logo Sign In

Best movies of 05 — Page 8

Author
Time
There was some time compression in the film (the Earth doesn't return until Life, The Universe and Everything, IIRC), but nothing that couldn't be fixed with a couple of sequels. Think of how Peter Jackson played fast and loose with the timelines in LOTR, not to mention characters.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Golden Globes for best movie and best director - Brokeback Mountain.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
It's not an easy decision, but I'd say I would give it to Nolan and "Batman Begins"...

Oh, wait, were those the results or your nomination?

4

Author
Time
I read an article in the New York Times last week about the bloated length of films recently, largely referring to Terrence Malick's The New World, which he has since taken and trimmed to about 2 hours and 14 minutes. The article also mentioned Brokeback Mountain as an egregious offender in this regard, stating that it spent way too much time on the pretty vistas and took forever to get going.

Yet this is what the Hollywood foreign Press (an organisation of dubious merit, in any event) chose as Best Picture, which goes to show what hype will buy.


In case anyone was wondering, yes, they did mention King Kong as another offender, as well as Munich.

Here's a link: Films in Need of a Little Nip and Tuck .

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
I don't belive a movie's lenght has anything to do with it being a good film or not. I could easily watch a 5 hour movie, if it's enjoyable and I have the free time for it.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Some people cant stand to sit through movies that long, though, Ric. My mother, for one.

4

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Some people cant stand to sit through movies that long, though, Ric. My mother, for one.


I assume she doesn't go to Peter Jackson movies?
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ricarleite
I don't belive a movie's lenght has anything to do with it being a good film or not. I could easily watch a 5 hour movie, if it's enjoyable and I have the free time for it.


And your last comment says it all. A lot of directors are getting to the point where final cut is all-important, and while I do agree that a director should have final say, I also believe that a responsible director will try to bring some objectivity to his work. In other words, he will ask his editor to be brutally honest, if necessary, and tell him which scenes advance the story and which are window dressing.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Adamwankenobi
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Some people cant stand to sit through movies that long, though, Ric. My mother, for one.


I assume she doesn't go to Peter Jackson movies?


Any of his pre-LOTR movies would be fine.


"I'm a Derek! Dereks don't run!"

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
The only pre-LOTR Peter Jackson I've seen was The Frighteners (hideously underrated). Anything you would recommend?

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
I'd recommend "Bad Taste" (his very first film), and "Dead Alive" ( a zombie flick, a lot of the locations were later used on The Frighteners). I've heard "Meet the Feebles" is good too, but I have yet to track that one down.

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Meet the Feebles is available on DVD in Canada here.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
i have never seen what is so wrong with window dressing in a movie?
i mean who's to say i want to watch a quick 2 hour movie? maybe i dont want to plot to unfold in such a manner of time that seems unrealistic....
if a movie needs that time or works well with that time then why bother trimming anything?

sure it maybe more convenient for the public, but if your not willing to spend that time to enjoy the film i say dont bother watching it at all...
i like to enjoy every last drop of a movie whether is 4 hours long or a just a quick 1 and a half hours....
"Never. I'll never turn to the darkside. You've failed your highness. I am a jedi, like my father before me."
Author
Time
If I'm paying $10 bucks for a movie ticket these days, it damned well better be three hours long!
Author
Time
2005

1 Batman Begins
2 Land of the Dead
3 Narnia
Author
Time
narnia was a good kids film especially when so much junk is aimed their way
Author
Time
Originally posted by: sybeman
If I'm paying $10 bucks for a movie ticket these days, it damned well better be three hours long!


I disagree. If I can see a good 90 minute film for $10, I'll take that any day over a bloated 3-hour "epic". The problem with Hollywood in terms of entertainment value is not quantity, but quality. People who have enjoyed King Kong have told me it was way too long.

We need to get out of the Wal-Mart/Costco mentality that large quantities at low prices=good. With some commodities, that is true, but not entertainment.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: battlewars
dont insult the WALMART generation


...only Wal-Mart.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: battlewars
dont insult the WALMART generation

No slight intended. What I'm saying is that, contrary to popular belief, the Wal-Mart model doesn't fit everything, entertainment being a shining example of something that doesn't fit.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
King Kong is a long movie, but it's generally entertaining enough that it never really feels like it's dragging.

4