Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Movies: What have you seen lately - part 2 Movies: What have you seen lately - part 2

04-20-2010 , 03:28 PM
Don't forget Harrison Ford, I know a very small part.

Truth be told Brando wasn't even in it that much. Like I said, I like it. I just wasn't sitting thinking how awesome it was.

I know I'm changing topics here.

But a couple movies I was floored by as soon as I saw them were Seven and Clear and Present Danger.

Seven because of how dark it seemed. The acting was fine but the story was great. I love how Kevin Spacey didn't want his name mentioned because it would give some things away.

For some reason one line that stickd with me from that movie was:

F. Lee Ermy - (as he sits down at someone elses desk and the phone rings. He picks it up and says "this isn't even my desk"

Clear and Present Danger - was probably better to me than most because I was in the military at the time. I was going through a tough time myself about mistrust in the military.
04-20-2010 , 04:35 PM
Kick-Ass was fun....I liked how Big Daddy and Hit Girl's secret weapon was paid off in the end....
04-20-2010 , 05:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rushmore
In fact, try watching "Hearts of Darkness," which is a documentary filled with footage shot entirely by Coppola's wife, and which really puts some things into perspective (Brando, Coppola, Sheen, and a very young (16!!) Laurence Fishburne). I mean, damn--you have nervous breakdowns, heart attacks, helicopters being recalled in mid-scene, meltdowns of all kinds...
This movie is so amazing and such an important artifact of American cinema, I can not endorse it enough.
04-21-2010 , 01:27 AM
So I just finished watching Moon on Netflix Watch Instantly. Wow. What a great, inventive movie. Great acting, great character development, great pacing. I have the one part of the film score that they kept repeating stuck in my head. There were some really beautiful shots too. Definitely lived up to the hype.

I had a couple of questions though:

Spoiler:
At the very end, they show a scene of someone knocking down one of the communications jammers on the moon. And then it flashes to the signal of a "live feed active". Was that someone from the Eliza crew doing that? And presumably the purpose would be so that the people in the control center would be able to keep a closer eye on the clones and watch them?

OK, I just thought of another question I had: so, the first Sam who ever went through this training was the "real" Sam, right? That's how they got all of the taped video messages with Tess. So, going from the fact that Eve was 15 when the Same Clone 1 spoke with her, then LUNAR has been using Sam Clones at this station for 15 years or so? Or was it longer? There would have been 5 Sam Clones used before the last two?
04-21-2010 , 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HobbyHorse
So I just finished watching Moon on Netflix Watch Instantly. Wow. What a great, inventive movie. Great acting, great character development, great pacing. I have the one part of the film score that they kept repeating stuck in my head. There were some really beautiful shots too. Definitely lived up to the hype.

I had a couple of questions though:

Spoiler:
At the very end, they show a scene of someone knocking down one of the communications jammers on the moon. And then it flashes to the signal of a "live feed active". Was that someone from the Eliza crew doing that? And presumably the purpose would be so that the people in the control center would be able to keep a closer eye on the clones and watch them?

OK, I just thought of another question I had: so, the first Sam who ever went through this training was the "real" Sam, right? That's how they got all of the taped video messages with Tess. So, going from the fact that Eve was 15 when the Same Clone 1 spoke with her, then LUNAR has been using Sam Clones at this station for 15 years or so? Or was it longer? There would have been 5 Sam Clones used before the last two?
Spoiler:
Sam deliberately crashed the main Rover into the jammer tower so the current and future clones would be able to communicate with the outside world -- so they would no longer be controlled like rats in an experiment, so they would no longer be tricked. Before he gets on the ship that takes him back to Earth, he programs new coordinates into the Rover, coordinates he acquired when he first discovers the communications jammer.

There would have been three clones used before the first Sam clone we see. Each clone has a shelf life of three years then they are destroyed in the machine they think is the transporter back to Earth. The first Sam clone sees them being destroyed when GERTY shows him the videos. Timeline is something like this: Actual Sam on Moon until Eve is three, then clone 1 goes to work until Eve is six, then clone 2 goes to work until Eve is nine, then clone 3 goes to work until Eve is twelve, and finally clone 4 goes to work until Eve is fifteen. Clone 4 is the one that opens the movie -- the first Sam clone we see -- he's two weeks from termination.

^IMO
04-21-2010 , 02:31 AM
agree with ryan on both points

Hard Candy - Ellen Page as a 14 year old turning the table on a child predator (Patrick Wilson). Thought this was really well done. 8/10
04-21-2010 , 03:56 AM
Platoon: glad i saw this one, the moment I saw Charlie Sheen I thought uhoh this movie is in trouble but soon I realised he actually did a good job in this movie.

like everyone else i saw kick-ass and it kicks ass... quite worried about the future because this genre will definitly get raped the **** out of it by hollywood after this success, Nic Cage did a great job on this movie, good to know he still has it in him since the last 2 movies I seen from him are horrendous (Changingedit: **** i mean knowing, cant even remember the title of this piece of ****, and bangkok dangerous, burn these movies please...)

This reminds me, I need to watch Leaving Las Vegas again, definitly one of my favourite movies of all time, and by far Cage's best performance on the screen

cheers
04-21-2010 , 04:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator
Hard Candy - Ellen Page as a 14 year old turning the table on a child predator (Patrick Wilson). Thought this was really well done. 8/10
this movie was disturbing (i saw it with zero knowledge of what it was going to be about)
04-21-2010 , 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonsaltron
this movie was disturbing (i saw it with zero knowledge of what it was going to be about)
I never thought...

Spoiler:
I'd be thinking... you know... this seems kind of a cruel thing to do to a pedophile. Maybe she's overreacting, lol. I didn't know what it was about either. I thought Wilson was going to be the predator, not the prey, initially. Probably shouldn't have "spoiled" it but not really a twist. Or maybe?
04-21-2010 , 05:37 AM
Ellen Page can turn her tables on me anytime she wants.
04-21-2010 , 05:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kioshk
Ellen Page can turn her tables on me anytime she wants.
I'm pretty sure she's a lesbian
04-21-2010 , 06:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diebitter
I'm pretty sure she's a lesbian
Do not shatter my illusions like that. She's so pretty! She was to die for in Whip It, which is a very underrated movie and will grow in stature over the years as people discover it.
04-21-2010 , 06:21 AM
She's not a lesbian. Thespian. Actually I have no idea.
04-21-2010 , 06:39 AM
The short hair and maculine attributes are indicators imo
04-21-2010 , 07:17 AM
Masculine attributes?
04-21-2010 , 10:50 AM
I was never really impressed by Platoon, in fact I think it is overrated, Stone has done better films in his career. It's a good film, don't take me wrong, but is not really original, both from the contents and they are presented. Behind the spectacular scenes, Platoon lacks the substance needed to make it one of the best war movies ever made.
04-21-2010 , 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diebitter
The short hair and maculine attributes are indicators imo
Masculine attributes has me too wondering what you mean. She's extremely feminine looking, at any rate. Gorgeous IMO too.
04-21-2010 , 12:25 PM
Hobby, Ryan got Moon right....that was a very interesting film
04-21-2010 , 12:26 PM
Yeah, diebitter is describing a different Ellen Page than I know about. She's adorable and all woman.
04-21-2010 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
Hobby, Ryan got Moon right....that was a very interesting film
That's how I saw it too. Very impressed by Moon. Sam Rockwell needs more recognition as one of the most interesting actors out there today. Also interested afterward learning that this was the first feature flick from David Bowie's kid.
04-21-2010 , 12:40 PM
I watched The Room last night. Holy mother of God. I can't even begin to describe the awesomeness of this movie. I realize this is a discussion thread, but you will have to check it out yourself.
04-21-2010 , 12:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey OT
I watched The Room last night. Holy mother of God. I can't even begin to describe the awesomeness of this movie. I realize this is a discussion thread, but you will have to check it out yourself.
I've never understood the joy people get from watching terrible films. There are too many good ones to watch.

So no, never seen it.
04-21-2010 , 12:49 PM
Didn't we have a "The Room" discussion in the Lounge a little while ago? It is beyond bad, Clovis, it is spectacular in its badness. So damn funny.
04-21-2010 , 12:50 PM
Clovis8 is so blunt, Clovis8.
04-21-2010 , 01:00 PM
The Goebbels Experiment -- Kenneth Branagh reads from Goebbel's diary. Interesting film of Germany prewar and during, including some color, and plenty of Hitler shots I've never seen before, with translations as he spoke (which used to be effectively banned, so that's always interesting to see). Some reviewers said it was slow, but I was attentive throughout. If anything, I wanted more. There was a weird dissonance between the humanity of how Goebbels sometimes seemed so hopeful and the horror of what he was doing his hoping about. The elipses in the narrative -- barely touching on some key horrors in the war -- made me wonder if they were purposeful in some way, or if Goebbels might have simply not written much about them. The movie makes plain he was a true believer from very early on, though. Unfortunately, there is nothing about how he got to be that way or rationalized his outrageous beliefs. All in all, an interesting look at the Hitler regime and Germany pre-war from the perspective of one of its key players.

Hamsun -- Max Von Sydow as Knut Hamsun, Norway's 1920 Nobel prize winning author and national culture hero who drifts into support of Hitler and finds himself having to answer for it when the war is over. The movie starts on an off note, with a bitchy argument between Hamsun and his wife about their ruined lives, and I get the feeling that we are hit with it too fast and it is too sketchy to really work as a scene, much less such a long one. Often on the outs with his much younger wife, Hamsun is the type who believes his own press clippings about his genius, and has a very old school idea about the nearly sacred virtue of art and artists. This causes him to isolate himself from his family, and his family from each other, as he pursues his all-important muse. As the war progresses, he becomes unsettled about his country's position in a post-war Europe under German control. Visiting Hitler, perhaps a bit unused to controlling himself, he distractedly blurts agitated non-sequiturs out about it to a very scary man and is lucky to escape with his life. Shamed by the shameful and the righteous alike, after the war he is sent to a mental asylum to judge his fitness for trial as a collaborator. Interestingly enough, though he has barely written a thing for decades, something in his life experiences rekindles enough in him to prompt a fresh masterpiece at 88. An extremely strong performance by von Sydow in a slow-moving film that is at times oblique and trying when dealing with the all-important family matters in Hamsun's life rescues the film from the places it trails off, and collects its energies finally into a slow but interesting chronicle of one man's failure to outlive his prejudices and arguable final redemption.

Battleground -- Van Heflin stars in a WW2 movie about the Screaming Eagles in WW2 and their defense of the small town of Bastogne under heavy fire from the Germans. Reviewed as one of the less cliched movies of its type, it was still highly cliched to me, so much so that I wondered at its Oscar for best screenplay. The dialogue in the first half hour was so kitschy it was very hard for me to continue watching. Eventually the cheesy dialogue tapers off enough to give a modern viewer a bit of a breather and a better chance to get into the flick. And there is a firefight scene that is pretty decent and shows actual maneuver, which surprised me, as most old war films are very static. That scene was slim pickin's in an otherwise mostly dull movie that may have seemed daring when it came out, but by today's standards is still easily cheesy enough to seem unnatural, forced, and even propagandistic. Shame ... I really wanted to like this one more. Would not recommend.

      
m