| Author |
Message |
|
| Nancy |
 Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:53 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4607
Location: Norman, OK
|
marantzo wrote: Nancy wrote: Glad you liked it, warpedgirl! I thought it was really outstanding. (BTW, I saw a couple of episodes of The Big Bang Theory and I'm hooked. Thanks for the recommendation!)
I recommended The Big Bang Theory when it first hit the small screen. My ratings get no respect, no respect.
I knew someone else had recommended it, but I couldn't remember who. Thanks, Gary. Actually, the first person who recommended it was a friend from my gaming group who has been raving about it for some time. |
_________________
"All in all, it's just another feather in the fan."
Isaacism, 2009 |
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:59 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12929
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
marantzo wrote: Nancy wrote: Glad you liked it, warpedgirl! I thought it was really outstanding. (BTW, I saw a couple of episodes of The Big Bang Theory and I'm hooked. Thanks for the recommendation!)
I recommended The Big Bang Theory when it first hit the small screen. My ratings get no respect, no respect.
Billy, yes, the reviews for Watchmen have been all over the place. They use a nice devise here with some of the movie reviews in the paper. After the review they print a lot of quotes from other reviewers around world. So it was a very mixed bag. The two reviews from Winnipeg critics were both positive. One being an outright rave and the other being mixed but having the reviewer say that she had to see it again, because she thought it would be better with more than one viewing.
Did they drop the subplot about the Pirate comic? I didn't think that worked in the graphic novel. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Don't Know. Haven't seen the movie, but all the ones whom I have heard, who were up on the graphic novel (comic book) said it represented The Watchmen of the GN very accurately. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:29 pm |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
WATCHMEN (no "The") is a trip. Surprising in its darkness, brutality and sexuality.
I came to the film, as Lorne did, having not read the book and knowing very little about it. It is a satisfying film that has an absolutely terrific performance by Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. With WATCHMEN and LITTLE CHILDREN, Haley has made an impressive comeback. WATCHMEN's main weakness is in the tepidness of the other performances. What a bland collection of actors and poorly defined characterizations. Other than Haley, Jeffrey Dean Morgan makes an impact as The Comedian.
Recommended. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| lshap |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:43 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4248
Location: Montreal
|
Marc - Glad you liked it.
Feeling awake and having a strong bladder helps the experience since this sucker runs at 160 minutes. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:20 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
billyweeds wrote: Joe Vitus wrote: I've been curious what the Third Eye Rection might be. Thanks Lorne.
It certainly seems to have prompted a Third Eye Rection from Lorne.
The overall "rection" to this movie has been wildly mixed, everything from Lorne's all the way down to "avoid at all costs."
For some reason, I thought the movie would be highly anticipated around here, so I'm a bit surprised at the small number of people who seem interested. No discussion about it prior to release, only three people catching it the opening weekend. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:28 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| The whole subject of Watchmen is lost on me. It's presumably a huge cult. Maybe it's generational. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:47 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
I coudn't get into the graphic novel myself, and am not interested in the movie too much. "Grim" and "dirty" aren't really the buzzwords to get im interested in a comic book/grapic novel (they are not exactly the same thing) movie, though they are supposed to represent a great evolution in the genre.
But considering the huge excitement for the Batman and other superhero franchises around here, plus a general interest whenever a pop medium is used for serious art, I expected more enthusiasm around here, and was hoping it would either encourage or discourage my seeing the movie/attempting the book again.
I am more likely to see it now, since Lorne and Marc wrote raves. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Befade |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:40 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 3784
Location: AZ
|
Quote: I didn't see Penn's performance so I can't compare, but it is very hard for me to imagine a better performance than Rourke's. The Wrestler was a terrific movie as. I'm starting to worry. I'm agreeing with Lorne too much.
Rourke's performance was in a manner of and comparable with, the top Brando work.
Gary.......I loved Rourke too. I thought Penn was better in that he played against type......and that seems like it would be harder to do......holding himself back.......than what Rourke did.......giving it HIS all. Probably Rourke was more memorable though. |
_________________
Lost in my own private I dunno. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:57 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
| When the movie MILK and Sean Penn's depiction of Harvey is long forgotten, Mickey Rourke as THE WRESTLER will be regarded as one of the legendary film incarnations of all time. And it is an incarnation, not a performance. When an actor embodies a role so deeply, drawing from his own inner depths, blurring the lines between the actor and the character, we encounter a phenomenon that is very very rare in movies today. I am not talking about the method actor practice of 'sense memory". I am talking about an actor who through his character reveals himself so totally that you get a glimpse into not only the character's soul but also the actor's. This is not acting. It is incarnating. This is magic, alchemy, shamanism. We expect this of rock and rollers, Jim Morrison, The Beatles,Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan. But, we don't expect this same quality of transcendent energy from actors. But, certain actors can pull down this power. Rourke did this in The Wrestler. Brando did it in Last Tango. Gena Rowlands in A Woman Under The Influence. Sean Penn in At Close Range. David Thewlis in Naked. Charlize Theron in Monster. Maria Falconetti in Dreyer's Joan Of Arc. This form of "acting" echoes the trance writing of the surrealists, when some higher force, the muse, invaded their consciousness and took over. This process requires the surrender of ego. It is the exact opposite of acting as celebrity hood, It is the annihilation of the ego at the service of art. True art emerges when ego begins the process of its own destruction and from its ashes the truth emerges. But, you still have to start with the ego. So, the actors job is to get so inside his character via his own soul that he is willing to disappear. He is willing to become transparent, a window that opens to his own becoming. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:08 am |
|
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12929
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
Nancy wrote: marantzo wrote: Nancy wrote: Glad you liked it, warpedgirl! I thought it was really outstanding. (BTW, I saw a couple of episodes of The Big Bang Theory and I'm hooked. Thanks for the recommendation!)
I recommended The Big Bang Theory when it first hit the small screen. My ratings get no respect, no respect.
I knew someone else had recommended it, but I couldn't remember who. Thanks, Gary. Actually, the first person who recommended it was a friend from my gaming group who has been raving about it for some time.
Leonard (who isn't on the forum), Gary and Warpedgirl. If you beat me over the head enough eventually I'll pay attention. Especially if Leonard and Warpedgirl agree on anything. The series is delightful, I know these people, and I think I'm one of these people , and the series may even survive for a few seasons.
I'm now debating whether to spend another ten dollars a month to get the BBC channel to get Primeval in which we get time warps to connect us to the Cretaceous. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:27 am |
|
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12929
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
Marc wrote: WATCHMEN (no "The") is a trip. Surprising in its darkness, brutality and sexuality.
I came to the film, as Lorne did, having not read the book and knowing very little about it. It is a satisfying film that has an absolutely terrific performance by Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. With WATCHMEN and LITTLE CHILDREN, Haley has made an impressive comeback. WATCHMEN's main weakness is in the tepidness of the other performances. What a bland collection of actors and poorly defined characterizations. Other than Haley, Jeffrey Dean Morgan makes an impact as The Comedian.
Recommended.
Thanks, Marc. Rorschach and the Comedian have to be just right or you don't have a movie. Rorschach is insane (though less insane than several other characters), and the Comedian is someone you want to die immediately in as painful a method as possible. You need Dr. Manhattan too, but he's fundamentally incomprehensible anyway. Night Owl and Silk Spectre were bland even in the comics. Well, ultimately, their relationship affected Dr. Manhattan, but he was a bit beyond it by that point. It sounds like the people who did the movie did as good a job as possible, and I'm looking forward to it. I've read the book and you should too. Although I think the ultimate horror, five fucking terms of Richard Nixon, may be lost on a 2008 audience. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 4:02 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marc,
Who's to say Milk and Sean Penn will be long forgotten? Gotta disagree with you there. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 5:31 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Marc,
Who's to say Milk and Sean Penn will be long forgotten? Gotta disagree with you there.
Marc may have overstated his case, but the basic opinion--that Rourke's performance was more indelible and way more iconic (and therefore more award-worthy)--is IMO absolutely indisputable. Penn gave a very good performance; Rourke was sui generis, inspired, and worthy of the overused adjective "great." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 5:51 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| Who says? Sorry, but you guys would be much more convincing saying you found it more indelible/iconic than pretending the general consensus does/will agree with you. I've heard almost no one mention Rourke's performance outside of this forum. Not at all sure it is more likely to go down in cinema history than Penn's. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
