What Have You Just Seen... Marks Out of 5

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 29 Dec 2007, 04:18

Before The Devil Knows You're Dead 3/5

Interesting crime drama from Sidney Lumet about a robbery going horribly wrong and the fallout that ensues from it. decent performances from Philip Seymour Hoffman & Ethan Hawke as desperate brothers. gets a bit far fetched towards the end and there is not one likeable character in the whole movie.well worth seeing though. any movie with an opening scene featuring a stark naked Marisa Tomei being taken from behind by Truman Capote gets an extra star in my book

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Dec 2007, 05:47

Shingster wrote:No, but then you're so conservative you give Mary Whitehouse a run for her money!

Too true

It's not as if they smoked it in front of them.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 29 Dec 2007, 10:26

Eiken (Japan, 2003) (2 Episodes) – 1,5/5
This is probably the most sexually suggestive show ever (without any actual sex). And not any better than you’d expect. There’s a couple of funny moments, and more than once had hard time believing my eyes, but otherwise Eiken has very little to effer (although ”little” is not the best word to describe a show full of girls with boobs larger than their heads). Very boring.

Fatal Contact (Hong Kong, 2006) – 3/5
SPL villain Wu Jing plays the hero in Dennis Law’s weird combination of youth film and manly fighting movie. The characterization is awful and almost everybody acts badly, but the girl is cute, Wu Jing wins over the audience’s symphathy, and then there’s Suet Lam. The fight choreography is good and the film remains entertaining from start to finish. The ending is original and terrible, but not in an all bad way.

Some (South Korea, 2004) – 2/5
I found Yoon-Hyun Chang’s previous film, serial killer flick Tell Me Something, highly impressive. Unfortunately the same cannot be said about Some. The cop thriller is technically well made and features a good male lead, but it’s a bit hard to come up with reasons for this movie to exist. Appart from from one weird element in the storyline the script doesn’t offer anything interesting, and the director doesn’t even manage to create any single stand out scenes. Some car crashes are ruined with ugly cgi. Not a terrible film by any means, just an unnecessary one.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 11:00

Shingster wrote:
Markgway wrote:Side note: Did anyone else think it was irresponsible to show the parents smoking dope whilst their three young children slept in the next room? That took me by surprise.
No, but then you're so conservative you give Mary Whitehouse a run for her money!

Huh? You think it's OK then? I don't equate being a responsible adult with being conservative but I guess you do?

bradavon wrote:It's not as if they smoked it in front of them.

If you're a parent you shouldn't be smoking drugs at all. You call me conservative, so I guess I would call you guys a pair of irresponsible hippies. I know which I'd rather be.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 29 Dec 2007, 11:39

The Golden Compass: 3/5

OK fantasy, I liked the part in the cold North with the polar bears. Dakota Blue Richards improved as the film went on.
The anti religion/church apsect of the book appeared toned down (I havent read it), I found the chirpy cockney kids annoying though.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 29 Dec 2007, 14:05

Markgway wrote:If you're a parent you shouldn't be smoking drugs at all. You call me conservative, so I guess I would call you guys a pair of irresponsible hippies. I know which I'd rather be.

Do you feel the same way about alcohol? Weed and alcohol are on a par, really.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 29 Dec 2007, 14:20

gasteropod wrote:
Markgway wrote:
Do you feel the same way about alcohol? Weed and alcohol are on a par, really.

is weed legal these days?

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 29 Dec 2007, 14:39

Depends where you live

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 29 Dec 2007, 15:45

Alcohol does not move thru the air into the Children (unless you piss in their mouths). Smoke does.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 29 Dec 2007, 16:08

Markgway wrote:Huh? You think it's OK then? I don't equate being a responsible adult with being conservative but I guess you do?

It's a fecking film! I don't equate getting into fist fights with being a responsible adult but we all regularly watch kung fu films - and I hardly thing Poltergeist is the only hollywood film that features adults smoking pot/taking drugs in the vicinity of children!

Honestly Mark what a gormless thing to say, characters in films act in an irresponsible way all the time! It's not a medium for preaching/demonstrating moral virtues and "family" values FFS!

romerojpg wrote:Alcohol does not move thru the air into the Children (unless you piss in their mouths). Smoke does.

No, but many films show pregnant women drinking alcohol.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 29 Dec 2007, 16:27

romerojpg wrote:Alcohol does not move thru the air into the Children (unless you piss in their mouths). Smoke does.

They were in different rooms, apparently.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 29 Dec 2007, 16:32

Paedophiles can move through the air into children. That is scientific FACT!

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:11

Shingster has summed it up perfectly.

The only reason alcohol is legal is because it would never work being illegal, it's not because it's any less damaging than weed. Many "responsible" parents drink technically too much alcohol but as their bodies are used to it you cannot always tell, society is okay with that.

Mark you really are so conservative. I find it somewhat scary that people in nearly 2008 can be that conservative. I dare not ask your opinion on abortion.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:29

gasteropod wrote:Do you feel the same way about alcohol? Weed and alcohol are on a par, really.

Not in the eyes of the law. How can you teach a child to respect the law when you openly break it yourself? I'm not an expert, but from what I've read cannibas is more damaging to mental health than alcohol, which in turn causes liver damage. But imagine if a fire broke out in the home and the parents are stoned...? It's one thing doing stupid shit when it's just you, but when you've got kids you have to grow the fuck up. Something too many people seem incapable of.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:37

And that wouldn't happen if you're completely drunk and a fire starts?

Like I said: "The only reason alcohol is legal is because it would never work being illegal, it's not because it's any less damaging than weed."

When it comes to the law I tend to use my own common sense instead of sticking to it like a lemming. I wouldn't smoke dope in public but I would in the privacy of my own home. As it happens I've no interest but it makes my point.

It's illegal to piss in public (i.e - even a secluded field) but many men do it. That's a dumb law, not the law itself but the strict nature it's handed out.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:38

Shingster wrote:It's a fecking film! Honestly Mark what a gormless thing to say, characters in films act in an irresponsible way all the time! It's not a medium for preaching/demonstrating moral virtues and "family" values FFS!

So you can justify anything a film shows by dismissing it as meaningless? Why bother having any debate on film beyond "was it good?" if it's of no consequence? Why make political and social commentary in films if nobody gives a shit because it's a "fecking film"?

My complaint was not that the characters smoked dope - but that it was shown without consequence. The film gives the impression that it's a normal, acceptable thing to do, and to me, when you have kids to be responsible for, it's certainly not. I would say the same if the parents were shown getting pissed -- though as of yet alcohol hasn't been classed as illegal in any way.

Filmmakers have a responsibility to show that negative behaviour has negative consequences. No one is talking about "preaching" but a dose of morality in films dealing with violence and drugs is a good thing IMO. I know a lot of viewers couldn't give a shit about that sort of thing... but I do.

If you're gonna "credit" me with making gormless statements, try to avoid making your own in response.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:45

How many films show people getting shot without consequence? Flipping thousands. We as young men get off on it, please.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:46

bradavon wrote:The only reason alcohol is legal is because it would never work being illegal, it's not because it's any less damaging than weed.

I suggest you try reading up on the medical facts before making inaccurate statements. Report after report has confirmed that smoking weed can damage the brain: either killing off cells (even after one toke) or causing mental illness (which is admittedly in the minority). I can't stand this ludicrous propaganda that claims weed is OK. Science has proven otherwise. If you wanna smoke it? Fine go ahead. But don't pretend it can't fuck you up.

Mark you really are so conservative.

You say that like it's a bad thing....? Is that like when I call you a Liberal?

I find it somewhat scary that people in nearly 2008 can be that conservative.

You find it scary that someone objects to parents smoking cannibas in a home they share with their children? What world do you live in??

I dare not ask your opinion on abortion.

You can have it. In principal I'm against abortion after a limited number of weeks (less than it's currently situated at) unless there are medical complications or if a woman has been raped. I suppose that makes me Ghengis Khan?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:50

bradavon wrote:How many films show people getting shot without consequence? Flipping thousands. We as young men get off on it, please.

I don't get off on it. Like I said: I prefer films to have a moral core. Not that many I can think of (at least that I own) struggle with that. True Romance is maybe one?

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 29 Dec 2007, 18:52

Am I drunk or are you all drunk? Cause nothing I see here today makes any fuckin sense. I'm gonna go to sleep.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 29 Dec 2007, 19:03

Markgway wrote:I suggest you try reading up on the medical facts before making inaccurate statements. Report after report has confirmed that smoking weed can damage the brain: either killing off cells (even after one toke) or causing mental illness (which is admittedly in the minority).

And drinking too much alcohol doesn't? I didn't say it wasn't damaging. I and others have said it's as damaging.

I can't stand this ludicrous propaganda that claims weed is OK. Science has proven otherwise. If you wanna smoke it? Fine go ahead. But don't pretend it can't fuck you up.

Markgway wrote:You say that like it's a bad thing....?

You're right I do, quite correct.

Markgway wrote:You can have it. In principal I'm against abortion after a limited number of weeks (less than it's currently situated at) unless there are medical complications or if a woman has been raped. I suppose that makes me Ghengis Khan?

No not Ghengis Khan just the opinion I was expecting. Personally I believe a feutus is alive but not a life. That and the parents who are a life should be allowed to choose.

Not wanting to go off topic (then we are in the "what have you seen" threads anyway

) but I do find the "against abortion" stance utterly absurd because none of them answer the question what do you do with all the millions of unwanted kids? Who'd lives will be ruined (growing up in care, yep that's fun) and even if they are wanted they'll possibly be brought up in environments not best for bringing up children.

That's all I want to say on abortion but it is an odd reality no campaigner against abortion seems to want to answer.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 19:04

HungFist wrote:Am I drunk or are you all drunk? Cause nothing I see here today makes any fuckin sense. I'm gonna go to sleep.

Maybe you're just stoned??

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 29 Dec 2007, 19:21

Markgway wrote:So you can justify anything a film shows by dismissing it as meaningless?

Well, you can dismiss a scene because the target audience (adults) are old enough to know the fucking difference between fact and fiction. Seriously, i'm not getting drawn into this debate because, not only is it so stupid I actually feel my brain melting down as I type, but it's also taking this off-topic discussion waaaay to far. It was Poltergeist we were talking about here, not fecking E.T!

Oh, and you appear to know nothing about the casual use of drugs as you clearly have lived a life of good christian values. If you did know anything about dope, you'd know that casual use is about as harmful as normal smoking, drinking. It's when you abuse the use that things get problematic - and yes I'm far more aware of the pyschotic affects of draw than it seems you are, as I've seen it first hand with many people., some friends of mine.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 19:22

bradavon wrote:And drinking too much alcohol doesn't?

Both are damaging and both are (when children are present) irresponsible (but in health terms, drugs more so). Yet I keep hearing that alcohol is "demon drink" and that weed is OK actually. Why not legalise it? Just ignore the warnings (and never mind the research that proves for that for many weed is a gateway drug). It's all one-sided propaganda.

Markgway wrote:You say that like it's a bad thing....?
You're right I do, quite correct.

Is it always bad to be Conservative or just with regards to drugs? I'm curious. What about crime? I'm strong on punishment and moral behaviour on society? Is that Conservative too? Britain is now run by Liberals and you can see what a shithole it's become. But when I slag off "The Liberals" I'm not slagging off liberalism as such but rather the people who wear it like a badge. You know the type... I'm a Liberal so how special and superior does that make me? The people who think that responsibility is a dirty word. Right on, self-righteous dudes.

No not Ghengis Khan just the opinion I was expecting. Personally I believe a feutus is alive but not a life. That and the parents who are a life should be allowed to choose.

I would contest that a feutus becomes a life when it develops a heartbeat. At that point it's a living creature as opposed to an organism. I don't know how many weeks into the pregnancy that is... but at that point I would outlaw abortion except in exceptional circumstances.

Again it's down to responsibility. If you have sex you know the risks involved. If for whatever reason you choose to abort (and I understand it's not a decision made lightly) there's no need for it to take up to 24 weeks.

So many people out there want to adopt children but can't because of bureaucracy and red tape. Isn't it better for a child to have a life and a chance of happiness than to cut it short before it's began? It's like saying "you're life's probably gonna be fucked so we'll just save you the bother".

And then there's the countless number of mothers who have abortions and then regret it... I've read someone tearful articles where these mothers would give anything to go back.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Dec 2007, 19:25

Shingster wrote:Well, you can dismiss a scene because the target audience (adults) are old enough to know the fucking difference between fact and fiction. Seriously, i'm not getting drawn into this debate because, not only is it so stupid I actually feel my brain melting down as I type, but it's also taking this off-topic discussion waaaay to far. It was Poltergeist we were talking about here, not fecking E.T!

It's only now a stupid discussion because you realise I have a point which you don't have an answer for. Saying it's unimportant is a get out of jail free card. Dismissing my POV allows you to take the high road (I'm too smart for this...)

Regardless of the film (which was actually Rated PG in the USA) it's irresponsible to show parents smoking dope (especially in the same house as their children). No big shocker. Simple common sense. End of.