Serious Movie Discussion | Page 21

Discussion in 'Mayberry Lounge' started by Bullitt68, Sep 24, 2016.

  1. youandme All on the DL.

    youandme
    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,936
    Likes Received:
    126
    Location:
    One Eyed Jacks
    Split's ending is total shit
     
    #401
    RoryFan likes this.
  2. lostdog000 Red Belt

    lostdog000
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,975
    Likes Received:
    2,930
  3. HUNTERMANIA "I'll be the prince."

    HUNTERMANIA
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,005
    Likes Received:
    4,487
    Since Black Sails is back on, I'm rewatching the show. I don't know that I had ever seen it more than once. I think I binged watched the first season while the 2nd season was coming out and watched the 3rd season live. I can't ever get a good feel for TV shows watching them live. IDK what it is, but I can't put together one week to the next like that, I have to see it play out as one unit.

    I'm appreciating the show a lot more this time. I'm still on the beginning of Season 2 but I'm not feeling any of the complaints I remember from the first viewing and I'm enjoying the characters a lot more. Captain Flint is one of my favorite characters in any show.

    One of the best parts is when Anne Bonny first gets with Max (the one who runs the whorehouse - had no idea what her name was until I looked it up) and Jack Rackham comes to her and is like, "I understand if she can play with what's between your legs better than I can, but it bothers me that she can play with what's between your ears more! Why can't you see it?" and she's like "I know" and then he asks her, "why don't you stop it?" and she looks down and says, "I can't." - and I feel that's so perfect, like, we're all weak, we're all sinners, we're all frail humans that fuck up all the time and we have to love each other in spite of it. Good shit.
     
    #403
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2017
    europe1 likes this.
  4. Gavster Purple Belt

    Gavster
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,163
    Likes Received:
    664
    They should have called it Manchester in the Sea.
    It was well done but damn, it was a harsh journey of a movie.
    So much grief and sadness.
     
    #404
  5. lostdog000 Red Belt

    lostdog000
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,975
    Likes Received:
    2,930
    good shit
     
    #405
    chickenluver likes this.
  6. Joe_Armstrong Starfleet Belt

    Joe_Armstrong
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    11,367
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Location:
    On the Balance
    Just saw 'Keeping up with the Joneses'

    It was tretty good for a comedy.
    That Gal Gadot who is gonna play Wonderwoman is one intense beauty.
     
    #406
  7. Shot Brown Belt

    Shot
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    3,243
    Likes Received:
    128
    Just watched Hacksaw Ridge and Arrival. Both movies seemed to be getting a lot of buzz and I definitely think the praise is warranted.

    Arrival was excellent. The cinematography was beautiful. I loved that they were able to keep it focused on the mystery and limited the action-y parts. Very refreshing to see a movie that tackles this genre in a more realistic way, it's a good break from the invasion specticals that have become all the rage in recent years. It's the type of movie that sticks in your mind a long time after viewing. Great story, good performances, and a great ending. If I had to pick flaws, I'd say Renner's character could have definitely felt more fleshed out and one particular moment, that was meant to amp up tension, felt out of left field. Still though, it's been stuck in my head ever since and I can't wait to watch it again just to see how the mystery unwraps from the beginning up and just stare at the cinematography again.

    Hacksaw Ridge was great as well, but I'm more conflicted about certain aspects of it. While overall I enjoyed the first act of the movie, I thought it was a good setup for the characters and it definitely connected me with them, I thought some aspects of it were hamfisted, especially the love story. Felt a little too corny for its own good, although I acknowledge that it may be my perspective at play here, simply because I know my generations view of 'courtship' is vastly different than someone's from the 1940s. My other beef is I feel like the violence was celebrated at parts. Some of it felt a little too action movie-esque and drew me out of the realism, not to mention they seem at odds with the pacifist message of the story. One moment in particular (I'll just call it the bodyshield scene) really threw me out of the moment, although some research on the movie afterwords told me that that is very likely to have happened in real life. So I'm even slightly conflicted about whether to feel conflicted about it. None the less, Gibson is well known for his gratuitous violence and it's here in bucketfuls. The performances all around are excellent, especially by Garfield and Hugo Weaving, and the ending hit me like a ton of bricks. I'd love to see Mel Gibson more active in hollywood. Many people have done far shittier things than he has and have been blacklisted for far less time, and sometimes not at all. Gibson has done his time, imo.
     
    #407
    europe1 likes this.
  8. europe1 It´s a nice peninsula to Asia

    europe1
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    16,319
    Likes Received:
    6,999
    Location:
    West of Finland, East of Norway
    Arrival was excellent. The cinematography was beautiful. I loved that they were able to keep it focused on the mystery and limited the action-y parts. Very refreshing to see a movie that tackles this genre in a more realistic way, it's a good break from the invasion specticals that have become all the rage in recent years. It's the type of movie that sticks in your mind a long time after viewing. Great story, good performances, and a great ending. If I had to pick flaws, I'd say Renner's character could have definitely felt more fleshed out and one particular moment, that was meant to amp up tension, felt out of left field. Still though, it's been stuck in my head ever since and I can't wait to watch it again just to see how the mystery unwraps from the beginning up and just stare at the cinematography again.

    QFT.

    Somehow I just get the sensation that deep in his heart Mel Gibson thinks that violence is a lot more romantic than love is. :D

    That entire message was weird as hell. So Garfield holds extreme convictions that he should never personally harm another human being. Yet he display's absolutely no moral conundrum's what's so ever about aiding others in killing said human beings. Like, he doesn't even pause to think about it once? No-one else brings it up? It's a pretty damn giant loophole in his entire conviction.

    That I can give a pass though. While it's weird as hell, it's certainly true to life. People do hold weird, contradictory views.

    Yeah me too. Can't help but to feel like Gisbon felt very giddy directing that though. It's directed in a rather exploitative manner, spine and viscera dangling as they do and all.

    Antisemitism = ban for life

    Pedophilia = An Oscar... (or a job at the Disney cooperation).

    It seriously sickens me seeing so many Hollywood people justify raping children just because one of their fellow artists did it. You even hear bullshit like how we should overlook it precisely because it's done by great artists, as if that makes it okay. Why don't they donate thier own fucking children if they want their fellow artists to have some underaged kids to diddle on the side?
     
    #408
  9. HUNTERMANIA "I'll be the prince."

    HUNTERMANIA
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,005
    Likes Received:
    4,487
    Um, no.
     
    #409
    Rimbaud82 likes this.
  10. chickenluver Bookmobile Driver

    chickenluver
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    7,987
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    Location:
    The Magical World of Reading
    Who are you referring to here?
    I think some who say that probably sympathize with that behavior anyway, but would never admit to that publicly, they need a great artist to point to as an excuse.

    Some probably do actually disregard their principals because the perpetrator is someone whose work them admire.

    I'll admit to some hypocrisy on my part, because I do like Polanski's movies. When I think of Polanski I only really think of his movies, nothing else about him comes to mind. Perhaps that's conscious on my part, so I don't have to think about it too deeply. Of course I'm not personally inviting him to festivals and nominating him for awards, but I'll get his movies from netflix or whatever from time to time, which is supporting him. I even nominated one of his films for the movie club. I don't think bad things people do makes them any less capable of being great artists, but I do think something can be both a great artist and a terrible person.

    It's easier when they're dead. The conductor Karl Bohm was a Nazi sympathizer. Many German and Austrian musicians and composers at that time were. Herbert Von Karajan was actually a Nazi Party member. Both are dead now so I don't feel the least bit bad about buying their music.
     
    #410
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    europe1 likes this.
  11. europe1 It´s a nice peninsula to Asia

    europe1
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    16,319
    Likes Received:
    6,999
    Location:
    West of Finland, East of Norway
    Victor Salva.

    He directed stuff like the Jeepers Creepers films (which of course are filled with shirtless teenage boys)
     
    #411
    Gregoire1 likes this.
  12. chickenluver Bookmobile Driver

    chickenluver
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    7,987
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    Location:
    The Magical World of Reading
    Oh shit, I've actually read a bit about that guy. Yeah that's a troubling case for many reasons. It was a child actor he messed with, the star of the movie nonetheless, he continues to get work here in the States where he committed his crimes, and yes as you said even made a movie with Disney AFTER he was released from prison.

    I've read that some film people have openly called for him to be forgiven and given work. I think Coppola was one right? I think they are friends. The arguments from them are mostly things like he served his time, he hasn't re-offended, and everybody deserves a second chance. I can kind of understand that line of thinking. I do agree that if we have established prison terms and someone is found guilty and serves all that time, they shouldn't necessarily have to keep paying for their crime for the rest of their life, the time spent behind bars is their punishment. Yet some crimes, such as murder and child rape, are so severe that I'm not so sure I can agree that those found guilty deserve a second chance. Besides, Salva didn't get life in prison so really he was given a second chance, I just don't think he should also get a second chance at Hollywood. Would any of these friends of Salva in the filmmaking world be saying give him a second chance if it was their kid he raped? Somehow I doubt it.

    Also, Salva may not have re-offended, but the themes of his films, and as you mentioned the fact that they usually are filled with shirtless male youths, seems to indicate what's still on his mind.
     
    #412
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
    europe1 likes this.
  13. Bubzeh #TeamTules

    Bubzeh
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2016
    Messages:
    3,547
    Likes Received:
    8,533
    Location:
    Sheffield, England
    Nocturnal Animals
    Doctor Strange
    Allied
    Moonlight

    All available now.

    Cannot wait to watch them tonight and tommorrow.
     
    #413
    guard_passer and Caveat like this.
  14. Bullitt68 Senior Moderator

    Bullitt68
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    23,905
    Likes Received:
    963
    Ok, SMD. This is the longest I've ever gone without posting in here, and for that, I apologize. I wasn't slacking on my movie/TV watching. If anything, I was more productive than I've been in a while. I just couldn't get my ass in here (because of that smelly girl problem Ricky mentioned). But the wait is over. It's mega post time.

    First off, I'll start with my Marvel marathon. I watched every Marvel movie (that I wanted to) from Iron Man to Civil War in chronological order. I can now officially state that my favorite Marvel movies are, in order, Thor, The Avengers, and The Winter Soldier. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you, Ricky, that, on the whole, these movies seem to be slipping a bit. Rewatching The Avengers 2, I still feel exactly the same as I did after my first viewing. It's just...stupid. Their decision-making on both the story and character levels was just bad. Civil War was encouraging insofar as it indicated to me that The Avengers 2 was an uncharacteristic fumble, but I was still disappointed, given how awesome The Winter Soldier was, that Civil War wasn't better than it was. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great, either. So far, the Thor movies are the only ones that have been consistently strong. The Iron Man movies have all been good to different degrees, but Iron Man 3 was conspicuously superior. The Thor movies, by contrast, are just straight-up awesome. Hopefully Thor 3 will keep that going and level Marvel out.

    This was the post that initially got me revved up to do this Marvel marathon. I responded as follows:

    Now having seen Civil War, I stand by what I said. You're right that, if someone tried to watch Civil War without ever having seen The Avengers, The Winter Soldier, or The Avengers 2, they wouldn't "get" it. But I still don't see how that's a flaw. That's the point. It's like starting to watch a show at Season 3 or starting to read a book at Chapter 7. That shit don't fly.

    You then followed up with a post that I couldn't respond to in detail. Now I can.

    I'm still wary of the "if you have to explain it, you didn't feel it" line (mind/body and what not) but I agree with you here. Not about Fury. Him surviving is fine. He's Fury. He should be able to survive a corporate takeover. But I agree as far as stakes go and the lack of consequences that seem to be, as you noted, a trend in these movies. I thought of it initially with Iron Man 3, which, oddly, you exempt from these criticisms despite, based on what happens with Gwyneth Paltrow, it seeming to fit perfectly. I thought the same thing but even more so in Civil War with Don Cheadle.

    First off, I think Paltrow should've died in Iron Man 3. And whatever reservations I may have had, whatever back-and-forth I may have been experiencing, they were wiped out in Civil War with their whole Ross and Rachel "we're on a break" angle. Fuck that. They should've just killed her in Iron Man 3, that could've fed into his "I didn't do enough" arc in The Avengers 2, and then when his friend dies in Civil War, he just goes ape shit and kills Bucky. And then, when the dust settled, you had Steve and Tony, two friends who now have to deal with the fact that they both lost friends.

    At the very least, somebody needed to die. Not anyone in the "inner circle" (which includes Fury, which is why I disagree with you) but Paltrow, Cheadle, Bucky, Falcon, someone in that next ring out from the inner circle. One of the only things they did right in The Avengers 2 was make sure that not everyone made it out of Sokovia. Thor 2 provided a kick in the ass when his mom gets killed. They're not afraid to shed some blood, and when they do it, it works. But considering the stakes and the level at which they're playing this game, I'm with you that shit needs to get realer more often. And I'm taking it a step further than you: I do think more bodies need to drop.

    Especially, talking about Civil War in particular now, considering what they did instead of having Cheadle die. Nothing against the man, but he should be dead because that would've been infinitely superior to the random, out-of-left-field parent angle, which I thought was stupid as fuck. It would've really emphasized the theme of friendship and pushed Steve and Tony to face themselves and each other with how far they're willing to go and what they're willing to do for their friends. Instead, it just turned into "You killed my mommy." Give me a break.

    And that's what the Marvel movies are shying away from. They're dropping people, but not people we've gotten to know. In Civil War, Black Panther's dad dies and that sets his story in motion. But a fucking bomb went off and of course Black Widow escapes without a scratch and her make-up still flawless.

    It's a shitty way to put it, but the next person who dies needs to be someone who matters.

    I could feel that. The "end of the line" thing worked exactly as it should've.

    Meh, I'm with europe on this one as far as thinking the reason that failed was because the idea (collateral damage) failed. Her kid was one of what, 11 that died? 11 versus the entire human race? Sorry, lady, but we did our job.

    Continuing with the Steve/Bucky angle, though, I disagree with this, too. I don't think that it's "pure texture." From my perspective, the "remember the old days" stuff is the natural mode of conversation between friends who have been separated for an extended period of time (and I'm saying this having hung out when I was back in Chicago for only the third time in ten years with my best friend growing up). However, I disagree that it feels like the writers were forcing it. Rather, I felt like Steve was forcing it. It felt organic to the character, so lost and out-of-touch with this new world and the new people in it but now with a chance to reach back (in time) and forward (in space) and (re)connect with his best friend. That it's so one-sided (at least initially) works really well. You can feel Steve's desperation. That's not an accident or a mistake. That's characterization. And you know that's my jam. Function is crucial, but characterization is essential.

    If anything, I'd be harder on the Civil War storyline. It would've been better if the whole plot revolved around those frozen winter soldiers being woken up and used to kill people and bomb that UN thing. That would've been Bucky atoning for his sins and trying to close that chapter in his life, Steve trying to help his friend work through those demons, and then over the course of shutting down those winter soldiers the Tony parent shit could've come to light. Instead, they just hopped on to the Manchurian Candidate express and left Bucky in basically the same spot they left him in The Winter Soldier.

    So that's our Marvel conversation out of the way. Now let's go back to Sorkin:

    And probably more so than any other Sorkin character I can think of. Jeff Daniels in The Newsroom has weight, he can be the motherfucking boss, but he doesn't have swag. Josh does.

    Either I'm way off or you're describing a director surrogate. Isn't the director the one doing the telling? To me, an audience surrogate is seeing and/or feeling, and seeing and/or feeling with us, seeing and/or feeling as we see or feel (both seeing and feeling are usually there, but which one gets the lion's share of the emphasis varies). In Cloverfield, Hud sees what we see (and feels what we feel). In Inception, Ariadne feels what we feel (and sees what we see). Those are classic examples of an audience surrogate.

    This is the problem. If male storytellers don't deal with women in their stories, they're sexist, but because they're male storytellers, even if they do deal with women in their stories, they're still sexist because they're male storytellers. Sorkin's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. And it's all because of that damned penis.

    I'm hyperbolizing, of course, but this is always hovering in the background of these types of conversations. And I'm going to come back to it very shortly...

    This is the logic that precludes men from being feminists. No man "really knows" what it's like to be a woman if "really knows" means "has experienced." Sorkin has obviously never been a woman, but that's a ludicrous standard to hold him (or anyone else) to and it's not a valid position from which to criticize him (or anyone else). The issue is whether Sorkin is pulling that shit out of his ass or if women around him had expressed those/similar sentiments. Sorkin is a diligent researcher, he doesn't talk about shit unless he's done his homework. He's not just some redneck who doesn't like it that his women don't stay home and make him sandwiches anymore. He's an intelligent guy reading the cultural terrain and giving voice to one of the popular sentiments amidst discourses on gender, and doing it in an intelligent and, dramatically, plausible fashion.

    But this is where context is key. Sorkin isn't abstractly saying that "it's nothing." He's using that specific example of what Sam said to indicate something specific that's nothing. At least to him (and Ainsley). That is worth dissecting.

    Whatever happened to Gary Cooper?

    [​IMG]

    And now, to what will likely be your least favorite part of this post, Ricky: I tried to watch Gilmore Girls. Already, based on the "tried," I'm sure you're bracing yourself. Well, in the spirit of friendship, let me warn you at the outset: Brace harder.

    What in the ungodly fuck from that miserable excuse for a sitcom did you possibly think I would ever in a million years respond to in any way other than violent rage? That's one of the worst things I've ever tried to watch. The only thing I enjoyed was how ironic it was that, at countless times throughout the Pilot, I’d think to myself, “No women sound like this,” something, incidentally, I’ve never thought while watching a Sorkin woman. On top of which, Sorkin has never created a character more insulting to the female gender than Melissa McCarthy’s character in Gilmore Girls. Are you kidding me with this shit, Ricky? I’m saying this both for the reference and because it’s necessary: You got some splainin to do.

    Based on what I know of your sensibility, you'd definitely like Felicity more, but your position on The Newsroom will never cease to confound me.

    What did you like better, Bringing Up Baby or His Girl Friday?

    You know about the Kubrick connection with this one, right?

    I prefer calling it his "Silence of God" trilogy. "Faith trilogy" makes it sound nicer and happier than it really is. "Silence of God" captures Bergman's spirit better.

    Bergman was never really hopeless. He'd get down in the dumps, but he was always searching, and that manifested in his films to where, no matter how bleak (like The Seventh Seal or The Virgin Spring), there was always that sense that they were still willing to go forward with (re)new(ed) spirit. I say this with a heavy qualification though as I don't remember Winter Light very well except for the vague sense that it was one of his harshest meditations on religion. Am I recalling that right?

    Oh, dude, that movie is poetry. Sorkin is one of the last writers to think would ever be a slave to biography/history. The hook for him as a writer - and the hook he wanted for viewers - was the father/daughter story. It wasn't so much a cautionary tale as it was a glimpse into the mind and heart of a very different type of human being for whom "normal" human emotions were difficult yet for whom those emotions were nonetheless present. That's why that ending is so powerful for me.

    Easily one of the best films in the last decade or two for me.

    I just watched Paterson the other day (Jarmusch is the gf's favorite). I dug it, too. The wife, not so much, but Adam Driver did a great job. The dog stole the show, though. Easily my favorite character. I lost it when I realized he was taking out his frustrations on the mailbox :D

    Interestingly, someone wrote an article on Clint (on American Sniper and Sully in particular) expressing a similar sentiment. The author didn't make any specific references to Rand, but in the comments section, I did.

    http://brightlightsfilm.com/cowboys...ood-trump-american-sniper-sully/#.WKXgcH9OiUk

    [​IMG]

    Well, if you're interested in cementing its status, its stiffest competition would come from the likes of Little Caesar, The Public Enemy, Scarface, 'G' Men, Bullets or Ballots, Angels with Dirty Faces, and The Roaring Twenties. Those are the heavy hitters from the '30s.

    Hepburn in Stage Door is another interesting example of this.

    I always feel like I missed the ride for this one. I love noir and so many people love it. I never did.

    Honestly, the only reason I ever watched this one was because I thought of Crank when I read the plot description on TCM. Definitely worth that curiosity/novelty viewing, though.

    Very apt description.

    [​IMG]

    This is actually one I haven't seen. It's on my radar now, though.

    Another one I haven't seen. Based on your reaction to it, I'd say stick to the list I gave you of Bullitt-approved Preminger films ;)

    I took so long with this fucking mega post that I don't remember the movie well enough now to talk about it, but I wasn't exaggerating when I said I thought it was "borderline shit." I remember being stunned as I was watching that it was (a) that bad and (b) not getting better. Pacino was the only part of the film worth a shit. And even his stuff was weak as fuck. And why was Ed Harris even there? I love Ed Harris and this movie made me not want to see him. Enough said.

    Ha, I first saw that as a "Suggested Post" on Facebook. I actually might take a ride on the Sorkin Screenwriting Express. I don't know about sponsoring you mooks, though :p

    When you say his "last two films," are you saying that as a preface to talking about Silence - as in you liked The Wolf of Wall Street and Hugo better - or are you including Silence - as in you liked Silence and The Wolf of Wall Street better?

    I haven't seen Silence, so I can't tell you that you're crazy (I'm thinking it, though), but I can tell you that, while I was back in Chicago for the holidays, my friend and I realized there was literally nothing we wanted to see in theaters. Then we thought of Silence, and neither one of us, both Scorsese guys, had any desire to see it. I just can't get worked up for this movie. It seems like it's going to be a fine addition to the "Why did you bother?" folder alongside shit like The Age of Innocence and Kundun.

    Fuck it: You're crazy :D

    [​IMG]

    Abso-motherfucking-lutely. I still flip through it from time-to-time with no intention of reading even a chapter but just to read a few random sentences and to intellectually sink into his linguistic groove.

    Glad you enjoyed it. If you liked the style of criticism in the Arnold book, then I can also recommend (though neither one of these books are quite at that level in terms of Saunders' way with words, though they're both close and fantastic for their own reasons) Directed by Clint Eastwood (1996) by Laurence F. Knapp (not only an old professor of mine and a brilliant critic but the professor of the class where I read the Arnold book; he's also very close to Saunders with his linguistic deftness) and The Films of Fritz Lang by Tom Gunning (also an old professor and one of the most renowned film scholars of all-time).

    My least favorite aspect of the book is the fact that Saunders held Arnold's work from Jingle All The Way through Collateral Damage in such low esteem. My next least favorite aspect was how much he bashed Stallone :(

    You haven't seen one of the GOATest of the GOAT - and the GOAT's GOAT - and yet you want me to sponsor you for Sorkin's masterclass?

    [​IMG]

    Hmm. I don't think I'd go so far as to identify "the life you live, it's not about you" as Scorsese's Truth. At least, not on the evidence you've provided here. I agree that his movies deal with people who either do the wrong thing(s) for the right reason(s) (Mean Streets and Taxi Driver just for two choice examples) or the wrong thing(s) for the wrong reason(s) (Raging Bull and Goodfellas just for two choice examples) but I don't see an altruistic message in his work. Mean Streets, as the "start" of his career, all but zeroes in on the path of the individual. His is absolutely a moral cinema, but in the sense of trying and failing - or never trying - to live a "good" life and in the process highlighting/questioning what "good" means in different time periods, places, contexts, etc.

    That said, I'd love it if you provided a more detailed explanation of why you see altruism as Scorsese's Truth.

    [​IMG]

    There's a show I've never heard of that's on the level of Hannibal? Tell me more please.

    Always loved this movie. It's on TCM every Christmas, and while I don't watch the whole thing every year, I always watch that chariot sequence. William Wyler outdid himself - and most everyone else - with Ben-Hur. An epic of truly epic proportions.

    I'm just responding to this post to compliment you on your AV. I just started rewatching The Mentalist last week. Easily one of the best shows to premier in the last decade.
     
    #414
    ufcfan4, chickenluver and HUNTERMANIA like this.
  15. HUNTERMANIA "I'll be the prince."

    HUNTERMANIA
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,005
    Likes Received:
    4,487
    @Bullitt68 -- Borgia is beautifully shot, very funny, and based on true stories. Because it's based on historical reality it can often feel disconnected and weird, like real life is, and not necessarily one congruent story that all fits together neatly... but it is definitely very good. I recommend checking it out for sure. I also think you will relate to and enjoy the character of Cesare because of the ideas he talks about and embodies. I think you'll like the show if you check it out. I was taken by surprise at how good it was - some really nice aesthetics.
     
    #415
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2017
    chickenluver likes this.
  16. Bullitt68 Senior Moderator

    Bullitt68
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    23,905
    Likes Received:
    963
    And, if I'm on the right Wikipedia page, created by the guy who created Oz.

    [​IMG]
     
    #416
    HUNTERMANIA likes this.
  17. chickenluver Bookmobile Driver

    chickenluver
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    7,987
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    Location:
    The Magical World of Reading
    That's the one
     
    #417
    HUNTERMANIA likes this.
  18. chickenluver Bookmobile Driver

    chickenluver
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    7,987
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    Location:
    The Magical World of Reading
    Just rented a copy of the extended edition of Once Upon a Time in America. Anybody seen this yet?

    I've heard mixed things about it. Apparently the restored footage is not of the same visual quality as the rest. Some people said the new scenes are jarring for that reason. I'm not too bothered by that. The restored Metropolis had several scenes that looked rough and grainy, but all of the scenes themselves were invaluable. Then again, it's only about 20 minutes added to OUTA whereas Metropolis had over an hour added I think, and before they restored it they had to use a bunch of title cards describing the missing scenes because the film would be impossible to follow otherwise. Conversely, some reviews have said the scenes added to OUTA are superfluous. Also, it can't really be called a director's cut considering Leone is no longer around. I don't remember if this cut originally played at Cannes before Leone cut it for international distribution (before it got butchered for the American release, but that's another story) or if the Cannes people had Leone cut it before it played at the festival. If the 229 minute version is what played at Cannes then that's probably the true director's cut. Anyway, I'll watch the film and report back.

    Also, anybody know what's going on with TCM? They seem to be playing all their movies in alphabetical order for the foreseeable future. They were on G last time I looked.
     
    #418
  19. ufcfan4 Can't Andle The Riddum

    ufcfan4
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    31,820
    Likes Received:
    5,508
    @Bullitt68

    I think it's awesome that you really rank Thor that highly. To me, that stands out as one Marvel movie that is very, very underrated. I feel like a lot of people think it's good, but I think it's one of the best. I wouldn't rank it over Winter Soldier, but it's definitely an upper echelon.

    What you should really do when you get a chance is check out Doctor Strange. That one surprised me. I was expecting to like it because I generally enjoy the Marvel movies and I think Cumberbatch, Chiwetel, and Swinton are awesome, but I don't think I anticipated enjoying it as much as I did. Visually, it is one of the more impressive of any of these movies. There was a sense of fun, but there was also weight behind it and I liked the origin story a lot.

    Civil War and Winter Soldier are very close in quality from my perspective. I think Winter Soldier is definitely narratively tighter and is, likely, the better overall film, but I thoroughly enjoyed Civil War. Much like The Avengers (again, as you said, one of the best) I felt it managed to include a bunch of characters in an organic way. Ant Man and Spiderman could have easily seemed shoehorned in and pointless, but they were effectively integrated for that huge, awesome action setpiece. Black Panther was legit- really liked the movement and fighting but also thought Boseman added a lot of credibility with his performance.

    You know I'm not really a fan of Iron Man 3. Saw it once all through and that was really enough for me. I put it in a category of movies that entertained me as I was watching it, but irritated me as I thought about it afterwards. Pearce is a quality actor, but that villain did not stand out to me. Kingsley was squandered. All that build up for a bait and switch gag. The end battle was confusing. Give me the final battle in The Avengers any day of the week with the heroes crushing cans. Ending felt muddled too. Doesn't he destroy all the suits. Remove the arc reactor surgically? Essentially make it seem as though he's no longer Iron Man. And yet then in Avengers 2, he's back, no questions asked.

    Thor 2 was a lot of fun to me, but it couldn't live up to the original. I'm not crazy for thinking Dennings was hilarious in that one am I?
     
    #419
    chickenluver likes this.
  20. ufcfan4 Can't Andle The Riddum

    ufcfan4
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    31,820
    Likes Received:
    5,508
    What a great movie. That moment in the earlygoing where Jobs' five-year old at the time(?) daughter points out that the computer is named after her and Jobs, still adamantly denying that's his daughter, condescendingly asks her if she knows what a coincidence is...that shit was rough, man.

    Great dialogue throughout and that device of building the film around those three different presentations seemed iffy when first announced but was executed close to perfectly. Sorkin really is at the top of his game still.
     
    #420

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "fd5733925866a04e50edd70f38dfaa35"
monitoring_string = "603ac9fff68f23709f2a42bf5e29272b"