Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (3 Viewers)

[Kenny Powers]

Glengarry Glen Ross - 7.5/10

You know, at first I didn't think I liked it. It definitely exceeded my effenheimer quota for a movie.

Wha? Seriously? For me, whether it's a profane comedian or a profane movie, I think it all comes down to the quality of the material. A bad movie sucks with zero profanity, and a great movie isn't affected by 1,000 cuss words. People complained constantly about the swears in Deadwood, and I found that perplexing. #1, the language was 100% appropriate, and #2, while people obsessed over the cuss words they were missing out on some of the greatest dialogue ever written for the screen.

I finally saw this, and I've been surprised to find out all the mentions of profanity in this film on wiki, imdb, and in here, as I thought the dialogue from start to finish was so natural that I didn't notice anything inordinate about the profanity at all. Great, great film.

From what I recall, totally agree with that sentiment. I dont remember much profanity at all.

Then I think you were not paying attention. The f-word and its derivatives are uttered 138 times.

The s-word and its derivatives are uttered 50 times.

During the production, the actors referred to this film as "Death of a F'n' Salesman".

Well then, like I agreed, it blended in very well. Its also been a long time since Ive seen this one as well though.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Then I think you were not paying attention. The f-word and its derivatives are uttered 138 times. The s-word and its derivatives are uttered 50 times. During the production, the actors referred to this film as "Death of a F'n' Salesman".

Well then, like I agreed, it blended in very well. Its also been a long time since Ive seen this one as well though.

For sure. It fit the movie. It just hurts MY ears is all.

 

[Kenny Powers]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

 

[jdoggydogg]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

Understandable. Reminds of when, in the 70s, a minister friend & i took his youth group to a revival house to see Duck Soup & Night at the Opera. They were all, "Those jokes are so old!" and we were indignantly "Where do you think they came from?!". Surprise is a huge element of comedy and time filters that out. Fact of life. I recommend to any others who've yet to see it that they watch some Richard Pryor (co-writer & Brooks's intended Bart) standup beforehand, cuz his rhythms are all over this.

I get this logic but I can't explain why people like me appreciated (loved actually) films Duck Soup & Night at the Opera even though they were over 30 years old when I first saw them.Maybe there is a certain point in their teens when most of them have been exposed to enough things to find them familiar but not enough to realize that almost all entertainment is derivative and therefore see everything as a ripoff or copy of something else.I can watch Duck Soup today and still LMMFAO and I still LOL at more recent comedy releases like Wag the Dog, In The Loop or The Dictator. Which are all descendents in the Duck Soup family tree. Don't see why others have trouble with that.

The Marx Brothers will always be funny to me

 

[jdoggydogg]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

When I watch Breaking Bad, Cranston's so good, I can barely see the acting. In Drive, I can see it in every word.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Then I think you were not paying attention. The f-word and its derivatives are uttered 138 times. The s-word and its derivatives are uttered 50 times. During the production, the actors referred to this film as "Death of a F'n' Salesman".

Well then, like I agreed, it blended in very well. Its also been a long time since Ive seen this one as well though.

For sure. It fit the movie. It just hurts MY ears is all.

I saw it 2 days ago and I don't even remember the profanity.

 

[cosjobs]

Contraband.Insultingly bad. Nothing worse then lazy storytelling. Was hoping for a decent popcorn flick like Shooter.

Shooter is Predator compared to Contraband.

I liked Shooter and Contraband (barely) better than Predator.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

I see you got a lot of abuse for this but I kind of agree in that I rarely laughed in Blazing Saddles, too slapstick for my tastes as well. As far as "classic comedies" go, I found Airplane! and Caddyshack to still be very funny even today, Blazing Saddles not so much.

The 'abuse' was completely expected and pretty standard for disagreeing with the consensus in this thread. Agree with Airplane! and Caddyshack. Just watched Caddyshack for 192nd time (give or take) last weekend and still laughed.

I think there's a heavy nostalgia factor going on. I watched Caddyshack a year or so ago and thought it was awful. I love a lot of the actors in the move, but the movie itself was painful to sit through. I'm also not wild about Blazing Saddles. I get WHY they're both funny and people enjoy them. I just don't like them or find them funny. Love Airplane!. Also don't care for Spaceballs. Love Brooks' Young Frankenstein, The Producers, High Anxiety, and Robin Hood. Silent Movie is a bit fuzzy.

 

[Kenny Powers]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

When I watch Breaking Bad, Cranston's so good, I can barely see the acting. In Drive, I can see it in every word.

Before you even replied, I was going to say I think Breaking Bad is impacting how you and others felt about Cranston in Drive. When you love a character/actor (especially in a long running TV series), youre always interested to see what he/she does with their newest role. I havent started BB yet, so none of that crossed my mind. From what I can surmise, in BB (once he establishes himself) he's a bad MFer that dont take no #### from no one, its his way or the highway, and can make as much money as he pretty much desires within reason of his trade. In Drive, he's a mechanic who's in debt, still searching for that "in" to make big money, never sure where he's going or what he's onto next. Pretty polar opposite characters. I understand what youre saying in the 2nd sentence of your post and can see that, but his character's personality in Drive was so hyperactive, meandering and devoid of self-awareness - which is exactly what he conveyed for me. That said, I have no doubts he's markedly better in BB.

 

[Chaka]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

When I watch Breaking Bad, Cranston's so good, I can barely see the acting. In Drive, I can see it in every word.

I really had no problem with him in Drive. Is it possible that you were distracted by not seeing Walter White?I think he shows solid range as an actor.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

When I watch Breaking Bad, Cranston's so good, I can barely see the acting. In Drive, I can see it in every word.

I really had no problem with him in Drive. Is it possible that you were distracted by not seeing Walter White?I think he shows solid range as an actor.

I don't get the issues with him in Drive at all.

 

[Chaka]

O Brother, Where Art Thou? - I first saw it when it came out and I was horribly disappointed. At the time I felt that the Coen brothers were trying too hard to be quirky and create lines that would become part of the pop culture lexicon. It felt forced unlike Raising Arizona which just seemed to be naturally quirky.

Upon rewatching I definitely enjoyed it more as an entertaining, funny movie with great music. However my underlying complaint still stands. It still felt forced but this time at least it was forgivable.

On another note I think this film represents the most range I have seen from Clooney in his career. He was pretty solid.

 

[Chaka]

Everything Must Go - Good film about an alcoholic who comes home to find himself locked out of his house and all of his possessions on the front lawn. He spends the next week living in his front yard and coming to grips with his life.

I wish Will Ferrell would take on more of these type of roles. I am not sure how much range he actually has but between this and Stranger Than Fiction the guy has shown some potential as a dramatic actor.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

O Brother, Where Art Thou? - I first saw it when it came out and I was horribly disappointed. At the time I felt that the Coen brothers were trying too hard to be quirky and create lines that would become part of the pop culture lexicon. It felt forced unlike Raising Arizona which just seemed to be naturally quirky.

Upon rewatching I definitely enjoyed it more as an entertaining, funny movie with great music. However my underlying complaint still stands. It still felt forced but this time at least it was forgivable.

On another note I think this film represents the most range I have seen from Clooney in his career. He was pretty solid.

I didn't have that reaction to O Brother Where Art Though, but I did with their latest movie. The whole thing just felt forced. I didn't even finish it, and it's the only one of theirs that I felt that way on.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Contraband.

Insultingly bad. Nothing worse then lazy storytelling. Was hoping for a decent popcorn flick like Shooter.

Shooter is Predator compared to Contraband.

I liked Shooter and Contraband (barely) better than Predator.

 

[jdoggydogg]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

I see you got a lot of abuse for this but I kind of agree in that I rarely laughed in Blazing Saddles, too slapstick for my tastes as well. As far as "classic comedies" go, I found Airplane! and Caddyshack to still be very funny even today, Blazing Saddles not so much.

The 'abuse' was completely expected and pretty standard for disagreeing with the consensus in this thread. Agree with Airplane! and Caddyshack. Just watched Caddyshack for 192nd time (give or take) last weekend and still laughed.

I think there's a heavy nostalgia factor going on. I watched Caddyshack a year or so ago and thought it was awful. I love a lot of the actors in the move, but the movie itself was painful to sit through. I'm also not wild about Blazing Saddles. I get WHY they're both funny and people enjoy them. I just don't like them or find them funny. Love Airplane!. Also don't care for Spaceballs. Love Brooks' Young Frankenstein, The Producers, High Anxiety, and Robin Hood. Silent Movie is a bit fuzzy.

Caddy shack was hilarious when I was 10. Now? The only thing that makes me laugh in that movie is Rodney Dangerfield.

 

[jdoggydogg]

caught "drive" the other night. meh. not a bad film by any stretch but the plot/script was kind of a mess. i appreciate the nod to the late 70's-early 80's style panache. it wasn't entirely aping but it didn't add much to the film. the film still felt a little hollow.

Yes. I know this movie is a darling of the the critics. But I can't get past the fact that the director didn't really help his actors here. Especially Cranston. In Breaking Bad gives a performance that rivals practically any good film role. In Drive, he sounds like a first time actor. That does not reflect well on the director.

be fair: the script wasn't doing anyone any favors. i was really surprised that albert brooks got an oscar nomination for that role, for example. perlman is a hammy actor to begin with but,in a role so underwritten, he's forced to chew scenery to make an impression. gosling did the smart thing and kept cool mostly. cranston was just a poor choice for the role. i could see him killing in the role that brooks had. i say all this while freely admitting how much i really adore Albert.

I see what youre saying, but I loved the film anyway. I think Brooks got more accolades than usual/anticipated for this because it was such a surprising role for him. He's never even an antagonist, let alone a ruthless, moneygrubbing mobster who cares about no one but himself and kills even acquaintances with no regard for life. I thought he was very good, but not Oscar worthy.

Not directing this at you, but Ive heard numerous people say it in threads here (including this series of quotes) about Cranston. I didnt have a problem at all with him. He did quite well with how his character was intended to come across I thought.

Cranston's far too eager in Drive. I blame the director for that. It's like they were going after a cheesy 1950s character actor.

Wasnt his character supposed to be eager?

When I watch Breaking Bad, Cranston's so good, I can barely see the acting. In Drive, I can see it in every word.

I really had no problem with him in Drive. Is it possible that you were distracted by not seeing Walter White?I think he shows solid range as an actor.

To respond to what you and Kenny said:I like Cranston. A lot. I'm not looking for Walter White in Ddrive. I don't like how the actors were directed in Drive.

 

[Worm]

La Casa Muda (The Silent House, original version)

snip

No one else has seen this?eta - Muda not Muba

 

[Kenny Powers]

O Brother, Where Art Thou? - I first saw it when it came out and I was horribly disappointed. At the time I felt that the Coen brothers were trying too hard to be quirky and create lines that would become part of the pop culture lexicon. It felt forced unlike Raising Arizona which just seemed to be naturally quirky.

Upon rewatching I definitely enjoyed it more as an entertaining, funny movie with great music. However my underlying complaint still stands. It still felt forced but this time at least it was forgivable.

On another note I think this film represents the most range I have seen from Clooney in his career. He was pretty solid.

I vote Batman & Robin

 

[SmoovySmoov]

La Casa Muda (The Silent House, original version)

snip

No one else has seen this?eta - Muda not Muba

I made myself a note to check it out.

 

[Chaka]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

I see you got a lot of abuse for this but I kind of agree in that I rarely laughed in Blazing Saddles, too slapstick for my tastes as well. As far as "classic comedies" go, I found Airplane! and Caddyshack to still be very funny even today, Blazing Saddles not so much.

The 'abuse' was completely expected and pretty standard for disagreeing with the consensus in this thread. Agree with Airplane! and Caddyshack. Just watched Caddyshack for 192nd time (give or take) last weekend and still laughed.

I think there's a heavy nostalgia factor going on. I watched Caddyshack a year or so ago and thought it was awful. I love a lot of the actors in the move, but the movie itself was painful to sit through. I'm also not wild about Blazing Saddles. I get WHY they're both funny and people enjoy them. I just don't like them or find them funny. Love Airplane!. Also don't care for Spaceballs. Love Brooks' Young Frankenstein, The Producers, High Anxiety, and Robin Hood. Silent Movie is a bit fuzzy.

Caddy shack was hilarious when I was 10. Now? The only thing that makes me laugh in that movie is Rodney Dangerfield.

I think the only one not worth watching is Noonan. Dangerfield, Murray, Knight and Chevy are all still hysterical.

 

[Chaka]

Contraband.

Insultingly bad. Nothing worse then lazy storytelling. Was hoping for a decent popcorn flick like Shooter.

Shooter is Predator compared to Contraband.

I liked Shooter and Contraband (barely) better than Predator.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

I see you got a lot of abuse for this but I kind of agree in that I rarely laughed in Blazing Saddles, too slapstick for my tastes as well. As far as "classic comedies" go, I found Airplane! and Caddyshack to still be very funny even today, Blazing Saddles not so much.

The 'abuse' was completely expected and pretty standard for disagreeing with the consensus in this thread. Agree with Airplane! and Caddyshack. Just watched Caddyshack for 192nd time (give or take) last weekend and still laughed.

I think there's a heavy nostalgia factor going on. I watched Caddyshack a year or so ago and thought it was awful. I love a lot of the actors in the move, but the movie itself was painful to sit through. I'm also not wild about Blazing Saddles. I get WHY they're both funny and people enjoy them. I just don't like them or find them funny. Love Airplane!. Also don't care for Spaceballs. Love Brooks' Young Frankenstein, The Producers, High Anxiety, and Robin Hood. Silent Movie is a bit fuzzy.

Caddy shack was hilarious when I was 10. Now? The only thing that makes me laugh in that movie is Rodney Dangerfield.

I think the only one not worth watching is Noonan. Dangerfield, Murray, Knight and Chevy are all still hysterical.

WELL, TANKS FER NUTIN!!!

 

[Chaka]

So I tried watching Blazing Saddles the other day. Heard that it is one of the best comedies ever . Turned it off after a half hour when I realized it was on par with Epic Movie or Not Another Teen Movie.

I see you got a lot of abuse for this but I kind of agree in that I rarely laughed in Blazing Saddles, too slapstick for my tastes as well. As far as "classic comedies" go, I found Airplane! and Caddyshack to still be very funny even today, Blazing Saddles not so much.

The 'abuse' was completely expected and pretty standard for disagreeing with the consensus in this thread. Agree with Airplane! and Caddyshack. Just watched Caddyshack for 192nd time (give or take) last weekend and still laughed.

I think there's a heavy nostalgia factor going on. I watched Caddyshack a year or so ago and thought it was awful. I love a lot of the actors in the move, but the movie itself was painful to sit through. I'm also not wild about Blazing Saddles. I get WHY they're both funny and people enjoy them. I just don't like them or find them funny. Love Airplane!. Also don't care for Spaceballs. Love Brooks' Young Frankenstein, The Producers, High Anxiety, and Robin Hood. Silent Movie is a bit fuzzy.

Caddy shack was hilarious when I was 10. Now? The only thing that makes me laugh in that movie is Rodney Dangerfield.

I think the only one not worth watching is Noonan. Dangerfield, Murray, Knight and Chevy are all still hysterical.

WELL, TANKS FER NUTIN!!!

Sorry. If it makes you feel any better I don't stop the tape for Lacey Underall either.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Contraband.

Insultingly bad. Nothing worse then lazy storytelling. Was hoping for a decent popcorn flick like Shooter.

Shooter is Predator compared to Contraband.

I liked Shooter and Contraband (barely) better than Predator.

When people disagree with me about Tree of Life, I understand. Predator? Not so much.

 

[Chaka]

Yi Yi - Saw this one getting praised quite a bit over the last few pages so I thought I would check it out. Excellent film from start to finish. I am shocked that it wasn't even nominated for best foreign film at the Oscars (not sure if it would have been 2000 or 2001).

The thing that sticks with me is how honest and realistic the entire production feels. It's a very long film, and really it is little more than a slice of life drama following a Taiwanese family for around a year as they deal with, generally speaking, typical life issues, but it didn't really feel long. The characters had a lot of room to breathe and grow and at some point the audience becomes sincerely invested in them.

Spoiler

When the little boy jumps in the pool near the end I just about crapped a pear sideways I was so irate that the director went in that direction. I was grateful when it turned out to be a bait and switch. Killing the boy would have been a big step too far for a film that was already dealing with a lot of issues (the unwelcome marriage/baby, grandma's stroke, attempted suicide, marital infidelity, young love and, of course the murder). Upon reflection the director handled the little boy in the pool brilliantly giving the audience that moment of WTF and then rolling it back.

Wonderful film for fans of the foreign stuff.

 

[Chaka]

Zombie Diaries 2: World of the Dead - I'm an idiot.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Zombie Diaries 2: World of the Dead - I'm an idiot.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I prefer X-Men Last Stand over First Class.

Last Stand at time plays fast and loose with X-Men canon but First Class pretty much completely ignores it. And while Fassbender is great in everything he does and McAvoy is solid enough everyone else is a boring mish-mash of random and uninteresting characters.

I think the storyline for Last Stand also flows better and makes more sense, particularly when viewed in the light of the first two films.

I wouldn't call either of them great films, nor would I call them bad, but as a lifelong fan of the X-Men, Last Stand >>>>> First Class.

ETA: Although I must add that Hugh Jackman's cameo on First Class was probably the best scene in any of the films. #### off!

Ignoring the canon aside, First Class is just a far better movie I mean, I am a comic book fan since way back in 1975. But I'd rather watch a good movie that rewrites the canon than a bad one that adheres to said canon.

Last Stand was too loud and never lived up to it's own hype. First Class allowed fro more character development which added a level of tension Last Stand wanted to achieve but didn't come close to pulling off.

Last stand was like watching Muppets From Space. Bad.

I was pretty proud of this

 

[Chaka]

I prefer X-Men Last Stand over First Class.

Last Stand at time plays fast and loose with X-Men canon but First Class pretty much completely ignores it. And while Fassbender is great in everything he does and McAvoy is solid enough everyone else is a boring mish-mash of random and uninteresting characters.

I think the storyline for Last Stand also flows better and makes more sense, particularly when viewed in the light of the first two films.

I wouldn't call either of them great films, nor would I call them bad, but as a lifelong fan of the X-Men, Last Stand >>>>> First Class.

ETA: Although I must add that Hugh Jackman's cameo on First Class was probably the best scene in any of the films. #### off!

Ignoring the canon aside, First Class is just a far better movie I mean, I am a comic book fan since way back in 1975. But I'd rather watch a good movie that rewrites the canon than a bad one that adheres to said canon.

Last Stand was too loud and never lived up to it's own hype. First Class allowed fro more character development which added a level of tension Last Stand wanted to achieve but didn't come close to pulling off.

Last stand was like watching Muppets From Space. Bad.

I was pretty proud of this

What the hell is wrong with Muppets from Space?

 

[jdoggydogg]

I prefer X-Men Last Stand over First Class.

Last Stand at time plays fast and loose with X-Men canon but First Class pretty much completely ignores it. And while Fassbender is great in everything he does and McAvoy is solid enough everyone else is a boring mish-mash of random and uninteresting characters.

I think the storyline for Last Stand also flows better and makes more sense, particularly when viewed in the light of the first two films.

I wouldn't call either of them great films, nor would I call them bad, but as a lifelong fan of the X-Men, Last Stand >>>>> First Class.

ETA: Although I must add that Hugh Jackman's cameo on First Class was probably the best scene in any of the films. #### off!

Ignoring the canon aside, First Class is just a far better movie I mean, I am a comic book fan since way back in 1975. But I'd rather watch a good movie that rewrites the canon than a bad one that adheres to said canon.

Last Stand was too loud and never lived up to it's own hype. First Class allowed fro more character development which added a level of tension Last Stand wanted to achieve but didn't come close to pulling off.

Last stand was like watching Muppets From Space. Bad.

I was pretty proud of this

What the hell is wrong with Muppets from Space?

 

[Maik Jeaunz]

on a whim, my wife and I decided to go watch Titanic in 3D before it leaves the theater, because it's probably the only chance we'll ever have to do so. I thought it was pretty amazing. sure it's a cheesy popcorn love story, and sure it takes a lot of heat (g**damn Billy Zane), but technically it's pretty awesome. and the 3D was well done; understated and not in your face. this is one of those movies that you can watch on TV or DVD and it's fine, but it's really meant to be seen on the big screen, and the 3D gave it an element of depth and scale that really wasn't there before. it might be too late in most places, but if you don't HATE the movie and haven't seen it in 3D yet, I would recommend it.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

on a whim, my wife and I decided to go watch Titanic in 3D before it leaves the theater, because it's probably the only chance we'll ever have to do so. I thought it was pretty amazing. sure it's a cheesy popcorn love story, and sure it takes a lot of heat (g**damn Billy Zane), but technically it's pretty awesome. and the 3D was well done; understated and not in your face. this is one of those movies that you can watch on TV or DVD and it's fine, but it's really meant to be seen on the big screen, and the 3D gave it an element of depth and scale that really wasn't there before. it might be too late in most places, but if you don't HATE the movie and haven't seen it in 3D yet, I would recommend it.

I'm a big fan of Titanic. It's worth it to go just to see it on the big screen again. The downside of 3D is that it washes out a lot of the colors, which is a shame because Titanic is really a good LOOKING movie.

 

[Maik Jeaunz]

on a whim, my wife and I decided to go watch Titanic in 3D before it leaves the theater, because it's probably the only chance we'll ever have to do so. I thought it was pretty amazing. sure it's a cheesy popcorn love story, and sure it takes a lot of heat (g**damn Billy Zane), but technically it's pretty awesome. and the 3D was well done; understated and not in your face. this is one of those movies that you can watch on TV or DVD and it's fine, but it's really meant to be seen on the big screen, and the 3D gave it an element of depth and scale that really wasn't there before. it might be too late in most places, but if you don't HATE the movie and haven't seen it in 3D yet, I would recommend it.

I'm a big fan of Titanic. It's worth it to go just to see it on the big screen again. The downside of 3D is that it washes out a lot of the colors, which is a shame because Titanic is really a good LOOKING movie.

yes, it definitely does that, but it also brings out some depth that wasn't there before. I remember one scene where the camera is looking down over a railing onto a deck below, and I had the urge to crane my neck to look OVER the railing. or getting a feeling for the size of the staterooms or hallways. you don't get that from 2D. however, 3D was not kind to the old lady.

 

[El Floppo]

Yi Yi - Saw this one getting praised quite a bit over the last few pages so I thought I would check it out. Excellent film from start to finish. I am shocked that it wasn't even nominated for best foreign film at the Oscars (not sure if it would have been 2000 or 2001).

The thing that sticks with me is how honest and realistic the entire production feels. It's a very long film, and really it is little more than a slice of life drama following a Taiwanese family for around a year as they deal with, generally speaking, typical life issues, but it didn't really feel long. The characters had a lot of room to breathe and grow and at some point the audience becomes sincerely invested in them.

Spoiler

When the little boy jumps in the pool near the end I just about crapped a pear sideways I was so irate that the director went in that direction. I was grateful when it turned out to be a bait and switch. Killing the boy would have been a big step too far for a film that was already dealing with a lot of issues (the unwelcome marriage/baby, grandma's stroke, attempted suicide, marital infidelity, young love and, of course the murder). Upon reflection the director handled the little boy in the pool brilliantly giving the audience that moment of WTF and then rolling it back.

Wonderful film for fans of the foreign stuff.

I brought that film up, and IIRC only Krista had ssen it or bothered to reply.Really glad you saw it and liked it. FWIW- I ahd the exact response that you did while watching... the director/writers played with cliches of melodrama/story-telling and set up the viewer and movie incredibly well with their control of expectations for them. I also love how it dips into magical realism... LOVE this movie.

 

[El Floppo]

Listening to the

Did you get to see The Princess and the Warrior? Same team- or at least director- IIRC and equally compelling... at least IMO.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

My favorite part about Last Stand was learning that the super power that 95% of mutants have is being able to jump really high.

I never knew that before that movie.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Listening to the

I haven't. But I think I'll have to check it out. Sounds interesting.

 

[El Floppo]

re: Mel Brooks...

His makes movies by firing buckshot rounds of jokes continuously on the screen- most don't work, but Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, History of the World part 1... all hit more than miss IMHO. But sometimes- at least for me- all the misses really ruin the occasional zingers (High Anxiety, Space Balls)

 

[Chaka]

Yi Yi - Saw this one getting praised quite a bit over the last few pages so I thought I would check it out. Excellent film from start to finish. I am shocked that it wasn't even nominated for best foreign film at the Oscars (not sure if it would have been 2000 or 2001).

The thing that sticks with me is how honest and realistic the entire production feels. It's a very long film, and really it is little more than a slice of life drama following a Taiwanese family for around a year as they deal with, generally speaking, typical life issues, but it didn't really feel long. The characters had a lot of room to breathe and grow and at some point the audience becomes sincerely invested in them.

Spoiler

When the little boy jumps in the pool near the end I just about crapped a pear sideways I was so irate that the director went in that direction. I was grateful when it turned out to be a bait and switch. Killing the boy would have been a big step too far for a film that was already dealing with a lot of issues (the unwelcome marriage/baby, grandma's stroke, attempted suicide, marital infidelity, young love and, of course the murder). Upon reflection the director handled the little boy in the pool brilliantly giving the audience that moment of WTF and then rolling it back.

Spoiler

Wonderful film for fans of the foreign stuff.

I brought that film up, and IIRC only Krista had ssen it or bothered to reply.Really glad you saw it and liked it. FWIW- I ahd the exact response that you did while watching... the director/writers played with cliches of melodrama/story-telling and set up the viewer and movie incredibly well with their control of expectations for them. I also love how it dips into magical realism... LOVE this movie.

It felt like more comments than that. Still, I'm definitely happy that I saw it. Still baffled that it didn't at least get an Oscar nomination.

 

[El Floppo]

Wings of Desire was on AMC the other night.

I came. eta... to the same conclusion I've always had since seeing it in the theaters- my favorite movie. But I forgive anybody for thinking it's pretentious clap-trap. I forgive, but also hate unconditionally.

 

[El Floppo]

Yi Yi - Saw this one getting praised quite a bit over the last few pages so I thought I would check it out. Excellent film from start to finish. I am shocked that it wasn't even nominated for best foreign film at the Oscars (not sure if it would have been 2000 or 2001).

The thing that sticks with me is how honest and realistic the entire production feels. It's a very long film, and really it is little more than a slice of life drama following a Taiwanese family for around a year as they deal with, generally speaking, typical life issues, but it didn't really feel long. The characters had a lot of room to breathe and grow and at some point the audience becomes sincerely invested in them.

Spoiler

When the little boy jumps in the pool near the end I just about crapped a pear sideways I was so irate that the director went in that direction. I was grateful when it turned out to be a bait and switch. Killing the boy would have been a big step too far for a film that was already dealing with a lot of issues (the unwelcome marriage/baby, grandma's stroke, attempted suicide, marital infidelity, young love and, of course the murder). Upon reflection the director handled the little boy in the pool brilliantly giving the audience that moment of WTF and then rolling it back.

Spoiler

Wonderful film for fans of the foreign stuff.

Spoiler

I brought that film up, and IIRC only Krista had ssen it or bothered to reply.Really glad you saw it and liked it. FWIW- I ahd the exact response that you did while watching... the director/writers played with cliches of melodrama/story-telling and set up the viewer and movie incredibly well with their control of expectations for them. I also love how it dips into magical realism... LOVE this movie.

It felt like more comments than that. Still, I'm definitely happy that I saw it. Still baffled that it didn't at least get an Oscar nomination.I could be wrong.I'm still waiting for anybody to comment on Before the Rain.

 

[jdoggydogg]

re: Mel Brooks...His makes movies by firing buckshot rounds of jokes continuously on the screen- most don't work, but Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, History of the World part 1... all hit more than miss IMHO. But sometimes- at least for me- all the misses really ruin the occasional zingers (High Anxiety, Space Balls)

Mel, like any comedian, doesn't nail it every time. But come on, people. This is the guy that gave us a king firing a shotgun at flying peasants. Genius.

 

[El Floppo]

and god ####### dammit- I don't want to hear anybody speak badly about Dr Strangelove, a top 3 movie for me on most days.

If you can't appreciate Sterling Hayden, much less George C Scott in this... I dunno.

 

[El Floppo]

re: Mel Brooks...His makes movies by firing buckshot rounds of jokes continuously on the screen- most don't work, but Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, History of the World part 1... all hit more than miss IMHO. But sometimes- at least for me- all the misses really ruin the occasional zingers (High Anxiety, Space Balls)

Mel, like any comedian, doesn't nail it every time. But come on, people. This is the guy that gave us a king firing a shotgun at flying peasants. Genius.

It's good to be the king.eta: and most comedians aren't machine-gunning jokes on the screen. Mel is kind of unique that way, IMO.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

re: Mel Brooks...His makes movies by firing buckshot rounds of jokes continuously on the screen- most don't work, but Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, History of the World part 1... all hit more than miss IMHO. But sometimes- at least for me- all the misses really ruin the occasional zingers (High Anxiety, Space Balls)

Mel, like any comedian, doesn't nail it every time. But come on, people. This is the guy that gave us a king firing a shotgun at flying peasants. Genius.

What gets me is that he put out Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein.....IN THE SAME YEAR. Definite genius. Yeah, everything doesn't hit the mark every time, but those two films are both top notch.

 

[saintfool]

Wings of Desire was on AMC the other night.

I came. eta... to the same conclusion I've always had since seeing it in the theaters- my favorite movie. But I forgive anybody for thinking it's pretentious clap-trap. I forgive, but also hate unconditionally.

pretty great film. wenders made good films. i kind of lost track of him following buena vista social club. i really enjoyed until the end of the world.

 

[jdoggydogg]

and god ####### dammit- I don't want to hear anybody speak badly about Dr Strangelove, a top 3 movie for me on most days.If you can't appreciate Sterling Hayden, much less George C Scott in this... I dunno.

Dr Strangelove is brilliant. I didn't even know this was in question.

 

[jdoggydogg]

re: Mel Brooks...His makes movies by firing buckshot rounds of jokes continuously on the screen- most don't work, but Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, History of the World part 1... all hit more than miss IMHO. But sometimes- at least for me- all the misses really ruin the occasional zingers (High Anxiety, Space Balls)

Mel, like any comedian, doesn't nail it every time. But come on, people. This is the guy that gave us a king firing a shotgun at flying peasants. Genius.

What gets me is that he put out Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein.....IN THE SAME YEAR. Definite genius. Yeah, everything doesn't hit the mark every time, but those two films are both top notch.

I don't know my film history, but didn't Brooks practically invent this kind of outrageous humor in film?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

and god ####### dammit- I don't want to hear anybody speak badly about Dr Strangelove, a top 3 movie for me on most days.If you can't appreciate Sterling Hayden, much less George C Scott in this... I dunno.

Dr Strangelove is brilliant. I didn't even know this was in question.

The only people that question it are those that haven't protected their precious bodily fluids.