SHUTTER ISLAND: WILL IT SUCK?

1 vote for SUCK

Voting SUCK

Voted SUCK

i voted suck, sadly

suck

write-in for "neither good nor bad but BATSHIT"

write-in for "neither good nor bad but BATSHIT"

― ('_') (omar little), Thursday, February 18, 2010 7:46 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

otm, + critical savaging + critical reappraisal in ~10 yrs

honestly can't see how any good can come of this. poor Ruff, he doesn't even merit a shot in the ads/previews

looks like an unfocused mess. Those Jacques Tourneur movies 90 minutes long so FU Scorsese voted "suck". Will still watch tho, definitely.

if it's batshit i'm on board but i suspect more confused/generic w/ touches of cape fear self pastiche.

Guess it won't be up to snuff for the group that voted The Departed one of the top 25 Best Films of the 00's.

voted "will suck." not sure why; i love scorsese. but his newer films seem . . . smaller, tinny, and much less coherent.

Ebert likes it:

You may read reviews of "Shutter Island" complaining that the ending blindsides you. The uncertainty it causes prevents the film from feeling perfect on first viewing. I have a feeling it might improve on second. Some may believe it doesn't make sense. Or that, if it does, then the movie leading up to it doesn't. I asked myself: OK, then, how should it end? What would be more satisfactory? Why can't I be one of those critics who informs the director what he should have done instead?

Oh, I've had moments like that. Every moviegoer does. But not with "Shutter Island." This movie is all of a piece, even the parts that don't appear to fit. There is a human tendency to note carefully what goes before, and draw logical conclusions. But -- what if you can't nail down exactly what went before? What if there were things about Cawley and his peculiar staff that were hidden? What if the movie lacks a reliable narrator? What if its point of view isn't omniscient but fragmented? Where can it all lead? What does it mean? We ask, and Teddy asks, too.

What if there were things about Cawley and his peculiar staff that were hidden?

aw shit if theres sorcerers in this it will be goat

no

it will be between 60% and 85% as good as 'bringing out the dead'

Ebert adores this man.

You may read reviews of "Shutter Island" complaining that the ending blindsides you.

Um, even the positive reviews of this one probably won't be making that particular complaint.

You may read reviews of "Shutter Island" complaining that the ending blindsides you doesn't make any sense.

You may read reviews of "Shutter Island" complaining that the ending blindsides you doesn't make any sense is the most predictable ending in movie history.

That said, was surprised by how much I actually liked this one.

(Null vote.)

That said, was surprised by how much I actually liked this one.

Ebert's review?

I guess I wouldn't be shocked if it were good, great artists surprise you, but (the Dylan documentary excepted) Scorsese hasn't made it past passable since at least Casino, which has a variety of problems itself. He hasn't made a pantheon film since GoodFellas, alternating between hopeless bombast (Cape Fear, Gangs of New York, Bringing Out the Dead) and varying kinds of bleah. I thought that getting his symbolic Academy Award might finally lead him back to better things, but this looks like more of the same.

The movie, Alfred. But I guess I like Scorsese's "passable" movies generally better than his pantheon stuff, so I'm not to be trusted, et al.

Too afraid of spoilers to read this thread, but this will not suck if you like well-photographed-and-edited b-movies that you can have a lot of fun with.

i haven't seen 'bringing out the dead'

but i unabashedly love coppola's dracula so if it's a big lurid mess it will not suck.

I'm a big fan of Coppola's Dracula too...so maybe my sense of bombast isn't all that consistent.

hmmm the tv ads are quoting peter travers and harry knowles. this sucks!

This thread kind of makes me want to see it.

you're getting sucked in

shutter island? I haven't been inside her yet!

Ebert adores this man.

ya the fact that he gave it only 3.5 stars is pretty negative

this was laaame

dude has no flair for the gothic cgi horror shit, and frankly there's not much of it. mostly just obvious chatty scene after obvious chatty scene (WHICH MAY NOT HAVE ACTUALLY HAPPENED WHAT WITH THE TWISTS AND ALL). Most embarrassing moment might be when (SPOILER!!!!!) Ben Kingsley whips out a marker board with anagrams on it during the oh-so-intense climax.

lot of scenes where the scorsese of cape fear would have had leo JAB THE FUCKER IN THE EYE but instead he just kind of whimpers or nothing happens

Ben Kingsley whips out a marker board with anagrams on it

Between that and The Love Guru he's been on a roll.

suck

i think i saw Kingsley on the poster for Prince Of Persia too. Dude's going for a hat trick!

I'm looking forward to this if for no other reason than to enjoy Jackie Earle Haley in full-on lunatic mode, before the Nightmare on Elm Street reboot crushes the magic forever.

he's only in the film for one scene and is more a sad guy unjustly imprisoned then a full-on lunatic, fair warning

that is fucking lame.

That said, was surprised by how much I actually liked this one.

so, no country music?

But I guess I like Scorsese's "passable" movies generally better than his pantheon stuff

plz see The King of Comedy, we need more ppl pushing the Alternate Pantheon.

i will enjoy this more than the departed, i'm calling it.

“Shutter Island” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). Blood, swearing, cigarettes.

plz see The King of Comedy, we need more ppl pushing the Alternate Pantheon.

I do count King of Comedy as part of the pantheon, no argument; maybe Who's That Knocking at My Door, too. If the point is that Taxi Driver, Mean Streets, Raging Bull, and/or GoodFellas ought to be written out of the pantheon, no--as obvious as they may be, it all starts with them.

Results 1 - 10 of about 802 for "shitter island". (0.33 seconds)

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Amazed about these 17 votes.

this was great!

i mean it wasn't Great Scorsese, but it was fun & looked awesome & i even liked the twist

it's not really unfocused or batshit or a mess, interestingly enough.

actually everything i've heard (and it's getting pretty solid reviews) seems to suggest that it's pretty tight.

Those Jacques Tourneur movies 90 minutes long so FU Scorsese

sigh

so its just the ads/previews that make it look like shit?

i'm kinda excited for this.

the metacritic scores are all over the fuckin' map, 100 highest to 20 lowest

yes

this happens sometimes.

i was as skeptical as the next guy and besides departed have not been a fan of the scorz in a while.

xp

think we're on the same page - Departed (which was fun but hardly amazing) was the first Scorz film I liked since Casino. How was the Ruff

i'm most curious about the Lev

i always like the ruff! he was good

btw u shouldnt look at the imdb.

is dude ever going to do a movie without DiCaprio for the rest of his life? is anyone actually clamoring for more collaborations between them?

who knows.

hate DiCaprio so much, mostly try to avoid him

thought he was mostly laughable in Departed

they've all done pretty respectable worldwide business haven't they? apparently planet earth luvs marty and leo.

definitely passing on this one until it hits pay cable on a saturday afternoon though.

see it. just dont read a million things about it before imo.

really excited to see Lourdes w/ Sylvie Testud instead of something by a famous has-been.

i dunno i don't feel like Scorsese's movies would do any worse with any of a dozen of other actors in the LD roles, and LD hasn't really done all that much post-Titanic outside of Scorsese's movies, just strikes me as an odd marriage.

ya.... i dunno, i guess he likes him! i can't really say much to defend their creative collabo as i don't like anything else they've done except this.

erg, I want to write my review but I cant write it here on ilx without spoilers

History Mayne chillax Scorsese even acknowledges that when he tries to make a small little B movie it grows into something big and epic. Would love to just actually see him make a small little B.

Yay, s1ocki!

ehhh wasn't crazy about this. executed w/ the panache you'd expect but such a hackneyed bullshitty premise that's been done more in a more interesting fashion not that long ago. waste of a ridiculous supporting cast (haley, sydow, emily mortimer[!], michelle williams, patricia clarkson [!!])

also, cunning IMDb trivia:

# In this film, Leonardo DiCaprio's character is seasick. Previously, DiCaprio starred in Titanic (1997), most of which is set on a ship.

loooool

Leo is versatile.

It's a little difficult to work out what it is about DiCaprio that Scorsese likes so much. He's never seems very likeable or identifiable to me. He's quite, cold, earnest, stiff. A contrast to DeNiro.

idk this looks like enjoyable hokum tho. I liked Cape Fear btw.

maybe he's just happy to have a young, bankable actor with an Italian surname

did you guys that like it really not mind the amount of redundant chatter in it (and i mean stuff that's redundant BEFORE a twist makes any part of the movie redundant - I don't think its spoilerific to say there's a twist), esp considering how little there was in the way of action? jackie earle haley and patricia clarkson do nothing but repeat the big plot points, that long flashback at the end is preceded by a long discussion telling us what EXACTLY we'll see in it. Feels like the movie was always people talking about cool stuff we don't actually get to see (can't think of much in the way of movement-heavy set pieces aside from the dachau shootout and that one tussle in Ward C - which wasn't really that intense).

i can see not hating it, some good performances and atmosphere, but I'm curious if you guys rate it over any of the other leo/marty movies or cape fear, and if so, why?

yes, do you rate it over the most burnable movies in MS's career?

*** definitely gonna be spoilers here ***
it's an effective thriller. none of that stuff really bothered me—though it might on second viewing—cuz i guess i just like spooky fireside chats with max von sydow and ben kingsley. the flashback at the end was definitely too long tho. but i loved when ben kingsley revealed the chalkboard.

i also really liked that ben kingsley's character seems to be the "evil doctor who pretends to be kindly and solicitous" and actually DOES end up being the latter! and ya the premise is kinda wild and pulpy and silly, but that's the kind of movie it's trying to be and i'm not mad at that. what can i say to a word like "hackneyed"? it's an pulp thriller. in a lesser director's hands it could totally be straight-to-video. good thing a movie's "premise" often doesn't really matter.

***ok joining spoiler club***
flashbacks to see how an earlier scene REALLY was (like the Illusionist and Fight Club and stuff) are pretty cheesy, but since Kingsley says he was running the world's biggest rpg on leo it would be nice to know what was planned (presumably his big moment with the woman who pretended to be the missing patient), accidental but fortuitous (his run in with jackie earle) and totally in his head (patricia clarkson, unless kingsley knew leo would climb up a mountain of rats to get to his actress). The fact that they didn't makes me wonder if it even adds up at all.

and yeah, the fireside stuff was the best, leo did a pretty good gumshoe (all his marty movies have him playing "determined but vulnerable" well) before he became a bloated ball of sweat, which wasn't really as entertaining/engaging.

***club member***

i'm of two minds of the "how it REALLY was" flashback, sometimes they can be terrific—aren't you a huge depalma fan?—but they might have added something here. or maybe not, i was enjoying it enough that i didn't really want to think about whether it really added up. i think it intentionally leaves some questions hanging, like how much of his concentration camp memories are really true—you get the sense that at least some of them are, and have something to do with him snapping.

have to say that emily mortimer's nurse character was a pretty talented actress. that scene was REALLY spooky.

*** also ***

for most of the movie i was really thinking this was like a scientologist's dream film.

gotta say as far as recent thrillers with a lot of unexplained shit and frequent unnecessary dialogue scenes go, I preferred Legion, which also had possessed grandmas getting hit with frying pans and armored angels beating the tar out of each other.

***more spoilerification here***
i left this vaguely disappointed for the things croupier talks about ^^. i guess i was left with the feeling that it's still possible the crazy manchurian candidate test program shit might be true, even tho you 'know' it's not -- maybe i just liked that better. i think cos the 1st 2/3rds of the movie have much more energy and force and enjoyability in them than the last third. same problem i had with memento.

i'm of two minds of the "how it REALLY was" flashback, sometimes they can be terrific—aren't you a huge depalma fan?

yeah, it can be fun, though usually the movies where they are aren't as weepy as this one. and speaking of depalma - scorsese really doesn't have his knack for the slo-mo tortured dream sequence. figured they basically served as his chance to experiment with cgi after his debates with george lucas on gangs of new york.

***hacky bandwagoneer****

yeah I agree the subversion of the evil-doctor thing was neat, esp. with kingsley in the role. still, is there anyon who didn't have the movie's SHOCKING REVELATIONS mapped out 1/2way through thanks to the sledgehammer unsubtlety of, oh, everything? I choose to blame lehane.

also Legion is the WORST SHIT EVER, this is about 1000x better.

legion has way too many discussions of faith and, as a friend put it, ends like a Creed video, but srsly demon grandmas, toddlers with knives, pestilence and b actors guarding a diner from psycho angels are all good things

i mean yeah i have no idea why paul bettany cared so much about that baby but at least they gave me more than elias koteas' one-minute tribute to robert deniro's frankenstein to distract me

http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsK/9586-28832.jpg http://www.cinemacom.com/frankenstein/deniro.jpg

really wonder if this was intentional

I choose to blame lehane

never read him but the movie gone baby gone ended with an obvious absurd twist too and some even more seriously STFU speeches

Mystic River remains the gold standard of all those qualities.

not gonna lie - I love gone baby gone

first 2/3rds were really great but omg stfu casey affleck stfu

i know i liked a good bit of mystic river before the climax but for some reason all i can remember is Tim Robbins' "i was thinkin bout VAMPIYAHS" speech

Looking forward to comparing and contrasting with The Crazies remake.

weird reason I am looking forward to the crazies (besides giving us a reason to do Romero): after the bloated $80mil Wolfman, I'm hoping the "modest" $12 mil budget of the crazies = lean and efficient. plus olyphant.

i'm waiting for not-subtle teabagger references in The Crazies, is that so wrong?

(didn't know it was a remake)

***spoiler****

yeah I agree the subversion of the evil-doctor thing was neat, esp. with kingsley in the role. still, is there anyon who didn't have the movie's SHOCKING REVELATIONS mapped out 1/2waythrough thanks to the sledgehammer unsubtlety of, oh, everything? I choose to blame lehane.

also Legion is the WORST SHIT EVER, this is about 1000x better. -Simon H.

***spoiler****

what I want to mention is along the lines of having the movie mapped out 1/2waythrough.
okay, at the beginning we are under the assumption (for the most part) that the island people are hiding something and not Leo. there are points where I'm thinking, oh no, this might have a wickerman ending where Leo is doome no matter what. by halfway through we have enough evidence to think that Leo is actually patient 67. but sometime after the halfway mark we start to believe Leo again. Scorsese has us thinking that maybe Leo's farfetched ideas which he shares with the lady in the cave are actually correct. sure she could be a hallucination but there is already so much evidence telling the viewer that the ending is so easily contrived that I actually believe there is a chance that Leo is not crazy. I started to believe this more and more when ben kingsley said "you never had a partner" - I remember the policeman at the beginning of the movie saying see you guys later and stuff like that and I'm thinking, ofcourse Leo has a partner! and when the other german dr. is hiding the syringe and about to stab him, I'm again on Leo's side.

so what the movie did was a great job of making you believe Leo, then it subtley makes yout hink Leo is actually crazy (and the climax will eventually reveal this - yet I have no time to think of the details as to why he is crazy), and then it flipped to me believing Leo again (hey maybe that contrived ending wont happen!).

but in the end, somewhere during the chalkboard scene, me the viewer just like leo himself, slowly realizes that he is delusional. (That parallel is actually pretty cool despite all the long flashback stuff).

yes I thought the ending sort of dragged. the very ending was really well done though when he sitting on the steps and talking to his partner. (I notice this much more after seeing the movie because I was thoroughly disappointed at the time, that the writer chose Leo to actually be crazy like the movie had been hinting the whole time (and in some way the ending was sort of like wickerman))

what I wish had happened was a final twist back to Leo's favor. I wanted him to outsmart ben kingsley sometime during the chalkboard scene. I wanted Leo to prove that ben kingsley was just out to get him and that the island was actually harboring evil doctors. and if the writer had some way of doing a final flip I would have been astounded. we could have Leo somehow proving he is correct (maybe with his partner's help, who turns out to be alive, and not a psychiatrist afterall). And the the climax could have been a cool action sequence -survivalesque- where Leo and Partner have to get to the boat and leave without being killed for knowing too much. Alas, that ending must be to hard for the writer to fathom or even begin to write. But a double twist followed by an action ecscape scene would have been fucking awesome.

despite not going there, I give the movie a B. Great cinematography, directing, art and music. Unfortunately the ending was contrived - but there was enough things in the movie that kept me thinking that it didn't have to end that way (up until the climax where Im like oh darn). so despite the contrived ending, it wasn't exactly completely predicatable. there was a definite sway towards believing Leo again somewhere in the latter half

***spoiler****

***spoiler, again***

it was obvious that DiCaprio was nuts from frame one thanks to DiCaprio acting completely fucking nuts for the entire film. call it The Shining syndrome.

Was his bad accent a consequence of his insanity?

his scenes with michelle williams would have been a lot more affecting if they weren't burdened with that shit

its not like their beantown roots were integral to the story so wtf

didn't bother me, but bad accents never both me in movies.

actually i didn't even think it was bad. accents are fun!

*** spoiler ***

i also was very happy that ruffalo wasn't entirely a delusion. that was good.

yeah i don't mean they're "bad" like Diane Lane in the Perfect Storm, just that having Leo and Michelle wrangle accents and convey some kind of deep bond while CGI flames bounce around - seemed like a hurdle not worth jumping

those scenes were so OTT and i had expected to hate them so much that i was actually like "hey, that's kinda cool"

the only CGI stuff that really bothered me was the storm scene in the graveyard

CGI was just there, really - added nothing.

***spoiler, again***

it was obvious that DiCaprio was nuts from frame one thanks to DiCaprio acting completely fucking nuts for the entire film. call it The Shining syndrome.

― Simon H., Saturday, February 20, 2010 8:51 PM (44 minutes ago)

Not if you were overthinking it.. "oh he can't be completely nuts. That would suck. The movie is too good so far to go the cheesy way out." obviously you took the cynical route and thought "of course they will go with the contrived ending". none of the stuff re-enforcing the 'maybe he's right' theory got to you apparently. there was an overwhelming amount of evidence that supported the 'he must be completely crazy' theory and that actually helped me believe that this could be a classic case of misdirection. + the stuff finally re-enforcing the 'maybe he's right' theory definitely had me undecided before the climax. I'm sorry the movie didn't do that for you

Also, I didn't see any scores or reviews before I saw the movie which helped

***spoiler, again***

I had HOPE

god what a waste of time this movie was

a goddamn juggalo could figure this movie out from the trailer.

i would rather eat dirt than see this movie

***spoiler***so what the movie did was a great job of making you believe Leo, then it subtley makes yout hink Leo is actually crazy (and the climax will eventually reveal this - yet I have no time to think of the details as to why he is crazy), and then it flipped to me believing Leo again (hey maybe that contrived ending wont happen!).

if the only suspense in a supposed suspense thriller is some meta-bullshit about whether or not the movie is gonna turn to be as fucking stupid as it already seems, then fuck that movie.

***end spoiler***

a goddamn juggalo could figure this movie out from the trailer.

Seriously. Which why I was surprised Ebert's review emphasized the plot twist at the end as being very shocking.

Me and ebert had HOPE
I saw the contrived ending as a definite possibility, like someone said even a juggalo could see the god damn clues. But what the movie did was have you (or maybe just some people like me) start to believe the reverse - that scorcese only wanted to make you think you had it all figured out and then he was gonna pull the rug out from under your feet. Alas it didn't happen. That's all I'm trying to say here.. there was room for another possible ending - and a lot of you must of had low expectations if you thought that there could only be one possible ending.

And please don't call me a god damn juggalo you stinking asspipe

Nicole, maybe you should have saw this movie before reading this thread or any reviews

*erm Latebloomer (maybe Nicole?)

**spoiler**

I liked it a lot!

i didn't read a single review!

i consciously avoided them before seeing this. and cap'n, i did not call you a juggalo.

well then who DID

obv the capt did it TO HIMSELF

cap'n save-a-lo

**spoiler-y yada yada**But what the movie did was have you (or maybe just some people like me) start to believe the reverse - that scorcese only wanted to make you think you had it all figured out and then he was gonna pull the rug out from under your feet. Alas it didn't happen.

this is like a magician showing up at a birthday party and the only trick he knows is the old "coin from behind the ear" trick.

**end spoiler-y yada yada**

***spoilery metaphor!!!***

or like r. kelly coming over to your house for two hours, making you think he MIGHT not pee on your daughter, and then peeing on your daughter between putting his coat back on and heading out the door.

***hope i didn't ruin the movie!!***

I skipped over all yr spoilerage and I think I figured this movie out from the trailer.

i had a good time the whole way through but yeah i thought the ending was unfortunate

i had a friend who read the book who said that as bad as the SPOILER glenn beck white board anagrams were SPOILER there was some even dumber shit in the book that sorcsese must have taken out

ruffalo was the best though

boss

*** yknow ***

i felt the ending was gonna go one of two ways:

1) it actually is a conspiracy to cover-up a gov't mindwashing program
2) he's just a crazy guy running around

and those are kinda the only ways it COULD have gone. but instead it goes for a variation on 2) (he is a crazy guy running around but he's also part of an experimental therapeutic LARP session, and so i was happy with that.

SPOILER

my friend who read the book who hated said, there are two bad ways to end a story: "it was all a dream" and "everyone was just an actor" and somehow this managed to do both

i didnt really care. would have liked it more if it was a crazy huac nazi conspiracy type deal, but the ending was weird enough to be enjoyable.

i need more cello stabs in my life too.

who ends a story "everyone was just an actor"

"my world was full of actors: the movie"

The Aviator 2 in pre-production

this dragged in places (with a long ***spoiler*** fake ***end spoiler*** expository fireside chat scene in a cave and another expository scene in the lighthouse/mind) but for the most part was entertaining and i loved how elemental it was with all the fire and water everywhere.

best moment in the whole movie: "if i were to sink my teeth right now into your eye, would you be able to stop me before i blinded you?" YES!

LOVED the conversation with Ted "lotion in the basket" Levine.

yeah it was just so goofily weird and tense.

the fact that I can't read 75% of this thread cause of spoilers almost seems like a spoiler itself? this is gonna be gimmicky innit.

**spoiler-y yada yada**
But what the movie did was have you (or maybe just some people like me) start to believe the reverse - that scorcese only wanted to make you think you had it all figured out and then he was gonna pull the rug out from under your feet. Alas it didn't happen. -lorax

this is like a magician showing up at a birthday party and the only trick he knows is the old "coin from behind the ear" trick. -latebloomer

oh, come on if the end of the movie had Leo not being crazy, rather the island doctors were evil scientists, you would have along the lines of dumbfounded. your comparison doesn't make any sense to me -lorax
**end spoiler-y yada yada**

I love how at the very beginning the ship captain such a great ship captain. plus the camera angle when driving up to the place

**barely spoilerish**

**barely makes sense**

Everyone should stop sweating the spoilers or lack thereof. This movie's pleasures are not really in the big reveal.

ya for sure - like i said, i was okay with the ending but that didn't make the movie for me at all.

only genuinely cool creepy moment for me was ted levine lecturing leo in the jeep.

felt like it belonged to a better movie

i actually think the movie would have been more palatable to me if it had been sillier and less po-faced. and shorter. da croupier made a good point about all the redundancy and over-explanation and chatter.

eh, i liked that it was knowing without being too knowing.

i mean, it seemed clear that everyone (except maybe leo?) realized how silly and fun it was, but it would have worked less well if it had moved away from slightly-winking seriousness and gotten too campy

t seemed clear that everyone (except maybe leo?) realized how silly and fun it was

i'd also question whether michelle williams, jackie earle haley and whoever made those dachau flashbacks realized the film was silly, fun and slightly-winking

agree the old guys knew what was up, though

and the ruff!

boss

i avoided this thread until seeing the movie, but: no, it did not suck. it had the potential to, but i think scorsese made the ending feel less "lazy cliche," more "genre trope that he's working with cuz rules can be fun."

thought this str8 up killed

havent read the thread yet but here are sum thoughts4u:

- liked that it was less of a mystery and more of a ~journey~
- dream sequences were really good-looking
- not sure if ~reading deeply~ is a good idea. tht it was emotionally powerful moment-to-moment even if mb not everything hung 2gether in the end
- unnecessary/ridiculous/surreal touches kinda made the movie for me

- unnecessary/ridiculous/surreal touches kinda made the movie for me

yeah i wasn't on board with these at first but then i told myself to stfu.

can't believe so many people are save-a-ho for this piece of shit

if this wasn't scorcese no one'd be making excuses for this bullshit

this shit

this...shitty shit shit

shit

sht

st

s

http://www.idiom.com/~drjohn/lobot1.jpg

so, uh..yeah

haven't been this viscerally turned off by a movie in a long time

shitter island

Web
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,060 for "shitter island". (0.16 seconds)

if this wasn't scorcese no one'd be making excuses for this bullshit

― nitzer ENBB (latebloomer), Monday, February 22, 2010 4:50 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

thats bcuz if this wasnt scorsese it would suck

i liked this at least as much as any other psychological thriller
it was a good gloomy sunday movie

i had a friend who read the book who said that as bad as the SPOILER glenn beck white board anagrams were SPOILER there was some even dumber shit in the book that sorcsese must have taken out

― max, Sunday, February 21, 2010 4:13 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

***SPOILERS***

my wife read the book and she said the movie, for the most part, sticks pretty close, with the exception of just cutting stuff out probably for time's sake...like i guess in the book leo actually gets on the ferry and tries to escape but the stop the boat...

also...i thought this was kinda interesting....

she said that very last line of the movie was not in the book, in the book he doesn't say the thing about living as a monster or dying as a hero, so she read it in the book as he just basically didn't get well and they knew it and ordered the lobotomy as opposed to him sorta making the decision

***SPOILSERSSSS***

as soon as he said that i was expecting him to make a run for it and kill himself on the electric fence

soon as he said that i expected mark ruffalo to turn into a pile of ash

just have him watch the AFI top 100 + the top 20 grossers of the 90s and 00s

wrong thread

who, ruffalo?

who did you mean, max

~~andrew laeddis~~

*faints*

the way the Ruff always calls Leo "boss" is academy award worthy IMO

<3ed that

im sayin, i thought ruff was even better than gandhi and jesus

i had a great deal of joy, in planning to see this movie with a lady friend, that i knew likes mark ruffalo a lot, saying, often, "let's go see shutter island. i know how you like it ruff."

i hope she slapped u

wish ruff would star in more movies that my girlfriend would otherwise have no desire to see

hollywood should get on that, yes

Ruffalo is unrecognizable shaven, imo

hollywood should get on that, yes

― horseshoe, Monday, February 22, 2010 12:52 PM (57 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

id say you were being sarcastic... but i know that neither you nor any red-blooded american womyn can resist the charms of the ruffalo soldier

i have never been more sincere in my life. i would see all the movies.

who ends a story "everyone was just an actor"

― nitzer Ed (s1ocki), Sunday, February 21, 2010

http://douglasgreen.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/the_truman_show-front_divx.jpg

technically that one also begins with "everyone was just an actor"

oh man i'd love to see the plot of the truman show made into a twist

wonder if you could just remove every scene not from carrey's pov and turn it into some lynchian voyeur thriller

true max, i was just trying to help

wonder if you could just remove every scene not from carrey's pov and turn it into some lynchian voyeur thriller

― da croupier, Monday, February 22, 2010 8:39 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

good idea

Still haven't seen it. I have, however, come up with an alternate title: National Lampoon's Cape Fear Vacation.

Saw it today and am mostly on the fence. Felt that it was something that would have been on a double-bill with Fuller's Shock Corridor in 1963 - enh OK, but never really engaging either. Wanted more Ruffalo and Clarkson. Less Leo too - I actually like him in general, but when it's time for the crazy he gets shrill and unbelievable (see also when he tries to play crazy Howard Hughes as opposed to early/charismatic Hughes)

Real life New England island conspiracy theories: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plum_Island_Animal_Disease_Center

Any good will this film built with me in the first 3/4th (and it built quite a bit) it totally lost in the ending. I was actually stifling laughter in the theater. Just terrible.

i want to see it on a double bill with titicut follies (which also took place in a massachusetts hospital for the criminally insane).

Meantime:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/shutter-island-moviegoer-complains-about-cellphone-call-gets-stabbed-in-neck-with-meter-thermometer.html

what kind do u think it was?
http://hostedmedia.reimanpub.com/rrmag/everydayLiving/wellEquipped/equippedMeatThermo.jpg

http://images.marketplaceadvisor.channeladvisor.com/hi/72/72196/ET-68.jpg

this could do sum damage imo

hope he got his temperature reading at least.

btw thought this movie was decent for about an hour then fell into the crapper the moment he met cave woman and her giant expository essay.

yeah first hour was OK, the other 3 and a half, not so much

in all seriousness though i probably wouldn't have been so mad at the movie if it had been a half hour shorter.

okay so this totally ruled

lol J0rdan

i thought the dream sequences/hallucinations were done really well

You people are insane, this movie was a blast.

...or are you all actually *sane* and it was terrible?

If you cut out everything lighthouse on... and threw in the other possible ending, people might all agree that it was at least a pretty good movie. Basically everyone that disliked this movie based their dislike on the ending (or Leo in several cases)

I think they should've ended it ambiguously, so it was never clear whether he was insane or sane. One of those things where the viewer can debate what happened. The way it did end tho was LOL WAT TEH FUCK? "Advanced roleplaying scenario!" "You mean like Dungeons + Dragons?"

you can only use "and then he woke up!" so many times before I stop giving a shit

uhhh i have a problem with using "shutter island" as a peg for that story at all

also the holocaust stuff was pretty iffy

The point I've been trying to make on this thread isn't that "and he woke up" endings don't suck. I've been trying to say that you can judge a movie up until the last half hour or so as good/pretty good - because at that point the ending wasn't set in stone. The ending makes people dislike earlier parts of the film.

For instance if you were a Dallas fan and saw all but the last episode(s?) of season 8 where the viewer finds out that the whole season is a dream, then many fans wouldn't have beef with that whole season. A lot of the beef in this thread was about the whole movie based only the ending. (I have never seen Dallas but someone mentioned it up thread)

I don't know why I have been defending this movie so much. In retrospect it was just another 'C-B+' movie. I just wanted to clarify the point I made up thread in which I posted a needlessly large wall of text (I apologize).

this movie was a delight :)

I saw the new Scorsese movie, Shutter Island last night. Fuckin loved it all in all. Not a near perfect movie but it offers droves for those inclined toward inward examinations of the macabre.. Or something like that, I reckon.. I'm curious to see if some discussion could be kicked off here - its been a while.

Here is very Edifying review of Shutter Island: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/movies/reviews/2010/shutterisland.html

The reviewer suggests considering these questions to get a discussion going

1. Who, if anyone, comes out of this film with integrity and morality intact? Can we discern the heroes from the villains?
2. What do you think Scorsese is trying to observe about good and evil in Shutter Island?
3. What do you make of the last line of the film?

I think the first question is a great one. I'd love to get into it... anyone else? I know the movies come out recently so the handful you chaps round these parts might not see it for a while. But drop a line here if you do, if you like. I might write something up anyway (one day) but I could tear in to this one with company.

"God loves violence" "There is no moral order at all. There's only, can my violence conquer yours?"

thx :)

jesus christ this sucked

shoulda waited the extra 45 mins for hot tub time machine no doubt

this movie sucked, alright. "well made" in that it looked pretty cool and the acting was decent, but overall just totally silly and way too long. I guess when you start with shitty source material, it's hard to turn it into something good.

people trying to defend it upthread are pretty hilarious - guess what, the first 3/4 of the movie sucked too. the big atonal portentous score was especially hilarious. hey let's have another "surreal" dream sequence

i really hate movies where the female characters do nothing but cry

like to keep that to ur personal life, eh

bwahaha

this is a rly great film

I liked how everything was deliberately layed on thick, almost comically overdramatic. It wasn't afraid to go big. A subtler approach wouldn't have been as successful I don't think. It was too long and draggy though. Some judicious editing to get it tighter and it would've been great.

best scorsese film in a decade imo

rly liked the music

don't think it's better than 'the depahted' tho

or even 'the aviator', in a way

the soundtrack is amazing, fairly heavily referencing 'the shining' w/ ligeti's 'lontano' and penderecki

also scelsi and cage in a big hwood pic...

Liked it, didn't love it. May have enjoyed it more in the cinema rather than on a plane.

awesome movie

only good movie i've seen this year iirc

this movie looks intentionally ridiculous and crazy. i'm just going in assuming it's scorsese's version of 'in dreams'.

― ('_') (omar little), Monday, February 8, 2010 7:26 PM

from another thread on this movie, but calls it pretty well imo.

So I have never read a Dennis Lehane novel and the movies of his novels have convinced me this was very wise.

i doubt any of his novels includes the lines 'DiCaprio squints incessantly'

I doubt the screenplay did either though.

i bet it was written on sticky notes and passed to scorsese a lot during filming tho

not as an instruction or anything, just as a 'boss, have you um, noticed this?'

yeah i guess having spent months directing him scorsese will have noticed his 'restricted affect' and inability to emote without looking like a peturbed cat

shutter island is very great tho

i enjoyed it a lot, tbf. i'm not very sure about it being 'great' if that signifies hidden depths or w/e

not necessarily

theatrically i thought it was very impressive (on a huge screen in a nearly deserted auditorium) and it's stayed with me

need to get the bluray

irl people don't have that many facial expressions

if you get it on bluray and watch it on a very small tv from across the room you can be just like leo

irl people don't get the run of mental facility islands with mark ruffalo trembling his lips at them for two days for the lulz

leo needs at least to extend his repertoire beyond x) / x( to XD, :s, :/, 8)

there was a bit in titanic where he was :p at kate winslett's boobs iirc

with his success record all that champ's gonna extend is his waistline, hiyo

"i bet it was written on sticky notes and passed to scorsese a lot during filming tho"

From the 2030 EW Voices from Shutter Island piece:

Scorsese: Leo just kept asking me, "Should I squint more? I don't know if I am squinting enough. Maybe I should start this scene with a long squint? How tight do you think the close up on this squint should be?" Dealing with the squinting questions drove me back to cocaine actually. Really it was a depressing time in my life.

cocaine was cut by shoving leo's face into it and making him squint it up reeeeal fine

You people are insane, this movie was a blast.

― Shannon Whirry and the Bad Brains, Monday, March 15, 2010 6:06 AM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

...or are you all actually *sane* and it was terrible?

― Shannon Whirry and the Bad Brains, Monday, March 15, 2010 6:06 AM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

also, was there a thread that was mostly people making fun of the accents in the trailer OR WAS IT JUST A DREAM?

there's another thread on it somewhere, wheah the eaksents ah layempooned

Shutter Island (new Scorsese, w/DiCaprio, Ruffalo, etc)

i kept calling my dog ah doolee appointed feduhral mahshull last night and my wife had to tell me to knock it off

― El GarBage (M@tt He1ges0n), Friday, February 19, 2010 12:38 PM Bookmark

http://grab.by/91iq

^basically apparent to anyone who saw the trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGM6BgmHLSc

DiCaprio’s bad acting is so bad in this that it forces Ruffallo to act poorly as well just to match his awkward energy.

I don't really understand what Marty sees in him - he's terrible in everything! He gets by in Departed and GONY, just, because he's not the center of attention. Otherwise, yeesh.

Scorsese's best movie this century

lol, I guess I'm completely wrong as fuck in thinking he was decent in The Aviator

he was good in once upon a time but i think it was because you were supposed to laugh at him

Yeah, he's well cast in Once Upon A etc., I think it's his best performance and he works well with Pitt.

And then he's back to being a very silly boy in Flower Moon.

I dunno, feel like he's decent playing a profoundly dumb and evil character.

yeah thats the only Scorsese movie where his thing works for me at all, precisely because he plays a complete moron constantly scrunching his face up in confusion

Scorsese's best movie this century

Not sure if that's meant more as a comment on Shutter Island itself or everything else he's done this century.

(Not sure where I posted about it; thought it was really silly the one time I saw it.)