You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Combining the thread for commentary suggestions and the thread for Intermission suggestions. Also for use suggesting topics for Documentality and the fourth one that you guys don't know about yet.
I always say too much. Anyway, just some tidying up, thread-wise. Suggest things!
I'd be curious for you guys to do an Intermission on religion and your lack thereof, but that could step on some toes pretty easily. Not that you're too concerned about being politically correct, but still.
That'd be waaaaaay too far removed from movie-related topics. A discussion about religion in movies, however, would be very interesting.
That's true; Intermission has gotten removed sometimes, but not that removed. So strike my suggestion and consider me in agreement with the Doctor.
I'll agree with the original/now redacted suggestion. I'd be curious about the guys backgrounds and how they came to be atheists. Half of the experience of each episode is about the topic of discussion and the other half is who is actually being featured in the episode. Their backgrounds are relevant and while I don't think that should necessarily take up an entire chunk of a movie commentary, that's what an intermission could be for. Just the concept of Eddie mentioning being annoyed by "new atheists" in one commentary had me laughing for quite a while, because those 2 words painted a bigger picture than you can imagine. The conversations don't lose my interest for the most part, whether or not I care about the topic or not and this is one I would be interested in anyway. Just saying.
I should make it clear that I actually don't identify as atheist. I do not believe in a God as a singular masculine consciousness, but I stop just shy of saying atheist. The difference is largely semantical but as a Buddhist, I kinda have this view as Universe and it's contents = God.
Oh, yeah, sorry, Eddie. Not too familiar with Buddhist philosophy. 
I'd be up both for my original idea *and* Doc Sub's idea, maybe as a two-act episode?
Last edited by Abbie (2013-10-23 01:17:58)
I think a conversation about religion in movies would really benefit from people who are actively religious (and respectful of those who aren't) being involved. The alternative is akin to a group of gents discussing issues which relate specifically to women. We can look in and empathise, but it's commentary one or two steps removed.
I'd like a movie disasters intermission. By that I mean the movies that went so far over their budgets they bankrupted studios and what happened that caused them to go over budget. You've mentioned the end of United Artists being a certain film that I can't remember now. I vaguely remember there being something about Waterworld's set partially sinking or some specific event that led to the production cost skyrocketing. Examples like that, that don't necessarily merit doing a full Waterworld commentary to tell the story but something along those lines would be interesting. As an extension, the near miss scenarios that got movies finished that should have been canned (like Heath Ledger's role being partially recast by Johnny Depp and Jude Law).
Uh-huh.....keep them coming, folks...... *writes ideas down for the Extended Edition podcast*
+2
Darth Praxus wrote:I'd be curious for you guys to do an Intermission on religion and your lack thereof, but that could step on some toes pretty easily. Not that you're too concerned about being politically correct, but still.
That'd be waaaaaay too far removed from movie-related topics. A discussion about religion in movies, however, would be very interesting.
It's funny that you mention this. I was at the Urgent Care this past weekend and X-Men 2 was on. The character of Nightcrawler struck me as very interesting because he wasn't belligerent in his faith but it was there. It also had some of the best use of Bible verses in films that I have personally seen.
While the panelists' personal religious views are interesting (to me) it is also just that: personal. I shy away from religious discussions on the Internet because it is way too personal for us as human beings, regardless of belief. Too easy to offend, to hard to apologize and make good connections.
Sorry, tangent.
I just started thinking about scripture quotes in movies and how they have been used or misused. Thought it would be an interesting movie topic.
Also, I had the thought about an Intermission regarding Doctor Who-quick summary, doesn't have to be anything in depth, like a full commentary.
I saw a turd of a movie last night that is absolutely perfect for a dissection in the same way as Cowboys & Aliens. The film in question?
The dumbest plot twist I've ever seen. It's unfathomable.
Last edited by Ewing (2013-11-01 16:19:51)
I saw a turd of a movie last night that is absolutely perfect for a dissection in the same way as Cowboys & Aliens. The film in question?
The dumbest plot twist I've ever seen. It's unfathomable.
I saw this movie for free and I still wanted my money back. It's hilariously inept.
Ohhh, that movie. Five minutes in, I was already hating it so hard.
Trey's on board. Just need 3 more
Here's my answer.
+2
Well now I've got to see this flick. Pencil me in for the commentary.
Well now I've got to see this flick. Pencil me in for the commentary.
Hahahahahaha you're going to lose your mind.
Also, it has some of the worst looking greenscreen stuff I've ever seen.
I thought the trailer for that looked pretty decent, but I never got round to seeing it. Is it really that bad?
You know what everyone wants to see from a movie about vegas magicians? Blatantly CGI magic tricks of course!
Yep. I was hoping for a fun romp about what stage magicians can (and can't) do. I was disappointed. Repeatedly.
To recycle Mike's comment about Prometheus (I think?): if a movie about football got everything as wrong as this movie does about stage magic, "football" would be played on skates with bats.
PS And I didn't think the ending could possibly disappoint me even further... but it did. Kind of an achievement, that.
And I didn't think the ending could possibly disappoint me even further... but it did. Kind of an achievement, that.
Indeed. As if the movie wasn't already dumb enough, the ending sends it right over the edge into total utter stupidity.
On a somewhat similar note, why did Ruffalo act like a clueless dolt even when no else was around? For instance, Melanie Laurent is sleeping and then Ruffalo is awake. He notices a book about The Eye and looks puzzled and confused by it. He already knows all about The Eye, there's no reason for him to read the book like it holds a bunch of secrets. Better yet, why even follow any leads in the case at all? Wouldn't it have made more sense for Ruffalo to sabotage the entire investigation?
Not to mention, Ruffalo's motivation and backstory becomes beyond convoluted and just a total mess after the twist is revealed. Ruffalo wanted to get revenge on everyone he blamed for his father's death. That's a fine motivation but the way he went about it is nonsensical. Why spend years becoming an FBI agent if the way he achieved his goal was through a magic show / heist? It'd be like joining the military and then using a bakery to get back at his enemies. Why not just use the tools already at his disposal? He's in the FBI, wouldn't it be easier just pursue cases against those involved? Or, since he's apparently amazing at covering his own tracks, so why not just break into Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine's homes and plant incriminating evidence on them? There's no reason to go through the insanely meticulous planning of the most elaborate magic show / heist ever.
Why did Ruffalo even blame anyone besides Michael Caine? Caine's company refused to pay the insurance. That's a totally acceptable reason for Ruffalo to go after him, but what did Freeman and the safe company do to warrant revenge? Freeman made his living by exposing magic tricks. Ruffalo's father decided to come up with a suicidal trick that couldn't be exposed and died while performing it. What exactly did Freeman do wrong? It's not like he tampered with the safe so his dad couldn't escape. All he did was show people how tricks were performed. That hardly justifies locking Freeman up for the rest of his life.
As for the safe company, Ruffalo says the safe warped at the bottom of the river and trapped his dad. Last I checked, safes are made for the sole purpose of securing objects against theft. They do not make safes to function as an escapable pod at the bottom of a river. How is the safe company even remotely at fault for his father's own stupidity? His father decided to preform a magic trick without first properly testing it's safety. That's on him, not the safe company. Imagine if his father had died while preforming a trick that involved swallowing a grenade, only for the grenade to go off while it was being swallowed. Would Ruffalo blame the weapons company for making a grenade that couldn't be swallowed safely? No, because that's fucking stupid, just like this entire piece of shit movie.
Granted, I saw this movie while I was drinking heavily and by the end of it, I was pretty wasted so it's entirely possible the movie explained some of this.
Last edited by Ewing (2013-11-02 01:46:37)
To answer your question,
You know how I read that twist? The filmmakers were like, "What's the most shocking, unbelievable, impossible-to-predict thing that could happen at the end?" And, well...that's the answer. The problem is that they were dumb enough to think that it would work.
That's the problem with the entire movie, really...
"What would be a really cool magic trick?"
"Girl floats over audience in a soap bubble!"
"Is that even remotely plausible in the real world?"
"Oh, hell no."
"Then let's do that!"
[repeat until budget is spent]
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
