Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Ahtman wrote: I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.
Ironically, I feel the same about Firefly.
Funny thing is that was the first thing that came to mind when problems from the fan base. I liked the show & movie but can't stand the fans.
I watched fight club ages ago and I'm still confused, how did he throw himself across the room in the fight scene at the end. In regard to fight club, cool premise, hollywood made claptrap result.
I have to sound all hoity toity but I like films made almost anywhere else due to liking things like characters and plot and feeling , less liking explosions, top 40 sound tracks and NON-STOP ACTION!
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
Bullockist wrote: I watched fight club ages ago and I'm still confused, how did he throw himself across the room in the fight scene at the end. In regard to fight club, cool premise, hollywood made claptrap result.
I have to sound all hoity toity but I like films made almost anywhere else due to liking things like characters and plot and feeling , less liking explosions, top 40 sound tracks and NON-STOP ACTION!
WTH? Hoity Toity? NVM
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
Lawrence of Arabia actually pulled in a good amount of money.
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
Lawrence of Arabia actually pulled in a good amount of money.
I'm pretty sure "Citizen Cain" (and "Seven Samurai" being a close second) is usually lauded as the "greatest movie of all time" by most critics.
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
Lawrence of Arabia actually pulled in a good amount of money.
I'm pretty sure "Citizen Cain" (and "Seven Samurai" being a close second) is usually lauded as the "greatest movie of all time" by most critics.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: And yeah... the book is, in many ways, better than the film.
Nah. The book is good, but its definitely one case where the film absolutely improves on the book.
In fact, Pahalniuk disagrees with you. "Now that I see the movie, especially when I sat down with Jim Uhls and record a commentary track for the DVD, I was sort of embarrassed of the book, because the movie had streamlined the plot and made it so much more effective and made connections that I had never thought to make. There is a line about "fathers setting up franchises with other families," and I never thought about connecting that with the fact that Fight Club was being franchised and the movie made that connection. I was just beating myself in the head for not having made that connection myself."
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Should go without saying, but the book is much better.
No, seriously, it isn't. It's still good, but it reaches in about a dozen different directions that just distracted from the overall message. The film brought a lot of that in to focus and in doing so condensed the message and give it a real punch - instead of meanderings in to Eastern philosophy and other stuff, you get a much clearer focus on a guy who's working his way through extended adolescence and getting to a point where he can actually have a proper relationship.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Platuan4th wrote: Those are both amazing films, IMO. They actually make you feel and think. I've yet to meet anyone not utterly affected by City of Lost Children.
What?
Here's the thing - I love the City of Lost Children. I have the full movie poster on the wall of my study. Its one of my favourite movies. But deep? The film is fanciful and looks marvellous, but it isn't deep at all.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/25 07:08:16
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
Lawrence of Arabia actually pulled in a good amount of money.
I'm pretty sure "Citizen Cain" (and "Seven Samurai" being a close second) is usually lauded as the "greatest movie of all time" by most critics.
As a fan of both of those films, I find no difficulty in saying that Lawrence of Arabia is better than the both of them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/25 07:10:30
Ahtman wrote: I've found that is a decent enough movie but that some of its adherents are problematic to say the least. The other problem is that somehow its reputation is much greater than it is, so people go in having been over-hyped and come out disappointed.
Good post, I think that might explain a lot of this thread. People are reacting more against the over-zealous fans and big reputation than the actual quality of the movie.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I'm reacting to the inability of a man to throw himself into the wall in the manner he was thrown. That's what I'm about Sebster, facts... and sound reasoning.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
Bullockist wrote: I have to sound all hoity toity but I like films made almost anywhere else due to liking things like characters and plot and feeling , less liking explosions, top 40 sound tracks and NON-STOP ACTION!
It doesn't really work that way and never really has.
Hollywood makes its fair share of crap, of course, but so does everywhere else. Cinema elsewhere relies on a constant stream of mediocre genre films no different to Hollywood crap. It's just that Hollywood crap tends to get shown everywhere, while French, Japanese and crap from everywhere else gets a much smaller release outside of their home countries. And when it does come out you get that weird effect that because its obscure people think it's better than it is - consider all the cliched, rubbish anime that are as superficial and implausible as the latest Transformers film but still get loved in anime circles.
In fact, it's even something of a nonsense to talk about Hollywood and international film as though there's a meaningful distinction these days. A lot of the crappiest "American" films made these days come out of production companies like Luc Bessons, and have no US money behind them, and maybe only one American involved in all (as the main star).
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
Lawrence of Arabia actually pulled in a good amount of money.
I'm pretty sure "Citizen Cain" (and "Seven Samurai" being a close second) is usually lauded as the "greatest movie of all time" by most critics.
As a fan of both of those films, I find no difficulty in saying that Lawrence of Arabia is better than the both of them.
I haven't seen "Lawrence of Arabia" since high school social studies class and that was a horrible context to watch it in as the teacher would fast-forward scenes and we never finished it but I remember enjoying what little I saw of it.
Bullockist wrote: I'm reacting to the inability of a man to throw himself into the wall in the manner he was thrown. That's what I'm about Sebster, facts... and sound reasoning.
Maybe that seen was simply what the Narrator saw in his mind… but more to the point who cares? It’s like claiming Star Wars is terrible because space combat wouldn’t work like they were WWII fighters.
It’s a minor detail that’s got nothing to do with the overall meaning of the film.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Bullockist wrote: I have to sound all hoity toity but I like films made almost anywhere else due to liking things like characters and plot and feeling , less liking explosions, top 40 sound tracks and NON-STOP ACTION!
It doesn't really work that way and never really has.
Hollywood makes its fair share of crap, of course, but so does everywhere else. Cinema elsewhere relies on a constant stream of mediocre genre films no different to Hollywood crap. It's just that Hollywood crap tends to get shown everywhere, while French, Japanese and crap from everywhere else gets a much smaller release outside of their home countries. And when it does come out you get that weird effect that because its obscure people think it's better than it is - consider all the cliched, rubbish anime that are as superficial and implausible as the latest Transformers film but still get loved in anime circles.
In fact, it's even something of a nonsense to talk about Hollywood and international film as though there's a meaningful distinction these days. A lot of the crappiest "American" films made these days come out of production companies like Luc Bessons, and have no US money behind them, and maybe only one American involved in all (as the main star).
It does work that way.
Consider your argument refuted.
I am dissapoint, there is no multi-quoting nor even a graph in your reply.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
Bromsy wrote: I'm just happy that the greatest movie of all time didn't do well in theaters and isn't ever going to be rebooted, redone, or sequalized.
I dunno man, I keep hearing rumors that they're making a Big Lebowski 2: The Dude Returns.... but like, that's just your opinion man
It's a bit late for this isn't it? I'm assuming that today's angry white boys have their own things? Seems like they'd respond better to a new property than sequel to a title that's original audience has probably outgrown it. Like are they expecting people to be popping in their Eminem CDs again suddenly... or? Like, what?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/25 16:41:47
Chongara wrote: It's a bit late for this isn't it? I'm assuming that today's angry white boys have their own things? Seems like they'd respond better to a new property than sequel to a title that's original audience has probably outgrown it. Like are they expecting people to be popping in their Eminem CDs again suddenly... or? Like, what?
I think that, for Palahniuk fans, there is no "outgrowing" the book. Plus, there's going to be some "passing on" of the book to younger guys, etc. Also, I think that this is really the first sequel Palahniuk has ever done, which is interesting from a following the work/progression of an artist/author, etc.
He Who Controls The Dice Controls The Universe 
