|
|
| |
Forum Overview
::
Peter Molyneux's The Movies
|
| |
|
by Lizard_King 07/20/2007, 4:39pm PDT |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fussbett wrote:
The "refugee camp" (sneer quotes added at your request) was easy to enter and navigate compared to a prison, is all I'm saying. A huge sprawling chaotic slum and no guards.
I really think you're misremembering. I saw this for the first time two weeks ago, and its pretty fresh in my mind. First off, you'll recall they went through a barrage of guards to get into the camp, and they even laid on the Gitmo/Abu Ghraib imagery on pretty thick with the screening process. Remember how they pull the annoying hippie dyke sidekick off the bus, and put her in the isolation cages, next to the naked guys and the executed bodies?
Also, you'll recall they had to use that silly boat mechanic as a means out of the city, which from the outside appeared completely walled in, Judge Dredd-like.
That second Fish coup plan didn't get instigated until the heroes went on the run. It was more of a desperation Plan C at that point. Wasn't it?
That, I'm not sure about. I'd understood the whole time (since they are unveiled as "bad") that the plan had to do with causing a literal uprising in the refugee camps, which I recall thinking was a bad idea even before I saw it executed. It's like trying to overthrow Hitler from within Auschwitz.
Regardless, I can forgive dumb people having a stupid plan in a movie. They were bad guys who became bad guys based on their bad ideas to begin with. People have bad ideas all the time in real life. [Bush joke]
That I can see as a valid point. I just have a tough time then caring about any of the characters other than Clive Owen for being awesome. IIRC, the book was somewhat more successful in painting the Fish as tragic and doomed and wrong, but not as fucking retarded.
I think I don't consider The Lives of Others to be high art either, which is the real problem here. But Children of Men and The Lives of Others both CRUSH Pan. What do you think of that?
I think you're baiting me, that's what I think. To which you'll respond with a citation where you said this back in the day, and I'll still think you were baiting me clairvoyantly. I also think Pan loses a great deal in translation. The subtitles were ok, but I tried watching it reading them rather than listening and the movie suffered greatly as a result. Also, I think the fact that a lot of people I hate liked the movie hurt it, simply because listening to what they liked about it pointed out flaws I'd ignored.
But I still think it's the best of this random assortment of three movies, and I think Lives is a superlative movie within its genre (sappy Eastern Europe noir) because it manages to be character driven and extremely well acted. I think Children is by far the most generic and silly of the three, which does not preclude it being a good movie. It's just not in the same league. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The Lives of Others by Quentin Beck 07/10/2007, 6:46pm PDT 
Re: The Lives of Others by Zseni 07/10/2007, 6:51pm PDT
Re: The Lives of Others by Vested Id 07/10/2007, 6:58pm PDT
Re: The Lives of Others by Quentin Beck 07/10/2007, 9:17pm PDT
Wrong the best movie of the last 2 years is 300. NT by Jhoh Cable o_O 07/10/2007, 7:43pm PDT
I thought it was "Never been Thawed" NT by Mischief Maker 07/10/2007, 7:48pm PDT
It will be "The King of Kong" NT by John Tidor 07/13/2007, 2:11pm PDT
I saw this in an arthouse cinema. [oblique spoilers] by Ray of Light 07/11/2007, 12:32am PDT
You're spoilers aren't oblique! You've ruined the movie for everyone! by Quentin Beck 07/11/2007, 8:11pm PDT
You're! NT by Quentin Beck 07/11/2007, 8:11pm PDT
Now THESE are spoilers by Ray of Light 07/12/2007, 7:06am PDT
Re: Now THESE are spoilers by Quentin Beck 07/12/2007, 7:44am PDT
Re: Now THESE are spoilers by Jhoh Cable o_O 07/12/2007, 11:22am PDT
Re: Now THESE are spoilers by Quentin Beck 07/12/2007, 6:19pm PDT
I definitely have not seen this movie. NT by Jhoh Cable o_O 07/12/2007, 7:46pm PDT
Re: Now THESE are spoilers by Mischief Maker 07/13/2007, 5:41pm PDT
NOT better than Children of Men by Fussbett 07/13/2007, 1:03pm PDT
Re: NOT better than Children of Men by Lizard_King 07/13/2007, 1:54pm PDT
Re: NOT better than Children of Men by Ray of Light 07/14/2007, 12:34am PDT
Re: NOT better than Children of Men by Lizard_King 07/18/2007, 5:23am PDT
Re: NOT better than Children of Men by Quentin Beck 07/14/2007, 12:47am PDT
And it's definitely better than Children of Men. by Lizard_King 07/18/2007, 5:38am PDT
Children of Men, come for the fantastic cinematography by Fahbs 07/18/2007, 6:50am PDT
It definitely sets up for a video game. by Lizard_King 07/18/2007, 5:41pm PDT
Spoilers by Fussbett 07/18/2007, 5:47pm PDT
Re: Spoilers by Lizard_King 07/20/2007, 8:53am PDT
Re: Spoilers by Fussbett 07/20/2007, 11:19am PDT
Re: Spoilers by Lizard_King 07/20/2007, 4:39pm PDT
Plan C by Fahbs 07/20/2007, 8:26pm PDT
Re: Plan C by Lizard_King 07/21/2007, 8:37am PDT
Lizard King has successfully agreed with me. Fussbett is dismissed. NT by Quentin Beck 07/20/2007, 11:27pm PDT
You now like Pan's better than The Lives of Others? What a flip flop. NT by Fussbett 07/21/2007, 3:37am PDT
GET THE FUCK OUT! NT by Quentin Beck 07/21/2007, 6:30am PDT
You probably prefer Pan's Labyrinth because of the lack of artists in that film. NT by Fussbett 07/21/2007, 5:50pm PDT
Artists may be appreciated but should never be respected or admired. NT by Quentin Beck 07/24/2007, 5:58pm PDT
Re: Spoilers by Leaped Frog 07/22/2007, 3:03pm PDT
It definitely had weak writing in a lot of parts by Fahbs 07/18/2007, 8:14pm PDT
I can't believe we agree on this (?!?) by Lizard_King 07/20/2007, 8:54am PDT
|
|
| |
|
| |
