NOW WATCHING

I'll let you guess guys.....
here is a quote from that film that I saw for 10th time :

You will noticethat I have distinguished...four-- four distinct states of being... in the cannabis or marijuana society.
They are cool, groovy...hip and square.
….Seldom, if ever- If he figures out what is happening...then he can rise
one notch...and become hip. And then if he canconvince himself...
to approve of what is happening...then he becomes groovy. Groovy.
And then, after that,he can actually raise himself...to the rank of cool.
He can become one of those...cool guys.
 
Call me an asshole, but for future reference, this is not a trivia thread, there is already one of those.
 
So I watched Pan's Labyrinth and I have to say it is one great movie. One of the things I never really liked about my country's films or anything not from hollywood, was the cheap production. they have great stories and good acting, but they all look like a home movie. This hasn't been the case in recent years, but still the norm. So to have a fantasy story outside of hollywood with good writing, amazing acting and of course great cinematography and production was great. I loved the dialogue, because it was nice to hear words I've only read in high brow literature actually spoken and making sense hahaha.
 
I'm glad we agree on Pan's Labyrinth.

Has anyone seen Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth?  I find that he brings up many important issues and points, even though some of the stuff is sensationalized.
 
I just finished watching Eragon. While the dragon is the cutest thing imaginable (when its little), the acting and the story-line and the cinematography is sub-par. Especially the acting. As for action and the like, since its a fantasy movie I would have expected bigger battles, or at least battles with a bit of blood in 'em. Not a great movie, not even a good one in my opinion, but if you like adorable baby dragons, watch this.  :innocent:
 
I watched Fast Food Nation at a sneak preview last night. I can't say it was a bad movie, because it wasn't really, but it was somewhat inconsistent.
First of all, it suffered from the same problems as Syriana. To make it worse, these problems were even more throrough.
The film is about a major fast food chain and its latest feat, a big hamburger that sells like crazy. The company sends out an employee to check out the conditions under which the meat for the burger is produced and goes to Colorado, where the cattle farms are situated. The reason why he is sent out is because independent studies found out the meat is contaminated with cow dung.
At the same time, a group of illegal immigrants are transported across the Mexican-US border by Coyotes and end up in the same town in Colorado, and most of them start working in the factory that produces the meat for the burger chain. Finally, at some point in the film, we get introduced to a girl selling the burgers at the local restaurant.

The problem is, that with three storylines in this film, there is no plot. The first storyling about the guy who investigates the factory is suddenly ended in the middle of the film and gets somewhat replaced by the one about the girl, who was introduced way into the film and whom we hadn't even known to be a main character yet.
While we can follow the investigators revealings about the burger production, the poor immigrants developments in their new lives and the girls growing dissatisfaction with her life, at some point in the film, I asked myself: Where is this heading to? At that point, it became incredibly boring because it was all so slow-moving, and instead of seeing any kind of action from the characters, the story unfolds in endless dialogues. I got the feeling that at some point, the filmmakers decided they needed a climax, so they let the girl join a group of activists who try, unsuccesfully, to free the cattle. At the same time, two of the immigrants get wounded by the machines in the factory.

So, the film has good intentions, and it is obvious what it is trying to portray. It even portrays things quite well. But as a movie, it needs a plot to keep things interesting to the viewer. It is simply a dramaturgic delict to introduce interesting characters at the beginning only to drop them in the middle. You can have as many funny cameos by Bruce Willis as you like, if it only serves a storyline that might have been an interesting plot but simply stop to be replaced by two painfully melodramatic and slumberously slow, and let's say it, boring ones, it's pointless.
Needless to say, the three storylines aren't woven together, They touch at certain points, but they don't have anything to do with each other. This just isn't dramaturgy.
 
I've watched quite a few films lately,  but I haven't had time (boredom actually :P).  Anyway,  I recently watched "The Mysterious Affair At Styles",  a film based on an Agatha Christie novel,  starring David Suchet.  I will not commend on the film,  as the storyline is a common one.  But I will comment on the performance of Suchet.  I've watched several Poirot films with different actors,  and I've also watched the series with Suchet.  He is by far the best Poirot I've seen.  He has the perfect mix of eccentricity,  he's funny,  and serious when he should be.  A very enjoyable character.  All in all,  if you're a Christie fan,  you'll definetly like the film,  if you like detective stories I think you'll like it...

This weekend I'll probably be watching "Firewall" or "Rumor Has It".  I'll be commenting on these two as soon as possible.
 
I've just watched The Terminal. It's a nice little movie, nothing grand, but it gives you a nice warm feeling inside. It's all about a man who, due to a war in his home country, gets stuck in JFK and can neither go home, nor into New York, and has to live in a terminal. Tom Hanks plays the role well, but the 'nice' thing about this movie is its innocence. Watch it, and you'll see what I mean.
 
I saw two movies this weekend. The first was Black Snake Moan with Samuel L. Jackson, Cristina Ricci and Justin Timberlake. It was.. um, an interesting movie. The previews focused to much on the fact that Jackson had Ricci chained up. I was sure it would be a funny movie or very suggestive, instead it was neither. Pretty much Jackson is all bitter because his cheating wife left him for his brother, Timberlake is National Guard or something and Ricci is his whore of a girlfriend. The reason she's such a slut is because she was abused by her stepfather and traumatized her for life basically.

Now, the other film I saw was Man of the Year with Williams. I didn't like this film, but from what the critics say. They said that the first half was funny and then it just deadpans. It was never funny, sure it makes you chuckle here and there, but no more. contrary to what they say though, it was consistent. The reason I didn't like it is because I no longer find William's antics "funny," he should quit.
In the movie he runs a "Daily Show" type program on tv and he's fans (much like Stewart's) want him to run for president and he does. Not much more worth mentioning.
 
Onhell said:
The reason I didn't like it is because I no longer find William's antics "funny," he should quit.
Click to expand...

You got a point there, unfortunately. If a comedian relies too much on special visual or vocal trademarks, it wears off easily and becomes old quite early. We've seen it before and we know what happens, so it's not funny anymore. As Albie said earlier in this thread, others who don't try so hard, like Bill Murray, have much more comedic value.
Another problem with Williams is that in most of his films, he uses an unbearable sentimental edge which characterises his roles and acting much more than his funny faces and vocal acrobatics. So whenever I see his face, I keep seeing the crying clown, which is an image I can't stand. It's a pity, because he actually is a good actor, but he got too deep into his routine too long ago.

In other news, I saw "The Deported" last night. I must honestly say that it's been quite a while since I walked out the cinema the same way as last night: Thrilled, entertained and, most of all, satisfied. The film was simply brilliant, and one of the best I've seen in ages. It definitely deserved the Oscars it got, and would have deserved more of them. Everything in the film was perfect: The plot, the acting, hell, even the suspense. I haven't experienced so much suspense since I first saw the X-Files episode "The Train" wayy back in '98 or '99. I was a bit disappointed when I learned this was actually a remake, but so what. What impressed me was how the film managed to avoid obvious clichées and stay exciting right to the very end.
Although Jack Nicholson's performance is fine, the film really is carried by Matt Damon and Leonardo DiCaprio, both of whom pull off what is certainly among the finest performances of their respective careers (and, to be honest, both are high calibre actors, so this is saying much). Go watch it.
 
Perun said:
In other news, I saw "The Deported" last night. I must honestly say that it's been quite a while since I walked out the cinema the same way as last night: Thrilled, entertained and, most of all, satisfied. The film was simply brilliant, and one of the best I've seen in ages. It definitely deserved the Oscars it got, and would have deserved more of them. Everything in the film was perfect: The plot, the acting, hell, even the suspense. I haven't experienced so much suspense since I first saw the X-Files episode "The Train" wayy back in '98 or '99. I was a bit disappointed when I learned this was actually a remake, but so what. What impressed me was how the film managed to avoid obvious clichées and stay exciting right to the very end.
Although Jack Nicholson's performance is fine, the film really is carried by Matt Damon and Leonardo DiCaprio, both of whom pull off what is certainly among the finest performances of their respective careers (and, to be honest, both are high calibre actors, so this is saying much). Go watch it.
Click to expand...

The Departed. I saw the film last week too, and thought it was very good. Scorsese seems to have found his new leading man in DiCaprio, like De Nero used to be. This is their third film together I think in recent years, after Gangs of New York and The Aviator, and I read somewhere that they're planning another.
I agree that Nicholson's role wasn't the important one, and the two others are the main highlights of the film. Some of the supporting roles were very well cast and acted too: Mark Wahlberg and Martin Sheen especially.


By the way, '300' comes out very soon, and looks awesome - no other word for it. Perun, you must have heard about this! For anyone who hasn't, it's about the 300 Spartans at the battle of Thermopylae. Watch the trailers here: http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/300/
 
national acrobat said:
By the way, '300' comes out very soon, and looks awesome - no other word for it. Perun, you must have heard about this! For anyone who hasn't, it's about the 300 Spartans at the battle of Thermopylae. Watch the trailers here: http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/300/
Click to expand...

Yeah, I heard about it, and I think it looks good. What annoys me, however, is that once again, as with any film based on history, everybody who read the Age of Empires help file thinks he is a qualified historian, so virtually every website from Youtube to eternity gets spammed by those prats who think anyone cares... even moreso since this film is obviously a fantasy film inspired by historical events (as should become clear when you see that strange creature with horns growing out of its cheeks in the trailer ;)).
 
Perun said:
even moreso since this film is obviously a fantasy film inspired by historical events (as should become clear when you see that strange creature with horns growing out of its cheeks in the trailer ;)).
Click to expand...
:o You mean that there never was creatures like that??

I saw the Departed a few months ago myself and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was definitely one of the best films that I've seen for a long time in the cinema and I'm eagerly awaiting its release on DVD. DiCaprio was excellent in it, possibly his finest role, and I'm generally not a fan of his work, so it is high praise. ;)

300 is something that got my mouth watering when I saw the teaser trailer a while back. I don't pretend to be some expert on the Greeks or anything like that, but I generally do enjoy a film along those lines, like Troy (which incidentally made me want to go home and listen to Manowar's Achilles' Agony and Ecstasy In Eight Parts a few times).
 
I'm still stoked, I'm watching it friday! The History Channel (true to form) is doing a doc on them, the actual event that is. Speaking of the history channel, anybody been watching Barbarians Week? it's fucking awesome!
 
Perun said:
And once again I ask myself what it is with this website...  :huh:
Click to expand...

Well..there's not a lot to their moronic, ironic hipster-induced humour. "LOL flying monkey LOL! Weed using hipsterish Tool fan LOL! Obscure 80s reference LOL!"

Basically it's the kind of stuff that a bored college student would come up with when smoking weed in their dorm. Oh, wait I'm talking about Aqua Teen Hunger Force. Ah well, it can be applied either way.

On-topic, I haven't gone to the cinema in an eternity, since everything these days is modern. One thing that does strike is how quickly everything gets released on DVD so quickly after their run in the cinemas. Ah well, I guess it goes to show you that movies these days are so disposable that they're quickly forgotten the next week. Says a lot about their quality. Just though I'd have a little rant again since it saves the need to get some worthless blog and give myself the impression that the rest of teh intarnetz ppl are hanging on to my every word.

Anyways, the last movie of worth that I viewed was The Wizard of Gore directed by Herschell Gordon Lewis (plus I hear it's being remade so it can be made modern, therefore lame). The plot is pretty bare, A magician performs a show where he selects a female volunteer and appears to put swords, drills, and such through them. They walk away and everyone applauds, then they show up somewhere else, dead of the same injuries they sustained in the magic show. Police are baffled and can't tie the murders to the magician. A man whose girlfriend is infatuated with the show begins to investigate on his own and things start to get nasty...well...er...nastier. Nothing quite like a good bit of cheezegore, eh? Oh, and for some trivial metal trivia, which speed metal band wrote a song about this movie? Hey, hey, you, get out of the Metal For Dummies Encyclopedia, whoops, I mean, Metal Archives.
 
Black Dragon said:
Just though I'd have a little rant again since it saves the need to get some worthless blog and give myself the impression that the rest of teh intarnetz ppl are hanging on to my every word.
Click to expand...

Hehe, if you'd get a blog, I'd read it ;)
 
Although not strictly a film, last week I watched "Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii", which I guess belongs here. I was expecting something great, and got something better! The shots of the town are fantastic, a place which holds a fascination over me. I've had the fortune to go there and can't wait to go back. The shots of the Roman ruins and of the bubbling volcano really suit the music well, with the band playing in the amphithetre. Musical highlight has to be Echoes, an amazing song. The Directors Cut also includes interviews of the band while working on Dark Side of the Moon, which are quite amusing, and also includes footage of them in the studio practising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top