My wife, daughter and I saw it last night. A very good story, with excellent acting by Matthew McConaughey. The ending was a little abrupt, though. Still, a good movie that I’d recommend.
What are your thoughts?
As for the other Best Picture nominees I’ve only seen Gravity so far, and I give it ☆☆☆. It’s a fun movie, with good cinematography (CG, really).
— American Hustle: ?
— Captain Phillips: ?
— Dallas Buyers Club: ☆☆☆☆
— Gravity: ☆☆☆
— Her: ?
— Nebraska: ?
— Philomena: ?
— 12 Years a Slave: ?
— The Wolf of Wall Street: ?
I do plan to see Captain Phillips, American Hustle, 12 Years, and The Wolf. Hopefully before the Academy Awards on 02 March.
Watched it at home with Moonwife last night and we both liked it very much.
Four stars out of five, I’d say. Maybe 4.5 stars.
Others (to compare):
Gravity: 3.5
American Hustle 3.5 (for completely different reasons that Gravity, of course)
Wolf of Wall Street 2-2.5 - thought it was quite overrated.
Her - I fell asleep, to be honest, so can’t give a fair assessment.
12 Years a Slave (as well as all the rest): haven’t seen it. A bit behind this year.
I had no idea what it was about until two minutes before watching it- it was really great. This is the type of role Matt McConaughey should do more often - he was great and normally I really don’t care for him. Glad to see him ditch the romantic leads- he’s been awesome in True Detective too. I saw him on CBS Sunday Morning and he talked about how he made a conscious effort to only play roles that made him uncomfortable… lucky for us because they are far more interesting.
Saw it tonight and really, really enjoyed it. I agree that 4 or possibly 4.5 out of 5 stars is about right. McConaughey is as good as everyone is saying, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he wins an Oscar for the role. Jared Leto was likewise very good, though his portrayal was just a tad too caricatured for my taste. Jennifer Garner, who I usually really like - and was good in this - was comparatively the weak link.
Nice screenplay and direction as well. You really believed the progression of events and the development of the characters. When the credits rolled and the name of the director, Jean-Marc Vallée, appeared, I was a bit surprised that a presumably French director (actually, I see that he is Quebecois) could seemingly so accurately portray lower-class Texas life in the 1980s. But there you have it.
One thing that doesn’t seem like it should be a spoiler, but that I’ll hide anyway…
I had no idea until the very end that the movie was based on a true story. Unless I missed it they did not announce that at the beginning. I think my ignorance enhanced my viewing pleasure, as sometimes with “based on true life” movies I inadvertently find myself drawn out of the moment, wondering how accurate what I’m seeing is.
I’ve only seen a handful of the Best Picture nominees this year, but this one is probably the best so far. American Hustle was a bit slack for my taste: 3 or 3.5/5. 12 Years a Slave was very affecting, and probably 4/5.
Rodgers01 I agree with your spoiler, all aspects of it, and I too don’t think I missed a beginning announcement.
I’m wondering if only a few dopers saw this. I searched before posting and saw little talk of it, and there’s little action on this thread. Maybe it’s not worth discussing to many who did see it…?
Probably few have, but hopefully the positive recommendations in this thread will encourage some more to check it out. Plus the Oscar nominations will drum up some interest. As I think Roger Ebert said, if the Oscars are good for nothing else, they’re a nice way to make the moviegoing public aware of some good movies they may not otherwise have noticed.
I should add for anyone who’s considering seeing it that it’s not a dreary or tragic or particularly depressing movie. I was a bit hesitant to see it because I thought it might be all of those things, given the topic, but it’s not, really.
Just watched it. I feel like the movie was too unbalanced as presenting the medical/science/big pharma side as being reckless and not really interested in helping people. Now part of that is the nature of the story - you’re basing it around a character who feels that this is true. But there’s more. The sympathetic female doctor questions the safety of AZT quite loudly through several parts of the film. The pharma company and the FDA are potrayed repeatedly as recklessly pushing poison through the system so they can make a quick buck.
From watching the movie, you’d think that AZT was some awful poison that killed HIV sufferers left and right and offered no real value to them, but made a handy profit.
But the reality is that AZT worked. It was the only thing we had available at the time that was actually prolonging the lives of those with HIV. It’s still used to this day, and it’s the main ingredient in combinations of drugs that have allowed HIV users to live as long as non-HIV users. The scientists, doctors, and drug companies are the good guys - and random non-experts pumping each other full of whatever drug or natural remedy they could get their hands on, are sympathetic and not exactly the bad guys, but are ultimately mostly wrong.
The reason it bothers me so much is that our culture already distrusts medicine, science, and in particular, pharmaceutical companies. So filling them with the idea that we poisoned people to death in the early days of aids for profit feeds into that and does a disservice to science and medicine.
Excellent points, Beef. While the system is not perfect it is based on scientific achievement, stripping out bias from clinical trials, and the well-meaning intent to regulate safety and efficacy. Here, I use “the system” to include pharmaceutical companies trying to solve health maladies, and the FDA trying to weed out the snake oil manufacturers.
Let’s remember, too, that many people around the world when needing a cure for some of the worst illnesses come to the USA for treatment because we often have the best available, world-wide.
Watching the movie while keeping this in mind, I was able to enjoy the show. It’s Hollywood entertainment, and I’m genuinely happy for the McConaughey character for having success with his approach. It was also a great reminder of society’s vehement bias and hatred against gays in the 1980s. We’ve come a long way in 30 years. We’re not there yet, and we still have a long way to go.
So yeah, it’s Hollywood entertainment, and the typical “little guy fights and beats big government” story often sells well.
It wasn’t my favorite movie of the year (I’m in the minority who preferred American Hustle I guess), but I agree that both male leads, especially McConaughey, were outstanding.