Movies

Harry Pooter and the Gobpoop of Poopdom

some good shit, as expected. i really like how each director makes these films their own.
 
saw syriana tonight. awesome movie. reminded me of "the insider" which is a good comparison. syriana is much more complex though. highly recommended.
 
yeah. i might suggest waiting till it comes out on dvd. its pretty complex and you wont understand everything first time around. and personally, i think movies are too damn expensive to view a second time at the theater. plus, some dumbass screamed aloud during a "startling" moment, effectively distracting me from said "startling" moment - which is essentially the climax of the movie.
 
Chronicles of Narnia - Wasn't terrible, wasn't great, just kind of was. If you want to see a scene-for-scene adaptation of the book without good acting or direction, go for it. Effects and cinematography were great. The kids couldn't act very well, though. And the director is rather incompetent at giving any scenes any sense of weight. Why'd they get the guy who directed Shrek to do their huge budget movie again? He's only ever done computer animated movies; he has no experience directing actors.
 
jimbobhickville said:
Chronicles of Narnia - Wasn't terrible, wasn't great, just kind of was. If you want to see a scene-for-scene adaptation of the book

That's amazing because the one thing the director has emphasized ad nauseum is how much they've tried to adapt it more so for adults (read: try and solicit interest from LotR fans).

So if it's scene for scene, are you telling me they keep the bit where Father f'ing Christmas comes down with Rudolph and hands over some xmas presents from his sleigh (i.e. their weapons)?
 
the wife saw it last night. said if she knew it was rated G she wouldnt have seen it.
it's more like a kiddie movie apparently
 
JayKeeley said:
So if it's scene for scene, are you telling me they keep the bit where Father f'ing Christmas comes down with Rudolph and hands over some xmas presents from his sleigh (i.e. their weapons)?

Yes, yes he does. That was the stupidest part of both the book and movie. Still, the fantastical creatures are cool, and the idea is solid. If they hadn't wanted to stick so closely to the book, they could've made a great movie, methinks. That, and getting a real director to do it.
 
So just back from King Kong and... wow. Best. Blockbuster. Ever.

Ok a few scenes are buried under heaps of cheese but it just melts away at lightning speed under the overwhelmingness and fun B-movieness and emotion (well.... yes).

Some people will call the movie überlong but it's not. I love how Jackson dwells on amazing landscapes, and the lengthy factor of sequences like the diplodocus chase, the insects fight or the ultimate climax is pure gold for cinema lovers.

And the natives are ace!

And Kong beats the shit out of four tyrannosaurus single-handed. I mean... isn't that film history? :tickled:
 
Saw King Kong and thought it was pretty good. It was better than I expected. I figured the cast wouldn't work well but they did and I was entertained throughout. It was a bit long though and yes, it was way too cheesy at times.

Oddly, I don't think Jackson did a good enough job of making me feel sympathy for Kong.