Last movie seen — Page 115

TV's Frink said:

Rubber.

I expected a story about a self-aware tire that goes on a rampage.

I did not expect a story about a self-aware tire that goes on a rampage where the tire makes the most sense of anything in the movie.

7 binoculars out of 10.

TV's Frink said:

doubleofive said:

TV's Frink said:

Rubber.

I expected a story about a self-aware tire that goes on a rampage.

I did not expect a story about a self-aware tire that goes on a rampage where the tire makes the most sense of anything in the movie.

7 binoculars out of 10.

We only got about half hour into that before we turned it off. Shortly after the tire watched the woman take a shower.

I see...then you missed the non-tire parts that got very weird.

We watched Citizen Kane this weekend. Mrs. Xhonzi had never seen it before and it's been 15 or so years since I last watched it.

I still enjoyed it, my wife enjoyed it... but I still get a chuckle when people refer to it as some kind of "high water mark" of moviemaking perfection. It's good. It did a lot of things first. It changed the industry. But I don't think it's a better movie than... Secret of Nimh 2.

And Eric Idle

TV's Frink said:

My daughter has basically been watching Secret of NIMH on a non-stop loop the past few days.

Sorry, I would have posted this in the "Last movie your daughter seen" thread but I couldn't find it.

Roger Ebert said:

Secret of NIMH is okay, but doesn't have enough hardcore mouse nudity in it. SELLOUT!

The thing about Kane is this: no one wanted to push the envelope at the time. Welles pushed anything and everything he ever came into contact with. They thought he would do great in Hollywood. He sat around and couldn't get a project off the ground for over a year. So, you can definitely say that he came tearing out of the gate. However, they gave a young Orson Welles full control of the production. Kane is simply undiluted Welles on crack, with a great writer and brilliant and innovative people who actually wanted to do more than the same 9-5. Also, one must mention the fact Welles was usually on Benzedrine at this point in time. That's what makes it stand out. And all of the primary gushers for the film wouldn't even consider letting the man make another film. It took decades for it to even be considered as good, let alone even be shown.

captainsolo said:

The thing about Kane is this: no one wanted to push the envelope at the time. Welles pushed anything and everything he ever came into contact with. They thought he would do great in Hollywood. He sat around and couldn't get a project off the ground for over a year. So, you can definitely say that he came tearing out of the gate. However, they gave a young Orson Welles full control of the production. Kane is simply undiluted Welles on crack, with a great writer and brilliant and innovative people who actually wanted to do more than the same 9-5. Also, one must mention the fact Welles was usually on Benzedrine at this point in time. That's what makes it stand out. And all of the primary gushers for the film wouldn't even consider letting the man make another film. It took decades for it to even be considered as good, let alone even be shown.

I get all that, and I consider it one of the few all-time greats as well, but it's still a movie about a newspaper mogul, and that can only not be boring for so long before it gets boring.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I rarely give a rating higher than a 7. I've only given two films a perfect 10/10, and one of those two I haven't seen since 1996, so I may have to revise that one.

What are they?

RedFive said:

captainsolo said:

The thing about Kane is this: no one wanted to push the envelope at the time. Welles pushed anything and everything he ever came into contact with. They thought he would do great in Hollywood. He sat around and couldn't get a project off the ground for over a year. So, you can definitely say that he came tearing out of the gate. However, they gave a young Orson Welles full control of the production. Kane is simply undiluted Welles on crack, with a great writer and brilliant and innovative people who actually wanted to do more than the same 9-5. Also, one must mention the fact Welles was usually on Benzedrine at this point in time. That's what makes it stand out. And all of the primary gushers for the film wouldn't even consider letting the man make another film. It took decades for it to even be considered as good, let alone even be shown.

I get all that, and I consider it one of the few all-time greats as well, but it's still a movie about a newspaper mogul, and that can only not be boring for so long before it gets boring.