[akhare]

Rain, on Dec 30 2009, 02:32 PM, said:

I don't want to go to the theatre itself, but intend to buy dvd of Holmes and Avatar, especially Avatar. We got Inglorious Bastards over Xmas (must complete the Tarantino collection) but haven't watched yet.

2012's marketing campaign was the most annoying one I've ever seen - marketing it as though it was "news".

The BluRay transfer of "Inglorious..." is outstanding -- now, if only they would release Pulp Fiction out here in BR as well (drool)...

[kenberg]

We just took a fairly rare trip to a movie house and saw "Up in the air". I liked it. Actually I liked it a lot. Nothing gets blown up.

[blackshoe]

kenberg, on Dec 30 2009, 04:35 PM, said:

Nothing gets blown up.

That can't be right.

[jonottawa]

Inglourious Basterds looks appalling to me.

Dehumanizing Germans is good but dehumanizing Jews is bad? Uh, no.

Two wrongs don't make a right and making some sort of sociopathic gleeful cartoonish slaughter/torture of mid-20th century Germans 'fun' is really sick imo.

[Mbodell]

jonottawa, on Dec 30 2009, 03:47 PM, said:

Inglourious Basterds looks appalling to me.

Dehumanizing Germans is good but dehumanizing Jews is bad? Uh, no.

I think if you saw the film you wouldn't say it dehumanizes Germans. Certain Germans are seen buffoonish (Hitler, for instance) but it doesn't dehumanize anyone. It does revel in some violence though (not a surprise if you've seen any films by, or even just heard of, the director in question).

[jonottawa]

Rented the Cove tonight. I prefer my sociopathic gleeful cartoonish slaughter to target non-humans.

[kenberg]

Mbodell, on Dec 30 2009, 07:25 PM, said:

jonottawa, on Dec 30 2009, 03:47 PM, said:

Inglourious Basterds looks appalling to me. 

Dehumanizing Germans is good but dehumanizing Jews is bad?  Uh, no.

I think if you saw the film you wouldn't say it dehumanizes Germans. Certain Germans are seen buffoonish (Hitler, for instance) but it doesn't dehumanize anyone. It does revel in some violence though (not a surprise if you've seen any films by, or even just heard of, the director in question).

I saw the revolting Kill Bill Part I. It was enough. I don't understand the attraction, and I have no plans to correct this failing in the future. Same guy directing, right?

[blackshoe]

Tarantino is certainly into violence. I don't think he needs a reason to include it in a movie - more like it is the reason for the movie, as far as he's concerned.

I've seen both parts of Kill Bill. In spite of some well known names in the cast (Uma Thurman, Lucy Liu, David Carradine, Daryl Hannah, probably others I've forgotten) it wasn't much of a movie. Thin plot, and that much violence is not entertaining. Not if it doesn't have a reason.

There was plenty of violence in Taken, or A History of Violence, or some of Charles Bronson's stuff (Mr. Majestyk, the Deathwish series) but at least in those movies there was a reason for it.

Ack! There's a third Kill Bill in the works!

[Lobowolf]

I didn't love or hate Kill Bill, but for Tarantino at his best, it's one of the "Big 3" - Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, or True Romance.

[kenberg]

I didn't see any of the three Lobo mentions. Possibly I should gve him (Tarentino, not Lobo) another try. I found Kill Bill to be so immensely dumb that it has always seemed unlikely I would like anything by the same director.

I liked, for example, The Unforgiven. And Taxi Driver. More recently we saw Public Enemies which I liked although it certainly is not in a league with Unforgiven or Taxi Driver. I liked Bridge over the River Kwai a lot. These movies had violence but they also had substance. I think I have seen one or two of the Charles Bronson movies and one or maybe one and a half of the Die Hard movies, it's not to my taste but I agree that there is something there. But they will survive without me.


It's not only violence that brings this reaction. Some movies get weighed down with special effects and forget that there is supposed to be a story or some character development or some dialogue or something beyond large scale scenes of destruction. It's not particularly a moral point with me, I just get bored. On this basis I am not planning on seeing Avatar, but perhaps that's subject to reconsideration if enough people tell me that they liked it.

All that being said, I liked True Lies. I can't explain that, although there seemed to be a sense of irony in the whole thing. I heard an interview with Jamie Lee Curtis. She said she was known in the trade as a really good screamer. And I think Arnold always has a good sense of the absurd, and not just when making movies.

[y66]

I just asked my wife at the breakfast table what she thought about Kill Bill: "I f**king hated it. I do not get the attraction of violence porn". And she's someone who believes in constructive revenge. I would definitely not recommend Kill Bill 1 and 2 for general audiences. But if you like the martial-arts genre or the spaghetti western genre or if you're just an Uma Thurman fan who's not put off by over-the-top, stylized violence, I'll bet you'll like these films. I did.

Just watched The Big Lebowski on Netflix streaming video after reading Dwight Garner's recent inquiry into the requirements for cult classic status. Richard Gaughran who teaches English at James Madison University in Virginia asks his students "What is it that they see in the Dude that they find so desirable?" That would make a good thread. I love that guy and I feel fortunate to have friends who have some of his many fine qualities. Great movie, man.

[Al_U_Card]

akhare, on Dec 30 2009, 02:35 PM, said:

jonottawa, on Dec 29 2009, 06:21 PM, said:

Saw District 9 last night.  Was rather disappointed.  The special effects are good, but the plot is pretty awful.  That's kinda what I'm expecting from Avatar.  (Saw the South Park spoof of Avatar here.)

I have seen both and Avatar was much superior and somehow managed not to be cloyingly mawkish...

An alliterative analysis:

Bullies bullets beat bodies but brains beat bullies....

(especially planet-sized ones )

The plot line never got in the way of the action but the visuals were worth it.

[gwnn]

well I love Pulp fiction a LOT. I loved Reservoir Dogs also.

But I didn't like Inglorious Basterds. I just couldn't make up my mind who the good guys are. Brad Pitt was nice but his accent was bad and his character was dubious. All I liked was Diane Kruger who I like in all movies.

BTW has anyone seen Joyeux Noel the ww 1 movie? Very touching.

[jdonn]

Wow everyone is starting to make me feel almost guilty for liking Kill Bill! There are few enough places in life to enjoy some good old fashioned gratuitous violence that I'll take it where I can get it. Whatever happened to just being entertained by a movie?

[Lobowolf]

kenberg, on Dec 31 2009, 02:23 AM, said:

I didn't see any of the three Lobo mentions. Possibly I should gve him (Tarentino, not Lobo) another try. I found Kill Bill to be so immensely dumb that it has always seemed unlikely I would like anything by the same director.

I liked, for example, The Unforgiven. And Taxi Driver. More recently we saw Public Enemies which I liked although it certainly is not in a league with Unforgiven or Taxi Driver. I liked Bridge over the River Kwai a lot. These movies had violence but they also had substance. I think I have seen one or two of the Charles Bronson movies and one or maybe one and a half of the Die Hard movies, it's not to my taste but I agree that there is something there. But they will survive without me.


It's not only violence that brings this reaction. Some movies get weighed down with special effects and forget that there is supposed to be a story or some character development or some dialogue or something beyond large scale scenes of destruction. It's not particularly a moral point with me, I just get bored. On this basis I am not planning on seeing Avatar, but perhaps that's subject to reconsideration if enough people tell me that they liked it.

All that being said, I liked True Lies. I can't explain that, although there seemed to be a sense of irony in the whole thing. I heard an interview with Jamie Lee Curtis. She said she was known in the trade as a really good screamer. And I think Arnold always has a good sense of the absurd, and not just when making movies.

You should give me another try, too!


If you do try another of the movies, I'd suggest Pulp Fiction. I think it has a good mix of the best elements of the other two; it's a nice blend of character, humor, and intensity.

[mike777]

Just saw Up in the Air, it was decent on par with Holmes.


Agree with Pulp Fiction a truly great movie.

Kill Bill is very good but I am fan of Uma.

Thought I.B. was about average on par with Public Enemies.


For lovers of great old old movies....tonight TCM is running all of the "Thin Man' movies. I will be watching.

[Lobowolf]

I have to see "Up in the Air" just for having Iggy Pop's "The Passenger" in the soundtrack. That song never gets old to me.

[akhare]

jdonn, on Dec 31 2009, 11:15 AM, said:

Wow everyone is starting to make me feel almost guilty for liking Kill Bill! There are few enough places in life to enjoy some good old fashioned gratuitous violence that I'll take it where I can get it. Whatever happened to just being entertained by a movie?

Not to worry -- I loved Kill Bill too .

However, I do put a stop to "just being entertained by the movie" when it comes to the dredges like 2012, Independence Day and most of the thrash churned out by Hollywood...

[Sadie3]

I thought "UP in the Air" was mediocre at best. Sherlock Holmes (long movie) takes about half way through to get your attention. It starts out looking science fictiony...but I liked the Moriarity influence. I'm still waiting for the the movie of the year for me. We had to wait until a Tuesday evening to see "SHERLOCK" because it is being sold out every showing. I'll have to see AVATAR. Sounds like it has promise. Blind Side was quite good probably because I went to it not knowing anything about it.

[Lobowolf]

Blind Side was a good book, too. As I've come to expect from Michael Lewis.