Cinema

(WORF/179155) Man on a Ledge> I really liked it.

WORF@rss.iscabbs.com — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 07:16:00 -0600


Man on a Ledge> I really liked it.

Here is my (spoiler free) review:

http://worthplaying.com/article/2012/1/30/reviews/84927/

(Feoh/179154) Glargh. We just watched _Black Widow_ with Debra Winger this la...

Feoh@rss.iscabbs.com — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 04:11:00 -0600

Glargh.  We just watched _Black Widow_ with Debra Winger this last weekend.  I
dunno if it was ever good (We're guessing it must have been thought of well
because it's rated well on Netflix) but it Has Not Held Up to the test of time
:)

(Miser/179153) Man on a Ledge>

Miser@rss.iscabbs.com — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 03:53:00 -0600

Man on a Ledge>
Saw this with my wife on Sat. night and it was great.  She really liked it,
too, and she's normally not big into that type of movie.  I'd definitely
recommend it.

Not going to say much more as I think this is one that's really better not
knowing much going into it.  I will say, though, that I've gotten to where I
just don't give two shits about critic ratings or reviews.  This movie is a
great example as it got pretty bad reviews from the critics but good/great
reviews from users (average people like you and me).

(Secretary/179152) Film Quote Whores>

Secretary@rss.iscabbs.com — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 17:41:00 -0600


Film Quote Whores>

eFilmCritic keeps track of people who provide positive reviews for EVERY film:

eFilmCritic - Criticwatch - The 2011 Whores of the Year
http://www.efilmcritic.com/feature.php?feature=3343

The people seem to be ranked by how many of their quotes were used in actual
advertisements for bad movies.  The quotes and the movies they were used for
are listed below each name.

*****

David Manning (fictitious writer)>

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manning_%28fictitious_writer%29

""David Manning" was a fictitious film critic, created by a marketing executive
working for Sony Corporation around July 2000 to give consistently good reviews
for releases from Sony subsidiary Columbia Pictures. Several blurbs posted
under the name "David Manning" were written for the medieval action/drama A
Knight's Tale (citing Heath Ledger as "this year's hottest new star!") and Rob
Schneider's comedy The Animal ("Another winner!"),[1] the latter of which
generally received very poor reviews by real critics."

"David Manning was named after a friend of Matthew Cramer, the Sony marketing
executive responsible for the insertions. Manning was credited to The
Ridgefield Press, a small Connecticut weekly. During an investigation into
Manning's quotes, Newsweek reporter John Horn discovered that the newspaper had
never heard of him. Horn disclosed the truth about Manning in a June 2001
article in Newsweek, which emerged at around the same time as an announcement
that Sony had used employees posing as moviegoers in television commercials to
praise Mel Gibson's The Patriot. These occurrences, in tandem, raised questions
and controversy about ethics in movie marketing practices."

"On August 3, 2005, Sony made an out-of-court settlement and agreed to refund
$5 each to dissatisfied customers who saw Hollow Man, The Animal, The Patriot,
A Knight's Tale, or Vertical Limit in American theatres, under the impression
that it would be a great movie due to Manning's reviews."

(Secretary/179150) Superman II>

Secretary@rss.iscabbs.com — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:47:00 -0600


Superman II>

Am I the only one who didn't know there was a second release of Superman II in
2006 using 75% original footage shot by the original director.  Check out this
documentary:

Superman II Richard Donner Cut Documentary Pt 1 Restoring The Vision
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIyVcnlDDgE

(King Action/179149) "Yeah alot of it is selective usage of quotes from otherwise bad...

King Action@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:29:00 -0600


"Yeah alot of it is selective usage of quotes from otherwise bad reviews"

Yep. 'Masterminds of the shittiest cinema you will ever see' becomes:

'Masterminds of...cinema'

(Cerebus/179148) Yeah alot of it is selective usage of quotes from otherwise bad ...

Cerebus@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:56:00 -0600

Yeah alot of it is selective usage of quotes from otherwise bad reviews. There
were also cases of folks who ha dbeen paid to give good reviews.

(Rick Jenkins/179147) Are they sometimes (often?) quotes taken out of context? Like "A...

Rick Jenkins@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:16:00 -0600


Are they sometimes (often?) quotes taken out of context? Like "A truly feel-
good story" was actually something like "This looks like a piece of junk trying
to be a truly feel-good story."

(M Bison/179146) A lot of the time those quotes are from blogs or websites. I ha...

M Bison@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:00:00 -0600

A lot of the time those quotes are from blogs or websites.  I have been seeing
Harry Knowles from Aintitcoolnews.com quoted quite a bit lately.

(Rick Jenkins/179145) Didn't the recent Robin Hood movie get panned by most critics an...

Rick Jenkins@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 08:26:00 -0600


Didn't the recent Robin Hood movie get panned by most critics and not just
Ebert?

A little off topic, but that reminds me of a question I've been meaning to ask.
Let's say you see a TV commercial for an upcoming film to be released in
theaters. "Everyone" seems to think it's going to suck for whatever reason and
after the movie comes out, critics and fans alike ar ein general agreement that
it wasn't a good movie. Still, that TV commercial is going to have quotes about
how great the movie is but the print is so damn fine I can never see what the
sources of these quotes are.

Are these from alternative media sources or friends of someone involved the
movie that works somewhere in the media? Just wondering where these
descriptions of how good a bad movie is come from in general.

(Danix/179144) I've recently noticed that some movies on RT get dismal ratings ...

Danix@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 06:52:00 -0600

I've recently noticed that some movies on RT get dismal ratings from critics
even when they're good. Maybe they're being anal about stuff? I remember the
recent "Robin Hood" movie being slammed by Ebert just because it wasn't like
the Errol Flynn version. Meh.

(King Action/179143) I don't know that I've seena greater disparity between reviewers...

King Action@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 06:47:00 -0600


I don't know that I've seena greater disparity between reviewers and audience
members. On RT, One for the Money has an 83% approval rating for audiences and
a ZERO % rating from critics.

'The fuck??

(Nightspawn/179142) Ugh, the greedy local thater company (Marcus Theaters) isn't sho...

Nightspawn@rss.iscabbs.com — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 04:27:00 -0600

Ugh, the greedy local thater company (Marcus Theaters) isn't showing One For
The Money because of some dispute with Lionsgate. My wife is not a happy
camper s that is about the only movie she was looking forward to until summer.

(Fookin Caged Tigah/179141) well, jedi mind tricks, dude.

Fookin Caged Tigah@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:42:00 -0600

well, jedi mind tricks, dude.


qui-gon jinn had quite a bit of entertainment value as a grizzled old badass,
with liam neeson's considerable talents rounding out a shallow
characterization on paper, but like much of TPM his appeal is largely
superficial.  he looks awesome, he's liam neeson, he's wise, he ends up
rather pitiably mortal, yadda yadda yadda...

but consider the genius of the original trilogy and han solo.  into the mix
came this skeptic.  didn't care about the force or lightsabers.  wanted to
bang the princess.  mocked everybody, took nothing seriously except his own
hide and his bond with chewie, the ultimate dog.  yeah, he was relatively
domesticated by return of the jedi, but by then we were already hooked.

as evidenced by american graffiti, young george lucas knew this kind of guy
and had him in his imagination at the time, but old fat goiter lucas in his
flannels and khakis directing from his chair had long forgotten the han solo
inside him.

the prequels actually contain some interesting thoughts on the downfalls of
democracies, and the machinations of palpatine seem to be what excited lucas
the most as some of palpatine's scenes are among the best in all the series,
but as a whole it was a colossal failure that would have profited immensely
had lucas been more hands-off and, like the original trilogy, let others lead
him to greatness.

(Archmage/179140) TPM

Archmage@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:38:00 -0600

TPM

I also don't understand who the Viceroy think Siduous is, as they talk to his
video-teleconference image. Why are they compelled to do what he says?

(Gislef/179139) Liam Neeson and Ewan MacGregor were perfectly acceptable in the ...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:09:00 -0600

Liam Neeson and Ewan MacGregor were perfectly acceptable in the firs movie as
far as bringing life to TPM. MacGregor is really the standout of the entire
series, and about the only Jedi that actually acted like a Jedi. he was the
only person who made Christenson tolerable.

(Gespalder/179138) Now in the novels we have a different story.

Gespalder@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:00:00 -0600

Now in the novels we have a different story.
We see how the Empire acted and how people resisted.
Hell, in the Old Republic novels we see plenty of emotions.

(Fookin Caged Tigah/179137) dudes, nazis didn't last twenty years.

Fookin Caged Tigah@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:36:00 -0600

dudes, nazis didn't last twenty years.

evil overlords tend to inspire a bit o'resistance.


on another note, we might have cared more about the republic if anybody in it
expressed the slightest sign of spontaneous life.  jar jar, for all his
stupidity, at least betrayed a pulse!  darth maul's snarl was the only other
thing to come close in the first movie, but if you wanted any of the wit,
banter or humor of the original trilogy, you were left starving.   this also
serves to handicap most of the emotional underpinning of the entire prequel
trilogy, the romance between anakin and padme.  has anybody ever witnessed a
worse screen romance?  the heady, passionate heights of the han solo/leia
romance are completely fucking extinguished by george lucas' flannel-and-
khakis complacency.

(Egregious/179136) I guess it's my own complaint: the great empire that Luke took d...

Egregious@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:59:00 -0600


I guess it's my own complaint: the great empire that Luke took down
was only around since the time of his birth.

(Gislef/179135) Sorry, as I made clear later in the paragraph, I was referring t...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:56:00 -0600

Sorry, as I made clear later in the paragraph, I was referring to the Republic.

(Egregious/179134) The empire happens between episode 3 and episode 4. It was appa...

Egregious@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:06:00 -0600


The empire happens between episode 3 and episode 4.  It was apparetnly
this huge majestic thing, but it didn't even last 20 years.

(Gislef/179133) Another problem with TPM, and the prequel trilogy as a whole, is...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 08:29:00 -0600

Another problem with TPM, and the prequel trilogy as a whole, is that we're
seeing the fall of the empire. Probably is, we never saw it as something we
should care about. We don't see the Republic at its greatest and then its
tragic decline. We don't see the wise and powerful Jedi: we just get them as a
bunch of grumpy paranoids (hell, if I was Anakin, I'd rebel too). We don't see
the Galactic Senate as a representation of the best the Republic has: we get a
bunch of squabbling dicks who can be stampeded into ill-considered decisions.

For it to be a tragedy, we need to know we're losing. We don't. ironically,
the prequel needs a prequel.

(Gespalder/179132) And then we have Lucas going back and editing the films to be "h...

Gespalder@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 08:16:00 -0600

And then we have Lucas going back and editing the films to be "how I originally
intended them to be" (Greedo shooting first, removing the original Anakin in
the scene on Dagobah, messing with the Ewoks, etc)

(Gislef/179131) RotS is presented as a tragedy, and is arguably brought home by ...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 08:13:00 -0600

RotS is presented as a tragedy, and is arguably brought home by Ian McDiarmid
(and despite Christensen). TPM is tragic, but it's not a tragedy. :)

(Pluck Duck/179130) My problems weren't with that, because, lets face it, tragedies ...

Pluck Duck@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:06:00 -0600

My problems weren't with that, because, lets face it, tragedies are some of the
greatest works of literature, historically.  My problem is with the horrible
directing, acting, dialogue, and sheet shittiness of the films.  They make
Independence Day look like high art, and that's downright sad.

(Gislef/179129) Eh, having a... quadilogy? whatever six-parts are, where four pa...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:31:00 -0600

Eh, having a... quadilogy? whatever six-parts are, where four parts end with
the protagonists essentially losing (Empire Strikes Back Ends on a "we've lost"
element as well) seems a bit much. Even if you're watching them sequentially
and don't know the outcome.

But yes, it's no surprise that they "lose" and have helped Palpatine at the end
of TPM. But does it make for an entertaining movie to watch, knowing that?

(Danix/179128) TPM has the protagonists "win" in the sense that they free Naboo...

Danix@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:13:00 -0600

TPM has the protagonists "win" in the sense that they free Naboo. It fails in
the sense that the foreshadowing isn't really a surprise: we already KNOW
Palpatine's the future empreror, and that they are all going to lose. It is
compounded with the fact that we are shown that QuiGon Jinn, Obi Wan, Anakin
and Padme's actions have actually *helped* him achieve his goal.

It might actually work for people who watch Ep 1 without having ever seen Eps
4-6, or even knowing the story. But that's kinda hard to find, and definitely
wasn't the target audience for TPM.

(Gislef/179127) Which is why the conclusion of TPM is rather unengaging. Nothing...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:05:00 -0600

Which is why the conclusion of TPM is rather unengaging. Nothing is
accomplished (except by Palpatine), and nothing any of the heroes do ultimately
makes any difference.

You've got prequels that are somewhat predictable because you know the good
guys win. Nobody excepts Indiana Jones to die in Temple of Doom. But the three
Star Wars sequels are predicated on knowing that in each of the three, the
protagonists lose.

(Smoke Eater/179126) Girl With The Dragon Tattoo>

Smoke Eater@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:04:00 -0600

Girl With The Dragon Tattoo>
SPOILER!



























I wasn't quite sure, because I had to go to the bathroom during this time, but
I got the impression that in the movie, the Anita Vanger that was in London
*was* Harriet.  In the book, Anita leads Mikael Blomkvist to Harriet in
Australia.

Did I have that right from the movie?  Did they really change that from the
book?

(Danix/179125) Heh. Senator Palpatine's plan was actually a "I'll win anyway" s...

Danix@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:57:00 -0600

Heh. Senator Palpatine's plan was actually a "I'll win anyway" scenario.

If the Jedi had been killed, and Naboo falls, the Senator himself would have
protested, gone to run a no-confidence vote and get to be the big cheese
himself.

If the movie had progressed up to the point where they go back to fight the
Trade Federation, Senator Palpatine would have still been elected Supreme
Chancellor as the steps for this had already been set into motion. In both of
these cases (Jedi dead, this point) the new Supreme Chancellor would have sent
the Republican Army to pwn the Trade Federation; Naboo would have been freed
one way or another.

Even if the protagonists had gone back and failed, the Republic would still had
come in to beat the shit out of the Trade Federation.

And crossing into Eps 2 and 3; Palpatine was messing with both sides, even if
the Dooku/Grevious forces had won it would still have been a net win for
Palpatine!

(Fookin Caged Tigah/179124) just go to red letter media and watch their reviews of the prequ...

Fookin Caged Tigah@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:17:00 -0600

just go to red letter media and watch their reviews of the prequels.

it took a long time for the IT'S STAR WARS!!! sheen to rub off for me, but
once it did, a splitting headache emerged from all the fail...

(Knightshade/179123) Well, Vader actually DOES realize R2 is powerful, though probabl...

Knightshade@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:44:00 -0600

Well, Vader actually DOES realize R2 is powerful, though probably not how
much...

In the prequels he tells Amidala "Don't worry. We have Artoo with us."

In the first death star battle Vader makes a point of taking R2 out of the
fight.

In Empire when Luke comes to cloud city to fight vader, the first thing Vader
does?  Seperate R2 from him with a heavy blast door.



Everyone else though seems oblivious to R2 being the real power in the
universe...

(Gislef/179122) Sure, but that overlooks the fact that R2 _is_ the Emperor. Do y...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:39:00 -0600

Sure, but that overlooks the fact that R2 _is_ the Emperor. Do you ever see
them in the same room togethre?

(Steppenwolf/179121) REally, though, there's a huge difference in the gravity of the ...

Steppenwolf@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:38:00 -0600

REally, though, there's a huge difference in the gravity of the event when you
have a young adult who seems to come into his own and a nine-year-old kid with
what seems to be a measure of luck and pure witlessness. Yes, his skill is sure
great for a nine-year-old, but it doesn't exactly impart the same emotional
strength to the story.

(Knightshade/179120) Word.

Knightshade@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:11:00 -0600

Word.


R2 is the primary motivator of the entire series.  He's so Jedi nobody even
notices.

(Pluck Duck/179119) "Jan 26, 2012 15:24 from Gislef

Pluck Duck@rss.iscabbs.com — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:06:00 -0600

"Jan 26, 2012 15:24 from Gislef
There's also the deeper problem with the plot that a 9-year-old boy saves the
day. No, really. A nine-year-old kid freakin' saves the day."




Lies.


R2 saved the day.   Watch the dang movie.  R2 manipulates the whole thing,
flies the ship up into the hangar, and then "lets" Anakin tell him to start
shooting.

Like all of the other films, R2 is the Jedi Master and Anakin, then Obi-Wan,
are his simple pawns.

(WORF/179118) Man on a Ledge> Saw this.

WORF@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:32:00 -0600


Man on a Ledge> Saw this.

Shit rocks.

Don't want to spoil it, but good all around.

Oh, and HOTTIE. :)

(M Bison/179117) Naboo was the focal point because it was Senator Palpatine's hom...

M Bison@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:10:00 -0600

Naboo was the focal point because it was Senator Palpatine's home planet and
would gain him the sympathy vote when it came time to work his way into power.

(Gislef/179116) Egregious: right. I was referring to Jar-Jar Binks as the comic ...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:10:00 -0600

Egregious: right. I was referring to Jar-Jar Binks as the comic relief sidekick
who is kid-friendly. And little Vader as the entire resolution of the
storyline, since he pretty much single-handedly stops the Naboo invasion.

Can anyone really say that Jake Lloyd was funny or otherwise comic relief?

(Gislef/179115) It may also be the fate of any prequel, but there's a kind of "s...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:03:00 -0600

It may also be the fate of any prequel, but there's a kind of "so what?" to the
end of Phantom Menace. Presumably if the Gungans had been wiped out,
Palpatine's plan would have kicked in earlier (were the clones ready?), but
really it doesn't seem to make a difference what happens on Naboo. I suppose it
means that Palpatine was cunning enough to create a "I win either way"
scenario, but it doesn't make for a very climactic climax.

In fact, yes, the first three movies are prequels, but it brings up an
interesting point. Have there ever been not just one, but three big theatrical
crowd-pleasers and sorta/kinda popcorn movies, where evil wins at the end so
consistently and completely?

Still, RotS makes evil's triumphant kinda interesting. AotC, not so much. But
TPM... well, evil wins (and in fact can't seem to lose), and it's just not that
interesting.

(Egregious/179114) By some interpretations, little Vader is the main character, not...

Egregious@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:02:00 -0600


By some interpretations, little Vader is the main character, not the
comic relief or the sidekick.

(Gislef/179113) It'd be like if you were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple o...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:32:00 -0600

It'd be like if you were watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and
Short Round pulling out a gun and blowing Mola Ram away at the climactic
moment, and then killing a few dozen thuggees for good measure.

(Gislef/179112) There's also the deeper problem with the plot that a 9-year-old ...

Gislef@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:24:00 -0600

There's also the deeper problem with the plot that a 9-year-old boy saves the
day. No, really. A nine-year-old kid freakin' saves the day.

Now, like Jar-Jar, that may have been aimed at the kids. But there's a big
difference between making the comic relief sidekick kid-friendly, and basing
making the entire resolution of your storyline (well, the storyline of just
TPM0 kid-friendly.

(Egregious/179111) When I watched it in the theatres, I didn't hate it as much as p...

Egregious@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:13:00 -0600


When I watched it in the theatres, I didn't hate it as much as people
told me I would.  There was a clear pattern for being like episode 4,
and a lot of promise of stuff later.  I really didn't mind that the
Jedi Council didn't go into balls-out action, because I knew we would
get it later.

(Of course, when we got it in episode 2 it was incredibly dull.)

The plot is nonsense, which you don't notice at first.

(Kraven/179110) Just watched TPM with my nephew on my new blurays and really enj...

Kraven@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:08:00 -0600

Just watched TPM with my nephew on my new blurays and really enjoyed it again

(Rick Jenkins/179109) I remember liking TPM quite a bit when it came out except for Ja...

Rick Jenkins@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:56:00 -0600


I remember liking TPM quite a bit when it came out except for Jar Jar. I'd
really like to see it again to see if it's really as bad as everyone says.

(Egregious/179108) Then why get the Queen to sign a peace treaty? You want war, no...

Egregious@rss.iscabbs.com — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:51:00 -0600


Then why get the Queen to sign a peace treaty?  You want war, not peace,
so stop trying to make it legal.