DMann2003 Posted November 10, 2008 Report Posted November 10, 2008 The new film directed by Danny Boyle killed at Toronto and is generated big Oscar buzz It looks really cool
bobobrazil1984 Posted November 23, 2008 Report Posted November 23, 2008 I just saw this last night. incredibly well made, well edited and directed, funny, serious, if a little contrived... a more humurous and "Bollywood-ized" version of "City of God". Danny Boyle did a great job here.
DMann2003 Posted December 3, 2008 Author Report Posted December 3, 2008 I hate Barron cause he lives in NY and gets to see all these top films first, I'm in freakin' Dayton, usually have to wait till next year. He's probably already seen Fros/Nixon too.
bob_barron Posted December 3, 2008 Report Posted December 3, 2008 I actually saw Slumdog on my trip to Toronto. :-) Haven't seen Frost/Nixon yet, sadly.
DMann2003 Posted December 13, 2008 Author Report Posted December 13, 2008 Man I was right about this film. If you get a chance see it. It is expert storytelling with two leads who are so note perfect in their roles you need to see them get together. It's funny, tense, topical without hitting you over the head. And yes it's a crowd pleaser, in the way that should remind people that when those types of films are done right, they're a joy to behold. Danny Boyle's come along way from heroin shooting Scots. Kickass Bollywood Dance scene during the credits too
godthedog Posted December 13, 2008 Report Posted December 13, 2008 i eagerly await this one, just because it's danny boyle. everyone should see 'millions'.
bob_barron Posted December 13, 2008 Report Posted December 13, 2008 Millions was awful. It was just too manipulative and I didn't buy it. This is what Millions wanted to be.
godthedog Posted December 13, 2008 Report Posted December 13, 2008 of course it's manipulative, it's a kids' movie.
bob_barron Posted December 13, 2008 Report Posted December 13, 2008 But it's too manipulative- it just came off as so fake and corny
MDH257 Posted December 18, 2008 Report Posted December 18, 2008 Wonderful movie, even if it gets little too fairy tale at the end (yeah it was like that for the entire film, but for some reason the end felt like a little too much). The kid who played the youngest version of Saleem was a great villian.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 22, 2008 Report Posted December 22, 2008 It definitely did go overboard with the fairy-tale aspect at the end, and I thought the film relied a little too heavily on 45-degree camera angles (a pet peeve of mine; puts in mind the old Batman TV show), but I liked it well enough.
Mik Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 I enjoyed it. Didn't love the ending but the rest of the movie more then made up for it. Guessing on the last two questions? WTF?
Twisted Intestine Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 Good movie. Great movie? I don't think so. But solid entertaining movie. I didn't know the answer to the last question, so it was probably better for me because I wasn't sure he'd gotten it right. I imagine the end sequence there (Millionaire music/Saleem getting shot) isn't as intense for the people who know the answer.
Mik Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 What didn't you get about that? The fact that you have to be the most retarded fucker alive to even think about doing something like that. That's what I didn't get.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 What didn't you get about that? The fact that you have to be the most retarded fucker alive to even think about doing something like that. That's what I didn't get. Well, realism went out the window in the film's final 30-or-so minutes, so, on that level, I suppose Jamal's actions at the end played into that. Which is fine, but, as I alluded to earlier, I began losing interest in Slumdog Millionaire once the movie really cranked up the Disneyesque love story between Jamal and Latika. My only other beef with the film was they didn't spend much time establishing Salim's life as a gangster, which tied in with the kind-of-forced love story and made his death completely unmoving.
bob_barron Posted December 24, 2008 Report Posted December 24, 2008 What didn't you get about that? The fact that you have to be the most retarded fucker alive to even think about doing something like that. That's what I didn't get. But he didn't care about the money, all he wanted was Latka. That's why he guessed and didn't walk away.
Craig Th Posted December 26, 2008 Report Posted December 26, 2008 The movie was fucking fantastic. Best movie of the year. Though I didn't get why Why was there a little kid dressed up as Rama in the middle of a riot? I know it was religious thing, but did they happen to bring a little kid with them for it?
SamoaRowe Posted December 27, 2008 Report Posted December 27, 2008 Saw this last night. Definitely a top notch experience.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 27, 2008 Report Posted December 27, 2008 The movie was fucking fantastic. Best movie of the year. Though I didn't get why Why was there a little kid dressed up as Rama in the middle of a riot? I know it was religious thing, but did they happen to bring a little kid with them for it? The image of Rama was purely symbolic. From the Wikipedia article on Rama: "Rama's life and journey is one of perfect adherence to dharma despite harsh tests of life and time. For the sake of his father's honour, Rama abandons his claim to Kosala's throne to serve an exile of fourteen years in the forest. His wife, Sita and brother, Lakshmana being unable to live without Rama decide to join him, and all three spend the fourteen years in exile together. This leads to the kidnapping of Sita by Ravana, the Rakshasa monarch of Lanka. After a long and arduous search that tests his personal strength and virtue, Rama fights a colossal war against Ravana's armies. In a war of powerful and magical beings, greatly destructive weaponry and battles, Rama slays Ravana in battle and liberates his wife." Rama = Jamal Sita = Latika Lakshmana = Salim Slumdog Millionaire tweaks the story somewhat, but there are definite parallels between the two.
Epic Reine Posted December 29, 2008 Report Posted December 29, 2008 Saw this today and thought it was really good. The last 15 minutes were really heart warming and the storytelling and emotion were both top notch. I personally loved the host's character. why exactly was there a dance sequence at the end?
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 29, 2008 Report Posted December 29, 2008 Saw this today and thought it was really good. The last 15 minutes were really heart warming and the storytelling and emotion were both top notch. I personally loved the host's character. why exactly was there a dance sequence at the end? It was a tip of the hat to the films of Bollywood, which often feature song-and-dance numbers.
Craig Th Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 The movie was fucking fantastic. Best movie of the year. Though I didn't get why Why was there a little kid dressed up as Rama in the middle of a riot? I know it was religious thing, but did they happen to bring a little kid with them for it? The image of Rama was purely symbolic. From the Wikipedia article on Rama: "Rama's life and journey is one of perfect adherence to dharma despite harsh tests of life and time. For the sake of his father's honour, Rama abandons his claim to Kosala's throne to serve an exile of fourteen years in the forest. His wife, Sita and brother, Lakshmana being unable to live without Rama decide to join him, and all three spend the fourteen years in exile together. This leads to the kidnapping of Sita by Ravana, the Rakshasa monarch of Lanka. After a long and arduous search that tests his personal strength and virtue, Rama fights a colossal war against Ravana's armies. In a war of powerful and magical beings, greatly destructive weaponry and battles, Rama slays Ravana in battle and liberates his wife." Rama = Jamal Sita = Latika Lakshmana = Salim Slumdog Millionaire tweaks the story somewhat, but there are definite parallels between the two. Yeah, but why did he see the fuckin kid. It might have been symbolic, but he was able to answer that question because when he was little, he saw a fuckin kid all in blue.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 The movie was fucking fantastic. Best movie of the year. Though I didn't get why Why was there a little kid dressed up as Rama in the middle of a riot? I know it was religious thing, but did they happen to bring a little kid with them for it? The image of Rama was purely symbolic. From the Wikipedia article on Rama: "Rama's life and journey is one of perfect adherence to dharma despite harsh tests of life and time. For the sake of his father's honour, Rama abandons his claim to Kosala's throne to serve an exile of fourteen years in the forest. His wife, Sita and brother, Lakshmana being unable to live without Rama decide to join him, and all three spend the fourteen years in exile together. This leads to the kidnapping of Sita by Ravana, the Rakshasa monarch of Lanka. After a long and arduous search that tests his personal strength and virtue, Rama fights a colossal war against Ravana's armies. In a war of powerful and magical beings, greatly destructive weaponry and battles, Rama slays Ravana in battle and liberates his wife." Rama = Jamal Sita = Latika Lakshmana = Salim Slumdog Millionaire tweaks the story somewhat, but there are definite parallels between the two. Yeah, but why did he see the fuckin kid. It might have been symbolic, but he was able to answer that question because when he was little, he saw a fuckin kid all in blue. Rama was only there because his story paralleled Jamal's. That's all. That's why he appears when he does. Slumdog Millionaire has elements of fantasy, so not every single element of it is meant to be taken on a literal level.
godthedog Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 caught this last night in a sold-out house, sitting next to a real live indian couple! i agree that the final act was pretty sour, but more because it started leaning more towards dumb luck than earning what he deserved for being a good person and going through all the hardships and whatnot. up until that point, he had something to show for each question: either he outwitted the host (as with the cricket question), or he paid for the answers in some way. he paid for the rama question with the death of his mother, he paid for the benjamin franklin question by helping out an old friend, etc. that works well on a dramatic level because, although it seems like luck to the police, it's a piece of knowledge that's rightfully his and was gained by harder means than a basic education--and of course, the class you're born into is a matter of luck anyway, especially in india. there doesn't seem to be any reason for him to guess the last answer, except to increase the suspense, which is pointless anyway because we already know he wins. it doesn't even seem like a test of his courage as a character...he just sorta goes, "eh, whatever, let's do it." that's my only real problem with the movie. all was forgiven during the credit sequence. when i saw jamal and latika meet on the empty train platform i immediately thought, "PLEASE let them break into song." and they more-or-less did. there's something really satisfying about closing a movie like that with a big dance. it feeds the soul, like the last 5 minutes of 'it's a wonderful life'. i had myself a great time, and i came out of the theater with a heady love of life. i love how much of an old-fashioned storyteller danny boyle is, in a sly kind of way. this might actually be my favorite danny boyle movie. i'll have to watch 'trainspotting' again to verify that.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 there doesn't seem to be any reason for him to guess the last answer, except to increase the suspense, which is pointless anyway because we already know he wins. Do we already know that he wins? I might be forgetting/missing something here, but the framing device of Jamal being questioned by the police occurs between the first and second night of his two-evening appearance on the show. He didn't actually win it all until the second night. That said, that I knew the name of the third Musketeer killed any suspense built up once Jamal guessed correctly.
Mik Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 I mistakenly thought that the correct answer was d'Artagnan... so I had artificial suspense. Oops.
SamoaRowe Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 I mistakenly thought that the correct answer was d'Artagnan... so I had artificial suspense. Oops. Yeah, my fiance did too, I corrected her before Jamal made his guess.
godthedog Posted December 30, 2008 Report Posted December 30, 2008 there doesn't seem to be any reason for him to guess the last answer, except to increase the suspense, which is pointless anyway because we already know he wins. Do we already know that he wins? I might be forgetting/missing something here, but the framing device of Jamal being questioned by the police occurs between the first and second night of his two-evening appearance on the show. He didn't actually win it all until the second night. That said, that I knew the name of the third Musketeer killed any suspense built up once Jamal guessed correctly. the caption before the action started. it was something like, "jamal malik won 20 million rupees on 'who wants to be a millionaire'. how'd he do it? a. he cheated b. he's lucky c. he's a genius d. it was written" i don't remember exactly how it was phrased, but it was something that didn't leave the question of how far he got to the imagination. i do remember thinking, "well hell, what's the point of watching this when i already know what happens?"
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now