or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › What Movies Are You Watching Lately
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What Movies Are You Watching Lately - Page 885

post #13261 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jr Mouse View Post

Golden Globes apparently decided The Martian is a comedy film? :/

Yeah...thats the problem with the GG. They do stupid shit like that. Ridley Scott wasn't too happy about it.
post #13262 of 14435
I can't even wrap my head around that one. It's bizarre and makes me wonder if whoever made these choices even watched the film.
post #13263 of 14435
They don't matter but they kind of set the tone for nominees of oscars coming out later this week.

Still standing by Leo for the nod on actor. Weak year his year and it seems people think he's due.
post #13264 of 14435
I remember loffing once or twice during The Martian.
post #13265 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre Secreto View Post

Yeah, I don't think most people are looking for authenticity with Revenant. Gonna see it, because of the acting, directing, and revenge/survivor plot.

Agreed. I'll admit to not knowing the story, but I watched this around Christmas and enjoyed it. There are more than a couple gnarly scenes that were pretty cool.




Watched this last weekend. Hardy is fantastic as the Krays.

post #13266 of 14435
Is it true the Leo character has bear sex?
post #13267 of 14435

Monster: The Josef Fritzl Story - David Notman-Watt (2010)

 

 

Pure trash-TV that gives some new insight to the Fritzl-enigma; he had an incestious relation to his mother and was a loner all his days, convicted for rape on several occasions, and his beloved daughter was so so rebellious in her puberty that he figured out he had to lock her in. Later on he got carried away.

The documentary is so lousy made though, that the new information come by accident and is not followed up. This 'movie' wants to exploit the tragedy and not help us understand how this could happen.

post #13268 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Is it true the Leo character has bear sex?


No, he gets mauled by a bear but no sex. I don't know how that rumour got started.
post #13269 of 14435
Best bear related dialogue in a movie.


post #13270 of 14435
Solace. Pretty entertaining but would have been better with slower pacing.

Part seven/minority report
post #13271 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Is it true the Leo character has bear sex?

At times it does look as if the bear is humping Hugh! I think that animal attacks often do resemble sexual encounters. I am reminded of the story of one teen-age girl (who had evidently seen too many Disney movies like "The Lion King"), who, upon seeing a lion pulling down a zebra, asked her father, "Is the lion hugging the zebra?"

The more I think of that damn movie "The Revenant," the more I hate it. I particularly loathe it's anti-white, anti-American bias. For instance, it is alleged that Hugh Glass had killed an American officer when American soldiers were massacring the Pawnee village where he was living with his wife and son, his wife having killed by the evil, straight, white American males. In point of fact, there were no American soldiers within hundreds of miles of the Wolf Pawnees at the time Glass was living with them; the American government was pursuing a very peaceful, hands-off policy with the Western Indians; finally, the Americans and the Pawnees never fought each other--never!

Then there is the matter of Hugh Glass' half-breed son "Hawk" in the movie, portrayed as a youth about 15 or 16. He is an entirely fictional character. It is quite possible that Glass sired a son with woman of the Wolf Pawnees, but he had been captured by the Wolf Pawnees in 1819 or 1820. He was back in St. Louis by 1822. He was mauled on August 23, 1823 most probably. Well, you do the math!

The theme of the Noble Indigenous People is pervasive! Of course, the fact when Hugh was captured by the Pawnees, they stuck his partner full of splinters and set them on fire was never mentioned. Hugh saved himself from a similar fate by a timely gift to the chief. The Arikara ("Ree") Indians are also whitewashed. In the movie, they are defending their land and resources from white exploitation and searching for the chief's daughter, who had been abducted as a sex slave by a party of villainous French-Canadian traders. In reality, the Rees were nothing more than treacherous murderers: When General Ashley was leading a party in boats and on foot up the Missouri, they simply wanted to get past the Rees' village in peace on their way to Ft. Henry, far from the Rees' territory. However, the Rees sent word to General Ashley that they had a quantity of horses they wanted to trade for supplies, mostly gunpowder. A day of peaceful trading and socialization occurred on May 31, 1823. The next morning the Rees treacherously attacked the mountain men encamped on the bank of the Missouri next to their village, killing a dozen of them and wounding many others, including Hugh Glass. A punitive expedition mounted by the U.S. Army, mountain men and a large party of Sioux warriors scattered the Rees, but Col. Leavenworth, pursuing a peace policy, did not press his victory and granted them generous terms, which display of weakness incited other tribes to take the warpath against the white. The Rees were cunning and canny fighters. They mowed down the mountain men from an almost impregnable position in their palisaded village. In the movie they attack Major (demoted to "Captain" in the movie) Henry's party like typical "Redskins" from a 1950s movie, charging up, whooping, circling around and getting shot out of their saddles by the mountain men, who for some reason in the movie often manage to do so with uncocked rifles.

The locations of the movie were preposterous, northern Saskatchewan and Tierra del Fuego standing in for the plains of South Dakota. Glass' crawl and return to Ft. Kiowa occurred during the month of September. He was back in Ft. Kiowa by October 1. He was aided by the relatively benign weather. He could never have survived, maimed as he was, in steep, snow covered mountain and immersions in freezing rivers.

The climatic finale of the movie is entirely lurid fiction. In reality, Glass finally encountered Fitzgerald at Ft. Atkinson, where the latter was serving in the Army. Fitzgerald returned Glass' rifle to him, and Glass went off to other adventures. The Rees finally got him in 1833.

As a postscript, I would also observe that the young Jim Bridger was played by a callow, somewhat wimpy looking youth. Bridger was noted for being an exceptionally large, powerfully built man, and he probably would have given some evidence of this when he was 17 or 18, the time of his dealings with Hugh Glass.
post #13272 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniscientCause View Post

I'd think it would be pulp fiction or resovoir dogs. They are the building blocks of his style and every film he's made sense has played homage too them

 

disagree. i actually just re-watched pulp fiction. both great flicks, but both immature

 

what's funny is the final scene of Basterds QT himself claims that movie as his masterpiece as his lead Aldo Raine carves a swastika into the viewer's forehead. imma have to agree there.

post #13273 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by double00 View Post

disagree. i actually just re-watched pulp fiction. both great flicks, but both immature

what's funny is the final scene of Basterds QT himself claims that movie as his masterpiece as his lead Aldo Raine carves a swastika into the viewer's forehead. imma have to agree there.

He said he has 10 more movies in him so I think it may be a little early to declare a masterpiece.
post #13274 of 14435
Great artists often have more than one...
post #13275 of 14435
Quote:
Originally Posted by double00 View Post

Great artists often have more than one...

Pretty sure masterpiece is implies one, but he can have other great works but not masterpieces. IB is my favorite film of his so I'm not arguing against it.


Grammatically I can't even think of a plural form of masterpiece. X and y are his masterpieces...sounds stupid. X and y are his masterpi...sounds even worse.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › What Movies Are You Watching Lately