What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Older Films)

[JoeinAR 1,957]

only on a 14 beer night when pickings are very slim.

[Wojo 2,458]

So it's ok for the gay to use retarded as an adjective? That's fine, since both are determined by genes and totally unchangeable. I just want to make sure we all agree on the double standard. My niggas.

It's so adorable how quickly little Steffy rides to Joey's immediate defense.

That's worth at least three bazingas.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

never said that but you've been very free with the gay stuff over the years, I'm sure you're so easily offended. You've used it as a insult. I merely describe stupid cussing as retarded. but you want to be the PC police, however you simply come across as fake. but Jason is your cheerleader with her pom poms and poneytail, don't you feel vindicated.

[Wojo 2,458]

Free? You gotta buy me a drink, first.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

Jason is the first Mod I know who actively encourages members when they (try to) insult members he doesnt like.

As for coming to Joe's defence. Joe is a big boy, very very big or so I'm told. He can look after himself.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

getting back on topic,

we rented Jack Reacher last night, a minor Tom Cruise film.

It's watchable, it's funny and sad, and it's a coin flip to determine the villain. Robert Duvall is always a treat to watch.

[Jay 46,244]

Woah woah, i wasn't actively encouraging anyone to insult anyone else! I was laughing at his post because it was funny. He pointed out that Joey used the word "retarded" to insult someone else while saying that it was dumb to use the insult they used, and then he finished his post by using "gay" in the exact same way that Joey used "retarded" - both are examples of words many use to insult others that you shouldn't use. It was funny!

And there are no members I don't like, I love you all!

[A24 5,156]

Jason is the first Mod I know who actively encourages members when they (try to) insult members he doesnt like.

As for coming to Joe's defence. Joe is a big boy, very very big or so I'm told. He can look after himself.

Then why do you always protect him? I mean, that's okay, but if he's a big boy, then why do you do it?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

And there are no members I don't like, I love you all!

Gay!

[JoeinAR 1,957]

haven't you heard the Dion Warwick Song Alex, That's what friends are for. In good times, in bad times, I'll be on your side forever more, that's what friends are for.

[Wojo 2,458]

I have a cheerleader already, thank you very much. And I love her pom poms.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

Then why do you always protect him? I mean, that's okay, but if he's a big boy, then why do you do it?

Hmmm...are you jealous that I'm being to chummy with Joe?

I bet think about him often enough....

[JoeinAR 1,957]

And there are no members I don't like, I love you all!

Gay!

and a lie, I'd be on ignore if he wasn't the admin.

[Quintus 6,496]

Hmm, tbh I just saw Wojo's initial comment to be a big deliberate build up to a very, very dry punchline.

I don't think he was offended by the retard comment.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

with Wojo who knows. he's not offended by cursing, or racial insensitivity, but a comment about brain disfuntion... yeah you're probably right, but we American's don't do dry humor as well as you Brits.

[Jay 46,244]

Is it not possible for me to both love someone but not want to read their posts?

[JoeinAR 1,957]

et to Brute,

back to topic, there is a film, a B film that I read the synopsis and wanted to see. Rosewood Lane, turns out it's a Victor Silva film. He's sleazy but something always works in his films, and doesn't.

And someone tell me about Donnie Darko, is it worth watching. I read somewhere that it's a polarizing film with two frames of thought, like it/hate it, without much middle ground.

[Quintus 6,496]

You could be like me Jason and despise everyone and read their posts with mocking eyes, while admiring your own reflection in your phone.

[A24 5,156]

Then why do you always protect him? I mean, that's okay, but if he's a big boy, then why do you do it?

Hmmm...are you jealous that I'm being to chummy with Joe?

I bet think about him often enough....

I love Joey like the next JWfan but I think he's able to do his own fights. You don't show him the same respect.

[crocodile 9,724]

It's a good film. Donnie Darko. Not amazing, good. I'd avoid director's cut, though. It explains the film and there are some nice previously unseen bits, but it also makes it less special. I myself always saw it as a coming of age kind of film, rather than s-f.

Anyway, it's about 6 hours and 15 minutes till Star Trek Into Darkness showing starts. I don't almost anything about it, except for stuff I've seen in the trailers and one major spoiler. But the context of that is still a mystery.

Karol

[Wojo 2,458]

Don't worry, Joey. You're not the first poster I've critiqued for using retarded as a slang term. (He never quite picks up on what I mean.)

But if you can go there, it's open season to also use gay as another synonym for dumb or bad.

[A24 5,156]

Donnie Darko is not a Joey movie.

[Quintus 6,496]

I would be very surprised if Joey liked Donnie Darko. I personally found it to be hugely overrated hot air, but still mildly interesting after the fact, I suppose.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

Donnie Darko is not a Joey movie.

why do you say that?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,386]

Because its not like The Mentalist, NCIS or Hawai Five O.....

[A24 5,156]

Because it's the type of movie that you would call artsy-fartsy and pretentious. And yes, it's very far removed from the movies you usually tend to like and quite closely related to the movies you hate (think arthouse cinema, Paul Thomas Anderson, etc.)

Alex

[Uni 307]

"I have no use for that kind of language, it's just foul. So stfu, butthole."

Mmm-kay.

et to Brute,

. . . come in, Brute. . . .

- Uni

[JoeinAR 1,957]

well you have me there I don't like Paul Thomas Anderson films, not because they are artsy, they certainly are not that.

Kind of sort of like there will be blood, and havn't seen the master.

.

along comes equally judgemental Uni when all the drama is over to start it up again.

[Uni 307]

Nope. I just missed the fun earlier, and there simply was no way I could resist pointing out the bizarre double-standard.

But I simply added my voice to what others have already said. It's a mail-in ballot. No need to resurrect anything.

- Uni

[Jay 46,244]

Joey, I doubt you'll like Donnie Darko either, but if you are interested you might as well check it out! I mean what have you got to lose? Red Box rentals are $1. And it's fun watching movies you've never seen before instead of the same ones over and over again.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

Darko is only $5 on Amazon. I was actually thinking of picking it up since I haven't seen it in years. Very interesting and avant garde film. I wouldn't compare it to PTA at all.

[Quintus 6,496]

It's sort of Lynchesque minus the thick tangible atmosphere.

[Jay 46,244]

I wouldn't compare it to PTA at all either

Why spend $5 to own when you can spend $1 to rent if you don't love it?

[A24 5,156]

If I have to compare to make something clear to someone, then comparing a filmmaker like Richard Kelly to PTA really makes sense to me, but it doesn't surprise me that not everyone can see the correlations. The comparison is not new. Spike Jonze, Richard Kelly and Paul Thomas Anderson are often 'grouped' for making the movies that they do. That doesn't mean that they are exactly the same, but Joey will dislike all 3 of them for the same reasons.

[Quintus 6,496]

Being John Malkovich however is one of my favourites.

[Uni 307]

Being John Malkovich however is one of my favourites.

A phenomenal film.

My wife swears by Donnie Darko, though I've never seen it. May have to try it soon. . . .

- Uni

[JoeinAR 1,957]

Joey, I doubt you'll like Donnie Darko either, but if you are interested you might as well check it out! I mean what have you got to lose? Red Box rentals are $1. And it's fun watching movies you've never seen before instead of the same ones over and over again.

I will check it out eventually, I wouldn't have asked if I wasn't a least a bit curious. Alex, I liked Kelly's one film the box, it's sort of a guilty pleasure.

like Koray I do have a back log of blus I've purchases and have yet to watch.

[Quintus 6,496]

I buy my absolute favourites because I see them cheap and with the best of intentions, but then they just end up buried away somewhere. For now at least.

[crocodile 9,724]

Star Trek Into Darkness

The film is a roller coaster. Which is both good and bad. Is it darker? I'd say dark-ish. For every serious incident, there is a goof. They crammed in is so much stuff in it that it not entirely succeeds in what it tries to accomplish, I reckon. It's very uneven. At times I thought to myself "oh this is pretty cool", then "that wasn't too subtle", then "I didn't see this coming", then "seriously, JJ?", then "whoa what a ride", then "no, only not that!". The tone shifts every 10 minutes. Not sure what to make out of it, to be honest. Bennedict Cumberbatch's performance is as uneven as the film itself. In some moment he's really good, in some moments way too over the top in it's stillness (if you can even do that). Giacchino's score is functional, only sometimes exceptional. There is some good stuff in there, but I still hate his main theme.

I couldn't help thinking this film was Star Trek only for the first 10 minutes of its running time. Otherwise it's a modern breakneck action blockbuster with some references to the series thrown in into a mix. And some of those are quite bothersome and heavy-handed, I might add. I wish it was my first date with this franchise. That would have made it much more enjoyable.

In some ways better than the previous one, in some ways worse. As I said - uneven.

Karol

[Uni 307]

Wow. Is it out already? Wasn't watching for the release date.

- Uni

[JoeinAR 1,957]

not in the states Uni, for some reason they chose to release it in foreign markets first.

[Uni 307]

That would be why! I just checked the dates, and sure enough, it isn't due until next week. (Thought maybe Karol got to sit in on an advanced screening or something. . . .)

- Uni

[crocodile 9,724]

Nah it was a midnight showing. The film opens today. It'll be released in America in a week, I think.

Strange.

Karol

[publicist 4,650]

Star Trek Into Darkness

The film is a roller coaster. Which is both good and bad. Is it darker? I'd say dark-ish. For every serious incident, there is a goof. They crammed in is so much stuff in it that it not entirely succeeds in what it tries to accomplish, I reckon. It's very uneven. At times I thought to myself "oh this is pretty cool", then "that wasn't too subtle", then "I didn't see this coming", then "seriously, JJ?", then "whoa what a ride", then "no, only not that!". The tone shifts every 10 minutes. Not sure what to make out of it, to be honest. Bennedict Cumberbatch's performance is as uneven as the film itself. In some moment he's really good, in some moments way too over the top in it's stillness (if you can even do that). Giacchino's score is functional, only sometimes exceptional. There is some good stuff in there, but I still hate his main theme.

I couldn't help thinking this film was Star Trek only for the first 10 minutes of its running time. Otherwise it's a modern breakneck action blockbuster with some references to the series thrown in into a mix. And some of those are quite bothersome and heavy-handed, I might add. I wish it was my first date with this franchise. That would have made it much more enjoyable.

In some ways better than the previous one, in some ways worse. As I said - uneven.

Karol

From what i've seen of Abrams so far, that's my main problem with him: not the uneven-ness (which can be a wonderful advantage), but that he brings nothing to the table apart from his proficiency in breakneck action blockbuster directing - which he does with aplomb. What he lacks is any human, philosophical or ideologic insight that rises above perfunctory script necessities. Even if there's lip service paid to certain STAR RTEK ideas, you always know they have no more weight to him than the next cool snow monster scene.

Which is frustrating, because apart from this he is a very good kinetic filmmaker and a world apart from Michael Bay & Co.

[Quintus 6,496]

Abrams is hugely overrated as a director and I think the expectation surrounding him is overblown and unfair (on him). He should be making Final Destination movies or something, Jeepers Creepers 3, that sort of thing. Instead he's been given these massive budgets and the keys to the city to make these thunderous blockbusters off the back of a bloated but successful tv show. He's being asked to be the new Spielberg, when he's yet to make his Jaws.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

Abrams is hugely overrated as a director and I think the expectation surrounding him is overblown and unfair (on him). He should be making Final Destination movies or something, Jeepers Creepers 3, that sort of thing. Instead he's been given these massive budgets and the keys to the city to make these thunderous blockbusters off the back of a bloated but successful tv show. He's being asked to be the new Spielberg, when he's yet to make his Jaws.

I completely agree, I think he's great at assembling a cast. His uneveness as a director isn't a wonderful advantage, it's a disadvantage. It's a frustrating thing for audiences. His choice on writers is suspect at best, and while you can admire his loyalty, you have to question his reliance on such poor writers.

[Brónach 1,330]

I don't mind changes of tone at all (does real life have a set tone?), but I do mind shitty scripts and failed production design.

[crocodile 9,724]

Star Trek Into Darkness

The film is a roller coaster. Which is both good and bad. Is it darker? I'd say dark-ish. For every serious incident, there is a goof. They crammed in is so much stuff in it that it not entirely succeeds in what it tries to accomplish, I reckon. It's very uneven. At times I thought to myself "oh this is pretty cool", then "that wasn't too subtle", then "I didn't see this coming", then "seriously, JJ?", then "whoa what a ride", then "no, only not that!". The tone shifts every 10 minutes. Not sure what to make out of it, to be honest. Bennedict Cumberbatch's performance is as uneven as the film itself. In some moment he's really good, in some moments way too over the top in it's stillness (if you can even do that). Giacchino's score is functional, only sometimes exceptional. There is some good stuff in there, but I still hate his main theme.

I couldn't help thinking this film was Star Trek only for the first 10 minutes of its running time. Otherwise it's a modern breakneck action blockbuster with some references to the series thrown in into a mix. And some of those are quite bothersome and heavy-handed, I might add. I wish it was my first date with this franchise. That would have made it much more enjoyable.

In some ways better than the previous one, in some ways worse. As I said - uneven.

Karol

From what i've seen of Abrams so far, that's my main problem with him: not the uneven-ness (which can be a wonderful advantage), but that he brings nothing to the table apart from his proficiency in breakneck action blockbuster directing - which he does with aplomb. What he lacks is any human, philosophical or ideologic insight that rises above perfunctory script necessities. Even if there's lip service paid to certain STAR RTEK ideas, you always know they have no more weight to him than the next cool snow monster scene.

Which is frustrating, because apart from this he is a very good kinetic filmmaker and a world apart from Michael Bay & Co.

Yeah, let's remember - this is not a terrible film. Just not a particularly good. I'm sure a lot of people will like it. The audience seemed to enjoy it for the most part. It's exciting enough where it needs to be and for an action summer blockbuster it's not bad. But can't say I want to see it again. There is no soul to it.

Karol

[Delorean90 47]

For comparison's sake, remind me what you thought of the previous film, Karol.

[KK 3,313]

Abrams is hugely overrated as a director and I think the expectation surrounding him is overblown and unfair (on him). He should be making Final Destination movies or something, Jeepers Creepers 3, that sort of thing. Instead he's been given these massive budgets and the keys to the city to make these thunderous blockbusters off the back of a bloated but successful tv show. He's being asked to be the new Spielberg, when he's yet to make his Jaws.

Well said!