The Room."I did not hit her. I did Naaaht...
"I Hope you fall off the face of the Earth. That's a promise"
Classic...
The Room."I did not hit her. I did Naaaht...
"I Hope you fall off the face of the Earth. That's a promise"
Classic...
Oh Hi Mark"
Birdemic.Birdemic 2: The Resurrection just blows the already visual masterpiece and character driven plot of the original, to the extreme!
A classic.
Iron Sky.Everybody loves nazis, right?
It has nazi zombies that has been camping on the dark side of the moon. nuf said
Dead Alive (Braindead) - 1992 :thumb:
Iron Sky.
It has nazi zombies that has been camping on the dark side of the moon. nuf said
this is a question I really can't answer. There are some movies that I love with a passion because they are part of my childhood but that I can't say they are Great movies (I like Mary Poppins, so sue me). Other films that I like without a reason (like Starship troopers), others that I like because they remind me of fine moments spent with my wife (The Mummy... yeah the one with brendan fraser). I don't know, this is a question that I always find hard to answer. The Matrix and the first Star Wars (EP.IV) are in the list for sure.
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
asdf
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
asdf
Impressive! It sucked even when it was "modern".
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
Impressive! It sucked even when it was "modern".
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
Impressive! It sucked even when it was "modern".
Windows 95 never sucked. It was always awesome and always will be. Don't deny settled science.
Here's one of my favorite films of all time.
Impressive! It sucked even when it was "modern".
Windows 95 never sucked. It was always awesome and always will be. Don't deny settled science.
Citation needed for that science.
Dead Alive (Braindead) - 1992 :thumb:
This was solid..
Dead Alive (Braindead) - 1992 :thumb:
This was solid..
"Damn fine custard."
I'm kind of bias with my films because I love zombies.....A LOT!!!
I would have to start with the entire Evil Dead series. Including Army of Darkness!
Zombieland
Undead "...time is short. So you gotta ask yourself: Are you a fighter, Fish Queen, or are you zombie food?" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0339840/
Tucker & Dale vs. Evil
There are more but that's good enough for now.
Kiki's Delivery Service
you know it
Kiki's Delivery Service
you know it
sry, Howl's Moving Castle
Non animated I don't think I care enough.
Rush Hour 3!!
Not favorites but first 2 that popped in my mind are The Sting and Léon.
Recent action/adventure films have raised the bar so high that older films almost inevitably pale in comparison, as I learn when I try to get my teenage kids to watch the great films made when I was their age. Seriously, considering - Lord of the Rings - Harry Potter - Avengers - Transformers - I will stop but the list is hardly started - then the older stuff can really seem boring.
Master and Commander
OK, top 3 favorite animated films, in order:
1. Spirited Away
2. Aladdin
3. The Triplets of Belleville
honorable mentions go to The Incredibles, My Neighbor Totoro, Mary and Max, and Up
I'm kind of bias with my films because I love zombies.....A LOT!!!
I would have to start with the entire Evil Dead series. Including Army of Darkness!
Zombieland
Undead "...time is short. So you gotta ask yourself: Are you a fighter, Fish Queen, or are you zombie food?" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0339840/
Tucker & Dale vs. Evil
There are more but that's good enough for now.
hell yeah dude! have you ever checked out Lucio Fulci's ZombI? one of my favs, low budget zombie flick with crazy well done gore.
Also my all time favorites i could watch over and over...
1. American Beauty - Kevin Spacey is my personal hero in that movie
2. Toxic Avenger - Troma NJ trash
3. Freddy Vs Jason - Its so bad its good
Share some of your most beloved movies here! I'd like to get a grasp of the kind of films people like on here.
I'm a huge Film buff and and a wannabe film critic :rolleyes:
From what I can't think of off the top of my head is as follows:
The Evil Dead 1- 1981
Evil Dead 2- 1987
The Shining- 1980
A Clockwork Orange- 1971
Fargo- 1999
Citizen Kane- 1941
There Will Be Blood- 2007
Psycho- 1960
Pulp Fiction- 1994
The Matrix- 1999
And probably a lot more that I forgot, or haven't seen quite a long time. I'll update my list as I think of some of my other favorites.
I watch so many films though, It's really a huge part of my life. I can get so passionate talking to someone about film it's insane. If only I could afford to go to the theater more often though, Or that I had an awesome theater around me like the Alamo Drafthouse or something similar.
Share some of your most beloved movies here! I'd like to get a grasp of the kind of films people like on here.
I'm a huge Film buff and and a wannabe film critic :rolleyes:
From what I can't think of off the top of my head is as follows:
The Evil Dead 1- 1981
Evil Dead 2- 1987
The Shining- 1980
A Clockwork Orange- 1971
Fargo- 1999
Citizen Kane- 1941
There Will Be Blood- 2007
Psycho- 1960
Pulp Fiction- 1994
The Matrix- 1999
And probably a lot more that I forgot, or haven't seen quite a long time. I'll update my list as I think of some of my other favorites.
I watch so many films though, It's really a huge part of my life. I can get so passionate talking to someone about film it's insane. If only I could afford to go to the theater more often though, Or that I had an awesome theater around me like the Alamo Drafthouse or something similar.
I have to ask why you didn't list Evil Dead 3. :D I love that one just as much as the others, if not for different reasons.
Share some of your most beloved movies here! I'd like to get a grasp of the kind of films people like on here.
I'm a huge Film buff and and a wannabe film critic :rolleyes:
From what I can't think of off the top of my head is as follows:
The Evil Dead 1- 1981
Evil Dead 2- 1987
The Shining- 1980
A Clockwork Orange- 1971
Fargo- 1999
Citizen Kane- 1941
There Will Be Blood- 2007
Psycho- 1960
Pulp Fiction- 1994
The Matrix- 1999
And probably a lot more that I forgot, or haven't seen quite a long time. I'll update my list as I think of some of my other favorites.
I watch so many films though, It's really a huge part of my life. I can get so passionate talking to someone about film it's insane. If only I could afford to go to the theater more often though, Or that I had an awesome theater around me like the Alamo Drafthouse or something similar.
I have to ask why you didn't list Evil Dead 3. :D I love that one just as much as the others, if not for different reasons.
I only liked army of darkness.. Didn't like 1 and 2... please don't beat me upShow Image(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/beaten-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862490)
The Princess Bride
The Shawshank Redemption
Ferris Bueller's Day Off
Recent action/adventure films have raised the bar so high that older films almost inevitably pale in comparison, as I learn when I try to get my teenage kids to watch the great films made when I was their age. Seriously, considering - Lord of the Rings - Harry Potter - Avengers - Transformers - I will stop but the list is hardly started - then the older stuff can really seem boring.
That's why you get them to watch non action/adventure films that don't rely on modern special effects, so they can appreciate other aspects like storytelling, acting, character development, film score, editing, and cinematography.
But man, when they combine both of those things and do it well, gold. For example, Dark Knight.Recent action/adventure films have raised the bar so high that older films almost inevitably pale in comparison, as I learn when I try to get my teenage kids to watch the great films made when I was their age. Seriously, considering - Lord of the Rings - Harry Potter - Avengers - Transformers - I will stop but the list is hardly started - then the older stuff can really seem boring.
That's why you get them to watch non action/adventure films that don't rely on modern special effects, so they can appreciate other aspects like storytelling, acting, character development, film score, editing, and cinematography.
I have to agree with User Was Banned here. I really like the older sci-fi films that did not have all the CGI, and they had to be more creative with props, costumes, and all the aspects User Was Banned mentioned. Movies like Star Wars, Terminator 1, Space Odyssey, Blade Runner, etc.
These days, all they have to do is put a few geeks in front of a computer, make some explosions, skimp on creating an actual thought-provoking story, and BOOM! you got a blockbuster.
I dunno, I sort of feel like CG still isn't quite there yet. I actually much prefer seeing real props, costumes, and sets rather than everything being on green screen. Like Avengers looked fake to me, if uncanny valley could be applied to inanimate objects, New York City was the entire valley in that movie. On the other hand when you get stuff like LotR and almost anything by Guillermo Del Toro, I think it looks a thousand times better.
Just look at this behind the scenes from Hellboy 2, and then compare it to the eyesore that was Transformers or episode I II and III of Star Wars, both of which are like 75% greenscreen.
Mainly because I forgot to list it. :pShare some of your most beloved movies here! I'd like to get a grasp of the kind of films people like on here.
I'm a huge Film buff and and a wannabe film critic :rolleyes:
From what I can't think of off the top of my head is as follows:
The Evil Dead 1- 1981
Evil Dead 2- 1987
The Shining- 1980
A Clockwork Orange- 1971
Fargo- 1999
Citizen Kane- 1941
There Will Be Blood- 2007
Psycho- 1960
Pulp Fiction- 1994
The Matrix- 1999
And probably a lot more that I forgot, or haven't seen quite a long time. I'll update my list as I think of some of my other favorites.
I watch so many films though, It's really a huge part of my life. I can get so passionate talking to someone about film it's insane. If only I could afford to go to the theater more often though, Or that I had an awesome theater around me like the Alamo Drafthouse or something similar.
I have to ask why you didn't list Evil Dead 3. :D I love that one just as much as the others, if not for different reasons.
I have just looked up the thread entirely and my list is going to be huge at the rate you guys keep reminding me of movies that I love. Oh woe is me.
I dunno, I sort of feel like CG still isn't quite there yet. I actually much prefer seeing real props, costumes, and sets rather than everything being on green screen. Like Avengers looked fake to me, if uncanny valley could be applied to inanimate objects, New York City was the entire valley in that movie. On the other hand when you get stuff like LotR and almost anything by Guillermo Del Toro, I think it looks a thousand times better.
Just look at this behind the scenes from Hellboy 2, and then compare it to the eyesore that was Transformers or episode I II and III of Star Wars, both of which are like 75% greenscreen.
Green screen =/= CGI
Can we also say the worst movies? Titanic and Avatar are at the top of the bottom.
James Cameron stopped making good films after the 80's.terminator 2 was good.
Can we also say the worst movies? Titanic and Avatar are at the top of the bottom.List away. :-*
CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.Show Image(http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/5981_3.jpg)Show Image(http://www.geekpeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PaulMovie.jpg)
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.Show Image(http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/5981_3.jpg)Show Image(http://www.geekpeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PaulMovie.jpg)
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Did you really just use Paul as an example of modern CGI...?
Right, but you're pulling an example from the bottom of the barrel. That's like saying the English Premier League sucks because you watched Cardiff play Fulham.CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.Show Image(http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/5981_3.jpg)Show Image(http://www.geekpeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PaulMovie.jpg)
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Did you really just use Paul as an example of modern CGI...?
Well considering it is an example of modern CGI, yes. There are dozens of movies with similarly terrible effects, you can't just pretend they don't exist. Swap it out for Golem or whatever if you want, it's still just as bad.
Right, but you're pulling an example from the bottom of the barrel. That's like saying the English Premier League sucks because you watched Cardiff play Fulham.CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.Show Image(http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/5981_3.jpg)Show Image(http://www.geekpeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PaulMovie.jpg)
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Did you really just use Paul as an example of modern CGI...?
Well considering it is an example of modern CGI, yes. There are dozens of movies with similarly terrible effects, you can't just pretend they don't exist. Swap it out for Golem or whatever if you want, it's still just as bad.
You mentioned Gollum. I think his most recent incarnation in The Hobbit was very well done:
Also, the subtle uses of CGI. For example, in The Walking Dead: and
naah I like Cameron, but the last movie I enjoy watching of him is True Lies :)+1 one of Ahnold's finest.
I loved Prometheus, and I agree. Never really understood the hate either. Perhaps because I was never a diehard Aliens fan.
I think the CG in Prometheus was really well done, even though people like to hate on the film.
Right, but you're pulling an example from the bottom of the barrel. That's like saying the English Premier League sucks because you watched Cardiff play Fulham.CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.Show Image(http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/5981_3.jpg)Show Image(http://www.geekpeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/PaulMovie.jpg)
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Did you really just use Paul as an example of modern CGI...?
Well considering it is an example of modern CGI, yes. There are dozens of movies with similarly terrible effects, you can't just pretend they don't exist. Swap it out for Golem or whatever if you want, it's still just as bad.
You mentioned Gollum. I think his most recent incarnation in The Hobbit was very well done:
Also, the subtle uses of CGI. For example, in The Walking Dead: and
CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Calling out Gollum is particularly ridiculous, as he is the crown jewel of photoreal character animation done right. CG Gollum can act and emote and carry scenes standing next to photographed actors. A puppet, or a contortionist in prosthetics would be far more jarring.
Calling out Gollum is particularly ridiculous, as he is the crown jewel of photoreal character animation done right. CG Gollum can act and emote and carry scenes standing next to photographed actors. A puppet, or a contortionist in prosthetics would be far more jarring.
In contrast to CG Yoda. :(
(http://i.imgur.com/Da3FiYO.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/Da3FiYO.jpg)
terrible abuse of visual effects.
CGI is atrocious and lazy. It's pitiful when movies from 30 years ago like Gremlins, that used physical effects looks 100 times better than a CGI-dependent movie today.
In my opinion CGI should be used sparingly for non-offensive things like adding depth to scenes, like shrapnel, particle effects, concealing wire work, or non-realistic stylistic stuff like Sin City. Creating CGI dinosaurs or aliens or whatever and your movie is about as convincing to look at as Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Are you trolling here? Obviously we are arguing taste, but your stated opinion is just kind of laughable. CG is the only viable way to do wide shots of, say, dinosaurs running at full speed. Without question CG is overused and abused, but it has its place, and that place is waaaay larger than shrapnel and background extensions.
Calling out Gollum is particularly ridiculous, as he is the crown jewel of photoreal character animation done right. CG Gollum can act and emote and carry scenes standing next to photographed actors. A puppet, or a contortionist in prosthetics would be far more jarring.
These were both great films for their respective eras:Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/9aWI7IV.jpg)
Short Circuit (1986) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091949/)
WALL·E (2008) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910970/)
I disagree. All I see when I look at Gollum is a video-game model placed into a live-action scene. It's as jarring as Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Examples like Gremlins, Legend, Star Wars, etc. that all used physical effects for non-human characters didn't do that.
Good directors don't need gratuitous shots like your running dinosaurs example to make a good movie, or can limit the time and use speed, motion blur, etc. to keep it to an absolute minimum.
Calling out Gollum is particularly ridiculous, as he is the crown jewel of photoreal character animation done right. CG Gollum can act and emote and carry scenes standing next to photographed actors. A puppet, or a contortionist in prosthetics would be far more jarring.
In contrast to CG Yoda. :(Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/Da3FiYO.jpg)
Puppets have their own limitations and seams which are very visible, but ignored as part of the suspension of disbelief (just as with CG). Facial articulation is generally at a minimum (see Yoda), and you are very limited in the kinds of shots you can do.
You're talking about the kind of cinematic compromises that directors _had_ to make in the past precisely because of the limitations of special effects. Would you call wide shots of running dinosaurs gratuitous if puppets could achieve them? One hugely important effect of Jurassic Park was to free up directors and DPs to compose shots the way they would choose to compose them if they were filming live creatures, rather than being artificially constrained by the cutaway floor rig necessary for puppet Yoda's performance. That is a huge leap forward, cinematically, independent of the quality of the CG.
I think my favorite movie to date has to be O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Every scene, every line.
Glorious.
Puppets have their own limitations and seams which are very visible, but ignored as part of the suspension of disbelief (just as with CG). Facial articulation is generally at a minimum (see Yoda), and you are very limited in the kinds of shots you can do.
Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.You're talking about the kind of cinematic compromises that directors _had_ to make in the past precisely because of the limitations of special effects. Would you call wide shots of running dinosaurs gratuitous if puppets could achieve them? One hugely important effect of Jurassic Park was to free up directors and DPs to compose shots the way they would choose to compose them if they were filming live creatures, rather than being artificially constrained by the cutaway floor rig necessary for puppet Yoda's performance. That is a huge leap forward, cinematically, independent of the quality of the CG.
If you can't make the shot look decent, and it's superfluous to the plot then yeah it's gratuitous. I don't really see how it's of any benefit cinematically that CGI allows directors to make those kinds of shots, when it looks like a pile of crap and makes them too lazy to try and frame the shots in a less jarring way, which they would have done in the past due to the limitations of physical effects (although actually, bad/lazy directors just used claymation, and did the same crap as bad/lazy directors today do with CGI).
Puppets have their own limitations and seams which are very visible, but ignored as part of the suspension of disbelief (just as with CG). Facial articulation is generally at a minimum (see Yoda), and you are very limited in the kinds of shots you can do.
Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.You're talking about the kind of cinematic compromises that directors _had_ to make in the past precisely because of the limitations of special effects. Would you call wide shots of running dinosaurs gratuitous if puppets could achieve them? One hugely important effect of Jurassic Park was to free up directors and DPs to compose shots the way they would choose to compose them if they were filming live creatures, rather than being artificially constrained by the cutaway floor rig necessary for puppet Yoda's performance. That is a huge leap forward, cinematically, independent of the quality of the CG.
If you can't make the shot look decent, and it's superfluous to the plot then yeah it's gratuitous. I don't really see how it's of any benefit cinematically that CGI allows directors to make those kinds of shots, when it looks like a pile of crap and makes them too lazy to try and frame the shots in a less jarring way, which they would have done in the past due to the limitations of physical effects (although actually, bad/lazy directors just used claymation, and did the same crap as bad/lazy directors today do with CGI).
Plot is not the only consideration. If I want to convey the majesty, speed, and dynamism of dinosaurs in my film, but can't use wide shots, or tracking shots, or helicopter shots due to constraints imposed by the puppets, my film is diminished as a result. There are tradeoffs to consider, as always. But the fact that I don't have the _choice_ to do X is an arbitrary constraint that has nothing to do with filmmaking per se.
There is nothing magical about the cinematic conventions of 80s-era fantasy and sci-fi films. Those conventions were dictated to a large degree by the technology of the day (i.e., they were arbitrary). Saying that stepping out of those bounds is automatically gratuitous or lazy really shows a disrespect toward and ignorance of filmmaking.
You don't understand, I never claimed those things are automatically gratuitous or unnecessary in themselves, it's just that they look terrible due to CGI, there's no way around that.
There was no "majesty, speed, and dynamism" in Jurassic Park, there was just a load of really cheesy looking shots of unconvincing videogame dinosaurs plastered onto the screen. The close-up scenes where they used animatronics and puppets, on the other hand, looked fine.
Good directors don't need gratuitous shots like your running dinosaurs example to make a good movie, or can limit the time and use speed, motion blur, etc. to keep it to an absolute minimum.
I've seen Lost in Translation 38 times.W-what. That's insane.
I've seen Lost in Translation 38 times.
Ones I failed to mention:
- Apollo 13
- The Green Mile
- A Few Good Men
- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
- Star Trek: First Contact
- Animal House (such a classic)
There are many others, but I'm failing to recall them at the moment...These were both great films for their respective eras:Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/9aWI7IV.jpg)
Short Circuit (1986) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091949/)
WALL·E (2008) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910970/)
Yes! Short Circuit was such an underrated film, and to be perfectly honest, the sequel had much better acting than the original. It makes my honorable mentions list for sure. Long live Johnny 5.
I've seen Lost in Translation 38 times.W-what. That's insane.
Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.
If you can't make the shot look decent, and it's superfluous to the plot then yeah it's gratuitous. I don't really see how it's of any benefit cinematically that CGI allows directors to make those kinds of shots, when it looks like a pile of crap and makes them too lazy to try and frame the shots in a less jarring way, which they would have done in the past due to the limitations of physical effects (although actually, bad/lazy directors just used claymation, and did the same crap as bad/lazy directors today do with CGI).
Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.
There was no "majesty, speed, and dynamism" in Jurassic Park, there was just a load of really cheesy looking shots of unconvincing videogame dinosaurs plastered onto the screen. The close-up scenes where they used animatronics and puppets, on the other hand, looked fine.
Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.
If you can't make the shot look decent, and it's superfluous to the plot then yeah it's gratuitous. I don't really see how it's of any benefit cinematically that CGI allows directors to make those kinds of shots, when it looks like a pile of crap and makes them too lazy to try and frame the shots in a less jarring way, which they would have done in the past due to the limitations of physical effects (although actually, bad/lazy directors just used claymation, and did the same crap as bad/lazy directors today do with CGI).
lol I just can't even take you seriously anymore.Yet it still looks 100 times better than CGI. The fact you have a physical thing there in the same space as the actors, and subject to the same lighting and camera conditions makes a massive difference, and trumps any downsides like lack of facial movement.
There was no "majesty, speed, and dynamism" in Jurassic Park, there was just a load of really cheesy looking shots of unconvincing videogame dinosaurs plastered onto the screen. The close-up scenes where they used animatronics and puppets, on the other hand, looked fine.
You're whining about CG characters looking fake while extolling the use of stuffed animals on strings.
Muppets, so immersive.
I watch so many films, it's amazing how they all mesh together and I don't remember while writing up a list but once someone lists it off, I yell "Oh that's right!, I love that movie!"
Maybe one day, That's a lot of work. I've seen a good amount of ****ty forgettable movies also so it's hard to compile a full list. I'll get started and I'll post my results once I feel I have enough rememberedI watch so many films, it's amazing how they all mesh together and I don't remember while writing up a list but once someone lists it off, I yell "Oh that's right!, I love that movie!"
You should compile a list of all the movies you've seen. I'm curious to see. :)
Maybe one day, That's a lot of work. I've seen a good amount of ****ty forgettable movies also so it's hard to compile a full list. I'll get started and I'll post my results once I feel I have enough rememberedI watch so many films, it's amazing how they all mesh together and I don't remember while writing up a list but once someone lists it off, I yell "Oh that's right!, I love that movie!"
You should compile a list of all the movies you've seen. I'm curious to see. :)
I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out I haven't really watched all that many. After all it could just seem like a lot. I'll tally it up and come back with answers. :))Maybe one day, That's a lot of work. I've seen a good amount of ****ty forgettable movies also so it's hard to compile a full list. I'll get started and I'll post my results once I feel I have enough rememberedI watch so many films, it's amazing how they all mesh together and I don't remember while writing up a list but once someone lists it off, I yell "Oh that's right!, I love that movie!"
You should compile a list of all the movies you've seen. I'm curious to see. :)
I'm not sure the scope of your movie watching (and you probably won't know for sure until you're done with your list), but I know that I've seen 546 movies. Movies have never been my strong suit (I watch more TV than movies), so you likely have seen more movies than me, but I'd be surprised if you're above 2,000. Shouldn't be too hard. :P My list only took about 3 days to put together.
The Naked Gun
The Naked Gun
Oh man, how did I forget those??? Classics...
Also, John Candy movies. Uncle Buck is my favorite overall, but Planes, Trains, and Automobiles is a close second. Plus his appearance in National Lampoon's Vacation (another classic comedy).
Christmas Vacation is a venerable holiday tradition in my home.
Also, have we really gotten to page 5 without Ghostbusters getting a mention? One of the greatest films of all time.
Christmas Vacation is a venerable holiday tradition in my home.
Also, have we really gotten to page 5 without Ghostbusters getting a mention? One of the greatest films of all time.
Re-read my list, Hash. ;)
Also, have we really gotten to page 5 without Ghostbusters getting a mention?
Blade Runner
Blade Runner
Have you seen the fan edit? Amazing.
not one person said robocop?
puts into perspective just how much peter weller did to make robocop 2014 suckass.
Blade Runner
Have you seen the fan edit? Amazing.
Which one? I think I've seen it... but I've seen it so many times that all the versions have melded into one lol
I just googled some and one removed the 'Deckard is a replicant' theme while the other seems to be just a longer cut (done in 2008) which dsnt seem to add much more than the directors cut or later longer versions.
I think the directors cut is the best version and watching it in HD is really great, its surprising how much it adds to the look of the movie. That said I think if you like Blade Runner you should really read (as an accompaniment) Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. They are not the same and the characters are not the same but Blade Runner paints the world and the music while **** fills in the pieces and they really work well together.
Christmas Vacation is a venerable holiday tradition in my home.
Also, have we really gotten to page 5 without Ghostbusters getting a mention? One of the greatest films of all time.
Re-read my list, Hash. ;)
Ok good, as long as someone covered it. :DShow Image(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2008/11/busters1.jpg)
How's my list indecisive? I'm just adding more movies I love as they come to mind.
Don't be such a " (Negative) Nancy."
Christmas Vacation is a venerable holiday tradition in my home.
Also, have we really gotten to page 5 without Ghostbusters getting a mention? One of the greatest films of all time.
Re-read my list, Hash. ;)
Ok good, as long as someone covered it. :D
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2008/11/busters1.jpg) (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2008/11/busters1.jpg)
You try'n to tell me somethin' with that pic? Do I need to cull my list?
Action Movies:Not all of them, But it at least gives me some extra stuff to start watching. ^-^
From Dusk till Dawn
Cloak and Dagger (1984 kids movie)
Sin City (cool "cinematography")
Desperado
Air tree, have you seen the movies in my lists?
One of my favourites is Event Horizon, and also the Alien Trilogy. (I still see it as a trilogy :) )
Any gorehounds out there? Not my favorite genre, but sometimes I go on a gore bender and watch a bunch of brutal films in like a week. Satisfies me for about 6 months. Is that weird?
Any gorehounds out there? Not my favorite genre, but sometimes I go on a gore bender and watch a bunch of brutal films in like a week. Satisfies me for about 6 months. Is that weird?
Hell yea! I don't take that long of a break though, I watch horror suspense all the time!
I've seen some really f***ed up exploitation/horror films.Any gorehounds out there? Not my favorite genre, but sometimes I go on a gore bender and watch a bunch of brutal films in like a week. Satisfies me for about 6 months. Is that weird?
Hell yea! I don't take that long of a break though, I watch horror suspense all the time!
Oh, I watch a lot of horror, just not usually underground foreign shock flicks. Talking stuff like the Guinea Pig series, Salo, Aftermath, August Underground stuff, countless German and Korean flicks. You gotta be in a special kinda mood to do a marathon of those ;)
Office Space.
(Attachment Link)
Any gorehounds out there? Not my favorite genre, but sometimes I go on a gore bender and watch a bunch of brutal films in like a week. Satisfies me for about 6 months. Is that weird?
Hell yea! I don't take that long of a break though, I watch horror suspense all the time!
Oh, I watch a lot of horror, just not usually underground foreign shock flicks. Talking stuff like the Guinea Pig series, Salo, Aftermath, August Underground stuff, countless German and Korean flicks. You gotta be in a special kinda mood to do a marathon of those ;)
I mean, I can name off a bunch of great movies too. Doesn't make 'em my favorites though. I dunno how people can have these lists of a dozens of movies and claim they can't say any one of them is a better film than another on the list. ****, if we're just talking movies we like, brb, compiling a list of my top 200 :P
Sorry, indecisiveness upsets me in an inordinate amount :-X
Just saw The Grand Budapest Hotel. Not bad, but one of Anderson's weaker works for sure. Best imo being, The Fantastic Mr. Fox. The Life Aquatic and The Royal Tenenbaums were really good too though. So was Darjeeling Limited. Actually now that I'm am typing this out, TGBM might actually be his worst film.I enjoyed The Grand Budapest quite a lot. I still have yet to watch some of Anderson's other films.
Just saw The Grand Budapest Hotel. Not bad, but one of Anderson's weaker works for sure. Best imo being, The Fantastic Mr. Fox. The Life Aquatic and The Royal Tenenbaums were really good too though. So was Darjeeling Limited. Actually now that I'm am typing this out, TGBM might actually be his worst film.I enjoyed The Grand Budapest quite a lot. I still have yet to watch some of Anderson's other films.
Now that I think about it, I shall. I'm going to watch The Fantastic Mr. Fox. nowShow Image(http://www.cute-factor.com/images/smilies/onion_custom/th_0suit.gif)
My Neighbour Totoro.
Clockwork Orange (Attachment Link)
Clockwork Orange (Attachment Link)
This movie was terribad..
Awful..
Clockwork Orange (Attachment Link)
This movie was terribad..
Awful..
Review of the year.
This is Tp4's all time favorite movie..
yes that's right, it's coming out on Bluray April 30th, 2015..Show Image(http://i.yai.bz/Assets/06/754/l_p0039375406.jpg)
This is Tp4's all time favorite movie..
yes that's right, it's coming out on Bluray April 30th, 2015..Show Image(http://i.yai.bz/Assets/06/754/l_p0039375406.jpg)
I actually liked #2.
Since I'm here, favourite film of all time is Twilight Samurai, with Hiroyuki Sanada.
oh that's the chong in Helix. Too bad the show is midly terrible.This is Tp4's all time favorite movie..
yes that's right, it's coming out on Bluray April 30th, 2015..Show Image(http://i.yai.bz/Assets/06/754/l_p0039375406.jpg)
I actually liked #2.
Since I'm here, favourite film of all time is Twilight Samurai, with Hiroyuki Sanada.
Admit it.. that movie's lame, you just got a man-crush on Sanada..
This is Tp4's all time favorite movie..
yes that's right, it's coming out on Bluray April 30th, 2015..Show Image(http://i.yai.bz/Assets/06/754/l_p0039375406.jpg)
I actually liked #2.
Since I'm here, favourite film of all time is Twilight Samurai, with Hiroyuki Sanada.
Admit it.. that movie's lame, you just got a man-crush on Sanada..
@demik You are pretty literate, or aunt google told you ;-)
This is Tp4's all time favorite movie..
yes that's right, it's coming out on Bluray April 30th, 2015..Show Image(http://i.yai.bz/Assets/06/754/l_p0039375406.jpg)
I actually liked #2.
Since I'm here, favourite film of all time is Twilight Samurai, with Hiroyuki Sanada.
Can anyone recommend a good modern movie set in not modern times? Something along the lines of the victorian era or something.Umm, I don't know about the victorian era, but the film "The Artist" Is set in the late 20's and is a silent film about silent films and the ushering in of the 'talkie' era of films and it's effects on an actor stuck in the past of silent films.
Can anyone recommend a good modern movie set in not modern times? Something along the lines of the victorian era or something.Umm, I don't know about the victorian era, but the film "The Artist" Is set in the late 20's and is a silent film about silent films and the ushering in of the 'talkie' era of films and it's effects on an actor stuck in the past of silent films.
It's good, if you haven't seen it. But you probably have.
Dude, go watch The Terminal. I love that movie so much xD
When I'm working or doing other stuff and got nothing else to watch, I just play that movie on the 2nd monitor.
Dude, go watch The Terminal. I love that movie so much xD
When I'm working or doing other stuff and got nothing else to watch, I just play that movie on the 2nd monitor.
Dude, go watch The Terminal. I love that movie so much xD
When I'm working or doing other stuff and got nothing else to watch, I just play that movie on the 2nd monitor.
Can anyone recommend a good modern movie set in not modern times? Something along the lines of the victorian era or something.Umm, I don't know about the victorian era, but the film "The Artist" Is set in the late 20's and is a silent film about silent films and the ushering in of the 'talkie' era of films and it's effects on an actor stuck in the past of silent films.
It's good, if you haven't seen it. But you probably have.
(in no particular order and no effort to remmber anything other than off the top of my head)
i loved taxi driver a ****in ton
full metal jacket was shockingly good
the big lebowski is pretty good
fargo is ****ing great
reservoir dogs is outstanding
pulp fiction is super duper
john wick makes me moist
lotr extended cuts are worth the 7 months they take to watch
the count of monte cristo is great (1974 i think)
Clockwork Orange is the best movie I have watched in a while, Kids was also pretty good, someone on GH recommended it but I can't remember who it was