SJW Awards by JEWELSTAITEFAN

CINEMA

SJW Awards

POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Friday, March 16, 2018 13:24
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4053
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, March 4, 2018 6:17 PM

Tonight the Oscars ceremony will revel in the SJW ambience.

It would be really exciting if Wind River won in several major categories, but who really wants to suffer through the speechifying?

Any Firefly connections expected? Morena? Sarah Paulsen? Chewie? David Krumholz?

Who will be the biggest windbag?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 4, 2018 6:54 PM

WISHIMAY

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Who will be the biggest windbag?

You, 6ix, or Sig.

Maybe you all can share...

Runner up can have this one...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 4, 2018 8:59 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

I didn't watch any of their movies last year even though I had free access to watch all of them. There's no way I'd actually suffer through that terrible elitist circle jerk. I'd rather watch the Superbowl.... which I also didn't watch.

The end is neigh for Hollywood. I can't wait for that day.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 4, 2018 10:44 PM

WISHIMAY

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

The end is neigh for MOST MALES in Hollywood. I can't wait for that day.

Fixed that for you!

If you truly think Hollywood is going anywhere, you really are the biggest dope on the planet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 5, 2018 2:22 AM

SHINYGOODGUY

Funny, but I beg to differ, for a variety of reasons:

First, it is the year of the woman; and the wave has just begun. Why? you may ask, because of the capitalist system. The movie studios, old and new, will take advantage of the trend and make movies for, by and to women.

Two, the masses will flock regardless of how "good" or bad a movie is, and break box office records. People are simple, plus they're scared and they will gladly hand over the cash to escape the overwhelmingly horrid vulgarities of everyday life.
It is no longer acceptable to merely say, that movie sucked. Why? Because there are a handful of good movies being made, but the majority of the people want schlock and they get it in spades from the likes of Disney (who know how to make money).

There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part Hollywood is cranking out somewhat entertaining films, and occasionally throw a quality film into the mix to attract the adults in the room. There are movies like Greta Gerwig's LadyBird, Peele's Get Out, Denzel's Roman J. Isreal and, according to EC Gordon, Portman's Annihilation that challenge the average moviegoer's notion of what is good film.
But it doesn't take away the pure magic of box office draw.

Black Panther has reinforced the magic produced by last year's Wonder Woman (despite it's minor flaws), and that of the superhero movie. The remake of Jumanji and Thor's Ragnarok have revitalized the industry with clever and slick productions that had people running to the movies in droves. The American public, nay the world, are starved for entertaining films. Except for Star Wars, they have pretty much delivered. Is it schlock? Yeah. Do they care? No.

Black Panther, to some degree, is the exception. It is a somewhat thought-provoking film that happens to be disguised as a superhero movie. It is a cultural phenomenon. A tectonic shift in how to produce film of this type. It has managed to produce Black Pride in a time where a racist holds office in the White House and hate groups have actively been emboldened to encourage fear, mistrust and downright anger.

BP is headed for $1B worldwide and has already, in 3 weeks, made $500M domestically ($897.7M worldwide). Give it another month and it will top The Force Awakens ($937.7M). BP 17-day total is second only to TFA. Get Out grossed $176M that opened 2/24/17, and a year later has managed to win Best Screenplay. The Shape of Water only grossed $57.4M but won Best Director and Best Picture. The Last Jedi grossed $619M and no one is beating a path to the Oscars to praise this movie.

Okay, maybe that's not the best argument since the Oscars seem to draw your ire regarding Hollywood's penchant for playing it safe. And box office draw does not a great movie make. But that's my point exactly, it doesn't and shouldn't matter. My evidence is, once again, The Shape of Water and Get Out. Two highly touted and critically acclaimed films that have found a way to be different, and tell a story in a unique way. No cookie cutter here.

No friends, Hollywood is far from dead, and both women and "minorities" are bringing their lunch pails....they're ready to go to work. There's no denying and you can't wish it away. Capitalism is greed, and greed is good ladies and germs. Box office records may very well be set in 2018, and those greedy bastards will make sure to lead the way. Women of the world! Get ready to be exploited and manipulated yet again.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

The end is neigh for MOST MALES in Hollywood. I can't wait for that day.

Fixed that for you!

If you truly think Hollywood is going anywhere, you really are the biggest dope on the planet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 5, 2018 8:26 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Hollywood is terrified of making anything new. People are waking up to that and are tuning out. They won't be around in 20 years unless they make some huge changes to their business model.

Hanging all of the hopes for their future on Star Wars, the Marvel Universe and countless remakes is not a winning plan for the long term.

We're in the Golden Age of Television right now, and unlike days past many huge actors and actresses are flocking to the small screen.

The 90 minute format is dying. They can't keep up with the stories that can be told in a 12 or 13 episode season. Unless they do something to make it interesting again, it's only a matter of time until people turn their back on Hollywood. And no... making Women movies isn't going to work either. That's just a novelty gag that might work for a few years, but once people realize that it's just the same old shit with different players it's all over.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2018 5:33 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The end is neigh for Hollywood. I can't wait for that day.
If you truly think Hollywood is going anywhere, you really are the biggest dope on the planet.
Funny, but I beg to differ, for a variety of reasons:

First, it is the year of the woman; and the wave has just begun. Why? you may ask, because of the capitalist system. The movie studios, old and new, will take advantage of the trend and make movies for, by and to women.

Two, the masses will flock regardless of how "good" or bad a movie is, and break box office records. People are simple, plus they're scared and they will gladly hand over the cash to escape the overwhelmingly horrid vulgarities of everyday life.
It is no longer acceptable to merely say, that movie sucked. Why? Because there are a handful of good movies being made, but the majority of the people want schlock and they get it in spades from the likes of Disney (who know how to make money).

There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part Hollywood is cranking out somewhat entertaining films, and occasionally throw a quality film into the mix to attract the adults in the room. There are movies like Greta Gerwig's LadyBird, Peele's Get Out, Denzel's Roman J. Isreal and, according to EC Gordon, Portman's Annihilation that challenge the average moviegoer's notion of what is good film.
But it doesn't take away the pure magic of box office draw.

Black Panther has reinforced the magic produced by last year's Wonder Woman (despite it's minor flaws), and that of the superhero movie. The remake of Jumanji and Thor's Ragnarok have revitalized the industry with clever and slick productions that had people running to the movies in droves. The American public, nay the world, are starved for entertaining films. Except for Star Wars, they have pretty much delivered. Is it schlock? Yeah. Do they care? No.

Black Panther, to some degree, is the exception. It is a somewhat thought-provoking film that happens to be disguised as a superhero movie. It is a cultural phenomenon. A tectonic shift in how to produce film of this type. It has managed to produce Black Pride in a time where a racist holds office in the White House and hate groups have actively been emboldened to encourage fear, mistrust and downright anger.

BP is headed for $1B worldwide and has already, in 3 weeks, made $500M domestically ($897.7M worldwide). Give it another month and it will top The Force Awakens ($937.7M). BP 17-day total is second only to TFA. Get Out grossed $176M that opened 2/24/17, and a year later has managed to win Best Screenplay. The Shape of Water only grossed $57.4M but won Best Director and Best Picture. The Last Jedi grossed $619M and no one is beating a path to the Oscars to praise this movie.

Okay, maybe that's not the best argument since the Oscars seem to draw your ire regarding Hollywood's penchant for playing it safe. And box office draw does not a great movie make. But that's my point exactly, it doesn't and shouldn't matter. My evidence is, once again, The Shape of Water and Get Out. Two highly touted and critically acclaimed films that have found a way to be different, and tell a story in a unique way. No cookie cutter here.

No friends, Hollywood is far from dead, and both women and "minorities" are bringing their lunch pails....they're ready to go to work. There's no denying and you can't wish it away. Capitalism is greed, and greed is good ladies and germs. Box office records may very well be set in 2018, and those greedy bastards will make sure to lead the way. Women of the world! Get ready to be exploited and manipulated yet again.

SGG

You didn't mention 12 Years A Slave, which I liked better than Shape of Water.
Did you feel it was just too Downer, not uplifting enough, or diluted by Free State of Jones?

I did finally see Jumanji reboot. I wish films like Valerian had production as slick.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 3:27 AM

SHINYGOODGUY

Quote:
You didn't mention 12 Years A Slave, which I liked better than Shape of Water.
Did you feel it was just too Downer, not uplifting enough, or diluted by Free State of Jones?

Well, I was talking mainly about recently released movies. Besides, my comments towards the overall box office stats that today's movies are becoming more profitable than that of last year. Granted, Hollywood has been playing it safe in recent years, but there are those few exceptions. No, I'm afraid that Six is employing wishful thinking....however, he is right about the "cookie cutter" mentality. But no, Hollywood is not dying, mainly because they follow the rules of engagement when it comes to capitalism - adapt, adapt, adapt.

As far as 12 Years A Slave, it had it's good qualities, but we are talking apples and oranges when it comes to comparing it to Shape of Water. For my money, Del Toro's fable is the best since Pan's Labrynth (still the best, IMHO). No comparison. Shindler's List comes to mind whenever I think of masterpieces. Field of Dreams, Gladiator, The Departed, Raging Bull, Dances with Wolves......these are masterpieces, or damn near.

Now, mind you, I'm just spitballing here. This is no official list from anywhere but the back of my mind.

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 3:54 AM

SHINYGOODGUY

Quote:
Hollywood is terrified of making anything new.

On this one count, you are right.

Quote:
People are waking up to that and are tuning out.

Not according to Box Office Mojo. We are on record pace for 2018.
Of course, that is not the end all and be all. But there's no accounting
for taste.

Quote:
They won't be around in 20 years unless they make some huge changes to their business model.

You may have a point there, but Hollywood, in spite of their staunch beginnings, is slowly coming around. But it certainly will come true otherwise.

Quote:
We're in the Golden Age of Television right now, and unlike days past many huge actors and actresses are flocking to the small screen.

Again, you're right, but....television is the one medium that benefits from both Hollywood's failures and successes. The difference being the amount of time TV can devote to a character or characters, as opposed to Hollywood's constricted time frame in which to tell a story. There are just enough great stories in film to keep it afloat. The trouble is due to Hollywood's arrogance (much like the intelligence community during the days just before 9/11) no one paid any attention to the new talent, and so, we have blown opportunities to explore new markets.

If left up to Hollywood, Wonder Woman would have been a tremendous flop. Will someone please tell Hollywood to keep Zack Snyder away from the scripts....he just cannot write. Let him produce, but no to the writing, Zack my boy. 300 was his one masterpiece, oh and The Watchmen. But these old, white men just jump the shark when it comes to originality. All they know is money. I mention WW, because it led the way for Black Panther to become what it has become today...Box Office Gold.

SGG

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 4:13 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

6ix mentioned a 90 minute format, but does admit not seeing a new film in years.

Clint's 15:17 To Paris was the shortest film he's done, and has been the shortest in a while. 2 to 2 1/2 hours is fair common now.

Black Panther was 134 minutes.
Bladerunner 2049 was 164.
Valerian was 137.
Arrival, 116.
Thor 3, 130.
Wonder Woman, 141.
The Force Awakens, 136.
Red Sparrow, 140.
Annihilation, 115.
Jumanji, 119.
Phantom Thread, 130.
The Last Jedi, 152.
Rogue One, 133.
Shape of Water, 123.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 5:48 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Hollywood is terrified of making anything new.

On this one count, you are right.

You actually agreed with more than this one thing, but yes I am right about this. This has been a huge problem for a long time in Hollywood, and if they don't wake up from it then everything will be over.

Quote:
People are waking up to that and are tuning out.

Quote:
Not according to Box Office Mojo. We are on record pace for 2018.
Of course, that is not the end all and be all. But there's no accounting
for taste.

While Box Office Mojo certainly doesn't account for taste, it doesn't account for actual ticket sales vs ticket prices either. It's not hard to keep touting movies every year as the biggest sellers of all time when inflation seems to hit ticket prices disproportionately hard compared to other sectors of the economy. This likely has more to do with over-inflated paydays for big name actors and ever-increasing special effects budgets than the inflation stats though. It probably has a lot to do with pirate sources of revenue lost with sagging DVD sales and free streaming services. Even the paid streaming services available such as Netflix are cutting a lot of the after-theater recouping of costs they used to be able to rely on.

Here's a list of the top movies of all time based off of ticket sales, from Box Office Mojo themselves believe it or not. There's 300 on the actual list in the link, but I'm just showing the top 25 here:

1 Gone with the Wind MGM 202,044,600 $198,676,459 1939^
2 Star Wars Fox 178,119,600 $460,998,007 1977^
3 The Sound of Music Fox 142,415,400 $158,671,368 1965
4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial Uni. 141,854,300 $435,110,554 1982^
5 Titanic Par. 135,549,800 $659,363,944 1997^
6 The Ten Commandments Par. 131,000,000 $65,500,000 1956
7 Jaws Uni. 128,078,800 $260,000,000 1975
8 Doctor Zhivago MGM 124,135,500 $111,721,910 1965
9 The Exorcist WB 110,599,200 $232,906,145 1973^
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Dis. 109,000,000 $184,925,486 1937^
11 Star Wars: The Force Awakens BV 108,115,100 $936,662,225 2015
12 101 Dalmatians Dis. 99,917,300 $144,880,014 1961^
13 The Empire Strikes Back Fox 98,180,600 $290,475,067 1980^
14 Ben-Hur MGM 98,000,000 $74,000,000 1959
15 Avatar Fox 97,309,600 $760,507,625 2009^
16 Return of the Jedi Fox 94,059,400 $309,306,177 1983^
17 Jurassic Park Uni. 91,621,800 $402,453,882 1993^
18 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox 90,312,100 $474,544,677 1999^
19 The Lion King BV 89,146,400 $422,783,777 1994^
20 The Sting Uni. 89,142,900 $156,000,000 1973
21 Raiders of the Lost Ark Par. 88,526,800 $248,159,971 1981^
22 The Graduate AVCO 85,576,800 $104,945,305 1967^
23 Fantasia Dis. 83,043,500 $76,408,097 1941^
24 Jurassic World Uni. 79,049,200 $652,270,625 2015
25 The Godfather Par. 78,922,600 $134,966,411 1972^

The only movies made this century so far to break the top 25 are as follows:

1. The Force Awakens, at number 11 (2015).
2. Avatar, at number 15 (2009).
3. Jurassic World, at number 24 (2015).

Note that two of those three movies are sequels to other movies that made it higher on the list:

1. Star Wars, at number 2 (1977).
2. Jurassic Park, at number 17 (1993).

Also of note, recent movies being touted as smashing box office records are quite a bit further down the list:

1. Star Wars, The Last Jedi at 41 (2017).
2. Black Panther, at 56 (2018).

Again, one of them were a sequel to Number 2 on the list. The other has benefited from the huge Marvel Universe scam going on and has also been super hyped as the "first" black superhero movie which isn't even close to being true.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm?adjust_yr=1

Quote:
They won't be around in 20 years unless they make some huge changes to their business model.

Quote:
You may have a point there, but Hollywood, in spite of their staunch beginnings, is slowly coming around. But it certainly will come true otherwise.

Well... we'll see about this one. They don't seem to be doing anything to turn themselves around at the moment. They're in for a very rude awakening when people stop going to Marvel and Star Wars movies, I'm afraid.

Quote:
We're in the Golden Age of Television right now, and unlike days past many huge actors and actresses are flocking to the small screen.

Quote:
Again, you're right, but....television is the one medium that benefits from both Hollywood's failures and successes. The difference being the amount of time TV can devote to a character or characters, as opposed to Hollywood's constricted time frame in which to tell a story. There are just enough great stories in film to keep it afloat. The trouble is due to Hollywood's arrogance (much like the intelligence community during the days just before 9/11) no one paid any attention to the new talent, and so, we have blown opportunities to explore new markets.

If left up to Hollywood, Wonder Woman would have been a tremendous flop. Will someone please tell Hollywood to keep Zack Snyder away from the scripts....he just cannot write. Let him produce, but no to the writing, Zack my boy. 300 was his one masterpiece, oh and The Watchmen. But these old, white men just jump the shark when it comes to originality. All they know is money. I mention WW, because it led the way for Black Panther to become what it has become today...Box Office Gold.

Can't disagree with any of that. Those are just more reasons why Hollywood isn't up to the task. They need to completely change their mode of operation or they're going to keep dying the slow death they've been in since the early 2000s.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 5:55 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
6ix mentioned a 90 minute format, but does admit not seeing a new film in years.

Clint's 15:17 To Paris was the shortest film he's done, and has been the shortest in a while. 2 to 2 1/2 hours is fair common now.

Black Panther was 134 minutes.
Bladerunner 2049 was 164.
Valerian was 137.
Arrival, 116.
Thor 3, 130.
Wonder Woman, 141.
The Force Awakens, 136.
Red Sparrow, 140.
Annihilation, 115.
Jumanji, 119.
Phantom Thread, 130.
The Last Jedi, 152.
Rogue One, 133.
Shape of Water, 123.

Not true. I have seen some new films, just not many. Maybe only 1 to 3 movies a year compared to the 100+ I used to watch in my teens that have slowly dwindled down to now.

I see you're showing some movies in this list that are over 90 minutes, and they also seem to be some of the more popular movies that have come out recently. That's a good move by the studios, IMO. But how much longer can they stretch these movies out?

We might find out when "IT 2" comes out. A lot of people didn't go into that movie knowing it wasn't the full movie and were't too happy about it.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 14, 2018 7:12 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
6ix mentioned a 90 minute format, but does admit not seeing a new film in years.

Clint's 15:17 To Paris was the shortest film he's done, and has been the shortest in a while. 2 to 2 1/2 hours is fair common now.

Black Panther was 134 minutes.
Bladerunner 2049 was 164.
Valerian was 137.
Arrival, 116.
Thor 3, 130.
Wonder Woman, 141.
The Force Awakens, 136.
Red Sparrow, 140.
Annihilation, 115.
Jumanji, 119.
Phantom Thread, 130.
The Last Jedi, 152.
Rogue One, 133.
Shape of Water, 123.
Not true. I have seen some new films, just not many. Maybe only 1 to 3 movies a year compared to the 100+ I used to watch in my teens that have slowly dwindled down to now.

I see you're showing some movies in this list that are over 90 minutes, and they also seem to be some of the more popular movies that have come out recently. That's a good move by the studios, IMO. But how much longer can they stretch these movies out?

We might find out when "IT 2" comes out. A lot of people didn't go into that movie knowing it wasn't the full movie and were't too happy about it.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

I was thinking each year you say you haven't seen any films from the current year. Sorry for confusion.

All of the films I listed were over 90 minutes. I don't even know when was the last feature film, in cinema, that was less than 90 minutes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2018 7:52 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

You're right. I haven't seen more "new" movies in the last 2 years than I could count on one hand.

I guess maybe you'd have to define "feature film" for me. I'd have a hard time believing that disposable rom-coms, unfunny comedies (ie: Post-50 First Dates Sandler movies/Horrible parody movies like the Scary Movie series) or trashy horror flicks (ie: "Saw/Paranormal Activity" type movies, not "IT" type movies) would be more than 90 minutes.

I'm assuming you mean that most if not all of the huge budget epic type movies are all around 2+ hours these days?

EDIT: My god... Ghostbusters (2016) was just 4 minutes shy of 2 hours, and there's an extended version that was 134 minutes!

That is one of the very short list of recent flicks I've watched, simply out of morbid curiosity. I did fall asleep during it, but I watched the rest of it when I woke up. It wasn't terrible. It didn't destroy my childhood. I just walked away from it thinking that it was a lot of wasted money on something that probably shouldn't have ever been made. Fieg could have had the same cast on a movie with a $40 million budget that had to do with just about anything and he could have tripled or quadrupled the money. It was really just a strange thing to happen. I bet quite a few people were fired over that one.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2018 8:11 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

The two best "new" movies I've seen were ARQ and I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore.

ARQ was only 88 minutes without a single actor or actress that I recognize and a budget of under 2 Million dollars and filmed in 19 days in Canada. It was originally screened at 2016 Toronto International Film Festival., and was then released to Netflix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARQ_(film)

I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore was only 96 minutes and starred Elijah Wood and Melanie Lynskey. I can't seem to find any info about the budget anywhere, but I don't imagine it was all that much unless the two stars got paid a crazy amount for an indie flick. It was screened at the Sundance Film Festival and then released on Netflix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Don%27t_Feel_at_Home_in_This_World_Any
more

I do recommend both of these movies to anyone. Neither of them would hit my top 10 of all time or anything like that, but I found them far more interesting than anything that was released recently with a huge budget.

The last big budget movie I saw and actually enjoyed quite a bit was Edge of Tomorrow. There's no denying that movie was great.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2018 8:39 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The two best "new" movies I've seen were ARQ and I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore.

ARQ was only 88 minutes without a single actor or actress that I recognize and a budget of under 2 Million dollars and filmed in 19 days in Canada. It was originally screened at 2016 Toronto International Film Festival., and was then released to Netflix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARQ_(film)

I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore was only 96 minutes and starred Elijah Wood and Melanie Lynskey. I can't seem to find any info about the budget anywhere, but I don't imagine it was all that much unless the two stars got paid a crazy amount for an indie flick. It was screened at the Sundance Film Festival and then released on Netflix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Don%27t_Feel_at_Home_in_This_World_Any
more

I do recommend both of these movies to anyone. Neither of them would hit my top 10 of all time or anything like that, but I found them far more interesting than anything that was released recently with a huge budget.

The last big budget movie I saw and actually enjoyed quite a bit was Edge of Tomorrow. There's no denying that movie was great.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

I used to think you were older. Have you ever seen The Lost City of Children?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2018 7:57 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I used to think you were older.

You did? Did something about my last post make me sound childish and change your mind?

Quote:
Have you ever seen The Lost City of Children?

Can't say I have. Couldn't find that on IMDB. Were you talking about The City of Lost Children? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112682/

I didn't even know that was a movie. I knew there was a Playstation game of that name when I was in high school, but I never played it.

It looks pretty interesting, and it pre-dates anything I've seen Pearlman in by about 5 years. Do you recommend it?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2018 1:24 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I used to think you were older.
You did? Did something about my last post make me sound childish and change your mind?
Quote:
Have you ever seen The Lost City of Children?
Can't say I have. Couldn't find that on IMDB. Were you talking about The City of Lost Children? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112682/

I didn't even know that was a movie. I knew there was a Playstation game of that name when I was in high school, but I never played it.

It looks pretty interesting, and it pre-dates anything I've seen Pearlman in by about 5 years. Do you recommend it?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

In the past month or so you've mentioned things which place you in a different decade.

That is the correct title.
When it came out, people I polled who had seen it ranked it in their top 5 for that year. Everybody who did not include it in their top 5 had not seen it. It was bellwether film. The average person did not see it that year, when it was in cinema.
When viewing, use a really good screen, with vibrant colors. It was a visual feast in cinema.
It predates Pan's Labyrinth, but the tone felt similar.

Somewhere around here are threads mentioning it, with numerous endorsements. You should peruse some of the threads about best films, and older films, etc. Lots of great mentions in them. Before this Cinema forum, those threads were in places like Talk Story, General Discussion, etc. Look at the threads of the past year in various forums.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE