NOW WATCHING

I'll be heading to see Saw III tonight, but I haven't seen either I or II. Will I be lost, or should I be alright, storyline wise?
 
So I So "Borat" on firday... a very funny, very un-pc movie. I really don't want to talk too much about it, because it is best to watch it. It is just increadibly funny and it exposes the good, the bad and the ugly of U.S society.

Apparently the Khazakstani government, people who appeared in the movie and others just looking for a quick buck are suing Sascha Baron Cohen (Borat), because they are not pleased with the movie.... sissies.
 
I also saw "Borat" recently, and I have to say that I was quite disappointed. It is noticeably different to the television show that it started from. Lots of it seemed to be scripted and the same jokes that were used in the show were repeated. I am a giant fan of the show, but I'm afraid that I was let down by the film, which had the potential for something better, in my opinion. That being said, it does have some absolutely hilarious moments, where I couldn't stop laughing, so it wasn't all bad ;)
 
I have never seen the show, but I've read similar reviews to yours by other fans.... it's hard to make everybody happy.
 
I've recently just watched Mission Impossible III. Been that I love mindless action movies (I'll watch a movie to be simply entertained, not much wrong with that - is there?), this was right up my street.

So Ethan Hunt is coaxed out of retirement (he trains the agents now) to retrieve a weapon called "Rabbits Foot" so that it does not fall into the hands of a nasty arms dealer - who was ready to sell it on to some Middle Eastern countries hellbent on raging a war or two with the US. Yeah, there is a little bit more going on than that, but that's the crux of it. Much globetrotting is done during this as one would expect. Good film, nonetheless, and highly enjoyable.

Setting it up nicely before I go to see the new Bond movie this Friday (I hope) - Casino Royale. :D
 
My beef with Mission Impossible is that they took the wrong direction. The first movie was brilliant and closer to the actual tv show, plus it ended it perfectly for a sequal to pick up where it left off. Instead they changed director, ignore the first movie and make the second (and later third) a pointless action movie. I'm sure they are good not taking this into account, but I don't forgive that easily. I'm also looking forward to the bond film though, I hope it holds up as it is following this annoying "prequal" trend.
 
I will NEVER watch MI3 or any other Tom Cruise film. I detest scientologists in general, but him in particular.

I finally finished watching all 20 hours of the Ken Burns documentary "Jazz". While it's very good for the first 8 episodes, the last 4 hours are a pile of shit. Ken Burns made a GIGANTIC mistake when he decided to hire Wynton Marsalis as musical director. The whole thing winds up being 20 hours of "Jazz according to shithead old jazz purist Wynton Marsalis". I mean, it spends four hours on Bird (which is justifiable, he is a giant) but then only 45 minutes on Coltrane?!?!? John Coltrane is at least as important in jazz history as Charlie Parker. And Marsalis/Burns seem to think jazz ended when Miles Davis started using electric instruments and fusing jazz with rock. Someone needs to hit Marsalis on the head with a brick.

HOWEVER ... if you are a person who knows nothing about jazz, this documentary can serve as an excellent introduction. I knew a moderate amount, and I still learned a lot - not so much about the really famous guys, but about the lesser-known sidemen who never became famous.
 
I saw MI3 on the plane from Japan to France some months ago. I don't think it's anything special. It had the potential to be special and interesting, but somehow it went wrong somewhere.

So, I'm currently watching "Star Trek: The Original Series season 1", and I'm more or less half-way through. ST is pretty interesting, I think. There's a lot of technobabble, but it often deals with some quite interesting and sophisticated ethical and scientific issues. Of course, the original series is more naive than the later ones, but that was typical, I guess, of most pre-Star Wars sci-fi (and some post-Star wars stuff too, like the first season of "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century"), but it's fascinating nonetheless.

I've also recently seen a two part documentary about the history of Black Sabbath. I noticed an interesting fact, all their singers, except Ozzy and Ronnie, have mullets... now that's food for thought.
 
So I saw Casino Royale on friday and while a good movie it suffered from three things. The movie is supposed to be Bond's first mission as a double 0, hence it's a 'prequal' as such here are the mistakes. 1. Modern technology... if it's his first mission he is not going to have those gadgets, 2. M is again Judy Dench... M was a man until the brosnan movies. and 3. They play Texas Hold 'em instead of Bakarak or whatever it is they play in the book, a game that was not popular until 3 years ago and not to meniont NOT a game High-class multi-millionaires would waste their time playing. The only reason I can find that would excuse all these mistakes is that it is a "reboot" like Batman begins or Superman Returns (which ignores superman III and IV). Aside from that, it is a good movie.
 
Watching over LOST Season 2 on DVD. Season 3 is going amazing! Too bad we have to wait till next year February for the rest of episodes as there is a bit of a hiatus now. Any other LOST fans out there?

Just finished watching the teaser for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and the video for Amon Amath - Runes to my Memory
 
Onhell said:
So I saw Casino Royale on friday and while a good movie it suffered from three things. The movie is supposed to be Bond's first mission as a double 0, hence it's a 'prequal' as such here are the mistakes. 1. Modern technology... if it's his first mission he is not going to have those gadgets, 2. M is again Judy Dench... M was a man until the brosnan movies. and 3. They play Texas Hold 'em instead of Bakarak or whatever it is they play in the book, a game that was not popular until 3 years ago and not to meniont NOT a game High-class multi-millionaires would waste their time playing. The only reason I can find that would excuse all these mistakes is that it is a "reboot" like Batman begins or Superman Returns (which ignores superman III and IV). Aside from that, it is a good movie.
Click to expand...

Sounds like they have some serious continuity problems.
 
Although I haven't watched it yet,  indeed it seems a great Bond film.  I agree with Onhell,  I wish they made it look like the sixties when Bond first made his appearance rather than having his first mission in the present  :blush:
 
Nephellim said:
Watching over LOST Season 2 on DVD. Season 3 is going amazing! Too bad we have to wait till next year February for the rest of episodes as there is a bit of a hiatus now. Any other LOST fans out there?
Click to expand...
On the Irish channel RTE, we're a bit far behind, we're only on episode 4 of series 3 but I'm still enjoying it.  It hasn't kicked off as wel as the previous two serieses yet but is still enjoyable to watch.

I watched Saw II and III last week.  I've seen worse and I've seen better.  I think the unrealistic nature of the movies constantly nags my brain as I'm watching them (Why don't they just break out of the damned house?!) The fourth installment should be good though.
 
Conor said:
I watched Saw II and III last week.  I've seen worse and I've seen better.  I think the unrealistic nature of the movies constantly nags my brain as I'm watching them (Why don't they just break out of the damned house?!) The fourth installment should be good though.
Click to expand...

I don't think you paid much attention conor... they CAN'T break out, it's a MAZE, for one and two, in the second movie they're poisoned and the only cure is the antidote he provides, they are driven by the fear of death, not thinking very clearly. In the third it is his drive for revenge that keeps the guy going... I doubt there will be a fourth, but it is open ended enough to give it a cheap shot.
 
Onhell said:
So I saw Casino Royale on friday and while a good movie it suffered from three things. The movie is supposed to be Bond's first mission as a double 0, hence it's a 'prequal' as such here are the mistakes. 1. Modern technology... if it's his first mission he is not going to have those gadgets, 2. M is again Judy Dench... M was a man until the brosnan movies. and 3. They play Texas Hold 'em instead of Bakarak or whatever it is they play in the book, a game that was not popular until 3 years ago and not to meniont NOT a game High-class multi-millionaires would waste their time playing. The only reason I can find that would excuse all these mistakes is that it is a "reboot" like Batman begins or Superman Returns (which ignores superman III and IV). Aside from that, it is a good movie.
Click to expand...

Okay, so Bond and Moneypenny have had literal face changes (Bond having had 5 so far!), and you're quibbling over the setting of the movie?  The Bond movies are not supposed to have continuity!  And for your information, Casino Royale is not a 'reboot' any more than any of the other adaptations.  The original Casino Royale was a spoof starring Peter Sellers, and therefore not an official Bond movie.
 
Raven said:
The original Casino Royale was a spoof starring Peter Sellers, and therefore not an official Bond movie.
Click to expand...
Strictly speaking, Casino Royale was Ian Flemming's first novel and pre Bond 00 status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top