Author Topic: General Movie Thread  (Read 972519 times)

Bryan

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1635
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #840 on: December 21, 2009, 05:20:19 PM »
I'm going to post this here, and I'm sorry for that maybe.  But it is a very thorough undressing. 

Give it a chance...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

I just watched (some of) this! It's funny stuff. But long - I think there are 7 parts. I don't have that kind of attention span...

buffcoat

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 6214
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #841 on: December 22, 2009, 09:39:07 AM »
It's a very effective takedown.  I hated those movies so much, especially the first one, and this does a pretty solid job of explaining why.  Even if it's 40% as long as the whole movie.


Caveat: I like human suffering as much as the next guy, but the "woman-locked-in-the-basement" scenes weren't really, you know, funny, so much as disturbing.
I really don't appreciate your sarcastic, anti-comedy tone, Bro!

Bryan

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1635
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #842 on: December 22, 2009, 09:46:22 AM »
Caveat: I like human suffering as much as the next guy, but the "woman-locked-in-the-basement" scenes weren't really, you know, funny, so much as disturbing.

Ooh, I missed that bit.

crumbum

  • Tarsel tunnel syndrome
  • Posts: 470
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #843 on: December 22, 2009, 11:51:51 AM »
I have a question: does it bother you guys as much as it bothers me when two characters in a film are talking in a moving car, and the character who's driving keeps turning to look at the other character for inordinately long amounts of time instead of watching the road? I understand the mechanics of how these scenes are shot, and that the actors are generally not thinking about mimicking the act of driving so much as connecting with each other in the moment, but usually I'm sitting there thinking WATCH THE ROAD! YOU'RE GOING TO CRASH!!! Once you've noticed it once it seems to happen all the time.

The two examples I've seen recently are in My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done, where in the opening scene Willem Dafoe does it, and in Mamet's Homicide, where I think it's Joe Mantegna doing the driving and William H Macy in the passenger seat. What makes the latter scene funny is that as I was starting to panic, they do nearly crash due to Joe's inattentiveness. At the time I thought maybe David Mamet has the same pet peeve as me and was subtly making fun of the convention.

Christina

  • Administrator
  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 2387
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #844 on: December 22, 2009, 11:52:43 AM »
I have a question: does it bother you guys as much as it bothers me when two characters in a film are talking in a moving car, and the character who's driving keeps turning to look at the other character for inordinately long amounts of time instead of watching the road? I understand the mechanics of how these scenes are shot, and that the actors are generally not thinking about mimicking the act of driving so much as connecting with each other in the moment, but usually I'm sitting there thinking WATCH THE ROAD! YOU'RE GOING TO CRASH!!! Once you've noticed it once it seems to happen all the time.


That drives me nuts too.
Remember how he couldn't stop his leg?

Sarah

  • Guest
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #845 on: December 22, 2009, 12:31:16 PM »
Me, too.

buffcoat

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 6214
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #846 on: December 22, 2009, 01:39:27 PM »
They do crash... about a third of the time.  It's a terrible convention, very manipulative and stupid.




This review of The Phantom Menace is just about perfect.  What a terrible movie, what a disappointment, what a testament to the fact that ridiculous amounts of money and soft living and surrounding yourself at all times with a network of Yes Men is completely destructive to a once-great storyteller.

I really don't appreciate your sarcastic, anti-comedy tone, Bro!

Mark in Helsinki

  • Tarsel tunnel syndrome
  • Posts: 251
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #847 on: December 22, 2009, 07:31:28 PM »
They do crash... about a third of the time.  It's a terrible convention, very manipulative and stupid.




This review of The Phantom Menace is just about perfect.  What a terrible movie, what a disappointment, what a testament to the fact that ridiculous amounts of money and soft living and surrounding yourself at all times with a network of Yes Men is completely destructive to a once-great storyteller.



did anyone catch darth vader ringing the opening bell at NYSE today? It was in honor of star wars 30 years of being the top licenced brand in the world.

At first glance of vader and six stormtroopers were some sort of admission that the NYSE finally were admitting they belong to the evil Empire.
"Is this me?"

oilcantim

  • Achilles bursitis
  • Posts: 134
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #848 on: December 22, 2009, 09:26:39 PM »
I just saw dat Avatar film dere.

I'm sure this joke has been done before, but it was easily the best video game cut scene ever!  The game kinda sucked, though.

Sarah

  • Guest
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #849 on: December 24, 2009, 06:09:28 AM »
I'm watching Ladies of Leisure (dir. Frank Capra, 1930), Barbara Stanwyck's breakout role.  She's only twenty-three in it, and she's quite the charmer. 

dave from knoxville

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 5108
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #850 on: December 24, 2009, 10:08:14 PM »
I'm watching Ladies of Leisure (dir. Frank Capra, 1930), Barbara Stanwyck's breakout role.  She's only twenty-three in it, and she's quite the charmer. 

Coincidentally, we just saw Christmas in Connecticut last night, in which she was equally charming.

thom

  • Achilles bursitis
  • Posts: 238
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #851 on: December 24, 2009, 11:13:51 PM »
Did anyone else find the 3D in Avatar to be awful? I kept closing one eye so I could see what was going on.
Luckily the movie was so offensively bad that the cruddy 3D didn't make me enjoy the thing any less.

Sarah

  • Guest
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #852 on: December 25, 2009, 05:56:25 AM »
I'm watching Ladies of Leisure (dir. Frank Capra, 1930), Barbara Stanwyck's breakout role.  She's only twenty-three in it, and she's quite the charmer. 

Coincidentally, we just saw Christmas in Connecticut last night, in which she was equally charming.

Yes, that is a great one.  Another of my favorites of hers is Ball of Fire, a movie that prompted the inclusion of the phrase "on account of because" in my family's private lexicon.

buffcoat

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 6214
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #853 on: December 25, 2009, 03:55:49 PM »
I'm watching Ladies of Leisure (dir. Frank Capra, 1930), Barbara Stanwyck's breakout role.  She's only twenty-three in it, and she's quite the charmer. 

Coincidentally, we just saw Christmas in Connecticut last night, in which she was equally charming.

Yes, that is a great one.  Another of my favorites of hers is Ball of Fire, a movie prompted the inclusion of the phrase "on account of because" in my family's private lexicon.

Coincidence?  I just recorded some Bogart-kills-his-wife movie with her in it.
I really don't appreciate your sarcastic, anti-comedy tone, Bro!

Sarah

  • Guest
Re: General Movie Thread
« Reply #854 on: December 25, 2009, 04:42:58 PM »
Ruby gets around.