Zachary Quinto as Spock
Heath Ledger as the Joker
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by MartyJ
Zachary Quinto as Spock
Heath Ledger as the Joker
I watched it again yesterday and it stil holds up pretty well. A somewhat artsy psychological thriller with extreme method acting by Christian Bale (he went down to 120 pounds). I used to weigh 100 pounds at 5'10" (it was no Gypsy curse, just puberty), so I can sympathize.
If you want to see an emaciated Christian Bale in an indie with European sensibilities, give The Machinist a shot. It's moody and intriguing.
I hope you don't mind if I give my opinion of this one.
Of course not
The movie has a lot of admirers on IMDb (and a lot of haters too). Looks like it's one of those heavily contested flicks, just like Scott Pilgrim. And like Scott Pilgrim, it just didn't work for me.
Punisher was one of the two Marvel comic books that appeared in Poland in 1991 (Spider-Man was the other one... we also got Batman and Superman from DC that year). I owned a few Punisher issues and liked them, although Batman was my favorite. Today I decided to check out the 2004 film adaptation and... oh boy.
It's a simplistic revenge movie that reminds me of low budget Michael Dudikoff stuff. Absolutely unremarkable, bleak and uninteresting. If you want to see a gritty comic book adaptation done right, watch the Nolan Dark Knight Saga instead.
PS: I can't talk much about the movie. I liked it a lot but I was already a big fan of the TV series, so it had that taste of "Oh, so that's where it all came from. By the way, O'Neill looks so fucking serious!".
It was Richard Dean Anderson's sense of humor that made the TV show work (the same can be said of MacGyver). Action simply isn't memorable enough, you need an extra factor (in this case, a charming lead). How many episodes of MacGyver do you remember? Can you recall the plot of any of them? I remember one about some fake UFOs and that's it What I remember most about MacGyver is his personality.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You said it, Chewie. I wouldn't trust Emmerich with anything these days.
The TV shows, despite their flaws, were watchable. I liked the humorous tone of SG-1 and Atlantis. The long story arc of Universe was drifting, but I think it could be salvaged. Why not continue the existing franchise? It still has a fanbase. A fanbase that can be lost because of a bad reboot (that's exactly what happened to Trekkies after the J.J. reboot).
I have a feeling he's NOT going to be a bad motherfucker. I wouldn't buy that for a dollar.
It's not really surprising... Emmerich has already remade Stargate into 10,000 BC and The Day After Tomorrow into 2012. A few months ago he talked about sequels to ID4. Seems like the guy ran out of new ideas a long time ago...
Super 8 appears to be incomplete. It's just truncated mid-sentence after 1h 37m 14s.
Looks like Paramount went full retard... I was going to buy the disc release mostly for the extras.
Jurassic Park
I was probably the only kid in my elementary school who missed it in 1993. I only saw it on TV at the age of 13 or 14.
Independence Day
One of the few movies I saw on the big screen more than once.
The Matrix
The most impressive movie of my high school years.
Star Wars
The first movie I saw on VHS (in a kindergarten, around 1987). Made a great impression on me.
Aliens
I was 9 or 10. Scared the hell out of me.
Terminator 2
I must've seen it at least 10 times with my cousins.
Thanks for doing this movie.
I've been encountering references to it all my life, so, a few years ago, I've finally decided to watch it. It brought me to tears; I was sobbing like a little girl. What a charming piece of film.
Re: the female protagonist... Who's the most popular role model for modern girls? Bella Swan. An unlikable bitch with no personality to speak of. Go figure.
I've seen Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome a few times, so I decided to check out the first one.
Don't expect too much from Mad Max. It's a clunky and simplistic action movie that will entertain you for 93 minutes. If you're looking for the quintessential grindhouse experience, see this one.
Celebrating Roman Polanski's 80th birthday?
We should do that commentary.
I'd love to hear that.
Though I'd have to watch ERAGON again.
There's always booze. Too bad my meds prevent me from drinking...
It's just frustrating to see Fox ripping off their most popular franchise in such a bad way.
A dull, uninspired adaptation of Joseph Campbell's "hero's journey". It felt like the work of a teenage fan of Star Wars and LOTR. I checked the Wikipedia page and... surprise, surprise... turns out that the original book was written by a teenager (only a teenager could think that Eragon, which is one letter away from "dragon", is a clever title). I wonder how closely the movie follows the book (I haven't read it), so I'll give Paolini the benefit of the doubt and lay part of the blame at the feet of the filmmakers. It's not enough to use the Hero's Journey, you have to adapt it (a hint: create a unique world, like George Lucas and the Wachowskis did). Eragon is just Star Wars Episode IV reenacted in Middle-Earth without any hint of original thought. It's sad that major studios greenlight scripts that are barely good enough for Asylum. Eragon deserved to bomb much more horribly than it did; it makes John Carter look like Citizen Kane.
Advice to teenage writers: the next time you feel like writing a fantasy story, imagine Sam Jackson beating the crap out of you and shouting: "Imagination, motherfucker! Can you use it?!"
A grim thriller written by William Goldman (any FIYH listener will know who that is). The dark, cynical tone just screams "1970s". The plot is somewhat far-fetched, but still fairly terrifying.
I have to admit that, until now, I didn't know where the famous "Is it safe?" quote originally came from.
That was to be expected. Hardcore Trekkies weren't numerous enough to sustain the franchise, so J.J. decided to turn Star Trek into a series of generic villain-centered action movies for teens while trying to placate geeks with pointless references. It couldn't work. Nerds are obsessive, detail-oriented people (I'd say many of them are borderline autistic) who don't forgive bad science and canon violations. Think of all the outrage concerning Star Wars Special Editions... Geeks don't like revolutionary changes.
It's not just a hipster ("Star Trek was way cooler before it was popular") attitude. Attention to detail is the core of nerd identity. It's who we are. Admit it - we're mutants. We spend hours every day on sites like this one, nitpicking movies to death instead of getting laid. That's not healthy, but we wouldn't have our lives any other way. Mutant and proud!
Sure, the movies are engaging... I'll go watch them. I'll even buy the discs (unless they're very expensive). But they don't feel like "my" Star Trek anymore.
A lavish and visually impressive fantasy, a cross between Alice In Wonderland and Kill Bill. The only thing that's missing here is an interesting plot. It's just too much style with almost no substance.
I'd love to hear what FIYH had to say about it, but the commentary is still missing (I'm sure the guys will put it up again as soon as they can).
4. An asteroid can cross the galaxy in about an hour.
I'm pretty sure it's intentional and not a plot hole. Paul Verhoeven meant to suggest that the asteroid hit was just an accident that was used by the Federation to start a war with the bugs (the equivalent of the Reichstag fire in Germany).
Inland Empire is David Lynch at his Lynchiest, so don't expect any coherent structure (it was filmed without a complete screenplay). Since it was shot on SD digital video, the picture quality leaves much to be desired. David may think that it makes the movie better. I disagree - it just makes it feel more like a documentary (albeit one made on drugs).
Much of the movie was shot in my country (with some of our stars). Unlike many other projects shot in Poland, it didn't receive any public funding (as far as I know). I can only imagine the outrage if our tax money were spent on something like this
While I like some of Lynch's stuff (Blue Velvet, the hypnotizing Eraserhead and the intriguing Twin Peaks), Inland Empire is simply too much for me. Three hours of this mindfuckery is exhausting. Supposedly, the American distributor demanded a version shorter by 20 minutes and David Lynch responded by sending them a cut longer by 20 minutes.
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS is not just self-referential -- it's self-consciously referential, with characters all but turning to the camera to make sure we caught the reference each time they make one. Which they do constantly.
Mr. Brooks isn't nearly as edgy and quirky as it could be. A few decades ago this movie would've been quite shocking. Nowadays, not so much. After other semi-satirical murderer-themed films (Natural Born Killers, American Psycho etc.) it seems a little bland (and almost quaint). I'm not saying it's a bad movie... It's just not good enough to rejuvenate Kevin Costner's career as an A-list leading man (besides, he's probably too old now to fully regain this status).
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Posts by MartyJ
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.