Glens Falls (NY) Online Book Discussion Group discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Movies, DVDs, and Theater
>
What MOVIES or DVDs have you watched lately? (PART FOUR - 2011) (ongoing thread)
Werner wrote: " One caveat, though: a lot of people who've watched this series and are also historically knowledgable about the period agree that the writers take some serious liberties with history and period detail. "
For some reason, those liberties don't bother me at all IF the story is set far enough in the past. (Possibly BECAUSE I'm not very up on my history). But when they do one of their 'dramatizations' of some celeb who died 20 years ago, and make up details that nobody could possibly know (bullshit) this annoys me no end. I just never watch those things.
Jackie wrote: "The series mixes fact with fiction, or as they like to call it, 'dramatization', but the parts I mentioned about Anne Boleyn is well documented with how she withheld sex from Henry to control him and force him to divorce Catherine of Aragon. "I guess she was a witch, but a gutsy one, which I kind of admire. Henry ruled by divine right and had the power of life and death at his fingertips.. I'd hate to be the one denying him anything.
She was smart, I'll give her that. She knew exactly what would keep his interest...denying him what he wanted most.
Netflixed Lebanonhttp://movies.netflix.com/Movie/Leban...
Roger Ebert's take on it:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/p...
I was disappointed. The movie takes place inside an Israeli tank in Lebanon. Sure saves on location costs! Also makes it very dark and hard to distinguish oil-stained faces. The director WAS an actualIsraeli tank gunner. But... the opening scene has the gunner UNABLE (mentally) to fire his gun as a speeding auto approaches their roadblock. As the result an infantry man dies. OK, I was never in combat, nobody ever shot at me. But I'm 99.9% certain that EVERY guy in my old outfit would have NO problem pulling a trigger. I think the problem would have been keeping their triggers under control! Israeli kids grow up immersed in THEM and US mentality. I can't see how this scenario made any sense. This ruined the picture for me. The film was confusing and chaotic, just what you'd expect in a true wartime situation.
I gave the thing 2 stars out of 5. I was never so misled by an Ebert review.
Earl, thanks for the review and the links. I took a look at Ebert's review of "Lebanon". Below are some words about the film from the review:===========================================================
"...shuts us into a tank with an Israeli crew on a mission in Lebanon for virtually its entire running time. ... ...sweltering claustrophobia... ...stylistically experimental..."
FROM: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/p...
===========================================================
Ebert gave the film almost 4 stars. Guess he liked it. I doubt if I would have, but it's not the kind of film I would choose in the first place. :)
BTW, it's interesting that the review at Ebert's website, written 8/25/10, was written "by Jim Emerson" and edited by "RogerEbert.com". I know Roger Ebert has been suffering from cancer for a while. I wonder how he's doing.
I'd like to thank Katherine for telling us about "Downton Abbey". I streamed all the episodes from Netflix and enjoyed them thoroughly.http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Mas...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1606375/
There are so many interesting characters in the story and they are played so well. Maggie Smith is so funny as the snobby, stuffy grandmother. For example, when she first sits down on a swivel chair and almost falls off, she learns that it was an invention of Thomas Jefferson. So she says something to the effect: "How much more are we going to have to put up with from those Americans?!" (lol)
I gave the show 5 stars out of 5.
Here are some photos of Maggie Smith:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ZmXcaYlEAnc...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/__7s9GUTM-oY...
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&am...
Her IMDb page: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001749/
I thought I was fantastic also. I can't wait for the second season to arrive, though probably won't be for a while for us Americans, lolI also finished Bonekickers which was really good.
I can't wait either, Jackie. Please let me know when you hear about the next season of "Downton Abbey".About "Bonekickers", I missed your first post about it. It was at the end of the webpage and every once in a while the switch to a new webpage causes me to miss posts.
Your post was Message #150 at:
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/4...
Anyway, here are the Netflix and IMDb pages:
"Bonekickers" (2008)
http://movies.netflix.com/Movie/Bonek...
"The outspoken Dr. Gillian Magwilde and her bold team of archaeologists dig their way through history in each installment of the BBC drama, which takes viewers back to the Crusades, the slave trade, King Arthur's days and much more."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1148181/
"English archaeology professor 'Dolly' Parton's team handles high-profile (notably relic) finds. Often those prove relevant in the present, as such and/or as symbol for a cause. So the team runs personal danger, on top of their messy love - and other personal lives. Usually the story of the object is mainly told in an opening gambit and the episode's final."
At first I thought they were really going to mess with history as we know it, but somehow in each of the six episodes, their 'find' never gets to see the light of day, whether by theft, being destroyed, etc. For whatever reason, by the end of the episode, history remains intact. I found it interesting for the 'what if' factor. And the choices for each episode were ambitious, American Revolution, WWII, Joan of Arc, and of course, Excalibur. I wish it lasted more than one season. There really wasn't much in the love-life area, only a past love life between two members of the team, and it didn't affect their working relationship. I don't know why it's even mentioned, it makes it seem like there's more of an emphasis on it when there really isn't.
The actor who plays the patriarch on Downton Abbey, Hugh Bonneville, plays Parton in Bonekickers. Quite a different role and he plays both wonderfully. It was through a search of his name on imdb that I found Bonekickers.
Jackie, I agree that Hugh Bonneville is excellent. He was so likable in "Downton Abbey". Here's his photo:http://www-tc.pbs.org/s3/pbs.merlin.c...
Joy H. wrote: "BTW, it's interesting that the review at Ebert's website, written 8/25/10, was written "by Jim Emerson" and edited by "RogerEbert.com". I know Roger Ebert has been suffering from cancer for a while. I wonder how he's doing..."
Good catch, Joy. I knew Ebert was ailing but didn't catch on that others were weighing in in his name. Means I can't place as much reliance on his reviews. I often disagreed with Ebert in the past, but I could kind of read-between-the-lines in his reviews to deduce whether I'd like it or not.
Earl, at Wiki there's an update about Roger Ebert's health (he has been battling thyroid cancer and has had much surgery). His latest activites are discussed. He is presenting a new show called: "Ebert presents At the Movies".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_ebert
(Scroll down to the section called "Current Health".)
Excerpt:
===========================================================
"By January 2011, Ebert had been given a prosthesis for his chin created by University of Illinois craniofacial doctors and other specialists. The prosthesis, which took two years to fabricate, is worn by Ebert on "Ebert Presents at the Movies*", in a medium shot of him that is used for the "Roger's Office" segment."
[From the above-linked Wiki page]
==========================================================
*At the following link there is a video-clip of the new program:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/pages...
(Scroll down to find the video-clip. There's a short shot of Ebert near the end of the clip. He uses "text-to-speech" software to create an artificial voice. The clip shows him at a keyboard keying in his words to be voiced by the software. The software has been custom-tailored to create a voice that sounds more like Ebert's own voice.)
I feel bad for Ebert. He has shown great courage and fortitude during this ordeal.
Netflixed Date Nighthttp://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Dat...
I'm not a huge fan of Steve Carrel (The Office), but he and Tina Fey together make a great comedy team. I give 3 stars out of 5. OK, I should mention that Tina Fey (30 Rock) can do no wrong on my tv. I guess she's the reason the flick go into my Netflix queue.
Netflixed Inceptionhttp://movies.netflix.com/Movie/Incep...
Perhaps this plot could be presented better on the written page. On-screen is was just too confusing. I fast-forwarded thru all the chase-and-shoot parts. I give 1 star out of 5.
Earl wrote: I fast-forwarded thru all the chase-and-shoot parts. No wonder you didn't like it, you lost most of the plot by fast forwarding. The action scenes were more important than you could have guessed.
I've stated numerous times for those who was going to watch the movie that you must pay attention to all of it.
Don't blame the movie, you chose to miss most of it.
I liked Inception, but it didn't wow me. It was at least a 3, maybe 3.5. Fun & not that confusing if you've ever read much about time travel or multi-layered realities. It lost a point with me for being too predictable.
Jackie wrote: "Earl wrote: I fast-forwarded thru all the chase-and-shoot parts. No wonder you didn't like it, you lost most of the plot by fast forwarding. The action scenes were more important than you could ..."
I stand chastised. If both you and Jim liked it I probably missed something. You must remember I DEPEND on subtitles. Sometimes a movie is NOT MADE in such a way that subtitles can be useful. Mostly it's when they fly by too fast. Though in regular tv shows they can be either garbled or running 5 minutes behind. I still stand by my 1 star review. For ME that's what the show was worth. YMMV.
Ah, the subtitles! That would be hard trying to see this film and having to depend on them, I would imagine many films are ruined by that experience. You're entitled to rate it whatever you choose.
What does YMMV mean?
YMMV = Your Mileage May VaryI forgot about the subtitles, Earl. I hate foreign films where I have to rely on subtitles. Too many nuances are lost. That could well be the problem. Also, I've read about multilayered realities & time travel issues most of my life. It's an odd way of looking at reality. If you're not an SF nut & couldn't hear/see all the clues, I can see where the movie would just be bewildering.
Jackie wrote: "Ah, the subtitles! That would be hard trying to see this film and having to depend on them, I would imagine many films are ruined by that experience. You're entitled to rate it whatever you cho..."
Does it bother folks like it does me to see TV channel promotions running across the bottom of the screen, and obscuring the subtitles and/or part of the program?
I was watching Tora! Tora! Tora! the other night and it was very distracting. Good thing I knew what happened and really didn't need them. Didn't hurt either that I'd seen it more than a few times.
I HATE, DETEST, & DESPISE those stupid promotions in the middle of a show. (I'd tell you how I really feel, but it isn't printable.) They often interfere with what's going on. They're definitely distracting. Seriously, we need commercials running during the show? I think not.
Katherine wrote: "Does it bother folks like it does me to see TV channel promotions running across the bottom of the screen, and obscuring the subtitles and/or part of the program? ..."Jim wrote: "I HATE, DETEST, & DESPISE those stupid promotions in the middle of a show. ..."
About the TV ads which pop up or run at the bottom of the screen during a film or a show on TV, I consider them rude and intrusive. When I see those ads I want to say: "You have some nerve!"
In fact, it's a wonder that someone hasn't done something to put a stop to such a practice. How DARE the perpetrators assume that they can just barge into a program like that! Not only is it a cheeky thing to do to the audience, but it's an insult to the directors, the performers and the producers who put so much work into the creation of their films and shows. If film is an art form then the intrusive practice is akin to putting ads at the bottom of paintings in a museum. Nobody would stand for that! The ad people are overstepping their bounds, IMO.
Katherine, I'm glad you mentioned it. I've been wanting to get that rant off my chest for a long time. :)
Last April, in BBC country, during the season premiere of Doctor Who a banner ad for Graham Norton appeared on the screen, there was such outrage, emails and phonecalls, that Graham had to make a formal apology on his show the following night and promise it'd never happen again. Don't mess with the Whovians, lolWe need to complain in masses just like that.
Jackie, I'm glad to hear that there have been public complaints about the banner ads on TV. You're right, we have to complain en masse.
I like the fact that the people made such a fuss that something was done about it.
Jim wrote: "I HATE, DETEST, & DESPISE those stupid promotions in the middle of a show. (I'd tell you how I really feel, but it isn't printable.) They often interfere with what's going on. They're definitely..."Well... maybe we brought it on ourselves: we all love to fast-forward thru commercials on shows we've recorded. So they decided the only way to brainwash us is to shove ads down our throats by plastering ads over our shows. It wasn't so bad with just vcrs, 79@ of people wouldn't learn to program them to record, but the DVRs/TIVO are apparently easier to work, and now everyone is defeating their ads. (You can no longer buy a programmable vcr, they won't make them anymore).
I'll bounce that ball back into their corner. They shouldn't bombard us with so many ads, so it's their own fault we feel compelled to fast forward. For each hour long TV show, 1/3 of it is commercials. Life is too short to spend watching commercials I'm not remotely interested in. When there were less commericals I didn't really mind so much, it gave me the opportunity to get a drink, or snacks or whatever. My cable man was here the other day and told me the networks are complaining so much that the cable companies might have to do away with the Fast Forward function from their DVRs sometime in the future. If that happens, I'll drop my DVR service as well as the cable service completely. I could just as easily watch online where there's 4 or 5 one-minute ads per TV show or wait for the DVD to come out and rent it. As much as I watch TV, I could just as easily drop it altogether if I can't watch it without 20 minutes of commercials per hour. I really don't see a future for network TV for too much longer. It'll be pay channels like HBO that'll get the majority of viewers or straight to DVD series that'll make the money.
Jackie wrote: "I'll bounce that ball back into their corner. They shouldn't bombard us with so many ads, so it's their own fault we feel compelled to fast forward. For each hour long TV show, 1/3 of it is commer..."Sounds like the networks are cutting their own throats. When will they realize that it's in their best interests to shorten the length of their commercials!
Joy, I honestly don't think they care. The amount of quality shows has gone downhill. They seem to want cheap garbage like reality TV or those stupid Wipeout games. There'll always be mindless masses to actually want to see it.And new shows that are potentially good, they find ways to kill off quickly so they don't have to spend money. They don't advertise the show, they move it up against top rated shows. In some cases pull the show after 2 or 3 episodes, they don't give them a chance. I just read an article about the shows that are not likely to make it to a second season, one of them was Body of Proof, which hasn't even aired yet!
Jackie wrote: "Joy, I honestly don't think they care. The amount of quality shows has gone downhill. They seem to want cheap garbage like reality TV or those stupid Wipeout games. There'll always be mindless masses to actually want to see it. ..."That's pretty depressing, Jackie. Doesn't give us much to look forward to on network TV.
I have to disagree with Jackie on the future of TV, if only because the past was just as bad. Have you ever watched old sitcoms? I remember loving some of them, but I watch most now & just shudder.
It'll force us to pay for quality programming.
Jim, the old sitcoms seem outdated now because times have changed. If I had to choose one old sitcom for its lasting entertainment value, I would choose "Frasier" because its dialogue is so smart and witty and its characters are so well cast.
Jim, yes, I can't watch the old shows anymore. Same with old movies. I guess there's crap for every era, lolBut I still think a significant portion of current network TV is so far below even those old sitcoms and the pay cable stations put out some damn good shows.
I don't think networks will fold, or at least not anytime soon but more people are paying for a higher quality of television because it's apparent we're not going to get it from the networks.
Jackie, check this out.http://www.cracked.com/article_18983_...
It's pretty interesting & has some bearing on old shows through the old music. Only the best is saved.
I watched the Netflix DVD of:"The Social Network" (2010) (about the beginnings of Facebook)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/
http://movies.netflix.com/Movie/The_S...
Here's the IMDb awards page for the movie:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/a...
Among many other honors, it's been nominated for an Oscar for "Best Motion Picture of the Year". (The Oscar Awards will be aired on TV this coming Sunday.)
The dialogue comes fast and there's a lot to take in in a short time, but the film keeps you watching. It's hard to be sure about how much of the info is absolutely true, but at least one gets an idea of what went on and who was involved.
I came away from the film feeling a bit sorry for what Mark Zuckerberg and Eduardo Saverin went through in founding Facebook. Justin Timberlake was excellent as Sean Parker, the fellow who spurred Zuckerberg on to spread Facebook around the globe and find big investors.
Jesse Eisenberg was excellent as Zuckerberg, the computer genius, as was Andrew Garfield playing Eduardo Saverin (Zuckerberg's classmate at Harvard and the original investor). Eisenberg is up for an Oscar for "Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role".
The final financial settlements for all those involved in the legal proceedings were mind-boggling. Zuckerberg's head must have been spinning throughout the ordeal, but he proved his skill in creating the code for phenomenon of Facebook. He was driven at a very young age and became "the world's youngest billionaire as of 2008".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Zuc...
The movie was based on the book, The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal (2009), by Ben Mezrich
PS-Below is an excerpt from the GR description of the book mentioned above,_The Accidental Billionaires_ (about the founding of Facebook):
========================================================
"... What followed–a real-life adventure filled with slick venture capitalists ... makes for one of the most entertaining and compelling books of the year. Before long, Eduardo’s and Mark’s different ideas about Facebook created in their relationship faint cracks, which soon spiraled into out-and-out warfare. The collegiate exuberance that marked their collaboration fell prey to the adult world of lawyers and money. The great irony is that while Facebook succeeded by bringing people together, its very success tore two best friends apart."
FROM: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/63...
==========================================================
The film, "The Social Network" (2010) portrayed all of this very well.
Jim wrote: "Jackie, check this out.http://www.cracked.com/article_18983_...
It's pretty interesting & has some bearing on old shows through the old..."
It IS a great link. Kirk Douglas' The Ragman's Son alluded to some of this stuff.
As to tv's crappy shows, it is my belief (can't prove it) that network execs love crappy shows because they can churn them, always bringing new crappy shows on. I think it makes THEM money, personally, somehow.
Earl wrote: I think it makes THEM money, personally, somehow. They must, otherwise they wouldn't keep making them.
Good article Jim.
Cracked.com does have a lot of excellent articles, as this one proved. The only problem are the links at the end. They're like chips. I just have to click on one more...
Netflixed Salthttp://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Sal...
Lots of running and chasing. Angelina Joli's stunt doubles doing impossible tricks, aided by cgi. It did keep me watching and awake. 3 stars out of 5 for that, and because it's, you know, Angelina Joli.
Earl, I see that Roger Ebert gave "Salt" an enthusiastic 4 stars and a great review:http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/p...
Interestingly, we had a poll last month over in the Action Heroine Fans group, to name our favorite movie actress in the action heroine category. Jolie won it, with more votes than everyone else combined. (So if she doesn't get an Oscar, maybe that can be a consolation prize. :-) )Earl, I'm told she actually did some of her own stunts in Salt (using a surreptitiously-attached wire for safety's sake, but still.... ) I've heard some good feedback about that movie, and hope to see it myself sometime.
Netflixed Abandomedhttp://movies.netflix.com/Movie/Aband...
2 stars out of 5 from me. Searching for her guy is the hospital reminds me of one of some my low-grade nightmares: frustration about not being able to find something. Those SEEM to go on for hours. I think they may be provoked by physical discomfort, mainly my back. Still, the twist was fairly predictable in this flick. At least it didn't put me to sleep.
I saw this a while ago, I agree, it was too damn predictable. I knew the end before it barely got started. I can't stand such mediocrity in current crop of movies. I haven't been watching nearly as many movies as I used to.
I watched "Babylon AD" with Vin Diesel in it today - DVR'd it & knitted. It was pretty awful, but somewhat entertaining. I wouldn't pay money, not even a rental fee, for it.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Glens Falls (NY) Online Book Discussion Group
Books mentioned in this topic
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (other topics)The Card (other topics)
A Thousand Acres (other topics)
The Hobbit, or There and Back Again (other topics)
Tom Brown's Schooldays (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Douglas Adams (other topics)Arnold Bennett (other topics)
Jane Smiley (other topics)
J.R.R. Tolkien (other topics)
Fred Gipson (other topics)
More...
Jackie, I went back and searched for my former comments about the Tudors film. On 8/5/10, I posted the following:
==========================================================
"Jackie, about "The Tudors", the TV series, I streamed the first five episodes of Season 1 via Netflix. It was too slow-going for me. So I didn't continue. There were too many long-takes without much happening, as if the producers were trying to stretch the show out. I didn't think the part of Henry VIII was well cast. The actor wasn't masculine enough to be believable. I also found the bedroom scenes too graphic and there were too many of them... the same thing over and over again but with different women. After a while that sort of thing gets very old and ho-hum, not to mention distasteful. It bordered on porn, IMO. But even without that, I don't think I would have enjoyed the rest of the series. I just wasn't engaged enough to stay with it.
"Yes, the costumes were good. But it takes more than costumes and staging to make a film appealing. Besides, I find jousting and that sort of thing to be boring. So, all in all, the series wasn't for me."
FROM: http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...
==========================================================
Funny how we're all so different in our tastes for books and films. I wonder what makes the difference. I suppose stage of life (being younger or older) is a big factor. What used to draw us in, no longer does.