Re: what are you watching RIGHT NOW.... or somewheres about close to "right now" PART 2

by NSpan Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:48 am

silversurfer19 wrote:
NSpan wrote:the stutteringly anxious, shy and nerdy-but-"likable" protagonist that seems to populate more faux-indie movies than ever before any more enjoyable to watch...

Haven't these characters always populated movies? I don't think this is just a recent thing.

go ahead and COUNT the number of shots the cover of Transformer is featured.. even a heavy dose would've been excusable--seeing as Lou Reed is almost a plot point in himself.. but when the same image is placed somewhere in camera-view in nearly half the scenes (t-shirts, posters, albums, etc.), we're getting dangerously close to product placement..

Maybe so, but again, if I was directing this movie, it would be smattered with images of The Clash, not because I'm trying to appear hip, but maybe because I really like them and maybe I'm trying to introduce an artist that maybe the target audience of the movie isn't aware of? Same can be said of the soundtrack.

furthermore, playing "Pale Blue Eyes" (one of my all-time VU tracks, btw) non-diegetically TWICE in the same movie is inexcusable.
.

Doesn't this happen in a lot of movies. I'm pretty sure if I looked up a number of soundtracks from a variety of genres from a broad range of decades, we would find repeating songs in a movie soundtrack. And again, maybe he just loves this song?

these responses are all technically related to their respective topics--but nowhere are you making a case for Adventureland being a good movie.. the best you're offering is justification by appealing to the majority ("well, LOTS of movies make these mistakes").. and, frankly, the majority is crap..

Definitely not, and I haven't heralded the movie as the saviour of the coming age movie, but it definitely isn't bad.

but "isn't bad" isn't good enough for us!

we're film-geeks, dammit.. if we see a sub-par movie, we shout (in unison) "IT STINKS!"

we demand more from our movies................... don't we??

edit: scratch this next part, i should save it for a future date and time when it's more appropriate

Spoiler:

Maybe I'm pulling a Mottola....?

lol

by **Buscemi** Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:53 am

Had I made Adventureland, I would have had the main character acting out his thoughts for two hours. The result would have been an intense and violent portrayal of what happens when you don't get your way.

Music by Metallica and New Order (featuring Judas Priest, Crowded House, AC/DC and Run-DMC)

by NSpan Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:57 am

Buscemi wrote:Had I made Adventureland...

by **Buscemi** Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:10 am

Actually, my version would have been Falling Down in the 1980's.

Hollywood needs to make more movies like Falling Down.

by **silversurfer19** Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:16 am

these responses are all technically related to their respective topics--but nowhere are you making a case for Adventureland being a good movie.. the best you're offering is justification by appealing to the majority ("well, LOTS of movies make these mistakes").. and, frankly, the majority is crap..

You are correct, I recede my statement. I suppose I don't find Adventureland a landmark movie, and not even a highlight for the year. It's just better than most of this kind of movie out there at the moment. And I suppose we should have higher standards than this.

let's separate films that were somewhat enjoyable to watch with our girlfriends/wives from films that are objectively good.. you've been married for less than a year, don't go chick-flick on us already

Gah, I have haven't I. I've already admitted to having enjoyed I Love You, Man and Adventureland in one year. What has happened. I knew marriage was a mistake....

by mfrendo Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am

I really don't want to get into this debate, I liked the movie myself. But as far as using Transformer and the Lou Reed song, this was probably due to independent limitations. Songs and materials cost a shitload and it saves money to use the same ones consistently then buying everything you want to put in the film.

by BanksIsDaFuture Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:44 am

I watched a couple of interesting movies today...

Bobby (2006) - I don't remember this when it came out, then again I barely paid attention to limited releases before I started playing FM. I guess it won Best Picture at the Golden Globes, but I never hear anything about it. Anyway, I really, really liked it. The cast is jam packed with stars, all the way from Ashton Kutcher to Anthony Hopkins to Lindsay Lohan to William H. Macy. It sometimes feels like a bunch of vignettes shoved together, but they're all interesting and everyone does a great job. I also liked the inter-mingling of raw, actual footage and movie footage. 8/10

Amelie - Now onto this one.... Funny thing about this movie is that I loved almost everything, except for Amelie herself. I thought her character was annoying, one of those "quirky just for quirky's sake" types. Which I despise. But I loved the direction, the palettes they used for some of the shots are just beautiful. The animation thrown in is a great touch, and I loved every character present, except for Amelie. She reminds me of Poppy from Happy-Go-Lucky, although not THAT annoying (thank God). The story starts off a bit all over the place, I mean what's the point of her finding the tin and trying to return it to the guy? It really only exists to get to cross paths with the photo-machine guy, which is what the rest of the movie is about. I'm sure there could've been a much quicker and easier way to get her to that point. Like, I don't know....maybe just have her walking through the fucking subway. The good deeds and the tin and the gnome are all just bullshit to get her to that subway. Totally unneccesary. 6/10 still though

by NSpan Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:14 pm

AmelieI loved almost everything, except for Amelie herself. I thought her character was annoying, one of those "quirky just for quirky's sake" types.

Manic Pixie Dream Girls: A Cinematic Scourge?

by becs Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:19 pm

BanksIsDaFuture wrote:

Amelie - Now onto this one.... Funny thing about this movie is that I loved almost everything, except for Amelie herself. I thought her character was annoying, one of those "quirky just for quirky's sake" types. Which I despise. But I loved the direction, the palettes they used for some of the shots are just beautiful. The animation thrown in is a great touch, and I loved every character present, except for Amelie. She reminds me of Poppy from Happy-Go-Lucky, although not THAT annoying (thank God). The story starts off a bit all over the place, I mean what's the point of her finding the tin and trying to return it to the guy? It really only exists to get to cross paths with the photo-machine guy, which is what the rest of the movie is about. I'm sure there could've been a much quicker and easier way to get her to that point. Like, I don't know....maybe just have her walking through the fucking subway. The good deeds and the tin and the gnome are all just bullshit to get her to that subway. Totally unneccesary. 6/10 still though

Incredibly ironic that we saw Amelie about a week apart with almost the same reaction, I'm amazed Donte hasn't been around to berate us.

by undeadmonkey Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:16 pm

lol, its very interesting to me how such a mediocre movie can inspire such debate. I personally have already forgotten most of it.

by numbersix_99 Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:50 pm

BanksIsDaFuture wrote:

[b]A The story starts off a bit all over the place, I mean what's the point of her finding the tin and trying to return it to the guy? It really only exists to get to cross paths with the photo-machine guy, which is what the rest of the movie is about.

No, the point of that scene is to demonstrate that Ameilie is starting to reach out to the world, instead of existing solely in her own one. She wants to connect with people.

by BanksIsDaFuture Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:53 pm

Yeah, but it wasn't really needed. Just as that was a snap decision to try and return, it could've been a snap decision to pursue the guy. I mean, she would've still found his dropped photo album even if the first 30 minutes of the movie never occurred.

by W Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:03 pm

I watched a couple of Rs the past couple days:

Rushmore (56/100): Good for a few laughs, not uproariously funny, but a few good lines. Other than that, it seemed like a quirky Napoleon Dynamite type film. Decent.

Raging Bull (92/100): Great in parts. Any film where Pesci beats the Hell out of a guy is good for a watch and I'm a sucker for a decent/good sports drama anyways. The fights are very good and though it was overseen by La Motta himself, it still casts him and his brother in a very negative light.

by NSpan Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:54 pm

W wrote:Rushmore (56/100): Good for a few laughs, not uproariously funny, but a few good lines. Other than that, it seemed like a quirky Napoleon Dynamite type film. Decent.

ehhhhhh... evidently, you're watching films in a reverse-chronological order.. Napoleon Dynamite was a RIPOFF (or, at best, an out-and-out homage) to Wes Anderson films... particularly, in this case, Bottle Rocket

by W Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:41 pm

I didn't say they ripped it off and I know which came first. It just seemed like that TYPE of film... Which is pretty much what you just said. Like if your reviewing an overly sappy underdog sports film, you're going to say its Rudy-like even if Rudy came out after it.

Anyways, it was decent. If I saw it when I was a teenager, I'd probably still love it to this day (I still remember the O.R. joke from the trailer). But I didn't, so it was only decent.

by **Buscemi** Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:43 pm

I watched Falling Down a few days ago. Very underrated Michael Douglas film.

by **BarcaRulz** Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:33 am

I just watched Next Day Air. Gave it a 7/10. Much better than I expected it to be, then again a 'black' movie with a 6.1 on IMDB should at the very least be as good as Godfather. Very Happy

Best way to describe it would be a black Guy Ritchie movie, and since I like Guy Ritchie, and I like Donald Faison and Mos Def, I actually enjoyed this one. Got too serious for its own good towards the end, but not bad overall.

by mfrendo Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:10 am

I fucking hated Next Day Air. It wasn't funny, dramatic, or anything. Like they just put a story together for no reason. Actually, it's the worst of the year in my opinion, which is saying alot given what's come out so far.

by **Buscemi** Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:15 am

And keep in mind, Frendo loved The Girlfriend Experience! Laughing

by **silversurfer19** Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:32 am

Last night we watched Nim's Island. Nowhere near as bad as I had anticipated. Not that it was particularly good, as Foster's character was more grinding than anything and the story was pitiful to say the least. No drama, no tension and no care for any of the characters. And what happened to the little girl everyone loved in Little Miss Sunshine. Gone is that charm and innocence and what is left is an annoyingly smiley brat. However, there was some decent animation which distracted from the appaling CGI and sets, and Gerard Butler was watchable as ever (I even kind of saw him as a potential heir to the Indiana Jones franchise in this role - what with the costume and bravado), so it wasn't all bad. 5/10

by BanksIsDaFuture Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:40 am

I too hated Next Day Air...

by **Buscemi** Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:41 pm

I watched The Mighty Ducks again. Damn, that movie probably has the most asshole-type characters ever in a Disney movie. The opposing coach is an asshole, the boss at the law firm is an asshole, the players on the opposing team are assholes, hell even some of the good guys were assholes.

And despite the ridiculous plot of D2: The Mighty Ducks, that one might actually be better than the first. Not as many assholes in that one plus that one explored a lot more in the plot (such as Gordon's comeback attempt as a player and his reimaging as a Pat Riley-type hotshot).

by IPKI$$ Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:25 am

Next Day Air was garbage...It had no clue what kind of movie it wanted to be. And the best parts, Mike Epps, Mos Def, and Donald Faison were only in it for a combined 15 minutes if that.

by W Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:07 am

A few more:

Frozen River (83/100): Good, but not excessively great (besides Leo). It was slow in parts and I expected more stuff to happen (more runs, etc). What was really great about the film in my opinion is that all of the characters seemed like real people. Also, it was nice to see that a film was cast that didn't try to shove a model-like human being into a main role. Don't get me wrong, 20-30 year old blondes are nice, but most of the people struggling to get by don't look like Kim Baysinger (8 Mile), et al.

Wake Up, Ron Burgundy (52/100): I don't know what I thought I was going to get, but I should have expected that there would be no real plot for most of the film and for a lot of it to not make sense considering its (mostly) footage that was cut from another film. Also wasn't nearly as funny as Anchorman considering they obviously used all of the good parts for the main film.

On the Waterfront (82/100): Good story with great dialogue. Didn't like it as much as some of the other older films I've watched recently, though. I just couldn't get myself completely into it.

by **Buscemi** Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:10 am

I watched Smokey and The Bandit earlier. I always wondered if they won the "double or nothing" bet inbetween the first two films.

by Sponsored content