View Full Version : The Movie Thread
SirManchester
23 Jul 2006, 03:25 PM
Anyone seen Lady in the Water yet??
Yes, and it was awful, just awful.
Shayamalan thinks he earned his right to pull random shit out of his ass and produce it into a movie, no matter how ridiculous it seems. He still remains one of the most original directors in Hollywood now and I admire the way he takes risks like this (even though his original scripts always end up being changed by force) but this one, he simply didn't think through.
He wanted a "Princess Bride" fantasy feel to it, but it simply didn't work, from the start of the movie to the end, and I don't want to spoil it for anyone who plans on seeing it, but I can recall questioning every single scene. In fact, it almost seemed like he took a five minute bedtime story, and elongated it into a 500 page script just because M. Night thought he could.
His first two films were absolute genius, his third was good, his fourth questionable but still very interesting, I have no clue where he got the idea from that he earned his right to just fool around with film now.
Out of four stars, I give this; one and a half.
DutchFootballRulez
23 Jul 2006, 08:34 PM
Yes, and it was awful, just awful.
Shayamalan thinks he earned his right to pull random shit out of his ass and produce it into a movie, no matter how ridiculous it seems. He still remains one of the most original directors in Hollywood now and I admire the way he takes risks like this (even though his original scripts always end up being changed by force) but this one, he simply didn't think through.
He wanted a "Princess Bride" fantasy feel to it, but it simply didn't work, from the start of the movie to the end, and I don't want to spoil it for anyone who plans on seeing it, but I can recall questioning every single scene. In fact, it almost seemed like he took a five minute bedtime story, and elongated it into a 500 page script just because M. Night thought he could.
His first two films were absolute genius, his third was good, his fourth questionable but still very interesting, I have no clue where he got the idea from that he earned his right to just fool around with film now.
Out of four stars, I give this; one and a half.
Once you get an American Express commercial, its pretty much downhill from there.
Rakim_22
24 Jul 2006, 01:23 AM
Over the Hedge sure was a retarded movie. Another rip off of Madagascar and these Disney companies or whatever can't get enough of fcukin zoo animals. Terrible movie. Sheesh!
benni...
24 Jul 2006, 07:54 AM
Rakim, if I may ask, how old are you?
jrod69
24 Jul 2006, 12:28 PM
Rakim, if I may ask, how old are you?
nuthin wrong with G rated movies I think Shrek was decent as well as THe Incredibles
Rakim_22
24 Jul 2006, 12:36 PM
Rakim, if I may ask, how old are you?
If you must inquire 16. I was watching it at my aunts house. I really had no choice.
benni...
24 Jul 2006, 01:51 PM
Wasnt trying to be a smart ass, just asking a question.
Vermont Red
24 Jul 2006, 01:57 PM
I watched "Wicker Park" on cable this weekend and was pleasantly surprised. (Yes, I know it is based on a foreign film staring the lovely Monica Bellucci.) On my four star rating system, I give it three. I also really like the previously-mentioned "Garden State". I liked it better than "Wicker Park" but since I don't give half stars, I also give that three.
Achtung
24 Jul 2006, 02:05 PM
Once you get an American Express commercial, its pretty much downhill from there.
I sure hope that's not true for Wes Anderson...
Vermont Red
24 Jul 2006, 02:07 PM
I sure hope that's not true for Wes Anderson...
I have to admit that I couldn't get through "The Life Aquatic". Maybe just a touch too much whimsy.
SirManchester
24 Jul 2006, 02:28 PM
I have to admit that I couldn't get through "The Life Aquatic". Maybe just a touch too much whimsy.
Other than Rushmore, none of his other movies are watchable. The Royal Tennenbaums was pointless and The Life Aquatic was certainly original, Anderson tried too hard to achieve his brand of filmmaking rather than actually making a good film.
Achtung
24 Jul 2006, 02:32 PM
I liked the Royal Tenenbaums a lot, and thought Life Aquatic was good, though not great. I just think several characters were miscast in it, the problem of course being that Anderson likes to stick with the same actors for some reason. It dragged a little, but overall I enjoyed it.
Shyamalan has definitely been downhill since Unbreakable. Signs was alright, but had a thoroughly poor final 15 minutes. The Village... double meh.
FIFARay007
24 Jul 2006, 02:33 PM
Other than Rushmore, none of his other movies are watchable. The Royal Tennenbaums was pointless and The Life Aquatic was certainly original, Anderson tried too hard to achieve his brand of filmmaking rather than actually making a good film.
While some directors work up to their peak, Wes started at the top with Bottle Rocket, and has tumbled constantly down, hitting every rock and tree along the way.
Vermont Red
24 Jul 2006, 02:41 PM
I need to watch "Bottle Rocket" again. I didn't care for it when I saw it, but maybe it's better than I thought. I liked "Rushmore", liked "Tennebaums" less.
As for M. Night, I think "Unbreakable" is underrated. The denoument of "Signs" almost ruins the whole movie and the denoument of "The Village" makes a bad movie worse.
The problem you see with a lot of directors is that too much freedom actually hurts them. Notably free of this problem (so far) is Alexander Payne.
SirManchester
24 Jul 2006, 02:46 PM
I need to watch "Bottle Rocket" again. I didn't care for it when I saw it, but maybe it's better than I thought. I liked "Rushmore", liked "Tennebaums" less.
As for M. Night, I think "Unbreakable" is underrated. The denoument of "Signs" almost ruins the whole movie and the denoument of "The Village" makes a bad movie worse.
The problem you see with a lot of directors is that too much freedom actually hurts them. Notably free of this problem (so far) is Alexander Payne.
Well I don't think it's too much freedom that hurts them, if they were more restricted by studios then we would never see some of the fantastic things they might be able to accomplish.
A true director who takes his art seriously needs creative freedom, mainly to explore the medium, to search what is possible and to expand on his knowledge. In Anderson's and Shyamalan's case for example, the amount of freedom given just showed that they aren't as original and excellent as we all thought them out to be, especially if they make consecutively worse movies.
Out of all new directors in Hollywood, my personal favorites are still Chris Nolan and Darren Aranofsky who both have two interesting films coming out soon.
Achtung
24 Jul 2006, 02:54 PM
Out of all new directors in Hollywood, my personal favorites are still Chris Nolan and Darren Aranofsky who both have two interesting films coming out soon.
I'm a fan of those two guys as well. What happened to Aronofsky after Requiem for a Dream? I remember him being attached originally to the Batman Begins movie, before of course Nolan took that over. His IMDb page shows a few movies coming out soon though.
Vermont Red
24 Jul 2006, 02:57 PM
Well I don't think it's too much freedom that hurts them, if they were more restricted by studios then we would never see some of the fantastic things they might be able to accomplish.
My point is that sometimes its the restrictions that make for better work. How many times have we seen a director who finally has (relatively) unlimited resources make an incoherent or indulgent mess? There is such a thing as too many choices.
Out of all new directors in Hollywood, my personal favorites are still Chris Nolan and Darren Aranofsky who both have two interesting films coming out soon.
For me, the jury's still out on Nolan. Given I didn't see his films before "Memento", but I haven't been as impressed with "Insomnia" (inferior to the orginal) and "Batman Begins" as I'd hoped. I agree that Aranofsky is the real deal. By the way, are you saying that each are coming out with two interesting films?
SirManchester
24 Jul 2006, 02:57 PM
Aronofsky's new film The Fountain
http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/thefountain/
Nolan's new film The Prestige
http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/theprestige/hd/
Still, my favorite new director and he hasn't hit America yet, is Neil Marshal, director of Dog Soldiers and The Descent.
SirManchester
24 Jul 2006, 03:02 PM
My point is that sometimes its the restrictions that make for better work. How many times have we seen a director who finally has (relatively) unlimited resources make an incoherent or indulgent mess? There is such a thing as too many choices.
You're right, too much freedom is only for those who know what to do with it. It's obvious to me Shyamalan and Anderson aren't the true auteurs we hoped them to be from the getgo. Also, sometimes we see true genius from directors who are extremely restricted, then they can pull out all their tricks and show them off.
For me, the jury's still out on Nolan. Given I didn't see his films before "Memento", but I haven't been as impressed with "Insomnia" (inferior to the orginal) and "Batman Begins" as I'd hoped. I agree that Aranofsky is the real deal. By the way, are you saying that each are coming out with two interesting films?
Nolan's first film "Following" is great, intriguing neo-noir with a twist. And again, sorry, both have one film coming up each.
Rakim_22
24 Jul 2006, 07:18 PM
Wasnt trying to be a smart ass, just asking a question.
Oh ok. Gotcha.