A24

Bubble Boy: The world is wrong. It IS a funny movie.

Heheh, Superman is going to like this new album of John Williams. In fact, he's going to love it to death!

The title and performer would be etched in the crystal, silly.

Now this is how I want my music to be stored!

Body Of Lies is getting very mixed reviews, which doesn't help its overall score, but James Berardinelli, Roger Ebert and Peter Travers are rather positive about it.

The first notes of the main theme sound awfully familiar. Apparently so. Wow! Thanks, Drax. I was waiting for this to be confirmed.

Someone gave me the high definition DVD of Waterworld: Yes, it's true what people say, it's Mad Max on water. However, Kevin Reynolds' film is without fun and excitement. Waterwold has good sets but that's about it. Various elements of the story/events are just plain silly. Kevin Kostner has the charisma of a wet sock and his opponent Dennis Hopper only seems to be doing his best to earn a place in the top 10 of worst villains. I missed the big climax because I fell asleep.

There we go again! You didn't get that I was talking about the film itself. The film is all about plot and not about art. However, unlike me, you believe that every film is art, so you interpretted my words 'incorrectly'. I find that strange. Why would a couple of 'good' performances and 'good' SFX turn a film into art? Heck, I even asked you the very same question and still you didn't get it. You thought that I saw no merit in the actors, SFX, or what have you. Why else did you disagree with me? Well, well, somehow you like to point that out with every chance you get, don't you? Let's see how good your writing skills are when we're writing in my language, Bryant. To be honest, I find your constant need to correct my English grammar to be very childish. In fact, I've seen you acting like the grammar police towards other people too. I'm sure that my grammar is not the issue here. It's all about interpretation. "All plot and no art" can be read in two different ways. You chose the one that fitted your personal conception of the word 'art'. Please, when I said, "All plot and no art", didn't you reply with "I totally disagree, the film has great acting performances and SFX"? Doesn't that indicate that you forgot to consider that maybe I was referring to the film itself? You're acting like a baby because your ego is hurt. And now your hurt ego is on a crusade against my English grammar and my reading and writing abilities. Sorry for that, Bryant. I'm really doing my best.

I agree, even though not really amazing. More stylish and appealing.

Hm, I too like good movies.

Sooooo, after a brief silence, it seems Captain Obvious is alive and well after all! I know it sounds obvious but many seem to believe that "entertaining" stands for light, harmless good fun. Not true. "Entertaining" is whathever holds your attention. In my book, 2001: A Space Odyssey is entertaining. That's why I rarely use it. It's not because I hire ILM or Robert Downey Jr. for my film that I have made "art". Having the best drummer playing on your record doesn't mean your music is art. So you claim that I meant to say Jeff Bridges is no art? I didn't know that. Thanks for telling me what to think, Bryant. It's pretty clear that you think highly of yourself. And please, stop acting like a baby. 'Liking everything' is not that bad! Hey, maybe it even compensates for your lousy interpretation skills.

The Color Purple is kinda of a musical with the musical acts kept to a minimum. It's one of my favorite Spielbergs because I can watch it again and again. The film radiates Spielberg's ambition and love for film to such an extend that it' almost palpable. Alex

Apparently it's seen as an achievement, Iron Man scores a whopping 93% at RT. And who said I always agree with the critics, huh?

I know it sounds obvious but many seem to believe that "entertaining" stands for light, harmless good fun. Not true. "Entertaining" is whathever holds your attention. In Iron Man, everything felt so old and commonplace that it failed to "entertain" me. I remember that I was more charmed by The Rocketeer.

Loving a summer blockbuster? That's wasn't the topic. I never said it's wrong to love a blockbuster movie. Yes, I already admitted he doesn't love everything. After all, 95% still isn't 100%, right? You know, "fun" and "entertaining" (as someone else called it) are highly subjective. What entertains me might not entertain someone else, and vice versa.

I wanted to be sure to single out this remarkable section. You're on me for saying that if the story is good, the score is irrelevant. I can see how that might make me suspect as far as my opinions about music go. But in this particular instance, we're not talking about music, we're talking about movies, and the implication of what you're saying is that the score is more important than the story. If that's what you're actually saying, then I rest my case on the subject of your ability to critique movies. Thanks for hanging yourself and saving me the trouble. Fortunately for me and my neck, that's not what I'm saying. Really, how you draw the line from one point to another is beyond me. I think you need help, Bryant. Knowing how to write isn't enough to get you through life. And certainly not when your BS is starting to show.

Actually, I tried to make you realize that I don't think that good makeup, good acting or SFX turn a film into 'art'. We can argue forever about whether something is art or not but I'm glad that you agree that Iron Man is nothing special. Not only every movie, Bryant, but every TV series too. Why don't you accept your own posts as proof? Believe it or not, but your posts have formed my opinion about you. I didn't know someone is capable of so much "love". Hahaha. If you say so. You don't have to. I, myself, find it rather difficult to take 'someone who loves everything' seriously too.

Your reply about great acting and SFX was beside the point. Admit it, it didn't come to you that I referred to the film itself, not even when I sarcastically hinted with "I truly felt the artist at work here." You simply didn't realize that I was talking about film as a whole. It is YOU who actually saw what you wanted to see. Where would we be if we consider every movie with good acting and good FX, or great makeup to other people, as art? I know, we all would be like Bryant Burnette loving every movie out there. Hahaha. No, Bryant, that's what YOU thought it meant. Or do you really think I don't respect ILM or Jeff Bridges? Are their efforts alone enough to create art? Not in my book. I don't use that word lightly. That's precisely what I said and now, for the first time, you are realizing that. Before that, you chose to be nitpicky, you ignored what was obvious, and talked about the great acting (in a film with the most shallow characters) and SFX. Sure, Bryant, if that makes you feel better. Despite the fact that you interpretted my post from your own personal point of view, and thereby totally missing my point, you sure know how to write. I agree. Yes, you did point that out, even though it was quite beside the point, not to mention trivial.

I said "Iron Man is all plot and no art." Then you come and reply (read very carefully now, Bryant): "I TOTALLY DISAGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The acting was great and so were the SFX." First of all, that's not what I meant (obviously, I meant that what the director brings to it: his voice, his signature, his personal stamp, and that distinguishes it from an ordinary run-off-the-mill movie and that aims for something more than just a filmed script), and second, I don't think the acting and SFX of Iron Man, while good and professional workmanship, are worth calling art. So you remember a few titles that you don't love. Well, I can name a thousand titles that you do "love". OK, I guess you don't really love everything. My bad.

Hehe, proud Bryant is angry. Why don't you read your own posts? Scared to find out that you indeed love everything? It's all there, I don't have to do a thing. And I can't read? Where does that comes from? Oh, right! Bryant: "If the story is good, I don't give a rat's arse about the music." I can read that just fine, Bryant. It's very telling about you too. Didn't I just say Iron Man is just plot and nothing else? Well, you've got your story so you're perfectly happy, aren't you? I would say that calling Iron Man art proofs that you don't know what art is. A debate between two people with different views on 'what is art' has never led to anything. So yes, just because you want to go there doesn't mean I have to play along. Alex

I've said it several times before, Bryant, you love everything. Just read your posts in this thread. Everything entertains you. Why explain? It seems to you everything is art. Make a film with Downey Jr, throw in some FX by ILM and you think you've created art.

That's just it! Should we be satisfied with "It was okay" these days? I felt Iron Man added very little to what I already have seen. Besides the familiar plot, the film had nothing to offer. If this is the result of Marvel being in total control of the production then I think I'll pass the next time. It was just plot and no art. I don't need movies for that! Alex Well, I for one thought it was better than okay. Maybe not a classic, but very good at the least. There really wasn't one single aspect of the movie that failed to entertain me. (Except maybe for the score, which was okay, but nothing I'd want to listen to on its own.) I definitely disagree that there is "no art" in the movie. The performances by Downey, Paltrow, and Bridges are extremely good, and the effects are outstanding, if nothing else. That's art to you? Shallow characters played by good actors and good SFX? Oh yeah! What a special treat! I really felt the soul of the artist at work here! Sorry, Bryant, how easily you're are satisfied.

That's just it! Should we be satisfied with "It was okay" these days? I felt Iron Man added very little to what I already have seen. Besides the familiar plot, the film had nothing to offer. If this is the result of Marvel being in total control of the production then I think I'll pass the next time. It was just plot and no art. I don't need movies for that! Alex

Iron Man: Nothing special, extremely forgettable. No really, I can't think of anything to be positive about.

Baffling! If we accept this line of thinking, then John Williams' efforts on Star Wars were futile. According to you, a score can't elevate a movie to a higher level. Star Wars could've been scored by Clint Eastwood and still be as good. I'm perplexed. Alex