Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

A boy's best friend is his [Film Thread]

1939495969799»

Posts

  • NeliNeli Registered User regular
    Heat is so good. I need to rewatch it soon, it must have been over a decade since I watched it last time

    vhgb4m.jpg
    I have stared into Satan's asshole, and it fucking winked at me.
    [/size]
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    The Last of the Mohicans was brilliant

    The Insider was also excellent

    Ketar
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I'll reply with what Peter Jackson said about the necessity of The Hobbit:

    "I didn't really want to make it, but I didn't want anyone else to make it, and it was going to be made either way."


    Jackson is remarkably candid for a director when it comes to problems with his films and I love it. He thinks the ghost army at Pellinor Fields is just as dumb as the rest of us do.

    Was it the studio's decision to make it 3 films long? Because if Jackson was basically told, "We're doing the Hobbit. We want there to be at least 3 films, because $$$$. You in?" then I understand that. Otherwise, it seems an odd choice for someone who says he didn't want to be doing it in the first place. Like, "Fuck, I don't want to do a goddamn book report, I hate reading. Fine, whatever, guess I'll do it on War and Peace."

    I think Jackson commits wholly to projects once aboard, but it's clear that at times he is at the mercy of the moneymen (see: the whole Pellinor Fields thing).

    I think the most plausible explanation was that Jackson was asking to run long with The Hobbit pts 1 and 2, and the studio probably just said, "Fuck it, we'll make three and be richer for it." Almost all directors shoot hours that get cut from the theatrical release, so Jackson probably had plenty of footage to pad out the running times with. As much as I like the EE versions of the LOTR films, the theatrical versions work just fine on their own.

    Given that as recently as last July, Jackson was still intending to make two films, I think this is the most likely explanation.

    Jackson also kind of lucked out with the source material. The Hobbit kind of has two late-act finales that aren't connected to each other (Smaug, the Battle of Five Armies), so with some deft plotting you could probably stretch those out quite a bit. I get the feeling that film 3 is going to have a long-ish Helm's Deep type battle at the gates of Erebor that'll eat up much of the running time.

    Harry Dresden
  • southwicksouthwick Registered User regular
    Personally, while being fairly disappointed in the Hobbit, I think they can get three films. My issue isn't the 3 films its the 3, 3hr films. I would have been fine if they had cut some of the, I feel, terrible mess out of the first film.
    Then of course none of that would have come from the first 45 minutes for me.
    The first scene I would have just cut is Rhadagast "leading?" the trolls from our heroes. That whole scene is poorly shot, boring, and just doesn't make much sense.
    Also can someone explain to me how Galadriel got magic vanishing powers in that movie?

    I think I will be fine with the film down the road, but it could have been cleaned up to about half an hour shorter and been a better film.

  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Yeah, AUJ is too long and too padded, which makes me morbidly curious about the rumored EE cut, which scuttlebutt says is going to be another 40 minutes longer or so.

    However, anyone who saw PJ's preview of DoS will see where he talks about the second film working a little more like the other LOTR films because you start to get several concurrent storylines going on at once. Which is good, because so much of the pacing issues in AUJ arise from the fact that we almost never leave the company.

  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    I always thought Hobbit was episodic enough that a TV Miniseries would be a better fit. I could see them doing two movies out of it, though.

    3 is a bit much. I want to give Hobbit a second chance, but when I saw it in theaters (first morning showing after staying out too late), I kept wanting to fall asleep.

  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    I don't think The Hobbit has enough cohesion to be a miniseries, unfortunately, mostly for the same reason I just said above: too much focus on just one group of people.

    The reason Jackson is having to invent so much for the films is because the book just isn't that dynamic of a narrative.

  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    Thirith wrote: »
    Heat is the richer, more complex film, and there's something almost operatic about it. I like the leanness of Collateral a lot, though.

    Which reminds me: I still haven't seen Last of the Mohicans, even though it's been on my DVD pile forever... Should finally watch it.

    Last of the Mohicans is a great fucking movie

    sig.png
    GrisloHounKetaremp123JacobkoshDeadfall
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    @Atomic Ross: What would the money men's motivation have been for the Pelennor Fields we got? To me a lot of what I disliked about Return of the King (which I still like as a whole, mind you) came from the excessiveness that can be found in a lot of Jackson's work. King Kong, which very much seemed to have been a labour of love for the man, suffered a lot from this tendency of "Wouldn't it be cool if we made it bigger? And added more of absolutely everything?" Pelennor Fields didn't seem categorically different to me from other moments in the films when Jackson's love of more, more, more outstripped his directorial talent.

    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Jackson felt that the ghost army at Pellinor Fields was too much of a deus ex machina and lacked narrative punch because of their tenuous relationship to the rest of the story. His original plan was taken from the book and would have seen Aragorn in the third film claiming his birthright first not in Gondor, but in the lost kingdoms of the Dunedain with the last remainder of his people. And then all the sons and daughters of Elendil would have rallied to him and joined the battle for Gondor.


    The studio felt that "ghost army" was more visually engaging, and the few scenes with the army were going to be much cheaper to film than all the extra location shooting it would have taken to have Aragorn go back and round up the Numenoreans. Plus, it would have meant more live-action shooting in the finale (with horses!) instead of the easier, cheaper CGI that the Army of the Dead required.

  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited April 2013
    Hobbit becoming two movies I could accept despite it being the perfect length book for one decently long movie.

    Becoming three movies is a shameless cash grab.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • GrisloGrislo Registered User regular
    Thirith wrote: »
    Heat is the richer, more complex film, and there's something almost operatic about it. I like the leanness of Collateral a lot, though.

    Which reminds me: I still haven't seen Last of the Mohicans, even though it's been on my DVD pile forever... Should finally watch it.

    Last of the Mohicans is a great fucking movie

    The last 10 or so minutes is one of the best action scenes / finales ever.

    From
    the major's death to Magua's death, basically (ignoring that there's an actual ending after that). So well done.

    This post was sponsored by LG.

    'Get your fucking finger on the wookie'
    KetarDeadfall
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Hobbit becoming two movies I could accept despite it being the perfect length book for one decently long movie.

    Becoming three movies is a shameless cash grab.

    I disagree with your first statement but not your second.

  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    I'm personally looking forward to the inevitable cut-down fan edit of AUJ.

  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    I'm personally looking forward to the inevitable cut-down fan edit of AUJ.

    I'd probably cut everything with Radagast. I didn't dislike the character wholly, but everything with him is so tonally inconsistent with the rest of the film.

    HoungjaustinZombiemamboshrykeGnome-Interruptus
  • HeraldSHeraldS Registered User regular
    Grislo wrote: »
    Thirith wrote: »
    Heat is the richer, more complex film, and there's something almost operatic about it. I like the leanness of Collateral a lot, though.

    Which reminds me: I still haven't seen Last of the Mohicans, even though it's been on my DVD pile forever... Should finally watch it.

    Last of the Mohicans is a great fucking movie

    The last 10 or so minutes is one of the best action scenes / finales ever.

    From
    the major's death to Magua's death, basically (ignoring that there's an actual ending after that). So well done.
    Totally. I loved it. The major's redemption, the chase, then finally getting to see just how badass the father (Chingachkook?) really was. Magua bit off way more than he could chew.

    Ketar
  • gjaustingjaustin Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    I'm personally looking forward to the inevitable cut-down fan edit of AUJ.

    I'd probably cut everything with Radagast. I didn't dislike the character wholly, but everything with him is so tonally inconsistent with the rest of the film.

    Stupid Rhosgobel rabbits.

    It sounded like something out of a terrible animated children's movie. Though, I suppose The Hobbit WAS originally intended as a children's book.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    southwick wrote: »
    Personally, while being fairly disappointed in the Hobbit, I think they can get three films. My issue isn't the 3 films its the 3, 3hr films. I would have been fine if they had cut some of the, I feel, terrible mess out of the first film.
    Then of course none of that would have come from the first 45 minutes for me.
    The first scene I would have just cut is Rhadagast "leading?" the trolls from our heroes. That whole scene is poorly shot, boring, and just doesn't make much sense.
    Also can someone explain to me how Galadriel got magic vanishing powers in that movie?

    I think I will be fine with the film down the road, but it could have been cleaned up to about half an hour shorter and been a better film.
    Galadriel was astral projecting. She's an extremely powerful telepath.

  • KetarKetar My autocomplete is a tad agressive today.Registered User regular
    Thirith wrote: »
    Heat is the richer, more complex film, and there's something almost operatic about it. I like the leanness of Collateral a lot, though.

    Which reminds me: I still haven't seen Last of the Mohicans, even though it's been on my DVD pile forever... Should finally watch it.

    Make sure to watch it in HD if you can. Dante Spinotti's cinematography is superb, and deserves to be viewed in the best conditions possible.

  • NeliNeli Registered User regular
    So I just saw Jennifers Body and it wasn't very good. I did learn that Megan Fox isn't as terrible of an actress as I thought after watching her in the Transformers movies though

    Though I haven't seen her in anything else so maybe she's just inconsistent

    vhgb4m.jpg
    I have stared into Satan's asshole, and it fucking winked at me.
    [/size]
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    Neli wrote: »
    So I just saw Jennifers Body and it wasn't very good. I did learn that Megan Fox isn't as terrible of an actress as I thought after watching her in the Transformers movies though

    Though I haven't seen her in anything else so maybe she's just inconsistent

    Michael Bay is just that bad a director.

  • DeaderinredDeaderinred Registered User regular
    edited April 2013
    goddamnit. my brother's father in law is getting rid of a ton dvds/bluray from his home theatre setup, like they brought back a huuuuuuuge bag full of discs and have stared sharing them out. classics both new and old, some still wrapped.

    and the fuckers give me the first 3 twilight films on bluray, steelbook limited edition and everything. :|

    shame in my collection. i don't know how this happened.

    i've just been given the rest of this collection and holy shit i now own a fuckton of dvds, a few blurays and some vhs tapes. vhs tapes! obscure shit that isnt even on dvd like Paper Tiger staring david niven and toshiro mifune and a still wrapped chuck norris movie. a originally wrapped vhs box.

    also i can now proudly tell people i own motherfuckin ROADHOUSE on VHS.

    hell yea!

    Deaderinred on
    Capt Howdy
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Neli wrote: »
    So I just saw Jennifers Body and it wasn't very good. I did learn that Megan Fox isn't as terrible of an actress as I thought after watching her in the Transformers movies though

    Though I haven't seen her in anything else so maybe she's just inconsistent

    Michael Bay is just that bad a director.

    Michael Bay is second only to George Lucas in extracting terrible performances from good actors.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    KanaHarry DresdenAtomikashrykeshoeboxjeddyNeli
  • BogartBogart Because I hate you Registered User, Moderator mod
    Just watched A Late Quartet. It's wonderful to see Walken play an ageing, dignified guy with no craziness and no wild eyed scene where he loses it or offs an old lady. Just a kind of wistful dignity that reverberates throughout the movie.

  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    Jennifer's Body is a terrible, terrible movie, and it is so because Diablo Cody is an okay writer with the worst process ever. She deliberately writes like Michael Bay does, or a AAA video game studio, by listing a bunch of big scenes and set-pieces and random ideas, and writing those first, and then going back and trying to connect them into a coherent story. It's why none of her shit has a plot worth a damn, and why I refuse to watch anything else she does.

    ACsTqqK.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika not a robot. does not eat bugs!Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Neli wrote: »
    So I just saw Jennifers Body and it wasn't very good. I did learn that Megan Fox isn't as terrible of an actress as I thought after watching her in the Transformers movies though

    Though I haven't seen her in anything else so maybe she's just inconsistent

    Michael Bay is just that bad a director.

    Michael Bay is second only to George Lucas in extracting terrible performances from good actors.

    I agree, but it's not apples and apples. Lucas manages to get shitty performances because he refuses to give his actors any context or information while sticking them against greenscreens without anything for feedback.

    Bay's performances are almost always cartoonish hyperbolic archetypes. Everyone is the most stereotypical version of that kind of character there can be, turned up to eleven. I bet Michael Bay watches Hot Fuzz and doesn't realize it's making fun of him.

    shrykeDeaderinred
  • LoveIsUnityLoveIsUnity Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    Jennifer's Body is a terrible, terrible movie, and it is so because Diablo Cody is an okay writer with the worst process ever. She deliberately writes like Michael Bay does, or a AAA video game studio, by listing a bunch of big scenes and set-pieces and random ideas, and writing those first, and then going back and trying to connect them into a coherent story. It's why none of her shit has a plot worth a damn, and why I refuse to watch anything else she does.

    I can't help but agree with this, which is a shame because I really dug Juno when I saw it close to the time it released.

    steam_sig.png
  • flamebroiledchickenflamebroiledchicken Registered User regular
    Juno is one of those movies that skates by on charm so you don't really realize how stupid and shitty it is until later.

    y59kydgzuja4.png
    Houn
  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    Cody wrote Young Adult, which I thought was terrific.

  • JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
  • GethGeth Legion Perseus VeilRegistered User, Moderator, Penny Arcade Staff, Vanilla Staff vanilla
    Affirmative Jacobkosh. Closing thread...

This discussion has been closed.