 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
97.125.120.249
startled to find himself in a sci-fi/slasher film instead of a period Brit romp. Jennifer Connelly has lots of curves and makes one lust for that un-emaciated, splendiciously voluptuous incantation of herself before she began some terminal Subway experiment. Without any serious contenders, Kiefer Sutherland gives absolutely the WORST performance of the past 20 years. Not only an eye deformation, a limp, a speech mannerism, and a ridiculous accent, but also a boyish tone. Definitely a strong contender for "send-up" selection at your next film party.
William Hurt, to his credit, perfectly imitates the viewer though perhaps his ennui even is underplayed.
I will buy that one on Blu Ray the INSTANT it is available. My idea of the perfect woman.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
Didn't even get that far....the film was so dark I had a hard time seeing the images.
I happen to like this movie a lot in spite of Kiefer's bizarre mannerisms (which fit the character but nonethless feel like ... "ACTING! Master Thespian"). The Blu-Ray version features a much brighter (and higher-rez image), some minor editing changes, and the removal of the voice-over narration at the beginning which somewhat spoils the rest of the movie.
If you saw it in the cinema the projector needed a new bulb.
If you saw it at home your display prolly needs adjustment.
It's dark...but it's not that dark.
This film, LOTR and Master & Commander make excellent audition VDs/BDs because if the gear is not set porperly, or the diplay has weak blacks and poor grey scale the detail will be lost. These negatives are why I didn't care for LCD TVs for many years.
I LOVE Dark City, a film which sharply divides a lot of movie fans. Most people love it or hate it - indifference is not a typical reaction. Dark City was not a hit on its initial release, but it has picked up a legion of fans since and it has influenced several higher profile hits, The Matrix series included.I remember a reviewer calling it "nightmare sci-fi film noir", which underscores some of the problems for the naysayers. Ebert says it's a mixture of existential dread and action - he feels it's a masterpiece (he did a famous shot by shot analysis of the film, much of which is included as a DVD commentary track). Dark City is packed with invention, imagination and visual detail. Perfect it's not, but if you can't be seduced by the stunning visuals ten you can't. But for those willing to be seduced, Dark City offers up rich rewards upon repeated veiwings. (I should also say here that I much prefer Proyas' director's cut version, which dispenses with the intro VO narration, over the theatrical release, which includes it. If you have not seen DC, DO NOT rent the theatrical. Go straight to the DC!)
I think the key terms concerning this film are "nightmare" and "sci-fi fantasy", with emphasis on the nightmare and not much on the sci-fi. (I tend to think of DC as a sci-fi fairy tale myself.) To my utter unsurprise, the film is based on a childhood dream of director Proyas'. The film owes as much to dream logic as it does to its visual influences and literary/pop culture touchstones (vast and myriad, noir and Kafka being only the most obvious ones). More David Lynch than typical sci-fi. There are many familiar elements to be sure, but the way Proyas recombines and reimagines them is fresh and compelling.
I also cherish the way the film plunges you straight into Murdoch's nightmare, no explanation, no leading by the hand. We search as he searches, we learn as he learns - except that we are shown just a bit more, only increasing our dread for the protagonist. It's up to us to puzzle things out. I truly appreciate a filmmaker who trusts to the intelligence of the audience - an approach that risks much, including having your film misunderstood. I don't want the filmmakers to spell things out. Dark City demands one be an active participant in the film.
As for the performances, Sewell can do little wrong in my book, and he makes a fine and sympathetic Everyman. Connelly has never been lovelier and Hurt is drily amusing. The tone of the performances are purposefully low key and alienated (pun intended), the "why" of which should be abundantly clear. (Hint" these people are supposed to be numb.) Ian Richardson is impressive as "Mr. Book" and Richard O'Brien (Rocky Horror) is a hoot as Mr. Hand. Several small roles and cameos are capably filled by veteran Aussie and Kiwi actors.
That said, Dark City isn't a conventional or "actor-ly" movie. So I accept it may not be everyone's cuppa. But it is mine.
It is apparently this guy's too: http://flipsidemovies.com/darkcity.html
Edits: 12/10/09
...on the big screen after hearing Ebert's rave.
I thought it was very creative, dark and a little disturbing.
I've always been a fan of sci-fi.
I liked it and I'd give it a B.
Maybe time to do so.
It does seem to be a love it or hate it film (I'm not quite sure why), but it's 50's noir-ish look and dialogue and haunting mixture of SF and hard-boiled detective mystery is gripping, IMO.
AuPh
Post a Followup:
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
