Rob's comments (member since Apr 20, 2009)

Rob's comments from the Goodflicks group.

Yeah...but we all know if you get in a wrestling ring with 500 rednecks in the crowd and start tongue-kissing a man....the response won't be good. Gee...what a surprise.


I wasn't "offended" by Bruno per se. I just didn't think it was funny. Predictable, yes. I mean....how would a gay man react if he was alone in a hotel room with a woman and she blatantly hit on him? He might not call her a name, but I think the reaction might be similar. He'd probably try to get the hell out of there and would look very uncomfortable.

I'm more concerned with whether gays/lesbians have the same rights as straight people than I am with how 'racy' they can act in public.

Amen. ;)

OK. I'm a pretty liberal guy. I'm not exactly a prude either. But Bruno was juuuust a bit much. I loved Borat and was expecting a lot of the same shenanigans...which there were. But this time, it just wasn't very funny. Shocking..yes. More than I care to see? Yes. Funny? Not really. I think Sacha Baron Cohen tried too hard this time and ended up with something that was more confrontational than funny.

And...how the hell did a shot of a guy swinging his penis around for 20 seconds get left in an R rated movie? The penis even yells out, "Bruno!!!" with it's little opening! Hey...I don't care that it's in the movie, but if a HORROR movie or a DRAMATIC movie showed the same thing, it'd be slapped with an NC-17 faster than you can say "member"! Why do comedies get a free pass? I've seen much worse (as far as sex and nudity) in comedies lately than in ANY horror or suspense movie.

Kelly wrote: "i just saw this tonight. i liked it, not really scary more just creepy. there is a real hazy line about if the footage being claimed real is so or not. i found something online saying its all bull,..."

Wow. If THAT'S true, then there's a metric buttload of films that need to pay up! Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Blair Witch, Faces of Death, etc. Why do people BELIEVE the claims that what they're seeing is true? That's what I want to know.

If they got no-name actors and spent a little less on Happy Meal tie-ins, it could be done.

*Crosses fingers and hopes I'm not full of shit*

Yeah...the Coraline mention was meant as an example of smooth, non-jerky, "realistic-looking" stop motion. I didn't care for the movie as a whole. When was the last time a filmmaker DID try to combine stop-motion with live action? The original Clash of the Titans was one of the last ones I remember.

I actually LIKE Jim Carrey's spastic humor, but not in Christmas movies. Seems like he's in one almost every year anymore.

Stacy: Well....you can't blame Harryhusen for declining. He IS well into his 80's. The filmmakers could very well have got a whole crew of stop-motion animators with Harryhausen's blessing. With the great technological advances re: stop-motion (see: Coraline), I don't know why they couldn't have.

The Day After was pretty realistic. But then, the writers weren't so concerned with a romantic subplot or a happy ending either, if I remember correctly.

Agreed. This is one movie where I thought the CGI was fantastic. And I liked the film even more because it didn't rely on the f/x as a crutch! There was actually a good STORY!

Stacie: Yeah...I don't think the Harryhausen effects are "cheesy" either. Bad choice of words I guess. I was trying to be in the mindset of most modern filmgoers...who probably WOULD think they were "cheesy"! I love stop-motion animation as well and think the CGI in this movie is kind of a slap in the face to Harryhausen. Most CGI just flat-out sucks. There. I said it. Every once in a while I see some impressive CGI...like in District 9. But for the most part, the CGI in a movie is not impressive at all.

I'll be the Allosaurus...you can be the T. Rex. Graaawr!!

And if this wasn't meant to be a remake of the Clash of the Titans from the 80's, then why are they capitalizing on the name? The mythology wasn't named Clash of the Titans, was it?

So....how did they have a happy ending after 3/4 of the Earth was destroyed? That's the only thing I'm curious about.

I don't think people are going to fall for that ruse much anymore.

Susanna wrote: "I guess they tried to make a new Blair Witch out of this...."


ANOTHER Blair Witch clone? Jeez. I didn't think Blair Witch was all THAT....

Was he the one whose jaw was falling off? I didn't see it, but my li'l girl said I'd like it because it was "scary". Heh.

It was the creatures that enticed me to the original. I could've cared less about the plot.

My 6 year old said one of the ghosts was pretty scary.

So...they replaced kind of cheesy-looking stop-motion creatures with kind of cheesy-looking CGI creatures. I might give it a shot, but the original will always be special to me.

I wonder what Ray Harryhausen thinks of this?

Heh heh.

Kandice's mom: "Hee-hee! Giggle! Look! Little Kandice just flushed all my money down the toilet! Isn't she a laugh riot? Hahahaha!!"

;)

OK, Angie. You're gonna have to fess up about this "drama vacation". What happened?

I'm not interested in it, but I just read that it grossed the most ever for an opening-weekend non-sequel.