eeks2's Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

This user has no Want to See movie selections yet.

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

Ashes of Time Redux
3 years ago via Movies on Facebook

Dream like, beautiful, but challenging. A very Kar Wai Wongish film in its approach to love, which makes sense since he directed it. Although divided into seasons and vignettes built around one central character's profession, I never quite felt like I had a firm grasp on what was happening, so much so that I wondered if the subtitles were just mistranslating or miswritten (in this case, they weren't except for replacing all lowercase F's with upper case F's, like if I wrote "a letter from Will" as "a letter From Will"). Some of that, perhaps most of that, is intentional. I have not seen the original, but in this version they make the desert of Western China to be exquisitely beautiful, and everything unfolds as if it was being painted, inchoate, uneven, fluid. Not action heavy despite the wuxia frame, but what action there is is fantastical.

Silver Linings Playbook
4 years ago via Flixster

An obsessive, mentally broken-down man finds redemptive love in a less mentally broken-down (but still mentally-broken down) woman. Romantic, wrenching, intense, full of earned emotion and sharp, cutting banter, maybe the best movie I've seen this year. The last twenty minutes had my eyes squeezed and my throat clenched; I found a lot to relate to here.

Cloud Atlas
Cloud Atlas (2012)
4 years ago via Flixster

This movie breaks rating frameworks. Ebert gushed about it, many critics panned it, but no matter how flawed you'll think it is, it's tough to imagine that you won't have thought it was worth seeing, if just because Cloud Atlas is a singularly ambitious film. Definitively, a much better book (one of my favorite ever) than movie. The Wachowski brothers (Matrix) and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run) got together to film the unfilmable book, Cloud Atlas, a book that features six interwoven genre stories from different periods of human history, a book held together by a single author's virtuoso writing. The resultant movie reflects their ambition, their talent, and their task's impossibility. Moments in this movie operate like nothing else in any movie, six stories crescendoing at once, the perspective splicing back and forth each few seconds, challenging your ability to keep up, to keep track, and at times, pushing your attention past analysis to awe. I openly question whether someone who has not read the book could keep a handle on the movie's plot. Other aspects stick in your craw: the casting of a mediocre Korean actress who speaks unintelligible English into a position that requires her to speak quite a bit, the choice to have actors play roles across each story, a choice that results in Tom Hanks playing a chavvy Brit gangster or Hugo Weaving the old person's home equivalent of a Brunhilda Ratchett or dozens of awkward prosthetic-wearing racial-FX wielding performances - interesting, I guess, but it fails to do much else but take the viewer out of it and serve as bait for the race police and everyone who doesn't understand what racism is.

Ebert's review snippet:

Surely this is one of the most ambitious films ever made. The little world of film criticism has been alive with interpretations of it, which propose to explain something that lies outside explanation. Any explanation of a work of art must be found in it, not taken to it. As a film teacher, I was always being told by students that a film by David Lynch, say, or Warner Herzog, was "a retelling of the life of Christ, say, or 'Moby Dick.' " My standard reply was: Maybe it's simply the telling of itself.


But, oh, what a film this is! And what a demonstration of the magical, dreamlike qualities of the cinema. And what an opportunity for the actors. And what a leap by the directors, who free themselves from the chains of narrative continuity."

Arbitrage (2012)
4 years ago via Flixster

The only time in cinematic history that "fraudulent conveyance" was used, correctly to boot. But a pretty paint-by-numbers financial thriller. Not bad, but not great - it falls well short of something like Michael Clayton. I got distracted picking nits with some of the details: Gere's trading firm founder/financial superstar is on the cover of Forbes, known by everyone, but he is running a firm an order of magnitude smaller than Madoff's, something with $5bn or so in assets under management and worth $500mm or in a sale in the world of this movie, a lot of money, but a pipsqueak in terms of the size of influential funds or people who manage money. It's actually one third the size of the commodities hedge fund run by the director's dad, Henry Jarecki, a firm that was sold to Nuveen. These guys should know better. Graydon Carter of Vanity Fair and Lapham's has a cameo wherein he exhibits anti-charisma as a financial impresario of some sort. Also, Laetitia Casta of all people plays Gere's mistress.

The Dark Knight Rises
4 years ago via Flixster

Ambitious, intense, and even thought it didn't stick the landing on everything it took on, nothing felt ineffective. The weakest part of the movie was probably just Cotillard's acting and perhaps her characterization, but considering how much shit was jam packed into these three hours, that's small potatoes. TDKR possessed an almost incessant visual intensity in lock-step with that score that seemed to rise and swell from start to finish. I liked it more than TDK and BB. The actual movie-waching experience was an awesome 5 in IMAX - so many of the scenes used the extra-screen that IMAX provides, and TDKR had more footage shot with IMAX cameras than any feature to date.