Miscellaneous Movie Musings the Sequel [Archive] - Page 4

Ghoulish Delight

01-17-2011, 09:39 AM

For the first time I manged to keep an accurate list of my movie watching for a year. Kinda interesting looking back. I noted the movie, whether it was the firs time seeing it, the release year, whether we saw it the theater, wrote some quick thoughts, and gave each a rating. I tried as best I could to make the ratings simply "how did I feel at the time about the movie" and not necessarily a comparator between movies, so it's pretty fascinating to see those in hindsight and compare them to each other. Like the fact that I rated Observe and Report below Smiley Face, a truly awful, amateurish attempt at stoner comedy. Man did I not like O&R.

Movies watched: 39
First Time: 36 (wow, I don't rewatch movies as much as I used to)
2010 releases: 11
In Theater: 4 (all after June)
Highest Rated: Tie - Scott Pilgrim vs. The World and ODDSAC (experimental music video/movie from Animal Collective)
Lowest Rated: The aforementioned Observer and Report

In hindsight, I think the only real change I'd make is to have rated Imaginarium of Dr. Parnasus a little higher, making a 3-way tie for first. Scanning the list, that one jumps out as being as enjoyable to watch as the others.

Meanwhile, we watched the original Tron this weekend. Sigh, not quite what I remembered (not childhood memories, really only saw it for the first time 5 or so years ago). It was not as technically detailed (in terms of depth of analogy between program "characters" and actual programming concepts) as my memory was giving credit for. I guess I was handicapping it for having the audacity to allude to ANY sort of technical computer concepts in an era where they were completely foreign to most. Alas, they really didn't do much more than throw some jargon in to sound impressive.

Alex

01-17-2011, 10:48 AM

My stats

Movies Watched in 2010: 146
2010 Releases: 61 (includes 3 2010 movies seen since the beginning of the year)
Had already seen: 5
Movies Seen at the theater: 56

I only use a five point scale for my personal notes so not a lot of differentiation

Highest rated at time seen (both 5 of 5): Toy Story 3 and 127 Hours (I'd pick neither of them as my favorite movie of the year but they invoked strong feelings while walking out of the theater. I saw 31 movies I gave 4s to so it wasn't a bad year.

Lowest rated at time seen (lots of competition): Deep in the Valley (2009), Legion, When in Rome, The Cannonball Run II (1984), Repo Men, High Kick Girl! (2009, Japan), Jonah Hex, Species, Crank 2: High Voltage

Movies in the list of things seen in 2010 where just looking at the title on the list I have no idea what it is (some of these I rated highly):

People Will Talk (1951) - 4 of 5 - Ah, a Cary Grant movie, I still don't remember it even after looking it up.
My Name is Bruce (2009) - 2 of 5 - Ah, a spoof on Bruce Campbell's cult fame.
Sleeping Dogs Lie (2006) - 3 of 5 - Ah, a comedy about what happens when a woman reveals to her boyfriend that she once had sex with her dog.
The Boys Are Back (2009) - 2 of 5 - Ah, a cookie-cutter grief drama of Clive Owen having to figure out how to raise his sons after the death of their mother.
Cop Out (2010) - 2 of 5 - Ah, that bad cop buddy movie with Tracy Morgan (thus almost by default bad) and Bruce Willis.
The Stranger (1946) - 4 of 5 - Ah, finding secret Nazis. Actually was very interesting for shedding light on an aspect of the post-war mood. Not such a great movie just as a movie.
Paper Heart (2009) - 3 of 5 - Ah, that Michael Cera/Charlyne Yi relationship mockumentary.

Stan4dSteph

01-17-2011, 01:19 PM

For the first time I manged to keep an accurate list of my movie watching for a year.What did you use to keep track?

Cadaverous Pallor

01-17-2011, 08:06 PM

Movies Seen at the theater: 56If I ever need advice on movie-going, I'm going to ask you.

Steph - GD used an Excel spreadsheet.

Ghoulish Delight

01-17-2011, 09:01 PM

Google Doc spreadsheet, actually.

Stan4dSteph

01-17-2011, 09:32 PM

Thanks! I figured something like that. I am going to try to keep track this year.

Alex

01-17-2011, 09:49 PM

When I first started my list it was a spreadsheet with:

Title
Date Seen
Year of Release
Where I Watched it
Country of Release
Language
Running time
How much I paid to watch it
Personal Rating

Then with pivot tables I could generate all kinds of interesting (to only me) lists.

But even that ended up being something I'd put off doing that I'd forget to list some, so now it is just Title, Date Seen, Year of Release, Country of Release, Rating.

Ghoulish Delight

01-17-2011, 10:16 PM

My columns are Date Seen, title, in theater, first time, release year, rating, notes.

Chernabog

01-24-2011, 10:38 PM

First movie of the year that I couldn't make it all the way through:

Inception

Maybe it was the hype that killed it, but dear god what a stupid movie. Got to about 1 hour 15 minutes in, looked at how much time was left, went "hell no" and went upstairs to play video games. Video games with much more plot, emotion, and entertainment value. I've liked all of Chris Nolan's films until this piece of trash.... I just hate movies that make up whatever ridiculous convoluted rules they want to on the fly, and then break those rules with even more convoluted rules just to fit the plot.

As far as "entering your dreams" goes, that Jennifer Lopez movie from ten years ago was much more fun. Cronenberg's eXistenz was more interesting.

If I wanted to see a pretty world with an incomprehensible plot and a hot guy (Joseph Gordon-Levitt, yummy) then I'll go see Tron:Legacy again (Garrett Hedlund, extra yummy). I was actually able to sit through Tron, even with the horrid 3-D that looked like you were watching the film through a murky green fog.

katiesue

01-24-2011, 11:05 PM

I didn't make it through either Cherny. I quit pausing when I got up to do this or that. Then it was a bad dvd and stopped halfway through. I ordered a replacement but I can't seem to make myself attempt to figure out where I was so I sent it back.

Strangler Lewis

01-24-2011, 11:36 PM

I enjoyed it well enough. In fact, I would give it some honorary Oscar for the most ridiculous story that was nonetheless played with utter conviction. As for the ending, though, I think you could have picked any number of potential twists out of a hat and it wouldn't have made much difference.

BarTopDancer

01-25-2011, 12:02 AM

I finally saw The Social Network. I really, really enjoyed it. If it's even half-true Zuckerberg is a world class dbag and the character was played with traits of Aspergers. I see why it won the awards that it did. And man, Justin Timberlake can act.

Strangler Lewis

01-25-2011, 01:38 AM

I'm a little leery of The Social Network. I generally find that a little of the Aaron Sorkin "attractive people who are really good at their job and all talk on three tangents at once and all perfectly understand each other" goes a long way.

innerSpaceman

01-25-2011, 12:12 PM

In Time's interview with Zuckerberg as its Person of the Year, I learned that practically NOTHING in The Social Network about Zuckerberg was true, except that they got every single T-shirt he wore in the movie exactly right.

This fouls me against the movie before seeing it. I still want to watch it, and it can still be a good movie. But I cannot understand nor can I appreciate so much falsification about its main character.

mousepod

01-25-2011, 12:17 PM

What's interesting for me is that when Heather and I saw The Social Network, not only did we enjoy it, but we liked the Zuckerberg character (for the most part).

LSPoorEeyorick

01-25-2011, 12:56 PM

I liked Social Network well enough. Just not as much as a few other films this year. And I neither liked nor disliked Zuckerberg - just figured he was a fictional character with flaws.

Kevy Baby

01-25-2011, 01:19 PM

...just figured he was a fictional character with flaws.Aren't we all really?

innerSpaceman

01-25-2011, 01:43 PM

Heheh.

But WHY be so inaccurate about the facts (not the character) of a currently living person so famous he was made Time's Person of the Year? I just don't get it.

Ghoulish Delight

01-25-2011, 01:51 PM

Umm, because it made for a better movie?

innerSpaceman

01-25-2011, 03:49 PM

Then make a piece of fiction. Don't make a True Story with no truth. That dramatic license sh!t works a lot better when the truth you are adapting is more than 4 years old.

Anyway, it's funny how Cherny could not make it through Inception, but could watch Tron again. I'm the exact opposite. But I daresay there's a reason Inception is nominated for a ton of awards and Tron is nominated for best sound mixing. :p

mousepod

01-25-2011, 03:58 PM

This is not intended as snark: iSm - you should take a couple of hours out of your life and see The Social Network. I'd like to hear what you actually think of the movie as opposed to your theoretical objections.

alphabassettgrrl

01-25-2011, 05:24 PM

Well, for what it's worth, I'm with iSm on the true-story-should-be-based-in-truth stuff. If you're going to make a fictionalized version, tell me so.

I do plan on seeing The Social Network (at some point) but it is disappointing to hear that they made up everything about the person supposedly at the center of the movie. I know they always take some dramatic license, but to use almost nothing of reality? Can't love it.

innerSpaceman

01-25-2011, 06:06 PM

It's not that there's nothing of reality. They got some stuff right besides the T-Shirts. And I don't mind dramatic license when it's used to simplify the drama or the number of characters so it's suitable for a movie (i.e., rolling 4 characters into 1, compressing the time span of events).

I will see The Social Network, and I bet it's a damn fine movie. I also bet they could have stuck to Zuckerberg's actual story and had the film be none the worse for it.

Otherwise, and perhaps Gemini Cricket would have preferred this, they could have gone the "Trans Global Airlines" route and not used "Facebook" for the film. Clear product placement! Harumph! :)

mousepod

01-25-2011, 07:34 PM

If I remember correctly, the script was based on the two lawsuits (that also serve to frame the film). So it was a reality, just not the one that Time wrote about.

Just see the damn thing already. I'm looking forward to your take on it.

Kevy Baby

01-25-2011, 07:50 PM

Was Social Network billed as a "True Story" or a documentary (meant as an 'either' question, not an 'or')? It would appear to be much closer to reality than say, anything Michael Moore has ever put out.

I like this line from mousepodSo it was a reality, just not the one that Time wrote about.

BarTopDancer

01-25-2011, 10:04 PM

There are 2 sides to every story and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Information out of the lawsuits is certainly going to be more damning then information filtered through Zuckerberg and his talking heads.

I think the truth is somewhere between the movie and the article. But I won't be calling the move completely made up or complete truth when I wasn't privy to the actual discussions/happenings at that time.

Not Afraid

01-25-2011, 10:58 PM

I need to see The Social Network because my friend Kelly Thompson's art is on the walls.

BarTopDancer

01-25-2011, 11:21 PM

But was her art on the specific walls in real life?

Not Afraid

01-25-2011, 11:22 PM

But was her art on the specific walls in real life?

No, but it is on mine. Does that count?

Ghoulish Delight

01-25-2011, 11:33 PM

My wife is going to give a very different review, but 300 accidentally ended up at the top of our Netflix queue and that has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Perhaps I'm a victim of self fulfilling prophecy as I watched it reluctantly, expecting to not like it, but it was worse than I expected. Seriously not a redeeming thing to say about it from my view.

BarTopDancer

01-25-2011, 11:34 PM

Were your walls with that art on it in the movies or did any one of the main characters have an event portrayed in the movies in your home showing the art?

Only events that happened in real life should be portrayed in a quasi-fictional movie setting.

Chernabog

01-26-2011, 07:33 AM

What's interesting for me is that when Heather and I saw The Social Network, not only did we enjoy it, but we liked the Zuckerberg character (for the most part).

How can you *not* like Jesse Eisenberg, with that cute-as-hell Jew-fro? ;) I gotta see Social Network, glad it is coming to Netflix prior to the Oscars. I'm not so worried that it is heavily fiction. I can't think of any "based on a true story" movies that are meant to be exact accounts of what happened. That usually makes for boring movies, since life doesn't really progress in story arcs.

But I daresay there's a reason Inception is nominated for a ton of awards and Tron is nominated for best sound mixing.

I didn't say that Tron was academy-award material, 'cos it isn't. It seemed to be one of those movies that pretended to be deep but really it was a silly excuse to show "look at what we can do with computer effects!" which hasn't really thrilled me since Jurassic Park. (for another example of such a movie, I cite The Matrix and Larry Fishburne's intense spewing of "deep" utter bullsh~t. Incidentally I liked Matrix 3 because it was just an action film with no such pretensions.) It just wasn't my cup of tea, even if it was yours. I won't think any less of you, I promise. ;)

but 300 accidentally ended up at the top of our Netflix queue and that has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

But it did make for an awesome episode of South Park. Scissor me timbers!

innerSpaceman

01-26-2011, 10:56 AM

On JW Bear's recommendation of a few weeks ago, I watched 2008's 10,000 B.C. last night - purely to enjoy the yumminess of Steven Straight, who ironically brings out this Steven's gay like nobody's business.

It was kinda meh, but not really objectionable. Actionist, likable characters, yummy leading man - and I have to admit: Herds of Wooley Mammoths enslaved to help build the Pyramids was Bitchin' Cool.

JWBear

01-26-2011, 12:42 PM

I wouldn't actually say I recommended it.

innerSpaceman

01-26-2011, 01:07 PM

Well, not the movie, but pointed me in the right direction for the leading man enjoyment I was looking for. Wooley Mammoths building the pyramids was just a bonus!

Cadaverous Pallor

01-26-2011, 09:51 PM

My wife is going to give a very different review...I've been meaning to see 300 since it was in the theaters. Seeing it now, I just wish I had insisted on seeing it when it first came out on DVD, as it has lost a lot of oomph what with the billions of spoofs since then. Even so, I enjoyed it thoroughly. My only issue was that they said "Sparta" a billion times.

Major Husband Bonus Points for putting up with it. It's not often I ask him to sit through something we both know he will actively dislike. I'm not into RomComs or Costume Dramas or Sex in the City...but once in a while I need to see some popcorn-flick action. :)

Gemini Cricket

01-27-2011, 01:05 PM

300 was neat. Lots of Spartan eye candy.

DreadPirateRoberts

01-27-2011, 02:44 PM

I enjoyed True Grit. The actor who played Colonel G. Stonehill (Dakin Matthews) did a great job, at first I thought they got the original actor (Strother Martin).

innerSpaceman

01-28-2011, 01:24 PM

Finally got around to seeing Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. Cute, but ultimately my feeling is MEH.

Still chuckling, though, over the Universal logo theme customization, and the Vegan powers bit - which was admittedly hysterical.

Oh, and a running joke inspired me to get a haircut. It was getting a wee bit shaggy.

JWBear

02-02-2011, 10:13 AM

We watched Stardust (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0486655/) last night. Very cute movie. Great scenery chewing performances by Robert De Nero and Michelle Pfeiffer.

Oh, and the male lead, Charlie Cox, is adorably cute.

Chernabog

02-02-2011, 12:33 PM

I saw The King's Speech the other night and will add to the chorus of "it was really good" reviews. The only bad part of it was Timothy Spall as Alfred Hitchcock as Winston Churchill. Really, that was a caricature, not acting.

mousepod

02-02-2011, 01:01 PM

No time to expand on this but... didn't love The King's Speech at all. Fun watching some great actors chew the scenery, but wasn't moved by the story and found the direction relatively artless. I am clearly in a small minority.

mousepod

02-02-2011, 01:03 PM

Now 127 Hours on the other hand...

Went in expecting to hate it. It was a neat little film. A few "show-off" flourishes by Boyle notwithstanding, the thing held together nicely, thanks to a surprisingly excellent performance from James Franco.

innerSpaceman

02-02-2011, 01:14 PM

Have to agree there with mousepod. Oh, except that I don't even have any desire to see The King's Speech, though I do like all the leading actors in it.

Alex

02-02-2011, 01:48 PM

Now 127 Hours on the other hand...

I really enjoyed The King's Speech, but no it isn't my pick for best of the year.

127 Hours is the closest I've come to crying at a movie in a long time and it wasn't emotional manipulation, it was just so perfect at ratcheting up the suspense (evening knowing the ending) and then releasing it all in one big rush that I was quite carried away for the next hour or so. A real endorphin rush.

innerSpaceman

02-02-2011, 01:56 PM

I love movies that successfully have suspense when everyone in the audience already knows the ending.

And yes, I consider Star Wars one of those movies. :p

Strangler Lewis

02-02-2011, 02:21 PM

Like a good Columbo.

Chernabog

02-02-2011, 02:27 PM

Have to agree there with mousepod. Oh, except that I don't even have any desire to see The King's Speech, though I do like all the leading actors in it.

You can wait for Bluray. And I didn't think it would be interesting either cos of the subject matter, but it was. Rush and Firth were amazing. What's-her-face was good too, because the movie wasn't directed by Tim Burton.

Tim Burton's "The King's Speech" would have Johnny Depp as King George, dream-like flashbacks to his growing up with "King Daddy George" and a CGI trip through his larynx set to the music of Oingo Boingo.

Gn2Dlnd

02-02-2011, 03:00 PM

Helen Bonham-Crazy.

Moonliner

02-03-2011, 12:03 PM

Jan Favreau has passed on directing Iron Man 3 in favor of a new Disney movie: "The Magic Kingdom (http://screenrant.com/jon-favreau-magic-kingdom-movie-pauly-90983/)"

“The story for Magic Kingdom is essentially a family caught in Disneyland, bringing all of the attractions to life. I really want to plumb the depths of the history of the park because it’s a place I love to go a few times a year.”

Really? I mean really?

I wonder who will play the dad of the family. I can see either Robin Williams or Ben Stiller doing well in a role like that.

Alex

02-03-2011, 12:17 PM

Actually, if a Night at the Museum didn't already exist, that is a concept that could have some fun potential (I was surprised by how much I enjoyed that movie).

Strangler Lewis

02-03-2011, 12:22 PM

Yes, it would be cool if they made films that built stories around some of the Disney rides like Peter Pan, Dumbo, etc.

I think Jon Favreau should play the dad in a Jon Favreau way throughout, i.e., being totally unimpressed and irritated, "All right, we've seen it, let's move along so we can get the f*ck out of here someday."

Or maybe I should play the dad.

innerSpaceman

02-03-2011, 01:24 PM

Yes, considering that 3 or 4 movies have been made based on Disneyland attractions, and that at least a dozen other attractions are already based on movies, what's left to come alive? I'm pretty sure this leaves only Big Thunder Mountain and the Mark Twain. This is going to be a pretty boring movie.

SzczerbiakManiac

02-03-2011, 01:36 PM

Teacups?

Alex

02-03-2011, 01:36 PM

It all depends on how they come alive.

Admittedly, I don't have high hopes for it, but it isn't an idea without some potential.

Though one thing I'd take pause with is that, as hard as it is to believe, most people have never actually been to Disneyland and so deep familiarity can't really be assumed for the good gags.

innerSpaceman

02-03-2011, 01:55 PM

Sorry, SM, Teacups is based on a movie, based on a book.

Ok, which is better - Immortal Beloved based on the true story of Beethovan with a tiny bit of conjecture as to the riddle of his death letter mystery

-OR-

Amadeus - based on, well, almost pure fiction about Mozart?

I ask because I just saw Immortal Beloved for the first time, really liked it - but was much more charmed by Amadeus. It bugs me a bit, though, that my naive trust is abused because when I watch a movie about a famous historical figure, I assume it's mostly true - with the usual exceptions for dramatic license.

I mean, certainly everyone knew going in that something like Shakespeare in Love was a totally fictional account featuring historical characters. But was I completely clueless not to realize Amadeus was pretty much the same thing?

In any event, I liked learning about Beethovan's life through this movie better than I liked learning little about Mozart's life through the Oscar-winning Milos Forman pic. Oh, and I enjoy Beethovan's music better than Mozart's, too.

Of course, Gary Oldman's Beethovan was kind of a creep, and Thomas Hulce's Mozart was a ton of immature fun. So there's that. :cool:

Alex

02-03-2011, 02:05 PM

Unless it is an area I know reasonably well independently I just treat biographical and historical films as completely fictional.

If it requires a patina of reality to be entertaining then, frankly, it fails as a movie in my opinion.

To an extent this is even true of documentaries. I assume that there is not intentional distortion but unless I'm familiar with things I assume that the filmmaker could be so unintentionally distorting things as to be a useful document, but it can still be an entertaining film.

innerSpaceman

02-03-2011, 04:41 PM

I'm much more moved by true stories. I don't much mind if things have a dramatic slant, even in a documentary, but I will be much more involved in a story if I believe it somewhat really happened.

Maybe that's just me. But it's why I like A Night to Remember better than The Poseidon Adventure (and why mixing real with bullsh!t so blithely in Titanic really bugs me).

Alex

02-03-2011, 05:53 PM

I'm sure it isn't just you, but since I'm mostly unfamiliar with the factual basis, for example, it matters not at all to me whether The King's Speech and The Social Network are 100% factual or 100% fiction.

Now, that wouldn't be the case if I were familiar with them, not because I think the movie needs to be factual when I know about it, it is just that when I know the altered facts it distracts me from the movie to be wondering why they changed such and such (could be for good reasons, bad reasons, or just sloppiness).

So for that reason, it is probably best not to put Pearl Harbor on Midway for you World War II movie, but if I don't know, I wouldn't care.

innerSpaceman

02-03-2011, 08:53 PM

I think my curse is knowing a little bit about a lot of things, and a lot of stuff about very few things.

For instance, I didn't know enough about Mozart (and still don't) to know how vigorously Amadeus was pulling my leg. But I know enough about Facebook to wonder if The Social Network will bug me when I finally see it.

Hey, I know ZERO about the subject matter of The King's Speech, but I still have near zero desire to see it - even though I'm sure not to be bugged by inaccuracies. Too bad.

Alex

02-03-2011, 10:04 PM

There's very little Facebook (if you mean the actual web site) in the movie.

LSPoorEeyorick

02-04-2011, 09:07 AM

Too bad about your feelings toward King's Speech, iSm. Some people here may not care for it, but it was definitely my favorite film of the year.

innerSpaceman

02-04-2011, 10:26 AM

I'll Netflix it.

SzczerbiakManiac

02-04-2011, 11:37 AM

Sorry, SM, Teacups is based on a movie, based on a book.I was just trying to think of what would be the silliest ride to "come alive" and couldn't come up with anything better. :)

Ghoulish Delight

02-04-2011, 11:39 AM

I want to see Superstar Limo: The Movie

Moonliner

02-04-2011, 11:43 AM

I was just trying to think of what would be the silliest ride to "come alive" and couldn't come up with anything better. :)

Perhaps IASW will come to life and all the worlds children will banish the recently added Disney characters.

JWBear

02-04-2011, 11:45 AM

Perhaps IASW will come to life and all the worlds children will banish the recently added Disney characters.

Now THAT I'd pay good money to see!

Gemini Cricket

02-04-2011, 12:08 PM

I want to see Superstar Limo: The Movie
That wouldn't just so straight to DVD, it would go straight to the $3.99 bin at Blockbuster.

lashbear

02-05-2011, 12:33 AM

I think they should be chased out of the haunted mansion by the Hatbox Ghost.

Oh, wait.

Morrigoon

02-25-2011, 01:44 AM

So in the last week I've managed to see Black Swan and King's Speech. That takes me from having seen something from 2 categories up to 15.

Betty

03-07-2011, 09:00 AM

We never go to the movies - with a big screen at home and netflix, we see things later than everyone else but who cares!

However, my husband won a gift card to Regal so we took advantage of the kids going to the grandparent's house and went to see The Adjustment Bureau.

My quick review - no spoilers but just in case:

It was very meh. Not quite what I expected. It's more a love story than anything else. I wondered if it was based on a book (you know how they seem to take a great book and the movie never does it justice) and sure enough: "This film is loosely based on Philip Dick's science fiction short story "Adjustment Team" about a salesman who discovers that the world is controlled by outside guardians"

Have you read the short story?

Alex

03-07-2011, 11:51 AM

Yes, but I have no particular memory of it.

I liked the movie well enough. It isn't a timeless classic but it kept me engaged. Matt Damon has good charisma and he and Emily Blunt actually sold the "love at first sight" thing.

I'm glad it wasn't made into a non-stop action chase scene that it could have been and is frequently how people go wrong trying to translate PKD to film.

Ghoulish Delight

03-07-2011, 11:32 PM

Watched Social Network.

I wanted to not like it, but couldn't. The score almost ruined it, it started to become too present and overbearing during the first act - but it stopped just in time. Other than that, loved the FaceMash "hacking" bit, raised my scripter hackles. And, cliche as the setup line was, loved the "relationship status" moment. They totally stole the Real Genius dance set. And how the **** did Eisenberg hold that face for so long?!

The 'twins' had the best lines.

Not Afraid

03-08-2011, 03:30 PM

The Social Network is sitting on our coffee table. Soon.

innerSpaceman

03-08-2011, 03:56 PM

I want to see it. But I also want to watch the extras. Guess I have to buy it.

Ghoulish Delight

03-08-2011, 03:59 PM

For what it's worth, while I haven't read the book, I did as much reading around the intertubes after watching the movie, and the stuff that people talk about as being discrepancies between the book, fact, and the movie seem pretty inconsequential to me eye. YMMV.

innerSpaceman

03-08-2011, 05:11 PM

Ghoulish Delight

03-08-2011, 05:34 PM

I guess I just got ticked off from the get-go, because - and I haven't yet seen the film - the first scene is supposedly about him getting dumped by this girl and it's funny - except it never happened, and they've been happily married ever since college. I understand the scene is funny. But why lie about something that central to the man's life you're quasi-biographing?The fictional girl in the movie is not supposed to be the girl he eventually ends up with in real life at all. While he met that girl around the time of the movie, they didn't start dating until after the timeline of the movie. The girl in the movie is just there to set him up as someone who's relatively socially inept/more focused on his work than girls at that time in his life.

I also understand that, GD's review notwithstanding, it's a very good film.Huh? I said I tried NOT to like it, but couldn't. i.e., I liked it.

Cadaverous Pallor

03-08-2011, 06:17 PM

I also really liked it. Great performances. A movie of people having meetings made for surprisingly engaging storytelling.

I totally disagree with anyone who says it's too early to make this film. When it began and the year 2003 popped up on the screen, I thought, "was 2003 really that long ago?" The nature of the internet makes for quick history.

innerSpaceman

03-08-2011, 07:58 PM

Oh, sorry, I misread.

Why were you trying not to like it???

Ghoulish Delight

03-08-2011, 08:14 PM

'cause that's what all the cool kids are doing.

innerSpaceman

03-09-2011, 07:07 AM

OMG, are we in a post-facebook world already! Ack, us old folks can't keep up!

innerSpaceman

03-10-2011, 11:10 AM

Well, I really, really liked The Social Network and am not at all disappointed that it was the first movie I've ever purchased sight-unseen.

Now that I've seen it, I can see the element of the gal who rejected him was played up for emotional touchstone and bookends effect that I didn't get from simply hearing about the funny pre-credits scene. In that sense, oddly, I am fine with its emotional content being fictionalized.

In going back over the Time Person of the Year piece, I see that Zuckerberg does not deny ever being dumped by this girl. Only that he met the real love interest of his life, Priscilla Chan, before that. And so the thing with Erica and his feelings toward her throughout the film were likely made up for dramatic purposes. Oh well.

But I am interested in knowing how much of the story I enjoyed on film reflects what actually happened to characters I came to care about or loathe. From what I can glean, the script was careful to follow the testimony in the two lawsuits that form the structural backbone of the movie - and so I'm satisfied the film's events and characters bear an acceptable resemblance to fact for a "true story" movie.

And I found the 3 main characters really came to life for me, a testament to the script and the performances by Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield (whoa, hot stuff) and Justin Timberlake (surprisingly).

Dunno if I would have voted this Best Picture, since I haven't seen The King's Speech Yet ... and, heheh, much as I liked it, don't think it was better than Toy Story 3. ;)

JWBear

03-10-2011, 11:18 PM

We finally watched Megamind tonight. Very cute.

"Retired" Metro Man was HAWT!

Morrigoon

03-11-2011, 02:37 AM

Not surprisingly about Justin Timberlake. He gave a great performance in Love Guru. Okay, I was surprised too ;) But now I won't be.

SzczerbiakManiac

03-25-2011, 11:59 AM

Tom Hooper, who just won the Best Director Oscar for The King's Speech is set to direct (http://www.firstshowing.net/2011/oscar-winner-tom-hooper-directing-les-miserables-musical-next/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+firstshowing+%28FirstShowing. net%29&utm_content=Google+Reader) Les Misérables.

I love Les Miz and would be thrilled to see a good movie version of it, but I have a hard time imagining a studio allowing it to be the proper length.

Alex

03-25-2011, 01:45 PM

You can't make a good movie version of it because the good parts of the book are in the things that will never be put in a movie.

The musical is a fine musical as a standalone thing, but it is a faint shadow of the book.

Morrigoon

03-27-2011, 11:49 PM

The book is a ponderous tome with entire chapters devoted to expendable material (see the chapter about the convent, for a prime example, the only purpose of which was to say that Jean Valjean worked there, as it bore little bearing on the forward motion of the narrative).

The musical, however, cuts the book down to a mere 3 hours. But a 30-hour musical movie? The industry will never believe that American audiences could handle it.

wendybeth

03-28-2011, 12:30 AM

Sorry, Morri- but I disagree with your assessment of the book. I think perhaps to many people who have become accustomed to soundbites and synopsis it can be considered "ponderous",* but to me every word in that story is where and how it should be- to excise anything from the original story only serves to diminish it. I love the musical, but the original story is one of the greatest novels ever written, second ( imho) only to Flaubert's Madame Bovary.

(* Not directed at you- just at all of us who have had our brains altered by the computer age).

flippyshark

03-28-2011, 05:20 AM

The stage musical has been slowly whittled over its history to where it now runs 2.5 hours, as opposed to its original 3. Two and a half hours is a perfectly normal running time for a big event movie these days, so I don't see any real reason not to keep the musical intact. The real challenge will be dealing with all those gorgeous but motionless ballads. Having an actor stand alone on stage and sing is thrilling in person, and potentially deadly on film, and this show has a lot of that. I imagine there will wind up being many cutaways to illustrative montage during songs like "I Dreamed A Dream" or "Empty Chairs At Empty Tables" to avoid the spectacle of hapless actors lip syncing while looking forlorn for entire songs at a time. I hope it all works out. I adore this show. But it could be a ponderous bore of a movie if not handled carefully.

innerSpaceman

03-28-2011, 11:01 AM

I hated the musical, never read the book.

* * * * * * *

But last night, I saw a movie I was so intrigued by. It's called "Howl" and stars James Franco as beat-poet Allen Ginsberg, author of the eponymous 1955 poem. Also featuring David Strathairn, Bob Balaban, Jeff Bridges, and Jon Hamm - which wouldn't be unusual for a "Hollywood" movie - but this is more like a documentary - and yet not.

Yes, in that every word spoken by any character in the film was truly spoken by the characters they play. But otherwise, the scenarios were dramatically re-created, and not "reported" on in documentary style. The controversial poem at the center of the piece is rendered wonderfully in two ways - a re-staging of a 1955 Ginsberg reading (by Franco) at an underground club that was, of course, the epitome of the beat poet Go-Daddy-O scene so often lampooned and copied - - - and an animated accompaniment to a less-public-drama reading, also by James Franco, that constantly punctuates the action - which shifts between the censorship / obscenity trial of the poem's publisher, and an extended interview with Ginsberg that deftly illuminates the poem as it unfolds in the aforementioned treatments and at the trial.

It really is an unusual and, imo, an unusually successful format for a film. So I recommend it for that alone. But it's also equally worthwhile for the appreciation of this seminal work of poetry and of Ginsberg as a person that can be gleaned through this oddball, wonderful film.

Moonliner

03-28-2011, 11:28 AM

Snowflake

03-28-2011, 11:36 AM

Caught the first two parts of HBO's Mildred Pierce last night. Production values are fabulous. Costuming spectacularly spot on. Amazing that nothing was shot on the West Coast.

I'm missing the spiffy Warner Brothers dialogue. Overall, an enthusiastic response from me. The first two parts are set up, grittier than Hollywood gloss.

Good quality television and Guy Pearce is just slimey from the get go. Wally is just, ew.

Kate Winslet is very good. I'm not sure if I will like the grown up Veda or not.

Strangler Lewis

03-28-2011, 09:04 PM

flippyshark

03-29-2011, 09:05 AM

What did you think of the play VS the subsequent movie verison of Phantom of the Opera?

Phantom as a play? Terrific fun, and I liked several of the tunes before I became permanently tired of them. But, I'd go again if someone bought me a ticket.

The movie? I like Gerard Butler, but he was miscast here. That high note in Music of the Night is a real cringer. Also, I wish he had actually been pathetically ugly, not incredibly handsome with what looked like a bad sunburn on only part of his face. I liked the lush production values, but found the whole thing lacked energy. Also, I didn't care for the habit of replacing sung recitative with spoken dialog, especially as they didn't re-write it AS dialog. They just spoke lyrics in a very stilted self-conscious way. (Almost like they were ashamed to admit they were making a sung-through musical! I hope the makers of Les Mis simply commit to the form and sing out throughout.) Not disastrously bad, but never thrilling either. It just kind of thumps along, very expensively. (Also, Minnie Driver seems to be the only one having anything like a good time with the material - maybe a little bit TOO good a time? I could have made a decent sandwich out of that ham!)

As for the film of Evita, as mentioned by Strangler Lewis, I like that one a lot more, and thought the montage impressive, telling lots of story visually. But, yeah, I could see how that could be exhausting.

Has anyone here checked out the Phantom musical sequel Love Never Dies? Now, THAT is some mighty bold musical misfire! (Based on a focused listen through of the cast album, not an actual viewing) I bet it never gets anywhere near a movie screen, and good thing, too.

Alex

03-29-2011, 12:08 PM

Far overshadowed by the movie and eventually ALW but the novel Phantom of the Opera is worth a read as well.

flippyshark

03-29-2011, 05:59 PM

Far overshadowed by the movie and eventually ALW but the novel Phantom of the Opera is worth a read as well.

I read it several times during my "monster kid" youth. (I also built the Aurora plastic model and frequently checked out the 8mm highlights reel of the Lon Chaney version from the public library.)

Strangler Lewis

03-29-2011, 07:01 PM

As for Phantom as a play: when we did Hamlet in high school, Euro played the Ghost standing backstage and using a microphone. I don't remember anyone saying, "Ghost sounded like a guy backstage coming over the loudspeakers." Yet that is exactly the feeling I had seeing Phantom at the Orange County Performing Arts Center some years ago. Perhaps it could not be otherwise, or perhaps their sound engineer was unsubtle, but it was not very phantomy.

Morrigoon

03-31-2011, 03:21 PM

The movie? I like Gerard Butler, but he was miscast here. That high note in Music of the Night is a real cringer. Also, I wish he had actually been pathetically ugly, not incredibly handsome with what looked like a bad sunburn on only part of his face. I liked the lush production values, but found the whole thing lacked energy.
Agreed, but more so. Gerard Butler RUINED the movie for me. I enjoyed it on first viewing, but find it almost unwatchable since because I simply can't stand a Phantom that can't sing. Worst Phantom since Franc D'Ambrosio.

Production values kicked ass and the rest of the movie is great. I'd consider a rewatch if someone ran the play soundtrack over the film's soundtrack.

Also, I didn't care for the habit of replacing sung recitative with spoken dialog, especially as they didn't re-write it AS dialog. They just spoke lyrics in a very stilted self-conscious way. (Almost like they were ashamed to admit they were making a sung-through musical! I hope the makers of Les Mis simply commit to the form and sing out throughout.) Not disastrously bad, but never thrilling either. It just kind of thumps along, very expensively. (Also, Minnie Driver seems to be the only one having anything like a good time with the material - maybe a little bit TOO good a time? I could have made a decent sandwich out of that ham!)
Again agreed. I *hate* that Hollywood doesn't trust American audiences to a true musical.

They'd better not so much as attempt that with Les Mis. It's a through-composed musical and I can't see anything but disaster resulting from inserting spoken lines.

As for the film of Evita, as mentioned by Strangler Lewis, I like that one a lot more, and thought the montage impressive, telling lots of story visually. But, yeah, I could see how that could be exhausting.
Except for the part where they took all the best/funniest lines out and gave Madonna the song that belongs to the mistress she kicks out.

Alex: Agreed on the novel. Good read.

Morrigoon

03-31-2011, 03:24 PM

Ghoulish Delight

03-31-2011, 04:01 PM

Production values kicked ass and the rest of the movie is great.Really? I thought the cinematography was absolutely abysmal. Particularly during the big music numbers which were all filmed from a half mile away to be sure you couldn't possible get a glimpse at any sort of emotional performance from the actors (though perhaps that's more a commentary on the actors than the cinematographer.

innerSpaceman

04-04-2011, 12:23 PM

Saw Source Code over the weekend. A really fun flick making good use of a pretty good gimmick. Not quite up to Duncan Jones' debut feature (Moon), in my opinion, but a damn good movie nonetheless. I've heard some criticism that the ending defies the film's stated internal logic, but that was the entire point of the exercise, and anyone who didn't see it coming is really kinda stupid when it comes to films.

Oh, and Jake Gyllenhaal sporting a 3-day stubble throughout the proceedings as a heroic sweetie is a super-plus!

Alex

04-04-2011, 04:23 PM

The ending didn't defy the films logic, but it did leave unexplained something that the movie seemed to think it had explained. It also raises a few subsidiary considerations that aren't necessarily relevant but I'm curious whether they were thought through at all.

I enjoyed it. It was well paced which is good since the ending was obvious so too much clutter on the way there would have been a problem.

innerSpaceman

04-05-2011, 09:36 AM

Yeah, you don't see many mainstream movies clocking in a 90 minutes. That was a smart move, as was not going back to the 8-minute train loop too many times. I don't pay too much attention to internal logic McGuffin gobbledeegook talk, so I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to, Alex.

Spoiler tags, perhaps?

Ghoulish Delight

04-05-2011, 09:54 AM

Whoa (http://www.movieline.com/2011/04/keanu-reeves-announces-bill-ted-3-reveals-excellent-plot-details.php)

Alex

04-05-2011, 10:26 AM

I thought about it a bit more and it may not be the issue I thought it was.

My initial understanding of was was happening is that every time Source Code was invoked it spawned a new parallel universe, created entirely by Source Code.

So the question was, how did Source Code know all of the stuff outside of the direct experience of Sean Fentriss such that it could be used to accurately mirror what was had happened in the real world.

In other words, if all of that information is already in the computer, there should be someway to query it more directly.

But instead, I think it is correct to say that without the program people understanding it, they were actually injecting just him into the alternate reality that was, because it was forked from their specific moment of reality accurate.

So the movie explains it, but the movie doesn't explain why the scientist guy would think what he thought was the way Source Code works, since that doesn't make sense.

innerSpaceman

04-05-2011, 12:24 PM

Yeah ...

I suppose if there was an actual alternate reality spawned each time Capt. Colter Stevens (his porn name, I presume) was introduced via the Source Code procedure, it would not be reliant on the brain memory storage of the subject being replaced in that reality.

Sure, there's no explanation of why the programmers think they are tapping into a dead memory bank that's somehow subjectively malleable for its 8-minute duration. That seems a rather large error if indeed what's happening instead is the spawning of an actual alternate reality. But, yeah, that's the point of the film's McGuffin - they got it all wrong!

Personally, I think this film handled its lack of believable sci-fi explanation better than most, by rationally stating - in the midst of a real-world, time-of-the-essence emergency - that every second spent explaining the science is time detracted from completing the mission. To me, this is all the respect a film McGuffin deserves, and better than one usually gets.

Personally, I'd rather consider that Capt. Stevens ends up in an internally-generated fantasy world while still a lump of meat in the "real" world where he is not taken off life-support (that only having happened in his fantasy world). Admittedly, there are problems with that theory, not the least of which is how are we seeing him taken off life support if he's not "there" to witness it?

But, to me, that's less of a problem than him being able to send a text message from one particular alternate reality where the train explosion never happened and thus Source Code was never invoked ... to a completely different parallel universe where the Source Code was used, and thus Goodwin feels honor-bound to terminate his life-support. By the film's internal logic, he would only be able to text the Goodwin at the control center pre-Source Code, yet we see her receive the message in the post-Source Code control center.

Boggle on purpose, or by mistake? We'll never know.

Alex

04-05-2011, 01:27 PM

[quote=innerSpaceman;344841]Yeah ...

But, to me, that's less of a problem than him being able to send a text message from one particular alternate reality where the train explosion never happened and thus Source Code was never invoked ... to a completely different parallel universe where the Source Code was used, and thus Goodwin feels honor-bound to terminate his life-support. By the film's internal logic, he would only be able to text the Goodwin at the control center pre-Source Code, yet we see her receive the message in the post-Source Code control center.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but his text message did not cross from one reality to another. It stayed in the new alternate reality where he saved everybody on the train.

She unplugged him in the first reality based solely on his request and their conversation, that her never saw a text message.

innerSpaceman

04-05-2011, 02:20 PM

Oh, maybe I need to see it again.

But if she received the text in the universe where Colter never went on a mission, and thus never proposed he could do that ... was she just totally confused and baffled by receiving the text from the lump of meat in the freezer in the corner? Perhaps as confused as I am right now?

Assuming the text was sent and received in the same universe, why was he sending the text? In that universe, he was never sent on a mission. I mean, he was (and I guess he himself has memory of that), but his action in stopping the bomber before the train explodes changes the reality in that universe such that he never goes on the mission. Colter is not there at all, only Sean Fentress.

But even if this Sean is really Colter with all of Colter's memories ... Colter would know that in his current reality, he was never sent on a mission and thus Goodwin would not understand the significance of receiving a text from him. So why do it?

I think this is a film best not ruminated on too closely. It's way more messed up than Inception, imo. But I still liked it a lot.

Starring Jake instead of Leo gives it a leg up!

Gemini Cricket

04-05-2011, 02:24 PM

I haven't seen a new movie since Toy Story 3. Sad, no?

katiesue

04-05-2011, 02:32 PM

I haven't seen a new movie since Toy Story 3. Sad, no?

If you saw it in the theaters you're ahead of me. The last thing I saw was the last Harry Potter.

Kevy Baby

04-05-2011, 04:35 PM

I honestly can't remember the last time I went to a movie theater.

Alex

04-05-2011, 04:35 PM

But if she received the text in the universe where Colter never went on a mission, and thus never proposed he could do that ... was she just totally confused and baffled by receiving the text from the lump of meat in the freezer in the corner? Perhaps as confused as I am right now?

No. She's aware of what her project's mission is. She gets a text message that claims to be from the lump of meet in their freezer.

She might not believe it but the message tells her things about the program that are almost certainly super secret and also tells her she's going to learn about a foiled terrorist attack on a Chicago-bound train and that the terrorists name is X.

She's walking into Jeffrey Wright's (the black guy) office to show him this when she overhears the Army guy telling Wright about the terrorist attack, confirming the text message.

The message further tells her that is was her and him working together that actually foiled the message and so she should now understand what is really happening when, in this new timeline, they actually do use him and start spawning yet more alternate realities.

This actually creates an interesting idea for one long chain of alternate universes. Each time they use Source Code they prevent the terrorist act
in question and thus spawn a timeline in which the terrorist act did not occur and so Source Code was not yet put to the test until ultimately the program is defunded and shut down for no longer being needed.

Gemini Cricket

04-05-2011, 05:14 PM

If you saw it in the theaters you're ahead of me. The last thing I saw was the last Harry Potter.
If the last Harry Potter was after TS3 then HP was the last movie I saw in the theatre...

cirquelover

04-06-2011, 09:28 AM

I rented Love & Other Drugs. I actually found it to be a very good story. I like Ann Hathaway but was unsure if she would be able to pull off this role. I was pleasantly surprised.

We also rented Unstoppable. It was ok but the boy really liked it. Then again if there is things being destroyed he is a happy boy.

innerSpaceman

04-06-2011, 11:13 AM

How much naked Jake is in Love & Other Drugs? I have a good Jake jones going right now.

cirquelover

04-06-2011, 01:12 PM

I recall some really nice shots of his ass. They were a pretty steamy couple

innerSpaceman

04-06-2011, 02:33 PM

Sold.

Alex

04-06-2011, 02:58 PM

There's quite a bit of naked. Plenty of Anne naked too.

And a solid romantic drama. Probably not the kind of thing that'll be remembered in 20 years but not remotely a burn.

innerSpaceman

04-06-2011, 03:55 PM

Believe it or not, I will appreciate some naked Hathaway, too - - but above all, appreciate a decent romantic film.

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

04-07-2011, 06:03 PM

Far overshadowed by the movie and eventually ALW but the novel Phantom of the Opera is worth a read as well.

Agreed. There's even some loveliness in there. The silent film is also very good and probably the most faithful adaptation, save the end.

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

04-07-2011, 06:10 PM

Been on a Michael Fassbender binge.

Angel = HORRIBLE. He's good but everything else is horrid.
Fish Tank = Very, very good film.
Centurion = Like other Neil Marshall movies, fun for the sake of fun mostly. And gory. And full of frightening women.

Saw the latest Jane Eyre (also starring M.F.) and thought it was a bit plodding, actually. Though they played around with the chronology in how they told the story, so made it a somewhat unique adaptation. Threw in a bit more obvious UST than the usual. But as the cast Rochesters get more and more attractive, Jane seems more and more like a liar when she tells him she doesn't think him handsome. Heh.

innerSpaceman

04-11-2011, 05:03 PM

So I watched Love and Other Drugs, and found it kinda meh. Jake is adorable, but I guess I don't much like it when the whole plot is about him knowing what a hot stud he is.

Also, even though the story WAS about the health industry, I find romcoms where the girl has a terminal illness to be pretty heavy-handed.

flippyshark

04-12-2011, 03:46 PM

So, in the last year, I have not gone to the cinema often, but here are some of the movies I've gone to: Inception, Unknown, The Adjustment Bureau, Limitless, and today, Source Code. And they're all really blending together! (It's partly because I won't go to see comedies in the theater- they seem like video fodder to me - and these alternate reality/sci-fi things just seem to always catch me when I have free time and a free pass, as was the case today.)

Anyway, Source Code- I enjoyed it. However, I would have liked it more if

It had ended at the "frozen in time" moment just a few minutes away from the end. In other words, if it had left the existence of the happy alternative future ambiguous. I would have found that really lovely.

Also, I was surprised to learn that I'm only nine years older than super-cute Michelle Monaghan.

Moonliner

04-13-2011, 04:12 AM

I don't get to the theater much anymore, but I did just get my Bluray version of The Incredibles.

Time to break some more dishes (http://www.loungeoftomorrow.com/LoT/showpost.php?p=345126&postcount=5).

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

04-13-2011, 05:59 PM

SUPER. James Gunn at his best. I loved its violence, its humor, the characters, the actors, and the squishy, bleeding heart at its center.

innerSpaceman

04-14-2011, 11:34 AM

So, EH1812, what would you say to combat my not-yet-seen-it impression that SUPER is just a riff off last year's Kick Ass?

flippyshark

04-15-2011, 06:50 AM

Moonliner

04-15-2011, 12:09 PM

I wonder if they can do this one justice.

Atlas Shrugged (Part 1) (http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/atlas-shrugged-movie-trailer)

flippyshark

04-15-2011, 12:31 PM

I wonder if they can do this one justice.

Atlas Shrugged (Part 1) (http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/atlas-shrugged-movie-trailer)

Apparently not. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_i/) I find the prospect of a two part movie based on that tedious tome mighty daunting. A movie about Rand and her coterie of devotees could actually be fascinating, but this looks deadly.

Moonliner

04-15-2011, 12:47 PM

Apparently not. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_i/) I find the prospect of a two part movie based on that tedious tome mighty daunting. A movie about Rand and her coterie of devotees could actually be fascinating, but this looks deadly.

86% like is a fairly high rating.

Ghoulish Delight

04-15-2011, 12:47 PM

No matter what the content or quality of the movie, it will end up being nothing more than a catalyst for more tiresome soundbytery about free markets, tea parties, blah blah blah blah

flippyshark

04-15-2011, 01:04 PM

86% like is a fairly high rating.

Indeed, I was referring to the critical response. I'm inclined to think that the positive audience response is from a highly self-selecting group who are sympathetic to the Objectivist message, and less concerned with the film's entertainment value. (It looks wooden and amateurish in the trailer, I gotta say, regardless of viewpoint. i'm happy to stand corrected, but I'd have to hear from people I really trust.)

Yeah, any discussion of Objectivism per se would have to migrate to a different thread, and I've had that discussion enough times in my life. No ill will implied.

Moonliner

04-15-2011, 01:57 PM

Indeed, I was referring to the critical response. I'm inclined to think that the positive audience response is from a highly self-selecting group who are sympathetic to the Objectivist message, and less concerned with the film's entertainment value. (It looks wooden and amateurish in the trailer, I gotta say, regardless of viewpoint. i'm happy to stand corrected, but I'd have to hear from people I really trust.)

Yeah, any discussion of Objectivism per se would have to migrate to a different thread, and I've had that discussion enough times in my life. No ill will implied.

Agreed, we'll have to wait and see what our resident movie expert has to say about this flick. Speaking of which, where is Scaegales anyways?

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

04-15-2011, 02:08 PM

So, EH1812, what would you say to combat my not-yet-seen-it impression that SUPER is just a riff off last year's Kick Ass?

There are a ton of super hero movies and tv shows. There are a ton of movies/tv shows about supernatural this and that, cops, lawyers, etc. So I don't have any problem with there being two films that deal with people trying to be super heroes who have no powers.

I thought Kick Ass was a disappointing bore and badly overdone. I think James Gunn handled his story better, and it's original rather than based on a comic book. I don't know. SUPER is a film right up my alley but I can totally understand friends having a very different reaction to it. I love James Gunn's outrageous humor and less polished approach to the subject matter. He's from the Troma school of filmmakers. I just love him a lot, so am probably biased.

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

04-15-2011, 02:09 PM

It's coming out in August, which is often a bad sign, but I am ridiculously excited about Rise of the Planet of the Apes (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/fox/apeswillrise/). No apparent connection to the Tim Burton misfire. It looks like B movie bliss to me!

Seems like a super fun take on an origin story. Trailer was very entertaining and the WETA apes actually look pretty great.

Ghoulish Delight

04-15-2011, 02:10 PM

I thought Kick Ass was a disappointing bore and badly overdone.
And this is why I give very much weight to your Super review. Couldn't agree more.

Alex

04-15-2011, 02:16 PM

And that rating is based in 5000+ user ratings. I doubt that 5000 people in the world have seen it yet, let alone 5000 Rotten Tomato users.

innerSpaceman

04-15-2011, 02:34 PM

Wow, and I LOVED, LOVED, LOVED Kick Ass. Does that mean I would likely not like Super?

Oh, and I'll be seeing Atlas Shrugged, if only via Netflix later. It's one of the first novels I ever read, and I'm just too curious to pass it up entirely.

Moonliner

04-15-2011, 02:52 PM

Indeed, I was referring to the critical response.

Now that you bring it up:

6% from reviewers and 86% from the audience. I wonder if that disparity is a record for rotten tomato. At the very least I would have to agree with your observation that something fishy is going on.

Cadaverous Pallor

04-15-2011, 03:58 PM

The numbers on RT are always crazy before wide release.

Cadaverous Pallor

04-15-2011, 04:02 PM

Oh, and I'll be seeing Atlas Shrugged, if only via Netflix later. It's one of the first novels I ever read, and I'm just too curious to pass it up entirely.Wow, I had no idea this was happpening. I like that they've cast somewhat unknown people. Intriguing.

ETA - I think l'll watch this one alone ;)

JWBear

04-15-2011, 10:25 PM

I wonder if they can do this one justice.

Atlas Shrugged (Part 1) (http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/atlas-shrugged-movie-trailer)

I heard about that one. I'll pass, thank you.

Not Afraid

04-15-2011, 11:38 PM

We are permanently behind on our movie watching - and choosy to boot. Netflix brought us A Single Man today, which we watched tonight. The film was beautiful beyond belief. One of the most stunning films I've ever seen that isn't made up of sweeping vistas and lush greenery. The story was powerful, the acting brilliant, the focused shots and the color faded added so much to the feel of the picture. I really loved everything about it except the melancholy mood it has put me in.

innerSpaceman

04-18-2011, 06:49 AM

I rather liked The Conspirator. It was presented in a rather staid, old-school film style - but I found that perfectly appropriate to an historical piece about the aftermath of the Lincoln assassination. It's a bit of history I was personally ignorant of, and the two lead performances were excellent - so I really enjoyed it.

Also, having experienced the eerie movie-release timing of The China Syndrome to the Three Mile Island events several decades ago, I had a strange sense of deja-vu - since just this week it was announced that plans had been scuttled to hold civil trials for Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and 4 other 9/11 plotters, and instead subject them to "military tribunals."

Redford made no bones about comparing the injustice of the assassination plotters' trial to current events - but unless he was making up American history out of whole cloth, I found the comparisons pretty apt - and the timing could not have been much better.

JWBear

04-19-2011, 10:58 PM

We finally saw The King's Speech tonight. Loved it!

Not Afraid

04-20-2011, 10:40 AM

It's being delivered tomorrow for us. I can't wait. It's a Firth Fest here!

Snowflake

04-20-2011, 10:45 AM

It's being delivered tomorrow for us. I can't wait. It's a Firth Fest here!

Dammit, we're on the shortlist waiting....I'll console myself with Pride and Prejudice in the meantime.

innerSpaceman

04-20-2011, 12:02 PM

I gotta admit, I found The King's Speech so booooring, I fell asleep during it.

But under the assumption I was just really sleepy, I'll give it another shot some day. I'm in no hurry, though. I really didn't see what all the fuss was about, and wouldn't be surprised if this was just another in a long string of Best Picture WTFs.

Alex

04-20-2011, 12:25 PM

While it wasn't my pick for best picture, I did think it was a very pleasant movie without much to say.

Strangler Lewis

04-20-2011, 12:58 PM

While it wasn't my pick for best picture, I did think it was a very pleasant movie without much to say.

The King's Speech is my favorite of the six nominees I've made it through so far.

As to what it has to say, it's about friendship, honor, the importance of a fantasy and doing one's duty when you're thrown into a situation you're ill prepared for.

If you take out the part about doing one's duty in difficult situations, it's basically Toy Story 3, except without the claw jokes.

innerSpaceman

04-20-2011, 02:33 PM

And the excitement, and the humor, and the interestingness, and the entertainment value. Yep, just like TS3.

Ghoulish Delight

04-20-2011, 10:20 PM

The Constipator?

cirquelover

05-03-2011, 11:32 AM

It was free movie Monday from Redbox yesterday. I picked up Rabbit Hole, probably not the best selection given my mood lately. Anywho it was a very good drama but it was also depressing. It made me think about things that probably would have been best to not be in my brain at the moment. I think I'll have to rent it again when I'm in a better frame of mind. I like Nicole Kidman and she did a very good job in this movie.

I do not suggest CP rents it, or anyone with small children. Although it is poignant and touching in places it can also spin you off into what ifs.

The second movie, Zach didn't want his code, is Secretariat. At least that should be more litehearted, I hope. Maybe I should have gotten Yogi Bear, at least it would be good for groans ;)

innerSpaceman

05-03-2011, 12:02 PM

Saw another slice of American History movie yesterday, Fair Game, about the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame scandal of the Bush years/Iraq War. Great performances by Sean Penn as Wilson and Naomi Watts as Plame. The DVD commentary was particularly surreal, by Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame.

Over the weekend, I watched another movie about a bit of lesser American History, Cinema Verite, an HBO movie about the ground-breaking, first "reality" show, PBS series of the early 70's, "An American Family." Really interesting time capsule stuff.

alphabassettgrrl

05-03-2011, 12:28 PM

Just watched "Normal". Interesting movie. Well made.

Moonliner

05-04-2011, 07:34 AM

The Lion King? In 3D (http://www.amazon.com/Lion-Four-Disc-Diamond-Blu-ray-Digital/dp/B004WDRT1Y/ref=pd_bxgy_d_img_c)?
Beauty and the Beast? In 3D (http://www.amazon.com/Beauty-Beast-Five-Disc-Combo/dp/B004WE01YA/ref=bxgy_cc_d_img_b)?

I don't have or plan to have 3D at home anytime soon but I'm still curious about how well this is going to work out.

Snowflake

05-04-2011, 09:53 AM

Just saw The Wildest Dream, amazing photography. Inconclusive on whether or not Mallory did make the summit. Indications are he and Irvine were on the way back down. Also had some amazing vintage footage and not enough Alan Rickman on the soundtrack (FYI for Pru).

cirquelover

05-09-2011, 09:42 PM

JWBear

05-14-2011, 05:42 PM

Alex

05-14-2011, 05:50 PM

Bridesmaids was enjoyable if you're willing to sit through gross out comedy (I am) and the comedy of personal embarrassment (harder for me).

Moonliner

05-14-2011, 08:42 PM

We just saw Thor this afternoon. *sigh* Chris Hemsworth *sigh*.

For the life of me, I can't remember much about the plot. Something was distracting me. I'm just going to have to watch it again... (and again, and again....)

I saw it today as well. Being somewhat less distracted, I also don't remember much about the plot, largely because there was not much of one.

Overall I had the feeling that much like the comic itself, Thor is the lesser child in the Marvel movie franchise.

BarTopDancer

05-15-2011, 12:47 AM

I saw Thor tonight as well. It kept my attention (all of it, not just the scenes I was drooling over). It also made me realize, despite my love for all things Stargate, the new BSG, Sanctuary and other SciFi, computers and technonogy how much of a geek I am not.

flippyshark

05-16-2011, 05:40 PM

Things I wish had actually happened:
Jodorowsky's DUNE (http://twitchfilm.com/news/2011/05/cannes-2011-exclusive-jodorowskys-dune-promo-video.php)!

At least we get a "what might have been" documentary out of it.

Check out the video clip. That would have been the strangest shoot in film history. Ah, I could listen to Alexandro talk his enticing brand of crazy all day long.

innerSpaceman

05-16-2011, 06:51 PM

Ugh ... so tantalizing!

Moonliner

05-23-2011, 11:31 AM

Things I wish had actually happened:
Jodorowsky's DUNE (http://twitchfilm.com/news/2011/05/cannes-2011-exclusive-jodorowskys-dune-promo-video.php)!

A film about a film that never happened. Huh. So if it's successful will the sequel be the actual movie?

flippyshark

05-23-2011, 01:11 PM

A film about a film that never happened. Huh. So if it's successful will the sequel be the actual movie?

Well, ever since Lost In La Mancha came out, there have been rumors that Terry Gilliam's The Man Who Killed Don Quixote might actually get made.

Alex

05-23-2011, 01:14 PM

It's not the only example of the genre: Lost in La Mancha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_in_La_Mancha).

Ghoulish Delight

05-23-2011, 03:09 PM

This trailer (http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=6CloKbXtD28) has a little surprise, keep watching :)

flippyshark

05-23-2011, 03:21 PM

This trailer (http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=6CloKbXtD28) has a little surprise, keep watching :)

Can't wait!

Not Afraid

05-23-2011, 04:43 PM

Watched The King's Speech last night. That movie would be nothing and nowhere without Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush. They are both amazing actors to watch.

Snowflake

05-23-2011, 07:28 PM

Watched The King's Speech last night. That movie would be nothing and nowhere without Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush. They are both amazing actors to watch.

I totally heart Colin Firth and am happy he won an aAcademy Award. I think Geoffrey Rush was robbed, he stole the movie and should have stolen all the awards, too.

Last night watched The Illusionist (animated film, not Edward Norton film from a while back) The Jacques Tati story was touching, funny and sad. I wept at the end. Animation was beautiful.

katiesue

05-23-2011, 07:59 PM

This trailer (http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=6CloKbXtD28) has a little surprise, keep watching :)

Love it - they played it before On Stranger Tides (which bites by the way). Can't wait to see it.

flippyshark

05-23-2011, 08:29 PM

Love it - they played it before On Stranger Tides (which bites by the way). Can't wait to see it.

I didn't have a miserable time watching On Stranger Tides. (It wasn't as bloated, overbearing and noisy as the third entry, which I found punishingly awful) On the other hand, once it was over, I was struck by how indifferent it all was. Depp was a third (or fourth) wheel most of the time. The way the romantic sub-plot (with the missionary and Syrena) ended up didn't make much sense, but I cared so little it didn't matter. Did she take him underwater to his death? He certainly didn't deserve that. Did she take him to some magical safe haven where he could be outfitted with gills and a tail? I couldn't be bothered to care, but it seemed like a weird throwaway. And while I'm at it, why was Angelique so keen on keeping Mr. Holy-pants alive? He played no role in the main denouement, and she didn't seem to miss him at all once he disappeared. I'll have forgotten the whole thing by this time tomorrow, so little impact did it make.

Was the afore-mentioned trailer in 3D? Will the movie be?

Alex

05-23-2011, 08:41 PM

As for the romance, I suspect that there'll be more in the next two movies.

katiesue

05-23-2011, 09:33 PM

Maddie wasn't thrilled about the romance either.

She did explain to me that when they were all in the boat waiting for the mermaids they said that if you kiss a mermaid you can never drown. So I guess he can live in mermaid land now?

And why were the Spanish even there?

Moonliner

05-24-2011, 09:57 AM

I decided after the last two atrocities I was done with the Pirates franchise unless the vibe on Tides was overwhelmingly positive. That does not seem to be the case so I'll pass on this one for now.

Moonliner

05-27-2011, 08:25 AM

Busting out of work early: Check.
Fresh load of Netflix Blu-rays on their way: Check
Moonliners "Hole in the head" home theater finally ready for action: Check
Hot air popper and fresh popping corn: Check
Plenty of Coke: Check
Three day weekend: Check.

My cheese is happy. :D

Kevy Baby

05-27-2011, 09:05 AM

Plenty of Coke: CheckHuh: I always thought you were a meth guy

flippyshark

05-27-2011, 02:09 PM

Moonliner

05-27-2011, 02:36 PM

So what are you watching?

Vanishing Point
Aliens
Galaxyquest
Kings Speech
Unstoppable
Bull Durham
Moonstruck
Gone with the wind
The Wizard of Oz
The Incredibles
Apollo 13
Titanic
Across the Universe

Are the new Blu-rays that have built up while I was building/painting the room. I plan to start with Aliens and after that see where the wind takes me.

flippyshark

05-27-2011, 02:55 PM

I have the whole Alien quadrilogy Blu-Ray box set and spent a long weekend with it a few months ago. It was terrific. (I watched it all - alternate cuts and hours and hours of extras included. I was Alien-saturated by the end, but I'm still all agog about the upcoming not-really-a-prequel from Ridley Scott.)

I'm contemplating an Ape-O-Rama weekend myself. (Sans Tim Burton version) I can't wait for Rise of the Apes. I hope it won't suck.

alphabassettgrrl

05-27-2011, 09:14 PM

Ghoulish Delight

05-27-2011, 09:21 PM

Finally got around to 127 Hours

I can't add to the many superlatives that have already been slung. Really "enjoyed" it, if that's the word. As a father, though, I call emotional shenanigans for using images of him as a child/his future child. Total tear-jerker cheating, the bastards!

innerSpaceman

05-28-2011, 12:36 PM

I believe when life flashes before your eyes pre-demise, your childhood is included. And that if you're going to summon enough will to live to knaw off your own arm with your teeth (or the equivalent), picturing your own child or child-perhaps-to-be is good incentive. I can't recall if they employed one or both shameless tactics. ;)

Ghoulish Delight

05-28-2011, 12:54 PM

Both.

Kevy Baby

05-30-2011, 08:00 PM

We are watching Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (yeah, we never saw it in the theatres). Hopefully we can stay away until the end

Kevy Baby

05-30-2011, 08:08 PM

The wedding dress that Fleur is wearing is freaking GORGEOUS!!!

flippyshark

05-30-2011, 08:41 PM

I just watched HP and the DH Part I a few nights ago and enjoyed it. (I fell into a deep slumber when I tried to watch it at the theater last year.) I rented it through the iTunes store, and I was struck by how very dim the image was throughout. The colors were muted and washed out in all but a few scenes, I presume on purpose. This is how the last few HP movies have looked to me at the theater as well - dark and dim. I was thinking this was due to bad projection at the local cinema, but it looks as though it's often a conscious choice to make films so murky I begin to worry about my eyesight. (By immediate contrast, the iTunes menu screens and trailers for other movies looked vivid and bright on the very same monitor just moments before and after I began streaming HP. I checked because I was so shocked at the dimness of the HP image.)

Given that 3D cinema showings leach even more light from movies, I am most definitely going to attend the final HP film in 2D!

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 10:56 AM

Given that 3D cinema showings leach even more light from movies, I am most definitely going to attend the final HP film in 2D!

Be sure to keep an weather eye out for 2D shown via 3D lenses (http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2011/05/22/misuse_of_3_d_digital_lens_leaves_2_d_movies_in_th e_dark/?page=full).

moviegoers in the Boston area are being left in the dark thanks to the regular misuse of the lenses on new digital projection equipment at many of the region’s major theater chains. But almost no one at the theaters or their corporate headquarters is willing to talk about it.

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 11:05 AM

Vanishing Point
Aliens
Galaxyquest
Kings Speech
Unstoppable
Bull Durham
Moonstruck
Gone with the wind
The Wizard of Oz
The Incredibles
Apollo 13
Titanic
Across the Universe

Are the new Blu-rays that have built up while I was building/painting the room. I plan to start with Aliens and after that see where the wind takes me.

*sigh*

I managed a grand total of two movies over the three days. GalaxyQuest and Vanishing Point. GQ never ceases to amuse (it's the little things in life you live for) and the girl on the motorcycle in VP is one of the all time classic move scenes so I guess I can't complain too loudly.

I did get out and about some which was nice. I even saw lipstick on a hog. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/29/palin-arrival-rolling-thunder-feeds-election-speculation-fury/)

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 11:18 AM

Hobbit news:

New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. and MGM announced Monday that "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" will be released Dec. 14, 2012. The sequel, "The Hobbit: There and Back Again," is to be released Dec. 13, 2013.

Does anyone know, are they breaking "The Hobbit" up into two movies or is one based on the relatively short novel and another on something else?

innerSpaceman

05-31-2011, 11:46 AM

Breaking up the 30-page The Hobbit into two movies. Milk, milk, milk the stupid cow.

flippyshark

05-31-2011, 11:55 AM

Heck, I don't think the last Harry Potter book needed to be two movies, and it was a big fat 1800 page monster. The Hobbit is indeed a slender volume, and I bet neither film will clock in at less than 2 hours and 55 minutes. Heck, maybe they'll just throw in Tom Bombadil to kill time.

Snowflake

05-31-2011, 12:22 PM

"Bell, Book, and Candle"

Interesting. Movie making and acting were quite different back then. First observation: actresses were younger and trying to look older as opposed to now, they're older and trying to look younger. Fascinating.

Less background music (a plus; it's less distracting); slower pace (again, a plus; feels less frantic); quick enough to not be boring; I kind of like the men being in suits.

I love this movie. Kim Novak is note perfect and Jack Lemmon and Ernie Kovacs are a riot. Really. Lemmon steals the film. Then there is Hermoinie Gingold.

I've always wanted to have a cat named Pywacket.

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 12:25 PM

CoasterMatt

05-31-2011, 12:49 PM

Hey Moonliner, I've got a couple of DVDs you should check out...

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 12:59 PM

Hey Moonliner, I've got a couple of DVDs you should check out...

I don't know if I should be excited or scared.

katiesue

05-31-2011, 01:02 PM

I don't know if I should be excited or scared.

Scared (and I didn't even see them). Just say "No".

BarTopDancer

05-31-2011, 01:29 PM

Hey Moonliner, I've got a couple of DVDs you should check out...

I don't know if I should be excited or scared.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO is the correct answer.

CoasterMatt

05-31-2011, 02:53 PM

But there's Donald Duck! and goldfish! and Herve Villachaize!!

innerSpaceman

05-31-2011, 03:00 PM

I did a bit of checking, my impression is "The Hobbit" is the first movie, and the second one is something else.
And what exactly gives you that impression?

BarTopDancer

05-31-2011, 04:03 PM

But there's Donald Duck! and goldfish! and Herve Villachaize!!

I don't care that the fish is gay. I mean gay. excuse me. I mean lived.

CoasterMatt

05-31-2011, 04:43 PM

There's no clowns, though.

Moonliner

05-31-2011, 07:04 PM

And what exactly gives you that impression?

Primarily because they are bringing back Orlando Bloom who's character does not appear in the Hobbit.

innerSpaceman

05-31-2011, 07:34 PM

Oh, I'm sure they are stretching it out quite a bit (perhaps even having wrong Lothlorien elves hanging out at Rivendell by chance). But the subtitle of the second film is "There and Back Again," which much more strongly implies the conclusion of Bilbo's adventures in The Hobbit.

Oh well, we'll see. I rather like your notion better, Moonliner - because I think splitting this small tale into two separate admission films, released a year apart at that, is a wee bit retarded ... and, ya know, craven.

flippyshark

05-31-2011, 07:39 PM

A couple of years ago, when The Hobbit was going to be a Benecio Del Toro movie, the press indicated that it would be first movie - The Hobbit, second movie, interim stuff that leads up to the trilogy. Now that it's back to Peter Jackson, he says it's really just The Hobbit, in two parts. So, it's going to be ridiculously padded, sounds like.

BarTopDancer

05-31-2011, 10:41 PM

But the most important question is...Is Aragon and his scruffy hotness going to be back?

Alex

05-31-2011, 11:21 PM

If Peter Jackson is involved in making it, my interest is hovering somewhere around a medium negative number.

alphabassettgrrl

06-01-2011, 10:53 AM

I've always wanted to have a cat named Pywacket.

It's a great name for a cat! Not every cat can pull it off, but for a cat who can do it, wonderful! :)

Alex

06-01-2011, 07:30 PM

If you were curious what The Hangover would have been like it if were simply mean-spirited and all the funny had been removed, go see The Hangover, Part II (which is weird, because I thought Due Date was The Hangover with the funny removed).

innerSpaceman

06-02-2011, 06:25 AM

And yet, apparently adding mean and subtracting funny, oh and of course adding the label "II" gets you the biggest 5-day holiday weekend opening in cinema history. Sheesh.

Moonliner

06-02-2011, 06:28 AM

And yet, apparently adding mean and subtracting funny, oh and of course adding the label "II" gets you the biggest 5-day holiday weekend opening in cinema history. Sheesh.

Sounds like someone knew they had a bomb on their hands and released it to as many screens as possible. Unless of course it continues to play strong this week in which case people are just weird.

innerSpaceman

06-02-2011, 06:48 AM

I don't know that it's a bomb. I seems, from all I've heard, to be a total remake, but without everything that made the first one fantastic. Perfect sequel formula. Idiots everywhere eat it up.

Alex

06-02-2011, 10:58 AM

On another board I post to there are plenty of people saying they liked it and even that it is better than the first.

I disagree, but it has supporters.

mousepod

06-03-2011, 09:05 AM

Finally saw the first one last week. Didn't love it, but I think it was because I watched it alone - that kind of movie seems to need a group viewing to convey its 'funny' somehow.

Personally, I expected a darker flick, a la "Very Bad Things", which I loved.

It's odd for me to be old enough to realize that the "daring" and "edgy" studio movies are nowhere near as edgy as the '70s and '80s movies that inform them.

Last weekend, we watched "Pretty Maids All In A Row". That is a movie that no studio would make now - and we're poorer for it.

innerSpaceman

06-03-2011, 10:18 AM

X-Men: First Class was really rather rad. Michael Fassbinder and James McAvoy are excellent in the leads, and the production was fast-paced, fun, dramatic, intelligent, and Sixties Suave. Highly recommended for beyond the fanboy set.

Also saw great trailers for Green Hornet, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and Harry Potter Finale. So excited for all those, too! Pirates of the What?

Alex

06-03-2011, 10:29 AM

Have they released new trailers for Green Hornet and Rise of the Planet of the Apes? The ones I've seen looked awful.

innerSpaceman

06-03-2011, 11:38 AM

Not to me. :p

(I'm pretty sure these were brand-spanking new trailers. Know for a fact the Apes one was.)

Alex

06-03-2011, 11:51 AM

Well, then hopefully they change my mind.

Green Lantern feels like it has been coming out for about three years now. I'm exhausted with it and it hasn't even hit the really heavy push yet.

I'm just generally burned out on the Apes franchise, so even really well done apes doesn't have much appeal to me.

innerSpaceman

06-03-2011, 04:22 PM

The new trailer for Apes is all over the interweb if you want to check it out. Hold on, I'll find a linky.

Here Ya Go. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3tidwW1gGM)

While you may be burned out over the Apes franchise, I - on the other hand - need to wash the taste of Tim Burton's take on it Out Of My Head.

Cadaverous Pallor

06-04-2011, 01:19 PM

The trailer doesn't evoke "Planet of the Apes" to me - looks like a standard sci-fi scary animals film (Them, The Birds, the list is endless). How are there thousands and thousands of apes instantly in the city?

We saw MacGruber last night - very funny. Will Forte run amok. I wouldn't allow myself to believe that the villain was actually Val Kilmer. Yeech. He used to be so hot!

Moonliner

06-04-2011, 03:07 PM

The trailer doesn't evoke "Planet of the Apes" to me - looks like a standard sci-fi scary animals film (Them, The Birds, the list is endless). How are there thousands and thousands of apes instantly in the city?

If they follow the earlier movies, Apes are used as domestic servants in many households.

Alex

06-04-2011, 07:48 PM

X-Men: First Class is an unusually well written comic book movie. And a standardly blandly filmed one. High meh.

Cadaverous Pallor

06-04-2011, 09:08 PM

If they follow the earlier movies, Apes are used as domestic servants in many households.Did I miss something in the trailer?

innerSpaceman

06-04-2011, 11:35 PM

Did I miss something in the trailer?

Nope. Moonie's just pointing out one possible answer to your question, a logical one based on the scenario in, ya know, the Planet of the Apes series.

X-Men: First Class is an unusually well written comic book movie. And a standardly blandly filmed one. High meh.
Well, to me, the smart writing, nice performances, and fun of it overrode any pedestrianism I might have noticed in the direction. Sometimes, though, I noticed quite the opposite. I liked all the James Bond touches. I liked the training segment which used split screens instead of standard montage.

I don't know that it will stand up so well to repeated viewings, but I really liked XMFC and, though not a particularly high bar, consider it way near the top rung of comic book movies.

JWBear

06-06-2011, 08:54 AM

CoasterMatt

06-06-2011, 10:16 AM

Deathly Hallows looks great on a properly calibrated screen. Now even the movie theaters can't get that right.

flippyshark

06-06-2011, 04:17 PM

Deathly Hallows looks great on a properly calibrated screen. Now even the movie theaters can't get that right.

But shouldn't it look great on a hi-def monitor? It's a real chore to watch, and no projectionist to blame. (see my post a page or so back.)

Kevy Baby

06-06-2011, 08:57 PM

We finally saw Deathly Hallows I last night. When people said that it was a dark movie I didn't realize they meant it so literally! Most of the movie was so dimly lit that while watching it at night with all the lights out we still couldn’t make out what was happening in half the movie! A lot of scenes were just vague moving shapes.

Deathly Hallows looks great on a properly calibrated screen. Now even the movie theaters can't get that right.

But shouldn't it look great on a hi-def monitor? It's a real chore to watch, and no projectionist to blame. (see my post a page or so back.)We watched on a 65" Mitsubishi DLP and didn't have any problems. Ours is a little more bright than most (part of why we chose this model), so that may have something to do with it.

BarTopDancer

06-06-2011, 09:18 PM

I wouldn't allow myself to believe that the villain was actually Val Kilmer. Yeech. He used to be so hot!

So did Richard Dean Anderson (moreso in my favorite TV series EVEAH! than in MacGyver). I did a triple take check IMDB to see recent photos of him after the MacGrybber/MacGyver cameo on SNL.

Kevy Baby

06-06-2011, 11:33 PM

Along those lines, see if you can guess who this is in the picture below (met him over the weekend)

Hint/Trivia:
While hs is probably better known as Neidermeir in Animal House along with a reprisal of the character in a couple of Twister Sister videos, I was surprised to learn he also played The Master on Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

Still don't know?
Mark Metcalf

Alex

06-07-2011, 05:20 AM

Still don't know.

Kevy Baby

06-07-2011, 10:59 PM

Still don't know.Something tells me you probably never will, Which is fine.

CoasterMatt

06-08-2011, 06:59 AM

Hi-def monitors still need to be calibrated to look their best - CRT, DLP, LCD or LED.

Some of the best "looking" displays in the store, look absolutely hideous in normal home viewing conditions.

Strangler Lewis

06-08-2011, 07:54 AM

Indeed. That's what the hue knob is for.

innerSpaceman

06-08-2011, 08:17 AM

I finally saw Prince of Persia ... wasn't very high on my must-see list, obviously.

Not as awful as I was generally led to believe. Yeah, did not deserve to become a franchise or anything, but it was a fine bit of Arabian Adventure. Perfectly serviceable. Jake is appealing, as always. You could do worse for a villain than, um, Ben Kingsley. Alfred Molina got critical praise for his comic-relief performance, well-deserved.

It was by-the-numbers and nothing special, nothing terrible. I find it hard, though, to fault movies that - if they'd only been made in a previous era, would have been fantastic. This is an old-schooler harkening back to the Errol Flynn genre. Sadly not suitable for the 21st century, but a fine mid-20th movie. Tsk, tsk, all that beautiful body building Jake went through for just the one picture. The least I could do was drool.

flippyshark

06-08-2011, 10:37 AM

Hi-def monitors still need to be calibrated to look their best - CRT, DLP, LCD or LED.

Some of the best "looking" displays in the store, look absolutely hideous in normal home viewing conditions.

Believe me, I played with adjustments like crazy on HP7a, and it stayed dank and dark. (Though it was WAAAY worse when I tried it on my DLP projection system) Mind you, I dislike the desaturated or hue-shifted look of so much current summer blockbuster cinema. It doesn't heighten mood for me. It just seems like lazy post production fiddling. Real cinematography should involve how the set was lit, not Adobe filters. Getting old and cranky.

alphabassettgrrl

06-08-2011, 01:59 PM

X-Men prelude and Hot Tub Time Machine.

Highly recommend both.

CoasterMatt

06-08-2011, 02:20 PM

Believe me, I played with adjustments like crazy on HP7a, and it stayed dank and dark. (Though it was WAAAY worse when I tried it on my DLP projection system) Mind you, I dislike the desaturated or hue-shifted look of so much current summer blockbuster cinema. It doesn't heighten mood for me. It just seems like lazy post production fiddling. Real cinematography should involve how the set was lit, not Adobe filters. Getting old and cranky.

Not getting old and cranky at all - it's like suddenly they have a huge color gamut, but to be "edgy" or "moody" they desaturate to the point of hardly being color at all. HP7 though, is a "challenging" film for DLP systems - it looked great here, but we have a really controlled light environment.

Eliza Hodgkins 1812

06-08-2011, 05:31 PM

X-Men: Competent and fun, but really mostly all about the awesomeness that is Michael Fassbender. He was the only one who stood out and though I loved Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone I found her a bit flat here. January Jones is a terrible actress with some of Grace Kelly's looks and none of her talent, though a mighty fine pair o' boobies. She had something in Madmen Season 1 but whatever it was has since been lost. I think a few reviewers oversold it as better than X-Men and X2 and I still prefer those films.

The Hangover Part II was always going to be a ridiculously massive hit despite how lazy it was. I didn't think it was any more or less mean spirited than any of Phillips' films, and the only one I really like is The Hangover. I watched Due Date right after my dad died and thought it was hilarious. Rewatched it recently and it's unfunny and fairly awful.

Eager to see:
- Tree of Life
- Submarine
- Green Lantern (finished; I only saw an early cut and quite enjoyed myself)
- Rise of the Apes (which looks like awesome sauce to my eyes, and does make me excited about the franchise again)
- HP7 Part II
- Cowboys and Aliens
- Captain America (preview intrigued me more than I would have thought)

Going to see Captain Blood tonight, as part of Last Remaining Seats. Yay!

Alex

06-08-2011, 07:19 PM

Yes, January Jones is an awful actress.

It's funny but when you said her name my reaction was "January Jones was in X-Men?" Weren't the only women pretty much Mystique, the moth lady, and the CIA lady? None of those were Jones, were they?

I had to go to IMDb and be reminded that Emma is in it. Jones just immediately evaporates from the brain.

innerSpaceman

06-08-2011, 07:24 PM

Have to agree about Jones. She's become less fine and less relevant as Mad Men has dragged on. I think they should write her out, along with that whole useless storyline of the main character's divorced family that no one really cares about anymore (least of all the main character).

However, I think cold frostiness was appropos for Emma Frost, and I liked the movie better than all the priors except X2, which remains my fave.

Looking forward to seeing Super 8, Cowboys and Aliens, Tree of Life, Apes, Last of Potter, and Green Lantern - - wasn't a certain someone going to attempt arranging a group screening outting?

Cadaverous Pallor

06-08-2011, 08:10 PM

None of the comic book movies appeal to me anymore. The Green Lantern ads/trailer/billboards/etc all just look like a noisy mess to me. The movie looks like a wacky cartoon with that guy's face glued onto it. The posters are all diagonal, what's up with that? It's annoying. Getting old and cranky like flippy. I might see the X-men prequel on Netflix but that's not even a 50/50 possibility.