I just locked up everything as soon as I picked up the wife. Luckily doorbell has been broken
for ages and I'm not going to fix it anytime soon.
I didnt even have a chance to get a good horror to watch. Lame Halloween. I am going
to eat a cold steak sandwich and ice cream though.
Oh, what have I watched recently..er, Workaholics, loving it! and the Ghost in the Shell Stand Alone Series
as well as Bubblgegum Crisis 2040. Loving those too.
The Shining, in the cinema drunk as a lord.
It was pretty boring. The characters didnt have much of an arc.
Haha only joking it was fucking awesome.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; October 31st, 2012 at 09:25 PM.
Just finished watching Freaks & Geeks. Never seen it before and after years of recommendations to do it, I really liked it. Laughed hard at every episode. God highschool was such a mess. Feeling old as hell now, though. Joel Hodgson as a Disco clothing salesman, lmfao, so amazing!
Also finally watched Predators last weekend. That movie was bad-ass. Deemed a "true" predecessor to the original by critics and I couldn't agree more. Beautiful photography, intense action and special effects and one of the coolest opening scenes i've ever seen... After seeing it, I like to think Predator 2 was just a bad dream and never actually happened.
I just couldn't buy the metro setting. A intergalactic species who does nothing but hunt for sport decides to choose a major city with a multi-million figure populace? Why? Its like a poacher riding shotgun in a low flying helicopter buzzing a watering hole in the savanna. Zero challenge. I can think of more dangerous primitive indigenous tribesmen they could have been testing their skills against rather than some niche pop culture fascination with "modern" gangsters. The whole thing just seemed so contrived. The original setting was so real for me. I'm sure its mostly the romanticism of nostalgia that makes the original so irreplaceable, but I just don't buy 2. With that said, the introduction to more of the alien tech WAS one minor saving grace.
Hah, and no, I won't defend AVP by any stretch of the word. With exception to the games, which I thought were awesome.
can't get enough of the predator itself. Except in AVP. There they moved liked clumsy oafs.
And I enjoy seeing thugs get their comeuppance.
And yeah, the AVP games were awesome, let it be known to anyone who does not know yet, the games were around before the films
as was the novel. Which was actually a good book.
Also, the whole AVP thing was inspired by a brief moment in the trophy room of Pred 2. Another reason to love it or hate it I suppose!
The Darkhorse AVP comic book was pretty great I remember, with the human ranchers trapped between a Predator hunting party out for revenge for the killing of their mates, and an out of control xenomorph nest. Cool hoverbikes too.
Taxi Driver. It was ok.
If there's one thing I didn't get, why exactly did he act like he was gonna shoot the guy running for president? Just to get chased by the secret service dude?
EDIT: Wait, he was really gonna try to kill him? Uh...Why?
What did they use for fake blood back in the 70's? It always looks like a thick version of Frank's Red Hot.
Huh.To attain an "R" rating, Scorsese had the colors desaturated, making the brightly colored blood less prominent.
Oh, by the way:
Nice. I'd love to have that on my resume.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 1st, 2012 at 12:43 AM.
Bickle is lonely, bored, becoming dangerously unstable, infatuated with one of the candidates campaigners, nauseated by the corruption he sees all around him. He's not being logical, he's focussing his rage on the targets that he sees both among the street scum and the fatuous political class. You have no ability to empathise with characters in movies at all do you. Very odd.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 1st, 2012 at 06:36 AM.
So the excuse is "he's crazy"? Shooting up the pimps made sense. It was building up to that the whole movie.
What corruption did he see in the candidate? Heck, he actually met the guy and did nothing but kiss his ass the whole time (obviously just because of Betsy). It's made clear that Travis didn't know a single thing about politics. Was there some deleted scene where he actually finds out what Palantine's policies were and feels betrayed or something?
Travis never knew a single thing about the guy, and you're saying he was put on the list because apparently he saw him in the same boat as the pimps? Based on what?
The only excuse I can see is "he's crazy, he'll target anyone, even if it makes no sense." And seriously, that's the kind of thing you see bad slasher movies do to add to the body count when a killer has an established motive.
Clearly that wasn't the intent in this movie, so it seems to me you aren't the right person to ask for a satisfying answer.
If the whole candidate thing was because of Betsy, you'd think the final scene would have played out alot differently than him just being distant and aloof to her.
You gonna finish up from what I said about Full Metal Jacket? You know you want to set me straight about it. Or are quick insults all you're able to do? And we still didn't get to A Clockwork Orange. C'mon, c'mon. Waiting on you.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 1st, 2012 at 10:08 AM.
"Joker going into the front lines isn't much of a step for him."
Joker, the hero, shot a child to death at the end of the film. i guess you missed that part of his arc..
"By the way, I never said Full Metal Jacket was boring. I said A Clockwork Orange was boring. Pay attention."
Fascinating though your one-word critical appraisal of a classic like A Clockwork Orange as "boring" is, youre reading comprehension is on par with your ability to follow plots. Check back at what I said if you like..
WHat you seem unable to grasp is that there is significantly more to these complex films than the extremely simple literal interpretation you assume is the only one allowed. Its not my job to explain them to a scoffing, none-too-bright internet messageboard bellend either. If you want in depth analysis of all the parts you completely missed, theres a website called Google which has more information for you.
Im english you dolt.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 1st, 2012 at 10:32 AM.
Travis Bickle had a character arc. He starts as a lonely insomniac who eventually becomes a disturbed vigilante, before apparently regressing to normal after luck prevented him from committing suicide.
What was Joker's arc?
So you can't, huh? That's the easiest type of cop out: Claim to know what you're talking about and refuse to prove it when prompted. I shouldn't be surprised to see this from you, I really shouldn't.Discussing these complex movies to someone with so little imagination would be a futile task. Carry on.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 1st, 2012 at 10:39 AM.
Hokay guys, let's take it easy please.
Oh noes! People have different opinions on movies. Time to kill each other!
"Explain to me what Joker's arc was. Tell me, step by step."
In short words, Jokers arc is from gentle, fun-loving kid to child-killing, emotionally scarred, coldly ironic war correspondant.
I already tried to give you a clue to a central theme of the film by linking to the clip where he quips about it being " a Jungian thing."
The complex, goodbad ambiguity of life as a soldier and a man, or the american public's attitude to war, or the two halves of the film itself, are all jungian dualities that Kubrick challenges us to take a view on.
"Explain to me"
im not your dad kid, its down to you to educate yourself. or not. the choice is yours. its a jungian thing i guess.
Last edited by Velocity Kendall; November 1st, 2012 at 10:50 AM.
Hartman could see clearly that despite his smart mouth, Joker was one of the best suited and intentionally set him up with the complete loser Pyle in order to help him improve. Despite his efforts, Pyle just couldn't cut it, and Hartman's methods to toughen him up completely backfired, so Pyle had a breakdown that resulted in his murder suicide.
Calling Joker "gentle and fun-loving" tells me that you barely remember the movie, if you saw it at all.
You use the term child-killing as if it weren't in self defense, revenge, or mercy (she was gonna bleed to death, anyway). The child was a soldier that had already killed off members of their crew, including his best friend Cowboy. Him finishing off the kid and being called "hardcore" for it just shows more of what was established in the beginning, that despite rarely seeing action he was capable of doing things even the other guys couldn't get themselves to do.to child-killing, emotionally scarred, coldly ironic war correspondant..
Before even joining Animal Mother and the rest, he could casually watch another soldier pick off innocent Vietnamese from a helicopter, and could nonchalantly confirm that said soldier was in fact murdering women and children like they were nothing.
Emotionally scarred? I didn't see it. Ironic? Yes he was, from the very beginning. That was part of what made him stand out. He was fully aware of the reality of everything from his first step, and that's where the jokes come from.
And I'm supposed to find this somehow enthralling, because it's telling me nothing I haven't heard before? That humanity is capable of good and bad things? War is a horrible thing that people don't think about enough? Soldiers are intentionally molded to prepare to do horrible things on duty while being considered heroes at home? WOW, I never thought of it that way!I already tried to give you a clue to a central theme of the film by linking to the clip where he quips about it being " a Jungian thing."
The complex, goodbad ambiguity of life as a soldier and a man, or the american public's attitude to war, or the two halves of the film itself, are all jungian dualities that Kubrick challenges us to take a view on.
If this movie taught YOU something new, more power to you. And that last sentence is not sarcasm.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 1st, 2012 at 12:33 PM.
"Before even joining Animal Mother and the rest, he could casually watch another soldier pick off innocent Vietnamese from a helicopter, and could nonchalantly confirm that said soldier was in fact murdering women and children like they were nothing.
Emotionally scarred? I didn't see it."
No, thats exactly right. You didnt see it.
He watched in horror as the guy fired the mounted cannon, and only a few weeks later was shooting a little girl.
You clearly have trouble comprehending emotion in other human beings. Its not your fault you find amazing movies boring, you might as well be watching with the sound turned off.
I was hoping it would go somewhere, but we haven't incured Godwin's law, yet!
Just watched the remake of Scarface (1983). It's great how it feels almost like a different movie, despite similar plot beats and some dialogue is taken line for line.
Unlike Tony Camonte, Tony Montana's a loudmouthed dork (good lord, watch him dance) who thinks he's bigger than his britches. Pacino's entertaining, but never comes across as the type of person you'd ever want to be around.
Montana is much closer to Little Caesar than Tony Camonte. He's very direct when he challenges his boss, and not passive-aggressive like the original was.
It's funny how some of the things that stay similar, like Tony trying to get with the boss' girlfriend, plays so opposite to the original. They even use a line from the original, and the context is changed. This Tony isn't a suave guy with charisma and charm, THIS Tony is a slimy rat that doesn't know when to give up regardless of how many times he's rejected.
Yeah, I GUESS eventually he marries her, but he's still an asshole.
When the issue with his sister comes up in this one, it doesn't seem out of place for this type of character. In the original, it's a JARRING change of pace that reveals the type of bastard the protagonist really is beneath the skin.
We already know Montana's an asshole the second we meet him!
One thing this movie definitely gets right is having Manny be an established supporting character, and not some guy who pops up from the background whenever the plot needs to use him, like Rinaldo.
Now, I liked Rinaldo, but he only ever showed up for scenes that would set up his death. And he never did anything else. You'd see him clearly one time early on and you'd forget the guy even existed until you get a scene of Tony's sister flirting with him. He just fades into the background.
The ending is so much better, too. Instead of Tony getting his house surrounded by cops after killing his best friend, Montana gets put on his manufacturer's death list due to him (in a bit of irony) actually having a moral line he won't dare to cross, and it goes without saying how spectacular the 80's version ends.
So, the things that the remake has over the original: The friend who gets with the sister is done much better. Richard Belzer cameo. The ending. THE SOUNDTRACK.
Which movie did I like better? They're both great, but I have to say the original, mostly because of Paul Muni's character and how intriguing his likability was. It seems to me like that element of the original is a testament to the medium of film.
Oh, here's one thing I realized when watching this movie. I should have noticed when I watched the Untouchables, but this one being a remake made it more obvious: In the movies from the 30's and 40's that I've watched, I have yet to see a dirty cop who gets bribed to avert their eyes. This was really going on, and yet the movies of those times never really brought it up.
Strange. I'm guessing it's something that the filmmakers would be wary of showing, not knowing how audiences would react.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 2nd, 2012 at 01:20 PM.
"I was hoping it would go somewhere, but we haven't incured Godwin's law, yet!"
Discussing highly complex, multilayered, morally ambiguous artworks with a shrill simpleton who just thinks theyre "boring" is not my idea of fun.
PS Youre worse than hitler.
Anyway, what ARE the other movies you watched, if they're supposedly that good? I should watch more foreign stuff.
Seven Samurai is good.
It's 3 and a half hours long, but none of that time is wasted.
What it really has going for it is how realistically and believably it treats all the events, which is how it manages to make a very simple plot work for that long.
The first 100 minutes of the movie are all about recruiting the seven, how they plan out their strategy, and train the villagers to help defend themselves.
Then the last half is them first taking out a few bandit scouts, launching a preemptive strike, and then finally defending the village as the bandits come in waves over a few days time.
I was worried that it'd have the one thing I disliked about Rashomon, in that the fights would be well choreographed but go on for WAY too long, but there's none of that here.
They establish just enough to make the seven likeable (though there are three that qualify as main characters and get the most screen time), and I managed to feel a little sad for the ones that don't survive the battle.
Might as well look at the western (heh) remake, the Magnificent Seven, that might be cool. There's also a Japanese cartoon from 2004 called Samurai 7, which is on instant Netflix, but I'm gonna bet that it's garbage.
Good lord, just READING that put me in a bad mood. No way in hell am I watching that cartoon.Kikuchiyo is a cyborg with a mechanized exoskeleton.
Just completed the James Cagney movie Taxi! (1932). Blech, that could have been better if it did three things:
1. Had a REASON to be named "Taxi!" and involve Taxi drivers.
2. Had characters be SENSIBLE.
3. Followed up on a theme of peace and nonviolence, which it APPEARED to be about from the beginning, but I REALLY don't know after watching it.
It's wishy washy about that last one. You THINK Cagney's lust for revenge would come back to bite him. The entire movie sets that up, but a stroke of luck makes his target die in an accident while running from the cops, and Cagney goes scott free, his wife forgives him for being an asshole for the hundredth time, the end.
It also would have been nice to actually SEE Cagney do HIS JOB as a taxi driver outside of his introduction.
You THINK it's about a dirty conglomerate muscling in on independent taxi services with intimidation and sabotage, but no!
It's really just about some borderline abusive hotheaded asshole (Jeez, it's not even a crime film and Cagney still plays a dick, I guess you'd call that typecasting) who's after his brother's murderer and doesn't listen to his peace-loving wife that revenge is not the right way to go, and that going that route will only cause more heartache.*
There was no reason this movie needed to be called "Taxi!". The fact that the main character was a taxi driver had no bearing on anything other than the set up for the apparent theme (which itself didn't need taxis, it could have been any business, ANYTHING! This could have been about a deli owner and be called "Deli!" It'd still be the same crappy movie.)
Oh, and Taxi! was the movie that everyone THINKS the line "You dirty rat! You killed my brother!" came from, but that happens to be a misquote that stuck due to most people not actually caring.
What he actually said was "Come out and take it, you dirty yellow-bellied rat, or I'll give it to you through the door!"
I don't blame them for not caring. It's a pretty crappy and forgettable movie. Except for Leila Bennet as Loretta Young's best friend. She was funny. There's also an uncredited George Raft cameo.
...I think it goes without saying that I only watched Taxi Driver because I was initially gonna watch this movie, then remembered that the Scorsese movie existed, so I went to look for that first. Heh.
*And despite her good heart and morals, she does some pretty stupid things that no sensible person would do, like HELP A MURDERER ESCAPE THE COUNTRY.
What the hell? Just call the cops on the guy (they ARE looking for him), get him sent to jail for murder, and then Cagney can be in the audience when he gets the chair/hanged/whatever. It's just crappy writing thrown in to add "suspense". There's another scene like this, too! It's frustrating.
Anyway, onto another Scorsese film: Goodfellas! Finally I watch that movie in full! Instead of just bits and pieces!
Yep, decent enough movie. I'd love to imagine what the audiences that were shocked by the Public Enemy would feel if they watched this movie right afterward!
The thing I find interesting about Goodfellas is that it never feels like a normal movie with a narrative, despite having one. It feels more like a History channel documentary somehow. That's the only way I can describe it.
Yeah, it's based on a true story, but I mean that there's more to it than just that. Part of it's the narration, part of it's the constant time skips. It feels very unique because of it, and it changes the way I feel about the characters I'm following, and I find them harder to read because of it.
Now of all the gangster movies I've watched, somehow Tommy is the only character so far in these types of movies that I just find absolutely disgusting. All these other murders, robbers, drug dealers, ect, and it's Tommy that I seriously cannot stand. They're ALL pieces of shit to some degree or another, but Tommy always stood out to me, and I really can't put my finger on why. I think it's just a combination of the actor and the characterization that hits me just right.
I was SO glad to see that guy get a bullet to the head. Every other expected criminal death in these movies is "Yep, you brought it on yourself", "It was only a matter of time". Tommy's death was "YEAH! That's what you GET!"
It was interesting seeing Paul Sorvino play a criminal here, despite not doing too much. He's still the same likeable type of guy he was in Law and Order, and yet he's on the opposite side of the law.
Last edited by Psychotime; November 4th, 2012 at 12:23 AM.
A tale of two sisters.
Asian Horror, spoilers alert! creepy dead girl involved
It was actually pretty well done, the editing around the scary parts worked rather nicely, the character are sort of bleh and the dialog is not a strong aspect but a lot goes in favour of the feeling of confusion that this kind of movies sort of look for.
I always get the same dejavus when watching any kind of horror movie, but it was nice.
Also watched Summer Wars...Can you get any more corny? trying to hard to be all feelgood and whatnot but it is no Tokio Godparents, falls into every cheesy thing in the book. Has some cool design and animation bits that made it worthwhile but not really as memorable as i was told.
Last edited by JDSart; November 4th, 2012 at 02:09 AM.
The Strawberry Blonde (1941).
This time Cagney plays a legitimately likeable character (at this point in his career he was REALLY tired of playing douchebags due to his old contract), and it's a pretty good movie, to boot!
It takes place in New York in the late 19th century, so expect goofy pugilism poses (Cagney's still a tough guy, but not an asshole) and jokes about the stuck up "proper" etiquette of the times. (Oh my, couples kissing in public, how shameful!)
Cagney plays a dentist who had at one point done some time in prison (still Cagney), and by a stroke of luck he gets an appointment from an old "friend" from years ago. It's made clear that Cagney doesn't have good feelings for the guy, and he flashes back to explain everything.
It sets up a revenge plot but tricks you into initially thinking that the motive is something amazingly stupid and petty, but by the end you find out the true reasons (which are completely different than you thought) and you end up agreeing that Cagney deserves some payback.
And yet, it ends the way that Taxi! SHOULD have ended. With Cagney thinking about all of the events and realizing it's just not worth it.
We do get this scene, though. And it's awesome.
( Click to show/hide )
This is the first Raoul Walsh movie I've seen, and I have high hopes for the next couple of movies by him that are on my list, Manpower (starring George Raft and Edward G Robinson) and The Roaring Twenties (another gangster movie with Cagney).
Last edited by Psychotime; November 4th, 2012 at 01:40 PM.
Watched all the episodes released so far of Sword Art Online. I actually like it. While the .hack series tried to get into MMOs the problem was, nothing happened. It was a bunch of people talking in cute RPG outfits. Nothing made it significant.
Sword Art Online is kinda like Gantz, it's a game that actually had consequences.
It's also not afraid to show a bit of love/romance and less "cocktease" "harem" crap I find in too much anime.
It's not without its problems. I think the transition to the next story arc a bit...too rushed.
Finished the first season of Alias. So after watching a bunch of them I really like the pacing and Garner is very physical in her role. The father is the best character though, he is a good guy who is totally unlikable and Victor Garber plays the character just right. Some annoying things are Garners character choices when she isn't working and some of the plot devices are really telegraphed but for network TV it is still entertaining. The lead up to the season finale reveal was too obvious but it was still a satisfying first season. I'm on to season two and we're also starting Damages with so I'll give a report after I watch a few of those.
Just watched John Carter of Mars. Was a really good movie.
Watched Abraham Lincoln vs Zombies. It was very shit.
Best part was spotting moving traffic and parked cars behind the civil war soldiers.