Nice. She could pass as Jennifer Lawrence's little sister....

http://ilarge.listal.com/image/26896...uno-temple.jpg

I had to Google her age after Killer Joe just to fap with a clear conscience.

Especially since the 'T-zone' looks like the daughter on Castle, though she's 20 IRL and even 18-19 on the show at this point.

http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/M...q5UN6Q5w4m.jpg

Watched The Road with Viggo Mortenson. It was worth a look but not incredible.

Given that Olympus has Fallen is on Netflix, I gave it a WTF watch last night. I like Gerard Butler and knew it was going to be a god awful piece of shit going in, but I still didn't adequately prepare myself.

The Macguffin in that movie is one of the most poorly researched, illogical plot devices ever. Still fun to watch Butler do Butler things, but there were dozens of :facepalm: moments.

man I thought that movie was horrible. just horrible.

I'll bet I get bashed for this....but here goes....
I watched The Outsiders this weekend. it'd been so damn long since I'd seen it I had forgotten a lot of it. now I know this movie is considered a classic....but damn....not a very good movie. actually laughable in some parts. quite the cast, but I just didn't think it was very good.

No, you're right.
Even back then, the consensus was 1) Diane Lane is hot, and 2) boy a lot of stars came out of that.

It's overly stagey. Some material works as a stage play brought to screen, but The Outsiders wasn't one.

Then I might be a bit biased as my 8th grade Lit/English teacher got visibly moist teaching S.E.Hinton's stuff, and I was like c'mon, it's watered down West Side Story, which is watered down R&J.

:eek: wow

Did you watch the original version or the director's cut? Not that it improves the acting that much, but it certainly provides a better idea of what Coppola was trying to do. It has alot of scenes the studio cut out for fear of homophobic reactions even though they are clearly about brotherly love. He was really playing with what a young adult story/movie can address but the studio just wasn't on board, and while all the actors end up with considerable career success, they were cast to sell Tiger Beat magazines, and they shot the whole thing in no time at all so not much rehearsal time. I think there is still some success in bringing a unique perspective to film (and literature with the original novel.) It is a teenage girls perspective of bad boys so it is ultra-romanticized and prone to being overwrought, but it has a genuine appreciation of the struggles boys face growing up.

For his next one, Rumble Fish, shot right then as well in Tulsa, the studio backed out so he was on his own plus they added great veterans like Dennis Hopper and Laurence Fishburne to compliment the young cast. It is even more theatrical and stylized and was critically destroyed except for Ebert who loved the risk and originality. It goes the full distance he was trying for in The Outsiders, and was way more successful visually. Critics in retrospect have come to judge it as an art film instead of a teen film and rate it much better. I would recommend Rumble Fish for sure over the other one. It is one of my favorite movies, especially to look at.

no it wasn't the directors cut. it wasn't even from a movie channel...it had commercials and whatnot. this is interesting for a few reasons.
1 - I'm well aware that more times than not, the directors cut is better. (see Alien 3! this bitch barely even makes sense in the theatrical version)
2 - several times I thought Ralph Machio came across as kinda gay

I won't go out of my way to go after it.....but if the opportunity presents, I'd watch the directors cut just for kicks.

Mud was really good.

I watched The Paperboy for the first time, very good movie.

12 years a slave was excellent. There are several scenes that are hard to watch. The usher at the theater said several people walked out.