HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Let's talk about movies (and TV shows)... The Sequel!!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2013, 12:19 PM
  #676
Lshap
Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmagic View Post
I don't really care if you're studying film. That doesn't change anything.

As one of Richard Linklater's biggest fans I would suggest that you watch some interviews with him and see that not only were much of the lines improvised, but many scenes/shots themselves were improvised and made up on the spot. It's a style he continues to return to (see Before Sunrise, Sunset, Midnight) ever since Slacker.

And I will stand by my comments about True Romance... I don't believe Quentin Tarantino to be a good writer or filmmaker. Aside from Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, and Inglorious, his films are often hilariously bad.
Before the inevitable storm of poo about your low opinion of Tarantino, let me say that even though I disagree with you, I understand the physics of disliking him. Tarantino screws with conventions. He loves doing it. The more control he has, the more convention-defying screwing around he does. He messes with linear time, his choice of music clashes with the era, he rewrites history, he rewrites film genres, he rewrites conflict into cartoon. This is off-putting to some. It's not the gore (although it could be) and it's not the characters themselves, it's the structure in which they operate. He just can't resist drawing outside the lines, which can be seen as either audaciousness, or showing off.

Tarantino's like a weird architect who builds gorgeous homes with tilted floors. People who love him - like me - say, "Isn't it cool to be standing sideways!", while others don't appreciate him messing with gravity. Basically, Tarantino disturbs people's equilibrium.

For me, Pulp Fiction remains his best film, and an archetype for modern filmmakers. Also love Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, along with much (but not all) of Inglorious Basterds and Django. Reservoir Dogs was good, but lacked the cleverness of his later films.

Lshap is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:23 PM
  #677
overlords
youmyboyblou!
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceDaddy View Post
try the newsroom, its really good. Or his best work IMO is the west wing, my all time favorite show...
Newsroom is a guilty pleasure of mine, which is the only reason I gave sports night a chance. My girlfriend really wants me to get into west wing, thinking about giving it a shot.

overlords is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:43 PM
  #678
ZARTONK
Headscratcher!
 
ZARTONK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Armenia
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Newsroom is a guilty pleasure of mine, which is the only reason I gave sports night a chance. My girlfriend really wants me to get into west wing, thinking about giving it a shot.
The West Wing is really good, the last season wasn't too good if you ask me, I don't want to spoil it, but a character does something and I just don't believe that that character would have done that, it kind of ruined it for me, not to mention that almost all the characters started to annoy me towards the end. But the show is really good, and you should watch it.

If you're into political shows I highly recommend House of Cards with Kevin Spacey. While the West Wing is a very idealistic and romanticized version of politics, House of Cards is the dark and dirty side of American politics, the blackmailing and backstabbing part of politics, I loved it.

ZARTONK is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:45 PM
  #679
overlords
youmyboyblou!
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZARTONK View Post
The West Wing is really good, the last season wasn't too good if you ask me, I don't want to spoil it, but a character does something and I just don't believe that that character would have done that, it kind of ruined it for me, not to mention that almost all the characters started to annoy me towards the end. But the show is really good, and you should watch it.

If you're into political shows I highly recommend House of Cards with Kevin Spacey. While the West Wing is a very idealistic and romanticized version of politics, House of Cards is the dark and dirty side of American politics, the blackmailing and backstabbing part of politics, I loved it.
Yeah, I've watched house of cards already. Very good show. Can't wait for season 2.

overlords is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:47 PM
  #680
mitchmagic
Registered User
 
mitchmagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Iceland
Posts: 2,143
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to mitchmagic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
Before the inevitable storm of poo about your low opinion of Tarantino, let me say that even though I disagree with you, I understand the physics of disliking him. Tarantino screws with conventions. He loves doing it. The more control he has, the more convention-defying screwing around he does. He messes with linear time, his choice of music clashes with the era, he rewrites history, he rewrites film genres, he rewrites conflict into cartoon. This is off-putting to some. It's not the gore (although it could be) and it's not the characters themselves, it's the structure in which they operate. He just can't resist drawing outside the lines, which can be seen as either audaciousness, or showing off.

Tarantino's like a weird architect who builds gorgeous homes with tilted floors. People who love him - like me - say, "Isn't it cool to be standing sideways!", while others don't appreciate him messing with gravity. Basically, Tarantino disturbs people's equilibrium.

For me, Pulp Fiction remains his best film, and an archetype for modern filmmakers. Also love Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, along with much (but not all) of Inglorious Basterds and Django. Reservoir Dogs was good, but lacked the cleverness of his later films.
You see, I don't see him as the visionary convention-defying filmmaker people make him out to be. Why? Because he's not. His films aren't doing anything new or spectacular. Non-linearity in cinema is nothing new. He's not messing with anything. He appropriating images from the past and not saying anything new about them. Tarantino still manages to rip shots directly from other films in the guise of homage which is another word for cliché (not actually don't tell me about their meanings in French. I know).

People say that Tarantino has evolved from his Pulp Fiction days. But the only way he's evolved is that now instead of doing mashups of other people's cinema, he's doing mashups of his own cinema.

Tarantino's one strength is his dialogue. When he does it right, it's fantastic. But it often becomes self-indulgent beyond repair (see Django Unchained.) I think it works the best Inglorious Basterds through his use of language to create unbearable tension.

Pulp Fiction is a good film because it's a mastery of editing. And that is due to Sally Menke more so than Quentin Tarantino.


Last edited by mitchmagic: 10-23-2013 at 12:55 PM.
mitchmagic is online now  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:51 PM
  #681
sventington
Registered User
 
sventington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,002
vCash: 500
Seasons 1 and 3 of Deadwood were great. I would have loved to see where they took the show had it not been cancelled. Rome also sounds like it would have been amazing. Season 1 was, but when they found out it wouldn't be renewed, they crammed a huge amount of years into season 2 and it just ruined the pace. The deaths of Antony and Cleopatra were still pretty powerful though.

EDIT: Django Unchained was almost a good movie. The ending ruined it. Dicaprio was pretty good nonetheless.

That said, I can't say I am a big Tarantino fan. He ruins interesting ideas.

sventington is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:52 PM
  #682
ZARTONK
Headscratcher!
 
ZARTONK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Armenia
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sventington View Post
Seasons 1 and 3 of Deadwood were great. I would have loved to see where they took the show had it not been cancelled. Rome also sounds like it would have been amazing. Season 1 was, but when they found out it wouldn't be renewed, they crammed a huge amount of years into season 2 and it just ruined the pace. The deaths of Antony and Cleopatra were still pretty powerful though.
I just found Vikings, it's pretty much the same concept as Rome but for Vikings. It's actually pretty good.

ZARTONK is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:56 PM
  #683
sventington
Registered User
 
sventington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZARTONK View Post
I just found Vikings, it's pretty much the same concept as Rome but for Vikings. It's actually pretty good.
I watched that! I then went a wiki'ing and it turns out Ragnar Lothbrook was a real person. In reading the article I fear I ruined the general mystery of what will happen next, though.

sventington is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 12:57 PM
  #684
Redux91
I do Three bullets.
 
Redux91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Montreal West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,755
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Redux91 Send a message via MSN to Redux91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
Before the inevitable storm of poo about your low opinion of Tarantino, let me say that even though I disagree with you, I understand the physics of disliking him. Tarantino screws with conventions. He loves doing it. The more control he has, the more convention-defying screwing around he does. He messes with linear time, his choice of music clashes with the era, he rewrites history, he rewrites film genres, he rewrites conflict into cartoon. This is off-putting to some. It's not the gore (although it could be) and it's not the characters themselves, it's the structure in which they operate. He just can't resist drawing outside the lines, which can be seen as either audaciousness, or showing off.

Tarantino's like a weird architect who builds gorgeous homes with tilted floors. People who love him - like me - say, "Isn't it cool to be standing sideways!", while others don't appreciate him messing with gravity. Basically, Tarantino disturbs people's equilibrium.

For me, Pulp Fiction remains his best film, and an archetype for modern filmmakers. Also love Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, along with much (but not all) of Inglorious Basterds and Django. Reservoir Dogs was good, but lacked the cleverness of his later films.
Some of my favorite things about him , easily one of my favorites because he directs his own writing which not enough do

in order my favs have to be :

-Pulp Fiction (best writting and diologue for a film ive EVER seen, unmatched)
-Inglorious Basterds (everything about it was just so cool and fun)
-Django Unchained (what a pleasant surprise it turned out to be, i was skeptical)
-Reservoir Dogs (love everything about it, except wish we could of SEEN the robbery, but he didnt have enough money lol)
-Kill Bill Vol. 2 (i dont know, i just seem to love the 2nd one more, Bill is just such a cool guy i loved all of his scenes, especially the ending)
-Kill Bill Vol. 1 (its interrestingly good lol)
-Jackie Brown (unusual but still good)
-DeathProof (easily his worse, but god damn that car chase at the end was bad ASS)

Redux91 is online now  
Old
10-23-2013, 01:01 PM
  #685
overlords
youmyboyblou!
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sventington View Post
I watched that! I then went a wiki'ing and it turns out Ragnar Lothbrook was a real person. In reading the article I fear I ruined the general mystery of what will happen next, though.
He might have been a real person at some point in time, but much of his legend seems to be pretty much only that.

Great series, though. Really enjoy it.

overlords is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:06 PM
  #686
MasterDecoy
Lo Pan's lovechild
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 14,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Newsroom is a guilty pleasure of mine, which is the only reason I gave sports night a chance. My girlfriend really wants me to get into west wing, thinking about giving it a shot.
west wing is ****ing great. definitely in my top 3

MasterDecoy is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:19 PM
  #687
Avengers*
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
vCash: 500
Anyone watching Homeland Season 3?

They need to get rid of dena and bring back brody for more than 1 episode...

Avengers* is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:23 PM
  #688
68*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avengers View Post
Anyone watching Homeland Season 3?

They need to get rid of dena and bring back brody for more than 1 episode...
Yeah she's starting to get on my nerves.

68* is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:24 PM
  #689
ZARTONK
Headscratcher!
 
ZARTONK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Armenia
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avengers View Post
Anyone watching Homeland Season 3?

They need to get rid of dena and bring back brody for more than 1 episode...
I started watching Homeland, couldn't stay on it, didn't do it for me.

ZARTONK is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:30 PM
  #690
Lshap
Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmagic View Post
You see, I don't see him as the visionary convention-defying filmmaker people make him out to be. Why? Because he's not. His films aren't doing anything new or spectacular. Non-linearity in cinema is nothing new. He's not messing with anything. He appropriating images from the past and not saying anything new about them. Tarantino still manages to rip shots directly from other films in the guise of homage which is another word for cliché (not actually don't tell me about their meanings in French. I know).

People say that Tarantino has evolved from his Pulp Fiction days. But the only way he's evolved is that now instead of doing mashups of other people's cinema, he's doing mashups of his own cinema.

Tarantino's one strength is his dialogue. When he does it right, it's fantastic. But it often becomes self-indulgent beyond repair (see Django Unchained.) I think it works the best Inglorious Basterds through his use of language to create unbearable tension.

Pulp Fiction is a good film because it's a mastery of editing. And that is due to Sally Menke more so than Quentin Tarantino.
It's fair to say that, like him or not, Tarantino directs his films with a very bold signature. He may 'homage' everything in sight, but the end product comes out looking distinctly his. You always know you're watching a Tarantino film. Is it "New or spectacular"? No, but I don't think those adjectives are possible for anyone to achieve anymore. If you want to get philosophical, all new art in film, music, painting and literature is a mash-up of what's come before. The only question is whether you like the reference material. I'm not a fanboy of any of Tarantino's pet sources, but I love how he throws elements into a blender and produces a new taste out of old ingredients. You say he's not evolving? Disagree. Watch the opening scene of Inglorious Basterds, with Christopher Walz checking the farmer's house for Jews. The camerawork, dialogue and editing created a level of suspense right up there with the best of Hitchcock. Same with the scene near the end at the screening, with Pitt's hilarious Italian overlaying the tension. That's a mature filmmaker at work, able to deliver straightforward drama right before pulling the rug out from under you and ripping the joint with machine guns.

Yeah, a lot of the quality comes back to Tarantino's amazing ear for dialogue, but without his director's eye to enhance it, the scene would look flat.

Lshap is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:34 PM
  #691
Lshap
Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avengers View Post
Anyone watching Homeland Season 3?

They need to get rid of dena and bring back brody for more than 1 episode...
Agreed. I have faith the subplots will tie together, but right now it's lost the edge that made it great at the beginning -- the sense that something huge is building. For the moment, the characters have become static.

Lshap is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 02:58 PM
  #692
mitchmagic
Registered User
 
mitchmagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Iceland
Posts: 2,143
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to mitchmagic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
If you want to get philosophical, all new art in film, music, painting and literature is a mash-up of what's come before. The only question is whether you like the reference material.
That is always in reference to plot. New images, new styles, and new ways of seeing are always coming about. A modern filmmaker who continues to give the audience something new and fresh is Terrence Malick. The Tree of Life is one of the most stunning pieces of cinema in the last 20 years. Filmmakers like Wong Kar Wai, Michael Haneke, Harmony Korine, and Werner Herzog create a strong case against "the nothing is new" theory. They also leave Tarantino in their dust if we're going to talk about non-linear and unconventional filmmaking. Tarantino is as conventional as can be. He's pandering to the audience at this point while still being able to bask in his own self-indulgence. There is a difference too between inspiration and downright plagiarism.

Tarantino's work borders on cliché. It's just not good filmmaking, with a few exceptions. Django Unchained was nearly unwatchable because he just referenced his own films rather than referencing any other cinema. At least with films such as Kill Bill he's reaching out of his own repertoire.

The problem too lies that the substance of his films are purely superficial. The substance starts and ends with his smart references and snappy dialogue. There is not much else to his films aside from that. Which is a problem. If we are to create something truly unique and new, a filmmaker must move past the superficial. Someone like Harmony Korine uses images of the superficial in Spring Breakers to present interesting ideas about that superficiality that he's showing. The same can't be said for Tarantino.

Also, Jackie Brown might be his best film only because it's based on a source material that he didn't create.

That being said, his films can, at times, be good fun. Which is why I enjoy Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Basterds. But, to me, his repertoire is spectacularly weak.

mitchmagic is online now  
Old
10-23-2013, 03:27 PM
  #693
gunnerdom
Go HABS Go!!!!
 
gunnerdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,736
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to gunnerdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmagic View Post
That is always in reference to plot. New images, new styles, and new ways of seeing are always coming about. A modern filmmaker who continues to give the audience something new and fresh is Terrence Malick. The Tree of Life is one of the most stunning pieces of cinema in the last 20 years. Filmmakers like Wong Kar Wai, Michael Haneke, Harmony Korine, and Werner Herzog create a strong case against "the nothing is new" theory. They also leave Tarantino in their dust if we're going to talk about non-linear and unconventional filmmaking. Tarantino is as conventional as can be. He's pandering to the audience at this point while still being able to bask in his own self-indulgence. There is a difference too between inspiration and downright plagiarism.

Tarantino's work borders on cliché. It's just not good filmmaking, with a few exceptions. Django Unchained was nearly unwatchable because he just referenced his own films rather than referencing any other cinema. At least with films such as Kill Bill he's reaching out of his own repertoire.
Maybe as a piece of art, The Tree of Life is something special but it was one of the most boring thing I had ever seen. You couldn't pay me to watch that movie again. So maybe it's awesome for some artsy reason, but as entertainement, I thought it was horrible. At least I'm always entertained with Tarantino. He always has some of the best dialogue for sure.

I do have a soft spot for british hitman/gangster/bank robery movies so I love In Bruges, Layer Cakes, Gangster Number 1, Lock Stock, Snatch, Rock N Rolla, etc.

My taste might not be the best reference point because my favourite movies are usually Horror/Suspence.

gunnerdom is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 04:26 PM
  #694
Lshap
Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmagic View Post
That is always in reference to plot. New images, new styles, and new ways of seeing are always coming about. A modern filmmaker who continues to give the audience something new and fresh is Terrence Malick. The Tree of Life is one of the most stunning pieces of cinema in the last 20 years. Filmmakers like Wong Kar Wai, Michael Haneke, Harmony Korine, and Werner Herzog create a strong case against "the nothing is new" theory. They also leave Tarantino in their dust if we're going to talk about non-linear and unconventional filmmaking. Tarantino is as conventional as can be. He's pandering to the audience at this point while still being able to bask in his own self-indulgence. There is a difference too between inspiration and downright plagiarism.
I haven't seen any of Wong Kar Wai, Michael Haneke or Harmony Korine, but I love most of Terrence Malick's films. The Thin Red Line and The New World are both fantastic, stunning to watch with deeply layered meaning. Tree Of Life... well... I admired the ambition but I found the over-reaching theme stretched too thinly. It had Malick's usual gorgeous cinematography, but overlaid onto a hazy story that tried way too hard. I remember Brad Pitt being very good, but little else. Was it original? Yes, I'll give Malick credit for really pushing the envelope of how far a story can stretch. But I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as his previous films. Originality doesn't trump cohesion.

But that's subjective personal opinion. Objectively, I'm curious what you think makes Malick 'new'. I'll say he's much more meticulous with his visuals and gets more out of natural settings than practically anyone, but is that 'new'? Malick is very much a taste for adults, while Tarantino aims for fanboys, but that's a choice of style, not a measure of originality.

Lshap is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 04:40 PM
  #695
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmagic View Post
That is always in reference to plot. New images, new styles, and new ways of seeing are always coming about. A modern filmmaker who continues to give the audience something new and fresh is Terrence Malick. The Tree of Life is one of the most stunning pieces of cinema in the last 20 years. Filmmakers like Wong Kar Wai, Michael Haneke, Harmony Korine, and Werner Herzog create a strong case against "the nothing is new" theory. They also leave Tarantino in their dust if we're going to talk about non-linear and unconventional filmmaking. Tarantino is as conventional as can be. He's pandering to the audience at this point while still being able to bask in his own self-indulgence. There is a difference too between inspiration and downright plagiarism.

Tarantino's work borders on cliché. It's just not good filmmaking, with a few exceptions. Django Unchained was nearly unwatchable because he just referenced his own films rather than referencing any other cinema. At least with films such as Kill Bill he's reaching out of his own repertoire.

The problem too lies that the substance of his films are purely superficial. The substance starts and ends with his smart references and snappy dialogue. There is not much else to his films aside from that. Which is a problem. If we are to create something truly unique and new, a filmmaker must move past the superficial. Someone like Harmony Korine uses images of the superficial in Spring Breakers to present interesting ideas about that superficiality that he's showing. The same can't be said for Tarantino.

Also, Jackie Brown might be his best film only because it's based on a source material that he didn't create.

That being said, his films can, at times, be good fun. Which is why I enjoy Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Basterds. But, to me, his repertoire is spectacularly weak.
I partially agree with you, partially with LShap as both of you make valid points. IMO there are few Directors who do make a difference and "invent" (which is probably debatable since their creations come from inspiration, much like how Pulp Fiction was created) like Kubrick's long moving shot, Peckinpah slow motion/editing job he did in his action scenes, Altman's use of diferent layers of voices etc..

But am actually curious to your list and how they are revolutionizing cinema like some i mentioned? (i saw both Piano Teacher and White Ribbon in theaters when they were released and some other movies from the others you listed; i had to look it up since my knowledge of them is fairly limited, though i am familiar with some of the works)

uiCk is online now  
Old
10-23-2013, 04:49 PM
  #696
dackelljuneaubulis02
Registered User
 
dackelljuneaubulis02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hototogisu View Post
Well to be fair, the English title for Tarkovsky's Solaris is also Solaris

But yes, it's excellent. If anyone likes 2001: A Space Odyssey and wanted to check out something in a similar vein, go for that one.
Solaris is tops! One of the few works of art that had my mind being blown to bits while also having me in tears. Simultaneously. Tarkovsky's a genius. I need to see more of his movies. Andrei Rublev is pretty much a Bergman film but with the Bergman multiplied by a thousand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZARTONK View Post
The West Wing is really good, the last season wasn't too good if you ask me, I don't want to spoil it, but a character does something and I just don't believe that that character would have done that, it kind of ruined it for me, not to mention that almost all the characters started to annoy me towards the end. But the show is really good, and you should watch it.

If you're into political shows I highly recommend House of Cards with Kevin Spacey. While the West Wing is a very idealistic and romanticized version of politics, House of Cards is the dark and dirty side of American politics, the blackmailing and backstabbing part of politics, I loved it.
It's a pretty amazing feat that Sorkin made a show about the government that pretty much treated it's subject with almost next to nothing critical faculties and still made a good show. Seems to be the same with Newsroom.

Two of the biggest crooks going and he makes them and all the people involved in them to be altruist do gooders with first rate wits, hahaha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sventington View Post
Seasons 1 and 3 of Deadwood were great. I would have loved to see where they took the show had it not been cancelled. Rome also sounds like it would have been amazing. Season 1 was, but when they found out it wouldn't be renewed, they crammed a huge amount of years into season 2 and it just ruined the pace. The deaths of Antony and Cleopatra were still pretty powerful though.

EDIT: Django Unchained was almost a good movie. The ending ruined it. Dicaprio was pretty good nonetheless.

That said, I can't say I am a big Tarantino fan. He ruins interesting ideas.
This is the exact thing I thought about Django.

SPOILER: After Waltz and Dicaprio die the movie starts to drag. I like ******** better.

dackelljuneaubulis02 is offline  
Old
10-23-2013, 11:34 PM
  #697
WhiskeySeven
BargainUnbinned
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 20,429
vCash: 300
Hello Ladies is painful, awkward, embarrassing, goofy and infuriating. I just watched the fist four episodes.

It's not haute-television but it's pretty fun.

WhiskeySeven is online now  
Old
10-24-2013, 12:44 AM
  #698
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
If you like good writing I'd highly recommend a rewatch of True Romance, The Insider and especially The Departed. My favourite movie, Dazed and Confused has my favourite writing ever however.
I just watched True Romance, so tell me again why the writing is so good. It just felt like a road trip movie involving incompetent criminals doing implausible things.

The scene with Walken and Hopper is good. So many movies would be so much better if they just HAD MORE WALKEN.

Agnostic is offline  
Old
10-24-2013, 12:55 AM
  #699
WhiskeySeven
BargainUnbinned
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 20,429
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
I just watched True Romance, so tell me again why the writing is so good. It just felt like a road trip movie involving incompetent criminals doing implausible things.

The scene with Walken and Hopper is good. So many movies would be so much better if they just HAD MORE WALKEN.
It's all about the style of it, the panache and the stylized nature of the whole thing. It's not a drama, yknow. The soundtrack is great, the unlikely love story, the Elvis played by Val Kilmer, James Gandolfini as a brutal hitman, Walken and Hopper... GARY OLDMAN AS A RASTA PIMP.

It's a "style over substance" kinda movie, it took these unlikely protagonists and put them in way over their heads and it all goes to crap for them... but it still kinda works and is fun to see it all unfold.

If you're looking for "serious" fodder I can help ya out too...

WhiskeySeven is online now  
Old
10-24-2013, 03:00 AM
  #700
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,411
vCash: 500
tonights movie for me was Amelie.

I can't say enough good things about that movie. So fresh and unique. At the end I felt the same way I did with Juno. Like nothing I'd ever seen before, leaves you with a good feeling at the end, in total awe of the art within the movie.

Agnostic is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.