Movies and TV Movies - Page 293

irishjayhawk · 10-13-2007, 11:31 PM

Yeah, so I saw a lot of movies this weekend.

Elizabeth: The Golden Age - Mediocre, at best. Slow and dragged on. Shorten it to 2 hours and it's golden. It's not, so it fails.

Michael Clayton - Amazing. Everything about it is awesome. However, it's VERY complex and mind bending. You have to think, so be prepared. I still feel like I'm missing key details of exactly what happened. Gotta see it again.

Across the Universe - Perfect is one word that comes to mind. It just works. And, contrary to many people I bet, the movie is best viewed sober. Trust me.

**Reaper16** · 02-22-2010, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phisherman

i took a bunch of film classes in college and it made me very critical of film in general.

a shitload of quick edits and jump cuts in an action flick doesn't really do anything for me. creativity with the camera and strong acting performances are what i enjoy.

don't get me wrong; i like many genres of film, but on the whole, most of the blockbuster movies bore me to tears. way too formulaic.

when i want to enjoy a movie, i will normally go to older movies. directors like billy wilder, hitchcock, sam peckinpah, orson welles, sam fuller, hal ashby are what i like the most. i even like to throw in some foreign stuff, powell and pressburger, truffaut, and some kurosawa when i'm feeling really adventurous.

No one is more critical of film here than I am and I've seen plenty of worthwhile, important film in the past couple of years, let alone the past five.

phisherman · 02-22-2010, 09:16 PM

i think i could probably give you a run for your money in the critical department when it comes to movies. beer and books probably not so much; i am easier to please in these areas.

i'm not saying that there aren't or haven't been good films released in the past few years. i'm simply saying that the directors of today lack the creativity and vision that directors of the past have, for the most part. my assumption is that this is the product of big studios not wanting to take risks on pictures that are perceived as "out of the mainstream" and not considered to be as profitable as a "blockbuster" type of film or a cookie cutter movie with big name stars and a boring and cliched script.

i should also add that these are just my opinions and everyone is certainly entitled to theirs; i always enjoy a lively film discussion.

**Reaper16** · 02-22-2010, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phisherman

i think i could probably give you a run for your money in the critical department when it comes to movies. beer and books probably not so much; i am easier to please in these areas.

i'm not saying that there aren't or haven't been good films released in the past few years. i'm simply saying that the directors of today lack the creativity and vision that directors of the past have, for the most part. my assumption is that this is the product of big studios not wanting to take risks on pictures that are perceived as "out of the mainstream" and not considered to be as profitable as a "blockbuster" type of film or a cookie cutter movie with big name stars and a boring and cliched script.

i should also add that these are just my opinions and everyone is certainly entitled to theirs; i always enjoy a lively film discussion.

I don't doubt that you could give me a run for my money; I didn't say that I was singularly the most critical on CP, only that there are none moreso.

There are great directors working today. Few would dare say that Paul Thomas Anderson, The Coen Bros., Alfonso Cuaron, Quentin Tarentino, Darren Aronofsky, Pedro Almodovar, Steven Soderburgh, etc. lack an abundance of creativity and vision.

Are you aware of the richness and depth of independent film both in America and abroad?

phisherman · 02-22-2010, 09:33 PM

p.t. anderson, coen brothers, almodovar - all fine directors and capable on any given day of producing some good stuff.

tarantino - sorry, but i think he's kind of a hack as a director. way too much copycatting from blaxploitation and sonny cheeba movies from the 60s and 70s. that being said, he's a GREAT writer; the dude can definitely write dialogue.

aronofsky and soderburgh - meh...aronofsky is a bit indulgent for my taste. i liked pi, but it's his only film that really caught my eye. the wrestler was ok, just a bit overhyped. i like soderburgh's early films much better than his later fare; schizopolis and sex, lies and videotape are both good, but once he butchered solaris, that was it. it was far inferior to the tarkovsky version (which i really dug) and once he started making the oceans 11-13 movies it just looked like he was copying french new wave directors like truffaut and godard with his stylized approach.

**Lzen** · 02-22-2010, 09:42 PM

Just saw Law Abiding Citizen. It was pretty cool. Made you wonder how he was doing it. It definitely took a different direction than I thought it would.

**Reaper16** · 02-22-2010, 11:03 PM

Just watched JCVD -- a crazy, silly little film where Jean Claude Van Damme plays a lightly fictionalized version of himself. Its mostly a comedic send up but there is a great monologue that goes all meta on the audience. Van Damme legitimately acts his ass off in this movie.

**Reaper16** · 02-22-2010, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phisherman

p.t. anderson, coen brothers, almodovar - all fine directors and capable on any given day of producing some good stuff.

tarantino - sorry, but i think he's kind of a hack as a director. way too much copycatting from blaxploitation and sonny cheeba movies from the 60s and 70s. that being said, he's a GREAT writer; the dude can definitely write dialogue.

aronofsky and soderburgh - meh...aronofsky is a bit indulgent for my taste. i liked pi, but it's his only film that really caught my eye. the wrestler was ok, just a bit overhyped. i like soderburgh's early films much better than his later fare; schizopolis and sex, lies and videotape are both good, but once he butchered solaris, that was it. it was far inferior to the tarkovsky version (which i really dug) and once he started making the oceans 11-13 movies it just looked like he was copying french new wave directors like truffaut and godard with his stylized approach.

Tarantino shows his influences on his sleeve, sure. But hack is way too strong for me. I mean, Inglorious Basterds is a tremendous artistic achievement. I'd vote for Tarantino for this year's Best Director Oscar over Kathryne Bigelow.

Aronofsky, well, I can see indulgent when talking about The Fountain. His other three films are pretty damn nice from the director's chair. I really, really disagree with you about The Wrestler; I find it to be a tremendous work of art. That film is the ****ing American story.

I mentioned Soderbergh not for his money-making Hollywood films. Allow me a quick simile: I put up with the ubiquitousness of Boulevard's Unfiltered Wheat Beer because it pays the bills, allowing Boulevard to brew the Smokestack Series. In the same way Soderbergh makes fare like the Oceans franchise so that he can make better, more creative films like Traffic, Bubble, Che or The Girlfriend Experience. He's unafraid to change up his styles or to take large risks. He's unafraid to fail, which is commendable.

**KcMizzou** · 02-22-2010, 11:42 PM

I'm not nearly as critical as you guys when it comes to movies. (or "films") I either like it, or I don't.

But I have to say, I do enjoy reading these discussions. It's interesting.

blazzin311 · 02-22-2010, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Just watched JCVD -- a crazy, silly little film where Jean Claude Van Damme plays a lightly fictionalized version of himself. Its mostly a comedic send up but there is a great monologue that goes all meta on the audience. Van Damme legitimately acts his ass off in this movie.

Yup I definitely agree. I saw it about a year ago or so. (December of 08' I think) Acually quite a good flick as you mentioned...and who knew Jean Claude Van Damme could act. I mean seriously. Displayed some impressive acting chops in that movie as well as being his usual badass self.

Jenson71 · 02-23-2010, 01:40 AM

I have disliked every movie since 1984.

Miles · 02-23-2010, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

I have disliked every movie since 1984.

Did you recently watch 1984?

Jerm · 02-23-2010, 05:37 AM

Just watched Law Abiding Citizen...awesome, loved it. Well thought out, provoking, very grey in that plot points and characters and such aren't fleshed out or black and white...makes ya think.

Gerard Butler was ****ing epic...great acting.

Now having said all that, the end was ABSOLUTELY ****ING TERRIBLE. Jesus I hated it...even though it somewhat fit in with the story and theme it almost killed the Clyde character for me. Didn't ruin the movie but it def brought the experience down.
Posted via Mobile Device

**007** · 02-23-2010, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsFan4Life

Just watched "Children of Men". One of my top 5 worst movies of all time.

I wouldn't go that far but I definitely didn't care for it at all.

**Fire Me Boy!** · 02-23-2010, 05:59 AM

at the pissing contest about who's more critical of movies.

Come on.... it's easy. phisherman took a bunch of film classes in college.

patteeu · 02-23-2010, 06:16 AM

I don't know... I think phisherman is just a little bit more critical of film and seems to know slightly more about it than Reaper16.

10-13-2007, 11:31 PM
irishjayhawk Feelin' Alright Join Date: Aug 2004 Casino cash: $10004900	Movies Yeah, so I saw a lot of movies this weekend. Elizabeth: The Golden Age - Mediocre, at best. Slow and dragged on. Shorten it to 2 hours and it's golden. It's not, so it fails. Michael Clayton - Amazing. Everything about it is awesome. However, it's VERY complex and mind bending. You have to think, so be prepared. I still feel like I'm missing key details of exactly what happened. Gotta see it again. Across the Universe - Perfect is one word that comes to mind. It just works. And, contrary to many people I bet, the movie is best viewed sober. Trust me.
Posts: 16,887

02-22-2010, 09:16 PM	#4382
phisherman King Sandbagger Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The Summit, MO Casino cash: $1705484	i think i could probably give you a run for your money in the critical department when it comes to movies. beer and books probably not so much; i am easier to please in these areas. i'm not saying that there aren't or haven't been good films released in the past few years. i'm simply saying that the directors of today lack the creativity and vision that directors of the past have, for the most part. my assumption is that this is the product of big studios not wanting to take risks on pictures that are perceived as "out of the mainstream" and not considered to be as profitable as a "blockbuster" type of film or a cookie cutter movie with big name stars and a boring and cliched script. i should also add that these are just my opinions and everyone is certainly entitled to theirs; i always enjoy a lively film discussion.
Posts: 3,806

02-22-2010, 09:33 PM	#4384
phisherman King Sandbagger Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The Summit, MO Casino cash: $1705484	p.t. anderson, coen brothers, almodovar - all fine directors and capable on any given day of producing some good stuff. tarantino - sorry, but i think he's kind of a hack as a director. way too much copycatting from blaxploitation and sonny cheeba movies from the 60s and 70s. that being said, he's a GREAT writer; the dude can definitely write dialogue. aronofsky and soderburgh - meh...aronofsky is a bit indulgent for my taste. i liked pi, but it's his only film that really caught my eye. the wrestler was ok, just a bit overhyped. i like soderburgh's early films much better than his later fare; schizopolis and sex, lies and videotape are both good, but once he butchered solaris, that was it. it was far inferior to the tarkovsky version (which i really dug) and once he started making the oceans 11-13 movies it just looked like he was copying french new wave directors like truffaut and godard with his stylized approach.
Posts: 3,806

02-22-2010, 09:42 PM	#4385
Lzen Supporter Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Jan Quadrant Vincent 16 Casino cash: $2310692	Just saw Law Abiding Citizen. It was pretty cool. Made you wonder how he was doing it. It definitely took a different direction than I thought it would. __________________ If at first you don't succeed ...skydiving is not for you.
Posts: 41,311

02-22-2010, 11:42 PM	#4388
KcMizzou Supporter Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Parkville MO Casino cash: $10005170	I'm not nearly as critical as you guys when it comes to movies. (or "films") I either like it, or I don't. But I have to say, I do enjoy reading these discussions. It's interesting.
Posts: 54,695

02-23-2010, 01:40 AM	#4390
Jenson71 fides quaerens intellectum Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: United States Casino cash: $8330900	I have disliked every movie since 1984.
Posts: 15,986

02-23-2010, 05:37 AM	#4392
Jerm Mahomes > God Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Clinton, MO Casino cash: $5928996	Just watched Law Abiding Citizen...awesome, loved it. Well thought out, provoking, very grey in that plot points and characters and such aren't fleshed out or black and white...makes ya think. Gerard Butler was **ing epic...great acting. Now having said all that, the end was ABSOLUTELY *ING TERRIBLE. Jesus I hated it...even though it somewhat fit in with the story and theme it almost killed the Clyde character for me. Didn't ruin the movie but it def brought the experience down. Posted via Mobile Device*
Posts: 9,738

02-23-2010, 05:59 AM	#4394
Fire Me Boy! Cast Iron Jedi Join Date: Nov 2004 Casino cash: $9999900 VARSITY	at the pissing contest about who's more critical of movies. Come on.... it's easy. phisherman took a bunch of film classes in college.
Posts: 35,253

02-23-2010, 06:16 AM	#4395
patteeu The 23rd Pillar Join Date: Sep 2002 Casino cash: $10019237	I don't know... I think phisherman is just a little bit more critical of film and seems to know slightly more about it than Reaper16. __________________ “Boy, you all want power. God, I hope you never get it.” - Lindsay Graham
Posts: 110,871