https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUiCu-zuAgM
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
I NOW KNOW WHAT'S BETTER THAN SEX
Printable View
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUiCu-zuAgM
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
I NOW KNOW WHAT'S BETTER THAN SEX
Niiiiiice!
I love these Western films.....and decent Westerns are rare these days.
It looks very good. The Coen brothers should get the best out of Bridges, and Brolin was great in NCFOM. A reviewer in the DC area said Bridges was better than Wayne was in the original.
Impossible, but the movie is getting excellent reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I will definitely be there opening night for a Coen brothers film.Quote:
Originally Posted by drone
I want this
I hate Westerns.
My mule don't like people hating Westerns. :clown:
Best he apologize to your mule then.Quote:
Originally Posted by india
I love a good Western, but they are rare.
I love my Westerns rare.
Of course, this does violate the Prime Directive: Never remake good movies.
Really? Maybe we have different standards, but I don't think good westerns are any rarer than, say good action movies. If you meant "good western" as in "great western", then yes, I'll agree those are far and few between, just as the great action movies are. But honestly, I can pretty much turn on any random western with John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, etc. and be entertained.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Also, there's actually been quite a few really good westerns lately, especially considering the number of total westerns being made: The Proposition (an Outback Western, but it's pretty much still just a Western), 3:10 to Yuma (another not-great-but-still-good one, and quite frankly somewhat better than the original), Broken Trail (NOT Brokeback Mountain) and Appaloosa, the latter two of which easily stand up against the great films of the classic era like the Searchers or Once Upon a Time in the West. Percentage-wise, that's pretty much on par with the percentage of good westerns you would see during the genre's heyday.
3:10 to Yuma, the one with Russel Crowe could have been good, had they decided to leave in a bit more of the original story instead of glorifying the outlaw and making him the hero, while portraying the good guy as a martyr.....
I dunno, I felt like the original was a bit awkward; the whole thing with the villain suddenly saving the good guy felt weirdly shoehorned in. It just felt more awkward in general; I mean, sure, the new one wasn't the most natural movie, but I felt like they pulled the character development off better. Maybe I need to give the original a couple more viewings, but the ending just seemed much more awkward than in the remake.
Err...yes...I never saw the original movie....I was actually referring to the story by Elmore Leonard on which the movie was based....It's got the same basic plot-line aside from the fact that the hero is a deputy sheriff, and the fact that in the end he's the one who forces the villain to run tot he train and shoots Charlie Prince in the process, insted of getting beat up and being saved by the villain.
Guess it's the old 'what-story-translates-well-into-a-movie' thing.
They don't actually exist. Everyone I've ever tried to sit through has been bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Looks good. Minus Matt Damon.
so...I take it you frequent Spill.com also?Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Bridges + Coens = MAGIC.
Oh when oh when will this come to the old continent?
.................................................................................................... .......the hell did you just say about Matt Damon?Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychonaut
Perhaps for once a remake has the potential to outshine the original.
I will be interested to see.
It doesn’t come out here until Feb and chances are I will have to wait until it is on DVD to see it in the original English version.
Watching a Western in German just loses something....like all of its flavor.:no:
Its hard for me to watch a Western in another language.:laugh4:
This one looks really good. Perhaps I'll watch it with my father when he gets back from Marseille (whenever that may be).
My cousin said it wasn't very good, and I want to believe him. Yet it got excellent reviews everywhere else.
It looks awesome, so I guess I'll have to see it to make up my own mind. :)
Jeff Bridges was cool, but the movie was just ok in general. It is worth seeing though.
Jeff Bridges? Was there any rug-peeing involved?
The Rooster abides.
That is something that happens when you find a stranger in the Alps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
Well, several of the reviews I read call it the film of the year.
There are conflicting views as to which of the two versions of the film is more fateful to the book...but then I never read the book.
I searched around for a bad review, something all movies get, but I didn’t find it. Maybe I just didn’t spend enough time but I didn’t want to waste more of my time on it.
I am looking forward to seeing it.
Oh my god that was amazing.
Im going for seconds. Anyone with me?
One review I read said that you need to see it more than once.
I still have to wait two months and hope I can find a theater showing it in the original English.
It is just not the same watching Westerns dubbed and everyone speaks in perfect High German.
Saw it, thoroughly enjoyed it. Easily the best western since Unforgiven, possibly going even farther back. This isn't the last we've seen of that young actress, that's for certain. Bridges was awesome, Damon was Damon, and Brolin was good but underused. Loved the soundtrack too.