#41  
Old 04-18-2012, 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMovieMan View Post
HEY! There's nothing wrong with Diane Kruger's or Bridget Fonda's feet Uma Thurman on the other hand ... that, I could of done without.
Don't forget about that scene in From Dusk till Dawn where Quentin drinks whiskey off of Salma Hayek's foot. Almost ruined one of the hottest scenes in movie history for me. I guess I'll just never understand foot fetishes.

Anyway I guess I'll provide my 10 top anticipated list:

1. The Dark Knight Rises
2. Prometheus
3. Cosmopolis
4. The Burial
5. The Master
6. Stoker
7. Only God Forgives
8. Looper
9. Skyfall
10. Lawless
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-18-2012, 02:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Sorry, but Tolkien is just as nerdy as Batman. The Hobbit is a children's book, how is that any more or less worthy of anticipation than a comic book film? The LOTR films kind of outwore their welcome with the ridiculous potty humor and ROTK just suffered from bad editing. Tarantino has become a parody of himself and his talents are being crushed under the weight of his own ego. He hasn't made a great film since Jackie Brown. What's depressing is your inability to respect other's opinions and understand that film is very subjective.
I completely respect your opinion. As I said I fully understand that I sound like a dick. Over the past 7 years here I've never really said anything other than that single post, out of 2000, that has been derogatory of others opinions. In fact I don't even really think what i said was all that negative, it's just not sugar coated. I'm just saying I think your opinion sucks. I understand you think mine sucks and that's fine with me, we can disagree. I would argue that Tolkiens work is far nerdier than anything batman related, but that has nothing to do with me liking or disliking shit.

Quote:
The Hobbit is a children's book, how is that any more or less worthy of anticipation than a comic book film?
because one is actually a book, the other is 5 pages with some poorly written dialogue and then some shitty pictures.

Quote:
The Hobbit is just a cash in for the creators because The Hobbit is a fairly large step down from Lord of the Rings; trust me, I've read both.
I don't disagree about the motivations for the film. The theory that the hobbit is a step down is a little silly, granted it was initially a bedtime story for his children which he had developed in the trenches of WWI. Of course it's not on the same level of depth as the LOTR trilogy, as davey so amazingly put it, it's a childrens book. That being said it was the precursor to the LOTR trilogy. Obviously the Silmarillion was in the works before The Hobbit and remained a work in process all his life, but it was, as I am sure you know as a self proclaimed expert, Tolkiens first step into ME. The Hobbit introduced, at least to the public, almost every idea and ideology that were later presented in LOTR and the Histories of Middle Earth; trust me, I've read them all.

Everything I've said is obviously my extremely biased opinion. I know it pisses some of you off and that's fine, your opinions frustrate me too. Luckily that's what the purpose of these boards are. What it boils down to is that I find the idea of a bunch of midgets marching to a mountain to kill a dragon that stole their shit more interesting than an irritating masked guy trying to save a city from a steroid injecting criminal with a paintball mask on.

Last edited by Lost in Space; 04-18-2012 at 02:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-18-2012, 02:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost in Space View Post
I completely respect your opinion. As I said I fully understand that I sound like a dick. Over the past 7 years here I've never really said anything other than that single post, out of 2000, that has been derogatory of others opinions. In fact I don't even really think what i said was all that negative, it's just not sugar coated. I'm just saying I think your opinion sucks. I understand you think mine sucks and that's fine with me, we can disagree. I would argue that Tolkiens work is far nerdier than anything batman related, but that has nothing to do with me liking or disliking shit.
This paragraph is contradictory. You can't respect my opinion if you think it sucks. Film is subjective, you either like something or you don't. I'd be careful with how you word things. People have used that work around before: "I don't think you're stupid, I just think you're opinion is stupid" and have been disciplined for it. It's disrespectful, even if you don't mean for it to be.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost in Space View Post
because one is actually a book, the other is 5 pages with some poorly written dialogue and then some shitty pictures.
Don't let soda see that. These films have transcended the genre, The Dark Knight made a billion dollars and not from just comic book fans. That's because people in the mainstream care about the characters and the stories that originated in the comic books. Just like LOTR has transcended its roots and become popular in the mainstream with people who will never pick up the books. All I'm saying is that they're on the same level when it comes to the movies. So I'd never sit back and get depressed because people are more excited to see The Hobbit than TDKR, I'd appreciate the fact that they like those characters and stories more than I do.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-18-2012, 02:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
This paragraph is contradictory. You can't respect my opinion if you think it sucks. Film is subjective, you either like something or you don't. I'd be careful with how you word things. People have used that work around before: "I don't think you're stupid, I just think you're opinion is stupid" and have been disciplined for it. It's disrespectful, even if you don't mean for it to be.




Don't let soda see that. These films have transcended the genre, The Dark Knight made a billion dollars and not from just comic book fans. That's because people in the mainstream care about the characters and the stories that originated in the comic books. Just like LOTR has transcended its roots and become popular in the mainstream with people who will never pick up the books. All I'm saying is that they're on the same level when it comes to the movies. So I'd never sit back and get depressed because people are more excited to see The Hobbit than TDKR, I'd appreciate the fact that they like those characters and stories more than I do.
Perhaps what I should say is that I respect your right to have that opinion, I just don't like it. Honestly I was really drunk when I wrote the initially comment, but for the most part I stand by it. Insensitive? probably. Ban worthy? no.

Here's to riding out this shit tornado from oz

Last edited by Lost in Space; 04-18-2012 at 02:50 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-18-2012, 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Don't forget about that scene in From Dusk till Dawn where Quentin drinks whiskey off of Salma Hayek's foot. Almost ruined one of the hottest scenes in movie history for me. I guess I'll just never understand foot fetishes.
Oh, I will never forget that scene for as long as I live. I get QT's love of feet

Great anticipation list btw, save for No.8
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-18-2012, 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMovieMan View Post
Oh, I will never forget that scene for as long as I live. I get QT's love of feet

Great anticipation list btw, save for No.8
Thanks! I thought you might have an issue with that one. It was actually kind of hard for me to get the list to 10 even. I rarely watch new releases in the theater. I tend to seek out obscure films from the past, often times foreign, and don't bother keeping up too much with mainstream American releases. However, I have to admit that 2012 is shaping up to be one of the best years for movies since the 90s.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost in Space View Post
Perhaps what I should say is that I respect your right to have that opinion, I just don't like it. Honestly I was really drunk when I wrote the initially comment, but for the most part I stand by it. Insensitive? probably. Ban worthy? no.

Here's to riding out this shit tornado from oz
I think that's a much better way to word it, or simply that you disagree with it. I agree that it's not ban worthy, but people have gotten in trouble for similar language in the past. People will ultimately report you for stuff like that, because we all have different definitions of what is or isn't disrespectful. A lot of people on the internet have thin skin. Anyway, good luck with that tornado, they have been tearing up the midwest in the states lately.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-18-2012, 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
His comparisons to The Fountain worry me though. I didn't like The Fountain since I found that movie to be every bit as incomprehensible and incoherent as 2001: A Space Odyssey was. Also, I'm always wary of movies that use voice over narration. As much as I loved Terrance Malick's The Tree of Life, that movie did get bogged down by all the annoying voice overs, alas.
I'm not much of a Fountain fan either. The comparison was just apt due to some similarities in the way they approach their stories but I think Cloud Atlas would be more approachable for most people because on one level, I think you could just view it as an anthology film.

I think the difference here is that in Cloud Atlas, each of the stories themselves are more solidly contained - i.e. you don't need to analyze or interpret events to understand each of the stories and their basic arcs. Any of these stories, by itself, would mostly make a relatively straightforward movie in its own genre so I think regardless of how you feel about the film as a cohesive whole, you will be able to enjoy the six storylines for their individual merits. The execution of the stories, familiar as some may be, really worked for me. I mostly never felt frustrated about jumping around from story to story because each one was up my alley.

Where the interpretation comes into play, and where it gets to be an expansive field of analysis is when you view the film as a whole (and that's what will make or break this for people I think - if you see it as a single entity bursting with thematic parallels and juxtapositions or if you feel like it is six mostly unrelated stories spliced together awkwardly) - it's how you interpret each storyline in contrast with the others. I don't really know how to explain but I definitely felt like the sum was greater than the individual parts. Which, come to think of it, relates directly to a key line in the script. Despite the wildly varied genres and the lack of clean parallels and solid links between each story, I find they harmonized well together, each contributing to a greater tapestry. It's like - there are themes present in each story but some themes are not as obvious as others, and may not even have revealed themselves if you only read the single story. But when you parallel one of the stories with several other stories that may not exactly repeat the themes but have echoes and traces of them, those themes start pulling themselves more to the foreground in a way they never could have within the single storyline. Hope I'm making sense...Essentially, the film feels like a cumulative experience to me rather than a fractured one. The more I think about it and connect with the thematic links from story to story, the more it weaves itself together as a seamless movie, and the more impressed I am.

As for the voiceovers, they are definitely present throughout the script but nowhere near as frequent as in a Malick movie. There's still far more dialogue than voiceover in the script, maybe about an 80/20 ratio.

I'm curious how they cut this script down. I have no idea where they'd start, each story is just long enough to feel satisfying I think. Too short and there may not be enough weight to the whole piece.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMovieMan View Post
JC, thanks for breaking down the Cloud Atlas script. I'm definitely intrigued. Complex storylines like that really pull me in and when done right end up on my year-end top ten lists (I'm thinking Synechdoche, New York now). Are you going to read the book before the film?
I think I might now actually. I kind of wanted to re-read the script to see if the thematic links will reveal themselves more second time around, but reading the book is a good way to do the same thing and maybe get even more insight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
At least Nolan doesn't put close-ups of feet all over his films. Blech!
Hahah spot on.

And...I think I've just hijacked my own thread lol. Carry on. So. anticipated movies of 2012...totally agree about it shaping up as one of the best line-ups in years. Which I really need cause last year was a bit of a downer for movies for me.

Last edited by JCPhoenix; 04-18-2012 at 04:51 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-18-2012, 08:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost in Space View Post
I completely respect your opinion. As I said I fully understand that I sound like a dick. Over the past 7 years here I've never really said anything other than that single post, out of 2000, that has been derogatory of others opinions. In fact I don't even really think what i said was all that negative, it's just not sugar coated. I'm just saying I think your opinion sucks. I understand you think mine sucks and that's fine with me, we can disagree. I would argue that Tolkiens work is far nerdier than anything batman related, but that has nothing to do with me liking or disliking shit.



because one is actually a book, the other is 5 pages with some poorly written dialogue and then some shitty pictures.



I don't disagree about the motivations for the film. The theory that the hobbit is a step down is a little silly, granted it was initially a bedtime story for his children which he had developed in the trenches of WWI. Of course it's not on the same level of depth as the LOTR trilogy, as davey so amazingly put it, it's a childrens book. That being said it was the precursor to the LOTR trilogy. Obviously the Silmarillion was in the works before The Hobbit and remained a work in process all his life, but it was, as I am sure you know as a self proclaimed expert, Tolkiens first step into ME. The Hobbit introduced, at least to the public, almost every idea and ideology that were later presented in LOTR and the Histories of Middle Earth; trust me, I've read them all.

Everything I've said is obviously my extremely biased opinion. I know it pisses some of you off and that's fine, your opinions frustrate me too. Luckily that's what the purpose of these boards are. What it boils down to is that I find the idea of a bunch of midgets marching to a mountain to kill a dragon that stole their shit more interesting than an irritating masked guy trying to save a city from a steroid injecting criminal with a paintball mask on.


Had to come back here and just derail the thread a little bit more (sorry JC) cause I love honest posts like this. Plus the last line made me lol for real.

And i couldn't resist that gif
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-18-2012, 10:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost in Space View Post

I don't disagree about the motivations for the film. The theory that the hobbit is a step down is a little silly, granted it was initially a bedtime story for his children which he had developed in the trenches of WWI. Of course it's not on the same level of depth as the LOTR trilogy, as davey so amazingly put it, it's a childrens book. That being said it was the precursor to the LOTR trilogy. Obviously the Silmarillion was in the works before The Hobbit and remained a work in process all his life, but it was, as I am sure you know as a self proclaimed expert, Tolkiens first step into ME. The Hobbit introduced, at least to the public, almost every idea and ideology that were later presented in LOTR and the Histories of Middle Earth; trust me, I've read them all.

Everything I've said is obviously my extremely biased opinion. I know it pisses some of you off and that's fine, your opinions frustrate me too. Luckily that's what the purpose of these boards are. What it boils down to is that I find the idea of a bunch of midgets marching to a mountain to kill a dragon that stole their shit more interesting than an irritating masked guy trying to save a city from a steroid injecting criminal with a paintball mask on.
I'm not looking to piss anyone off with my completely opinionated stance, I'm merely trying to get a better idea of why you questioned someone's excitement for a Batman movie over The Hobbit. Personally, I think the LOTR series is completely overrated and you clearly feel the same about the current Batman' movies. But I feel that if they were to adapt another Tolkien' novel then The Silmarillion would have been more fitting. Sure, people wouldn't have know what the hell was going on or who most of the characters were, but it continues and even expands upon some of the darker underlining themes covered in LOTR by showing how it literally all started. On the hand, you have The Hobbit--which davey accurately classified as a child's book--which is on a much smaller scale but subsequently is being split into two parts. Why is this necessary? I think the main reason my excitement isn't as high as many fanatics of the books is because Peter Jackson isn't very consistent when it comes to film making. King Kong was too long and The Lovely Bones was bad, just bad. So his return to Middle Earth seems more forced than anything else.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-18-2012, 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123 View Post
I'm not looking to piss anyone off with my completely opinionated stance, I'm merely trying to get a better idea of why you questioned someone's excitement for a Batman movie over The Hobbit. Personally, I think the LOTR series is completely overrated and you clearly feel the same about the current Batman' movies. But I feel that if they were to adapt another Tolkien' novel then The Silmarillion would have been more fitting. Sure, people wouldn't have know what the hell was going on or who most of the characters were, but it continues and even expands upon some of the darker underlining themes covered in LOTR by showing how it literally all started. On the hand, you have The Hobbit--which davey accurately classified as a child's book--which is on a much smaller scale but subsequently is being split into two parts. Why is this necessary? I think the main reason my excitement isn't as high as many fanatics of the books is because Peter Jackson isn't very consistent when it comes to film making. King Kong was too long and The Lovely Bones was bad, just bad. So his return to Middle Earth seems more forced than anything else.

I really don't disagree with you. I really don't even dislike the batman movies, it's just so overhyped, especially here, it's hard to buy into it all. Finally The Hobbit is really the only other tolkien piece that is viable for the screen. The Silmarilion is a whacky book, and really couldn't be a movie. I suppose you could take the main strugle against melkor and let that stand alone but otherwise, no. The same can be said for all this HOME's really.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-23-2012, 02:13 PM
Gotta edit my list now because I completely forgot what is sure to be Robert Zemeckis's triumphant return to live action filmmaking with Flight. Flight just sounds all kinds of awesome and with Denzel Washington as the star, it HAS to be GREAT! Definitely in my top 5 for the year!
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-23-2012, 02:35 PM
I should add The Impossible somewhere on my top 30, the trailer I just saw kinda blew me away. There's something about underwater images that really get to me.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-23-2012, 10:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
Gotta edit my list now because I completely forgot what is sure to be Robert Zemeckis's triumphant return to live action filmmaking with Flight. Flight just sounds all kinds of awesome and with Denzel Washington as the star, it HAS to be GREAT! Definitely in my top 5 for the year!
Damn, I forgot about that one. It does sound great and I've heard good things about how the production went.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-27-2012, 04:00 PM


Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:09 PM
In an attempt to keep my expectations in check, here are a few of my most anticipated that I think could end up being duds.

Gangster Squad
Cosmopolis
Prometheus
The Hobbit
Savages
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-28-2012, 12:40 AM
I really doubt that The Hobbit will be a dud. Not with Peter Jackson returning to Middle Earth. Now will it be on the same level as the Lord of the Rings trilogy? That might be hard to do, but I think it'll at the very least be on the same level as Jackson's King Kong remake which was flawed but great.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-28-2012, 02:59 PM

It sounds like Cloud Atlas might require a big blunt before viewing.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-30-2012, 01:29 PM

Another film thats flying under the radar is the untitled film by James Gray (Two Lovers, We Own The Night). The rumored title is Lowlife

Plot: A woman (Marion Cotillard) who immigrates from Poland to America, but her life takes a turn for the worst as she gets wrapped up with a pimp (Joaquin Phoenix), all while a magician (Jeremy Renner) attempts to befriend her.





Great cast & a good director. Sounds interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 05-17-2012, 05:16 PM
possibly Gebo and the Shadow
Rust and Bone
History of the Arkanar Massacre / Hard to be God
The Raid
The Dictator
The Master
Lawless
Beasts of the Southern Wild
possibly The Hobbit idk
Gingerclown 3D
Smiley
Himizu
possibly POV: Norowareta Film (looks too familiar)
Stoker

Last edited by SS-Block; 06-10-2012 at 06:21 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-27-2012, 12:02 PM
Here's an updated list, now that we are nearing the fall movie season:

1. The Master (Paul Thomas Anderson)
2. Django Unchained (Quentin Tarantino)
3. Killing Them Softly (Andrew Dominik)
4. Seven Psychopaths (Martin McDonagh)
5. The Place Beyond the Pines (Derek Cianfrance)
6. Only God Forgives (Nicolas Winding Refn)
7. Argo (Ben Affleck)
8. Flight (Robert Zemeckis)
9. Rust and Bone (Jaques Audiard)
10. Mud (Jeff Nichols)
11. Amour (Michael Haneke)
12. The Hunt (Thomas Vinterberg)
13. Beyond the Hills (Cristian Mungiu)
14. To the Wonder (Terrence Malick)
15. The Silver Linings Playbook (David O. Russell)
16. Life of Pi (Ang Lee)
17. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Peter Jackson)
18. Zero Dark Thirty (Kathryn Bigelow)
19. Lincoln (Steven Spielberg)
20. The Impossible (Juan Antonio Bayona)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump