Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
May 21, 2013, 09:57:36 AM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
655890
Posts in
9232
Topics by
3396
Members Latest Member:
-
vlozan86
Most online today:
19
- most online ever:
494
(Jul 01, 2007, 02:59:53 PM)
LPTJ
|
Last Plane Forums
|
Departure Lounge
| Topic:
"Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
[
6
]
7
8
9
10
11
...
21
« previous
next »
Author
Topic: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread) (Read 22297 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Bernard
Registered user
Posts: 9845
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #125 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 11:49:00 AM »
Man, I still haven't had a chance to see Moon, and I'm worrying now that it'll be gone before I do.
Logged
Ha, see, and look how Julian Casablancas ended up!!!!
mixed cats
Registered user
Posts: 3200
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #126 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 11:55:00 AM »
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 01:12:14 AM
Also!
Quote from: lastclearchance on Jul 19, 2009, 09:33:25 PM
a screening of
Mishima
that I missed
I know this movie came out 25 years ago but whoah! Maybe loving an author does not necessarily mean that I'll love a movie about him but I am going to try to sneak this into the roommate's Netflix queue.
I enjoyed the film very much with only having a small familiarity with his writing
Logged
call me, and we'll sit down and work it out
over pancakes and orange juices
Thermofusion
Registered user
Posts: 10000
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #127 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 12:33:00 PM »
Quote from: edison on Jul 27, 2009, 10:59:45 AM
Quote from: Thermofusion on Jul 27, 2009, 09:24:09 AM
Going to see Whatever Works tonight, am more stoked than the reviews would have me be
The other day, while I was sleep-deprived and rather depressed, I decided to go see this to have some distraction, but about 30 minutes after it started, I had to get up to pee. Only too late did I realize that I had walked through the wrong door, and I was locked out of the movie theatre (that door only led to an exit in a backstreet, so I could theoretically have come back through the front door at the expense of missing three or four minutes of the movie, but I was too pissed off at my own stupidity to even consider it). I was actually really disappointed by the first half-hour I did manage to see, but since I hate starting movies and not finishing them, I'll have to pay another ticket to finish the damn thing one of these days. Let us know what you thought!
Man, that would have pissed me off.
I'm pretty excited, although my theory is that Larry David as the token Woody analogue will prove either inspired or insipid with little chance of an in-between
Logged
triple paisley minimum
mountmccabe
Registered user
Posts: 2844
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #128 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 01:09:32 PM »
Quote from: jebreject on Jul 27, 2009, 01:47:19 AM
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 12:57:37 AM
I liked
Moon
but after the fact flaws in the story have killed my revelry.
What flaws? PM if you like.
I will answer here but with whited out text.
NOTICE: The following discussion of
Moon
includes a lot of plot points and such that you likely don't want to read before seeing the film.
Minor complaints:
- Clones. Most of the rest of it is rather naturalistic sci-fi but then they go with the toy idea of clones coming out of a copier or something. Ugh. They didn't even try to come up with anything that made sense here.
- 15 years. Is that supposed to be a long time? That room appeared to be full of clones... and this whole thing has only lasted ~5 cycles? I know the carved town isn't that elaborate yet and if it was going to be hundreds or thousands of years one'd expect there might could be plenty of other people on the Moon. Hell, that, actually, probably would've been a better way to finish the movie.
Serious issues:
- The towers jamming the signal. If Gerty can get through what could the towers have to do with anything? I understand that sending the harvester to destroy the tower was clever and that showed that Sam #2 wasn't entirely cynical and did something to help future Sams but it doesn't make any sense how that re-established communications. Which leads to...
- Gerty is undeveloped. How he worked and what his role there was one of the great mysteries of the movie... but it never became any more clear. He evades Sam's questions and outright lies to him but then he also helps Sam #1 with the password and tells Sam #1 about being a clone - which was lame exposition by talking - and even helps Sam #2 escape and everything. It seems like they didn't want to go all 2001 and have Gerty try to lock Sam #2 out so he'd die - I am glad that they avoided that - but isn't that what Gerty should've done for the good of the base/company? Letting a Sam escape to Earth is probably the worst thing that could happen.
In conclusion,
I liked the questions of identity and human rights and remote communication - the emoticons that Gerty used directly tying things into internet communication was pretty great - but there was also a lot of mystery and wonder that I don't think they followed through on.
Logged
You know a pancake?
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user
Posts: 39426
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #129 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 02:37:28 PM »
Quote from: Thermofusion on Jul 27, 2009, 12:33:00 PM
I'm pretty excited, although my theory is that Larry David as the token Woody analogue will prove either inspired or insipid with little chance of an in-between
The part was written for Zero Mostel, so I figure Larry will slot into it OK.
Logged
I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
elpollodiablo
Registered user
Posts: 32624
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #130 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 04:09:31 PM »
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 01:09:32 PM
Quote from: jebreject on Jul 27, 2009, 01:47:19 AM
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 12:57:37 AM
I liked
Moon
but after the fact flaws in the story have killed my revelry.
What flaws? PM if you like.
I will answer here but with whited out text.
NOTICE: The following discussion of
Moon
includes a lot of plot points and such that you likely don't want to read before seeing the film.
Minor complaints:
- Clones. Most of the rest of it is rather naturalistic sci-fi but then they go with the toy idea of clones coming out of a copier or something. Ugh. They didn't even try to come up with anything that made sense here.
- 15 years. Is that supposed to be a long time? That room appeared to be full of clones... and this whole thing has only lasted ~5 cycles? I know the carved town isn't that elaborate yet and if it was going to be hundreds or thousands of years one'd expect there might could be plenty of other people on the Moon. Hell, that, actually, probably would've been a better way to finish the movie.
Serious issues:
- The towers jamming the signal. If Gerty can get through what could the towers have to do with anything? I understand that sending the harvester to destroy the tower was clever and that showed that Sam #2 wasn't entirely cynical and did something to help future Sams but it doesn't make any sense how that re-established communications. Which leads to...
- Gerty is undeveloped. How he worked and what his role there was one of the great mysteries of the movie... but it never became any more clear. He evades Sam's questions and outright lies to him but then he also helps Sam #1 with the password and tells Sam #1 about being a clone - which was lame exposition by talking - and even helps Sam #2 escape and everything. It seems like they didn't want to go all 2001 and have Gerty try to lock Sam #2 out so he'd die - I am glad that they avoided that - but isn't that what Gerty should've done for the good of the base/company? Letting a Sam escape to Earth is probably the worst thing that could happen.
In conclusion,
I liked the questions of identity and human rights and remote communication - the emoticons that Gerty used directly tying things into internet communication was pretty great - but there was also a lot of mystery and wonder that I don't think they followed through on.
I had a lot of similar complaints about the plot--there were some gaping holes, after all--but I enjoyed the overall film so much I didn't really care by the time I left the theater.
Logged
think 'on the road.'
girl
Registered user
Posts: 9144
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #131 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 04:32:16 PM »
I fell asleep for a little over an hour about an hour into
Watchmen
. Did I miss anything important?
Logged
this is a story and you're not in it
G.C.R
Registered user
Posts: 6219
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #132 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 05:37:42 PM »
Quote from: elpollodiablo on Jul 27, 2009, 09:53:25 AM
Any of you guys seen this Danish film called Flame & Citron? I saw the trailer before Moon and was really intrigued and lo and behold it was available on Time Warner On Demand. Pretty good period action/drama in the American mold; I probably thought more highly of it since they weren't speaking English. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see this remade with Ralph Fiennes, Colin Farrel, Clive Owen, Rachel Weisz, &c. A couple of great performances, especially the dude who played Citron. If those two guys did even half the shit that's detailed in the move IRL, they were hard as nails and cold as ice.
I haven't, it's apparently the most expensive Danish film ever made. We tend not to agree on films I think, but with you on Mads Mikkelson (Citron) being pretty fucking awesome. I loved him in
Adam's Apples
.
Logged
I think it's fair to assume we'll be inebriated and covered in bodily effluvia all weekend
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user
Posts: 39426
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #133 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 05:41:46 PM »
Quote from: girl on Jul 27, 2009, 04:32:16 PM
I fell asleep for a little over an hour about an hour into
Watchmen
. Did I miss anything important?
Have you read the book? If so, no. If not, just read the book and don't worry about it.
Logged
I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
elpollodiablo
Registered user
Posts: 32624
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #134 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 06:28:22 PM »
Quote from: G.C.R on Jul 27, 2009, 05:37:42 PM
Quote from: elpollodiablo on Jul 27, 2009, 09:53:25 AM
Any of you guys seen this Danish film called Flame & Citron? I saw the trailer before Moon and was really intrigued and lo and behold it was available on Time Warner On Demand. Pretty good period action/drama in the American mold; I probably thought more highly of it since they weren't speaking English. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see this remade with Ralph Fiennes, Colin Farrel, Clive Owen, Rachel Weisz, &c. A couple of great performances, especially the dude who played Citron. If those two guys did even half the shit that's detailed in the move IRL, they were hard as nails and cold as ice.
I haven't, it's apparently the most expensive Danish film ever made. We tend not to agree on films I think, but with you on Mads Mikkelson (Citron) being pretty fucking awesome. I loved him in
Adam's Apples
.
I would certainly watch something else with him in it! I'll have to track that down.
Logged
think 'on the road.'
G.C.R
Registered user
Posts: 6219
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #135 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 07:31:46 PM »
Very very black comedy where he plays a priest who takes in an excon rascist skinhead!
Logged
I think it's fair to assume we'll be inebriated and covered in bodily effluvia all weekend
jebreject
Registered user
Posts: 27071
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #136 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 07:54:41 PM »
Quote from: elpollodiablo on Jul 27, 2009, 04:09:31 PM
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 01:09:32 PM
Quote from: jebreject on Jul 27, 2009, 01:47:19 AM
Quote from: mountmccabe on Jul 27, 2009, 12:57:37 AM
I liked
Moon
but after the fact flaws in the story have killed my revelry.
What flaws? PM if you like.
I will answer here but with whited out text.
NOTICE: The following discussion of
Moon
includes a lot of plot points and such that you likely don't want to read before seeing the film.
Minor complaints:
- Clones. Most of the rest of it is rather naturalistic sci-fi but then they go with the toy idea of clones coming out of a copier or something. Ugh. They didn't even try to come up with anything that made sense here.
- 15 years. Is that supposed to be a long time? That room appeared to be full of clones... and this whole thing has only lasted ~5 cycles? I know the carved town isn't that elaborate yet and if it was going to be hundreds or thousands of years one'd expect there might could be plenty of other people on the Moon. Hell, that, actually, probably would've been a better way to finish the movie.
Serious issues:
- The towers jamming the signal. If Gerty can get through what could the towers have to do with anything? I understand that sending the harvester to destroy the tower was clever and that showed that Sam #2 wasn't entirely cynical and did something to help future Sams but it doesn't make any sense how that re-established communications. Which leads to...
- Gerty is undeveloped. How he worked and what his role there was one of the great mysteries of the movie... but it never became any more clear. He evades Sam's questions and outright lies to him but then he also helps Sam #1 with the password and tells Sam #1 about being a clone - which was lame exposition by talking - and even helps Sam #2 escape and everything. It seems like they didn't want to go all 2001 and have Gerty try to lock Sam #2 out so he'd die - I am glad that they avoided that - but isn't that what Gerty should've done for the good of the base/company? Letting a Sam escape to Earth is probably the worst thing that could happen.
In conclusion,
I liked the questions of identity and human rights and remote communication - the emoticons that Gerty used directly tying things into internet communication was pretty great - but there was also a lot of mystery and wonder that I don't think they followed through on.
I had a lot of similar complaints about the plot--there were some gaping holes, after all--but I enjoyed the overall film so much I didn't really care by the time I left the theater.
Agreed for the most part.
Logged
I'm not racist, I've got lots of black Facebook friends.
Babar
Registered user
Posts: 3305
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #137 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 08:48:23 PM »
Quote from: girl on Jul 27, 2009, 04:32:16 PM
I fell asleep for a little over an hour about an hour into
Watchmen
. Did I miss anything important?
i think it's an amazing film.
Logged
Oh man, I'm gonna have cause to regret this post. I know it.
elpollodiablo
Registered user
Posts: 32624
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #138 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 08:50:48 PM »
It's definitely amazing that someone would cast Malin Akerman in anything
Logged
think 'on the road.'
Maaik
Registered user
Posts: 15119
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #139 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 10:37:24 PM »
I saw Public Enemies and the new Harry Potter movie this weekend. Public Enemies was pretty good--though the banter between Dillinger and his woman was cheesy as all fuck. I also wanted to to have more noir than shaky handheld elements. But it was entertaining. I thought it was kind of odd that they chose to shoot such a period piece in digital.
Harry Potter was ok. I really have no attachment to the source material and have only seen the first film and Prisoner of Azkaban, so I went in pretty out of the loop. I was still able to follow it well enough--I mean, you know who Harry is, you know what Hogwarts is, you know a few of the main characters and you're fine. The teenage melodrama stuff went from kind of funny to mildly irritating and the reveal of who the Half Blood Prince is was really half assed, but I hear that it's like that in the book as well. Also: I like Luna. More of her please.
Logged
I need anne the man lessons
jebreject
Registered user
Posts: 27071
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #140 on:
Jul 27, 2009, 11:17:27 PM »
Quote from: Maaik on Jul 27, 2009, 10:37:24 PM
Also: I like Luna. More of her please.
WORD!
Logged
I'm not racist, I've got lots of black Facebook friends.
Black Amnesia of Heaven
Registered user
Posts: 4034
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #141 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 02:16:27 AM »
Saw
Kicking and Screaming
, the Noah Baumbach one, which hit somewhat close to home. Nice to see Digger playing someone not vile.
Well, okay, he's still sort of vile.
Logged
UNBORN WHISKEY
alistarr*
Registered user
Posts: 8129
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #142 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 03:46:15 AM »
Quote from: Maaik on Jul 27, 2009, 10:37:24 PM
Harry Potter was ok. I really have no attachment to the source material and have only seen the first film and Prisoner of Azkaban, so I went in pretty out of the loop. I was still able to follow it well enough--I mean, you know who Harry is, you know what Hogwarts is, you know a few of the main characters and you're fine. The teenage melodrama stuff went from kind of funny to mildly irritating and the reveal of who the Half Blood Prince is was really half assed, but I hear that it's like that in the book as well. Also: I like Luna. More of her please.
i really liked some of the teen dramadramaDRAMA stuff quite a lot. i particularly enjoyed the sad part with the birds and that, and found very reminiscent of a tv show i like called skins (which is also all about teens thinking they're all grown up and very good at portraying that kind of feeling without it being either too Important or too mocking). i'd say that bit, alongside the fact that the naughty boy was the same colour as the castle in almost every shot (almost becoming part of the school, davy jones/black pearl style?), was probably my favourite thing about the movie. mind you, i can see how it might be seen in a less positive light.
as for the prince reveal thing, i guess it didn't help that it basically didn't matter at all who the prince was anyway, to the plot or to any of the characters. or that the movie itself had become boring and pointless by that stage in proceedings.
Logged
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user
Posts: 39426
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #143 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:01:27 PM »
In the book it matters, but not as much as you might think based on it being the title of the book.
Logged
I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
donblood
Guest
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #144 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:11:08 PM »
edit: moving this to the book thread where it belongs
«
Last Edit: Jul 28, 2009, 12:13:24 PM by donblood
»
Logged
donblood
Guest
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #145 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:12:56 PM »
Oops this is the movie thread. I'm illiterate.
Logged
donblood
Guest
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #146 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:26:43 PM »
Okay so I posted in the movie thread and mentioned DeLillo. Now this, which means I am a wizard with mystical powers:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/cronenberg-to-adapt-don-delillos-cosmopolis,30926/
This is really exciting news as far as I'm concerned. A lot of people think
Cosmopolis
is shite and man are they ever wrong.
Logged
what whale
Registered user
Posts: 362
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #147 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:31:03 PM »
Quote from: donblood on Jul 28, 2009, 12:26:43 PM
Okay so I posted in the movie thread and mentioned DeLillo. Now this, which means I am a wizard with mystical powers:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/cronenberg-to-adapt-don-delillos-cosmopolis,30926/
This is really exciting news as far as I'm concerned. A lot of people think
Cosmopolis
is shite and man are they ever wrong.
That is
fucking awesome
.
Logged
Quote from: "Hooks"
sick of bein sad but thank beer companies make everyday better lol
elpollodiablo
Registered user
Posts: 32624
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #148 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:32:04 PM »
Put Ed Harris in it
Logged
think 'on the road.'
donblood
Guest
Re: "Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
«
Reply #149 on:
Jul 28, 2009, 12:33:42 PM »
Shush you.
Good question, though. Who should play the role of Our Hero?
Videodrome
-era James Woods would be pretty hilarious.
Logged
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
[
6
]
7
8
9
10
11
...
21
LPTJ
|
Last Plane Forums
|
Departure Lounge
| Topic:
"Not the art of scholars but of illiterates." (new movie thread)
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Last Plane Forums
-----------------------------
=> Last Plane
=> In The Earbuds
=> Departure Lounge
=> White Courtesy Phone
-----------------------------
Archives
-----------------------------
=> The Hangar
Loading...