Author Topic: Solo does the movies, PD farts in his general direction with his appalling taste  (Read 53643 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #300 on: March 01, 2007, 04:31:47 AM »
Beginning = slow? If anything, Brazil races into the story at top speed, dude. There's hardly any exposition in those first twenty minutes. >:(

I said it's a BIT slow. Mainly the parts with Lowry and Bilbo trying to figure out the Tuttle/Buttle mystery.

Anway I watched Raiders of the Lost Arc today. OMG still amazing, still classic. This is the perfect adventure movie. The pacing is great, and it still makes me laugh so many years after my first viewing of it.

10/10  :bow
010

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #301 on: March 02, 2007, 08:10:22 AM »
The Prestige (Nolan, 2006) - 8.5/10

What a difference a second viewing can make. I saw the film theatrically back in October, and came away feeling disappointed. Be it due to my own anticipation, or the hype surrounding the film, for whatever reason, what I saw did not live up to my expectations. As such, I pretty much chose to forget about the movie, and it dropped off my radar. Well, on a whim, I decided to give it another go on DVD. With all the pre-conceptions and hype garbage long in the past, I just sat down and took in the film on its own merits. And it totally blew me away this time. Actually knowing the twists beforehand made me appreciate the film much more, as you could see the rather generous hints constantly being dropped, and just how well Nolan handled the material in this meticulously crafted film. Pretty much everything about this movie works wonderfully, and the film is a magic trick in itself. The writing is engaging, the cinematography is ace, Nolan's direction is in top form, and the acting is fantastic across the board. Most noticeably incredible is the pacing, which is almost perfect. At 130 minutes, it feels like a 90 minute film. Nolan's take on the material is very brisk and never boring. I originally commented that I felt this was one of Nolan's weaker efforts. After a second viewing, watched with an open mind, I'm ready to put it near the front, if not at the very top. An excellent and sadly over-looked piece of film-making. Highly recommended.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #302 on: March 02, 2007, 12:26:16 PM »
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring SE (Jackson, 2002)


There aren't many franchises that elicit schoolgirl screams from me. While I absolutely love the original Star Wars movies, I was never a huge Star Wars freak. Instead I'm a Rings fanbody at heart. From the first time I read the books I was hooked, and after that I immediately craved a movie adaption. I really liked the Lord of the Rings cartoon, which perhaps gives you a hint at my state of mind with respect to the franchise. When the movies came out me and my friends made it a ritual to skip the last day of school - after having other people turn in our finals papers of course - and see the movies. The day after seeing The Two Towers on opening day we bailed out of a school awards ceremony to see it again; later I found out I had won a couple school awards, and I can only imagine the look on the teaching staff's face when they realized I was nowhere to be seen.

So obviously the movies are...precious to me. Yet despite my mania I wasn't quick to get the SE versions of the movies. I had seen the TC in the theater so many times that I sort of put off getting the DVDs, feeling that I could wait a few more months until the price went down. Well, more than a few years passed, yet yesterday I finally made my way down to Barnes and Noble and picked up the SE for Fellowship of the Ring.

As I said earlier, I have seen the TC many times, so it was very easy for me to notice even the slightest musical changes in this version. And after watching this it's not surprising why so many diehard Tolkien fans love the SE. While the TC was as faithful as possible to the book, the SE is even better. From the very beginning the faithfullness is evident. After the story recap Jackson places a perfect adaption of "Concerning Hobbits" ahead of where the TC begins (with Frodo greeting Gandalf). Perhaps my favorite aspect of the movies is how brilliantly Jackson captured the essense of the book - from the environments to the music to the costumes. The "Concerning Hobbits" puts all of this on display as the Shire is put on display. With so little effort Jackson shows daily Hobbit life, from the tilling to the eating.

After this scene the TC parts become more evident, yet for the most part everything comes together perfectly. Yet it is the small things that most make an impression. For instance, the SE quickly establishes the Sackville-Baggins and their interest in Bilbo's house. Another short but effective scene happens in the bar, during which the Old Gaffer is actually seen - along with Sam, Frodo, and possibly Sandyman - gossiping. These little details brought a smile to my face and made me appreciate even more the fact that Jackson, a true fan at heart, made the movie.

And of course there are some even bigger additions that make more of an impact. These parts really seem to shine once the Hobbits reach Rivendell. Some of the changes seem casual, yet they are very insightful - such as Aragorn's visit to his mother's grave. Then there's a scene where Gandalf speaks the language of Mordor to repell Boromir from touching the ring - I need to see that again, because at the time it didn't make much sense. Once it was explained I got it more.

Yet easily the best addition comes during the Fellowship's journey into Moria. While I always felt the Moria scenes were great, the SE makes them brilliant. The added dialogue is insightful, and the extra footage makes the battle scenes much, much better. The SE is worth it for the troll battle alone imo.

Some of the additional scenes in Lothlorien seem rather flat though, especially the ones where Aragorn is convincing the elves to let the Fellowship into the city. And of course, this part also includes my least favorite scene in the entire trilogy: Galadriel's green rant about the ring. I hate that part because it just looks so tacky, and could have been done much better. But despite that there are some great scenes here, such as Gimli's change of heart with respect to the "Lady of the Wood". I also like the fact that here you finally get a sense that Legalos is not just some badass archer, but an elven prince.

Overall I found the SE to be great. While there are some flat scenes, for the most part it does a great job adding material to an already great film. The only complaint I have is about the sound mixing. During many scenes the music is just too loud compared to the dialogue, and it gets hard to hear what is being said; this is especially evident in Moria. And while the over use of overhead camera shots have been ragged on by some, I felt that they served an important purpose with respect to showing just how beautiful the environments were, and how perfectly suited NZ was in brining Middle Earth to life. Yeah I suppose different shots could have done this, but I'm not going to knock this since it's obviously Jackson's "thing". But then again, some of the slow motion shots he likes to use in his movies are rather annoying, especially in Kong.

Yet those technical flaws are not nearly enough to harm this perfect adaption of a fantasy masterpiece.

10/10
010

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #303 on: March 02, 2007, 12:41:27 PM »
 :lol
PSP

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #304 on: March 02, 2007, 12:42:42 PM »
 :-\
010

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #305 on: March 02, 2007, 12:44:20 PM »
I'm sorry, I just can't take any long-winded review for Lord of the Rings by a geek on the Internet ending with TEN-out-of-TEN at face value.
PSP

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #306 on: March 02, 2007, 12:46:07 PM »
I feel you. As I said in the first paragraph, I'm a straight up Lord of the Rings fanboy, and unapologetic about it. My opinion is far from fair and balanced lol

 :-\
010

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #307 on: March 02, 2007, 12:55:14 PM »
The Prestige (Nolan, 2006) - 8.5/10

What a difference a second viewing can make. I saw the film theatrically back in October, and came away feeling disappointed. Be it due to my own anticipation, or the hype surrounding the film, for whatever reason, what I saw did not live up to my expectations. As such, I pretty much chose to forget about the movie, and it dropped off my radar. Well, on a whim, I decided to give it another go on DVD. With all the pre-conceptions and hype garbage long in the past, I just sat down and took in the film on its own merits. And it totally blew me away this time. Actually knowing the twists beforehand made me appreciate the film much more, as you could see the rather generous hints constantly being dropped, and just how well Nolan handled the material in this meticulously crafted film. Pretty much everything about this movie works wonderfully, and the film is a magic trick in itself. The writing is engaging, the cinematography is ace, Nolan's direction is in top form, and the acting is fantastic across the board. Most noticeably incredible is the pacing, which is almost perfect. At 130 minutes, it feels like a 90 minute film. Nolan's take on the material is very brisk and never boring. I originally commented that I felt this was one of Nolan's weaker efforts. After a second viewing, watched with an open mind, I'm ready to put it near the front, if not at the very top. An excellent and sadly over-looked piece of film-making. Highly recommended.

 :bow 

I can't remember if I've said this here before, but my only major gripe is with the last 10 minutes or so, where everything is laid out and really pounded down your throat.  I also thought it was interesting that earlier on Bale mentions to never give away your secrets-- if you do they'll forget you and so on, and here we have the ending of this otherwise great film exposing what I percieved to be too much detail. 

I should note that I think this was done to drive home the "dedication" theme, so that Bale's and Jackman's characters could further explain themselves, which does work quite nicely. 
obo

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #308 on: March 02, 2007, 12:56:25 PM »
What is with The Prestige hate, by the way?  By all accounts, even its detractors say it's not a bad movie.
PSP

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #309 on: March 02, 2007, 12:58:27 PM »
What is with The Prestige hate, by the way?  By all accounts, even its detractors say it's not a bad movie.

Some stuff in it is far-fetched to the point of ridiculousness, even when we're talking about "magic."  It literally becomes sci-fi at a certain point.  That's the only major thing I've heard from people who really didn't like it.
obo

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #310 on: March 02, 2007, 01:14:18 PM »
It wasn't meant to be a historically accurate period piece.  The moment anyone saw trailers of David Bowie trotting around as Tesla with some kind of electricity farm, they should've known that.
PSP

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #311 on: March 02, 2007, 01:24:37 PM »
The rest of it could work perfectly as a period peice.  It takes a very deliberate turn about two thirds in and the manner in which all of it is introduced is pretty outrageous.  All of the "magic" up to that point consists of little tricks and gadgetry grounded in reality.

That said, although I understand the complaint, I don't agree with it at all.  The source material works the same way and the trailers made it pretty clear that it wasn't just a behind-the-scenes movie about magicians, like you said.
obo

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #312 on: March 02, 2007, 01:25:13 PM »
I believe shake has bashed it somewhat, I don't remember why though. I don't think he saw it.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment

  • Can he only eat just one?
  • The Walking Dead
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #313 on: March 02, 2007, 02:23:00 PM »
I believe shake has bashed it somewhat, I don't remember why though. I don't think he saw it.

a. Wrong

b. Right
BKO

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #314 on: March 02, 2007, 02:45:08 PM »
The Prestige (Nolan, 2006) - 8.5/10

What a difference a second viewing can make. I saw the film theatrically back in October, and came away feeling disappointed. Be it due to my own anticipation, or the hype surrounding the film, for whatever reason, what I saw did not live up to my expectations. As such, I pretty much chose to forget about the movie, and it dropped off my radar. Well, on a whim, I decided to give it another go on DVD. With all the pre-conceptions and hype garbage long in the past, I just sat down and took in the film on its own merits. And it totally blew me away this time. Actually knowing the twists beforehand made me appreciate the film much more, as you could see the rather generous hints constantly being dropped, and just how well Nolan handled the material in this meticulously crafted film. Pretty much everything about this movie works wonderfully, and the film is a magic trick in itself. The writing is engaging, the cinematography is ace, Nolan's direction is in top form, and the acting is fantastic across the board. Most noticeably incredible is the pacing, which is almost perfect. At 130 minutes, it feels like a 90 minute film. Nolan's take on the material is very brisk and never boring. I originally commented that I felt this was one of Nolan's weaker efforts. After a second viewing, watched with an open mind, I'm ready to put it near the front, if not at the very top. An excellent and sadly over-looked piece of film-making. Highly recommended.

 :bow 

I can't remember if I've said this here before, but my only major gripe is with the last 10 minutes or so, where everything is laid out and really pounded down your throat.  I also thought it was interesting that earlier on Bale mentions to never give away your secrets-- if you do they'll forget you and so on, and here we have the ending of this otherwise great film exposing what I percieved to be too much detail. 

I should note that I think this was done to drive home the "dedication" theme, so that Bale's and Jackman's characters could further explain themselves, which does work quite nicely. 

Indeed. In the end I think its a toss up as to who was more dedicated. I mean,
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Angier killed himself 100 times, while Borden led a double life for years
[close]
. Anyways, I was rooting for Borden the whole time. I liked his character more, and I love Christian Bale's performance.

But yeah, I really loved this on the second viewing, and its definately the type of film I think my appreciation will grow for.

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #315 on: March 02, 2007, 03:01:06 PM »
The Prestige (Nolan, 2006) - 8.5/10

What a difference a second viewing can make. I saw the film theatrically back in October, and came away feeling disappointed. Be it due to my own anticipation, or the hype surrounding the film, for whatever reason, what I saw did not live up to my expectations. As such, I pretty much chose to forget about the movie, and it dropped off my radar. Well, on a whim, I decided to give it another go on DVD. With all the pre-conceptions and hype garbage long in the past, I just sat down and took in the film on its own merits. And it totally blew me away this time. Actually knowing the twists beforehand made me appreciate the film much more, as you could see the rather generous hints constantly being dropped, and just how well Nolan handled the material in this meticulously crafted film. Pretty much everything about this movie works wonderfully, and the film is a magic trick in itself. The writing is engaging, the cinematography is ace, Nolan's direction is in top form, and the acting is fantastic across the board. Most noticeably incredible is the pacing, which is almost perfect. At 130 minutes, it feels like a 90 minute film. Nolan's take on the material is very brisk and never boring. I originally commented that I felt this was one of Nolan's weaker efforts. After a second viewing, watched with an open mind, I'm ready to put it near the front, if not at the very top. An excellent and sadly over-looked piece of film-making. Highly recommended.

 :bow 

I can't remember if I've said this here before, but my only major gripe is with the last 10 minutes or so, where everything is laid out and really pounded down your throat.  I also thought it was interesting that earlier on Bale mentions to never give away your secrets-- if you do they'll forget you and so on, and here we have the ending of this otherwise great film exposing what I percieved to be too much detail. 

I should note that I think this was done to drive home the "dedication" theme, so that Bale's and Jackman's characters could further explain themselves, which does work quite nicely. 

Indeed. In the end I think its a toss up as to who was more dedicated. I mean,
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Angier killed himself 100 times, while Borden led a double life for years
[close]
. Anyways, I was rooting for Borden the whole time. I liked his character more, and I love Christian Bale's performance.

But yeah, I really loved this on the second viewing, and its definately the type of film I think my appreciation will grow for.

I don't think it's a toss up when you consider...

spoiler (click to show/hide)
that even with the knowledge that Angier could be exposed and he could possibly be freed, Fallon sacrificed his (one and only) life only to decieve Angier and allow Borden to kill him and get his child back.

Also, while it took balls for Angier to fall in that tank every night, he ultimately sacrificed nothing.  Borden and Fallon ruined each others lives to stay in character.
[close]
« Last Edit: March 02, 2007, 03:07:16 PM by RoboJ »
obo

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #316 on: March 02, 2007, 03:13:48 PM »
You got Fallon and Borden backwards, I think. Gets a bit confusing after a while, lol.

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #317 on: March 02, 2007, 03:27:52 PM »
spoiler (click to show/hide)
I just noticed the Wikipedia article mentions that Fallon is the one that saw Angier fall in the tank, but it says that Borden is the one who is hanged.  Then it goes on to say that Borden is the one that kills Angier.  Does it ever make it clear who is really Fallon and who is Borden?  I'll have to watch it again.
[close]
obo

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #318 on: March 02, 2007, 03:33:00 PM »
Im pretty sure
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Borden
[close]
dies.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #319 on: March 02, 2007, 11:20:44 PM »
I always felt it was
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Fallon. Borden being with his child just makes more sense in a happy ending sort of way.
[close]

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #320 on: March 03, 2007, 02:22:12 AM »
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

WHAT THE HELL

I don't rememeber seeing 70% of this movie. I know I saw it as a kid, but clearly I must have forgotten most of it. I knew going in that it would be pretty over the top, but what I did not expect was the demon seed of Hook and Return of the Jedi :lol

First off: the movie is not horrible. I suppose I can forgive it for being a big dumb adventure movie. If Raiders is the blueprint for all good adventure movies, Temple of Doom is clearly the blueprint for all bad adventure movies; yet as the blueprint it finds a way to be better than the cheap imitations that have since come to be. Pretty early on the genre cliches are in full circle. The annoying, spunky female who wishes she was back on the LA strip hangin with her girlfriends. The uninteresting baddie who flunked out of EVIL VILLIAN UNIVERSITY - you know, the kind of guy who'd rather enslave some children instead of taking over the fucking world (these types seem to love Gotham City). And don't forget the sassy frass little kid sidekick! But hey, this dude is pretty BADASS don't you think? If the movie consisted of him and Indy trading dialogue and mimicing each other - minus the chick - the movie would be so much better.

The first ten minutes are so fucking crazy I couldn't help but laugh at the screen while throwing pretzels in the air. One car chase, one plane crash, and one water park ride later our heroes have made it from China to India lol. What follows next is a series of semi racist portrayals of Indians that made me cringe. The reason "savages" worked in King Kong is that there was no ethnicity linked to them - they were just some ugly ass savages splitting heads and worshipping monkeys on an island. Here you have fucking INDIANS, from India, eating bugs and drinking monkey brains. WTF Spielberg? This really disgusted me and made me want to put on a PASSION PLAY to show Willco's people who's really in charge of shit.

Overall this was like a late 90's Disney movie - a rather messy mix of mature themes and content with overly childish humor. It just didn't work to well. If anything it just makes me appreciate POTC even more. IF you're going to do a dumb adventure movie, DO IT RITE.

6/10

And a 6 is generous. It's hard to totally trash a movie with a character as awesome as Indiana Jones in it. The movie has many flaws, but it still manages to shine (albiet briefly) when Indy is being a badass.
010

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #321 on: March 03, 2007, 07:58:09 AM »
I always felt it was
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Fallon. Borden being with his child just makes more sense in a happy ending sort of way.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Why? Fallon is the one who loved Sarah, and probably loved the kid more. When Sarah told Borden she was pregnant, why do you think his first words were "thats great, we shoulda told Fallon!". Borden would have loved the little girl too, no doubt, but since Fallon was the one who loved her mother, and presumably was the father of the child, it makes more sense for him to be alive. Besides, Borden was hung, not Fallon.
[close]

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #322 on: March 03, 2007, 08:51:48 AM »
George Lucas and Steven Spielberg blame the problems of Doom with the fact Lucas was in the middle of a messy divorce as he was writing the story lol

When Spielberg was asked the about the weakness of the film he said like "Hey, at least I met my wife on it..right?"  :lol


Watch Last Crusade when you have a chance. Raiders is the best film but oddly Last Crusade seems to age better.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2007, 08:53:25 AM by Cheebs »

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #323 on: March 03, 2007, 09:08:43 AM »
Bah. Raiders gets put on a pedestal too much. Last Crusade is the most fun of the 3. James Bond and his role in The Untouchables aside, this is probably Connery's best role. He totally upstages Ford at every turn.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #324 on: March 03, 2007, 09:14:47 AM »
Raiders it the best "FILM" of the 3 while Last Crusade is the most fun and most re-watchable. Out of the 3 I probably have watched Last Crusade on VHS and then DVD like 5x as much as Raiders.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #325 on: March 03, 2007, 09:17:02 AM »
I wasnt born when Raiders came out, and was only a year old when Temple came out. But I was 6 when Crusade came out, and I have a lot of fond memories of watching it on VHS as a kid.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #326 on: March 03, 2007, 09:19:52 AM »
Other than Connery I think Marcus Brody steals many of the scenes he is in.

Quote
Indiana Jones: He's got a two day head start on you, which is more than he needs. Brody's got friends in every town and village from here to the Sudan, he speaks a dozen languages, knows every local custom, he'll blend in, disappear, you'll never see him again. With any luck, he's got the grail already.

[Cut to middle of fair in the Middle East, Marcus Brody wearing bright suit and white hat, sticking out like sore thumb]
Marcus Brody: Uhhh, does anyone here speak English?
:lol :lol

bagofeyes

  • blow me - I deserve it
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #327 on: March 03, 2007, 09:19:58 AM »
I was 7 when Last Crusade came out. I still remember vividly going to see it at the cinema for my birthday.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #328 on: March 03, 2007, 09:21:01 AM »
What I love about Connery in TLC is he shows a comedic range that, before the movie, I never knew he possessed.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #329 on: March 03, 2007, 09:24:48 AM »
Connery says Indy IV would be the only thing to bring him out of retirement but only if the script is good enough. He apparently just got a copy of the script last week. I hope he accepts it. Apparently he is asking for a fuck-load of money if he says yes. I doubt we'd find out if Connery gives it the ok. Spielberg and Lucas are being damn tight lipped about this.

I really hope he is in it even if the film is weaker than Last Crusade(which it likely will be) just because I would love to see him as that character at least one more time.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #330 on: March 03, 2007, 09:26:11 AM »
Knowing Connery, he'll ask for a lion's share, but give most of it away.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #331 on: March 03, 2007, 09:35:24 AM »
I wonder what Connery would have done with the money had he said yes LOTR. He was offered a huge stake in the box office intake, far more if I remember than the record-setting percentage Nicholson got for Batman.

Connery would have crushed any record an actor has ever gotten paid by an obscene amount.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #332 on: March 03, 2007, 09:40:46 AM »
Are you sure his deal was for a backend cut of the gross? I mean, this wasn't the case for anyone else involved in the films.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #333 on: March 03, 2007, 10:12:03 AM »
Are you sure his deal was for a backend cut of the gross? I mean, this wasn't the case for anyone else involved in the films.
Yeah it was, and he was the only one offered that because the studio wanted him BADLY.

Quote
refused an offer to play Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it has emerged.

If the actor had put on the long white beard and clasped the wizard's staff as the hero of Middle Earth he would have earned as much as £225 million.
Advert for SuperScotBingo

Peter Jackson, the director of the fantasy trilogy, has revealed that New Line Cinema, the production company behind the films, offered the Scottish actor between 10 and 15 per cent of worldwide box office takings to secure his participation.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1747562006

Wow, look at this list:
http://www.notstarring.com/actors/connery-sean


He turned down/was turned down A LOT of big name stuff.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2007, 10:15:21 AM by Cheebs »

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #334 on: March 03, 2007, 06:35:31 PM »
Last Crusade is fucking amazing. I haven't seen it in years so I'm hyped to watch it tonight.

010

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #335 on: March 04, 2007, 08:59:31 AM »
Marie Antoinette (Coppola, 2006) - 8/10

Sophia Coppola is a modern day writer and director who seems to draw the strongest emotions from people. Either love or venomous hate is usually thrown her way. I have been on both sides of this fence. I hated The Virgin Suicides, but I gave Lost In Translation a chance, and it has become one of my favorite films. When Marie Antoinette was released this past year, once again, all I heard were extremely divisive reactions. There was the Cannes debable, and several major critics tore the film to shreds. On the other side, many called this a great film, and praised Coppola for being some kind of modern auteur. The bad-to-mixed reception, coupled with my own indifference to the subject matter, left me skipping this one during its theatrical run, and just now getting to it on DVD. After finally watching it, despite the general consensus saying otherwise, I loved it. This is the first time I can honestly say I really liked Kirsten Dunst in anything. I felt she was perfect for the role, having lived the young-and-famous lifestyle herself. The rest of the cast was quite good too. The writing wasn't anything incredible, but then, I feel Coppola's talent is in setting up the atmosphere, and not in writing great dialogue. To that end, I felt she was wildly successful. Much like her previous film, this feels more like a movie about Coppola herself than Antoinette. It's definately something that leaks into all her screenplays, much like the contemporary music leaks into her soundtracks. I enjoyed her direction, and I like her no-frills style, as it feels very natural to me. The movie had a nice, brisk pace, and the 2 hours rolled by pretty quick. The thing I loved most about the film was the visuals. The costumes, make-up, and cinematography were absolutely brilliant. Shooting on location in Versailles doesn't hurt when trying to create a realistic environment, either. Ultimately, like Lost In Translation, despite its scope, Marie Antoinette offers a small story about a young girl thrust into an impossible situation. It is not a masterpiece, nor even a great film, but it's a damned good one that was unfairly lashed-out against.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #336 on: March 04, 2007, 09:45:58 AM »
Marie Antoinette (Coppola, 2006) - 8/10

Sophia Coppola is a modern day writer and director who seems to draw the strongest emotions from people. Either love or venomous hate is usually thrown her way. I have been on both sides of this fence. I hated The Virgin Suicides, but I gave Lost In Translation a chance, and it has become one of my favorite films. When Marie Antoinette was released this past year, once again, all I heard were extremely divisive reactions. There was the Cannes debable, and several major critics tore the film to shreds. On the other side, many called this a great film, and praised Coppola for being some kind of modern auteur. The bad-to-mixed reception, coupled with my own indifference to the subject matter, left me skipping this one during its theatrical run, and just now getting to it on DVD. After finally watching it, despite the general consensus saying otherwise, I loved it. This is the first time I can honestly say I really liked Kirsten Dunst in anything. I felt she was perfect for the role, having lived the young-and-famous lifestyle herself. The rest of the cast was quite good too. The writing wasn't anything incredible, but then, I feel Coppola's talent is in setting up the atmosphere, and not in writing great dialogue. To that end, I felt she was wildly successful. Much like her previous film, this feels more like a movie about Coppola herself than Antoinette. It's definately something that leaks into all her screenplays, much like the contemporary music leaks into her soundtracks. I enjoyed her direction, and I like her no-frills style, as it feels very natural to me. The movie had a nice, brisk pace, and the 2 hours rolled by pretty quick. The thing I loved most about the film was the visuals. The costumes, make-up, and cinematography were absolutely brilliant. Shooting on location in Versailles doesn't hurt when trying to create a realistic environment, either. Ultimately, like Lost In Translation, despite its scope, Marie Antoinette offers a small story about a young girl thrust into an impossible situation. It is not a masterpiece, nor even a great film, but it's a damned good one that was unfairly lashed-out against.
I loved this movie, I gave it a 8.5/10 after re-watching it when I "only" gave it a 7/10 in theaters. I loved Lost in Translation more though. I wonder if I would like Virgin Suicides I am suprised I never got around to it because her other two films are fantastic.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2007, 09:48:59 AM by Cheebs »

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #337 on: March 04, 2007, 09:53:30 AM »
Nice to see another fan. Yeah, I totally love this movie. I can understand the criticisms her detractors throw her way, but they just dont bother me. I find Coppola to be a great young filmmaker. Hell, its nice to see a woman director becoming one of the greats of her era. I like LiT more too, but thats because I LOVE that movie, and its one of my 10's. MA is still exceptionally stellar though. It just doesnt click with me on a personal level.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #338 on: March 04, 2007, 09:55:27 AM »
The movie also had a Barry Lyndon vibe, in the costumes and lighting, which rocks.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #339 on: March 04, 2007, 10:01:14 AM »
The movie also had a Barry Lyndon vibe, in the costumes and lighting, which rocks.
Well the costumes were done by the same person. Notice how when MA won for best costumes the costume designer for MA thanked Kubrick?

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #340 on: March 04, 2007, 10:06:36 AM »
Nope. Didn't know that! Well I guess it makes sense why I got that vibe, lol.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #341 on: March 06, 2007, 04:42:39 PM »
Zodiac (Fincher, 2007) - 8.5/10

David Fincher's first film in several years is his most solid in a decade. The subject matter he tackles with this film is intriguing to say the least. However, unlike Fincher's Se7en, this film isn't so much about the logistics of the murders, or the killer himself. Zodiac as a film is more about the men who worked for years on the case, and is equally a story about obsession. In fact, I would go so far as to say that what ultimately makes the film so engaging is not the case itself, but watching the characters grow more and more obsessed with catching the killer. That's not to say that there isn't lots of suspense to be found here, because there is, and at times it is quite masterfully achieved. Jake Gyllenhaal and Mark Ruffalo are great in the lead roles, but unsurprisingly, it is Robert Downey Jr. who steals the show with his performance, lending the picture most of its humor. The rest of the cast is uniformly solid. The movie is nearly three hours long, but the pacing and editing is pulled off well enough such that it never feels that long. Fincher's direction is in fine form, however, the film doesn't feel like a typical David Fincher film. He has toned down his super-stylized form of his previous efforts, and it seems to fit this film more appropriately, although it isn't instantly recognizable as a Fincher film. Not a masterpiece by any means, but a very solid film, and the best of 2007 thusfar.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 04:45:43 PM by Solo »

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment

  • Can he only eat just one?
  • The Walking Dead
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #342 on: March 06, 2007, 04:44:29 PM »
Robert Downey Jr.
BKO

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #343 on: March 06, 2007, 04:45:27 PM »
LOLZ

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment

  • Can he only eat just one?
  • The Walking Dead
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #344 on: March 06, 2007, 04:46:41 PM »
lol
BKO

Robo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #345 on: March 06, 2007, 04:54:13 PM »
Delicious as hell.

I liked Zodiac, but the detail it goes into is too gratuitous.  I felt like Fincher was mirroring Graysmith's obsession on film and it's sort of disturbing.
obo

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment

  • Can he only eat just one?
  • The Walking Dead
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #346 on: March 06, 2007, 04:55:48 PM »
Delicious as hell.

I liked Zodiac, but the detail it goes into is too gratuitous.  I felt like I was watching Graysmith's obsession played out on film and it's sort of disturbing.

Pretty much, yeah. :-[

Still a B+, especially considering nothing of substance has really been released this year.
BKO

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #347 on: March 06, 2007, 04:59:37 PM »
I think it's his second best after Se7en. I really loved Zodiac.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #348 on: March 10, 2007, 07:13:45 AM »
Lost In Translation (Coppola, 2003) - 9/10

Short and sweet this time, since I've reviewed this several times before: aside from Oldboy, Lost In Translation remains my favorite film from 2003. I love everything about it, from Bill Murray's performance, to his chemistry with Scarlett, to the cinematography, to the musical choices, and most of everything in between. More importantly, I love how it is really a small, intimate film about two people whose lives are completely off the rails when they meet randomly, and by the time they part, they are both in a much better place than they were when we first met them. Some people think it is a depressing movie, but I feel totally the opposite way. I think it is a movie full of hope.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #349 on: March 10, 2007, 08:46:40 AM »
I liked it more than you! I gave it 10/10 and would put it in my top 20 of all time. Currently it is my favorite film of this decade.

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #350 on: March 10, 2007, 09:02:52 AM »
I would put it in my Top 50 probably, and in my top 5 of the decade thusfar.

Cheebs

  • How's my posting? Call 1-866-MAF-BANS to report flame bait.
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #351 on: March 10, 2007, 09:07:01 AM »
What is your #1 of the decade so far?

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #352 on: March 10, 2007, 10:20:47 AM »
After about 2 whole minutes of thought, so Im definately gonna miss something:

Since 2000:

10. Master And Commander
09. Wonder Boys
08. In The Mood For Love
07. Downfall
06. Collateral
05. Eternal Sunshine
04. Lost In Translation
03. Oldboy
02. City Of God
01. Children Of Men
« Last Edit: March 10, 2007, 10:26:03 AM by Solo »

MrAngryFace

  • I have the most sensible car on The Bore
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #353 on: March 10, 2007, 10:54:18 AM »
Master and Commander would have rocked without the part where they doof the fuck around on that goddamned island for like an HOUR.

I love that someone gives Collateral and Wonder Boys some credit tho.
o_0

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #354 on: March 10, 2007, 11:17:16 AM »
Delicious as hell.

I liked Zodiac, but the detail it goes into is too gratuitous.  I felt like Fincher was mirroring Graysmith's obsession on film and it's sort of disturbing.

Me too, I also read somewhere that Fincher grew up in the area and that he remembers his dad telling him before school that the Zodiac had threatened to shoot children coming off of a bus.  Provides a good insight into Fincher's head!  :lol

Personally I don't get Solo's dislike of Fight Club, and thought that Zodiac was a bit weak for Fincher yet still a good film.  I'd give it a 7/10.  Still, it is better than Panic Room.
yar

Solo

  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #355 on: March 10, 2007, 12:27:26 PM »
For me and Fincher, its Se7en > Zodiac > Fight Club > The Game > Panic Room
Never saw his Aliens movie.

Flannel Boy

  • classic millennial sex pickle
  • Icon
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #356 on: March 10, 2007, 12:45:20 PM »
LOL I forgot I wathed Master and Commander. I really should stop watching movies while loaded.

MrAngryFace

  • I have the most sensible car on The Bore
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #357 on: March 10, 2007, 12:49:05 PM »
Buy a copy of House of the Dead, its a great 'while drunk' movie.
o_0

Flannel Boy

  • classic millennial sex pickle
  • Icon
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #358 on: March 10, 2007, 12:51:13 PM »
Buy a copy of House of the Dead, its a great 'while drunk' movie.
Translation: The only way you can get through this movie is if you're too drunk to hit stop on the remote.

MrAngryFace

  • I have the most sensible car on The Bore
  • Senior Member
Re: Solo does the movies
« Reply #359 on: March 10, 2007, 12:59:24 PM »
exactly, its hilarious when youre drunk tho
o_0