|
Grex > Cinema > #68: Grex goes to the movies - The Summer Movies Review Item |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 323 responses total. |
jvmv
|
|
response 90 of 323:
| 
Jul 7 07:24 UTC 2004 |
I watched "Before sunset" some years ago.
I don't like all of Richard Linklater's films but he made
a good work in this film. I don't like Ethan, he's a good actor
but very inexpressive.
One of the great things about "Before sunset" is the
characterization. The screenwriter put a lot of thought into
philosophical issues. I really liked the ideas the characters
had and they made me think.
Well, I'm a little skeptic about the sequel.
|
gregb
|
|
response 91 of 323:
|
Jul 7 15:55 UTC 2004 |
Saw Van Helsing last weekend and while visually great, the story was,
IMO, thin. This was, basically, an action story. In some ways it
reminded me of a Bond flick, especially a scene early in the film where
Van is in a "lab" located in the basement of a church, getting his
briefing for his next mission. There's even a Q-type character who
shows him the newest gizmos he'll use. Unlike Bond, however, this "Q"
goes on the mission.
If you like action-oriented stories, this one is definitely worth seeing.
|
richard
|
|
response 92 of 323:
|
Jul 7 19:25 UTC 2004 |
re #90, you watched "Before SUNRISE" some years ago. That movie takes place
mostly at night, before sunrise. "Before SUNSET" is the new movie, which
takes place in the day time and ends at sunset. Which I suppose could be
intended as a metaphor for the idea that you see things more clearly when you
get older. In the first movie they are walking around in the darkness and
relishing the moment. They don't even want to know each other's last names.
In the second movie they are a decade older, and are walking around in the
daytime actually making something of an effort to really get to know each
other. They can see each other now, as they are older, in a way that they
couldn't then...
|
jvmv
|
|
response 93 of 323:
|
Jul 8 06:08 UTC 2004 |
That's right, I made a mistake. I meant "Before sunrise".
|
bru
|
|
response 94 of 323:
|
Jul 8 10:11 UTC 2004 |
We Went to see King Arthur last night and found it quite entertaining. Much
more gritty and dirty than any other Arthurian movie, more accurrate to the
conditions of the time.
|
tod
|
|
response 95 of 323:
|
Jul 8 15:26 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 96 of 323:
|
Jul 9 19:38 UTC 2004 |
Why>
|
krj
|
|
response 97 of 323:
|
Jul 9 21:06 UTC 2004 |
Oh pooh, nothing could be more accurate than "Monty Python and the
Holy Grail": "He must be a king, he hasn't got shit all over 'im!"
|
richard
|
|
response 98 of 323:
|
Jul 11 08:40 UTC 2004 |
I saw Spiderman2, I thought it was well made and one of the best of the
superhero genre movies. I especially liked Alfred Molina as Doc Ock, aka
Dr. Octavious.
|
jvmv
|
|
response 99 of 323:
|
Jul 11 09:20 UTC 2004 |
Has some interesting elements.
I think the special effects were great. The future of exciting
movies is in exploring & exploiting that one, however if only the
special effects were as competent as the ideas which I can only say
that it's a matter of incompetence.
A sentence of the previous film still sounds in my memory when one
of the characters even says "just because you can beat someone up,
doesn't mean you have to". There Raimi added interesting messages.
|
klg
|
|
response 100 of 323:
|
Jul 11 16:54 UTC 2004 |
We went to the local multiplex yesterday to waste money on Anchorman,
which was playing on 2 screens vs. 1 screen for Michael Mooron's
F9/11 - and the parking lot was pretty much empty.
|
twenex
|
|
response 101 of 323:
|
Jul 11 16:58 UTC 2004 |
What is that you were saying about insults VS logical arguments?
|
klg
|
|
response 102 of 323:
|
Jul 11 17:04 UTC 2004 |
We apologize for insulting Anchorman. (Happy now?)
|
katie
|
|
response 103 of 323:
|
Jul 11 17:18 UTC 2004 |
Anchorman was awful.
|
klg
|
|
response 104 of 323:
|
Jul 11 19:22 UTC 2004 |
No, worse.
|
tsty
|
|
response 105 of 323:
|
Jul 11 21:40 UTC 2004 |
did anchorman even try to reincarnate network?
|
tod
|
|
response 106 of 323:
|
Jul 12 15:03 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
edina
|
|
response 107 of 323:
|
Jul 12 16:05 UTC 2004 |
I saw "Saved!" and "King Arthur" on vacation. I liked both, for entirely
different reasons. (Duh)
"Saved!" just had me busting out. And somewhat thinking. And vowing to never
stick my kid in a school like that. I really enjoyed Eva Amurri in this,
though she was far from the star. And Macauley Culkin is making me forget
"Home Alone".
"King Arthur" was just a fun ride. I'm a major fan of Clive Owen, so to see
him doing more "action" was just a blast. Plus, the guys were hot. I mean,
seriously hot. A skosh of Tristan, Gawain and Galahad would do any hetero
girl good. Oh - and the plot was interesting. Very much not your
Disney/typical send up, much more dark and gritty.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 108 of 323:
|
Jul 12 16:56 UTC 2004 |
Saw "Spiderman 2" over the weekend and managed to stay entertained
for a couple of hours (though only just barely in a few parts, I'd
say the pacing could/should have been tightened a bit.)
I thought they did a fantastic job with the Doctor Octopus special
effects; Doc Ock was always one of my favorite Spiderman villains
and they did an excellent job with both his motion and the sheer
physical menace of his mechanical limbs.
It's odd but the parts I liked best of the comic books are the parts
I thought dragged the most in the movie -- Peter Parker's hapless
struggle to master the everyday life of an intelligent outsider in
a world he really doesn't fit into. The real genius of the Spiderman
comic books was that the focus of the story really wasn't Spiderman's
struggle against the supervillains, it was Peter Parker's struggle
against everyday life. The fights with the supervillains were just
added inconveniences heaped upon an already staggeringly overburdened
young misfit who rarely got a break. And if things weren't confusing
enough for young Peter already, half of the time the villains turned
out to be people he cared about from the everyday life he was trying
to cope with -- you can see them setting up for that in this latest
movie with the introduction of John Jameson (who, in the comics, turns
into some sort of man/wolf beast after a moon mission goes wrong) and
Dr. Curtis Connors (becomes "The Lizard" after an experiment in limb
regeneration goes wrong -- notice a pattern here?) and, of course,
with Harry Osborne, who eventually becomes the second Green Goblin
(after his father's scientific experiments and subsequent supervillain
career go wrong, naturally..)
|
tod
|
|
response 109 of 323:
|
Jul 12 16:59 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 110 of 323:
|
Jul 12 18:00 UTC 2004 |
Well, in those days when a comic found a successful niche, it stuck to it.
If you were a "tampered with things man was not meant to know / science
experiment gone wrong" sort of comic-book reader you were probably a
Spiderman fan.
|
tod
|
|
response 111 of 323:
|
Jul 12 18:06 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
pgreen
|
|
response 112 of 323:
|
Jul 13 19:25 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 113 of 323:
|
Jul 14 01:37 UTC 2004 |
Just read an item in the ny daily news that the success of spiderman2 has
convinced marvel that spidey's ready for the great white way. They are in
negotiations with Julie Taymor, who did the Lion King play, to
do...yes indeed....
SPIDERMAN-- THE MUSICAL
Hey its already got a catchy theme song ('spiderman spiderman, does
whatever a spider can....) and thats half the battle when it comes to a
musical.
|
pgreen
|
|
response 114 of 323:
|
Jul 14 02:39 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|