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

[BloodBoal 7,538]

http://www.chronologicallylost.com/2010/05/frequently-asked-questions.html

What is Chronologically LOST?

Chronologically LOST is a project I have undertaken to present the show LOST in its entirety in chronological order. That means taking every flashback, flash forward, and flash sideways, extracting them from the present day storyline, and creating one big timeline, that starts with the earliest flashbacks of the island, and goes through all the way to the end of the series in...well, I guess the end doesn't really have a specific date. The plan is to release this timeline in 'episodes', just as the show is presented to us now. These episodes will be posted on this site for viewing, and will be approximately the length of a regular LOST episode, 45 minutes, give or take depending on the logistics of a particular episode.

How long did it take you to do all of this?

I haven't really kept track, but it's taken a while. Basically, the entire series is 120 episodes, or about 85 hours, and I've had to take all of that video, put it on my computer and in a format that's workable, go through every episode to split up all the clips, organize them chronologically (I worked on this on a season by season basis, because it's too big as a whole for my computer to handle), then start working on integrating the different seasons into one master timeline. Then, finally, I had to go through each audio and video transition in between every clip to make sure everything looks and sounds okay. This also included dealing with scenes that are looked at from multiple perspectives (ie. The Oceanic 815 plane crash or Locke, Jack, Kate & Desmond in the hatch, etc.), and figuring out where everything goes and setting up split screens if necessary. It's been a fun yet arduous process, and it's really given me a good refresher course on the entire series since I've had to go through much of it a few times while working on all of this.

Is there any non-televised material that will be included in the project?

Basically, I wanted to only include things that were considered officially canon in the LOST universe. So, other than the actual episodes, there are the "Missing Pieces" mobisodes that were originally released as part of a mobile phone promotion and ultimately ended up on the Season 4 DVD extras. These are considered to be canon, and are meant to enhance the hardcore LOST fan's understanding of the show. There are 14 of them, and each one is only a few minutes long, so it's not a lot of extra material, but there is some definite value in some of the mobisodes. Other than that, though, I don't know of any other sources that would be considered 'canon', so for the most part it will just be video from the televised episodes.

Now, there are rumored to be some additional video clips on either the Season 6 DVD set or the Complete Series DVD set that may take place after the end of Jack's time on the island. As of right now I believe those clips are going to be considered canon, so they will probably be integrated into the project as soon as possible.

What are you going to do with the flash sideways?

This is a popular question that I get a lot, and the short answer is: I don't know, and I probably won't know until the show is actually over. But I have some ideas.

There is some precedence for how to handle flash sideways, because we (unknown to us at the time) experienced one in Season 3 in "Flashes Before Your Eyes", after Desmond turned the key in the hatch. Desmond flashed to 1996, only it wasn't 1996 in our world, but it was a similar world. What happened in this place did not affect anything that happened in his actual life, his talking to Charlie, meeting Eloise, etc. Now, since this flash sideways did not occur in our world, just because in the flash sideways world it was 1996, does not mean that's where it falls in our master timeline. Instead, we would place this flash sideways at the moment Desmond starts to experience it. As we saw in our world, Desmond started experiencing his flash sideways the moment he turned the key, and when he finished the experience, he woke up in the jungle. And so in our timeline, that's where it will be placed.

Contrast that with Desmond in "The Constant". In that episode, Desmond is leaving the island by helicopter, and starts to experience a temporal distortion, his mind flashing between 2004 and 1996. Only this time, he's actually moving between two time periods in our world, so his actions in 1996 affect how things play out in the future (The whole point of the episode, his conversation with Penny, is evidence of this). So this is not a flash sideways, this is just Desmond flashing in time, similar to Locke, Sawyer & Co. flashing through time on the island. So in this instance, Desmond's flashes to 1996 would be placed on the timeline in 1996, and not in 2004 where he is supposed to reside.

But, back to our flash sideways in Season 6. While with our previous flash sideways, we knew precisely when it was occurring from Desmond's perspective. With our current flash sideways, we don't know who is experiencing it, or even when they are experiencing it. Desmond was "awaken" from his flash sideways by a cricket bat to the side of the head. I think that whoever is experiencing this flash sideways will have a similar waking up, and at that time we should have a better idea of when exactly these flash sideways were experienced in our world. Now, this is all speculation on my part based on past experience, it could play out in any number of ways, which is why my short answer was I don't know. But that's the long answer as to why I still don't know, and don't expect to find out how to handle it until May 23.



Hooray, we have an answer! In case you were still wondering, the flash sideways world will be placed at the very end of the series, as a bit of an epilogue.

How did you arrange the flashbacks?


I used Lostpedia's fantastic timeline for a lot of the initial groundwork. While it doesn't list out everything, it gave me enough to work on to where I could use my best guess to figure out where everything else goes. Since most of the flashbacks don't have any set dates as to when they occurred, it was more like putting together puzzle pieces than anything, making sure everything fit together. It's an inexact science, but I believe I was able to put things into a logical order.

[nightscape94 965]

Love how none of this stuff is about anything currently in theatres.

It's almost impossible to stay on topic when discussing movies. You invariably jump from one to the next because you're reminded of something else, or you mention a cinematic influence, cousin, or companion film, then you start talking about that, then it leads to another....

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Get back in line and follow the rules!

[nightscape94 965]

So I hear that Sin City: A Dame to Kill For is getting absolutely destroyed in the box office. Yikes.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

It bombed worse than Van Halen's second comeback. People don't want that phoney digital backlot crap, especially when it's all style over substance--desperately trying to be cool, but utterly failing. I guess it's kinda like The Expendables 3 in that regard, albeit with a million percent more CGI.

[Sweeping Strings 2,356]

I'll be going, I enjoyed the first one. Plus it's refreshing to see in this age of 'toning down' to get a 12A/PG-13 (like the aforementioned Expendables 3), Sin City 2 is unashamedly an 18/R.

[Matt C 452]

For it to be an 8/10 experience, it lacks a bit a gravitas. Like Star Wars, it could have done with a wider range of emotions. You never feel real danger, threat, sadness or victory. It's all flash and fluffy ... but sure, is was fun ...

Alex

The thing I have against Guardians is that it could've been sharper and funnier, but it wasn't. It was moderately clever and funny (the soundtrack usage was inspired), but a lot of people are giving it a free pass just because "it's Marvel."

It bombed worse than Van Halen's second comeback. People don't want that phoney digital backlot crap, especially when it's all style over substance--desperately trying to be cool, but utterly failing. I guess it's kinda like The Expendables 3 in that regard, albeit with a million percent more CGI.

Please don't group in Sin City: A Dame to Kill For with The Expendables 3. The latter failed because it was neutered for PG-13, which took away the only thing worthwhile about the series... the wonderfully over-the-top blood and gore.

Sin City 2 failed because Rodriguez took way too long to make it. By the time it came out, no one really cared. And it does not look phony, it has a stunning ultra-stylized film noir look to it. Plus it has Eva Green, which automatically makes it better than The Expendables 3 anyway.

[Romão 2,274]

That's an indicator of how well crafted Serenity was, that it could be watched and enjoyed without any prior knowledge of events in the show. But yes, it's definitely a better idea to see the show before the movie. There's the in-jokes, for one.

And then there's Fire Walk With Me, which is utterly pointless without Twin Peaks before it. Some might argue it's still pointless with it, like I would.

I would consider Fire Walk With Me absolutely necessary viewing to bring the whole story to fruition. And the score is mesmerizing

[A24 4,331]

I'll be going, I enjoyed the first one. Plus it's refreshing to see in this age of 'toning down' to get a 12A/PG-13 (like the aforementioned Expendables 3), Sin City 2 is unashamedly an 18/R.

An often heard critique about Sin City 2 is "lifeless". Who knows, maybe the critics all have been Marvelized (Guardians Of The Galaxy: 92%). I mean, everything that is not Marvel is getting low grades these days.

Sin City 2 failed because Rodriguez took way too long to make it. By the time it came out, no one really cared. And it does not look phony, it has a stunning ultra-stylized film noir look to it. Plus it has Eva Green, which automatically makes it better than The Expendables 3 anyway.

She's slowly becoming the queen of the stylized comic book movie sequel.

Alex

[King Mark 3,631]

She's slightly passed her prime too

[Quintus 5,399]

In what way?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

She's 34, she's pretty and has a fantastic pair of tits. Past her prime?

[Quintus 5,399]

Apparently she's a talented actress as well.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Eva Green? Not really.

She's only been in the business for 11 years, what prime did she pass?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

KM only judges women looks wise, i think.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Pig!

[Matt C 452]

Apparently she's a talented actress as well.

That's what I mean. Her beauty comes a close second. Her presence just really elevates any kind of movie she's in... except The Dreamers, which was boring no matter how many times she took her clothes off.

Now if she was in The Expendables 3, I'd be torn. Luckily enough she has the sense to stay away from senseless sausage fests.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

She's fucking stunning in a petite way. Green's best role is in THE DREAMERS where she got to show off her knockers - a terrific film BTW. Otherwise, she's not a very good actress. To quote a wise man.

Eva makes me uncomfortable, but not in a good way. Her occasional screen appearances are my cue to go and put the kettle on.

She's obviously intelligent, unusual in an actor, but then she's not a natural actress. My best guess is that she acts to avoid self analysis and it's that lack of ease which cripples her performances. They're far too studied and mannered. She comes across as someone who is scared to live so has read a few books instead.

I'm sure that painful self-consciousness would resurface in the bedroom so she doesn't interest me sexually. I'd much prefer to be her unpaid psychiatrist. First world demons might be the sort of everyday drama she'd excel at.

Suppressed suburban hysterics r us...

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

She's fucking stunning in a petite way. Green's best role is in THE DREAMERS where she got to show off her knockers - a terrific film BTW. Otherwise, she's not a very good actress. To quote a wise man.

Eva makes me uncomfortable, but not in a good way. Her occasional screen appearances are my cue to go and put the kettle on.

She's obviously intelligent, unusual in an actor, but then she's not a natural actress. My best guess is that she acts to avoid self analysis and it's that lack of ease which cripples her performances. They're far too studied and mannered. She comes across as someone who is scared to live so has read a few books instead.

I'm sure that painful self-consciousness would resurface in the bedroom so she doesn't interest me sexually. I'd much prefer to be her unpaid psychiatrist. First world demons might be the sort of everyday drama she'd excel at.

Suppressed suburban hysterics r us...

Dafuq?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Luckily enough she has the sense to stay away from senseless sausage fests.

[Hurmm 91]

Actually I agree about the bit that she's unnatural. About the only time that I really liked her was in Casino Royale, where her unnaturalness was a perfect fit, because that's what the role required. She can be okay in other roles, but they never seem natural. You can see its a performance.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

What are all these other unnatural roles? The woman's been in like 5 films that have any clout.

[crocodile 8,002]

She doesn't really ever play regular people, so not sure how natural her performances can be. And here lies the potential problem. If they carry on casting her in those quirky roles, she'll end up like Johnny Depp - stuck in the same routine for eternity.

Having said that, I'm enjoying her in Penny Dreadful.

Karol

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

She'll be happy as long as she's getting paid.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You make her sound like a hooker!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

You make her sound like a hooker!

We shared some viruses once!

[A24 4,331]

Maybe Tim Burton should use her instead of Helena Bonham Carter.

[Matt C 452]

Luckily enough she has the sense to stay away from senseless sausage fests.

I was referring to The Expendables franchise as "senseless sausage fests." And anyway, she wasn't the only woman in 300: Rise of an empire -- Lena Headey was in it too.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I remember how gawky Lena Headey looked in MacGyver: Trail to Doomsday.

[Sweeping Strings 2,356]

Green spends a fair amount of her screentime in Sin City 2 naked, and I can assure you that she is FAR from past her prime .

Anyway, I enjoyed it ... very much more of the same as the first. You either buy into that 'world' or you don't, I guess.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Green spends a fair amount of her screentime in Sin City 2 naked, and I can assure you that she is FAR from past her prime .

This should never have bombed!

[King Mark 3,631]

Well, her body is probably CGI enhanced

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Christ you really are a sexist, arent you?

Is Emma Watson too old now too?

[Quintus 5,399]

He'll be a closet misogynist.

[nightscape94 965]

Her body is sculpted from the gods.

[Marian Schedenig 8,192]

And how old are they?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

As old as humanity.

[Marian Schedenig 8,192]

Way past their prime then.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

What are all these other unnatural roles? The woman's been in like 5 films that have any clout.

DARK SHADOWS, CASINO ROYALE, THE GOLDEN COMPASS, WOMB, and worst of all - CRACKS. And it's usually the performances that are unnatural, inhibited and self-conscious, not the roles.

[Matt C 452]

Neighbors - I don't understand the pic's success. It's repulsive and mean-spirited, and while it's fun to see Zac Efron trying to shake the chains of the High School Musical franchise, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Seth Rogen is again playing another slovenly fat "everyman", and it's no longer funny. Rose Byrne is the lone bright spot here, and even she can't save it. Deplorable.

Sex Tape - If anything, it's worse than Neighbors. Some sporadically funny moments, but otherwise is just embarrassing. The title item in particular is so revolting that even the couple wants to kibosh it. I wish Sony had done the same for this movie... this has not been a good year for R-rated comedies.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Why watch stuff like that?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

He has Alex syndrome!

[King Mark 3,631]

Guardians of the Galaxy

Sorry, it didn't work for me. The movie felt disjointed and slapped together, like the script was almost improvised from scene to scene. I found a few jokes amusing but most of them felt flat (kinda like I felt watching all the trailers). I never felt like anything was at stake and didn't care what happened next most of the time. I found every single character annoying except rocket racoon. Visually, the movie had the typical CGI fake look to it, with too much random colors and stuff happening in every shot

The score was absolutely horrible too, but it did have a cool new variation of the Marvel Fanfare at the beginning

I also saw the trailer for Interstellar and nothing in it made me want to see it. Looks like another long boring movie like Oblivion. I also noticed they went with the desaturated color look and it didn't make it too appealing

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Interstellar does indeed look boring.

[Jay 37,350]

Wasn't that Marvel Fanfare tracked in from Thor 2?

[Not Mr. Big 4,639]

Interstellar looks fine. I just find it insanely disappointing that we're never going to hear John Williams' take on it. It was arguably the most promising future project for him and having Zimmer do the score instead is absolutely maddening.

[King Mark 3,631]

Wasn't that Marvel Fanfare tracked in from Thor 2?

No, it had different orchestrations I believe .Maybe Brian Tyler recorded a few takes

[A24 4,331]

Interstellar does indeed look boring.

It looks too saccharine. It feels as if Nolan wants to outdo Spielberg at his most sentimental ... which means some people here might actually 'feel' something again while watching a movie.

[King Mark 3,631]

Maybe, IF the emotional parts do connect during the movie

It's the whole look of it I didn't like in the trailer. The all white rock planet didn't look too good for example, and same for the few space shots with beige planets we saw

[Quintus 5,399]

Interstellar looks more Ron Howard than Spielberg imo.