Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (1 Viewer)

[El Floppo]

Next up I'll catch up on some Scorsese films here's the list:

Haven't seen:

Mean Streets

King of Comedy

After Hours

Casino

Last Temptation of Christ

Bringing out the Dead

Seen Once/long ago:

Raging Bull

Gangs of New York

I bolded the 3 I had down to watch. Is there another on the 'haven't seen' list that is a must watch?

I love LOVE Scorcese's "comedies"- King of Comedy (I'm in the minority on this one, I think) and After Hours. if you have to pick one, I guess After Hours... but did I mention how much I love KoC? Jerry Lewis is flat out genius in it, and Sandra Bernhardt... pretty much herself, but it works, especially foiled/paired with DeNiro's Rupert Pupkin (one of my all time favorite characters). For some reason, I can't remember Bringing out the Dead, but all of those on the "unseen" list are great. And if it's a question- watch Raging Bull again. IMO, that is one of, if not his absolute, best. For that matter, I'd happily put it in my top 10 on any given day.

 

[jdoggydogg]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

 

[Abraham]

Red - 4 out of 5. Much better then I was expecting. Ending was kind of "huh?" but that's okay.

Salt - 2 out of 5. One of them most predictable plots in years. ANd like Robin Hood, I hate that the director presumed there would be a sequel for such a mediocre movie.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Next up I'll catch up on some Scorsese films here's the list:

Haven't seen:

Mean Streets

King of Comedy

After Hours

Casino

Last Temptation of Christ

Bringing out the Dead

Mean Streets is overrated, but an important movie, for sure. King of Comedy is a weird movie, but I really like it. I love Casino and I think it's every bit as good as Goodfellas. I couldn't even finish Last Temptation, but to be fair, I only watched the first 20 minutes.

Seen Once/long ago:

Raging Bull

Gangs of New York

Upon a few subsequent viewings, Cameron Diaz didn't totally ruin Gangs. But she is horribly miscast and remains a huge flaw in an otherwise excellent movie. I think Raging Bull gets better with every viewing. I had zero sympathy for LaMotta initially. But his deep rage and pathos became more interesting with more viewings.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Red - 4 out of 5. Much better then I was expecting. Ending was kind of "huh?" but that's okay. Salt - 2 out of 5. One of them most predictable plots in years. ANd like Robin Hood, I hate that the director presumed there would be a sequel for such a mediocre movie.

I'm with you on Red. Very predictable, but all these veteran actors pulled it off. I liked Salt

 

[Andy Dufresne]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

"Anyone of you calls me 'grandpa', I'll kill you."I like this movie, but it is over the top.

Upon a few subsequent viewings, Cameron Diaz didn't totally ruin Gangs. But she is horribly miscast and remains a huge flaw in an otherwise excellent movie. I think Raging Bull gets better with every viewing. I had zero sympathy for LaMotta initially. But his deep rage and pathos became more interesting with more viewings.

Raging Bull, like its director, is really overrated.

 

[joffer]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Agree it was a bit cliche, but I liked it more than that. I thought including the story of the wives was interesting. battle scenes were really well done. agree that Sam Elliot is always a great character. best mustache of all time.

 

[Abraham]

Red - 4 out of 5. Much better then I was expecting. Ending was kind of "huh?" but that's okay.

Salt - 2 out of 5. One of them most predictable plots in years. ANd like Robin Hood, I hate that the director presumed there would be a sequel for such a mediocre movie.

I'm with you on Red. Very predictable, but all these veteran actors pulled it off. I liked Salt

You didn't think it was completely predictable that I just thought each scene was very predictable. Entertaining, sure. But predictable.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Agree it was a bit cliche, but I liked it more than that. I thought including the story of the wives was interesting. battle scenes were really well done. agree that Sam Elliot is always a great character. best mustache of all time.

The scene where they kiss their families good bye in the middle of the night and the song
are great.

 

[hooter311]

Next up I'll catch up on some Scorsese films here's the list:

Haven't seen:

Mean Streets

King of Comedy

After Hours

Casino

Last Temptation of Christ

Bringing out the Dead

Seen Once/long ago:

Raging Bull

Gangs of New York

I bolded the 3 I had down to watch. Is there another on the 'haven't seen' list that is a must watch?

I'm a huge fan of Bringing Out the Dead, but its black, dark as night comedy. If you take it too seriously you'll probably hate it because it is surreal and weird. Watched After Hours recently for the first time myself, its great, a classic.

Casino is a must see, but I don't think it's quite as good as Goodfellas. Has probably one of the three hardest scenes I've ever had to watch at the end, maybe even #1.

I'm in with the Raging Bull is overrated crowd. Great performances, average film.

I've never seen Mean Streets, King of Comedy, or LTofC.

 

[jdoggydogg]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

"Anyone of you calls me 'grandpa', I'll kill you."I like this movie, but it is over the top.

Upon a few subsequent viewings, Cameron Diaz didn't totally ruin Gangs. But she is horribly miscast and remains a huge flaw in an otherwise excellent movie. I think Raging Bull gets better with every viewing. I had zero sympathy for LaMotta initially. But his deep rage and pathos became more interesting with more viewings.

Raging Bull, like its director, is really overrated.

Again, Sam Elliot rules. I certainly enjoyed parts of Soldiers. I liked that the enemy strategy was shown - although I think that was done better in Flags of Our Fathers.Scorsese is overrated the same way that fine restaurants and hot chicks are overrated. You often need to possess a high level of quality to be overrated in the first place.

 

[jdoggydogg]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Agree it was a bit cliche, but I liked it more than that. I thought including the story of the wives was interesting. battle scenes were really well done. agree that Sam Elliot is always a great character. best mustache of all time.

I liked that the movie showed a lot of the wives. But this was a very poorly written movie.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Red - 4 out of 5. Much better then I was expecting. Ending was kind of "huh?" but that's okay.

Salt - 2 out of 5. One of them most predictable plots in years. ANd like Robin Hood, I hate that the director presumed there would be a sequel for such a mediocre movie.

I'm with you on Red. Very predictable, but all these veteran actors pulled it off. I liked Salt

You didn't think it was completely predictable that
*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close(); I just thought each scene was very predictable. Entertaining, sure. But predictable.

Absolutely predictable. But so few action movies are original or surprising, I judge them by a different standard.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I've never seen Mean Streets, King of Comedy, or LTofC.

You must see King of Comedy.

 

[Statorama]

13 Tzameti (French): I once posted a thread about movies that you enjoyed but wish you'd never seen. This might have to go on my list...almost. The first thing I read about this movie was that it was important to see it without having read much about it, and I'd recommend the same and will not say much. I will say that starting at about 40 minutes into the film, it becomes the most difficult and tense movie I've ever seen (which is saying a lot). I felt like I was going to vomit for the rest of the movie because it was so difficult to watch. It has nothing to do with actual violence--there is very little blood or violence in the movie. I can't describe it--you'd just have to see it. In addition, the movie is extremely well acted and beautifully shot (it is in black and white). Highly recommend this one, but not if you are looking for anything at all light or happy. I can't get it out of my head. 5/5

Saw the remake with Jason Statham and that creepy guy from Revolutionary Road, and it was reasonably well made. Didn't grip me in the shorts like the original grabbed you...so I'll give the source material a shot.Unfortunately I can't unsee what I've already seen, so I'll know the basic plotline.

 

[hooter311]

I've never seen Mean Streets, King of Comedy, or LTofC.

You must see King of Comedy.

Easy enough, will make room in the queue for it.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I've never seen Mean Streets, King of Comedy, or LTofC.

You must see King of Comedy.

Easy enough, will make room in the queue for it.

I've only seen it once years ago. But how often do we get to see black comedy?

 

[hooter311]

I've never seen Mean Streets, King of Comedy, or LTofC.

You must see King of Comedy.

Easy enough, will make room in the queue for it.

I've only seen it once years ago. But how often do we get to see black comedy?

Not often enough and seemingly never with any kind of budget.I'll take whatever I can get in this area.

 

[El Floppo]

Wait... the Red you guys are talking about- not part of the Blue, White, Red trilogy?

 

[El Floppo]

And FWIW- I liked LToC a lot, but it hits on my favorite/most-interesting part ofthe bible and then runs with it- so it worked for me.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Wait... the Red you guys are talking about- not part of the Blue, White, Red trilogy?

I was talking about the silly action flick.

 

[saintfool]

I love LOVE Scorcese's "comedies"- King of Comedy (I'm in the minority on this one, I think) and After Hours. if you have to pick one, I guess After Hours... but did I mention how much I love KoC? Jerry Lewis is flat out genius in it, and Sandra Bernhardt... pretty much herself, but it works, especially foiled/paired with DeNiro's Rupert Pupkin (one of my all time favorite characters). For some reason, I can't remember Bringing out the Dead, but all of those on the "unseen" list are great.

this.i love KoC tremendously. it's awesome and fits with my kind of sense of humor in many ways. that said, "after hours" is my favorite comedy by scorsese. it's not especially innovative or anything and in some ways it is a typical comedy of its day. however, i find there are movies that i kind of identify (or project myself as) with the protagonist. "after hours" is one of those movies...

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Next up I'll catch up on some Scorsese films here's the list:

Haven't seen:

Mean Streets

King of Comedy

After Hours

Casino

Last Temptation of Christ

Bringing out the Dead

Seen Once/long ago:

Raging Bull

Gangs of New York

I bolded the 3 I had down to watch. Is there another on the 'haven't seen' list that is a must watch?

Casino.

IIRC, KarmaPolice is the guy who hates voice overs with a passion. If that is the case and he can't get over that, then he will likely think Casino is one of the worst films of all time. I can't recall a film that has as much voice over as Casino has. Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

 

[saintfool]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

 

[Chaka]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

He was perfect for that role.I agree with your analysis but I will say that it was well executed cliche.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

I think Sharon Stone is, in many ways, a bad actor. But I think she nailed this role.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

I think Sharon Stone is, in many ways, a bad actor. But I think she nailed this role.

She may have nailed the role, but that role of De Niro's wife shouldn't have been of such focus to begin with, and the amount of whining/yelling that character does is unnecessary, made me want to stop watching.

 

[saintfool]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

I think Sharon Stone is, in many ways, a bad actor. But I think she nailed this role.

i would agree with that statement. it's not that it was bad as a subplot but it took us out of this other, more interesting film. i think she can be very good in films but she's not been a lead actress, if ever, for many years. she could be a decent character actor if she wanted. sort of a cut rate sarandon possibly because she has a peculiar intensity.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Next up I'll catch up on some Scorsese films here's the list:

Haven't seen:

Mean Streets

King of Comedy

After Hours

Casino

Last Temptation of Christ

Bringing out the Dead

Seen Once/long ago:

Raging Bull

Gangs of New York

I bolded the 3 I had down to watch. Is there another on the 'haven't seen' list that is a must watch?

Casino.

IIRC, KarmaPolice is the guy who hates voice overs with a passion. If that is the case and he can't get over that, then he will likely think Casino is one of the worst films of all time. I can't recall a film that has as much voice over as Casino has. Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

You recall correctly. Almost didn't finish Goodfellas because of it.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

I think Sharon Stone is, in many ways, a bad actor. But I think she nailed this role.

i would agree with that statement. it's not that it was bad as a subplot but it took us out of this other, more interesting film. i think she can be very good in films but she's not been a lead actress, if ever, for many years. she could be a decent character actor if she wanted. sort of a cut rate sarandon possibly because she has a peculiar intensity.

I'm not saying her scenes are the best part of the movie. Just saying that they didn't detract from the movie for me.

 

[hooter311]

Personally, I didn't think it was that great of a film either. I enjoyed the first half of the film, but the 2nd half wasn't very good; mostly because the 2nd half of the film was mostly just Sharon Stone screaming for 45 minutes which made me want to kill her due to how annoying it was. I also find the film to be too long, it was just dragging on for the last 45min or so.

i think the sharon stone stuff kind of took me out of the movie. it could have been another "goodfellas", i think, but for that subplot.

agree completely.

I think Sharon Stone is, in many ways, a bad actor. But I think she nailed this role.

She may have nailed the role, but that role of De Niro's wife shouldn't have been of such focus to begin with, and the amount of whining/yelling that character does is unnecessary, made me want to stop watching.

You haven't spent enough time with coke sluts. Her character is pretty much dead on and is very necessary to the story because ##### is the only thing that could have formed a wedge between these guys.Almost didn't finish Goodfellas? My head just exploded.

You probably wouldn't enjoy Casino then, but its the only way to truly ever get the entire Joe Pesci experience. If anything, you will learn what you can do with a ballpoint pen if someone insults your friend in front of you.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

You haven't spent enough time with coke sluts. Her character is pretty much dead on and is very necessary to the story because ##### is the only thing that could have formed a wedge between these guys.

Almost didn't finish Goodfellas? My head just exploded.

You probably wouldn't enjoy Casino then, but its the only way to truly ever get the entire Joe Pesci experience. If anything, you will learn what you can do with a ballpoint pen if someone insults your friend in front of you.

Not sure if this deserves a spoiler tag or if spoiler tags are even used in this thread, but just to be safe:
Again, I'm not saying that it wasn't an accurate portrayal or that Stone did acted poorly in the film, I just don't think it was necessary for the yelling/whining to go on and on.

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

 

[krista4]

Didn't even read the synopsis - just clicked and added to the queue. I'll report back mid-week

Did you ever report back on this?

I don't know what this means in this context.

 

[krista4]

Just trying to catch up a little:

Robert Altman Did I miss it or did no one mention his best, Short Cuts? The Player and Gosford Park are my other favorites.

Woody Allen Especially anything from the 70s.

Lars von Trier Don't find him emotionally manipulative, though. Dogville? Really?

Steven Spielberg mostly. Sorry.

Michael Bay - Pretty sure I haven't seen any of his work.

Scorsese - Nothing better than After Hours, and it's not even close.

 

[krista4]

13 Tzameti (French): I once posted a thread about movies that you enjoyed but wish you'd never seen. This might have to go on my list...almost. The first thing I read about this movie was that it was important to see it without having read much about it, and I'd recommend the same and will not say much. I will say that starting at about 40 minutes into the film, it becomes the most difficult and tense movie I've ever seen (which is saying a lot). I felt like I was going to vomit for the rest of the movie because it was so difficult to watch. It has nothing to do with actual violence--there is very little blood or violence in the movie. I can't describe it--you'd just have to see it. In addition, the movie is extremely well acted and beautifully shot (it is in black and white). Highly recommend this one, but not if you are looking for anything at all light or happy. I can't get it out of my head. 5/5

Saw the remake with Jason Statham and that creepy guy from Revolutionary Road, and it was reasonably well made. Didn't grip me in the shorts like the original grabbed you...so I'll give the source material a shot.Unfortunately I can't unsee what I've already seen, so I'll know the basic plotline.

Had no idea there was a remake. What's it called?

 

[Philo]

Had no idea there was a remake. What's it called?

13

 

[jdoggydogg]

Woody Allen Especially anything from the 70s.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Had no idea there was a remake. What's it called?

13

It has some pretty big names in it (Mickey Rourke, Jason Statham, Emmanuelle Chriqui, 50 Cent), I'm surprised I heard absolutely nothing about this film whatsoever.

 

[krista4]

Had no idea there was a remake. What's it called?

13

It has some pretty big names in it (Mickey Rourke, Jason Statham, Emmanuelle Chriqui, 50 Cent), I'm surprised I heard absolutely nothing about this film whatsoever.

Firstly, I by no means, fancy anything I might write could ever even pretend to compare with those wonderful musings, Dr Yvon's Review, entitled "Dr Yvon rents a movie". Writer-director Géla Babluani remakes his inventive French thriller, 13 Tzameti -- winner of the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival in 2006 -- with this direct-to-DVD thriller feature. I was a huge fan of 13 Tzameti. I liked the excitement and story and enjoyed the mix of film styles. 13 is, on the other hand the most boring, self-indulgent piece of cinematic crap I have had the misfortune to sit through. I can see why Babluani edited all this junk out of the first one and how he NEVER could have released them in the opposite order. He spends endless amounts of screen time explaining/showing minutia which you at least hope will be useful later in the film, but ultimately turn out not to be. His trademark style here is a total failure as he's constantly interrupting any chance of building tension or a story to go spend 15 minutes on some point that turns out to just detract from the film. Babluani desperately needs someone to stand over his shoulder and say "NO" when he's in the editing room and decides to keep a scene running a solid 10 minutes longer than it should. If you feel Ridley Scott was obscenely self-indulgent in that travesty of a film Hannibal you will feel worse about 13 as it doesn't even have a saving grace shock you ending that at least made Hannibal a water cooler topic. AVOID AT ALL COSTS!

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Had no idea there was a remake. What's it called?

13

It has some pretty big names in it (Mickey Rourke, Jason Statham, Emmanuelle Chriqui, 50 Cent), I'm surprised I heard absolutely nothing about this film whatsoever.

Firstly, I by no means, fancy anything I might write could ever even pretend to compare with those wonderful musings, Dr Yvon's Review, entitled "Dr Yvon rents a movie". Writer-director Géla Babluani remakes his inventive French thriller, 13 Tzameti -- winner of the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival in 2006 -- with this direct-to-DVD thriller feature. I was a huge fan of 13 Tzameti. I liked the excitement and story and enjoyed the mix of film styles. 13 is, on the other hand the most boring, self-indulgent piece of cinematic crap I have had the misfortune to sit through. I can see why Babluani edited all this junk out of the first one and how he NEVER could have released them in the opposite order. He spends endless amounts of screen time explaining/showing minutia which you at least hope will be useful later in the film, but ultimately turn out not to be. His trademark style here is a total failure as he's constantly interrupting any chance of building tension or a story to go spend 15 minutes on some point that turns out to just detract from the film. Babluani desperately needs someone to stand over his shoulder and say "NO" when he's in the editing room and decides to keep a scene running a solid 10 minutes longer than it should. If you feel Ridley Scott was obscenely self-indulgent in that travesty of a film Hannibal you will feel worse about 13 as it doesn't even have a saving grace shock you ending that at least made Hannibal a water cooler topic. AVOID AT ALL COSTS!

Yikes. Sounds like it was for the best that I never heard of it. There was never a hope that an American/British remake of 13 Tzameti would be better than the original, but I thought it could have been at least somewhat interesting. Guess I won't waste my time.

 

[Sea Ropes]

House Bunny (on TBS)

Shelley: The eyes are the nipples of the face.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Didn't even read the synopsis - just clicked and added to the queue. I'll report back mid-week

Did you ever report back on this?

I don't know what this means in this context.

No, and I was hiding b/c I posted that it would be watched last week.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Just trying to catch up a little:

Robert Altman Did I miss it or did no one mention his best, Short Cuts? The Player and Gosford Park are my other favorites.

Woody Allen Especially anything from the 70s.

Lars von Trier Don't find him emotionally manipulative, though. Dogville? Really?

Steven Spielberg mostly. Sorry.

Michael Bay - Pretty sure I haven't seen any of his work.

Scorsese - Nothing better than After Hours, and it's not even close.

Oh my.

 

[beer 30]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Just curious but what were you expecting? It's based, pretty closely, on the book.Agree with Sam Elliot, I've never seen him in a bad role and that includes Ghostrider.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Sam Elliot is great as Brig. Gen. John Buford in Gettysburg.

 

[jdoggydogg]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Just curious but what were you expecting? It's based, pretty closely, on the book.Agree with Sam Elliot, I've never seen him in a bad role and that includes Ghostrider.

I was expecting a better script and something other than a bunch of rehashed war movie cliches. If John Wayne had made this movie fifty years ago, it would have been excellent. But in the modern era, we've seen too many excellent war films to let an inferior movie like this slide.

 

[Chaka]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Just curious but what were you expecting? It's based, pretty closely, on the book.Agree with Sam Elliot, I've never seen him in a bad role and that includes Ghostrider.

I was expecting a better script and something other than a bunch of rehashed war movie cliches. If John Wayne had made this movie fifty years ago, it would have been excellent. But in the modern era, we've seen too many excellent war films to let an inferior movie like this slide.

While I don't think it was Royal Shakespeare Theater quality I think WWS was better than all that. Some of the cliches were a little painful to watch and all that but I thought that from a strictly military aspect it presented some unique perspectives and is one of the few battle films that bothered to really lay out and map the events to give the audience a more realistic glimpse of how battles develop. In other words I think they did a very good job lifting the Fog of War for the audience.I also liked the way they included the female characters in the overall story. I thought they had a powerful impact.

So while I agree that there were many cliches that were at times tough to bear (and the ending battle was a little oddly executed) I thought it also had many redeeming elements that make it a worthwhile film to view.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

The most disturbing element of We Were Soldiers was Madeleine Stowe's collagen injection mangled lips.

She used to be pretty but in that show she looks like a carp.

 

[jdoggydogg]

We Were Soldiers

Meh. That said, is there a more enjoyable actor to watch than Sam Elliott? This guy should be in every movie. All of them. Mel Gibson was solid. But this is a pretty lame effort overall. This movie might have been decent pre-Flags of Our Fathers or pre-Apocalypse Now. But as it stands, it's more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else. Painfully obvious and cliche.

Just curious but what were you expecting? It's based, pretty closely, on the book.Agree with Sam Elliot, I've never seen him in a bad role and that includes Ghostrider.

I was expecting a better script and something other than a bunch of rehashed war movie cliches. If John Wayne had made this movie fifty years ago, it would have been excellent. But in the modern era, we've seen too many excellent war films to let an inferior movie like this slide.

While I don't think it was Royal Shakespeare Theater quality I think WWS was better than all that. Some of the cliches were a little painful to watch and all that but I thought that from a strictly military aspect it presented some unique perspectives and is one of the few battle films that bothered to really lay out and map the events to give the audience a more realistic glimpse of how battles develop. In other words I think they did a very good job lifting the Fog of War for the audience.I also liked the way they included the female characters in the overall story. I thought they had a powerful impact.

So while I agree that there were many cliches that were at times tough to bear (and the ending battle was a little oddly executed) I thought it also had many redeeming elements that make it a worthwhile film to view.

I did enjoy seeing the planning and execution of the battles from both sides. But without having read the book, I will assume that was more about the source material. Including the female characters was a good idea. But how about that scene where the one white wife is just horrified that a black soldier can't have his laundry washed at an all-white laundromat? That was some of the most painful writing and acting I've ever seen in a major film.Let's just set aside my other beefs and look at the editing. The editing of this movie is terrible. Some scenes end abruptly at times, while others go on and on. I'm surprised this movie was directed by the same man that made Braveheart. Because that is a far superior film.

The movie has some redeeming qualities. I think it was very earnest in showing the fear and anxiety of being a soldier. But Full Metal Jacket showed all that and was 100 times better.