|
I watched The Grey the other night. It was a good, if bleak thriller and I'm just going to copy and paste the main plot here from Wikipedia:quote:The story follows a number of oil-men stranded in Alaska after a plane crash, who are forced to survive using little more than their wits, as a pack of grey wolves stalk them amidst mercilessly cold weather. And after reading the Wikipedia article, I learned I should have stuck through the end of the credits to find out what happened after the ending.
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
So Cabin In The Woods just popped up on UK Netflix, and holy balls if amid all the horrible beasties killing everyone, that loving unicorn prancing about goring people with tinkly music wasn't the greatest thing I've ever seen. Would recommend to anyone who is a fan of horror which doesn't take itself seriously. Hahaha Sigourney Weaver cameo while openly deconstructing all horror films
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
I loving love Cabin in the Woods and wish I had seen it sooner. The merman lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Cabin in the Woods is legit one of the best deconstructions and light hearted looks at horror movies we've ever had, and the fact that (if I remember right?) it was advertised as a straight up 100% genuine horror movie makes it better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 06:05
|
|
|
I watched Cosmopolis last night, and it was excellent. It's mostly quiet and low-key, but I was enthralled through every scene. If you like Cronenberg's dramas it's a must watch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
I had a great time with Let the Bullets Fly. It was a fun Chinese action/comedy that had some great characters and story in it, without taking itself seriously. English required subtitles if I recall correctly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
gently caress. I thought they would have uploaded all the episodes of the Cartoon Network/Adult Swim shows but they put up the first season or so of most of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Twitch posted:I watched Cosmopolis last night, and it was excellent. It's mostly quiet and low-key, but I was enthralled through every scene. If you like Cronenberg's dramas it's a must watch. Yeah if you liked Network at all I would give Cosmopolis a shot since they're fairly similar in their dialogue and storylines. Network is about the role of the media and an emotionally disturbed TV host, Cosmopolis is about the role of cybercapitalism and its effects and an emotionally disturbed smug Zuckerberg like character. However if you hate soliloquies and navel-gazing (or were expecting a regular movie plot) then it might make you scream at the screen. Also its worth it just to see Robert Pattinson get pied in the faced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
I finally had the time to watch Cosmopolis.  Amazing movie! I still don't understand why the flood of bad reviews,or why the majority of Pattinson fans seem to hate it so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:I finally had the time to watch Cosmopolis. Hahaha like you don't know who the majority of Pattinson fans are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
Tardcore posted:Hahaha like you don't know who the majority of Pattinson fans are.  Do I? HAH!But yeah,I hope he makes more movies in this style, just for the pleasure of seeing their reactions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
priznat posted:I loving love Cabin in the Woods and wish I had seen it sooner. I've witnessed this reaction enough times to convince me to watch it myself. My friends gush about it being "an awesome horror film," but apparently I'm just not in on the joke yet 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
GOTTA STAY FAI posted:I've witnessed this reaction enough times to convince me to watch it myself. My friends gush about it being "an awesome horror film," but apparently I'm just not in on the joke yet It's not much of a horror film, but if you enjoy being "in on jokes" you'll love it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Yeah I don't consider it to be a horror movie really, but it is smart, well written with a great cast and some real "haha wtf??" moments. I dig it a lot. Jenkins is a hoot. Also: "Am I on speakerphone?" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
Is Cabin in the Woods on the US Netflix? I haven't seen it on there. We watched Battle Royale tonight and enjoyed it. Thanks for the recommendation, people in this thread!
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
Samurai Jack For those who aren't familiar with it, its a heavily stylized animated action/adventure series that premiered on Cartoon Network. It follows a samurai sent forward in time by Aku (a dangerous, yet odd and sort-of naive demon) to a bizarre futuristic world ruled by said demon. Apparently, some people consider it to be "anime", but don't let that deter you. The animation is refreshingly unique and stylish, and the design blends elements of caricature and cartoon with gritty sci-fi noire and fantasy landscapes. Screencaps:   
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
grapey posted:Is Cabin in the Woods on the US Netflix? I haven't seen it on there. It isn't :/ I just checked. Samurai Jack is a brilliant show and has some very creative action direction. If memory serves, there are a few episodes without dialogue and I have a huge boner for stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:I finally had the time to watch Cosmopolis. I like slow, rambling, navel-gazey films but Cosmopolis felt too far up its own rear end for even me. It just felt like its ambition far exceeded its execution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 07:43
|
|
|
The Hunger Games is kind of a disturbingly average movie that shows how making simple mistakes can completely undermine the entire film itself. The violence is too bland and not very affecting, it's not going to startle anyone but weirdos who've watched nothing but Full House their entire lives, I guess. Ultimately that means that whatever sort of gut reaction you were supposed to have when seeing kids kill each other only really lies in the concept, the director was fairly inept at actually making it have a visceral response from what actually exists in the movie. I don't mean the violence should have been gorier, or necessarily even more overt, but something, anything should have been to make it actually have weight, because it doesn't. Also, I may be overly sensitive, but seeing the rich "future people" and having all the men seem incredibly effetimate was giving me mixed signals, like the movie was trying to make some statement about men being emasculated in this sort of society. Whatever. I don't know, that's another criticism, the whole movie is kind of this droning hodge-podge of attempted social commentary that just kind of simmers in the background and never actually says anything. It's like they didn't have the balls to go full out beyond the uber-typical overhanging themes the movie presented. It was fairly pedestrian in that form. Also the character of Rue was barely developed and I don't really understand what her purpose was. Is there more exposition in the novel? Who knows? I read 1984 and I read Battle Royale, I don't feel like reading some soppy young adult novels that make thematic retreads on age old ideas. The CGI is also horrendously distracting, and the special effects are generally bad, even the make-up for the wounds the characters suffer was also pretty lame. Also what the gently caress was with the weird painted camouflage? How do you manage that in such a short period of time? I didn't loving get it. What a bizarrely middling movie that makes absolutely no sense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 08:04
|
|
|
JebanyPedal posted:The Hunger Games is kind of a disturbingly average movie that shows how making simple mistakes can completely undermine the entire film itself. The violence is too bland and not very affecting, it's not going to startle anyone but weirdos who've watched nothing but Full House their entire lives, I guess. Ultimately that means that whatever sort of gut reaction you were supposed to have when seeing kids kill each other only really lies in the concept, the director was fairly inept at actually making it have a visceral response from what actually exists in the movie. I don't mean the violence should have been gorier, or necessarily even more overt, but something, anything should have been to make it actually have weight, because it doesn't. Its a movie for tweens who liked the books. The books are actually pretty good though, in the same way that Harry Potter is really quite enjoyable reading, not that they're not "Young Adult" books. As for the mens stylistic choices, it actually harks very well to nobility dress in the middle ages compared to the working population. But anyways, you're not the intended audience for the movie and in that sense it's a poor film. For fans of the books, it wasn't a bad depiction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 13:49
|
|
|
Jellymouth posted:Samurai Jack FYI all that poo poo is by Scott Wills http://animationbgs.blogspot.com/
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 13:55
|
|
|
JebanyPedal posted:The Hunger Games is kind of a disturbingly average movie that shows how making simple mistakes can completely undermine the entire film itself. The violence is too bland and not very affecting, it's not going to startle anyone but weirdos who've watched nothing but Full House their entire lives, I guess. Ultimately that means that whatever sort of gut reaction you were supposed to have when seeing kids kill each other only really lies in the concept, the director was fairly inept at actually making it have a visceral response from what actually exists in the movie. I don't mean the violence should have been gorier, or necessarily even more overt, but something, anything should have been to make it actually have weight, because it doesn't. The thing I liked best about how they had all the men dress in the capital zone was that when they got Lenny Kravitz they basically just put a little gold eye shadow on him and put him out there as-is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 15:26
|
|
|
People that read the book told me that it's almost impossible to turn it into a good movie because of all the internal dialogue the protagonist has (what's her name again?) that actually gives more depth than a cardboard cutout.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Pope Mobile posted:People that read the book told me that it's almost impossible to turn it into a good movie because of all the internal dialogue the protagonist has <b>(what's her name again?)</b> that actually gives more depth than a cardboard cutout. Catnip? Catpiss? Catmiss? Catiss? Caty? Something about a cat? I enjoyed it, but it wasn't a movie to praise or obsess for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
There's a phrase I've seen people use when evaluating sports talent. They say that the "hate has gone too far." This means people had notions that a player was bad and they go into evaluating them with confirmation bias and it drives the player way down because they just keep looking for reasons to hate them. This is what's happening with Hunger Games. Is it transcendent filmmaking? No. Is it a movie based on a young adult novel. It sure is. People are more passionate about hating it for some reason than those who like it. Personally, I thought it was alright. The best thing that HG has for it was the whole America has fallen apart and is vaguely mirroring the descent of Rome. The opulent central city, gladitorial combat, etc. It's sad they don't explore that more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:There's a phrase I've seen people use when evaluating sports talent. They say that the "hate has gone too far." This means people had notions that a player was bad and they go into evaluating them with confirmation bias and it drives the player way down because they just keep looking for reasons to hate them. They do explore the city in the sequels. I have high hopes for the next two movies. I agree with you about the unnecessary hate. Hunger Games wasn't trying to win an Oscar, you guys know that right? Its an adaptation of a book that middle school kids read for fun. If you feel the need to write 500 words on why the "pacing was off", then you weren't the target audience. And, you know, at least hunger games has better themes and more purpose got existing than poo poo like Twilight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
My only problem with The Hunger Games movie was that as a stand-alone movie it was bad at explaining the back story, essentially diving into the action with no purpose to support it. As a counter-example I felt that the Harry Potter movies were better at being good standalone (in series) movies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
Drunk Tomato posted:They do explore the city in the sequels. I have high hopes for the next two movies. I have a hard time buying that though. The Harry Potter movies were smash hits, were incredibly watchable and were written for the exact same audience. They handled dark themes in ways that showed a real threat of danger but was mild enough for kids to enjoy but still managed to be enjoyable movies across audience. HG managed to spend the majority of its time sitting in trees and caves that ended up with hamfisted exposition or just plain nothing. Maybe the source material just blows and they didn't try to improve or adapt it, but that really isnt an excuse, when adapting a book for a movie if you aren't cutting moving and actually adapting material you suck at your job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
All of you fans of The American Astronaut should check out Stingray Sam. It's another space-western-musical done by the same guys, but set up as a six part serial narrated by David Hyde Pierce.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Totally TWISTED posted:My only problem with The Hunger Games movie was that as a stand-alone movie it was bad at explaining the back story, essentially diving into the action with no purpose to support it. As a counter-example I felt that the Harry Potter movies were better at being good standalone (in series) movies. That's funny, because as someone who's read the Harry Potter series, and not read the Hunger Games books, I feel the exact opposite. I saw The Hunger Games in theaters and really enjoyed it. I thought it was fun, well-made, and had a compelling enough world and premise to get me emotionally invested. I hadn't read anything about the story beforehand and pretty much just walked into the film blind to everything but the fact that it was based on a book and involved a Battle Royale sort of setup (which, incidentally, I haven't seen either). By contrast, while I also really liked the Harry Potter movies (especially after Chris Columbus stopped direct them), they alluded to many things in the books without fully explaining them, and can't imagine understanding them without having read the books. Maybe those things were just there for the book fans and I wouldn't have noticed them if I hadn't read the books, but I don't feel you can get the full experience without having read the books. Then again, my brother, who hates reading, and hasn't read any of them, really enjoyed all the movies. In any case, the only point I'm trying to make is that The Hunger Games is a good, fun action/adventure flick. I wouldn't call it groundbreaking cinema or anything like that, but it's a fun movie to watch if you're looking for something exciting and entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
dik-dik posted:That's funny, because as someone who's read the Harry Potter series, and not read the Hunger Games books, I feel the exact opposite. This goes for any book that's turned into a movie or TV show. There are plenty of people who hate LOTR/Game of Thrones/Harry Potter/Hunger Games because of the stuff they left out/changed/didn't explain. Twilight, on the other hand, is just pure poo poo. I didn't hate the Hunger Games or thoroughly enjoy it. It was just "meh" to me. E: I have a friend who's a huge fantasy nerd and absolutely hates the LOTR films because he doesn't like how they portrated Aragorn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
Pixar films are primarily targeted at children. Hugo was based on a children's novel. It's ridiculous to say something is for kids so it can't be held to any real standard of quality. I haven't seen the movie because I don't care, but it's totally valid to criticize it if it's poorly made in some ways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:I have a hard time buying that though. The Harry Potter movies were smash hits, were incredibly watchable and were written for the exact same audience. They handled dark themes in ways that showed a real threat of danger but was mild enough for kids to enjoy but still managed to be enjoyable movies across audience. HG managed to spend the majority of its time sitting in trees and caves that ended up with hamfisted exposition or just plain nothing. Maybe the source material just blows and they didn't try to improve or adapt it, but that really isnt an excuse, when adapting a book for a movie if you aren't cutting moving and actually adapting material you suck at your job. I didn't like the book but I thought that a film could distill the basic concepts down well enough that it could be a pretty good movie (insert your own Battle Royale reference here). So I went in with high hopes and found the film to be pretty weak. The film managed to be even worse about establishing the conflict in the pre-game sequences than the book was, and the games wound up being pretty boring. The film was exposition dumps about things that didn't matter but seemed to be shoved in to keep book fans happy. Then blandly glossing over what should have been rising tensions in the build up to the game. And then what should have been a terrifying battle as the climax of the film became a fun action-adventure romp. I might not have liked the book but at least there I could see the author attempting to hit the correct beats in the story. The movie version was just completely lost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
I think that regardless of your position on the books or the standard of quality of children's films, that kid painting himself to look like a rock is probably the stupidest thing you saw in a movie that year. Seriously... 
Bedurndurn has a new favorite as of 20:19 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:I think that regardless of your position on the books or the standard of quality of children's films, that kid painting himself to look like a rock is probably the stupidest thing you saw in a movie that year. It got bonus points in the "incredibly dumb" department because his ability to whip up a disguise as a loving rocktumor was "I used to decorate cakes in the bakery!". Yup. I'm sure all the cakes looked like rocks. My biggest complaint about the book and the movie was how goddamn predictable they were. No, wait, it was the way that basically none of the characters had any sort of defining traits. I dunno, maybe it's hard for me to separate my reaction to that in my head. The two things came together and made it so I didn't care in the slightest when someone bit it, which, according to some of my friends who like the series, makes me totally heartless or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
Lenny Kravitz air dropped him some icing and brushes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Bedurndurn posted:I think that regardless of your position on the books or the standard of quality of children's films, that kid painting himself to look like a rock is probably the stupidest thing you saw in a movie that year. Reminds me of the fish from The Meaning of Life.  Edit: This movie is also on Netflix. Tardcore has a new favorite as of 23:30 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Has anyone watched Holy Motors yet? I have seen it on some best-of lists for 2012 and I'm interested in watching it, but reading the comments on Netflix it sounds like the streaming version is censored for some reason. Should I just get the DVD through the mail?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Thanks for whoever recommended Comedy Bang Bang. Please tell me there are more than 10 episodes. I need more things like this, without any new Tim and Eric to watch (that I know of).
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
BlindNinja posted:Thanks for whoever recommended Comedy Bang Bang. Please tell me there are more than 10 episodes. I need more things like this, without any new Tim and Eric to watch (that I know of). There will be a new season this summer with 20 episodes, but that's it for the TV show for now. It got it's start as a very popular podcast with more than 200 episodes of backlog, so maybe give that a try? It obviously isn't exactly the same as the TV show but Scott Aukerman is a really funny guy, you will probably like it. Here's the SA thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2013 04:56
|
|
