logo Sign In

Last movie seen — Page 79

Author
Time

RedFive said:

Anchorhead said:

Stress and anger are killers. 

Plus, they lead to the dark side.

I watched Shutter Island again last night.
SPOILERS baleted::

Sidenote: Watching it after not having seen it for a while was very enjoyable, you really pick up on a lot of intricacies the Scorsese worked into the film.  Awesome movie.

I think the movie and the book were both written to be intentionally ambiguous.  While I lean to your interpretation, I think the movie supports your cousin's as a valid interpretation as well.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

Anchorhead said:

War movies, Batman, that sort of thing I'm fine with.  There was a film a few years ago with Naomi Watts as part of a family taken hostage and brutalized by two criminals.  For the life of me, I can't imagine someone desiring to watch two hours of something that horrible. Its appeal is completely lost on me.

Being much younger than you two, and I guess still quite angst ridden, I still couldn't imagine ever wanting to see anything like the Naomi Watts film you mentioned, but overly violent things like Metalocalypse tend to amuse the hell out of me.

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

I think the movie and the book were both written to be intentionally ambiguous.  While I lean to your interpretation, I think the movie supports your cousin's as a valid interpretation as well.
What? I don't see how it could support anything but the explanation the movie itself gave. Vanilla Sky was like that, no one understood it, even though they spend the last 10 minutes of the movie explaining what was going on.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

 

xhonzi said:

I think the movie and the book were both written to be intentionally ambiguous.  While I lean to your interpretation, I think the movie supports your cousin's as a valid interpretation as well.
What? I don't see how it could support anything but the explanation the movie itself gave. Vanilla Sky was like that, no one understood it, even though they spend the last 10 minutes of the movie explaining what was going on.

 

I agree. The movie spelled out the explanation quite clearly and definitively, I don't think there was the least bit of ambiguity about it.

I loved that movie while watching it, thought it was shaping up to be a great little mystery thriller, especially when he met the woman in the cave. It was getting really exciting with all the conspiracy stuff. Then all the twists kicked in... and I was pretty disappointed. Feels like everything goes for the "WHAT A TWIST!!!" shock reaction these days. Comes off as a lame gimmick to me. Tired of it. Very disappointed by Shutter Island in the end, felt it could have been so much more.

Author
Time

I must admit to finding Machete a bundle of laughs but the film wears it's irony so proudly on it's chest that it's almost impossible to be offended by it.

Wolf Creek really annoyed me because it was beautifully photographed and the actors were clearly talented but the piece was so pointless and the action boiled down to the same old routine of people (specifically of the female gender) being brutally punished for acting in a bizarrely stupid way. At least your average splatter flick has the language of exploitation to provide a comfort zone for that sort of cinematic rubber necking.

The original version of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre had pathos and almost Beckettesque humour, it was grueling but also demonstrated surprising restraint and provided a cathartic experience.

REC worked on a similar level, it's essentially a zombie film with shaky cam effects but it has layers of scary ideas overlaid onto it as well as some realistic characterisation and it provides a white knuckle coaster ride experience.

House Of 1000 Corpses, started so well, the first act plays like a John Walters comedy and then it became deeply and repellently sadistic.

It wasn't fun in a gooey splatter sense, it had no message or ideas, it didn't even work as a Grand Guignol ghost ride, it was just sick for sick sake.

Author
Time

I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey again today, aaand

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

it wasn't as bad as I remember....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just don't tell Ziggy.

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time
 (Edited)

CP3S said:

doubleofive said:

 

xhonzi said:

I think the movie and the book were both written to be intentionally ambiguous.  While I lean to your interpretation, I think the movie supports your cousin's as a valid interpretation as well.
What? I don't see how it could support anything but the explanation the movie itself gave. Vanilla Sky was like that, no one understood it, even though they spend the last 10 minutes of the movie explaining what was going on.

 

I agree. The movie spelled out the explanation quite clearly and definitively, I don't think there was the least bit of ambiguity about it.

I loved that movie while watching it, thought it was shaping up to be a great little mystery thriller, especially when he met the woman in the cave. It was getting really exciting with all the conspiracy stuff. Then all the twists kicked in... and I was pretty disappointed. Feels like everything goes for the "WHAT A TWIST!!!" shock reaction these days. Comes off as a lame gimmick to me. Tired of it. Very disappointed by Shutter Island in the end, felt it could have been so much more.

Well!  First Portal and now this...

I want to say that the director commentary addresses the "ambiguity" of the piece.

If not, then I guess you both are just wrong.  :)

In other words, watch it again and try to see it as "all a lie" to convince him.  I think you'll find that it plays that way to the degree that there is no really conclusive evidence against it.

But you can go debate it on the imdb forums too, if you'd like.  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1130884/board/

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

Anchorhead said:

There was a film a few years ago with Naomi Watts as part of a family taken hostage and brutalized by two criminals.


"Funny Games", a remake of a german (ok, austrian) movie by the same title, done by the same director. And it was a shot-by-shot remake.

Author
Time

TK-949 said:

 

Anchorhead said:

There was a film a few years ago with Naomi Watts as part of a family taken hostage and brutalized by two criminals.


"Funny Games", a remake of a german (ok, austrian) movie by the same title, done by the same director. And it was a shot-by-shot remake.

 

I've seen the remake, the original is still in my queue.  Not sure if it's worth it given that the remake was shot-by-shot the same.

Author
Time

RedFive said:

*oops :(

I don't know, it wasn't great, but *meh was so much worse, *oops was a triumph in comparison.  I mean, at least *oops had something to say.  *meh was, well, just meh.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

TK-949 said:

 

Anchorhead said:

There was a film a few years ago with Naomi Watts as part of a family taken hostage and brutalized by two criminals.


"Funny Games", a remake of a german (ok, austrian) movie by the same title, done by the same director. And it was a shot-by-shot remake.

 

I've seen the remake, the original is still in my queue.  Not sure if it's worth it given that the remake was shot-by-shot the same.

Meh, they both sucked. I wouldn't bother

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

Oops! (1999)

"Late one evening a woman enters a near-deserted underground carpark and discovers a strange man attempting to break into her beloved black Mini. When a broken pay phone foils her bid to call for help she decides to fight back. Utilizing various grocer items she launches an attack on the would-be thief. After a bitter struggle she eventually prevails, only to discover her actions may have been a little hasty."


Author
Time

"kill the irishman" aka "bulletproof gangster"  WOW!!!!! i mean WOW...

this is the new goodfellas. this may even be better then goodfellas. trust me watch it.

believe in the ball and throw yourself!

Author
Time

thumbs down for saying "2001 a space odyssey" and "bad" in the same post. the film is probably the single most influential scifi movie of all time. the genius of the movie can not be denied. there are so few truly epic scifi movies. 2001 was not just about evolution it was about the evolution of cinema. i will let that small mistake you made slide greenpenguino. just dont let it happen again:)

believe in the ball and throw yourself!

Author
Time

ibleedspeed said:

thumbs down for saying "2001 a space odyssey" and "bad" in the same post. the film is probably the single most influential scifi movie of all time. the genius of the movie can not be denied. there are so few truly epic scifi movies. 2001 was not just about evolution it was about the evolution of cinema. i will let that small mistake you made slide greenpenguino. just dont let it happen again:)

Sooooo.....

 

 

what would you say if I said 2001 and overrated in the same sentence...??

 

;) *snigger*

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

Spicedriver's edit of Exorcist III (with the original title for the film Legion).

A massive improvement on a great film screwed over by the studio.

I suspect not as great as a director's cut would be if it became possible and I could see a few areas for improvement but if you want to check out a non-Star Wars fan edit I recommend it highly.

Author
Time


"Tangled"

Charming. Very cute. Amazing CGI.

THE SECOND MOST EXPENSIVE FILM EVER MADE!?!?!? wow.

Author
Time

captainsolo said:

Batman 89

It makes me sad that people have to add the "89."  I understand it, but it makes me sad.