BOTTOM TEN - 2003!!!!!

Started by MacGuffin, December 28, 2003, 11:09:58 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

modage

#45
January 08, 2004, 10:26:42 PM
Quote from: Pit was hilarious.
it would've been funnier if Matt and Casey had been conjoined twins.  just imagine what wacky situations they would've gotten into?!  like, what if they'd run into a woman and one of them wanted to date her!

seriously, there was a thread a while back about what a "self indulgent" film is.  this should be the textbook example.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

godardian

#46
January 09, 2004, 12:01:53 AM
Gerry is Waiting for Godot for the new millenium. Seriously, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if, forty years from now, it's looked back upon as some kind of cinematic touchstone. People who say it's beautiful are right, people who say it's sad and moving are right, and P is right when he says it's funny.

I don't know about "people," would've viewed it the same exact way had it not been a Gus van Sant Brand Film, I guarantee you. And I don't like Matt Damon.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

Pubrick

#47
January 09, 2004, 12:04:41 AM
hav u seen Walkabout? i wouldn't say Gerry is as important a film as that. but it's a worthy (succesful) experiment for modern times. the question really is, is this enuff for a film. what is a film. wait, what am i doing here. ::head implodes::
under the paving stones.

godardian

#48
January 09, 2004, 01:10:54 AM
Quote from: Phav u seen Walkabout? i wouldn't say Gerry is as important a film as that. but it's a worthy (succesful) experiment for modern times. the question really is, is this enuff for a film. what is a film. wait, what am i doing here. ::head implodes::

I will just this once toot my own horn:

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=1802&highlight=walkabout

I looooove Walkabout. It's a lot different than Gerry, though. More pointed, in its way.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

modage

#49
January 10, 2004, 11:55:44 AM
Quote from: Weak2nd MacGuffin Trumpet1. Charlie's Angels 2: Full Throttle

Quote from: McGAnd strangely, I've found there's a direct correlation between the more intense the film fan, the more likely he or she is to actually embrace the picture.  I've heard from Martin Scorsese to Terrence Malick to just fabulous filmmakers that I respect and they've shared their enthusiasm for the picture because these guys, they understand what it is, and naturally they know I'm not trying to threaten or challenge or in any disrespect what they're the masters of, so they take it for what it is and they enjoy themselves and they have fun with the performances.
isnt that weird?  i dont even know how to imagine scorsese and malick going up to mcg and talking about charlies angels 2.  wait it gets better...

Quote from: McGI think you have an obligation to your audience to try to improve upon the original in any respect. I think that's successfully done in Godfather II. I think it's very successfully done in Terminator 2. And we used those two models as our examples and we did the best we could.
the godfather 2 and terminator 2 were frames of reference for CA2.  that is all.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Ernie

#50
January 10, 2004, 03:11:26 PM
-Gerry
-Dirty Pretty Things


Modernage really said it all with "Gerry", there's not much I can add. It saddened me that people praised it because I think it's a fucking crime that Gus put so little into this film and still got away with some good reviews, a couple REALLY good reviews even. It just plain saddens me that there's filmmaker's out there that put their heart and soul into their films, like just EVERYTHING they got and, for whatever reason, some of them aren't ever accepted....but somebody can make an artsy, empty movie likes this and get praised as a genius, that's bullshit. I mean, I'm not saying that "Gerry" was critically acclaimed, most critics saw right through it thankfully, but it got better reviews than it deserved. Empty films will almost always appear deeper than complex films cause they are so abstract or whatever, it's so lame....it's usually just lazy filmmaking in diguise. I wish Gus Van Sant hadn't made this kind of film cause I think he might be a genius looking at "Drugstore Cowboy" and "My Own Private Idaho"...really though, they were both on my top 30 for the dekapenticon thing, they're classics.

"Dirty Pretty Things" was just a bad film I thought. I hated the annoying comic relief from the hooker character above all things. I hated the ending. The film had no heart, it was just dark and gloomy and quirky....it didn't move me at all, I didn't feel anything for it. And Audrey Tautou's in it of all people, and it still didn't matter. She was the one redeeming value in the movie probably. Her and the main guy, he wasn't too bad...most of the acting was actually quite good, it was just the tone that I didn't get into at all.

RegularKarate

#51
January 10, 2004, 10:13:03 PM
Ebes... take some fuckin' Ritalin... then maybe you can talk about Gerry.

Pozer

#52
January 11, 2004, 02:55:49 PM
Quote from: themodernage02
1. gerry

what a piece of shit. i dont even know where to begin.  first of all, the only reason anyone is sitting through this 100 minutes of garbage in the first place is that its Gus Van Sant and has 'real stars' in it.  if this exact EXACT same movie were made by some kid in college and starred his two buddies.  not only would no one be talking about how good it was, but no one would be able to sit through it EVER.  no studio would look at it and agree to put it out, no one would give them another job to ever work again after watching it.  it was terrible.  

i was prepared for a movie with no story about two guys wandering around talking about nothing.  i was not prepared for unbroken shots that went on for 10 minutes and more that contained no talking or a still camera.  if i want to look at a photograph ill do that.  when i want to watch a movie, you better fucking have somebody talking or move the camera or SOMETHING.  tell me a fucking story already!??  i dont want to watch somebodys art project, i want to see a movie.  

this is an example of the absolute worst 'independent film' has to offer.  a fucking bullshit 'art' movie with two assholes wandering around the desert.  how so many of you were tricked into thinking that this was in any way 'good' i have no idea.  who are you kidding?! this thing blew the hardest of any movie ever.

true mothafackin Grit

pete

#53
January 11, 2004, 03:14:05 PM
the thing about gus van sant is that his "avant garde" is so 30-years ago.  he's doing things someone else has already done and recycling "artfilm" cliches that hasn't been cutting edge since the 60's.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

j_scott_stroup04

#54
January 11, 2004, 04:19:15 PM
Worst of the 2003 year....

in no order

House of 1000 Corpses
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Freddy vs. Jason
Dumb and Dumberer
Terminator 3

Tolerable, but would never watch again:

Matrix Reloaded
Elf
Identity
Daredevil
Bruce Almighty

Those I chose to avoid:

Gigli
Dickie Roberts
In the Cut
Paycheck
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Anger Management
Phone Booth
Charlie's Angels
Matrix Revolutions
Basic
Alex and Emma
Old School

among others...
"The sunshine bores the daylights outta me!"- Rolling Stones

"When I am King you will be first against the wall!"- Radiohead
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions