tranceaddict Forums

tranceaddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- The movie recommendations thread, son
Pages (99): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 [74] 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 »


Posted by GoSpeedGo! on Jan-10-2012 13:16:

He may have consulted Stephen Hawking for all I know; the point is, it's still not important. Instead of arguing ad hominems and making unsubstantiated claims, maybe you could tell me how exactly is this aspect of scientific plausibility relevant to any kind of interpretation of Melancholia or even to its passive viewing.

What a director (especially Trier) says in an interview does not matter.


Posted by LAdazeNYnights on Jan-12-2012 23:39:

New Wes Anderson flick:



What an amazing cast!!
Bill Murray & Jason Schwartzman, of course, but Edward Norton + Bruce Willis + Frances Mcdermot + Tilda Swinton


Posted by mathieu on Jan-12-2012 23:51:

The Devil Inside.

Don't watch it. Mother****** it was bad.

Its another one of those handheld camera films, I could basically tell what the characters were going to say, I got a couple jumps but theres a difference between jumping and being surprised from loud well timed fucking noise and being scared. if you really want to see it, torrent it lol


Posted by LAdazeNYnights on Jan-12-2012 23:53:

^rofll i read something about how it was the #1 movie of the weekend - attributing it's success to the massive online marketing it did. apparently theater exit polls have audiences grading it an 'F'


Posted by EgosXII on Jan-13-2012 04:33:

quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
New Wes Anderson flick:



What an amazing cast!!
Bill Murray & Jason Schwartzman, of course, but Edward Norton + Bruce Willis + Frances Mcdermot + Tilda Swinton


Its finally nearing completion?!?! Thank the gods!


Posted by LeopoldStotch on Jan-13-2012 20:31:

Saw a good number of movies during my trip ..

Jane Eyre - like i said .. great period movie piece. wasikowska and fassbender did an excellent job filling their individual roles, and the movie stayed true to the book.


Tinker Tailor Solider Spy - as a highly regarded movie with a lot of buzz, i felt underwhelmed watching the movie. I guess this is what happens when you place the movie so high before watching it. oldman, firth, and tom hardy were pretty good, but as a suspense thriller film, i thought it underperformed. that's just my opinion. I'm sure the book is better, but I am sure Fincher's "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" is better than TTSS as a suspense thriller film.


Moneyball - for a sports/baseball fan, it's a good movie. brad pitt basically carried this movie. you take him out of the movie, and this movie sucks. PSH's limited role in the movie wouldn't help. i don't see a movie goer who doesn't like baseball enjoying this movie.


Another Earth - this movie is a 2011 sleeper. i don't think many people have talked about this movie last year. great science fiction movie about astrophysics, and life in general. i definitely recommend this film.


Cowboys and Aliens - why did i watch this? i figured to watch one action film while on the trip. the first 20 minutes and last 30 minutes were good. everything else inbetween was shitty. what was jon favreau thinking?


so my rankings on the 5 movies:
- jane eyre
- another earth
- moneyball
- tinker tailor sailor spy
- cowboys and aliens


Posted by Vector A on Jan-13-2012 20:45:

quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
^rofll i read something about how it was the #1 movie of the weekend - attributing it's success to the massive online marketing it did. apparently theater exit polls have audiences grading it an 'F'

6% on Rotten Tomatoes so far.


Posted by WittyHandle on Jan-13-2012 21:31:

I liked Moneyball a lot and I couldn't care less about baseball.

GoSpeed I respect the fact that you can articulate your views, I just get the feeling that you're out to defend a lot of movies that don't deserve it. That Bruce Willis plot comparison was just stupid and really weakens my impression of your perspective.

I have yet to see Melancholia, but I'll give it a fair shot.

Anyone who thought Devil Inside was going to be anything more than surface level garbage is way too easily led by flashy marketing.


Posted by LeopoldStotch on Jan-13-2012 22:46:

quote:
Originally posted by WittyHandle
I liked Moneyball a lot and I couldn't care less about baseball.



i think it's also for those who like good storytelling, which is exactly what the movie is also. Other than that, I can't see anyone else enjoying the film if there is no interest in a good storyline or baseball.


Posted by GoSpeedGo! on Jan-14-2012 00:40:

quote:
Originally posted by WittyHandle
GoSpeed I respect the fact that you can articulate your views, I just get the feeling that you're out to defend a lot of movies that don't deserve it.


I'm not sure why you think so - Melancholia would've probably won Palm D'or if it weren't for Trier's politically incorrect joke about Nazis, and many film critics name the film as one of the best of the year. It's the complete opposite of, say, Sucker Punch.


quote:
That Bruce Willis plot comparison was just stupid and really weakens my impression of your perspective.


Well, let me elaborate.

I was trying to say that if you see Melancholia as a catastrophic film then it is really the perfect antithesis of something like Armageddon. The difference is, as I said, the whole point of the movie. An apocalypse in a conventional Hollywood movie is something that needs to be averted so the whole narrative is centered around that. There is usually a deadline - a very common element of classical narration - that needs to be met or everyone is going to die etc. We all watch the hero overcome the impossible obstacles and this creates tension.

Now this obviously sets a whole lot of expectations for the viewers when it comes to movies like this so imagine someone who has never heard of Lars von Trier and only read the synopsis of Melancholia (cool! another disaster movie!) going to watch the film. Of course they may be easily baffled by the fact that it's mostly about people arguing and some depressed girl who can apparently predict future and noone knows why. Also, they literally show how the planets collide within the first few minutes of the movie! WTF?! Where's the tension that I'm used to?

This is, again, just a surface comparison but hopefully it is more clear now.

So to sum it up briefly, Armageddon asks "How can we avert this situation?" while Melancholia asks "How can we personally deal with the inevitable catastrophe and why do we deserve it?", which is a completely different question.

I'm not saying that arthouse films that subvert genre conventions are necesarilly better than Hollywood movies, they just require a different approach from the viewer, which - when not applied - may easily lead to boredom.

e: For what it's worth, I don't even think Melancholia is all that brilliant - it has its flaws and it's probably the worst Trier film I've watched (still, that's a lot better than a majority of what gets released). This is not some kind of a fanboyish defense by me, I'm just offering another perspective when it's clear that people are dismissing a film mostly out of ignorance.


Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Jan-14-2012 00:48:

Aw. So it's like Deep Impact then, eh? *obnoxiously chews gum with a vapid stare*


Posted by EgosXII on Jan-14-2012 01:01:

quote:
Originally posted by GoSpeedGo!

e: For what it's worth, I don't even think Melancholia is all that brilliant - it has its flaws and it's probably the worst Trier film I've watched (still, that's a lot better than a majority of what gets released). This is not some kind of a fanboyish defense by me, I'm just offering another perspective when it's clear that people are dismissing a film mostly out of ignorance.




You are a complete tool. Fucking hell.

Seriously, how much of a pretentious wanker ARE YOU!? We give opinions in here, which YOU AGREE WITH, and yet we're Ignorant?!?


Posted by GoSpeedGo! on Jan-14-2012 02:09:

quote:
Originally posted by EgosXII


You are a complete tool. Fucking hell.

Seriously, how much of a pretentious wanker ARE YOU!? We give opinions in here, which YOU AGREE WITH, and yet we're Ignorant?!?


I don't think I should even reply to this shitpost.

I'm not sure which opinions of yours have I agreed with. If we're still talking about Melancholia, I disagreed with pretty much everything you said and actually backed it up. Your opinion was a complete mess that you haven't been able to clear up so I assumed it was ignorance.

Learn to fucking read and stop embarassing yourself.


Posted by WittyHandle on Jan-16-2012 08:24:

Speed, while we disagree on some movies, I like that you have a reason for your opinions, and I really like your ability to see things for what they are instead of trying to make them fit your expectations.


Posted by LAdazeNYnights on Jan-16-2012 08:38:

Yah, speed's posts are good reading for sure.


I finally caught Shame in the theater tonight. My first impressions: the cinematography was such a joy to behold. Almost every shot seemed so beautifully constructed. The film's color palette really lent to the overall atmosphere. Carey Mulligan was OK in it - at times I felt as though she was over-acting. Perhaps my main issue with her character was an inability to empathize with her hysterical cellphone breakdown. Then again, that might've actually been the point: seeing it in the same way Fassbender did, reacting with the same strange mix of disgust, loathing, and sympathy. Fassbender was simply flawless in it and if he loses out in the oscar race to some shmuck (clooney in descendants or pitt in moneyball) i'm gonna be very displeased.


Posted by LeopoldStotch on Jan-16-2012 11:58:

quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
Yah, speed's posts are good reading for sure.


I finally caught Shame in the theater tonight. My first impressions: the cinematography was such a joy to behold. Almost every shot seemed so beautifully constructed. The film's color palette really lent to the overall atmosphere. Carey Mulligan was OK in it - at times I felt as though she was over-acting. Perhaps my main issue with her character was an inability to empathize with her hysterical cellphone breakdown. Then again, that might've actually been the point: seeing it in the same way Fassbender did, reacting with the same strange mix of disgust, loathing, and sympathy. Fassbender was simply flawless in it and if he loses out in the oscar race to some shmuck (clooney in descendants or pitt in moneyball) i'm gonna be very displeased.


good to hear you liked it. I've been hearing positive things about 'Shame' especially for up and coming UK director Steve McQueen. As for the best actor award, the only person I think I wouldn't be displeased Fassbender to lose to is Jean DuJardin('The Artist').


Posted by GoSpeedGo! on Jan-16-2012 13:41:

I'd love to see Shame but I need to wait one more month. Sometimes I hate living in Central Europe where we get a lot of the good films weeks later. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo just premiered last Thursday - a very good analytical film, I liked it a lot. Though I'm not sure if Fincher should be wasting time doing adaptations of airport-fiction novels when he's pretty much at his best right now.


Posted by LeopoldStotch on Jan-16-2012 15:17:

quote:
Originally posted by GoSpeedGo!
I'd love to see Shame but I need to wait one more month. Sometimes I hate living in Central Europe where we get a lot of the good films weeks later. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo just premiered last Thursday - a very good analytical film, I liked it a lot. Though I'm not sure if Fincher should be wasting time doing adaptations of airport-fiction novels when he's pretty much at his best right now.


I do agree with this. I do feel he's just mailing it in since 'Zodiac'. We'll see what happens since he has plenty of projects on his plate the next couple of years.


Posted by zGoogleman on Jan-16-2012 19:52:

Can anyone identify this movie? I can remember that it was low budget and it was set in a prison. Basically it centered around a prisoner that is building an air balloon to escape the prison. And in the end he does lift off in the air balloon weeks past and he returns to the jail. He tells his friends that are inmates that he does not belong outside in the normal society.

Anybody? My only other memory is that all the actors are unknowns but they acted extremely good for being a bunch of delta force commandos.


Posted by Jarvmeister on Jan-16-2012 20:43:

quote:
Originally posted by zGoogleman
Can anyone identify this movie? I can remember that it was low budget and it was set in a prison. Basically it centered around a prisoner that is building an air balloon to escape the prison. And in the end he does lift off in the air balloon weeks past and he returns to the jail. He tells his friends that are inmates that he does not belong outside in the normal society.

Anybody? My only other memory is that all the actors are unknowns but they acted extremely good for being a bunch of delta force commandos.


http://www.prisonmovies.net/on-the-yard-1978-usa


Posted by Joss Weatherby on Jan-16-2012 21:12:

Saw Hugo yesterday, was pretty good. I liked the film history in it. Seeing those films, like train entering station and women leaving factory was pretty cool on a big screen.


Posted by zGoogleman on Jan-16-2012 21:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Jarvmeister
http://www.prisonmovies.net/on-the-yard-1978-usa


Oh yeah, you got it right. Thanks for that.

Did you know they were delta force commandos?


Posted by WittyHandle on Jan-16-2012 22:06:

quote:
Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights
if he loses out in the oscar race to some shmuck (clooney in descendants or pitt in moneyball) i'm gonna be very displeased.


I thought Brad did a great job in Moneyball. Not Oscar-worthy, but a very good performance.


Posted by zGoogleman on Jan-16-2012 22:20:

Is 2012 going to be a bad year for Hollywood movies?


Posted by GoSpeedGo! on Jan-16-2012 23:08:

quote:
Originally posted by zGoogleman
Is 2012 going to be a bad year for Hollywood movies?


No. A year that has The Dark Knight Rises, Prometheus and possibly Cloud Atlas can't be bad for Hollywood.


Also, there's been talk about Brad Pitt and Moneyball but I think the best thing about the film is its script, or rather the way it goes beyond the cliches of sport dramas and transforms the film into something more than that. The statistics are literally more important than the players so when we see the team set the new win streak record it's not an emotive climax of the story but just another piece of data. The story then goes on for quite a while and I know this was a bit confusing for some of the viewers.

It's the same schema Steven Zaillian used for the new Fincher film which was also more about the process of investigation rather than the investigation itself - even such mundane activities like going to the office or getting food was shot that way.

This is the most important quality of these films, I think, and I hope it doesn't get overdone because I like it.


Pages (99): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 [74] 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.