Posted July 14, 2011 No! Just...no! Actually, I'd rather less Rachel McAdam than less Jude Law, she irritated me... We'll never see eye to eye on this particular film, Dazz, my friend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 14, 2011 We'll never see eye to eye on this particular film, Dazz, my friend. I know but I have a feeling that we will on Game of Shadows though...I just know it... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 14, 2011 I watched Megamind and Monsters the other day. Barely knew anything about any of them - they just popped through the door courtesy of Lovefilm. Megamind was brilliant - probably Dreamwork's best since Shrek 2. Monsters was...strange. I didn't like the characters, plot or the "monsters" yet for some reason I still enjoyed it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 14, 2011 I'm so sick of that movie already Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 14, 2011 Vertigo (1958, Hitchcock) I loved. I understand why it's so famous. Felt so relevant and interesting, even today. I loved how the "hero" is actually a really questionable character -- not actually that protagonistic, and kinda creepy and stalkerish. Didn't see the end coming. Was so ripe. Was so prime. Saw it in the cinema; it was a restored version. It had been restored so stunningly in some places, and not so greatly in others. Felt really vibrant and pleasing to look at sometimes. Midge was my absolute best. And I love Madeleine's face and hair. An obvious stunner. Surprisingly great actress too. Just stunningly directed too. So many interesting camera angles, and stunning music choice. And so many scenes which were like "Yes, that was superfluous, but so necessary for my enjoyment and fulfillment as an audience." Hitchcock is my best, I can already tell. Dare I give it 10/10? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 14, 2011 The question is... dare you not give it 10? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 15, 2011 (edited) Good man, Chair. I've got well over 30 of his films. Even a Hitchcock hiccup is just greater than most films. Realise now why my signature is devoted to him. He was well-reared. ---------------------------------------------- The best way to spend the next 17 minutes of your life -- watch it. I'm serious. Absolutely amazing film. The lack of any speech. Oh yes. Madame Tutli-Putli is me, with breasts and vagina. The ending is a lit "What the Fuck?" but it's just...left me speechless. The eyes...my favorite characteristic of anyone is beautiful eyes. Nothing draws me in deeper. Great film...well, I probably feel that way because of the cast. Mesmerized by Marilyn. I really don't like when she is pounded with make-up. This movie just makes her look beautiful. When she comes down that pole in nothing but a woolly sweater and panties! Honestly the definition of sex. She makes me want to be a woman. I would honestly just love to be her. The twinkle in her eye So sexy. A woman I'd do in a heartbeat. Hilarious. Surprisingly modern. Cute. Marilyn is once again a lovable babe. Edited July 15, 2011 by Frank Automerged Doublepost Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 16, 2011 I saw Bridesmaids in the week and forgot to tell you guys. It was actually a pleasant surprise as I found it very funny. Especially the bridal shop scene, that had me in stitches. I also saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 which is my favourite Harry Potter film at the moment but I have a feeling that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 will be when I see it on Monday. Yes, you read that correctly, I haven't even seen it yet! Tonight or tomorrow, I'm going to watch The Lord of the Rings Trilogy once and for all and I'm going to give Source Code another chance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 17, 2011 Bet he's lost his funny in his chase for that slimline figure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 Saw Cars recently in preperation for the second, and utilising the FUCKING AMAZINGLY FANTASTIC Disney Rewards which LITERALLY makes Nintendo club look like a complete and utter piece of shit. It....IT HONESTLY SHITS ON IT. 150 points in a Blu-Ray, Cars on Blu-Ray was 800 points. Whereas Nintendo is 250 points in a game (triple price of Blu-Ray) and you need to spend...what....4000 or 5000 points to get a decade old GBA game (Mario Tennis) So basically 5 Blu-Rays = Approx £60 = free brand new Blu-Ray. (Tron Legacy was same price I think) So basically 16 games = Approx £320 = free decade old game. :/ Anyway. Wow tangent win. Yeah I really enjoyed it a lot, and found myself not understanding the hate. In fact if Pixar films are designated genres beyond "Animation" then I found it to be the most "Drama" orientated movie. Up is an adventure, as is Wall-E (well sci-fi adventure/rom com) but this really was a straigh up drama. Not very funny but I'm usually not big on Pixar/Disney humour anyway (MINE MINE MINE MINE MINE is probably my most hated thing in the world) But yeah, it was great and I think I'm gonna really enjoy 2. Oh and it looked absolutely stunning. 5 years old and it looks completely inseperable in quality from a lot of their recent stuff IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 You're talking as if animation is a genre when we all know its merely a technique, right? Been considering making a Cars 2 thread all day but laaaazy :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 I meant more in that they're not specifically referred to as "stuff". E.g. Toy Story is a 1995 American computer-animated film released by Walt Disney Pictures. Animal Kingdom is a 2010 Australian crime drama written and directed by David Michôd And you should make a thread if you've seen it/stop being lazy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 "Stuff"? As in matter, material, articles, or activities of a specified or indeterminate kind that are being referred to, indicated, or implied. So you're saying what exactly? Talk sense (and I was merely making the snide comment, often made by Brad Bird, that animation isn't a genre, as it is often referred to as, but rather a technique the same way B&W is, 8mm is, 3D stereoscopic is etc) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 I had Scott Pilgrim vs The World Skyplussed and watched it on Saturday night. Top stuff indeed - so stylish. I wish it had been longer (more subspace stuff/ more dreams of Ramona) but they still managed to cram in tons of content plus Young Neil always playing A Link to the Past was amazing. And Ramona Flowers. What can I say? Supremely well cast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 I watched it for like the sixth or seventh time (and the for the second time with London Girl) from her Sky+ and I (we) still love it. I keep noticing different things each time. Like Young Neil eating a coin at the end My favourite film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 (and I was merely making the snide comment, often made by Brad Bird, that animation isn't a genre, as it is often referred to as, but rather a technique the same way B&W is, 8mm is, 3D stereoscopic is etc) I am aware of this, I was just saying that they're never actually referred to as what they are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 As in they never say "it's an animated drama"? I'm genuinely confused and trying to figure you out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 The only confusion here is in the use of the word 'genre'. Genre can mean a type of media, but it can also mean a type within that media. The latter can be defined in various ways; form, content, meaning, matter, shape, whatever. The above exchange of posts needlessly picks upon the use of the word, rather than focusing on the points made. CGI/animated movies is fine. Disney is fine. Michael Bay is fine. I do find it silly, though, that ashley says "say what you mean" then posts again to clarify that his original post was a reference to something that nobody could've guessed because he didn't clarify his first post with that reference. Again. Snark, ashley, leads to ruins and is not needed to communicate with us peons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 18, 2011 I was genuinely looking for clarification. I had no idea what he was trying to say and I was merely trying to understand. I think you seem to believe I'm being mean snarky lately when its not my intention. Sarcasm is just more difficult to sell over the internet I guess. I'm not that full of bile. And my post may have been a reference to something Brad Bird has said but its a wider thing. Its a theory, I was merely specifying a particular theorist. I wasn't trying to be obscure. In fact by mentioning BB I was trying to help clarify my own point. And I've never seen genre be used to mean type of media. That's always been 'medium' to me (as in television is a medium, film is a medium) thus animation is a medium that can have a genre (e.g. Grave of the Fireflies is an animated war movie). But as you say its all just semantics. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 26, 2011 Just watched this, Was a little half baked but I thought it was fantastic. Saoirse Ronan is phenomenal. She really makes the film. Very promising actress. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted July 27, 2011 SHUT UP CRIME! Ellen Page stole the film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
