|
Post by tsmooth31 on Nov 26, 2008 18:30:55 GMT -5
let me know what you think of it, it had some good gore although the blood was to watery looking, usually i like weird movies but this one just seemed pointless, it never really answered any questions and like i said is filled with some really weird characters and weird scenes, all i could think of was what the fuck did i just watch after i saw it
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 26, 2008 20:46:44 GMT -5
Fearless(Jet Li) : I have seen many times but have watched again recently. Probably a poor choice of description but... this movie is beautiful. Everything from the scenery to the ending to the message. The fights are cool(not as good as kiss of the Dragon) and the plot is very good. This makes me want to watch "Once Upon A Time in China". Action masterpiece. 9/10
p.s. I really want to see Tony Jaa and Jet Li in a film together. Who's with me???
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 27, 2008 3:21:31 GMT -5
i watch horror movies just about every night, do you think i really care if i have some gay moron saying i dont like horror?? First of all, the fact that I'm gay has nothing to do with my taste in horror (YEAH RIGHT!). Well, you have no idea what it's like to be gay, so you wouldn't know anything about that either. You may watch horror movies, but that doesn't mean you understand the genre. Which you clearly don't. see i could be like you and say you dont know horror because you dont like some of the stuff i like, but im not a little kid that has to know more then you and be better then you, im mature enough to realize that for the most part we both have different tastes when it comes to horror, if you wanna grow up and actually have a convo with me let me know You are not mature in any way, shape, or form. And you don't have "convo"s with people. You simplify everything, ignore great movies, and overrate shit like Saw. You call it taste, but you've proved you have NO taste. You won't even talk about yourself because you can't stand criticism. Every time you get it, you twist it around and say the same thing about other people. Like that old "I'm rubber, your glue thing." Which again proves you're NOT mature. So keep denying it all. YOU'RE the moron and you prove it every time you reply.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Nov 27, 2008 4:59:53 GMT -5
talking in the third person again i see
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 27, 2008 5:01:22 GMT -5
Relying on the same few words and terms you learned in high school English class to try and make yourself look clever I see.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Nov 27, 2008 5:04:24 GMT -5
you shouldnt talk about trying to make yourself look clever..........
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 27, 2008 6:12:04 GMT -5
I'm not talking about that. You should know that by now.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 30, 2008 14:56:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Dec 2, 2008 5:08:35 GMT -5
I watched this with the understanding that it was supposed to be a spoof of murder mysteries and what it ended up being was a 2nd-rate version of a better mystery, dragging on for what felt like forever, and divulging into so many details in a case that I couldn't possibly have cared less about. However, other than a few good style and music choices, it does have some funny moments. Those are the only thing that keep this interesting. There's supposed to be a much funnier English-language version with several different scenes. And, watched the new-world famous: And... wow, what a movie. It's not a masterpiece. Nor is it among Argento's best. It's a return to his great style, but also lacks a lot from his older films. It's as good as any Argento film/project from the-new-millennium could be. Also, there are A LOT of surprises in this movie. Like some really stupid scenes, some outrageously LAUGH OUT LOUD funny moments, quite a bit of campy stuff, and a lot of really beautiful scenes. It's also worth mentioning that the first 11 minutes of this movie are the worst of any of Argento's career. Even worse than Phantom of the Opera. But thank God it started to get better. The ending is surprisingly silly and surreally fun.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Dec 4, 2008 22:08:48 GMT -5
the ending sucked, it was way to cliche and dumb, although all of his movies are pretty cliche, its all about the atmosphere and gore for him
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Dec 5, 2008 5:03:38 GMT -5
just watched the movie scarce about 3 guys driving home i na blizzard who crash and go look for help and end up running into some cannibal hillbillies, sure it was a been there done that seen it already movie, but it was atleast a good one, shot on a great location with good scenery, had a litle suspense, some good gore, the acting was a bit stiff and cheesy at times but thats to be expected in a low budget dtv movie, 8/10
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Dec 5, 2008 5:54:11 GMT -5
the ending sucked, it was way to cliche and dumb You didn't get the humor of it, did you? And it was stylized, T - it wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. It wasn't supposed to be suspenseful or scary. although all of his movies are pretty cliche, its all about the atmosphere and gore for him He invents his own cliche. His movies take place in their own world. And they're also not really that gory. Suspiria was a little bit gory, Tenebre was very bloody. Stendhal Syndrome was extremely violent. But other than that, the rates of his films are usually 2% blood or special effects (which is why they usually look so bad- the "barb wire" throat-cutting scene in Suspiria for instance, it's a bad-looking effect). He's hardly Lucio Fulci. That guy's movies are at least a hardy 8% gore and FX. You're not giving the structures of his films enough credit. They're a lot more open wide than you think. There's a lot of story in his films, it's just in the visuals. In any dialogue scene in an Argento film, half of the substance is in the crude words, but the other half is in the camera angles and movement, the music, lighting, and set / art design / location. Trauma, for instance, is jam-packed full of story. Argento is an art lover, so there are sculptures and paintings all over the scenes that enhance the meaning of it. Same with The Stendhal Syndrome. There's a world of stuff going on in the scenes at the art gallery and the museum. Every piece of art or nature or architecture he shoots up close has meaning. It's usually an Italian or European location, so I can't really tell you what it means. But he's been so thoroughly studied by other people, that it's already been discovered how much stuff Argento is actually saying in his movies that some people write off as just gory. If you re-watch them, you'll see how little gore and violence is in them. People just say that because that's what they remember from most horror movies they watch. You're programmed to remember certain things more than others. watched this PG-er on TV: It's nowhere near as good as Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. And no matter how much it may be like the famous and subversive book, it takes inspiration from the original movie. It also has absolutely zero subversive or dark bite to it. It's too farty and expensive and mainstream and over-the-top to nail any points home. Oh, sure- the kids are nastier and much less likable here than they were in the 1971 version. But you end up hating them as much as you'd hate Buffy or The Gilmore Girls or most of the Friends characters. You know? Wow, a movie achieved something that hundreds of other movies and TV shows have already done in the last 7 years. Bravo! Johnny Depp is nowhere near as good as Gene Wilder was. His performance here grows tiring very fast. It's worth noting right away though, how much Helena Bonham Carter looks like she's doing an impression of Johnny Depp in this movie. She looks so much like he did in Sleepy Hollow, it's hilarious! The movie is nothing more than stylish and very expensive-looking. And I rarely count that as a flaw. Just one musical number by the Oompa Loompa hologram-parade here will send most serious film-lovers running for the hills or clutching their BARF BAGs. For once, a festive film about colors and candy has left a distinctly bad taste in my mouth.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Dec 5, 2008 13:42:16 GMT -5
well i find all of his movies gory enough and i think it always looks pretty good, except for in pelts where it just looked to fake, when it comes to argento hes really hit or miss, you have movies like the card player, trauma and do you like hitchcock which are very average and then you have movies like opera and sleepless which are excellent, i also found susperia to be very overated, i like it but didnt think it was nearly as good as some people would have you believe
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Dec 5, 2008 13:52:45 GMT -5
Argento was almost always HIT at a time. Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Deep Red, Suspiria, Tenebre, Phenomena, Opera, The Stendhal Syndrome, and Jenifer are all hits for certain. Inferno was better than average. Four Flies on Gray Velvet was okay (might be a lot more effective in widescreen when the DVD finally comes out). I think Trauma is underrated by many, even though it's not great- it's at least better than Pelts, Cat o' Nine Tails, and Phantom of the Opera (1998).
And now, there's Mother of Tears. Which sits side-by-side with Trauma and Four Flies on Gray Velvet for good but not great. Overall, Argento is way more hit than miss. Which makes him in my opinion, the greatest horror director of all time.
Haven't seen Sleepless yet and am really waiting for Lionsgate (those lazy FUCKERS!!!) to finally release a widescreen special edition, and I will see The Card Player and Do You Like Hitchcock? before the weekend is over (they're on Netflix's online-movie player).
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Dec 6, 2008 11:22:10 GMT -5
Iron Man- Finally, a decent Marvel film. No one could have played Tony Stark better than Robert Downey Jr. Gwyneth Paltrow was pretty dry but then again, when isn't she?! 8/10
Return to Sleepaway Camp - Watchable. I felt that it had the same tone as the original. Alan's character was one big whiskey-shit gone wrong. It's hard to get people's sympathy when they would be more than happy to kill you themselves(ie. Franklin from TCM). 6/10
|
|
lowkey
SERIAL KILLER
Posts: 574
|
Post by lowkey on Dec 6, 2008 20:20:58 GMT -5
Tropic Thunder and Hancock. My friend invited me over to watch movies with him, his wife, and stepson. Tropic Thunder was pretty funny. A lot better than I would have expected, though still not great comedy like the Big Lebowski, or Airplane.
Hancock is just completely boring. I quit caring about 15 minutes in, and it never managed to pull me back in.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Dec 7, 2008 1:04:51 GMT -5
Nice to know you're not dead yet, Low! re-watched: And, for a sequel to a 70's masterpiece made in the "Friday the 13th" 80's... it's better than expected. It thinks it knows what the original was all about from a directorial standpoint. But as we've all learned, the writing was meant to be bad since John Carpenter and Debra Hill only did the sequel for money. However, the directing is not that bad. Visually, it looks great. Dean Cundey's cinematography is as incredible here as it was in the original. There's lots of color, lots of Halloween-isms, the Alan Howarth music is amazing, and though it's a graphic slasher film where the first was not- it's mostly fun to watch. Of course... Jamie Lee Curtis runs too fast and too easily through the hospital for someone drugged up with so many injuries.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Dec 7, 2008 2:13:33 GMT -5
lowkey might not be dead, but i think piggsy might be, we really need to get some more people here
|
|
lowkey
SERIAL KILLER
Posts: 574
|
Post by lowkey on Dec 7, 2008 7:16:59 GMT -5
Sorry I haven't been around much. My mom died in Oct. and I just haven't felt like doing much of anything.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Dec 7, 2008 7:59:04 GMT -5
lowkey might not be dead, but i think piggsy might be, we really need to get some more people here I agree. We're not some tiny little fly-by-night thing. We're Big-Timers. We could practically start our own The-Video-Graveyard or The-Horror-Debate if we wanted to. Sorry I haven't been around much. My mom died in Oct. and I just haven't felt like doing much of anything. I'm very sorry about that. If a family member of mine died, I'd be doing everything I can to not think about it. But I know other people have more ties to their family. Sorry for your loss and I hope you only think about the good things. No use thinking about the bad now.
|
|