• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Movies you have seen recently?

Status
Not open for further replies.
swoon said:
loving your noir impressions. narrow margin is a fucking sad movie. the ending is pretty brutal. it's worth tracking down the remake.

They Shoot Pictures Don't They 1000 update is live. some pretty big changes, fucking Gummo made the list. thoughts? I guess i should create a thread so people can complain about old films, but whateva.

Icheckmovies has me at 920/1013 for the list, but it's pretty messed up (like the rest of their site) at the moment.

Their intro to it says that it's the smallest number of changes that have been made to a list thus far; seems that until the 2012 Sight and Sound Poll, they suspect that it will remain fairly stable.
 
I would like to talk about other films I have seen. Has anyone seen 32 Short Films about Glenn Gould? I think it is something that will continue to grow with me even if it could have been executed just a bit better (imagine if that thing had a cinematographer like Slawomir Idziak when he worked for Krzysztof Kieslowski, I would have felt gutted). I wish more people took liberties in biopics like what was done in 32 Short Films for it felt like I had a muh better understanding of Glenn Gould then if it was linear paint by numbers. It is much like how I loved I'm Not There for trying to understand the mythos of Bob Dylan.

Another notable is Dillinger is Dead which my friend Ryan told me that he thought it was the worst film in the Criterion Collection. I don't think I have disagreed with him on a film more which I thought was a very funny while going through all these somewhat lunatic like notions the most mundane way possible (which is actually a compliment).

A joke I made to my friend Chelsea for Cleo, from 5 to 7 is the film should be called Cleo, from 5 to 6:30 since it is only an hour and a half long. Bad joke, I know.
 
swoon said:
loving your noir impressions. narrow margin is a fucking sad movie. the ending is pretty brutal. it's worth tracking down the remake.

They Shoot Pictures Don't They 1000 update is live. some pretty big changes, fucking Gummo made the list. thoughts? I guess i should create a thread so people can complain about old films, but whateva.

Icheckmovies has me at 920/1013 for the list, but it's pretty messed up (like the rest of their site) at the moment.

Gummo is probably the best film of the 90s.
 
I saw The Last Laugh in my film history class the other day, but it was a double feature with Dr. Caligari, and I was pretty sleepy by the time we got to it; I jolted awake during the second half, but the first half is all sort of a blur. What I saw was quite good, though, albeit several notches below Nosferatu and Sunrise.
 
My top 10 for 2010 looks like this by the way:
1. Dogtooth
2. Exit Through the Gift Shop
.....
Somewhere in the top 10:
Enter the Void

Things needed to be watched:
Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, Another Year, White Material (starting to doubt it though), the Illusionist, Heartbeats, Never Let Me Go, Hahaha, Daddy Longlegs, Helen, The Strange Case of Angelica, The Life and Death of a Porno Gang, The Famous and the Dead, A Serbian Film, Mysteries of Lisbon, Norwegian Wood, Room and a Half, Everyone Else, the Invisible Frame, Animal Kingdom, The King's Speech, Blue Valentine, The Way Back, Inspector Bellamy, Miriam Bale, Inwetrayzacja, Meek's Cutoff, Ne Change Rien, Symbol, Alamar, Rubber, Rubber, Ceritified Copy, I'm Still Here, Of Gods and Men, Film Socialisme, Our Beloved Month of August, Promises Written in Water, Robinson in Ruins, Mysteries of Lisbon, Cold Weather, Poetry, The Portuguese Nun, The Housemaid, Tape, Caterpillar, The Father of My Children, Corneille-Brecht, and The Ditch.
 
I haven't been active in a while, here's a bunch from the last month as I catch up on 2010. I have about 20 more 2010 films I want to see before the Oscars (Four Lions, Winter's Bone, Ghost Writer, Restrepo, The King's Speech, Uncle Boonmee, etc.)


Black Swan (2010)
Entirely predictable right from the outset (aside: why is predictability usually held against Shutter Island but glossed over here?), but it doesn't much matter; the journey to the obvious conclusion is well worth the time. You can nominate Portman the Oscar right now, such an amazing portrayal of fear and paranoia and dedication; a lesser performance would've harmed this movie immensely. Aronofsky is a over the top, as usual, but keeps the feeling of tension and a slowly crumbling reality strong throughout. One of the better films in a weak year. [4/5]


127 Hours (2010)
Danny Boyle is almost as bad as Quentin Tarantino in being completely incapable of restraining himself. We have a story here about a canyoneer who became trapped under a boulder and his subsequent dealing with the situation over the following days. Does this sound like a movie that needs frequent instances of jump cuts, fast and slow motion montages and other flashy editing tricks over blaring indie rock and ironic 70s lite rock? Franco is great as the lead, and his hallucinatory scenes are the movie's highlights, but there's just too much style splashed around on a story that doesn't need it. Sometimes Boyle gets it right when he contrasts the majestic open spaces just overhead of Franco's claustrophobic nightmare, and sometimes it comes off like a shitty music video. [3.5/5]


True Grit (2010)
A quirky, low-key Western carried along by great acting from Bridges, Damon and Steinfeld rather than plot or visuals; definitely something of a role reversal for a genre which usually relies on plot details and panoramic views. True Grit certainly has a fair share of those elements, but the core of the movie is the uneasy partnership of the three lead characters.

For a Western it's a fine movie, for a Coen brothers film it's something of a disappointment. Their usual cleverness and metafictional winking is nowhere to be found, although their ear for snappy, period-authentic dialog is as strong here as any of their films. Certainly not one of the Coens' best, but a strong movie regardless. [4/5]


Exit Through the Gift Shop (2010)
Metafictional documentary on art appreciation and notoriety. It demonstrates some fascinating examples of the acceptance and appreciation of art largely being a byproduct of peer pressure and curiosity seeking.

It's a little rough as a film, though. The first part of the documentary about the authentic street artists is great for the visuals but mostly focuses on Thierry, the documentarian, and his obsession with video taping everything. Even though he's a charming eccentric, it's laborious viewing at times. And when Thierry becomes an artist in the second half of the film, the tongue is pressed a little too firmly in cheek. His art is so bad, his behavior so erratic, it's like hitting the viewer over the head with a mallet in making the point.

But these are relatively minor complaints on what is a clever and subversive film. Better to reflect on than to watch, but maybe being forced to view all that horrible pop art made me a bit cranky. [4/5]


Devil (2010)
Reasonably entertaining thriller, marred by a silly theme of supernatural justice. The brief 80 minute run time was a wise decision. It's a quick and somewhat cliched film where you know what you're going to get and it pays off well enough. I could think of a dozen ways to make it better, but really, Hollywood turns out far worse junk than this on a weekly basis. [2.5/5]


Dinner for Schmucks (2010)
Honestly horrid. I really wanted to like it and I'm no stranger to dumb Hollywood comedies; liking a few, hating a few, and thinking most are mediocre. At worst I thought between Zach Galifianakis and Jemaine Clement this would at least have a few moments, but my god, the writing is just dire. There is nothing subtle about it at all -- every scene is overacted and overdone. Carell's awkward guy schtick was old years ago, too, and since most of the movie is about his character, this was a chore from beginning to end. [1/5]


The Fighter (2010)
Strong contender for the best of 2010. I had little interest in seeing this as I end up hating most sports movies, besides which the story of a poor white kid trying to make it in the cruel world of professional boxing has been done a dozen times before, but I decided to give it a go and am very happy I did. It's really more of a family drama with a side plot of boxing rather than a boxing movie with a side plot of family drama. Bale is unbelievable, best male acting performance by a good stretch this year. It's a gritty, engaging, well-balanced drama -- it's tough but doesn't try too hard, it can be warm but never maudlin -- every element of the story plays out very naturally and evenly. Great flick. [4.5/5]


High on Crack Street: Lost Lives in Lowell (1995)
This is the documentary referenced in The Fighter which follows the daily lives of a few crack addicts in the run down town of Lowell, Massachusetts. I sought it out and watched it right after I saw The Fighter just for some further backstory on the movie, but it turned out to be plenty engaging on its own. It's a good, neutral documentary -- it doesn't try to elicit emotion from the viewer and it's very plainly shot -- cameras just roll silently in the background and follow a trio of crackheads around for 18 months as they crawl deeper into their addictions and try to pull themselves out. It's currently available free and legally on snagfilms.com. [4/5]


My 2010 so far:
1. Shutter Island [4.5]
2. The Fighter [4.5]
3. Black Swan [4]
4. True Grit [4]
5. Inception [4]*
6. Exit Through the Gift Shop [4]
7. 127 Hours [3.5]
8. Get Him to the Greek [3.5]
9. Magic & Bird: A Courtship of Rivals [3.5]
10. Greenberg [3]
11. The Town [3]
12. Tron Legacy [3]
13. Alice in Wonderland [2.5]
14. Devil [2.5]
15. Date Night [2.5]
16. Hot Tub Time Machine [2]
17. Clash of the Titans [2]
18. Cop Out [1.5]
19. Dinner for Schmucks [1]


(*need to see again. saw in a dinner theater on my birthday, couldn't pay the closest attention)
 
Seriously! What the fuck is up with "Cannibal Holocaust"?


HiResDes said:
I wrote this about Precious in an old editorial:


The most surprising thing to me about “Precious” is how bleak a fate is painted for all of its characters of color and how both the writer and director failed to take any initiative to reinterpret the story into one that was less static and discouraging.

If “Precious” was intended to paint an uplifting story about a marginalized underdog of color who asserts herself and finds an identity, in many ways it fails to be translated on the big screen.
Precious lives in an overly abusive household, struggles with illiteracy, has a sexually transmitted disease and is a young mother of two (one with Down’s Syndrome), so it seems ridiculous for people of color to take solace in the fact that she is only able to find help through the assistance of fairer-skinned people.

The biggest problem with the film is how ridiculous it was.

She - Is incredibly abused at home, failing school, can't read, can't write, has no job, was regularly raped, has two kids, one of the kids has down syndrome, is fat as fuck, is hideous, homeless, never had a boyfriend, and has aids...I think the writers and directors were trying a bit too hard with this film.
 
Just saw Public Enemies.

Strongly acted and stylishly filmed, it was also....rather boring. Even during the action scenes with guns blazing everywhere, the film felt curiously without excitement. It was ponderous and even-keel all the way through. Mann used the same techniques and structure that worked so well in Heat here, but this just didn't gel.
 
VALIS said:
127 Hours (2010)
Danny Boyle is almost as bad as Quentin Tarantino in being completely incapable of restraining himself. We have a story here about a canyoneer who became trapped under a boulder and his subsequent dealing with the situation over the following days. Does this sound like a movie that needs frequent instances of jump cuts, fast and slow motion montages and other flashy editing tricks over blaring indie rock and ironic 70s lite rock? Franco is great as the lead, and his hallucinatory scenes are the movie's highlights, but there's just too much style splashed around on a story that doesn't need it. Sometimes Boyle gets it right when he contrasts the majestic open spaces just overhead of Franco's claustrophobic nightmare, and sometimes it comes off like a shitty music video. [3.5/5]

After seeing the movie and trying to articulate why it wasn't as excellent as I hoped, I found I agree fully with your nice little mini-review. Great lead performance, but the spastic/frantic editing didn't fit the theme, I think.
 
Happiness_DVD_cover.jpg


so messed up lol
 
BeeDog said:
After seeing the movie and trying to articulate why it wasn't as excellent as I hoped, I found I agree fully with your nice little mini-review. Great lead performance, but the spastic/frantic editing didn't fit the theme, I think.

The whole thing was way too flashy for the story he was telling. It worked for Slumdog but hurts 127 Hours.
 
I watched A History of Violence earlier today, having picked it up due to a friend's suggestion. Shamefully, I haven't seen many Cronenberg films, but I knew enough to be surprised when I heard the basic setup for this one. As "commercial" as it may seem in concept, it has real human depth that makes it more than worthwhile. Highly recommended, but be warned: the violence is shocking and grisly.

I bought a cheapo copy of Amadeus a few hours ago and I'll be watching it soon. I was far too young the first time I attempted it.
 
Shadows (1959) - My first john cassavetes film, and while it wasn't particularly a great film, i was definitely enthralled from beginning to the end due to the naturalistic dialogue and characters. I was even more impressed that the whole thing was apparently improvised. Really looking forward to seeing more of his films. I can definitely see his filmography become amazing as i progress.

Persona (1966) - Bibi andersson performance in this was incredible, and was the real highlight of the film as far as I'm concerned. But other then that I'm not so sure what to think of it. It's a great film objectively speaking, but I'm unsure of whether i enjoyed it at all.:lol

Collateral (2004) - My second Micheal mann movie after heat. And in some ways i liked this more. While heat had better individual moments, this felt far tighter in terms of pacing and less bloated then what heat was. And the cinematography was simply gorgeous, it managed to make the setting feel alive and lively in a good way. Definitely need to buy this on blu-ray sometime.

A Woman is a Woman (1961) - Just a very fun film to watch from beginning to end, and i absolutely adored anna karina's character. I'm surprised on how much i enjoyed it, since i usually can't get into musicals.:lol

brianjones said:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Happiness_DVD_cover.jpg

so messed up lol

Man, I've been wanting to see that film for a quite a while. But I'm not so sure if i can handle the subject manner. (from what I've read about it anyway).:lol
 
AlternativeUlster said:
I would like to talk about other films I have seen. Has anyone seen 32 Short Films about Glenn Gould? I think it is something that will continue to grow with me even if it could have been executed just a bit better (imagine if that thing had a cinematographer like Slawomir Idziak when he worked for Krzysztof Kieslowski, I would have felt gutted). I wish more people took liberties in biopics like what was done in 32 Short Films for it felt like I had a muh better understanding of Glenn Gould then if it was linear paint by numbers. It is much like how I loved I'm Not There for trying to understand the mythos of Bob Dylan.

I love 32 Films About Glenn Gould. So much fun to watch. A shame so few have seen it.

brianjones said:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Happiness_DVD_cover.jpg[IMG]

so messed up lol[/QUOTE]

Be sure to watch the sequel, Life During Wartime.
 
Night_Trekker said:
I watched A History of Violence earlier today, having picked it up due to a friend's suggestion. Shamefully, I haven't seen many Cronenberg films, but I knew enough to be surprised when I heard the basic setup for this one. As "commercial" as it may seem in concept, it has real human depth that makes it more than worthwhile. Highly recommended, but be warned: the violence is shocking and grisly.


If you liked that perhaps 'Eastern Promises' is worth a watch as well, if you haven't seen it already.
 
Brute Force (1947)
Something i noticed about all Dassin films so far is how great the photography is. He had such an eye for picture composition. You could print out screens from his films and hang them on the wall. As a movie i found Brute Force a bit underwhelming. It did a poor job in convincing me how bad the life in that prison was. Even the bad guy seemed rather reasonable and fair until later in the film. The whole story felt artificial and forced to me. Great actors in it tho.

Thieves' Highway (1949)

It's a solid movie with a decent enough story but i had a hard time to connect to the main character. I found him so stupid and unsympathic. Might be that i just didn't like the actor tho.

The Woman in the Window (1944)
Another solid noir from Fritz Lang with the same strenghts and weaknesses that i noticed in his other ones. The story was interesting but way too predictable and the ending was just silly.

The Lady from Shanghai (1947)
Simply remarkable. Can't believe this was made in the 1940's. Orson Welles must have been on drugs when he did this film. It feels so crazy and fresh. It has a dream like quality in that things constantly move forward and transform. So many quirky details and oddities in it. Everytime Rita Hayworth is visible her shining beauty seems to fill out the screen like she was filmed for a commercial spot.
I know Welles hated it because the studio forced him to cut around 1 hour but to me the lenght felt just right. More of it would have been sensory overload. Honestly i found this film more interesting and ahead of its time than Citizen Kane. It also aged much better. Best way to describe it is modernist arthouse noir, if such a thing exists.
 
So I watched Salt apparently the same night that a buddy watched it. I watched the Directors Cut and thought it was a pretty cool movie with a good ending. I talked to my friend and he told me he watched it and the ending was horrible...apparently the ending in the theatrical cut is vastly different and inferior in every way to the directors cut. I thought that was pretty crazy seeing as if the movie ended the way he described it to me the whole movie would have been a waste of time.

Anyhow...4/5
 
Fallout-NL said:
If you liked that perhaps 'Eastern Promises' is worth a watch as well, if you haven't seen it already.
Eastern Promises is more than "worth a watch" in fact it's wholly superior to that mediocre film.
 
HiResDes said:
I wrote this about Precious in an old editorial:


The most surprising thing to me about “Precious” is how bleak a fate is painted for all of its characters of color and how both the writer and director failed to take any initiative to reinterpret the story into one that was less static and discouraging.

If “Precious” was intended to paint an uplifting story about a marginalized underdog of color who asserts herself and finds an identity, in many ways it fails to be translated on the big screen.
Precious lives in an overly abusive household, struggles with illiteracy, has a sexually transmitted disease and is a young mother of two (one with Down’s Syndrome), so it seems ridiculous for people of color to take solace in the fact that she is only able to find help through the assistance of fairer-skinned people.
I can't help but notice your rather simple view on the movie is centered on race when the themes presented are about anything but that. It seems a very superficial examination of the film. The skin color of the people Precious gets help from is not the issue the movie is exploring and to reduce it to such and to suggest that this conclusion is all that people of color will glean from it is frankly insulting. Is this only a problem for you if the character who has a bleak fate is a person of color? Or would everything have been OK if the teacher and social worker were a few shades darker?

Also puzzling is your insistence that the writer and director should have "happy-ified" the film, lest the viewer feel a bit uncomfortable or somehow have the despair of Precious' situation resonate with them. Maybe their intention wasn't to uplift. Or maybe it was, and they trusted their audience would have the spirit to be resilient enough to make it through the grimy shit and come out fine on the other side. Either way I don't bother with concerning myself with filmmakers' intentions. I view what they produced and deal with that. Sometimes movies -- like life -- can be cruel and brutal. And since harsh realities are a truth which knows no racial boundaries, I see no reason why a film should be viewed negatively for reflecting that with a character of any skin color. I'd hate to imagine a filmmaker being afraid to show a character of color in a shitty situation or being helped by a "fair skinned" character in order to appease some vague notion of political correctness. No thanks.

Flying_Phoenix said:
The biggest problem with the film is how ridiculous it was.

She - Is incredibly abused at home, failing school, can't read, can't write, has no job, was regularly raped, has two kids, one of the kids has down syndrome, is fat as fuck, is hideous, homeless, never had a boyfriend, and has aids...I think the writers and directors were trying a bit too hard with this film.
Ok, so you've described the main character. Are we to infer that there are not people in the world who are in situations just as dire and desperate as Precious? That they went completely out in left field and created a character so impossibly pathetic that it is not possible to relate to her? Or is it that only characters who are positive, good looking, thin, disease-free, etc., are worthy of having stories told? I guess I'm just struck at the cosmetic examination of a character being used as a critique of an entire film. Maybe you had issues with the pacing, or acting, or plot, but it seems that a cursory character evaluation is all that you needed to determine the entire film's worth.

For the record I am not a huge fan of the movie, I thought it had a few good performances and some OK ones, and I thought the story was a bit lacking in substance. But as far as Precious appearance or her bleak situation, or the fucking skin complexion of the characters who help her, never once did any of that present a problem insofar as the plot and pace of the film was concerned. I was just suprised to see such surface level analysis going on with this movie.
 
Satyamdas said:
I can't help but notice your rather simple view on the movie is centered on race when the themes presented are about anything but that. It seems a very superficial examination of the film. The skin color of the people Precious gets help from is not the issue the movie is exploring and to reduce it to such and to suggest that this conclusion is all that people of color will glean from it is frankly insulting. Is this only a problem for you if the character who has a bleak fate is a person of color? Or would everything have been OK if the teacher and social worker were a few shades darker?

Also puzzling is your insistence that the writer and director should have "happy-ified" the film, lest the viewer feel a bit uncomfortable or somehow have the despair of Precious' situation resonate with them. Maybe their intention wasn't to uplift. Or maybe it was, and they trusted their audience would have the spirit to be resilient enough to make it through the grimy shit and come out fine on the other side. Either way I don't bother with concerning myself with filmmakers' intentions. I view what they produced and deal with that. Sometimes movies -- like life -- can be cruel and brutal. And since harsh realities are a truth which knows no racial boundaries, I see no reason why a film should be viewed negatively for reflecting that with a character of any skin color. I'd hate to imagine a filmmaker being afraid to show a character of color in a shitty situation or being helped by a "fair skinned" character in order to appease some vague notion of political correctness. No thanks.

...Precious is a rather simple film about contemporary racial issues that might as well have been written and directed by Tyler Perry. I'm all for sad films, in fact my favorite film is Dancer in the Dark, but it just feels forced in this movie, as do many of the character relationships. However, maybe I was little harsher on it given that it was largely an editorial centered on race in films and I had to stretch my opinions in order to make my comparisons to the movie Blindside seem more viable.
 
AlternativeUlster said:
I would like to talk about other films I have seen. Has anyone seen 32 Short Films about Glenn Gould? I think it is something that will continue to grow with me even if it could have been executed just a bit better (imagine if that thing had a cinematographer like Slawomir Idziak when he worked for Krzysztof Kieslowski, I would have felt gutted). I wish more people took liberties in biopics like what was done in 32 Short Films for it felt like I had a muh better understanding of Glenn Gould then if it was linear paint by numbers. It is much like how I loved I'm Not There for trying to understand the mythos of Bob Dylan.

I saw it. I think I'm right with you. It was very interesting, though the production felt a little televisioney to me, whatever that means.

The other thing I remember about it was that Netflix screwed up the aspect ratio so that it was smashed vertically. There's a section in the movie with an animation involving what I guess are ping pong balls moving around the screen. Except that at first I thought they were eggs. Which is interesting because a ping pong ball is just a ping pong ball, but an egg could mean something. So... I guess it meant nothing.
 
I saw True Grit. I loved the writing, I loved Jeff Bridges and the young girl. It was a very good movie. It's amazing how good the coen brothers can be and yet awkward in the same movie. The final moments of True Grit, specifically the horse scene, could have been done better. It was just awkward. Matt Damon was way off here, he had no business in this movie. Yet the dialogue and some scene were very powerful. Good movie.
 
Fallout-NL said:
If you liked that perhaps 'Eastern Promises' is worth a watch as well, if you haven't seen it already.
I'd definitely recommend it, as well. Not really a huge fan of this director's other worse, but Eastern Promises and A History of Violence are two of my favourite movies in their respective genres.
 
ShinAmano said:
So I watched Salt apparently the same night that a buddy watched it. I watched the Directors Cut and thought it was a pretty cool movie with a good ending. I talked to my friend and he told me he watched it and the ending was horrible...apparently the ending in the theatrical cut is vastly different and inferior in every way to the directors cut. I thought that was pretty crazy seeing as if the movie ended the way he described it to me the whole movie would have been a waste of time.

Anyhow...4/5

What was the ending in the director's cut? I saw the theatrical cut and thought it was pretty mediocre.
 
ShinAmano said:
So I watched Salt apparently the same night that a buddy watched it. I watched the Directors Cut and thought it was a pretty cool movie with a good ending. I talked to my friend and he told me he watched it and the ending was horrible...apparently the ending in the theatrical cut is vastly different and inferior in every way to the directors cut. I thought that was pretty crazy seeing as if the movie ended the way he described it to me the whole movie would have been a waste of time.

Anyhow...4/5

I watched both cuts on Blu-Ray....really surprised how much different they were from each other. I guess the theatrical cut's purpose was to leave it more open-ended for a possible sequel.
 
Had a couple backlogged, I'll just say something short about them.

Inglourious Basterds - 8/10

I liked this movie a lot more than I thought I would. At first I was sorta let down by not seeing enough of the Basterds terrorizing, but I've sorta come to accept that this isn't that kind of film, and Tarantino was wise to spread out the stories. After Kill Bill and this though, I'd still like something more "down to earth" from him.

Love Me If You Dare - 7/10

Someone some pages back recommended this to me after I was talking about my love of Amelie. I can see why. This started out very lovely, especially when the leads were children. The "game" is very cute and I've actually never heard of it before but I'm guessing it's more common in Europe? Doesn't feel like something made up so perfectly for a film. The film starts to drag on however once they grow older, and by the time they are adults, I was sorta just waiting for it to be over. Nevertheless, glad I watched it.

Repo Men - 5/10

Suffers from the same sort of problems that Babylon A.D. did. There is some interesting visual things here, and it even hints at some political implications, but ultimately the world is too unbelievable. I just don't "buy" the entire "repo-men" thing, it doesn't make sense for any society to evolve like this, let alone one as scientifically advanced as the one in the film. People can't pay for their transplants, so they are hunted down and killed? Yeah, no. LOL @ the shock ending.

Mother - 7/10

Most disappointing of this batch, even though it wasn't technically bad. Just a little overrated I guess. At the end of the film, I was left feeling like everyone was just a piece of shit. I've seen this, The Host, and Memoirs of Murder and MoM is by far the best of those to me.

Inception - 10/10

The kind of movie that feels like it was made specifically for me to enjoy. Can't say much more, still amazed by it. Holds up better than Dark Knight for me. I'm overrating but fuck it, I can't ask for much more from a blockbuster. There are so few that are as good as this.
 
Cosmic Bus said:
Yeah, I've gotta get the scoop on that one, too.

Also, I probably won't leave gaf completely. I'd be bored... My minimal posting will just be confined to this and a handful of other threads.

I've tried leaving too. The problem I found is that GAF is by far the best message board on the internet.

4chan may be huge, but it has horrible format, full of trolling posters, and is impossible to post from a public place due to the fact that somebody can glance over and see you browsing a page with a guy who has 3 fishes up his ass.

Something Awful is prestigious and has respectful posters, but the sites security and moderation is ridiculous. The site actually realise on such to make money. Not to mention it's not as active as GAF and all the community is full of a bunch of pussies thanks to its strict moderation.

SRK is decently active and has a nice retro gaming community. But the site has the laxest moderation, outside of 4chan, full of abusive, sexist, and racist posters and fascist.

Every other message board if full of whiny high school kids.

Don't get me wrong GAF has its share of bullshit. But it's not as bad and it has the perfect balance.
 
Flying_Phoenix said:
Something Awful is prestigious and has respectful posters, but the sites security and moderation is ridiculous. The site actually realise on such to make money. Not to mention it's not as active as GAF and all the community is full of a bunch of pussies thanks to its strict moderation.
I've been using Something Awful a little lately and this is what I noticed too. People get banned for fucking everything there. It's insane.
 
Drewsky said:
I've been using Something Awful a little lately and this is what I noticed too. People get banned for fucking everything there. It's insane.

It's because that's how the site makes money. If you get banned you have to pay an extra $10. This is why they are so strict. But honestly it isn't fun posting there because unless you are super careful, you WILL get banned. Not to mention the arguments are so weak there. I ran across something posted in the SApedia about an event of when SA were invited to Stormfront (the world-leading white supremacist message board) to do debate and they got annihilated. It wasn't that the Stormfront arguments were good, they were idiotic, it's just that the SA members had no idea how to handle troll-logic/troll-arguments. If the same thing happened in GAF we would have ran circles around them.

Seriously the site's only redeeming feature is that it has the best political board on the net and that isn't saying much (at all). I guess I'm just bitter because I actually paid money for that site and expected what most described as a "Super GAF" or "GAF Gold" but received a site that was moderated like a corrupt high security prison with prisons always on their best behaviour to avoid the chopping block.
 
So I saw this.

250px-Goemon.jpg


Wow what a movie! I've never seen such a bloated, over the top, contrived, and nonsensical epic ever. I mean the end has like three climaxes. It's amazing and towards the end all I could do was just accept the ridiculousness and go with it.
 
I'm taking an International Film class this semester, which is pretty awesome. So far we've watched The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, which I thought was amazing (especially the cinematography in the first thirty minutes), and tonight we just watched The Passenger which bored me out of my god damn mind.

Gonna be a fun class!
 
HiResDes said:
...Precious is a rather simple film about contemporary racial issues that might as well have been written and directed by Tyler Perry.
I just don't see it. Living with an abusive mother, being illiterate, being a teenage mother, longing for a loving relationship, and somehow persevering through such unrelenting misery is the main issue I saw in the film. Simple film? Yes. Film about race? No. Although I can see making such a (rather large) stretch if the point of your editorial was race rather than critique or review of the film.

I'm curious though, would you consider the film to be about contemporary racial issues if Precious were white and the only ones to help her were black?
 
Rahxephon91 said:
So I saw this.

250px-Goemon.jpg


Wow what a movie! I've never seen such a bloated, over the top, contrived, and nonsensical epic ever. I mean the end has like three climaxes. It's amazing and towards the end all I could do was just accept the ridiculousness and go with it.

I hated that movie.
 
Hey after I reviewed The Diving Bell and the Butterfly a few pages ago so many others watched it right after...I'd like to think I had something to do with it, even though obviously not everybody read my review
 
HiResDes said:
Hey after I reviewed The Diving Bell and the Butterfly a few pages ago so many others watched it right after...I'd like to think I had something to do with it, even though obviously not everybody read my review


I'll watch it after this semester. I'm on a Japanese films only diet.
 
Satyamdas said:
I just don't see it. Living with an abusive mother, being illiterate, being a teenage mother, longing for a loving relationship, and somehow persevering through such unrelenting misery is the main issue I saw in the film. Simple film? Yes. Film about race? No. Although I can see making such a (rather large) stretch if the point of your editorial was race rather than critique or review of the film.

I'm curious though, would you consider the film to be about contemporary racial issues if Precious were white and the only ones to help her were black?
Yes. Although as you've probably noticed I'm willing to concede that I may very well be in the wrong, but when talking about racial issues in films the answer is never all too objective...Even if the director/writer decides to chime in, as ultimately the finished project breathes an entire new life of its own.
 
otake said:
I saw True Grit. I loved the writing, I loved Jeff Bridges and the young girl. It was a very good movie. It's amazing how good the coen brothers can be and yet awkward in the same movie. The final moments of True Grit, specifically the horse scene, could have been done better. It was just awkward. Matt Damon was way off here, he had no business in this movie. Yet the dialogue and some scene were very powerful. Good movie.
Agreed, except I had no problem with the horse scene at the end or Matt Damon (to whom I'm usually ambivalent). I thought he worked perfectly well in the film. If anything, his performance was just overshadowed by the sheer fucking brilliance of Jeff Bridges. Goddamn he was awesome in this.

I haven't seen everything Bridges done, but I'd rank his Rooster Cogburn right up there with The Dude as far as performances that are completely beyond reproach, and before this it was Lebowski in a class all it's own.
 
HiResDes said:
Ah, ok. So any time two characters of differing races interact, the issues presented by the characters cease to be about their problems or resolutions or character development, but instead becomes a statement on racial issues by default? Am I reading you right?

HiResDes said:
Although as you've probably noticed I'm willing to concede that I may very well be in the wrong, but when talking about racial issues in films the answer is never all too objective...Even if the director/writer decides to chime in, as ultimately the finished project breathes an entire new life of its own.
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not trying to prove you "wrong" or anything like that. I was just genuinely curious if the mere appearance of a mixed race cast de facto implies being a statement ON race, or if I was missing something altogether. I'd no sooner insist you see films interpreted my way than I would accept another's insistence of same, so if I came off like that I apologize.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom