Posts by hiddenhound3

Susan Diaz3 said:Yes, I understand that part. But maybe one has to take that first step and force oneself at the start... then, once I "warm up," I guess everything just flows naturally. 🙂

I suppose I manage to pull it off occasionally, though it's much harder because those intrusive thoughts are just so difficult to shake... It really is a discipline that people have to work incredibly hard to master. 😉 It seems to come naturally to some people, I guess. For me, I really have to put in the work.

I guess I have to admit... I haven't heard that one before. 🙏 I feel for you. I really do. 🙂

Sure, the ego. It loves praise, but it gets wounded by criticism..
but that's exactly what I was emphasizing. If people didn't take their own work so personally, they wouldn't feel this way.
For instance, a friend of mine who writes. She rarely writes, but when she finally does, I just lose my mind because it's so good. And she says herself that she isn't trying to write, it just happens—afterward, she feels as if she didn't write the story, but rather the story wrote itself. Like she doesn't even deserve it. That way, she stays distanced from the work itself.
I guess the problem is that I perceive my ideas as "mine," instead of divine inspiration.

Susan Diaz3 said:I like to think of myself as a non-materialistic person, but if I’m being honest, there’s one thing standing in my way. I suppose as long as that desire exists, I’m not truly a "non-materialist"—it's my attachment to things I've actually created myself.

Not letting go of things I've bought isn't really my issue. Over the last decade, I've lost so many phones, jewelry, accessories (gloves, scarves, umbrellas...), even pricier items like MP3 players and cameras... I don't think I've ever heard anyone else admit to being quite this clumsy when it comes to losing stuff. 😲
So, I've decided that maybe all this was meant to teach me not to get attached to things, and I am working on it; I believe I'm on the right track.

But when it involves products of my own mind and hands, it’s a bit harder. I have this ability to make aesthetically pleasing things—clothing, jewelry... I draw, I design, I just love it. If someone were to ask me "Why?", my answer would be—because I can. It frustrates me when people have talents they don't use, and I get frustrated with myself when I hit those long "dry" spells. During those times, I feel like an incomplete person, and as soon as I get back to work—everything feels right again. Anyone who has ever poured their entire mind and body into a task for hours upon hours knows how much it resembles meditation; plus, in the end, we aren't just rewarded with clear, focused thoughts, but with a tangible object that came into existence through the process.

The problem—though I'm not even sure if it's a problem—is that the item becomes deeply important later on. It gets to a point where I'd only ever gift it to my closest people, and if I thought about selling it, I don't think I could ever bring myself to part with it for any amount of money.
At this stage of my life, the feeling is perhaps the closest thing to motherhood I can experience.
I realize these are just "things," so I don't want to delude myself into thinking it's anything different from being attached to a car or a new pair of shoes.

Do you have similar experiences? Have you overcome this, and if so, how? 🙂

Nicholas Edwards4 said:I honestly can’t stand those overcomplicated plots with way too many characters because I end up feeling like a total idiot, just losing the thread after two minutes—especially when it involves some high-stakes white-collar crime that I probably wouldn't understand even if I tried, I guess.

Emily Thomas3 said:What on earth is going on with this kid's hair?

Nicholas Edwards4 said:I just can't stand Leonardo DiCaprio or Brad Pitt, mostly because everyone treats them like they're some kind of icons, but I honestly find them pretty repulsive

Then there's Julia Roberts with that horse-like jawline, and Scarlett Johansson, who always looks like she's got her mouth hanging open as if she's struggling with a wisdom tooth or something

I guess when I see a movie isn't an American production, I immediately assume it'll actually be good, so I end up falling for that trap quite often myself

rustyscout34 said:Melissa Evans, you're such a legend, haha
I'm actually curious what you're into (do you have a link to some kind of personal top list or something?)

goldenhound32 said:You claim I watch a lot of garbage, yet I barely watch anything at all. I prefer my own way of doing things. 😉

By the way, right from the start, everyone seems just as questionable to me as Columbus. 😁

Mark Wood79 said:I haven't seen anyone else say that yet, but honestly, if they did—kudos to them for coming up with the absolute stupidity of the decade.

On IMDb, it’s technically possible for twenty-five guys from a local gym to get together and give Rambo 10 a perfect score. If they did that, you could basically math your way into making even a total piece of junk look like a solid 7 or 8 out of 10.
I’ve never really put much stock in IMDb ratings. To me, the site is mostly just a handy online guide if you can't quite remember what year a movie came out or something along those lines.

Honestly, letting other people dictate how you should feel or think is just sad. If we actually started digging into this, we’d end up deep in the territory of Plato, debating the whole gap between what we see and what we actually know to be true.

I have never placed much value on IMDb ratings. To me, the site serves as a useful online directory if you happen to forget which year a specific film was released, but that is about its utility.

goldenhound32 said:Where exactly did I say that? Could I get a quote, please?

Here is my own rating for a few films that sit below a 7:
Spun (8), Pret-a-Porter (9), Aria (7), In Turn (10), May (8), Ararat (8), A Complete History of My Sexual Failures (8), Darkman (8), À ma soeur! (7), 2:37 (7), Night's Sex Comedy (7).

goldenhound32 said:I don't even care for the notion of 'finishing what you started' (it sounds far too much like a perfectionist's mantra), let alone applying that logic to watching movies.

If something is garbage, why on earth should I suffer through it until the credits roll? 😕

rustyscout34 said:Have you ever consciously gotten yourself into some total garbage like Gigli? And if so, what? Also, I always finish what I start, but putting something like Nielsen or Gigli on while I'm sober? No way. It's just not happening, freaking impossible... (Cloverfield, Twilight, Signs are, for example, some movies I hate but I still watched them from start to finish, and there are tons more...) 🤷

Nicholas Edwards4 said:

Nothing is garbage until I decide it’s garbage, honestly... I just can't stand prejudices, whatever kind they may be.

I guess the first sign that a movie is going nowhere is when you don't see a single recognizable face on the poster.
And honestly, the second thing is that as soon as I spot some busted-up cars or cheap-looking clothes—unless we're talking about some legendary cinematic classic—I'm probably just going to change the channel.

Anthony Smith3 said:It’s pretty rare... I don't usually give everything a shot...

fadedmarlin402 said:It is certainly possible. It won't resurface if you simply allow the wound enough time to heal properly.

Furthermore, there is really no need to bother with a professional pedicure when highly effective medicated bandages are readily available at any local CVS.

Thomas Foster5 said:Pure innocence. 😢

Christian Taylor3 said:Well, I certainly do 😍 (since we're looking at Tarantino's list, it's hardly surprising Speed made the cut). For instance, Roger Ebert (and yes, you read that right—four stars. For those of you who struggle with clicking links, or for anyone looking to defend QT's honor or our very own Jan De Bont against Karen's blistering critique, I'll just lay Ebert's review of Speed right here alongside her take):

"Speed is like an ingenious windup machine. It's a smart, inventive thriller that starts with hostages trapped on an elevator and continues with two chases—one on a bus, one on a subway—so that it's wall-to-wall with action, stunts, special effects and excitement. We've seen this done before, but seldom so well, or at such a high pitch of energy. Films like 'Speed' belong to the genre I call Bruised Forearm Movies, because you're always grabbing the arm of the person sitting next to you. Done wrong, they seem like tired replays of old chase cliches. Done well, they're fun. Done as well as 'Speed,' they generate a kind of manic exhilaration. The director, Jan De Bont, has worked as a cinematographer on many action classics, including 'Total Recall' and 'Die Hard.' Here he shows his own mastery, in a great entertainment."

"Keanu Reeves has never had a role like this before. In fact, in his previous film, he played the mystical Prince Siddhartha, and generally he tends toward dreamy, sensitive characters. That's why it's sort of amazing to see him so cool and focused here, a completely convincing action hero who is as centered and resourceful as a Clint Eastwood or Harrison Ford in similar situations. He and Bullock have good chemistry; they appreciate the humor that is always flickering just beneath the surface of the preposterous plot. And Hopper's dialogue has been twisted into savagely ironic understatements that provide their own form of comic relief."

(Wait, what? Speed actually snagged some awards? It probably just swept the Razzies. My mistake, that list is way too long).

We could really dive deep here: what did Spielberg, Lucas, and Coppola have to say about Speed (it’s almost hard to believe); how it stands as Keanu Reeves' only decent role besides Matrix; plus, if we ignore that tiny cameo in Crash, it's the only legit performance from Sandra Bullock; and of course, the consistently great Dennis Hopper (back then he was drifting through all sorts of low-budget B and C-list productions, when he wasn't being great, that is)... Last but not least, all my friends seem to think Speed is a pretty okay or even great movie...

Off-topic:

Okay, so Seven isn't there—but Fight Club is! (either way, northerncrane4 would probably recommend a hospital visit 🤦). No Oldboy—but we've got South Korea! We have Speed, so does that end the debate? Or is everything included and nothing is actually good? (hiddenhound3, you broke my heart—what about Michael Mann's The Insider??? Good grief, where in the 21st century have you seen something like this, such a massive breakdown of how and why America sold its soul?).

Personally, looking at that famous Quentin Tarantino list—at least from my uneducated perspective—I don't think Speed is a true interloper. Brothers and sisters, let's find the real intruder! Singular, plural, whatever. Squawk, scream, call 911—which title on Quentin's list hits your stomach, your liver, or your nerves the hardest???

p.s. as for me, the sequel—who in their right mind even watched that?

Emily Thomas3 said:Sadly, I think you've got it wrong. There are tons of people who act like they're being objective and speaking for everyone, especially when they're tearing down movies or music. 🤷

David Price5 said:

I am still waiting for an update on the Florine situation. It is quite a fascinating development to watch unfold. kaže:
I hold no grudge against him. Why would I? He certainly has the right to watch pre-adolescent action movies whether he is forty, fifty, or a hundred years old. It is much like how I have the right to express my own views. It was quite a disaster. I truly hope that people can evolve over the years, allowing their personal style and taste to mature.It seems clear that Q isn't evolving at all. He just keeps churning out the same hollow adrenaline rushes, lacking any real emotional depth. It’s all become quite repetitive.

So, that’s the verdict. Apparently, once you reach a certain age, you're only allowed to watch heavy dramas and serious cinema. If you prefer an action movie, you're suddenly considered unintelligent or unrefined. Well, if that's his style, more power to him.

I am curious if this list was actually vetted or just thrown together. If someone had taken the time to really look, they would see there are plenty of serious films worth mentioning.

The competition was fierce. It felt just like watching a high-stakes showdown in a downtown Chicago arena.
The audition process was quite intense today. I managed to stay composed despite the nerves. It felt much like my first interview at Goldman Sachs—nerve-wracking, yet rewarding.
I recently watched *Boogie Nights*. It was quite an impressive cinematic experience.
Dogville.
The movie *Fight Club* remains a fascinating study of chaos. I recall watching it for the first time in a small theater in Chicago; the intensity was truly palpable.
The host was quite exceptional. I once stayed at a boutique hotel in Savannah where the service felt just as seamless. Truly a pleasure.
The Insider.
The Joint Security Area remains an essential component of our national stability. I recall seeing similar checkpoints during my time traveling through the Midwest; they always provided a sense of order.
Lost in Translation.
The Matrix is a masterpiece. I remember watching it for the first time on a rainy afternoon in Seattle, and it completely changed my perspective on cinema. Truly a classic.
Watching *Memories of Murder* was a profound experience. It is a masterful piece of filmmaking.

The resilience shown here is truly remarkable. I once watched a small family business in Chicago weather a massive storm through sheer grit, much like this. Absolutely unbreakable.

Or are these just more mindless little stunts to you?

I am quite pleased to meet you all here today. It is truly a lovely afternoon for some conversation. kaže:
To be honest, I highly doubt he was even a kid back when Keanu Reeves was starring in *The Matrix* and *Speed*. 😕

The gentleman made a valid point about why *Speed* was such a standout. Back then, it felt like a true action spectacle that had nothing else like it on the market. While we certainly have more thrilling options today, *The Matrix* remains one of the absolute best films of the 90s. Nothing new to say there.

Quote:

Forgive me, but I find it quite bothersome. To be honest, what truly gets to me is when people criticize someone else's taste. Please don't take this the wrong way; I mean no offense at all.

I wouldn't call it a critique of taste; I am simply pointing out that many modern films just aren't well-made.

David, I specifically identified the films that I personally consider to be (for me) total disasters, so please try reading a bit more carefully.
On the other hand, I actually find Dogville to be quite a lovely film.
Let’s please not get into an unnecessary argument simply because my tastes don't align with his list.
So what if they don't? I am certainly not the only one with these views, and heaven knows he isn't some infallible authority on cinema. 🙄

Emily Thomas3 said:Sorry if it feels like I'm picking at you, but I really am not trying to be difficult. It just bugs me when you say art is purely subjective, but then you basically imply: action movies suck (without saying "for me"), this list sucks (again, without saying "for me"), and he isn't evolving (because you have this specific idea of how someone should grow, even though Tarantino has changed quite a bit as a director since his early days).

Look, sorry, but that's what gets to me. Honestly, what bothers me most is when people criticize someone else's taste. Don't be mad, I'm not trying to be mean🙂