Periodic Movie Review

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!
human.
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:02 pm
Title: pequenino

Postby human. » Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:33 pm

Just wondering.. Does the word "terrific" have anything to do with the word "terror"?

But! The Hannah Montana movie, was a good, heart-warming, Disney movie. With a fun, surprise (kind of) ending!

zeroguy
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2741
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:29 pm
Title: 01111010 01100111
First Joined: 0- 8-2001
Location: Where you least expect me.
Contact:

Postby zeroguy » Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:12 am

Just wondering.. Does the word "terrific" have anything to do with the word "terror"?
According to wiktionary, yes. "frighteningly good"

< Latin terrificus (“causing terror”) < terrere (“to frighten, terrify”) + -ficus < facere (“to make”).
Proud member of the Canadian Alliance.

dgf hhw

human.
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:02 pm
Title: pequenino

Postby human. » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:40 pm

Interesting! Thank you! It reminds me of "wicked." Though I've never heard wicked used with quite the sarcasm terrific can be pulled off with.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:35 am

Quo Vadis - 7 of 10

much better than the Robe but still troubled by too much cheese and over earnestness. This is closer to an excellent movie but what it really lacks is star power. Kerr is beautiful, but Taylor doesn't have the screen presence to anchor the film. Ustinov is fun, but the part eventually gets away from him.

Gregory Peck and Elizabeth Taylor would have been a huge improvement. It's as clunky as most of LeRoy's films, it's easy to feel that a director with a stronger vision like John Huston would have pulled out something as amazing as Wyler or DeMille managed in the best of the biblical epics. ah, for the film this almost was.

God I love watching the documentaries on WB dvds and hearing my old professors talk about these films. :)
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
Mich
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2948
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:58 am
Title: T.U.R.T.L.E. Power
First Joined: 02 Apr 2002
Location: Land o' Ports
Contact:

Postby Mich » Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:14 am

I couldn't help it. I wanted to see Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool. It sounded like the perfect combination. They couldn't mess it up. My friend had the leaked copy, and I watched it. I didn't care about Wolverine, and I (almost) didn't care they had apparently made Gambit telekinetic, as seen in the trailers. I just wanted to see me some Deadpool wise-crackin' action.

I've been awake all night, angry. How could they mess that up so much?
Shell the unshellable, crawl the uncrawlible.

Row--row.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:39 am

The Third Man - a superb film, one I like a bit better the second time around, and a bit less. The film starts off a bit slow and whether it's a first or second time you're still waiting for Lyme to show up.

Director Carol Reed was heavily influenced by Bernard's Les Miserables, Alexander Korda's sweeping production design (the film is sparse but uses bombed out Vienna in that manner) and Warner Brothers' House style of gangster films in the thirties. The film has been rather dumbly attributed to be heavily influenced by Orson Welles' films, an idea that Welles lustily encouraged, eventually claiming 'most of Harry Lyme's dialogue' for himself, when he added but one famed line about a cuckoo clock. This fervant desire to worship Welles' and attribute everything great about it to his influence is incredibly detrimental to reputation and achievement of director Carol Reed (whose producers on this film included Selznick and Korda, so unlikely Welles was having any say and precious little influence on the film). It's a little bit pathetic and more than a bit frustrating to see so much willful blindness in orteder to see what you want to and expect to see because of the biased influence of the auteur theory.

Particularly considering Graham Greene wrote the screenplay the hefty influence of Les Miserables on the literary aspects of the storyline should be evident to anyone with a whit of sense, instead film critics have fallen over themselves to attribute the flight through the sewers at the end of the film to welles' influence. flight through the sewers. Yeah. invention of welles. Right. Just cause there are dynamic shadows there, and dynamic shadows were 'invented' by Welles. um. no. not to mention the soviet esque cutting throughout the the film, particularly in the montage between closeups, and the way characters are framed, their gazes and look of them, that sort of Soviet style had matriculated through Great Britain in the twenties and thirties (see Hitchcock, for example) and the influence was visible in their films, not so true for widespread hollywood films, or indeed Welles in particular. His brand of cutting was inspired by a variety of hollywood influences while his style of cinematography was basically Ford and Wyler with a dash of Curtiz (basically the best from the dominant house styles seen at the time.

in any event, it's a brilliant and magnificent film. not a personal favorite but a true great one, and from about forty minutes to the last frame it's pretty much perfection and some of the best filmmaking ever.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:08 am

L'Atalante is slightly better than I remembered

The bluray of How the West was Won, particularly the smilebox version is really incredibly impressive, I'm gonna buy it eventually.

Observe and Report is extremely painful for the first half (but funny, usually I don't find the 'mocking the clueless' humor very funny, but this kind of worked) and then begins to get into a groove in the second half and becomes funnier and easier to take (less painful, more funny). The controversial 'is it date rape or not' scene is relatively minor, though the subject they use for a joke is a pretty sensitive one, definitely the most 'boundary pushing' aspect of the film.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:03 pm

The Masseurs and a Woman is another great film from Hiroshi Shimizu. Buying the eclipse box set of his films blind is one of my best blind purchases. A lovely and beautifully made little film.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:03 am

Young People f****** is a canadian film released as YPF in the states, and yeah, I watched it because of the title. It's a funny and entertaining film, about five couples who are having sex that particular night. no particular relation to each other, they just move back and forth between each of the entertwining stories. You have the long time friends now looking for some benefits and 'fun', you have the long time couple, you have the exes, you have the first date and you have the roommates. Each of the stories is unique, but each bit of story builds off the previous bit of story and kind of gives you a hilarious and wry look at sex.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:24 am

Sugar is a decent baseball movie. the first half of the film is excellent, beautifully constructed film, then it falters and loses the rhythm in the latter half, and the motivations driving the main character, while clear, are not very well evoked by the storytelling. The film recovers in its final section, but it never regains the energy it had in the beginning of the film. In a way this reflects the story, but not in a natural or synergistic way.

Airport 77 is goofy fun. Jimmy Stewart lends gravitas in an extended cameo and Jack Lemmon has fun as the aged hero pilot of the story. The bizarre part is that some criminals hijack an experimental luxury jet via an extremely elaborate set up, and then for whatever reason accidentally crash it into the ocean. Luckily it's only about 50 feet deep where they crash, and the cabin is pressurized. but there's leaking and only so much air and no one knows where they are (due to the hijacking). Goofy, pulpy B- material. entertaining, but pretty light.

Kiss of the Spider Woman is the sort of independent film that can be considered one of the forerunners of the independent revolution of the late eighties and early nineties. It was an immense success with William Hurt playing a queen imprisoned in Brazil and Raul Julia as his communist revolutionary cell mate. Their contentious and unique relationship unfurls in story and metaphor. Molina (the queen) tells 'movies' to Valentin (the revolutionary) and the film cuts between their story in the cell, the film Molina is retelling, and occasionally the past of the two men. Fascinating, lovely and beautiful film, just not something that I'm crazy over. though it's fairly flawless and quite delicate I wasn't really enthralled.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:21 am

In the Realm of the Senses is a superb film. Erotic, highly metaphorical and extremely explicit. Real f****** in this movie. You see everything, they really do have sex, not just faux movie sex. And for a movie that's about two people becoming so obsessed with each other that they sort of drop out of life to do nothing but make love 24/7 that's kind of important. Ugh. the lead actress has pretty much the most amazing body I've ever seen on the big screen. and errr... I'm, uh, certain (right) that my assessment has nothing at all to do with how similar her body is to that of my first girlfriend (and the first nude girl I saw in person. heh.

Anyway, moving on, in some respects the sizzling sexuality and eroticism of the film makes it hard to assess it not as pornographic. The film is pornographic. And here's what surprises me the most. It's also artistic and making an artistic statement. It's not just pornographic with pretensions of artistry but overwhelmed by the sex, like Shortbus is. I'm not terribly clear at everything the film is elaborating, I'm sure some of the subtext went over my head, but I think I got the core ideas and themes from the film. One I'd definitely see a second time.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
shadow-petra
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:59 pm
Title: Totoro To-to-ro
Location: Boston, MA

Postby shadow-petra » Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:38 pm

My sister and I went to see Earth yesterday. I have to be honest, and say that I'm not impressed. She liked it, I didn't. I think I fell asleep for a good half hour. I watch 'Planet Earth', so that might be the difference. they used a lot of the same footage, had James Earl Jones narrate it with a G narration, and changed the soundtrack, but the storyline was the same.

If you have never seen Planet Earth, by all means, it's very cute movie, especially for kids, becuase they edit out most of the blood and killings. But if you are a fan of Planet Earth, don't waste your money.
June 2004...Gawd I'm old...

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sun Apr 26, 2009 1:30 am

I almost saw Earth tonight, but ran out of time.

I did see The Soloist though, which was outstanding. superb performances and a great story about friendship even when its not easy. The music is wonderful and the filmmaking (same team that made Atonement) is absolutely superb. A top film for the year so far.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
Yebra
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:48 am
Title: Shadow Zebra

Postby Yebra » Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:36 am

Whenever it gets it's US distributor sorted out I highly recommend In The Loop, which follows in a long tradition in British film of being completely incapable of having anything good to say about how politics works whilst being so good it's likely to join 'Yes Minster' as recommended viewing for incoming Cabinet ministers.

You really don't stop laughing - deliciously cynical, wonderfully constructed and features some of the most creative swearing you're likely to hear for a while. Go see.
Yebra: A cross between a zebra and something that fancied a zebra.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sat May 02, 2009 2:19 am

Wolverine is just. Meh. It's got lots of fun action scenes that are creative and entertaining. And they attempted to create a coherent story. The issue is that the film is really nothing more than one scene after another. Nothing connects and like XMen 3 there is virtually no underlying theme or meaningful resonance. Hugh Jackman destroys things and he occasionally stares at the sky and roars. AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!! Where is Padme! NOOOOOOOOO!

It really is that bad. Gambit is good, Ryan Reynolds is well used. Liev Shrieber is wasted, though he makes you really hate Victor. And Stryker is pointless throughout the film.

*Ring Ring.* Continuity? Yes? Go f*** yourself. *click.*

5 of 10
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sun May 10, 2009 2:44 am

Star Trek - 9 of 10

An excellent film, one major plot hole, but I was particularly taken with the ice world events, completely surprised and won over by that point. Terrific new cast, good writing, great set pieces and very entertaining action. Not as deep as Serenity, but it is as good (if not better than) Galaxy Quest, which has been the best 'star trek' film made until this one. I actually wouldn't mind seeing this again in a theatre. :)

Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence - 6ish of 10. an Oshima film that is mostly in English as it examines the dynamic between Allied POWs and the Japanese imprisoning them. Lawrence is the officer who had spent some time in Japan so he speaks Japanese and often acts as an interceder between miscommunications between the two seemingly vastly different warrior cultures of East and West (the actual differences are much less than we suppose which I think is what the final coda which reverses roles is intended to convey). David Bowie plays Cilliers, the other main character, a British Officer with immense charisma and an attitude that might well be a dangerous death wish due to his own psychological baggage. the magnificent Takeshi Kitano plays Sergeant Hara, the oft smiling man in charge of the day to day of the prisoners. the sort who befriends easily but also likes to rub the british officer's noses in their differences as a matter of illustrating Japanese pride and their superior inner character. In the opening scene, Hara drags Lawrence out of bed to see the seppuku of a Japanese/Korean officer caught f****** one of the prisoners. He is not shamed and needing to kill himself because of the, but for the crime of being a homosexual.

Lastly, there is Captain Tanoi, a very young officer who is in far over his head, he becomes more and more superstitious as the film progresses, particularly as Cilliers goads him on this point and Tanoi's honor and stature is called into question. Good but wierd. I am ambivalent towards the film, but I think it's one I'll like more over time. as it sort of sticks with you.

Naughty Marietta - 5 of 10 - is a pretty boring Jeanette MacDonald, Nelson Eddy film from the 30s. it was nominated for Best Picture, but it's not especially good. it's a story of a french princess who is to be wed to a spanish lord and she instead runs away and sneaks aboard a ship filled with french peasant women headed to New Orleans, contracted by the king to immigrate to supply wives to the men settled there. They're attacked by pirates in the carribbean and a mercenary militia troop, led by the oft singing Eddy rescues them back and sets them safely to New Orleans. The typical love plot happens between the two, hate each other, loath each other. love each other, torn apart, desperate to get back together. love triumphs. yawn, at times funny, and Eddy has an extremely good baritone. but the songs are utterly unmemorable and the story is so cliche as to be grating.

Sixteen Candles - see film club. :-p
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Mon May 11, 2009 1:04 am

One Hundred Men and a Girl - 4 of 10 - Deanna Durbin is bad and drags a rather simple, but potentially charming, film down with her. ugh.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Mon May 11, 2009 5:21 am

Star Trek - 9 of 10

An excellent film, one major plot hole, but I was particularly taken with the ice world events, completely surprised and won over by that point. Terrific new cast, good writing, great set pieces and very entertaining action. Not as deep as Serenity, but it is as good (if not better than) Galaxy Quest, which has been the best 'star trek' film made until this one. I actually wouldn't mind seeing this again in a theatre. :)
I'd go so far as to say that Trek is better than Serenity. I was quite impressed by it to say the least. Just out of curiosity, what's the one major plot hole you're referring to? Nothing in particular comes to mind.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

mr_thebrain
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:22 pm
Title: The same thing we do every night...
First Joined: 0- 7-2000
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby mr_thebrain » Mon May 11, 2009 8:19 am

i'd have to give star trek a 9/10 too. i have two concerns about this movie that keep it from being a 10/10 first is that the classic lines from bones and scotty were a bit too cheesy and forced for my taste, and i felt that some of the action scenes were just thrown in so that there would be action. they were exciting for sure. and even enjoyable. but it seemed like they were thrown in so the movie always had action. still, i understand why both the lines and the action scenes were there. and i would love to see it again on the big screen.
Ubernaustrum

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Mon May 11, 2009 2:02 pm

I'd go so far as to say that Trek is better than Serenity. I was quite impressed by it to say the least. Just out of curiosity, what's the one major plot hole you're referring to? Nothing in particular comes to mind.
plot hole (spoilers)Big ass giant ship comes through worm hole, destroys the ship Kirk's father captained and 800 people escape. This is a big deal, the captain who recruits Kirk wrote his dissertation on it. Yet giant ass ship, more massive than any star fleet ship of the era stays in the place it destroyed Kirk's father's ship and waits twenty five years for Old-Spock's ship to come out of the wormhole. So. this ship stayed in one place for twenty five years but the big deal of destroying Kirk's father's ship never led to an investigation in the area or a retaliatory force being sent out there? It was just left to lurk and wait, undiscovered and unmolested for twenty-five years? This is highly illogical.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
Oliver Dale
Former Speaker
Former Speaker
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:24 pm
Title: Trapped in the Trunk!

Postby Oliver Dale » Mon May 11, 2009 2:42 pm

There are a couple others, too. But the one that bugged me the most was: (I don't know how to do the invisible text thingie, so allow me to simply .....)

** Spoilers Below!!! **






Okay, Kirk is stranded/exiled on an icy planet and, through the course of stumbling around, manages to find the exact cave that Spock is in. Okay, that's too much coincidence by itself. But, if Spock knew there was a star base within walking distance (as he then tells Kirk, right before the two of them set off), why doesn't he walk there himself in order to warn the universe of Vulcan's impending doom?

Also

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Mon May 11, 2009 4:24 pm

Minor spoilers in response to Locke:


I sorta assumed that either it had advanced cloaking technology (Romulan ships are known to cloak) or it didn't in fact stay in the same place all that time.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
^Peter
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 259
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:06 am
Location: CA

Postby ^Peter » Mon May 11, 2009 4:35 pm

Were you all part of the Star Trek generation? I'm young, so I never actually saw the series. And I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I thought the movie was good, but I wish I knew the original continuation instead of the movie's "alternate reality" timeline.

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Mon May 11, 2009 4:43 pm

The Star Trek generation? I was born in the 80s and some of my earliest memories are watching the original series. It's not like it disappeared off tv when it was canceled in the 60s. It still airs five days a week here.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
^Peter
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 259
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:06 am
Location: CA

Postby ^Peter » Mon May 11, 2009 4:46 pm

Did the "Star Trek generation" sound weird? I guess it did. I meant were you able to watch Star Trek when it first aired. So you answered my question, neo-dragon. Sorry for poor choice of wording.

User avatar
Luet
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 4511
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:49 pm
Title: Bird Nerd
First Joined: 01 Jul 2000
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Luet » Mon May 11, 2009 8:27 pm

I was born in 1976 and only watched the original series sporadically in reruns. I was a big fan of TNG, however. And I have watched all of the movies at some point.
"In the depth of winter, I finally learned that within me there lay an invincible summer." - Albert Camus in Return to Tipasa

Jayelle
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:32 pm
Title: Queen Ducky
First Joined: 25 Feb 2002
Location: The Far East (of Canada)

Postby Jayelle » Tue May 12, 2009 7:16 pm

If by "Star Trek generation" you mean "The people here are older then you" then yes.
Wolverine is just. Meh. It's got lots of fun action scenes that are creative and entertaining. And they attempted to create a coherent story. The issue is that the film is really nothing more than one scene after another. Nothing connects and like XMen 3 there is virtually no underlying theme or meaningful resonance. Hugh Jackman destroys things and he occasionally stares at the sky and roars. AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!! Where is Padme! NOOOOOOOOO!

It really is that bad. Gambit is good, Ryan Reynolds is well used. Liev Shrieber is wasted, though he makes you really hate Victor. And Stryker is pointless throughout the film.

*Ring Ring.* Continuity? Yes? Go f*** yourself. *click.*

5 of 10

I found it quite enjoyable - it's been awhile since I've seen a movie where I can predict every single shot. It was certainly entertaining, but I completely agree with what you said. It drove me crazy how Wolverine's all "I'm good at what I do" but we see NO evidence of that. For all we know, he's good at standing around looking angry. I know that they didn't want to take him somewhere that they couldn't redeem him from - but that meant that it looked like everyone else was doing awesome stuff but he just stood around.

Also, the claws looked TERRIBLE! They looked so much better in the first X-Men movie. The scene in the bathroom was laughable at how fake they looked. Also, the "younger" Professor X was freaky looking.

Gambit was very cool, however.


So many cliched shots!
Director: Oh! Oh! Let's have a scene where they're running through the woods as kids and suddenly they're running through the woods as adults!
Producer: Brilliant! No one's ever thought of that before!
Audience: *yawn*
One Duck to rule them all.
--------------------------------
It needs to be about 20% cooler.

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3046
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Tue May 19, 2009 2:06 am

Brothers Bloom - solid and entertaining, quite fun but a bit long. Loved Rachel Weisz and Rinko Kikuchi in this. :)

Gone with the Wind - well it is in fact a great movie, which is undeniable once you see it on the big screen (and I've tried denying it before tonight). I still think Scarlet is a horrible vile bitch of a woman for what she does to Ashley and Melly (much less Rhett) but she did strike me as more sympathetic this time around. I really love the Scarlet at the beginning of the second half, who's self sufficient, gritty, determined, hard working and damned if anyone or anything is going to stop her. Then she throws herself at Rhett and at her sister's beau and I start to lose interest. That's really where it fell apart for me this time, the mostly domestic melodrama of the second half. Still, it's a freaking great movie, and on the big screen, holy s***, it's so much better than seeing it on video. Mesmerizing, magical and transformative like the best of movies should be. It really makes you catch your breath throughout it's so well done. "No I'm not going to kiss you now. Though I want to. You should be kissed. And often. By Someone who knows how." I didn't know it was possible to 'hear' a swoon, but I think every female in the audience pretty much emitted a collective 'swoon' sound (though I'm still not sure what that sound is, exactly) when Gable pulls off that line. heh. :)
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

Gravity Defier
Commander
Commander
Posts: 8017
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:32 pm
Title: Ewok in Tauntaun-land

Postby Gravity Defier » Tue May 19, 2009 3:05 am

"No I'm not going to kiss you now. Though I want to. You should be kissed. And often. By Someone who knows how." I didn't know it was possible to 'hear' a swoon, but I think every female in the audience pretty much emitted a collective 'swoon' sound (though I'm still not sure what that sound is, exactly) when Gable pulls off that line. heh. :)
Hell, I haven't seen that movie since I was in the 8th grade, I certainly don't remember that line being delivered, and I just swooned reading it.
Se paciente y duro; algún día este dolor te será útil.

Petra456
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:48 pm
Title: Actually, I'm Fred (and a monster)
First Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Location: Singing on Krikkit.
Contact:

Postby Petra456 » Tue May 19, 2009 11:40 am

Gone with the Wind - well it is in fact a great movie, which is undeniable once you see it on the big screen (and I've tried denying it before tonight). I still think Scarlet is a horrible vile bitch of a woman for what she does to Ashley and Melly (much less Rhett) but she did strike me as more sympathetic this time around. I really love the Scarlet at the beginning of the second half, who's self sufficient, gritty, determined, hard working and damned if anyone or anything is going to stop her. Then she throws herself at Rhett and at her sister's beau and I start to lose interest. That's really where it fell apart for me this time, the mostly domestic melodrama of the second half. Still, it's a freaking great movie, and on the big screen, holy s***, it's so much better than seeing it on video. Mesmerizing, magical and transformative like the best of movies should be. It really makes you catch your breath throughout it's so well done. "No I'm not going to kiss you now. Though I want to. You should be kissed. And often. By Someone who knows how." I didn't know it was possible to 'hear' a swoon, but I think every female in the audience pretty much emitted a collective 'swoon' sound (though I'm still not sure what that sound is, exactly) when Gable pulls off that line. heh. :)
Gone With The Wind has always been (and probably will always be) one of my top favorite movies. I watched it for the first time back in 6th grade and have watched it at least a couple times a year from then on!

I've been waiting for someone to play it on the big screen around here, I would be first in line. Seeing something like Gone With The Wind in Imax would be amazing.

Also, that line is one of my favorites : )
Member since March 16th, 2004.

And there will come a time, you'll see, with no more tears.
And love will not break your heart, but dismiss your fears.
Get over your hill and see what you find there,
With grace in your heart and flowers in your hair.

User avatar
Purity Control
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: The depths of Oblivion...

Postby Purity Control » Tue May 19, 2009 3:42 pm

Glory - 9 out of 10
I recently watched this for an English class project, and was thoroughly impressed by the cast and dialouge. The main plot focusses around the first colored (ie: African American) regiment in the U.S. Army durring the American Civil War. The leader of the regiment is Colonel Robert Shaw, an aristocrat from Massachusetts who pretty much sacrificed any social standing he had by commanding this regiment. It is a great story of courage and leadership, and ultimatley, it doesn't need to have an ubsurd amount of explosions to get the moral point across.
For now all my concentration is focused on inertial control and navigation. Targeting isn't even a consideration - I will be engaging my enemy at arm's length.

Gravity Defier
Commander
Commander
Posts: 8017
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:32 pm
Title: Ewok in Tauntaun-land

Postby Gravity Defier » Sun May 24, 2009 8:08 pm

Okay, okay. Terminator Salvation.

Spoilers down below:
I enjoyed the coloring in the film; it had a gritty look to it that I felt was appropriate. I got a kick out of Kyle saying "Come with me if you want to live," just like he'll say it to Sarah later...or earlier, whatever. I thought it was funny when John said "I'll be back."

Kudos for bringing the tapes Sarah made for John into this and showing they were important to him (Was that Linda Hamilton? And did they reuse the clip about whether or not to mention Kyle from the first if it was or did they have her re-record it? From memory, it seems less heavy and faster paced in TS than T1). Likewise with the picture of her in the jeep. Was that place that was blown up in TS by gigantor-Terminator supposed to be the same gas station she stopped at?

Awesomeness for showing the T-101 but I'm a little disappointed John didn't even flinch at the sight of him, considering the attachment he had to a T-101 in T2; I can, however, get past that when I consider he had that reaction in T3 and probably worked on that issue, considering it'd be suicide not to work on it.

I was also disappointed in John; he was intense, he was hardened, he even cared for those people in the Skynet SF HQ but only the first two qualities really resonated with me. I'm not sure that was inappropriate, though, as it was a war and I'm not sure how they could have shown him differently but I'd like to have seen a little more compassion somewhere. Maybe in the talks over the radio to the survivors; maybe he should have shown just a tad more something there. I don't know.

I also thought it was laughable when he was fighting that terminator in the factory line room, blew a hole in that molten metal container and didn't get himself melted in the process. I am pretty sure he was in the wrong position to escape that and yet he did.

I knew Markus was going to give him his heart; there were too many references prior to that about how strong his heart was and then how John's heart couldn't handle the work at the end. Weak heart get replaced by strong heart? Duh.

The scariest moments for me were all the ones where the Terminators were endlessly coming after them on foot or by dragging what was left of their frames after them. It was reminiscent of T1 that way. The less personal, bigger walking and flying machines really didn't scare me at all.

With all that said, I'm pretty darn easy to please. ;) I liked it, even if I was a little underwhelmed.
Se paciente y duro; algún día este dolor te será útil.

User avatar
^Peter
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 259
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:06 am
Location: CA

Postby ^Peter » Mon May 25, 2009 11:24 am

Who watched Night at the Museum? I liked it. It was all comedy, but that's the reason we went. Um.... 8/10, considering you might not have understood the plot much if you didn't see the first one.
I just lost the game; you just lost the game.

http://www.losethegame.net/

I know! I'll use my sig as advertisement space for my classmates. http://www.youtube.com/user/Theorem42

User avatar
Jeesh_girl15
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:23 pm
Title: Procrastination Fairy
Location: Wherever I wanna be

Postby Jeesh_girl15 » Mon May 25, 2009 11:28 am

Oh, I loved it. I went the night it came out with a few friends. 5 to be exact. It was pretty good. I loved Honest Abe Lincoln. I'd have to agree with an 8 outta 10.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Mon May 25, 2009 4:12 pm

I enjoyed Terminator Salvation quite a bit. I have no idea why it's getting so much flak from critics and fans of the franchise. Does it surpass the The original films? Well, no, but it's not the same type of movie. It's not trying to be. It sure is a lot better than T3 though.

Things that I liked about it:


- John Connor: This is the John I've been waiting to see since T2. In T3 John was a total idiot and a wuss to boot. I mean, he carried a paintball gun, was disarmed and neutralized by an unarmed veterinarian, and stands like a deer in headlights while stupidly asking a terminator whether or not it intends to kill him. We're supposed to believe that this is the guy who badass Sarah has been training since birth to be the greatest military leader ever?! Even "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" presents a John who's a bit too moody for my liking. Salvation's John is finally the John Connor who Skynet has reason to fear. Christian Bail nailed it.
- Homages to the originals:
"Come with me if you want to live." (said by Reese, the character who said it in the original).
"I'll be back." (said by a human rather than a terminator for the first time in the series)
John's choice of music in the scene when he hijacks a motorcycle.
The appearance of the model 101: most awesome moment in the entire film.
Molten steel and freezing used to combat a terminator, as well as fighting and fleeing from said terminator in a factory setting.
- The whole last act with John saving the prisoners from Skynet was pretty awesome. :D


Things that I didn't like about it:

- The terminator repeatedly throwing John and backhanding him. Why would a ruthlessly efficient super strong killing machine not just snap his head off?
- The fact that Skynet clearly knows that Kyle Reese is John's father doesn't really make sense, and creates something of a plot hole. First, I can't figure out how it knows. Second, since it apparently does know, why use Reese to lure John into a trap when simply killing him should erase John from existence? What's more, Skynet should realize that all it has to do to prevent John's birth is nothing at all, since if it doesn't send the first Terminator back in time Reese has no reason to go back either. But then again, it was the cpu from that terminator that set Cyberdyne on the path to making Skynet in the first place, so I guess in an example of temporal irony both the terminator and Reese have to go back in time and kill each other in order to ensure the creation of the entities that sent them.
- Some things could have used a bit more explanation. Everything we know about Marcus' past and why he's on death row we learn in the first 5 minutes of the movie. He doesn't exactly seem like a cold-blooded killer, so there must be some story there. Also, no one in the resistance seems to question how John knows about things like the T-800, or why Kyle Reese is so important to him and to Skynet. Has he told people about his past? Do they actually believe him?


Overall TS pretty much delivered what I expected, which isn't bad. A solid 8/10.

To put that in perspective, I give the new Star Trek 9/10, and Wolverine 6.8/10.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Yandex [Bot] and 58 guests