- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Gravity = Open water in space
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:35 pm to alexman
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:35 pm to alexman
Wow, you're so smart, especially when all the critics are calling it visionary and a movie that cinema was made for. I guess I'll take your dumb fricking advice, despite the fact that you haven't even seen the film.
0
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:36 pm to Displaced
quote:
I just hate how people make up their minds on these movies that get the critics thumbs up or down before the movie is even released.
I don't always agree with them, but I agree with them 9 times out of 10.
quote:
I mean, have your thoughts about it, but unless you have seen it, how can someone thinking it looks stupid from the previews be wrong? how can an opinion be wrong anyway?
Because Alfonso Cuaron is a great filmmaker and has yet to frick up. I'll pay money blindly on faith alone and have no idea what the film is about if Cuaron has directed it. He has earned our faith, and has yet to betray it, unlike some filmmakers.
This post was edited on 9/12/13 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:41 pm to titmouse
Dear god. Now you throw the word Ever out there. It isn't close to the greatest cinematography ever. 
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:42 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
It really isn't head and shoulders better than I Am Legend. It is very good, and I, personally, would rank it higher than I Am Legend, but it's not a clear cut choice by any stretch. If you didn't like I Am Legend, you're letting your hatred for Will Smith color your perceptions.
I Am Legend is pretty damn mediocre and completely shite the bed at the very end. I liked it, but I didn't love it or think about it much after I saw it. Children of Men is incredible though.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:43 pm to TigerMyth36
my worry, as someone stated before, is lots of effect, but no affect. the several minute long shots sound a tad self indulgent
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:44 pm to Carson123987
quote:
my worry, as someone stated before, is lots of effect, but no affect. the several minute long shots sound a tad self indulgent
I think it's 10 minutes longer than that even.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:45 pm to OMLandshark
yeah i heard there was a 17.5 minute continuous shot
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:48 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
I Am Legend is pretty damn mediocre and completely shite the bed at the very end. I liked it, but I didn't love it or think about it much after I saw it. Children of Men is incredible though.
Notice how everyone is picking on I Am Legend, and not the other three movies I mentioned (Sunshine, The Road, and District 9). Seems a little, I don't know, straw-mannish. I'll agree the end of I Am Legend was pretty poor. And as I've said before, it has been nearly 7 years or so since I watched Children of Men, but I don't remember walking away from it being completely in awe of how wonderful it was. I remember thinking, "That was pretty damn good." I remember thinking several scenes were masterfully done. I don't remember thinking, "In the realm of Science Fiction, I'd put it above Blade Runner, the Original Star Wars Trilogy, Alien, or even 2001 despite the fact that 2001 is more an exercise in moving art than it is in making a movie."
Again, perhaps I just need to watch it again, but the level of praise this board is giving Children of Men appears more than a bit undeserved.
ETA: then again, this seems to be this board's MO.
This post was edited on 9/12/13 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 9/12/13 at 3:49 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
it has been nearly 7 years or so since I watched Children of Men, but I don't remember walking away from it being completely in awe of how wonderful it was. I remember thinking, "That was pretty damn good." I remember thinking several scenes were masterfully done.
pretty much exactly this for me
Posted on 9/12/13 at 4:38 pm to Carson123987
quote:
Notice how everyone is picking on I Am Legend, and not the other three movies I mentioned (Sunshine, The Road, and District 9)
quote:Terrible. Terrible. Terrible. Awful. Terrible.
I Am Legend
quote:Good movie that I really enjoy and bought the dvd. Weak third act.
Sunshine
quote:Meh. Mediocore at best.
The Road
quote:Sucked. No way around it.
District 9
Children of Men is lightyears ahead all of those movies and certainly one of the top films of the past decade.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 4:44 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:The MO is fear towards something different than the mold. Pushing the boundaries has never been received well here. Calling the several minute long shots, "self indulgent", etc. is why great film makers like Malick don't get respect while a count like Abrams will receive six 30 page threads discussing his recent lens flared bowel movement.
this seems to be this board's MO
Posted on 9/12/13 at 5:07 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
The MO is fear towards something different than the mold. Pushing the boundaries has never been received well here. Calling the several minute long shots, "self indulgent", etc. is why great film makers like Malick don't get respect while a count like Abrams will receive six 30 page threads discussing his recent lens flared bowel movement.
Your perspective on this board is vastly different than mine. To me, if nothing else, this thread proves that long shots and artistic directing are revered on this board. Cuaron is certainly artistic and Children of Men is certainly an artistic film. On the other hand, people shite all over Abrams for his lens flares. They may like his Star Trek movies overall, but there seem to be no illusions as to the quality of his directing.
Calling several minute long shots self indulgent is not not giving respect to Malick or Cuaron. Indeed, many in this thread were praising Cuaron for his ability to do these long shots. It was not until someone mentioned that one of the long shots in Gravity lasts 17 minutes that the phrase "self indulgent" came out. And, honestly, at that point, it very well could be. Cuaron may just be (a) trying to show off, or (b) see how far he can push one take.
Malick, on the other hand, is a hotly debated director on this board because his movies are clearly not for everyone. To me, Malick is the epitome of self-indulgent. His movies, or "films" as you may call them, are overtly pretentious and he makes no apologies for that. I'm all for beautiful shots, but telling a story is more than painting a pretty picture. Filmmaking involves many aspects and focusing on one of those is a hallmark of bad directing, if you ask me. Malick focuses on getting the look of the scene right in the same way Michael Bay focuses on getting explosions right. And Michael Bay is a terrible director. Just saying.
Yes, I just compared Malick to Bay. Suck it.
(In fairness, Malick is a far better storyteller than Bay and I use that comparison merely as an exaggerated example of how focusing on a single aspect of filmmaking makes for bad movies)
Posted on 9/12/13 at 5:16 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote::cringe:
telling a story is more than painting a pretty picture
Posted on 9/12/13 at 5:44 pm to alexman
Open water is about my best friends' sister and BIL so suck it.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 6:15 pm to THRILLHO
Ermagerd everytime I watch Open Water (2) I always think errybody will get back on the boat alive
Then I think the sharks are gonna get em you just wait
But it never happens (Spoilers)
And OMG Clive Owen is so fine Children of Men the greatest of all time IMO I would have his baby
Then I think the sharks are gonna get em you just wait
But it never happens (Spoilers)
And OMG Clive Owen is so fine Children of Men the greatest of all time IMO I would have his baby
Posted on 9/12/13 at 6:29 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
Your perspective on this board is vastly different than mine. To me, if nothing else, this thread proves that long shots and artistic directing are revered on this board. Cuaron is certainly artistic and Children of Men is certainly an artistic film. On the other hand, people shite all over Abrams for his lens flares. They may like his Star Trek movies overall, but there seem to be no illusions as to the quality of his directing.
Except, throughout the last few posts, you've painted the board into a very small box. Other than the terrible taste in women around here Mila Kunis over Grace Kelly? Come on people), the board doesn't just "revere long shots and shite over Abrams") You see the defense for Choldren of Men? There's just as much defense for Star Trek, guaranteed. Maybe not as much for Alias, and I'm the first one around to blast the shite out of Lost. People love Aronofsky, who popularized "hip hop editing," and made it into an artform. So, for the most part, we get it right. People like well made films. While Children of Men is a superb film, both in effect and in inventiveness, I am Legend isn't in the same hemisphere, much less universe. It's a film with a completely differet intent, and while it makes good on the action movie promise, it has quite a few flaws. Sunshine gets mad respect around here as well, and most say exactly what is wrong, Great film, poor ending. That's been echoed more than here and is spot on.
quote:
Calling several minute long shots self indulgent is not not giving respect to Malick or Cuaron. Indeed, many in this thread were praising Cuaron for his ability to do these long shots. It was not until someone mentioned that one of the long shots in Gravity lasts 17 minutes that the phrase "self indulgent" came out. And, honestly, at that point, it very well could be. Cuaron may just be (a) trying to show off, or (b) see how far he can push one take.
And? So what if his intent is to push the boundaries of film, that's a good thing. Even when it fails, a la Avatar, it's still a good thing to do (although the jury is still out on pushing 3d).
Posted on 9/12/13 at 9:43 pm to OMLandshark
Have to watch the directors cut of I am legend. Studio completely killed that movie with the parts they changed
Posted on 9/12/13 at 10:03 pm to jeff5891
I am Legend really wasn't very good. It butchered the story.
I don't understand why the powers that be decided to replace the thinking zombies with mindless rage machines.
I don't understand why the powers that be decided to replace the thinking zombies with mindless rage machines.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 10:16 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Except, throughout the last few posts, you've painted the board into a very small box
Not at all. On the contrary, I have shown that it can't be painted into a small box. That's precisely why I said Blue Velvet's perspective seems skewed to me.
quote:precisely my point. That's why I said people, even if they like Star Trek, are apt to point out that Abrams goes absolutely bonkers with lens flares. Blue Velvet, on the other hand, seems to believe that Malick, a fine filmmaker in his estimation, is shite on while people on this board eat up Abrams' "lens flared bowel movement."
People like well made films.
quote:
While Children of Men is a superb film, both in effect and in inventiveness, I am Legend isn't in the same hemisphere, much less universe. It's a film with a completely differet intent, and while it makes good on the action movie promise, it has quite a few flaws
Well no shite. I tried to draw a few movies together that had similar basic settings (i.e. post-apocalyptic worlds with grim outlooks). Children of Men is a very good movie, as I've said. I was merely attempting to illustrate that the notion that it is the best movie of the last decade is straight up hyperbole at best, and completely delusional at worst.
quote:
And? So what if his intent is to push the boundaries of film, that's a good thing.
Yet again you miss the point, which was to explain why one, one person said the long shots "a tad self indulgent." This was after several people mentioned that Cuaron was amazing precisely because of his ability to do long shots. However, when a filmmaker attempts to push the envelope simply for the sake of pushing the envelope and not to further the purpose or development of the story, then it is the very definition of self-indulgent. Not saying that Cuaron is guilty of that, just justifying Carson's point.
Posted on 9/12/13 at 10:16 pm to jeff5891
quote:
Have to watch the directors cut of I am legend. Studio completely killed that movie with the parts they changed
Very true.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News