|
churningindawake
Mar 26, 2009, 1:59 AM
Post #176 of 302
(6709 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2007
Posts: 5292
|
Just figured out today that the movie Twilight had a part that was filmed at my local climbing area.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 26, 2009, 2:28 AM
Post #177 of 302
(6701 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
churningindawake wrote: Just figured out today that the movie Twilight had a part that was filmed at my local climbing area.
Heh, thats funny. After enjoying Let The Right Ones In so much the other night, I thought I would rent Twilight just for some fun. I'm watching it right now.
|
|
|
|
|
churningindawake
Mar 26, 2009, 2:43 AM
Post #178 of 302
(6695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2007
Posts: 5292
|
notapplicable wrote: churningindawake wrote: Just figured out today that the movie Twilight had a part that was filmed at my local climbing area. Heh, thats funny. After enjoying Let The Right Ones In so much the other night, I thought I would rent Twilight just for some fun. I'm watching it right now.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 26, 2009, 3:12 AM
Post #179 of 302
(6692 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
Watched Knowing http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448011/ in the theater the other night.
This guys movies all share the same shortcoming, he's a really bad writer/director with really great ideas. Dark City worked simply because the uniquely perverse story and settings were so far out there that they over shadowed his ineptitude as a director. I Robot worked because he didn't write the script and he had a bunch of studio/producer oversight to keep him in check.
Unfortunately that wasn't the case here. The story is contrived and all the action of the first half (which is interesting while it's happening) turns out to have no logical connection with the second half, despite their pretending it does. Most of the scenes and line deliveries feel awkward, over the top or cliche.
The only redeeming feature are the powerful and beautiful disaster sequences. Big props to the Art Department, CG and post production teams. The airplane and subway crashes are just awesome.
Beyond that though, it's just a mess. Wait for DVD.
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 6, 2009, 7:05 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 26, 2009, 7:18 AM
Post #180 of 302
(6685 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
Just finished Twilight. Taken for what it is, it was actually better and more watchable than I thought it might be. Although I'm not generally a fan of the "vampire with a conscience" gimmick, I liked the Cullen family dynamic. Would have been nice to see some more of their back story. As a whole, there were a lot of obvious weaknesses in the story but presumably most of it was taken from the source material so it's hard to fault the movie for that. The two biggest problems that didn't stem from the script were the action scenes and Robert Pattinson's (Edwards character) very limited acting range.
Everything from jumping through the trees, to the baseball game and especially the final fight, just looked ugly. By all accounts they were poorly choreographed, executed, and edited. Which was actually a bit surprising because the director was able to put together some rather convincing and even elegant skate scenes in Lords Of Dogtown. Maybe she just didn't have the right technical advisement or production teams in place, who knows.
Secondly and most annoyingly, Edwards character was pretty badly miscast and WTF was up with that hair? Anyway, it didn't matter if he was supposed to be tormented, angry, disgusted or concerned, if you walked in to the room at any given moment you would just assume he really had to take a shit. He had two facial expressions, the occasional wry but mostly unconvincing smile and constipated. In fairness though, tormented is hard to play and a lot of more experienced actors have gotten it just as wrong.
Bellas character was good though. The quality of the acting wavered a bit but at least she got inside the characters skin and was believable.
Judged against the lexicon of vampire movies, well it ranks pretty low but taken for what it is and given it's target audience, Twilight is worth watching if you get the chance.
(This post was edited by notapplicable on Mar 26, 2009, 7:30 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 27, 2009, 3:57 PM
Post #181 of 302
(6679 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
A couple of interesting summer releases have just had their trailers made available.
The first is the newest Tarantino movie Inglourious Basterds http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/
The trailer here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TadvFY3rA8
There's nothing not to be excited about on this one. Tarantino always creates lasting images and characters, no matter the subject matter. Plus it's just a great idea for a movie. The blood is gonna run for sure...
(This post was edited by notapplicable on Mar 27, 2009, 4:47 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 27, 2009, 4:45 PM
Post #182 of 302
(6674 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
Second is the newest Michael Mann film Public Enemies. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1152836/
Original trailer but in HD - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6c5F5Xzmjo
New trailer in HD - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2SJ5JaUDtY
Of all 2009 releases, I'm probably most excited about this one. No American director has done more within the "crime drama" genre than MM and very few others have such a discerning eye for creating atmosphere with color and light. Everything he produces just looks beautiful. Also, he's working with a dream team of lead, character and supporting actors, combined with what should be a great story. The legend of John Dillinger and his relationship to the formation and rise to power of the FBI.
And if all that weren't enough, you've got Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Billy Crudup all in one place. You couldn't ask for a more beautiful line up.
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 3, 2009, 7:22 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
lockeyaaron
Mar 27, 2009, 6:41 PM
Post #184 of 302
(6652 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2004
Posts: 649
|
I just watched the trailer for Basterds and it looks GREAT!!!
|
|
|
|
|
wideguy
Mar 27, 2009, 7:02 PM
Post #185 of 302
(6651 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15046
|
both look great
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Mar 27, 2009, 11:31 PM
Post #186 of 302
(6636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
lockeyaaron wrote: I just watched the trailer for Basterds and it looks GREAT!!!
I know. Everything he does has so much energy to it, you can't help but have fun watching.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 3, 2009, 6:40 AM
Post #187 of 302
(6545 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
I was thinking to myself the other day how unfortunate it is that we haven't seen a successful film adaptation of an Ernest Hemingway novel in a long, long time. It's been more than 50 years. So I was curious enough to look it up and it turns out that a feature length version of The Garden Of Eden was completed in 2008 and saw a very small "test release" in the UK. Since then though, it has languished in distribution and possibly re-edit hell. The little bit of info. available makes it sound like a U.S. release is in the works but it may not even happen by the end of the year.
Originally my suspicion was that the production just wasn't very good but after seeing the trailer, I now think it's an issue of not being perceived as suitable (read: Profitable) for American audiences. The story was his most consistently confrontational of sexual taboos and the preview makes it clear that the director didn't shy away from the sex or nudity. As a big fan of his work, this may be my favorite of his novels (Yeah yeah I know, he didn't even finish it before he died. Eat me!), I am hoping something gets worked out sooner rather than later.
I'm kind of hooked on the trailer actually, I've watched it 5 times I think. It is slightly NSFW though, as it was used in Europe and contains a quick nipple shot.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1031243/
Trailer here>> http://videos.caterinaweb.net//play.php?vid=102
Or here>> http://sg.video.yahoo.com/watch/3770405/10342782
DOES ANYONE RECOGNIZE THE SONG THAT PLAYS DURING THE LAST 40 SECONDS OF THE TRAILER??
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 4, 2009, 12:26 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 3, 2009, 6:59 AM
Post #188 of 302
(6541 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
This does raise a serious question though. Why is it that we haven't seen a recent effort at bringing The Sun Also Rises or A Farewell To Arms to the big screen?
I think TSAR is the obvious choice because its a much smaller production, while still being a really compelling and layered human drama. AFTA is what I would really like to see though. There is just so much of the human soul captured in that novel. It would be such a great vehicle for exploring the people, politics and culture of the times. If I had my pick, I would put it in the hands of Terrence Malick but Eastwood or Spielberg or Haneke of PTA would be good choices as well.
I'd also like to see something structured around the Nick Adam Stories but thats probably a bit much to hope for.
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 3, 2009, 7:17 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
churningindawake
May 3, 2009, 1:22 PM
Post #189 of 302
(6513 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2007
Posts: 5292
|
Thanks for keeping this thread alive... I thas a lot of good content in it.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 4, 2009, 5:11 PM
Post #190 of 302
(6495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
I went and watched the new X-men movie late last night. It was no better or worse than the other ones before it. High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass and Liev Schreiber makes for a much better Sabertooth.
If you like the series you should definitely watch it but absent fandom, you won't suffer any great loss by skipping it.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 4, 2009, 8:57 PM
Post #191 of 302
(6486 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
One movie I recommend you don't skip is Adventureland - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091722/
Having only seen the previews, I went in expecting a melding of Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist and Superbad but it went far beyond all that. Every 10 years or so a movie comes out that captures with a freshness and sincerity the experience very broadly and aptly described as "coming of age". I think this is that movie. I think Adventureland is the 21st centuries Ferris Bueller's Day Off or Almost Famous and am not exactly sure why it was marketed as a comedy in the vein of Superbad. Twas an unfortunately mismanaged campaign IMO.
Not to say that it isn't funny because it often is but I don't distinctly remember laughing out loud more than a few times. At turns sweet, ironic and soberingly sad, it's the kind of movie where you smile or even chuckle to yourself but in a knowing way. You'll see yourself, or as the case will be for most of us, your former self reflected in the characters.
The entire cast was great. Near the top of this page I commented that in Twilight "The quality of [Kristen Stewarts] acting wavered a bit..." but that was far from the case here. She was perfect as a disaffected youth who wants nothing more than to know optimism but is entirely lost as to where to even begin. Stewart does have a genetic advantage in that department though, as she has this great face which always carries just a hint of sadness even when she smiles. It may be something she out grows but that naturally "wounded" look is something she uses to great advantage here. Jesse Eisenberg is the male lead and although I've seen him in few smaller roles, he's never anchored a film before and he nails it. The consummate romantic and idealist, he lacks any real sense of the practicality of human emotion, which I think is his charm. Ryan Reynolds is great as always and was in some ways the most effecting for me.
Adventureland is the finest exercise within this genre in some time and is (much like life) in every sense of the word, "bittersweet". And much like in life, I suppose it is up to the individual to decide how much of it's beauty is owed to that infusion of such tender melancholy and to what degree it exists in spite of that informing spirit of sadness. Regardless of individual notions as to it's origins though, I sincerely doubt that any one of you will fail to be impressed by it's aesthetic. It's due out on DVD soon, give it a watch.
(This post was edited by notapplicable on May 5, 2009, 6:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
ThisSilentDream
May 5, 2009, 4:07 PM
Post #192 of 302
(6456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2008
Posts: 56
|
notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass
The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain.
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
May 5, 2009, 4:28 PM
Post #193 of 302
(6455 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
ThisSilentDream wrote: notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain.
All comic characters are made up. Deadpool is a relatively recent comic addition.... I think from the very early 90's.
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
May 5, 2009, 4:32 PM
Post #194 of 302
(6450 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
I got what I was expecting from the new X-Men movie. It was entertaining but by no means "amazing"
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 5, 2009, 5:54 PM
Post #195 of 302
(6443 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
ThisSilentDream wrote: notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain.
I just thought he was effectively creepy and posed a believable challenge for Wolverine, unlike Sabertooth who he could have destroyed in seconds once he had the adamantum claws.
If I could change anything about the ending, it would be to have a 1 vs. 10 brawl between the freed mutants and Deadpool. That could have been significantly more epic than what did happen but some of the young ones would have died and they like to avoid that. Pussies.
|
|
|
|
|
ThisSilentDream
May 5, 2009, 9:37 PM
Post #196 of 302
(6429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2008
Posts: 56
|
kachoong wrote: ThisSilentDream wrote: notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain. All comic characters are made up. Deadpool is a relatively recent comic addition.... I think from the very early 90's.
Oh. Right. I knew that. :-P
No I meant he isn't really like the Deadpool from the comics, but almost made up specifically for this film.
|
|
|
|
|
clausti
May 5, 2009, 11:50 PM
Post #197 of 302
(6423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Posts: 5690
|
notapplicable wrote: Secondly and most annoyingly, Edwards character was pretty badly miscast and WTF was up with that hair?
totally missed this the first time around. i laughed inappropriately a lot during the movie. i would have personally like more car chases and vampire fight scenes. and i liked the book, for the most part.
but yes, the casting of edward was practically the worse possible. i honestly think zac fucking effron is a better actor. they needed brad pitt, patrick stewart, brent spiner. they got william SHATner.
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
May 6, 2009, 1:47 PM
Post #198 of 302
(6405 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
ThisSilentDream wrote: kachoong wrote: ThisSilentDream wrote: notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain. All comic characters are made up. Deadpool is a relatively recent comic addition.... I think from the very early 90's. Oh. Right. I knew that. :-P No I meant he isn't really like the Deadpool from the comics, but almost made up specifically for this film.
Nerd alert! So, I just saw Wolverine last night and found the whole Deadpool thing just a little annoying but still fairly well done. Did you stay until the very end of the credits? If not, you missed a little surprise. Originally Deadpool was disfigured but certainly not to the extent of in the film. He's really just like the Reynolds character in ability but has been disfigured... he even talks, so the whole sewing the mouth up bit to be Weapon XI was for the movie. I didn't like that they used a different actor for the last ten minutes... not sure why they didn't use Reynolds.
Overall I liked the Wolverine movie.... Liev Schreiber was great! Also the first two adult guys in the film were Aussies.... well, I think one is Kiwi, but lives in Aus.
|
|
|
|
|
ThisSilentDream
May 6, 2009, 6:52 PM
Post #199 of 302
(6393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2008
Posts: 56
|
kachoong wrote: ThisSilentDream wrote: kachoong wrote: ThisSilentDream wrote: notapplicable wrote: High points would be that Deadpool was bad ass The new X-Men movie was pretty bad, but I really thought that "Deadpool" was actually the lowpoint of the film. I thought Ryan Reynolds character was badass at the beginning, but then they turned him into a crappy made-up villain. All comic characters are made up. Deadpool is a relatively recent comic addition.... I think from the very early 90's. Oh. Right. I knew that. :-P No I meant he isn't really like the Deadpool from the comics, but almost made up specifically for this film. Nerd alert! So, I just saw Wolverine last night and found the whole Deadpool thing just a little annoying but still fairly well done. Did you stay until the very end of the credits? If not, you missed a little surprise. Originally Deadpool was disfigured but certainly not to the extent of in the film. He's really just like the Reynolds character in ability but has been disfigured... he even talks, so the whole sewing the mouth up bit to be Weapon XI was for the movie. I didn't like that they used a different actor for the last ten minutes... not sure why they didn't use Reynolds. Overall I liked the Wolverine movie.... Liev Schreiber was great! Also the first two adult guys in the film were Aussies.... well, I think one is Kiwi, but lives in Aus.
I did not stay till the end, but I know what happened. I found out after I saw it that those things were there, I hate that. I mean, let me know ahead of time or something, to put something that cool at the end and have people miss it sucks. Oh well.
I agree whole-heartedly. I think the character was hella cool, but not cannon, which I guess is fine, but give him a new name. I also wish they had kept Reynolds, I think he's a cool cat and thought he was funny, his quips were classic! Liev was also very good, and I thought they did the rivalry really well, which is something they glossed over really quick in the previous films, but what can you expect. Overall sweet movie. Now I just have to wait for Star Trek and Terminator:Salvation. it's totally a nerds summer... HAHA
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
May 6, 2009, 6:54 PM
Post #200 of 302
(6393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
clausti wrote: notapplicable wrote: Secondly and most annoyingly, Edwards character was pretty badly miscast and WTF was up with that hair? totally missed this the first time around. i laughed inappropriately a lot during the movie. i would have personally like more car chases and vampire fight scenes. and i liked the book, for the most part. but yes, the casting of edward was practically the worse possible. i honestly think zac fucking effron is a better actor. they needed brad pitt, patrick stewart, brent spiner. they got william SHATner.
heh heh
Fuckin Will Shatner. Thats funny.
Since you've read the books I have a question for ya though. What bothered me more than anything else was the way Edward ran in the movie. Is there any description in the book that has him moving like roadrunner with his legs going a mile-a-minute? With his flying/leaping abilities, I don't see why he wouldn't move much more elegantly than that.
Oh and FWIW, they have put a different director in charge of New Moon. He's more of a Hollywood insider type and possibly less talented than Catherine Hardwicke but that doesn't realy mean anything because Twilight was a poor fit for her to start. He may end up being able to do more with this specific type material.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
