A few films recently watched.

i saw inglourious basterds in blu ray. oh my god. that was the first time i've ever actually seen blu ray. it's a little weird. yes the picture is wonderful, but the movement and motion of everything seems so fluid and perfect. it's hard to describe, but it almost makes it look like it's not even a movie

i just watched Lost Highway for the first time. Jesus Christ./

  On 1/11/2010 at 12:27 AM, data said:

oh? someone was complaining about how it was still missing a bunch of scenes ..oh well.

yes, there were a whole bunch of releases yesterday where the movie was missing 20 or so minutes. But today a complete version of the movie has been posted. I just quickly checked the version I downloaded and its all there in its entirety.

The only problem is the quality. Its pretty decent but since the movie has a lot of dark scenes, sometimes its had to fgure out whats going on.

I cant complain because the movie is not playing anywhere near me.

  On 1/11/2010 at 1:18 AM, yek said:

i just watched Lost Highway for the first time. Jesus Christ./

I love that film. I saw Funny People last night which... wasn't actually that funny. If it decided whether it wanted to be a drama or a comedy it would have been better.

  On 1/11/2010 at 12:51 AM, Calx Sherbet said:

i saw inglourious basterds in blu ray. oh my god. that was the first time i've ever actually seen blu ray. it's a little weird. yes the picture is wonderful, but the movement and motion of everything seems so fluid and perfect. it's hard to describe, but it almost makes it look like it's not even a movie

are you sure you didn't watch it on one of those bizarre 'flo-motion' capable HD tvs made by Samsung or Sonyt hat ads 6 extra new frames into a 24 frames per second film?

if so those do look fucking weird and i cannot enjoy watching movies on them, it makea professional movies look like made for TV video taped transmissions.

Just saw

Lovely Bones - 5/10, i'm frankly shocked Peter Jackson has lost it so badly. The visuals in the movie were well done but almost everything else seemed half assed and did not gel. Mark Whalberg, an actor i usually cannot stand was probably the least problematic thing about this movie.

Bad Lieutenant (Remake) - 6/10, I give Werner Herzog some credit of trying to do something very different for the remake but it veered too closely to the original that it's hard not to keep comparing the two. And the Able Ferrera version seems like a masterpiece compared to this one. Nicholas Cage is hilarious in parts, and those are probably the best scenes of the movie but it was completely devoid of the dirty voyeuristic feel you get after you watch the one with Harvey Kietel. Too much talking in this version, and not enough scenes that reach the heights of Kietel on so much heroin that he cries naked or shoots his radio after his baseball team looses. Most people i've heard opinions from about this movie either haven't seen the original or arent fans of the original. it would be interesting to hear opinions from people who like the original.

theyre completely different films. the only similarity is the name

i do like the original but i see no point in comparing them

the name was definitely not the only similarity, his sports gambling debts building up towards the end, him being threatened with violence if he didn't pay up his debts and well the crack smoking all seemed directly influenced from the original. As well as the one scene where the couple tells him 'please dont tell my parents' seemed like a direct paralell to the scene in the original when he pulls over the 2 women who take out their fathers car for a joy ride. Were these coincidences? I believe Werner Herzog hasn't seen the original, but its out of the question to me that he just organically made a totally different movie with such similar scenes and elements. clearly he had some knowledge of the original movie's plot. I just thought it didn't hold a candle to the original and i was hoping it would be more dissimilar. I found it too similar to fully enjoy. I actually went into the movie hoping it was going to be 'completely different' , but it was not

  On 1/10/2010 at 4:27 PM, Hoodie said:

i watched the godfather and godfather part ii recently. gonna start on part iii soon.

 

they're such fucking amazing movies. i can't believe i've never seen them before. i love the character of michael. he's simultaneously good and evil and you keep rooting for him, no matter the rotten things he does. it's awesome

don't watch III

II was the pinnacle

im hesitant to watch 3, mostly because of how bad coppola's films from that era are. 2 was pretty amazing, it's rare to see a sequel that in a lot of ways exceeds the original.

  On 1/11/2010 at 3:07 AM, Awepittance said:

the name was definitely not the only similarity, his sports gambling debts building up towards the end, him being threatened with violence if he didn't pay up his debts and well the crack smoking all seemed directly influenced from the original. As well as the one scene where the couple tells him 'please dont tell my parents' seemed like a direct paralell to the scene in the original when he pulls over the 2 women who take out their fathers car for a joy ride. Were these coincidences? I believe Werner Herzog hasn't seen the original, but its out of the question to me that he just organically made a totally different movie with such similar scenes and elements. clearly he had some knowledge of the original movie's plot. I just thought it didn't hold a candle to the original and i was hoping it would be more dissimilar. I found it too similar to fully enjoy. I actually went into the movie hoping it was going to be 'completely different' , but it was not

my guess is the person that wrote the screenplay saw the original. ok, similar plot points aside, the tone of the film is so completely different from the original. ferraras film never even came to my mind while watching the 'remake'. its more of a herzog film than his past few fiction attempts.. "rescue dawn" and "invincible" didnt feel like herzog films at all really

being not really familiar with Herzog's stuff, i just went into it hoping it was going to be a movie that gelled and had coherent pacing and characters. It didn't really succeed on that level for me. There were moments of the film where i was laughing out loud and pretty engaged but overall it fell kind of flat. The artsy stuff in it seemed almost tacked on too and didn't fit with the rest of the movie ie :the inguanas, the breakdancer ghost and alligator. I loved those parts individually but they felt like they were from a different movie, didn't belong with the rest of it. The film just felt too standard and paced like a hollywood movie to warrant those odd breaks to his hallucinations. i wanted something a little weirder or higher concept overall

those 'tacked on artsy parts' are pure herzog! i mean, this is not someone who wakes up one day feeling artsy and decides to put it in his film.. those parts, for me, added to the gleeful insanity of it all

i liked those parts, i just didn't like the rest of the movie , so it just didnt feel like they fit with the tone of the rest of it.

I'm really behind as far as Herzog is concerned, i think the only other movie i've seen of his was his previous documentary 'encounters at the end of the world'

don't know if you remember my top 40 list of the decade, but perhaps you can recommend other good movies of his to see?

aguirre

stroszek

the enigma of kaspar hauser

nosferatu

theres a bunch..

pretty much everything he made in the 70s is good.

which luckily it seems most of those movies are on netflix streaming right now! i'm excited a have a bunch of new movies to watch

Visioneers - 2/10 What a piece of shit.

This is England - 8/10

  On 1/10/2010 at 1:54 PM, lumpenprol said:

Buffalo 66. Some of you guys adore this flick, really? I mean I fully understand the appeal of hottie cupie Christina Ricci, she raises the film by at least 3 points - the film deserves to stay around for the sole reason that it's a testament to her beauty pre anorexia and boob reduction. The film deserves another point for probably being the inspiration for bullet time in the Matrix, I had no idea. but apart from that...Vincent Gallo is a pretty unappealing character and his attempts to humanize himself struck me as phony. The film is extremely thin; apart from the dinner sequence there's basically nothing there. 5/10

i loved the movie, but it could be that i was so much younger back then. i really had no problems with Gallo's character, i found him very familiar and started to care about him deeply very soon after the beginning. well, i guess that's what bothers most people - Gallo's roles seem to always be the sort of a heartbroken, depressive and a bit quirky characters that need you care for them, almost like a child. as i said, i loved that when i saw buffalo 66, but i can see myself hating it for that if i saw today.

  On 1/11/2010 at 12:51 AM, Calx Sherbet said:

i saw inglourious basterds in blu ray. oh my god. that was the first time i've ever actually seen blu ray. it's a little weird. yes the picture is wonderful, but the movement and motion of everything seems so fluid and perfect. it's hard to describe, but it almost makes it look like it's not even a movie

it's not about blu-ray, it's not about HD. it's called MCFI (motion compensated frame interpolation) and you need to turn it off NOW. then proceed to write an email to that TV's manufacturer: "I FUCKING HATE MCFI AND WILL NOT BUY ANY MORE OF YOUR PRODUCTS UNTIL YOU STOP PRODUCING TELEVISION WITH MCFI".

Lol, kokoon, give it a chance man. There has got to be some way to use that technology!

actually, it is - porn.

wow, yea, real live porn in your living room. With your tv they're all life size or more!

  On 1/11/2010 at 3:43 AM, Z_B_Z said:

aguirre

stroszek

the enigma of kaspar hauser

nosferatu

 

theres a bunch..

 

pretty much everything he made in the 70s is good.

must sees as far as i know - fitzcarraldo, aguirre-wrath of god, woyzeck, nosferatu (klaus kinski ftw)

i also thoroughly enjoyed the recent(ish) documentary, grizzly man.

daybreakers 7/10

it was like someone had an interesting concept and gave it to some idiots to write the script. it romanticized vampires. the antithesis of twilight. everyones a vampire and its boring. being human is where its at. i actually really enjoyed the experience of watching this movie. if i could leave it there i'd be happy but there were so many cliches (how many times in 1 movie can someone be about to be shoot and someone else shoot the shooter before they shoot? fuck!). the ridiculous gore and blood was silly and made me laugh pretty hard but made my wife feel sick even though it was clearly over the top and comical. i definitely liked it but thinking about it afterward it is bad

and why did ethan hawkes vampire character have a kitchen? vampires don't eat.

fucking lol at the trailer for legion!!!

funny people 6/10

the comedy was bad. way too many awful (not even really) jokes about balls and big cocks. the story part was actually interesting. if they edited out the funny it could be a decentish hour and a half movie called 'people'. oh and lose seth rogen and ditch the writer/directors family from the cast too

Touch of Evil - 8/10 - This was Welles cut of the film I believe. A classic and probably one of my favorite openings to a film. Spare the handful of plot holes and a few poor characters, I love this damn film... especially its lighting and camera work. One of my favorite scenes...

Chaplin - 7/10 - The first half of the film felt very forced and lacked every bit of momentum. The use of transitions, though I know were tribute to those Chaplin would often use in his films, were far over used and cringe-worthy at times. The young Robert Downey Jr, spare some rather terrible makeup for the elder Chaplin, and the films ending helped bump this up from a 5/6 to a 7.

Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium - 4/10 - Another really bad regurgitated representation of the loss of inner child. I dug the set design, use of color though, and Dustin Hoffman.

fantastic mr. fox 7/10

if nothing else, only because of the scene with the