|
Grex > Agora35 > #177: sean granger talks about 200's films | |
|
| Author |
Message |
grangerz
|
|
sean granger talks about 200's films
| 
Nov 30 04:48 UTC 2000 |
cinema - the granger comments on 2000 movies
of course everyone on earth has seen and loved gladiator
didnt see it - go rent it
didnt like it - seek mental help immediately, you need therapy - somewhere
along the lines of growing up it was not imprinted on your brain that seeing
big strong romans decapitate barbarians and slaves is cool - you missed that
part of our culture that so loves spartacus and ben hur
unbreakable - brilliant women for some reason dont like it
do you have a penis - go see the film
men of honor - do you like de niro or cuba gooding - go see
autumn in new york - do you have a pulse, rent it cause i know you didnt spend
money at a theater
pay it forward - go see
|
| 31 responses total. |
remmers
|
|
response 1 of 31:
|
Nov 30 11:53 UTC 2000 |
Hm... Guess I'm a real oddball. I didn't see "Gladiator", liked
"Spartacus", disliked "Ben Hur".
As to "Unbreakable" -- well, it's true that Mary hated it and
I didn't. It helps to appreciate it if you are, or have been, a
comic book addict (like me). I thought it looked great and had
some brilliant scenes, but there were problems, like the too-abrupt
ending. Might've been better if it had been an hour longer.
|
ric
|
|
response 2 of 31:
|
Nov 30 12:19 UTC 2000 |
You really should check out Gladiator John, at least rent it when it's
available.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 3 of 31:
|
Nov 30 12:29 UTC 2000 |
maximus gluteus.
|
mary
|
|
response 4 of 31:
|
Nov 30 13:40 UTC 2000 |
The working concept of "Unbreakable" has been done before,
brilliantly, in "Fearless". I found "Unbreakable" all FX
atmosphere with a very shallow story line. Too, Bruce Willis
was wildly miscast.
"Gladiator" was a good testosterone film. I can enjoy about
one of those a year then I find I need something to think about
for my $8. I tend to prefer "hmmmm"-type films to those
showcasing absolute good and evil.
|
fitz
|
|
response 5 of 31:
|
Nov 30 13:53 UTC 2000 |
"Gladiator" had outstanding lighting and cinematography. I don't know if the
production values will be evident on a television. It'll be quite a surprise
to me if some other film(s) takes the Academy Award in these catagories.
|
ashke
|
|
response 6 of 31:
|
Nov 30 14:06 UTC 2000 |
I'm with remmers. I didn't like Ben Hur (too prechy for my tastes), and I
LOVED Sparticus...but I've been not really wanting to see Gladiator. It seems
like a rip off...perhaps a good one, but I just haven't been in the mood for
it lately.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 7 of 31:
|
Nov 30 16:12 UTC 2000 |
Gladiator... what I always say- He kills a kitty. This I dislike...
strongly. (yes I know the cat wasn't really killed and that in the
scene it's kill the tiger or die, but still.)
|
edina
|
|
response 8 of 31:
|
Nov 30 16:17 UTC 2000 |
As it was digitally added, it didn't even exist. So you dislike him for
killing something that wasn't there to begin with.
|
ashke
|
|
response 9 of 31:
|
Nov 30 17:15 UTC 2000 |
Works for me.
|
carson
|
|
response 10 of 31:
|
Nov 30 18:08 UTC 2000 |
(I didn't know remmers was a comics buff. actually, being a superhero
buff helps with the enjoyment of "Unbreakable" [knowing what colors
villians wear, etc.], but it was still IMO silly. plus, Shyamanian
is a bit sloppy when it comes to consistency, so there were some holes
in continuity. I'd have to see it again to pick them all out because
M. is effective at distracting the viewer from paying attention to the
details.)
|
mcnally
|
|
response 11 of 31:
|
Nov 30 21:27 UTC 2000 |
I guess I'm in need of mental help -- I was more annoyed by Gladiator
than entertained.
|
remmers
|
|
response 12 of 31:
|
Nov 30 22:11 UTC 2000 |
We rented "Gladiator" the other day, and I watched the big battle
scene at the beginning -- it looked pretty impressive, even on
DVD -- but it didn't grab me enough to continue, so I skipped
out and occupied myself in other ways.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 13 of 31:
|
Nov 30 22:25 UTC 2000 |
re #8 Movies themselves aren't real, the people aren't 'there' per se.
And it's not that I dislike 'him' (meaning Russell Crowe right?) it's
just that I would be bothered by that scene and as yet have chosen not
to see the movie.
People get bothered by certain things they see onscreen, even knowing
it's not real. Different people are bugged by different things. A
friend of mine is bothered by seeing blood onscreen, it makes her feel
ill. I personally don't like seeing cats getting hurt/killed.
|
ric
|
|
response 14 of 31:
|
Nov 30 22:28 UTC 2000 |
re 12 - you missed out John... you saw the flashy intro, not the movie.. the
movie gets better as it goes along.. for me, the flashy intro didn't really
do anything for me. It was more about his rise to gladiator stardom than his
fall from roman general fame, in my opinion.
|
aaron
|
|
response 15 of 31:
|
Dec 1 01:12 UTC 2000 |
Most of the tiger footage in Gladiator involved real tigers. One had been
declawed. And if you wondered about having somebody hold a starving tiger
by a rope, so it wouldn't attack the gladiators, yes... in fact one of
those rope-holders was attacked by one of the live (and in reality well-fed)
tigers... so that might have stretched credibility an inch or two.
I think the more correct description for Unbreakable's inspiration is
Manga, as opposed to "comic books".
|
mcnally
|
|
response 16 of 31:
|
Dec 1 01:27 UTC 2000 |
re #14: I disagree, and think John saw the only part of the movie that
I'd actually recommend. The rest was just an embarrassingly poorly-plotted
shambles, albeit with nice eye-candy..
|
grangerz
|
|
response 17 of 31:
|
Dec 1 01:34 UTC 2000 |
the first part of gladiator in my opinion was just a big battle scene, nothing
to do with the film other than heh this guy can kill and kill well
which is what a gladiator does
|
anderyn
|
|
response 18 of 31:
|
Dec 1 12:10 UTC 2000 |
Gladiator was an okay movie, although I found some of the cinematography
amazingly annoying (particularly in the first battle) -- since I don't see
that well anyhow, having the action slow/speed/freeze just made me wonder if
I was going blinder than I was -- the story was pretty standard, but it was
acted competently and didn't have any glaring plot holes that jumped out at
me mid-movie (some after the movie, but that's standard, again). I *really*
wanted the tigers to eat someone, and since I'm a tiger fan, I was expecting
to be upset about the killing scene -- but I wasn't, exactly.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 19 of 31:
|
Dec 1 12:19 UTC 2000 |
you should sue.
|
ric
|
|
response 20 of 31:
|
Dec 1 15:12 UTC 2000 |
I didn't much care for the style of the opening battle scene either.
I want to watch it again, and try to determine where in the shooting of the
movie that one actor died... the rest of his scenes were computer generated.
|
krj
|
|
response 21 of 31:
|
Dec 1 21:33 UTC 2000 |
As movies are generally not shot in their final running order, I don't
know how you would find a spot where shots were filmed after the actor
had died.
|
ric
|
|
response 22 of 31:
|
Dec 1 22:31 UTC 2000 |
Not entirely in order, but I'll bet that the shots in the desert of north
africa or where-ever the hell they were got filmed before the coliseum/rome
stuff did.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 23 of 31:
|
Dec 2 03:30 UTC 2000 |
Or after. All of each at the same time, anyway.
|
ric
|
|
response 24 of 31:
|
Dec 2 05:06 UTC 2000 |
From what I read with regards to the actor dying, probably not.
|