The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Steve46

2000 Amores perros??? Maybe this

yep. just looked it up. it's Amores Perros, Babel and 21 Grams.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

yep. just looked it up. it's Amores Perros, Babel and 21 Grams.

Ebert:

The film is by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, the almost unreasonably talented Mexican filmmaker whose "Amores Perros" (2000) was an enormous success. That film intercut three simultaneous stories, all centering on a traffic accident. "21 Grams" has three stories and a traffic accident, but the stories move back and forth in time, so that sometimes we know more than the characters, sometimes they know more than we do.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by CZAR

1. Cars
2. Over the Hedge
3. Up
4. Toy Story 2
5. Toy Story
6. Into the Wild ---
7. Monster House
8. Doogal

isn't this the Emile Hirsch movie? i'm guessing you mean The Wild with the animals in NYC?

and i've never even heard of Doogal but i definitely won't be checking it out. here are some others to get to when you feel like it:

9
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Coraline
Aladdin
The Lion King
Ice Age (and the sequels if you like the first)
The Emperor's New Groove

and don't worry, i haven't seen a lot of Disney classics. not really my style

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Diesel

As for my thoughts on this one, well, I have none since I haven't seen it

And I have absolutely zero interest. I've seen all the trailers, even a clip or two, and it just looks incredibly lame to me (no offense to anyone who likes it of course, different strokes for different folks and all that).

I know I'm probably Foggy's mortal enemy because of that, but I can take it

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

i don't know which he'll hate worse: that i watched it and disliked it, or that you don't even want to see it?

Originally Posted by Diesel

I think I might win in that contest


]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

you might be right but i know he didn't take kindly to me giving it a 2.5/5 the first time around, so now that i tried again he might have even less of a tolerance for me and my dislike of it


]

Dont worry, Foggy has no clout here anymore. He has yet to put forth any analysis on Triangle. Member a la Weak Sauce. Wuss du Jour.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Ebert:

The film is by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, the almost unreasonably talented Mexican filmmaker whose "Amores Perros" (2000) was an enormous success. That film intercut three simultaneous stories, all centering on a traffic accident. "21 Grams" has three stories and a traffic accident, but the stories move back and forth in time, so that sometimes we know more than the characters, sometimes they know more than we do.

this sounds exactly like something that Crash ripped off. jeez, Crash ripped off like, 10 films, but Crash gets all the recognition?

these sound very interesting, and added to the list

[Diesel]

This thread is really busy for a Sunday

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Over 50% leass badass than a Baron.

Mathematical put down. Nice.

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

NO i liked it allot. It tells you the full story behind Skynet and the true purpose of a "terminator". I look at it like this if you liked T1 and T2 but hated Salvation then you were never a fan of the story . You just were a fan of Arnold.

I know a lot of people said it didn't "feel" like a Terminator movie.

There were different reasons people said that. Two main ones though.

Some of it because it was rated PG-13. To that I say, bah. Look at the story it told, it didn't need to be R for any reason. If it were it would have felt forced imo

Some because Arnold wasn't there. Well, Terminator universe isn't about the T-800. It's about John Connor and the fight of the Resistance. Arnold was obviously the huge fan favorite in the other films, but the fact is the films aren't about him. So he didn't NEED to be there (even though they did give a nod to him).


Of course, then there's people who just legitimately didn't like it, and that one's fine

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

oooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
tbizzle just got so schooled when he reads that he'll sizzle!

[Show spoiler] that makes no sense, i'm aware, but it rhymes

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

The damage cant be corrected. Its too late. I already spit on your grave.

So I don't need to bother watching it now then?

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Dont worry, Foggy has no clout here anymore. He has yet to put forth any analysis on Triangle. Member a la Weak Sauce. Wuss du Jour.

Semi-French put down this time. You're really bringing a variety to the table today aren't you?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

You bet. I've always wanted to see it and love Penelope. In case you're wondering, what I heard was that it was the most "flavorless", bland and generally terrible performance he has ever seen and a prime example of Tom Cruise's "bad acting" reputation. He uses it as an example every time we joke about bad acting. But I will take up your suggestion and give it a view with an open mind.

You might be surprised on that. Diaz is good as a

[Show spoiler]crazy ass stalker psycho b!tch.

[lDlisturb3d]

My Top 10 (No Order because thats way to hard)

This is hard as h3ll but imma do it.

1. Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Yeah im counting it as 1 movie lol)
2. Revanche
3. Memento
4. 8 1/2
5. Gladiator
6. Ratatouille
7. Triangle
8. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
9. A Clockwork Orange
10. The Godfather Trilogy (Yep 1 story)

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

i well hopefully one of his films will be



funner to discuss than actually experience.
:

I think Days of Heaven is his most enjoyable film. Maybe because its the most "Mainstream".

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Diesel

This thread is really busy for a Sunday

agreed! usually the weekends are pretty dead here. usually i personally am busy with football, but me and the buds are more interested in the night game / later games so i've got nothing to do but be on here, come up with my rental list, and watch the game in the background.

the monday regulars are gonna have a lot of catching up to

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I think Days of Heaven is his most enjoyable films. Maybe because its the most "Mainstream".

hmm. i would have thought The Thin Red Line would be his most mainstream. still interested in seeing Days of Heaven. the story really intrigues me more than the rest of his films i must say.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by lDlisturb3d

Paris, Texas

Man im not even gonna write a full review on this movie. I am gonna mention that this movie is way too long for the story. The story its self is ok at best and really not that interesting. I tried to give this Director another shot because i thought Wings of Desire was ok at best but if i were to watch another Wim Wenders it would be Wings of Desire. I'll give to movie credit for the pros but there's way too many cons. I dont wanna crap on the movie entirely but i felt like it was just boring. It did have its good points especially the bonding between him and his sons, i thought those parts were pretty warming but everything else was TRASH. I probably wont ever watch this again. EVER.

Only if you like Wim Wenders

2.5/5

Dont trade or sell it. Sit on it for 3-4 years and rewatch it. Theres a reason that I say this.

[lDlisturb3d]

Walkabout (Criterion)

Director: Nicolas Roeg
Writer: Edward Bond and James Vance Marshall (novel)
Mains: Jenny Agutter, Luc Roeg, and David Gulpill

Visually Amazing

Synopsis: A young woman and boy are stranded in the wilderness trying to find their way home and they run into a Australian native that is going through a ritual to becoming a man. They will walk through the outback and battle through all types of obstacles and find their way of adapting to the wilderness

My Take: I enjoyed this movie, i thought it was a very well done adventure film that felt allot like a documentary of the outback. The shot and scenes are beautiful and feel very real because it is. I loved how the director used modern life or western life in retrospect with the wilderness. I also love the innocent little boy that doesn't realize the situation that they are in. This film felt allot like art and was amazingly calm. But with that said the film did have flaws. I thought that it was simply a little bit too dry, you cant tell amazing story without making the story drawn out. I also didnt like the fact that many things weren't explained, i love to use my head but this leaves no facts to make up your own theories.

Conclusion: This movie is a great way of looking at the lives of others and its an exceptional documentary/nature film. It leaves you in a warm but cold feel after-wards but its still pretty darn original and very risky. I would like to warn any one that doesnt like to see animals butchered to stay away because this is cold. Overall good movie if you like art and nature you should try this film out.


3.5/5

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Dont trade or sell it. Sit on it for 3-4 years and rewatch it. Theres a reason that I say this.

hmmm. I'll keep that in mind.

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

say whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?

Cruse has a bad acting reputation? I must have missed that memo. I couldn't disagree with your friend more. He's my favorite active actor. He doesn't seem to be a fan of Cruise, which is fine, but suggesting he has some bad reputation (like a Keanu Reeves) is just not accurate, IMO. Of course, I'll openly admit I'm 100% biased, as I'm a huge Cruise fan and of his performance in Vanilla Sky, which is an all time favorite of mine. There are parts where his performance is eccentric, but his character and the script requires it.

Here is my take on the bad rep Vanilla Sky gets: its definitely a film you have to 100% invest in, maybe 2+ viewings. Some people (not directing this at your friend necessarily. The film is pretty polarizing, with a big chunk not liking it) don't want to invest that, so (like 2001-type films) are frustrated when they don't "get it" on a first viewing, and will put the blame somewhere.

my 2 cents

Very interested now.

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Cruise certainly does not have a bad acting reputation--he has a bad reputation. The two are distinct from one another. The people who seem to dislike Cruise most often do so because of his weird off-screen behavior. Unfortunately, some of these people automatically translate their dislike to his screen performances just for the sake of doing so. Cruise is not the best actor out there, but there's no doubt he's a high quality actor. His resume and accolades speak for itself.

As for Cruise in Vanilla Sky, it's not his best role by any means but he's not bad in it at all. I would say he's "good" in it, but it obviously does not rise to the level of some of his better performances. Love the film though.

Cruise did great in A Few Good Men, The Last Samurai, and Collateral. I think your right in that his celebrity status must be where it comes from because I have heard it several times. There are many people that simply cannot separate an actor's personal life with their on-screen roles. Same goes with directors (Polanski) and music careers (Michael Jackson).

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Unimpressed.

As for Kilcher being put into situations with Bale and Farrell, notice that you don't see kissing or anything intimate. Also note that Pocahontas was supposed to be 12 at the time.

Unimpressed with what? My opinion? Dont take it personally because of your bias. I know you think he's fantastic, and thats fine. My opinion is that he is unorganized and unfocused. His record of dragging projects out, longer and longer is well documented. I think his efforts to dwell on style over substance damages the storytelling, and ultimately the story. Those are my opinions.

I am well aware of Pocahontas' age, and you may want to watch those scenes again, more closely. And it's NOT a double. Ask yourself, would you be comfortable with your daughter in those scenes?

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

Hey Czar -- did you notice how Jaden completely imitates some of Will's acting? Let me be specific: you know when Will is doing the "wow, ok, that's cool" look. It could be when someone is acting like a total nut in front of him, or some hot girl is dancing in front of him -- Will has this look of shock and his eyes give that "wowwww, okkkkkkkkk" (could be in a good way- hot chick, or bad way - crazy dude).

Jaden does the EXACT same look. He did it when the

[Show spoiler]girl was dancing on that arcade machine -- hot dancing!

and again when Chan showed him some crazy moves.

what you think? obviously it makes sense, given that Will probably taught him a lot of his acting.

Have you seen his 10 year old daughter?

[Show spoiler]

[Lepidopterous]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

yep. just looked it up. it's Amores Perros, Babel and 21 Grams.

The 3 reasons why Inarritu is one of my favorite directors. Cannot wait to see Biutiful.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I am well aware of Pocahontas' age, and you may want to watch those scenes again, more closely. And it's NOT a double. Ask yourself, would you be comfortable with your daughter in those scenes?

i wouldn't be comfortable being Farrell or Bale!

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Jump on that!

Unless you're waiting for the blu-ray, which I would assume won't be until 2012 at the earliest.

I'm good. I've waited 18 years. Might as well keep waiting.