The always good Empire Records.

I saw Birdman and didn't like it.
Too long.
The director's so in love with his own virtuosity (well well...) that it was the only thing left on the screen.
The dialogue is boring.
Soooo signifying.
I didn't like Emma Stone ; Naomi Watts has no part ; Edward Norton is excellent but, all of a sudden, he's no needed anymore.
Had it been a meal, I would have left most of it and still felt sick.

Boyhood.

typical Lanklater film. inexperienced actors and the deep non-deep naive conversations made for awkward dialogs.

i liked it, but thought it was too long.

bonus for Patricia Arquette's knockers.:eek: come on, you like em too!!!:p

Fuck Jada in this movie, always trying to break up two brothers. Even when Jason tells her about killing his father selfish bitch still only thinking about herself giving him ultimatums and shit. Men are complicated, blood is thicker than pussy especially when there is life and death man shit happening.. fuck that. If she his wife then his blood becomes her blood and she got to support that. Fuck it gangsta shit is complicated... what pisses me off most is how Jason gonna let his brother kill himself and ride off into the sunset with that chick?? When your brother get into some gangsta shit you got to have his back, he'll have yours. Life and death shit bigger than pussy or companionship. After all, a man got to live with his decisions and no man can truly live with his dead brother on his conscience unless he ain't a REAL man yo

X-Men Days of Future Past.

I was bored at first but it got me hooked and I enjoyed it.

oh i watched it too-- last night-- was about to post a big picture of it



it was great! lots of fun. hilarious to see juno in it. i was like "wtf is that juno???" ha ha ha.

also, i miss rebecca romjin's body (ha ha) but j-law's acting is way superior.

My wife said the same thing, "Juno is in this?"

ha!

i said to my wife-- this guy is both GANDALF and MAGNETO-- how the fuck does one get to be BOTH?

and old Sherlock Holmes right? new movie coming out

Nightcrawler

complete waste of time. utter shit. piss in the mouth. the worst ranchiest fart you've every smelt. the worst diarrhea you've every felt. boring. tug a dick. pick and flick a booger. scratch yr ass.

like eating rotton eggs.

a cock blocker of a film.

that too.....?

how does one get such gigs?

next thing he'll be colonel sanders in the japanese version of christmas

Watched In The Mouth Of Madness more carefully again and it was an even better flick than hen i last watched it a few months ago! A brilliant premise, great lemonade from an otherwise uninspiring cast, and great setting.

Really? I thought it may be good. Who else seen it?

Sam Neill! All around good in most anything he's in. About the only good thing in the Tudors series. Anyone see him in Peaky Blinders yet?

Gyllenhaal's performance is top-notch and the main attraction of the film. Too many compare it to Drive, and it obviously falls short of that (especially in the soundtrack department). There's some killer off-beat cinematography though, and if you're like me, you may relate to the protagonist's mania a little too much despite some far-fetched plot elements. See it for Gyllenhaal, but maybe watch Enemy instead.

Upon seeing it, I thought it was masterful: my favorite film of 2014. Looking back though, it doesn't even reach my top five for the year. Birdman, Insterstellar, Under the Skin, Tusk, Foxcatcher, Gone Girl, and even How to Train Your Dragon 2 were all far more enjoyable. Nightcrawler is like a low 8/10.

Omen III for lyfe.

Nightcrawler is in my top 5 for last year. Waaay better that Drive, which is a boring crime/fantasy wank and the most overrated film since the turn of the millenium.

Drive was wrong is so many ways (for a supposed real crime story) Just full of cliches.

done with mesmerizing style though

it's a great little film

if you want realism just watch the news

I really liked Nightcrawler too. Gyllenhaal's performance is great and it is beautifully shot. It's also sort of a return to that "Disturbed individual in the big city" formula that used to be really popular in the 70s and 80s (Taxi Driver, King Of Comedy etc.). Enjoyed it alot.

I thought Drive was really flawed. It started out strong but quickly lost its steam as the plot progressed. By the point the Hallmark-esqe love-interest and her kid quality time montage hit the screen, my expectations had decreased significantly. The last third didn't really do it for me either.

by looking for an absent "deeper meaning" you lost sight of the beautiful glossy surface

it's like getting a nice bowl of silky ice cream and complaining that there are no vegetables in it

of course there aren't supposed to be vegetables-- these are stock stories. everybody knows how they're going to end. they won't provide you with the key to life or shocking plot twists. they're an excuse to get your senses bombarded with color, sound, blood, and beautiful faces. there is nothing underneath. just stylistic overload.

drive works with the logic of dreams, not the logic of reality-- like melville's "le samourai". it's not supposed to be examined for plausibility-- what hitchcock called "moronic logic"-- looking for explanations instead of having fun: http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=5468,3832269

if this movie isn't doing its thing you need to calibrate your screen and fix your speakers. don't ask for what it never offered in the first place. its offering is postulated from the start. then again, not everybody likes ice cream.

I didn't necessarily look for a deeper meaning, but I admit all those rave reviews around the time of its release did influence my expectations. All this "Exhillerating, slow moving Neo-Noir" and whatnot. They really made it sound like a modern Taxi Driver or some great character-based film with a morally gray, tight-lipped protagonist. He was somewhat morally gray and certainly tight-lipped but I thought all the stuff around him was just too distracting.

Yes, it certainly was glossy. The style just didn't fully connect with me. I didn't hate the movie though. Some of the quieter moments were brilliantly executed and some nice cinematography here and there. It's just that some of the creative choices, in my opinion at least, really clashed with the tone set by the brilliant opening. But then again, I didn't hate it. I thought it was certainly a mess but an interesting one. I guess it all boils down to tonal issues in my case. But I can see why people like it.

The way movies are received usually depends on how well people can connect with them. There are some examples where opinions differ wildly because people's personal experiences, viewing habits and preferences differ wildly. How can one possibly judge a movie in an objective way? It's not possible. Drive didn't fully connect with me. But a lot of people can absolutely relate to its established atmosphere. That's perfectly fine.

oh, i see. i hadn't heard anything about it before-- i was presented with an ugly disc menu with an 80's font and said "whatever, press play". then the movie started and i was very pleasantly surprised. it wasn't a morality play or a character study-- it was a pretty awesome action/noir movie that happens almost in slow motion. action movies require their own sets of expectations though-- just like horror or murder mysteries.

and a great opening scene can't be sustained for a whole movie. take a masterpiece like "touch of evil". that opening sequence is legendary! can you think of any other scene like that in it? of course you can't. touch of evil is a great movie, one of the best ever made, but the superfantastic first scene stands on its own as a mini-film and a great technical achievement.

anyway-- sorry you didn't like it!

--

ps- speaking of my own bias/limits, i generally don't like horror movies. i like some horror movies, and i like them a lot, but not the genre itself.

Good im still finnin to check out nightcrawler then

Maybe I'll re-watch it with the mindset that I'm going to see an action movie. Might be a better preset. I'm not averse to action movies that are executed well. I just thought it's going to be a character study of some sort. All the reviews and recommendations made it sound like that was its intention.

Yeah, you're right about the fact that great openings can't be sustained for a whole movie. I personally just found it to be a bit misleading. Here we have the stone-faced cold professional in the line of his work - an intense, somehow claustrophobic scene, and then later on the aforementioned montage. I get the reason behind it - it's there to show the viewer that he is perfectly capable of being a caring person as well. In my opinion it was just laid on way too thick. Especially when compared to some of the subtler touches throughout the movie. But maybe I'm analysing it too much again.

I'll re-watch it and let you know what my second thoughts were. But first I'm gonna finally watch the films you recommended to me. I'm really looking forward to that.

And as for horror movies - I used to be really into them many years ago. Nowadays I'm kind of lukewarm towards the genre. I just think the market is oversaturated with subpar output. There's a huge demand for cheap thrills. There are great, even phenomenal horror movies, but they are few and far between. I'm still a sucker for atmosphere-based horror though. For the most part I prefer Mystery to straightforward Horror. But I also enjoy some good old tension buildup.

Last few:

1. Daughters of Evil (aka Filhas do Fogo) 1977- atmospheric but disjointed 70's Portugese psychological horror. A bit deriviative of other films like "The Haunting of Julia" which came out same year.

2. Tiresia (2002)- Love the work of Bertrand Bonello and the way he collides almost pornographic material with more serious (or pretentious) matters is quite stunning at times. His masterpiece is still "House of Tolerance" tho!

3. Flowers of War (2012)- Holy crap a good film when I was expecting something sub par. Zhang Yimou hasn't lost it. Also features one helluva great, long tracking shot that begins with tension and ends in misery.

4. Ballet 422 (2015)- reviewed for publication at www.DallasFilmNow.com documentary that simply observes the process of creating a ballet. Sounds boring, but for a neophyte such as myself, I found it interesting.

5. Da Sweet Blood of Jesus (2014)- not one of Spike Lee's best, but still worth watching because its Lee and it looks great. Remake of "Ganja and Hess" if that motivates anyone.

6. It Happened In Broad Daylight (1958)- great, little-seen German film about the hunt for a serial killer. Covers the "M" murders, but done from the POV of the detective. Nice little crime procedural. can be found on torrents.

7. Night Across the Street (2012)- Sometimes I wonder if director Raoul Ruiz is just that much smarter than me or he's pulling my chain. I never quite "understand" any of his films and this one is dense, obscure and full of quotes about everything from literature to folklore.

8. Focus (2015)- Another obligation for print media work. I try to go into every film with a sense of anticipation, and "Focus" is okay, but nothing more. Forgettable fluff.

9. Burned Barns (1973)- Bland, dreary and completely uninvolving. Saad since its caliber of stars includes Alain Delon, Simone Signoret and Miou-Miou

10. Serena (2015)- Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence re team for a western drama. I believe I can't write about it until the embargo for reviews lifts. I've seen it though!

House By the Cemetery

One of my favourite Fulci films, even though the dubbing gives the boy one of the most annoying voices I've ever heard.

don't worry about rewatching it and check out "johnny guitar" instead!

---

recently saw



TWENTY FEET FROM STARDOM - wow! i got goosebumps in weird places, like my shins. maybe not about the type of music that people listen to here, but if you like music, well worth a watch.



SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD - i wasn't familiar with the comic (though i knew there was one) and i was expecting more of an indie comedy so it took me about 1/2 hour to adapt to the elliptical/fantastic narrative style of this. weird thing, i didn't like it that much while i was watching, and scott pilgrim came across as a feckless asshole for most of the movie, but in the end i liked it okay; and what's most strange, i like it better in recollection than i did when actually watching. maybe i like the addition of its mythology to my imagination more than the actual movie. also, knives chau > ramona flowers. though she was 17! (criminal, i know). how come this fucking poster doesn't show knives? lol white people's fantasies of asian subordination.

I actually liked this, yeah it could have been better but the cinematography was gorgeous and i have to love a movie that costs only $4million with effects and production that rival movies that cost 10 and even 20 times as much!!



This movie was going really really good.. you weren't sure WHAT THE FUCK was happening, was it aliens or ghosts? Is it a conspiracy of some kind? Are people just fucking with him?? Then it is wastes an otherwise fantastic flick on a total shit ending! Ruined it



This was a throwback to the best horror of the mid90s like People Under The Stairs kind of ahit.. some straight up wtf??? I also like how it satirized real controversial issues from Asia particularly the new rich

Get on Up.

huge James Brown fan but this bored me after about an hour. had to cut it off.

doing this rebox thing now but all the new movies are very unsatisfying. think ill go back with Netflix.

also Dan Aykroyd should not exist at all in popular culture now. his slimy white canadian ass has been bumming off nostalgic black culture for awhile now. hasn't he been playing the same character since the Great Outdoors. oh look everybody, it's Dan Aykroyd!!!!

just one thing i hated about this bio boring topic. guess it's easy to fuck up a James Brown film.

got to have a mutha fo me!!!! p.s. if you want seizure enducing James live, then check out Newport 69. kills!!

Fuck a James Brown bioflick, can I just watch a few hours of late-1960s era LIVE James Brown?? Enough said.

^^ YES!!!

have you heard the version of "Popcorn" from Newport 69? fucking insane!! fucking insane!!

5/5 - my favorite film of the year so far.



5/5 - Best horror film I've seen in a very, very long time. noise go see this you'll love it

I actually really liked this movie and realized i like a lot of Marky Mark movies.. this one was totally over the top in unbelievable shit but it also some interesting twists like an early 90s thriller, i found myself totally surprised like at least three times!

WOODSTOCK. director's cut/ 40th anniversary edition. great movie overall. historic footage, great editing, some fantastic performances. everyone knows about jimi hendrix-- but santana! holy shit, santana.

i feel a little jealous watching this. sure, those filthy hippies failed in many ways, but the idealism that shows through the movie is just amazing. we live in a much more cynical age. e.g., while woodstock was famous for nudity everywhere, woodstock 99 (wtf was that anyway?) is remembered for gang rapes.

not saying that there isn't a desire in people to change the world somehow, etc, but this aspiration has moved from mass consciousnes to the fringes.

great little piece of history. bluray looks great. scorsese was an editor in this! and his long time collaborator thelma schoonmaker as well.

"21 Years: Richard Linklater" and "10 Things I Hate About You".

last year in marienbad

Watched this on Thursday and I was incredibly let down

Santana was fried on Orange Sunshine LSD during that woodstock set. It rules

Ritchie Havens rules too in that. he wakes everyone the fuck up