Posts by Jessica Nguyen85

Gus van Sant - Last Days

... those final few days of Kurt Cobain's life. I've been sitting here wondering for quite a while now who might actually step up to tackle this. Looking at how things went with Elephant, there's a decent chance we’re looking at a deeply meditative, somewhat hermetic piece of cinema—the kind of movie that probably won't be a massive crowd-pleaser. I'm mostly just curious about what angle they'll choose... what's going to be the driving force behind their take on what Kurt did.

I usually give a movie at least fifteen minutes to actually grab me—to surprise me, fascinate me, or just get under my skin... but this? This was honestly worse than your average episode of Curb your enthusiasm, which, if you think about it, is almost a compliment...

I don't know... just bad, plain and simple... someone mentioned the dialogue... nothing special there either...

Brian Cox
Harry Dean Stanton
Chris Cooper
Chris Cooper
Billy Bob Thornton It’s funny how that works. When an actor shows up just for a bit part—you know, like those roles in U Turn, Simple Plan, or Dead Man... it hits different. There's something about seeing someone established pop up for a moment that just sticks with you.

My girlfriend and I actually bailed halfway through the movie.

What if you’d gone by yourself? 😉

Come on, admit it... 😁

An American painter? Try to remember the name.

Mladen Mikulin and his work
location #4 in terms of popularity in Paris Jim Morrison's grave
Interesting article (in English) about

Godless
Go drink some milk, kid. 😉 😁

it’s got everything—shootouts, thugs, deserters, and the North American mafia, all wrapped up in this layer of constant, cynical joking.

Nothing personal, really, but I just have to see this one. It feels like something genuinely fresh, which is a nice change from the endless sea of overly dramatic, visually heavy movies we've been drowning in for the last decade or so. 🙄 😉

That's what I call a movie with some actual skin in the game... 😁

Just one quick question—how much screen time does Jessica Biel actually get?

I tend to view confidence as this internal realization—that your skills, your traits, your knowledge, or even just your raw potential are enough (when looking at things objectively) or perhaps superior (subjectively, compared to others) to actually tackle something, whether it’s an event or a new commitment. While that realization is still unconfirmed, there are these identified "gaps," which look like self-doubt to outsiders. Internally, though, it’s more of a struggle because I like to think people are actually working to fix those gaps, basically patching the holes, which feels like a positive way to spin the whole thing. The negative spin would be the people who can't wait to point out those flaws just so they have an excuse to quit. Both paths are just different ways of dealing with the same underlying issue.

The way Anne carries herself with such "confidence" is really just her knowing that whatever she says carries weight simply because of her beauty. It's a conscious awareness on her part; she’s just leveraging the opportunities that present themselves, even if they have nothing to do with having the confidence to say something smart, funny, or interesting. It happens because the eyes react before the brain does. That specific kind of "confidence" is more accurately described as an illusion, or occasionally, a bit of manipulation (kind of like a calculated move).

It's a completely different vibe when you're the one observing these confident people. It gets pretty complicated because how you perceive them depends entirely on the context. Sometimes they feel like a threat, sometimes they're just boring, sometimes they come off as egotistical, annoying, inspiring, or even necessary. It's very rare for them to trigger a truly neutral reaction.

It’s kind of curious to me how Spielberg would even touch material similar to Stanley Kubrick's. They don't share much in common, not in their descriptions, not in their vision or understanding. But then again... who am I to complain? 😎

Honestly, they should probably drop the title for a debut film, because given such a high-profile name, I expected a lot more. Aside from Teddy, the cast feels pretty second-rate. 😁

The movie tries to tackle every possible theme stemming from the fact that A.I. exists at the level explained at the start, and frankly, I wasn't really feeling it. Just the mere idea that immortality—meaning the robot hosting the A.I. lives forever—combined with stagnation, since the robot doesn't physically change, opens up such incredible possibilities regarding how those things impact fundamental human relationships and emotions.

However, it seems the director was way more preoccupied with trying to impress us visually (pathetically so in the last half hour) rather than hitting an emotional note. But that's just Spielberg... I guess that's just his style.

Some thirty-minute episodes of The Twilight Zone offer more satisfaction than this massive money pit.

The core pillars of EQ include:
- understanding your own feelings
- managing the intensity of those emotions
- self-motivation—basically, having that internal drive
- picking up on what others are feeling—empathy (definitely one of the big ones when it comes to EQ)
- building and keeping up relationships with people

Basically, the jerks always seem to have an easier time. For instance, someone who thinks manipulating people is just part of the game, or views subtle threats as anything other than blackmail... they’re never going to get far.

How much resistance a person shows toward emotional intelligence directly impacts their ability to thrive, both in the office and in their social life.

Honestly, EQ feels a lot like those management books you see everywhere—just documented observations designed to make you think you'll suddenly become that person once you finish the last chapter. But in my view, if you weren't born with it, no book is going to fix you. It's probably better to just figure out what you're made of, accept the reality of it, and then find your own little corner in this messy social and professional world.

Neither the folks at Cannon nor Kevin Eastman were ever counting on seeing a dime back.

But you said you wanted to boost the artistic street cred of their production house, Cannon
A "return" doesn't always have to be about the cash. To me, anything done with intention is an investment—and, obviously, there's a risk attached to that.

And what on earth does "creating conditions for artistic freedom" actually mean?!?

I just meant it in the sense that art isn't some commodity you pick up at a department store where you just point and say, "Yeah, wrap up five pounds of that, please."

What we’re looking at here is pure financial investment, nothing more. It isn't about cultivating an environment where artistic freedom can actually explode. An investor’s goal isn't to back a piece of art by guaranteeing creative liberty; they want a return on their capital. They want profit, and they get it by betting on an author who's already proven they can deliver.

Artistic freedom is usually just a reaction to restrictive conditions or a shift in how we perceive the world. It’s a process, not some static state you just achieve. But, anyway, what were we talking about... art in film, comics, and video games... 🙄 😉

I honestly don't know how people can watch this if they aren't into Jim Morrison’s poetry or the whole vibe of a band playing without a bassist. For me, though... it was something transcendental. I’ve always been obsessed with the context behind how R&R bands actually formed, and this film just crystallizes that era perfectly. It captures the exact atmosphere I’d always imagined in my head.

Also, that desert scene? Pure psychedelia. If you aren't a fan of that concept, you probably won't enjoy what comes next. And those concert scenes are phenomenal—they feel spontaneous, maybe even chaotic enough to leave you with this sort of "residual after-taste." You know, that lingering feeling after an event has passed. Kind of like that feeling after finishing a bottle of fine Napa Valley Cabernet.

But hey, judging by the comments here, the experience is definitely subjective.🙂 😎

here

Which Google are you using? 😉

Here's what I dug up:


Marco Brambilla’s Milestones
Moved to Canada to study film.
Directed commercials for Nike, Coca-Cola and IBM.
1987 Named top commercial director in Canada.
1990 Moved to the USA.
1990 Worked for Ridley and Tony Scott's RSA USA commercial production house.
1993 Feature directorial debut, "Demolition Man".
1997 Made second film, the Alicia Silverstone vehicle "Excess Baggage".
2001 Had exhibition in NYC " Marco Brambilla
2002 Directed the ABC miniseries "Dinotopia".

It's not actually from nowhere.

Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) in American Beauty...

Top Gun is one of those movies Quentin Tarantino loves
A few years back, I was watching some flick on TV Guide—can't remember the title, pretty sure Eric Stolz is in it—it’s about these young actors in Hollywood
And suddenly, right in the middle of the movie, Tarantino pops up in a cameo and starts explaining, in his usual style, what the actual core theme of Top Gun is: hidden homosexuality in the US military
The proof is in the ending, when the Americans beat the Russians, and Iceman hugs Maverick and says all happy, "you can always be my wingman"

😁

The movie is 'Sleep with me' and the clip goes like this (Sid is played by Tarantino):

Sid: You want subversion on a massive level. You know what one of the greatest fucking scripts ever written in the history of Hollywood is? Top Gun.
Duane: Oh, come on.
Sid: Top Gun is fucking great. What is Top Gun? You think it's a story about a bunch of fighter pilots.
Duane: It's about a bunch of guys waving their dicks around.
Sid: It is a story about a man's struggle with his own homosexuality. It is! That is what Top Gun is about, man. You've got Maverick, all right? He's on the edge, man. He's right on the fucking line, all right? And you've got Iceman, and all his crew. They're gay, they represent the gay man, all right? And they're saying, go, go the gay way, go the gay way. He could go both ways.
Duane: What about Kelly McGillis?
Sid: Kelly McGillis, she's heterosexuality. She's saying: no, no, no, no, no, no, go the normal way, play by the rules, go the normal way. They're saying no, go the gay way, be the gay way, go for the gay way, all right? That is what's going on throughout that whole movie... He goes to her house, all right? It looks like they're going to have sex, you know, they're just kind of sitting back, he's takin' a shower and everything. They don't have sex. He gets on the motorcycle, drives away. She's like, "What the fuck, what the fuck is going on here?" Next scene, next scene you see her, she's in the elevator, she is dressed like a guy. She's got the cap on, she's got the aviator glasses, she's wearing the same jacket that the Iceman wears. She is, okay, this is how I gotta get this guy, this guy's going towards the gay way, I gotta bring him back, I gotta bring him back from the gay way, so I'll do that through subterfuge, I'm gonna dress like a man. All right? That is how she approaches it. Okay, now let me just ask you - I'm gonna digress for two seconds here. I met this girl Amy here, she's like floating around here and everything. Now, she just got divorced, right? All right, but the REAL ending of the movie is when they fight the MIGs at the end, all right? Because he has passed over into the gay way. They are this gay fighting fucking force, all right? And they're beating the Russians, the gays are beating the Russians. And it's over, and they fucking land, and Iceman's been trying to get Maverick the entire time, and finally, he's got him, all right? And what is the last fucking line that they have together? They're all hugging and k and happy with each other, and Ice comes up to Maverick, and he says, "Man, you can ride my tail, anytime!" And what does Maverick say? "You can ride mine!" Swordfight! Swordfight! Fuckin' A, man!

😁 🙏

Just finished reading an interview with Vrdoljak and I’m honestly just shaking my head. It feels like there’s at least one part of his argument that actually hits home, despite all that provincial, "lesser-than" chip on the shoulder that seems to plague the American film establishment.

Is he onto something when he complains about how overly harsh and hyper-critical everyone gets whenever a domestic movie comes along? Personally, I think he's right.

And is he right when he claims... that American cinema will only ever catch the world's attention if it stays true to its own roots and actually makes an American film? I'd say he's got a point there, too.

Just my two cents... I worry that today's pop-culture tastes and the standards people hold now aren't exactly doing much favors for the American film industry.

p.s. Anyone here actually make it out to the Sundance Film Festival?

Look, I can sit through a bad American movie all the way to the credits, but if an American movie is bad? I can't finish it. Maybe that means I subconsciously hate my own country, or maybe it just means the movie is such absolute garbage that watching it feels like a chore.

I honestly think comparing us to the US or Germany is a bit unfair. It mostly comes down to the numbers—you’ve got nearly 300 million Americans or 70-80 million Germans versus a tiny population here. Quantity really does drive quality when it comes to everything from A-list actors to the crew behind the scenes; there's just more talent pool available in the States or Germany. Plus, American films are easy to watch because the settings feel totally foreign to the average American viewer, so if nothing interesting is happening, it’s just... different.