crimsontrucker4 said:I think Wolverine is garbage, and as for those other three movies... I honestly have no clue. I don't really bother distinguishing between films when they're part of a trilogy.😁 Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean, the X-Men series... to me, they all just feel like one big movie.😁
Wait, what on earth are you talking about? 😁
Hey, Kate Harris4, why did you decide to scrap that poll about the Lord of the Rings trilogy?
Basically, let’s hold off on voting until things get sorted out. 😁
Personally, I am leaning heavily toward The Hunt for Red October. You just can't beat a lineup like McTiernan, Connery, Neill, and Baldwin; it’s practically a guaranteed win.
I was reminiscing recently about those old black-and-white submarine movies set during World War II—there was one in particular featuring Curd Jürgens as the German captain. Honestly, kill me now, but the title is escaping me entirely.
I also quite enjoyed that movie starring Armand Assante about the first submarine used during the American Civil War. It was such a compelling drama, though I can't recall the title (of course) and I'm not even certain if it was originally a TV movie. Regardless, it was very well done.
hollowpanther said:The film was censored on YouTube.
It is quite likely that someone simply uploaded it there without obtaining the proper permission from the distributor. I mean, who else would be willing to throw away these $22? Besides, you can't really host anything significant there, let alone hunt for the Holy Grail, and goodness knows you certainly can't download chips via YouTube. It wouldn't be fair to the honorable gentleman, after all. He has to make a living somehow.
hollowpanther said:Do you really believe that censorship is going to stop the truth from getting out?
So, what exactly did the Judge find—the Holy Grail? Even Indiana Jones managed to track that down, and I recall quite a spirited debate about it right here on this forum. 😁
Are they actually being serious right now? A little package of hostia? The Holy Grail?
👍I am reaching for a total facepalm here.
It would honestly be quite fascinating if some professional film critic could somehow find the patience to sit down, watch this, and offer a proper critique. 😁
Thankfully, my nephews didn't catch on. If they had, one would have been heartbroken, while the other probably would have just started teasing me relentlessly—mostly because he was dying to watch Transformers instead. 😁
But getting back to the main point here: I don't know, I suppose I have a bit of a masochistic streak when it comes to cinema. There is this persistent, quiet hope I carry that if I just sit through a film until the very end, I might actually manage to grasp the deeper meaning behind it all.
I caught a screening of World of Books at Kaptol yesterday, and I honestly can't wrap my head around why they chose this specific documentary to feature in the lineup here in the States. If this is really the standard for the rest of the selection, then goodness gracious. I mean, don't get me wrong—it’s fine if you just want to see something unfamiliar, like the general situation over in Turkmenistan—but I’ve sat through amateur documentaries that were easily a hundred times better. Instead of leaning into the absurdly funny reality of massive corporations translating total garbage just to wedge themselves into a new market, the filmmaker mostly just highlights his own inability to get any real answers from these companies. What was he even thinking? These corporations pull stunts like this everywhere, usually involving much larger bribes; in this case, they actually got off incredibly cheap. 😁 Then there’s the way he tries to weave in bits of political repression, but it feels so half-hearted and detached. It felt like he was trying to cram too many different ideas into one film instead of just sticking to one strong, central theme.
I found myself wondering about the title *Fish Tank*. It feels like she views her work—or filmmaking in general—as nothing more than a raw observation of reality, almost as if we’re just peering at fish in an aquarium, haha. But can a movie actually function that way? I don't think so, unless she had been following that girl's life in one continuous, unbroken shot. The moment you start cutting between scenes, you've already made editorial choices about what to show and what to hide. There's an inherent statement being made there, yet she seems to be trying so hard to avoid making any kind of statement at all. To me, it just feels a bit silly. 😁
The scene where she cries over the horse didn't bother me all that much. As soon as the guy mentioned they had to shoot the horse, I knew she was going to break. Honestly, I actually found the way she wept so quietly quite poignant; since someone was right there with her, she couldn't exactly have a full-blown breakdown. However, that dance scene—good grief. It felt incredibly forced.
As for the film itself, it isn't any more socially engaged than *Revenge* or *The Little Soldier* (sorry, I haven't seen the others yet). But when I think back to last year's winner... well, what can I say? Not to mention that, in my opinion, a huge number of these independent films could be trimmed by at least 20% without losing a single meaningful thing. 😁
Just to reiterate, I thought Arnold's *Red Road* was a genuinely good film, even if it was slow-paced. But this? I don't think I'll ever truly get it. 🙂
Actually, I wasn't referring to *The Little Soldier*. I finally caught that nuance yesterday while watching 😁*Fish Tank*. I can't say I was particularly satisfied with it either. It wasn't because of a lack of humanity or warmth—honestly, the scene where she lashes out at that idiot like a little kid felt perfectly fine in that regard. You can't really expect people who are that fundamentally broken to express their emotions in any "normal" way. My issue is more that the film feels somewhat unfinished or underdeveloped in certain stretches. It’s almost as if the director is afraid to lean into classic storytelling techniques. Perhaps that hesitation is exactly why it picked up an award.😕
brightsurfer4 said:I haven't checked out Lady Vengeance yet, but honestly, Revenge is killer—it’s actually a step above Fish Tank for me. I can't stand Fish Tank; I think its biggest flaw is just taking itself way too seriously. The movie lacks any real sense of humanity or warmth. Sure, we get it—the protagonist lives in a world where swearing and getting punched in the face is just Tuesday—but whenever they try to pivot toward showing actual human connection or warmth, they totally whiff it.
Are you talking about Fish Tank? 😁 I don't know, personally, I thought it was fantastic. She simply isn't capable of expressing "humanity and warmth" in any conventional sense. But she’s trying to do the right thing, even if she’s completely failing at it (I mean, how can anyone seriously think they can save the world in Iraq?!). In the end, she pays the price, but she refuses to compromise who she is.
I spent today in downtown Chicago catching screenings of Fish Tank and Revenge, and I have to say, I walked away feeling quite satisfied with both selections. Tomorrow, we’re heading out to catch Fish Tank. Her previous film, Red Road, stuck with me even though it felt a little drawn out at the time; looking back, it certainly wasn't half bad. 🙂
I find myself in complete agreement regarding "Return of the King."
It seems this kind of thing happens quite frequently with Spielberg. Take *Saving Private Ryan*, for instance—that shot of the American flag at the end, or even that scene showing an older Ryan at the cemetery... in my opinion, it’s all a bit much. I think the movie would have been significantly stronger without those flourishes. I remember hearing Steven mention in an interview that he crafted the film specifically as a tribute to veterans. While I understand the sentiment, I truly believe that simply telling the story of the war itself, without leaning on that extra layer of "context," is actually the most profound way to honor the people who lived through it. Another excellent example has to be Minority Report. It’s such a phenomenal film with an incredible narrative, yet by the end, they felt compelled to manufacture this artificial, picture-book conclusion where everything just wraps up perfectly and everyone lives happily ever after.
Has anyone had the chance to mention William " Golden " Holden yet? I truly believe he is nothing short of a genius. As far as the leading ladies go, I would also have to single out Carola Lombard.
briskhound2 said:You really should've just asked who plays the maniac better—Dennis Hopper or Malcolm McDowell... honestly, I bet half the people out there don't even realize which two movies they're talking about when they bring up those roles. Anyway, my vote goes to MCDowell—he’s just more convincing as the anti-villain in this one...
Susan Hayes35 said:I suppose there truly is no such thing as a safe haven for the elderly—I felt as though I were hovering on the edge of the great beyond myself; I had to make several trips to the restroom and drifted off into sleep three separate times... honestly, I couldn't quite put my finger on what was happening to me.🙂
Now, you have to be honest with us—surely you enjoyed a cold craft beer before all this went down? There simply isn't any other logical explanation for such an experience.😍