Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Wed Dec 17, 2014 4:04 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16773 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 709, 710, 711, 712, 713, 714, 715 ... 839  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Director
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 1770
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
ilovemovies wrote:
To me, it's all about the movie. Some movies may be three hours long but they can fly by. Take Titanic for instance. It's 3 hours and 14 minutes, but I found the movie to fly by.

The Lord of the Rings are some of my favorite movies of all time. They are all 3 hours long, I think Return of the King is even a little longer.

Malcolm X, JFK, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, The Godfather Parts 1 an 2 are some of the greatest movies of all time. Love them all, don't have a problem with the length. Meet Joe Black is around 3 hours I believe, I love and adore that movie (unlike James, I know he hated that movie).

If I'm really into a movie, I don't care about the length. I've seen 90 minute movies that feel interminable because of how horrible they are.

That said, I still have yet to see Lawrence of Arabia and Gone With the Wind, and I will admit, their lengths are a reason. Both movies are about 3 hours and 40-45 minutes, so I have to make sure I have the time to watch them. I don't like watching movies in pieces. I need to see it in full, if I'm watching a movie for the first time.


Lawrence of Arabia was shown with an intermission.Good thing, too, because the audience was getting really thirsty. I bet Gone with the Wind had an intermission. Gandhi had one, too. I wish more long movies had one. I don't find any of the movies you mention that I've seen are too long, although I haven't seen Malcolm X or JFK and I'm one of the few people who's never seen Gone with the Wind.

_________________
Evil does not wear a bonnet!--Mr. Tinkles


Last edited by Syd Henderson on Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:05 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
15 minutes in the waiting room at the DMV feels the same length of time to you as a 15 minute sexual encounter?

For a minute, I thought this said you had a 15 minute sexual encounter at the DMV, and I was like, "You too?"

Here's a pretty good encapsulation of this conversation.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:08 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6468
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
MGamesCook wrote:
You read me right again kunz. Maybe I'm some sort of mutant and have a heightened sense of time - didn't think that was so unusual.


No, what you are is that kid who wears shorts every day in the winter and claims he isn't cold.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:13 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1994
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
MGamesCook wrote:
You read me right again kunz. Maybe I'm some sort of mutant and have a heightened sense of time - didn't think that was so unusual.


No, what you are is that kid who wears shorts every day in the winter and claims he isn't cold.


Careful or you may have to start another thread about civility - for yourself.


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:16 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6468
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
MGamesCook wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
MGamesCook wrote:
You read me right again kunz. Maybe I'm some sort of mutant and have a heightened sense of time - didn't think that was so unusual.


No, what you are is that kid who wears shorts every day in the winter and claims he isn't cold.


Careful or you may have to start another thread about civility - for yourself.


There is nothing uncivil about that statement.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:16 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1994
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Okay, just wanted to check and make sure. In any case, I don't fully understand your comment. A movies' length is concrete. In the example you used before, you described the difference between a good 15 minutes and a bad 15 minutes. But it's still 15.


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:22 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
No length of time is concrete. Psychology and physics both say so.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:26 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3959
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Syd Henderson wrote:
ilovemovies wrote:
To me, it's all about the movie. Some movies may be three hours long but they can fly by. Take Titanic for instance. It's 3 hours and 14 minutes, but I found the movie to fly by.

The Lord of the Rings are some of my favorite movies of all time. They are all 3 hours long, I think Return of the King is even a little longer.

Malcolm X, JFK, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, The Godfather Parts 1 an 2 are some of the greatest movies of all time. Love them all, don't have a problem with the length. Meet Joe Black is around 3 hours I believe, I love and adore that movie (unlike James, I know he hated that movie).

If I'm really into a movie, I don't care about the length. I've seen 90 minute movies that feel interminable because of how horrible they are.

That said, I still have yet to see Lawrence of Arabia and Gone With the Wind, and I will admit, their lengths are a reason. Both movies are about 3 hours and 40-45 minutes, so I have to make sure I have the time to watch them. I don't like watching movies in pieces. I need to see it in full, if I'm watching a movie for the first time.


Lawrence of Arabia was shown with an intermission.Good thing, too, because the audience was getting really thirsty. I bet Gone with the Wind had an intermission. Gandhi had one, too. I wish more long movies had one. I don't find any of the movies you mention that I've seen are too long, although I haven't seen Malcolm X or JFK and I'm one of the few people who's never seen Gone with the Wind.

Believe me, you're better not seeing that film, the racial stereotypes alone made it unwatchable for me(same with Birth Of A Nation).


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:27 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6468
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
MGamesCook wrote:
Okay, just wanted to check and make sure. In any case, I don't fully understand your comment. A movies' length is concrete. In the example you used before, you described the difference between a good 15 minutes and a bad 15 minutes. But it's still 15.


But how time feels is relative. Everybody from Einstein to conventional wisdom ("Time flies when you're having fun...a watched pot never boils" etc) has said this. Everyone of us feels it in our day to day lives. And you seem to be trying to suggest otherwise. The idea that 180 minutes in a theater always feels the exact same way regardless of what you're doing is ridiculous enough (to take your point to the logical extreme, you'd be just as engaged watching a blank screen) that I think you're just trying to call attention to yourself, like the boy who wears shorts in the winter and waits for someone to ask "Oh aren't you cold?"

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:28 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1994
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
MGamesCook wrote:
Okay, just wanted to check and make sure. In any case, I don't fully understand your comment. A movies' length is concrete. In the example you used before, you described the difference between a good 15 minutes and a bad 15 minutes. But it's still 15.


But how time feels is relative. Everybody from Einstein to conventional wisdom ("Time flies when you're having fun...a watched pot never boils" etc) has said this. Everyone of us feels it in our day to day lives. And you seem to be trying to suggest otherwise. The idea that 180 minutes in a theater always feels the exact same way regardless of what you're doing is ridiculous enough (to take your point to the logical extreme, you'd be just as engaged watching a blank screen) that I think you're just trying to call attention to yourself, like the boy who wears shorts in the winter and waits for someone to ask "Oh aren't you cold?"


I don't know if boys who wear shorts in winter have that motive either, but anyway. I'm not out for myself here. The issue is...if Scorsese didn't want Wall Street to feel like three hours, why did he make it three hours? Is it bad for a movie to feel what it is? Why is a fast 3 hours a good thing? If it didn't feel 3 hours, then maybe it didn't need to be 3 hours. A slow 90 minutes is still 90 minutes, no matter what anyone says. It's something that can't be argued against. As to how it feels, that's an argument that has no bottom. Anyone can claim that, but a running length still is what it is.


Last edited by MGamesCook on Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:00 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 322
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Time is 100% relative. Nothing about it is set in stone; there are just agreed-upon standards of measurement.

The last film I saw with an intermission was Hamlet, which absolutely needed it, but its 4-hour running time didn't detract at all from it. Intermissions would seemingly benefit theaters, because it's a natural break that allows for more concession scarfing. The studios must not like them nowadays, because rare is the film that has one.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:02 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3959
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Gwaihir wrote:
Time is 100% relative. Nothing about it is set in stone; there are just agreed-upon standards of measurement.

The last film I saw with an intermission was Hamlet, which absolutely needed it, but its 4-hour running time didn't detract at all from it. Intermissions would seemingly benefit theaters, because it's a natural break that allows for more concession scarfing. The studios must not like them nowadays, because rare is the film that has one.

Che was the last film I can think of that had an intermission.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:08 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1994
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Gwaihir wrote:
Time is 100% relative. Nothing about it is set in stone; there are just agreed-upon standards of measurement.

The last film I saw with an intermission was Hamlet, which absolutely needed it, but its 4-hour running time didn't detract at all from it. Intermissions would seemingly benefit theaters, because it's a natural break that allows for more concession scarfing. The studios must not like them nowadays, because rare is the film that has one.


Intermissions make a world of difference.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:10 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 322
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Hellboy II:The Golden Army - I have to agree 100% with JB on this one, especially his issues with the ending, which were my lone problems with it as well. That and I missed Rasputin, though Nuada was a solid villain. Rasputin was just so delightfully deranged. Where Hellboy II exceeded its predecessor was in its far more assured acting by its central characters, and in its remarkable world building. The Goblin Market in particular was wondrous, and the Angel of Death sequence was, though on its surface not entirely necessary, a cool piece of mythos. Hellboy II did a much better job of portraying two worlds, the human and the fantastical, than its predecessor. Unfortunately the ending had so many facepalm moments, two of which were so bad that you wonder how they got past the script stage, that they hurt the overall film. 7/10, worth a look if you liked the original. Speaking of which...

Hellboy (rewatch) - I was mostly struck by... how cool Rasputin was as a villain (though quibbles can be made with the portrayal, I loved how unhinged he was) and how much The Avengers either borrowed or ripped off from this film, depending on how charitable you are. It was good to see that though, because the whole alien portal thing definitely felt like something I'd seen before the first time I watched The Avengers, but I couldn't quite place it.

All in all, I'll welcome Hellboy III if it ever gets made, but the first two films are interesting to watch in that though they're both good, they're almost mirror images in quality terms. What one film got right the other didn't, particularly on a story level. If both films' problems can be smoothed out in part III, we'll get a special film indeed.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:26 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 373
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
thered47 wrote:
I don't exactly feel like getting drawn into this conversation per se but I am reminded of the scene in The Next Generation where Data watches a pot of water and winds up observing something along the lines of "but it always takes the exact same amount of time to boil whether I watch it or not!"


MGamesCook wrote:
And he was right.


This is absolutely not true. Time a pot of water boiling at sea level, and then fly to Aspen, CO, and time a pot of water boiling there.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:35 am
Profile
Online
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 1090
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The Act of Killing (2013)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2375605/
Documentary about the genocide that occurred in Indonesia in the mid 1960's against communists and Chinese residents in general. The methodology of educating (for me the point of a documentary) the viewers is unusual in that the director gets the perpetrators of the murders/torture to confront their sins by having them reenact their crimes by allowing them to stage scenes (of their choosing) of the acts they committed. The Act of Killing thus functions as a "making of" documentary of these scenes inter-cut with "interviews" with the real-life criminals (none of whom were held to account) making them. The memories this awakens in these "gangsters" (what they call themselves) has mixed results - some harbour deep regrets while others seemingly have little or no remorse. As a documentary it effectively highlights a genocide that took the lives of over a million people that is perhaps not as well known as others and examines the mindset of the people that undertake such acts. I watched the "extended edition" that is, at 2h 39m, far too long for the content. The standard version is 1h 55m, which I suspect I would have greatly preferred. Definitely scores points for originality of delivery, but I found the actual content strangely lacking.
7/10.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:52 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1994
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vera Drake

Very different style from Leigh's other work that I've seen. More classical, polished; bit more Hollywood. I think it's very compelling and dark in just the right way. From what I see, it takes no stand on abortion at all. Instead, it simply raises the question, is Vera a bad person or a good one. I mean obviously there's a bit of both, point being the movie is focused on her character and not the larger issues, which is good. I did think there were one or two too many close-ups of Imelda Stanton crying in the second hour, but all scenes were extremely effective. An ideal drama.


Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:49 am
Profile
Online
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1425
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The Fifth Estate (2013)

It operates itself dryly as surface recreations all the time. The only moments it hits deeper emotional stuff are purely based on Benedict Cumberbatch's compelling performance. He may run the risk of being typecasted as an anti-social genius very soon, but the different depth in which he portrays each role is still distinctive enough to impress. Superficially watchable, but apart from one performance there is nothing to latch on to. 5.5/10

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Pure cinematic highs alternating with entertaining mediums, the latter especially when the film goes into its last hour. I also got a vague feeling of something incomplete in the narrative, especially concerning Chandler's FBI character. But those peaks are, deliriously, some of 2013's best. DiCaprio is in insane energy here, delivering his most accomplished performance (imo) to date. The scene depicting the effects of Lemmon 714 had me in tears. 8.5/10


Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:58 am
Profile
Online
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2702
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The Wolf of Wall Street

This film should be renamed "what guys will get up to if given too much money, freedom, power etc".

I wasn't remotely offended by this film, because it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. Namely that even the dorkiest of men (and this crew really were dorky), will indulge themselves in an opulent, decadent demise given a chance. And what better chance than a largely unregulated 1980s financial market?

Of course this film is fundamentally amoral. But it is challenging in that it asks you to give a shit about this fact amidst all the fun taking place on screen. And it is fun. Scorsese seems to employ the same narrative structure that he did in Goodfellas and Casino but with obviously very different results.

Of all Leo's collaborations with Scorsese, I think for better or worse, this is the best of them. I never fully bought him as Howard Hughes for instance, but as a fool-made-good on the stock exchange, and with the clear level of comedy this film layers over the action, I can go for it.

I was entertained by this. I can't remember ever seeing more crease in a mainstream film. You can't call it a great Scorsese flick, but bloody fun one.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon Jan 20, 2014 8:02 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 663
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Syd Henderson wrote:
Lawrence of Arabia was shown with an intermission.Good thing, too, because the audience was getting really thirsty. I bet Gone with the Wind had an intermission. Gandhi had one, too. I wish more long movies had one. I don't find any of the movies you mention that I've seen are too long, although I haven't seen Malcolm X or JFK and I'm one of the few people who's never seen Gone with the Wind.


I have seen Gone With the Wind and haven't seen Lawrence of Arabia. I suspect you got the better of it. I suppose GWTW is a good movie, but I saw it at a theater that ran it about 16 years ago - with an intermission, and to me it was boring and seemed even longer than it actually is. Clark Gable gives a terrific turn in it though if you like him. I don't believe in the conspiracies brought up, but thoroughly enjoyed JFK when I caught it in the original run. Like some others have said, if I think a movie is good it is not too long. If I don't like it then it is too long. I've never enjoyed a long movie and then thought to myself that it might have been better if it had a shorter story.


Last edited by CasualDad on Mon Jan 20, 2014 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Jan 20, 2014 1:10 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16773 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 709, 710, 711, 712, 713, 714, 715 ... 839  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nitrium, peng and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr