The Official Movie Thread

I've been told The Road was butchered, mainly due to the inclusion of telling how the world was pissed all over, brutally crap CG atmosphere and a very TERRIBLE soundtrack.

Viggo looks grim as shit though.
 
I saw Elephant and it was okay, slightly better than I had hoped. I actually thought of an interpretation while watching it that accounts for many of its flaws and oddities, but from what I've read afterwards it doesn't seem like one that Van Sant intended.

I really enjoyed all the long, pointless, trivial scenes. I'm not sarcastic.

it's not too bad. i wrote this on criticker at the time: 'mostly about the way little things have their meaning revamped by the shadow of impending death, it's realism transformed into quietly haunting dreamscape by foreshadowing and hindsight, with beethoven as deathmarch and elegy. sometimes it's too cute, its tension and implication feel contrived, but it works ok.'

i think i'd be harsher now because i've seen enough of van sant to understand just how pathetically self-indulgent he is, but it's definitely my favourite of the four i've seen. i haven't seen his early classics or 'gerry' admittedly, maybe they're better.
 
I've heard they don't tell you how the world ended. I have heard mixed things about the soundtrack though.

Hey, I might be wrong! But that's why it's called hearsay :cool:
Universally around though I've heard terrible things about the soundtrack; it makes me wonder why they even bothered to include one with this story anyway.
 
I might be wrong too, just saying what I hear :cool:

I agree that a minimalistic soundtrack would have been ideal. I've always thought that Nick Cave has a good ear for things like this, but maybe he's gone overboard with this one.
 
it's not too bad. i wrote this on criticker at the time: 'mostly about the way little things have their meaning revamped by the shadow of impending death, it's realism transformed into quietly haunting dreamscape by foreshadowing and hindsight, with beethoven as deathmarch and elegy. sometimes it's too cute, its tension and implication feel contrived, but it works ok.'

i think i'd be harsher now because i've seen enough of van sant to understand just how pathetically self-indulgent he is, but it's definitely my favourite of the four i've seen. i haven't seen his early classics or 'gerry' admittedly, maybe they're better.

I personally loved Gerry alot, I recommend it. It is very slow and some might think its to slow, but seeing that your such a movie lover you should probably see it nonetheless.
 
the new Siskel and Ebert guys (whatever their names are), said the film version of The Road is very faithful to the book, but where the movie fails is in achieving the atmosphere that was so masterfully done in the book...it's not as bleak
 
What I've heard, essentially, is that it's as faithful to the book as it can be without resorting to narration. That's understandable. There's no way it can hope to match the book, unlike No Country For Old Men, which arguably surpassed the book; but No Country lent itself more to a film adaptation.
 
I think Viggo has established himself enough to where The Road is an instant watch in a theater or rental or whatever..I hope it hits the US army theater here soon! Is the book that good? I may look into it
 
I personally loved Gerry alot, I recommend it. It is very slow and some might think its to slow, but seeing that your such a movie lover you should probably see it nonetheless.

i will. i've never disliked a van sant movie for its slowness anyways. he's a very talented director so i'm not giving up on him just yet.
 
What I've heard, essentially, is that it's as faithful to the book as it can be without resorting to narration. That's understandable. There's no way it can hope to match the book, unlike No Country For Old Men, which arguably surpassed the book; but No Country lent itself more to a film adaptation.

faithfulness to the source material, even if it's great source material, should never be the goal of a film director as far as i'm concerned.
 
rms: cormac mccarthy is generally put alongside the likes of pynchon/roth/delillo/marquez/saramago/etc as one of the best writers of the last few decades. the road was kind of his mainstream breakthrough and can probably be considered minor mccarthy, but still very very good and an ideal entry point perhaps. blood meridian and the crossing are really his masterpieces and will probably one day be talked about in the same hushed tones as, say, faulkner is now.
 
c'mon somebody...any Red Cliff reviews yet? I'm anxious to see it...sounds like some well-done epic battle shit. More intriguing is the films strongpoint supposably depicts some of the greatest strategical / tactical methods of warfare maybe ever to hit the big-screen?
 
I think Viggo has established himself enough to where The Road is an instant watch in a theater or rental or whatever..I hope it hits the US army theater here soon! Is the book that good? I may look into it

Probably a good place to start with McCarthy. It's a quick read, and (despite its bleak atmosphere) his most mainstream publication. However, if you really like it, check out his older stuff like Blood Meridian and Suttree.
 
c'mon somebody...any Red Cliff reviews yet? I'm anxious to see it...sounds like some well-done epic battle shit. More intriguing is the films strongpoint supposably depicts some of the greatest strategical / tactical methods of warfare maybe ever to hit the big-screen?

I saw Red Cliff Part 1 and 2 a while back, can't find the review I wrote back when I watched it, so I'll do my best from memory. Also not sure if it's being released in America as 1 movie, or in it's 2 parts, so the American release may vary from my review.

As I recall the battles were definitely some of the best I've seen. Lots of strategy involved, and the cinematography keeps you well aware of the overall structure of the battle. The actual person to person fight choreography is fairly simple but suitable for large war-fare style fighting. There's no flying around or anything, but some suspension of disbelief is required for generals who take out bunches of armed soldiers bare handed. There's a solid amount of blood, not a ton, but a realistic amount.

The plot as I recall was really simplistic. Not so bad it was annoying, but not terribly great either. Just kind of passable. There's often really long passages between the battles, which I was alright with, but may bore others.

Very worth seeing if your a fan of this kind of stuff, but nothing too great.
 
i'll see it soon and let you know. john woo doing a fucking period epic, it's gonna be insane
:kickass:


I saw Red Cliff Part 1 and 2 a while back, can't find the review I wrote back when I watched it, so I'll do my best from memory. Also not sure if it's being released in America as 1 movie, or in it's 2 parts, so the American release may vary from my review.

As I recall the battles were definitely some of the best I've seen. Lots of strategy involved, and the cinematography keeps you well aware of the overall structure of the battle. The actual person to person fight choreography is fairly simple but suitable for large war-fare style fighting. There's no flying around or anything, but some suspension of disbelief is required for generals who take out bunches of armed soldiers bare handed. There's a solid amount of blood, not a ton, but a realistic amount.

The plot as I recall was really simplistic. Not so bad it was annoying, but not terribly great either. Just kind of passable. There's often really long passages between the battles, which I was alright with, but may bore others.

Very worth seeing if your a fan of this kind of stuff, but nothing too great.

Thanks much!
Sounds good...very much lookin forward to seeing this.
Yes, I believe the U.S. release will feature the shorter 1-part version?