Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
timschochet

timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you

Recommended Posts

Good talk guys - I'll see myself out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gr00vus said:

It's a great movie, pretty much every actor turned in a quality performance. Broderick was terrible in it.

I think he was miscast, but acquitted himself well. Coming off Ferris Bueller it was hard to get that role out of your head. The more I've watched this movie, the better Broderick gets. If you think about the age the guy Broderick was playing would have been, the fresh face isnt that out of place. A more assured officer wouldnt have got that job and Broderick conveys naivete well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, timschochet said:

It is not.

Did you watch Gettysburg? Gods and Generals? Those movies are boring. Glory is riveting, IMO.

Hold on. Gettysburg has boring parts (it is bloated and was intended as a miniseries) but has some awesome parts.  The battle of Little Round Top is anything but boring.  

God's and Generals is definitely a mess. 

Glory is just amazing with an equally amazing James Horner score. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2017 at 4:30 PM, timschochet said:

17. Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)

Directed by: Stanley Kramer

Starring: Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn, Sidney Poitier

This is the last of the Kramer-Tracy trilogy on my list (though Stanley Kramer was the producer of an upcoming film I have yet to rank.) It is considered to be particularly poignant by film historians as it was the final Tracy/Hepburn film, Tracy was dying as it was filmed, and the tears that are in Katherine Hepburn's eyes in the final scene have to do with these facts (though that is a very tearful scene; I always cry watching it myself, but because of the script, not Spencer Tracy's fate sad as it was.) 

The film is essentially a comedy though it deals with what was an important issue of the time (interracial marriage), less so now. Some of both it's humor and it's message is incredibly dated- Isabel Sanford in particular is cringeworthy with some of her dialogue. I was actually introduced to this movie in a college film class by a professor who made the point that it's both sexist and racist. Racist in that Sidney Poitier is presented as the "perfect" black man; perfect in that he is a handsome, clean cut brilliant doctor. Yet he is willing to defer to the wishes of his fiancé's parents, telling them that if they disapprove of the marriage, it's off. This last is also what makes the film sexist, especially when contrasted with another interracial film from a decade earlier: Sayonara, starring Marlon Brando. Brando is a white man who is in love with a Japanese girl; at the end of the film he says screw it to everyone and marries her. The message from Hollywood, according to my professor, is that in a mixed marriage if the man is white, he can decide what to do. But if the woman is white, the man must defer to her parents to decide. 

I agree with my old professor's analysis, and even so I love this movie. (So, frankly, did he.) It may be dated, racist, sexist, but it's heart is absolutely in the right place and it's a wonderful romantic comedy. Tracy and Hepburn are simply magic together (as they usually were.) Poitier is fine but he strangely reminds me of William Shatner in this film, in looks, movement, speech patterns. I'm being serious here- watch this movie back to back with any episode of Star Trek: the original series. It's eery. 

Up next:  And that's the hardest part. Today everything is different; there's no action... have to wait around like everyone else. Can't even get decent food - right after I got here, I ordered some spaghetti with marinara sauce, and I got egg noodles and ketchup. I'm an average nobody... get to live the rest of my life like a schnook.

Really? That movie may have been shocking and groundbreaking at the time. Today, it's pretty lame IMO. There are definitely better Poitier movies and better Hepburn/Tracy films. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, timschochet said:

It is not.

Did you watch Gettysburg? Gods and Generals? Those movies are boring. Glory is riveting, IMO.

Totally agree w/ Gods and Generals. I like it for the period / costumes / etc, but it's a trainwreck all around.

But Gettysburg is boring? Really?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that you have bad taste in movies I'm really not.  And I liked Glory a lot.  Agree with everything you said about it.

But how the **** you rank it higher than Godfather?  On what planet is that a real thing?  This one?  Nope, not on this one.  You're on some different plane of existence or something. 

Again.  In my humble opinion.  YMMV.  Etcetera, etcetera.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, timschochet said:

It is not.

Did you watch Gettysburg? Gods and Generals? Those movies are boring. Glory is riveting, IMO.

Woah woah woah... Boring?

Gettysburg?  The movie about Gettysburg?  The one with the President Bartlett, the bouncer from RoadHouse and the guy from Dumb and Dumber who also played the greatest news anchor in television history for three seasons of an HBO show?  That Gettysburg?

Just when I want to like you you go and do something like that.  Like playing cards with my brother's kids or something....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Yankee23Fan said:

I'm not saying that you have bad taste in movies I'm really not.  And I liked Glory a lot.  Agree with everything you said about it.

But how the **** you rank it higher than Godfather?  On what planet is that a real thing?  This one?  Nope, not on this one.  You're on some different plane of existence or something. 

Again.  In my humble opinion.  YMMV.  Etcetera, etcetera.

Because he likes it more than Godfather.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ilov80s said:

Really? That movie may have been shocking and groundbreaking at the time. Today, it's pretty lame IMO. There are definitely better Poitier movies and better Hepburn/Tracy films. 

Agree. Tried to watch it recently and rarely seen anything more staid and stagy. Would have enjoyed a slasher musical more. Important, yes, but to put it on a favorites list you'd have to be a humorless, lip-service progressive with a pineapple up your a........................................nm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Timmy, your summary of 'Glory' is good but incomplete -- no mention of the visceral/moving score? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wikkidpissah said:

Agree. Tried to watch it recently and rarely seen anything more staid and stagy. Would have enjoyed a slasher musical more. Important, yes, but to put it on a favorites list you'd have to be a humorless, lip-service progressive with a pineapple up your a........................................nm

Some movies age like a fine wine and some age like a burrito from Taco Bell. This movie is the latter. It literally killed Spencer Tracy.Some movies age like a fine wine and some age like a burrito from Taco Bell. This movie is the latter. It literally killed Spencer Tracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Some movies age like a fine wine and some age like a burrito from Taco Bell. This movie is the latter. It literally killed Spencer Tracy.Some movies age like a fine wine and some age like a burrito from Taco Bell. This movie is the latter. It literally killed Spencer Tracy.

I loved it. It was much better than Cats. I'm going to see it again and again. I loved it. It was much better than Cats. I'm going to see it again and again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Because he likes it more than Godfather.

 

Glory >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godfather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, McGarnicle said:

I loved it. It was much better than Cats. I'm going to see it again and again. I loved it. It was much better than Cats. I'm going to see it again and again.

I'm seeing double so figure I might as well type double 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yankee23Fan said:

I'm not saying that you have bad taste in movies I'm really not.  And I liked Glory a lot.  Agree with everything you said about it.

But how the **** you rank it higher than Godfather?  On what planet is that a real thing?  This one?  Nope, not on this one.  You're on some different plane of existence or something. 

Again.  In my humble opinion.  YMMV.  Etcetera, etcetera.

Godfather Part II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, tomato tomahto. 

 

We need a new american history type list thing. Finish this one up already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13. The Caine Mutiny (1954)

Directed by: Edward Dmytryk

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Fred MacMurray, Van Johnson, Jose Ferrer

Columbia Pictures told Stanley Kramer, the producer of this film, that they were afraid that Herman Wouk's story might be perceived as "anti-military" (this was during the Red Scare), so Kramer puts in lots of scenes glorifying the Navy, along with a message at the beginning of the film about how wonderful US servicemen are. Actually, I found that these inclusions add to the film's likability. 

Most people remember Bogart, of course, because Queeg is at once one of the greatest Hollywood villains ever, but what's really ironic is that he's not the villain of the movie at all- indeed, he's a hero, as the film eventually demonstrates. The true villain is Keefer, played by MacMurray, who was simply a spectacular noir actor before he gave that up to become the fatherly star of My Three Sons. Van Johnson was also terrific as the hero Maryk (Johnson was a gay movie star who tragically had to live in the closet, even to the point of marrying). Robert Francis as Keith had a promising movie career ahead of him, but died only a year later in a plane crash. Jose Ferrer had perhaps the greatest voice in movie history.

Anyhow, this is my favorite of the great old fashioned Hollywood war movies. It's riveting all throughout. And it's also my favorite Bogart role. 

Up next: Six years from now, I'll be back here with my wife and two kids. And I'll see you, and one of my kids will say, "Daddy, who is that?" And I'll say it's not nice to point at single fat women.

 
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, timschochet said:

By the way, Wikipedia refers to the 54th Regiment, correctly, as made up of African-American soldiers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/54th_Massachusetts_Infantry_Regiment

You're fine calling them the 54th Massachusetts, but their historical is 54th Massachusetts (Colored) Volunteer Infantry. Commonly referred to that in numerous books & websites. Though you have to wonder where the parenthetical reference came from? The 175 federal regiments were called USCT, but the state regiments didn't seem to use the C word in their title (think there was like 6 state regiments.) pretty minor point.

Great movie, and along with Ken Burns PBS series, proved to be a critical element in a resurgence in ACW history & battlefield tourism. 

But...no where there Godfather I or II in any ranking. The story lags in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim, refresh my memory: this is a list of the films you enjoy most, not the films you think are the best - right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

You're fine calling them the 54th Massachusetts, but their historical is 54th Massachusetts (Colored) Volunteer Infantry. Commonly referred to that in numerous books & websites. Though you have to wonder where the parenthetical reference came from? The 175 federal regiments were called USCT, but the state regiments didn't seem to use the C word in their title (think there was like 6 state regiments.) pretty minor point.

Great movie, and along with Ken Burns PBS series, proved to be a critical element in a resurgence in ACW history & battlefield tourism. 

But...no where there Godfather I or II in any ranking. The story lags in the middle.

Interesting stuff.

Obviously, my ranking of The Godfather Part II as my 23rd favorite movie of all time appears to be my most controversial choice so far. I do love that movie, or it wouldn't be #23 on my list. But IMO it is flawed compared to the movies I have ranked above it. I'll discuss this in a little more detail when I get to the original film (a little later on.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Uruk-Hai said:

Tim, refresh my memory: this is a list of the films you enjoy most, not the films you think are the best - right?

Yep. It's even in the title. "Favorite".

If I were ranking the BEST films of all time (which I am not at all qualified to do,) I would probably end up including some movies in my top 10 that aren't anywhere on this list: such as:  

Citizen Kane

8 1/2

2001: A Space Odyssey

Other movies that are not on this list but would have to be on that one, in no particular order:

Sunset Boulevard

The Seventh Seal

Gone With the Wind

The Wizard of Oz

Casablanca

To Kill A Mockingbird

Psycho

Vertigo

Rear Window

Persona

The Grand Illusion

City Lights

The Graduate

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, timschochet said:

13. The Caine Mutiny (1954)

Directed by: Edward Dmytryk

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Fred MacMurray, Van Johnson, Jose Ferrer

Columbia Pictures told Stanley Kramer, the producer of this film, that they were afraid that Herman Wouk's story might be perceived as "anti-military" (this was during the Red Scare), so Kramer puts in lots of scenes glorifying the Navy, along with a message at the beginning of the film about how wonderful US servicemen are. Actually, I found that these inclusions add to the film's likability. 

Most people remember Bogart, of course, because Queeg is at once one of the greatest Hollywood villains ever, but what's really ironic is that he's not the villain of the movie at all- indeed, he's a hero, as the film eventually demonstrates. The true villain is Keefer, played by MacMurray, who was simply a spectacular noir actor before he gave that up to become the fatherly star of My Three Sons. Van Johnson was also terrific as the hero Maryk (Johnson was a gay movie star who tragically had to live in the closet, even to the point of marrying). Robert Francis as Keith had a promising movie career ahead of him, but died only a year later in a plane crash. Jose Ferrer had perhaps the greatest voice in movie history.

Anyhow, this is my favorite of the great old fashioned Hollywood war movies. It's riveting all throughout. And it's also my favorite Bogart role. 

Up next: Six years from now, I'll be back here with my wife and two kids. And I'll see you, and one of my kids will say, "Daddy, who is that?" And I'll say it's not nice to point at single fat women.

 

you are so woke. great picture -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, timschochet said:

13. The Caine Mutiny (1954)

Directed by: Edward Dmytryk

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Fred MacMurray, Van Johnson, Jose Ferrer

 

The post-WWII era was tough on Hollywood.  The studio system was much weaker than the 30s and the industry faced challenges from television and the red scare.  But there were some great war movies that came out in the immediate aftermath.  They struck a more realistic and reflective tone than the jingoism of the war years.  Other great ones included Twelve O'Clock High, Stalag 17, They Were Expendable and Battleground.  I don't think modern viewers can appreciate them same way that contemporary audiences did.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Yep. It's even in the title. "Favorite".

 

 

 

I'm just wondering why you're getting hammered, then. I'd watch Glory 20 times on rerun before I'd watch any of the Godfather films if I had a choice. I grew up in the 60s/70s, and those New Hollywood movies like The Godfather have not aged well. Hopefully, enough of us older folks will retire and there will be a reassessment of those films by younger critics. I don't think GF1 is even a particularly good movie and GF2 is WAY too long (plus, Pacino is an awful actor and failed miserably having to carry the "modern" portion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Uruk-Hai said:

I'm just wondering why you're getting hammered, then. I'd watch Glory 20 times on rerun before I'd watch any of the Godfather films if I had a choice. I grew up in the 60s/70s, and those New Hollywood movies like The Godfather have not aged well. Hopefully, enough of us older folks will retire and there will be a reassessment of those films by younger critics. I don't think GF1 is even a particularly good movie and GF2 is WAY too long (plus, Pacino is an awful actor and failed miserably having to carry the "modern" portion)

You're going too far for me. I simply can't agree with you. Both are, IMO, incredibly entertaining films- the first significantly more than the second. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Uruk-Hai said:

I'm just wondering why you're getting hammered, then. I'd watch Glory 20 times on rerun before I'd watch any of the Godfather films if I had a choice. I grew up in the 60s/70s, and those New Hollywood movies like The Godfather have not aged well. Hopefully, enough of us older folks will retire and there will be a reassessment of those films by younger critics. I don't think GF1 is even a particularly good movie and GF2 is WAY too long (plus, Pacino is an awful actor and failed miserably having to carry the "modern" portion)

The Godfather films have aged better than Pacino has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

You're going too far for me. I simply can't agree with you. Both are, IMO, incredibly entertaining films- the first significantly more than the second. 

:shrug:

I don't think they suck, and I can appreciate the craft.

No one will ever convince me that Pacino was a good actor in those films, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mr. Mojo said:

I have yet to see a Humphrey Bogart film that wasn't good.

He was a one of a kind.

Agree, he might have the highest hit rate ever. (As great movies go)

Edited by Ilov80s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mr. Mojo said:

I have yet to see a Humphrey Bogart film that wasn't good.

He was a one of a kind.

Greatest movie star of all time IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eephus said:

The post-WWII era was tough on Hollywood.  The studio system was much weaker than the 30s and the industry faced challenges from television and the red scare.  But there were some great war movies that came out in the immediate aftermath.  They struck a more realistic and reflective tone than the jingoism of the war years.  Other great ones included Twelve O'Clock High, Stalag 17, They Were Expendable and Battleground.  I don't think modern viewers can appreciate them same way that contemporary audiences did.

Post WW2 was great, one of best in film history 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, John Maddens Lunchbox said:

I think he was miscast, but acquitted himself well. Coming off Ferris Bueller it was hard to get that role out of your head. The more I've watched this movie, the better Broderick gets. If you think about the age the guy Broderick was playing would have been, the fresh face isnt that out of place. A more assured officer wouldnt have got that job and Broderick conveys naivete well.

I found him to be distractingly stiff and awkward in this movie. I realize he was probably going for stiff in the role, assuming that was how a person of that class/station would comport themselves in that era, but it just didn't come off convincingly. It was particularly glaring to me because there were so many other actors knocking it out of the park in the same film. And I've got nothing against Broderick in general (I think he was perfect in Election).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

You're fine calling them the 54th Massachusetts, but their historical is 54th Massachusetts (Colored) Volunteer Infantry. Commonly referred to that in numerous books & websites. Though you have to wonder where the parenthetical reference came from? The 175 federal regiments were called USCT, but the state regiments didn't seem to use the C word in their title (think there was like 6 state regiments.) pretty minor point.

Hey don't go around spreading the truth, they won't like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mr. Mojo said:

I have yet to see a Humphrey Bogart film that wasn't good.

He was a one of a kind.

 

13 hours ago, timschochet said:

Greatest movie star of all time IMO.

No one said lines like they just came into his head like Bogie. And you can have your Waynes & Schwarzeneggers & Rocks - Bogie's ordinary men doing extraordinary things are 100x more heroic than any of em without an ounce of leaping, riding, running, strafing or sweating because they have the fear, doubt, corruption, honor and purpose of a real person within em.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wikkidpissah said:

 

No one said lines like they just came into his head like Bogie. And you can have your Waynes & Schwarzeneggers & Rocks - Bogie's ordinary men doing extraordinary things are 100x more heroic than any of em without an ounce of leaping, riding, running, strafing or sweating because they have the fear, doubt, corruption, honor and purpose of a real person within em.

Agreed. I think Harrison Ford has some of that quality as well. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Bogart had another dimension to him that Ford and others like the ones WP mentioned did not: all thoroughout his career, he often played the villain as well as the hero. As I pointed out The Caine Mutiny is somewhat complicated: Queeg is paranoid and small-minded but not truly a villain. But in another film I love from a year earlier, The Desperate Hours, Bogie plays an escaped convict and killer who is pure evil. 

Most Hollywood stars back then, and some to this day, are typecast: if moviegoers perceive them as good guys, they don't play bad guys. When's the last time Tom Cruise played the villain? Bogart was one of the great exceptions to this rule. Jack Nicholson is another. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bogart's best performance,  IMO, is in In A Lonely Place.

It's so nuanced and he shows what acting is ALL about in the last 15 minutes. An absolute clinic. I can't think of many times (any?) where I shared the character's emotions as much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I most intensely remember my first Bogie experience. I knew who he was cuz he was big when i was a kid and my uncle & dad's college buds were always imitating him but i hadn't really seen him til a sick day when the Dialing-for-Dollars movie had this stoopit thing of Bette Davis & a gay guy arguing about poetry outside a gas station in the desert. I had a fever & was waiting for soup so i didnt get up and change the channel. Then a gangster car pulled up and this sweaty, unshaven guy gets out and looks at everybody like he's deciding whether to shoot em or bite their nose off. And he's scared and he's mad and obnoxious and cool at the same time and he's making everybody be scared and mad and sweaty too cuz he's gotta hole up and wait for dis dame, see?! And it was just the bossest ####in thing i ever saw. I can still feel Bogie's Duke Mantee inside me in turbulent times.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2015 at 10:20 PM, timschochet said:

HISS: May I say for the record at this point, that I would like to invite Mr. Whittaker Chambers to make these same statements out of the presence of this committee without their being privileged for suit and libel. I challenge you to do it, and I hope you will do it damned quickly...

Yaknow, I can't help but think Trump forcing Comey to appear to unfurl the FISA warrant to disprove Trump's claims isn't going to end well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12. Broadcast News (1987)

Directed by: James L. Brooks

Starring: Holly Hunter, William Hurt, Albert Brooks

In a way, this movie is a companion piece to Network, in that, filmed a decade later, it continues to show the deterioration of the news media into entertainment. But although its not as creative or as sharply written as that previous film, I find it more entertaining because it's three main characters are so well defined. Broadcast News is, above all else, a romantic comedy, and it works because we believe in and empathize with its stars.

Holly Hunter gives IMO the best performance of her career as the modern American executive woman, brilliant and obsessive-compulsive, yet insecure. Her character would have been impossible ten years earlier (Faye Dunaway's Diane Christensen is a caricature by comparison). Albert Brooks plays, well, Albert Brooks, as he does in the previous two movies I have placed on my list (Lost in America and Defending Your Life). But he's very good at this role, and he's given a lot of great snarky lines to work with. But between the 3 of them, perhaps the guy with the hardest acting job is William Hurt, because he has to come off as well-meaning, very good at what he does (network anchorman), but somewhat stupid, yet real. The last two words are what makes it so difficult- Hurt could have easily played this like Ted Knight from The Mary Tyler Moore Show, but he's going for a deeper pathos than that, and he achieves it.

The movie also features some great supporting characters (particularly Joan Cusack and Jack Nicholson), and like all James L. Brooks movies is expertly written in a witty style that Aaron Sorkin would come to imitate.

Up Next: I've done my share of bootlegging. Up 'ere, if you engage in what the federal government calls 'illegal activity,' but what we call 'just a man tryin' to make a livin' for his family sellin' moonshine liquor,' it behooves oneself to keep his wits. Long story short, we hear a story too good to be true... it ain't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 6:46 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yaknow, I can't help but think Trump forcing Comey to appear to unfurl the FISA warrant to disprove Trump's claims isn't going to end well.

Good prediction!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2017 at 10:50 AM, Andy Dufresne said:

Bogart's best performance,  IMO, is in In A Lonely Place.

It's so nuanced and he shows what acting is ALL about in the last 15 minutes. An absolute clinic. I can't think of many times (any?) where I shared the character's emotions as much.

Just grabbed this one at the library yesterday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11. Inglorious Basterds (2009)

Directed by: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent

Just a fantastic, entertaining film in so many ways. There are a number of great Hollywood WWII movies that I love but was forced to leave off my list, including, in no particular order, The Great Escape, The Dirty Dozen, The Guns of Navarone, The Eagle Has Landed, Where Eagles Dare, Stalag 17. Tarantino borrows from all of these and from numerous other sources as well in order to tell his fantasy story about killing Hitler. And that's awesome, because everything works in this movie: the tension, suspense, humor, acting, directing, is all top notch. 

Christoph Waltz has the role of a lifetime here, for which he'll no doubt always be remembered. Brad Pitt is fine in a caricature role. Michael Fassbinder is only on screen for a few minutes but is extremely memorable, as is Eli Roth. And then there's Til Schweiger, so ####### awesome. I'm going to have to watch this movie again. So great. 

Up next: I'm going to be a great film star! That is, if booze and sex don't get me first.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, timschochet said:

11. Inglorious Basterds (2009)

Directed by: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent

Just a fantastic, entertaining film in so many ways. There are a number of great Hollywood WWII movies that I love but was forced to leave off my list, including, in no particular order, The Great Escape, The Dirty Dozen, The Guns of Navarone, The Eagle Has Landed, Where Eagles Dare, Stalag 17. Tarantino borrows from all of these and from numerous other sources as well in order to tell his fantasy story about killing Hitler. And that's awesome, because everything works in this movie: the tension, suspense, humor, acting, directing, is all top notch. 

Christoph Waltz has the role of a lifetime here, for which he'll no doubt always be remembered. Brad Pitt is fine in a caricature role. Michael Fassbinder is only on screen for a few minutes but is extremely memorable, as is Eli Roth. And then there's Til Schweiger, so ####### awesome. I'm going to have to watch this movie again. So great. 

Up next: I'm going to be a great film star! That is, if booze and sex don't get me first.

Huh.  Number 11?  It barely cracks the Tarantino top 11 for me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Nick Vermeil said:

Huh.  Number 11?  It barely cracks the Tarantino top 11 for me.  

If it's not at least above Death Proof, I think you are doing something wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.