What's spinning in your DVD PLAYER? eh? eh? General Movie Discussion

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by bernardos70

Cedar Rapids: Very quirky comedy. Very enjoyable though, I had quite a few laughs.
Super 8: Old school sci-fi, sold as such, and delivers as such. Very fun movie. Loved it.
Too Big To Fail: Interesting, insightful. Painted Henry Paulson in a very good light.

I also have a few others waiting to be watched: Battle: Los Angeles (don't have high hopes for this one), Cyrus, and The Adjustment Bureau.

Cedar Rapids was fucking awesome.

[Murphy3]

just watched:
The World's Fastest Indian

It's an absolutely tremendous movie. Check it out..you won't be disappointed unless you have extremely bad taste.

[bernardos70]

I watched Cyrus: funny, in an extremely awkward way. Some, not many, outright laugh aloud moments, but still very funny.

[LonghornDub]

Lolzy (be sure to watch the vid):

http://jezebel.com/5816752/friends-w...ame-damn-movie

[bernardos70]

Insidious. Not bad at all. As in most horror movies, make sure your sound is right for this one: dialog sounds natural, loudness wise. It has a lot of.... dynamic range, let's just say.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

just watched:
The World's Fastest Indian

It's an absolutely tremendous movie. Check it out..you won't be disappointed unless you have extremely bad taste.

Yup...mighty good.

[CadBane]

Just watched Biutiful...wow. Can't believe how underrated that was. I know Bardem got an Oscar nom, but a lot of people saw that as an outlier and the film is only got 63% on RT, insane. Having seen all the Oscar noms from last year, no disrespect to Colin, but I think Bardem hands down deserved the award and very well might have received it if the film got better reviews as it should have.

[bernardos70]

Ya think it had anything to do with the subtitles? I know quite a few people (sadly) that would quickly discard a movie or simply go into it with a negative mindset simply because they had to read.

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by bernardos70

Ya think it had anything to do with the subtitles? I know quite a few people (sadly) that would quickly discard a movie or simply go into it with a negative mindset simply because they had to read.

I'm sure that played a role. I think there has only been 2 people that have ever won an Oscar for best actor in a foreign (subtitled) film.

[LonghornDub]

I want to smack my friends whenever they say they don't want to watch a movie because it has subtitles. You stop noticing you're even reading them after the first 15 minutes or so.

Haven't seen the film, but I've heard good things. I'll put it on the list.

[dude1394]

Half the time I put subtitles on normal movies, but subtitles do require a lot more attention.

[orangedays]

Recently watched:

The Adjustment Bureau

Like Hereafter, I thought this film had a great deal of potential with a highly original story and a solid cast. Unfortunately, also like Hereafter, I found it left far too many unanswered questions on the table and spent too much time on the love story component and too little on the thinkin' man's part of the plot - e.g., what the hell is the Adjustment Bureau, where did it come from, why is it here, etc. etc. I felt thoroughly unsatisfied leaving the theater having invested my time thinking possible solutions to those questions, only to realize the producers of the film did not care enough (or did not have the capacity) to address them. Imagine if the creators of LOST had ended that series without giving us any definitive answers...how frustrated would you be about that??? Over a full year later???

Matt Damon is a great actor and has a knack for picking interesting, intellectually-driven movies. But he is falling behind DiCaprio in applying the cerebral/visceral formula to winning films. Shutter Island and Inception focused on a singular, never-seen-before concept (e.g., crazy dude and crazy dreams, respectfully) with minimal distractions. In both films, the character lost his (tangent creating) love interest, and it was his quest for redemption, to fulfill his character arc that drew us, as the audience, in. We invested in his success, yet found equal satisfaction in his eventual failure. DiCaprio's films exist in a finite universe, a vacuum of meaning, and as a result of this existential limitation are that much more compelling. Damon attempts to transcend this and find greater meaning in life...things like 'love', and all the necessary melodrama that comes with it. It is not surprising, in retrospect, that in both Adjustment Bureau and Hereafter, we are left with closing shots showing Damon and (insert random moderately but not distractingly attractive actress here) kissing or hugging or holding hands or something that probably made your gf/wife squeeze your hand a little tighter, but did nothing for you. The more I think about it the, more disappointed I am - this film had such potential and I was looking forward to it (rare given how cynical I am), but the next time I want to be jerked around for two hours and leave feeling unsatisfied, well...nevermind.

True Grit

What a great film. Was worried at first that it would crumple under the weight of expectation but I really enjoyed this movie. Hailee Steinfeld steals every scene she is in and, along with Chloe Moretz ((500) Days of Summer, Kick-Ass), is a representative of the new wave of highly articulate, pre-pubescent supporting ladies. True Grit is very much a dialogue driven film, and while the back and forth gets somewhat unbelievable at times given context (particularly during Josh Brolin's brief appearance), I really enjoyed listening to these actors intellectualize rustic speech. Bang up movie, along with The King's Speech one of the best of the past few years.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Originally Posted by orangedays

Imagine if the creators of LOST had ended that series without giving us any definitive answers...how frustrated would you be about that??? Over a full year later???

ummmmm, did you watch LOST?

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

ummmmm, did you watch LOST?

LOST, along with the Matrix trilogy, helped ruin my ability to appreciate these long-term, "get superinvested and talk with your friends/debate with people on the internet about what's really going on" vehicles. When The Matrix came out, I was blown away. There was so much possibility there - I remember getting into heated arguments with my friends (keep in mind I was 15 at the time...and, in retrospect, an outrageous nerd) about the greater philosophical implications as this concept forced us to shift personal paradigms and reassess perceptions of OUR reality. Discussions also ensued about how the plot would progress - then the bastards turned it into a freakin' love story. Not that I'm against romance, I just think it has a time and place and shoot'em up action movies are not one of them. Neo's humanity became his fatal flaw, and the movie ended in an egregious cop-out - even the protagonist's ultimate sacrifice only meant the cycle began anew. Lesson learned? If you don't have a brilliant ending that matches the brilliance of your beginning, don't squeeze out two more movies. It's a crime against your art. We know you did it for the money. It shows.

Lesson promptly forgotten when LOST came out. I was in college and remember talking nonstop with the gf at the time about the show. What is the black smoke? Where did the polar bear/big stone foot/adam and eve come from? Are these guys already dead? The first few seasons were brilliant, and then I started to catch on. The writers kept piling question on top of question on top of question. As much as the conspiracy theorists tried, it reached a point where there was no way a coherent explanation for EVERYTHING could exist. Then the weird sh*t started happening. Traveling through time. New characters being introduced, then dying a few episodes later. Shark jumping galore. And in the end? Nothing. A big, heaping pile of nothing. Cop-out. The last season was filled with half-assed explanations that had the feel of an essay I pulled together after putting a project off for three months, then pulling two all-nighters. It made sense, but not really - C+. Boy, I was pissed.

And so, again, lesson learned. And I would like to think that America has learned along with me. "Fool me once, shame on...you. Er...fool me, well you can't get fooled again." That's why The Event was canceled. That's why Falling Skies will be canceled. That's why pieces of sh*t like Transformers 3 sell so well, because it doesn't even TRY to have a fully developed plot. Just blow stuff up. Lots of it. We are damaged goods, so afraid of being hurt again that we just go for the hot girl who's dumb as a pile of bricks - low return but no risk.

Haha...didn't mean to pull a Dennis Miller but to answer your question, yes I did watch LOST.

[Big Boy Laroux]

ha ha my statement was more along the lines of you posing your question about lost as a hypothetical. But that's actually what happened.

[CadBane]

They did give a number of definitive answers...

[Big Boy Laroux]

Right - I forgot. "You see this wheel? The wheel lets water touch light and then... MAGIC!"

I really, deep down, think the issue with LOST was that they did have a plan, and did plan to explain things in some pseudo-scientific way. But then the phenomenon took off and people were guessing left and right and coming up with logical theories on the internet.

I think some of those theories were probably dead-on, and the creators didn't like that their baby could have been figured out so easily. So then they just started making shit up.

[jthig32]

I was perfectly happy with the way Lost ended, and would absolutely watch the series again if I were to go back in time. It was well worth my time.

I personally found the show much more enjoyable once I stopped obsessing over every little clue and reading every detailed breakdown online. Focusing too heavily on the mythology led some people to miss the real point of the show, which was the characters.

I don't think there was ever a plan to explain anything in a remotely pseudo-scientific way.

[Kirobaito]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I was perfectly happy with the way Lost ended, and would absolutely watch the series again if I were to go back in time. It was well worth my time.

I personally found the show much more enjoyable once I stopped obsessing over every little clue and reading every detailed breakdown online. Focusing too heavily on the mythology led some people to miss the real point of the show, which was the characters.

I don't think there was ever a plan to explain anything in a remotely pseudo-scientific way.

Ding ding ding.

[Big Boy Laroux]

not to turn this into a LOST thread, since we have one...

BUT, i agree that it was worth my time. Mainly because of the acting, locale, direction, etc. It was an amazingly solid show. I would absolutely watch it again.

About end of season 2/start of season 3, i stopped reading stuff online. I only posted about LOST on this forum, and one other general DVD forum (DVDTalk). I agree it got more enjoyable as you watched without all the extraneous crap.

I will disagree on the explanation portion - i never needed anything explicitly explained. I never needed to know what the wheel was, for example. But when they explain it with something hokey, that sticks out in my mind. I feel there was a shift in tone mid-way through the series where things became less scientific and more mystical. DHARMA was essentially abandoned and we get the magical mystical brothers. It's my own personal opinion that the producers made this decision in direction change to avoid their project being spoiled.

Anyway, we can continue here if you want:

http://www.dallas-mavs.com/vb/showth...=35903&page=37

[ShaggyDirk]

I think once they started using "the Midi-chlorian" approach to explaining shit, I stopped caring about anything but enjoying the show...

[orangedays]

So what you guys are saying is...the less intellectual the show became, the more you enjoyed it?

To each his own, I suppose.

[LonghornDub]

Going back a few posts, I agree with OD's overall assessment of Adjustment Bureau. Good premise but I thought it didn't live up to its potential.

I get there a different way though. I don't mind the way they "explained" things. I thought it was actually pretty clear who the Bureau are etc., and anything more explicit would have been too on-the-nose for my tastes. What I didn't like about the movie is it doesn't really escalate at all after the first 30 minutes or so. It's just the same thing over and over again. He bails on the girl, randomly finds her again, bails on her....

Then the climax was horrible (that's what she said). Deus (literally) Ex Machina like whoa.

[ShaggyDirk]

Originally Posted by orangedays

So what you guys are saying is...the less intellectual the show became, the more you enjoyed it?

To each his own, I suppose.

I don't understand how you interpreted this from what we were saying. I can only speak for myself though. I felt the show really wasn't that "intellectual" in the first place. Looking back, Jthig is correct. It's all about the first season. Characters. The sci-fi/fantasy made the show more enjoyable to tak about by the water cooler. There are plenty of shows that blow LOST out of the water when it comes to a thought provoking experience.

As you correctly stated...to each his own.

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by ShaggyDirk

I don't understand how you interpreted this from what we were saying. I can only speak for myself though. I felt the show really wasn't that "intellectual" in the first place. Looking back, Jthig is correct. It's all about the first season. Characters. The sci-fi/fantasy made the show more enjoyable to tak about by the water cooler. There are plenty of shows that blow LOST out of the water when it comes to a thought provoking experience.

As you correctly stated...to each his own.

I think there were serious metaphysical elements introduced in Season 1 that made the show a philosophical exercise. It made us ask of the characters, and eventually of ourselves, "who are we?", "why are we here?", "what is the meaning of xxx?". The unanswered questions helped the story along by mirroring the unknowns in our own lives. We all find meaning by seeking answers to impossible questions. By bailing out and relying on mysticism and magic at the end of the series, the writers and producers of the film essentially said, "the answers to these questions are irrelevant - we are what we are and things are the way that things are. That is the end of that."

I agree 100% that one of the keys to the show was the characters - BUT ONLY IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF SEASONS. Before Jack became a sniveling little b*tch. Before Hurley became nothing more than fat, sweaty comic relief. Before the incessant "good cop/bad cop" back and forth with Linus. There was complexity there that was slowly whittled away and at the end, we saw that each of the characters were exactly the same. No protagonists, no antagonists. Just a bunch of disappointingly dysfunctional, normal people. If that was the point of the show, well - that simply doesn't cut it for me.

EDIT:

What my naivety (or more appropriately, self-denial) prevented me from recognizing is that it is much easier to ask the question than to provide the answer. Perhaps the writers simply didn't have the creative horsepower to get to the finish line. Maybe jthig is right, perhaps there was never any intention of going there. No greater purpose, no pride in one's art, just entertainment for the great unwashed and $$$. Maybe that's why I stopped caring and went into finance.

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Right - I forgot. "You see this wheel? The wheel lets water touch light and then... MAGIC!"

I really, deep down, think the issue with LOST was that they did have a plan, and did plan to explain things in some pseudo-scientific way. But then the phenomenon took off and people were guessing left and right and coming up with logical theories on the internet.

I think some of those theories were probably dead-on, and the creators didn't like that their baby could have been figured out so easily. So then they just started making shit up.

Bingo. That's what is mildly heart-breaking for me. This series could have been so much more, but at the end of the day, it was diluted down to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

[jthig32]

I would have to respectfully say that you have no idea what you're talking about if you think Lost appealed to the lowest common denominator. Lost was about as ambitious a network tv series as you will ever see. People bailed on the show in droves after the first season as they realized that it demanded more from them than the typical procedural drama.

The reality is that from the beginning it was a science fiction/fantasy show. The central character was a freaking island for god's sake. If you don't like what it turned in to, fine, but don't be one of these people that mistakes "something they didn't like" for "something that wasn't good".

The show itself did not become less intellectual. I simply found that I enjoyed it more when I wasn't obsessing over every single detail and connected event, especially once it became painfully obvious that 90% of these "details" were basically Easter eggs, rather than actual plot points. I still watched it with my thinking cap on, and tried to connect dots, but I wasn't interested in spending the next week breaking it down to the granular level. If that's what you enjoyed, fine, but I will always contend that the people that did that missed the overall point of the show.

And by the way, I personally certainly don't find any meaning in seeking answers to impossible questions, and I don't need a tv show to ask those kinds of questions either. At no point did Lost make me ask "why am I here".

I do completely agree on the Adjustment Bureau, fwiw. It was not good. But that's to be expected of a movie that's almost released and then pushed back about half a year.

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I would have to respectfully say that you have no idea what you're talking about if you think Lost appealed to the lowest common denominator. Lost was about as ambitious a network tv series as you will ever see. People bailed on the show in droves after the first season as they realized that it demanded more from them than the typical procedural drama.

The reality is that from the beginning it was a science fiction/fantasy show. The central character was a freaking island for god's sake. If you don't like what it turned in to, fine, but don't be one of these people that mistakes "something they didn't like" for "something that wasn't good".

The show itself did not become less intellectual. I simply found that I enjoyed it more when I wasn't obsessing over every single detail and connected event, especially once it became painfully obvious that 90% of these "details" were basically Easter eggs, rather than actual plot points. I still watched it with my thinking cap on, and tried to connect dots, but I wasn't interested in spending the next week breaking it down to the granular level. If that's what you enjoyed, fine, but I will always contend that the people that did that missed the overall point of the show.

*shakes head*

Let's dissect this.

People bailed on the show in droves after the first season as they realized that it demanded more from them than the typical procedural drama.

Wrong. Audience went up in year 2. Dropped in year 3 but it was an overall weaker TV year, relative rank still increased. Wiki it. People didn't start bailing until Season 4. "Coincidentally", this is when the show started taking tangental liberties with the plot - like freakin' time travel.

The reality is that from the beginning it was a science fiction/fantasy show. The central character was a freaking island for god's sake. If you don't like what it turned in to, fine, but don't be one of these people that mistakes "something they didn't like" for "something that wasn't good".

Right, I get that it wasn't real. I think even the lowest common denominator got that. It was a TV show after all. The burden of expectation is not on the scientific plausibility of the show jthig - you misunderstand. The key to any good story is RESOLUTION. I don't care if the explanation makes sense within the confines of today's physics, but it should at least have a clear cut rationale. That was the failure of LOST.

I simply found that I enjoyed it more when I wasn't obsessing over every single detail and connected event, especially once it became painfully obvious that 90% of these "details" were basically Easter eggs, rather than actual plot points.

This I agree on. And therein lies the heart of my disappointment. I am not satisfied with Easter Eggs. I want to be able to find deeper, subtle meaning in my media, whether that be a book, a movie or a TV show. There are plenty of TV shows about characters. This was a show that advertised itself in Season 1 as something more. You enjoyed it more when the details stopped mattering. I prefer detail and complexity. To each his own.

If that's what you enjoyed, fine, but I will always contend that the people that did that missed the overall point of the show.

Pray tell, what was the overall point of the show?

LOST was indeed ambitious, I don't deny that. But that ambition went unfulfilled. I would have to respectfully say that you have no idea what you're talking about if you don't think LOST subordinated its artistic credibility to the greater purpose of appealing to a bigger audience (a point, which I should note, it failed at as reflected in its declining ratings). The show had incredible potential and peaked too early, then became an unwieldy behemoth of subplots and cross references that needed to be unwound in a hurry because it was no longer economically feasible to continue shooting. It's a shame, really.

[orangedays]

As an aside, I do want to note that in no way is any of this meant to be disrespectful - I am enjoying the debate. Missed doing this for the last few years.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by orangedays

You enjoyed it more when the details stopped mattering. I prefer detail and complexity. To each his own.

You continue to miss my point here. The details didn't "stop mattering". Lost was always a show that you had to be very tuned in to. It still brought many discussion points to the table. Many episodes made more sense after a second viewing. What I stopped doing was obsessing over every..single..moment of the show. I stopped reading the incredibly detailed blogs/sites that broke down every single moment and talked about what each meant and what theories this did or did not help.

I love detailed television. The Wire is the greatest thing that's ever been on television, and that show fit the pieces together across multiple seasons masterfully.

So no, the details didn't "stop mattering", I just simply came up for air and followed the details at a more typical level.

As to what the point was..I already said, it was about the characters. The first season was great BECAUSE you spent the whole season learning about these characters, why they were here and what tied them together. That's what set the entire show into motion, for me.

One final point: I could not disagree more with the notion that they "sold out". They did exactly he opposite, actually. Selling out would have been to start answering questions they never intended on answering. Selling out would have been simplify the plot, make it easier for people to follow along. In my opinion they went the opposite direction. They dug their heels in the ground and made the show they wanted to make, regardless of what was happening with the ratings.

[Underdog]

Kate was a Cylon.

[orangedays]

You continue to miss my point here. The details didn't "stop mattering". Lost was always a show that you had to be very tuned in to. It still brought many discussion points to the table. Many episodes made more sense after a second viewing. What I stopped doing was obsessing over every..single..moment of the show. I stopped reading the incredibly detailed blogs/sites that broke down every single moment and talked about what each meant and what theories this did or did not help.

I think this is less an issue of my missing the point and more one of your inability to clearly communicate your point. You said this:

once it became painfully obvious that 90% of these "details" were basically Easter eggs, rather than actual plot points.

If 90% of Input A does not contribute to Output B, one can safely assume that A does not matter. But I digress from turning this into an argument over semantics. I understand your position, you liked the details but weren't obsessed. 10-4. Again, that might have worked for you but my enjoyment derived from the belief that those details held greater meaning. When it became apparent that they did not, that's when my relationship with LOST began to deteriorate.

I love detailed television. The Wire is the greatest thing that's ever been on television, and that show fit the pieces together across multiple seasons masterfully.

I have heard nothing but good things about this show so it's creeped way up to the top of my list after I polish off The Civil War, Baseball and The War by Ken Burns. The Wire and Friday Night Lights.

As to what the point was..I already said, it was about the characters. The first season was great BECAUSE you spent the whole season learning about these characters, why they were here and what tied them together. That's what set the entire show into motion, for me.

And I agree on this point - Season 1 was phenomenal. A tour de force of cinematic television. Season 2 was great, reminiscent of Season 1. Then the wheels started getting a little creaky, then they started coming off. For me (emphasis on the caveat), it was better not knowing certain things about these characters than seeing them in their full, imperfect splendor. I thought the story was better off just being Jack + Kate. Not Jack + Kate + Sawyer - Jack + Jack. I hate soap operas.

One final point: I could not disagree more with the notion that they "sold out". They did exactly he opposite, actually. Selling out would have been to start answering questions they never intended on answering. Selling out would have been simplify the plot, make it easier for people to follow along. In my opinion they went the opposite direction. They dug their heels in the ground and made the show they wanted to make, regardless of what was happening with the ratings.

This is pure speculation. How are we to know what they intended to answer or not? As a perpetual conspiracy theorist, I think Big Boy Laroux hit the nail on the head. There were probably more answers than we saw - but what was the point when every base had already been covered by obsessed netizens? It was better to leave us scratching our heads. The Soprano school of ending a dramatic series. You don't think they simplified the plot? Here's an easy question - was Season 6 as good as Season 1 or 2? Was the show moving on an upward or downward trajectory? This had everything to do with the plot. Maybe there were more moving parts (and by that definition, the plot was more complex), but there were fewer compelling elements. People were getting bored.

My guess is as good as yours, but I truly believe there were exogenous factors that made continued production of the show untenable, economic (cast salaries, shooting costs, declining ratings) and non-economic (exhaustion, other projects). As a result the powers that be made the decision to pull the plug quickly and play it off as "this is what we intended all along and it's so deep you might not understand it, but trust us. "

[LonghornDub]

Carry on.

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Kate was a Cylon.

Haha, had to google that. I've never actually seen an episode of Battlestar Galactica, but Grace Park is a stone cold fox.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by orangedays

Haha, had to google that. I've never actually seen an episode of Battlestar Galactica, but Grace Park is a stone cold fox.

I have no idea what this thread is about anymore, but(t)....

[orangedays]

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Underdog again."

I think you and LonghornDub are winning this debate, hands down.

EDIT:

Dammit, LonghornDub too. I used to give this stuff out like candy, I'm out of touch.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by orangedays

My guess is as good as yours, but I truly believe there were exogenous factors that made continued production of the show untenable, economic (cast salaries, shooting costs, declining ratings) and non-economic (exhaustion, other projects). As a result the powers that be made the decision to pull the plug quickly and play it off as "this is what we intended all along and it's so deep you might not understand it, but trust us. "

I'm confused by the "pull the plug quickly" notion. They had the end date set after season three.

[orangedays]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I'm confused by the "pull the plug quickly" notion. They had the end date set after season three.

There may have been a predefined end date but I posit that there was an imperfect understanding of what would happen in the interim period. If you are familiar with underwear gnomes:



If anything, I would say the predetermined timeline exacerbated the issue. Towards the end, the realization dawned on the writers and producers that time was running out to tie things together / close things out. That's why things got sloppier and sloppier as we approached the final episode. I point to my prior example of a long-term essay project that I put off for three months, then banged out over two sleepless nights. By the time it came to write a coherent conclusion, I simply didn't care. And it showed.

[Big Boy Laroux]

ha ha ha ha, i love that picture so much.

[CadBane]

jthig ftw...carry on.