Bullets 'n' Babes

In The Mood for Love and Chungking Express are both brilliant IMO. I guess you're not a fan of WKW, Romero.
I did watch what some consider to be a classic recently though - M Hulots Holiday. Has anyone seen it? 2/5 IMO, found it dull TBH.

I didn't expect you to "get it" Romero but honestly it is deep. An essay on the film, which is well worth a read (if you've seen the film):

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/rev ... FID=132770

When I first saw 2001 about 10 years ago I didn't get it either and thought it was overrated like you. It's a love it or hate it film but when you do "get it" you'll see it is incredibly deep. As you reckon 2001 is "some nice music and a few good effects shots" then you definitely didn't get the depth behind the obvious in 2001.

The opening sequence and ending alone are just staggering.

Obviously Bradavon loves what wanker critics love to praise. Talk about sheep.

I happen to agree so that makes me a sheep? O-Kay. Have you even seen "Lilya 4-ever"?

Compared to the man whose said Resident Evil and Starship Troopers are masterpieces this means nothing at all

Hmmm, by your logic (that a masterpiece has to be flawless) I'm surprised that you would call any film a masterpiece actually. Do you really think "The Godfather" is flawless?

Fair point LD. I was mistaken to include that one, because it's been so long since I've seen it I cannot really give a true decision if I like it enough.

Can I discount that one? . The rest definitely still stand. I did toy with including Blade Runner but I'm not sure it's "quite" good enough to be called a masterpiece.

saltysam wrote:2001 i've never seen.

I'd definitely recommend you give it a go. The HD Disc is supposed to be amazing and the best of the Warner HD Remasters.

You may not like it on first viewing but hold on to it and watch it later on and you may then love it. I would guess those who didn't like it on first viewing just "didn't get it" and simply need to watch it again.

The ending is very, very weird. I found that Empire article helped me to fully appreciate it after I'd seen the film recently.

2001 is shit, there is nothing to get, its simple to see what they meant as its not deep in any way only a complete muppet doesnt know what is going on, who gives a shit when its all so bland.

You talking like if you get it the film magically changes into the best film ever made, what crap. The beginning and ending esspecially ranks as some of the most overated bile in cinema history.

The beginning. Whoooo look idiots in bad monkey suits, tossing bones on a badly made indoor set, what amazing depth! wow so much depth, so deep and coupled with the black thing its even deper, what a life changing beginning of a film. I am in awe of the masterful deep depth the film has, and that ending wow the deepness of the black thing and the way the deep depth observes the life and times of mankind thru the ages, its just so damn deep and full of depth. Wow I just did not get it before, what a moron I am for thinking if you do not get it you must be watching a bad film and just have to see it again to see if you get it, so deep.

Star Trek the Motion Picture has 10 times more depth, but I guess you didnt get that.

Poeple who say "you dont get it", well they are ignorant beyond words. Its a sad persons response.


I guess you did not get Resident Evil or Starship Troopers, as its obvious you would love both as the best films ever made, if someone explained the social and political relevance of both to you bullshit.

If you need some masterfull article and expert to help you appreciate a film more, well your obviously a deep person.



and Grim
Chunking Express is great, INMFL is stagnant and meandering and worst of all not very intresting at all.

You talking like if you get it the film magically changes into the best film ever made, what crap.

Not the best film ever made but yes you're otherwise correct.

Star Trek the Motion Picture has 10 times more depth, but I guess you didnt get that.

Obviously not 10 times the depth that's stupid but agreed it does have more depth and is much better as a Sci-fi adventure than most give credit.

I am in awe of the masterful deep depth the film has, and that ending wow the deepness of the black thing and the way the deep depth observes the life and times of mankind thru the ages, its just so damn deep and full of depth.

Point proven. That isn't what happens. It's all very subjective when it comes to 2001 as Kubrick sure doesn't spell it out and that article I link to could be wrong. I don't think it is but it's all open to debate. That article could be wrong and so could what I think happened but your statement above just proves you sure as hell didn't get it.

I originally thought something else happened at the end. I could be right but even if I'm not the film should be praised for making us think so much.

I somehow doubt the greater meaning behind Resident Evil and Starship Troopers isn't anywhere near as deep. Don't call people morons because they took something different away from a film than you did!

If you need some masterfull article and expert to help you appreciate a film more, well your obviously a deep person.

Try commenting after you've read it next time

I did watch what some consider to be a classic recently though - M Hulots Holiday. Has anyone seen it? 2/5 IMO, found it dull TBH.

I wonder if it's a case of it not holding up tell in today's world? That and many who loved it probably grew up with it, most who love it are 50+

I can see your point. Most consider Citizen Kane a masterpiece. While I can see it was technically way ahead of it's time my god it's boring. It's in my top 5 for most boring films ever made.

WOW we've gone way off topic

I read the Empire article when I bought the magazine (many months ago now from memory) I read the magazine from front to back, even if I do not like certain films as hell I like that sort of stuff informative most the time, even films you do not like much.

But hell I am pulling your leg a bit anyway 2001 its watchable, but hell I hate the way people over analise things to the point of insanity the end ruined the film for me esspecially the last 30 minutes or so, I do not mind slow films with a message, but 2001 just went no where for me. Still the music and lingering spaceship shots are nice, well for that time back then.

Still we are off topic a wee bit, but still as you say you can take very different things from a film, even if people go way to deep and start making stuff up that no one involved in the film intended.
I listen to nearly all commentaries for films (even films I hate), its suprising how many directors etc.. say that exact thing, the critics over analise that directors film and blatantly make up what they think a director intended, when in fact all they wanted to do was stick something simple on screen to impress people with no subtext what so ever


Ahh debate about films, we love it really

But hell I am pulling your leg a bit anyway.

Fair enough then

The lingering space shots are incredible even without all the other mumbo jumbo. The first time I saw it was in 4:3 P&S and it was completely ruined. I think it was P&S I'd be surprised if it's Open Matt.

even if people go way to deep and start making stuff up that no one involved in the film intended.

We'll never really know with 2001 Kubrick is dead and he never let on when he was alive anyway.

the critics over analise that directors film and blatantly make up what they think a director intended.

Don't you think that's fun to do? Even if it's not what the director intended.

Depends on what they say when they over analise. I just take things for what they are, thats why I like Starship Troopers (masterpiece of entertainment maybe) its entertainment, not deep or realistic (even if some people seem to think it is). Some films are more complex than that, but I like things for what they are ussually and try not to analise them as much as others.

Having listened to the commentary for Donnie Darko (the director's cut), it seems even the director doesn't really understand it. He sounds a bit of a fool to me, he won't even say which cut is his favourite. So yeah, don't expect all films to have profound messages behind them and their directors being masterminds

bradavon wrote:Fair point LD. I was mistaken to include that one, because it's been so long since I've seen it I cannot really give a true decision if I like it enough.

Can I discount that one? . The rest definitely still stand.

Brad, it doesn't really matter, because I could tell you the flaws of any film you would call a flawless masterpiece.

I'd say there is meaning behind Starship Troopers even if it ultimately doesn't matter because as you say Romero it's only exists to entertain. I happen to think it's utter rubbish but that's not relevant to the point I'm making.

gasteropod wrote:Having listened to the commentary for Donnie Darko (the director's cut), it seems even the director doesn't really understand it.

I thought the DC was well the DC. I'd guess he understands most of it, no? He wrote it after all.

I havent seen Citizen Kane, Brad. As for M. Hulot, I enjoyed some of the gentle slapstick I guess but it didnt do much for me TBH. That's a good point aboout it maybe not holding up well, I'm too young I guess.

I don't think you're too young. I meant it was made a long time ago and people have lived with it for years now.

bradavon wrote:I thought the DC was well the DC. I'd guess he understands most of it, no? He wrote it after all.

So did I until I listened to his commentary. He says it is just an alternative cut. He also pretty much gave the impression that the film is what you make of it, when Kevin Smith kept asking questions he never had any good answers lol, what a moron.

He also pretty much gave the impression that the film is what you make of it.

While I do prefer to know which is the DC I do also like it when director's let the viewer make their own mind up. Good on him for not giving too much away.

I know most prefer the TC but I liked both cuts just as much. I didn't think like most the DC gave too much away. I was equally as confused by the end. I opted to keep the DC as I thought it was the DC and it is a better overall DVD. I am trying not to own two cuts if on two DVDs if I can help it.

thelostdragon wrote:Hmmm, by your logic (that a masterpiece has to be flawless) I'm surprised that you would call any film a masterpiece actually. Do you really think "The Godfather" is flawless? Didn't you see how Sunny beat up his sister's husband in the streets. He barely touched him.

That fight is famous because James Caan actually did beat the crap out of Gianni Russo as they filmed it. Apparently they both hated each other and Caan left Russo with a broken rib and chipped elbow.

Shingster wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:Hmmm, by your logic (that a masterpiece has to be flawless) I'm surprised that you would call any film a masterpiece actually. Do you really think "The Godfather" is flawless? Didn't you see how Sunny beat up his sister's husband in the streets. He barely touched him.

That fight is famous because James Caan actually did beat the crap out of Gianni Russo as they filmed it. Apparently they both hated each other and Caan left Russo with a broken rib and chipped elbow.

Well, what a wasted effort is all I can say about that. What a shame really, because the fight scene looks just fake.

thelostdragon wrote:

Shingster wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:Hmmm, by your logic (that a masterpiece has to be flawless) I'm surprised that you would call any film a masterpiece actually. Do you really think "The Godfather" is flawless? Didn't you see how Sunny beat up his sister's husband in the streets. He barely touched him.

That fight is famous because James Caan actually did beat the crap out of Gianni Russo as they filmed it. Apparently they both hated each other and Caan left Russo with a broken rib and chipped elbow.

Well, what a wasted effort is all I can say about that. What a shame really, because the fight scene looks just fake.

Real fights look nothing at all like the Movies you should know that. I have seen people get broken bits and they looked like a bunch of girls slapping each other.

Yeah, I know what you mean, romero. What I meant thoguh was, that Russo reacted to punches that clearly missed him.

He was probably trying to get out the way of Caan's real swinging!

Yup Caan semed like such a hard bastard, you would not want even a soft smack from him in his day turn and run for your life.

The new trailer, showing a little more of the "true" Forbidden Kingdom...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6sBwD1g0AbE

Boy?? lol. He's gotta be at least 25(!)

I notice they don't say who gets top billing: Jackie or Jet?

And choreography by Woo-Ping Yuen. That's just WRONG.

It is annoying but even the people's whose name it is don't seem to mind.

I bet the kid gets top billing