rise above the appalling sh*te the screenplay asks them to deliver. The result is excruciatingly awful, ham-fisted dialogue almost every time someone opens their gob to speak.

The film features a pre-fame Farrah Fawcett and it speaks volumes to the level of performances in this turgid flick, that even one so challenged as she in the thesping stakes, delivers a performance that is pretty much on a par with everyone else in the film.

Then, just as you think you’ve seen the worst, in the third act along comes Peter Ustinov, who serves up a performance accompanied by several thick slices of ham and a highly dubious American accent.

As I said, this was only my second viewing of the film in its entirety since its original cinema release, but I recall sometime in the early ‘80s wandering into a screening room at a science fiction convention and catching a glimpse of ‘Logan’s Run’, which was a perennial convention favourite at the time. This was only a few years after its cinema release, but I remember thinking at the time that the brief snippet I saw looked incredibly dated, even then. As you can imagine several decades later, things have not improved.

This is a film that is appallingly dated in almost every conceivable area; conceptualisation, scripting, performances, dialogue, set design, costumes and some highly risible future tech. I am never one to criticise SFX in older films for having dated somewhat, as many productions employed what was the state of the art at the time and should not be criticised in the light of today’s more sophisticated technologies. However...

I must make special mention of the robot in the ice cave, which must be a contender for the worst ever automaton ever seen in any SF film. Some might say ‘Robot Monster’ has it beat, but that was a zero budget, poverty row production, whereas ‘Logan’s Run’ was a multi million dollar production from a major studio and they managed to deliver something that looked like a build-it-from-Fairy Liquid-bottles ‘Blue Peter’ project. I say this not in the light of today’s more sophisticated screen FX, as back in 1976, I recall that I almost pissed myself when I saw this.

To sum up, this is a film that was badly in need of a decent concept, a decent screenplay and a decent director, not to mention the services of a decent script doctor to spark up some of the worst dialogue I’ve ever encountered in any major motion picture. And several of the performers in this train-wreck really should have known better. But, money talks and credibility walks, I suppose.

The film also features what is probably the worst musical score in the illustrious career of the otherwise marvellous Jerry Goldsmith. But let's face it, he was hardly given inspirational material to work with, was he?

I’ve lost count of the number of times over the years that I’ve heard this disaster referred to as a classic SF film. I can only assume this is from people who’ve never actually seen it, perchance, or those that think “old” and “classic” mean the same thing. Have no doubts, ‘Logan’s Run’ is the poster child for bad science fiction cinema and only a “classic” in the eyes of those that regard the likes of ‘Space 1999’ and ‘Blake’s 7’ as “classic” SF.

Easily one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. However I should easily get a fiver for this in the car boot sale tomorrow and thus turn a tidy £1 profit! :D
Wow. Pretty harsh. Ive always had a soft spot for this one as I grew up with it being repeated on tv. Yes its cheesy with modern eyes but I still love it.

And stop knocking Box! :D

And definitely dont start knocking Blakes 7...

I wonder if you have ever seen Star Crash? Now that you should see... ;)
 
Wow. Pretty harsh. Ive always had a soft spot for this one as I grew up with it being repeated on tv. Yes its cheesy with modern eyes but I still love it.

And stop knocking Box! :D

And definitely dont start knocking Blakes 7...
I remember persuading my parents to let me stay up to watch it on tv back in the day. I was ONLY interested in the robot scenes...:facepalm:
 
I wonder if you have ever seen Star Crash? Now that you should see... ;)

Unfortunately yes. Another perennial favourite on the SF convention circuit in the '80s, featuring Caroline Munro, the Meryl Streep of her generation. Another classic of the shitence fiction genre. :)

As I mentioned on the 'Picard' thread, my many years of experience the most hardcore Trekkies and SF fans, taught me to never trust their opinions on what constituted good SF/Trek.

What really used to amuse and irritate me in equal measure was that these people watched only SF and completely poo-pooed any other genre, which meant of course that their viewing consisted of a large proportion of total shite. Literally anything would do as long as it had spaceships or robots in it. They would give a wide berth to films like 'The Godfather' or ' Apocalypse Now' or 'Taxi Driver' and witheringly referred to people that enjoyed these or other forms of cinema and TV as "mundanes".

I remember a conversation with one knobhead at a convention where i was extolling the virtues of 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' and he asked me "How can you watch such unimaginative rubbish?" When I asked if he had actually seen the film he replied, "If it's not sci-fi I dont watch it."

'Starcrash' was a huge favourite with many people knew back then and I can't imagine a more "mundane" mind than someone that enjoyed that heap of crap.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately yes. Another perennial favourite on the SF convention circuit in the '80s, featuring Caroline Munro, the Meryl Streep of her generation. Another classic of the sh*tence fiction genre. :)

As I mentioned on the 'Picard' thread, my many years of experience the most hardcore Trekkies and SF fans, taught me to never trust their opinions on what constituted good SF/Trek.

What really used to amuse and irritate me in equal measure was that these people watched only SF and completely poo-pooed any other genre, which meant of course that their viewing consisted of a large proportion of total sh*te. Literally anything would do as long as it had spaceships or robots in it. They would give a wide berth to films like 'The Godfather' or ' Apocalypse Now' or 'Taxi Driver' and witheringly referred to people that enjoyed these or other forms of cinema and TV as "mundanes".

I remember a conversation with one knobhead at a convention where i was extolling the virtues of 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest' and he asked me "How can you watch such unimaginative rubbish?" When I asked if he had actually seen the film he replied, "If it's not sci-fi I dont watch it."

'Starcrash' was a huge favourite with many people knew back then and I can't imagine a more "mundane" mind than someone that enjoyed that heap of crap.
Ah I love Starcrash. Or Starcrap as my brother and I call it. Never saw it until a few years back when someone happened to mention it on a forum.

I love SF but I don't ignore other genres. The most popular genre here though has to be horror by a long shot I think.
 
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Arrow LE)

Buy the ticket, take the ride.

You wont need much...just a tiny taste...

If he figures out what is "happening", then he can rise one notch and become "hip", and then if he can convince himself to approve of what is "happening", then he becomes "groovy". Groooooovy.

I hate to say this, but this place is getting to me. I think I'm getting the Fear.

We always talk in codes....especially with Dr Gonzo.

White rabbit! White rabbit!


OK I know there may be some of you already wincing thinking "uh oh, Jimmy's blathering on about Fear & Loathing again...like he hasn't done this at least twice already" - and you're right! I must have reviewed this at least twice here - maybe more. So I'm not going to off on a mad rant about why I love this film yet again....I think. ;)

So this must be easily the 5th or 6th time I have bought this film. And I don't regret any of it! Terry Gilliam achieved the previously thought impossible task of bringing Hunter S Thompson's masterpiece to the screen. And this film set me off on a course of reading all his work too which I managed to achieve recently - and its brilliant. First time I watched it I didn't really get it. Second time I watched it I was laughing quite a bit. Third time...well you know the rest. Gilliam really did achieve the impossible here - this film is as close to the book as we will ever see and I doubt that anyone will ever try to adapt it again, there simply is no point. Say what you like about Johnny Depp but when he's good, he's really good and he's certainly that here - its simply impossible to imagine anyone else playing the role of Raoul Duke, crazed reporter. And then there's Benicio Del Toro who almost matches him as his debauched attorney, Dr Gonzo.

Gilliam keeps the film moving nearly all the time and its so easy to miss little details here and there. He only really slows it down so we can get even more uncomfortable with exactly what we are witnessing! Even on this watch I noticed one or two little things I hadn't really seen before though that could be down to the new transfer on offer here. The film was made on a fairly tight budget and the small amount of CGI is quite obvious at times but its never off-putting and fits the hallucinogenic tone of the film well. The rest of the cast are all very good and I am sure you will all spot the real Hunter easily enough in the film too! The dialogue is fantastic. OK - its mostly lifted from the book of course but its just so damn quotable. I could have filled a page here just with memorable quotes from the film.

Arrow ordered a 4K restoration for this release and it shows. Now, the old Criterion (and second German) release had a very good transfer but this one seems to be that bit better again. Colour and detail are superb as are the black levels and I am sure I noticed a couple of things on this watch which didn't seem to be there before (though that could be the OLED). Great stuff! The AQ appears to be the same 5.1 lossless track from before but it upscales nicely and sounds very good. I did have to increase the volume quite a bit compared to normal but that was no problem. The only downside here really of course is that this isn't a 4K disc. I suspect a 4K disc could look even better. This really is the next best thing though and fans of the film should not hesitate!

This new limited edition Arrow release manages to destroy the old Criterion release though you may want to keep that for extras not provided here. There is a ton of new extras and a big documentary too which are all fascinating for fans of the film like me. There is also a second disc with a documentary on Ralph Steadman which I haven't got round to yet as well. There is a really nice (not short) book about the film along with a poster and postcards too.

Summary? Well I managed to keep the blathering down here but as you have probably gathered, I absolutely love this film and its one of my favourites of the 1990s no question. It still manages to make me howl laughing despite seeing it way too many times. Buy the ticket - take the ride.

Film 9.5/10
PQ 9.5/10
AQ 9/10
 
Last edited:
I love Blakes 7 - some of it is rubbish but the good outweighs the bad and the incredible acting (?) from Paul Darrow is pure entertainment

Logan's Run i love that too.

You will be dissing Saturn 3 next :)
 
‘Logan’s Run’ (1976)


The film also features what is probably the worst musical score in the illustrious career of the otherwise marvellous Jerry Goldsmith. But let's face it, he was hardly given inspirational material to work with, was he?
There always something in Jerry's score to like even if you don't like all of it 36.26 what not to like about that.
 
I love Blakes 7 - some of it is rubbish but the good outweighs the bad and the incredible acting (?) from Paul Darrow is pure entertainment

Logan's Run i love that too.

You will be dissing Saturn 3 next :)

My cousin once played in the orchestra in a pantomime in Newcastle where Gareth (Blake ) Thomas was playing King Rat and he told him that I was a big SF fan but hated 'Blake's 7'. Thomas laughed and said that he hated it as well as it was the biggest pile of crap he'd ever appeared in.

As for 'Saturn 3' that must be surely one of the most intensely stupid pieces of SF ever committed to the screen. A total disaster.

The likes of 'Saturn 3', 'Blake's 7' and 'Logan's Run' are the reason that the SF community long ago coined the term "sci-fi" to describe such exercises in awfulness to distinguish them from decent science fiction.
 
Last edited:
I liked Blakes 7 more when Gareth Thomas left - no slight on him though and more to do with the introduction of Glynis Barber.

The last episode in particular is wonderful.
 
I liked Blakes 7 more when Gareth Thomas left - no slight on him though and more to do with the introduction of Glynis Barber.

The last episode in particular is wonderful.
Even as a kid I knew it was different to the usual SF we got on tv. The storylines were great even if the effects werent! It was always my favourite over the likes of Dr Who, Space 1999 and Star Trek.
 
Hardcore (Indicator, region B - UK disc)

Only outdated in its central concept of someone being able to completely disappear, this powerful character study is made by Scott's performance.

A hard working, religious mid-western man, Scott's teenage daughter disappears on a trip to California and some months later, the seedy PI he's hired to find her shows him a 'stag' film of her and two gentleman. What follows is Scott trying to find her, from randomly going into seedy pleasure palaces in downtown LA and asking strangers if they know her, to more focussed efforts such as casting for a non-existent movie in the hope of attracting her co-stars.

The notion of someone being able to disappear with no trace seems quaint today - as does the notion of the porn industry in the late '70's. But what isn't quaint is Scott. Every emotion is played out on his face - his disgust at the industry and those that care so little for his values who circle around it, to his unbridled naivete at understanding what some people are willing to do for money and come its finale, when seemingly it all ends happily, there's a gut punch when he realises that he has become what he has most detested - a user of women, in an ending that is every bit as powerful as the ending of Chinatown.

Scott is the film and he is stunning. Even wearing ridiculous fake moustaches and wearing hilariously unhip jeans, he's a powerhouse on screen and you feel through his conversations with his companion on his hunt how he starts to realise how he's driven his daughter away and his world is coming crashing down around him. Its a brilliant performance and without it, the film is nothing. Schrader's deeply depressing view of the porn industry is grim and unrelenting, going from nudey booths to snuff films, but almost always with a lack of judgement that is both refreshing and scary.

Not an easy or fun film to watch, but a powerful film even if the world it depicts no longer exists - because the human emotions that cause this behaviour are still relevant to this day. Next time you 'accidentally' flick on Pornhub, this film will definitely make you think twice...…..

Its Indicator, so its another great transfer. Detail is good, colours are spot on (all that neon and shadows look blinding and deep) and grain is present and managed wonderfully. The lossless mono track is clear and anchored to the centre speaker. Extras are a near two hour audio interview with Schrader that plays over the film like a commentary track, 10 mins with the DP and a 22 min excerpt from a longer doc on Jack Neitzsche and his music. Ok, but I'd have liked something about the context of the film.

Summary - powerful and grim (well its Schrader, what did you expect????) its a fascinating look into a man out of depth but desperate to find his daughter. Scott is brilliant and worth the price of admission alone. The disc does the important stuff right and for Schrader fans, I'm sure there's something on the disc for you.
 
Have no doubts, ‘Logan’s Run’ is the poster child for bad science fiction cinema and only a “classic” in the eyes of those that regard the likes of ‘Space 1999’ and ‘Blake’s 7’ as “classic” SF.
78248.jpg

How dare you


:laugh:
 
It's taken me a little longer than I was planning but I've completed watching the first 7 seasons of Game of Thrones. I'm about to watch Dr Who The Invasion.
 
Shawshank redemption
the butterfly effect. Directors cut of course
Butterfly effect DC is an outstandingly dark movie. Why oh why did they release the limp and safe theatrical version. It's no wonder the critics panned it.
the DC is very dark with a shocking denouement. You don't see it coming.
It's a very complex movie that unravels and makes more sense the more you watch it. The movie is a modern classic of the genre
try it. But make sure its the DC.
 
Joker (WB, region free - UHD, US disc)

Stunningly presented and produced, yet incredibly shallow and unsurprising, its obvious why this has proven to be so divisive.

Forget the dubious attacks on its politics - it may want to fool us into thinking it has some, but its as politically empty as it is almost everything else - the real issue here is that the film has no arc, there's no real story here, there's nothing here that I didn't instantly guess from the trailer. Arthur Fleck has been dealt a crappy hand, he lives a crappy life and it only gets worse - he loses his job, the one person he seemingly cares for and has two chances of happiness and meaning in his life cruelly snatched away, savagely pushing him over the edge...……….as edgy and as dark as that sounds, that is literally the entire film.

It looks and sounds wonderful, a fantastically artful look at grime and filth in all its forms, anchored by Pheonix who, while no doubt delivering a strong performance, unfortunately has exactly the same arc as the film.......there just isn't one. The godawful attempts to shoehorn into this film some form of a Batman origin gives us, unforgivably for the umpteenth time, another version of Thomas and Martha Wayne's death, a scene which simply wasn't needed and serves to grate rather than anything else.

The scenes of brutality and madness are short, sharp and shocking given the film is an almost arthouse meditation on the downtrodden and puncture Fleck's journey at just the right time and in just the right way...…..and yet come its city in flames ending, our anti-hero standing aloft in triumph as Gotham burns around him, it feels completely hollow, totally undone by its own narrative whereby Pheonix proudly announces he has no interest in what's going on around him...….and yet the film wants to accept that he has thanks to nothing more than a 30-second car ride.

It was a powerful watch and its very well realised by all involved (who knew Philips had something like this in him). But its narratively inert in almost every way, any complexity hinted at by our central character lost in the relentless tide of misfortune that befalls him. Interesting to look at and listen to. Not to actually watch.

And that is helped no end by a rather stunning 4K presentation - the image is pristine. And I do mean pristine. Razor sharp with some of the best detail levels seen on this and any format, its a beauty. Colours are muted and naturalistic, even when those garish primary colours are daubed on Fleck's face, but the contrast ratio is huge on this. There's almost nothing negative to say about the image whatsoever. The lossless Atmos track is a room filler, but mostly for the music and ambient effects. When its needed to, it goes big, loud and everywhere but for the most part, its a very solid track.

Summary - I was constantly wanting more from this. More...…...anything. Its a shame Pheonix's performance is wasted on a character that does nothing and says even less. Ledger's take on the character has infinitely more depth and layers precisely because we don't know anything about him. This is a textbook example of when trying to explain the unexplainable, you make it less scary, less interesting, less.....everything. Worth a watch for the handsome visuals and for Pheonix, but its a crushing disappointment after all the hype. Eleven Oscar noms for this? Jesus wept...…....

Really well written review and hard to argue with most of what you say. Personally, however, I would disagree that there's no character arc here. It may not fit into certain definitions, but we see a guy go from 'zero to hero' over the space of ninety minutes. I'm not seeing how that isn't a 'development' (& a very detailed, considered one at that...hell, that's pretty much all there is!)

The performance was definitely significantly better than the film itself, that's for sure...
 
Joker (WB, region free - UHD, US disc)

Stunningly presented and produced, yet incredibly shallow and unsurprising, its obvious why this has proven to be so divisive.

Forget the dubious attacks on its politics - it may want to fool us into thinking it has some, but its as politically empty as it is almost everything else - the real issue here is that the film has no arc, there's no real story here, there's nothing here that I didn't instantly guess from the trailer. Arthur Fleck has been dealt a crappy hand, he lives a crappy life and it only gets worse - he loses his job, the one person he seemingly cares for and has two chances of happiness and meaning in his life cruelly snatched away, savagely pushing him over the edge...……….as edgy and as dark as that sounds, that is literally the entire film.

It looks and sounds wonderful, a fantastically artful look at grime and filth in all its forms, anchored by Pheonix who, while no doubt delivering a strong performance, unfortunately has exactly the same arc as the film.......there just isn't one. The godawful attempts to shoehorn into this film some form of a Batman origin gives us, unforgivably for the umpteenth time, another version of Thomas and Martha Wayne's death, a scene which simply wasn't needed and serves to grate rather than anything else.

The scenes of brutality and madness are short, sharp and shocking given the film is an almost arthouse meditation on the downtrodden and puncture Fleck's journey at just the right time and in just the right way...…..and yet come its city in flames ending, our anti-hero standing aloft in triumph as Gotham burns around him, it feels completely hollow, totally undone by its own narrative whereby Pheonix proudly announces he has no interest in what's going on around him...….and yet the film wants to accept that he has thanks to nothing more than a 30-second car ride.

It was a powerful watch and its very well realised by all involved (who knew Philips had something like this in him). But its narratively inert in almost every way, any complexity hinted at by our central character lost in the relentless tide of misfortune that befalls him. Interesting to look at and listen to. Not to actually watch.

And that is helped no end by a rather stunning 4K presentation - the image is pristine. And I do mean pristine. Razor sharp with some of the best detail levels seen on this and any format, its a beauty. Colours are muted and naturalistic, even when those garish primary colours are daubed on Fleck's face, but the contrast ratio is huge on this. There's almost nothing negative to say about the image whatsoever. The lossless Atmos track is a room filler, but mostly for the music and ambient effects. When its needed to, it goes big, loud and everywhere but for the most part, its a very solid track.

Summary - I was constantly wanting more from this. More...…...anything. Its a shame Pheonix's performance is wasted on a character that does nothing and says even less. Ledger's take on the character has infinitely more depth and layers precisely because we don't know anything about him. This is a textbook example of when trying to explain the unexplainable, you make it less scary, less interesting, less.....everything. Worth a watch for the handsome visuals and for Pheonix, but its a crushing disappointment after all the hype. Eleven Oscar noms for this? Jesus wept...…....

Thanks for the review Coz. I have to confess I just don't fancy watching this. I'll definitely give it a miss now.

Bri
 
Really well written review and hard to argue with most of what you say. Personally, however, I would disagree that there's no character arc here. It may not fit into certain definitions, but we see a guy go from 'zero to hero' over the space of ninety minutes. I'm not seeing how that isn't a 'development' (& a very detailed, considered one at that...hell, that's pretty much all there is!)

The performance was definitely significantly better than the film itself, that's for sure...
Thanks.

Interesting that you do view it as a journey - for me Fleck started off a zero and ended up......well, slightly more of a zero. There was an almost total disconnect between Fleck and what was going on in Gotham - sure, he may have inadvertently kicked the city-wide issues off with his first shocking act, but he then proceeded to completely distance himself from them, even going so far as to announce that he has no interest in any of that when others questioned him about his role in its start. Its then as if Fleck's story and the Gotham story just happened to move in parallel, rather than feeling like it was one single story.

All the way through he has no interest in being the 'hero' and in fact, the only thing that led to that final shot for me was the 30-second cop car ride immediately beforehand. So I suppose the journey technically went from zero to bigger zero for 89.5 mins, then to hero for 0.5 mins!

But I'm ok with others liking it - always interesting to get opposing views and shows how subjective even the most straightforward of films can be.
 
In the electric mist, full length version. It took me many years to track this down but finally I got it
Just as the butterfly effect I watched last night, this movie got very average reviews. Its no surprise given they released a version with 20 minutes cut out. Therefore the movie didn't make sense.
Just as they released a cut version of butterfly effect and it flopped they did the same with electric mist.
as a movie its superb. PQ is also super.
I do like TLJ. He's got style.
He's good in no country for old men but he's better in this.
It's a film worth seeing but make sure its the uncut version
 
Boyz N The Hood 4k UHD Blu Ray projected.

I've viewed this film more than once over the decades, the usual, VHS, DVD, Blu Ray and now 4k. It says a lot for a film, especially for meto keep buying on various formats, well i normally always do lol, but as well as the upgraded Audio Visual qualities, this was mainly for the film.

South Central LA, the hood, Compton and Crenshaw, gang bangers, bloods and crips etc etc..we follow a group of school friends, watching them grow, try to survive and get out of the hood. Certain traits of this film, especially the beginning, have a certain feel of something like "Stand By Me" not in the sense of adventure, but one of togetherness, friends for life, always on the look out for each other, no matter what. This continues in as we watch the youngsters finally become men! This is where life changes.

Cuba Gooding Jr. is believable in his role, naivety, cool but not a hard man. The same can be said for a young looking Laurence Fishburne, who plays the roll of Goodings father, pretty much coolness personified in this, trying to teach right from wrong, and bring his son up the best way he knows how. He's been there, seen it and got the T-Shirt. Another shout out to Ice-Cube, i thought he excelled at this and put in a believable performance.

Something is always going to go wrong,.especially in deprived areas, lack of education, lack of opportunity, its like the government put them here to kill themselves, as Fishburne says, everybody has guns, theres liquor stores on every corner. They will either shoot eachother or drink themselves to death. Unfortunately for Ice Cube and Co, guns rule the roost here.

PQ, for a film on a modest budget, i thought this was good, to great, to excellent. Just the way it was shot i guess, some soft scenes, nice grain. 1.85.1 aspect ratio is perfect for this film. It's one of those Sony back catalogue releases that can make you smile, colours for most part are excellent, i even said wow at one point, check out the blazing sun, green grass in the garden, ice cube and cuba talking, the deep blacks of cubes T shirt and the glistening hair, to the low rider parked on the drive, the gold rims gleaming, every ounce of detail is mustered out of this disc, most close up facial shots are great. I just love what Sony can do.

SQ, we have a nice upgraded Dolby Atmos soundtrack, not going to win awards, but dialouge is excellent, music vo.es through all the speakers and fill the room nicely. You then have the constant presence of police helicopters, you don't see them, but you can constantly hear them hovering overhead, left to right, front to back..gunshots, when they appear, sound natural and unforced.

Well worth a watch as a film, and Sony mange to do another great job on another back catalogue release. Win win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom