Topic: KinkyCyborg's Random Reviews 2012

[Najemikon]

I honestly think this is one of the best films in American cinema for a few years. Incredible piece of work. Considering your opening comments, you might appreciate my review: http://www.dvdcollectorsonline.com/index.php/topic,7434.msg146933.html#msg146933

I do think David Fincher specialises in making films about arseholes! And Zuckerberg is no exception. Meanwhile I have to say I draw the line at thinking he should have been in the running for Best Actor. If you watch the superb making of documentary you'll see how many takes (90+ for one scene!) Fincher used and then he 'built' the performances from multiple takes. I'm not questioning the method at all, but from the actor's perspective, I do question how much control they actually had over the characters. The documentary is long, but I can't stress strong enough just how brilliant it is. Fascinating stuff.

[Antares]

I honestly think this is one of the best films in American cinema for a few years. Incredible piece of work.

We definitely disagree on this. It felt like watching an episode of any reality show on TV today. Just a lot of backstabbing, and I found it very boring.

Meanwhile I have to say I draw the line at thinking he should have been in the running for Best Actor. If you watch the superb making of documentary you'll see how many takes (90+ for one scene!) Fincher used and then he 'built' the performances from multiple takes. I'm not questioning the method at all, but from the actor's perspective, I do question how much control they actually had over the characters.

This is the same criticism that I have leveled against, for many years, Marlon Brando's performance in On the Waterfront. While the dialog and the intensity are both there, if you measure the time between cuts, it never goes for more than 15 seconds between edits. Brando was well known by then, for asking for multiple takes to get into the character precisely. As good as he appears, you wonder how much of his performance was created by the film editor. Especially when you consider that the film editor is often the unsung genius on most films.

[KinkyCyborg]

Thanks for the link to your review Jon. We certainly see eye to eye on a few things.   

I finished watching the movie late in the evening and didn't watch any of the special features but I will make the effort to gain a bit more perspective but I am often hesitant to delve too deep into the behind-the-scenes material or commentaries because it sometimes, drastically in some cases, alters my first impressions of the movie that I base my reviews on. The relative merits of Eisenberg's performance is a good example of that. I thought he was great and delivered his biting remarks thick with sarcasm with tactile precision, making me feel I know just what kind of a genius dink this Zuckerberg guy is. Hearing you say that it took many repeated takes for some of his scenes would likely change my attitude towards his performance. I prefer to critique and rate a movie based on the finished product and not with a fairly detailed blueprint of it's construction which bonus material often contains. People going to the theatre to watch a movie don't have that extra material to form an opinion with and that's the way I believe it should be.

That being said, I often do watch the Special Features because they are usually very interesting but I mostly do this only after I've written my review and I never go back and change it based on what I learned in the extras. Another good example of that... Harrison Ford. I love his performances without fail but his backstage persona leaves a lot to be desired which is why I won't seek out his interviews because of how it might alter my perception of his performances. Unlikely, but I have had the thought go through my mind when watching the movie Witness  ... "It's hard to believe that this great actor is so boring and drab in real life!"   

[KinkyCyborg]

This is the same criticism that I have leveled against, for many years, Marlon Brando's performance in On the Waterfront. While the dialog and the intensity are both there, if you measure the time between cuts, it never goes for more than 15 seconds between edits. Brando was well known by then, for asking for multiple takes to get into the character precisely. As good as he appears, you wonder how much of his performance was created by the film editor. Especially when you consider that the film editor is often the unsung genius on most films.

That pretty much confirms what I said. I don't disagree that the editors play a crucial role in the successful execution of a film and don't get the credit deserved for it but when I evaluate a movie it is based on the separate but equally important parts that make it a whole... actor/actress performance, story/plot, presentation and delivery (ambiance, music, cinematography, makeup etc...). I can then form opinions about the performance of those behind the cameras based on what I loved or hated about the film. What is important to most viewers is how the movie made them feel. Did it make you smile? Laugh? Did it unleash emotions like joy or sorrow or disgust because it was so stupid or shock over the disturbing subject matter? The factoids found in the extras are often very interesting but it is the effect the movie has on them that is really what they are looking to take away with them after the film is over. That of course is just my opinion... I just don't care to allow things like budget, number of takes, technology, actor egos or any other behind the scenes discoveries to influence my opinion of the movie as a whole... I'm not always successful at achieving that but I try hard at it which is why I'm never too quick to start scratching at the surface to see what is lying underneath.

As far as Brando's turn in On The Waterfront I always felt it was a strained and tight performance like he was trying way too hard and given your trivia about it, it now makes sense. Not my favorite performance from him. I much preferred him in Burn! 

[Najemikon]

Where's Kevin? All his posts are marked as "guest" now, so I assume his account has gone. I wonder if Karsten knows...

[Jimmy]

Maybe he did ask to have is account closed as Eric did (and regret ) some time ago.
Kind of funny as I was wondering too why he didn't post for so long...

[Najemikon]

But he was active. The last post here is only a month old or so.

[samuelrichardscott]

He's also been in the list of online members quite a few times recently... I really wanted to know how he enjoyed the finale of The Shield.

[Jimmy]

But he was active. The last post here is only a month old or so.

One month is long here... some months ago I've PM Marie because she didn't post for 4 or 5 days, see my definition of long is kind of short

[Najemikon]

Well his Video Vault site is still being updated at least in the past few days...

[samuelrichardscott]

Did anyone manage to get a hold of KC?