Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Patrick_Gibbs

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
136
Movies and TV / Re: review: The Island
« on: July 30, 2005, 01:35:01 AM »
Archon -

Perhaps I am being misunderstood, or I didn't make myself clear, because I don't see how what I meant was narrow minded. There are many war movies, such as "Guns of Navarone," or even "U-571" that I have enjoyed purely as adventure films. But war itself is a horror story - whatever the cause, right or wrong, the fact that the war itself is taking place, and that people who don't know each other are killing people that are really not any different from them, is pretty horrific.  I just think it's irresponsible to portray war as something fun and exciting and romantic.

137
Movies and TV / Re: King Kong
« on: July 29, 2005, 03:52:03 PM »
Yes, because that's what EVERYONE said about Gollum. I'll take that bet, provided we're basing this on real critical reaction, not what people on internet fan sites are saying.

138
Movies and TV / Re: Voltron the movie
« on: July 29, 2005, 02:06:30 PM »
You're excited about a Voltron movie but you don't . . . never mind.

When "King Kong" kills everything at the box office, and everyone loves it, I will have the last laugh.

139
Movies and TV / Re: King Kong
« on: July 29, 2005, 11:55:06 AM »
That is a rare thing, and I have no doubt that "Godzilla 2000" satisfied fans more than Emmerich's overblown epic. I gues I'm in the same category with "Godzilla" that you are with "Kong.": I've always been told I'm supposed to like it, and as a movie freak, and someone who enjoys bad movies, I have tried, but I just don't. I can't even sit through it. I think what we are both saying is that personal taste should be based on what you like, not what everyone else tells you to like.

One last thing I will still say about "Kong" is that the orignal has to be watched the same way as "Citizen Kane" - meaning that you have to appreciate what was so groundbreaking about it back then, not how it holds up now. I have a friend who refuses to acknowledge that "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is one of the great adventure movies, because he could name so many other movies that had as much action, if not more, and felt that he had seen it all before. But every movie he named came AFTER "Raiders."

140
Movies and TV / Re: King Kong
« on: July 29, 2005, 01:14:16 AM »
I see your point about feel obligated to think something is great, and if you don't like "King Kong," I completely respect that. But to me, "King Kong" is honestly that good. My point is that the comparsion to "Lost World" doesn't hold water because the only reason Spielberg made that movie was to do a homage to "King Kong " and "Hatari," and that while I love Spielberg, and I enjoy the "JP" sequels, they are all about Spielberg and Joe Johnsaton trying to relive the original King Kong.

Now, "Godzilla" on the other hand, that one I don't get at all. The American version is terrible, and the Japanese movies are laughably bad. I am constantly amazed that it has fans. There has NEVER been a Godzilla film that has been hasn't been just plain awful.

141
Movies and TV / Re: review: The Island
« on: July 28, 2005, 10:28:02 PM »
"Pearl Harbor" was nothing more than a bunch of studio suits hypothisizing: what if they had to save Private Ryan from the Titanic? It featured the worst romantic dialogue I've ever heard: ("Life didn't ask me what I wanted. But I only hope that as a gaze out into the sunset, I can catch the last few rays, and send them to your heart.).  The love story was so deadly dull that by the time you got to the bombing sequence, you didn't care anymore, and the bombing sequence was played as sn action extravaganza, or in other words, for cheap thrills, which I found to be profoundly disrespectful to the real victims. Even survivors of the real bombing complained that it was nowhere near that exciting or loud. I also felt that the movie protrayed the Americans as perfect saints and the Japanese as inhuman monsters (apparently during the bombing of Tokyo, no actual people were hurt.). I hate war movies that don't portray the brutality and horrors of war. This was a Harlequin romance novel set in a WWII backdrop, and I think it was appalling.

Also, it featured Cuba Gooding, Jr, which is enough reason to hate any movie.

As far as "the Island," I do agree that it was a concept that could have been developed much better than it was. A better script and a better director, some seriosu rethinking to fix the plot holes, and they could have had one of the best movies of the summer.

142
Movies and TV / Re: King Kong
« on: July 28, 2005, 12:15:19 PM »
Well, if you don't like "King Kong", then this is not the movie for you. It definitely looks like Jackson  is taking a reverential approach, becaue the original is beloved by so many film fans and film makers as one of the most influential blockbusters of all time. But if it's not your cup of tea, than I can certainly understand why you are not looking forward to the movie.

143
Movies and TV / Re: King Kong
« on: July 28, 2005, 02:32:02 AM »
Have you people seen the original "King Kong"? The trailer makes this look like an extremely faithful remake, and as a huge fan of the original, and of Jackson, I can't wait.! As far the comparison to "The Lost World: Jurassic Park," that entire movie was Spielberg's homage to Kong, right down to name of the boat the T-Rex arrives in (S.S. Venture.).

Everything about this trailer looks cool, and I for one am just excited to see Adrian Brody  finally following up "The Pianist" with something that isn't going to suck.

144
Movies and TV / Re: review: The Island
« on: July 27, 2005, 10:37:31 PM »
As far as "The Rock" is concerned, I enjoy a good mindless action movie from time to time (I even own "Die Hard 2" on DVD), though I prefer one that has a bit of a brain to it.  But "The Rock"was REALLY mindless. The plot made no sense, and the action was horribly staged (the car chase scene where the corvette changes color is hysterical.). But I will say this: Nicolas Cage was great in the movie, and his presence made it seem better than it was. On the whole, I would rate it as one of Bay's better films, but I think it's still one of the weakest big budget action movies of the nineties.

145
Books / Re: review: Half-Blood Prince
« on: July 27, 2005, 02:54:23 PM »
There was only one pairing that I thought was sudden, but I won't say which it was in order to avoid a spoiler (but I think it's fairly obvious which one I mean). But yes, absolutely, the onther ones have been building up for the whole series.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]