- 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
1
Posted on 10/8/13 at 2:52 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
United 93
Pretty decent comparison, actually.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 2:54 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Oh Gravity is not Armageddon. Armageddon had a first, second, and third act with better character development and that's not saying that Armageddon was a great movie either.
armageddon is one of the worst movies ive ever seen
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:00 pm to DURANTULA
quote:
Oh Gravity is not Armageddon. Armageddon had a first, second, and third act with better character development and that's not saying that Armageddon was a great movie either. If Michael Bay can slap the traditional 3 acts in his movie and have characters that develop, then why the hell couldn't someone like Alfonso Cauron - who this board apparently thinks is the new Scorsese - do it as well?
Are you saying Armageddon is better or just as good as Gravity? Honest question, I have not read this whole thread.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:01 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
One of my favorite movies, United 93, lacked a 3 act structure as well as character development and the film didn't suffer at all.
That was a bad movie that lived solely on emotion from the event it portrayed.
Gravity had 3 distinguishable acts and a very classical character journey. Man vs. Nature. Etc. United 93 was cashing in on peoples' emotions.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:10 pm to Freauxzen
Answer me.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:13 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
That was a bad movie that lived solely on emotion from the event it portrayed.
Couldn't disagree more about it being a bad movie. And to say it lived solely on the emotion from the event it portrayed would also discredit pretty much every historical movie that has ever existed.
quote:
United 93 was cashing in on peoples' emotions.
While that may be true, it's also the most accurate film about 9/11 that has yet to be made. It should be shown in high school history classes due to its accuracy and commitment to authenticity.
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:36 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
3D? I'm avoiding it unless it's mandatory.
Mandatory. I wouldn't see it any other way. The only bad thing about the film is the experience just can't be duplicated. Not in 2D, not on a small screen. That might be a problem for its lasting appeal.
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:37 pm to Freauxzen
Thanks 
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:42 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Couldn't disagree more about it being a bad movie. And to say it lived solely on the emotion from the event it portrayed would also discredit pretty much every historical movie that has ever existed.
L O L. No.
A movie made within 5 years of a nationally tragic event is plenty different from something like Patton.
9-11 is maybe one of the most shockingly and "mass culture" driven events of all time, that changes the game in terms of the ability of people to profit from it.
quote:
While that may be true, it's also the most accurate film about 9/11 that has yet to be made.
Only because World Trade Center was an even greater failure, and more of an obvious cash in.
quote:
It should be shown in high school history classes due to its accuracy and commitment to authenticity.
I won't disagree, but this doesn't make it a particularly good film. And doesn't absolve its sins, literal and figurative.
It's a terrible movie that is relevant only because of the emotion of the event (and that's the only reason I can't disagree with it's historical relevance). It has literally nothing else to drive it. And it isn't even in the same universe as Gravity.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:43 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
Thanks
Sorry saw the reply, didn't realize it was for me. As a Malick fan, you should enjoy this. On that note, have you seen To the Wonder?
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:51 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
A movie made within 5 years of a nationally tragic event is plenty different from something like Patton.
How about the numerous World War II movies that were produced DURING World War II? Two of the more famous would be Guadalcanal Diaries (released mere months after the conclusion of the battle) and The Purple Heart. And of course the legend of legends, Casablanca.
quote:
Only because World Trade Center was an even greater failure, and more of an obvious cash in.
World Trade Center was accurate as well. But I am talking about the "big picture". United 93 has done that better than any film about 9/11 that has been released thus far.
quote:
It has literally nothing else to drive it.
That's all it needs.
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:51 pm to Freauxzen
Saw it in IMAX 3D today. It was alright. Nothing mind blowing but at least it looked cool.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 3:53 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Just got back from seeing To the Wonder. People always say Malick's flicks are tedious. I've never shared this sentiment because I've enjoyed every movie the man has made. Not this one. Hot damn it was tedious. I loved The New World and I don't need dialogue but this movie wasn't good enough to not have any; if that makes since. Of course there were great shots and great music and it was touching but it went nowhere. I came home and did some reading on it. The entire plot section on Wiki of the movie is two sentences; the movie is two hours long. Also, Jessica Chastain, Rachel Weisz, Amanda Peet, Barry Pepper and Michael Sheen were removed from the final cut.Malick staaaaaaacked, Actors fuuuuuuuucked. I'm glad I saw it and sure it's better than 90% of the filth out there but I don't plan on seeing it again and there's no rush to see it if you haven't. It's 2 hours of eye candy though. Only Malick can make an Econo Lodge and a Sonic look gorgeous.
6/10
LINK
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:13 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
Just got back from seeing To the Wonder. People always say Malick's flicks are tedious. I've never shared this sentiment because I've enjoyed every movie the man has made. Not this one. Hot damn it was tedious. I loved The New World and I don't need dialogue but this movie wasn't good enough to not have any; if that makes since. Of course there were great shots and great music and it was touching but it went nowhere. I came home and did some reading on it. The entire plot section on Wiki of the movie is two sentences; the movie is two hours long. Also, Jessica Chastain, Rachel Weisz, Amanda Peet, Barry Pepper and Michael Sheen were removed from the final cut. Malick staaaaaaacked, Actors fuuuuuuuucked. I'm glad I saw it and sure it's better than 90% of the filth out there but I don't plan on seeing it again and there's no rush to see it if you haven't. It's 2 hours of eye candy though. Only Malick can make an Econo Lodge and a Sonic look gorgeous.
6/10
So it's the most Malick of Malick films? That just makes me more intrigued.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:17 pm to Freauxzen
I actually like it more now than when I wrote that. But yes, it's the most Malicky. Cut out all the casts who filmed (Chastain 
), it's purely voiceovers, no dialogue, no plot, beautfiul, etc.
And I mean fricking beautiful.
), it's purely voiceovers, no dialogue, no plot, beautfiul, etc. And I mean fricking beautiful.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:20 pm to Blue Velvet
Thank God the critics don't have as much of a boner for To the Wonder as they have had for his last few films.
And you're saying there is no acting or characters on the screen at all? It's just voice overs?
And you're saying there is no acting or characters on the screen at all? It's just voice overs?
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:20 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
How about the numerous World War II movies that were produced DURING World War II? Two of the more famous would be Guadalcanal Diaries (released mere months after the conclusion of the battle) and The Purple Heart. And of course the legend of legends, Casablanca.
World War II isn't a tragedy in the same sense as 9-11. Two completely different things. War has always been a film topic, and because War often spans years, this is normal. And those films all have stories.
quote:
World Trade Center was accurate as well. But I am talking about the "big picture". United 93 has done that better than any film about 9/11 that has been released thus far.
It's easy to be accurate in today's day and age, this doesn't make it a good movie.
quote:
That's all it needs.
That's also what makes it a complete hack job. So you're admitting that the film lives and breathes pure emotion, and need no other general film properties? Correct? So it isn't a good movie.
If they were well-meaning and not preying on people then they could have made admission free. It was profit driven by pure tragedy, that's a very nefarious thing to do.
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:22 pm to Blue Velvet
quote:
I actually like it more now than when I wrote that. But yes, it's the most Malicky. Cut out all the casts who filmed (Chastain ), it's purely voiceovers, no dialogue, no plot, beautfiul, etc.
And I mean fricking beautiful.
Interesting. And I don't like Malick all that much, you know that. I do want to watch this.
And Days of Heaven left Netflix before I could catch it. Unless it's back.
(My beef with Malick comes mostly from Thin Red Line and New World. I hated those movies with the rage of 1000 suns. I don't mind what else I have seen.)
This post was edited on 10/8/13 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 10/8/13 at 4:27 pm to Freauxzen
quote:Incredible.
Days of Heaven
quote:Surprised how low the ratings are. Loved it.
New World
Page 15 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News