I think the movies he's homaging were for the most part shitty like that just for budget and time reasons, not on purpose. They would always have slow pacing, be overly talky, but then have some really standout set-piece where all their money went and that they were remembered for and everyone would say "you gotta see it for this!". Tons of stuff from the 70s is like this.

The premise of Grindhouse being to bring back that kind of movie, I think Tarantino 100% succeeded, to where if you didn't know the people involved and saw Death Proof on cable a decade later, you might absolutely mistake it for something trashy from the 70s. Planet Terror is a nudge nudge, wink wink fan film to that kind of movie, whereas Death Proof is that movie for real.

And just like those Grindhouse movies from the 70s, its the kinda thing where you want to fast forward through 50-75% of it.

Jackie Brown needs to happen, as I think that's one that all the DIFers will like, and be able to appreciate as Tarantino's most grown-up film.

Inglourious Basterds needs to happen, but only if there's at least 1 person defending it, that commentary needs people from both sides.

Death Proof don't bother, no one really likes it that much, even defenders like me enjoy it for its commitment to what its doing more than its overall quality, not much of an interesting discussion there.

See, I vehemently disagree that this should be the case. You have a giant universe of infinite stories you can tell, and the only framework their capable of is rehashing Wrath of Khan for the 4th time out. The level of narrative laziness and cowardice is mind-boggling to me. Look at the TOS movies, there's 6 of them, and they for the most part all try to do totally different types of stories, and for the most part it works great.

I happen to like Star Trek the Motion Picture a lot, you take that style of movie and fix some of the pacing issues, and it would be awesome. It's really depressing that something like that isn't even an option. Would it kill them to make a movie called Star "TREK" be about actual exploration?! But no, we gotta have 50% of it take place on earth, and a villain Kirk can have a punch-out fight with.

Maybe Nolan's Interstellar next year will scratch that TOS itch, I guess we'll see.

I'm hearing disturbing rumours of this movie being Prometheus-level stupid. Adjusting expectations accordingly.

Please don't end up being some stupid viral marketing campaign or something

Reading up on the behind the scenes, they pulled some real crazy shit on this one, which may explain why it looks so damn good.

Apparently stuff like this shot is 100% practical. They built the entire house set, built a full-scale bubble-ship, put it on the landing pad outside, and built a giant rear-projection wall around the entire set which projects cloud-footage they shot in Hawaii.
The computer console is real in-camera as well. They play back pre-animated footage on queue which the actress times her movements to, no green-screen computer interface there at all.

Just saw it, this movie is really fucking good, borderline great.

I was really skeptical going in, cause I hated Tron Legacy, but man Kosinski is really a guy to watch.
The design and vfx work here is STAGGERING. I can't believe this is a March release, a few years ago this would be the tentpole movie of the summer. And unlike Tron, this has strong confident pacing, well directed/hard-hitting action sequences, and likable actors and characters.

That being said, it is very derivative, pretty predictable, and the premise makes no sense when you think about it, but that doesn't bother me this time out because it has its heart in the right place. The logic problems are really with the basic premise, but once you accept that (and I did), the story holds together pretty damn well, doesn't pull any 3rd act bullshit, and is REALLY, REALLY well executed.

I saw it and thought the conversion was amazing. Like I'm totally sold on conversions now as a result, cause the level of depth was awesome and immersive, without resorting to gimmicky stuff for the most part. To be fair, I haven't seen Titanic 3d so I can't really compare it to that, but I think its miles better than the modern day conversions I've seen like the Avengers and Conan. It was interesting too, because all the 3d previews beforehand looked really distracting and fake to me (I have no interest in Iron Man 3 in 3d now), but once JP started it was really solid. I suspect a lot of this might be down to the use of lots of Practical effects, which work way better in 3d than when there's tons of obviously CG things flying around, as well as Spielberg being really good at framing his shots with multiple layers of depth.

The movie by many accounts is the cheesy, lame biopic you would expect, but I think the trailer is extremely well-cut.

I wish there was a demo video out of the new blackmagic pocket cam.
Like as a comparison with a 7d/5d for instance. My suspicion is it blows them out of the water (and at a lower price!) but it's still a cropped sensor, so who knows. If the image quality is comparable to the normal black-magic cam from last year, this is the fucking steal of the century for film enthusiasts.

Also need to figure out if I can use my old Canon lenses on this thing.

Was about to post that: http://rogerebert.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art … 09984/1023

Really fitting somehow to go out on a Malick film, I feel happier now