cosjobs
Footballguy
no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
Twelve minutes in and I'm pretty sure I lost a coupel I.Q. points already.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
But doggone it, that's a good horse.'Chaka said:Twelve minutes in and I'm pretty sure I lost a coupel I.Q. points already.'cosjobs said:no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.'Chaka said:Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture. ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.'cosjobs said:no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.'Chaka said:Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?

Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.'cosjobs said:no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.'Chaka said:Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
It's been a long time since I saw Chicago but I don't remember hating it.Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.'cosjobs said:no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.'Chaka said:Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
It's the weakest film in recent history to win Best Picture.Weaker than Crash, Out Of Africa, etc.It's been a long time since I saw Chicago but I don't remember hating it.Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.'cosjobs said:no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.'Chaka said:Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
Did you not hate it enough to find it worthy of a best picture nomination?It's been a long time since I saw Chicago but I don't remember hating it.Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
I don't remember it well enough to comment. I saw it in theaters with my Colombian girlfriend and was a little distracted IIRC.I would have a hard time believing that it is better than Gangs of New York, The Pianist (even though I despise Polanski as a person I recognize his genius) or even The Two Towers (never saw The Hours) because I think those were all excellent films. But that doesn't mean that Chicago was a bad film.Did you not hate it enough to find it worthy of a best picture nomination?It's been a long time since I saw Chicago but I don't remember hating it.Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
You should - saw it again recently for the 1st time since its 1st run & there may not be a better-acted movie EVER. And, if one tempers one's outlook to what may be expected of an adaptation of Mrs. Dalloway, a fine film all around.My sentiments on Chicago are well known by now (and possibly the source of the observation?).I don't remember it well enough to comment. I saw it in theaters with my Colombian girlfriend and was a little distracted IIRC.I would have a hard time believing that it is better than Gangs of New York, The Pianist (even though I despise Polanski as a person I recognize his genius) or even The Two Towers (never saw The Hours) because I think those were all excellent films. But that doesn't mean that Chicago was a bad film.Did you not hate it enough to find it worthy of a best picture nomination?It's been a long time since I saw Chicago but I don't remember hating it.Dude, Chicago was a best picture nominee.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
I might have to watch it again.
Yeah, that one was kind of cheesy but entertaining. I think Tatum is a pretty good actor for what he is, but my favorite part of it was Terrence Howard as the street hustler. Ever since Hustle & Flow, he seems to only take the whitest black people roles out there.I just realized I was talking about a different movie called Fighting with Channing Tatum. I did see The Fighter. I liked that a lot... and yeah it wasn't cheesy to me.I don't like the 'fake' fighting the Matrix introduced. There was a recent movie called Fighter which was pretty cheesy but was enjoyable to watch for the fight scenesI liked Shoot 'em Up because it was a parody of those violent movies. I'll make an exception for any Nic Cage movie. I wouldn't mind checking out the new Ghost Rider.I love how the best film you mention in that post, and a true story nonetheless, was cheesy
Spot on. It was a weak year but even in a 10 film field, there was a lot of stuff much better than it. I havent seen much from 2011 yet, but Warrior and Margin Call both quickly come to mind.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture. ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?![]()
Agree with your assessment of Tatum and the guy from Hustle & Flow. Both were pretty good in that movie.Yeah, that one was kind of cheesy but entertaining. I think Tatum is a pretty good actor for what he is, but my favorite part of it was Terrence Howard as the street hustler. Ever since Hustle & Flow, he seems to only take the whitest black people roles out there.I just realized I was talking about a different movie called Fighting with Channing Tatum. I did see The Fighter. I liked that a lot... and yeah it wasn't cheesy to me.I don't like the 'fake' fighting the Matrix introduced. There was a recent movie called Fighter which was pretty cheesy but was enjoyable to watch for the fight scenesI liked Shoot 'em Up because it was a parody of those violent movies. I'll make an exception for any Nic Cage movie. I wouldn't mind checking out the new Ghost Rider.I love how the best film you mention in that post, and a true story nonetheless, was cheesy
I'm a little hesitant about War Horse. Based on what I've read in this thread it sounds like it might be even too much for me to take. Your probably right tho... haha.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture. ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?![]()
Martha Marcy May Marlene was criminally overlooked across the board.Spot on. It was a weak year but even in a 10 film field, there was a lot of stuff much better than it. I havent seen much from 2011 yet, but Warrior and Margin Call both quickly come to mind.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.![]()
Young Adult
Just the kind of movie I like: dark and honest. Thumbs up.

Yeah, I watch another episode of Men of a Certain Age, and I don't get how you think these are bad people. I think people idealize their own behavior and actions to the point where it's easier to judge what they believe is bad behavior. These are not bad men.I believe I've only watched 1 episode of MofCA, and part of another episode. In the episode I saw, Joe lost a ton of money due to gambling. Because of this loss he had to fire someone at his store. I don't remember exactly how it happened, but I remember the firing going very poorly. This tells me that the guy's gambling, something that is illegal, put his and his family's welfare at risk, and put an employee on the street... and he was a poor manager when he handled it. I also seem to recall him being a poor father, missing his kids events or something like that.In this same episode the guy that is trying to be an actor was invited by some of his 'friends' to work on a tv or movie. He was all excited, made notes on the script, went to hang with them... and they basically laughed at him and treated him like crap. Basically taking the attitude of... we weren't seriously going to get you involved in this project... you are just lucky that we invited you to hang out with us. He left in shame. The depiction was of a guy still trying to be an actor and desparately holding on to his youth. The fact that he normally dates women much younger then him also adds to this depiction. The fact that he doesn't have a career, and works part time selling cars makes his character seem kind of sad.I don't remember anything about the black guy but I read about the show on wiki. I remember him not getting any respect from his kids. Just beaten down by his family. He works at his dad's car dealership and his dad treats him like crap. All three of these characters just came off as sad to me. I do think they are bad people. At a minimum, due to Joe's actions, he is a bad person, and the others just lead sad lives.What I was trying to say is, I'm sure they do make some good decisions in the show... but it seems like the show focuses on the dumb / bad / sad things they do. The partial episode I saw involved Joe's character and his mom. He was at his mom's house to try and spend time with her, because he never does (another bad characteristics) and he ends up hitting her with the car? Or something bizarre like that? Am I remembering this completely wrong? I just don't see much good going on in this show.I decided to stop watching shows with violence or criminal activity. At some point I just reached my fill. And look at all the shows that have been considered huge successes over the years... The Sopranos, The Wire, Breaking Bad. They all involve some type of criminal element. The Law & Order series, the CSI series, Criminal Minds, all popular and all chock full of crime. That's specifically why I like a show like Parenthood. It's a good show and no one has to break the law to keep it entertaining.Jutz's reasoning behind why MofCA isnt good is perplexing to me, but it just sounds like a personal preference more than anything. Based on what he's saying on the decision making, kind of sounds like Californication which I think is great.As for Parenthood, I think its a really good show and totally out of my wheelhouse of what I normally watch TV series wise. Id say I typically only watch dramas that involve violence or criminal activity, so that fact the Im still watching Parenthood I think is credited to how good of a show it is. Pretty sure its the only network TV show Ive stuck with. Its got a great ensemble cast (Dax, Peter Krause, Lauren Graham, Craig T. Nelson, Michael B. Jordan, and Monica Potter and Erika Christensen never struck me as very good actresses but they do a great job with their characters here) and the kid actors are pretty strong for the most part. Im way behind on this season but the first 2 seasons were very good.I don't think that any of the lead characters in Men are bad people. I think they are human.Sure, I'll give Parenthood a shot.
Cancelled after two seasons. With a show like this, that was inevitable. I'm watching season 1.I thought men of a certain age was cancelled.
At a certain age, all men are canceledI thought men of a certain age was cancelled.
The inevitable march towards non-existence.At a certain age, all men are canceledI thought men of a certain age was cancelled.
Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
I thought he was forced comedy relief that he didn't pull off....however I will admit that she was good:http://www.netizenwallpapers.com/upload/DesktopWallpapers/cache/Paula-Patton-in-Mission-Impossible-4-640x960.jpgSimon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
Big fan of this movie.Get him to the Greek - liked it a lot better than I thought I would. Russel Brand is growing on me. 3.4/5
Of its type, its one of the best films out there. Not Bourne quality but very solid.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
I don't get the negative reviews for MI4. For an action flick, it delivers.Of its type, its one of the best films out there. Not Bourne quality but very solid.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
And it was definitely one of the movies worth shelling out the bucks to see in a theaterI don't get the negative reviews for MI4. For an action flick, it delivers.Of its type, its one of the best films out there. Not Bourne quality but very solid.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
Definitely. I saw in it in the theater.And it was definitely one of the movies worth shelling out the bucks to see in a theaterI don't get the negative reviews for MI4. For an action flick, it delivers.Of its type, its one of the best films out there. Not Bourne quality but very solid.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
I know pretty much everyone here had positive things to say about it, but I havent seen it yet. Definitely on the list.'Chaka said:Martha Marcy May Marlene was criminally overlooked across the board.'Kenny Powers said:Spot on. It was a weak year but even in a 10 film field, there was a lot of stuff much better than it. I havent seen much from 2011 yet, but Warrior and Margin Call both quickly come to mind.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.![]()
Havent seen 4, but I think the first 1 is definitely the best of the series.Without even seeing 4, I can tell the last 3 are/were more action flicks while the 1st was more mystery-thriller. I guess it depends on preference of genre among other things, but Ill go with the first one every time in this particular series.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
'Chaka said:Martha Marcy May Marlene was criminally overlooked across the board.'Kenny Powers said:Spot on. It was a weak year but even in a 10 film field, there was a lot of stuff much better than it. I havent seen much from 2011 yet, but Warrior and Margin Call both quickly come to mind.I was honestly expecting to enjoy this film. I was expecting to come in here and defend the positive traits that I figured must have been overlooked by others. I don't think I can do that.I found it to be obvious, uninspiring, not very well acted, nonsensical at times, overscored and overshot. Even with all the warnings I found it to be a disappointing effort and am shocked it was nominated for best picture.no. its self-important and plodding, but not life threatening. Set your expectations for two stars and they will be exceeded.Just sitting down for War Horse. Am I going to die?
ETA: I bet Jutz is gonna love it.![]()
This combined with the fact that my 2 female employees hated it will probably make me watch it this week.'Chaka said:'jdoggydogg said:Young Adult
Just the kind of movie I like: dark and honest. Thumbs up.![]()
I don't get the negative reviews, but I don't get the praise either. It is an above average action movie, but I don't think it was better than MI3, and certainly not better than the first one. In the end I was just bored with it and think the series has dried up.I don't get the negative reviews for MI4. For an action flick, it delivers.Of its type, its one of the best films out there. Not Bourne quality but very solid.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
Good way to put it...and frames up my criticism. There were no surprises....no plot twists that I didn't see coming a mile away...in fact most of the story has been done many times, including by the franchise itself. If all I expected was action, then it would have been ok I guess. But the first one is the only one I've seen....and it was definitely more.Havent seen 4, but I think the first 1 is definitely the best of the series.Without even seeing 4, I can tell the last 3 are/were more action flicks while the 1st was more mystery-thriller. I guess it depends on preference of genre among other things, but Ill go with the first one every time in this particular series.'TexanFan02 said:The only one of those I ever liked was MI3. How does it compare to that?I liked it more than the others in the series.Simon Pegg was the only good thing about it.'gump said:MI: Ghost Protocol - wow was this terrible. Lost interest about an hour in...and I love a good popcorn action flick. Cruise and the english comedian were painful.
. 3/5I think in the end I said at a minimum Ramano's character is bad, and the other 2 are sad. So do you think Ramano's character, even though he is a gambling addict that puts his life savings, livelihood (store), and his ability to provide for his family at risk is not a bad guy? Then he fabricates a story to fire an employee caused by his gambling problem. Am I correct that he never makes time to see his mom either? Am I correct he is portrayed as a guy that often misses his kids events (baseball games I think it was)?Honestly, like I said, I only saw an episode and a half and it was a while ago. But so far you haven't refuted the examples I put forth. I mean... did he change in some positive way since that episode I saw? I'm pretty sure that was one of the first 3 episodes in season 1.And lets just say that if I had a friend around the age of 40 that was still trying to make it as an actor, while continuously having meaningless relationships with younger women, and working at a car dealership but had no career... well, I would hang with a guy like that because it sounds fun, but I would still think he leads a sad existence.Yeah, I watch another episode of Men of a Certain Age, and I don't get how you think these are bad people. I think people idealize their own behavior and actions to the point where it's easier to judge what they believe is bad behavior. These are not bad men.I believe I've only watched 1 episode of MofCA, and part of another episode. In the episode I saw, Joe lost a ton of money due to gambling. Because of this loss he had to fire someone at his store. I don't remember exactly how it happened, but I remember the firing going very poorly. This tells me that the guy's gambling, something that is illegal, put his and his family's welfare at risk, and put an employee on the street... and he was a poor manager when he handled it. I also seem to recall him being a poor father, missing his kids events or something like that.In this same episode the guy that is trying to be an actor was invited by some of his 'friends' to work on a tv or movie. He was all excited, made notes on the script, went to hang with them... and they basically laughed at him and treated him like crap. Basically taking the attitude of... we weren't seriously going to get you involved in this project... you are just lucky that we invited you to hang out with us. He left in shame. The depiction was of a guy still trying to be an actor and desparately holding on to his youth. The fact that he normally dates women much younger then him also adds to this depiction. The fact that he doesn't have a career, and works part time selling cars makes his character seem kind of sad.I don't remember anything about the black guy but I read about the show on wiki. I remember him not getting any respect from his kids. Just beaten down by his family. He works at his dad's car dealership and his dad treats him like crap. All three of these characters just came off as sad to me. I do think they are bad people. At a minimum, due to Joe's actions, he is a bad person, and the others just lead sad lives.What I was trying to say is, I'm sure they do make some good decisions in the show... but it seems like the show focuses on the dumb / bad / sad things they do. The partial episode I saw involved Joe's character and his mom. He was at his mom's house to try and spend time with her, because he never does (another bad characteristics) and he ends up hitting her with the car? Or something bizarre like that? Am I remembering this completely wrong? I just don't see much good going on in this show.I decided to stop watching shows with violence or criminal activity. At some point I just reached my fill. And look at all the shows that have been considered huge successes over the years... The Sopranos, The Wire, Breaking Bad. They all involve some type of criminal element. The Law & Order series, the CSI series, Criminal Minds, all popular and all chock full of crime. That's specifically why I like a show like Parenthood. It's a good show and no one has to break the law to keep it entertaining.Jutz's reasoning behind why MofCA isnt good is perplexing to me, but it just sounds like a personal preference more than anything. Based on what he's saying on the decision making, kind of sounds like Californication which I think is great.As for Parenthood, I think its a really good show and totally out of my wheelhouse of what I normally watch TV series wise. Id say I typically only watch dramas that involve violence or criminal activity, so that fact the Im still watching Parenthood I think is credited to how good of a show it is. Pretty sure its the only network TV show Ive stuck with. Its got a great ensemble cast (Dax, Peter Krause, Lauren Graham, Craig T. Nelson, Michael B. Jordan, and Monica Potter and Erika Christensen never struck me as very good actresses but they do a great job with their characters here) and the kid actors are pretty strong for the most part. Im way behind on this season but the first 2 seasons were very good.I don't think that any of the lead characters in Men are bad people. I think they are human.Sure, I'll give Parenthood a shot.