Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (4 Viewers)

[jdoggydogg]

caught "tinker tailor soldier spy" yesterday with the wife. good but not great. i'll probably check out the alec guinness original from back in the day.

I was supposed to see this last Friday, but got talked into Contraband. What a mistake that was

 

[jdoggydogg]

The first Sherlock movie is much better than this new one. The latter took forever to get going, seemed to have several superfluous scenes, and didn't have much of a payoff.

I can't help but compare both movies to the various BBC iterations, and the movies pale in comparison.

 

[jdoggydogg]

No it wasn't. It was fun.

while i happened to enjoy myself while seeing this film, i can see where some would be put off by it. i think if a person is annoyed by the ritchie gimmickry, for example, then it could be less fun. i think there is also some formula that posits the delight that one has in this film is likely in direct proportion to one's affection for RDJr. if you like him then you'll probably enjoy this or any of the "iron man" films. finally, if you're s holmes loyalist - in any way, shape or form - then i could see where this could make you dislike the film.

Here's the condensed essence of the Sherlock movies:Guy Ritchie = awesome

Sherlock Holmes (the character) = awesome

Robert Downey, Jr. = awesome

The two Sherlock movies = mediocre

Those entities should have combined into something special. Alas, they did not.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Watched 'The Iron Lady' and if you want to picture Margaret Thatcher as a bucktoothed idiot this is the movie for you. An extraordinary amount of time in the movie is spent watching Thatcher spiral into dementia in her later years, which will delight it's target audience of Thatcher haters. After seeing this, I have no doubt it will be followed by Tom Hanks riffing on an alzheimers riddled Ronald Reagan.

Liberal Thatcher-hater here. If you had time to peruse my review posted above, rather than project my thoughts, you would have found I had the same issues with the movie you did. I would much preferred to have seen more of what she actually did while in office than any of the old age stuff.

I didn't even read yours, but I will. I just got the feeling while watching it that it was Thatcher-hate pron.

All you really need to know about the movie is in the choice of actress to play her, isn't it.?Kind of like how I know how "The Reagans" would be because James Brolin plays The Gipper.

Really? Do you see everything Hollywood produces as agenda-driven? Meryl Streep as an activist?I thought the movie was even-handed to moderately pro-Thatcher, as far as her depiction from her political career.As far as the old age stuff- that's a universal malady and do not think there was desire to show that it was a conservative condition, but a human condition. Either way, I did not care for that part of the film at all. I wish all that screen time ahd further developed things like the Falkland war and IRA bombings, etc.

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

 

[jdoggydogg]

So you think Meryl Streep is too liberal to give a credibly conservative portrayal of Thatcher?

I'm sure she gives a credible performance. I've heard as such.I simply don't believe, however, that Streep would have taken the role had it portrayed Thatcher in a more positive light.Does that answer your question?

I think you're reading too much into this. Streep is a Thatcher fan, despite Thatcher's politics.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

 

[jdoggydogg]

No it wasn't. It was fun.

while i happened to enjoy myself while seeing this film, i can see where some would be put off by it. i think if a person is annoyed by the ritchie gimmickry, for example, then it could be less fun. i think there is also some formula that posits the delight that one has in this film is likely in direct proportion to one's affection for RDJr. if you like him then you'll probably enjoy this or any of the "iron man" films. finally, if you're s holmes loyalist - in any way, shape or form - then i could see where this could make you dislike the film.

I think he is fantastic. Really enjoyed both Iron Man flicks. Maybe it is my growing dislike for non-CGI action movies.

That last line does not compute. I will never understand how people can tolerate movies looking like video games. Nothing takes me out of a movie faster or takes the "magic" out of a movie for me quicker than obvious cgi.

Yeah, I'm with you. I've watched around two...just two...CGI action movies where I can literally recall forgetting it was fake: Legend of the Guardians and Avatar. Most of the time, CGI just feels extra fake to me.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

So you think Meryl Streep is too liberal to give a credibly conservative portrayal of Thatcher?

I'm sure she gives a credible performance. I've heard as such.I simply don't believe, however, that Streep would have taken the role had it portrayed Thatcher in a more positive light.

Does that answer your question?

I think you're reading too much into this. Streep is a Thatcher fan, despite Thatcher's politics.

Only after she took the part.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

So was the movie supposed to glamorize Thatcher? I don't get it. Were you hoping for something resembling the Sarah Palin documentary?

 

[Kenny Powers]

The Artist

I was hesitant to see this, as it seemed kind of gimmicky and I am a big fan of dialogue. But I thought if I was going to see it, I should go ahead and do so in a theater, as a silent movie would have a much smaller chance of pleasing me and holding my attention on a TV.

It was good/solid, but my reservations were justified.It jsut didn't work for me much less enamor me like many reviewers who seemed to fall under its spell. I'm glad they loved it and its the type of innovative cinema I like to see produced, but it left me kind of ho-hum.

3/5 stars, more out of respect than enjoyment

The feeling I get from the couple reviews I've seen on it is that it is a cutesy movie that brings up people's nostalgia for classic movies, but doesn't bring anything different to the table. In other words, the exact type of movie that pulls on the Academy's heartstrings. From the trailers I've seen I fully expect this and Warhorse to battle it out for the Oscar this year.

Despite checking this thread pretty much daily, Ive gotten lazy with my reviews and havent done one in maybe 2 months. I'll try to catch up, but I did see War Horse so...War Horse....So a Spielberg-directed film set in WWI Europe has got to be good, right? Wrong. If you are a 10-14 year old boy you will probably love this movie, if not, there are very few reasons I could recommend seeing it. It starts out slow about a struggling family trying to keep their farm, alongside headscratching actions and over the top dialogue, that is only saved by some nice acting from Peter Mullan. In retrospect, this was probably the strongest portion of the film somehow. After this half hour or so start where the bond between horse and boy is formed, the war starts and the horse is sold to a British Army officer and from there, it is basically about the horse bouncing around Europe during the war from pseudo-owner to the next. The horse is never in one place long enough to provide any connection to the human characters, and that felt like a blatant error to me and made it hard to stay interested in the movie. The middle 60-90 minutes is somehow just as slow as the beginning, except with no character development, and surprisingly little action. When the battle scenes did come late, I found them frantic, poorly shot, and not all that suspenseful. Considering this is a Spielberg movie, that may have been the most surprising disappointment of War Horse. After this, the horse somehow is granted miracle after miracle in a storyline that one would expect in an animated Disney movie, although I did still think it achieved some emotional impact late, as unbelievable as the circumstances may have been. That said, overall this is a movie that provides subpar acting, a wandering storyline, battle action as satisfying as an appetizer at Applebee's, and leaves little for the viewer to really enjoy. This felt like a made for TV movie that was about an hour too long in it's near pointless 2nd Act.....1.5/5

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

So was the movie supposed to glamorize Thatcher? I don't get it. Were you hoping for something resembling the Sarah Palin documentary?

I think we've lost the thread of the original argument...

 

[jdoggydogg]

The Artist

I was hesitant to see this, as it seemed kind of gimmicky and I am a big fan of dialogue. But I thought if I was going to see it, I should go ahead and do so in a theater, as a silent movie would have a much smaller chance of pleasing me and holding my attention on a TV.

It was good/solid, but my reservations were justified.It jsut didn't work for me much less enamor me like many reviewers who seemed to fall under its spell. I'm glad they loved it and its the type of innovative cinema I like to see produced, but it left me kind of ho-hum.

3/5 stars, more out of respect than enjoyment

The feeling I get from the couple reviews I've seen on it is that it is a cutesy movie that brings up people's nostalgia for classic movies, but doesn't bring anything different to the table. In other words, the exact type of movie that pulls on the Academy's heartstrings. From the trailers I've seen I fully expect this and Warhorse to battle it out for the Oscar this year.

Despite checking this thread pretty much daily, Ive gotten lazy with my reviews and havent done one in maybe 2 months. I'll try to catch up, but I did see War Horse so...War Horse....So a Spielberg-directed film set in WWI Europe has got to be good, right? Wrong. If you are a 10-14 year old boy you will probably love this movie, if not, there are very few reasons I could recommend seeing it. It starts out slow about a struggling family trying to keep their farm, alongside headscratching actions and over the top dialogue, that is only saved by some nice acting from Peter Mullan. In retrospect, this was probably the strongest portion of the film somehow. After this half hour or so start where the bond between horse and boy is formed, the war starts and the horse is sold to a British Army officer and from there, it is basically about the horse bouncing around Europe during the war from pseudo-owner to the next. The horse is never in one place long enough to provide any connection to the human characters, and that felt like a blatant error to me and made it hard to stay interested in the movie. The middle 60-90 minutes is somehow just as slow as the beginning, except with no character development, and surprisingly little action. When the battle scenes did come late, I found them frantic, poorly shot, and not all that suspenseful. Considering this is a Spielberg movie, that may have been the most surprising disappointment of War Horse. After this, the horse somehow is granted miracle after miracle in a storyline that one would expect in an animated Disney movie, although I did still think it achieved some emotional impact late, as unbelievable as the circumstances may have been. That said, overall this is a movie that provides subpar acting, a wandering storyline, battle action as satisfying as an appetizer at Applebee's, and leaves little for the viewer to really enjoy. This felt like a made for TV movie that was about an hour too long in it's near pointless 2nd Act.....1.5/5

This movie looks like absolute ####.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

So was the movie supposed to glamorize Thatcher? I don't get it. Were you hoping for something resembling the Sarah Palin documentary?

I think we've lost the thread of the original argument...

Was it you that said Streep wouldn't have taken on the role if it painted Thatcher in a more positive light?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

That's a pretty good review of War Horse. I wanted to like it much more than I did and the two 12 year old boys that I took to it liked it a lot.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

So was the movie supposed to glamorize Thatcher? I don't get it. Were you hoping for something resembling the Sarah Palin documentary?

I think we've lost the thread of the original argument...

Was it you that said Streep wouldn't have taken on the role if it painted Thatcher in a more positive light?

Piggybacking on the idea that the movie apparently spends more time on her latter dementia filled life than her earlier conservative victory portion, yes.

 

[Statorama]

A movie that's worth a look when it comes to DVD is "Young Adult" with Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt. Some of the most uncomfortable social scenes ever put on celluloid bookended by two of the strongest performances of the year. Theron's performance was darker and more real than her oscar winning "Monster" turn, but this film might be way too black of a comedy to get her any hardware.

I haven't seen a movie like it before or since. I would warn you that if social discomfort makes you squeamish, this is the 'Human Centipede' of social discomfort.

 

[Statorama]

Watched 'The Iron Lady' and if you want to picture Margaret Thatcher as a bucktoothed idiot this is the movie for you. An extraordinary amount of time in the movie is spent watching Thatcher spiral into dementia in her later years, which will delight it's target audience of Thatcher haters. After seeing this, I have no doubt it will be followed by Tom Hanks riffing on an alzheimers riddled Ronald Reagan.

Liberal Thatcher-hater here. If you had time to peruse my review posted above, rather than project my thoughts, you would have found I had the same issues with the movie you did. I would much preferred to have seen more of what she actually did while in office than any of the old age stuff.

I didn't even read yours, but I will. I just got the feeling while watching it that it was Thatcher-hate pron.

All you really need to know about the movie is in the choice of actress to play her, isn't it.?Kind of like how I know how "The Reagans" would be because James Brolin plays The Gipper.

When I saw Sean Penn attached to that Valerie Plame movie I knew I didn't have to waste my time watching it.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Did y'all watch the Streep interview on 60 Minutes? She seemed to have great admiration for Thatcher.

For what she accomplished as a woman.

So was the movie supposed to glamorize Thatcher? I don't get it. Were you hoping for something resembling the Sarah Palin documentary?

I think we've lost the thread of the original argument...

Was it you that said Streep wouldn't have taken on the role if it painted Thatcher in a more positive light?

Piggybacking on the idea that the movie apparently spends more time on her latter dementia filled life than her earlier conservative victory portion, yes.

But you really think that Streep doesn't take on the role unless it makes Thatcher look bad? That's kind of crass.

 

[jdoggydogg]

A movie that's worth a look when it comes to DVD is "Young Adult" with Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt. Some of the most uncomfortable social scenes ever put on celluloid bookended by two of the strongest performances of the year. Theron's performance was darker and more real than her oscar winning "Monster" turn, but this film might be way too black of a comedy to get her any hardware.I haven't seen a movie like it before or since. I would warn you that if social discomfort makes you squeamish, this is the 'Human Centipede' of social discomfort.

Really looking forward to seeing this movie, but none of my friends will see it with me

 

[cosjobs]

A movie that's worth a look when it comes to DVD is "Young Adult" with Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt. Some of the most uncomfortable social scenes ever put on celluloid bookended by two of the strongest performances of the year. Theron's performance was darker and more real than her oscar winning "Monster" turn, but this film might be way too black of a comedy to get her any hardware.I haven't seen a movie like it before or since. I would warn you that if social discomfort makes you squeamish, this is the 'Human Centipede' of social discomfort.

I've been trying to see this for a couple of weeks now. Maybe tomorrow. It sounds good to me.

 

[cosjobs]

Stat and Andy seem to be the ultimate love the game hate the players moviegoers.

Seriously, some of their projections onto films and their actors are cinemascopic.

Do you guys realize that even though we are complete political opposites, I still read your posts and value what you have to say?

 

[jdoggydogg]

Stat and Andy seem to be the ultimate love the game hate the players moviegoers.Seriously, some of their projections onto films and their actors are cinemascopic.Do you guys realize that even though we are complete political opposites, I still read your posts and value what you have to say?

With artists, I really don't care about their politics. There are too few movies worth seeing. Even with Mel Gibson - an antisemitic misogynist - I'll totally still see his movies.So I don't really care what Streep thinks about Thatcher. The movie's good, or it isn't.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I wouldnt have expected Margaret Thatcher to drum up such a long debate in here

 

[KarmaPolice]

No it wasn't. It was fun.

while i happened to enjoy myself while seeing this film, i can see where some would be put off by it. i think if a person is annoyed by the ritchie gimmickry, for example, then it could be less fun. i think there is also some formula that posits the delight that one has in this film is likely in direct proportion to one's affection for RDJr. if you like him then you'll probably enjoy this or any of the "iron man" films. finally, if you're s holmes loyalist - in any way, shape or form - then i could see where this could make you dislike the film.

I think he is fantastic. Really enjoyed both Iron Man flicks. Maybe it is my growing dislike for non-CGI action movies.

That last line does not compute. I will never understand how people can tolerate movies looking like video games. Nothing takes me out of a movie faster or takes the "magic" out of a movie for me quicker than obvious cgi.

I'd rather watched some crazy looking robots battle it out then watch Jason Statham get punched in the head 100 times but shake it off and kill someone. If I'm going to suspend disbelief I'd prefer it to at least look pretty awesome. Don't get me wrong, something like Ong Bak >>>> CGI but those are few and far between.

That's cool. I just don't think much CGI looks awesome, and it's a main reason I usually stay clear of action movies. I think the peak of action movies and how I prefer them to look would be in the early 90s when the technology was coming into it's own, but it was still about practical effects when you could and sprinkle in the CGI. Look no further than Jurassic Park and T2. I still sit and watch those movies and wonder how they pulled off some of those scenes. Then came stuff like The Matrix that set the tone for action movies yet to come. Now there is no mystery to it at all - it's a team of geeks at computers making most of the movie. I realize it streamlines the process and is more cost effective, but now the talent is shifted from the director, cinematographer, etc.. and into the computer lab. Don't like that at all. Also the acting suffers because instead of reacting to practical effects and explosions they are acting at a screen. Long story short - get off my lawn !!!

 

[KarmaPolice]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

I would too. I think New World is my least favorite of Malick's work that I have seen. Don't think I would watch it again, but I loved Days of Heaven and Tree of Life. Still have to pop in Thin Red Line.

 

[Chaka]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

Cool but how does DoH compare to A Thin Red Line in your opinion? Badlands?

 

[Chaka]

No it wasn't. It was fun.

while i happened to enjoy myself while seeing this film, i can see where some would be put off by it. i think if a person is annoyed by the ritchie gimmickry, for example, then it could be less fun. i think there is also some formula that posits the delight that one has in this film is likely in direct proportion to one's affection for RDJr. if you like him then you'll probably enjoy this or any of the "iron man" films. finally, if you're s holmes loyalist - in any way, shape or form - then i could see where this could make you dislike the film.

I think he is fantastic. Really enjoyed both Iron Man flicks. Maybe it is my growing dislike for non-CGI action movies.

That last line does not compute. I will never understand how people can tolerate movies looking like video games. Nothing takes me out of a movie faster or takes the "magic" out of a movie for me quicker than obvious cgi.

Yeah, I'm with you. I've watched around two...just two...CGI action movies where I can literally recall forgetting it was fake: Legend of the Guardians and Avatar. Most of the time, CGI just feels extra fake to me.

Except for the beginning where Caesar was swinging through the house, I pretty much forgot during Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

Cool but how does DoH compare to A Thin Red Line in your opinion? Badlands?

You know, years ago, long before I understood Malick's aesthetic, I watched 10 minutes of Thin Red Line and turned it off. Obviously, I intend to give it a fair shot soon. I haven't seen Badlands.

 

[jdoggydogg]

No it wasn't. It was fun.

while i happened to enjoy myself while seeing this film, i can see where some would be put off by it. i think if a person is annoyed by the ritchie gimmickry, for example, then it could be less fun. i think there is also some formula that posits the delight that one has in this film is likely in direct proportion to one's affection for RDJr. if you like him then you'll probably enjoy this or any of the "iron man" films. finally, if you're s holmes loyalist - in any way, shape or form - then i could see where this could make you dislike the film.

I think he is fantastic. Really enjoyed both Iron Man flicks. Maybe it is my growing dislike for non-CGI action movies.

That last line does not compute. I will never understand how people can tolerate movies looking like video games. Nothing takes me out of a movie faster or takes the "magic" out of a movie for me quicker than obvious cgi.

Yeah, I'm with you. I've watched around two...just two...CGI action movies where I can literally recall forgetting it was fake: Legend of the Guardians and Avatar. Most of the time, CGI just feels extra fake to me.

Except for the beginning where Caesar was swinging through the house, I pretty much forgot during Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Certainly. And we could probably come up with more examples. Boardwalk Empire has some seamless CGI.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Just for the heck of it...

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Films of 2011:

1. "Midnight In Paris"

2. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes"

3. "Moneyball"

4. "The Skin I Live In"

5. "X-Men: First Class"

6. "Young Adult"

7. "Attack The Block"

8. "Red State"

9. "Warrior"

10. "The Artist" / "Our Idiot Brother" (tie)

11. "The Three Musketeers"

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

Cool but how does DoH compare to A Thin Red Line in your opinion? Badlands?

Excuse me for butting in but you seem to be asking for more opinions on Days of Heaven.I like Days of Heaven much better than The This Red Line. It had a great story and photography and the Thin Red Line starts out that way but goes on way too long and just gets dull with too much voice over.

 

[Chaka]

Days of Heaven - I definitely get the love for this film. It is quite simply beautiful to look at. The story is told with an economy of dialogue, an abundance of wonderful imagery and a running narration that doesn't so much speak to what is happening on the screen but is used to flesh out the characters so we can better understand who they are.

This is only my third Malick film, I still need to see The New World and Tree of Life, but I put Days of Heaven and Badlands far above The Thin Red Line.

I'd rank Tree Of Life and The New World easily above Days of Heaven, but Saintfool would disagree with me.

Cool but how does DoH compare to A Thin Red Line in your opinion? Badlands?

Excuse me for butting in but you seem to be asking for more opinions on Days of Heaven.I like Days of Heaven much better than The This Red Line. It had a great story and photography and the Thin Red Line starts out that way but goes on way too long and just gets dull with too much voice over.

Not butting in at all. That is my feeling as well. TRL just seems to meander and try very hard to make a profound statement but I never understood what that statement was.IMDB trivia says Malick threw out the script for DoH very early during production and kept the actors working for a year believing that the story would eventually reveal itself and, IMO, he was right. I heard from a producer friend of mine that during the editing of TRL Malick decided to almost entirely change the focus of the movie from John Cusak (or was it Brody?) to James Cavizel. IMO this didn't work...or perhaps it did but we'll never know.

 

[cosjobs]

Just for the heck of it...

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Films of 2011:

1. "Midnight In Paris"

2. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes"

3. "Moneyball"

4. "The Skin I Live In"

5. "X-Men: First Class"

6. "Young Adult"

7. "Attack The Block"

8. "Red State"

9. "Warrior"

10. "The Artist" / "Our Idiot Brother" (tie)

11. "The Three Musketeers"

Really? So you're saying he hasn't seen The Adjustment Bureau yet?

 

[Kenny Powers]

Just for the heck of it...

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Films of 2011:

1. "Midnight In Paris"

2. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes"

3. "Moneyball"

4. "The Skin I Live In"

5. "X-Men: First Class"

6. "Young Adult"

7. "Attack The Block"

8. "Red State"

9. "Warrior"

10. "The Artist" / "Our Idiot Brother" (tie)

11. "The Three Musketeers"

Really? So you're saying he hasn't seen The Adjustment Bureau yet?

You mean AdBur?

 

[jdoggydogg]

Just for the heck of it...

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Films of 2011:

1. "Midnight In Paris"

2. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes"

3. "Moneyball"

4. "The Skin I Live In"

5. "X-Men: First Class"

6. "Young Adult"

7. "Attack The Block"

8. "Red State"

9. "Warrior"

10. "The Artist" / "Our Idiot Brother" (tie)

11. "The Three Musketeers"

Really? So you're saying he hasn't seen The Adjustment Bureau yet?

I don't get it

 

[cstu]

Just for the heck of it...

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Films of 2011:

1. "Midnight In Paris"

2. "Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes"

3. "Moneyball"

4. "The Skin I Live In"

5. "X-Men: First Class"

6. "Young Adult"

7. "Attack The Block"

8. "Red State"

9. "Warrior"

10. "The Artist" / "Our Idiot Brother" (tie)

11. "The Three Musketeers"

Great schtick.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

The first Sherlock movie is much better than this new one.

The latter took forever to get going, seemed to have several superfluous scenes, and didn't have much of a payoff.

I can't help but compare both movies to the various BBC iterations, and the movies pale in comparison.

The Jeremy Brett series is the gold standard for me.

 

[JZilla]

The Descendants - Howbout we just give Clooney the Best Actor Oscar he so desperately desires so he'll stop making end-of-the-year inner dissonance movies where he's charming in service to the life process. And they should change the "y" to an "i" in the director's name anymore. My dad - family occasions being the only thing that gets me in movie theaters anymore - nailed it: "Why did i just pay ten bucks to go to a wake for a stranger?!".

This is the best movie of the year? I don't get it. Slow, tense, depressing. Clooney's character was good, the rest were pretty standard, and I did not feel the side story of the family money and land was all that realistic. Agree with pissah on most points above.Then again, have I seen a better movie this year? I don't even know.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

But you really think that Streep doesn't take on the role unless it makes Thatcher look bad? That's kind of crass.

That's not what I said. I said that she likely would have declined the role if it would have spent more time making Thatcher look like a hero. There's a big difference.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Stat and Andy seem to be the ultimate love the game hate the players moviegoers.Seriously, some of their projections onto films and their actors are cinemascopic.Do you guys realize that even though we are complete political opposites, I still read your posts and value what you have to say?

With artists, I really don't care about their politics. There are too few movies worth seeing. Even with Mel Gibson - an antisemitic misogynist - I'll totally still see his movies.So I don't really care what Streep thinks about Thatcher. The movie's good, or it isn't.

That's all well and good unless it comes to biopics where the politics of the actor bleed into the role and give you a skewed view of the subject matter.

 

[jdoggydogg]

The first Sherlock movie is much better than this new one.

The latter took forever to get going, seemed to have several superfluous scenes, and didn't have much of a payoff.

I can't help but compare both movies to the various BBC iterations, and the movies pale in comparison.

The Jeremy Brett series is the gold standard for me.

Exactly. I'm a fan of the modern version, but Brett's Holmes is the best Holmes by a wide margin.

 

[beer 30]

This has AWESOME written all over it

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

 

[jdoggydogg]

This has AWESOME written all over it

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

I can't post it here because it's rated R, but Google the trailer for FDR: American Badass!

 

[Chaka]

This has AWESOME written all over it

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

I can't post it here because it's rated R, but Google the trailer for FDR: American Badass!

What the hell was that?

 

[jdoggydogg]

BBC ‘Sherlock’ Confirmed For Third Season

 

[jdoggydogg]

This has AWESOME written all over it

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

I can't post it here because it's rated R, but Google the trailer for FDR: American Badass!

What the hell was that?

1,000 tons of awesome.

 

[Apple Jack]

The Descendants - Howbout we just give Clooney the Best Actor Oscar he so desperately desires so he'll stop making end-of-the-year inner dissonance movies where he's charming in service to the life process. And they should change the "y" to an "i" in the director's name anymore. My dad - family occasions being the only thing that gets me in movie theaters anymore - nailed it: "Why did i just pay ten bucks to go to a wake for a stranger?!".

This is the best movie of the year? I don't get it. Slow, tense, depressing. Clooney's character was good, the rest were pretty standard, and I did not feel the side story of the family money and land was all that realistic. Agree with pissah on most points above.Then again, have I seen a better movie this year? I don't even know.

This kind of conversation has followed just about every Alexander Payne film.

 

[Chaka]

BBC 'Sherlock' Confirmed For Third Season

Good news. I had not realized that season two had been released.

 

[JZilla]

The Descendants - Howbout we just give Clooney the Best Actor Oscar he so desperately desires so he'll stop making end-of-the-year inner dissonance movies where he's charming in service to the life process. And they should change the "y" to an "i" in the director's name anymore. My dad - family occasions being the only thing that gets me in movie theaters anymore - nailed it: "Why did i just pay ten bucks to go to a wake for a stranger?!".

This is the best movie of the year? I don't get it. Slow, tense, depressing. Clooney's character was good, the rest were pretty standard, and I did not feel the side story of the family money and land was all that realistic. Agree with pissah on most points above.Then again, have I seen a better movie this year? I don't even know.

This kind of conversation has followed just about every Alexander Payne film.

Guess that makes him as predictable as he is overrated