|
twistedmentat posted:Also, in Platoon, when Charlie Sheen is waiting for the VC soldiers to come into the ambush, he keeps covering and uncover his eyes. Why the gently caress is he doing that? Unless I'm missing something, he was just covering his face because he didn't want to get bothered by the bugs. He thinks he sees something (VC solider) but probably figures he's imagining it or whatever, so he covers his face again. But then he realizes that maybe he did see something, looks again, and yes, there's a VC soldier standing there who had been there the whole time.
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2008 13:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Thats what i thought he was doing. It just seemed like surreal. I guess his delay doing that is why he got chewed out at the end of the scene. It was a bit surreal, yes, but I think that's what they were going for. They were all like zombies out there, running on no sleep, so it was easy for the mind to play tricks. I think he got chewed out because Junior said that Chris fell asleep, but it was actually Junior who fell asleep on his watch. Chris also hosed up the claymores because he didn't take the safety off.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2008 13:38
|
|
|
Does anyone know AMC speeds up songs in movies? I first noticed it the other week when they had a Forrest Gump marathon, and many of the songs (e.g. "Free Bird") were noticeably sped up. The other day, Pulp Fiction was on and "Son of a Preacher Man" was sped up. What's the deal with that?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2010 14:48
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Your local stations don't broadcast in HD? Or he might not have an HD cable box where that TV is located.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2010 15:34
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:In Young Guns, when they are down by the river, there is the following exchange: I haven't seen the movie for awhile, but right after McCloskey makes a suggestion counter to what the gang is thinking is the best plan, he makes a sidelong glance at the Murphy posse member that they've got guns pointed on. The glance isn't much but it's definitely a "don't worry, I'll get you out of this" type glance. There was also some speculation all along that McCloskey may have been a spy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2010 14:33
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:As my film genres professor put it, "Tarantino is like a film genres professor who actually makes movies." This is a very accurate statement. Tarantino knows more about film than probably any direct currently working. I'm blanking on the movie, but there was some film that Tarantino complemented the director on by saying, "What a great satire!" and the director was thrilled that, finally, someone in the industry understood that the film was intended as satire and not what it seemed on the surface. I just can't remember the film. Does anyone remember this? EDIT: \/ That sounds like it, thanks. Butthole Prince fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Apr 21, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2010 14:28
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Scorsese and Spielberg would like a word with you. I was trying to indicate history of film and all of that, and I stand by it. He's got an insane level of knowledge about movies but that probably comes from working at the video store and just having an obsessive compulsive level of knowledge about the industry.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2010 20:10
|
|
|
Does that guy in the Western primer thread go into the movie at all? You'd probably find the best explanation there. I think it has to do with how the hero is the opposite of what we had come to expect from previous Westerns. Instead of riding off into the sunset at the end, he murders a bunch of people and then threatens to come back and kill everyone and their families, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 20:27
|
|
|
Why is The Searchers described as a right-wing response to High Noon exactly? I get that High Noon was a metaphor for McCarthyism, blacklisting, etc., but where does The Searchers fit in as being a right-wing response? I've read that description multiple times and I guess I just don't understand it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 21:22
|
|
|
Isn't that an episode from "The Simpsons"?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2010 14:19
|
|
|
Well, I don't know, you could be thinking of a movie, but there is definitely an episode of "The Simpsons" that involves Homer and friends stealing from the fire victims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crook_and_Ladder
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
Dr_Amazing posted:Half baked is a pretty common saying. It just means poorly done, or not thought out. Mr. Braddock: Ben, this whole idea sounds pretty half-baked. Benjamin: Oh, it's not. It's completely baked.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2010 14:07
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Trying to think of some great movie performances by actors that weren't regarded as particularly good actors, or serious actors, prior to the role. Some that come to mind from recent history: Jim Carrey in "The Truman Show", perhaps. I think that's a good candidate because it was shortly after his "Dumb and Dumber" type roles.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2010 14:26
|
|
|
In "Sin City", Hartigan is locked up and receiving letters from Nancy posing as Cordelia. He is released from prison and goes looking for Nancy because he thinks she's in trouble. He realizes that it was a rouse and he led Junior to Nancy. Are we really to believe that Junior and/or Roark's people would be unable to find Nancy? Hartigan's partner, a fellow cop, was working for Roark. Much is made of the power that Roark has. Nancy's name was widely known when she was kidnapped. Connecting the dots, it seems impossibly obvious that they'd be able to track Nancy down with ease. She doesn't change her name except in the letters she writes (and it's also obvious who's writing to Hartigan the whole time, despite what Junior says about how they wondered who was writing to him).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2010 14:31
|
|
|
Yeah, the movie seems like it was made so that it would have appeal to casual watchers of the show, or even those who don't watch it at all or haven't seen it. The McBain joke thus may not have been as funny as it would have to those who are avid fans.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2010 14:47
|
|
|
bl4d3 posted:It doesn't appear to be a supported theory at all, but at the very end of Into the Wild, when Christopher is near death and jumps into his bed, he wipes his leg with what seems to be a bloody cloth/sponge and brown/reddish liquid runs down. Do you think he opened up his veins and committed suicide? Or was it a starvation/natural death? I don't have an explanation for that scene itself, but he most definitely died of starvation and did not commit suicide by opening a vein. Some (or many?) disagree with the claim that the seeds or berries or whatever they were contributed to his death and feel that he simply starved outright.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 15:28
|
|
|
Akuma posted:Wait, what? How can you possibly disagree with that? It's this massive "Oh poo poo, I'm hosed" event, and then shortly thereafter he is in no state to find or consume food so he dies. I had no idea people thought it was ambiguous, I don't see how they could make it clearer that the former caused the latter. Jon Krakauer, the author of the book the film is based on, essentially came up with the theory that the seeds poisoned him and/or led to his death. Tests performed in a lab at a later date did not find toxins in the plants or seeds that McCandless had been eating. The "Oh poo poo" moment you speak of may have been completely fictional, as no one knows exactly what happened apart from the diary entry where McCandless theorized that the potato seeds may have caused him to take ill. Locals near where he went into the wilderness feel he was wholly unprepared and simply starved to death for lack of proper nutrition. The film adaptation simply stays faithful to the book and Krakauer's theory. More information here if you're interested in a brief overview. You should read the book, though, it's very well written and insightful (potentially apart from the above).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 22:54
|
|
|
The specific lines are: "If anyone saw this, everything would be undone. All the criminals you pulled off the streets would be released." It does seem to imply that Dent's actions would cause the release of everyone he put away which is basically what Fat Turkey was asking about.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2011 21:29
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:Why did a movie that claimed to teach people to focus on inner beauty make so many jokes at the expense of outer appearance? A valid question, but I think the Farrelly track record would show that jokes come first regardless. It's really a terrible movie and I have no idea why anyone enjoys it, though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2011 17:36
|
|
|
Human Tornada posted:In Heat, why don't they pick up Val Kilmer at the road block after Ashley Judd warns him? He's got a fake ID but surely they have a picture of him. It's a great movie, but there are a few plot points like this one that make zero sense. I was always bothered by that one, along with Tone Loc casually using the word "slick" as the catalyst for the entire police investigation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2011 14:10
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:There was some thread about bad actors or something and somebody mentioned that they felt that Sharon Stone completely ruined Casino. I don't think it was a problem with her acting, but in the character and whole subplot. It seems to me the whole love story could be completely removed and trim an hour of useless crap to cut the movie down from three hours to a more accessible two hour experience. You can't have a major film without a female character (*). They gotta crowbar it in somewhere, man. (* Exceptions to the rule include prison films and war movies.)
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
ZoDiAC_ posted:Are there any good stories about actors fighting about who is billed first, as imagine this is quite a common occurence and probably gets sorted out before the actor signs a contract? Paul Newman and Steve McQueen in The Towering Inferno. Both wanted top billing and no agreement could be reached so their names were displayed at the same time during the opening credits. I think it was Newman who was also obsessed with the lines of dialog and demanded that McQueen not have more lines. McQueen's character is a firefighter who doesn't show up until halfway through the movie, and Newman's character is in it from the beginning. As a result, Newman uses up most of his screen time during the first part of the movie. McQueen was also going to be in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid but they couldn't decide who got top billing between he and Newman and so he left the project.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2011 15:16
|
|