fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-28-2009, 04:41 PM
I forgot to say I watched The Man Who Wasn't There last week. It was pretty great. I think the fact that I saw it after reading The Stranger made me appreciate it more.
|
||
|
K2 BRB, Posting Posts: 1,373 Joined: May 2008 |
05-29-2009, 12:31 AM
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww
|
||
|
SBCrystal BRB, Posting Posts: 578 Joined: Dec 2008 |
05-29-2009, 12:37 AM
That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/
|
||
|
fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-29-2009, 09:01 AM
(05-29-2009, 12:31 AM)K2 link Wrote: I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. |
||
|
Surf314 Seriously, this week I'll play PS Posts: 12,078 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-29-2009, 09:13 AM
(05-29-2009, 09:01 AM)fyre link Wrote: [quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094] That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. [/quote] The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it. It was a pretty strong collaboration. Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable. |
||
|
KarthXLR Free of STD's ... lolwut? Posts: 9,927 Joined: May 2008 |
05-29-2009, 06:00 PM
Saw "UP" today with a few of my friends.
Bloody fantastic movie from start to finish. It's officially my favorite Pixar film. You know what this means? GO SEE "UP" RIGHT NOW. SERIOUSLY. |
||
|
fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-29-2009, 06:10 PM
(05-29-2009, 09:13 AM)Surf314 link Wrote: [quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86723#msg86723 date=1243605683] That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. [/quote] The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it. It was a pretty strong collaboration. Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable. [/quote] I read the book. It was ok. The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie". I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though. (05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/ But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie. |
||
|
SBCrystal BRB, Posting Posts: 578 Joined: Dec 2008 |
05-29-2009, 06:25 PM
You know, you're right. That and FMJ are both fucking awesome movies.
|
||
|
K2 BRB, Posting Posts: 1,373 Joined: May 2008 |
05-29-2009, 07:41 PM
(05-29-2009, 06:10 PM)fyre link Wrote: [quote author=Surf314 link=topic=947.msg86724#msg86724 date=1243606414] That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. [/quote] The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it. It was a pretty strong collaboration. Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable. [/quote] I read the book. It was ok. The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie". I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though. (05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/ But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie. [/quote] I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old. |
||
|
Squishy3 Closet Furry Posts: 5,757 Joined: May 2008 |
05-29-2009, 07:58 PM
(05-29-2009, 06:00 PM)Karth is SPY link Wrote: Saw "UP" today with a few of my friends.Probably seeing it tomorrow. |
||
|
copulatingduck Following in Gordon's Footsteps Posts: 7,518 Joined: Apr 2008 |
05-30-2009, 04:34 AM
Ripped like paper raped with ease hey scrub nerd pyros suck on these |
||
|
Darklink BRB, Posting Posts: 833 Joined: Jul 2008 |
05-30-2009, 08:23 AM
(05-30-2009, 04:34 AM)CopulatingDuck link Wrote: Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus trailer I lol'd when jets way up in the clouds get blown up by them. |
||
|
fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-30-2009, 10:43 PM
Watched Transporter 2. It was a fun action movie/Audi commercial.
|
||
|
KarthXLR Free of STD's ... lolwut? Posts: 9,927 Joined: May 2008 |
05-31-2009, 02:18 AM
saw UP again today. I really recommend it to anyone who's ever enjoyed a Pixar film.
|
||
|
Squishy3 Closet Furry Posts: 5,757 Joined: May 2008 |
05-31-2009, 09:09 AM
(05-30-2009, 10:43 PM)fyre link Wrote: Watched Transporter 2. It was a fun action movie/Audi commercial.3rd one's okay, the girl in it is really fucking hot. |
||
|
Surf314 Seriously, this week I'll play PS Posts: 12,078 Joined: Mar 2008 |
05-31-2009, 10:30 AM
UP was really good.
|
||
|
fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
06-01-2009, 12:24 PM
|
||
|
K2 BRB, Posting Posts: 1,373 Joined: May 2008 |
06-01-2009, 03:18 PM
(05-31-2009, 10:30 AM)Surf314 link Wrote: UP was really good. This. Also I watched all of Full-Life Consequences earlier that day, so that was all I could think of every time Dug talked. |
||
|
fyre BRB, Posting Posts: 1,968 Joined: Mar 2008 |
06-01-2009, 06:44 PM
I watched this over a year ago, but I just happened to think about it now for some reason. What is it, you ask? It is...the best adaptation of Alice in Wonderland EVAR. (Although, I have to admit I haven't seen all the adaptations, but I'm sure this is the best.) And it'll totally kick Burton's version's ass.
It's got a great surreal, dream-like feel that I just love. Here's one of my favorite scenes. Alice in Wonderland (1966) And here's a few bonuses... Alice adventures in Wonderland Alice in Wonderland (1966) It's definitely worth a look if you're an Alice fan. (05-29-2009, 07:41 PM)K2 link Wrote: [quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86817#msg86817 date=1243638653] That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. [/quote] The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it. It was a pretty strong collaboration. Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable. [/quote] I read the book. It was ok. The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie". I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though. (05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/ But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie. [/quote] I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old. [/quote] I just happened to reread this, and I realized that I kinda sounded like an asshole. :-\ Sorry 'bout that. I didn't mean to attack you or your taste or anything. Most of the time if I don't like a movie I'm just like...ok...whatever. But for some reason that movie pissed me off, and I get a bit mad whenever I think about. I dunno why. |
||
|
K2 BRB, Posting Posts: 1,373 Joined: May 2008 |
06-01-2009, 09:50 PM
(06-01-2009, 06:44 PM)fyre link Wrote: [quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86873#msg86873 date=1243644087] That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. [/quote] The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it. It was a pretty strong collaboration. Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable. [/quote] I read the book. It was ok. The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie". I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though. (05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/ But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie. [/quote] I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old. [/quote] I just happened to reread this, and I realized that I kinda sounded like an asshole. :-\ Sorry 'bout that. I didn't mean to attack you or your taste or anything. Most of the time if I don't like a movie I'm just like...ok...whatever. But for some reason that movie pissed me off, and I get a bit mad whenever I think about. I dunno why. [/quote] Don't worry about it. I get the same way about Moulin Rouge. For some reason I cannot understand why anyone could possibly enjoy that movie. |
||
|
|