northfork

Started by pete, July 16, 2003, 10:32:22 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2
User actions

modage

#15
August 04, 2003, 04:21:09 PM
i'm going to have to go against the grain here.  i just watched this movie, and i hated it.  it was so sloooooooooooooooooooow.  i thought the cinematography looked cool from the previews, but within the first 15 minutes of watching it, it was already becoming very annoying.  (i guess there's a reason movies use lights).  it was an interesting idea, but the pace was far too slow for the payoff.  i wasnt aware the movie would have so little humor and be so heavyhanded with the religious stuff just shoving it down your throat.   i actually have not been to the independant theatres since april, since there hasn't been anything i was too interested in, but after i read a bit about this one i decided to give it a shot.  you would think that with all the summer popcorn flicks that it would have atleast been a nice change of pace, but unfortunately i should've trusted my instincts.  this was a stinker.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

pete

#16
August 04, 2003, 05:19:26 PM
I didn't think it was that slow, and I didn't see any religious stuff shoving down my throat.  I didn't feel preached to nor whatever.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

dufresne

#17
August 05, 2003, 11:20:56 PM
are you kidding me?  this was one of the funniest movies i've seen in a while.

diversify.
There are shadows in life, baby.

SoNowThen

#18
August 19, 2003, 09:36:28 AM
Yeah, great film. I gotta see it again to get it full, but I quite enjoyed it.

And I didn't find the religious stuff heavy handed, simply because it really only dealt with the myth aspects of Christianity, much like it dealt with the myths of the West, and of Americana and so on. If a movie has echoes of a Greek tragedy we don't say it was heavy-handed, so why label this one as so?

Struck me as a fairy tale, reminded me of when I first saw the Last Unicorn as a kid. I wasn't exactly sure what to make of it, and know there is more just beyond my grasp, but it was like watching magic...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Gamblour.

#19
November 19, 2003, 09:21:41 PM
Quote from: themodernage02i'm going to have to go against the grain here.  i just watched this movie, and i hated it.  it was so sloooooooooooooooooooow.  i thought the cinematography looked cool from the previews, but within the first 15 minutes of watching it, it was already becoming very annoying.  (i guess there's a reason movies use lights).  it was an interesting idea, but the pace was far too slow for the payoff.  i wasnt aware the movie would have so little humor and be so heavyhanded with the religious stuff just shoving it down your throat.   i actually have not been to the independant theatres since april, since there hasn't been anything i was too interested in, but after i read a bit about this one i decided to give it a shot.  you would think that with all the summer popcorn flicks that it would have atleast been a nice change of pace, but unfortunately i should've trusted my instincts.  this was a stinker.

I just saw it...my god, your description is pretty dead on. Yeah, it looked good, and everything, but jesus, I fell asleep during this movie, and I'm not one to do that. There were lots of parts that could've been really good, some of it hooked me at the beginning, but it was so goddamn slow.
WWPTAD?

SoNowThen

#20
November 19, 2003, 09:39:05 PM
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cowboykurtis

#21
November 19, 2003, 10:08:27 PM
Quote from: mindfuckThe cinematography was nothing short of amazing.
agreed
...your excuses are your own...

cine

#22
November 19, 2003, 10:33:29 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenComes out on dvd on Dec 30, for those who care...
City of God and this in December. Merry Christmas to me.

EDIT: Just saw the City of God thread now. Fuck Xmas.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2
User actions