or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Movies that blow
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Movies that blow - Page 8

post #106 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by designprofessor
The Brothers Grimm. not even the beauty of Monica Bellucci could save this one. I fast forwarded on DVD, and it was still too long.
Speaking of Monica Bellucci has anyone seen "Irreversible"?
Unfortunately, yes. I still pain for sweet, sweet Monica.

Actually, the movie was fantastic, but gut-wrenching.
post #107 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiger02
Unfortunately, yes. I still pain for sweet, sweet Monica.

Actually, the movie was fantastic, but gut-wrenching.

Irreversible is more an experience than a film. To be seen on the big screen (yes, I really liked it). Anyone seen Gaspar Noe's sort-of precursor, "I stand alone"?
post #108 of 718
Thread Starter 
The Sweetest Thing was just on tv. Cameron Diaz, Jason Bateman, Christina Applegate. Completely unwatchable. Trainwreck. I lasted about 20 mins - possibly a record.
post #109 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by skalogre
Irreversible is more an experience than a film. To be seen on the big screen (yes, I really liked it). Anyone seen Gaspar Noe's sort-of precursor, "I stand alone"?

i saw 'i stand alone' first, and loved it. that's why i went to see 'irreversible'. they are both great.

i agree you really have to see it in a theater. when i saw it there were only about 7 or 8 people in the theater, and half walked out after the first 20 minutes.

one of the reviewers said, "i hated it. it's a masterpiece."
post #110 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by matadorpoeta
i saw 'i stand alone' first, and loved it. that's why i went to see 'irreversible'. they are both great. i agree you really have to see it in a theater. when i saw it there were only about 7 or 8 people in the theater, and half walked out after the first 20 minutes. one of the reviewers said, "i hated it. it's a masterpiece."
LOL! It was even better for my wife and I; There were 7-8 people, within 10 or so minutes they ALL left . I placed an order from Amazon.co.uk for Irreversible (and Divine Intervention which I saw at the same small independent cinema a week ago) merely days later.
post #111 of 718
P.s. one of the worst films I had ever seen was "Air Force One." I walked out on it midway. Oh, Wolfgang Petersen... how the mighty fall. How the hell can someone go from something as monumentally excellent as "Das Boot" to that jingoistic, US-president-as-Rambo-saving himself-and-the-free-world badly written piece of donkey poo?!? P.S.2 Do NOT even get me started on "Troy," Wolfgang is beyond saving! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
post #112 of 718
Just rented and watched Domino - other than some brief nude shots of the luscious Keira Knightley, this movie is really bad.
post #113 of 718
I don't know if I was drunk then, or had my head up my ass, or what, but I rented Van Helsing a while back. I wouldn't recommend it.
post #114 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by javyn
I don't know if I was drunk then, or had my head up my ass, or what, but I rented Van Helsing a while back. I wouldn't recommend it.

Sorry Javyn. I am sure the trauma will subside eventually
post #115 of 718
i really don't think irreversible is that good a film. yes, the rape scene is filmed and played very effectively, the shot puts you at the level of belluci, and her reaching out toward the viewer has the effect (on me at least) of implicating you in the scene, as either apathetic bystander or perverted rubber-necker; but to what end? the reversed timeline seemed a pointless gimmick, especially with temporal discontinuity done so appropriately in memento, pulp fiction and 21 grams (plus more i'm sure), why did noe employ it in this film? and to finish the film on the repetition of the phrase 'time destroys all things' (or words very simmilar) i found pathetic, about as profound as angsty teenage poetry.

i usually quite like arty crap, but irreversible was crap arty crap.

i think the worst film i have ever seen is welcome II the terror dome - inexplicably shite
post #116 of 718
How the hell did you even get through it without vomitting, with all that camera motion. If that's some stunt to lend gritty realism to the film, it doesn't work. Its merely distracting and makes me toss my junior mints!
post #117 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by designprofessor
How the hell did you even get through it without vomitting, with all that camera motion. If that's some stunt to lend gritty realism to the film, it doesn't work. Its merely distracting and makes me toss my junior mints!

shaky-cam is, i agree, rubbish. but it makes more sense in a cinema rather than on a telly, making the film more of an 'experience' (quote above) i suppose. i don't remeber irreversible being all that shaky though, the film that really springs to mind in this respect is the bourne supremacy (paul greengrass), the barrage of movement and rapid cuts completely drowned out any other qualities the film had.

i think it was recently popularised by NYPD blue (i say recently, i mena in the last decade or so). another good example is roger dodger, my girlfriend stopped watching after 15 mins just because of the constantly movign camera, it's like watching it really drunk (a good film though)
post #118 of 718
I've never had a problem with a moving camera, going back to Blair Witch. Didn't even notice it in Roger Dodger (F'n awesome movie) or Irreversible. I'd have to go back and specifically look for it.

Tom
post #119 of 718
roger dodger is class aint it? but it did make the mrs feel sick and literally have to leave the room just because of the camera work. incidentally i thought it helped the film, esp. in the bar scenes because it complimented and reinforced roger's furtiveness and constantly roving eyes perfectly.
post #120 of 718
The Sentinel. A paint-by-numbers whodunit where you can guess whodunit very early in the film.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Movies that blow