Vader being Lukes father. The chick and Luke being siblings. Yoda being a Jedi. etc.
that was a shit movie.Kimmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:
jack reacher 8/10 lots of injuries pertaining to the head in this movie hah- good chase stuff - story aiight, nice and confusing. tom cruise is very attractive still.
3 stooges-esque scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE0oDPBslUs
guys don't listen to kim. that was one of the most silly scenes in the film.
the three stooges Are silly - was laughing in that scene, why i posted it
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6587|Graz, Austria
That in the end, the mighty Emperor Disney subdues the whole galaxy far, far away and turns it into a theme park.RTHKI wrote:
what surprises
(The best Jedi, who'd deserved to appear in the 7th movie.)
The movie is better than the book imo. I thought it was brilliant that they cast someone as Tom that looked like Hemingway, Fitzgeralds' rival. I thought DiCaprio was perfectly cast as Gatsby, he plays that sort of role well. Was the partying over the top? In a way, but it was fun too. The only real problem I had with the movie was Toby McGuire, but I hate him in everything so...Uzique The Lesser wrote:
great gatsby was really shit. and i don't care about 'faithful' novel adaptations or w/e. i could take his zany romeo & juliet remaking - it captured the histrionics and classical pageantry of shakespeare perfectly well, even with his "WTF" idiosyncrasies layered over the top (incidentally you get a pretty good idea what a director thinks of himself when he drastically alters shakespeare and fitzgerald...) but the WHOLE POINT of the great gatsby was the nuance and subtle psychodrama going on beneath his surface: gatsby gently ironizes the 'american dream' and tells a beautiful/damned story of aspiration and success. the latest movie had none of that. it was a crass celebration of partying and luhrmann's art department. it drained all of the complexity and nuance out of the book's tale, the ambiguities hidden in gatsby's (and fitzgerald's) lives and their surface appearances of success and fame... and just replaced it with an hour and a half of the most vacuous, dumb, meaningless spectacle imaginable. again: he made lots of stylistic changes with romeo & juliet, it was just as bombastic and over-the-top... but it retained the essence of the original. this remake is just stupid. you don't leave with the core 'message' or feel the 'stimmung' of the story at all. it's bawdy and shallow.
the choice of sound-track is a massive disaster and vanity project/ego-trip by jay-z that is so egregious it deserves a thread all unto itself, tbh. every single song on it is an absolute stinker, so ill-conceived, poorly advised, and terribly executed.
also lol'ing at the conversation about aussie/nz cinema above. the world doesn't give a fuck about aussie/nz cinema. 'film' as an institution still has its heart in europe.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
It opened by biasing the entire audience with video of a guy shooting people, but then the movie "twists" it later and says that it wasn't that guy but was another guy? Who was it then, some unmentioned evil twin? Jack Reacher failed as a mystery or even a thriller because of this, I think.Kimmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:
jack reacher 8/10 lots of injuries pertaining to the head in this movie hah- good chase stuff - story aiight, nice and confusing. tom cruise is very attractive still.
3 stooges-esque scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE0oDPBslUs
What are you on about. It was always the same guy.
I think the movie succeeded as a mystery because UNN had no idea what was going on
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 
You only didn't like the book because it made you feel uncomfortable about your wealth chasing and fake persona.Jay wrote:
The movie is better than the book imo. I thought it was brilliant that they cast someone as Tom that looked like Hemingway, Fitzgeralds' rival. I thought DiCaprio was perfectly cast as Gatsby, he plays that sort of role well. Was the partying over the top? In a way, but it was fun too. The only real problem I had with the movie was Toby McGuire, but I hate him in everything so...Uzique The Lesser wrote:
great gatsby was really shit. and i don't care about 'faithful' novel adaptations or w/e. i could take his zany romeo & juliet remaking - it captured the histrionics and classical pageantry of shakespeare perfectly well, even with his "WTF" idiosyncrasies layered over the top (incidentally you get a pretty good idea what a director thinks of himself when he drastically alters shakespeare and fitzgerald...) but the WHOLE POINT of the great gatsby was the nuance and subtle psychodrama going on beneath his surface: gatsby gently ironizes the 'american dream' and tells a beautiful/damned story of aspiration and success. the latest movie had none of that. it was a crass celebration of partying and luhrmann's art department. it drained all of the complexity and nuance out of the book's tale, the ambiguities hidden in gatsby's (and fitzgerald's) lives and their surface appearances of success and fame... and just replaced it with an hour and a half of the most vacuous, dumb, meaningless spectacle imaginable. again: he made lots of stylistic changes with romeo & juliet, it was just as bombastic and over-the-top... but it retained the essence of the original. this remake is just stupid. you don't leave with the core 'message' or feel the 'stimmung' of the story at all. it's bawdy and shallow.
the choice of sound-track is a massive disaster and vanity project/ego-trip by jay-z that is so egregious it deserves a thread all unto itself, tbh. every single song on it is an absolute stinker, so ill-conceived, poorly advised, and terribly executed.
also lol'ing at the conversation about aussie/nz cinema above. the world doesn't give a fuck about aussie/nz cinema. 'film' as an institution still has its heart in europe.
Last edited by Macbeth (2013-05-22 18:41:08)
Nah. If I was chasing wealth I'd be in finance.Macbeth wrote:
You only didn't like the book because it made you feel uncomfortable about your wealth chasing and fake persona.Jay wrote:
The movie is better than the book imo. I thought it was brilliant that they cast someone as Tom that looked like Hemingway, Fitzgeralds' rival. I thought DiCaprio was perfectly cast as Gatsby, he plays that sort of role well. Was the partying over the top? In a way, but it was fun too. The only real problem I had with the movie was Toby McGuire, but I hate him in everything so...Uzique The Lesser wrote:
great gatsby was really shit. and i don't care about 'faithful' novel adaptations or w/e. i could take his zany romeo & juliet remaking - it captured the histrionics and classical pageantry of shakespeare perfectly well, even with his "WTF" idiosyncrasies layered over the top (incidentally you get a pretty good idea what a director thinks of himself when he drastically alters shakespeare and fitzgerald...) but the WHOLE POINT of the great gatsby was the nuance and subtle psychodrama going on beneath his surface: gatsby gently ironizes the 'american dream' and tells a beautiful/damned story of aspiration and success. the latest movie had none of that. it was a crass celebration of partying and luhrmann's art department. it drained all of the complexity and nuance out of the book's tale, the ambiguities hidden in gatsby's (and fitzgerald's) lives and their surface appearances of success and fame... and just replaced it with an hour and a half of the most vacuous, dumb, meaningless spectacle imaginable. again: he made lots of stylistic changes with romeo & juliet, it was just as bombastic and over-the-top... but it retained the essence of the original. this remake is just stupid. you don't leave with the core 'message' or feel the 'stimmung' of the story at all. it's bawdy and shallow.
the choice of sound-track is a massive disaster and vanity project/ego-trip by jay-z that is so egregious it deserves a thread all unto itself, tbh. every single song on it is an absolute stinker, so ill-conceived, poorly advised, and terribly executed.
also lol'ing at the conversation about aussie/nz cinema above. the world doesn't give a fuck about aussie/nz cinema. 'film' as an institution still has its heart in europe.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
lol okay. You are just doing engineering because it is your life passion.
I absolutely love it, yes.Macbeth wrote:
lol okay. You are just doing engineering because it is your life passion.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Yes, that is why you have told us you one day want to retire and teach history at a college. You dream of getting out of the field one day to teach little Uzis since you have such a passion for your work as an engineer.
Last edited by Macbeth (2013-05-22 19:26:46)
Sure, easy job, easy hours, and you get to teach an easy subject. I would never want to teach engineering, too much of a pain in the ass and I would be a complete asshole to bad students. With history, who cares? No one is gonna get killed by someone who snuck through with a D in history class
I dunno why it's difficult for you to understand that I like what I do. My primary job is conducting green energy surveys on buildings. I go to the building, root around for a week or so, then spend a few weeks writing up a report telling them exactly what they have to do to comply with building codes, and become more energy efficient at the same time. It's fun. It takes a brain, and there's creativity involved. When I'm not doing that, I'm designing building systems in CAD, mostly so the building can meet LEED certification. I have enough variety in my work, and I exercise my brain enough, that I don't get bored. Most people can't say the same about their own jobs.
I dunno why it's difficult for you to understand that I like what I do. My primary job is conducting green energy surveys on buildings. I go to the building, root around for a week or so, then spend a few weeks writing up a report telling them exactly what they have to do to comply with building codes, and become more energy efficient at the same time. It's fun. It takes a brain, and there's creativity involved. When I'm not doing that, I'm designing building systems in CAD, mostly so the building can meet LEED certification. I have enough variety in my work, and I exercise my brain enough, that I don't get bored. Most people can't say the same about their own jobs.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Unless you devout serious amounts of time early, you aren't going to be teaching higher level students than community college. Teaching history at a real college means you have to do a lot of research and constantly publish papers. "Publish or perish." It is not an easy job and many history professors take time off from teaching to write their books. Building a career that will land you in a halfway decent college is also something you need to start in your 20's. Not when you are 50.
Don't really care who I teach if that's the path I choose to take. I'd be an adjunct somewhere anyway, not looking to build a second career.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Yeah it is not as easy as you seem to think.
Probably won't happen anyway, we'll see.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
So what, did I just fall asleep through some huge reveal hidden among the creepy Russian scenes?-Whiteroom- wrote:
What are you on about. It was always the same guy.
The guy: here's me shooting people in the movie.
The guy later: I don't remember much but I probably did it
Tom Cruise: You didn't do it.
The guy: *weepy weepy*
Roll credits.
That denies the possibility of there being a bad mystery, which I think this was. There's a difference between a solid mystery/thriller and a film just not meshing together. I've got all kinds of mystery movies/film noir and thrillers. Lots of them kept me guessing in a good way. Jack Reacher started out by saying "A is true" and then said "sorry, A is not true." Wow, I'm going to file that right next to Vertigo.Mutantbear wrote:
I think the movie succeeded as a mystery because UNN had no idea what was going on
If I missed something crucial during that snorefest, please: let me know.
i fell asleep in iron man.. that's just me being bored through non stop action.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So what, did I just fall asleep through some huge reveal hidden among the creepy Russian scenes?-Whiteroom- wrote:
What are you on about. It was always the same guy.
..
you're right it's a fuckin mystery.. so there will be part 2.
i think i was so into the character tom cruise was playing that it made me throw up an 8. . im attracted to it.
(they even had a long abs shot but i wasnt going to tell you that..
I like mysteries, but John Reacher didn't reach me.
I can't believe any of you even went to see that movie.
Rental.
In a nutshell:
Shooter: "Hi, I'm shooting people. You can see me shooting people because I'm being filmed shooting people."
Tom: "I don't want this case."
Tom: "I want this case."
Russian: "Eat your fingers."
Goons: "We criminals are loyal to a fault because we're criminals. With guns. And stuff."
Tom: "Don't talk about this case."
Black cop: "I'm a black man attacking a white woman. Edgy!"
Tom: "Fuck, you talked about this case."
Tom: "I've got Robocop aim, black cop!" *BANG*
Tom: "Why didn't anyone shoot you crazy Russian P.O.S. before now?" *BANG*
Amnesiac shooter: "I'm pretty sure I shot those people."
Tom: "You didn't shoot those people."
Amnesiac shooter: "Really? I guess you're right. *boo-hoo boo-hoo*."
roll credits
In a nutshell:
Shooter: "Hi, I'm shooting people. You can see me shooting people because I'm being filmed shooting people."
Tom: "I don't want this case."
Tom: "I want this case."
Russian: "Eat your fingers."
Goons: "We criminals are loyal to a fault because we're criminals. With guns. And stuff."
Tom: "Don't talk about this case."
Black cop: "I'm a black man attacking a white woman. Edgy!"
Tom: "Fuck, you talked about this case."
Tom: "I've got Robocop aim, black cop!" *BANG*
Tom: "Why didn't anyone shoot you crazy Russian P.O.S. before now?" *BANG*
Amnesiac shooter: "I'm pretty sure I shot those people."
Tom: "You didn't shoot those people."
Amnesiac shooter: "Really? I guess you're right. *boo-hoo boo-hoo*."
roll credits