Someone had to state the obvious, bro. No need to thank me for taking one for the team. All in a day's work.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Movie Talk (New Films, Old Films... doesn't matter) (195 Viewers)
- Thread starter Elvin
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
Don't expect a bigger paycheck. 
umpkin:
Speaking of the devil, Tarkovsky, Ivan's Childhood tonight sounds good.
umpkin:Speaking of the devil, Tarkovsky, Ivan's Childhood tonight sounds good.
I might watch The Sacrifice, seeing as I was given the blu-ray release by a friend for Xmas. I'm interested to see just what Kino did to it. I've heard it looks really good at times, but they really screwed up with edge enhancement at other times. Still, supposed to be a vast improvement over any of the previous home video options for it. I'm still happy to have seen it on the big screen.
It comes with the dvd documentary extra Directed by Tarkovsky too, Swedish film Institute production, so that might be interesting too.
Gold 
- - - Updated - - -
Enjoy it. 
- - - Updated - - -
Philanthropy it is then, no big deal. I'm a giver.
I might watch The Sacrifice, seeing as I was given the blu-ray release by a friend for Xmas. I'm interested to see just what Kino did to it. I've heard it looks really good at times, but they really screwed up with edge enhancement at other times. Still, supposed to be a vast improvement over any of the previous home video options for it. I'm still happy to have seen it on the big screen.
It comes with the dvd documentary extra Directed by Tarkovsky too, Swedish film Institute production, so that might be interesting too.
I might watch The Sacrifice, seeing as I was given the blu-ray release by a friend for Xmas. I'm interested to see just what Kino did to it. I've heard it looks really good at times, but they really screwed up with edge enhancement at other times. Still, supposed to be a vast improvement over any of the previous home video options for it. I'm still happy to have seen it on the big screen.
It comes with the dvd documentary extra Directed by Tarkovsky too, Swedish film Institute production, so that might be interesting too.
i respect that opinion, but that vid you posted as your argument why it's terrible can only be suitable for someone braindead
If it's not you sense of humor I totally understand it though.And to compare Prometheus with 2001 is laughable. It's full of illogical plotholes (and no, these are not things that "are left ambigious on purpose in order to let the viewer think for himself". They're just illogical plotholes typical of most mediocre to decent Hollywood movies). Besides, there is no originality whatsoever in it. Pretty much every concept or theme of this movie has been done elsewhere, and better at that.
I mean there are plenty of worse movies out there for sure, and none of its flaws are as severe as in really flawed films, but it's just mediocre, 5-6/10. Not anywhere near a classic, not in any way.
On a more positive note, I enjoyed En duva satt på en gren och funderade på tillvaron (A pigeon sat on branch pondering its existence) @PostIronic. Although enjoy is probably the wrong word, but I found it to be extremely intriguing, if alienating at times. The visuals and camerawork are outstanding, its style is something that I'll defenitely look forward to in other Andersson films, it's almost refreshingly different from generic filmmaking. As is the narrative, if it can even be called like that
. To be fully honest, I still do not fully understand the significance or meaning of quite a number of scenes, such as the one with mother playing with her babys feet in the baby buggy, or the couple sleeping at the beach with their dog. It's probably a rare sight to see a film, where every single scene has the depth to be interpreted in scrupulous detail, and where it actually makes sense to do so. What also stood out to me is the deliberate slowness, which still somehow never manages to turn the scenes boring or uninteresting. In this respect it almost reminded me of Kubrick.
Some scenes, like the labratory-monkey or the "bronce bull" were incredibly intense as well. In general it was interesting to see a movie so absurd, but with hardly any "funny" moments, but instead being quite tragic, dark or depressive at times.
Btw the theatre we went to had a discussion round about the movie, where a Swedish audience member brought about a very interesting point about the Karl XII scenes: Apparently they're rather charged with political meaning, as the far right in Sweden, which becoming incredibly strong at the moment, is building him up as some sort of national idol and hero. His alluded homosexuality seems to be a historical fact as well.
Btw the theatre we went to had a discussion round about the movie, where a Swedish audience member brought about a very interesting point about the Karl XII scenes: Apparently they're rather charged with political meaning, as the far right in Sweden, which becoming incredibly strong at the moment, is building him up as some sort of national idol and hero. His alluded homosexuality seems to be a historical fact as well.
On a more positive note, I enjoyed En duva satt på en gren och funderade på tillvaron (A pigeon sat on branch pondering its existence) @PostIronic. Although enjoy is probably the wrong word, but I found it to be extremely intriguing, if alienating at times. The visuals and camerawork are outstanding, its style is something that I'll defenitely look forward to in other Andersson films, it's almost refreshingly different from generic filmmaking. As is the narrative, if it can even be called like that . To be fully honest, I still do not fully understand the significance or meaning of quite a number of scenes, such as the one with mother playing with her babys feet in the baby buggy, or the couple sleeping at the beach with their dog. It's probably a rare sight to see a film, where every single scene has the depth to be interpreted in scrupulous detail, and where it actually makes sense to do so.
What also stood out to me is the deliberate slowness, which still somehow never manages to turn the scenes boring or uninteresting. In this respect it almost reminded me of Kubrick.
. To be fully honest, I still do not fully understand the significance or meaning of quite a number of scenes, such as the one with mother playing with her babys feet in the baby buggy, or the couple sleeping at the beach with their dog. It's probably a rare sight to see a film, where every single scene has the depth to be interpreted in scrupulous detail, and where it actually makes sense to do so. What also stood out to me is the deliberate slowness, which still somehow never manages to turn the scenes boring or uninteresting. In this respect it almost reminded me of Kubrick.
Some scenes, like the labratory-monkey or the "bronce bull" were incredibly intense as well. In general it was interesting to see a movie so absurd, but with hardly any "funny" moments, but instead being quite tragic, dark or depressive at times.
Btw the theatre we went to had a discussion round about the movie, where a Swedish audience member brought about a very interesting point about the Karl XII scenes: Apparently they're rather charged with political meaning, as the far right in Sweden, which becoming incredibly strong at the moment, is building him up as some sort of national idol and hero. His alluded homosexuality seems to be a historical fact as well.
Btw the theatre we went to had a discussion round about the movie, where a Swedish audience member brought about a very interesting point about the Karl XII scenes: Apparently they're rather charged with political meaning, as the far right in Sweden, which becoming incredibly strong at the moment, is building him up as some sort of national idol and hero. His alluded homosexuality seems to be a historical fact as well.
I think you'd really like Songs From the Second Floor. My favourite of the trilogy, in much the same vein, darkly absurd. That discussion you got to participate in after the film must have been really interesting. I'm jealous. I love stuff like that. When I saw Lech Majewski's Field of Dogs at VIFF this past Autumn, he was there to introduce the film and then field questions on it after. Quite fascinating to hear the thought process and ideas behind the film (a film slightly surreal, slightly absurd, and quite tragic).
Recently watched all 4 alien movies, having watched prometheus last year (only say alien 4 untill that)
Shocked. First i tought prometheus was actualy good.
But seriously, those first two alien films are insanely good, and if i'd watch prometheus now, i'd probably find it predictable and less good
I cant believe Alien (1) was made in 79.
Usually when you watch science fiction from those years, its looks horribly bad and dated (like star wars 4,5,6, or star trek).
Aliens however, when watched today, remains a very immersive movie, that doesnt for a moment gives the impression "this was from the end 70ties, its all fake and shit"
apart from the alien itself, wich was still miles better then what they usually did back then
Shocked. First i tought prometheus was actualy good.
But seriously, those first two alien films are insanely good, and if i'd watch prometheus now, i'd probably find it predictable and less good
I cant believe Alien (1) was made in 79.
Usually when you watch science fiction from those years, its looks horribly bad and dated (like star wars 4,5,6, or star trek).
Aliens however, when watched today, remains a very immersive movie, that doesnt for a moment gives the impression "this was from the end 70ties, its all fake and shit"
apart from the alien itself, wich was still miles better then what they usually did back then
I watched a few movies today...
The Interview, The Drop and Foxcatcher.
Loved all 3 movies but am annoyed that Steve Carrel is getting so much praise for his performance and Tom Hardy's amazing performance in locke is being overlooked. Steve Carrel was good but not Oscar nomination worthy he just strolled about with his mouth hanging open. Tom Hardy deserves and oscar for Locke but as has been said before the Oscars and Golden globes are aload of shite anyway. Mark Ruffalo was better than Steve carrel and Channing impressed me too.
James Franco is the sole reason i loved The Interview he completly outclassed Seth Rogan.
Might watch The Fountain or Enemy now. I have Prosioners on DVD but im saving it for a rainy day.
The Interview, The Drop and Foxcatcher.
Loved all 3 movies but am annoyed that Steve Carrel is getting so much praise for his performance and Tom Hardy's amazing performance in locke is being overlooked. Steve Carrel was good but not Oscar nomination worthy he just strolled about with his mouth hanging open. Tom Hardy deserves and oscar for Locke but as has been said before the Oscars and Golden globes are aload of shite anyway. Mark Ruffalo was better than Steve carrel and Channing impressed me too.
James Franco is the sole reason i loved The Interview he completly outclassed Seth Rogan.
Might watch The Fountain or Enemy now. I have Prosioners on DVD but im saving it for a rainy day.
He's just saying that the film has aged well. What sci-fi films from the 60's and 70's - besides Solaris and 2001 - do you think have aged well when it comes to visual effects?
- - - Updated - - -
Speaking of Ridley Scott, Exodus: Gods and Kings is absolute garbage. More than anything it lacks focus. It's plain out boring.
- - - Updated - - -
Speaking of Ridley Scott, Exodus: Gods and Kings is absolute garbage. More than anything it lacks focus. It's plain out boring.