Films

[SnB]

...but it feels like 2 hours.  Kong on the other hand, is 3 hours and feels like 4.

agree with that definitely. I maybe would have come out of tha tmovie with a positive attitude if it didn't drag on forever. Jackson got too much into the action part of it and alot of it was unnecessary IMO.

By the time the movie was nearing it's end, I didn't care about kong anymore just because I wanted to go home.

[Flash Tizzle]

If people are clamoring for Brokeback Mountain as a Best Picture lock in the Oscars, it must really be one HELL of a movie to defeat Munich. Best movie I've seen this year--probably in the last two or three. I would be shocked if Munich didn't win atleast two of the following four: original score, director, actor, best film.

[Milkman delivers]

If people are clamoring for Brokeback Mountain as a Best Picture lock in the Oscars, it must really be one HELL of a movie to defeat Munich. Best movie I've seen this year--probably in the last two or three. I would be shocked if Munich didn't win atleast two of the following four: original score, director, actor, best film.

 

Does the movie feature gays or retards? That would help its chances exponentially.

[LosMediasBlancas]

If people are clamoring for Brokeback Mountain as a Best Picture lock in the Oscars, it must really be one HELL of a movie to defeat Munich. Best movie I've seen this year--probably in the last two or three. I would be shocked if Munich didn't win atleast two of the following four: original score, director, actor, best film.

 

This is a personal bias, but I have a hard time giving too much praise to films that are based on actual events. If you have a great, true story to begin with, it's pretty hard to make a bad film out of it. Hotel Rwanada is a recent example that comes to mind. Great story, but nothing about the film making itself really blew me away.

On the other hand, it is much tougher to first come up with a good story for a film and then follow it up with a good production.

It's difficult to compare films like Munich and BBM head to head since they set out to do different things.

[White Sox Josh]

There is a guy at my work that loved Fantastic Four and wanted me to watch it.....so I did...and i though it was a piece of s***...had some parts, but overall sucked. 

 

The thing that bothers me is that he said it was better than Batman Begins.  And I'm serious when I say the he is serious about that.     This is a guy that also said the Shield is hyped too much and has very bad acting...needless to say i don't take any film or tv advice from him anymore

for what it was it was pretty good. It wasn't great but it was entertaining. It was a Summer Action Movie.

[BigSqwert]

for what it was it was pretty good.  It wasn't great but it was entertaining.  It was a Summer Action Movie.

I would have to disagree. Thought it was awful.

[SnB]

It was a Summer Action Movie.

= awful

[Flash Tizzle]

This is a personal bias, but I have a hard time giving too much praise to films that are based on actual events.  If you have a great, true story to begin with, it's pretty hard to make a bad film out of it.  Hotel Rwanada is a recent example that comes to mind.  Great story, but nothing about the film making itself really blew me away.

On the other hand, it is much tougher to first come up with a good story for a film and then follow it up with a good production.

It's difficult to compare films like Munich and BBM head to head since they set out to do different things.

 

I agree it's not that simple. However, you can't just recreate true stories without additional elements. Look at Titanic: everyone knew it was bound to sink before they entered the theater, but due to the numerous conflicts within the film (ie, DiCaprio/Winslet, DiCaprio/Zane) it provided an ideal blend of drama which obviously persuaded academy voters. If anything, events based off reality only restrict directors, screenwritiers, etc.

 

I haven't seen BBM, and I don't believe I will. Which is why I emphasize it must be one hell of a movie to defeat Munich. Ask yourself, if you've seen the movie, how Eric Bana has evaded talks of winning an Oscar? I couldn't care how gay Gyllenhal or Ledger can portray themselves, Bana should atleast be included in discussions for Best Actor. It's amazing how shunned Munich has seemingly become.

 

What I wonder about the film is how exactly the relationship between Ledger and Gyllenhal is portrayed. Are they outcast by society? Does the movie illustrate how difficult it is to have an open relationship with another person of the same sex? What message does Ang Lee send about homosexual relationships? For all the discussions pertaining to the film being "revolutionary" I'd expect several of the preceding points to be addressed. If not--or not to the extent a best picture warrants, then I'll be convinced this movie is being acclaimed simply because the two leading actors are THE GAY!11@@@ If I created a story about a chicken f***ing lunatic who must choose between his love of assraping chickens, or conforming to socities standards towards such activities, I damn well better include as many angles as possible within the script. I"m not comparing homosexuality to chicken f***ing; but rather the depth of inner conflicts and society pressure I'd have to show. Bottom line--does BBM do this?

 

What Munich did successfully is not only highlight the inner struggles Aver (Bana) experiences, but openly suggests the acts of Israel may have actually caused more harm than good. If lends the audience (I imagine) to pick sides. Do they support Israel's act of retaliation, or sympathize with terrorists? What message does BBM send? I haven't extensively asked people about the movie, but no one I've talked to really has been overwhelmed by it. It seems liberal individuals are more intent on promoting the movie as a venue to expose people to homosexuality than the film itself.

Edited January 13, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[SnB]

I saw glory road this afternoon, it's nothing spectactular, but it's very well done and a good see for a college basketball fan.

[rventura23]

Theres this old black and white baseball movie about a professor who creates a substance that avoids wood and puts it on baseballs and becomes a major league pitcher.

Its a good movie if you can tolerate old movies, and its pretty funny.

Does anybody know what movie I am talking about? (I have forgotten the title)

[LosMediasBlancas]

I agree it's not that simple. However, you can't just recreate true stories without additional elements. Look at Titanic: everyone knew it was bound to sink before they entered the theater, but due to the numerous conflicts within the film (ie, DiCaprio/Winslet, DiCaprio/Zane) it provided an ideal blend of drama which  obviously persuaded academy voters. If anything, events based off reality only restrict directors, screenwritiers, etc.

 

I haven't seen BBM, and I don't believe I will. Which is why I emphasize it must be one hell of a movie to defeat Munich. Ask yourself, if you've seen the movie, how Eric Bana has evaded talks of winning an Oscar? I couldn't care how gay Gyllenhal or Ledger can portray themselves, Bana should atleast be included in discussions for Best Actor. It's amazing how shunned Munich has seemingly become.

 

What I wonder about the film is how exactly the relationship between Ledger and Gyllenhal is portrayed. Are they outcast by society? Does the movie illustrate how difficult it is to have an open relationship with another person of the same sex? What message does Ang Lee send about homosexual relationships? For all the discussions pertaining to the film being "revolutionary" I'd expect several of the preceding points to be addressed. If not--or not to the extent a best picture warrants, then I'll be convinced this movie is being acclaimed simply because the two leading actors are THE GAY!11@@@ If I created a story about a chicken f***ing lunatic who must choose between his love of assraping chickens, or conforming to socities standards towards such activities, I damn well better include as many angles as possible within the script. I"m not comparing homosexuality to chicken f***ing; but rather the depth of inner conflicts and society pressure I'd have to show. Bottom line--does BBM do this?

 

What Munich did successfully is not only highlight the inner struggles Aver (Bana) experiences, but openly suggests the acts of Israel may have actually caused more harm than good. If lends the audience (I imagine) to pick sides. Do they support Israel's act of retaliation, or sympathize with terrorists? What message does BBM send? I haven't extensively asked people about the movie, but no one I've talked to really has been overwhelmed by it. It seems liberal individuals are more intent on promoting the movie as a venue to expose people to homosexuality than the film itself.

 

I feel you and I think you should see the film for yourself. It's not the 'pro gay film' porn fest everyone wants to believe it is. I'd go so far as to say it's not even a 'gay film'. In a nutshell, no it probably doesn't do any of the things you're looking for, but it doesn't set out to. Does that make it a bad film? IMO, no. Like I said, comparing films head to head is impossible.

[Flash Tizzle]

I feel you and I think you should see the film for yourself.  It's not the 'pro gay film' porn fest everyone wants to believe it is.  I'd go so far as to say it's not even a 'gay film'.  In a nutshell, no it probably doesn't do any of the things you're looking for, but it doesn't set out to.  Does that make it a bad film? IMO, no.  Like I said, comparing films head to head is impossible.

 

But what exactly makes it a contender for Best Picture if it doesn't actually address the subject of homosexuality? It would be similar to Clint Eastwood not presenting the conflicting views of mercy killings within Million Dollar Baby. I don't understand how a film about two gay cowboys can't include any of the troubles one may experience, and yet is considered "revolutionary." I've already heard three news segments use a variation of the term when highlighting the film.

[LosMediasBlancas]

But what exactly makes it a contender for Best Picture if it doesn't actually address the subject of homosexuality? It would be similar to Clint Eastwood not presenting the conflicting views of mercy killings within Million Dollar Baby. I don't understand how a film about two gay cowboys can't include any of the troubles one may experience, and yet is considered "revolutionary." I've already heard three news segments use a variation of the term when highlighting the film.

You're asking me to answer for other people and I can't do that. I'm not even sure BBM is the best pic. All I'm saying is that both films are very good and I could see it going either way. I'd suggest you not listen to me or anything you've read, but to see BBM and decide for yourself.

[YASNY]

But what exactly makes it a contender for Best Picture if it doesn't actually address the subject of homosexuality? It would be similar to Clint Eastwood not presenting the conflicting views of mercy killings within Million Dollar Baby. I don't understand how a film about two gay cowboys can't include any of the troubles one may experience, and yet is considered "revolutionary." I've already heard three news segments use a variation of the term when highlighting the film.

 

Disclaimer: I haven't seen the film.

 

Maybe, the fact that it's a film about two gay cowboys that doesn't include any of the troubles one may experience is what makes it revolutionary. Think about it.

[LosMediasBlancas]

Disclaimer:  I haven't seen the film.

 

Maybe, the fact that it's a film about two gay cowboys that doesn't include any of the troubles one may experience is what makes it revolutionary.  Think about it.

It's done in a way that doesn't focus on them being gay. IMO the story could have been told within a heterosexual relationship (with some obvious changes of course) and still been a very good film. Again, I'm not flying the BBM flag and it might not win best pic, I just think people think who think they know what the film is about should open their minds and give it a chance. It would be like dismissing 'Field of Dreams' because Oh it's just another stupid movie about baseball. They might be surprised.

[BigSqwert]

Watched 'The Chateau' on IFC earlier today. It's a few years old but man I laughed my ass off. Stars Paul Rudd and is about a guy and his adopted brother who inherit a chateau (castle) in France.

[jackie hayes]

Just saw BBM, and I thought I'd throw in my 2 cents. Or 10 cents, as you like it. (No spoilers, unless you want to know absolutely nothing -- I don't say anything that isn't in the reviews.) It's not that it doesn't center around the problems faced by homosexuals. But the largest problem is simply that they can't possibly be together, and that's a problem shared by lots of great stories (Romeo & Juliet, Lord knows how many 1800s English novels). For that reason, I don't think the movie is "revolutionary" at all. It's one of the oldest stories anywhere, just very well done, with great characters, in a new setting.

 

It was a great movie, much better than the 'gay chick flick' I thought it would be when I first saw the ads. It was the best I've seen this year, although I've missed a lot of the 'big' movies.

[Soxy]

I also just saw BBM. One of the friends I went with disliked it the other loved it. I thought it was absolutely gorgeous in terms of the setting--but I can't say I really got emotionally involved (or really even cared about any of the main characters, I did like Ennis' oldest daughter, but that's about it). At its heart I think the movie is about infidelity, whether you want to think about it in terms of the men being unfaithful to their wives or to each other is up for grabs. But, like Jackie said, it's not a new story. Jack and Ennis' relationship didn't seem to make either of them happy (except for a few days/weeks a year) and it certainly didn't make their wives/girlfriends happy (if they knew about it or not). I didn't think the story was particularly romantic, but I did think it was sad on a few levels.

1.) sad that these two men that care about each other can't be with each other

2.) that the two guys don't make choices that make them happy

3.) sad for the guys' kids (and wives)

[Middle Buffalo]

I also just saw BBM. One of the friends I went with disliked it the other loved it. I thought it was absolutely gorgeous in terms of the setting--but I can't say I really got emotionally involved (or really even cared about any of the main characters, I did like Ennis' oldest daughter, but that's about it). At its heart I think the movie is about infidelity, whether you want to think about it in terms of the men being unfaithful to their wives or to each other is up for grabs. But, like Jackie said, it's not a new story. Jack and Ennis' relationship didn't seem to make either of them happy (except for a few days/weeks a year) and it certainly didn't make their wives/girlfriends happy (if they knew about it or not). I didn't think the story was particularly romantic, but I did think it was sad on a few levels.

1.) sad that these two men that care about each other can't be with each other

2.) that the two guys don't make choices that make them happy

3.) sad for the guys' kids (and wives)

My wife saw BBM this weekend. She had the same basic review (beautiful film, but not quite deserving of all of the attention because it lacked something in terms of story/character development). On a positive note, she said she was pretty sure I wouldn't have liked it. I feel so manly.

[jackie hayes]

Eh, to each his own. I thought the characters were great, especially Ennis's whole family. Michelle Williams was incredible as his wife.

 

What's interesting is how the stigma on homosexuality is not really in the film itself, just assumed to be known, on the outskirts. Everyone in the film (at least, almost everyone) who is angry at the two of them for their affair is someone they've hurt -- someone who has every right to be angry at them. I expected at least a few preachy moments, and I was surprised when I came out of the theater that there had been zilch on that count, not one time when I thought about anything 'political', about any message.

[LosMediasBlancas]

Golden Globe awards.

 

 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/entertainme...r-globe17x.html

[White Sox Josh]

Eh, to each his own.  I thought the characters were great, especially Ennis's whole family.  Michelle Williams was incredible as his wife.

 

What's interesting is how the stigma on homosexuality is not really in the film itself, just assumed to be known, on the outskirts.  Everyone in the film (at least, almost everyone) who is angry at the two of them for their affair is someone they've hurt -- someone who has every right to be angry at them.  I expected at least a few preachy moments, and I was surprised when I came out of the theater that there had been zilch on that count, not one time when I thought about anything 'political', about any message.

Michelle Williams was very good and I thought Ledger did a good job (seemed to be channeling Billy Bob Thorton) but the script was so bad.

[BigSqwert]

Saw Match Point the other night. I enjoyed it but I don't think it's for everyone. Wonderful locales (mostly in London and the countryside), great music (Opera), beautiful people and just enough suspense to keep you interested throughout. Some people may think there's not enough going on or that the plot isn't all that groundbreaking but overall it was entertaining IMO.

[qwerty]

Saw Match Point the other night.  I enjoyed it but I don't think it's for everyone.  Wonderful locales (mostly in London and the countryside), great music (Opera), beautiful people and just enough suspense to keep you interested throughout.  Some people may think there's not enough going on or that the plot isn't all that groundbreaking but overall it was entertaining IMO.

 

The more movies with scarlett johannson the better. Woody allen is gonna be making two more films with her ( third is still being talked about) all in london.

[White Sox Josh]

The more movies with scarlett johannson the better. Woody allen is gonna be making two more films with her ( third is still being talked about) all in london.

Another good Woody Allen movie that came out this year is Melinda and Melinda. Very funny movie.