|
|
Post by rockkid on Apr 23, 2005 11:42:55 GMT -5
Only Penn is going to make that one worth while for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ampage on Apr 23, 2005 11:45:22 GMT -5
You don't like Nicole or Cathleen? Meow!
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Apr 23, 2005 14:47:28 GMT -5
Interpreter's going to be cool if just for the NYC locale and the use of the inner halls of the United Nations building for the first time...
AND for Nicole Kidman and Katherine Keener.
Yeah....and Spiccoli.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ampage on Apr 23, 2005 17:19:06 GMT -5
Yea, that her name, lol!
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Apr 24, 2005 14:22:39 GMT -5
Haven't seen Steamboy yet, Adam -- would really like to.
Just saw KUNG FU HUSTLE: Hot Damn! Most freaking hilarious -- and action packed -- movie we all saw in a loooong while. Oh yeah, and cool story to boot. Lot going for this flick. I'd see it again in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Apr 25, 2005 8:51:34 GMT -5
See told you all  Nope amp I don't like Kidman. I used to but she's gotten pretty bad of late IMO. She's a risky one, either make or break a movie & it's anyones guess sadly. |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Apr 25, 2005 10:07:11 GMT -5
I agree about Kidman -- but you gotta admit she was impeccable in THE OTHERS.
Saw THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES finally, yesterday. This is a terrific road movie, I'd go so far as to say it is sublime. One gets the impression the moviemakers really strove for accuracy - in depicting the memoirs of Ernesto Guevara as well as the record left behind by his road buddy Alberto Granado.
The choice to adapt this awesome road trip during the soon-to-be revolutionary's budding youth is excellent. I feel that the resulting spell over the viewer ends up being more powerful than if they had chosen to film Che's revolutionary days.
The way every little episode shows Guevara's honesty and directness is thoroughly revealing; not to mention his occasional happenstance meetings with various homeless migrant workers, all experiences which open his eyes bit by bit to the injustices seperating the poor from the rich, the sick from the healthy.
Gael Garcia Bernal's performance as the thoughtful young Ernesto is not so much "riveting" as it is merely direct and thoughtful. The viewer can infer that in studying for this role, Gael decided to imbue the young Guevara with not so much a "fire" to reflect any future revolutionary status, but rather -- he decided to portray Ernesto's fundamental humanity via his honesty; something I felt managed to work miracles towards sculpting the personality behind such a legendary counter cultural hero. To have approached the portrayal of such an icon as Che in any other manner would have most certainly been counter productive in contrast to what Gael delivers onscreen: the simple, straightforward behaviour of not an idealistic young man, but rather a straightforwardly honest one.
As such, THE MOTORCYLCE DIARIES packs a more emotional whallop insofar as getting the audience thinking about what truly drives the revolutionary mindset. It is an important film that provides a window into the formative experiences that would later beget a legendary force for revolution. As such, it is mandatory viewing for anyone who gives a good god damn about such matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Apr 25, 2005 10:57:05 GMT -5
I should make it clear that one of the film's many strong points is that it offers audiences who could care less about "Che" Guevara plenty to enjoy. It is essentially a humanistic film with excellent performances and an easygoing stride -- which in my mind makes it mandatory for all viewers (not just those interested in Che Guevara). Essentially -- the viewer who had never even heard of Ernesto "Che" Guevara, and who somehow went so far as having missed that aspect of this charming road movie altogether, would still walk away with a smile haunting their face. I really think this is "must see" movie making, for all audiences, right here.  [Rated "R" for Language only -- in Spanish with Subtitles] |
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Apr 25, 2005 12:48:08 GMT -5
I honestly think I haven't seen a 'bad' performance by her...tho, just as honestly there's great big holes in her filmography which I haven't seen either...looking at IMDB, I see that the last thing I've seen with her was Cold Mountain where she took a back seat to Zellweger's character(and Portman's agonizing sequence with her baby lying in the dirt)...
Then Birthday Girl which was actually alright tho you had to overlook the shitty Russian accent Kidman tried...
Eyes Wide Shut which as a concept was pretty goofy...and Tom Cruise wanting to 'have' someone other than her was certainly prescient wunnit?
Peacemaker she was very good in...tho to me it was a 'complete' movie with very good storyline, writing, acting...
Enough...generally I see Kidman on the same par as Michelle Pfeiffer or Julianne Moore...drop-dead gorgeous actresses who can be icy cold, but at the same time can give the impression of being warm and approachable.
Tho Kidman's taste in men rivals Salma Hayek's...or Halle Berry's....ya think she was asking for trouble 'hooking up' with friggin' Lenny Kravitz?
|
|
|
|
Post by pattentank24 on Apr 25, 2005 13:14:08 GMT -5
I honestly think I haven't seen a 'bad' performance by her...tho, just as honestly there's great big holes in her filmography which I haven't seen either...looking at IMDB, I see that the last thing I've seen with her was Cold Mountain where she took a back seat to Zellweger's character(and Portman's agonizing sequence with her baby lying in the dirt)... Then Birthday Girl which was actually alright tho you had to overlook the shitty Russian accent Kidman tried... Eyes Wide Shut which as a concept was pretty goofy...and Tom Cruise wanting to 'have' someone other than her was certainly prescient wunnit? Peacemaker she was very good in...tho to me it was a 'complete' movie with very good storyline, writing, acting... Enough...generally I see Kidman on the same par as Michelle Pfeiffer or Julianne Moore...drop-dead gorgeous actresses who can be icy cold, but at the same time can give the impression of being warm and approachable. Cmon how can you forget her Oscar Worthy Performance in Days of ThunderI saw Dig! over the weekend I want to watch both band comentarries before I post my opinon Reminder April 26 PBS is showing The Ramones End of the Century doc, uncut |
|
|
|
Post by Weeping_Guitar on Apr 25, 2005 18:30:23 GMT -5
 The Interpreter (8.0/10)A thriller that almost entirely relies on plot and character is something of a rarity these days. Director Sydney Pollack knows how to construct suspense and how to take advantage of what he has at his disposal: namely his actors and location. A story of a UN intepreter who overhears an assassination plot wouldn't work quite as well if Pollack hadn't been able to shoot within the actual United Nations building and a film that falls back on character and their agendas certainly would fall apart without such excellence as shown by Nicole Kidman and Sean Penn, who remind us why they are among the best at their trade. The sense of believable reality given to the film by these things overcomes any excesses the film builds onto itself. When Sylvia Broome (Kidman) overhears an assassination plot against the embattled leader of her home African country she finds that all paths lead back to one person: herself. Not only is it odd that the threat was spoken in the rare language she translates for professionally, but it is after hours when she needn't be at her workplace. Her background as an activist and fighter in her fictional home country of Motobo and one can't blame Secret Service Agent Tobin Keller (Penn, in a finely controlled performance) for looking to her for answers to these not so coincidental findings. The names, connections, and positions of the many African leaders and their associates may be hard to follow, but the film's premise and solid base situation revolving around the two main characers are much too strong to be deterred. It's politics are a blend of post-9/11 paranoia and never ending African civil wars that reflect the compexities of modern diplomacy that the UN tries to solve. How successfully or not it succeeds I'm sure is left in the eye of the beholder, but it's slight trumpeting of the UN is a great trade-off for it's chance to get inside the actual United Nations Building that gives the film an obvious sense of reality that could be mimicked elsewhere, but never duplicated. The UN is the ideal physical representation of the ideals of diplomacy, reconciliation, and progress the film tries to slighly suggest throughout. It's moral dillema of slow, steady diplomacy against a speeding bullet isn't the most hidden of agendas (check a few well-timed and personally appreciated one-liners for further proof), but it's hard to make a political thriller without at least a little hint of politics. |
|
|
|
Post by maarts on Apr 26, 2005 21:52:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 27, 2005 10:41:58 GMT -5
Has there been any discussion of that Korean movie Oldboy on this board yet? It seems like the kind of movie some folks here would be interested in discussing - thorny especially! I went to see it this past weekend - and beware, there are spoilers ahead...
I've grown totally bored of "shocking" movies. There were some nice moments in the film, although the ultra-flashy directorial style isn't really my thing, but I'll accept that's a matter of personal preference. But fuckin hell, was it necessary to overload the movie with every conceivable "offense" against staid tastes? We get a dude eating live octopus, cutting out his own tongue (very graphically), fucking his daughter (unbeknownst to either him or his daughter - don't ask), and then another dude fucking his sister (thoroughly "beknownst" to both him and his sister!) and then dropping her off a bridge. I mean - ok, is this stuff supposed to be interesting just because it's shocking? It reminded me a little of parts of Kill Bill, and unsurprisingly Tarantino is a huge fan of the movie. Makes sense - it's all style and very little substance, although unlike Tarantino, it's hyper-melodramatic on top of lacking anything much to say, which means it's "shocking" and oddly saccharine at the same time.
I'm sick of this kind of movie-making, where the director covers his lack of anything to say by filling the story with countless shocking scenes and revelations. I don't know how I'm supposed to react to watching a dude cut his own tongue out, but yeah, the scene was "memorable" insofar as it was totally gross - it would also be "memorable" to watch a guy skin himself, would that make a good movie??
Fuck. Just tell me a good story. I'm not getting puritanical in my old age - I don't mind a bit the ol' ultraviolence, as Alex would say. Just have it serve some purpose beyond itself. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of vacuous flash.
M
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Apr 27, 2005 13:54:50 GMT -5
I said pretty much the same thing a few posts ago, but from the perspective of the suffering these 'victims' should feel, if this were real life....a 'castration by hand', a disarticulation of a person's jaw(if not the crushing skull fracture Ed Norton's character intended to inflict) or the permanent cognitive changes made to Liotta's character by the arrogant Hannibal as he pecks away at the man's brain which of course is to assume he let Liotta's character live at all.....
That scale of cruelty, just to show how 'gross', callous and cold that the filmmaker can be...how badass shocking, doesn't impress.
It's like watching that opportunist cocksucker Jerry Springer, it makes me ashamed to be part of the human race.
|
|
|
|
Post by pissin2 on Apr 27, 2005 14:07:15 GMT -5
Booooooooooo!
|
|
