pedro2112

QUOTE (Hypatia @ Apr 27 2005, 08:33 AM) QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Apr 26 2005, 11:22 PM) Your last name isn't "Lee," is it? No, different Hypatia. Does your "old buddy" have a broad ( ) range of movie recommendations or did you stumble across Hypatia Lee all on your own? It was a long time ago.. that type of thing is not permitted anymore.

QUOTE (Hypatia @ Apr 26 2005, 07:48 PM) QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Apr 26 2005, 05:39 PM) An old buddy of mine just recommended this show to me. He said the series is available on DVD. Is it worth it to buy or just rent? I think it's the best sf show I've ever seen; however, since you can rent them and I know nothing about what you'd like or dislike, I'd recommend you rent one or two and then decide. I bought the set after watching the (netflix-ed) first two disks. Enjoy! Your last name isn't "Lee," is it?

An old buddy of mine just recommended this show to me. He said the series is available on DVD. Is it worth it to buy or just rent?

QUOTE (Cygnus @ Apr 24 2005, 04:15 PM) Star War VI The Empire Strikes Back That's V, not VI. I just finished watching Locusts... it was so bad it was hilarious!

both those women's chests are much too small for wonder woman. Remember, Lynda Carter had enormous mammary glands.

Sounds like an interesting movie, maybe I'll check it out one of these days. Maybe it will be as good as "Deep Blue Sea" with Samuel L. Jackson?

I won't see it. The original was so good that I know I will be disappointed. As an aside, the original was the first R rated movie that I saw.. I was at the ripe old age of 11. I was staying overnight at my grandma's apartment in the city. The landlord (greek immigrants) had a boy around my age. The parents didn't know any better, and took us to see the movie. I was scared shitless! I had to sleep in my two older sisters room that night on the floor between their beds!

QUOTE (sullysue @ Apr 19 2005, 10:13 AM) QUOTE (Test4VitalSigns @ Apr 18 2005, 03:35 PM) Not only remakes but endless, useless sequels which usually suck and taints the original movie. Here, here!!! Barring Spiderman, though. I think 2 was better than the first. Empire Strikes Back was better than A New Hope. Terminator II was better than Terminator Debbie Does Dallas II was also better than the original.

QUOTE (invisibleairwaves @ Apr 18 2005, 06:16 PM) QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Apr 18 2005, 05:00 PM) I used to love the BBC series of the same name. Have you read the books? a loooooong time ago I believe I read the first one. Douglas Adams.

I thought Phantom Menace was just as bad as Return of the Jedi. Frankly, both films would have been a heck of a lot better if the Ewoks and Jar-jar Banks were written out of them respectively. It sort of ruins the movie when a huge part of the plot involves ridiculous, half-assed characters. I really enjoyed Attack of the Clones, however. I was actually looking forward to the upcoming movie until I heard that lucas called it "titanic in space.. a real tearjerker." Not that I have anything against a good love story, it's just that Lucas sucks at love.

Frankly, "The Hitcher" was one of the best thrillers I have ever seen. Hauer was completely insane in that movie, and Ponyboy did a fantastic job as the protagonist. To think that this remake will be directed by the quintessential hollywood "commercial" director makes me want to defecate.

I used to love the BBC series of the same name.

QUOTE (Schro @ Apr 16 2005, 03:46 PM) P.S. What then, did you mean by "attitude adjustment"? Adjusting one's perspective with the help of external factors.

QUOTE (Schro @ Apr 15 2005, 04:50 PM) QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Apr 14 2005, 04:16 PM)QUOTE (Schro @ Apr 14 2005, 12:36 PM) Rent it. Make popcorn. Get cozy. Then come back here and tell us what you think. Schro Would an "attitude adjustment" be appropriate for this movie? I suppose an attitude adjustment, if I understand you correctly, would be a good start. /rant on Some would classify "Equilibrium" as science fiction - it is set in the future and creates a world that is foreign to us. But the themes are something I think we can identify with strongly, despite the story being unrealistic. I like the poster above who said it had parallels to 2112. Does one need an "attitude adjustment" for 2112? Consider: Would any of us honestly pretend that there could ever be a time where music was banned, and then rediscovered? Certainly not. But if we allow the author (Neil, in this case) some latitude that it might happen, than we can appreciate the other elements he was trying to deliver to us, learning about the human spirit, it's potential, it's sorrow, and how much music means to us that perhaps we take for granted. Movies to me are always riding a paradox. We know they are fiction, but at the same time we expect a certain sense of realism and plausability, an undercurrent of truth. Some people will walk out of a theatre and complain, "there's no way that could happen - I hated that movie." Some movies need more "suspension of disbelief" than others, depending on the world they are trying to create. If you criticize a movie for being unrealistic, I think you also have to ask yourself, "Did the writer want us to think this aspect of the movie would be realistic?" Sometimes the writer purposely makes parts of it's movie unplausable, in order to better deliver it's main theme or themes. Unfortunately, this is lost on some people, who only focus in on parts they couldn't swallow, and don't realize those unrealistic elements were just devices towards the movie's theme. I agree it's a fine line, and that if nothing or very little in a film rings true than it will rightfully fall flat on it's face. I think movies can be criticized or praised like art. The best criterion for art I've heard are two questions: 1) What was the artist trying to do? 2) How successful was the artist in doing what he set out to do? /rant off Schro *zzzzzzzzzzzppppppppppppppppppppppttttttttttttttt *the sound of pedro's post going over schro's head........

Wow, I may actually see this one on the big screen. Any idea if it will be rated R or PG-13?

Why all this positive buzz about the new batman movie? Frankly, I was disappointed in them all. In my opinion, none of them have been that great, some much worse than others (you know which ones I am talking about). Is there any objective evidence that this one will actually be a great movie?

QUOTE (kazzman @ Apr 14 2005, 04:36 PM) Sahara wasn't a bad movie. Kinda an Indiana Jones rip-off, but it wasn't bad. Was it better than the Mummy with Fraser?

QUOTE (Schro @ Apr 14 2005, 12:36 PM) Rent it. Make popcorn. Get cozy. Then come back here and tell us what you think. Schro Would an "attitude adjustment" be appropriate for this movie?

QUOTE (kazzman @ Apr 13 2005, 07:22 PM) Anybody else seen this film? I just saw it last night and I loved it. Sounds interesting.. is it out on DVD yet? Oh, and Dark City is excellent.

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ Apr 13 2005, 06:15 PM) QUOTE (Sodoff Baldrick @ Apr 13 2005, 04:54 PM) Not from Hollywood, but Branagh's Henry V is one of the best film adaptations. Definitely! An oustanding film.

QUOTE (Test4VitalSigns @ Apr 13 2005, 01:15 AM) I only liked the first 2....not really a fan of endless sequels like that... I concur. The first two were fantastic! Heck, even the wife (who hates "gross" movies) loved them. The third was so-so, and the rest were dreck.

Clint was clearly at his best in "Hang em' High" "For a Few Dollars More" "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" "Fistful of Dollars" etc...

Has anyone actually read the books upon which the movie is based? Are they any good?

QUOTE (My_Shrimp_Cot @ Apr 9 2005, 09:07 AM) That being said, Im kind of getting sick of movies where the guys are all screwed up and the women aren't. You have to remember, movies are a place where people like to "escape" to.. you know, sort of turn reality on it's head.

QUOTE (barney_rebel @ Mar 19 2005, 10:49 PM) Man this movie is funny as hell! Hell is not funny.. but the movie was!