The vote is already leaning toward James Cameron. 😛 It honestly bugs me that that loser George Lucas somehow has two votes while Steven Spielberg hasn't gotten a single one yet. 😠
Because of Aliens and James Cameron's Terminator 2, those are my top picks.
And yeah, I might as well weigh in on that take regarding Starship Troopers. Honestly, that movie is a brilliant middle finger to the original book. I guess Verhoeven is just a genius with balls the size of watermelons.
It isn't exactly specific, but I was reading that Mexicans supposedly exported about $2.2 billion in food products back in 2010, whereas we only managed to export $1.08 billion worth of agri-food products during the first ten months of that same year. (Apparently, fruit and nuts saw an export surge of about 78%). The most significant issue seems to be the massive import of various food items—primarily fruits and vegetables, but also meat and meat products, eggs and cheese, live cattle, oilseed cakes, pet food, cigarettes, baby formula, coffee, cocoa products, bananas... and so on. http://www.agroklub.com/poljoprivred...kurentna/4335/
Frank Moore4 said:As a Catholic, this kind of movie really rubs me the wrong way, so I think I’ll just pass on it. To me, it feels like nothing more than blatant anti-Christian propaganda, honestly similar to Milton's epic.
I mean, if someone else wants to watch it, I’m not going to stop them. 😉
Paradise Lost is easily one of the most significant and monumental pieces of English literature ever written. Comparing it to Da Vinci's code just seems totally nonsensical to me. Besides, Milton's work actually had such a massive impact on Christianity that a lot of people today—without even realizing it stems from this epic—believe in this specific version of events regarding the fall of Lucifer (even though, obviously, there’s nothing about that in the Bible).
I guess I just have one question? You claim it feels like "pure anti-Christian propaganda," but have you actually even read the epic?
Meh. I guess Proyas is kind of a has-been at this point, and honestly, I’m not about to waste a single dime on Bradley Cooper. Plus, I'm really not seeing how they’re going to pull off the action side of things. I mean, what’s even the point of these epic battles led by angels if they aren't even capable of dying? That said, the story itself is actually pretty interesting. Having Lucifer as an anti-hero is a cool concept because you can actually relate to him—he’s essentially rebelling against authority (and in this case, the ultimate dictator, God). I just wonder if the studio will actually have the guts to interpret the story that way. We can always hope it turns out well. There aren't exactly a ton of movies out there centered on Christian mythology.
Jamie Thompson3 said:I just hope they don't ruin a classic fairy tale we all love by making it overly pretentious. 🙂
To me, that sounds exactly like those tired claims about "telling the story in a completely new way."
Well, I guess that’s obviously their big master plan, because otherwise, what would be the point of filming yet another carbon copy of a Robin Hood movie?? 🙄
If you’re talking about the actual classics, like the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker hits 👍 , then sure, I suppose I have a soft spot for parodies. I mean, if we're looking at stuff like Mel Brooks' >, >, or >—which, honestly, might be one of the greatest comedies ever made—then yeah, I'm on board. But if your definition of a parody includes things like >, >, >, or the > franchise... then absolutely not. I can't stand those movies, and frankly, I have zero respect for anyone involved in making them or anyone who actually sits through them. ☕
redowl90 said:Nowhere yet, until I made this post:
Most American movies—regardless of genre—outclass most European (or any other) films by lightyears when it comes to quality and all the metrics used to judge them.
Europeans will never be able to produce films like The Matrix or die hard 4. They are too preoccupied with being pretentious and self-indulgent, making movies solely for the sake of "art." They make those types of films meant for various festivals that indie crowds love to obsess over. But a movie isn't JUST art—it's much more than that. Americans get that, Europeans don't, while Asians seem to sit somewhere in the middle.
😂 I mean, any random guy could probably whip up a movie like Die Hard 4 if they just had enough cash on hand. Honestly, putting The Matrix and Die Hard 4 in the same sentence feels like it should actually be illegal.
Then again, maybe Hollywood could never pull off something like Amélie, for instance. To me, Amélie is basically living proof that films from Europe can actually look even better than those coming out of the States. I guess the visual look of a movie really just comes down to whatever style the director decides to go with. If someone tried to shoot Hidden (which I think someone already brought up) using the same vibe, it would probably be a total disaster; a digital camera seems like the only logical choice given the actual subject matter and the story being told. Besides, there are probably a million European films out there that have much better cinematography and visual flair (and everything else, really) than most big-budget Hollywood productions: Pan's Labyrinth, A Very Long Engagement, Malèna, ...
Just finished watching the movie. It was honestly great, and I have to say, Tilda Swinton was absolutely brilliant—probably the best part of the whole thing.