Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I fell in love with this film when I was 13 and I saw it again (in a computer, I didn't have a DVD player). I used to constantly draw the Discovery in class instead of paying attention.
BloodBoal 8,711 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I fell in love with this film when I was 12.Gay!No, wait: cinesexual!
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 And that's why you're sitting here now instead of being out trying to get your end away! You should have been out climbing trees when you were 12. Bloody 2001 my arse!
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I think I was a bit older, I didn't have Internet when I was 12.It's not like I didn't climb a tree when I saw one, myself...
Wojo 2,458 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I fell in love with this film when I was 12.Gay!No, wait: cinesexual!How cinful...
JoeinAR 1,957 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Your taste in movies is staggeringly atrocious, according to my opinion.so, what does that matter to me. I'm sorry that my love for Jaws is atrocious to you. Sorry you think that movie sucks ass.I read the book before I saw 2001, then I saw 2001 and it was visually impressive but emotionally cold. It still is.I'm glad that people discuss it. It's clear that many here admire the film, I can't say that anyone here has posted that they love it. People love Star Wars, people admire 2001. Star Wars isn't meant to be an intellectual sci fi film. 2001 isn't meant to be an action adventure film. Personally I find 2001 more interesting for it's religious overtones than just about anything else.
crocodile 9,724 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Even if you didn't, you should have still be able to appreciate one of the the best looking films of all time. It just doesn't age (not counting some bits of technology).Karol
JoeinAR 1,957 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 there are many great looking films out there. Best is just hyperbole.
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 C'mon Joey, we all know you're JWFan's Mr Conventional where movies are concerned. If it ain't Hollywood and there's a chance it might be out of your comfort zone, you're guaranteed to have a little explosion of rage in reaction to whichever director happened to sneak up behind you and take you by surprise this time. How very dare he show you that movie, right? We see it time and time again here - you can't stand unconventional films which don't conform with your quaint little worldly view. And from that moment onwards you bitch about the movie and it's director for all eternity, or at least as long as there are people here to read it, for the umpteenth time. And no, your little flying saucer movies don't count as unconventional.
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 there are many great looking films out there. Best is just hyperbole.Though most look nothing special.And I agree with Quint, again! Joey has a pretty gay taste when it comes to movies (Titanic, Mama Mia, Shirley Temple movies ... ), music (Madonna, Lady Gaga, Ce Ce Peniston,) and TV series (The Mentalist, Castle, ...).
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Joe is a very manly, and sexual man.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 You cost me... A HELL OF A LOT, Joey, a hell of a lot!And religious overtones? Will people someday stop imagining religious overtones in everything because they can't find a better word for it?
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 E.T. is a retelling of the story of christ.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Of course, like Superman and Chance.I love 2001.too late.I said it too...
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I saw Captain America: The First AvengerNow, Alex made it seem like I was making up the Marvel films looking different from each other, but am I going crazy here? This one also looks different to me! With those fake backgrounds, the Snyder-like smooth movements of the characters, the pseudo-propaganda montages... The Incredible Hulk had a dark, modern "action film" look, green looking, lots of handheld, sweeping aerial shots, and the CGI looked crappier. The look of the CGI in this one is more painterly. Thor was more brightly light than either, used more slow motion and angled and tilted shots, and of course relied on Asgard styled like Jack Kirby...
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 but am I going crazy here? ..Yes. Generally speaking, it looks and feels like the next Marvel film. It's like they are all made by the the same director. Marvel doesn't want it any other way, BTW.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 That stuffs older than Snyder.What stuff?but am I going crazy here? ..Yes. Generally speaking, it looks and feels like the next Marvel film.Well I do see a difference between Captain America and The Avengers.
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Well you've edited and added more since I posted, but I was replying to the "Snyder-like smooth movements of the characters."I haven't seen CA, but isn't its look rather washed out and pseudo-black and white, as if it's an homage to a bygone era?
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Well yeah, it was an example. When Cap fight the Red Skull it reminds me of the opening scene of Watchmen. As if it was theatre. I like that, usually I feel more "distance" between myself and the action.
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 No, what I'm saying is CA looks nothing like The Avengers. Alex said marvel movies all look the same - and most of them do - loud, primary colours liberally splashed all over the place, blue skies, like in The Avengers, but CA goes for something a little different. I'm just sayin', that all.
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 The sets of the '40s had a different look but that's not what I mean with "different kind of moviemaking". Marvel comic book movies are not about auteurship. It's precisely the one thing Marvel doesn't want for their movies.
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Yeah I know what you meant, as I hinted at a moment ago. The physical sets and the costumes aren't what differentiate CA from the rest - judging by the images I've seen. That's all I'm trying to say.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Marvel comic book movies are not about auteurship. It's precisely the one thing Marvel doesn't want for their movies.That's a different thing altogether.Yet they kind of choose the directors clearly based on their previous work, which is interesting, although they don't let them that much freedom later (see Marvel cutting some good scenes from Thor). Other than Whedon who was basically set free with all these toys. Probably because he tends to write by himself just what they want and he does it so well. I'm glad, it doesn't happen very often.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Marvel wants all their films to have a certain look and feel, to be recognizable as a Marvel product.
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Same as Disney.Do we have to go to DC for the 'darker' fair?
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Marvel wants all their films to have a certain look and feel, to be recognizable as a Marvel product.There's pre-Hulk and post-Hulk.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Same as Disney.Do we have to go to DC for the 'darker' fair?They only know how to make Batman and Superman films.
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Watchmen is DC.Blade is pre-Hulk Marvel.Hellboy is ... eh ... Dark Horse Comics?!
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Wonder how close the X-Men films are to the established Marvel style
A24 5,155 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 It's pretty obvious. X-men and X2 are pre-Hulk Marvel. That means I like 'm. The rest or the bad ones are post-Hulk Marvel.
JoeinAR 1,957 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 there are many great looking films out there. Best is just hyperbole.Though most look nothing special.And I agree with Quint, again! Joey has a pretty gay taste when it comes to movies (Titanic, Mama Mia, Shirley Temple movies ... ), music (Madonna, Lady Gaga, Ce Ce Peniston,) and TV series (The Mentalist, Castle, ...). lol at alex and his stupidity, not to mention his superiority complex. Castle, I've never seen the show, Lady Gaga and Ce Ce Peniston, don't even know who that last person is. Titanic is one of the most popular movies ever, and it's a terrific movie on many levels, only a snobby bitch would deny that. but you are that.I thought Mamma Mia was okay but I don't own it, but I think all involved had a blast. Shirley Temple is a classic actress that made some comfy films.Alex is afraid of emotion. He's also scared of movies at the theater because they are more likely to force him emotions to the surface. That's why he loves film's like 2001 and Blade Runner because they are as cold as ice, like him. God forbid he should ever shed a tear because it would be revealing a weakness in himself. I would hate to be his family, how awful it must be to live with a f*****g ice cube.Joe, who gets that all Alex knows about gay people is stereotypes, we're all fey men who are fabulous with decor, make amazing floral arrangements, give women amazing hair, and all die of aids.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 film's like 2001 and Blade Runner because they are as cold as ice, like him.NO-THEY'RE-NOT.
JoeinAR 1,957 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 film's like 2001 and Blade Runner because they are as cold as ice, like him.NO-THEY'RE-NOT.saying there not doesn't make them so, they are cold films, devoid of any warmth.
Brónach 1,330 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 film's like 2001 and Blade Runner because they are as cold as ice, like him.NO-THEY'RE-NOT.saying there not doesn't make them so, they are cold films, devoid of any warmth.Saying that doesn't make them so Now seriously, in my first and only viewing so far of Blade Runner I was profoundly moved and in my first viewing of 2001 I was frightened as fuck (also a bit the last time I saw it.) I can't characterize these films as devoid of emotions.
Romão 2,473 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Blade Runner might be the only SCi Fi movie that actually moved me to tears
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 The tears in the rain moment is breathtaking. and the love scene is beautiful. Very vulnerable.
crocodile 9,724 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Just came back from the screening of Wes Anderson's Moonrise Kingdom. Didn't plan to go. I just went to collect my tickets for Prometheus. But then I was it was starting in about 20 minutes... Anyway, it's really good. Somewhat reminiscent of Fantastic Mr. Fox, but that's ok because I liked that film and, from my understanding, this is a typical Anderson (can't say I'm an expert). Very interesting camera work and a charming, dry-witted script. And terrific score from Alexandre Desplat. He's clearly one of the best film composers around these days (and Deathly Hallows is his least interesting work). I had a good time. Recommended.Karol
Quintus 6,494 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I must say I do love Joey's reprisals! I look forward to them, I do, and that one was vintage! Just an awesome poster here, always entertaining. Lee - who was surprised to get off so lightly.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,385 Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 I must say I do love Joey's reprisals! I look forward to them, Lee - who was surprised to get off so lightly.You like to be dominated right?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now