The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
It's Our [FILM] Thread Down Here
Fatboy Roberts
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
In the days of yore, the people were entertained via parable; hand-me-down stories from grizzled, wizened old men with voices like gravel and eyes that had looked into forever. Their visage was weathered, their voice ragged, but their tales were full of life, of vigor, of pain and exultation. The crags and wrinkles on their face held wisdom, and kindness, and cruelty and pain. And they shared their stories so that we could learn, and feel, and marvel at things that we could be.
Later, those stories were accompanied by song, and dance. Troubadours traipsed through villages and shantytowns, plucking lutes and putting those tales to music. Fancy lads in green tights would stake out a plot of grass and gather amongst them those touched by a muse, and together, would spin similar yarns, in the hopes of entertaining and enlightening, of educating and enveloping those who simply wished to peek into a world that was bigger, braver, bolder, more boisterous.
And then, a couple of brothers named Lumiere took a camera, and shot footage of a train entering a station, and PEOPLE LOST THEIR SHIT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dgLEDdFddk
I mean people dived out of their chairs, ran up the aisles, burst out of the theater doors into the street, and started screaming at people to run.
Storytelling would never be the same.
It seemed slow at the time, but the rapidity with which directors, cameramen and editors figured out how to manipulate 24 frames of film a second was nothing short of astonishing. By 1925, narrative had not only been bent to the will of the director, it had been transformed, inflamed, made vibrant, sharp, STABBY. So much so that things like Sergei Eisenstein's 1925 epic "Battleship Potemkin"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLEE2UL_N7Q
Was not only being referenced, but outright ripped off by 1987's Brian DePalma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTtj-VXxgbc
The innovations kept coming, pouring out of people so genius they couldn't help but invent pop-culture, and those that studied at the feet of the masters ended up standing on their shoulders. Curtiz. Ford. Hawks. Renoir. Bergman. Godard. Truffaut. Edwards. Wilder. Kurosawa. Tartovsky. Lean. Hitchcock. Ashby. Scorsese. Coppola. Carpenter. Spielberg. Yes, even Lucas. Van Sant. Woo. Miyazaki. Frears. Almodovar. Del Toro. Soderbergh. Coen. Bird. Jackson. Tarantino. So many left out, so many more to come up and stake their claim, tell their stories, enrapture their audiences.
And you wonder why people get lost in their heads. You wonder why they keep going to the theaters, even as prices approach 15 bucks a ticket. You wonder why they spend all this money on flatscreens and 7.1 surround sound, why they purchase blu-ray after blu-ray, why they subscribe to Netflix and Hulu, why their sig is a movie quote, why their walls are adorned with Drew Struzan art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4WQdHNRvXA
It's because Films are time travel. Dimensional Travel. A trip to a world where idealism is rewarded, where the good fight is won, where the world makes sense, even when it doesn't. Where emotions are laid bare, where heartstrings aren't just plucked, but soloed upon as if Dick Dale himself had laid fingers upon your soul. It is, at its best, 90 minutes to 2hrs of the best of us, and the worst of us, in the most poignant, inspirational, depressing, scary, hilarious and exhilirating of ways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4tIrjBDkk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGR4SFOimlk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac6cOJb2FvI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYt24hq5nbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF4kCgi9fDM
This is the film thread.
Later, those stories were accompanied by song, and dance. Troubadours traipsed through villages and shantytowns, plucking lutes and putting those tales to music. Fancy lads in green tights would stake out a plot of grass and gather amongst them those touched by a muse, and together, would spin similar yarns, in the hopes of entertaining and enlightening, of educating and enveloping those who simply wished to peek into a world that was bigger, braver, bolder, more boisterous.
And then, a couple of brothers named Lumiere took a camera, and shot footage of a train entering a station, and PEOPLE LOST THEIR SHIT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dgLEDdFddkI mean people dived out of their chairs, ran up the aisles, burst out of the theater doors into the street, and started screaming at people to run.
Storytelling would never be the same.
It seemed slow at the time, but the rapidity with which directors, cameramen and editors figured out how to manipulate 24 frames of film a second was nothing short of astonishing. By 1925, narrative had not only been bent to the will of the director, it had been transformed, inflamed, made vibrant, sharp, STABBY. So much so that things like Sergei Eisenstein's 1925 epic "Battleship Potemkin"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLEE2UL_N7QWas not only being referenced, but outright ripped off by 1987's Brian DePalma
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTtj-VXxgbcThe innovations kept coming, pouring out of people so genius they couldn't help but invent pop-culture, and those that studied at the feet of the masters ended up standing on their shoulders. Curtiz. Ford. Hawks. Renoir. Bergman. Godard. Truffaut. Edwards. Wilder. Kurosawa. Tartovsky. Lean. Hitchcock. Ashby. Scorsese. Coppola. Carpenter. Spielberg. Yes, even Lucas. Van Sant. Woo. Miyazaki. Frears. Almodovar. Del Toro. Soderbergh. Coen. Bird. Jackson. Tarantino. So many left out, so many more to come up and stake their claim, tell their stories, enrapture their audiences.
And you wonder why people get lost in their heads. You wonder why they keep going to the theaters, even as prices approach 15 bucks a ticket. You wonder why they spend all this money on flatscreens and 7.1 surround sound, why they purchase blu-ray after blu-ray, why they subscribe to Netflix and Hulu, why their sig is a movie quote, why their walls are adorned with Drew Struzan art.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4WQdHNRvXAIt's because Films are time travel. Dimensional Travel. A trip to a world where idealism is rewarded, where the good fight is won, where the world makes sense, even when it doesn't. Where emotions are laid bare, where heartstrings aren't just plucked, but soloed upon as if Dick Dale himself had laid fingers upon your soul. It is, at its best, 90 minutes to 2hrs of the best of us, and the worst of us, in the most poignant, inspirational, depressing, scary, hilarious and exhilirating of ways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4tIrjBDkkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGR4SFOimlkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac6cOJb2FvIhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYt24hq5nbMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF4kCgi9fDMThis is the film thread.
The best show you've never heard
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
Fatboy Roberts on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
So Drive is a good movie. Kinda felt like 80s Michael Mann with a few extremely memorable stops in Cronenberg country.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
This thread should hold the easy 50 pages we'd get out of those 3 movies.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
(Having said that, I haven't seen the film in, oh, probably 10-15 years. I wonder how I'd like it now. Might be a good film to watch with my girlfriend, though, to see whether she needs anyone to cuddle up to. 8-) )
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
That was a bad idea.
Same. There's a BBC radio adaptation floating around with Alfred Molina in Pacino's role, he does a great job too.
I'm still surprised by how good that movie was.
I have to see it again because I told my aunt I'd see it with her, forgot, and saw it with my friend. but I do not regret this, I can't wait to see it a second time, I think Monday.
Only one way to find out!
Just watched Drive last night, and I thought it was fantastic. It feels old school in all the right ways, but the cinematography, the story beats it uses makes it an almost brand new experience. I thought that Gosling, Cranston, and Brooks were great, with Gosling probably pulling an Oscar nom out of this.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
It actually makes me kind of sad to know that it would be impossible for any movie to ever have such a huge impact on me.
I feel like whoever pushes 3D feels like they're going to get this effect. And they're so very wrong.
I wish I could go back in time and record a video of the crowd reacting to that. A billion hits on youtube.
Evil Dead 2 (that dancing girlfriend creeped the heck out of me).
House I & 2 :
I am sure the house films are terrible today, and house two even then was more of a horror comedy, thanks to a charismatic old west zombie called "gramps." Watching those trailers again, you may notice that there are some Cheers stars cast.
Is it matinee terrible? Wait for it on rental terrible? Wait for it to hit TV?
How much money can I spend on a ticket before I feel like I got ripped off?
I would expect the next James Bond movie to be called: Skyfall.
It's good. Real good actually.
It's predictable as hell and you will know exactly what's going to happen next but it's just such a fun movie. Spielberg touch is all over it. Jackman is good but the kid is the real stand out, as well as the fight scenes. It's hard not to smile during certain scenes or get into the robot fights.
It's one of the most enjoyable sport movies in a while.
I seriously can't believe they got Paul Giamatti to be in this. I absolutely can not wait to go see this one.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
That may all be true. I just can't get past rockem sockem robots.
I gotta be honest, rockem sockem robots is one the huge draws to the movie for me. I mean, I saw giant boxing robots and I was pretty much sold. Then I saw a trailer with what appeared to be a stereo-typical "annoying kid" and I started to worry that he might get in the way of robot boxing.
Robot boxing, how can you not love it?
I feel the opposite way.
I've seen The Thing millions of times and I always think it's incredible.
It's easily one of my favorite movies ever. I think that you're right though, it really does feel like fantasy.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Was looking around the movie news sites yesterday trying to find out where this came from, but came up bupkes.
Geek: Remixed - A Decade's worth of ruined pop culture memories
Xbox Live - Fatboy PDX
I saw it last night. It's the kind of movie that I have a feeling the Academy will use to fill out its Best Supporting Actor category.
The performances are stellar, the story is engaging and has many unpredictable twists and turns, and Gosling proves again that he is the best dressed actor in Hollywood (so many suit/overcoat combos, and who can pull off tortoise shell glasses like that?!?! ANYWAYS).
The one thing I'll remind people of, and I didn't know this so I'm not talking down, but there isn't much "thriller" to this political thriller. It's not Michael Clayton. Ides of March is based on a play and it feels like you're watching a play. Not so much in an intrusive way like Rabbit Hole, which just felt like a series of monologues set in different locales. But it's about 85% intense conversations. Maybe more than that.
I totally recommend it and it made me want to see more of Clooney as a director. But just be forewarned that you're not getting some crazy thrill-ride.
Also I saw Dream House. I ate a whole thing of popcorn after it because I needed to erase the idea that someone thought this would be a good movie to make. Also its the first time I've ever actually experienced a trailer ruining a LARGE protion of a movie for me.
I liked that it never really settled the question of whether Damon was a psychic or just a gifted people-reader. The "they don't want to believe" stuff was kind of annoying but I thought it still worked as an examination of that woman being unable to find meaning and connection in life after her experience.
Something I really loved about the movie, and about Eastwood movies in general, was the sense of realism. Every place in it felt like a real place. Matt Damon's community college felt like a real community college, and that sort of tentative friendship he strikes up with the girl really felt like the kind of short-lived relationships you can develop in a setting like that. The office at the blue-collar place he works feels like a blue-collar office, and the other guys there aren't Hollywood pretty but look like actual mechanics.
My big gripe with the movie was that it was ultimately too low-key. The sense of grief and sadness running through the movie was tastefully muted and kept as an undercurrent, which I appreciated, but the end really needed to be bigger and less shy. I mean, it's sort of authentic, I guess - when you "get over" bereavement, you feel more tired than, like, big and bursting with joy, but it just left the movie feeling kind of cold and wet.