Be Right Back, Uninstalling

I forgot to say I watched The Man Who Wasn't There last week. It was pretty great. I think the fact that I saw it after reading The Stranger made me appreciate it more.

I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/

(05-29-2009, 12:31 AM)K2 link Wrote: [ -> ]I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.

(05-29-2009, 09:01 AM)fyre link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094]
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.
[/quote]

The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it.  It was a pretty strong collaboration.  Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable.

Saw "UP" today with a few of my friends.

Bloody fantastic movie from start to finish. It's officially my favorite Pixar film.


You know what this means?

GO SEE "UP" RIGHT NOW. SERIOUSLY.

(05-29-2009, 09:13 AM)Surf314 link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86723#msg86723 date=1243605683]
[quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094]
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.
[/quote]

The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it.  It was a pretty strong collaboration.  Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable.
[/quote]

I read the book. It was ok.

The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie".

I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though.

(05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: [ -> ]That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/

But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie.

You know, you're right. That and FMJ are both fucking awesome movies.

(05-29-2009, 06:10 PM)fyre link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=Surf314 link=topic=947.msg86724#msg86724 date=1243606414]
[quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86723#msg86723 date=1243605683]
[quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094]
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.
[/quote]

The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it.  It was a pretty strong collaboration.  Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable.
[/quote]

I read the book. It was ok.

The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie".

I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though.

(05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: [ -> ]That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/

But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie.
[/quote]

I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old.

(05-29-2009, 06:00 PM)Karth is SPY link Wrote: [ -> ]Saw "UP" today with a few of my friends.

Bloody fantastic movie from start to finish. It's officially my favorite Pixar film.


You know what this means?

GO SEE "UP" RIGHT NOW. SERIOUSLY.

Probably seeing it tomorrow.

(05-30-2009, 04:34 AM)CopulatingDuck link Wrote: [ -> ]Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus trailer

I lol'd when jets way up in the clouds get blown up by them.

Watched Transporter 2. It was a fun action movie/Audi commercial.

saw UP again today. I really recommend  it to anyone who's ever  enjoyed  a Pixar film.

(05-30-2009, 10:43 PM)fyre link Wrote: [ -> ]Watched Transporter 2. It was a fun action movie/Audi commercial.

3rd one's okay, the girl in it is really fucking hot.

UP was really good.

Gamer  Movie Trailer

Might be kinda cool.

(05-31-2009, 10:30 AM)Surf314 link Wrote: [ -> ]UP was really good.

This. Also I watched all of Full-Life Consequences earlier that day, so that was all I could think of every time Dug talked.

I watched this over a year ago, but I just happened to think about it now for some reason. What is it, you ask? It is...the best adaptation of Alice in Wonderland EVAR. (Although, I have to admit I haven't seen all the adaptations, but I'm sure this is the best.) And it'll totally kick Burton's version's ass.

It's got a great surreal, dream-like feel that I just love. Here's one of my favorite scenes.

Alice in Wonderland (1966)

And here's a few bonuses...

Alice adventures in Wonderland

Alice in Wonderland (1966)

It's definitely worth a look if you're an Alice fan.

(05-29-2009, 07:41 PM)K2 link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86817#msg86817 date=1243638653]
[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=947.msg86724#msg86724 date=1243606414]
[quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86723#msg86723 date=1243605683]
[quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094]
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.
[/quote]

The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it.  It was a pretty strong collaboration.  Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable.
[/quote]

I read the book. It was ok.

The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie".

I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though.

(05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: [ -> ]That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/

But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie.
[/quote]

I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old.
[/quote]

I just happened to reread this, and I realized that I kinda sounded like an asshole. :-\ Sorry 'bout that. I didn't mean to attack you or your taste or anything. Most of the time if I don't like a movie I'm just like...ok...whatever. But for some reason that movie pissed me off, and I get a bit mad whenever I think about. I dunno why.

(06-01-2009, 06:44 PM)fyre link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86873#msg86873 date=1243644087]
[quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86817#msg86817 date=1243638653]
[quote author=Surf314 link=topic=947.msg86724#msg86724 date=1243606414]
[quote author=fyre link=topic=947.msg86723#msg86723 date=1243605683]
[quote author=K2 link=topic=947.msg86678#msg86678 date=1243575094]
I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey again today. Great film, but so damn ssssslllllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww

That's a shit film. It's like watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa.
[/quote]

The making of the movie is actually interesting. Clarke wrote it on the request of Kubrick for him and then wrote the book alongside it.  It was a pretty strong collaboration.  Also the book helps you understand the movie a lot better, something Kubrick was actually unhappy with because he wanted things to remain inscrutable.
[/quote]

I read the book. It was ok.

The film was great, technically speaking. Great cinematography, great special effects, etc. But IMO, it's nothing more than a technical exercise. Nothing really happened. I don't think it deserves to be called a "movie".

I dunno, I should probably watch it again sometime, cuz I've only seen it once and that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now that I'm older. I doubt it though.

(05-29-2009, 12:37 AM)SBCrystal link Wrote: [ -> ]That's Kubrick for ya, though. At least it's not nearly as bad as Barry Lyndon. :/

But Kubrick was capable of making incredibly engaging movies. Dr. Strangelove, for instance. There isn't a dull moment in that movie.
[/quote]

I enjoyed the book quite a bit, but I agree with you about the movie. I do kind of enjoy it more for the visuals and adherence to actual space physics than for the story (which I missed a lot of the first time I saw it, before I read the book). It's kind of sad that the most accurate portrayal of outer space in a Hollywood movie is over forty years old.
[/quote]

I just happened to reread this, and I realized that I kinda sounded like an asshole. :-\ Sorry 'bout that. I didn't mean to attack you or your taste or anything. Most of the time if I don't like a movie I'm just like...ok...whatever. But for some reason that movie pissed me off, and I get a bit mad whenever I think about. I dunno why.
[/quote]

Don't worry about it. I get the same way about Moulin Rouge. For some reason I cannot understand why anyone could possibly enjoy that movie.