Re: Seen any good films lately? [2]

by chris63 Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:52 pm

If the earth got flooded all water would be sea water, so how did the freshwater fish survive.
That bit always puzzled me. Maybe Noah had an endless supply of fish tanks, but then again
glass wasn't invented then was it ?

mmmmm pauses for reflection for a second.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
still reflecting...

by halfwise Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:02 pm

Freshwater floats on top of saltwater. Don't you realize God thought this through? Suspect

(Except maybe for where the water all goes afterwards. That realization must have been a bummer.)

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:21 pm

Yes but the change in salt levels caused by such huge amounts of fresh water (enough to cover all the mountains on earth remember) would kill most marine species, the rest would be killed by the dramatic changes in light levels.

by bungobaggins Mon Apr 14, 2014 4:22 pm

chris63 wrote:If the earth got flooded all water would be sea water, so how did the freshwater fish survive.
That bit always puzzled me. Maybe Noah had an endless supply of fish tanks, but then again
glass wasn't invented then was it ?

Seen any good films lately? [2] - Page 33 45523432_400x400

by Eldorion Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:32 am

I watched The Battle of Algiers tonight. It's an Italian film from 1966, but it's set in French Algeria during its war of independence, so all the dialogue is in French and Arabic. It's considered a landmark movie about terrorism, and as the Criterion Collection is fond of bragging, was banned in France for its depiction of atrocities on both sides before being screened by the Pentagon nearly 40 years later as a case study in counter-insurgency.

Apparently the film is based on a book written by one of the leaders of Algeria's militant independence movement and most of the characters in the film were either real people or were based on real people. I found it to be quite fascinating, if somewhat disturbing at times. It only covers a portion of the war but is an incredible case study of such a conflict, although at times it feels more like a lecture on big ideas than a film about real historical figures. This is perhaps fitting given that the entire film was shot in Algiers only a few years later, in documentary style, re-creating protests, riots, and attacks in intense detail without any use of documentary footage. All in all I'd recommend it to anyone with an interest in history or politics.

by Radaghast Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:01 pm

Saw The Wolf of Wall Street yesterday. A very well-made film. I almost have to think it was almost as good as Goodfellas. It says something about some of the characters of TWoWS, maybe, that they were at least as repellent as the ones in GF; and about the skill of Scorsese and DiCaprio that made me feel invested in Jordan Belfort's character, despite his being an enormous douchebag.

by Ringdrotten Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:10 pm

I've been meaning to watch this film since the premiere, and still haven't Mad

It's worth watching for Scorsese and DiCaprio alone. And Goodfellas is one of my favourite movies, so this does sound promising Very Happy

by Radaghast Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:43 pm

Shutter Island is my favorite Scorsese/DiCaprio movie, followed by The Departed, though this maybe comes in third. It's arguably DiCaprio's best performance. I haven't seen The Aviator, though.

by halfwise Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:56 pm

Aviator was not memorable. Possibly because Scorsese doesn't know what to do if there's no violence (though Hugo may dispute that).

by Radaghast Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:30 pm

I don't remember The King of Comedy having much violence but maybe I'm misremembering. And what about The Age of Innocence? (haven't seen that one yet; it's in my queue).

Anyway, I have't seen Hugo either. Glad to see it's streaming on Netflix.

Re: Wolf, one thing I found lacking was that Jonah Hill's characters wasn't punched in the face enough.

by azriel Fri Apr 18, 2014 7:33 pm

I watched "Blood Simple" last night, its by the Coen Bros. First one of theirs I ever saw, way back when. Its years old but, still holds its attraction. Sweet & simple Id call it, just enough suspense, blood & 'icky' moments thu it. The iconic 'motorway at night,in the dark with just headlamps' was there, plenty of shadows, plenty of 'is he,isnt he' to. good film all in all Nod

by halfwise Sat Apr 19, 2014 2:33 am

Just finished watching Amelie. What a beautiful and loving study of human quirkiness. I think my favorite line is a quick throwaway: she's about to give change to a homeless man and he says "no, I never work on sundays."

by azriel Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:44 pm

I liked it when she crept into that Green Grocers flat & messed up his shoes & phone numbers etc, Laughing

"you'll never be a vegetable, even Artichokes have hearts " Very Happy

by Mrs Figg Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:45 pm

is it the first time you have seen it Halfy? Amelie is one of my favorite films ever. Its perfection, a one off, every character is heartbreaking. I love her dad, and the old artist. My favorite scene is Amelie helping the blind guy to cross the street giving him a sensory overload. brilliant.

by halfwise Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:12 pm

Strangely, the only thing I've seen that comes close to it is the American comedy TV show "My Name is Earl". Another celebration of quirkiness and good intentions. Not quite as even in quality since they had to pump one out a week, but roughly half the episodes are a joy.

For all my love of Coen brothers films, I've never seen Blood Simple. Time to load it up.

by azriel Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:24 pm

Load away Halfy,

by Forest Shepherd Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:15 pm

halfwise wrote:Strangely, the only thing I've seen that comes close to it is the American comedy TV show "My Name is Earl". Another celebration of quirkiness and good intentions. Not quite as even in quality since they had to pump one out a week, but roughly half the episodes are a joy.

For all my love of Coen brothers films, I've never seen Blood Simple. Time to load it up.

Ok, now hold on a minute!
There are plenty of good-hearted quirky films out there that are far superior to My Name is Earl, (which is a TV show, yes I know.)
I mean c'mon! Amelie and a so-so tv show about trailer-people? Where does that comparison come from!

by Eldorion Sun May 04, 2014 5:58 pm

I saw The Hunger Games nearly two years ago when it came out in theatres since it was a riding a sudden and massive wave of publicity and I had to see for myself how it was. I had read the book mere months earlier after receiving several glowing recommendations, but was not blown away but it and not sufficiently interested to read the sequels. I felt similarly about the film (and preferred the book, though that might just be because the impact of the film's violence was lost on me due to its being relatively sanitized in pursuit of a PG-13 rating). However, after Catching Fire came out to rave reviews last November and pretty much everyone said it was a step up from the first one, I decided to see it after it was available on home video. I finally did so last night, renting it through DirecTV with my family. We all agreed it was better than the first one; spoilery impressions below.

Spoiler:

by Forest Shepherd Wed May 07, 2014 10:36 pm

Thanks for sharing Eldo. I have read all three books, and watched both films, and feel basically the same as you about the progression thus far.
The Hunger Games death scene of the young girl (Rue her name was, had to look that up) was intended to be emotionally impactful, but the mildness of the film kept me from actually caring much in that scene. I found the second film much more effective.
I still believe the entire series to be, ultimately, a bunch of over-dramatized, depressing, clunky, stupid, poorly-sci-fi'd, boring, weird, oppressive and lame baloney, but the second film was better.

I also started Robin of Sherwood last night. I saw the first episode, and although I was washing dishes at the time so that I had to look over my shoulder for most of it, I thought it was quite enjoyable. I loved some of the dialogue, particularly the squabbling between the two brothers over whether or not the one's fishpond would be drained. Lines like "why are you churchmen so damn acquisitive!" were well-done.

The action sequences (which were the ones I could fully hear over the sound of dish-washing) were a bit messy by modern standards, a bit soft. The sound of a body being hit by a heavy bag, for example, or the piercing of a sword through chain-mail was not emphasized as it is in productions with strong Foley sound development. However, if I ignored that the action sequences were enjoyable in their chaos. The escape from the castle stands out to me as a good scene in that regard. Much more so than the later ambush. ("The sword, it's bewitched!") Smile

by Pettytyrant101 Wed May 07, 2014 11:02 pm

I'm a huge fan of Robin of Sherwood though it should probably have ended after series 2 even though one of my favourite story episodes comes after that.

And the best Sheriff of Nottingham ever committed to screen bar none.

by Forest Shepherd Wed May 07, 2014 11:39 pm

I enjoyed Sir Guy as well. Him running around after Robin while in his undergarments was a nice touch.
He plays the scornful Normal part well:
Seen any good films lately? [2] - Page 33 B727da76c913de3ec95a154462699b3c_m

Seen any good films lately? [2] - Page 33 B727da76c913de3ec95a154462699b3c_m

Little John's introduction was a nice meaty scene as well. Erm, no pun intended. Embarassed

I mean it was forceful, even if his possessed-state was perhaps a bit over-done in the mouth department.

by Pettytyrant101 Wed May 07, 2014 11:56 pm

Yes Guy is excellent too and works brilliantly with the Sheriff to make a great bad guy double act.
How far have you watched so I can avoid spoilers when discussing it?

by Eldorion Thu May 08, 2014 12:09 am

Forest Shepherd wrote:I still believe the entire series to be, ultimately, a bunch of over-dramatized, depressing, clunky, stupid, poorly-sci-fi'd, boring, weird, oppressive and lame baloney, but the second film was better.

Ouch.

The first book actually bothered me a bit on an emotional level, and left me feeling upset for the characters when it was over. On the one hand, I figure this is the sign of a well-written story if it's able to get to me like, and I give it credit for that. But on the other hand, I did find myself at times asking myself what the point of all the gruesome, horrific shit that was going down was. It's not that I have an aversion to gruesomeness, necessarily. I like Tarantino movies, after all. And I quite liked Battle Royale (which is both one of Tarantino's faves and what THG probably ripped off). BR also had the whole kids killing kids angle for extra horrificness, but there, it tied into a broader commentary (and very dark satiric take) on Japanese society and inter-generational relations. So it felt like there was some point to it (and there was humor mixed in).

Suzanne Collins has talked about the political messages within THG -- supposedly she got the idea for the series while channel surfing between reality TV and news coverage of the Iraq War -- but its so poorly told and inconsistent with itself that I can't buy into it. Like, in addition to the reality TV thing, she claims the games are inspired by both the labyrinth of Minos from Greek mythology and the Roman motto panem et circenses ("bread and circuses", which is reflected in the name of the country in THG). But these are two totally different methods of social control: one is a method of keeping down foreigners through fear, and the other is a way of appeasing the common people at home through superficial distractions. One could argue that the division between the Capital and the Districts means both methods are being used at once, but the population of the Capital are not the "common people", so this excuse doesn't really work.

by Forest Shepherd Thu May 08, 2014 12:41 am

Unfortunately Petty, I have yet to see any but the first episode. However, I have 2 and 3 on the same disc, and if my family let me will be getting more soon!

And good points Eldo.
I find the main difference between Battle Royale (which I enjoyed) and The Hunger Games (which make me want to slap teenagers) is that the horror and death is played completely seriously.
So one can have, say, some insect with a name like Tracker Jacker (WHAT?!) violently sting to death a teen girl.

Spoiler:

I mean, cmon. That's sickening and stupid as heck. The science-fiction elements, used as they are mostly to underline the cruelty of the capital are nothing more than disturbing. They aren't interesting elements of this created universe, they are just more ways in which children and adults can gruesomely, and pointlessly, kill each other.

by Pettytyrant101 Thu May 08, 2014 12:47 am

I have 2 and 3 on the same disc- Forest

The Witch of Elsdon and Seven Poor Knights From Acre. Two good episodes. I especially like the seocnd one of those, the first is solid but a bit more standard fare, though it does cement the characters very well so does its primary job for the first main episode after the opening story.