Printable View
Watched Dodgeball last weekend. Hilarious stuff-- it's become my third favourite comedy, after Monty Python and the Holy Grail and Austin Powers. Ben Stiller shows why he's my favourite among the Hollywood comedy troupe.
Anybody else watch this movie, and, if so, what did you think of it?
Gah! I *hate* Ben Stiller with the fire of a thousand novas. Just like Will Ferrell, he's one of the least funny actors I know, yet somehow keeps appearing in movie after movie. :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirinus
Now with that said, I admittedly enjoyed Dodgeball quite a bit. Vince Vaughn is in his usual droll comedic form, and Rip Torn as Patches O'Hoolihan is hillarious. :laugh4: Gary Cole & Jason Bateman as the announcers were great as well ("Ladies and gentlemen, I have been to the Great Wall of China, I have seen the Pyramids of Egypt, I've even witnessed a grown man satisfy a camel!"). Overall, it's a pretty solid physical comedy.
Of course, my favorite scene is where Lance Armstrong has that little talk with Peter. Truly classic. :smash:
Babel, meh. I am getting a bit tired of the multiple storylines omg they are connected how smart trick. It was genius in Magnolia, 21gram was good Crash was absolutily terrible and this is really nothing at all.
I was actually quite impressed with Will Ferrell in Stranger than Fiction. The comic star of questionable talent really came alive for me in a more dramatic role. With Emma Thompson and Dustin Hoffman, the movie already had plenty of quality acting outside of Ferrell's character, but he made an IRS agent of all people a sympathetic and likeable character, and showed he can act with subtlety as well as his usual over-the-top style. I'd like to see him in more dramatic roles and fewer comic ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martok
Ajax
No, Crash was great! It set out to be melodramatic and thoroughly over-the-top, and succeeded marvelously. Some very memorable scenes, but o did it go for the cheap tricks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Saw the Bucket List. Wasn't bad as a "feel good" type of movie, but then again it wasn't much more. Morgan Freeman is always excellent though.
So incredibly patronising and cheap, hated it. It wasn't clever or anything just pushy and annoying. It also messes up with the seperate storylines because there isn't really a conclusion, if you want to see it done right watch 'The Hours'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
As a matter of fact, I do want to see this one as well. In addition to it being generally well-reviewed, I admit I'd still be curious to watch it just for the novelty of watching Ferrell play a serious role for once.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
(Sort of like watching Jim Carrey in non-comedies. I love The Majestic. :2thumbsup: )
I'd highly recommend it. It's one of my favorite new movies of the last couple years. Quirky, funny, and touching as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martok
Ajax
Leben der Anderen, Das
Nazi Communists
.
.
.
and boobs.
Plus, you'll learn a bit about socialism (but not enough to know whether or not to capitalize the "S").
LMFAO! I loved that movie! it was great.
Has anyone seen: Akbar ?
I'm sure I'll enjoy it throughly but I wanted some other views of those who have seen it.
edit: For those who haven't seen or heard of it there was no subtitled trailer on youtube that I could find, there is one on the official site: http://www.jodhaaakbar.com/
JAI HIND ! JAI JAWAN !
?You watch Indian movies? ~:)
The local Rajput groups didn't let them release the movie in Rajasthan, but I don't think its such a loss, the movie isn't very good, I mean, it's basically your well beaten love story plot. No where accurate or anything. Good enough when you're just bored and have got nothing to do, not otherwise.
Thanks for you feedback. I'm taking that you did in fact see the film.
Well I have never seen a perfect historical movie so I'm not too fussed about if it's historical, or not.
Personally I think it will be a great movie, and I can judge that by the trailer, it should be very entertaining.
Now who would say Crouching Tiger is historical, or the more recent Chinese movie with the beautiful Zhang Ziyi, the one about the Chinese court. That's not historical either. I'm not much surprised that it's banned in Rajasthan, after all it shows a Raja's girl falling in love with a Muslim king, and being bartered to the King in return for political promise. There are other aspects of the film which probably insult the Rajas such as Akbar's persistence and desire for a great unified India. The Rajas would prefer to see him as a foreigner to preserve the idea of a purely Hindu India. Bombay (the movie) also had a lot of heat because of it's theme of love between a Hindu woman and a Muslim man.
I'd watch Akbar just for the whole costume drama, just like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, I wouldn't watch that for history either.
Saw I, Robot recently. I expected it to be bad based on what i had heard on the internets, but it was surprisingly good for a 'blockbuster' movie. Quite a few dumb action scenes, but also a story that digs just a little deeper than most (hyper commerical movies).
So like a typical idiot I looked at the title and thought: "Gee, wonder if anyone's head gets chopped off by a Muslim." Then I saw the clip, liked it (even though the emir/sultan guy looks like Borat), thought of Broken Crescent, and thought: "Interesting, it would be nice to see someone's head get chopped off." :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinan
Looks interesting. Very powerful if you're from the region.
Shui hu zhuan (The Water Margin) (1972) is an excellent chinese martial arts film set in 12th century China based on several chapters of a chinese literary classic. Originally released in the USA in a hacked down 81 minute version as Seven Blows of the Dragon, this film has been beautifully remastered in widesceen and restored by Dragon Dynasty to its full 124 minutes. The story, acting and fighting sequences are all very good and believable. There is hand-to-hand fighting and fighting with lots of different weapons. You won't see people flying through the air in this film or goofy comic relief. The only dodgy thing really is the opening sequence which briefly shows some obviously motorized boats. There are a lot of characters of which to keep track, but they are each introduced by their name in text when they first appear in the film.
The Bourne Ultimating, fine and all but it's so silly. Especially the scene in the terminal, Bourne is telling the journalist how to be unnoticed while holding his cell-phone as if it was a walky talky or whatever they are called.
Does he not have ear pieces or does he drop them for that scene?
More importantly: Why is Mr Superspyninja using an unencrypted cell phone?
Death at a funeral
Black comedy, setting is a funeral of some British guy where thing after thing goes wrong. Good acting, some truly hilarious moments and a midget wrestling scene. What more could you want?
I won't say
I-robot, really enjoyed it. Too heavy on the action but the camara-work in these sequences is truly amazing, the way they camara swirls around the action, up, down, under, wherever, is simply dazzling. Not a shabby plot either, Hollywood at it's best, first class entertainment. They could have fleshed out the main character some more, his aversion for robots isn't all that believable but it doesn't distract from an overall very enjoyable movie.
Considering that most of the plot is based on Asimov's tales, I wouldn't call it Hollywood at its best :grin3:
How does that effect a Hollywood production?
Well, if you're going to be picky, I may as well join in. Affect is the verb. Effect is the noun. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wandering Scholar
I feel I should make a movie related post. So, I've had the film about Ian Curtis and Joy Division for a while but I haven't got around to watching it yet. Has anyone here seen it? What did you think? I think it's called Closer but I'm not 100%
Well if you consider it Hollywood at it's best because it doesn't have a shabby plot, and Hollywood hasn't got anything to do with the plot, then the movie isn't that great because of Hollywood, but rather despite Hollywood.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wandering Scholar
Two things.
1)
Why does Hollywood have to come up with the plot for a movie to be 'Hollywood at its best'? Perhaps recognizing that talented writers can come up with better plots than most movie producers, and making a quality movie based off such a plot, is more laudable than repeatedly producing trash. Many of the best movies are made using plots that did not originate in Hollywood. I would happily call such effective borrowing 'Hollywood at its best.'
2)
In regards to affect vs effect. Both spellings can function as either a noun or a verb;
however, the most commonly used meaning of affect is a verb and the most commonly used meaning of effect is a noun.
affect
verb--2 major definitions (and several less common ones)
-To make a material impression on; to act upon, influence, move, touch, or have an effect on
-To put on a pretence of; to assume a false appearance of, to counterfeit or pretend
noun--used most commonly in psychology
-The way in which one is affected or disposed; mental state, mood, feeling, desire, intention
effect
noun
-Something accomplished, caused, or produced; a result, consequence
verb
-To bring about (an event, a result); to accomplish (an intention, a desire)
Definitions above are courtesy of the OED online, and here's a little XKCD comic on the subject:
Effect an Effect
Ajax
:gah2:
Why, Ajax, why? :sad:
Because I really am that geeky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
:holmes: :book: :pokemon: :study: ~;p :stupido: :book2: :scholar: :idea: :smart: :clown:
Ajax
Is that for me or against?