"Now Showing"
- Thread starter Mark
- Start date
Slayed
Hyper Poster
I went on a stag weekend to Vegas and suffered no debauchery :lol: (apart from getting raped by Manhattan Express). I'll watch the film to see what we missed!
We did however get roaringly drink, waste $500 on Blackjack inside 30 mins & throw our knickers at Tom Jones, perfection
.
We did however get roaringly drink, waste $500 on Blackjack inside 30 mins & throw our knickers at Tom Jones, perfection
.^ That is class :lol:
Here's a few films I've seen, since I last posted here.
Requiem for a Dream: I knew it was going to be quite 'strong', not the most pleasant movie, well it did live up to the expectations SPOILERwell actually for the last 30mins or so /SPOILER.
It was good, disturbing, annoying and exciting and had nice camera work, but in the end I think it was sort of too much indirect 'preaching' which has been told before, but still 8.5/10
Lost Highway: For quite a while this was amazing, haunting, great atmosphere, very exciting, but then (you'll see when if you see the movie), it sort of changed too much and it just totally went in another direction, which was arty, more disturbing, nice at times, but later sort of became more uninteresting and in the end it was sort of a disappointment. 7.3/10. (the first part 10/10)
Che Part.1: Went to see this for fun, it was ok, but for some reason I almost fell asleep like about 5 times :lol: even if it was just around 4-5pm and missed some small bits, still I would dare to say that it was quite boring, it was nicely realistic, with solid acting, but not as good as the media had pointed out imo. 7/10.
Here's a few films I've seen, since I last posted here.
Requiem for a Dream: I knew it was going to be quite 'strong', not the most pleasant movie, well it did live up to the expectations SPOILERwell actually for the last 30mins or so /SPOILER.
It was good, disturbing, annoying and exciting and had nice camera work, but in the end I think it was sort of too much indirect 'preaching' which has been told before, but still 8.5/10
Lost Highway: For quite a while this was amazing, haunting, great atmosphere, very exciting, but then (you'll see when if you see the movie), it sort of changed too much and it just totally went in another direction, which was arty, more disturbing, nice at times, but later sort of became more uninteresting and in the end it was sort of a disappointment. 7.3/10. (the first part 10/10)
Che Part.1: Went to see this for fun, it was ok, but for some reason I almost fell asleep like about 5 times :lol: even if it was just around 4-5pm and missed some small bits, still I would dare to say that it was quite boring, it was nicely realistic, with solid acting, but not as good as the media had pointed out imo. 7/10.
mrclam
Giga Poster
Friday the 13th : Killer Cut dvd
I'm a big fan of cheesy 80's style slasher horrors - i grew up with films like this, so i was looking forwards to watching this.
Alarm bells started ringing when i saw the name "Michael Bay" in the title credits.. But I carried on watching.
So first issue, in the opening scenes - is that these are supposed to be "poor" normal teenagers. I know nowadays it must be hard getting girls who havent had breast implants to go topless.. But yet both the girls have VERY obvious fake implants, boobs are not sphere shapped - even when you're 18. So believability went out the window almost straight away.
In the opening scenes there is a "reveal" where the girl looks like jasons mum.. I dont know for sure.. but something tells me that being a modern film i can guess there's a big bit of predictability coming here..
"action/horror" scenes are filmed in "blur-o-fast-moving-camera-o-vision" similar to the bourne indentities puke inducing car chase sequences.. To the point that on dvd it was actually very hard to figure out what is causing them the issues they're screaming about.. These sort of scenes never work well on dvd as they do in the cinema.
The next thing that struck me was how boring it was! I was 20 minutes into it and started doing chores around my house while watching it.
Like "the curious case of benjamin zzzz" i'm too bored to watch it all in one sitting - so I'll come back when i've finished watching the whole thing.. but so far so bad.
I'm a big fan of cheesy 80's style slasher horrors - i grew up with films like this, so i was looking forwards to watching this.
Alarm bells started ringing when i saw the name "Michael Bay" in the title credits.. But I carried on watching.
So first issue, in the opening scenes - is that these are supposed to be "poor" normal teenagers. I know nowadays it must be hard getting girls who havent had breast implants to go topless.. But yet both the girls have VERY obvious fake implants, boobs are not sphere shapped - even when you're 18. So believability went out the window almost straight away.
In the opening scenes there is a "reveal" where the girl looks like jasons mum.. I dont know for sure.. but something tells me that being a modern film i can guess there's a big bit of predictability coming here..
"action/horror" scenes are filmed in "blur-o-fast-moving-camera-o-vision" similar to the bourne indentities puke inducing car chase sequences.. To the point that on dvd it was actually very hard to figure out what is causing them the issues they're screaming about.. These sort of scenes never work well on dvd as they do in the cinema.
The next thing that struck me was how boring it was! I was 20 minutes into it and started doing chores around my house while watching it.
Like "the curious case of benjamin zzzz" i'm too bored to watch it all in one sitting - so I'll come back when i've finished watching the whole thing.. but so far so bad.
Nemesis Inferno
Strata Poster
Just got sent a link to this by Kara...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIpZxBczWUg[/youtube]
2009 seems like one of the best years for film in recent memory imo...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIpZxBczWUg[/youtube]
2009 seems like one of the best years for film in recent memory imo...
^When I saw the trailer ages ago it got me really excited but had recently forgot about it (then again it doesn't come out for ages). The main thing that is exciting about it is the fact that Tim Burton and Russian director who made Wanted and Day/Night watch are producing it (not directing, but still awesomes).
mrclam
Giga Poster
Friday The 13th
well just finished watching it... took about 4 different sittings...
man what a dull movie. The "scares" were just your standard "make quiet - then suddenly play a loud noise to make audience jump" affair rather than actually being scary...
The acting for the most part terrible.
And the ending made bugger all sense (but i wont do an ollie here for those who want to see it)... hmmm.. okay.. with spoiler tag:
well just finished watching it... took about 4 different sittings...
man what a dull movie. The "scares" were just your standard "make quiet - then suddenly play a loud noise to make audience jump" affair rather than actually being scary...
The acting for the most part terrible.
And the ending made bugger all sense (but i wont do an ollie here for those who want to see it)... hmmm.. okay.. with spoiler tag:
why chuck him in the lake? Did they not think the police might want to have the person responsible for doing all the killings?
Nemesis Inferno said:
NO.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55pDYPtL4g4[/youtube]
THAT'S the best film called Nine this year
ROB MARSHALL DOING ANOTHER MUSICAL?!?!?! YES TO THE ****! OH. And did I mention the cast are all absolutely sublime? Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz AND Nicole Kidman?!?! YES. YES. YES.
Screaming Coasters
Strata Poster
^ That actually looks really good, but then most things from Tim Burton are.
mrclam said:
Because I'm ace!
mrclam said:
With time travel (I've explained this already), you have two outcomes.
1. Paradox
2. Inevitability.
1. When telling a story, you must avoid paradox as it makes no logical sense. It's an infinite loop and shows a lack of fore-thought and poor scripting/story telling technique.
2. Inevitability comes in three flavours.
a) The future has already affected the past. This is the T1 premise. Malky makes a time machine and sends me back to meet his grandmother. I sleep with her and become Malky's grandfather. That's fine, as I have always been his Grandfather and the circle works out logically.
b) The future works to right itself to stop paradox. This is essentially what they're trying to do with the Terminator story to explain the paradox of the T2 ending. No matter what you do in the past to try and alter the future, the future will always happen to allow for the avoidance of paradox. Malky makes a time machine and sends me back to meet his Grandmother. I kill her, so Malky is never born. The time line repairs itself without Malky, and instead, another person creates a time machine for me to use. If I kill their Grandmother, the time line will create another person to send me back. On and on.
c) The future is set in stone. No matter what you do to the past, the future is unaltered. Malky sends me back in time, I kill his Grandmother. Time doesn't care and Malky still exists to send me back anyway. I cannot change my own past. This is the poorest way of avoiding paradox, as you are just shoving paradox under the carpet and ignoring it.
As a piece of storytelling, You need to avoid Paradox and "The future is set in stone" - unless you're making them the major part and parcel of the plot and being very clever (let's face it, the Terminator series does not fit this bill).
"The future will right itself" is a minefield and the world's biggest and most blatant deus ex machina. It's a cop out of great magnitude.
"The future has already affected the past" is neat and well rounded. It means that you play with your story and have fun without worrying as long as you tie up the neat ends. That's why the original Terminator is the strongest in plot and story terms out of all the films. It works.
So, in conclusion, from the ending of T2 onwards - the Terminator story is poor quality, cop out tosh and should be treated as such
I hope that's explained it all?
Anyway - No country for old men - I can't decide about this film. After Benjamin Button, it was like eating ice cream. I think from now on, time will be measured against Benjamin Button and how much of it I want back in my life.
I thought the film making was excellent, and it was subtle, witty and tense. It was also meandering and didn't really have a typical "plot conclusion". It was two and a bit hours of relatively typical kind of story (with a slightly different bent) that suddenly ends and wraps up harshly. I know that this untold bit is part of the design of the film, but I didn't like the way it lulled you into thinking it was going to be a normal story - then ditches you with cleverness at the end.
Problem is, I need to watch it again to decide how good it really actually was, but I don't want to as it's too long and hard work :lol:
nealbie
CF Legend
I sort of agree with furie but differ slightly in my grasp of the Terminator series. (based on films 1, 2 and 3; never watched SJCs or Salvation). Oh yeah and I suppose for those of you that haven't seen the first 3 there may be a few spoilers :lol:
T1 - Exactly the same as furie, "the future has alread affected the past". Robot is sent in time machine from future to kill mother of unborn resistance leader John Connor. Kyle sent back from future to defend and impregnate (although unwittingly) mother, thus becoming JC's daddy. Infinite lopp.
T2 - My interpretation of the recipe is somewhat different. 2 robots come back in time, 1 to kill JC, the other to protect him and hopefully destroy t'other robot. Mother decides, "Hey why not stop judgement day altogether and destroy Skynet before it exists?" (ala T1). Said plan falls into place, building blows up, stuff destroyed, evil robot melted. In order to ensure that future items are not kept lying around, the items from T1 and t'good robot Arnie are also melted. However, JC is still alive, yet no robots and junk = no judgement day = no JC to send unwitting daddy back in time = no JC. :? Hmmm, therefore Judgement Day still has to happen somehow. Perhaps not everything was blown up fully? After all the explosion wasn't all that nuclear was it?
Therefore, T3 - More robots sent back in time, meaning, yes there was a Judgement Day, T2 then becomes a rather pointless (but very good) 2 hour film/story. At various points JC goes to kill himself, but it is impossible, because good Arnie bot number 2 has to do it in the future. Again this ruins the suspense supposedly added through music to create an atmosphere, etc, etc. Skynet gets turned on (apparently unlike Daleks, Terminators do have emotions :roll: ), and everyone nukes each other, etc, etc. I can't believe how candidly I just spoke of a nuclear holocaust, I feel bad .
Meaning that timeline is complete. Number 2 may seem paradoxical, but only when seen as a separate entity from the 3rd film. With it, it all makes sense in a timey wimey manner of speaking, which I'm sure David Tennant would greatly approve of.
The future doesn't "right itself" as furie put it in my opinion. It was always going to happen that way in order for it to make sense as an infinite loop in time. Something which is portrayed as such in the Terminator films.
And at some point in the near future I will review Angels and Demons avec Da Vinci Code.
T1 - Exactly the same as furie, "the future has alread affected the past". Robot is sent in time machine from future to kill mother of unborn resistance leader John Connor. Kyle sent back from future to defend and impregnate (although unwittingly) mother, thus becoming JC's daddy. Infinite lopp.
T2 - My interpretation of the recipe is somewhat different. 2 robots come back in time, 1 to kill JC, the other to protect him and hopefully destroy t'other robot. Mother decides, "Hey why not stop judgement day altogether and destroy Skynet before it exists?" (ala T1). Said plan falls into place, building blows up, stuff destroyed, evil robot melted. In order to ensure that future items are not kept lying around, the items from T1 and t'good robot Arnie are also melted. However, JC is still alive, yet no robots and junk = no judgement day = no JC to send unwitting daddy back in time = no JC. :? Hmmm, therefore Judgement Day still has to happen somehow. Perhaps not everything was blown up fully? After all the explosion wasn't all that nuclear was it?
Therefore, T3 - More robots sent back in time, meaning, yes there was a Judgement Day, T2 then becomes a rather pointless (but very good) 2 hour film/story. At various points JC goes to kill himself, but it is impossible, because good Arnie bot number 2 has to do it in the future. Again this ruins the suspense supposedly added through music to create an atmosphere, etc, etc. Skynet gets turned on (apparently unlike Daleks, Terminators do have emotions :roll: ), and everyone nukes each other, etc, etc. I can't believe how candidly I just spoke of a nuclear holocaust, I feel bad
.Meaning that timeline is complete. Number 2 may seem paradoxical, but only when seen as a separate entity from the 3rd film. With it, it all makes sense in a timey wimey manner of speaking, which I'm sure David Tennant would greatly approve of.
The future doesn't "right itself" as furie put it in my opinion. It was always going to happen that way in order for it to make sense as an infinite loop in time. Something which is portrayed as such in the Terminator films.
And at some point in the near future I will review Angels and Demons avec Da Vinci Code.
mrclam said:
I watched it before you did!
And Neal, the point is.
Skynet is this super intelligent computer system. We'll ignore the massive leap of any thought process required to believe that the ripples in time haven't irrevocably ruined the future time line and utterly suspend all disbelief.
So, this computer system can't work out it's either going to create a paradox somewhere, or that what has happened is inevitable. Either way, it would quickly be able to work out that it was better putting its effort into creating an army of robots so powerful a single one can kill everyone (except Sarah Conner). So the story falls on its arse very rapidly due to not making any sense at all and just going for the easy, cheap, crap option instead of the writers thinking things through.
I could live with the T2 ending to be honest, it's poor, but it doesn't ruin the entire film too much. T3 was a travesty though
Watched Kill Bill Parts one and two Already watched it once, and I quite like the first one, but the second is just a bit bland. It was quite exciting the first time, but the second time it really was poor.
I don't like Thurman's character portrayal either. I don't know if she's supposed to be "flawed" deliberately, but she never seems comfortable or confident at any time she's in a fight. As a super killer, there's too much fear. I recognise it and that lack of confidence gets you killed very quickly. I know you're supposed to root for the under-dog, but it gets a bit ridiculous.
Still, 8/10 for part one - 6/10 for part two.