NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › Oh I'm sorry, Did I Break Your Conversation........Well Allow Me A Movie Thread by S&T
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Oh I'm sorry, Did I Break Your Conversation........Well Allow Me A Movie Thread by S&T - Page 1265

post #37921 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrp44 View Post

Started Netflix back up so gonna start a TV series...should I go with Sons of Anarchy or Dexter first?

the Dexter series finale automatically makes me tell friends and family to never invest anytime into starting Dexter.
No matter how good those first few seasons are... DONT do it.

You will be so devastated at how GOD AWFUL the show gets... its so hilariously bad after season 4.

So...

Sons of Anarchy, easy. smokin.gif
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
post #37922 of 57723

Marco Polo........an interesting 4.5/8

#QuestFor8

We are Tottenham, From the Lane...

El Tricolor 

My biography, as told by Grandtheftbike

Reply

#QuestFor8

We are Tottenham, From the Lane...

El Tricolor 

My biography, as told by Grandtheftbike

Reply
post #37923 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiCeNseD To BaLL View Post

People complaining about the plots of Liam Neeson movies are watching for the wrong reasons.

You don't go watch his movies for Oscar
Worthy screen plays.

You go watch to see him kick people's *****.

He's old though. Should've broken a hip or had a heart attack in the second movie.
post #37924 of 57723
If I was a screen play writer or producer I would cast liam as a psycho killer man. Like having orgasm After a kill in a blood pool. Some sick **** ... LoL
post #37925 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiCeNseD To BaLL View Post

Just finished Foxcatcher...

Wow.
Damn.
Wow eek.gif

I really hope Carrell gets strong consideration for an Oscar.

And I really hope he stops ******* around with stupid comedies and takes on more serious roles because it's obvious he can act when he wants to.

Awesome film.

Nah, he's too good of a comedic actor to stop doing comedies, he's just got to be more selective with the comedic roles like he has with these dramatic roles.
post #37926 of 57723
Foxcatcher was very good. So glad I decided to watch it. Had me on the edge of my seat. Took me a while to get used to the (deliberately) slow pacing. Great performances by Carrell, Tatum and Ruffalo.

BTW, has anyone else seen I Origins? It's not as cohesive as his previous film, Another Earth (which Brit Marling also stars in), but I applaud Mike Cahill's attempt at another small budget but heady sci-fi flick. Can't wait to see what else he comes up with in the future.
post #37927 of 57723
The Last Detail was great. Just a lot of fun. I really enjoy stories like that. Might track down the book. Jack Nicholson, Otis Young, and a young Randy Quaid was a great trio for this. Movie made me want to experience America in the 70s. The camaraderie reminded me of when I use to go out drinking with my boys in college. Strong 7/8

Still of the Night was very enjoyable for me. Even though I read about the heavy Hitchcock homages and style I watched cuz of the premise. It sort of paid off although there was no eerie or macabre twist. The Hitchcockian vibe was rampant throughout. Then I got to see some Meryl Streep mass devil.gif Had me like eek.gif Cool movie

I just finished watching Company Business with Gene Hackman. Another good enjoyable movie. Liked how they maneuvered through Europe avoiding the CIA and KGB.

Might watch the Flying Scotsman or Lilies of the Field or Organization or The Bounty in between watching a Twilight Zone ep I haven't seen.
post #37928 of 57723
We should do Tuesday night flicks ...everyone watch a movie on Tuesdays and discuss likes or not ... Or any other day.
post #37929 of 57723
K let's watch Wolf of Wall Street (again for some of us) next Tuesday since it's streaming on Netflix and Amazon Prime, many non-blu ray owners will have access.

We can discuss next Wednesday smile.gif
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
post #37930 of 57723
LoL ... I'm down ... We should look for films that might not be big budget like Indy films, foreign, etc on occasions.
post #37931 of 57723
Lets watch Triangle, every Wednesday, for eternity.
Minnesota Vikings
NYK NYY NYR
Reply
Minnesota Vikings
NYK NYY NYR
Reply
post #37932 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keko Jones View Post

LoL ... I'm down ... We should look for films that might not be big budget like Indy films, foreign, etc on occasions.

that sounds cool.

 

 

not wolf of wall street though please

SRVD | cinévogue - film style blog

"WHERE THE DAMN HOPPIN' JOHN?" - Chalky White

Reply

SRVD | cinévogue - film style blog

"WHERE THE DAMN HOPPIN' JOHN?" - Chalky White

Reply
post #37933 of 57723
Lol.

It was just an initial idea, but yeah Keko I'm down for indie or low-key good films that not many people may have seen.

Always cool to discuss good movies that fly under the radar.

Put out some good ideas!
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
LOS ANGELES LAKERS - SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
MARGOT ROBBIE
COLE WORLD
Reply
post #37934 of 57723
I'll suggest Metro Manila. I really wanted to watch it last year but couldn't get my hands on a copy. Surprisingly on Netflix now.
post #37935 of 57723
Predestination is not an Indy film but it's pretty cool ... Some might not like it but it was pretty mind blowing.
post #37936 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by illmaticsoulchild View Post

I'll suggest Metro Manila. I really wanted to watch it last year but couldn't get my hands on a copy. Surprisingly on Netflix now.
I'm down for this. Will watch ...
post #37937 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by hymen man View Post

Lets watch Triangle, every Wednesday, for eternity.
laugh.gif
post #37938 of 57723

I still haven't seen Triangle

 

I feel like I'm missing out and personally hurting the feelings of @Kevin Cleveland

post #37939 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime View Post

Just finished watching the recent remake of Carrie..

So much potential.. What I don't get is, the brian de Palma version was quite a bit different from the book.. So why basically remake that version instead of maybe going more with what actually happened in the book

They literally just updated the de Palma version adding modern stuff (cell phones and youtube) and better special effects






With a lot of the subject matter which took place being so prevalent today (bullying and mass killings), they literally could have went with a closer version to the novel (inclusive of the aftermath) and it would have made for a far better movie.. Maybe they should have taken the source materially a little more seriously and tried to make a genuinely good movie from a King novel (like the green mile)

What was so disappointing bout the film was that Chloe is so fricking talented, but they decided to rehash the original De Palma film almost verbatim at times.

I have not seen a remake be so faithful to the original since Night of the Living Dead; but at least that was a film which you could make sense of it since it was for some of the original film makers to make money on their masterpiece. This? Cruddy.
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
post #37940 of 57723
Peter Jackson has finally come full circle with his films based on Middle Earth. With the last "The Hobbit," film being released today, it can be assumed that he has put his finishing touches on the series. That is, unless the Tolkein estate relinquishes their hold on some of his other work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CP1708 View Post

Every detail. You're judging off months of expectations. Those that watched opening weekend blind were blown away. (Myself included)

The feels with his mom to start, the humor after, the right to the point stone, meet Gamora, Rocket, Groot. The humor of Rocket right away, how great Groot was, the prison scene, the walkman scene, the escape, meeting Drax and his deadpan humor, the joining together, Ronan showing up and waxing Drax, Ronan defying Thrawn who just smiles (!!!!!!!!) the gorgeous blue b*tch, the "plan", Blue Merle whistling, the space battle, just like Kevin Bacon, Jackson Pollack, the final battle, the dance, the music, the end feels, Groot saying We, uniting to hold the stone, then closing it all down, knowing a sequel is coming.

This all worked and came together perfectly. Unexpected. Just sheer enjoyment for two and a half hours. People I know that hate every movie ever, LOVED this film. Men, women, kids. No expectations tho.

You saw it five months too late.

That's my complaint with a lot of you guys catching movies months later.

It's like, someone's gonna come through in three or four months saying he just caught Interstellar and be like, "Meh, it didn't look that good on my TV...."

laugh.gif
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
post #37941 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastaMind033 View Post

Best part of Guardians outside of the humor, music, and Groot was how great of a job Gunn did world building.

He nailed it and you just bought into it immediately.

Gunn is brilliant, I'm so happy that Guardians has put him on the map. He was really one of the most underrated genre filmmakers prior to this film.
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
post #37942 of 57723
I think there's a huge difference between judging a movie on it's overall quality and pointing out what it's lacking in some parts.

If the movie is just a viewing spectacle it really isn't worth watching to me. Word to Gravity. I'd at least expect a good story from Interstellar no matter if I watched it on a tv set from the 50s or if I watched it in Imax 3D.
post #37943 of 57723
Watched "what if", "the perks of being a wallflower" and " when Harry met Sally"

Enjoyed all 3, wasn't overly in love with any of them.. But all good movies.. Loved the way the actors played off of each other in all 3.. Really good chemistry in the movies
post #37944 of 57723
Honeymooners marathon pimp.gif

Happy New Year y'all
post #37945 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Zik View Post

I think there's a huge difference between judging a movie on it's overall quality and pointing out what it's lacking in some parts.

If the movie is just a viewing spectacle it really isn't worth watching to me. Word to Gravity. I'd at least expect a good story from Interstellar no matter if I watched it on a tv set from the 50s or if I watched it in Imax 3D.

But film is made to be seen on a large screen, with professional sound, and an audience.

Television is made to be seen on, yes, your television. laugh.gif

Your missing a large amount of detail by watching a film on your television, unless you have a pretty damn good home theater, which I don't think anyone on here has. nerd.gif

I can go on and on about films that were great theatrical experiences, that would still hold up if I were to go see them again tomorrow in the theater, but loses some detail when you go see them in the theater. Hugo was the most glaring example for me. Yes it's a decent/good film on it's own, but in a theater it's damn close to a masterpiece.

A good story, script, acting, and directing is noticeable on any screen, sure, but when films dedicate so much time and money to put the effects on screen, it counts.

For me, if I see a movie in the theater as opposed to a home viewing for the first time, that first theatrical experience will always hold a special place in my mind. I watched Her yesterday for the first time since I saw it in theaters, and while it wasn't as good, it took me back to how I felt when I first watched it, and was able to accept some of the technical flaws that I bypassed earlier because of the experience I had watching it in theaters.

I'm a HUGE stickler for quality. I really hate watching movies on my laptop or especially my phone/tablet, unless I have seen it at least once before. I will, but I don't like to. I will always spend a little bit more for a better experience. Every time.

That's just me though, and I feel like a lot of people lose out of their experience because they don't venture out to the theater enough. I know I go way more than I should, but I also know that others probably don't go out as much as THEY should. laugh.gif
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
DALLAS MAVERICKS
. At least Rick Carlisle is still here .
. Anderson, Barea, Dalembert, Evans, Felton, Harris, Jenkins, Matthews, McGee, Nowitzki, Pachulia, Parsons, Powell, Villanueva Williams .
Reply
post #37946 of 57723
Twilight Zone marathon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Never liked The Honeymooners.
post #37947 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAir21 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime View Post

Just finished watching the recent remake of Carrie..

So much potential.. What I don't get is, the brian de Palma version was quite a bit different from the book.. So why basically remake that version instead of maybe going more with what actually happened in the book

They literally just updated the de Palma version adding modern stuff (cell phones and youtube) and better special effects






With a lot of the subject matter which took place being so prevalent today (bullying and mass killings), they literally could have went with a closer version to the novel (inclusive of the aftermath) and it would have made for a far better movie.. Maybe they should have taken the source materially a little more seriously and tried to make a genuinely good movie from a King novel (like the green mile)

What was so disappointing bout the film was that Chloe is so fricking talented, but they decided to rehash the original De Palma film almost verbatim at times.

I have not seen a remake be so faithful to the original since Night of the Living Dead; but at least that was a film which you could make sense of it since it was for some of the original film makers to make money on their masterpiece. This? Cruddy.


Exactly they could have very easily went with the book version and it would have been a far better movie and story.. Plus it would be relevant with the stuff that is going on in schools today.. Bullying.. Mass killings
post #37948 of 57723
And happy new year guys
post #37949 of 57723
Also currently watching 'x-men first class', easily the best x-men film to date.. Should have just let Vaughn start from scratch and run the show fresh
post #37950 of 57723
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAir21 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Zik View Post

I think there's a huge difference between judging a movie on it's overall quality and pointing out what it's lacking in some parts.

If the movie is just a viewing spectacle it really isn't worth watching to me. Word to Gravity. I'd at least expect a good story from Interstellar no matter if I watched it on a tv set from the 50s or if I watched it in Imax 3D.

But film is made to be seen on a large screen, with professional sound, and an audience.

Television is made to be seen on, yes, your television. laugh.gif

Your missing a large amount of detail by watching a film on your television, unless you have a pretty damn good home theater, which I don't think anyone on here has. nerd.gif

I can go on and on about films that were great theatrical experiences, that would still hold up if I were to go see them again tomorrow in the theater, but loses some detail when you go see them in the theater. Hugo was the most glaring example for me. Yes it's a decent/good film on it's own, but in a theater it's damn close to a masterpiece.

A good story, script, acting, and directing is noticeable on any screen, sure, but when films dedicate so much time and money to put the effects on screen, it counts.

For me, if I see a movie in the theater as opposed to a home viewing for the first time, that first theatrical experience will always hold a special place in my mind. I watched Her yesterday for the first time since I saw it in theaters, and while it wasn't as good, it took me back to how I felt when I first watched it, and was able to accept some of the technical flaws that I bypassed earlier because of the experience I had watching it in theaters.

I'm a HUGE stickler for quality. I really hate watching movies on my laptop or especially my phone/tablet, unless I have seen it at least once before. I will, but I don't like to. I will always spend a little bit more for a better experience. Every time.

That's just me though, and I feel like a lot of people lose out of their experience because they don't venture out to the theater enough. I know I go way more than I should, but I also know that others probably don't go out as much as THEY should. laugh.gif
I don't care about most of that. I don't disagree that some ppl should get out more and go watch a movie and I'm not saying that the tv experience is equal to the theater experience by any means but I just tend to have my priorities that I naturally drift to when I watch a movie.

I just want to see good stories, good acting, a good script acted out, good directing, etc. I can tell if I'm seeing excellent cinematography on my tv. I know which movies need to be seen in theaters for the most part.

There's more trash to average movies out there being made than very good to excellent films for ppl to say I have to watch the flick in theaters and if not I'm missing out on a vital part of the experience. So how much they put in to visuals is a bit of a wash imo. The way you make it sound is the theater experience first just straight up fools you and ***** with your first impression and how you digest the movie when you end up seeing it a 2nd time on tv.

I don't believe I needed to see the Maltese Falcon in theaters to enjoy it right.

My 50+ inch HD plasma suits me fine when a movie gets that visual praise but nothing else.

I'll always be substance over style when approaching film.
Edited by Master Zik - 12/31/14 at 11:41pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General
NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › Oh I'm sorry, Did I Break Your Conversation........Well Allow Me A Movie Thread by S&T